In this month's National Geographic there's an article on pine beetles. Have you seen it and if so what do you think about it?
Hey Madhatte....
- Thread starter Gologit
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
Not yet, but I will look for it and report accordingly!
Thankee B'wana! I know NG tends to be a bit tree huggerish but I was mainly curious about their take on the beetle, their plans for remedy, and how valid their ideas are.
LOL...in other words I know what I read. I just want to know how much of it to believe.
OK, I just read the article. Wow. There's a lot of details touched on in there that aren't fleshed out at all. I don't know where to start, really, but I'll summarize with this: It's a decent article, if a bit short on explanation, but it's a complex subject and National Geographic is a non-technical magazine. I am pleased to see them make the attempt. If they would unpack the pieces and give each one its own article, they could make an excellent series on climate change and forestry. I am also pleased that they are not being unduly alarmist or self-righteous.
It's my suspicion that we are going to see a significant change in the composition of our forests, but that we are not going to see a loss of forest. Rather, they will be different in both structure and in location. This push and pull has happened throughout time and will continue long after we are gone. I am not interested at all in the argument over whether climate change is or is not caused by human activity. It makes no difference. It's happening regardless of anybody's opinion on the subject. Our challenge, then, is to learn to thrive in the conditions to come.
As for the rest of it: this is definitely campfire conversation. I wrote a page of notes while I was reading this, each of which would take a page or more to explore, or at least several minutes to talk about. I also wrote and deleted the beginning of a post attempting to explore the subjects I noted. That's a bigger job than I'm up to at the moment, so this scant couple of paragraphs will have to do until there is a handy campfire to get down to the serious business of beers and BS over. I'll see you there.
It's my suspicion that we are going to see a significant change in the composition of our forests, but that we are not going to see a loss of forest. Rather, they will be different in both structure and in location. This push and pull has happened throughout time and will continue long after we are gone. I am not interested at all in the argument over whether climate change is or is not caused by human activity. It makes no difference. It's happening regardless of anybody's opinion on the subject. Our challenge, then, is to learn to thrive in the conditions to come.
As for the rest of it: this is definitely campfire conversation. I wrote a page of notes while I was reading this, each of which would take a page or more to explore, or at least several minutes to talk about. I also wrote and deleted the beginning of a post attempting to explore the subjects I noted. That's a bigger job than I'm up to at the moment, so this scant couple of paragraphs will have to do until there is a handy campfire to get down to the serious business of beers and BS over. I'll see you there.
Does this mean that I must buy the magazine that I swore not to buy ever again?
LOL...Patty, I've sworn the same thing. More than once. I don't think there's any magazine anywhere that can fascinate me and then piss me off and then fascinate me again as quick as NG.
Knowing that they tend toward a preservationist stance and knowing that I won't agree with everything they write is balanced with glimpses into worlds that I'd never otherwise see. The older I get the more I'm aware of how vast those worlds are.
If nothing else, with the weight of the magazine, they make a pretty good frisbee when the contents present something that I do know a little about in a bad light.
Gotta love their maps too.
Nathan...thanks. I just like to know about that kind of stuff. I'm not really affected by it to the extent I used to be but it's still interesting. I always liked finding out the "whys". Knowing "how" wasn't always good enough. Knowing why seemed to make the pieces of the puzzle fit better.
Knowing that they tend toward a preservationist stance and knowing that I won't agree with everything they write is balanced with glimpses into worlds that I'd never otherwise see. The older I get the more I'm aware of how vast those worlds are.
If nothing else, with the weight of the magazine, they make a pretty good frisbee when the contents present something that I do know a little about in a bad light.
Gotta love their maps too.
Nathan...thanks. I just like to know about that kind of stuff. I'm not really affected by it to the extent I used to be but it's still interesting. I always liked finding out the "whys". Knowing "how" wasn't always good enough. Knowing why seemed to make the pieces of the puzzle fit better.
Thanks. I started reading it, but can't concentrate right now. I have my own theory on Lodgpole Pine, which has been shot down and ridiculed, but here it is.
Look back to when fire suppression started...right around 1911. Look at the average age of mature LP--around 80 years. Add that to 1911. Bark beetles are part of the life cycle of LP, and go for the over mature stuff. (scientific jargon--stuff). Since we have suppressed fire, we've got a large acreage of over ripe LP. Enter the beetle...
I worked on quite a bit of beetle salvage sales up near Tonasket. That was in the earl 1990s. Fires have burned a large amount since then that was not put up in timber sales. All merch lodgepole, live and dead was designated for cutting. The minimum size was negotiated and was based on what market could be found for the small stuff.
They cut it with bunchers, that area of the state has more of a rolling terrain. Even so, one of the planners said all we had done was made safety zones to run to when the uncut stuff went up in flames.
Look back to when fire suppression started...right around 1911. Look at the average age of mature LP--around 80 years. Add that to 1911. Bark beetles are part of the life cycle of LP, and go for the over mature stuff. (scientific jargon--stuff). Since we have suppressed fire, we've got a large acreage of over ripe LP. Enter the beetle...
I worked on quite a bit of beetle salvage sales up near Tonasket. That was in the earl 1990s. Fires have burned a large amount since then that was not put up in timber sales. All merch lodgepole, live and dead was designated for cutting. The minimum size was negotiated and was based on what market could be found for the small stuff.
They cut it with bunchers, that area of the state has more of a rolling terrain. Even so, one of the planners said all we had done was made safety zones to run to when the uncut stuff went up in flames.
treeslayer2003
Addicted to ArboristSite
Ms. Patty you and Nate make alot of sense. and Nate i think your right about forest composition changing, i have already seen it. there are species that are gone and new ones showing up. despite mans best intentions to save some, it has done no good even in places off limits to logging and development.
curios, do y'all have the same pine beetle we have?
curios, do y'all have the same pine beetle we have?
The thing about lodgepole country is, even though the Forest Service had plans to convert the stand to Western Larch and Doug-fir, lodgepole would seed itself back. Lodgepole is like a weed and was treated as such. We would do thinning and we cut and burned what is now merch.
I know the bark beetle did/doing a bunch of damage in the Whitman NF. I fell a ton of dead trees for homeowners and it was something to see for sure. I have bear hunted that forest every year since I was a kid and the mountains don't have any beetle sign. It's never been thinned or had any recent fires either. But on the upside, it appears the forest is getting healthy again. Stupid bugs
dhskier2
ArboristSite Operative
For further reading... an article a bit more specific to what Diana Six is proccessing.
This one's got a bit more slant then the NG article
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2015/03/bark-pine-beetles-climate-change-diana-six
This one's got a bit more slant then the NG article
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2015/03/bark-pine-beetles-climate-change-diana-six
There was a run 40 or so years ago on the spruce budworm. It passed, and there are still spruce. This, too, will pass.
treeslayer2003
Addicted to ArboristSite
when i was around 17, the job we were on had so many gypsy moth caterpillars i swore there couldn't possibly be an oak still alive after that. there was no foliage in the middle of june. i cut that tract again about 6-7 years ago, there was alot of oak.
mother nature is pretty slick
mother nature is pretty slick
What's a "National Geographic"... some sort'a loggers publication??
Just tryin' to learn.
I'VE MOVED HERE
tylerbeach3
fellimbuck spiltn'burn
Funny! NG has great pics though. Of course you've all seen the famous one of "the president". I'd love to climb a tree over 300ft, I'd work for them no matter what their political, social, religious, or culinary views are.
SliverPicker
ArboristSite Guru
My understanding with the mountain pine beetle is that the winters are shorter and warmer than they used to be. Due to this the beetles can complete their life cycle in 1 year instead of 2 to 3 years as it had always been. The result is you end up with not 2 or 3 times as many beetles as there used be but many times more since the beetle reproduction is not linear.
Since 2000 Colorado has lost 90% of all its lodgepole pine trees.
As far as spruce budworm goes; there was an epidemic here in the early 40s. There is an epidemic now too.
The subalpine fir is getting hammered by a root disease now too
Also don't forget that aspen here has been getting hit hard by who-knows-what for about 12-15 years now.
Its not a good time to be a tree in Colorado.
Since 2000 Colorado has lost 90% of all its lodgepole pine trees.
As far as spruce budworm goes; there was an epidemic here in the early 40s. There is an epidemic now too.
The subalpine fir is getting hammered by a root disease now too
Also don't forget that aspen here has been getting hit hard by who-knows-what for about 12-15 years now.
Its not a good time to be a tree in Colorado.
Remember that all pathogens are opportunists, but that so are everybody else. The bugs can eat themselves out of business. There's some cool but complicated math to model and describe this but the short version is that there's always a lag behind events. That is: bugs attack trees --> trees die --> bugs die --> trees recover --> bugs return. It's mapped as a loop of population versus time, and is usually oval in shape due to the time it takes for tree recovery. Here's a Wikipedia article if anybody's interested.
OlympicYJ
ArboristSite Guru
Yupp that's the gist of it. Forgot all that until you brought it up. I should go back and look at my notes from my entomology class. Not the funnest subject but with the right prof it can be pretty darn fun. The guy that teaches it at the U of I is awesome and great to run into at happy hour. He knew 99% of us weren't that interested in bugs and he would teach it in a way to get the core message across while keeping it simple and entertaining. Have to say it was probably the best laid out class that I took but will barely ever use. His message was don't to stuff that will cause an outbreak and if you do have one call an entomologist. Pretty darn simple. I had a blast writing our paper at the end of the year. I really got into and covered a topic that unfortunately has had very little research done on it (Spruce tip weevil and alder to manage it).
Whoah whoah whoah, back up a moment -- spruce tip weevil and alder to manage it? Please elaborate.
