J.J. Buckfart* communications * environment * leadership * science *

Biodiversity and Conservation

About a year ago, I co-authored a paper with some brilliant people. The paper is entitled, “Do tree-level monocultures develop following Canadian boreal silviculture? Tree-level diversity tested using a new method” and was published in Biodiversity and Conservation. In the paper we wrote,

“Modern forestry in Canada’s northern forests often includes clearcutting followed by site preparation, planting, and chemical or motor-manual tending. This suite of activities is criticized for reducing biodiversity (May 2005) to the point of creating monocultures (Mosquin et al. 1995) resulting in potentially unstable and unsustainable forest communities.”

Intuitively, I knew there was something amiss about the claim that these forestry activities created monocultures. I have walked through numerous clear cut areas in Northwestern Ontario. While these areas are not always being the most esthetic, I never saw a monoculture – not even on the most intensively managed forest.

Actually, the way forestry is typically done in Ontario’s boreal, it is next to impossible to create tree-level monocultures. With a variety of tree species naturally regenerating after a disturbance, it can be pretty much guaranteed that there will be a mix of trees as the forest becomes re-established.

However, I am aware of one situation where monocultures can occur in the boreal; that is the re-forestation of agricultural land. This is definitely not the way typical forestry is currently practiced in the region.

At this point, you may be wondering why I am making such as fuss about all this. Well the bottom line is that one of my biggest drives in life is discovering what is actual. The reason I am drawn to the sciences is due to my desire to discover and share fact. The reason I am drawn to theology and spirituality is due to my desire to discover and share truth.

I have seen the environmental community make big claims about how various land-use practices lead to environmental degradation. Sometimes the claims turn out to be fact, other times not really. I guess it urks me when we feel we need to spin what is really real, or make things sound worse than they really are in order to make a point. The bottom line is if we are stretching the truth, or misrepresenting the truth, we are not acting with integrity. We will be found out.

The Christian community seems to have this same problem. I’ve heard numerous statements flow from Christians lips that lack truth. Sure they sound pious and good, but there is err. For example, I’ve heard Christians tell their “pre-conversion” stories making their lives out to be a bit worse than it really was. As the story typically goes, after their “conversion” experience, life is described a bit better than it really currently is.

I think it will do both the environmental and Christian movements some good if we stop overstating our claims and communicate with greater integrity.

Oh of course not! If you did, you would definitely go to hell*.

Yesterday, I was walking** through the Thunder Bay Centennial Botantical Conservatory. I had been there numerous times and had never noticed that Thunder Bay has its very own coffee tree. This was very exciting for me.

In the Genesis account God created trees and seed bearing plants on the third day. God saw that the plants were good, and who am I to disagree. I especially agree with God, when it comes to those plants that I have a particularly strong affinity for. I especially like apples (Malus spp.) and coffee (Coffea arabica).

I wonder if God put the coffee tree on the earth with pastors in mind. I have yet to meet a pastor who isn’t borderline addicted to the drink made from Coffea arabica. Doing ministry, studying the Scriptures, counselling people, writing sermons and lessons, practicing prayer, etc. is rarely done without a cup of coffee nearby.

I can quit drinking coffee if I wanted to … really … I just don’t want to.
I bet you heard that one before.

Interestingly, caffeine acts as a natural defence against the coffee plant’s predators, but it looks like that strategy backfired. People figured out that we could pick the “beans,” roast ‘em and grind them up, then run hot water through the grinds, then after our hard work, drink the remaining liquid.

Scriptures are clear that we should have no false gods before us. I wonder if our love for coffee approaches worshiping a false god. Would God may make an exception in this one case?

* You won’t really go to hell. That was a joke.
** OK, actually I was playing hide and seek with my three year old daughter.

On a shady note: Some folks know that it is more ethical to purchase shade coffee rather than errr… non-shade coffee, but don’t know why. Coffee trees don’t grow very tall, are very shade tolerant and naturally found in the understory of forests. Shade coffee is generally grown in a more naturalized setting which sustains higher biodiversity. Compare that to areas where natural forests have been cut to make way for coffee plantations which support less biodiversity and require more human inputs such as fertilizer and chemical controls.