2 WHOPPERS at SUGARLOAF

[Larry Caldwell]

In article <Pine.ULT.3.91.960608195900.19503K-100000 at freenet.vcu.edu>,
David Beorn <dbeorn at freenet.vcu.edu> wrote:
> On 31 May 1996, Mckeantree wrote:

> > 2 WHOPPERS from SUGARLOAF/ RIDER
 
> > WHOPPER #1 

> > Boise Cascade and the Forest Service  told the public that only a few old
> > growth trees would be logged from Sugarloaf.
 
> > TRUTH:  the Public Forestry Foundation counted 1000 trees over four feet
> > in diameter marked for cutting.

The Sugarloaf sale was not a salvage rider sale, it was a legal timber 
sale of the new federal forest management plan.  It was a closely
controlled selective harvest of mature trees, while avoiding damage
to the forest floor.  All trees were removed by helicopter, and falling
was carefully planned.  It was a textbook case of careful harvesting.
Younger trees were left in an undamaged state to maintain the forest
ecology and mature for the future.  The Forest Service has been running
tours of the area for anyone interested in seeing the results.  In 10
years the ecology of Sugarloaf should be completely recovered.

The sale was always planned as the removal of mature trees.
 
> > WHOPPER #2: Logging Sugarloaf would improve the health of the forest by
> > removing the white fir understory.
 
> > TRUTH:  They took only the big trees and left the white fir.

The younger trees left were up to 50 years old.  It won't take long for
them to mature.  This was the announced purpose of the selective harvest.
Nobody was ever deceived.

> > IF this disgusts you as much as it does me, DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.  Tell
> > Clinton to use his executive power to stop the  rider  sales. He needs the
 
> What's wrong with it??  Did they damage the forest??  They probably took 
> trees that would be profitable.  Did they put it in writing they would do 
> these things or what??  Maybe someone who said it didn't know what they 
> were talking about.  Maybe they made a mistake???

The Sugarloaf operation went perfectly.  The Forest Service and Boise C.
did a beautiful job of managing the harvest.  Not far away, the China Left
sale was a clear cut, and for some reason didn't draw anywhere near as
much protest.

There's no doubt that the salvage rider was a typical federal law, too
late, too expensive, and not related to reality.  Most of the logs in
the salvage rider have been dead for over 5 years, and are already
infected with dry rot and other fungi.  Several salvage sales had no
bidders at all, and the Forest Service had to kick some green trees
into the pot to even make it worth moving equipment in.  

Congress also ignored any scientific input, so many sales were scheduled
in ecologically critical areas.  Most of the worst problems were worked
out in backroom deals between ecologists and timber interests.  
Representative Peter DeFazio was a key player in brokering most of the
swaps and mitigating the problems of congressional ignorance.  Most of
the swaps were probably not strictly legal, but nobody challenged them
in court because everybody considered the alternatives so much worse.

Congress recently appropriated $12.5 billion to pay for the next round 
of salvage "sales."  Only the federal government could take a natural 
resource as vast as the national forest and BLM lands and lose money on 
it.  The level of mismanagement is staggering.

The series of wind storms and floods in the PNW last winter left millions
of board feet of timber blowdown in national forests.  None of it can be
salvaged because it's not covered under current salvage laws.  By the
time congress hashes it out the wood will be rotten and worthless,
so there's not much hope that it will do anyone any good.
 
-- Larry