MT Rice Ridge Fire and Timber Mangement

RobG

RobG

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 10, 2010
Messages
5,738
Location
Bozeman, MT
The Rice Ridge fire is east of Seeley Lake: https://inciweb.nwcg.gov/incident/map/5414/0/74677/. I think it is the largest true "forest" fire in MT.

If you look at Google Earth (e.g. around 47°12'43.64"N 113°23'8.51"W and to the SE) you will see the area is full of roads and in fact that they have logged the hell out of the area outside wilderness area. While the cuts have been there for a while, the trees don't look like especially dense second growth or beetle kill.

Have they been trying to do timber sales in there that have been blocked?

FWIW I'm not blindly against logging, especially in a place that already has roads.
 
Even those who contend that significantly more extensive logging won't prevent wildland fires are not opposed to logging. They're just pointing out that drought and weather (climate warming) are the major drivers of wildland fires and intense costly wildfire seasons such as the 2017 one. Although thinning, logging, and planned fires can reduce the risks to structures, livestock, and people .... those measures will not significantly reduce the overall scope and number of wildfires, even with less drought and milder weather.
 
Very few situations hold a "one step will change the fate" type setting.
Small steps are an element politics typically rant about a failure to succeed for the sake that the selectively chosen small step proposed enhancement does not fix all. Publicly, it is an easy sell to the current impulsive, fickle mobs wanting to proudly wear their red or blue colors of pride...

We walk closed roads pretty darn frequently when hunting and in my case, find it a nice break to walk a gated road with packed game and (or) game cart full versus winding through the steep graded heavily wooded forests. It is not just the thinning of trees. It is not just the reduction of understory...
Logging roads provide significant strategic value to fire fighting elements. Thinned forests promote employment, timber and fire reduction.

I've hiked, fished, hunted the Seeley / Swan area a fair amount over my life span. One can say, "well, the fire is the largest and it was one with some prior thinned areas," etc... thus maybe it is not the "fix all" claimed to be... Orrrr.... Maybe it would be much greater IF NOT for the old gated logging roads for fire fighting strategic use, some reduced understory from a decade or two when logging was in fair operation.

Meh, you say tomato, I say tomato... Wait, what? ;)
 
Good points, Sytes. I dunno and you dunno. My post was an attempt at summarizing the recent columns, articles and letters submitted by those professionals who have and still are studying wildfire behavior and forestry management ... as opposed to the solutions and contentions of the politicians who seem to be pandering to particular economic interests such as the timber industry.

Personally I would like to see more thinning and logging projects in the right places, as well as an improved international trade situation favoring the US timber industry. But if you think the costs of fire suppression are high, just consider what it would cost to extensively thin, log, build and maintain roads across the vast forested lands of the northwest USA.

And I guess there are some naive folks who would like to believe that man can manage our forests like many in Europe, where each plant and animal has a particular name and/or number, used to identify that plant or animal on the permit to harvest it. Naively absurd!
 
Rob I have no idea what the status of the timber is where the fire is burning, but I will say that the Seeley Swan area is a friggin rain forest and it would only take a decade or so for that country to grow back all kinds of fuel.

And keep in mind there's 4 burning in the Bob, with an impressive acreage total.

Logging is certainly not the absolute solution to fire suppression, but if we can keep local loggers working and improve big game habitat, I'm all for it.
 
Straight Arrow said:
Personally I would like to see more thinning and logging projects in the right places, as well as an improved international trade situation favoring the US timber industry. But if you think the costs of fire suppression are high, just consider what it would cost to extensively thin, log, build and maintain roads across the vast forested lands of the northwest USA.
Click to expand...

I agree with your first line though the second, I am not sure I understand. Logging companies would bid for the opportunity to utilize our public land's renewable timber. This is $ in "our" pocket. They, (logging companies) would build the roads, maintain and hopefully once completed with proper renewable land management regulation/contract agreement, the land would sustainably "renew".
 
Sytes said:
I agree with your first line though the second, I am not sure I understand. Logging companies would bid for the opportunity to utilize our public land's renewable timber. This is $ in "our" pocket. They, (logging companies) would build the roads, maintain and hopefully once completed with proper renewable land management regulation/contract agreement, the land would sustainably "renew".
Click to expand...
.

While this would wook in a perfect world, a lot of times the market on finished lumber will not hold this up. And no one wants to pay more for the lumber package on their new house. This is where the subsidy talks come in.
 
Ya, agree... something would have to change within the "subsidy" type process within our National Forests to make it work.

Interesting enough Montana State School Trust Lands - managed by DSL, has been used as the leading example of making something like this - work. Not saying this one simple example is the "fix all"... rather to learn from our past to improve our future is a good start and one small step along the way.

I am not posting this with interest to support transfer of Federal lands to states. I oppose the idea. However, that does not mean we can not learn from actual examples - I am using this to share how we could make it work... better for covering the expenses and funding councils used to assure as best possible, a sustainably renewable forest for future generations.
StateTrustlandvsfederal.PNG
 
They, (logging companies) would build the roads,
Click to expand...
That would be great if the timber industry built and maintained the roads, but is that fiscally feasible? USFS has built a lot of roads for timber harvest private firms to extract timber, roads which if the logger had to build they would not even be interested in logging the area. USFS road building is the cost which has resulted in very little $ in "our" pocket from logging projects on public lands.
 
I'd temper any conclusions directly comparing revenues from state ground to federal ground. Though I'd fully agree the feds could use a change, it's worth remembering that the State manages its forests chiefly for profit and in my opinion it sometimes shows, and, when a state parcel isn't profitable they sell it and buy one that is. That's not to say we couldn't improve federal management by looking at what the state does better. I'm sure we could.

To the OP, I don't know if anything would have made a difference. When it blew up and toasted 60,000 acres in a day, it burned over 1,000s of acres that previously burned in 2012,2007, and 2003. Despite the implied claims of our politicians, I think when it's that dry and the wind blows no amount thinning will save us.
 
Again, going back to the point---> One small step is not the fix all D or R claim to public fame preached failure. It shows opportunity. It presents the viable opportunity to discuss, negotiate, debate, evaluate and yes, diversify our thinking. We can not stand on ultimatums.

Re: roads, When logging did occur, the companies routed the roads into their tract. They paid for their construction. I'll take some time to search out any related articles on this. There has to be some historical writings the cover this portion of our logging industry.

I agree as well re: state = profit and, as I've shared in past posts, I am not a fan of old *skool* clear cut thinking... it does show the potential to examine the accounting process and diversify our thinking. There is potential to shore up a lot of frivolity with our expenses comparing state vs fed. Though for God sake, stop dragging our tax dollars through the extremists dream team's litigation bull shnitz muck! Put our American families back to work! Respect OUR land... Our's is a key word.
 
Last edited:
belly-deep said:
Rob I have no idea what the status of the timber is where the fire is burning, but I will say that the Seeley Swan area is a friggin rain forest and it would only take a decade or so for that country to grow back all kinds of fuel.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it's my stomping ground so I know... and for the second growth reason much of the promises of logging management fails unless you blow a bunch of money clearing unmarketable trees later. Where I grew up along Swan Lake by far the thickest areas were 2nd growth.

But... the burned area is south of there and isn't quite as wet and the Google Earth view indicates the trees have been thinned. That view can be deceiving, but it looks like the area has been very heavily managed even recently. Has there been any major hindrances to this management?

One thing that isn't known yet is whether or not the managed areas burned with less intensity than the other areas. Maybe more of the mature trees survived.

rg
 
Sytes said:
Re: roads, When logging did occur, the companies routed the roads into their tract. They paid for their construction. I'll take some time to search out any related articles on this. There has to be some historical writings the cover this portion of our logging industry.
Click to expand...

Maybe the minor roads... If you want a current project look into the Limestone project south of Bozeman. I'd be interested in who pays for the roads there. (I'm not for or against this one, but I know it is in the process so the data should be available for the asking.)

In the 80s the state would lose money on their timber sales. I'm not sure what the current situation is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Pucky Freak
Historically-representative ecosystem management
Replies
12
Views
922
Pucky Freak
Pucky Freak
P
USFS grazing and timber
Replies
8
Views
901
Straight Arrow
Straight Arrow
cheeser
Voyageurs Wolf Project
Replies
14
Views
1K
Gus Chiggins
Gus Chiggins
QuazyQuinton
NE Oregon elk--Was it worth 21 points?
2
Replies
22
Views
2K
steveo_steelhead
steveo_steelhead
LRHFox
Crater Ridge Fire
Replies
10
Views
1K
LRHFox
LRHFox

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
111,057
Messages
1,945,299
Members
34,995
Latest member
Infraredice

Share this page

Back
Top