WAITING FOR BREAKFAST

Lynx, January 17, 2014

The snow background sets off its ear tufts.

It waited long enough that the sun rose.

Comparing this photo to 2013 pictures it now looks like a mature cat,
 the innocence is gone.

10:49 a.m. Giving up.

One last look at the red squirrel on the wall.

Moving right along.

Making a trail in the fresh snow of the lawn as it leaves.
January 17, 2014
Lynx

CLEARCUTTING CAN WORK IN THE BOREAL FOREST

BY MAC SQUIRES
AS PRINTED IN THE CHRONICLE JOURNAL, THUNDER BAY , JANUARY 4, 2014

reprinted here by permission of Mac Squires (retired professional forester)

"There is a common belief that clearcut timber harvesting is wrong in the boreal forest.  Is it?

The common natural forest pattern found in the boreal forest of Northwestern Ontario is a jigsaw puzzle of tree stands.  Pieces of the puzzle are tens of square kilometres of contiguous variable stands of trees all of the same age, often of a single species, and seldom of more than three tree species.  I maintain that if we are going to continue living close to, and in that forest and maintain its natural structure and fauna, our choices are limited.

We can allow natural wild-fire to renew the landscape as is has historically done.  That would require us to always be ready to move, or concentrate development in natural or man-made safe zones, with massive redesign and relocation of homes and infrastructure, and still occasionally experience massive losses of life and property.

I believe that the only practical alternative to that disturbing scenario is to remain where we are and work with nature.  That will require us to prevent and control wild-fires where practically possible, and utilize and renew the forest with methods that approximately maintain a landscape that is similar to that created by wildfire.

I have some questions that I believe we should all ponder with open minds.

Are we blinded by what to us appears ugly, and are some of us abandoning objective reasoning to achieve our own ends?  Would we be even less satisfied with the consequences of alternative silvicultural techniques such as selection cutting?  Are the things that disturb us most about current harvesting more a result of how we behave when harvesting, than of the silvicultural techniques being used?  Are our concerns really supported by the best available current knowledge?

How do the impacts of clearcutting differ from those of wildfire?  Are they more or less acceptable?  Is one uglier than the other?  What would happen to plant communities and wildlife habitat if we ban clearcutting in favour of partial (selection) cutting?  Will wildfires burn more intensely in selection harvested stands?  If so, what will be the new plant and wildlife succession?  What will happen to existing development and homes if we chose wildfire over harvesting?  Which will have the greater impact on climate change - selection, clearcutting or no harvesting?

Is our concern about current harvesting techniques distracting us from possibly greater undesirable consequences from its alternatives?  I believe it is.

My previous articles have detailed how the variety of trees and some other plants respond to common disturbances, how they interact and follow, or eliminate each other in the natural forest succession.  A review of those articles will explain the following.

I believe if we ban clearcut harvesting in Northwestern Ontario, in order to maintain natural forest succession, we will have to allow uncontrolled wildfire across the landscape.  I believe that a selection-harvested forest will follow a successional pathway that we will not like.  I believe that it will have fewer jack pine, black spruce, trembling aspen and white birch and more balsam fir and white spruce.  I believe we can then expect more insect epidemics, tree diseases, wind damage, and unwelcome changes in wildlife species and populations, and be inviting even more intense fires.

I believe that right and wrong are constructs of our human minds, and that nature makes no such distinctions. The forest has evolved with amazing resilience to eventually return to its historic structure.  When we recognize that resilience, and accommodate it by utilizing the forest with methods that best enable the continuation of natural trends, we hasten the return to a natural forest structure . I  believe that clearcut harvesting is the silvicultural technique that best enables those trends to continue in Northwestern Ontario forests."

LOOKING BACKWARD

Headlines in the Thunder Bay Newspaper , TIMES NEWS of January 29, 1992

GREENPEACE "PROPAGANDA" KILLING FOREST INDUSTRY, SAYS EXECUTIVE

MONTREAL, (CP) - The head of one of Canada's leading forest companies said Tuesday that Greenpeace is spreading lies to hurt his industry.

"There's environmental thuggery going on here," declared Ian Donald, chief executive of Vancouver-based Fletcher Challenge Canada Ltd., at a news conference.

Greenpeace officials could not immediately be reached for comment.

Donald accused the worldwide Greenpeace organization of employing "propaganda and fear tactics" that threaten Canadian pulp and paper markets, particularly for chlorine-bleached pulp and the white paper made from it.

Donald said that as a result of lobbying by the environmentalists, Germany will likely ban pulp bleached with elemental chlorine within a few months and the ban would probably be adopted by other European states.

He said Greenpeace has an 80 per-cent rate of public support in Germany, which buys more than 1 million tonnes of Canadian bleached pulp annually.

Canada is the world's largest supplier of pulp.  It sells $6 billion worth of bleached pulp abroad, of which 85% is bleached with chlorine.

Tests show the process releases dioxins and furans which, if injected into rats, gives them cancer.

Donald said Greenpeace is picking on the high-profile pulp and paper industry to create alarm and help Greenpeace raise funds for its annual budget of $180 million.

COME CLEAN

"It's time Greenpeace came clean" on its true objective, said Donald in a speech to the annual convention of the Canadian Pulp and Paper Association.

Earlier this month a new attack front formed when Time magazine announced it was going to start using chlorine-free pulp, if available, after getting 20,000 letters from readers demanding it.

Donald, whose company supplies Time with 20,000 tonnes of bleached paper a year from a plant in Minnesota, said he met with Time executives who told him they were embarrassed by the decision " taken at a junior level."

'Unfortunately Time blinked instead of saying "prove your case."

"It's just not proven that chlorine bleaching is bad for the environment," said Donald, calling the contention one of the untruths spread by Greenpeace.

He also said Greenpeace claims falsely that dioxin, released in chlorine bleaching, is the most deadly chemical known to man.

"This is untrue. Nobody has ever died from dioxin," said Donald. The worst effect known is skin rash from direct contact", he said.

The federal government has imposed limits on emissions of dioxins and furans from pulp mills.

Donald snorted that humans can be made sick if they are injected with table salt, which is found naturally in the body.

He added that the Canadian industry has spent in the past three years $2 billion out of  $5 billion committed to reducing emissions of dioxins.