3 ms·

> Most U.S. foresters, [Lohrengel] says, are trained to cut the best trees and leave the sick ones behind. The result is a forest with deteriorating genetic sto

> Most U.S. foresters, [Lohrengel] says, are trained to cut the best trees and leave the sick ones behind. The result is a forest with deteriorating genetic stock. But the Menominee are “doing the opposite, and making the forest healthier.” > “We come in every 15 years, take out the weak trees, the sick trees, and the ones that are dying, but leave the healthy stock to grow some more and reproduce” > In almost 170 years, the tribe has harvested nearly twice the forest’s former volume of timber, yet it still has 40 percent more standing wood than when they started. “And by leaving the best trees, the old and sick lumber they harvest is now better than the best from most everyone else” Such an elegant solution!

WalterBright 3y ago
What I heard was private tree farmers did just that. It's the public forestry service that logs out the best trees. It's that old "tragedy of the commons" problem.
- throwawaylinux 3y ago
  Forestry service doesn't sound like tragedy of the commons, it sounds like tragedy of government.
  - FrustratedMonky 3y ago
    The biggest tree cutters aren't the government. The big cutters are paper companies. Corporate forests are planted in nice rows like corn, so it is easy to plant, easy to harvest. Reduced time, reduced labor. And, these small private groups have larger labor overhead. Maybe tribes like this, or small family owned plots can do this. But I wonder if they are really self-sustaining, or these groups have cash coming in from other endeavors, other jobs that help support them.
    - throwawaylinux 3y ago
      The subject wasn't plantation timber though, but the forestry service (allegedly) logging out the best trees from forests.
qchris 3y ago
I read somewhere (I wish I could remember the primary source) that some large hunting ranches are taking this approach as well. Basically, if a buck looks like it would be a "trophy" animal (large antlers, etc.), they don't hunt it. Apparently this was something that started on a ranch where the owner's brother was an advocate for the practice, which they took to heart after he passed away young. The claimed result was that in even relatively small periods of time (less than a decade), the number of "high quality" deer on their property skyrocketed due to the fittest bucks actually being able to compete and pass on their genes rather than being hunted immediately.
Cthulhu_ 3y ago
It's a much more long term and sustainable approach, unfortunately a lot of companies and individuals are incentivised to do short term gains, i.e. "cut out the good wood and leave the rest, screw whoever comes afterwards, and 30 - 50 years from now is not my problem". But for the people that live there, it is their problem, they exist with people that were there 30-50 years ago, they know the local history going back hundreds of years. Most of us live in a temporary and individualistic society. In my country, generally speaking, people get married, buy a house, have kids, live there for 30-40 years, then sell the house because it's too big and inaccessible for their aging bones, live in a rental or buy an apartment for the next 10-15 years, then sell that and spend the rest of their money on the retirement / care home. Some might pass on to their children. Usually the children don't inherit the house, because they can't afford to buy it or buy the other children out, or because they don't want to live in their parental house or town. Nothing remains from the previous generations except maybe some keepsakes. The only example of generational stuff are some farms or companies, but even they don't last; farms from 100 years ago are not up to modern standards and cannot compete with industrial farms. I was staying at an airbnb on a farm like that, the only reason they still survived was because they lived in a protected nature area and they could benefit off of tourism, making and selling their own products in their own restaurant and local stores. Cottage industry, but they're the exception because it's a lot of work to make and sell products like that; you need an audience that's interested in locally produced goods like that, and it has to be priced competitively.
wiredfool 3y ago
Many foresters will warn you that if you have an over grown lot, harvesters will come in and harvest the big ones, leaving you the crap trees. Or at least the was the case in rural Wa ca 15 years ago.

WalterBright 3y ago

What I heard was private tree farmers did just that. It's the public forestry service that logs out the best trees. It's that old "tragedy of the commons" problem.

throwawaylinux 3y ago
Forestry service doesn't sound like tragedy of the commons, it sounds like tragedy of government.
- FrustratedMonky 3y ago
  The biggest tree cutters aren't the government. The big cutters are paper companies. Corporate forests are planted in nice rows like corn, so it is easy to plant, easy to harvest. Reduced time, reduced labor. And, these small private groups have larger labor overhead. Maybe tribes like this, or small family owned plots can do this. But I wonder if they are really self-sustaining, or these groups have cash coming in from other endeavors, other jobs that help support them.
  - throwawaylinux 3y ago
    The subject wasn't plantation timber though, but the forestry service (allegedly) logging out the best trees from forests.

qchris 3y ago

I read somewhere (I wish I could remember the primary source) that some large hunting ranches are taking this approach as well. Basically, if a buck looks like it would be a "trophy" animal (large antlers, etc.), they don't hunt it. Apparently this was something that started on a ranch where the owner's brother was an advocate for the practice, which they took to heart after he passed away young. The claimed result was that in even relatively small periods of time (less than a decade), the number of "high quality" deer on their property skyrocketed due to the fittest bucks actually being able to compete and pass on their genes rather than being hunted immediately.

Cthulhu_ 3y ago

It's a much more long term and sustainable approach, unfortunately a lot of companies and individuals are incentivised to do short term gains, i.e. "cut out the good wood and leave the rest, screw whoever comes afterwards, and 30 - 50 years from now is not my problem". But for the people that live there, it is their problem, they exist with people that were there 30-50 years ago, they know the local history going back hundreds of years. Most of us live in a temporary and individualistic society. In my country, generally speaking, people get married, buy a house, have kids, live there for 30-40 years, then sell the house because it's too big and inaccessible for their aging bones, live in a rental or buy an apartment for the next 10-15 years, then sell that and spend the rest of their money on the retirement / care home. Some might pass on to their children. Usually the children don't inherit the house, because they can't afford to buy it or buy the other children out, or because they don't want to live in their parental house or town. Nothing remains from the previous generations except maybe some keepsakes. The only example of generational stuff are some farms or companies, but even they don't last; farms from 100 years ago are not up to modern standards and cannot compete with industrial farms. I was staying at an airbnb on a farm like that, the only reason they still survived was because they lived in a protected nature area and they could benefit off of tourism, making and selling their own products in their own restaurant and local stores. Cottage industry, but they're the exception because it's a lot of work to make and sell products like that; you need an audience that's interested in locally produced goods like that, and it has to be priced competitively.

wiredfool 3y ago

Many foresters will warn you that if you have an over grown lot, harvesters will come in and harvest the big ones, leaving you the crap trees. Or at least the was the case in rural Wa ca 15 years ago.