High Sierra Topix

Fire on the Mountain: Rethinking Forest Management in the Sierra Nevada

https://lhc.ca.gov/report/fire-mountain ... rra-nevada

maverick wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 5:46 pm otherwise why even post one liners to this thread, they are just useless and only incite.

Have you been to the internet? You do know what it’s for right? Twitter is 140 characters for a reason... NO ONE WANTS YOUR LONG READS MAV!

To be fair, most of fires we've had near my home in Napa have been brush and goat land...nothing that would justify logging in any way.

Yes, we need to do a better job of managing our forests, but bear in mind that a lot of the land that is burning is not what most people would consider a forest---few large trees, and those that do exist may not be commercially viable logging species. Controlled burns may be much more effective than logging in these areas.

This is very good article in Popular Science that calls out climate change, forest management (generally a federal issue, not a state one, despite Rlowns' compaints) and changes in the way we build near forested areas...

https://www.popsci.com/story/environmen ... agreement/

Yesterday's episode of The Daily NYT podcast had an interesting side of the story I'm not hearing anywhere else. The population in many of these remote areas has exploded over the past few decades. More people = more potential ignition sources. No easy solutions.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/11/podc ... zones.html

I went to the Sierras for 2 two weeks in August just to get away from the heat in the Phoenix area(moved here 6/19) and I couldn't believe the amount people everywhere(South Lake TH, Rockcreek Lake TH). With that being said I don't no what the rules are but ALL campfires should be prohibited right now its way too dry out there. At June Lake junction store the lady said the campgrounds are full until the beginning of October. She also said there is new breed of campers coming out because of COVID and thats causing issues. That's why I believe to prohibit ALL campfire for everyone would be good. RLOWN is right you can't control nature or lightning caused fires. We all have to be conscious of the environment right now and PRAY FOR A HEAVY SNOW YEAR.

Texan

rlown wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 4:29 pm I see it as an environmentalist issue for not actually allowing logging and good forest mgmt.

The notion that logging somehow suppresses wildfires is false. Notice that any study claiming this as truth, including those put out by the Department of Agriculture, are heavily funded by the timber industry. The majority of California wildfires in recent years have been ravaging low-lying chaparral and foothill regions, places the timber industry has no desire to log. But even for fires that do occur in the coniferous zones, logging doesn't ameliorate the effects of wildfires. Logging companies are only interested in taking old growth, and they only take trunks, leaving all the easily-burning branches and duff on the forest floor. Naturally old growth trees are old-growth for a reason; they're hearty trees that have shown the ability to fend off fire over the years.

The other issue with logging is that it completely alters the ecology of a forest. Less old growth trees hinder a forest's ability to retain moisture and block wind, two factors that help suppress fire. Removal of these trees also significantly reduces a forest's carbon sink, which in the long run contributes to the warming conditions that have led to more significant wildfires in the past half-century. Naturally removing old growth also leaves a forest more susceptible to mud slides, already an increased concern in fire devastated areas, as even dead trees still maintain the ability to hold soil.

And all of these things are just repercussions of what the timber industry and Forest Service have charmingly labeled "thinning", a somewhat ludicrous on the surface notion that loggers would only selectively take a couple of trees here, and a couple of trees there. In reality loggers are only interested in clear-cutting, as it's the only economically viable way to extract timber, and that opens up a whole other bevy of ecological disasters.

I guess at the end of the day what you really have to ask yourself is when has man ever intervened with nature where it had a positive impact on the environment?

I didn't say clear cut.. Selective logging. Loggers are pretty good at clearing underbrush as well. And they put in skid roads that allow firefighters access to potential fires.

creekfeet wrote: ↑Sat Sep 12, 2020 1:15 pmIn reality loggers are only interested in clear-cutting, as it's the only economically viable way to extract timber, and that opens up a whole other bevy of ecological disasters.

I grew up hunting on land owned by Weyerhaeuser in eastern North Carolina. Maybe it's different out here, but they'd rarely clear cut land. Typically they would cut "thinning streaks" through the trees, replanting saplings in the streaks after harvest. It took about 10-15 years for the timber to mature, and then they'd repeat the process.

The idea that timber industries are only interested in clear cutting lumber is wrong. I don't think I've voted for a Republican for national office ever, but your wholly wrong argument makes it so easy for environmental activists to be easily dismissed.

I doubt that logging would really help the fire situation much. Old trees are fire resistant. But I'm not a forestry expert, and if an expert proposed the idea I'd be open to it. I wouldn't mind if someone wanted to put thinning streaks through the trees in the land that I currently sleep on the night before I drive into a scenic area. It's not like Harden Flat road is some pristine scenery or anything.

Tioga Road in Yosemite is now closed due to the Blue Jay Fire....one pilot car in each direction at 8pm to get vehicles out tonight.

And all national forests are closed in the West: campgrounds, trails, hunting, and all other uses. ..