Hello, it’s Conor here. If you’re looking for some uplifting news following a hot and eventful 250th birthday weekend, you’ve come to the right place.
This interview is conducted by host Steve Curwood for “Living on Earth,” public radio’s environmental news magazine, featuring Bill Moomaw, a distinguished visiting scientist at the Woodwell Climate Research Center. It is republished from Inside Climate News.
The arrival of European colonists dramatically altered the American landscape, particularly our forests. While clear-cutting was rampant, it is heartening to note that, on the 250th birthday of the United States, many forests have made a remarkable recovery, especially in the Northeast.
Forests serve as vital carbon sinks, making their preservation essential in our efforts to combat climate change. During the Kyoto Protocol negotiations, the U.S. even proposed considering its forests as a way to offset historical carbon emissions.
Bill Moomaw, an emeritus professor at Tufts University and a distinguished visiting scientist at the Woodwell Climate Research Center, has dedicated decades to studying how the restoration of American forests can influence the climate. He contributed to multiple reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which received the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007 alongside former Vice President Al Gore.
STEVE CURWOOD: Could you provide a historical overview of the early United States?
MOOMAW: After the Mayflower’s arrival, John Winthrop famously remarked: “We have been sent to a wilderness filled with savages and wild beasts.” This statement reflects their disdain for the lush forests and indigenous cultures they encountered, which they viewed as obstacles.
To replicate their English landscape, they needed agricultural land, leading to extensive deforestation to create villages. The staggering value of the towering white pines in these forests prompted the crown to mandate their preservation for the construction of superior masts for ships, surpassing those of the Spanish fleets. As a result, forests were regarded merely as resources to be harvested and barriers to be removed, especially in New England and Virginia— the first areas to be colonized.
CURWOOD: How much of the forest was lost in the Northeast following European colonization?
MOOMAW: It was a devastating process; by 1850, New England had experienced about 80 percent deforestation, with some areas losing up to 90 or even 100 percent of their forests. The ecological devastation was immense.
Significant change occurred after 1900 when Gifford Pinchot, the first head of the U.S. Forest Service, returned from Europe with insights on sustainable forest management. Prior to this shift, rampant destruction was common; entire hemlock forests were obliterated for bark to extract tannin for leather, while the rest was discarded and incinerated, leading to massive fires in New Hampshire.
CURWOOD: What steps were necessary for the forest’s resurgence in the Northeast?
MOOMAW: The story of recovery is remarkable. For example, Massachusetts—currently the third-most densely populated state in the U.S.—is now around 60 percent forested. At the time of European arrival, it boasted over 90 percent forest cover. The subsequent deforestation peaked between 1850 and 1900, largely fueled by the demands of the railroads.
Railroads required wood for steam, and tree ties were cut down for tracks, turning a period of industrialization into a disaster for our forests.
However, from around 1850, as farmland opened up in Ohio, New England farmers began abandoning their cleared lands. This led to what I term a “benign neglect” phenomenon—whereby forests regrew naturally in the once-farmed lands. The regrowth in the Northeast, especially in New England, represents one of the largest forest recoveries in global history.
In contrast, other regions transformed cut-over land into commercial tree plantations of single species rather than restoring natural forests. While some areas have not returned to their original ecological state, New England has witnessed an impressive revival over the past century.
CURWOOD: So, in the East, is it fair to say we can celebrate the forest’s restoration?
MOOMAW: Yes, it is indeed worth celebrating, yet the fight for forest preservation continues. Many states maintain Departments of Natural Resources, viewing forests mainly as exploitable resources for economic benefit.
This debate has persisted since the late 19th century, with notable figures like John Muir advocating for the sanctity of forests, while Gifford Pinchot insisted on their wise utilization as resources. We now have a third perspective recognizing forests and ecosystems as crucial components in maintaining Earth’s systems. This relevance to climate change underscores their importance in ensuring our planet’s stability.
CURWOOD: Looking forward to the next 250 years in America, how do you envision changes in forest management?
MOOMAW: I believe we must protect a significant portion of our forests enough to sustain both global climate and regional weather patterns.
For example, global warming’s effect on Northeast temperatures is lessened due to our substantial tree coverage. These forests provide crucial shade and, through their growth, draw up water containing essential minerals. This water evaporates from their leaves, effectively cooling the local environment. In the case of Boston, it is estimated that the city is three to four degrees cooler than it otherwise would be.
In other words, while global warming could raise temperatures significantly, our forests help mitigate that impact. This dynamic has economic repercussions as well. A few years ago, when Worcester, Massachusetts was compelled to cut down approximately 30,000 trees due to disease, the demand for air conditioning surged dramatically. It serves as a reminder that we need a climate conducive to all aspects of life, including outdoor labor and construction.
