1 Forests in the Here and Now I Edited by .. Benjamin B. Stout ' Forests in the Here and Now A Collection of writings of Hugh Miller Raup Bullard Professor of Forestry, Emeritus Harvard University Edited by Benjamin B. Stout with a fore- and afterword by Calvin W. Stillman Published by The Montana Forest and Conservation Experiment Station School of Forestry University of Montana Missoula, MT 59812 ©1981 The Montana Conservation and Experiment Station All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any mechanical means, including mimeograph, photocopying and recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. FIRST EDITION Printed in the United States of America Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Raup, Hugh Miller Forests in the Here and Now. Missoula, MT: Montana Forest and Conservation Experiment Station l31p. 8 !()7 8!069 Library of Congress number 81-83056 CONTENTS Acknowledgements . .. .. vi Foreword ........................................................................................... vii Introduction ....................... .............. ...................................... ..... .. ..... xi Chapter I COMMUNITY, SUCCESSION AND CLIMAX Chapter II SCALE .......................................................................................... 29 Chapter III PHYSICAL DISTURBANCE OF PLANT HABITATS .............. 35 Chapter IV ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINISM ........................................ 67 Chapter V REFLECTIONS ON AMERICAN FORESTRY ......................... 85 Chapter VI OPTIMISM ................................................................................... 105 Afterword . .. .. 115 Bibliography ......................................... .. ........................... ..... .. ......... 117 Published Works of Hugh M. Raup PAPERS-Alphabetical Listing .................................................... 121 Chronological Listing .................................................. 123 REVIEWS-Alphabetical Listing .................................................. 125 Chronological Listing ................................................ 128 Biography .......................................................................................... 131 V Acknowledgements This collection could not have been accomplished without the help and cooperation of many people and organizations. I thank the publishers of the journals in which these writings first appeared for permission to use the excerpts. Linda Harbine Martin, George Guthridge, Doris V. Falk and Calvin W. Stillman provided needed guidance and encouragement throughout the project. Special recognition goes to Dr. Raup. It was he who wrote the commentary letter in 1979 and made the initial selections for the chapters. The selections have always been in the way of suggestions. Final decisions and errors of omission are mine. Special Aid Funds, Inc., brought the project to completion by providing a publication subvention. That help is deeply appreciated. Benjamin B. Stout Missoula, MT March 1981 Vl Foreword We speak easily of Nature, as ifwe could define it. We reserve the greatest respect for "natural science," as ifsuch study were beyond the range ofhuman foibles. We seldom reflect that all science is a human enterprise, and thus subject to the vagaries of human minds. The term Nature always links its user to his larger world of things and of other people. Use of the term always has a subjective element, which should make it instantly suspect in the field of science. The term Nature links the user with his larger world through implying a proper sense of order, a pattern of how things ought to be, with a status established for the user of the term, and some claim ofsanctity for the general plan. The standard sanction is attribution of the plan to a Creator. This is all in the tradition of deductive logic. Robert Redfield pointed out long ago that Man, God, and Nature exist in some form in every culture. He pointed out the variations that are possible in emphases on these terms. Among the ancient Hebrews, God was overwhelmingly powerful. Among the Mesopotamians, all three were subjected to a dominant priesthood. Among the Arapesh of New Guinea, Man is the center of concern; God and Nature set aside. Among the Zuni of New Mexico all attention is devoted to maintaining a proper balance among the three. 1 To the ancient Greeks, deities were sufficiently non-threatening that time and attention could be paid to the amenities of life, among them speculation on such practical matters as agriculture, mining, geography and astronomy. For the Greeks of the Golden Age, Nature was to be enjoyed and explored., In the Christian world Nature as we would recognize it appears first among the early monastic brotherhoods which kept the faith alive in barren sites on the extreme western shores of Ireland. Their company was mostly sea-birds. Members of these orders travelled later throughout Europe spreading their values ofpiety, simplicity, and closeness to Nature. Their influence flowered in the 12th century in the person of St. Francis. Faith, Nature, and Poverty gave this young man a "unitive" experience. In the words ofour time, he got it all together; he enjoyed his life. 2 Personal feeling for Nature has been visible in our culture ever since. From the 12th century, leaves,jlowers, and little animals appeared as decorations in European cathedral architecture. Natural landscapes crept into the backgrounds ofreligious paintings, ready to become central in Flanders with the Reformation in the 16th century. 3 Amateurs led in the establishment ofall the field natural science disciplines. Needs of collectors led to classification systems, and to the development of glass to house their treasures. 4 With the notable exception of piety, the values .of St. Francis surfaced again with Thoreau at Walden Pond, and in the stark simplicity of the tradition of children's camps in our society. vii Assuming that the idea of Nature always has a place for the believer, we can predict instant appeal for any theory that relates an individual to his whole perceived world. Such seems to have been true in the mass acceptance of the tenets of ecology. Ecology takes its place among the great idea-systems that have moved our people. It has a place for everything, including the believer. A system is implied: a pattern, any disturbance of which would destroy a whole often represented as "the balance of nature." The usefulness ofecology in analytical science is limited as is any tool; the usefulness of ecology in popular philosophy has not yet found its end. Earlier great idea-systems trace back to Hebraic and Greek notions of an artisan God who designed our world down to its last detail, then left it to us to figure out how it all worked. 5 The great religions that grew from these origins offered complete explanations of the human and the non-human worlds, and gave each communicant a place to belong. These religions also were vectors of systems of ethics for interpersonal behavior. Ecology offers a system with a niche for every living thing, but no ethical parameter. There are no ethics in Nature. Many of us have been preconditioned to think in terms of such general plans. Any such plan implies a planner. As Langer has pointed out, some of the more sophisticated ofus have attributed the planning role to nature itself, or to evolution. 6 All such thinking is implicitly deductive, and in the tradition rather of theology than of experimental science. General ideas are so helpful to us in achieving individual orientations to the larger world that we are startled when a man like Hugh Raup points out their lack of congruence with reality. To work inductively and to question authority takes courage, and it takes time painstakingly to develop a case. We see the process in the papers which follow. Raup was trained in the tradition of Henry C. Cowles and Frederick E. Clements. 7 Their picture of the natural world comprised an orderly system of interdependent communities in which every living individual has found a pre­ existing niche. The whole moved through a stately succession toward a "climax" which represented stability in the long run. Individual lives and the roles of the random were de-emphasized. Overall hung an aura of continuity and of certainty. Robert Jay Lifton tells us that identification with on-going Nature is one of the devices we use to deal with really major stresses. 8 This is clear in the United States in the last century, at every period ofparticularly rapid social change with distortions of human status. The most recent example is the rise of the "environmental" movement. This was preceded by no noticeable change in the national life-support systems. It was preceded by a general rise in affluence and opportunity, sparked by civil-rights agitation, and then by the unrest occasioned by military operations in Vietnam. As Raup himself says, the prohibition movement of earlier in this century was very similar. 9 The flap over abortion has been attributed to similar pressures. 10 Deductive orientations come ready-made as shelters for minds under stress. viii Hugh Raup has spent his professional years as afield botanist. He admits to recognizing several thousand plant species when he meets them in the outdoors. His professional articles number, at last count, in the seventies. His reviews of books number in the nineties. His letters constitute a warmly personal mine of wisdom. From these materials