Editors, Vineyard Gazette;

How on God’s green earth can a task force made up of groups such as the Vineyard Conservation Society promote the clear-cutting of 175 acres worth of healthy white pine trees from the state forest?

The proponents of this deforestation plan say it is needed (1) for fire safety and (2) because white pine trees are not native to this Island. Both arguments are flimsy and far outweighed by the benefits of leaving the trees as they are.

Island fire authorities have stated that “the oak barrens and grasslands do catch fire more easily,” which suggests the risk of fire is lower with the pine forest versus the brush filled meadow that would replace it.

The non-native argument is even more dubious. It is said there were white pines here when the Island was still attached to the mainland. That was thousands of years ago, before the ocean levels rose at the end of the ice age. How long does a tree species need to have been here to be considered “native”? Even if the white pine didn’t fit the definition of native, what does it matter? It is not an invasive species that threatens our ecosystem.

Are we now going to eradicate every plant and tree that was not growing here before the ice age? Before European settlement? I can think of a handful of large scale for-profit green nurseries on the Island who may take issue with such a rigid standard. Unless, of course, it only applies when it suits the purposes of sand plain preservationists. I commend the VCS and other task force members for wanting to save moths and rare plants and I would encourage them to make more noise when it comes to advocating for the large swaths of sensitive habitat in Katama and off Meshacket Road being destroyed by developers.

For years, groups such as the VCS have been at the forefront of environmental activism on the Island, leading on land protection, sounding alarms about carbon emissions and pushing for bans on single-use water bottles and gas-guzzling leaf blowers. How in good conscience do such groups now support a plan that would result in an unprecedented release of stored carbon? By voting in favor of the removal of 175 acres of lush forest, VCS and other members of the task force are effectively green lighting the release of thousands of tons of stored carbon and the loss of future carbon sequestration potential. Explain that to the kids who will inherit the planet.

The hypocrisy of this stance is staggering. A mature white pine can store between 8,000 to 10,000 pounds of carbon in its trunk alone. Assuming an average of 85 trees per acre, the removal of 175 acres would impact approximately 14,875 trees. This equates to roughly 59,500 tons of carbon being released, which is the equivalent of producing approximately 565,838,764 six-ounce plastic water bottles. That’s more than half a billion plastic water bottles.

The task force’s justifications for this action, ranging from fire safety to invasion control, seem weak when weighed against the environmental cost. They claim to support “ecological restoration,” but fail to acknowledge the crucial role these pines play in our fight against climate change.

It’s time for the Vineyard Conservation Society and the other members of the task force to reassess their priorities. If they truly care about environmental protection and carbon reduction, they should be fighting to conserve these valuable carbon sinks, not advocating for their removal. Their current stance undermines years of environmental advocacy and sets a dangerous precedent for future conservation efforts on the island.

I urge the VCS and other Island conservation groups involved with the task force to carefully consider their position on this issue and to work towards a solution that protects and conserves these important white pine stands.

Johanna Hynes
Charlestown