Having contemplated “Sustainability Science” as an academic discipline in class this morning, it seemed ironic to hear Dr. Burton begin his talk on “Challenges and Opportunities in Managing Forests for Resilience” by suggesting that sustainability might be an overused concept that isn’t necessarily the be all and end all.  It’s certainly food for thought.

Of course, Dr. Burton was speaking of sustainability in the context of forest resiliency, namely the idea that adjustment, adaptation, and even transformation can be appropriate ecosystem responses.  Recovery of the forest to its original state is not often possible when it has been attacked (by insects, fire, disease, or logging).  As such, we shouldn’t expect it to remain static over time.  It was even mentioned that learning to live with fire is a key factor in ensuring forest resiliency.

I realize that Dr. Burton was not intending to imply that sustainability is not a positive concept – more, the word has lost some meaning (what exactly is a sustainable forest?) and it’s not enough to say that we want a sustainable ecosystem, or a sustainable forest industry, for example.  In fact, his recommendations for safeguarding forest resiliency are in line with sustainability goals: planning for increased diversity, preventing invasive species, and opting for risk-adverse management strategies, among others.  Could a resilient forest be the overarching goal when planning for sustainability, rather than managing forests for future harvesting?

It was interesting to hear that much of the trees killed by pine beetles in the 1990s and 2000s have since burned and released seeds that, in some cases, have developed into ideal uneven stand, mixed species forests.  So, hit by two separate “disasters”, these forests were able to recover (or perhaps adjust or adapt… I may not have my terminology in order yet!) – in fact, it may not have happened without the fire.  Once again, we see the need for allowing nature to take its course – after all, it’s only really our own human needs and wants that cause us to take an interest in “managing” the world around us, and it’s also only due to human interference that natural balances even require intervention in the first place (for example, logging trees, leaving slash on the ground, and planting monocultures).

I very much enjoyed the lecture, although I found the multitude of graphs and charts to be difficult to fully appreciate in such a short time frame.  There is clearly enough material here for several lectures, and the presentation unfortunately got a bit rushed towards the end.  It was a great introduction to the topic, and I hope to some day hear more.