How did we get here?

[Pony Soldier]

I'm not sure of how to approach this but---. When I was in grade school I remember a tour where we were taught about selective harvest of trees and wise silvaculture. By the early 60s we saw management change and forest service timber management brought in folks off the coast and instead of selective harvest of fir and larch we started to see massive clearcuts of multiple drainages and thousands of acres. A squirrel would have pack nuts to get across them. So big that it changed the ecosystems and it would take a couple hundred years to recover unlike the coasts where a saw log can appear in a 75 years.

When I went to college in wildlife management, I was told that wildlife live along the boundaries of habitat. This way clearcuts weren't all bad in the intermountain west but they needed to be 20-50 acres with uncut blocks between for security. A checkerboard of sorts and it seemed to work.

Then we came to the politics and emotional management. Every logging proposal was met with a lawsuit. Natural was great. So now after 20-30 years and pine beatles we have vast sections of forest with so much downfall there is very little habitat left so the game starts to migrate to better feed.

In there some turkey decides wolves need to be in the environment and plants pack wolves from canada and eliminates the native wolves from the ecosystem. Game management starts to manage predators like prey species and things start to get out of control. The prey species feel the heat and move onto the open fields for security creating a conflict with the ranchers trying to make a living. To limit the conflict Fish and Game have shoulder seasons to reduce the elk on the winter range which really only reduces the overall elk on the summer ranges to solve the winter range problems. That inturn focuses the hunters onto to ranch land to create more pressure.

Meanwhile the forest service starts to log where they can but now we are back to massive clearcuts based on where they can get equipment into rather than habitat needs. Where they can't, fires get started during the summer where they nurse them along for a month or two until conditions are right for thousands of acres are burnt. In the middle of that they drop pyro bombs to enhance the burn to solve the downfall problem. All of a sudden they have unlimited money to fix the roads and varius habitat issues that they haven't touched since the 80s when the timber management money when away.

Some of these areas will eventually support wildlife but likely not in my lifetime or what's left of it. I've been around long enough to see the series of mistakes caused by big money, politics and emotional management. I guess its up to you younger hunters to see if we can get this chain of bad decisions under control so your kids can enjoy a good elk dinner. Some cooperation between agencies in long term planning would be a nice place to start as well as some big picture thinking. It's just a shame that this chain of horrible decisions has taken us to this point.

Sorry folks. Hate to ruin your sunday but this was the best thoughts I could come up with while feeding horses this morning.

 

[ddavis_1313]

Great post.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Donjuan]

I listened to the MeatEater podcast where they talk to an NWTF biologist. I thought it was crazy the US Forest Service has to fight litigation over timber cutting, which is a source of revenue. Then they have to cut their budget from prescribed burning and prevention to spend the funds on fighting out of control fires, which could have been reduced to start with.

 

[roadrunner]

Where is "here"?

 

[Pony Soldier]

Western Montana

 

[Wyobohunter]

I'm not sure of how to approach this but---. When I was in grade school I remember a tour where we were taught about selective harvest of trees and wise silvaculture. By the early 60s we saw management change and forest service timber management brought in folks off the coast and instead of selective harvest of fir and larch we started to see massive clearcuts of multiple drainages and thousands of acres. A squirrel would have pack nuts to get across them. So big that it changed the ecosystems and it would take a couple hundred years to recover unlike the coasts where a saw log can appear in a 75 years.

When I went to college in wildlife management, I was told that wildlife live along the boundaries of habitat. This way clearcuts weren't all bad in the intermountain west but they needed to be 20-50 acres with uncut blocks between for security. A checkerboard of sorts and it seemed to work.

Then we came to the politics and emotional management. Every logging proposal was met with a lawsuit. Natural was great. So now after 20-30 years and pine beatles we have vast sections of forest with so much downfall there is very little habitat left so the game starts to migrate to better feed.

In there some turkey decides wolves need to be in the environment and plants pack wolves from canada and eliminates the native wolves from the ecosystem. Game management starts to manage predators like prey species and things start to get out of control. The prey species feel the heat and move onto the open fields for security creating a conflict with the ranchers trying to make a living. To limit the conflict Fish and Game have shoulder seasons to reduce the elk on the winter range which really only reduces the overall elk on the summer ranges to solve the winter range problems. That inturn focuses the hunters onto to ranch land to create more pressure.

Meanwhile the forest service starts to log where they can but now we are back to massive clearcuts based on where they can get equipment into rather than habitat needs. Where they can't, fires get started during the summer where they nurse them along for a month or two until conditions are right for thousands of acres are burnt. In the middle of that they drop pyro bombs to enhance the burn to solve the downfall problem. All of a sudden they have unlimited money to fix the roads and varius habitat issues that they haven't touched since the 80s when the timber management money when away.

Some of these areas will eventually support wildlife but likely not in my lifetime or what's left of it. I've been around long enough to see the series of mistakes caused by big money, politics and emotional management. I guess its up to you younger hunters to see if we can get this chain of bad decisions under control so your kids can enjoy a good elk dinner. Some cooperation between agencies in long term planning would be a nice place to start as well as some big picture thinking. It's just a shame that this chain of horrible decisions has taken us to this point.

Sorry folks. Hate to ruin your sunday but this was the best thoughts I could come up with while feeding horses this morning.

Thanks. Good summary of the challenges we face. I wish there were any easy solution. There is probably a simple solution but, as you know. Simple does not always mean easy.

On a lighter note. I’ve decided to label big swaths of deadfall as “cry holes” on my GPS. Sometimes they make me want to just flop down and cry.

 

[ORJoe]

I was trying to learn more about binoculars last Spring and all of my Google searches kept leading me here.

 

[Pony Soldier]

Wyobohunter - thanks for your comments. I too have a lot of cry holes. I believe it has been long enough that the elk should have developed new trails through and around those places.

I have one of those places. The elk start near my house then about mid Nov show at about the same
places each year. They used to travel on the top of the ridge but that has been barren. I'm guessing I will have to run some sweeps about midway up the face of the ridge to find the path. Just another challenge to see If I really care.

 

[pk_]

I guess its up to you younger hunters to see if we can get this chain of bad decisions under control so your kids can enjoy a good elk dinner. Some cooperation between agencies in long term planning would be a nice place to start as well as some big picture thinking. It's just a shame that this chain of horrible decisions has taken us to this point.

Fantastic post.

One huge issue though that I see with relying on newer and younger hunters is that unless they come from a generational hunting family or have a mentor who takes the time to explain as you have in this post, what the history is locally, they generally, by default, have no clue.

We just continue to have this shifting baseline with each generation and they don’t realize until 10, 20, 30 years later that the old grumpy hunter who always talked about ‘the good old days’ was right and that shit is indeed headed in the wrong direction…

I don’t know man. There are some bright spots here and there, but overall this topic really cuts deep when I give it much thought. Because at times it seems that it is not whether or not we can hold on to this lifestyle, but merely for how long.

It’s sad how little the average outdoorsman understands about habitat and wildlife management, let alone the history of the two and how they correlate as you so well laid out in your post. So expecting the general public to understand timber management best practices for flora and fauna to flourish, is a tall order. Also I assume the value of timber vs the cost of doing business is an issue as well. So once they get the equipment and crew into an area I am sure it is all about covering cost and turning a profit. So they aren’t going to leave money on the hill in the way of a selective cut vs a clear cut (just a guess).

Anyways. Another glaring problem is that you have made one of the more important and moving posts I have seen throughout years and years of lurking on hunting forums and it looks as if it won’t even make it to page 2 before it’s death. Perhaps you should have come up with a meme.

So I don’t have any good solutions. The only thing I am trying to do is lean in and support the people and organizations that I feel are pushing in the right direction…

 

[Rocsteel]

Great write up.

 

[CoStick]

We all are special interest groups and not enough land to appease us all.

 

[ThunderJack49]

I'm not sure of how to approach this but---. When I was in grade school I remember a tour where we were taught about selective harvest of trees and wise silvaculture. By the early 60s we saw management change and forest service timber management brought in folks off the coast and instead of selective harvest of fir and larch we started to see massive clearcuts of multiple drainages and thousands of acres. A squirrel would have pack nuts to get across them. So big that it changed the ecosystems and it would take a couple hundred years to recover unlike the coasts where a saw log can appear in a 75 years.

When I went to college in wildlife management, I was told that wildlife live along the boundaries of habitat. This way clearcuts weren't all bad in the intermountain west but they needed to be 20-50 acres with uncut blocks between for security. A checkerboard of sorts and it seemed to work.

Then we came to the politics and emotional management. Every logging proposal was met with a lawsuit. Natural was great. So now after 20-30 years and pine beatles we have vast sections of forest with so much downfall there is very little habitat left so the game starts to migrate to better feed.

In there some turkey decides wolves need to be in the environment and plants pack wolves from canada and eliminates the native wolves from the ecosystem. Game management starts to manage predators like prey species and things start to get out of control. The prey species feel the heat and move onto the open fields for security creating a conflict with the ranchers trying to make a living. To limit the conflict Fish and Game have shoulder seasons to reduce the elk on the winter range which really only reduces the overall elk on the summer ranges to solve the winter range problems. That inturn focuses the hunters onto to ranch land to create more pressure.

Meanwhile the forest service starts to log where they can but now we are back to massive clearcuts based on where they can get equipment into rather than habitat needs. Where they can't, fires get started during the summer where they nurse them along for a month or two until conditions are right for thousands of acres are burnt. In the middle of that they drop pyro bombs to enhance the burn to solve the downfall problem. All of a sudden they have unlimited money to fix the roads and varius habitat issues that they haven't touched since the 80s when the timber management money when away.

Some of these areas will eventually support wildlife but likely not in my lifetime or what's left of it. I've been around long enough to see the series of mistakes caused by big money, politics and emotional management. I guess its up to you younger hunters to see if we can get this chain of bad decisions under control so your kids can enjoy a good elk dinner. Some cooperation between agencies in long term planning would be a nice place to start as well as some big picture thinking. It's just a shame that this chain of horrible decisions has taken us to this point.

Sorry folks. Hate to ruin your sunday but this was the best thoughts I could come up with while feeding horses this morning.

Sometimes I dream of hiking in 50lbs sacks of aspen trees so deep into old burn scars that the forest service kids will never find them and then start a replanting operation that will pay off in a few decades....but they are just dreams for now.

 

[Pony Soldier]

I remember planting trees in the 70s and watching them grow till they burned 2 years ago. I'm waiting to see if there will be contracts to plant trees in the fire scar near my ranch.

However I do remember planting contracts where we planted ponderosa pine above where they grew. What grew back was lodgepole pines and white fir. Trees planted by wish list as opposed to reality.

I once transplanted a larch near the continental divide. I got 10 years out of it until it froze one spring. I have learned some things the hard way.

 

[Rokbar]

You can thank the tree hugging yuppies!!! In NC the commission cuts a good amount of STATE land. On the federal level in the national forests its like you said. Plan a cut and then go to court. Our state has some of the best foresters and biologists in the country. The are saying cut, cut, cut , and cut more. Not slash, burn, and cut like was done in the early 1900's. The general public is for the most part ignorant of what cutting timber can do for wildlife. If a cut is made on public land, up to 25% of the sale of timber goes into the school system of the county the timber was cut in. Sadly, the feds manage the national forests to accommodate people more so than the wildlife.

 

[Gobbler36]

I just can’t understand how these people can’t understand that smart timber harvest is good for everything, its really not that hard of a concept to understand, that’s the most frustrating part of all this to me. along with how do we move past this and get to a good forest management system

 

[Pony Soldier]

At a meeting with the district ranger last year when a long smoldering fire was really taking off, he said -- we can't log it so it might as well burn.

 

[Btaylor]

We all are special interest groups and not enough land to appease us all.

The problem is not the number of interest groups, it is the direction in which they pull. If all would pull to the middle rather than away from it, we could make a real difference on a lot of fronts. Sadly though, the majority are only interested in me benefits right now or quicker.

 

[CoStick]

The problem is not the number of interest groups, it is the direction in which they pull. If all would pull to the middle rather than away from it, we could make a real difference on a lot of fronts. Sadly though, the majority are only interested in me benefits right now or quicker.

You are correct, the vitriol between sides and inability to communicate is how we got here.