Forum Index > Stewardship > Bill to make fee demo permanent
Previous :: Next Topic  
Author Message
Allison
Feckless Swooner



Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 12304 | TRs
Location: putting on my Nikes before the comet comes
Allison
Feckless Swooner
PostTue Oct 21, 2003 6:34 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
My dad is a log scaler in Tacoma. He has been a scaler in Wa for 32 years now. We talk about how much cutting is being done on FS land all of the time, and for years he has said, "almost none." There is some being done on private land, else dad wouldn't have a job any more, but due to overcutting in the '80s and public outcry, logging on FS land simply is not what it once was.

Now I'm inclined to take dad's word on this, as virtually every log is scaled and graded my dad or one of his crew, but if someone can show me otherwise, well, I'd love to see it.

Sorry this is a little off topic so late in this thread, but there are a number of people here implying that logging is flooding the coffers of the FS.

--------------
www.allisonoutside.com

follow me on Twitter! @AllisonLWoods
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Visit poster's website Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Slugman
Slower than ever



Joined: 27 Mar 2003
Posts: 15990 | TRs

Slugman
Slower than ever
PostTue Oct 21, 2003 6:50 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Maintaining forest service roads to trailheads should not be charged AT ALL to hikers. If they hadn't clearcut the forest, then I wouldn't mind hiking through it to get where I am going. The roads don't bring me right to my final destination, just to the beginning of the non-destroyed areas. Parking areas, trail construction and maintainance, search and rescue, these are the things which only benefit users, and I am willing to pay my fair share for them. The costs associated with maintaining access roads through clearcut areas to the uncut areas behind them should be tacked on to the fees charged the clear-cutters, since it's their actions which make the roads necessary to begin with. Fair is fair, and I refuse to subsidize the destruction of my own property.

--------------
Just another tequila sunrise....
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
touron
Member
Member


Joined: 15 Sep 2003
Posts: 10305 | TRs
Location: Plymouth Rock
touron
Member
PostTue Oct 21, 2003 8:12 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Hmmm....$85 fees, $5000 fines...almost makes me want to  hurl.gif and quit being a tourist for good.  And calling it the America The Beautiful pass almost sounds like something from Animal Farm.  John Muir must be rolling over in his grave right now.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
hikermike
Member
Member


Joined: 24 Jun 2003
Posts: 1204 | TRs
Location: Tacoma
hikermike
Member
PostTue Oct 21, 2003 9:03 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
My previous point about 80% and the amount the forest service spends on extracting it was to point out that a. they're getting a poor return on investment andb. how underfunded they are by Congress.  This is not the way it was in the past.  We first started using forest service lands in the late 40's and early 50's.  At that time, cutting in the forests was just beginning.  Before that time private logging companies were not happy with the Forest service as they felt they were competition for their own lands.  (Called it Federal Subsidization)  At this time, this is when the privates realized they were running out of trees and were going to go out of business so they pushed the forest system to open up more and in the spirit of the 50's and 60's they more than obliged.  Prior to that, much of the forest was mostly used for recreation and grazing.  Forest personnel and facilities were like the Park service is now,  (But back then the Park Service was much better than now in services-my first backpacking trip was a 3-day affair led by a Park service ranger and I was upset with my Dad cuz he wouldn't do the 2-week one)  This was in Yosomite.  Cutting peaked around 1988 when Burlington Northern hauled a record amount of lumber OUT OF STATE.  (So much for local industries, most went to Japan.)  Lumber has fallen since but a part of the reason is second and third growth timber on private lands is now maturing and being harvested.  Much of the butchery of the 80's was done just to keep a few small mills from going out of business.  These were mills which hadn't updated to newer equiptment designed to be more efficient with smaller timber.  Anyway, I think we have enough National Parks, in this state, and resist the movement to add more.  I like the Wilderness system administered by the forest service, just think they need to turn more attention to trails and need to hire more naturalists.  In the 1920's there were more trail miles, rangers, acres of parks and money spent in the 2 services PER CAPITA than now.  The money is elswhere.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Malachai Constant
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jan 2002
Posts: 13802 | TRs
Location: Back Again Like A Bad Penny
Malachai Constant
Member
PostTue Oct 21, 2003 9:05 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
touron wrote:
Hmmm....$85 fees, $5000 fines...almost makes me want to  hurl.gif and quit being a tourist for good.  And calling it the America The Beautiful pass almost sounds like something from Animal Farm.  John Muir must be rolling over in his grave right now.

What do you expect from a bunch of Republicans? They have to pay for their wars somehow and it sure as hell isn't going to be taxes. moon.gif

--------------
"You do not laugh when you look at the mountains, or when you look at the sea." Lafcadio Hearn
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
kiliki
Member
Member


Joined: 07 Apr 2003
Posts: 1487 | TRs
Location: Seattle
kiliki
Member
PostTue Oct 21, 2003 9:39 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
If anyone is interested in reading about this subject (the FS and logging/land management, that is), "A Conspiracy of Optimism: Managment of the National Forests since World War II" by Paul Hirt is quite a good study, though kind of a dry read. Nancy Langston's "Forest Dreams, Forest Nightmares" is a well researched and well written look at how these FS timber management policies played out in the Blue Mountains. And if anyone wants any recommendations on Roosevelt (his own works are fascinating as they show the racial motivations behind his support for conservation/outdoor recreation), conservation, or anything else about US environmental history, give a shout out.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Allison
Feckless Swooner



Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 12304 | TRs
Location: putting on my Nikes before the comet comes
Allison
Feckless Swooner
PostTue Oct 21, 2003 11:45 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Okay, so what I am looking for is the data to back up the idea that there is a lot of cutting going on in the NFs NOW, esp in our part of the country.
That and that the FS is making a bunch of money on it, and using it to purport logging.

It is possible it is happening, but I need more than the vague sense from your gut that it is, as I have my dad's seat-of-the-pants anecdotal information at hand, and that is slightly more solid than the vague sensation thing.

--------------
www.allisonoutside.com

follow me on Twitter! @AllisonLWoods
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Visit poster's website Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
MCaver
Founder



Joined: 14 Dec 2001
Posts: 5128 | TRs

MCaver
Founder
PostTue Oct 21, 2003 11:54 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
There's some fresh logging going on along SR-410 south of Greenwater, near that viewpoint with the pavilion. I don't know if that's in the NF or part of the White River Tree Farm though. Close to the border.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Allison
Feckless Swooner



Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 12304 | TRs
Location: putting on my Nikes before the comet comes
Allison
Feckless Swooner
PostWed Oct 22, 2003 12:03 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
From what I know about that area, all of that cutting is taking place on private land. It used to be owned by Weyerhauser, and  it was, at least in large part, sold to John Hancock insurance company. Long story, but that is not NF land that is being cut on 410.

--------------
www.allisonoutside.com

follow me on Twitter! @AllisonLWoods
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Visit poster's website Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
touron
Member
Member


Joined: 15 Sep 2003
Posts: 10305 | TRs
Location: Plymouth Rock
touron
Member
PostWed Oct 22, 2003 1:41 am 
social engineering
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Quote:
What do you expect from a bunch of Republicans? They have to pay for their wars somehow and it sure as hell isn't going to be taxes.

Yo MC, all the forest service budget in washington would probably onlyl pay for a couple missiles.  I think fee demo (aka the Bad Deal) support is non-partisan.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Newt
Short Timer



Joined: 21 Dec 2001
Posts: 3191 | TRs
Location: Down the road and around the corner
Newt
Short Timer
PostWed Oct 22, 2003 4:57 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
I usually get a Forest Stewardship pamplet a couple of times a year that breaks things down.

Try this link for something similar. Stats

Scroll down to Annual Harvest by Ownership, By Species-All Types and open the Excel file. Compare the totals.

Also check the Economic Forcast - September 2003

NN

--------------
It's pretty safe to say that if we take all of man kinds accumulated knowledge, we still don't know everything. So, I hope you understand why I don't believe you know everything. But then again, maybe you do.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Malachai Constant
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jan 2002
Posts: 13802 | TRs
Location: Back Again Like A Bad Penny
Malachai Constant
Member
PostWed Oct 22, 2003 8:29 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
touron wrote:
Quote:
What do you expect from a bunch of Republicans? They have to pay for their wars somehow and it sure as hell isn't going to be taxes.

Yo MC, all the forest service budget in washington would probably onlyl pay for a couple missiles.  I think fee demo (aka the Bad Deal) support is non-partisan.

I had just noticed in the article all the sponsors were (R)s "from the East" actually Kansas and Ohio and could not resist the temptation.

And yes the whole FS budget is a drop in an 87 billion bucket, none the  less it shows where their priorities lie.

--------------
"You do not laugh when you look at the mountains, or when you look at the sea." Lafcadio Hearn
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Timber Cruiser
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 220 | TRs
Location: Cosi
Timber Cruiser
Member
PostWed Oct 22, 2003 8:55 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
frown.gif I can't type fast enough to respond to all the points I found in this thread.  Would love to move to the saloon and discuss "below cost" timber sales, etc.  Here's a chart to backup MaryLou's suspicions.  I haven't updated it for a couple years, but the trend remains the same.

Teddy Roosevelt and Gifford Pinchot would roll over in their graves at the suggestion that land be transferred back to the Dept. of Interior.  When TR transferred some 20 million acres to the new FS organization around 1908(Clintonian style-without approval from congress), the Interior wasn't much more than a land bank that politcians made withdrawals from to give to their powerful friends in the mining, ag. and lumber industries. Congress has used the budgeting process to beat up on the FS ever since. TR believed in preservation of the land through use, not by locking it up or giving it away to the privilaged.




USFSsales.jpg
USFSsales.jpg
 USFSsales.jpg (42 KB)
File downloaded or viewed 251 time(s)

Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
MCaver
Founder



Joined: 14 Dec 2001
Posts: 5128 | TRs

MCaver
Founder
PostWed Oct 22, 2003 9:36 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Just because that's how the DOI was run a century ago doesn't mean that's how it's run now. Are you saying that's the case? That the DOI and its agencies are just a means for politicians to dole out land to their friends? Maybe their corporation friends, but that's no different than the FS selling timber below cost to logging companies. It seems to me that the NPS is extremely focused on use, and they are under the DOI. Slugman has a good point that the wilderness areas are under the USDA which is focused on agriculture (aka harvesting) rather than protection as the NPS is in the DOI. You can have protection and use (DOI), but I don't think harvesting and use go together well (NFS), unless the use is just while waiting for the harvest. This seems to be the attitude of the NFS to me, at least outside the wilderness areas. Certainly harvesting and protection don't go together at all. Sounds to me like moving the wilderness areas out of the harvest department and into the protection/use department makes sense.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
mb
Member
Member


Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 434 | TRs

mb
Member
PostWed Oct 22, 2003 9:51 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
well the Bureau of Indian Affairs is under the department of the interior too. and the various mining departments.

http://www.doi.gov/ - see the column on the right.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
  Display:     All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Forum Index > Stewardship > Bill to make fee demo permanent
  Happy Birthday outdoorgirl, wildernessed!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
   Use Disclaimer Powered by phpBB Privacy Policy