|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For information on the Harriman Retraced Expedition e-mail: harriman2001@science.smith.edu |
|
|
A Lecture and Discussion on
the history of logging, politics, and forest ecology
research on the Tongass since the Harriman
Expedition. After seeing clearcuts along the
shore, and some towns heavily influenced by the timber
industry, heading from Wrangell up towards the Wrangell
Narrows near Petersburg, I gave a lecture/discussion on the
history of logging and forest ecology research on the
forests of Southeast Alaska. We started this afternoon at
2:30, immediately after sighting some whales, and after
discussing last-minute decisions on where we can land to
best see examples of old-growth forests, and examples of
logging on this trip. But despite the harried nature of the
trip thus far and this day, we had a lively discussion on
this crucial and controversial issue. First I asked expedition members
to visualize the archtypical old growth forest on the
Tongass. What does it look like? How big are the trees? How
uniform is it? And most critically what makes this forest
unique or different from other forests in the country with
which people are most familiar? Quickly we honed in on the
idea that what makes these forests special is that they are
rainforests, that is they grow in a uniquely wet and cold
environment, rich and mossy, with occasional large spruce or
cedar trees. The idea was to think about what did Berhard
Fernow, the forest ecologist on the 1899 expedition see and
observe. The forests are patchy because of extremely
variable geology and soils and excessive moisture which
leads to more peatbog and alpine tundra than forest along
this section of the coast. This followed with Fernow's and
Gannet's predictions published in the Harriman journals as
to the development of a timber industry in Southeast Alaska.
The predictions were simply this: While large trees do
occasionally occur on the Alaska coast, that the tree
species and their condition provides only marginally
commercially valuable lumber or pulp. The then mostly intact
forests of Puget Sound in Washington provide a fabulous
wealth of timber resources with much greater economic value
and that was much easier to extract than anything in Alaska.
So they predicted that the coastal forests were unlikely to
ever provide the foundation for a sustainable timber
industry since they were inferior in value to the Pacific
Northwest, were distant from market, and they occurred in
mostly inaccessible and difficult terrain. I then provided a brief
highlight of what has happened to the forests of Southeast
Alaska since the past expedition. At the turn of the
century, wood was used primarily for canneries (docks, fish
traps, boxes for shipping salmon), and local home
construction. By the mid 1920's B. Frank Heintzlman offered
an alternative vision of the timber industry for Southeast
Alaska. He was successful in promoting this vision, so much
so that he became the territorial governor of Alaska. The
vision was that if timber was given cheaply in a large
long-term contract, companies could be convinced to make the
considerable investment required to build pulp mills and
provide local employment. By allocating virtually all of the
forests in Southeast Alaska to logging, a permanent
population of 50,000 could be supported. By the late 1950's,
three large contracts were awarded and two large pulp mills
were built, and Alaska was proceeding towards this vision.
Science at the time supported this vision, finding forest
regrowth excellent and no obvious sign that logging would
affect fisheries. The large government subsidy required to
establish the industry was justified in terms of the
strategic importance of a permanent population in Alaska,
the value of contributing to post-World War II
reconstruction, and the desirability of utilizing a large
reservoir of timber resources. In the 1970s and 1980s the
Tongass was recognized increasingly as a tourist
destination, as a valuable example of temperate rainforest,
and its functioning as an ecosystem distinct from all others
in the rest of the United States emerged. The combination of
increased scientific understanding, greater public
awareness, and changes in public expectations or values of
forests and forest landscapes resulted in a shifting view of
how much logging should occur on the Tongass. The 1980
Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA)
established over 5 million acres of wilderness, but also
mandated elevated logging targets (450 million board feet
per year) and also mandated $40 million allocation to the
Forest Service exempt from normal Congressional review. This
led to increasingly rapid logging, more detailed scientific
studies, and increasing calls for an end to subsidized
logging on the Tongass. Logging on Native corporation lands
contributed to the boom in logging in the 1980s and 1990s,
which combined with Tongass logging equaled nearly 1 billion
board feet per year in 1989 and 1990. The 1990 Tongass
Timber Reform Act in many ways reversed the effects of the
amendment to the 1980 ANILCA act, and placed in protection
an additional million acres of prime old growth rainforest
more for protecting wilderness, wildlife and fisheries
resources than scenic vistas. One critical insight that
developed over these decades was the recognition of the
forests of the Tongass as temperate rainforest ecosystems. I
explained this as being carefully tied to the unique
climate, and natural disturbances that affect the structure
and wildlife habitat of these forests. In contrast to most
forests in the lower 48 these rainforests are not destroyed
by catastrophic fires, floods or similar events. They are
maintained by windstorms that frequently knock down small
patches of trees, but allow for the persistence of a complex
old growth forest. This disturbance helps recycle nutrients,
make the forest more variable and patchy, and stimulates
regeneration of forest trees. The point is that in this
forest renewal and regrowth and health are maintained by
these mostly small-scale disturbances. Logging by contrast,
while stimulating tree growth and regeneration, creates a
dense and more homogeneous forest that quickly becomes of
limited value to wildlife as habitat. So logging degrades
wildlife habitat for many critical species such as Sitka
black-tailed deer, bald eagles, grizzly bears, flying
squirrels and others. These considerations and the
integration of scientists and scientific information in the
new management plan for the Tongass in 1997 led to further
restrictions in logging regulations and the reduction of the
allowable cut to under 300 million board feet a year.
Declining profitability of logging progressively less
valuable forests combined with political and social changes
led to the closing of both pulp mills by 1997. So now, one century later we
have gone from a vision of 90% or more of the commercial
timber in Southeast Alaska being dedicated to clearcut
logging to nearly 80% of commercial forest land being in
some way protected from logging. The timber economy although
quite significant at its peak in the 1970s - 1980s, ended up
being quite transitory. So at the surface it appears Fernow
and Gannet were quite incorrect in their assessments of the
commercial value of timber in coastal Alaska. But I suggest
that in many important ways their insights have been
validated by the events of the past century. Clearly it is
difficult to find a market for the relatively low quality
timber on the Tongass, and it is extraordinarily expensive
and difficult to access this patchily arranged timber
resource. Were it not for a subsidy that at times reached as
much as 50-80% there could not have been even a transitory
large-scale timber economy in Southeast Alaska. We then had a lively discussion
in which expedition members raised many important details
about the history of logging on the Tongass. What was the
role of Native corporation logging the Tongass?, Why should
there be any logging on the Tongass, why can't the forests
simply be thinned to mitigate against wildlife habitat
impacts? How about selective logging as an alternative? In
my view, in reflecting on this history it is hard not to be
optimistic as to what future possibilities may unfold before
us. The world pulp market is steadily expanding. The world
demand continues to exceed the supply. Wood is becoming more
valuable. And the unique attributes of wood from Sitka
spruce and Alaska yellow cedar in particular are continuing
to be discovered. From guitars to airplanes and even
spacecraft, special high-value uses exist for some trees in
Southeast Alaska. With our increasing understanding of the
complex interrelationships in these forests it is hard not
to imagine that we should be able to eventually have the
wisdom, skill and determination to develop a sustainable
timber industry in Southeast Alaska, which can work in
concert with fisheries, wildlife, recreation and other
resources in this vast coastline. Immediately after this
discussion, many expedition members joined me on the wooden
sun-deck where I was able to continue to answer questions
and point out examples ecological patterns, and examples of
logging activities that were clearly visible as the ship
passed through the narrow Wrangell Narrows, just south of
Petersburg. Many topics were covered, including the deep and
complex interdependency of these coastal forests to salmon
and other marine resources, and the amazing patchiness and
complexity of this stunning landscape.
For information on the Harriman Retraced Expedition e-mail: harriman2001@science.smith.edu
Expedition
Log
Home | 2001 Expedition | 1899 Expedition | Maps | Log | Educators and Students | Film | Century of Change | After Expedition | About This Site