Timber Production Executive Order

[MallardSX2]

Also, that sawmill, does it have logs dropped off in log trucks, or is it an Alaska mill, or something in between?

I'm not a logger, but I have made money logging.
I'm not an arborist, but I have made money dropping trees in tight places that need to be climbed.

On this topic, those points are not important, but you appear to prefer to chase them over discussion at hand.

You don't get far from the Starbucks. It's obvious.

Have a good weekend buddy.

 

[Marbles]

You don't get far from the Starbucks. It's obvious.

Have a good weekend buddy.

So, you don't own a commercial mill, have a small 40 acre wood lot, and from the sound of it come from an overpopulated state down south, and the only thing you can come up with is to tell someone who has lived in the Alaskan bush for 2 years (by state definition, I'd still call it bush lite), that they don't get far from Starbucks?

I find the posturing amusing, don't understand the need for it though, surely you have enough true accomplishments in life you don't have to drag others down to stand tall, but I guess we all get to choose our own way.

 

[Pony Soldier]

MallardSX2: curiosity point. How big of logs can you handle? One man operation or processing company? I like to learn as my sawmill years are 50 years ago.

What capacities are reasonable given an executive notice?

 

[CaribouRanch]

I’m sure there’s a smart and methodical way this could be done in a way that cleans out choked forests, improves wildlife habitat, and increases the US’s lumber production, but I don’t have any confidence that will happen. Probably just slash and burn like everything else.

 

[Pony Soldier]

I was on the RAC (resource advisory council) for the BLM twice. We visited a post-logging unit that abutted USFS. The BLM had done a select cut that provided habitat while pulling out mature trees. The USFS block was a jungle you couldn't crawl through with downed trees and brush. A perfect target for a devastating forest fire.

To me this provided proof that good management was possible and doing nothing was not the answer.

 

[Yoteassasin]

I’m sure there’s a smart and methodical way this could be done in a way that cleans out choked forests, improves wildlife habitat, and increases the US’s lumber production, but I don’t have any confidence that will happen. Probably just slash and burn like everything else.

Slash and burn would be a great improvement over what has been going on in the west for the last 50 years .
Right now forests are burning so hot nothing can grow for years . Literal moonscape

We need any management that is different than do nothing and suppress fires until there is so much fuel load nothing can be done

 

[AK4570]

"We need any management that is different than do nothing and suppress fires until there is so much fuel load nothing can be done"

...this right here.

Despite where we might each fall on the issue, the current model has been a whole lot of do nothing.

And, as a wise man once said, anything is better than nothing.

Best regards,
John

 

[Pony Soldier]

I have a friend that has rented out his dozer on fires for the FS. They pay by the hour to have them block roads to control access. When I was young they built firelines. I think enough is enough.

 

[Hydrophilic]

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.

Well said, sounds familiar to much of the federal land I’m familiar with. There ought to be a common sense middle ground between cutting nothing with only ecology in mind, and clearcutting everything with no emphasis whatsoever on ecology and wildlife habitat.

 

[Clarktar]

I have a friend that has rented out his dozer on fires for the FS. They pay by the hour to have them block roads to control access. When I was young they built firelines. I think enough is enough.

Hm. Most of the fires I go on each summer on USFS land has plenty of line built and I haven't seen a piece of heavy equipment being used to block access unless it's moving earth to make some sort of blockage.

What region(s) is your friend working with his equipment?