Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Oregon
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-15-2016, 09:45 PM
 
Location: Myrtle Creek, Oregon
15,293 posts, read 17,624,485 times
Reputation: 25231

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloudy Dayz View Post
5 million down from 15 million in 1932, and if people like you had your way we wouldn't even have that. You want to revive the logging industry and cut down what is left. In the interest of forest fire prevention of course. If we don't have any forest, we won't have any forest fires. Like throwing the baby out with the dirty bath water.
You are the one who demonizes the whole lumber industry by claiming they want to cut old growth. In fact, all the mills have converted to small logs and engineered timbers. They couldn't mill a big log if they had one. Can you explain what you have against logging overstocked second, third and fourth growth? Do you think the land owner (you) is so negligent that you will allow loggers to do anything they want with no consequences?

Please explain. I'm waiting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-15-2016, 09:58 PM
 
Location: Myrtle Creek, Oregon
15,293 posts, read 17,624,485 times
Reputation: 25231
Quote:
Originally Posted by annoyingcherry View Post
I have not worked in this industry, but something about this does not seem right. Loggers are desperate to clear worthless old growth so they can plant a crop that won't be ready for 30 years?

Also, I've heard woodworkers say old growth wood is superior to plantation grown, more durable (they are actually looking for old growth logs at the bottom of lakes that were cut decades ago).
You are right. Unlike Cloudy Dayz' nightmares, nobody is interested in clearing worthless old growth. They are only interested in rot and disease-free third and fourth growth. Replanting is a trivial expense. Oregon started mandating replanting on all state and private logging projects in the early '60s, over 50 years ago. The feds finally got on board in the early '80s, though the mandate to manage O&C lands for timber production meant the BLM was replanting in the '70s. Boise Cascade pioneered reforestation plantings in 1919, so it has been going on for a long time.

Federal forest management is so horrible that when their forests burn they just shrug and walk away. It wasn't a logging project, so they see no reason to replant. Most of the Siskiyou National Forest burned in the Biscuit Fire, and the climate has changed since those trees sprouted. Without help the Siskiyou will never recover, but the feds don't care. They dance to the tune of The Wilderness Society (headquartered in Washington DC) and The Sierra Club (headquartered in Oakland, CA) that block any attempt to do anything that is not "natural," and their definition of "natural" is "nothing." It's horrible mismanagement by an absentee landlord.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2016, 10:06 PM
 
Location: Myrtle Creek, Oregon
15,293 posts, read 17,624,485 times
Reputation: 25231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yankeemama View Post
Oh, Larry. I couldn't possibly be insulted by you as I have always known your posts are judgemental but it's hilarious how you are blaming urban dwellers for every problem in rural Oregon. Isn't that the topic of this thread?
Obviously not every problem, but urban restrictions have removed about $600 million from the rural Oregon economy. Notice that I'm not talking about the years of the Reagan overcut. Harvests at that level are not sustainable, though they would pump $1 billion a year into the rural economy. $600 million a year should be sustainable forever, with some fluctuations in the construction industry. Currently the lumber industry only contributes about $200 million a year to the state economy, and the loss of 3/4 of the cash flow has caused terrible economic damage to most of the state.

https://oregoneconomicanalysis.com/2...duct-industry/
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2016, 10:46 PM
 
Location: Whidbey paradise
859 posts, read 1,056,425 times
Reputation: 879
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Caldwell View Post
Obviously not every problem, but urban restrictions have removed about $600 million from the rural Oregon economy. Notice that I'm not talking about the years of the Reagan overcut. Harvests at that level are not sustainable, though they would pump $1 billion a year into the rural economy. $600 million a year should be sustainable forever, with some fluctuations in the construction industry. Currently the lumber industry only contributes about $200 million a year to the state economy, and the loss of 3/4 of the cash flow has caused terrible economic damage to most of the state.

https://oregoneconomicanalysis.com/2...duct-industry/
Pretty much.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2016, 08:48 AM
 
Location: Oregon Coast
15,311 posts, read 8,926,726 times
Reputation: 20343
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Caldwell View Post
You are the one who demonizes the whole lumber industry by claiming they want to cut old growth. In fact, all the mills have converted to small logs and engineered timbers. They couldn't mill a big log if they had one. Can you explain what you have against logging overstocked second, third and fourth growth? Do you think the land owner (you) is so negligent that you will allow loggers to do anything they want with no consequences?

Please explain. I'm waiting.
Yes I think that. You clearly have an agenda. You talk about educating people, but you don't even read the articles that you post yourself. Is it really that hard for you to understand that you can't keep on clear cutting forests, that took hundreds and even thousands of years to grow? You can't have your cake and eat it too, you can't cut down your forests, and have them to. The pictures speak for themselves. The old growth has all been cut down. There is no more logging in Oregon, because virtually all the trees have been cut down. Now all they can do is wait for the trees to get big enough, so they can cut them down again.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2016, 11:01 AM
 
Location: Portland OR
2,653 posts, read 3,838,833 times
Reputation: 4853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloudy Dayz View Post
Yes I think that. You clearly have an agenda. You talk about educating people, but you don't even read the articles that you post yourself. Is it really that hard for you to understand that you can't keep on clear cutting forests, that took hundreds and even thousands of years to grow? You can't have your cake and eat it too, you can't cut down your forests, and have them to. The pictures speak for themselves. The old growth has all been cut down. There is no more logging in Oregon, because virtually all the trees have been cut down. Now all they can do is wait for the trees to get big enough, so they can cut them down again.

That picture looks great. In a few years, that place will be filled with wildlife and a vibrant ecology.

Very little wildlife in a mature forest.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2016, 03:44 PM
 
Location: Myrtle Creek, Oregon
15,293 posts, read 17,624,485 times
Reputation: 25231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloudy Dayz View Post
Yes I think that. You clearly have an agenda. You talk about educating people, but you don't even read the articles that you post yourself. Is it really that hard for you to understand that you can't keep on clear cutting forests, that took hundreds and even thousands of years to grow? You can't have your cake and eat it too, you can't cut down your forests, and have them to. The pictures speak for themselves. The old growth has all been cut down. There is no more logging in Oregon, because virtually all the trees have been cut down. Now all they can do is wait for the trees to get big enough, so they can cut them down again.
You don't know what that's a picture of, do you? If you had read the article, you would have discovered that the reduction in forested area in Oregon is due to road construction, agricultural expansion and urbanization. You can try to demonize the lumber industry all you want, but it's total BS. If you think all the trees have been cut down, you need to get outside the city limits once in a while. You have been lied to.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2016, 06:51 PM
 
Location: Oregon Coast
15,311 posts, read 8,926,726 times
Reputation: 20343
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccjarider View Post
That picture looks great. In a few years, that place will be filled with wildlife and a vibrant ecology.

Very little wildlife in a mature forest.
That is you self centered reality only. No independent expert will back up your contention that this is a good thing. Some of the effects of that type of environmental destruction.

First effect of this type of clear cutting will be warmer water in the rivers and creeks. A change in water temperature, kills many species of fish that need a certain temperature consistency.

Second effect. Trees trap and retain water. Once the trees are gone all the water runs over the surface of the ground, rather then being filtered into the aquifer. As the water runs down hill it carries the precious topsoil with it, into the river, turning the water brown and muddy. Then all the useful nutrients get washed out to sea. The excessive nutrients in the marine environment is harmful to marine organisms, and cause further population damage which extends for miles offshore.

Third effect. It destroys the habitat for a wide variety of animals, including many endangered species. Birds, reptiles, and mammals all face habitat destruction due to clear cutting. The animals have difficulty seeking out new habitats because the surrounding areas have also been clearcut. Many are simply incapable of adapting and quickly die off. The effects extend into the surrounding ecosystem as well, by removing a link in the local food chain.

Fourth effect. This type if irresponsible clear cutting increases the chance of natural disasters such as landslides and flooding.

Fifth effect of this environmental destruction, is a rise in air temperature. I'm sure you think it is just a coincidence, that just as the timber industry was cutting down the last old growth, the snowpack in Oregon, suddenly became almost non existent.

This is not land management. This is a man made disaster, far worse then any naturally disaster, including forest fires.

Last edited by Cloudy Dayz; 11-16-2016 at 07:00 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2016, 06:56 PM
 
Location: Oregon Coast
15,311 posts, read 8,926,726 times
Reputation: 20343
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Caldwell View Post
You don't know what that's a picture of, do you?
A five year old could look at that satellite image and see that it is a picture of a clear cut forest. Doh.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2016, 10:04 PM
 
Location: Myrtle Creek, Oregon
15,293 posts, read 17,624,485 times
Reputation: 25231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloudy Dayz View Post
A five year old could look at that satellite image and see that it is a picture of a clear cut forest. Doh.
An adult would look at that picture and see a recently harvested tree farm using a series of small 10 or 20 acre clear cuts, with perhaps at total are of 600 acres, out of millions of acres. The parts by the highway and river are just browned out summer pasture. You really don't know what you are looking at.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Oregon
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:37 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top