I recently read an article in The Seattle Times that is both hopeful and discouraging. It provided hope by illustrating how two groups that most would consider strange bedfellows found common ground by pursuing the sustainable land development principles of balancing people, planet and profit. The discouraging thing is that these groups, land conservancies and loggers, are joining together to oppose all development, which according to their own definition of the term, they perceive to be environmentally unsustainable.

The article, “Save Northwest Forests for Conifers, Not Condos” detailed how the Nature Conservancy is jumping with both feet into a business that historically has been commonly understood to be completely antithetical to their mission – logging. The environmental group is planning to cut trees on 161,000 acres in the Adirondacks in New York. Similarly, the Cascade Land Conservancy has acquired 140,000 acres of forested land in the state of Washington to log it, again, to “stop development.”
The ironic fact is that according to the classic definition of land development, the changing of a land’s current usage to another, these two groups are embedded in what they are opposing.

Not long ago, environmental activists chained themselves to trees to save them from cutting, and the forest industry was typically branded, for good reason, as a threat to the environment. In many forests around the world, clear-cut logging has contributed to habitat destruction, water pollution, the inequitable distribution of wealth, and even violence, in addition to many other ills against society and the environment. Sound familiar?

But times are changing. Today, forestry management best practices, principles, criteria, and standards exist that span economic, social, and environmental concerns and are being successfully implemented by many throughout the industry. Loggers are recognizing that the path to economic success goes through the tenets of sustainable land development, not around them. Sustainable logging practices now enable the achievement of maximum profit, the conservation of nature, and positive spin-off for society now, and future generations.

Through a triple-bottom-lined approach to sustainability, groups who previously were thought to possess opposing goals are now finding themselves in alignment. Rather than fight against them, conservationists now use logging practices to achieve their goals, and loggers use conservation practices to achieve theirs.
However, while the article reflects a positive trend toward more sophisticated approaches, it also reflects a tunnel-vision perspective that lacks a holistic, sustainable-developer viewpoint. This is evidenced in the anti-development rhetoric that starts with the title of the article.

What’s also concerning is that their joint rallying cry is opposition to land development. In the words of one conservationist, “It’s a choice between conifers and condos.” The Cascade Land Conservancy says that the logging will help protect “a unique jewel of nature from fragmentation and development.”

This “either/or” mentality is a recipe for failure. Development can – and must – integrate man and nature, not separate them. Not only do population and market realities make separation unrealistic, but as the environmentalists and loggers are discovering, a sustainable future requires greater human interaction with the forests, not less.

The forest will not manage itself. When we let it try, the result is catastrophic fire and rampant invasive species. Conversely, land must become more of a community forest. This underscores the reality that forestry management, conservation, and even agriculture are all inextricably connected with – not distinct from – the development community. Sustainable land development is our common umbrella.

Today, land development stakeholders from all interest segments, whether primarily social, economic or environmental, simply must be highly effective collaborators. The key to doing so lies in finding common ground. Common ground can be found through the tenets of SLDI.

The article underscores the fact that there probably isn’t a land development professional in existence that hasn’t incurred the browbeating of interest groups attempting to stop what they do. That fact is one of the primary driving forces behind Sustainable Land Development International.

When developers join with environmental interests, the regulators, media and public become curious. At first they’re skeptical and want to probe further to determine what’s REALLY going on. They become even more curious when the groups genuinely work well together. That curiosity is a valuable asset.

This is where SLDI comes in. By embracing a triple-bottom-line approach from the outset, everyone has the opportunity to achieve common ground from a holistic perspective. People can move forward with a better understanding of, and alignment toward, each others’ interests. When interests are aligned, environmental stakeholders begin to make economic arguments, economic stakeholders make social arguments, etc. Everyone wins.

As sustainable land development continues to take hold, more and more groups will begin to discover that they are part of our industry, and we’ll discover more about our common ground. As The Seattle Times article illustrates, making strange bedfellows is a way in which discouraging situations can begin to become hopeful – regardless of your primary interests. SLDT