Please Sign In

Please enter a valid username and password
  • Log in with Facebook
» Not a member? Take a moment to register
» Forgot Username or Password

Why Register?
Signing up could earn you gear (click here to learn how)! It also keeps offensive content off our site.

Fishing in the Salmon Forest, Part 5: The Lust for Timber vs. the Need for Forest

Recent Comments

Categories

Recent Posts

Archives

Syndicate

Google Reader or Homepage
Add to My Yahoo!
Add to My AOL

The Conservationist
in your Inbox

Enter your email address to get our new post everyday.

August 14, 2013

Fishing in the Salmon Forest, Part 5: The Lust for Timber vs. the Need for Forest

By Hal Herring

Editor’s note: Conservationist blogger Hal Herring spent five days exploring and fishing Alaska’s Tongass National Forest earlier this month. This is the last of five reports.


A Ward Air floatplane lands in the Tongass National Forest. Photo by Earl Harper, Earl Harper Studios.

President Theodore Roosevelt created what would become the Tongass National Forest in 1902, when he used the executive power of the 1891 Forest Reserve Act to establish the Alexander Archipelago Reserve in 1902. It would become the Tongass National Forest in 1907, when the “reserves” were renamed. The Tongass was part of the grand overarching plan for our National Forests, a system of productive public lands that would forever protect the one thing no nation could survive without: water. But as with so many well-meaning government efforts, the ever-variable human factor wormed its way into the Tongass, as I believe it has into every land-conservation effort in history, in every part of the world.

In 1947, Congress passed the Tongass Timber Act to prioritize logging in the public-land forests of southeast Alaska. It was an odd plan; even its boosters knew that the logging industry, unsupported by government subsidy, had tried many times and failed to turn a profit here. Instead, the plan was to establish, by government mandate and with eternal public subsidy (which included a never-ending supply of timber), an industry that would bring in population and provide them with secure jobs.

“This was a federal experiment to settle this region,” said Paula Dobbyn, a veteran journalist who reported on business, environment, fisheries and other issues across Alaska before joining Trout Unlimited as Communications Director for Alaska in 2009. “The goal was to create a timber economy here even though it would not be economically viable. In the 1940s, one of the goals was to establish a supply of timber to help re-build post-war Japan. The rest of it was a Cold War idea--build towns, create jobs, populate these outer areas.” (The old USSR built several of these, including the Stalin-era “worker’s paradise” of Neft Dashlari, on an oil discovery 34 kilometers out on the Caspian Sea.)

As government programs will, the timber economy plan took on its own momentum, expanding in the 1950s, with pulp mills built at Ketchikan and Sitka, each given a 50-year contract to harvest timber from the Tongass. Logging accelerated during each succeeding decade, until controversy erupted over the scale and impacts of the operations in the late 1980s and early 90s.

With the settlement of the 1971 Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, Native corporations were awarded a half-million acres of the Tongass National Forest, and logging on those lands exploded. By the early 1990s almost all productive forest lands awarded by the settlement were denuded of marketable timber, with most of it exported to Asia, adding fuel to the fire of controversy over the plans to continue logging the Tongass. The timber industry and the workers that depended on it experienced the roller-coaster effects of global supply and demand coupled with new laws and policies meant to protect the other resources of the forest. Today, as might be expected, there is controversy over what remains of the old growth forests on the Tongass, and over what remains of the strongest ecosystems that produce the fisheries.

Hal Herring with nice Dolly Varden taken on a Tenkara rod and bead. Photo by Earl Harper, Earl Harper Studios.

But it’s hard to concentrate on that controversy when you’re braced hip-deep in a big fast-water creek 35 miles south of Juneau, bowed up on a 22-inch Dolly Varden. I’m still throwing the little bead egg, and we are definitively into the big Dollies that we were promised existed “out there, way out there.” Not every cast, mind you, and not every fish, but right here in these shallow runs, with the chums and pinks charging around you, there are big wildly speckled char that sock the bead and double the rod and strip line and go straight into the air like bright silver missiles.

We came here on a midmorning floatplane flight with the excellent Ward Air service, and the Juneau-based guide Mark Hieronymous, of Bear Creek Outfitters, who commutes to his guide work almost daily on the Ward planes. It’s a testimony to the enduring attraction of southeast Alaska for a certain kind of adventurer that you can you can’t swing a cat around here without hitting a fishing guide with both a lot of education and a background in commercial salmon fishing. Mark is no exception--he has a degree in fisheries science and aquaculture, and he started out working the boats, then started a business that processed salmon roe. He sold that operation a few years ago, and now divides his time between working for Trout Unlimited and full-time guiding during the season. He’s got about 40 years of experience behind a fly rod, and he still fishes as if every cast were his last. He is obsessed, in the best possible way, with fish and water and all the mysteries therein. He’s guiding us, but it’s a friendly trip, too, so he’s fishing his tail off. And watching him connect with some very big Dollies, I’m learning how to fish this place.

I drift away up a side channel, a sinuous little braid enclosed by head-high grass and alders. It’s not safe--the smell of bear is everywhere, but Mark was up here a few minutes ago, and from the bank, you can see pretty far upstream. It’s like fishing a tiny creek back home in Montana, with big scour holes near overhanging banks, and a series of shoals, except that there are three foot long chum salmon everywhere, and way more bear sign. I drop the bead rig directly behind a couple of spawning fish and let it tumble along the gravels (I’ve added a split shot, BB-sized, a foot above the bead). This time, I’m so close that I see the flash of the Dolly as it hits the bead, and I rear back on the rod to set the hook. The fish flies off the gravel shoal and bores down into the scour hole, abandons that route and comes straight out of the water going downstream. I’m holding on, putting a lot of pressure on the heavy leader, bound to stop the fish from going around the corner to the main creek. It’s no real contest--it’s an 18-or 19-inch fish--but as I bring it to hand and jerk the little hook out of its jaw, I feel pure glory raining down all around me. To be alone here, on this braid, in this valley, with all these fish, is like a dream. I take off my sunglasses and put them on my hat--the day is already dark enough, and I’m not obsessively seeking the next fish, at least for a few minutes. On my next cast, I stick the hook in a big chum that I did not see, and it moves inexorably upstream to a log jam. I point the rod at it, lock one hand over the reel, and feel the line pop a few inches above the bead. Game over for the time being.

The day passed, as the best of days do, too fast. We are back at the landing site for the floatplane by 3 in the afternoon, still casting to pods of passing salmon and to some of those renegade Dollies that forsake the egg bounty and prowl down here in the salt for baitfish. It’s very, very hard to quit fishing. The whine of the floatplane coming in was a kind of mournful sound.

Our trip to the Tongass was not over. We had a day left to fish around Juneau, and we made the most of it, fishing Dollies and pinks in a small creek where I spied a brilliantly colored summer steelhead hovering in an eddy behind a boulder. I used a Tenkara rod to torment him with a Clouser until he finally swam away in apparent disgust. Later, I’d ask Mark Hieronymous if it was possible that what I’d seen was actually a steelhead. “Yes,” he replied, “you can never tell what you’ll see up in these creeks this time of year.”

That answer, to me, summed up what I think is most powerful about the Tongass, and the experience of fishing there. The seas are big and rowdy and dangerous. The bugs can be bad. The bears are there; they are big, irritable, and the woods and thickets are such that you never can be sure that they are not right there, about to be irritable with you. You are fishing in a place where killer whales eat seals like you and I would eat a Milk Dud, not far from where you are standing, casting so hopefully. There are fish everywhere.

You never know what will happen next.

 

New installments of this series will be posted every weekday. Read previous posts below:
Part I
Part II

Part III
Part IV

Comments (9)

Top Rated
All Comments
from SMC1986 wrote 35 weeks 15 hours ago

Great series of articles. Sounds like the trip of a lifetime.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Dangle wrote 34 weeks 6 days ago

The word "LUST" in the title is a "BAIT" word used to support anti-capitalist views. The demand for wood is there we know that. Hundreds of different consumer items use wood. Wood is a replenished resource, and demand is being met.

-3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Pacific Hunter wrote 34 weeks 6 days ago

Once again I find myself at odds with you on the idea of multiple use of forest lands. Perhaps you should expand a little further on your opening and TR designating these lands as "Reserves". While that is correct, you leave out the fact that they were changed to national forests at the urging of Pinchot who would become the first chief of the Roosevelt created Forest Service. They discussed the idea of reserves, which did not allow hunting or any take of anything, and TR who was our greatest conservation leader of all time concurred that the idea of non use was detrimental to the health and viability of these lands. The man that fostered the idea of conservation knew that multiple use must be incorporated and defined conservation as prudent use without waste. You also fail to mention that the areas of the Tongass which were so heavily mismanaged through logging supported the best black bear and Sitka blacktail hunting anywhere in the world until the early 2000's when logging was halted and harvest rates began to drop. The forage supplies dwindled as the disturbance areas grew back and regulations on harvest had to be strengthened by Alaska in response. I was also in an area of the Tongass enjoying the epic runs of fish still present today despite the years of mismanagement you elude too. The amazing thing to me was the number of the federally listed marbeled murelets whose decline has been blamed purely on timber harvest. Earlier you mentioned that the dollies or bull trout you were catching had their populations destroyed in the lower 48. Problem is, the lower 48 is the extreme southern end of both their ranges and densities were never firmly established, only hypothesized. So basically you are in a place that demonstrates these species thriving in conjunction with years of regulated use and you still try and use these facts as a basis to promote your non use ethic. You also left out that when these lands were returned to the native corporations they became private and off limits to recreation. That is a far greater travesty than logging that took place on them as game populations are still thriving. I do truly commend you for bringing attention to this amazing landscape though eventually I am hoping I can show you that multiple use guarantees the greatest reward for all involved from the sportsman, to the resident, to the wildlife species themselves.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from upacreek333 wrote 34 weeks 6 days ago

We can debate multiple use all you want... I think what we ought to be considering is "responsible" multiple use. You elude to years of mismanagement on the Tongass, and I suspect you're referring to Prince of Wales Island, which has been crisscrossed with logging roads, pocked by clearcuts and is hardly as functional from a fisheries perspective as it once was.

You're absolutely right about mismanagement--POW is the perfect laboratory for that. Clearcuts have grown back as single-species thickets full of small trees so close together that they are of little use to game or timber harvesters... if you start to manage for timber on the Tongass, then you enter into a long-term commitment of actual management... thinning, selective harvest, road maintenance, culvert repair/replacement... it gets really pricey, and frankly, economically dubious.

The resource on the Tongass is already there. The intact forests beget the fish, which, frankly put, do their share in feeding the world, not to mention satisfy the undervalued desire on the part of recreational anglers like me to feel the pull (and spend money on hotels, float planes, meals, cruise ships, trinkets and beer).

Multiple use is fine... just find a way to make it economically productive. And responsible, so it doesn't nuke the fish that line the pockets with hundreds every single season.

Great series, Hal... So glad you were able to make that trip. Your perpective is invaluable.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Archipelago wrote 34 weeks 6 days ago

Simply put, every step towards sensible, sustainable, balanced mamagement of the Tongass National Forest has been acheived through struggle. We now have a changed to finally do things right on our largest national forest by fitting the mill to the resource, not the resource to the mill. We will save tax dollars, feed the region's ecnonomic engines - fishing and tourism - and through Congressional action, preserve a healthy portion of one of the nation's most beautiful, rugged and productive natural landscapes.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Wy2083 wrote 34 weeks 6 days ago

Great series, Hal - a place well deserving of attention.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from hal herring wrote 34 weeks 6 days ago

Pacific Hunter- thanks for commenting, but I have a question for you: how is a huge commercial salmon fishery an example of a "no-use ethic?" And for Dangle, how is a timber industry that depends on eternal federal subsidy in money and trees just to stay in operation deemed to be an example of "capitalism?"

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from wisc14 wrote 34 weeks 4 days ago

great series. well written

+1 to upacreek.

logging has it place in the management of our resources but intensive logging isn't the best answer for the tongass, just as no logging isn't the best answer for ruffed grouse and woodcock habitat in the upper midwest northwoods.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Horseapples wrote 34 weeks 3 days ago

Hal, your gift of descriptive imagery transported me to the streams along side of you. Well done! As for the criticisms on calling out greed and resource mismanagement, a quote from one of my old forestry professors comes to mind "those who live amongst or closest to a resource many times are the same who take it for granted." He was saying that when faced with the plentifulness and abundance every day, it is easy to believe that the resource is there for the taking in a limitless fashion. The long forgotten pineries of Wisconsin are testiment to the fact that sustainable managment is a requirement lest we want to see history repeat itself. The Salmon guide family in your article knows that and they stated that to change that way of thinking is difficult but it is happening albiet slowly. Articles like yours help the cause. Keep up the good work.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report

Post a Comment

from upacreek333 wrote 34 weeks 6 days ago

We can debate multiple use all you want... I think what we ought to be considering is "responsible" multiple use. You elude to years of mismanagement on the Tongass, and I suspect you're referring to Prince of Wales Island, which has been crisscrossed with logging roads, pocked by clearcuts and is hardly as functional from a fisheries perspective as it once was.

You're absolutely right about mismanagement--POW is the perfect laboratory for that. Clearcuts have grown back as single-species thickets full of small trees so close together that they are of little use to game or timber harvesters... if you start to manage for timber on the Tongass, then you enter into a long-term commitment of actual management... thinning, selective harvest, road maintenance, culvert repair/replacement... it gets really pricey, and frankly, economically dubious.

The resource on the Tongass is already there. The intact forests beget the fish, which, frankly put, do their share in feeding the world, not to mention satisfy the undervalued desire on the part of recreational anglers like me to feel the pull (and spend money on hotels, float planes, meals, cruise ships, trinkets and beer).

Multiple use is fine... just find a way to make it economically productive. And responsible, so it doesn't nuke the fish that line the pockets with hundreds every single season.

Great series, Hal... So glad you were able to make that trip. Your perpective is invaluable.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Archipelago wrote 34 weeks 6 days ago

Simply put, every step towards sensible, sustainable, balanced mamagement of the Tongass National Forest has been acheived through struggle. We now have a changed to finally do things right on our largest national forest by fitting the mill to the resource, not the resource to the mill. We will save tax dollars, feed the region's ecnonomic engines - fishing and tourism - and through Congressional action, preserve a healthy portion of one of the nation's most beautiful, rugged and productive natural landscapes.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from hal herring wrote 34 weeks 6 days ago

Pacific Hunter- thanks for commenting, but I have a question for you: how is a huge commercial salmon fishery an example of a "no-use ethic?" And for Dangle, how is a timber industry that depends on eternal federal subsidy in money and trees just to stay in operation deemed to be an example of "capitalism?"

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from wisc14 wrote 34 weeks 4 days ago

great series. well written

+1 to upacreek.

logging has it place in the management of our resources but intensive logging isn't the best answer for the tongass, just as no logging isn't the best answer for ruffed grouse and woodcock habitat in the upper midwest northwoods.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Horseapples wrote 34 weeks 3 days ago

Hal, your gift of descriptive imagery transported me to the streams along side of you. Well done! As for the criticisms on calling out greed and resource mismanagement, a quote from one of my old forestry professors comes to mind "those who live amongst or closest to a resource many times are the same who take it for granted." He was saying that when faced with the plentifulness and abundance every day, it is easy to believe that the resource is there for the taking in a limitless fashion. The long forgotten pineries of Wisconsin are testiment to the fact that sustainable managment is a requirement lest we want to see history repeat itself. The Salmon guide family in your article knows that and they stated that to change that way of thinking is difficult but it is happening albiet slowly. Articles like yours help the cause. Keep up the good work.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Wy2083 wrote 34 weeks 6 days ago

Great series, Hal - a place well deserving of attention.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from SMC1986 wrote 35 weeks 15 hours ago

Great series of articles. Sounds like the trip of a lifetime.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Pacific Hunter wrote 34 weeks 6 days ago

Once again I find myself at odds with you on the idea of multiple use of forest lands. Perhaps you should expand a little further on your opening and TR designating these lands as "Reserves". While that is correct, you leave out the fact that they were changed to national forests at the urging of Pinchot who would become the first chief of the Roosevelt created Forest Service. They discussed the idea of reserves, which did not allow hunting or any take of anything, and TR who was our greatest conservation leader of all time concurred that the idea of non use was detrimental to the health and viability of these lands. The man that fostered the idea of conservation knew that multiple use must be incorporated and defined conservation as prudent use without waste. You also fail to mention that the areas of the Tongass which were so heavily mismanaged through logging supported the best black bear and Sitka blacktail hunting anywhere in the world until the early 2000's when logging was halted and harvest rates began to drop. The forage supplies dwindled as the disturbance areas grew back and regulations on harvest had to be strengthened by Alaska in response. I was also in an area of the Tongass enjoying the epic runs of fish still present today despite the years of mismanagement you elude too. The amazing thing to me was the number of the federally listed marbeled murelets whose decline has been blamed purely on timber harvest. Earlier you mentioned that the dollies or bull trout you were catching had their populations destroyed in the lower 48. Problem is, the lower 48 is the extreme southern end of both their ranges and densities were never firmly established, only hypothesized. So basically you are in a place that demonstrates these species thriving in conjunction with years of regulated use and you still try and use these facts as a basis to promote your non use ethic. You also left out that when these lands were returned to the native corporations they became private and off limits to recreation. That is a far greater travesty than logging that took place on them as game populations are still thriving. I do truly commend you for bringing attention to this amazing landscape though eventually I am hoping I can show you that multiple use guarantees the greatest reward for all involved from the sportsman, to the resident, to the wildlife species themselves.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Dangle wrote 34 weeks 6 days ago

The word "LUST" in the title is a "BAIT" word used to support anti-capitalist views. The demand for wood is there we know that. Hundreds of different consumer items use wood. Wood is a replenished resource, and demand is being met.

-3 Good Comment? | | Report

Post a Comment

bmxbiz-fs