Other Common Sense Items at Common Sense
July 27, 2005
Character in the Appalachian Woods
By Thomas D. Rowley
Word Count: 698
While people near the Arabuko-Sokoke Forest in Kenya are being rewarded for not cutting down trees (see last week’s column), folks in southwest Virginia and northeast Tennessee are being compensated for just the opposite—both, ironically, in the name of conservation. If that sounds wacky, just wait. Not only are these Appalachian landowners being paid to harvest trees, they are being paid a premium…and for the worst trees.
Confused? Allow me to explain.
In an effort to improve the health of the local forests and at the same time improve the health of the local economy, the not-for-profit organization Appalachian Sustainable Development four years ago kicked off its Sustainable Woods program. While attending the International Rural Network Conference in June, I had the good fortune of seeing the program in person—both in the forest and at the sawmill.
In a nutshell, the program works with landowners in its ten-county region to institute environmentally friendly forestry practices; it then takes the timber that results and processes it locally to create jobs and improve incomes. Pretty straightforward. The intriguing part comes in which trees are felled and how they are hauled out of the forest: the twisted, knotty ones and often as not by horse.
Conventional forestry practices typically rely on one of two methods: high grading or clear cutting. In high grading, loggers come in and take the straightest, best-looking trees of the most valuable species. In clear cutting, they take everything. Neither is particularly good for the forest. High grading leaves behind only the less-valued species and genetically inferior trees to propagate. Clear cutting fragments the forest and wildlife habitat. The conventional way of taking the felled trees out via heavy machinery and logging roads contributes to erosion and as a result damage to streams.
In contrast, selectively harvesting “the worst first,” as Appalachian Sustainable Development (ASD) does, improves the long-term health of the forest and keeps habitats intact. By using teams of draft horses (or more environmentally friendly mechanized means) to pull the logs out, damage to the forest, its soil, and water is also minimized.
Clearly, from a short-term, profit-maximizing standpoint, conventional forestry practices win out. But ASD isn’t in it for the short term or solely for profits. Which isn’t to say, the organization doesn’t recognize the power of dollar.
“There’s very little in the U.S. economy, culture, and politics that doesn’t start and end in the market,” says Executive Director Anthony Flaccavento. “Therefore, we take a market approach.”
Meaning they pay landowners for the timber, and pay them well—as much as 25 percent more per board foot than other lumber companies. This premium helps landowners swallow the notion of cutting fewer trees and effectively leaving money in the forest instead of putting it in their pockets. The land owners, says Flaccavento, “are getting a little more for leaving a little more.” Still, it takes a different kind of landowner, he says, one that is patient and not greedy.
After the harvest, ASD then mills the timber at is own facility (using a solar and waste-wood powered kiln to dry it) and sells it to be used in flooring, cabinets, and other products. To enable it to pay landowners a premium, ASD charges a small premium for the lumber based on its eco-friendly background.
Some customers are also willing to pay a bit more for the imperfections that result from the worst-first harvest, or as Flaccavento puts it, “our character grade wood.” A while back, I met a builder in Idaho who happened upon a similar market niche for lumber stained by insects. People saw it, liked it, and asked where he got it. Now he’s harvesting it, milling it, and selling it. In a world of bland homogenized perfection, people like products that stand out, products with a bit of “character”.
Flaccavento hopes that “character” will spread to more of us and be manifest in a willingness to pay a bit more for eco-friendly, locally produced products. For while acknowledging that citizen involvement in environmental and community development issues is important, he asks, “if our daily living, our buying habits don’t reinforce our political engagement, how effective can it be?”
Good question.
--
Copyright 2005, Thomas D. Rowley, RUPRI Fellow
This and previous columns can be found at www.rupri.org/editorial