Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart said it of pornography, but he could have applied the thought to old-growth forests as well: “I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced . . . but I know it when I see it.”

This is the third of a three-post examination of forests in the American East. Part 1 diagnosed an “environmental generational amnesia” that makes people think it is okay to not have real (old-growth) forests and to tolerate, if not facilitate, massive and repeated clear-cutting and/or deforestation in the name of creating “early successional habitat” for species of wildlife that we need not be concerned about. Part 2 shed light on a conspiracy of self-interested timber companies, misguided public land foresters, misinformed wildlife biologists, and Kool-Aid-drinking conservationists. This Part 3 suggests ways to partially—but significantly—bring back the magnificent old-growth forests that have long been lost.

This is the second of a three-post examination of forests in the American East. Part 1 diagnosed an “environmental generational amnesia” that makes people think it is okay to not have real (old-growth) forests and to tolerate, if not facilitate, massive and repeated clear-cutting and/or deforestation in the name of creating “early successional habitat” for species of wildlife that we need not be concerned about. This Part 2 sheds light on a conspiracy of self-interested timber companies, misguided public land foresters, misinformed wildlife biologists, and Kool-Aid-drinking conservationists. Part 3 will suggest ways to partially—but significantly—bring back the magnificent old-growth forests that have long been lost.

This is the first of a three-post examination of forests in the American East. Part 1 diagnoses an “environmental generational amnesia” that makes people think it is okay to not have real (old-growth) forests and to tolerate, if not facilitate, massive and repeated clear-cutting and/or deforestation in the name of creating “early successional habitat” for species of wildlife that we need not be concerned about. Part 2 will shed light on a conspiracy of self-interested timber companies, misguided public land foresters, misinformed wildlife biologists, and Kool-Aid-drinking conservationists. Part 3 will suggest ways to partially—but significantly—bring back the magnificent old-growth forests that have long been lost.

This is the second of a two-post exploration of the stage of forest succession that occurs after a stand-replacing event and before the canopy again closes and dominates the site. Part 1 discussed why preforests are valuable, if undervalued. Part 2 addresses management of preforests to preserve their ecological value.

This is the first of a two-post exploration of the stage of forest succession that occurs after a stand-replacing event and before the canopy again closes and dominates the site. In Part 1, we discuss why preforests are valuable, if undervalued. In Part 2, we will address management of preforests to preserve their ecological value.

Understanding the history of public lands is useful if one is to be the best advocate for the conservation of public lands.

While some states have more forested BLM land than does Oregon, in terms of biomass (think lots of big trees) Oregon’s BLM lands are likely more carbon-rich than all of the others combined.

It turns out that state forests are not held in trust for the financial benefit of certain timber-addicted counties.

Blumenauer’s bill would open up Mount Hood National Forest to new logging loopholes.

“It’s a home ignition problem, not a wildfire control problem.” —Jack Cohen, USDA Forest Service fire scientist

This is the second of two Public Lands Blog posts on the president’s executive order (EO) on forests, which, among other things, unambiguously directs the federal forest agencies to conserve the remaining mature and old-growth forests. Part 1 dissected the order. Part 2 places it in the current political context and makes recommendations to various key interests on how best to ensure that the potential of the EO is fulfilled.

This is the first of two Public Lands Blog posts on the president’s executive order (EO) on forests, which, among other things, unambiguously directs the federal forest agencies to conserve the remaining mature and old-growth forests. Part 1 dissects the order. Part 2 will place it in the current political context and make recommendations to various key interests on how best to ensure that the potential of the EO is fulfilled.

This is the second of two Public Lands Blog posts on the most consequential Oregonian yet to serve in the United States Senate. In Part 1, we looked at his role in enabling the destruction of Oregon forests. In Part 2, we look at his complicated legacy.

This is the second of two Public Lands Blog posts that are not about public lands but rather the conservation of public resources on private land. I offer my take on the Oregon Private Forest Accords (OPFA) because several readers asked for it. Part 1 examined the Oregon OPFA deal and its significance. Part 2 examines whether the OPFA is a grand bargain, a mere détente, or a great sellout.

This is the first of two Public Lands Blog posts that are not about public lands but rather the conservation of public resources on private land. I offer my take on the Oregon Private Forest Accords (OPFA) because several readers asked for it. Part 1 examines the Oregon OPFA deal and its significance. Part 2 will examine whether the OPFA is a grand bargain, a mere détente, or a great sellout.

The FSC is back with a new document signaling its continuing quest to certify wood products that come from federal public lands (including units of the National Park System) as being “environmentally sound, socially beneficial, and economically prosperous.” The standards FSC is proposing to apply to federal forestlands are little more than what is required of federal land management agencies now, if that. It’s called greenwashing.

The old forests of the Pacific Northwest are in far better condition today than they would be if not for Professors Jerry F. (for Forest!) Franklin and K. Norman Johnson. “Norm and Jerry,” as they are affectionately (or, depending upon your point of view, derisively) known, have had a greater positive impact on federal forest policy in the Pacific Northwest than any other individuals.

This is the third of three Public Lands Blog posts on state-owned forestlands in Oregon. Part 1 focused on a prospective habitat management plan for state forestlands in western Oregon. Part 2 surveyed state forests in Oregon by location, owner, and manager. Part 3 examines several key issues pertaining to state forest management in Oregon and explores how to secure the greatest permanent value of state forestlands to the state.

This is the second of three Public Lands Blog posts on state-owned forestlands in Oregon. Part 1 focused on a prospective habitat management plan for state forestlands in western Oregon. Part 2 surveys state forests in Oregon by location, owner, and manager. Part 3 will examine several key issues pertaining to state forest management in Oregon and explore how to secure the greatest permanent value of state forestlands to the state.