Lately, I have been reflecting on the practice of forestry and how some long-held beliefs that influence it have changed over time. For instance, look at how the industry has historically viewed red alder as a weed species. …Another example is the perspective that commercial thinning is an uneconomic practice in BC. Last May, I visited recently thinned sites near Prince George which were cash positive. Other treatment objectives for thinning such as for wildfire mitigation are now becoming just as important or more so than financial returns. As I have learnt more about wildfire resiliency of late, my perspectives on other conventional standards are changing as well. …Indeed, almost one hundred years of active fire suppression in BC’s forests has led to more conifers. We are also learning that exclusion of fire from our provincial forests has ironically actually made them more vulnerable to fire.
Now as we are adding old growth deferrals, 30×30 protected areas, Indigenous Protected Conservation Areas and other areas set aside for protecting biodiversity by excluding human activity, are we proliferating yet another belief that needs to be challenged? Many of these areas are just as likely to succumb to wildfire, defeating the purpose of their original protection. The Forest Practices Board said in their June 2023 special report on wildfire that “…unmanaged reserves are especially vulnerable to burning because of the amount of forest fuels that have accumulated over time.” Given the reality of an increasing wildfire threat, traditional beliefs on conservation need to shift from “preserve and walk away” to one which embraces active forest management in these areas. A new vision could be one where a sustainable forest industry consumes fibre collected from fuel reduction treatments to ensure enduring conservation values across the landscape, no matter the designated land use.