Caribou Gear

Timber and litigation and fire

BigHornRam said:
I like this letter to the editor.

http://www.bitterrootstar.com/2017/09/19/a-better-way/
Click to expand...

A quote for the letter you like:
Secondly, don’t switch the subject to climate change when we know that fire intensity is directly related to forest management. If the best climate change scientists hadn’t “cooked the books” more people might believe their dogma. One wonders if we could affect the climate if we keep burning off our forest at the current rate?
Click to expand...

He's saying fire intensity isn't directly related to the climate for the last 60 days? If you don't believe in climate change and address it your destined for failure. The fires will continue to get worse. We can't log our way out of this.
 
shoots-straight said:
A quote for the letter you like:

He's saying fire intensity isn't directly related to the climate for the last 60 days? If you don't believe in climate change and address it your destined for failure. The fires will continue to get worse. We can't log our way out of this.
Click to expand...

What happened for the last 60 days here is called weather, Shoots. A high pressure system stalled over the PNW.

Climate is global and long term.

How do you propose we address climate change Bob?

What I do like best about the editorial is letting knowledgeable forest scientist like Steve Arno set our policies, not the litigation crowd. Do you know Steve?
 
Read it SA and tell me what you think.
Click to expand...
I'll forward my address if you wish to gift me. From what I've read, Arno etal have some valid restoration theories ... but only could be implemented in a practical realistic way on small limited size areas. It seems Arno and you would like the forests of North America to be much like those of Europe. Size, scope, and array of public land forests make it virtually impossible to follow their model to any practical extent, albeit it may work well on limited scale projects such as the Darby Lumber Lands Project. It seems those such forestry management practices are designed for twenty, forty, or sixty acre parcels ... not for the hundreds of thousands of acre stands of timber on public lands.
 
Straight Arrow said:
I'll forward my address if you wish to gift me. From what I've read, Arno etal have some valid restoration theories ... but only could be implemented in a practical realistic way on small limited size areas. It seems Arno and you would like the forests of North America to be much like those of Europe. Size, scope, and array of public land forests make it virtually impossible to follow their model to any practical extent, albeit it may work well on limited scale projects such as the Darby Lumber Lands Project. It seems those such forestry management practices are designed for twenty, forty, or sixty acre parcels ... not for the hundreds of thousands of acre stands of timber on public lands.
Click to expand...

Pass on a couple pumpkin spice lattes, buy a copy, then read it completely.
There's even a chapter on wilderness.
 
Straight Arrow said:
I think the wood products industry and those who advocate for increased logging are becoming less credible by ignoring the science and the studies by wildfire behavior professionals. I believe that if the wood products folks would instead develop a proactive plan which would identify the urban - wildland interface areas most at risk and the areas with timber worth harvesting where reasonable access already exists, then their cause would be more widely supported. To merely assert that there are dead trees throughout the National Forests and on other public lands and thus the need to thin and reduce fuels is critical, really is not a reasonable well thought-out position.
Click to expand...

I'm still waiting for some links from these professionals you talk about here S A.

Roaring Lion fire was about as extreme of a wildfire event as it gets.

Professionals have been studying the aftermath of the fire and here are some of the results in this NBC News segment.


http://www.nbcmontana.com/news/keci/seedlings-sprout-after-roaring-lion-fire/567319558

Note that the FS lands next to this area were scheduled to be treated but that project was being litigated prior to the fire starting (human caused near the trailhead on public land).
 
BigHornRam said:
I'm still waiting for some links from these professionals you talk about here S A.

Roaring Lion fire was about as extreme of a wildfire event as it gets.

Professionals have been studying the aftermath of the fire and here are some of the results in this NBC News segment.


http://www.nbcmontana.com/news/keci/seedlings-sprout-after-roaring-lion-fire/567319558

Note that the FS lands next to this area were scheduled to be treated but that project was being litigated prior to the fire starting (human caused near the trailhead on public land).
Click to expand...

Pretty insightful read. Thanks for sharing. Talk about some facts presented that take a step beyond the armchair QB's of the internet world.

On Wednesday, the scientist met with homeowner Dick Tourangeau in Roaring Lion. Tourangeau's house and surrounding property were spared by the fire.

Tourangeau thinned the trees on his place 15-years ago. His trees were scorched but many of the seeds in the large ponderosa pine cones survived.

"Under these scorched surface fire burned areas," said Dr. Kolb, "are literally millions of ponderosa pine seedlings germinating."
Click to expand...
Across the road from the Tourangeaus it's a different story.

On that side you see evidence of a massive crown fire. All of those trees are dead and none of their seed sources survived.

That area had not been thinned. That crown fire jumped to Tourangeau's place. But Kolb said because the homeowner had thinned his property it dropped to a surface fire.

"Trees on his property survived the fire," he said, "because the fire was not able to continue to burn as an active crown fire."
Click to expand...
 
BigHornRam said:
I'm still waiting for some links from these professionals you talk about here S A.
Click to expand...
Almost every day there have been editorials, columns and other articles in the Montana newspapers ... too numerous and lengthy to link for your curiosity. Seems you have been reading only what supports your "theories"

Of course seedlings sprout after a wildfire. What's your point?
Click to expand...
 
Straight Arrow said:
Almost every day there have been editorials, columns and other articles in the Montana newspapers ... too numerous and lengthy to link for your curiosity. Seems you have been reading only what supports your "theories"

Of course seedlings sprout after a wildfire. What's your point?
Click to expand...

Re your first statement Straight Arrow, I find reading from source information gives more insight as to the basis of a person's internet forum post. An example of such as the PERC link I shared that you critiqued and respectfully so. People are able to evaluate for their own interest the strength of the content regarding scientific evidence, conjecture, fluff, political garbage or (and) reasonable opinion, etc...

For your second comment, not sure if you read the article or the quoted portions though, yes, of course seedlings sprout after a wildfire - the point is the significant difference the scientific findings revealed within two differing forested areas and how the wildfire effected them.
 
Sytes, I do agree with you regarding the real differences in wildfire behavior between areas which have been treated with different forest management practices. That is why we certainly agree that forest management practices can be very helpful in mitigating the risks involved with wildfire, and should be employed in WUI areas. It seems everyone agrees that fire behavior is influenced by such practices. Similarly, I think everyone agrees that the stifling litigation blocking worthwhile forest management practices should be addressed and put to an end.

However, BHR's point seems to be that USFS is not doing its job competently because the millions of acres of public forest land have not been thinned, selectively cut, or otherwise proactively managed by man. That is the point of contention. Furthermore, there seems to be confusion about the cause of the 2017 severe wildfire season. Most opinions addressing the science and dynamics point to climate change drought and the summer weather as the cause. Others somehow want to blame the lack of the aforementioned forest management practices as the "cause". Bottom line is that this thread has become convoluted ... aptly described by the phrase "apples vs oranges.
I apologize for argumentatively adding to the confusion.
 
Straight Arrow,

I am a proponent of multiple use of our public lands, including timber harvest. Majority of Montanans agree with my views. Apparently you do not. That's fine with me.
 
I am a proponent of multiple use of our public lands, including timber harvest. Majority of Montanans agree with my views. Apparently you do not.
Click to expand...
BigHornRam, yes I do. Your conclusion ignores reasonable, logical interpretation of what I have expressed above in numerous posts. Your "apparently" is "obviously" blatantly lacking rationality.


I am a proponent of multiple use of our public lands, including timber harvest.
Click to expand...
That is a reasonable and thoroughly established position to which I agree. Thank-you for such a clear succinct statement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Pucky Freak
Historically-representative ecosystem management
Replies
12
Views
919
Pucky Freak
Pucky Freak
B
MT Leg 2023 Attack on Access, Timber, Habitat
Replies
13
Views
1K
Sytes
Sytes
P
USFS grazing and timber
Replies
8
Views
895
Straight Arrow
Straight Arrow
jeremy.b
Family Man's 2022 Season Log
2
Replies
23
Views
2K
jeremy.b
jeremy.b
M
A Bull Ek, A Buck Deer and a Huge Black Wolf
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
Hunter4Life78
Hunter4Life78
Leupold BX-4 Rangefinding Binoculars

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
111,004
Messages
1,943,303
Members
34,956
Latest member
mfrosty6

Share this page

Back
Top