28
Canadian federal forest report obscures logging’s impact on wildlife and climate, conservation groups say
(www.theglobeandmail.com)
This article seems a bit occlusive, even though it's presenting facts in favor of a more detailed understanding of our forests.
For some additional information, logging companies need to replant clearcuts. Within a certain range of other trees, the forest will regenerate naturally if only small, selective cuts are taken. Those are minor wounds, clearcuts need skin grafts. Replanted trees are higher value species, sometimes only two kinds. Historically, no/few regulations on maintaining biodiversity has led to disease and explosions in insect populations who live off those species. You get big chunks of dead forest now more susceptible to fire and a lot of forest isn't that old. More like tree-farming than a naturally biodiverse, heathy landscape. Because it's all going to be harvested again in 40-80 years anyway.
Those forests need more maintenance, too, just like crops. They're sprayed down with chemicals that kill off competing plant species, inspected for disease and destructive insects, and generally just fucked with on the regular so they'll be worth more when harvested.
That means a replanted forest that's just waiting to be logged or taken down by spruce/pine beetles and disease is a lot different from old growth.