BEYOND THE CHAINSAW DEBATE: FINDING COMMON GROUND ON STEWARDSHIP OF AMERICA’S WILDERNESS
By Don Amador
7/29/26
A recent High Country News article titled, “A Ban on
Chainsaws in Wilderness is Performative, Not Practical" has sparked
renewed discussion about one of the most sensitive issues in public land
management. While the article focuses on whether chainsaws should be used to
clear trails in designated Wilderness Areas following the unprecedented
destruction caused by Western megafires, I believe the larger story is not
about chainsaws at all. It is about finding common ground on stewardship of designated Wilderness areas.
For decades, wilderness stewardship has been guided by
principles established in the Wilderness Act of 1964, a landmark law that has
served our nation well by protecting some of America's most treasured
landscapes. At the time, few could have imagined the scale of the ecological
changes that would occur during the first quarter of the 21st century. Today,
millions of acres of federal forests have experienced repeated high-severity
wildfires, widespread insect infestations, prolonged drought, and extensive
tree mortality. Across much of the West, trails that once connected visitors to
remote landscapes are now buried beneath thousands of fallen trees or
surrounded by hazardous stands of dead timber.
These conditions have created management challenges
unlike anything previous generations of land managers encountered. The question
is no longer simply whether trail crews should use crosscut saws or chainsaws.
The more important question is whether our current management framework is
keeping pace with the realities on the ground.
Fortunately, this is not a new challenge for public land
management. Throughout my career, I have watched federal and state agencies,
conservation organizations, recreation groups, local governments, industry
representatives, scientists, and volunteers come together to solve difficult
resource issues that once seemed impossible to overcome. Collaborative efforts
addressing post-fire recovery, watershed restoration, sustainable trail
management, forest health, invasive species, wildlife habitat, and outdoor
recreation have repeatedly demonstrated that the best solutions rarely emerge
from one stakeholder acting alone.
That same collaborative model should now be applied to
the growing challenge of maintaining access and stewardship within our National
Wilderness Preservation System.
Unfortunately, much of the current discussion appears to
be occurring within isolated circles rather than through an open, transparent
collaborative process. Some conversations are taking place within the Forest
Service. Others involve wilderness advocacy organizations, outfitters,
volunteer trail groups, or local communities. Yet there has been little
evidence of a broad national dialogue that intentionally brings together the
full range of interests that care deeply about America's wilderness.
The Forest Service has not adopted a nationwide policy authorizing
chainsaw use in Wilderness, nor should anyone expect such a significant policy
question to be resolved through isolated project decisions. Instead, the agency
continues to evaluate requests under the long-established "minimum
requirements" process authorized by the Wilderness Act. While that
approach provides flexibility on a case-by-case basis, it does little to answer
the larger question facing land managers across the West: How should wilderness
stewardship evolve as our forests continue to change?
A collaborative forum would allow participants to move
beyond the emotionally charged question of "chainsaws versus crosscut
saws" and instead examine broader issues such as post-fire forest
conditions, trail sustainability, volunteer capacity, workforce limitations,
visitor safety, ecological impacts, and long-term stewardship objectives.
Rather than debating a single tool, stakeholders could focus on identifying
management strategies capable of preserving both wilderness character and
meaningful public access for future generations.
Decisions developed through open dialogue are far more
likely to gain public acceptance than policies developed behind closed doors or
through litigation. Even when consensus cannot be achieved, participants gain a
better understanding of one another's perspectives and often discover common
ground that would otherwise remain hidden.
This issue also offers an opportunity for the Forest
Service to demonstrate leadership. The agency has decades of experience participating
in collaborative partnerships throughout the West. Applying that same
collaborative model to wilderness trail management could help establish a
thoughtful path forward that respects both the intent of the Wilderness Act and
the unprecedented conditions facing today's land managers.
None of us knows what the final answer will be. It may
involve increased funding for traditional trail crews, expanded volunteer
training, improved post-fire restoration strategies, additional research, carefully
limited administrative flexibility, or perhaps entirely new approaches that
have yet to be considered. Those solutions should emerge from collaboration
rather than confrontation.
Massive wildfires in the American West have changed many
forested lands dramatically over the past fifteen to 20 years. Rather than
asking whether chainsaws belong in Wilderness, perhaps the more important
question is this: Can we bring together the people who care most about these
remarkable places and work collaboratively to ensure they remain healthy,
accessible, and resilient for generations to come? - That is a conversation
worth having.
# # #
Don Amador has been in the trail advocacy, post wildfire recovery, and recreation management profession for 35 years. Don served as Chair of the CA State Parks Off-Highway Vehicle Recreation Commission (circa 1994-2000). Don served as an AD Driver for the Forest Service North Zone Fire Cache during the 2022, 2023, and 2024 Fire Seasons.

No comments:
Post a Comment