GRTimberCO
ArboristSite Operative
This photo came from a friend of mines Facebook with this caption-
My first thoughts are that this is another perfect example of why science and politics don't mix. Why do we allow this to happen?
Wildfires
- Thread starter GRTimberCO
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
This photo came from a friend of mines Facebook with this caption-
My first thoughts are that this is another perfect example of why science and politics don't mix. Why do we allow this to happen?
First off he needs to spell a bit better.
The blame game is starting. Fires happen. However, science can go either way. Someone will bring up a study showing that timber harvest increases fire risk and intensity. Somebody else will counter with a paper that harvest can lessen fire size.
Both are correct. How's that for an answer.
I've worked in that area. I was not there for any big fires. We were trying to put out timber sales, and the environmental groups were starting to go to court when I left.
A friend said the Rodeo (I'm not going to attempt the second part of the name) fire laid down when it got into areas that were thinned and had had the slash treated. Then the fire would get into untreated areas and blow up. You be the judge.
With less logging, there are less people in the woods to stop fires while they are small. However, some loggers don't want anything to do with putting out fires. Up here, they'll be more likely to be moving their equipment than putting a line around the fire. It all depends on the crew.
Yes, political figures are making the decision on which study they believe.
The Spotted Owl has little to do with it. The Mexican Spotted Owl lives in canyons where there is Douglas-fir growing. We didn't log those areas because they are steep and yarders were not a common piece of equipment there. Yup. They burn up.
Why do we allow this to happen? Because "we" are outnumbered and out educated. Timber folks are generally not as well educated as the environmentalists--degree wise. I see it on our local "collaboration" group. The enviros have folks with PHDs, or Master's degrees who know how to write well, and present an argument. The folks who want to see timber cut well, one makes a point of saying, "We should clearcut it." and that's it.
You've now got a generation and a half of people who will not want trees cut in this country. At least that. The timber industry is usually portrayed as the villain, if it is portrayed at all, in the entertainment industry. Movie stars are against cutting trees.
The enviros are smart. They've got good lawyers. They've got money. They've got part of the Forest Service by getting folks hired. The wildlife biologists, botanists, fish bios, soils bios, and 'ologists in particular outnumber the Foresters in the agency.
Public Affairs specialists decide "talking points". Pictures of logging that were up in the front part of the offices were taken down and replaced with photos of happy people and cute animals.
The Timber department was likely renamed as The Forest Products or Forest Operations department. Timber is a dirty word in many offices. Yet the 'ologists can be funded by it.
Things won't change until the urban public changes their mind, and from what I see, that will not happen. The politicians keep passing more laws. Our state brags that it has the toughest forest practices laws in the nation. Why should that be something to be proud of if it isn't needed?
You've got folks from Phoenix who don't know what an overstocked stand is. They have summer homes up high and want to save all their trees because trees are hard to come by in the valley. I saw little suppressed seedlings staked up to try to save them. This was in a Summer home area. The FS was trying to convince one community that a thinning was needed to protect their homes. The people didn't get it--cutting trees to save trees?
And so it goes. Prepare for the blame game, then the politicians will announce fire prevention measures to be taken, they will not fund it, or support cutting timber to help fund it, and the fires will come again and the circle will go on.
By the way, how many mills are there in that region now?
The blame game is starting. Fires happen. However, science can go either way. Someone will bring up a study showing that timber harvest increases fire risk and intensity. Somebody else will counter with a paper that harvest can lessen fire size.
Both are correct. How's that for an answer.
I've worked in that area. I was not there for any big fires. We were trying to put out timber sales, and the environmental groups were starting to go to court when I left.
A friend said the Rodeo (I'm not going to attempt the second part of the name) fire laid down when it got into areas that were thinned and had had the slash treated. Then the fire would get into untreated areas and blow up. You be the judge.
With less logging, there are less people in the woods to stop fires while they are small. However, some loggers don't want anything to do with putting out fires. Up here, they'll be more likely to be moving their equipment than putting a line around the fire. It all depends on the crew.
Yes, political figures are making the decision on which study they believe.
The Spotted Owl has little to do with it. The Mexican Spotted Owl lives in canyons where there is Douglas-fir growing. We didn't log those areas because they are steep and yarders were not a common piece of equipment there. Yup. They burn up.
Why do we allow this to happen? Because "we" are outnumbered and out educated. Timber folks are generally not as well educated as the environmentalists--degree wise. I see it on our local "collaboration" group. The enviros have folks with PHDs, or Master's degrees who know how to write well, and present an argument. The folks who want to see timber cut well, one makes a point of saying, "We should clearcut it." and that's it.
You've now got a generation and a half of people who will not want trees cut in this country. At least that. The timber industry is usually portrayed as the villain, if it is portrayed at all, in the entertainment industry. Movie stars are against cutting trees.
The enviros are smart. They've got good lawyers. They've got money. They've got part of the Forest Service by getting folks hired. The wildlife biologists, botanists, fish bios, soils bios, and 'ologists in particular outnumber the Foresters in the agency.
Public Affairs specialists decide "talking points". Pictures of logging that were up in the front part of the offices were taken down and replaced with photos of happy people and cute animals.
The Timber department was likely renamed as The Forest Products or Forest Operations department. Timber is a dirty word in many offices. Yet the 'ologists can be funded by it.
Things won't change until the urban public changes their mind, and from what I see, that will not happen. The politicians keep passing more laws. Our state brags that it has the toughest forest practices laws in the nation. Why should that be something to be proud of if it isn't needed?
You've got folks from Phoenix who don't know what an overstocked stand is. They have summer homes up high and want to save all their trees because trees are hard to come by in the valley. I saw little suppressed seedlings staked up to try to save them. This was in a Summer home area. The FS was trying to convince one community that a thinning was needed to protect their homes. The people didn't get it--cutting trees to save trees?
And so it goes. Prepare for the blame game, then the politicians will announce fire prevention measures to be taken, they will not fund it, or support cutting timber to help fund it, and the fires will come again and the circle will go on.
By the way, how many mills are there in that region now?
forestryworks
Addicted to ArboristSite
That picture is from the Wallow Fire in Arizona. Here is a link - Flickr: Apache-Sitgreaves National Forests' Photostream Look for pic marked wf6
I drove through the Wallow Fire area two weeks before it burned and there are lots and lots of doghair Ponderosa there. Made me sick.
Use it or lose it.
Wallow Fire updates - InciWeb the Incident Information System: Wallow
I drove through the Wallow Fire area two weeks before it burned and there are lots and lots of doghair Ponderosa there. Made me sick.
Use it or lose it.
Wallow Fire updates - InciWeb the Incident Information System: Wallow
When I saw it from the air a little over a week ago, it had just broken 100,000 acres. Now it's more than quadrupled in size. Quoth InciWeb: "Cause: Human - under investigation". If it's arson, no amount of wrist-wringing or finger-pointing can make it not "our" fault. Arson is a crime. That's not a policy anybody needs to argue about.
The stands that are burning? Another story. Let's wait 'til the fire is out and the forces are de-mobed before we do the autopsy.
The stands that are burning? Another story. Let's wait 'til the fire is out and the forces are de-mobed before we do the autopsy.
Yes. The Rodeo Chedwhatever fire was also caused by arson and a stupid camper. Not much you can do about that.
My family and I were evacuated from our home because of this fire as well as a couple other members here. Without going into too much detail, it is too thick of forest to stop the fire from growing with the help of our wind. Now when you look at the areas that it did not burn as complete, those are the areas that were thinned. There is a lot of blaming going on but its just sad to see our mountains all black from politics.
Well said.
nw axe man
ArboristSite Operative
A few years ago I was down there doing some traing for the BIA. I couldn't believe how thick the doghair was. I couldn't imagine what it must have been like to try to walk through it before it burned. Where we were the ground was completely nuked it had burned so hot. It was a pain working in it even after all the foliage had been burned off it was so thick.
As long as we have politicians running things this will not be fixed. It's difficult when the facts just confuse them. It's all about emotion, not proven facts.
I just moved my family back to Eagar today. I was pretty irritated to look out my window and see the smoke from the fire still burning a couple miles away destroying the place I camp, hunt, cut firewood and just go to relax or play. It is just the backburning I can see, but a few more miles away it still burns as it just became the largest wildfire in AZ history. This sucks.
I took this pic with my phone before the evacuation, just down the street from my house.
I took this pic with my phone before the evacuation, just down the street from my house.
Think how "irritated" you'd be if you were watching your livelihood burn up instead of your playground. A lot of people's lives are being changed for the worse because of that fire.
At least you still have a window to look out of. Many don't
People are out there right now putting themselves in harm's way to control that fire. How 'bout a little credit where credit is due?
You made some good points in your previous posts but all you've lost is a recreation area. I don't think that's worth whining about.
Last edited:
No no I give them credit and appreciate what they are doing. Im just saying it sucks to see it go up in smoke and what the mountain is to me. I grew up in them.
forestryworks
Addicted to ArboristSite
Still only 18% containment. Doesn't look good for the future.
Sadly, this is the kind of fire to make people say, "oh yeah, maybe we do need to thin out the overgrown forest." :monkey:
Again, use it or lose it.
Sadly, this is the kind of fire to make people say, "oh yeah, maybe we do need to thin out the overgrown forest." :monkey:
Again, use it or lose it.
I wasn't trying to downplay your loss. It's hard to watch an area that you care about go up in smoke.
We've seen it happen out here, too. A lot of the area I work in has a large amount of urban interface and when the fires come people have a hard time believing how easily everything they owned and worked for can be so instantly erased.
Exactly.
Just found this article that does a pretty good job outlining both sides of the story from the perspective of the Yellowstone Fires of 1988.
Here's a good blow-by-blow of 2002's Rodeo-Chediski complex.
Here's a good blow-by-blow of 2002's Rodeo-Chediski complex.
Last edited:
That was it. I was trying to remember the home owner's association that was against "logging" by their community. Forest Lakes. So we expected their community to burn up. It didn't and I guess they saw the light after the Rodeo fire. I was still in touch with the timber folks there.
The sad thing is that there may not even be any salvage. The guy I worked for said that the soils needed to have the ash cap disturbed to absorb water and regenerate pine, but there is probably somebody to refute that. Salvage is a word that is considered as nasty as clear cut.
What a good job the environmental industry has done, making such words unusable. End of Rant.
Let me see, the monsoon should start in July. Hope they get it knocked down a bit by then. I heard on the radio that another fire had started up at Carlsbad Caverns and they had to evacuate as the fire was headed right for the main part.
The sad thing is that there may not even be any salvage. The guy I worked for said that the soils needed to have the ash cap disturbed to absorb water and regenerate pine, but there is probably somebody to refute that. Salvage is a word that is considered as nasty as clear cut.
What a good job the environmental industry has done, making such words unusable. End of Rant.
Let me see, the monsoon should start in July. Hope they get it knocked down a bit by then. I heard on the radio that another fire had started up at Carlsbad Caverns and they had to evacuate as the fire was headed right for the main part.
forestryworks
Addicted to ArboristSite
Interview with Dr. Wally Covington of Northern Arizona University's Ecological Restoration Institute in Flagstaff, AZ
<iframe width="560" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/2_t6uovjoWw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
<iframe width="560" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/2_t6uovjoWw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Last edited:
Forestry Works, you have not been crushed by the fist of doom yet.
Folks have been trying to thin out the forests for some time. That's what we were doing when I worked on the Apache Sitgreaves. We had an active restoration program going. There was a paper mill that would take wood down to a 4 inch top. There were a couple of saw mills. There was infrastructure. We marked some of the fading pines for harvest, which made the sales worth bidding on.
Then, in Silver City NM, The Southwest Center for Biological Diversity was formed. They began appealing and suing on every sale. My boss at the time, invited the two members to come and look at what we were doing. Their answer was that they could not afford the gas and they already knew, from reading papers what was being done and it was wrong. They shut down the woods to logging for a while, then agreed to open up a few sales, which amazingly enough they agreed to let the sale start back up that had the largest trees of all the sales be logged. I think they got their sales mixed up.
The paper mill announced it would go to 100% recyclable operations and would no longer take wood. That was the end of that market.
I do not know if any sawmills are still in the area.
Meanwhile, the Southwest Center for Biological Diversity expanded operations and is now The Center For Biological Diversity and works all over the West.
So, my question is, how will this restoration be funded? It can't pay for itself unless you allow the cutting of some (not all) of the larger trees so the logger or purchaser can make a profit. Mention cutting any large diameter trees and you are facing an appeal and a trip to the courts. I would not be surprised if there was not a mandatory diameter limit on that forest now.
If it is contracted out, Congress has to allow funding in the budget.
That hasn't been too common. There is a lot of lip service, but no funding to follow it up.
This is always brought up after a fire, and folks just don't follow up. A few acres will get treated, but not nearly enough.
And, don't forget the burning that is usually required. Most of the population in that area are summer people who are from the city.
They don't want to have to breathe smoke. There are also very few days anymore that you can legally burn slash. Burning is not risk free...remember the Alamagordo fire? Foes of burning will bring up the disasters.
I can't see any change from the current policy happening. There are too many "stakeholders". I'd be treating my own little plot of land and putting a metal roof on the house, and doing all the other things that one should if one lives in a fire prone area.
Folks have been trying to thin out the forests for some time. That's what we were doing when I worked on the Apache Sitgreaves. We had an active restoration program going. There was a paper mill that would take wood down to a 4 inch top. There were a couple of saw mills. There was infrastructure. We marked some of the fading pines for harvest, which made the sales worth bidding on.
Then, in Silver City NM, The Southwest Center for Biological Diversity was formed. They began appealing and suing on every sale. My boss at the time, invited the two members to come and look at what we were doing. Their answer was that they could not afford the gas and they already knew, from reading papers what was being done and it was wrong. They shut down the woods to logging for a while, then agreed to open up a few sales, which amazingly enough they agreed to let the sale start back up that had the largest trees of all the sales be logged. I think they got their sales mixed up.
The paper mill announced it would go to 100% recyclable operations and would no longer take wood. That was the end of that market.
I do not know if any sawmills are still in the area.
Meanwhile, the Southwest Center for Biological Diversity expanded operations and is now The Center For Biological Diversity and works all over the West.
So, my question is, how will this restoration be funded? It can't pay for itself unless you allow the cutting of some (not all) of the larger trees so the logger or purchaser can make a profit. Mention cutting any large diameter trees and you are facing an appeal and a trip to the courts. I would not be surprised if there was not a mandatory diameter limit on that forest now.
If it is contracted out, Congress has to allow funding in the budget.
That hasn't been too common. There is a lot of lip service, but no funding to follow it up.
This is always brought up after a fire, and folks just don't follow up. A few acres will get treated, but not nearly enough.
And, don't forget the burning that is usually required. Most of the population in that area are summer people who are from the city.
They don't want to have to breathe smoke. There are also very few days anymore that you can legally burn slash. Burning is not risk free...remember the Alamagordo fire? Foes of burning will bring up the disasters.
I can't see any change from the current policy happening. There are too many "stakeholders". I'd be treating my own little plot of land and putting a metal roof on the house, and doing all the other things that one should if one lives in a fire prone area.
Uggh. "Stakeholders" is a dirty word. SO MANY whos and wheres have to be satisfied to get anything done. Even where I work, which has a lot more autonomy than some of the more public agencies, we have to cross a lot of "t's" and dot a lot of "i's" to get the green light to do the job we're paid to do. It's frustrating to see the obvious solution just out of reach due to bureaucracy.
