Timber Production Executive Order

[Gila]

When you see the words: “Emergency” or “National Security” in Executive Orders, those words should be red flags. Because when an Emergency is declared or actions deemed necessary in the interests of National Security, every resource is then managed by Executive Authority. The President can do what ever he chooses. He can ignore the ESA. He can ignore any existing management plans. He has anlready asked for “new plans” that maximizes the production of wood products and discourages wood product importation. Only Congress can end these powers and that isn’t likely.

 

[Pony Soldier]

During the middle 70s there was logging in se Alaska. I can't remember the rules but we were exporting the logs. They would were shipped out past our claimed boundaries where they were processed on a sawmill ship which I believe was japanese. Those boards were then brought back into the US.

Another special program under the Clinton admin (I think). The USGS and the US Bureau of. mines worked on critical and strategic minerals. Sound familiar! The US Bureau of Mines was defunded. The USGS was retained for the funding but the money was channeled to the US Biological Survey that they couldn't get congressional approval for.

As an old guy, It looks like everything the government touches turns to crap.

 

[MallardSX2]

But, while we are chasing red herring's, perhaps we should set the bar to eliminate the pretenders. Anyone who doesn't own spurs and pro grade saws, and hasn't made money using them is unqualified to comment.

A hippie arborist with a set of spurs wouldn’t be who I would take advice from about logging and forest management of our national forests……

After reading your rhetoric, tell me your an anti logging, city living fly fisherman without telling me your an anti logging, city living, fly fisherman.. lol

 

[JustABritCrazy]

I see it working in reality like this: USFS/BLM mark and put up for sale lots of timber, environmental groups file lots of law suits, Trump posts on social media at midnight how illegals, antifa and Biden are at fault for his grand scheme not working, we go in circles for 4 years. What is critically needed is viable markets for low quality wood. What is also needed are the loggers to harvest it and the facilities to process it. The EO would have far greater, critically needed impact if it targeted developing the logging crews, helped construct those facilities and ensured their operators they would have a viable supply chain. That would go a long way to blunting all the cheap wood from Canada and probably have a greater long term impact on the US economy. However current political theory is overriding objective reality. The current administration is living in a fantasy land thinking just putting timber for sale will make it happen.

 

[Yoteassasin]

I see it working in reality like this: USFS/BLM mark and put up for sale lots of timber, environmental groups file lots of law suits, Trump posts on social media at midnight how illegals, antifa and Biden are at fault for his grand scheme not working, we go in circles for 4 years. What is critically needed is viable markets for low quality wood. What is also needed are the loggers to harvest it and the facilities to process it. The EO would have far greater, critically needed impact if it targeted developing the logging crews, helped construct those facilities and ensured their operators they would have a viable supply chain. That would go a long way to blunting all the cheap wood from Canada and probably have a greater long term impact on the US economy. However current political theory is overriding objective reality. The current administration is living in a fantasy land thinking just putting timber for sale will make it happen.

Unfortunately that's exactly what we don't need. Regulatory quagmire and cheap foreign products have caused 50+ years of industry problems . We NEED to solve the problem. The government subsidizing industry via cash is exactly what has been done for the last 50 years. And who runs away with the $ every time.
The government should be handling the problem at the lowest possible cash point and let the industry fix its self, no cash bail outs

 

[Customweld]

A point to ponder:
When I was just out high school I signed on at the local saw mill as a tail sawyer. One day the loggers brought in a load of white pine from the "Cedars"in Idaho. The logs were 6 or 7 ft in diameter and we had one of the only head rigs big enough to cut most of the large logs. These were so big the carriage couldn't hold them so they had to be cabled on.

The slabs that came off were too big to go through the resaw so they had to be trimmed with a chainsaw.

Ten logs took us all afternoon with a lot of hand work.

We had one of the largest headrigs of that time and since then the mill was closed as were most of the mills in western Montana.

Because someone orders trees to be cut does not mean there are facilities to process them.

Boise Cascade closed the last oversize log mill in Council in 1995. Not very many mills are set up for oversize timber. My dad ran the head rig there before it closed.

 

[rabbithuntr]

Politics has no place in timber management.

As long as the government owns/controls forested land there will be politics involved.

 

[TreeDog]

I think what this ultimately leads to is higher timber targets for the USFS. The targets will be met in some places and not in others. Some places will lean on foresters and specialists to cut trees where they maybe shouldn't. Some won't. As far as circumventing the endangered species act and a host of other regulations goes... I'll believe it when I see it. I don't think the sky is falling, but I am biased since I think this EO makes it more likely that I keep my job.

I will be shocked if this leads to a change that is noticeable to the general public.

They aren't meeting the current targets now. At least not in Region 1. Agree that the ESA and other regs won't get thrown out the window. There's plenty of timber that can be accessed while still doing the right thing management wise and regulatory wise. I'm biased too though, my paycheck comes from the timber industry.

I see it working in reality like this: USFS/BLM mark and put up for sale lots of timber, environmental groups file lots of law suits, Trump posts on social media at midnight how illegals, antifa and Biden are at fault for his grand scheme not working, we go in circles for 4 years. What is critically needed is viable markets for low quality wood. What is also needed are the loggers to harvest it and the facilities to process it. The EO would have far greater, critically needed impact if it targeted developing the logging crews, helped construct those facilities and ensured their operators they would have a viable supply chain. That would go a long way to blunting all the cheap wood from Canada and probably have a greater long term impact on the US economy. However current political theory is overriding objective reality. The current administration is living in a fantasy land thinking just putting timber for sale will make it happen.

Unfortunately that's what will happen. Lawsuits and politics will be a big hurdle. Change in how lawsuits affect forest management and/or delisting the grizzly would go a long way, at least here. The agency needs a revamp as well. I'm hopeful the new chief will be able to steer it in the right direction. I disagree with the money going to developing crews and building facilities. A big part of the lack of logging and milling infrastructure is a lack of reliable timber supply, at least here in the intermountain west. Hard to make a a multimillion dollar bet on FS timber outputs. I'm a procurement forester for one of the last major sawmills left in Montana and one of my concerns for the next five years is log supply, while being surrounded by forests in dire need of management.

 

[riversidejeep]

A

Clearwater River.

And you might add the logging trucks are running 12 hours a day. Lots of fish, elk, deer ( a lot more before wolves) .

 

[wowzers]

They aren't meeting the current targets now. At least not in Region 1. Agree that the ESA and other regs won't get thrown out the window. There's plenty of timber that can be accessed while still doing the right thing management wise and regulatory wise. I'm biased too though, my paycheck comes from the timber industry.



Unfortunately that's what will happen. Lawsuits and politics will be a big hurdle. Change in how lawsuits affect forest management and/or delisting the grizzly would go a long way, at least here. The agency needs a revamp as well. I'm hopeful the new chief will be able to steer it in the right direction. I disagree with the money going to developing crews and building facilities. A big part of the lack of logging and milling infrastructure is a lack of reliable timber supply, at least here in the intermountain west. Hard to make a a multimillion dollar bet on FS timber outputs. I'm a procurement forester for one of the last major sawmills left in Montana and one of my concerns for the next five years is log supply, while being surrounded by forests in dire need of management.

Exactly on Region 1, and we are actually regressing. Ending the Equal Access to Justice Act or severely retooling it would go a long way. It has basically created a cottage industry for these groups to be come serial litigants.

 

[Wrench]

Boise Cascade closed the last oversize log mill in Council in 1995. Not very many mills are set up for oversize timber. My dad ran the head rig there before it closed.

I built and serviced stackers and such for USNR back then.

 

[Customweld]

I built and serviced stackers and such for USNR back then.

I worked a summer when I was in high school pulling green chain in the Council mill. My dad wasn't very happy with me when I skipped college and went to work in the woods.

 

[BuckSmasher]

Here is the problem, at least in North Idaho where I am. The forest were logged heavily in the 60s-80s and now we have millions (literally) of acres of dense 30-60 year old regrowth that doesn't grow a living thing other than trees, and moss on the ground. No flowering plants, no grass, no forbs. For millions of acres. Very sterile. In a lot of places USFS land will abut to timber company land that has been clear cut and the contrast is stark. Fresh clear cuts look awful but quickly grow a diverse plant community, at least for the first 15 years or so until the canopy closes. The USFS forest looks good from afar but walking into it you soon realize there is only dead wood and moss on the forest floor to sustain life.

What the USFS should be doing at a MINIMUM is thinning the older clearcuts to provide for wildlife habitat, fire reduction, and to mimic historic natural regime. The forest itself will tend to thin out all the extra stems but it takes very, very long time.

Idaho Panhandle National Forest is 2.5 million acres of mostly well roaded land, a lot of which is even denoted on the most recent forest plan as being 'loggable'. How much do you think has been getting logged the past few years? Take a look at it yourself on the link below. Looks like between 1,000-2500 acres per year on average. That is pathetic. Doesn't allow for early seral habitat, doesn't meet the forest services 'multi use' mission statement, doesn't accelerate tree growth and concentrate resources to desirable trees, encourages disease and wildfire and is just plain awful.

https://www.fs.usda.gov/resourcedetail/ipnf/landmanagement/resourcemanagement/?cid=FSEPRD1148658

For other areas of the country, like the Southwest where the national forests are drier, warmer, and the site index is lower additional logging or thinning may not be needed as much. Up here in the inland northwest the dual whammy of extensive prior logging combined with its almost complete stop has wreaked havoc.