Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Logging and Recreation can coexist
 Reply to topic
Previous :: Next Topic
Author Message
Chico
Member
Member


Joined: 30 Nov 2012
Posts: 2500 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lacey
Chico
Member
PostTue Oct 17, 2017 5:15 pm 
Timber harvests and recreation partner up: Capitol State Forest Friends of Capitol Forest joined DNR recreation and state lands forestry staff last month in the Capitol State Forest near Olympia to take a closer look at how timber harvests and recreation opportunities can go hand-in-hand. Volunteers worked with staff to identify which trees to retain as part of the future 2018 Pop Tart timber sale, planning for the trail experience on the proposed Little Larch Climbing Trail for mountain biking and trail running. While providing access to recreation opportunities like this one, DNR's working forests also generate revenue for public services, help protect forests from development and provide habitat for fish and wildlife. You can learn more about these and other benefits of DNR's working forests on our website.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11992 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
Member
PostTue Oct 17, 2017 6:07 pm 
I like this idea. It's cooperative and also blends opportunities for the two fastest paced human powered recreational activities.

Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Randito
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 9495 | TRs | Pics
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
Randito
Snarky Member
PostTue Oct 17, 2017 7:25 pm 
Skiing often benefits from logging -- at least until the trees grow tall enough and dense enough to form impenetrable thickets. The Roaring Thin Project looks like it has refreshed some ski terrain. Kendall Ridge, Mt Margaret and Amabalis Mtn are other examples of ski touring areas that became popular in the '80s after being clearcut -- that have become largely useless as ski terrain now that the replanted trees are over 30 feet tall and tightly packed. I believe that thinning operations would both increase timber growth and improve skiing opportunities. Of course the thinning operation needs to be done in a careful manner so that fish habitat isn't silted and other environmental damage avoided -- which means going through the whole NEPA process. I suppose the NEPA planning probably needs to start when the trees are replanted -- then by the time the paperwork is order -- the trees will be the right size for commercially viable thinning.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Schroder
Member
Member


Joined: 26 Oct 2007
Posts: 6696 | TRs | Pics
Location: on the beach
Schroder
Member
PostTue Oct 17, 2017 8:53 pm 
Right. DNR did just a great job on Blanchard Mountain. shakehead.gif

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12798 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostTue Oct 17, 2017 9:31 pm 
^ Don't know a thing about Blanchard Mountain. I do know that DNR, in respect to the Capitol State Forest, talks a good game, but from the standpoint of a hiker seeking some sort of "wilderness experience", their management practices can sometimes leave a bit to be desired. Maybe they've changed their game, but the few times I've been down there I've seen clearcuts right on top of trail corridors - something which really rubs me the wrong way, for reasons which should be obvious. I get it about the timber money - they do a pretty good job generating revenue for State schools - but clearcutting a parcel right on top of a trail corridor is really a bad PR move. It's also a good way to turn what was a good trail into a crappy trail; like the lower end of the Wright Meadow Trail #3, or the Blue Lake Ridge Trail #271 (both of which are USFS trails in the South Cascades.) That said, what we have currently in the Capitol State Forest is far better than what might have been had the State not taken possession of the abandoned cut-over lands at a time when the common thinking was that there was an infinite supply of timber to be cut.

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!



Joined: 25 Dec 2006
Posts: 11272 | TRs | Pics
Location: Don't move here
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!
PostWed Oct 18, 2017 7:12 am 
I would just warn that what is planned is not always going to happen exactly as planned. When people mark or choose trees to be cut, they often do not realize that more trees will need to be cut for operations. Logs like to move in straight lines. Extra trees are cut so machines can move around. Landings which are little clearcuts have to be built somewhere. The timber markers or tree choosers will mark trees that are impossible to get on the ground unless other, unmarked trees are cut so there is the choice of either leaving the marked tree or adding more to the unit. The feller bunchers are better at getting trees on the ground in thick (limb locked) stands but then they need trails to get around on and can't work on steep ground. It can get complicated to pull off sometimes. Then somebody in on the planning comes out and it doesn't look like they imagined.

What's especially fun about sock puppets is that you can make each one unique and individual, so that they each have special characters. And they don't have to be human––animals and aliens are great possibilities
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Chico
Member
Member


Joined: 30 Nov 2012
Posts: 2500 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lacey
Chico
Member
PostWed Oct 18, 2017 8:50 pm 
Ski wrote:
but from the standpoint of a hiker seeking some sort of "wilderness experience", their management practices can sometimes leave a bit to be desired.
You're kidding right? Wilderness experience? NO ONE goes there expecting a wilderness experience! It is to be expected that most all DNR lands which are held in state trust will be logged for the purpose of funding schools. As for logging on trail corridors - trails and roads are established. Some go through areas of second growth. Loggers are asked to be careful and help maintain the tread. In this case with Friends of Capitol Forest, they went out and marked trees not to cut along the trail. Not been out there myself so not sure of the width of this corridor. But typically loggers have to leave trees if clearcutting so they may leave them all in one corner. All who volunteer on the forest are fine with the logging. Seems to be those who simply want to visit and get their "wilderness experience" who have a problem. Yes we are sad to see the changes but trees grow back. There is a saying that goes something like "the only constant is change".

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Chico
Member
Member


Joined: 30 Nov 2012
Posts: 2500 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lacey
Chico
Member
PostWed Oct 18, 2017 10:44 pm 
Since it's not a designated wilderness area just what kind of wilderness "experience" do you expect? Are you shocked when hiking a trail through trees and you suddenly pop out into an area that was clearcut? (you shouldn't be!) Are you shocked when hiking a trail and have multiple encounters with people riding bikes?

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
   All times are GMT - 8 Hours
 Reply to topic
Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Logging and Recreation can coexist
  Happy Birthday noahk!
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