Can Sustainable Management Save Tropical Forests?
A: List the major ideas, concepts or key points- point by point
B: Summarize the AUTHOR’s main point or idea- at LEAST 1-2 paragraphs
Deforestation in tropics continue on a vast scale driven by widespread logging. Conservationists favored this strategy, until they concluded that most of the efforts had a slim chance for success. Sustainable forest management was an idea that first presented in 1980s. Mahogany is the most valuable species in tropical Americas because seedlings grew and prospered only after sizable natural disturbances. Disturbances dispersed pockets where seedlings could grow. Produced group of trees of approx. uniform age and size. Worries exacerbated by realization that there would be little natural growth to replace the harvested trees. With no natural growth, human intervention would be needed to maintain the mahogany. Having lots of trees may sound like a good idea, but cause of disturbance that can happen is much worse the chopping down trees.
C: Write a reaction paragraph to the article stating your own thoughts on the topic, using specific citations from the article to support your views
After reading this article I have learned what sustainable management is. I had no idea that trees were able to cause disturbance that can wipe out more trees and cause damage. There are two options that'll either make loggers happy or environmentalists happy. I think that many companies are reluctant to investing in long term logging. Although, no single strategy will work for all forests. Producers will have an ever greater incentive to enter currently uneconomic areas. I think the best thing to do is there should be a way to limit the number of trees cut, but at the same time create a profit for the logging companies.
So what?:
Says who?:
What if...? There was no tree harvesting limit:
What does this remind me of?:
The movie, Pocahontas. Two different groups of people want different things and the things they want will make one group happy and the other group upset.
- Logging rapidly harvests the most highly valued trees. Number of species may be as low as one or as high as 80 to 90.
- Logging continues on a large scale from the high price for tropical wood
- Logging companies show no concern for condition of residual stands and makes no investment in regeneration
- Forest management would mean a limit of trees to be cut as well as replacing them benefiting producers and conservation
- Scientists properly investigated only a small fraction of fauna and flora. Deforestation in tropics continue on a vast scale driven by widespread logging
- Logging companies face the decision of cutting the trees immediately and banking their profits or allowing trees to grow their volume and value
- Due to circumstances, many companies are reluctant to investing in long term logging
- Experts debate whether certification actually leads to higher market prices.
- Current patterns of selective harvest of large number of commercial species is a process that could require decades to complete
- Environmentalists need to remember that threats to tropical forests would continue even if sustainable management were to be adopted.
- If biodiversity is more important, then a low impact unsustainable choice may be preferred
- Delaying harvest has the risk of disaster such as fire, disease or if logging becomes prohibited
- Value of trees left to grow can plummet if wind, fire or disease destroyed them in the future, therefore choosing to leave mahogany growing amounts to rather uncertain investment is the same
- Less than 1/8 of 1% of production forests use a sustainable-yield basis
- Companies that rapidly harvest their assets usually invest right away and continue to generate high rates profit
- Worries exacerbated by realization that there would be little natural growth to replace the harvested trees
B: Summarize the AUTHOR’s main point or idea- at LEAST 1-2 paragraphs
Deforestation in tropics continue on a vast scale driven by widespread logging. Conservationists favored this strategy, until they concluded that most of the efforts had a slim chance for success. Sustainable forest management was an idea that first presented in 1980s. Mahogany is the most valuable species in tropical Americas because seedlings grew and prospered only after sizable natural disturbances. Disturbances dispersed pockets where seedlings could grow. Produced group of trees of approx. uniform age and size. Worries exacerbated by realization that there would be little natural growth to replace the harvested trees. With no natural growth, human intervention would be needed to maintain the mahogany. Having lots of trees may sound like a good idea, but cause of disturbance that can happen is much worse the chopping down trees.
C: Write a reaction paragraph to the article stating your own thoughts on the topic, using specific citations from the article to support your views
After reading this article I have learned what sustainable management is. I had no idea that trees were able to cause disturbance that can wipe out more trees and cause damage. There are two options that'll either make loggers happy or environmentalists happy. I think that many companies are reluctant to investing in long term logging. Although, no single strategy will work for all forests. Producers will have an ever greater incentive to enter currently uneconomic areas. I think the best thing to do is there should be a way to limit the number of trees cut, but at the same time create a profit for the logging companies.
So what?:
- Problems between loggers & environmentalists
- Deforestation
- Two options that'll make one or the other happy
Says who?:
- Richard E. Rice
- Raymond E. Gullison
- John W. Reid
What if...? There was no tree harvesting limit:
- All trees would probably be gone
- More profit would occur for a certain amount of time
- A result to harvesting other trees will happen when other trees are gone
What does this remind me of?:
The movie, Pocahontas. Two different groups of people want different things and the things they want will make one group happy and the other group upset.