Tales Of Our Times
By JOHN BARTLIT
Los Alamos

The priorities that make a healthy forest are quite different from the trendy views on the subject that fill the daily news. Politics today finds itself amid a full-blown dilemma. In times past, politicos once believed that the more facts are included, the better informed policy can be crafted on some large national issue, such as forest health.

Now, parties seek victory at the expense of issues. We live immersed in electioneering 24/7. Campaign ads tell us 24/7 to choose truths and trash truths according to our favorite ads. So, forest issues are used by politics to ignore information, which limits choices and boosts conflict between the big rival parties.  At first blush, these words sound bizarre. But think a moment. The very goal of election campaigns is one-dimensional. That is, to win an election, if only by one vote. We all stand to gain from a closer look at how much useful information is left out by the restricting scope of those partisan routines.

For proof, today’s piece about digital forestry leaves campaigning to party boosters. Instead, the column brings the latest from the U.S. Forest Service and the Purdue Institute of Digital Forestry.

To set the stage, a century or two ago a healthy ponderosa pine forest may have had 25 mature trees per acre, which a horse-drawn wagon could easily navigate. Today such forests have over 1,000 trees per acre, which a hiker cannot pass through. The tightly packed trees are smaller, weaker, and more prone to disease and insect attack. Such forests form huge reservoirs of fuel awaiting ignition, and pose a greater threat when drought comes. These basics are reforming the discipline of forestry itself, whose effects are huge, widespread, and ignored in the public arena.

Serious people who remedy large problems typically find that keys are in the details. Then they learn which details are key and learn better, faster, cheaper ways to learn these key details. Forestry is no different.

In forestry, key details include species of trees and other plants, their ages and sizes. The Digital Age has produced new smart tools that gather the right details orders of magnitude faster, better, and cheaper than men with clipboards. These smart tools are zippy drones that carry 3-D imaging and thermal imaging around in forests, gathering data for computer algorithms to interpret and plot at the U.S. Forest Service and/or the Purdue Institute of Digital Forestry. Faster, better, cheaper also applies to the supply of trainees at schools in the field.

Moving on further, it is always good to hear the views of related interests, as is required in court trials. One such interest is the traditional timber industry. We soon learn that trees that are key to healthier forests are the same trees that are key to the traditional timber industry, namely, the larger, more mature trees. The trees that most need to be thinned out are all the other trees in our overcrowded forests. Still other news—much better news—is awaiting.

The good news that we hear so little about is the steady progress being made worldwide in building structures with cross-laminated timber (CLT). See, cross-laminated timber – Wikipedia. It is always good to hear the views of other related interests, as is required in court trials. We soon learn that, by its nature, CLT can be made from a wider range of wood resources than traditional lumber.

I claim no expertise in the ins and outs of digital forestry, traditional timbering, or the current status of structures built with cross-laminated timber. I do claim there are valuable aspects of forests and wood technology that supply more remedies for national problems than the shreds of understanding that come to the surface in the era of 24/7 electioneering.

Summing up: serious work on large national issues requires a larger scope. And that is achieved by people of all walks making further inquiries.