Is selective felling possible in BC's coastal forests?
kats at prcn.org
Wed Feb 11 05:15:29 EST 1998
Larry Stamm wrote in message <34deaf42.22398689 at news.cancom.net>...
On Thu, 5 Feb 1998 09:49:26 +0000, theo hopkins
<thopkins at thopkins.demon.co.uk>
>I saw a figure in a US forestry magazine that MacBlo used 35 litres of
>fuel/cubic meter of wood carried to roadside with helicopter and 7
>litres/cu meter using conventional methods. In most countries, there is
>no tax on aviation fuel: if this is so in Canada, then that is part of
>(And the environment gives a subsidy as there are global warming
>Technical question again: is there a problem if selective logging by
>helicopter with trees to be lifted getting trapped by trees to rmain?
Helicopters are being increasingly used locally in central BC for single
selection or group selection salvage logging of bug killed timber. There
been as many as three different helicopter shows in operation at the same
in our local forest district. Since the stumpage on this wood is only
$0.25/metre and most of it is prime spruce and pine, the high cost of
time is acceptable. Helicopters are also being used on green timber where
costs would be excessive. Cost is not the only factor: by logging areas
would otherwise not be operable, the timber in that area is included in
calculating the Annual Allowable Cut. If that timber were not being logged,
AAC would be lowered further and the timber supply squeeze in BC would get
There is also a local contractor utilizing a skyline system with a 4 km
for selective cuts, but this is still experimental and he has gotten some
from FRBC to help get it off the ground.
There are several small cable yarders that have done shelterbelt and group
retention cuts, that worked very well. Since set-up times for these yarders
usually under an hour, settings can be very small in area (about 2
and the crew can work two or even three settings in a day.
Probably none of these methods would be in use today if environmental groups
hadn't been so vocal in opposition to the status quo methods.
larryst at vis.bc.ca
A good part of the heli - logging done on the coast is done that way due to
access - road building is just not an option in some places, and heli
logging is more cost effective in the long run. Road building and eventual
deactivation (temporary and permanent) is expensive. Many of the sites here
are too sensitive to build road into, and the sites are much more stable in
the long run with heli logging (less slides, etc.). Watersheds are a big
issue these days so preventive measures are seen as progressive (not to
mention the 'glam' of flying logs by chopper!!)
Visual impact is also much lower without the hideous sidecast usually found
on the steeper openings with roads built into them.
Unfortunately, one of the envirogroups (might be greenpeace) just invested
in a helicopter themselves - wonder how they are at toeing in on stumps? *G*
More information about the Ag-forst