As the short story The Man Who Planted Trees suggests, forest management is more important than indiscriminate planting, even if the latter is done with the best of intentions. Management, judgement and knowledge are key, experts say.
Trees sequester CO2, helping to slow global warming. They contribute to the water cycle through evapotranspiration. By channelling rain, they improve the porosity and structure of the soil. They protect thin topsoil from erosion. And they are a nursery for biodiversity. With this list of services, we might conclude that every forest is magical, and the more trees the better.
But in the complex forest habitat, what is beneficial in one environment can be counterproductive in another. In the Amazon and some parts of Asia and Africa that have been stripped bare by rampant logging, cutting down a tree can seem like a crime against sustainability. Other countries on the other side of the planet, such as Ethiopia and India, boast world records for massive tree plantings in less than 24 hours. And in Europe, where there is a trend towards reforestation and where, as in Spain, unplanned forests are expanding, experts such as foresters are prioritising management with judgement and knowledge rather than indiscriminate planting. It is not so much the quantity of trees that matters as the quality of the forest. The point is that planting, whether in Spain or in India, must be done with common sense and a long-term vision.
Selective interventions
For Eduardo de Miguel Beascoechea, executive manager of the Fundación Global Nature, a sensible forestry policy should combine the management of existing forests, especially those that naturally encroach on abandoned farmland and pastures, with long-term, sustainable planting. What is the point of mass tree planting, he asks, if neglect later fuels the super-fires that release the massive amounts of CO2 captured over decades or centuries?
“We need to focus on selective intervention and management rather than planting on a massive scale,” says De Miguel, “monitoring to consolidate what has been planted and to replace the dead trees if necessary.” Otherwise, unmanaged reforestation can degenerate into a tangle of vegetation, especially in the first critical years. According to Miguel Angel Ortega, president of the NGO Reforesta, “human intervention is needed to accelerate the transformation of rickety saplings into fruit-producing trees.” Ortega challenges the popular belief that the forest always regenerates itself. It does come back, of course, but often poorer because of the loss through erosion of soil capable of supporting trees.
For De Miguel, this professional management must be sound in the selection of lands and the combination of native species, as well as being planned for the long term with “forest management that adapts to climate change“: “We need to know what is going to be planted because the composition of species will vary, what diseases will affect them, whether more open or more closed forests are appropriate, etc.”
This far-sighted approach is at odds with practices such as planting pinus halepensis in gypsiferous soils, which are mistakenly perceived as eroded wasteland, when in fact the ecological value of these lands resides in this very characteristic, which produces unique species. Some organisations such as Global Citizen warn that this mistake could be repeated in massive plantation projects on African savannahs. Another misguided practice that continues to be repeated: reforestation dominated by a single species—a monoculture—with poor results in terms of biodiversity.
A single file forest
Looking to science for guidance applies not only to these fundamental issues, but also to other less obvious ones. The Fundación Global Nature cites the case of anti-parasitic drugs such as ivermectin, which remain in the faeces of treated animals and end up killing dung beetles, breaking the cycle of organic recycling in pastures. Here, scientific knowledge could help avoid unwanted side-effects of beneficial strategies, such as fire-fighting animals that clear undergrowth by grazing or browsing.
In addition to careful management—with the necessary rigour at each phase—experts such as Global Nature propose other measures to promote reforestation that is not only environmentally sustainable, but also socially and economically viable. The foundation calls for a more creative mindset, less burdened by apriorisms: for example, to restore the linear forests of hedges and trees that used to flank country roads and cattle tracks, which have almost disappeared as a result of land consolidation in countries such as Spain and France. According to De Miguel, regulations at the time prohibited the shading of crops in order to prioritise agricultural productivity. In order to avoid this minimal loss, the expert points out, “they gave up barriers against wind and erosion, water retention, habitats for predators of agricultural pests, as well as carbon sequestration.”
We are talking about a single file forest, but an immense one: “With 125,000 kilometres, 1% of the land area, our network of country roads and cattle tracks is unique in Europe.” And what works for country roads would also work for urban roads. According to one study, less than 15% of Europe’s city streets are shaded by any kind of foliage, and as temperatures rise, this lack of greenery will definitely be missed, at least in the south.
Associations such as COSE (Confederation of Spanish Forestry Organisations) often call for a European forestry policy that is more in line with professional forestry know-how… and the traditional techniques that have kept forests healthy for centuries. Legislation is needed that is compatible with tourism, timber, mycology, resin, pine, cork, biomass and maintenance activities. According to COSE, one hectare of poplar creates five direct jobs and ten in industry. They point out that effective forest management not only ensures but multiplies the return by avoiding the economic and ecological disaster of fires.
Comments on this publication