Imagining a Forest for the Future (Part 2)

Reflections on the Forests of the Present

In part one, we explored the importance of forests to life on earth and wildfire as a natural force on the landscape (Post-wildfire growth, Glacier National Park, photo above). Now, we will take that awareness and see how our past land management decisions have shaped our present forests. Then, we will take a look at the pathways ahead of us where we will need to choose how we want to be in relationship with the forests and the forces that shape them. 

“now is when it all begins

sitting here

breath by breath

right on the edge

of awareness

listening to everything…”

-Colin Wilcox

How logging, wildfire suppression, and a shifting climate fueled a crisis

After European colonization of the Americas, natural resources were often harvested or land cleared for agriculture without understanding of the long-term consequences. Important ecological knowledge was lost as Indigenous Peoples were killed or driven from their lands and scattered across the continent. The logging of the 19th and 20th centuries targeted trees that were “profitable”, which often meant large fire-resistant trees whose vital roles in their ecosystems were consequently lost. Huge quantities of logging slash (i.e., branches, tops, and other debris) were left behind. This logging boom dramatically altered not only the structure of the forests, but the way fire interacted with them. This set the stage for an increase in intense wildfires that spread quickly across the cut-over landscape.

As a result of the loss of life and property, wildfire was branded as an enemy to be eradicated. Smokey Bear’s famous slogan “Only you can prevent forest fires” captured the ethos that fire must be prevented at all costs. Decades of aggressive fire suppression, including the criminalization of cultural burning, further unsettled the relationship between the landscape and fire. As the decades passed, forests grew denser and more homogenous, setting the stage for far more destructive wildfires. 

Dense urban-adjacent forest, New Jersey  Photo Credit JFL Riehl

At the same time, we were also learning from past mistakes on how to sustainably manage forestland. Forest management incrementally improved with input from ecological research culminating in the Forest Management Act of 1976 focused on protecting national forestlands from destructive logging practices through regulating clear cuts, protecting water sources, and ensuring reforestation efforts. In more recent decades, accumulated decades of scientific knowledge have revealed a more nuanced view of what a healthy forest looks like, how different ecosystems are connected, and the role of fire. For example, the old growth forests play a critical role in supporting biodiversity, and improving human-valued ecosystem services such as carbon sequestration, wildfire mitigation, erosion control, and water quality. As a result, more recent forest and land management law and policy has emphasized the protection of old growth and diverse forests, wetlands, intact landscapes, and the importance of beneficial fire.

Still, increasing numbers of destructive fires have been occurring in the past couple of decades. While the megafires such as the 2024 Smokehouse Creek Fire or the 2020 August Complex Fire are concerning, researchers have found that fast-growing fires, such as the 2021 Marshall Fire, account for almost 90% of fire-related damages since 2001. The speed at which a fire grows is heavily influenced by wind speed and fuel moisture content, or how dry the dead and live plants on the landscape are, with faster fires occurring under high winds and dry conditions. The effects of climate change, including warmer temperatures, prolonged droughts, and shifting weather patterns, will continue to promote the occurrence of faster, more destructive fires. And since 1 in 3 homes in the US is in the wildland urban interface, which is where the built environment meets the forest or grassland, the way we interact with this new wildfire reality will have serious implications for the safety and health of our communities. More fire is coming, and we must actively participate in shaping what that will look like and consequently how it will impact our environment and our lives. 

Socio-cultural and science informed decision-making and the RAD Framework

We are at a crossroads where the decisions our leaders make today will reverberate for decades to come. Current efforts to increase timber production on federal lands and to roll back evidence-based and community supported rules under the claim of “wildfire risk reduction” is naïve at best and duplicitous at worst. These actions conflate indiscriminate logging with legitimate forest management practices. Reducing excess fuels is an important tool in wildfire mitigation and forest management, but it matters how and where it is done. Blanket increases in logging on public lands, especially if they ignore sound environmental laws and input from Tribes and local communities, are a recipe for ecologically destructive outcomes. Worse, they also risk undermining public trust. People will recognize when “fuel reduction” is used as a catch-all excuse to clear-cut forests for profit at the expense of public access and environmental and community health. For example, local communities are already concerned about the impact of increased logging in the only public national forest in Ohio. 

The logging of public lands only accounts for 4% of national harvests. Most of the timber industry activities occur on private lands. Furthermore, 60% of forest land in the US is owned privately, making how we care for our public lands an important piece in balancing economic and ecological values. Without the evidence-based management efforts on public lands, places may see increased threats from disturbances like flooding and wildfire and overall reduced environmental quality as extraction becomes the primary objective. As an added complication, the accelerated reduction in resources and staff for already under-resourced and under-staffed federal agencies like the Forest Service, means the ability to enact any new policies to the detriment or benefit of our public lands is under serious question. 

We already have evidence-based wildfire related forest management policy recommendations made by a diverse cohort of cross-disciplinary and cross-sector partners. In another piece, I wrote about how we have already spent the time to assess the past and present situations of our land management policy and where we need to go in the future to reduce wildfire risk and improve community safety and forest health. For one, we must be less reactive and more proactive in how we manage public lands (e.g., thinning forests where it matters, protecting old growth/big trees and wetlands, and promoting heterogenous forests and mosaic landscapes). The other piece is to continue to build on current efforts that effectively and respectfully collaborate with Indigenous fire experts and local communities. 

Now we need to act on them. This is not a partisan issue and at the same time it is a complex issue. Western science and traditional ecological knowledge both tell us that land management is complex, and decision-making will need to be tailored to specific ecosystems and communities. This can be a daunting task where “Resist, Accept, Direct (RAD)”, and reciprocal stewardship concepts can provide a flexible structure to place land management actions within. 

Sources/Usage: Public Domain. View Media Details

The RAD framework was proposed in 2021 to address the complex issues land managers face in a changing climate by placing the possible actions for a particular ecosystem into three strategic pots, resist, accept, or direct change. It has been building in popularity among land management professionals. As Nicole Ward of the Minnesota DNR describes it, “The RAD framework is about helping people really come to terms with the extent and pace of climate change and the discomfort that uncertainty brings… I think of a RAD brainstorming session like throwing a pot of freshly cooked spaghetti at the wall; if you don’t throw out some wild ideas, you’ll never find the one that sticks.” The RAD framework can also provide an easy to explain framework for the public to place the complex actions that land managers enact within, increasing public understanding and support (see the Kenai Peninsula and other case studies).

Sources: Two-Eyed Seeing: An adaptive co-stewardship model. Credit Cristina Eisenberg, Oregon State University College of Forestry. https://adaptiveforeststewardship.org/ 

Reciprocal stewardship asks the question, “Are people outside of forests, extracting goods and services that they desire, or are they in reciprocal relationships with forests?” It draws on centuries of knowledge in which reciprocal stewardship of forests was proactive and sustainable and provides a framework for integrating western science and traditional ecological knowledge.  Most importantly, it is a way to reaffirm our deep connections to the places that sustain our communities and promote forest management actions that reflect those connections and values (explore real-world examples of place-based stewardship). 

Our choices shape our values. They will have consequences for the quality of our air, soil and water, the safety of our communities, and the cultural ties we have to our forests. We cannot let the short-term gains of commodifying our public lands allow a long-term loss of functional life-supporting ecosystems. I want to emphasize that none of this will be possible if we continue to under-resource and under-staff the public agencies that manage and protect our public lands. We need to continue to advocate for adequately funded and staffed land management agencies as well as land management policies rooted in the knowledge gained from curiously connecting the lessons of our past and present to our future. A future that considers how best to nurture the forests and landscapes and in turn nurture ourselves. Because, as noted mycologist and writer Patricia Ononiwu Kaishian astutely observes in her book Forest Euphoria, “Humans are part of this collective [space], whether we choose to protect it or not, whether we choose to remember or not.”

Author

Jennifer Riehl, Ph.D.
2023-2025 Executive Branch Fellow at the U.S. National Science Foundation 

Editor

Andrew Czeidinski, Ph.D.
Sci on the Fly, Executive Editor 
2023-2026 Executive Branch Fellow at the U.S. National Science Foundation