VeteranXV
|
**** that, consume, marry, and reproduce.
|
|
|
VeteranXV
|
When the last tree is cut, the last river poisoned, and the last fish dead, we will discover that we can't eat money.
|
|
|
VeteranXV
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darksidesmoker
I hate when they do that as well, causes all sorts of problems in the streams from the run off. Does it rain a lot in southern Oregon?
|
The entire coast of the Pacific NW gets lots of rain/snow in the fall/winter. In the northern part of Oregon, in the I-5 corridor, it doesn't snow that much. But in the southern part of Oregon, the I-5 corridor has feet of snow in the winter.
The area in the picture would not be accessible from December-March (except to the eager hunter who shoots locks off of gates). This is just north of the dirt road the CNET guy took a few years ago where he died after a week of sitting in his car with his wife and baby. We took that road back...less logging on the south side of the Rogue River, as it is a designated Wild and Scenic area, so they can't log there at all, let alone clear cut hillsides. Just south of that is the Kalmiopsis which is more federally protected, and imo, the most beautiful place in the world. Clinton protected it, and then Bush wiped some of that out, because of a forest fire, so of course they get to log the snags now, because that makes sense. Right ? LOL. But of course there is no oversight deep in the forest, and the loggers say "woops...sorry we cut all of these extra hundreds of acres of thousand year old trees that didn't even get touched by the fire. we thought we were allowed to take those too. sorry about that."
Even as horrible as it is, I try to go to these areas with my family alot also, so that they can see. When you drive on I-5, 101, 26, etc., in Oregon, they of course leave the trees close to the highways. Except on 26, they don't really give a **** anymore. Pick a dirt road, and drive a mile or two, and then you really can't be in any one place without seeing a clearcut.
All sorts of problems are created by clearcutting. Erosion is horrible for the fish in the streams, but it's even worse for anything that will grow there in the future. Less biomass, smaller trees, rinse, repeat, until the trees are so small it isn't financially wise to even cut them anymore. Every generation of trees is smaller, of course, because there is always less biomass. Snags need to stay in the forest, and fall to the ground, and add more biomass. The mushrooms will do the rest, as long as they have something to eat.
|
|
|
VeteranXX Contributor
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by absent
We can do it right here in Finland for a 100+ years now. Only problem is the climate, trees grow slowly.
|
Scandinavia has used timber in a utilitarian and responsible way for at least a century. The problem is the Euro-******s that are ****ing things up here. You know, the ones that want their borders protected from outsiders.
|
|
|
VeteranXV
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reno
The strip of trees there is probably for erosion control.
I drove through OR a couple months ago and they had a bunch of obvious tree farms. Looked perfect (and actually sustainable) unlike clear-cutting a hillside.
|
What part of OR ?
There are tree farms everywhere here.
As far as logging goes in Oregon, from what I have seen, they soley clearcut.
|
|
|
VeteranXX
|
Everyone talks about the tree, but what about the smaller plants that never get a chance to grow because of the selfish trees? Why does no one care about them?
|
|
|
VeteranXV
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by borlaK
pro tip: trees grow back
damn beaten
|
Sure. But they grow back smaller. Every time.
Can you see that logically ending anywhere else other than even smaller trees, until they do not grow in those areas anymore ?
You can't just take, you have to give back. Some white people understand this.
Ask a farmer
|
|
|
VeteranXX Contributor
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MolimOrion
What part of OR ?
There are tree farms everywhere here.
As far as logging goes in Oregon, from what I have seen, they soley clearcut.
|
It was on the way from CO to MRNP so whatever that best route is.
It looked like they clearcut, but had big stands of varying ages next to each other. Looked like they cut one section, let it regrow for X number of years, and do it again. Clear cuts yes, but on flat and surrounded by older trees at any given time, and replanted.
|
|
|
VeteranX Contributor
|
that's horrible
|
|
|
VeteranXX
|
buncha hippies in this thread i tell ya whut
|
|
|
VeteranXX
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MolimOrion
You can't just take, you have to give back.
|
We do, they're called landfills.
|
|
|
VeteranXX Contributor
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Lucius
We do, they're called landfills.
|
We are very very generous.
|
|
|
|
Damn, thats ****ty.
I've been logging the same 100 acres for 10 years for firewood to sell and use personally, and I've yet to cut down a live tree.
|
|
|
VeteranXV
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by OtisPAB
how do we know that there aren't plans to replant that area? What does sustainable logging look like? I would hope that federal land would utilize the most responsible logging techniques available but seeing as how I've never lived near extensive logging I really have no idea how things work.
|
They do replant most of the areas. But farming doesn't work like that. Not in any sustainable way.
There are several ways to log responsibly. But in the near term, they all cost more.
You can log every other tree. You can use those expensive logging machines they have in other countries. You can wood chip up all of the excess, and spread that over the entire area. Giving the landscape a chance to heal quicker, and at least leaving some biomass. Do you know what they do here in Oregon ? They bulldoze all of the leftover wood into piles. And then after the first rains, they burn all of the piles. How does that make sense at all ?
They also make chainsaw oils with mushroom spores in the oil, to help with breaking the wood down into soil.
Our government doesn't really give a **** about responsible logging. The only way to have responsible logging is to have it be financially wise to log responsibly. But these are federal BLM lands, so the loggers don't really give a **** about the land, as it isn't theirs. For short-term thinking, it is better for them to just cut every single tree on every single acre they are given permission to log. They just say they will replant, and then the politicians sincerely believe this means that timber will be a renewable resource. Because they'll just replant.
|
|
|
VeteranXX Contributor
|
I'm with you
that makes me a squirrel-enabler
|
|
|
VeteranXV
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Lucius
Everyone talks about the tree, but what about the smaller plants that never get a chance to grow because of the selfish trees? Why does no one care about them?
|
Shade loving plants FTW
Believe me, there is enough human disturbance to the landscape which allows the FULL SUN loving plants to flourish.
Sadly though, these full sun plants are usually invasive species brought from Europe that just love when humans **** up the land. So all of the native plants lose out over the years, BECAUSE humans disturbed the landscape to a point that paved the way for the invasive species.
The resulting human mentality ? HATE the invasive species. HATE plants. LOL. But that is a pretty common mentality in the USA. Hating plants and even wars on plants.
|
|
|
VeteranXV
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Lucius
We do, they're called landfills.
|
|
|
|
VeteranXX
|
Humans are nature. Deal with it.
|
|
|
VeteranXV
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DealyRrunk
Damn, thats ****ty.
I've been logging the same 100 acres for 10 years for firewood to sell and use personally, and I've yet to cut down a live tree.
|
Only cutting some of the dead trees, and even only some of the live ones, you will probably end up consuming at a slower pace than regeneration. Which is the key.
|
|
|
Veteran++
|
While that works for gathering firewoood, structural timber requires live trees.
Selective logging isn't easy to do, in hilly terrain you would have to use helicopters.
Here in Canada it is law (iirc 1986?) that logged lands are reforested, I would think the same is true for the US. Along the coast, due to high rainfall, lands usually reforest naturally, so they wait a few years before considering tree planting a monocrop.
|
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
AGENT: claudebot / Y
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:02.
|