Threats to Forests - Capitalism

The Good, The Bad, The Ugly

of Capitalism

The basic premiss of Adam Smith’s capitalism ideals as told in his book, The Wealth of Nations, is that the pursuit of each individual’s self-interests will lead, as if by an “invisible hand,” to a greater good for all people.  He opposed anything that interferes with pure competition, whether it is government, business, labor, companies, banks, Wall Street, or whatever.  Considering how business, labor and anyone who is anybody lobbies congress to limit competition in their favor, Adam must be rolling over in his grave these days.  Many “talking heads” and politicians today call on Adam’s name when they want to extoll the virtues of “free market capitalism,”  “supply-side economics,” “trickle down” and “limited government,” usually in an effort to get some special privileges for themselves.  Poor Adam, *sigh*. 

At its root Adam’s capitalism theory is, the individual person will do what is best for himself or herself and by doing that the entire society will be better off.  We’ll all have more “things” from food to cellphones, from roads to aircraft carriers.  But, there is nothing in Capitalism that assures it can work over the long-run in a world of finite resources, in fact, there are a couple reason why it may not and probably can’t.  Some people who think about economic stuff a lot say the whole capitalistic system must have growth because only anticipated growth attracts the investment capital that fuels every business, big and small.  If there is no promise of growth there is no capital investment; then the government would have to step in and save the businesses, or everyone would be unemployed and that would probably lead to a revolution.  That’s pretty serious stuff, so every month some newsperson tells us how much the economy grew and what the experts say about that much growth, it is never enough. Yet, nothing can grow indefinitely, well maybe the universe, so they tell us, but that is expanding into “nothing,” whatever that is.  Anything short of the universe that keeps expanding will eventually outgrow its home, in our case, Earth.   Also, it’s probably not too far wrong to say pure capitalism is mean, it takes without giving back any more than it has to; to people, to natural resources, or to infrastructure.  it’s pure competition (IGM & WM = I Got Mine & Want More)  and there’s not a lot of “giving” in that.  And, of course, there is the fatal problem of ignoring long-term effects of short-term profit-taking, that’s been called, “penny wise and pound foolish.”  

The good news is, capitalism, as an economic system, is not from nature, it is not a hurricane, not a tornado, not El Nino, not the change of seasons; people made it, so people can change it.  Considering history and the direction we’re going (toward a huge cliff), it’s time to make some big changes.

There is more on this to be discussed, or "to be continued."

Fraternal Twins - A Story

Fraternal Twins, A Story

- to think about -

(This is s little long, but you may enjoy it)

Once upon a time, in the year 1776, twins were born, a girl and a boy.  Although they were born in a very humble home, they had a big back yard to play in.  Through the next 230 plus years they would have some tough times, but the things they accomplished are a shining example to all who came to know them.  You see, their home was the United States of America.  

The girl’s name is American Democracy, “Dema” for short.  She was born in the American Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776.  The boy is American Capitalism, “Cap“.  Cap had his start as Adam Smith’s book The Wealth of Nations published in 1776.  It’s the classic description of Capitalism and makes the case that free markets are more productive and beneficial to people than other economic systems.   From the beginning Dema and Cap were very different, but they occupied the same home and they still do.  Down through the years, they have found ways to generally get along, although sister and brother fights have been common.

Dema is all about freedom and security, education, a comfortable and safe life for her people.  Dema has been committed to everyday people having an important say in their individual and collective way.  She knew that down through the years her people would hire some managers that may lust for power, so she divided governing into three parts, Judicial, Legislative and Executive. Her thinking is that no one part should gain too much power causing the people to become mere pawns.

Cap, on the other hand, is not so high minded, he doesn’t want any limits on his powers.  Cap is rambunctious, up for a challenge. “Go for it!“ “Just stay outt’a my way and I’ll get things done.”

Cap and Dema have both improved the day-to-day lives of Americans down through the years. For example, in today’s automobiles Cap has brought us a GPS on the dash and DVDs for the kids in the back seat.  Dema has brought us seat belts and air bags.  It is good to have both.  

Dema looks far ahead in time,  does long range planning and takes actions that may require decades or longer to pay off.  Our National Parks, Public Universities, the Panama Canal, Social Security, Interstate Highways, Center for Disease Control, and the Space Program are some examples of Dema looking far ahead and doing things that are for people’s good and eventually good economically.  Cap generally doesn’t plan more than ten or twenty years ahead.  That’s  because Cap needs to make money and the cost of borrowing money for long term projects prevents doing things that take a very long time to pay off.  Often Cap’s decisions are based on what will produce the greatest profits in the next quarter of the year.  This time-thing is a big difference between these twins.

They are an unlikely pair to grow up in the same house, but there they are.  

In those first years their big back yard (North America all the way to the Pacific) helped them each do their thing without getting in each others way too much.  Dema hung around the Eastern seaboard and slowly developed things she thought were important: schools, good roads, police, fire departments and rules-of-fair-play everyone should follow.  Cap was able to kick up dust, stomp on things that were in his way and pretty much do what he wanted on the frontier.  Money could be made on the frontier because there were lots of natural resources (good soil, forests, water,  minerals) to make things (farms, boards, metal) and not many restrictions on how to do it.  It went on that way for a while, Dema and Cap growing up, each pretty much doing their own thing.  Dema helped Cap from time to time, President Andrew Jackson moved the Cherokee people out of their home in Georgia to the Oklahoma frontier, that made the Cherokee’s land available for Cap. Dema fought a war with Mexico and gained Texas, that gave Cap a boost.  Dema and Cap were both growing, but not in each others way.

About the time American Democracy and American Capitalism were acting like they were in their early teens, in the 1860s, they had a terrible experience.  Civil War.  The War lasted about four years, there were terrible costs, but the American States stayed together and slavery was over - done - finished!  

After the War Dema was in a state of shock, needing rest and time to think.  Not Cap!  Farms, towns, cities needed to be rebuilt.  Railroads were headed out across the continent.  Many people who’s personal and economic lives had been shattered by war headed West for a new beginning.  American Capitalism boomed!  Once again there were few rules, a lot of natural resources to be conquered - as well as Native People.  There was  a whole lot of money to be made conquering the frontier.  It was great for Cap, Dema helped where she could, giving land to railroad builders, putting Native People on reservations and making treaties with them - which Cap ignored.

The American frontier was declared closed in the 1890 census.  That was a jolt, Cap didn’t have more land to exploit.  Cap turned on people, child labor, unsafe factories, unsafe mines, unsafe lumbering, long, hard working hours.  The money could still flow, “Things were getting done.” But, the money was flowing to fewer and fewer people at the tiptop of the money machine.  The common people were hurting.   Women still did not have the vote. 

Dema took notice.  Her manager at that time, Theodore Roosevelt, saw the people needed help, limits were put on Cap.  Slowly things started to get better for people.  Cap was learning to adjust to the limits and things were going good.  

As the twins grew into young adulthood their characters became more developed.   Dema seemed to be of two minds.  On the one hand (Republican philosophy), she wanted to support her brother and felt she would do anything for him.  When he got into trouble she would be there doing everything she could to help him.  On the other hand (Democratic  philosophy), she cares for the people and the things that are beneficial and fair to them.   

Cap had always seemed to have bipolar tendencies, manic for a period of time then depression.  As he got bigger and stronger his bipolar swings were greater.  During up times, the factories were running full steam, farms were productive, cities were growing, industrial giants were making big money and it looked like the good times would go on and on.  Life was good.  Then there would be a down turn, a recession or depression,  and everything would be terrible for Cap.  He usually blamed everyone else for his problems, especially Dema because she hadn’t let him do everything he wanted without any limits.  But, together, they muddled on.

Another war, this time a World War I.  America lost many thousands of young men, but her cities, factories and farms were in tact.  Europe’s were in shambles.  Cap learned a big lesson, wars can be good for him.   It takes lots of money to make things that go “boom!”  After the war, those factories could make other things people in the destroyed countries needed.

Dema?  Not so much.  She had to increase taxes and borrow a lot of money to pay Cap for all those war machines.  That money didn’t educate, build infrastructure or much of anything else useful to her people.  All that borrowed money had to be paid back.

Smart people had been concerned about Cap’s bipolar condition for years, when he was in depression it was hard on everyone, rich and poor.  These economists were looking for ways to ease the pain when Cap had one of his down periods.  Dema listened to these wise people and put some limits on Cap here and there.  

But Cap was riding high after the big War -- until October 29, 1929, the bottom fell out. Cap went into deep Depression.   Dema did everything she could to help Cap and her people.  It was a grim time, most people were hurting - a lot!  Dema took some bold steps as a result of Cap’s big bout with Depression.  Cap would have to take some medicine, it tasted terrible, he didn’t think he needed it, but Dema insisted that banking had to be improved and the financial markets needed more rules and regulations and there had to be social security for people.  Cap should never fall into another bout of Depression like the 1929 crash.  

It was World War II that finally put the end to Cap’s big depression, a terrible remedy.  Again, Cap prospered by war.  After the War, Dema became involved  in developing ways to help the American people, The GI Bill that helped with home ownership and education for veterans were very big things.  

Soon, Dema and Cap united in a head-to-head battle against another economic system, Communism.  Their very existence was at stake and every American knew it.

Dema and Cap were always two separate individuals, sister and brother. They cooperated when necessary, they fought with each other over control issues, sometimes seriously, but somehow they had always worked things out.  Communism wasn’t like that, the economic system and the government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republic (USSR) were fused into one seamless entity.  The cold war with Communism was for control of the entire world, including survival of Democratic American Government and American Capitalism.  

During the Viet Nam War, a part of the Cold War, one of Dema’s managers believed America was rich enough to have both, “guns and butter”.   America wasn’t.  Her National Debt rose.   Dema struggled with how much to tax citizens, while, at the same time, dealing with civil rights for all Americans, The Feminist Movement, the Space Program, and how to improve the security, health, education and general welfare of Americans.  Each a huge effort.   Communism only dealt with the things that would promote the USSR’s Cold War goals.

Communism folded in 1989, defeated after 44 years of Cold War without a bomb exploding.  The workers in Communism couldn’t keep pace with what Dema and Cap could provide their people, even with all the diversions and conflicting issues Dema and Cap struggled to solve.  Fascism and Communism were enemies Americans could see, feel, hate, and we could fight them in factories, farms, schools and battlefields, we could eventually defeat them.

After that, Cap went on a manic spree.  Lots of Americans became millionaires and billionaires, regular people were making money in the stock market and many people were buying second homes.  Times were good.  Government had budget surpluses in the 1990’s.

Then - 9/11/2001!  Retaliation!  America would go to war against al-Qaeda  the country in the middle was Afghanistan.  Dema’s managers were right about that, but then they lost their way.  America would attack Iraq and there would be a tax CUT while fighting the two wars. 

Little by little, since 1980, the philosophy had crept in that Dema was the problem and Cap had all the answers.  With that creeping philosophy, regulations and limits on Cap’s activities were eased and done away with.  And why not?  Cap was working like a charm, people were making money.  It was hardly noticed that a greater and greater percentage of the money in America was being concentrated and controlled by fewer and fewer people and institutions at the top of the economic pyramid.  Big money hired more and more lobbyists and lawyers to control all three government departments, Legislative, Executive and Judicial at national and state levels.  Cap had the money to influence laws that would make him stronger by concentrating wealth.  This meant weakening  environmental protections, public safety, infrastructure and regulations to make finance safe, fair and transparent.

September 2008, Cap crashed again, it looked bad, maybe another Depression.  Important people, people we believed were smart and responsible, people we thought were taking care of things too complicated for us to understand began screaming, “The financial sky is falling!”  “Too big to fail is failing!” “GM may close!” 

Those who we trusted were telling us we have to pony up hundreds of billions of dollars and give it to big banks, big insurance and car companies. We’ll have to borrow the money and these banks, insurances and companies may or may not ever pay us back.  We were told we have to give these “Too big to fails”  hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars - OR ELSE!  Or else what?  “THEY’LL FAIL!”  “Oh.”  So, Dema bailed out Cap, again.  And now, no country in the history of the world has ever had this much debt for us, our sons and daughters and their sons and daughters to pay off.  IF we can even do it.  Maybe Americans can.  I hope we can.

How did this happen?

We need to go back to the early 1980’s when Dema’s manager said, “Government is the problem, not the solution.” He believed it and began to take actions.  Greed was said to be good and the basis for Capitalism, it was unleashed.  Accepting greed as “good” was like putting Cap on steroids.  Many politicians vilified government workers  as people who couldn’t make it in a “real” job, that they are a drag on real working people. (“Those who can’t do, teach.  Government workers are a liability on the taxpayer,” and many many more non-sequiturs.)  Air traffic controllers were fired because they wanted a pay raise.   Regulations that had been in place to limit the powers of Cap were deregulated, weakened, or loop-holed and the government employees who did the regulating were discredited.  Taxes were viewed as a bad  thing that limited Cap, so the Legislative branch, both national and state, handed out tax loopholes to lobbyists like candy at a parade.  America was losing sight of the basic fact that government is about service and government services are necessary for citizens and the general economy.  The annual Government budget went deficit (into the red), each year piling up greater and greater debt.  Americans were told, “debt doesn’t matter”.  The military was exulted and for several years was given a 10% budget increase each year.  Ten percent of hundreds of billions is a big bunch.  The $800 toilet seats the Navy bought is an indicator the military had more money than they could use wisely.  The Gulf War happened, more debt piled up. 

This game plan set Cap on a run like he’d never had before.  He was getting more powerful every day, huge amounts of money were accumulating  in fewer and fewer companies and people.   Cap could buy more lobbyists and lawyers to get Dema’s legislators to pass laws that favored him.  It was an upward spiral with fewer and fewer limits on what Cap could do, there was no end in sight.  It was great!  In the 1990’s Government budgets were in the black and the National Debt was being paid off - a good thing.

Dema, on the other hand, was deeply hurt by the “Government is the problem” attitude.  It takes exceptionally strong people committed to public service to suffer the criticism of being “a government bureaucrat” and still go out and do a good job every day.  Enough good people could not be found to fill every important government job.  Citizens were being hurt by all this and they didn’t realize it, even though there were signs along the way.   The Enron Company went down because of its greed and evil ways.  Contaminated peanut butter was sold to our schools because a company was filthy and greedy and regulators didn’t do anything about it.  Derivatives, designed to get around important financial regulations, were invented.  Bernie Madoff stole billions from the poor and rich, regulators didn’t challenge him. Then, there was the, “We don’t want the  smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud,”  lie designed to lead us to war in Iraq.  And the, “Debt don’t matter” lie that led to a tax cut so Americans wouldn’t notice we were in two wars.  

All these and more brought us to September 2008 when the cries went up, “We are heading for the cliff!”  “Too big to fail!”  “Bailout!”  Cap was crying to be saved.  We still don’t know if they were crocodile tears or if they were real.  We’ll never know what the effect would have been on Dema and Americans if the big banks did fail. 

What we do know is, Dema, once again, bailed-out Cap.  The American people borrowed hundreds of billions of dollars to save a gang of big banks, insurance companies and couple car companies.  Four years after the bailouts the car companies are making money, the big banks have gotten bigger and are again paying their managers immoral amounts of money that they certainly do not earn or deserve - and we don’t know why.  The big insurance company is crying about government controls over what they do, but they haven’t paid back the 160+ billion  dollars we people gave them to save their hides.  And, the common Americans are still hurting: the jobless rate was high for years, home foreclosures have hurt millions of people, homeowners and small businesses are intimidated and abused by banks, even with the Affordable Care Act passed Dema’s Legislative, Executive, and Judicial are playing a shell game, keeping Cap in control, making huge money on sick Americans. 

Can American Democracy and American Capitalism work together to save this country from huge debt; from concentration of wealth and power in the few, the greedy; from our inadequate education system; from unfairness to the common people; from environmental degradation; from our aging infrastructure?  

We don’t know yet, the story has pages to turn.  Dema and Cap have never been in a situation like this before.  Dema’s political structure is seriously broken.  Congress is being  short sighted, self-serving, stuck in opposing ideologies, unwilling to compromising.  It obviously lacks the character, intelligence and courage to do what is right for the people and the Nation.  Congress is simply not working.  Not much hope there.  The Executive needs more skill, intelligence, wisdom, commitment, integrity and clear-sightedness than we’ve ever seen.  The Judicial, that was  meant to be where wisdom resides, abandon that mantel when The Supreme Court went political in the 2000 election decision and the 2010 “Citizens United” decision.  The Citizens United decision gives Cap a huge advantage over Dema, MAYBE THE ABILITY TO CRUSH HER and turn America into an oligarchy (a state governed by a few people or families) disguised as a democracy.  

Cap has turned to shortsighted self-serving greed as a mantra, with J.P. Morgan Chase Bank setting the example, and he’s getting away with it, increasing his dominance over Dema in every way. 

America’s best hope is in the people, can we act unselfishly, with courage, determination, intelligence, with confidence in the long view?  Can we again make Dema’s institutions work “for the greatest good to the greatest number in the long run”?  Or, does our Congress accurately represent Americans?  I guess we’ll see.

Pogo’s words have come to reality, “We have met the enemy and he is us”

Threats to Forests - Economics Continued

Economics continued —

People have always needed forests for survival and growing a civilization.  People have always believed, “There are more forests over there when these are gone.”  No more!  It’s not that the forests are gone, they’re not.  But, all the forests and crop land in the world are now being uses, some in good way, a lot not.  So far, we haven’t been willing to invest enough to sustain healthy, forests everywhere so we can have a steady flow of their products.  Our for-profit economic system doesn’t allow it.

America’s economic system demands products get to market as cheap as possible, that often means the long-term good is abandon for short-term profits.  For example, it is expensive to plant trees and culture and protect them through the many years until the next harvest, so, too often, we don’t.   Roads are another example, logging roads are cheaper to build without designed water drainage, grade and culverts, but without good design, roads erode, the dirty water pollutes streams, the eroded soil won’t grow another crop of trees because it has been washed downstream and lies at the bottom of some city’s water reservoir, building up year after year.  Eventually, maybe sooner rather than later, the reservoir becomes a mudflat.  That’s an example of “penny wise and pound foolish,” in spades, but that’s where the drive for profits takes us.  

There are alternatives within our economic and financial systems to take care of natural resources as we use them, but those alternatives take long-range planning, financial commitment and political courage to make changes.  In our economic system budgets for taking care of national forest and park areas are established by Congress, and there’s the problem.  If the people don’t know and care about the forests and parks, neither will congress and very little money will be budgeted for the management and research to sustain forests, range lands, crop lands and soils.  That is what is happening now.  These issues are as important on private lands and forests as they are on public forests.  

A big problem is, we haven’t come up with ways to value forest beauty, wildlife habitat, clean water and keep soil in the place where it developed.  Economists and politicians need to work on this.  Without ways to value clean water, wildlife habitat, soil and natural beauty these “invaluable” gifts, that are couched within products that have dollar values (board feet of wood, animal-unit-months of grass, recreation visitor days, subdivision lots), are valueless and are smashed in the rush to harvest the resources that are worth dollars.  That was what destroyed the famous cedar forests of Lebanon during the Old Testament days (read about it in The Bible, I Kings chapter 5) and the  sandarac pine in the Atlas Mountains of north Africa during Roman times.  Today we are much more efficient at taking down forests than those guys two to four thousand years ago and they destroyed those wonderful forests and made deserts where forests had been. Think about what we can do these days if we don’t put our mind to it.

Threats to Forests - Economics

Economics

To talk about economic systems lets start before capitalism existed.  For far more than 10,000 years people lived on North American continent and lived by a very different economic system, even though some of these First People, the Iroquois League of Nation for example, had a democratic form of government.  Democracy and Capitalism are not always hand in hand (see “Fraternal Twins” below).  Those early people had worked out a policy for managing the forests and prairies that sustained the ecosystems and provided their necessities of life, generation after generation for over 400 generations - yes, four hundred generations, plus or minus a few.  

An old Ponderosa pine growing in a tough place.

Their economic system required that they manage the natural resources to sustain wild animals and fish as a protein source and edible wild plants.  Shelter, clothing, tools and money were from the animals, plants and minerals the people lived with, hunting and gathering.  They cultured clean water in the rivers so fish populations could thrive, and manage land to produce nourishing grass and shrubs for the grazers and browsers (deer, elk, moose, buffalo and, later, horses).  They managed the forests and grasslands with fire, fires set often, so the flame lengths were only 4, 6, or 8 feet, fire crept along burning the dead grass, old shrubs and limbs and down trees that had accumulated since the last fire less than ten years before.  The people knew these cool fires revived the grasses and shrubs because the roots weren’t killed, also, the low intensity fires don’t kill the bigger trees that have thick insulating bark.  The year following the fire new grasses and shrubs were so succulent and packed with nutrients, the grazers were back in greater numbers than before, that meant abundant food for the people.  It was a sustaining economic system that served their way-of-life..

About sixteen generations ago Europeans began making settlements on the continent.  Their forest management policies were very different.  The European economy grew food on farms, traded for goods and services and their homes had foundations.  Forest and prairie fires creeping around couldn’t be tolerated, and they weren’t.  A change in forest policy and management began to take effect.  The farm/trade/manufacture economy wanted very different products from the forest than the hunter/gather economy wanted.  Clean water, not so important; healthy grazing for wild animals, not important; forest beauty, forget it.  The policy was to make money off of those big trees and at the same time clear the land for farm crops. 

400 Generations!

Really?

Let’s look at that.

We’d better digress for a bit and explore that  400 generation thing.  Our present economic system, capitalism, just started in 1776 so has only existed for less than ten  generations; European settlement didn’t get started here much before 1600, that’s only sixteen generation and we’re wearing out the resources that support our way-of-living and our lives.   We’ve already had to pass laws to try and limit water and air pollution and save a whole host of wild critters and plants from becoming extinct, plus a lot of regulations to try and limit our abuses to Earth (DDT ban and on-and-on). Those necessary laws and regulations are both incriminating and magnanimous.  Incriminating because, so quickly, we are destroying so much of the Earth’s resources that supports us.  Magnanimous because we see the absolute end in sight for critters from the bald eagle to the snail darter fish and want to do something about it, plus, in the dark places of our mind, where we don’t want to go, we know, “That could be us.”  But it isn’t just today’s economic system that is taking us pel mel for the cliff, there have been plenty of civilizations that have done the same thing before us, and they went over the cliff.

“The Romans” for example, they didn’t last more than thirty generations, and think what they had.  They started with wonderful natural resources, a mild climate for people and growing plant crops, rich productive soils, horses, cows, sheep and goats (none of which existed in the Western Hemisphere), there was a rich protein source in the sea, the shore line had natural harbors and there were forests for making ships, metals to be mined and worked into tools and weapons.  There wasn’t much gold and silver nearby so they solved that by taking over Spain and working Spaniards in the mines as slaves.  As forests were cut and soils worn out close to Rome they conquered neighboring areas and worked the land, the forests and the people to death - literally.  When one set of land and people wore out, the Romans would conquer another place with land and people to be slaves and keep Rome going.  Always wearing out the forests, soils and people and always expanding their empire and transportation highways.  They ripped through North Africa, the Arabian peninsula, Syria, Armenia, and many other areas of Asia Minor.  Why these places?  Because, before Roman conquest, these places were rich in their ability to grow crops, there were forests and other resources the Romans wanted back home.  But even that efficient and brutal system finally collapsed because the land and resources they could conquer were used up.  And look what they left behind, North Africa and much of the middle east is still desert and poor land incapable of supporting healthy forests, crops and cities. (Men and Nature, Marsh, Introduction)   When the land had been abused enough by the Romans and wouldn’t support their imperial needs any longer, the great empire fell apart, around 1100 AD, and Europe went into economic depression, or chaos, called the Dark Ages or the Middle Ages, whatever; that lasted 400 years until the Renaissance.

A couple thousand years before the Romans, Canaan, the area from Lebanon south along the Mediterranean to Egypt, was a land rich in agricultural abundance, The Bible’s Exodus 33:3 refers to it as, “a land flowing with milk and honey.”  A lot of history happened there since then, conquest by one empire after another, each abusing the land, cutting forests, overgrazing by sheep and goats, and causing soils to eroded.  Today the area is certainly not “a land flowing with milk and honey,” it’s mostly desert and sparsely populated. 

In the Americas, the Mayas and the Aztecs were on about the same track as the Romans, except they didn’t have horses to supply power so their destructive ways were taking more time.  Their time ran out when the Spanish, with horses, iron and germs came and decided to take all the gold they could get and make slaves of the people.  The slave part didn’t work out too well, but the Spaniards got the gold and left the Mayas, Aztecs and Incas civilizations in shambles.  The mound builders in the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers had a sophisticated civilization with cities of twenty to thirty thousand people that lasted for over 6000 years, but they finally “went under,” possibly by diseases introduced by the first invading  Europeans.   It was a couple hundred years before white settlement got to where this mound builders civilization had been, by then the forest had reclaimed the land, but some mounds remain today.   The ancient Pueblo People in the Southwest had sophisticated civilizations, but, the best guesses are, they used-up their resources, forests, cropland, and water.    

A Ponderosa pine, 342 years old.

So, conquest doesn’t seem to work for the long run, and the present economic system has its problems with wearing out the Earth’s resources.  Yet, the First People in North America had social, economic and political systems that endured for 400 generations.  How did they do that?  What did their systems involve?  Well, they involved marriage, they involved religion, they involved education of young people and recognizable rights-of-passage into adulthood.  They involved political systems, including the Iroquois Nation’s democratic system and a constitution, they involved wars, they involved trade and money, they involved guiding philosophies, they involved the arts, and medicine, they involved divisions of labor.  There were rich nations and poor nations depending on their natural resource base.  And they involved land management policies and techniques with long-term sustainable goals that were the basis for their economic system. But, of course, their systems didn’t evolve a lot of the amenities we enjoy (relatively safe child birth for mother and child, longer healthier lives, warm homes in winter, abundant food).  Would it be worth living without hot showers?  I guess they thought so.

Hot showers, or four hundred generations?  We must be smart enough to figure out some middle ground that can sustain the earth’s forests, soil, clean water and air and still provide food and an enjoyable lifestyle, but not a greedy one, greed is the killer. 

Our economists and finance people need to do some serious thinking about the long-term (everything) and our politicians need to acquire some gumption and cooperate with one another to help us all save this life-giving earth from us. 

Enough digression, back to economics and trees.

Threats to Forests - Changing Lifestyles

Changing Lifestyles

A subtle threat to our forests is that most people don’t need to think about forests these days, so they don’t.  Most people don’t know, or care, how boards are grown; most of us don’t think about the wild critters very much; we’re not too concerned about where water for cities and crops comes from as long as it’s there when we turn on the faucet and natural beauty isn’t experienced on a daily basis.  We know all these things are important, but we are so darn busy with our daily lives: a wife, a husband, kids, parents, that whole work thing, our health, having enough money, keeping up appearances, all these and more just pile-up against the time and energy a person has.  And, most of us live in cities, far removed from the land and forests, forests are simply not a part of our thinking.

The problem with ignoring forest needs is, people have impacted the forests for many centuries, not given back what is necessary to make a healthy environment for trees and their associates, now many of our forests are sick.  Sick with too many trees killed by bugs, sick with too much fuel on the ground, sick because trees are too crowded.  Most of us can relate to these troubles even if we don’t go near a forest.  If forests don’t get the help they need we people will be the big losers.  We need healthy forests to provide clean water, wood for building, habitat for animals, outdoor recreation, and natural beauty that lifts our spirit.  Sick forests bring bigger fires, more bug-killed-trees, dirtier streams and reservoirs, more barren land with eroded soil, impact on wild animals and a less natural beauty.  Natural beauty is important in ways we can’t value in dollars, but it is necessary - to all of us.  Some of the poets understand this, we need to listen to them.  

So, human history has not been favorable to forests, but education, understanding and awareness can change what we think and value.  Every one of us can pay more attention to the natural world, you can learn the kinds of trees that are nearby and a little about them.  Each of us can notice natural beauty and point it out to someone.  Mary Oliver, a poet, wrote, “To pay attention is our everyday and proper work,” she makes a good point.  In the long-run, paying attention to the natural world is important to each of us, our body’s health, our spiritual health, and our economic health.  

“What we have loved, others will love and we will teach them how,”  William Wordsworth. “We” need to teach about forests and how to care for them.

*Intermission*

My Top Ten Trees, #7

Spirit Tree

Economic trees, yeoman trees, aesthetic trees,

Ancient trees, nuisance trees,

Corral Creek is a city of trees.

One is a Spirit Tree.

Whitebark pine, Spirit Tree.

Standing alone

At a place too steep, too rocky

for its economic or aesthetic fellows.

I know it is a Spirit Tree.

Its beauty is beyond the artist.

Brush and talent cannot capture

The color, detail and scale.

Four trunks, one root, anchored in rock.

Three trunks with narrow strips of living cambium;

Their soul exposed by fire, wind and sun.

One trunk living all around, supporting the whole.

Years; hardships; quiet, small triumphs;

There for the looking.

Power and Truth exposed, 

Beyond the poet’s words to capture.

In this remote, stoic place 

It is safe from economic people.

But, with effort and seeking, spiritual people

Can find and ponder its stories and Truths.

Hike the trail, crossing pleasant streams, 

On, to ridges.  Up, under the ancient guards.

Through flowered meadows.  Passing broom-like

pines, sweeping, in the ridge-top winds. 

Then down; north slope thick with small trees,

Cross avalanche paths, drop into the sharp “V”

Stream ~ a place too steep to be in!

And, there it is, beside the trail, Spirit Tree.

There are other Spirit Trees,

I’ve seen one on Pole Mountain. Wyoming.

Go to Corral Creek or seek your own.

See its beauty, decipher its stories, learn its Truths.

Jerry Covault

September 7, 2003

Ketchum, Idaho

Threats to Forests - Recreation - Continued

Much of what was beautiful about the forest and lake was lost in the process of people wanting to enjoy it.  Recreation can and does do that.  The problem is, we haven’t figured out how to limit recreation use below the level where the beauty is degraded.  Research hasn’t shown us how to reclaim natural beauty when it has been damaged, or destroyed.  We can replant trees after a fire or logging, we can obliterate roads, reduce grazing impacts by removing ungulates (hoofed, grazing animals, cows, elk, elephants etc.), we can rehabilitate streams, reintroduce fish and wild animals, we have the science to rehabilitate these, it is a matter of money and time to do it.  Recreation impacts are different, recreation is different because it involves so many individual people; it is economic and it is political and that’s a tough combination to limit.  People have very different ideas about what natural beauty is, how much degradation is acceptable, how accessible should beauty be, the limits of use, personal freedoms, “to do what I want to do on my land!”  People’s different ideas about forests, lakes, mountains, rivers, beauty and how to enjoy them is as varied as the people who want to enjoy outdoor recreation and those who want to make a living from it. 

It is typical for interest groups to want desirable areas exclusively for their particular use.  It is hard for horse riders to share a trail with four wheelers, it is hard for cross country skiers to share a trail with snowmobilers,  canoeists, kayakers and rafters prefer not to hear motor boats, motor boaters want to go wherever the water is suitable.  The list goes on and on. The point is, one person’s recreation may ruin the experience for another and there simply are not enough mountains, forests, lakes and rivers for every recreation interest group to have their own place.  We need to develop ways to share recreation spaces and accept some limits so natural beauty and the benefits of the outdoors are not degraded. 

So far, the answers have been: prohibit certain types of use in some places, install a lot of rules, and harden the sites.   “Hardening a site” usually involves blacktop, toilets, designated places to camp and so on.  Rules - the more people there are at a recreation area, the more rules there are and when the list of rules gets very long there will be rule enforcers, call them rangers, sheriffs or police, they are necessary.  In some places, limiting the kinds of uses is necessary to reduce conflicts between groups, or to protect nature.   Examples are, off road vehicles are prohibited in certain areas to protect soil, streams, wild animals and plants; motor boats may be prohibited where people swim, you can think of many other examples.  The problem with these tactics is they are just reacting to the problem of too many people using a place and wearing it out. 

Recreation areas need a “strategic management plan” that identifies the qualities that are important about a place, that can help determine how much use and what kinds of use the place can sustain and still preserve its special qualities.  Then, somehow, figure out ways to limit use.  That is a very difficult thing to do, but we need to try. If we don’t know what we want to save it will gradually be lost.

There is an underlaying problem related to degrading the natural beauty at recreation and scenic areas with blacktop and toilets.  That problem is, Americans are becoming accustomed to the idea that blacktop and toilets are associated with places of natural beauty and recreation.  Our understanding and standards of what is natural, of what is wild, of beauty, color, order and what is real is being compromised.  Maybe worse, most Americans view natural beauty on a digital screen more that in real life.  Those outdoor picture have likely been color enhanced, an obstruction that “doesn’t belong” may have been removed -  there is nothing real about a image on a screen, yet we’re getting accustomed to thinking, “that is nature.”  But, there is no breeze in your face, you can’t smell the smells, you don’t feel the fear when you’ve glimpsed a bear, you’re not freezing cold, or sweating from the effort to get to the view, it’s virtual and that is a long ways from being real.  People may be losing understanding of that difference, that can be serious.  

The parking lots, moderately clean toilets and digital images may be as close as many of us get to nature, and that’s probably better than nothing.  We can think of these experiences as incentives to learn more about the natural world and go deeper into it.  That would be good, that can take you beyond recreation to the kind of experience the poets describe - and even they can’t quite do it because the experience can be beyond words. That is where recreation can take us at its best.

Threats to Forests - Recreation

Recreation  

Once upon a time, in the mountains, over a pass, west of a city, there was a beautiful 4000 acre lake surrounded by forest and above-timberline-peaks.  The lake was the first place the clean cold snowmelt water settled.  Trout loved it.  People enjoy a lake like this for its beauty, to renew their spirits, to catch a fish, to change their routine, to meet new people.  It’s called recreation, and it is important, look at the money and effort people put into it, that shows how important it is  - sort‘a.  

Forest recreation, like any other kind of recreation, going to the movies, watching football, attending a symphony, or whatever, requires facilities.  In the case of forest recreation the facilities likely involve, roads, parking lots, restrooms, campgrounds,  boat ramps, bike trails, hiking trails, horse unloading ramps, ski areas, snowmobile parking, even places to just sit and look.   Most recreation facilities have been planned and designed by some forester and landscape architect.  These kinds of facilities are necessary to help people enjoy the place and protect the natural resources (water, soil, scenery and wildlife) from the polluting things people seem to trail behind them.

When just a few people came to our mountain lake for a weekend they did fine, finding a place where they could pull off the road, sit up a tent and walk to the lake.  They’d fish, play in the water (but not much, it is cold), they would walk around in the woods and have a good time.   More people came.  Trash and waste became problems.  Campgrounds and toilets were built to control the problems.  More and more people, more and more campgrounds, boat ramps, trails, outdoor theaters for nature talks, traffic signs.  The lake and around the lake became crowded.  Rules.  Law enforcement.  It wasn’t as pristine as it once was, but more people were enjoying it.  All this happened on public land around the lake.

Evening along the Marias River

There is also private land near the lake, including some shoreline.  Some people who had been camping at the lake for years decided they would buy land and build a vacation home.  “No Trespassing” signs went up, second and third cars were left outside at the vacation home, wire fences enclosed small lots.  Here and there a house in the trees was painted pink, or robin egg blue, or yellow - all good colors, besides, there were no rules about forest aesthetics and development.  Along with the no rules there was no central sewage system, septic tanks and leech fields handle the sewage, but with rocky soils they don’t always work the way they should.  Waste made its way, underground, to  the lake.  The lake’s water became less clear, water plants grew under the surface.  Campgrounds, cabins, businesses, homes and vacation homes generate mounds of trash.  A land-fill dump was needed, and established, but because there was not a large population there was not enough money to maintain it properly.  Once again waste went into the ground water and moved toward the lake.

There were the shopping areas and scattered stores, they all needed signs to direct customers to their businesses.  The more colorful and contrasting the signs are to the green forest and blue sky the better it was at attracting attention and neon lighting was best of all.   No one seemed to ask the question, “Is this what we really want here?” 

Threats to Forests - Weeds

Weeds

Weeds aren’t dramatic, they are even hard to define, but, “non-native, invasive plants” works as a definition.  Non-native, that’s obvious, a way to think about that is the way the Native American people probably viewed the first  settlers from across the oceans.  Invasive, the metaphor holds, the “invaders” seem harmless at first, maybe even desirable, but as their population explodes they will change everything.

The natives we want to save

Ok, but really, what’s so bad about a few weeds?  Fair question, let’s look at weeds in crop land first.  Any weed in a crop field is competing with the corn, wheat, soy beans, alfalfa, or whatever for soil moisture, nutrients, and growing space above ground and in the soil, so any weed is taking away from what the crop plants could be producing.  Too many weeds in a field will reduce the crop yield a lot. Lower yields mean less food produced and higher prices at the grocery store.  That’s real and that a good reason to control weeds.  Next, weeds in wild lands where there are no cultivated crops.  Wildlife don’t eat most weeds.  Wild animals evolved through thousands of years eating a diet of native plants in the area where they live.  When weeds come in fast and thick, the available forage for wildlife is significantly reduced.  In a heavy winter with a lot of snow on the traditional wildlife winter range that has been taken over by weeds the wild animals are out of alternatives, they starve to death.  It is not only the wild animals that suffer, the native plants can be outcompeted by weeds and just go away.   This can increase soil erosion as the fibrous roots of native grasses are replaced by tap roots of weeds, tap roots don’t do as much to hold soil together.  So, whether you are a people, a domestic animal, a wild animal, a plant or even a particle of soil, weeds can be a problem, especially where they become epidemic.   

  

There are lots of non-native, invasive plants in and around the woods today.  A plant that is non-native, but is not invasive can be tolerated by native plants, animals and people.  It is the invasive part that gets serious and will change the color, character and productivity of the landscape from what it has been for thousands of years and it can happen in a matter of a few years.

What to do?  There are biologists who, for years, have studied non-native invasive plants that threaten native ecosystems.  The research is mostly financed by government, no one else would pay for it because the consequences of weeds are so subtle, indirect and happen over time.  When an invasive weed is discovered in an ecosystem there are three things that can be done to prevent the weed from taking over and crowding out the natives: we can pull the weeds, we can spray the weeds, or we can get mother nature’s help.  All three are expensive and in most cases all three are used.  Pulling is obvious, spraying is obvious and comes with side-effects, getting nature’s help - very complicated. 

Here is how getting nature’s help goes.   Scientists determine where this invasive weed is native, it is probably on some distant continent.  Where the weed is native it is probably not invasive, it may not even be a weed, maybe its plant neighbors, the animals and people like it there.  The biologists study the invasive plant’s native environment to determine what keeps it from running wild.  The studies look for something that just loves to chew on the plant where it is native, but the chewer doesn’t exist in the plant’s new neighborhood, America.  The “chewer” may be a bug, a worm, a fungus, a virus, or some fuzzy critter. Whatever it is, the chewer, or chewers (there are usually several types) keep the plant population in check in its natural environment.  Learning what the natural enemies are, the scientists bring home several of these.  The chewer immigrants can’t just be turned lose, they might do damage to plants we like.  A long period of testing and retesting must be done to determine if the new agents will only attack the targeted weed and not damage other plants. Biological controls works best if there are at least three different bugs or diseases that will attack the invasive plant.   From dozens of agents tested there will be only a few that are safe and effective to release.  The agents that make the cut will have to be produced by the millions and distributed into the environment where they can attack the invasive plants. Biological control is a very long, complicated and expensive process, but it has been working for years and is one of the important tools against invasive weeds. 

You can do your part by learning about invasive weeds in your area and pulling them, also, pay your taxes that support the scientists doing this work. 

Mariposa Lilly -  A Native