Ed, I hate to sound like a shill for the forest products industry. I'm not. I'm an informed sceptic.
Trees are a crop, much of which is owned by the people with more or less a sweet spot for returning value of about 50 years.
Our forest management plan takes into account all the stakeholders in an attempt to get the people fair value for their forests, not wasting them as they age out, and enhance the outdoor experience for others. That'd be us.
Forest products rely on a renewable resource with a long life cycle. They also Create a lot of employment in rural areas. The sustainable part is the part where you don't cut them all in one batch.

Clear cutting isn't the only treatment anymore. Sometimes the people get the best value with select cutting, and leaving big old trees to provide acorns, etc for wildlife. They'll leave drumming logs amid known shrubby fruit and food sources trying to improve grouse density as well.
Checker boarding smaller cuts into 25 year and 15 year cycles creates a ton of seemingly great habitat, but the numbers aren't showing up.

So, we ask that people report their harvest to get a closer idea of the relationship between forest rotation and grouse numbers.
Since my annual impact is small, I happily report.

Out there doing it best I can.