USFS Salvage Sales

Don Staples dstaples at livingston.net
Tue Jun 9 11:10:45 EST 1998


Mike Hagen wrote:
> 
> I don't know about any 100 million feet per year being stolen but I
> can agree that every clause in that contract is there because of a
> purchasers scam, shortcut or theft at sometime in the past. Just
> because you've written the clause into the contract doesn't mean
> you'll have to use it. But you might. The compliance segment of the FS
> has an institutional memory second only to that of the vatican.  And
> the contract seems reasonable for a salvage done for silvicultural
> reasons, without knowing anything about the terrain or quality of
> timber offered.
> 
> What often makes completing an USFS sale difficult are the additional
> imposition of shutdowns. Wet conditions were mentioned. How about
> "hoot owls" and suchlike fire closures? Eagle nesting closures? Got
> those in Texas? They are a grudgingly accepted cost of doing business
> in the NW.
> 
Environmentally we are pretty secure in the owl and eagle category.  The
day after the storm the USFS had the bird house crew out to assist the
RCW's that were displaced by the storm.  Eagles were not in the area. 
While, yes, they are grudgingly accepted, the point on this sale was
salvage of a downed 110,000 acres, a loss that will be felt for years to
come in the local economy.  Additional restrictions were place on type
of equipment to be used, and indeed we had some PNW heli crews come in
for some of the salvage.

With a 90 day or so window of viable product, any restrictions in an
"emergency" salvage costs the local economy.  The terrain is mostly
flat, some slopes in the creek areas, the timber was everything from
broken tops to blow overs with roots still in the ground.  Videos of the
tracts show 100's of acres in a swath with every thing laying over.  At
present the loggers are taking only the butt cuts on the blow overs that
have had roots in the ground, with secondary effort for the pulp wood in
the remainder of the stems.

While not all the timber was damaged, harvest in some areas was little
more than a clear cut.  Other areas have silvicultural "thinnings"
caused by damage.  These areas would need full protection.  In nearly
all contracts there were clauses to leave snags for environmental
reasons.

I some point, I suppose, we will see a report on the actual amount
harvested.  Should be interesting.
-- 
Don Staples
UIN 4653335

My Ego Stroke:  http://www.livingston.net/dstaples/



More information about the Ag-forst mailing list