Oregon’s ancient old-growth forests (what remains of them) are under threat… always. This time its the Blue and Gold Timber Sale, which proposes logging some of the last remaining old-growth stands in the Oregon Coast Range, north of Roseburg. What are the consequences of continuing this failed legacy of disregarding these ancient wonders?
In the video below, I take you on a journey into these irreplaceable forests to show you what’s at stake. The incredible biodiversity of these ancient ecosystems, their vital role in carbon sequestration and climate stability, and the unique species that call these forests home, like the northern spotted owl and marbled murrelet, are but a few reasons this ought not be overlooked. Old-growth forests are more fire-resilient and clear-cutting could worsen wildfire risks. Logging these ancient giants has far-reaching consequences for water quality, soil health, and the Umpqua River watershed.
You can find Cascadia Wildlands’ petition to stop this project here.
Top Ten Reasons Old Growth Forests Are Irreplaceable
1. Old Growth Forests As Living Ecosystems vs. Timber Plantations:
Legacy forests are not just groups of trees; they are complex living ecosystems with unique relationships between plants, animals, fungi, and even the soil. Removing old-growth trees is not just cutting wood—it's destroying an entire, intricate web of life that has developed over centuries.
In contrast, timber plantations are human-designed systems that are often monocultures (usually Douglas fir in Oregon) that lack biodiversity. These areas are prone to disease and are far more vulnerable to pests and fire.
2. Natural Hydration and Fire Resilience of Legacy Forests:
Legacy forests naturally retain moisture, even in the dry summer months, through mosses, downed logs, and rich forest soils. These forests act like giant sponges, storing water from the rainy season and releasing it slowly, keeping the ecosystem hydrated and cool.
Removing old-growth increases the risk of fire by eliminating this moisture retention system. In contrast, industrially managed forests dry out quickly, becoming fire-prone "tinderboxes."
3. Wildlife and Biodiversity in Legacy Forests:
Legacy forests are critical habitats for numerous endangered species like the northern spotted owl, marbled murrelet, and even the salmon in the rivers that flow through them, which rely on the shade and cool water provided by these forests.
Logging removes not only the trees but also the biodiversity that depends on these trees for survival, leading to further habitat fragmentation and pushing species toward extinction.
4. Clear-Cutting as Conversion, Not Logging:
Clear-cutting a forest is not just harvesting trees; it’s converting a natural ecosystem into a human-designed one. Once clear-cut, the land is often replanted with uniform tree species, which do not provide the same environmental benefits or resilience as the original old-growth.
This practice is akin to turning a rich, diverse prairie into a monocrop field—it’s a total transformation of the ecosystem with long-term environmental consequences.
5. Legacy Forests and Carbon Sequestration:
Legacy forests are carbon powerhouses, capturing and storing vast amounts of carbon in their biomass and soils. When these forests are logged, centuries of stored carbon are released back into the atmosphere, contributing to climate change.
Newly planted trees in clear-cut areas cannot sequester carbon at the same rate for decades, meaning the immediate climate benefit of old-growth is lost.
6. Legacy Forests as “Cooling Islands” in a Warming World:
These older forests moderate local temperatures by creating their own microclimates, cooling the surrounding areas through shade and the evapotranspiration of water.
In a world facing more extreme weather events, legacy forests act as natural buffers against rising temperatures and droughts. Removing them makes the land more susceptible to heatwaves and reduced water availability.
7. Impact of Logging on the Water Cycle:
Old-growth forests in the Umpqua River watershed play a key role in the inland water cycle, contributing to consistent rain patterns and ensuring that rivers, like the Umpqua, remain healthy.
Logging disrupts this natural cycle, leading to increased runoff, erosion, and sedimentation in rivers, which directly harms fish populations, including endangered salmon.
8. The Legacy of Pre-Industrial Logging:
Historically, pre-industrial logging practices were more selective, leaving behind smaller and hard-to-reach trees that helped forests recover naturally. These legacy forests, which still exist in fragments, are essentially younger versions of old-growth and have the potential to become fully mature forests once again if left untouched.
Modern industrial logging methods, however, do not allow for this natural regeneration. Instead, they reset the clock, forcing forests into artificial cycles of growth and harvest, permanently altering the landscape.
9. The False Narrative of Forest “Mismanagement”:
Politicians and timber industry advocates often argue that forests are “undermanaged” and that more logging will prevent wildfires. However, studies show that thinning and clear-cutting can actually increase fire risks by opening the forest to drying winds and reducing moisture retention.
The real problem is not "lack of management," but rather the conversion of natural, resilient ecosystems into fire-prone monocultures.
10. Legacy Forests as Teachers of Complexity:
Legacy forests offer us a powerful lesson about natural complexity—they function through relationships that humans have only begun to understand. The interconnectedness of plants, animals, soil, water, and climate in these forests is vital to the land’s health.
By removing these forests, we not only destroy habitats but also lose opportunities to learn from the complexity of these ecosystems. Forests like these are laboratories for understanding how nature balances itself, especially in a time of climate crisis.
This is an excellent summary of a very detailed situation. I can't think of anything to add.
Thanks, Justin, for the alert. A point I would have emphasized a little more is that because the newer, smaller trees grow closer together, they increase the destructiveness of fires by making it easier for them to spread.