do you think moving to the land will destroy the forest?

[MyWorkingForest]

it seems like there’s a lot of people moving back to the land and if so do you feel that this will destroy a huge amount of the nations forest? i am going to if successful start a conservation forestry business that cuts trees to save the forest with logging money.

[Our Little Farm]

Traditional Woodland Management does not destroy the forest. It helps it thrive.

There is a huge difference between clear cut, select cut and woodland management.

Many people that move to a woodland acreage just clear enough for their cabin and that is all. Not harming the environment is top of the list.

[tyusclan]

No. More trees are planted than cut every year. We have more trees today than ever before.


Most people who move back to the land have an appreciation for the land, and make the effort to learn how to use it without harming it.

[Micheal]

Around here, most of the places and/or bare land that people are buying and moving to consist of un-used farm land hence no "real" forest involved.

Although a problem some local loggers are running into - 10-15 years ago they logged off a 30-40 acre piece of the farmer's woods and dealt with that farmer. Whereas today to log off that same section of woods that logger would have to deal with 2-3-6-15 landowners....... making it just not worth it.

[fishhead]

It depends on the ratio of land changed (home foot print, driveway, etc.) and the land left as forest. That's why it's better to keep lot sizes large.

I've often wondered if it would be possible to buy land for the purpose of logging and hunting leases and have it pay for itself with some sweat equity.

[MichaelK!]

In a very broad sense, I have to say yes, for a number of reasons.

First and foremost though; simply the presence of more people will automatically cause more damage. Not the damage caused by logging, but the mere presence of more people consuming more resources.

More roads will be built, and road building is the single most important human activity that produces soil erosion. Approximately 50% of all forest land erosion is from roads!

More forest fires will be started from routine human activities. More sparks will fly from unregulated woodstoves. More burning grease will drip from carelessly positioned barbeque grills. More cigarette butts will be tossed from open car windows. More fires will be sparked from the operation of chainsaws, weedeaters, and other machinery.

More game will be poached as struggling families try to put food on the table. More legally harvested game will disappear simply because there are more validly licensed hunters combing the hills.

All of these activities will occur simply because of the presence of people!

But, I've already gotten my land, the road to it is already built, I've got a spark arrestor on my chimney, and my deer rifle. I'm not ammenable to increased regulation to control my activities. I am ammenable to restricting you from coming in. There's the rub. How do we balance the pursuit of happiness, with the needs of the many? To protect MY forest, do I prevent you from coming in? Or is it that I'm the one damaging YOUR forest?

[fishhead]

There are many many examples of human activity destroying forests and paying the price later. Many of the devastating mudslides we read about were caused by removing the forest canopy and root system.

[tinknal]

The only way to destroy a forest is to clear cut it, doze the stumps and burn them, and plow it up and convert it to cropland, pasture, or development. Clear cut a forest and leave it be and in a very short time you will have a new forest.

[crtreedude]

Originally Posted by tinknal

The only way to destroy a forest is to clear cut it, doze the stumps and burn them, and plow it up and convert it to cropland, pasture, or development. Clear cut a forest and leave it be and in a very short time you will have a new forest.

Correct, cutting a forest down doesn't destroy a forest, only changing the usage of the land destroys a forest. However, high grading (taking only the good trees) can destroy the commercial value of a forest.

[Ed Norman]

Or you could ban logging, let the fuel load build, and have a devastating forest fire instead of a beneficial fire.

[Oldcountryboy]

Originally Posted by tyusclan

No. More trees are planted than cut every year. We have more trees today than ever before.


Most people who move back to the land have an appreciation for the land, and make the effort to learn how to use it without harming it.

I beg to differ on this statement!

At the time of the European invasion across the North American continent, it was said that a squirrel could run from tree top to tree top from west central Oklahoma all the way to the east coast lines without ever touching the ground.

Now days 90 percent of all forested land has been cleared for pasture, roads, houseing, and other developements. It's no wonder we're having such heat waves. There's not much shade left to cool the surface, or tree's to slow down the cold wind. A lot of creeks and small rivers are much shallower today due to the excess cutting of trees next to the banks that have caused cave in's.

Yep, in some way or another, moving to the land does destroy the forest, streams, and wildlife. Everyone needs to learn to live with nature, not against it.