Sizwill? Sizwheel? Whizzy? WTH (What the Heck)

[CurSedVoyce]

Cutting all of anything is no bueno, but leaving all of everything or any one thing is not always a good plan.
There is a balance.
Looking at what goes on in the rainforests in the tropics is an out rage. Looking at logging ops in the Northern hemisphere, much less so.

 

[cory]

You stagger in different generations of trees along with saving old growth...

Totally agree with that entire statement, but is that being practiced anywhere in the US where there is old growth? To take old growth you have to clear cut, no? And taking old growth on steep ground as in that IG post is particularly problematic due to erosion and reforestation difficuly

 

[Gypo]

BLM and Forest Service have 1000's of acres of old growth here that won't ever be cut. I do think some of it should be saved. Most of it is over-ripe, rotten, and falling down or burning up. I wouldn't want to cut it if we could.

On the other hand...

It's a publicly owned resource that has been wasted, in my opinion. Being a conservationist where I grew up meant not wasting resources. Those trees, and the land that they grow on, have been taken out of production forever, or so it appears. This land could have been used to create jobs and tax revenue for the good of the people.

I'm all for saving some big timber, don't get me wrong, but in what quantity? And for what gain? Most of the timber i speak of is in places people will rarely if ever go to see it. They will only be able to get there because a road system was built for logging to get there.

As I understand it, young trees sequester more carbon and use more CO2 than old trees.

Just my .02 take it or leave it.

Merry Christmas.

 

[cory]

Nice to read ya @Gypo, and thanks for your perspective. Send some pics of what your up to in the woods!

As I understand it, young trees sequester more carbon and use more CO2 than old trees.

Regarding that question, goog says old trees store far more carbon than young trees and uptake more of it too compared to young trees. However a given size of young-tree forest will suck up more than the same size old growth forest due to forest density.

Google Search

"I'm all for saving some big timber, don't get me wrong, but in what quantity? And for what gain?"

THAT is the big question!

 

[cory]

And also, imo, taking old growth on steep ground is no bueno

 

[Gypo]

Thanks for the feedback.

Only old growth I've ever cut has been on private ground, or in a burn on government ground widening right of ways for safety. In both cases it has been relatively rare. The 3120 gets run every 2 to 5 years typically.

Again, there are thousands of acres of old growth here on the government, it is not being cut generally.

You state erosion and reforestation issues above as reasons to oppose old growth harvest on steep ground, or this is how I read it at least.

How would this differ from clearcutting second growth?

Thanks for your time.