# Is it possible to preserve a forest without logging?



## M.D. Vaden (Oct 23, 2004)

Is it possible to preserve a forest without logging?

I've been thinking about forest preservation lately. Oregon deals with this issue routinely.

It's my view, that a forest can't be preserved totally, since it evolves. But I have noticed that very old forests are very pleasurable to enjoy.

In Oregon, apparently we lost a lot of forest because there was too much flammable material, partially due total lack of forestry work.

Do any of you have any views or ideas about promoting old growth forests?

Even if from scratch.


----------



## caryr (Oct 23, 2004)




----------



## caryr (Oct 23, 2004)




----------



## Guy Meilleur (Oct 23, 2004)

I'm not a forester but I think the Forest Stewards guild and the Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics have some good approaches. Controlled, low impact harvest, worst first, attack invasives, etc.


----------



## caryr (Oct 23, 2004)




----------



## Nickrosis (Oct 23, 2004)

So the question is what is the natural state of a forest? Just like the question, "what is a native species?" the answer is dynamic, without a definitive "correct" response.

The number of lightning-strike caused fires is quite low, but for the past 1000 years, humans have done a lot of their own burning in North America. The Native Americans burned an incredible amount of the landscape, for example.


----------



## Nickrosis (Oct 23, 2004)

But ignoring fire for the moment, if one wants to keep a forest *the same*, they have a lot of intervention to do. Forests don't stay the same - they all change, all the time. So someone wanting to keep on old-growth forest an old-growth forest has a lot of work to do if they want it to stay the same "forever." But I do understand that we are putting sunsets on old-growth forests faster than we were 300 years ago.


----------



## P_woozel (Oct 23, 2004)

The "natural" state of the forest is an ecosystem in constant change. whether we are speaking of a climax old growth doug fir, red cedar doimnated system or the Pondo forests on the east side of the mountains. Thinbgs will be diferent than they were 100 years ago, the number 1 reason is the continued growth of the urban environment. Now fires are being aggressively suppressed for the homes that are often built inb a place that has existed for centuries as a "fire ecosystem" coupled with the confusion about insect damage, politics, timber value etc it becomes difficult to have an effective mangement plan that truly works.


----------



## Nickrosis (Oct 23, 2004)

But the "fire ecosystem" is primarily of our own creation. So what should it be? What do you do to return it to its "natural" state?

I think you have to stop and look at where you are now....look at what you need to achieve....and make decisions based on that. I can't speak to fire as much here in the Midwest, but I know we deal with groundwater recharging issues. We know that we have fewer wetlands than in the past but that we have greater diversity than we did in the past.

So diversity is up, groundwater levels down. In my opinion, we should look to preserve the remaining wetlands when realistic (not to be militantly protective, though) and look to reestablish wetlands in abandoned sites, etc. I think a policy of compromise would be much better than the valiant stands for stupidity I've seen from both sides.


----------



## M.D. Vaden (Oct 23, 2004)

Cary...

I may take you up on that offer.

One other person I'd like to meet - not on forest talk - is the tree care instructor from Portland Community College that lives in Gales Creek on the east side of our coastal range.

Today, I was walking the woods again in Ecola Park.

One thought that came to mind today, was the vast effect that forests have on streams and run-off.

It reminded me of landscape plantings. When I put trees in, if I water without mulch, it's a matter of seconds before water runs to the side. But when I use a couple of inches of bark, I can get several gallons of water near the tree before it starts to leave the bark. Then when I move to another plant, the bark at the first tree is still releasing water slowly into the soil.

Todays thoughts surrounded how forests can prevent fast water runoff. The larger the tree, the more water it will adhere to itself before the rain hits the ground. A log, if allowed to rot, must be able to hold several hundred gallons of water like a sponge. The moss draping from and clinging to the trees must hold millions of gallons on a regional scale. And the thick mat of leaves needles and moss must also hold millions of gallons just to keep it moist. 

An established forest must have remarkable impact on the quality of water in streams and the depth of the rivers in the coastl range.

All I can say is this becomes more and more interesting all the time.

Cary....

What coastal city are you near?

Also, I noticed in the Oregonian today on page one, a story about a forest worker that was called to Ecola Park to rescue a doctor that got hung up in one of the tall trees. Is that paragliding or whatever they call it?

Have you met that climber?

The article said that he's hacked into his leg 4 times with a chainsaw, as well as other injuries like a week ago when a section of tree or limb came down and knocked him out.


----------



## caryr (Oct 24, 2004)




----------



## M.D. Vaden (Oct 24, 2004)

Thanks.

I was just out there doing a micro-job today - about 1 hour work. NW of the maiin drag up on a hill where the streets are named "planet" and "satellite" etc..

Did it on my way to the coast. Rained driving to Ecola Park, but cleared up upon arrival. Met a Canadian hiker at 11 am that had already gone up and back down Saddle Mountain and was doing the trail from Ecola Park to Seaside and back.

(and he still wasn't done for the day)

He was in many west US major parks and states - said Oregon was the best, and that our coast was the best of the best.

( I think the Columbia Gorge and WA's Olympic Forest will give him food for thought)


----------



## NYCHA FORESTER (Oct 25, 2004)

The natural sequence of plant community replacement beginning with bare ground and resulting in a final, stable community in which a climax forest is reached. Foresters, wildlife biologists, and farmers constantly battle ecological succession to try to maintain a particular vegetative cover.

A quote from- http://forestry.about.com/blforgls.htm


----------



## Nickrosis (Oct 26, 2004)

> _Originally posted by caryr _
> *Nick,
> 
> I think what you are missing is that fire in the ecosystem is natural. Take a look at the following Science Update: Fire risk in east-side forests. *


But like it says in the opening paragraph:


> Wildfire was a natural part of ecosystems in
> east-side Oregon and Washington before the
> 20th century. The fire regimes, or characteristic
> patterns of fire—how often, how hot, how big, what time
> ...


Fires of human origin were going on for centuries before that. So what was going on for the thousands of years before people were supposed to be on this continent? My point is that the definition of "natural" state is to what point? 100 years ago? 300 years ago? 3,000 years ago?


----------



## JJackson (Oct 26, 2004)

Nick has a point when he asked about the natural state to which point. At one time it was not uncommon for native americans to set fires, but the fires were not natural. In university we discussed this alot and pretty much came upon the problem of at what point is a forest natural. Never really came up with an answer, basically you have to define when you will condiser the forest to be at a natural state.


----------



## techdave (Oct 27, 2004)

*Alterations form Natural state, defined?*

Howdy all, interesting thread. In general it is probably true that it is hard to define natural state for all "forest types". But here in much of California for any ONE specific area it is pretty easy to describe what the climax community would look like,errrggh has traditionally been, in the abscence of stand-altering human activity.. 


A few selections have to be made first. Perhaps there is no sense in talking about natural state after "European" intervention since it is at most 200 years (in the west) and that is a mere blip on the biologiocal time scale. But in communites like the mixed coniferous and chaparral of SoCal human presence and activitiy on the wildland-Urban-interface have created conditons TOTALLY unlike what existed before major non-native habitiation. So that leaves the question of wether Native American practices altered the plant community enough to matter. Right now the common assumption is probably no, they did not modify it enough to matter, but I think it depends a lot on which native group, and what type of "forest".

Still, in the case of any one specific area the climax community can usually be identified. For example the forested areas of the EASTERN Sierra Nevada in Central California, Pinyon Juniper woodlands would be dominant, while on the Western side a Mixed coniferous forest would be the norm. The "ologists" (my term, my TM LOL!) then argue over what name to give to each plant community, and how many sub-groups to break each community down into based on the presence and relative abundance of various species. But regardless of what name they give it, it is only one community. Usually fire is the agent that causes stand replacement or conversion to another vegetation type, but it could also be avalanche, shading, or rockslide. Firescars, naturalists+explorers' descritions, old photos, or other methods can give a pretty good record of the period before major non-native human alteration. So if we know the interval to stand replacement, and what the climax community is, we have a pretty good idea of what dynamic existed in the plant community before Euro-contact. 


The easiest way to explain this is with an example. I am going to hack up the fine work of Dr Richard Minnich of UCRIVERSIDE, and use 2 places in the Californias as examples. One mixed coniferous forest is in the San Bernadinos, and has massive human alteration. Home to the largest urban forest in the US, in developed areas like around Lake Arrowhead domiciles and related structures are 20 percent of the average fuel load per acre. Landscaping and fire suppression have resulted in tree densties if up to several hundred per ace, and often 80 to 100 mature trees per acre. 

Now compare that to the Sierra San Perdo Martir about 250 miles osuth in Baja. There is virtually no development, aand almost no suppression. This area has a similar climate in terms of total ppt, with perhaps a bit more summer moisture, and less from northern systems in the winter. Old photos of the San Bernadinos show big similarities between the SBDos around 1900 and the SPMs now. 


Many areas in the SBDos have suffered stand replacing fires. The fire return interval is shortened to as little as 20 or 30 years, and suppression has non-randomized large fires into the worst possible weather conditions, 5% humidity with high winds. (this is almost always the only conditions under which fires seriously escape intial attack). Even attempts to counter the effects of past fire suppression with prescribed burns may fail if the prescribed burns do not have sufficient intensitry and flame height to kill almost all the recruitment trees and leave a mostly even-aged stand of trees over 100 years old. In the SBDos as they now exist, most tree mortality occurs at once, in a catastrophic fire. Only costly mechanical fuel removal can reduce the immediate danger around developed areas.


By contrast in the SPMs, most tree mortality occurs between 10 and 50 years of age. Most fires are small, and burn 1-5 thousand acres. One study area (I forgot to write down the size, probably 1000 hectarias) had 212 microburns in a twoweek period in 1991, mostly from lightning. Forest density typically is 40 trees per acre, plus or minus 10 or so. 


I know all the ologists are still fighting over HOW past best practices have altered the natural landscape, and HOW to get back to a plant community closer to the stable ones that existed before development and supression were widespread. But WHAT the natural community and it associated and defining fire regime looked like can probably be figured out pretty accurately by research, and looking south to the SPM and the Mexican cismontaine chaparral community.


----------



## caryr (Oct 28, 2004)




----------



## Gypo Logger (Oct 30, 2004)

If we assume that it takes 100 years to grow a decent forest whether hard or softwood. That forest would have to endure several stress factors such as high winds, bug infestation, blow down, snow press, wildfire and indescriminate cutting.
The trick is to have an uneven aged stand where there are always a certain amount of trees that are becoming financially mature. This is the basis of sustained yeild logging. However every situation is different, but to have trees we must cut trees. They are like glorified carrots that must be weeded as well as harvested.
Isolating crop trees by removing lower grade stems creates huge dividends with regards to growth rate and financial return.
The word natural is one of the most misused words in the English language. Nature is neither malevolent nor benevolent. It just tries to reach a happy medium whereby somethings loss is something elses gain.
John


----------



## Nathan Wreyford (Oct 30, 2004)

I didn't wade through the posts, but it seems as if the question is simply, "Is there any such thing as a climax community?"

I would have to say NO!


----------



## Reed (Oct 30, 2004)

Hey Nathan, heard they're starting to pay landowners to kill a few trees to get some deadwood to rot over there.

Like fleas, maybe it's too clean there?


----------



## M.D. Vaden (Dec 5, 2004)

Finally remembered to get back and read these posts. 

Good ideas you all have.

I just discovered that our state - Oregon - has a State Forestry Board.

It crossed my mind to apply for it.

Most of the people on the board seem to be heavy into the forest products industry. I don't think anyone on the board is from an environmental protection background.

I'm finishing my second 3 year term on the Oregon Landscape Contractors Board in fall of 2005. I would not want another function until that is over.

I'm just dabbling in thought about the other board. I'm rather soft on forestry specific knowledge, but I think I would be an asset to a board like that. I don't have an agenda. I like preservation of forests but I'm not on the side of forestry nor of the environmentalists. I believe in trying to give everyone some of what they need.

The only time I'm rock solid is if someone can prove that a certain change will wipe out a species. Nature is so intricate, we cant afford to lose a species if we can avoid that.

But in general, I'm fairly open to ideas.

The first board openings appear to come around in 2006. There is a difference; the landscape board is a direct appointment by the Governor. But the forestry board appointments must also be approved though the state senate or house.

BY THE WAY - NICE AVATAR NICKROSIS / THE CONE


----------



## Nickrosis (Dec 5, 2004)

netree said:


> Mario, we do wish you'd visit more often!


Don't sound so grandmotherly!

Mario, dude, you rock. We loves yo style and yo moves.



M.D. Vaden said:


> BY THE WAY - NICE AVATAR NICKROSIS / THE CONE


I read your post the first time through, missed this comment, thinking it was part of your signature. Then I re-read it to check something else and found this at the bottom!

Thank you very much. It's out of my own digital photo album. I figured last night while looking for something suitable that I have enough pictures to look at one for a 1/2 second and spend 6 straight hours looking at images. 

So glad I have Picasa! Anways, thanks for the comment and good luck with your endeavors, including the book writing.


----------



## Jacob J. (Dec 5, 2004)

Actually guys, natural sources of ignition are the most prevalent today, and have always been ( at least in the west ). I can show you lightning strike maps where there were over 4,000 active strikes in a 24-hour period west of the cascades alone, in several consecutive years. 

In 1996 there were several fires on both the west and east sides of the cascades ( 2,000+ acres in size ) that went unmanned due to the sheer number of lightning caused fires at the time. For more info on the stats of lightning caused fires, go here: http://www.nifc.gov


----------



## caryr (Dec 6, 2004)




----------



## M.D. Vaden (Dec 6, 2004)

I may take you up on that offer very soon. I was itching to drive to the coast this week, but my 2003 Dodge Ram is in the body shop.

About 2 weeks ago, I popped the back of another pickup - my first fender bender in 25 years. Anyway, I'm just getting by at work. Thank God I bought a GMC Safari for our personal vehicle. Those have a truck chassis and can haul a trailer. So I'm sharing it with my wife. 

The landscape job I just did was one where almost all material were delivered, so all I had to do was drop off my tools before I started. I took the trailer by there today - since it's done - to pack up all the tools.

I really like travelling in the truck when I can. It's got headroom and I like the seats a lot.

How about going to my website - link is in my signature - and from my menu, pick the CONTACT page. You can send me your phone number and address from there. I think I can swing by in two weeks or less.

Be sure to put something obvious in the subject line if you email, or in the first sentence if you use the form provided (like Oregon coast arborist sending contact info).

Have a good day - all.


----------



## caryr (Dec 7, 2004)




----------



## M.D. Vaden (Dec 7, 2004)

Thanks.

You should have got my acknowledgement email earlier.

I sent a note to my webmaster to let him know about the contact form problem.

We may fix it or even delete it.

After 2 years of having the website, I'm almost leaning toward having people make phone calls if they need an estimate rather than the email.


----------

