Logging regulation info needed for school project

Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
In the Lincoln National Forest we have a 24" cap. Very little gets marked to cut anywhere near the cap. They cried about "old growth" here, and there is no real old growth left. Not cutting anything over 24" dbh is the equivalent to a farmer not harvesting his crop when it's ready. I don't think we should cut every one of the bigger trees, but cutting none of them is asinine.

Andy

We have a 24" cap on U.S.F.S. land here too, unless certain exemptions are written into a timber sale. Then, as slowp noted above, those exemptions have to be approved by wildlife biologists, hydrologists, and soils people. Once the sale plan containing those conditions makes it through the federal end, it goes to the public (including the environmentalists) for comments, and then back to the government for final approval.

more and more we're gonna have to convert forests to tree farms and plantations... overcrowding kinda forces the industry in that direction does it not?

We already have more second and third growth timber plantations available to meet all of our woody debris needs for the next 500 years. The real focus now is continued streamlining and making operations more efficient and sustainable.

I don't think we have or will every really face a timber shortage....i think we will face an "available timber" shortage (timber that can actually be cut)

There's always going to be that steady supply of smaller-diameter woody material from private, municipal, and state lands. I hear timber operators here crying about what goes on or doesn't go on with federal lands...and yet they have more work than they can handle already on private and state ground. What logging companies really want is to go back to the days of logging big timber and reaping windfall profits. However, market conditions and the shifting of mills to the processing of smaller materials means that won't ever happen again. Yet, as a cutter, I like falling them bigg'uns.:clap:
 
Last edited:
Not to get too off topic as academic needs of SiLogger must be addressed, but a figure i was taught in school was that under intensive management practices, all forest product needs of the U.S. could be supplied in an area the size of Arkansas-- which is not much. Granted, where would we get our walnut dashboards and violin wood. Plus, I cut native hardwoods, and love big timber. But, got to put the facts straight too.

You're on to a good point, is it age or diameter. Our typical diameter limit cuts are asinine as far as timber mgmt goes- cause often they're even aged stands and we're just leaving supressed trees.

Ok, so there are some definitions of "old-growth" here...old-growth being the romantic descriptor of an ancient forest rather than a scientific term with a defined objective.

Where I live, several things are taken into account: growth rings per inch for a percentage of the diameter of the tree (measured with an increment borer); the presence of two or more specific types of lichens growing in the bark of the tree and other types of ground-based fungus growing within a distance of individual trees; interpolation of species of trees in the stand and factoring the dominant species within the stand; the presence of large fire scars or evidence of survival of near-catastrophic surface fire (meaning a forest fire that provides a certain percentage of mortality of trees in a stand); and diameter combined with extrapolation of the growth-ring data.

So yeah, it can be complicated and varies by location, forest cover type, dominant species, topography, and co-dependent factors (vegetation, weather, ecological history of that region).
 
I'm not sure what the age requirement is anymore. I'm thinking if you read up you may run into it. If the river rises today, I might have time to do some reading. I suspect that it is similar to what Jacob J is describing, since a lot of LSR land is actually plantations which we are to manage for old growth.
Diameter limits are not a good silvicultural practice. Big does not necessarily mean healthy. Diameter limits are a simple way for non-foresters to oversee forest management in a way they can understand.
 
Hey Slowp, have you ever worked around any of that big pine 5-8 footers North of Glenwood, WA? There was some freakin' hammmer ass pine up there. There still is a good bit of it left too. I cut some Silver fir up that way that was all 4 1/2 to 5 foot with four 36's and a short in most all of it!
 
Last edited:
Hey Slowp, have you ever worked around any of that big pine 5-8 footers North of Glenwood, WA? There was some freakin' hammmer ass pine up there. There still is a good bit of it left too. I cut some Silver fir up that way that was all 4 1/2 to 5 foot with four 36's and a short in most all of it!

No, but when I first worked here, it was pretty much all big wood, Doug fir, three log loads were common. Big yarders and the old grapple loaders were used.
 
what i don't get is why waste time showing a timber sale to the public and the enviros... they're only gonna base their ideas and negativity from a sentimental standpoint and not a forestry or logging standpoint.
 
Thats the problem, most of everything they say is based solely on THEIR needs and not the needs of the forest or the land. They dont want to see the big trees get cut because they dont like the look of it, they dont care that cutting those big trees could actually help the forest for later on.
 
We have a 24" cap on U.S.F.S. land here too, unless certain exemptions are written into a timber sale. Then, as slowp noted above, those exemptions have to be approved by wildlife biologists, hydrologists, and soils people. Once the sale plan containing those conditions makes it through the federal end, it goes to the public (including the environmentalists) for comments, and then back to the government for final approval.

They could do that here, but they won't. The FS will do anything to stay out of court with the enviro's.
We had a defoliator problem here, several thousand acres affected. The trees suffered about 75% mortality. The material could have been salvaged, but now it's been there too long to be worth anything, and all but 1 small mill is shut down now. The enviro's told the FS that they would take a salvage sale to court, so the FS settled for what they could do without going to court. 250 acres in camp grounds, along power lines, and main roads. All hazard trees. What a friggin waste.

Andy
 
Staying out of court is the unspoken mission. It was explained one time how much going to court costs, in real dollars and I started thinking differently, that maybe staying out, although chicken:censored: isn't such a bad idea. Think about how much it costs in time to put together the case, then flying high salaried people to the big, expensive, cities where the courts are. Add hotel bills, expenses, and salaries of everybody. It can go into the million dollar range. Then, if you lose, which can be done if a statement in the document is found to be a problem, we taxpayers also are paying for the expenses of the other side. In fact, I maintain that a lot of the enviros make their living off taxpayers through the lawsuits. It is a sad state of affairs.

The public needs to know what is going on in the woods because, IT IS PUBLIC LAND. The enviro groups are extremely well organized and have outdone the timber/woods user groups hundred fold. I'm not seeing any changes coming unless the majority of the people start speaking out. Our organization now contains more biologists than foresters, I can't absolutely prove that, but that's what I see. Foresters are taught about all the different uses and processes of the forest, biologist are specialized and often fail to see the big picture--or consider the people/community aspect of the forest. The Forest Service Chief for the past 10? years was run by a wildlife biologist and then a fisheries biologist. Now it is back in the hands of a forester, but she can't do much in such a short time. The Forest Service has become political and it isn't good. You will not see a change in forest management for quite some time, if any.

The only hope I have is that now the enviros, the hard core ones, have started writing papers on the effects of recreation, including hiking and backpacking, on wildlife. The first study has not been favorable. Perhaps when restrictions are placed on this user group, it will have been too much and they'll rebel. The tree huggers on the other site are complaining about the state of the roads to get to their trails, and some are realizing that it is the timber industry that build and maintained those roads. A very few are realizing that though. :mad:
 
Staying out of court is the unspoken mission. It was explained one time how much going to court costs, in real dollars and I started thinking differently, that maybe staying out, although chicken:censored: isn't such a bad idea. Think about how much it costs in time to put together the case, then flying high salaried people to the big, expensive, cities where the courts are. Add hotel bills, expenses, and salaries of everybody. It can go into the million dollar range. Then, if you lose, which can be done if a statement in the document is found to be a problem, we taxpayers also are paying for the expenses of the other side. In fact, I maintain that a lot of the enviros make their living off taxpayers through the lawsuits. It is a sad state of affairs.

The public needs to know what is going on in the woods because, IT IS PUBLIC LAND. The enviro groups are extremely well organized and have outdone the timber/woods user groups hundred fold. I'm not seeing any changes coming unless the majority of the people start speaking out. Our organization now contains more biologists than foresters, I can't absolutely prove that, but that's what I see. Foresters are taught about all the different uses and processes of the forest, biologist are specialized and often fail to see the big picture--or consider the people/community aspect of the forest. The Forest Service Chief for the past 10? years was run by a wildlife biologist and then a fisheries biologist. Now it is back in the hands of a forester, but she can't do much in such a short time. The Forest Service has become political and it isn't good. You will not see a change in forest management for quite some time, if any.

The only hope I have is that now the enviros, the hard core ones, have started writing papers on the effects of recreation, including hiking and backpacking, on wildlife. The first study has not been favorable. Perhaps when restrictions are placed on this user group, it will have been too much and they'll rebel. The tree huggers on the other site are complaining about the state of the roads to get to their trails, and some are realizing that it is the timber industry that build and maintained those roads. A very few are realizing that though. :mad:

Slowp, I understand the expense part but how much is a forest worth? Ours is fading fast due to mismanagement (I just couldn't call it management).
The guy who was in charge of the Lincoln actually told me that it wasn't "public" land, it was government land, and that we were not going to tell him what should be done on HIS forest.
I won't go into that any further, it still makes me furious.

Andy
 
Slowp, I understand the expense part but how much is a forest worth? Ours is fading fast due to mismanagement (I just couldn't call it management).
The guy who was in charge of the Lincoln actually told me that it wasn't "public" land, it was government land, and that we were not going to tell him what should be done on HIS forest.
I won't go into that any further, it still makes me furious.

Andy

I am not optimistic at all right now. I thought the Bush politicians would get things going a bit more, but that was not the case. Here, on our forest, and this isn't all of them by any means, we would need a large turnover of employees. There seems to be a timber isn't my real job (even though a large part of their wages come from that) and preservationist attitudes. It is a shame because trees grow so well here. :cry:
 
I am not optimistic at all right now. I thought the Bush politicians would get things going a bit more, but that was not the case. Here, on our forest, and this isn't all of them by any means, we would need a large turnover of employees. There seems to be a timber isn't my real job (even though a large part of their wages come from that) and preservationist attitudes. It is a shame because trees grow so well here. :cry:

Long ago I was told by my Dad that the Forest Service was a world class timber manager (In our area anyway). They built a massive road system, bridges, canals, ect. and were anal with wasting their wood. My Dad said they would follow loggers around and make sure that every last top and short was out before they'd let a cat skinner start a new landing. Sad display these days, around my area I see them drivng and eating, and in the local esspresso drive thru @ Mt. Hood. You should have heard the bull#### they tried to lay on me and a private party about cutting hazard trees at a local camp facility. They wanted an impact study, blah blah, while trees are leaning over paved roads, outbuildings, and campsites. Not aiming at you Slowp, but I can't freakin' handle that crap. I have watched the Mt. Hood district waste our money for 10+ years, doing the above mentioned. Coffee time.
 
Long ago I was told by my Dad that the Forest Service was a world class timber manager (In our area anyway). They built a massive road system, bridges, canals, ect. and were anal with wasting their wood. My Dad said they would follow loggers around and make sure that every last top and short was out before they'd let a cat skinner start a new landing. Sad display these days, around my area I see them drivng and eating, and in the local esspresso drive thru @ Mt. Hood. You should have heard the bull#### they tried to lay on me and a private party about cutting hazard trees at a local camp facility. They wanted an impact study, blah blah, while trees are leaning over paved roads, outbuildings, and campsites. Not aiming at you Slowp, but I can't freakin' handle that crap. I have watched the Mt. Hood district waste our money for 10+ years, doing the above mentioned. Coffee time.

Nope, I agree. What wood we used to not waste, is now good for the ground.
The hazard tree thing is a nightmare. Amazingly, I was able to get one cut yesterday within 2 hours of locating it. The cutter was scary to watch, but he got it down. We can't sell big wood for timber, if sold it has to go for firewood and usually specifies that it must be cut up less than 48 inches. I'm starting to get riled.

I do like working with most of the loggers. The fallers on one unit are busting their :censored: off to make it look good. The marking has mistakes so they've read up on the requirements and are trying to fix the bad areas. I generally don't take lunch breaks except I haven't figured out how to eat yogurt while driving. I come back into the office and see what is going on there and become angry so it is best to stay out. I'm thinking the loggers are now better, and the FS is worse.

It is a different organization now...mostly in a bad way. I better get going.
 
another side of the coin

we are having bigger fires as a result of more over crowding of weed trees in the wild lands:confused: which is worst cutting a few treez or letting a fire denuded the the ground and sterilizing the soils and in increasing soil erosion:confused: logging reduces the big fires by thinning and building roads that make fire fighting easier.

:greenchainsaw:
 
Slowp, I understand the expense part but how much is a forest worth? Ours is fading fast due to mismanagement (I just couldn't call it management).
The guy who was in charge of the Lincoln actually told me that it wasn't "public" land, it was government land, and that we were not going to tell him what should be done on HIS forest.
I won't go into that any further, it still makes me furious.

Andy

So you shot him dead then?
 
we are having bigger fires as a result of more over crowding of weed trees in the wild lands:confused: which is worst cutting a few treez or letting a fire denuded the the ground and sterilizing the soils and in increasing soil erosion:confused: logging reduces the big fires by thinning and building roads that make fire fighting easier.

:greenchainsaw:

stand replacing fires denude the landscape more than logging does

so +1 with what you say
 
i dont like the look of clearcuts but i would sure be happier to come upon a stand that had been clearcut and know that it was actually used then to come upon a stand that had been burned to the ground by fire and know that all the trees were wasted and useless.
 
So you shot him dead then?

Naw, didn't have to. He said that to me in a public meeting. Didn't work out for good PR in the area. I'm not sure what happened, but we have a new head honcho in the Lincoln now. I think she may be trying to turn things around, we'll just have to see how long she lasts.

Andy
 
Naw, didn't have to. He said that to me in a public meeting. Didn't work out for good PR in the area. I'm not sure what happened, but we have a new head honcho in the Lincoln now. I think she may be trying to turn things around, we'll just have to see how long she lasts.

Andy

i'll drink a beer to her trying to turn things around
as will others i'm sure

but i'll make sure you get your coffee Andy :cheers:
 
I have some pictures, that I downloaded at work so will have to put them on a thingy to get to this machine, of one of the units after cutting using the purchaser mark, largest stump diameter stays, method. It shows that the larger leave trees are infested with mistletoe.

Unfortunately, that unit also seems to have had a dried up underground stream in it, that came to the surface, and is running down a skid trail. I'll have to try to get the specialists out there. The skid trail was subsoiled, and had slash piled on it..no waterbars because there wasn't a good outlet. The latter happens when we are told to use old skid trails, which weren't located where good drainage occurs.

The good news is, that having a logger up there, the culverts got taken care of and the road was saved. We almost lost it in places but he was going around unplugging the pipes.
 
Back
Top