Time for a ban on old growth logging.

Social, economic and environmental issues in our ever-changing world.

Time for a ban on old growth logging.

Postby oldtrucker » Mar 6th, 2018, 4:25 pm

https://www.castanet.net/edition/news-s ... htm#220419

When does it end? When its all gone.
This needs to be stopped 50 years ago- don't care who loses money.
Some would view my above politically incorrect opinions as 'harsh' and may even be offended by them...That should just about cover why some nations are laughing at how soft and weak we have become.

2 people like this post.
User avatar
oldtrucker
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 875
Likes: 1 post
Liked in: 452 posts
Joined: Nov 24th, 2013, 4:19 pm

Re: Time for a ban on old growth logging.

Postby StraitTalk » Mar 8th, 2018, 1:16 am

https://vimeo.com/189394482

Humans will often fail to act until pushed to the brink of losing something. I believe that applies here.
User avatar
StraitTalk
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3620
Likes: 76 posts
Liked in: 326 posts
Joined: May 12th, 2009, 4:54 pm

Re: Time for a ban on old growth logging.

Postby seewood » Mar 8th, 2018, 10:11 am

Remember, the Provincial District Forester signs off on any cutting permits on public land. Has done so forever.
On private lands, ( South island for example) District Forester does not hold sway. Land owners do have to follow Provincial and Federal environment and Fisheries laws though.
I am not wealthy but I am rich
seewood
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 846
Likes: 1541 posts
Liked in: 897 posts
Joined: May 29th, 2013, 2:08 pm

Re: Time for a ban on old growth logging.

Postby oldtrucker » Mar 8th, 2018, 2:16 pm

This is one of those cases where the red tape needs to be bypassed somehow. By the time people finish going to this committee that committee, or that court...times up. It's gone. Destroyed for all, because a few in the forestry industry didn't care.
Some would view my above politically incorrect opinions as 'harsh' and may even be offended by them...That should just about cover why some nations are laughing at how soft and weak we have become.
User avatar
oldtrucker
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 875
Likes: 1 post
Liked in: 452 posts
Joined: Nov 24th, 2013, 4:19 pm

Re: Time for a ban on old growth logging.

Postby MAPearce » Mar 8th, 2018, 6:27 pm

I'm thinking that it's not old growth forestry that needs to change but rather the idea of clear cut forestry needs to be scrapped ...

Who on this earth that values a garden will raze healthy , but not yet ripe fruit and veggies , in their gardens to make it easier to harvest the most ripest ( and valuable) ??
I payed attention in High school....But not to what they were trying to teach me..
User avatar
MAPearce
Walks on Forum Water
 
Posts: 10559
Likes: 1381 posts
Liked in: 3644 posts
Joined: Nov 24th, 2009, 6:15 pm

Re: Time for a ban on old growth logging.

Postby seewood » Mar 9th, 2018, 10:07 am

MAPearce wrote:I'm thinking that it's not old growth forestry that needs to change but rather the idea of clear cut forestry needs to be scrapped ...

Really? How about selective grain harvesting? Trees are a crop that is harvested on a rotational basis much like grain. Rotation can be anywhere from 40 to 140 years depending on a number of factors.
The front of Grouse Mountain was a massive clear cut 150 years ago. Under the original tram is 3rd growth fir trees that are more than merchantable size.
In the 70's there was a huge road right of way scar up to Cypress Bowl. Today no one would recognize there is a 3 lane paved road up there now.
All over the province logging scars are greening up. However with the new business of environmental activism, past and present logging practices are being panned. Remember the war of the woods in the Walbran and Clayquot valleys? Well the Natives are logging in there now... where is the outrage? Politically incorrect when the Natives do it me thinks.
The Province needs and to some extent have done so, provided areas considered "working forests" where business can harvest trees on a sustainable basis forever. They have tried but then some activist group short on money or have to make pay roll act up and jump up and down making a ruckus.. Goal posts move yet again. Forestry is one of few private industry endeavors that will pay good wages with benefits. BC used to have an annual cut similar to Sweden's 75 million cubic meters. Today BC cuts around 45 million meters. The potential is to go the other way, not go down.
To add a cynical comment, the clear cuts up Cypress are now ski runs, never to be re-planted. The hypocrites at Whistler as they ski down clear cut ski runs, don't want to see any.
I am not wealthy but I am rich

LTD likes this post.
seewood
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 846
Likes: 1541 posts
Liked in: 897 posts
Joined: May 29th, 2013, 2:08 pm

Re: Time for a ban on old growth logging.

Postby StraitTalk » Mar 9th, 2018, 12:57 pm

seewood wrote:
MAPearce wrote:I'm thinking that it's not old growth forestry that needs to change but rather the idea of clear cut forestry needs to be scrapped ...

Really? How about selective grain harvesting? Trees are a crop that is harvested on a rotational basis much like grain. Rotation can be anywhere from 40 to 140 years depending on a number of factors.
The front of Grouse Mountain was a massive clear cut 150 years ago. Under the original tram is 3rd growth fir trees that are more than merchantable size.
In the 70's there was a huge road right of way scar up to Cypress Bowl. Today no one would recognize there is a 3 lane paved road up there now.
All over the province logging scars are greening up. However with the new business of environmental activism, past and present logging practices are being panned. Remember the war of the woods in the Walbran and Clayquot valleys? Well the Natives are logging in there now... where is the outrage? Politically incorrect when the Natives do it me thinks.
The Province needs and to some extent have done so, provided areas considered "working forests" where business can harvest trees on a sustainable basis forever. They have tried but then some activist group short on money or have to make pay roll act up and jump up and down making a ruckus.. Goal posts move yet again. Forestry is one of few private industry endeavors that will pay good wages with benefits. BC used to have an annual cut similar to Sweden's 75 million cubic meters. Today BC cuts around 45 million meters. The potential is to go the other way, not go down.
To add a cynical comment, the clear cuts up Cypress are now ski runs, never to be re-planted. The hypocrites at Whistler as they ski down clear cut ski runs, don't want to see any.


Old growth forests are climax climates, with trees over 250 years old. These are ecosystems that contain life that new forests do not. The damage is done - it's too late to save BC's old growth forests. In the case of the island, 6.5% remain, even less than on the mainland. At this point, these are forests that do not need to be touched but they still are. They should remain as reminders of what our forests could, and should have continued to be.

They have tried but then some activist group short on money or have to make pay roll act up and jump up and down making a ruckus


I don't know who you are referring to here, but from where I'm standing, I don't see suits protesting the logging of our forests - certainly not anyone looking for a pay day. You talk about hypocrites skiing on clear-cut ski runs - we're talking about something far greater than a few dozen ski runs. There is a straw-man argument thread you should probably check out.
User avatar
StraitTalk
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3620
Likes: 76 posts
Liked in: 326 posts
Joined: May 12th, 2009, 4:54 pm

Re: Time for a ban on old growth logging.

Postby rustled » Mar 9th, 2018, 1:28 pm

It's my understanding that generally, clear-cuts are better for the forests that used to renew themselves through forest fire, provided they are cleared and replanted with proper attention to streams, provision of habitat pockets, etc.

seewood likes this post.
rustled
Guru
 
Posts: 5372
Likes: 7929 posts
Liked in: 5952 posts
Joined: Dec 26th, 2010, 1:47 pm

Re: Time for a ban on old growth logging.

Postby seewood » Mar 10th, 2018, 9:08 am

StraitTalk wrote:There is a straw-man argument thread you should probably check out.


???? you now the debate, response discussion police??? Get a grip, not all here have the capability to provide discourse to perhaps your standards. Regardless of your "straw-man" blurb, I'll and I suspect many others will contribute the best way they can.
rustled wrote:It's my understanding that generally, clear-cuts are better for the forests that used to renew themselves through forest fire, provided they are cleared and replanted with proper attention to streams, provision of habitat pockets, etc.


It's my understanding that generally, clear-cuts are better for the forests that used to renew themselves through forest fire, provided they are cleared and replanted with proper attention to streams, provision of habitat pockets, etc.


Exactly. When replanted, the forest regeneration is advanced by about 10 years compared to natural regeneration. After a fire, the dead stems have to be removed for safety reasons before replanting. A clear cut is the safest, most economical method to harvest trees. Selective works, but is more dangerous and more expensive.
Streams, even intermittent ones are marked on a cutting permit map and any disturbance has consequences. I've had to jack a 6 foot Hemlock tree away from a creek. Tree was rotten but, nothing could go in the creek.
I am not wealthy but I am rich
seewood
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 846
Likes: 1541 posts
Liked in: 897 posts
Joined: May 29th, 2013, 2:08 pm

Re: Time for a ban on old growth logging.

Postby StraitTalk » Mar 13th, 2018, 10:26 pm

seewood wrote:
???? you now the debate, response discussion police??? Get a grip, not all here have the capability to provide discourse to perhaps your standards. Regardless of your "straw-man" blurb, I'll and I suspect many others will contribute the best way they can.


I'm sorry you don't like that I'm calling you out for your poor argumentative ability, but the statement that environmentalists are just out for a quick buck is absurd and serves only as a distraction from what we're discussing here.

Basically my favourite thing to do around here is call people out on their terrible arguments or illogical thinking. I'm not hiding it either. I'm passionate about reasonable and fair discourse.
User avatar
StraitTalk
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3620
Likes: 76 posts
Liked in: 326 posts
Joined: May 12th, 2009, 4:54 pm

Re: Time for a ban on old growth logging.

Postby seewood » Mar 14th, 2018, 11:36 am

StraitTalk wrote:but the statement that environmentalists are just out for a quick buck is absurd and serves only as a distraction from what we're discussing here.


The environmental groups get funding after they make a rukus about saving this and saving that. Their only source of revenue. Its a business no different than the anti pipeline lot. The ones on the front line...they might get a hot meal much like they did during the protests in the Walbran, Meares, or Clyaoquot
Thinking that protest groups don't have anything to do with trying to ban "old growth logging" is disingenuous.
I am not wealthy but I am rich
seewood
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 846
Likes: 1541 posts
Liked in: 897 posts
Joined: May 29th, 2013, 2:08 pm


Return to Social Concerns

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 4 guests