BIOLOGISMS (25): THE FORESTS

The generic term “forest” hides a misconception with serious implications: in the same bag, we put what’s left of the native forest (woodland, scrubland), what has been domesticated by man (montado) and commercial plantations (pine, eucalyptus, chestnut).

During the Neolithic there was a gradual conversion of the hunter-gatherer way of life to agro-pastoral and, consequently, pressure on the forest for the freeing up of land for livestock and agriculture. Until then, the forest had evolved with the rhythm of tectonic movements and climate change on a scale of millions of years. Since the Neolithic, human intervention has drastically accelerated changes, on the scale of thousands or even hundreds of years.

The arrival of the Romans in Iberia around 218 BC accentuated this pressure because they not only wanted to replace the Carthaginians and Phoenicians in exploiting mineral wealth, but also to produce wheat, which they needed to feed the Empire. In fact, the whole of North Africa, which was part of the Roman Empire, was transformed into an immense granary for Rome. During the 600 years that they remained on the Peninsula, the Romans replaced the subsistence economy of the primitive tribes with large agricultural units producing olive oil, wine, cereals and livestock. In short, with the Romans, the first major shift of forest soil to agriculture and grazing was accomplished.

Let us not forget that wood was the main source of energy for heating and industry until the advent of fossil fuels (and even afterwards in many regions). The energies of wind and water were supplementary and used for milling and little else. The native forest therefore had to be the one to supply the “lion’s share” of energy needs, at the same time as it saw itself progressively torn from its soil for the benefit of agriculture and livestock. And this … for centuries!

An elegant solution was found in the South where the evergreen oaks, holm oak and cork oak, are the dominant species. The ingenuity lay in thinning the woods, making room for grazing, particularly the black pig, but sparing the trees, which were pruned to encourage the production of acorns, from which the pigs were fed. This system is known as “montado “. Cork, by acquiring a major economic importance, has contributed to the upkeep of the montados in the context of their multi-purpose use.

But even the montado, despite the commitment it represented to livestock husbandry, from the 20th century onward could not survive an agricultural policy aimed at self-sufficiency in wheat production. In 1929, inspired by the “Bataglia del grano” promoted by Mussolini in Italy, the Estado Novo, ignoring the warnings of those who knew better (namely Prof. Azevedo Gomes), launched the “wheat campaign”. This had its greatest expression in the Alentejo, where the clearing of vast areas of cork oak forest and scrubland was subsidised for the expansion of wheat production. The erosion and depletion of what little fertility existed in the mostly meagre soils quickly led to failure. Since 1934, production has not stopped falling.

As we enter the 21st century, Portugal is facing a greater challenge: to re-establish a large part of its forest heritage, inspired by the composition of the native forests.

In fact, most of the vegetation cover which has been burning is made up of miserable stands of pine and eucalyptus. These have replaced the native forest, or fields abandoned by traditional farming practices which are barely viable in the context of the open economy. Whoever crosses our Beiras (and beyond), will encounter extensive green stains, deceptively wooded, candidates to be turned to ash-grey. And extensive grey stains waiting to regenerate only to burn again.

We must break this green-grey cycle. There is no point in blaming the economy; just as  plastic litter will only be eliminated when it’s widely recognized as a valuable raw material for manufacturing industries, so the forest will only be protected when its restocking, maintenance, and protection are based on a robust economic equation. But for this to happen, value must be attached to what has value: ie. the services that the forest provides us with.

• Forests are carbon sinks and producers of the oxygen we consume every second of our lives. How much is this service worth?

• Forests are the only effective barrier against desertification: they act as windbreaks, retain water, enrich the soil, regulate the rainfall regime, refresh the environment. Are we willing to do without them? How much is this service worth?

• Forests paint landscapes that enchant us, and relax us by removing stress; they also offer us environments for leisure and sporting activities. How much is this service worth?

• Forests and their biodiversity are one of the most important assets in the territory for the promotion of tourism. How much is this service worth?

• Forests provide us with various materials such as wood, cork and resin, which Man has always exploited; but also fruits, mushrooms, honey and much more.

Until we are willing to recognise and account for the countless and irreplaceable services that the forest provides, if it is genuinely cared for, we will always see reforestation as a heavy burden and not as an investment. There’s the rub!

Alongside the native forest, there can and must be, on appropriate and regulated land, silviculture (forestry) for the production of wood and cellulose pulp which, it’s good to see, belong in the carbon sequestration ranks as long as these materials are not burned, but recycled after use.

Hence the importance of the circular economy as well!