Should it be more profitable to leave a tree there than to cut it down?
That’s the meat of the issue confronting those who want to allow forestry offsets as part of the greenhouse gas emissions standards being discussed in our Congress and parliaments around the world. It’s a highly controversial idea that has moved very suddenly to the debate on how best to meet the Kyoto Protocol, which deliberately avoided the controversy.
The idea is simple: large forests absorb carbon dioxide, a major greenhouse gas, and preserving them is almost as good as cutting emissions. The problem for many environmentalists is that this involves putting a price tag on the value of large forests, putting them at the center of an economy that they are not part of now. That’s what forest offsets are all about.
To those of us who use sustainable wood practices as part of our business, the delicate balance has been well known for years. Practicing it on a large scale is a very different problem than what we now face, but we know what it’s all about. Allowing forests to grow and mature is not just a part of sustainable forestry practices, it also is what makes high quality hardwoods that can sustain craftsman who make heirloom quality furniture.
The debate over whether or not to put sustainable forestry square in the middle of the debate over how to manage and reduce greenhouse gases through forestry offsets is very important to us as a result. There are many good arguments both for and against, and in many ways this is starting to divide the green movement. What is critical at this point is that people who care about sustainable forestry and the few large forests that remain here stay engaged and involved in the developing debate.
Should forestry offsets be seen as a way of offsetting our greenhouse gas emissions here in the US? There are many ways to see this problem. We ask that everyone who cares about the environment and sustainable forestry stay in touch with what is happening and let themselves be heard, one way or the other. It’s our future, after all.
