# Best method to hide tree stumps?



## vancouverbc (Mar 16, 2013)

I'm not sure if the trees I cut were too close to thompson river. The slope is 45-50 degrees and hard to measure. Presently, I put moss on the top so they dont scream out to everyone that they have just recently been cut. Maybe burn them but I guess that screams that I have guilty conscious and know the rules. I guess if you are really bad and take one out really close to river you could excavate the whole thing or at least grind it below surface. for context, my
neighbour cut a whole swath of trees right to river and has not been bothered even cut a bunch of trees on my property.


----------



## imagineero (Mar 16, 2013)

When you close your eyes, the woods will be empty.


----------



## Gologit (Mar 16, 2013)

I'm going to move this to the Forestry and Logging forum. You'll probably get quite a few answers to your question.
You might not like the answers but they'll be based on actual experience with current law and custom.


----------



## northmanlogging (Mar 16, 2013)

Now I've never ever done this... ever... did I mention I'm 3rd gen gyppo...

If its one or two trees you can use the moss trick just cut your stump very low, and use lots and lots of moss, then toss a few limps and branches and what not over the top. Cover any skid marks with more moss and maybe a few ferns (no not the ones in your shorts).

This will keep most people from noticing that you have snaked a few decent trees out, it however won't keep anybody thats looking for stolen timber from noticing, in fact its kind of a red flag. 

Also like I said this will only work on a handful of trees, if you plan on clear cutting then you might as well just do it and hope no one cares, or at least try and get a permit.

This is by no means condoning illegal activity...


----------



## floyd (Mar 16, 2013)

While you're at it plant a seedling on the north side of the stump.


Ashes to ashes, you know.


----------



## madhatte (Mar 16, 2013)

northmanlogging said:


> it however won't keep anybody thats looking for stolen timber from noticing, in fact its kind of a red flag.




Boy howdy! We got a few winners hereabouts who cover the stump but just leave the face cut lying there like a formal announcement. I'm guessing that they never learned about causes and effects.


----------



## vancouverbc (Mar 16, 2013)

madhatte said:


> Boy howdy! We got a few winners hereabouts who cover the stump but just leave the face cut lying there like a formal announcement. I'm guessing that they never learned about causes and effects.


 I burn leftovers in wood stove. I have to laugh at my neighbour who clearcut right to bank of largest fish river in our province and left the trees on the slope and even went 30 ft into my land. 
Meanwhile talks about how much he loves trees and is outraged that other neighbour logged right up to his property line. He also cut down the only old growth cedar for miles around and just left it to rot.


----------



## H 2 H (Mar 16, 2013)

Something tells me there will be a problem in about 20 to 25 years


----------



## northmanlogging (Mar 17, 2013)

Nothing like the wooshing sound as 5-10 acres fall into the river over night, never to be seen again...


----------



## madhatte (Mar 17, 2013)

Erosion is no joke. A good friend of mine used to own about 100 acres there, at Washaway... USED to. It's all in the ocean now, and he lives in Darrington. He has video of the night he lost 5 acres in 5 minutes during a storm.


----------



## Gologit (Mar 17, 2013)

The OP is a biologist. You would think that he'd be able to make the connect between streamside cutting and erosion. Apparently not.

I moved this thread here in hopes that some of you who are up to date on these things could school this guy a little. He needs it. Soon.


----------



## northmanlogging (Mar 17, 2013)

seen lots of homes go down the sauk and the stilly, usually after some yokel cut the timber right up the the river. They some times left a few cotton woods in a vain hope of erosion control, or they just didn't want to deal with cutting them for very little profit... Few years ago some genius decided to re direct the river, spent a few weeks with a dozer and an excavator digging a new channel to steer it away from his land... it worked... except now he's in prison.


----------



## OlympicYJ (Mar 17, 2013)

Kind of tough Bob since he's in BC and I don't know the small forest landowner rules there. If say it were in WA a few can be taken. I've been told by a Forest Practices Forester firewooding the occasional tree in an RMZ is okay. Also if you're under 20 ac you can harvest a certain percentage. There are also hardwood conversions. IE hardwood cut and replanted with conifer. Small landowners cutting in RMZscan be a very dicey legal grey area. Allot also depends on how big of crusader the Forest Practices Forester is.

Him being in BC I haven't a clue about their rules. I believe they have Riparian Management Zones (RMZs) or different name but am not familiar with their rules.

Just because your neighbor didn't get pinched doesn't mean he still won't and you won't either...

My two cents,

Wes


----------



## Gologit (Mar 17, 2013)

Good information, Wes. I just thought it might be a good idea for the OP to have a better handle on what he's doing and the possible consequences.

The fact that he wants to hide his stumps speaks for itself.

Maybe some of our Canadian brethren can sharpen him up a little before he gets himself into serious trouble.


----------



## slowp (Mar 17, 2013)

A biologist ought to understand _cumulative effects_.


----------



## Gologit (Mar 17, 2013)

slowp said:


> A biologist ought to understand _cumulative effects_.



Ought to ain't does.


----------



## vancouverbc (Mar 17, 2013)

I was depressed the day I took the trees down. I honestly didnt expect to get much view. The result far exceeded my expectations.


----------



## H 2 H (Mar 17, 2013)

northmanlogging said:


> seen lots of homes go down the sauk and the stilly, usually after some yokel cut the timber right up the the river. They some times left a few cotton woods in a vain hope of erosion control, or they just didn't want to deal with cutting them for very little profit... Few years ago some genius decided to re direct the river, spent a few weeks with a dozer and an excavator digging a new channel to steer it away from his land... it worked... except now he's in prison.




Was that the one on the Sauk ?

It was a site seeing a dozier in the Sauk right along Seattle City Light propriety on the westside of the river about 3 miles down river from Darrington I was floating down counting Steelhead reds for SCL

I was also a board member of the Skagit Watershed Group at that time when the guy changed the Sauk around 

northmanlogging remember that little slide that blocked the Stilly about 8 or 9 years ago and re-rooted the Stilly River thru that housing development 

I was a member of SIRC and was up in the egg beaters over looking what happen for hours on end


----------



## northmanlogging (Mar 18, 2013)

Was that the one next to skaglunds hill... took out 4-5 houses or so? Some genius is building a big fancy house just a little west of there, maybe 30 yds from the river. 




> vancouverbc
> I was depressed the day I took the trees down. I honestly didnt expect to get much view. The result far exceeded my expectations.
> 
> 
> > In a few short years you might just have "riverfront" veiws and you can sell your house with the tag "easy beach access"


----------



## Gologit (Mar 18, 2013)

northmanlogging said:


> Was that the one next to skaglunds hill... took out 4-5 houses or so? Some genius is building a big fancy house just a little west of there, maybe 30 yds from the river.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Or maybe he could jack it up, slide pontoons underneath, and have a houseboat. Just in case.


----------



## slowp (Mar 18, 2013)

The houses that kinda floated down the Cowlitz in 2006 made the national news. Be sure to have a camera ready. My friend did and he got the video that they all used. 

Regular houses don't seem to float all that good. They tend to fall apart. Perhaps that can be rectified by the OP in time for the Big One?


----------



## northmanlogging (Mar 18, 2013)

saw a Mobile home going in near Lake Stevens over the weekend looks like they jacked it up 4-5' to start with... (probably not enough...)


----------



## 2dogs (Mar 18, 2013)

On a job last week, and quite often actually, I rub the cut edges with charcoal and/or mud. I would advice you really grind the charcoal into the wood HARD. Don't forget to treat the limbs the same way. Of course a low stump makes the camo project easier. If you can do it without digging a hole throw a little soil and leaves on the wood. 

An even better solution is to use explosives to blow the stump apart. This means no straight lines that attract the eyes. Might need an official OK from the local ologist.

I'm pretty sure there is a USDA video on the subject. I'll look.


----------



## vancouverbc (Mar 20, 2013)

I have to admit that I was an idiot to start this thread. I vote this a very dumb thread.


----------



## madhatte (Mar 20, 2013)

Not at all. It 's likely that somebody will read the things we've said here, and think twice about covering up a bad job. I count that as a Service to Mankind... and, you're welcome.


----------



## 4x4American (Mar 20, 2013)

Yea not a bad thread in terms of helping others, I learned from Madhatte that erosion is no joke, especially at washaway beach, cape shoalwater.


----------



## RPM (Mar 20, 2013)

vancouverbc said:


> I was depressed the day I took the trees down. I honestly didnt expect to get much view. The result far exceeded my expectations.



Isn't Yale on the Fraser River? In any case, Federal Fisheries Act would probably apply (private land or not) if you were found to have altered or have caused damage to a riparian area associated with fish habitat. Given that the Fraser River supports one of the largest Sockeye salmon runs in North America you'd better hope that no one notices. Hope you are please with your new view.


----------



## imagineero (Mar 20, 2013)

Who'd a thunk a bunch of dirty loggers would have such strong environmental views? They'll be on your property soon, chaining themselves to your skidder 

Shaun


----------



## northmanlogging (Mar 20, 2013)

If only the dirty hippies where literate...


----------



## Gologit (Mar 20, 2013)

imagineero said:


> Who'd a thunk a bunch of dirty loggers would have such strong environmental views? They'll be on your property soon, chaining themselves to your skidder
> 
> Shaun



We can't chain ourselves to his skidder. It sank. Maybe we could chain ourselves to his tugboat...you know, the one tied to the porch railing?


----------



## Gologit (Mar 20, 2013)

vancouverbc said:


> I have to admit that I was an idiot to start this thread. I vote this a very dumb thread.



You're not an idiot at all. As for the thread being dumb...are you talking about your ideas or our responses? 

This is a poor venue if somebody is looking for validation for bad ideas.


----------



## slowp (Mar 20, 2013)

For some of us foresters, a biologist doing such a thing is priceless. You are the ones who are usually ascared of what cutting one tree on a hillside, 500 feet away from a stream, during the dry season, when the birds are done nesting, when the elk calves are not so vulnerable, after the endangered flowers have been located and identified, and so on, will do to the ecosystem. 

I'm being a bit sarcastic, but just a bit, having worked with or tried to work with 'ologists for many years.
The ones just out of school are the worst, of course.

Yup, this thread is priceless.


----------



## madhatte (Mar 20, 2013)

I'm gonna rant some about wetlands later. For now, I'll say this: wetlands and riparian management areas are an issue that aren't going to go away. Sooner we wrap our heads around Best Practices, the better, for all involved.


----------



## OlympicYJ (Mar 20, 2013)

Well on a good note the Supreme Court just ruled that runoff from forest roads is non-point source and just like runoff from farm fields! :msp_w00t:

I know me and a few others are pretty ecstatic!


----------



## slowp (Mar 20, 2013)

OlympicYJ said:


> Well on a good note the Supreme Court just ruled that runoff from forest roads is non-point source and just like runoff from farm fields! :msp_w00t:
> 
> I know me and a few others are pretty ecstatic!





Madhatte, everybody needs to be on the same wavelength as to what a wetland is. I've had some 'ologists declare the soggy area around a developed water source--cow watering tank as a wetland. We've had to buffer the same distance around draws that dry up each year, as we did around year round creeks. The amount of buffering and definitions vary amongst hydrologists--at least those in the Forest Service, and by how much faith the deciding official has in those folks. It also varies depending on if you can get the hydrologist out of the office to ground truth some places that differ from what they are said to be in the GIS layers.


----------



## madhatte (Mar 20, 2013)

slowp said:


> It also varies depending on if you can get the hydrologist out of the office to ground truth some places that differ from what they are said to be in the GIS layers.



This will be the subject of my rant. I have a partial solution but it's complex and technical and the story's not over yet, so I'll hold off telling it a bit.


----------



## Gologit (Mar 20, 2013)

We'll be waiting.


----------



## RiverRat2 (Mar 20, 2013)

*Hnmm Porch, railing???? Hood River*



Gologit said:


> We can't chain ourselves to his skidder. It sank. Maybe we could chain ourselves to his tugboat...you know, the one tied to the porch railing?



Bar stool, cold beer, thats about all I care to think of for the present,,, Seems like we've been there before!!! and stuff  Just sayin:msp_ohmy:


----------



## OlympicYJ (Mar 20, 2013)

slowp said:


> Madhatte, everybody needs to be on the same wavelength as to what a wetland is. I've had some 'ologists declare the soggy area around a developed water source--cow watering tank as a wetland. We've had to buffer the same distance around draws that dry up each year, as we did around year round creeks. The amount of buffering and definitions vary amongst hydrologists--at least those in the Forest Service, and by how much faith the deciding official has in those folks. It also varies depending on if you can get the hydrologist out of the office to ground truth some places that differ from what they are said to be in the GIS layers.



Been there too. Never happen unless something extraordinary happens... must say actual foresters for the most part are more pleasant to work with than ologists. Although the company Geo morphologist that I worked with was awesome!

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## slowp (Mar 20, 2013)

RiverRat2 said:


> Bar stool, cold beer, thats about all I care to think of for the present,,, Seems like we've been there before!!! and stuff  Just sayin:msp_ohmy:



There is a small house for sale that is right on the Nehalem River, except it is also right on the highway. You could buy it and we could come and chain ourselves to the railing, unless it is flooding.


----------



## RiverRat2 (Mar 20, 2013)

slowp said:


> There is a small house for sale that is right on the Nehalem River, except it is also right on the highway. You could buy it and we could come and chain ourselves to the railing, unless it is flooding.



PM Me the listing or info,,, Im looking for a cabin in tha brush!!!


----------



## madhatte (Mar 20, 2013)

WARNING: data-heavy

Begin Rant

(click on the "notes" tab to see my comments)

This is a presentation I'll be giving to the F&W folks in a few days. There's a lot more data and steps than I show there, but this explains the process and thinking without too much wandering off on tangents.


----------



## northmanlogging (Mar 20, 2013)

slowp said:


> There is a small house for sale that is right on the Nehalem River, except it is also right on the highway. You could buy it and we could come and chain ourselves to the railing, unless it is flooding.



Does it have trees on it? If so maybe I'll come on down, buy it clear it, hide the stumps and then sell it as waterfront property with excellent views, Hel I could even turn a profit.:rolleyes2: 

Its that or dig up some crotchety old mans arm and hang it from the window with a finger in a permanent sign of defiance...


----------



## slowp (Mar 20, 2013)

northmanlogging said:


> Does it have trees on it? If so maybe I'll come on down, buy it clear it, hide the stumps and then sell it as waterfront property with excellent views, Hel I could even turn a profit.:rolleyes2:
> 
> Its that or dig up some crotchety old mans arm and hang it from the window with a finger in a permanent sign of defiance...



I looked it up. It has no or nothing to clear. The deck is almost or is a dock, and it is 400 or 500 thousand...too rich for me and it fronts highway 101.

Now, last fall, that movie house was for sale. It is on the Siletz River by Lincoln City. You could float that river and do the arm thing, and return to the house.


----------



## northmanlogging (Mar 20, 2013)

ok nevermind... If was only like a say $50. and had a couple trees I would seriously consider it... without trees its no fun...:angry2:


----------



## OlympicYJ (Mar 21, 2013)

Like the slideshow Nate! Looks good. I'm not too good with LIDAR but was able to follow along. What a PITA sale area by the looks, amount of wetlands I mean. If your interested I can PM a few spelling errors I found and I have one minor non scientific wording observation.

Again great job! 

Wes

Oh yea and will require a report on how it goes! lol


----------



## madhatte (Mar 21, 2013)

Not too worried about spelling/grammar -- I just added those notes for this forum. I'll be doing the presentation off the top of my head. Was supposed to be this week, but got pushed off... next week is planting, and the week after is Variable Probability Sampling at OSU, so it'll be at least mid-April before I get to present. Probably no hurry anyway... with this Sequester/furlough/hiring freeze BS, we'll likely not get to hire a seasonal crew this year, and I already have two sales in front of this one to mark. Still, I'll keep you all posted on the latest in the ongoing "techs vs 'ologists" battle.


----------



## OlympicYJ (Mar 21, 2013)

Ah ten4. My bad thought it was actual notes in the PPT. I hate missed spelling errors on my stuff lol

Yeah seen ya were't gonna get a summer crew. That is a big bummer, you don't get to use any percentage of sale revenue for things you need? Think we've just discussed the framework of your outfit for the most part.


----------



## 2dogs (Mar 21, 2013)

madhatte said:


> "techs vs 'ologists" battle.



Nate there is your ticket outta here. No more chainsaws, no more flippy caps, no more H vs.S. Just design that video game. You know, the techs have GIS and flagging and satelites. The ologists have refelctive vests and spray paint, 4x4 trucks. They both have computers but any time they call up wikipedia they lose a lifeline. They both have special operations hippies and nuclear tipped attorneys. Come on man, you can do it.


----------



## madhatte (Mar 21, 2013)

OlympicYJ said:


> you don't get to use any percentage of sale revenue for things you need?



It's complicated -- all installations pool resources. Some are revenue suppliers, some are just expenses. We're #1 or #2 supplier every year, so we are generally treated pretty well, but this current mess is quite deliberately not distinguishing between appropriated and reimbursable funds. We all get cut the same. It doesn't matter to the pencil-pushers upstairs that we're already not costing them anything. 



2dogs said:


> Come on man, you can do it.



WHAT? And miss out on all this?


----------

