Forests and Fens

Ecosystems Exploitation Forests have long been exploited. They are harvested for their timber, or cleared for agricultural land, both activities being entirely destructive to the ecosystem. The fen exists typically within the forest, and is not usually subject to exploitation until the forest itself is, because the forest acts as a natural barrier for the fen. The destruction of forests for timber is arguably the lesser of the two forms of exploitation, at least in countries with active silviculture programs, as the forests will have the potential to regenerate.

However the destruction of forest ecosystems is associated with several negative outcomes. The biodiversity of the forest system is reduced, and this effect is stronger the more forest is cleared. Destruction for agriculture is permanent, which means that the loss of biodiversity is permanent. Endemic and endangered species are rendered extinct, or their numbers reduced (Chediack, 2008). Fenland is often exploited via draining. Sometimes, the water source is affected by deforestation of the surrounding forest, as might occur after logging.

But where a forest has been removed for agriculture, the fenland is frequently drained as well, resulting in the destruction of the ecosystem. In some cases, fenland has been used as a dumping ground for hazardous wastes, for instance when the fen is filled in. Even when this has been done to facilitate agriculture, it ultimately ruins the soil, as an example in England where the filled-in fen was contaminated with heavy metals shows (Breward, 2003).

The benefits of the exploitation of forests and fens is usually economic, and in many cases short-lived. Timber extraction provides a short-run boost in economic activity. This can be sustainable over the long run if the forest is replanted, but old growth forest is not easily replaceable. The forest undergoes a change in composition upon exploitation, from a vibrant old growth forest ecosystem to a more limited second-growth system that exists mainly to service future logging interests.

When the forest is destroyed for agriculture, this mainly serves to increase food production, though not always in the long run. The increase in food production does have some value, but forests act as carbon sinks, among other benefits. Replacing a carbon sink with, say, meat production is doubly-negative with respect to climate change.

It is worth noting as well that a tree plantation of second-growth tree cover, does not have nearly the same level of carbon benefits as an old growth forest ecosystem, so replanting does little to mitigate the negative impacts of deforestation on climate change (Sasaki & Putz, 2009). There are also negative impacts on food supply, which is ironic where forest is being cleared to support agricultural production. Forests host such diversity of life that they contain leaves, fruits, nuts and roots, all of which have significant untapped nutritional value.

Clearing for timber or inefficient agriculture such as meat production actually reduces the amount of global food production capability, according to a UN report (UN, 2011). Fenland exploitation offers fewer tangible benefits. Such land is often drained to foster agriculture, but the value of wetlands is substantial. Wetlands are critical for drainage of land, and for biodiversity. The exploitation of fenland is destructive with little upside, but the fenland itself is affected when the forest around it is cleared. Nevertheless, there is not much case to be made for draining fens.

Management Plans The biggest issue with managing fens is that the cessation of exploitation is the only reasonable course of action. Fens are not usually "exploited" -- they are destroyed. Their best use is as parkland, and to remain as wetland to manage water levels and drainage, and to maintain some semblance of biodiversity even if the surrounding forest is cut. Maintaining fenland as an essential component of an agricultural ecosystem is an option in some cases. Forest management is a more nuanced issue.

Silviculture is one form of management used. While the nature of the forest is changed, and the climate sink benefits are diminished substantially, a regrowth forest is still better than outright destruction. In many cases, replanting of forests has resulted in rich second growth forests and sustainable timber production. This is imperfect, but it is also worth noting that when forests are replanted, that will eventually diminish the need to harvest other forests. Another means of managing forests are to view their assets differently.

The UN study on forests showed that they contain many useful things that are destroyed when the exploitation is total. The UN paper talked mostly about food, but forests are known to be an important source of medicine as well. Exploiting forests differently, by harvesting products from within the forest instead of destroying forests to produce agricultural products, is an alternative plan for managing forest ecosystems while still extracting value from them. Threats There are two major threats to both of these ecosystems.

Exploitation is a major threat, as forests are harvested for timber in an unsustainable way in many parts of the world. Further, forests are cut down for agricultural production. Neither practice is sustainable, and both destroy what is otherwise a valuable, untapped asset. Human destruction of forests has been conducted at a very rapid pace, and in many cases the forests will not be regrown until humans are wiped out. This threat needs to be addressed more effectively than it has been.

Old growth forest should be preserved and logging efforts concentrated on second growth timber. Protections on specific species need to be put in place, and critical areas need to be given much more conservation attention. The same is true of fenlands, which need to be protected. But they will need to be protected in the context of the surrounding forest as well. Climate change is a significant threat. Ecosystems adapt to their surroundings, and forests are no exception. Climate change affects different ecosystems in different ways.

In British Columbia, for example, warmer winters have allowed the mountain pine beetle to thrive, and the local trees have no defense for this predator, leading to wide-spread climate-change induced destruction (Fredeen, 2007). Deforestation is also a contributor to climate change, creating a negative feedback loop with regards to forest health. Prioritization One of the critical issues for both forests and fens is that they support biodiversity, and much of that biodiversity has not yet been fully explored.

There needs to be priority placed on preserving biodiversity as some of those species could ultimately prove useful for humans, but not if they are wiped out. The maintenance of forests in particular needs to.