“Especially after a fire, it is most often better to let the forest regenerate naturally”
[ad_1]
HASwith more than 60,000 hectares of forest gone up in smoke, this summer marked the return of major fires in France. A risk that will only increase with climate change and that should encourage us to thoroughly rethink our forest policy. However, the announcement of a major national reforestation project could produce the opposite effect and further weaken our forests by yielding to lobbying from part of the sector.
The eagerness to plant trees is, above all, a communication strategy intended to reassure public opinion by giving the illusion of control of the situation and a rapid return to normal. But it is also an admission of a deep incomprehension on the part of the public authorities of the forest issues, because planting trees is not always the wisest choice. Especially after a fire, it is most often best to let the forest regenerate naturally. A more effective and less expensive option in many situations.
In addition, tree plantations are still too often monospecific or very poorly diversified, which is nevertheless essential to strengthen the resistance and resilience of stands in the face of many hazards such as droughts, storms, diseases or even fires. . Even on very poor soils such as in the Landes, where it is difficult to do without maritime pine, it is always possible to introduce, in a mixture, hardwoods such as cork oak or tauzin oak to strengthen the stands.
The interest of the mixture is solidly supported scientifically and, however, it struggles to impose itself as a condition for public aid or as a rule to be respected in management plans. After the 2009 storm in the Landes, almost all of the massif belonging to private owners was replanted in monoculture with the help of public money.
The abandonment of public powers
The observation is similar for the more recent aid from the recovery plan which, for lack of sufficient environmental conditions, has been diverted by some of the actors to plant monocultures, sometimes replacing forests in good health but deemed to be economically unprofitable (report “ Planted! The hidden results of the forestry recovery plan », Canopy, March 2022).
These drifts are not the result of chance, but the result of the abandonment of public authorities to build a forest policy integrating all the issues. Torn between four ministries, the forest does not benefit from strong political backing capable of defending and deciding in favor of the general interest. It is left to the sole game of influence of the actors, the rule within the sector being above all not to point the finger at the excesses of some.
You have 47% of this article left to read. The following is for subscribers only.
[ad_2]
Source link
