Old Growth

Don Baccus donb at rational.com
Mon Dec 2 13:15:19 EST 1996

In article <e16ny0O5IMrT091yn at teleport.com>,
Larry Caldwell <larryc at teleport.com> wrote:
>In article <57coo7$8ug at rational.rational.com>,
>donb at rational.com (Don Baccus) wrote:
>> In OR/WA, the distinction is kinda moot, since management practices
>> in these western forests has almost exclusively based on clearcutting,
>> and no old-growth has been regenerated.  

>Recently, you are correct.

Of course I'm correct.

>Clearcutting was not so popular 50 years ago.

But many of the forest lands (state, federal) that escaped clearcutting
before have since been clearcut, making previous management techniques
applied to those lands moot.

>However, with 
>selective logging practices, mature forest characteristics regenerate
>very rapidly. 

Well, I'd say "relatively rapidly" - a couple of decades in the Coast
Range, rather than the many decades required for regeneration from

In the higher elevation Cascade forests, "rapidly" doesn't really apply,
unless you consider a few decades "rapid".  Or unless you consider the
removal of very few logs to be a commercially viable select cut.  

- Don Baccus, Portland OR <donb at rational.com>
  Nature photos, site guides, and other goodies at:

More information about the Ag-forst mailing list