The debate �all depends on what your values are� - July 14, 2002

Mail Tribune (Medford, OR — Wayback)

2002-08-03

Document text

CLOUDY Temp: 57 °F Wind: S at 4 mph Saturday, August 3, 2002  SECTIONS   Home Page   Local News  Sports  Business  Obituaries  Life  Opinion - Politics  AP News  Weather  Classified  Archives  Site Map  EXTRA  Cyberchef  E The People  Golf  Job Network  Headbone Zone  Wellness Connection  Movie Times  Newspaper in Education  Oregon CarZone  Outdoor Journal  Personals  Prime Times  Real Estate  Tempo A & E  TV Times  W3 Magazine  CLASSIFIEDS  Find a Car  Find a Home  Find a Job  Find Everything  E SOUTHERN OREGON  Destinations  Automotive  Communities  Employment  Entertainment  Publications  Real Estate  Recreation  Shopping  Calendar  ABOUT US  FAQ  What's New  Advertise  Home Delivery  Classified Ad  Contact Us  Media Kit  Jobs @ Mail Tribune Email Story to a Friend July 14, 2002 The debate ‘all depends on what your values are’ By PAUL FATTIG Mail Tribune The salvage debate that flares up after each wildfire on public land stems from different concerns and objectives, observed Tom Atzet. Related stories: � Debating salvage: The question becomes more pressing during fire season . � BLM decision restarts argument over salvage . "It all depends on what your values are," said the forest ecologist for the Rogue River, Siskiyou and Umpqua national forests. "If you value the forest for water, for example, you want to make sure you get a lot of vegetation back as soon as possible to intercept and absorb the water," he said. Likewise, if your value is based on timber production, planting trees immediately in the aftermath of a fire is a top priority, he said. "If your value is for wildlife, you want to make sure the snags and downed wood is not all removed," he said. "And if your value is looking for protection in the long run from fire, you may want to go into areas that were not intensely burned and take out material to reduce the chance of that material becoming a fire hazard," he added. Ultimately, the forest as an ecosystem will endure without human intervention, he said. "The forests have evolved with fire," he said. "If you take human beings out of the picture, the system will rebound." But that cycle can take decades, even centuries, he said. During the early years of the Forest Service, fires were perceived as harmful, resulting in decades of fire suppression, he said. "The value then was to try to eliminate all fires," he said. "Because of that, we allowed the fuels to accumulate and didn’t allow fire to do its thing." There are always winners and losers when a fire sweeps through a forest, he said. Some species, like knobcone pine, are dependent on fires to reproduce. "It is more than a tool that cleans up and maintains a forest," Atzet said. "It is a evolutionary thing that happens. The system becomes less and less healthy without fire. "Without human beings, the forest would do just fine," he reiterated. "But we’ve already entered the picture. We can’t undo that. And we are going to continue to have a demand on the woods." Printer Friendly Version   Email Story to a Friend Subscribe Archive: Click to Search Mail Tribune Home Local News  | Sports  | Business  | Obituaries  | Life Opinion - Politics | AP News | Archives  |  Site Map   E Southern Oregon  | Classified   Copyright 1997-2002 Mail Tribune. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy web master feedback A D V E R T I S E R S