clearcutting in Mass. on state land
Joe
and
http://clearcuttingmapubliclands.blogspot.com/
Joe
--
*******
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act"
George Orwell
mhagen
> http://clearcutma.blogspot.com/
>
> and
>
> http://clearcuttingmapubliclands.blogspot.com/
>
> Joe
>
Holy shit, Joe! Some of these are parks? You can't do this on public
lands in Washington anymore- although the visual effect of a "patch cut
with wildlife and green recruitment trees "is just about the same as a
small clearcut.
Really good blog.
Mike
Joe
the western Mass. area, then he lived in Washington State for many years
until he got sick of all the clearcutting- then he moved back only to find
that the state of Mass. has started up a big clearcutting campaign, so Chris
started photographing it- and flew around the state with a friend for the
aerial stuff. He has been joined by some other "tree huggers" and myself and
Mike Leonard- the only 2 foresters- for which we are considered traitors to
the forestry party line.
The establishment keeps justifying all these huge clearcuts as "biodiversity
enhancement"- they've co-opted the biodiversity language- and because the
state forests land is now FSC Certified, that also becomes part of their
rationalization- but this small group of "rebs" have been opposing it. In
reality, they like huge clearcuts- cheaper to log and great when setting up
for biomass harvesting.
An article was just published in the Worcester Telegram:
http://www.telegram.com/article/20080703/NEWS/807030652 and our group
blasted the author over it- he's responded to several of us that he'll do a
follow up.
Our group has blasted the big enviro groups- such as Mass. Audubon, Mass.
Sierra Club, TNC, Appalachian Mt. Club and others- for having bought into
the state's forestry policies including these huge clearcuts- it's really
amazing! So, those groups put on a meeting with us to try to enlighten us!
ha, ha, ha!
Joe
"mhagen" <mha...@nospamolympus.net> wrote in message
news:8O6dna7Ua8TuJ_LV...@posted.olypeninternet...
Larry
In first blog, I see poor utilization and sloppy work.
The largest unit in the first aerial is only about 7 ac., if my math
is any good...
Didn't read the second blog...
They may be over-cutting, practicing poor silviculture and doing a
crappy job, but the treatement areas seem pretty small to me.
Larry
Larry Caldwell
> http://clearcutma.blogspot.com/
No kidding? A million gallons of diesel a year, just for the log
trucks? That doesn't seem very economical. If you add in equipment
depreciation, labor, payments to land owners and waste disposal, fuel
costs could easily be 30% of the value of generated power. On the plus
side, you have to find some way of getting rid of all that wood. Piling
it up an burning it is not free, and much more polluting than using it
to generate electricity.
> and
>
> http://clearcuttingmapubliclands.blogspot.com/
The photos show a variety of patterns for opening up wildlife habitat.
I hear trees are pretty invasive on the east coast. Will they burn the
meadow openings to suppress seedlings, or use chemicals?
> Joe
>
>
--
For email, replace firstnamelastinitial
with my first name and last initial.
Larry Caldwell
says...
> The establishment keeps justifying all these huge clearcuts as "biodiversity
> enhancement"- they've co-opted the biodiversity language- and because the
> state forests land is now FSC Certified, that also becomes part of their
> rationalization- but this small group of "rebs" have been opposing it. In
> reality, they like huge clearcuts- cheaper to log and great when setting up
> for biomass harvesting.
The photos don't look very huge. What they look like is small meadows
being opened up in large stands of timber. Several shots show finger
cuts, designed to enhance edge effect for song bird habitat. In fact,
it looks exactly like a biodiversity enhancement project. Animals need
openings in the forest. If you want diverse wildlife, you need diverse
habitat.
mhagen
Seven acres is a pretty big wildlife opening. If the idea is to convert
forest to early seral stages- say for grouse or pheasant- it would be
easier to just use some already cleared land and burn it. A before
picture would have put things in perspective. If edge effect is what
they want, you get more with patch cuts in scattered skips and gaps.
Openings stay partially shaded at two or three tree lengths in
dimensions. That works out to be about 2.5 acres in western timber
types. These look more like conversions. The muck hole where they logged
through a wet spot could either be just that- or a portion of something
more important. can't tell from the picture.
Larry Caldwell
mha...@nospamolympus.net (mhagen) says...
> Seven acres is a pretty big wildlife opening. If the idea is to convert=20
> forest to early seral stages- say for grouse or pheasant- it would be=20
> easier to just use some already cleared land and burn it. A before=20
> picture would have put things in perspective. If edge effect is what=20
> they want, you get more with patch cuts in scattered skips and gaps.=20
That is just what a couple of the photos show - alternating strips of 2
tree lengths of timber, 2 tree lengths of cleared space, repeat several
times. Even the largest cuts don't look to be more than about 400' x
800', which seems reasonable if they are setting up a successional
closure over several decades. It's less disruptive to wildlife if they
don't go poking around in there every 10 or 15 years.
> Openings stay partially shaded at two or three tree lengths in=20
> dimensions. That works out to be about 2.5 acres in western timber=20
> types. These look more like conversions. The muck hole where they logged =
>
> through a wet spot could either be just that- or a portion of something=20
> more important. can't tell from the picture.
That's kind of the point. It's easy to take a picture and deplore the
picture, when any problem is imaginary. The area looks messy, because
they didn't burn the slash. Nature is messy. I would have expected
more slash piles, but that may be a western habitat enhancement
technique. If they are doing a biodiversity project, the design is up
to the biologists on the ground. We don't even know what the target
species were.