Choices Regarding Forest Management

We are left with two options, and frankly, that’s it. Global warming isn’t the main issue here.

In management, there’s a lesson that not making a decision is, in essence, a decision itself. In terms of forests, if we opt out of managing them, nature, through fire, will take care of it in its own way.

If you take a stroll through our western forests, you’ll find many are in pretty dire shape. Deviate from the trails, and you’ll notice that the deadfall makes it almost impossible to hike—both for people and animals. Many of these areas lack wildlife, mostly due to the scarcity of food amidst layers of dead trees and pine needles, just waiting for the right spark to ignite.

A typical thunderstorm in the mountains produces hundreds, if not thousands, of air-to-ground lightning strikes daily across the Mountain West. It’s almost a given that these unhealthy forests will ignite. Absolutely certain.

This condition is often a result of the pine beetle infestation we allowed to escalate, or simply from old forests that haven’t been managed. These places are like tinderboxes, just waiting for a fire. And once nature steps in, we fight the flames rather than letting natural processes unfold. If we wanted to act foolishly, we couldn’t pick a better method.

To manage forests properly, logging is necessary. If that doesn’t sit well with you, then consider the only alternative.

There’s nothing inherently complex about ecologically sound logging. First, we need to view forests as part of a broader ecosystem, which, like all living things, goes through cycles—birth, youth, maturity, and old age. This is a fundamental reality. Trees should be seen as a long-term crop; they take decades to grow before they’re ready for harvest, unlike corn, which can be grown in a single summer.

Those standing trees hold economic value, and there are companies eager to pay for the opportunity to harvest. It won’t cost us anything! Naturally, they must commit to replanting the areas with approved plants and undertake other necessary actions—like clearing deadfall and fertilizing—to set the stage for new growth. As long as the contract terms don’t exceed the economic value of the timber, companies will be eager to help manage these crucial areas. We shouldn’t look to the past for guidance; responsible practices are entirely possible today. We’re not advocating for exploitation followed by abandonment, nor does it need to turn into another expensive government failure.

Wildlife in the mountains would benefit immensely. Any hunter or outdoor enthusiast will confirm that clear-cut areas, logged regions, and lands that have burned eventually become hotspots for wildlife— far more than other parts of the forest. Simply put, that’s where the food is.

If we are set on allowing fires, at least we can manage them to mitigate uncertainty as much as possible. Planning for a fire can happen months or even a year ahead. This strategy provides property owners the time they need to prepare—removing fuel sources and taking other protective measures for their homes. Instead of a frantic race against the flames, animals can be relocated calmly, valuables safeguarded, and fire safety measures can be assessed and implemented without urgency, which reduces risks for lives, property, and wildlife.

The forest service would have ample time to construct firebreaks and execute other strategies to contain fires as much as feasible. Millions won’t be wasted on battling these natural events. We can save brave lives on the ground and in aircraft.

However, it’s important to acknowledge that we won’t fully control fires of such magnitude in these terrains. We just need to accept that and do the best we can. We’re tackling nearly 70 years of mismanagement over 323,000 square miles of public Western forest. There are many long-term solutions for effective management on the horizon, but currently, we face the urgent need for attention over nearly 600,000 square miles of public and private forests.

As I often mention in my consulting work, I shouldn’t be blamed for the current state of affairs; that’s not my doing. I’m here now to rectify the errors of the past, and this situation is no different.

Is the situation ideal? Rarely is anything. But it represents a substantial improvement over the current chaos of neglect followed by massive expenditure to fight an inevitable fire. In my view, logging is the better route—especially when considering the timber’s economic value, the significant emissions from fires, and the adverse impact on wildlife.

Yet, if we are going to set the stage for these forests to burn, we might as well try to manage that eventuality as effectively as we can.