Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

porkchop_sandviches t1_ja3oodx wrote

I just went to a presentation about why it's so crucial to preserve the few legacy forests we still have left. This is heartbreaking honestly

224

Rndmwhiteguy t1_ja4n4c5 wrote

What do you mean by legacy forests?

8

queenweasley t1_ja52sl8 wrote

Probably old growth, full of ecosystems and such. As opposed to new growth which can be grown specifically for logging

29

AltOnMain t1_ja54ojk wrote

I think they use the phrase legacy forest because the term old growth doesn’t really apply to these forests. They are older than some, no doubt but in terms of the natural stand progression or “life” of a PNW forest they are still kinda young. Maybe like teenager or mid 20s if we are using a dog year analogy.

I think the phrase old growth has sort of fallen out of favor as the focus in forest conservation has moved to cultivating complexity rather than old trees

10

galacticwonderer t1_ja6lm5c wrote

There is a truly fantastic podcast called the timber wars put out by oregons local public radio. It explains everything from the scientists side, the lawyers side, the loggers side, and the politicians side. In it you learn about the tussle for old growth forest. It’s really valuable ecologically and economically. They plant trees after cutting them down but forests don’t recover, it’s a whole ecosystem of different trees at different growth stages. All sorts of stuff relying on all sorts of stuff that takes a lot of time to come into existence. Wild fires already threaten these habitats.

2

AltOnMain t1_ja54bpo wrote

There’s merit to the argument that these forest shouldn’t be cut, but it is important to remember that USFS and WA DNR have set aside really a lot of land to be “wild”.

3