Our methodology of ”30-30-30” does it make sense?
Some claim that nature on earth should be 30 percent protected by year 2030 in order to maintain fundamental processes upon which life depends. One way to proceed with forests is thus to use…
- 30 percent of the land for conventional and commercial ”industrial” landuse (given fulfilling basic environmental and ecological considerations such as laws and certifications). In swedish forestry this means the regular clear cuts-planting-thinning-cycle (if not natural regeneration happens for numerous of reasons). One basic ecological consideration is to try to save many aspen trees when harvesting, see this great movie on the aspen tree (swedish only).
- 30 percent of the land with adaptive forest managemant, e.g., continuous cover forestry which have been used in large parts of Sweden before the clear-cut-heavy-machinery-era. More research is of course coming – read here. This company is however already using it in sensible places where other values in the forest besides timber score high.
- 30 percent of the land (e.g. the real estate) is left for mother nature – read here.
This whole makes more sense in forests where species as this appears:
[Phellinus chrysoloma]
The object.
So 30 – 30 – 30 Is it wise? Is it needed? At least this company believes so. Cuz we see the signs. Do you? Anyway, by creative and sound forestry ”book-keeping”, land management, we believe and also claim that the goal can and must be reached. Let’s try to go there!
Swedish biodiversity reporting to EU in May 2019, every sixth year, confirms the precaurius situation in Swedish forests. So our ”30-30-30 approach” is relevant!
References: