Seattle homeowners fined for cutting down public trees (home, live)

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by homelessinseattle

I guess you don't know much about clear cutting or why its done in Washington.

The forestry school at the UW used to teach that clear-cutting was an absolute no-no. You were supposed to either cut every other row, or cut in a checkerboard pattern, to support easy regeneration of the forest. Nowadays, they teach clear-cutting, and convince students that the huge clear patches will regenerate anyway, from the trees around the edges. Weyerhauser started making big donations to the school, just before that change in the curriculum.

[homelessinseattle]

From my former local sources, lands donated to the state can be used for logging. The proceeds are donated to fund state education in the jurisdictions they are logged. Just like the lottery and now your property taxes it is never enough.
Its a perpetual machine that will never be satisfied.
Good luck Washington tax payers.
Again, thanks for funding my retirement.

[Diana Holbrook]

Originally Posted by homelessinseattle

I guess you don't know much about clear cutting or why its done in Washington.

Trees are a crop in Washington, a renewable resource. All things considered, land being in timber production, that is harvested and replanted every 40-60 years is arguably better for the environment than practically every other land use I can think of.


If the "trees" that have been cut in the picture at the link are representative, they appear to be the regrowth of previously cut maples. Guess what... they will grow back again! Out of the same stumps. It looks ugly for the short term, and I agree they had no right to do it... but let's have some perspective, this does NOT look like the equivalent of people taking down either old growth or even valuable trees. These are tree-weeds.

IF they are truly concerned about landslide, big trees at the top of a hill DO NOT HOLD THE HILL. They are the weight that brings the hill down. Smaller, lower ground covers would be more effective for erosion control on a steep bank.

[tommy64]

Originally Posted by homelessinseattle

Again, thanks for funding my retirement.

......huh?

[Diana Holbrook]

Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth

The forestry school at the UW used to teach that clear-cutting was an absolute no-no. You were supposed to either cut every other row, or cut in a checkerboard pattern, to support easy regeneration of the forest. Nowadays, they teach clear-cutting, and convince students that the huge clear patches will regenerate anyway, from the trees around the edges. Weyerhauser started making big donations to the school, just before that change in the curriculum.

No modern forester leaves cut forest to regenerate on it's own. Clearcut areas are replanted, generally within the following year. And for the time that the trees are young until they grow up far overhead, the clear cut areas actually provide the diversity of landscape that grows berries, alder, shrubs and other forage that many animals depend on. There is good shelter in the deep dark woods, but there is little food there, in old growth forest.

Logging a patchwork of areas, and then replanting, improves the land, as habitat, for the long term... Shelter with nearby food sources only the open areas provide... Is a good thing... It really is.

[dozerbear]

Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth

The forestry school at the UW used to teach that clear-cutting was an absolute no-no. You were supposed to either cut every other row, or cut in a checkerboard pattern, to support easy regeneration of the forest. Nowadays, they teach clear-cutting, and convince students that the huge clear patches will regenerate anyway, from the trees around the edges. Weyerhauser started making big donations to the school, just before that change in the curriculum.

Nobody leaves a logged area to regenerate on its own, the law requires replanting within three years of harvest. Alaska, California, Idaho, and Oregon all have similar laws. Most timber companies have been replanting on their own since the 1930s, Weyerhaeuser started its first seedling nursery in Snoqualmie in 1938.

[mhays25]

Responsible forestry is kind of like "clean coal." A lot of it is fakery. There's no clean coal.

I work for a construction company and get why we need wood (some at least...nowhere near as much). It doesn't require monoculture planting or mass clearcutting.

[eightbitguy]

Originally Posted by homelessinseattle

I guess you don't know much about clear cutting or why its done in Washington.

Yes, but this chunk of land is made more dangerous by the lack of trees, as they're there to prevent a mudslide. That's not the same as clearcutting in a place where its safe to do that.

[Diana Holbrook]

Mature trees at the top of a hillside do not prevent mudslides! They are more likely to be the weight that pulls the hill down when the ground becomes saturated.

Shrubs and low groundcovers might prevent mudslides.

http://www.whereiamnow.net/2010/02/t...mudslides.html

[grega94]

Originally Posted by mhays25

Responsible forestry is kind of like "clean coal." A lot of it is fakery. There's no clean coal.

I work for a construction company and get why we need wood (some at least...nowhere near as much). It doesn't require monoculture planting or mass clearcutting.

so what building material is more sustainable, cost effective and ecologically clean than wood? Concrete is notoriously known to be environmentally harmful. I guess you can use bamboo or hemp, but what's the difference between a monoculture hemp/bamboo field and a monoculture tree field? I agree that more forest land needs to be protected, but there is no avoiding the lumber industry, particularly for construction. I think that hemp has the potential to replace lumber for paper production, but that's about it.