So, should we just let the burnt logs lay on the forest floor and allow wood worms and boring beetles to flourish while they destroy this valuable resource? I vote we send in careful crews of loggers to harvest the dead trees and make good use of them.

Did anyone hear the OPB spot by Lee Garnett today, where Mark Rey said that the environmental groups that were party to some suit refused to sign off on harvesting/restoring already roaded areas in order to guarantee the roadless areas wouldn't be cut? Anyone have the inside scoop on what he was referring to?

"worried that logging would adversely impact" What if it doesn't?
Then it would not be "damaging precedent" but a good thing.

The massive regrowth in southern and sw Oregon since the logging hey days when Coos Bay was the timber capital of the world is stunning when one takes a ride through it on the bypass logging road-detour off the road from Merlin to Gold Beach.

There is NO reasonble reason Oregon should not be logging some of it with the care of today's logging techniques.

Greetings Matthew,

Welcome to Red Oregon . . . or something. I'm guessing the reason it's roadless is it's remote, rugged, high relief, and has thin serpentine soils? No?

Any one else hear know a thing about logging on 35 degree slopes or serpentine soils? Know any of the science out there on forest recovery under these conditions? Species diversity changes? Comparing it to the low lands around coos bay is ridiculous.

Hey Paulie, Every study I've seen demonstrates that roads increase the likelihood of human caused fire. More roads mean more cars, more cars, more sparks, more people, more fireworks, campfires....well, you get the idea.

The theory that increased roading of forests makes it easier to stop fires is part of the same old smokey bear fetish that Americans have been pursuing for the last century.

I'm all for the "middle ground" approach you referenced. However, since we've already roaded 2/3rds of the national forests, and have a $600 MILLION backlog (in Oregon alone) of road maintenance, what do you say to drawing the line at building any more roads which we don't need and can't afford.

Ol' mama nature's been "managing" forests just fine for at least 10,000 years. Maybe we should just let her manage these last wild places and concentrate on fixing the ones we've been "managing".

Using Walter's "careful" management techniques, we could be going into some of the overgrown plantations and recovering clearcuts and removing smaller, second-growth trees. It would create jobs, possibly improve the environment and we wouldn't have to build more roads to do it.

Just a thought.

PS: RE Swail,

It's swale-not swail.

A low tract of land, especially when moist or marshy. A long, narrow, usually shallow trough between ridges on a beach, running parallel to the coastline. A shallow troughlike depression that carries water mainly during rainstorms or snow melts.

And from the Princess Bride: Inigo Montoya: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Perhaps you meant ridge:

A long narrow chain of hills or mountains. Also called ridgeline

How cow... good thing the logging nuts here were not in charge when Yellowstone burned.

You think we should keep roads out of Wildneress, but punch new ones into Roadless Areas? What do you think federal Wilderness was before Congress set it aside? So you think we should never set aside anyplace else in Oregon's forests from development, ever?

So you think we should never set aside anyplace else in Oregon's forests from development, ever?

How much more should we set aside? About 94% of Oregon is undeveloped at this point, so I really dont think this is a serious issue.

What's the point of outing a commenter? Not cool IMHO.

I don't see that it matters. Duke provided a good link and made the point that dense regrowth on private plantations and managed clearcuts is a much larger fire hazard than anything you will find in a roadless area. I'd add that the (lack of) proximity of roadless areas to homes makes them even less of a hazard to people. BTW, the Mikes Gulch sale area does contain some serpentine soils. These are hosts to many rare species and, if logged, will almost certainly never regrow saleable lumber in your grandchildren's life time.

Was the spelling correction out of bounds?

Are you saying the commenter, if affiliated with the AFL-CIO, is not speaking for the interests of union? Did Duke call you a ninkompoop on a previous thread?

My concern about this particular roadless area has to do with its species diversity. As a geographer, I've visited this area to conduct field studies of the native plants that are around in the Siskiyou/Kalmiopsis area. Those serpentive soils are the reason why Darlingtonia, a carnivorous pitcher-plant, thrives in the region in wetland areas. There are also many other species that exist only in this small mountain range, which has a very different geology from the rest of the state. What we know of its geomorphology indicates that it may have been a group of islands that, in ancient times, connected with the North American continent. Therefore, it has different soils and underlying strata than the more northern portions of the Coast Range or the Cascades. For this reason, it has some of the highest levels of biodiversity in the state.

I don't see any good reason to endanger this delicate ecosystem by running roughshod over it with logging, road-building and other heavy machinery. The natural process of decay is actually good for the forest. Those downed logs add habitat and contribute to healthy soil. When they fall in streams, they contribute to the health of the stream.

This is pure corrupt Bush-administration corporate profiteering. There are sustainable ways to provide jobs for rural Oregon families, and logging the Siskiyou-Kalmiopsis is not one of them.

About 94% of Oregon is undeveloped at this point, so I really dont think this is a serious issue.

Conservationists, I'd like to introduce you to brick wall. Brick wall, conservationists.

When an environmentalist says "sustainable jobs for rural Oregonians," s/he means "make my food, pump my gas, and clean my room when I come down from Portland."

Blizzak,

That's a really negative way to talk about those type of jobs. My mom was a waitress for 25 years and I've personally worked as a gas station attendant when I was younger. And my sister, who owns a bed in breakfast, -gasp - actually clean's people's rooms and makes them food for a living - how degrading is that?

Do you also put down the professionals who take visitors on rafting, hiking, and fishing trips? Or the people who work in specialty shops and art galleries that tend to spring up in places with a great natural environment, like the whole Oregon coast or in the Bend area.

Or what about sustainable forestry jobs that don't log in some of the last wild and public forests we have left?

Oh, I should add something:

Bend, for example, is near some of the largest tracts of designated Wilderness and roadless areas in the state. Bend is a thriving community that doesn't have to rely on destroying pristine natural areas to foster economic developement.

Environmental protection and economic development are not mutually exclusive. Starting in the late '60s and '70s America passed some of the most sweeping environmental reforms, like the Endangered Species Act, while also seeing tremoundous economic growth and prosperity.

In fact, Richard Nixon, a republican, signed a lot of that legislation into law. If only republicans were as 'moderate' as Nixon, ha.

This is about salvage logging, whether it's actually necessary, and, if so, how best to do it. It's also about what to do with 'salvaged' forestland after salvage is complete. Last month, the House passed HR 4200, the Forest Emergency Recovery and Research Act, sponsored by Congressman Walden and hailed on his web site as a “common-sense land management legislation to help restore forest health”. Those in opposition believe this legislation is flawed and ignores fundamental environmental concerns and those who support it think the enviros are only trying to make it more difficult to do business. The obvious polarization represented by these two POVs doesn't help. Before HR 4200 was passed, several attempts were made to add some environmental review to the process and were rejected by the majority party. The Senate will address this bill (unless preempted by more pressing business such as gay marriage, estate tax cuts for the unimaginably wealthy and those pesky flag burners ) at some point in the less than 40 days Congress will actually be in session before the November election. Under Secretary Rey, like many of the current administrations appointees, represents the forces of free market environmentalism. Free market environmentalism grew out of the Sagebrush Rebellion of the 70s then morphed into the Wise Use movement and consists largely of a network of corporations and conservative foundations and think tanks intent on gaining control of the public domain. Rey spent 18 years (1976-1994) in the employ of various “big timber” trade associations and organizations, including the National Forest Products Association, the American Paper Institute, and the American Forest Resources Alliance. He also served as vice president of forest resources for the American Forest & Paper Association, the country’s leading advocate for logging in our national forests. This is the same guy who said in 1997 that clear-cut logging, while "not aesthetically uplifting" is "compatible with rain forest ecology" and that the practice is "relatively comparable" to windstorms. He was the "key architect" of a 1997 version of the National Forest Management Act, which would have eliminated citizen oversight and made timber harvest levels mandatory and enforceable, while making environmental standards unenforceable "policies." He also once suggested getting the attention of the Forest Service by limiting the agency's budget to "custodial management."
Salvage logging, one of the most ecologically risky practices in modern forestry, employs an overriding short-term economic rational as an excuse to summarily ignore all current ecological knowledge about the long- term biological sustainability of forests. Building bridges between the two opposing points of view is long overdue.

Edison,

I appreciate your insight, but I think this issue is largely about roadless areas and not post-fire logging. While post-fire logging is an issue here, clearly the biggest issue is whether we should be logging backcountry roadless forests - areas that for the last 7 years have been off limits to development.

Governor Kulongoski and others have consistently made the argument that roadless areas provide more of a benefit standing then horizontal. In Oregon, towns like Salem, Ashland, Pendleton, Bend, Lake Oswego, Baker City, etc. all get drinking water from roadless forests. Sometimes the water is so clean and reliable it doesn't have to be subjected to expensive filtration treatment.

Additionally, several threatened endagered species like the bald eagle and such commercially viable animals such as salmon have critical habitat within roadless areas. Obvious reasons for protection.

And lastly, the Outdoor Industry Association, which represents more than 4,000 outdoor recreation and apparel businesses and, according to the Wall Street Journal, represents $33 billion in revenue a year, actively supports roadless forest protection because having pristine public lands is important for business and tourism.

Mr. Shepard, Please accept my apologies for any negative repurcussions resulting from labeling mixups. Until Kari referred me to the post today, I was unaware of the issue.

I hereby pledge to amend my moniker so that such confusion is minimized in the future.

Regrets, Stryker

You're right, John, and the relationship is that the eventual outcome impacts water quality and species health. I'm heartened that more than ever people of all political stripes are recognizing that we share the environment and the health of one of the species involved is human.

Perhaps Tre Arrow would allow himself to be extradicted from Canada to Oregon if his punishment was community service as a fire prevention advisor for the US Forest Service.

I'd love to see rural families employed in environment-enhancing activities. With global warming becoming such a large issue, I'd like to see more funding available for planting trees, restoring habitat in degraded areas, selective harvesting of some species in second-growth forests while maintaining the overall forest ecosystem by declaring an end to clearcutting. I know a guy who does wonders making hardwood floors out of madrone, which is traditionally considered a waste wood by the timber industry.

You know what would do more to save Oregon timber industry jobs than destroying the remains the Biscuit burn and other "salvage logging" forays into roadless areas?

Enacting a rule that no unmilled log could leave the state. That is, value must be added to the natural resources of the forest before they could be exported. No more ships full of logs going to Asia; no more logging trucks crossing state lines. Keep those jobs in the local economy. It's not rocket science. And roadless areas can be preserved without destroying the timber economy, if simple, common-sense measures like these are followed.

"Salvage Logging"

What is the rationale for doing this? Don't we already have enough trees to provide for our needs? Why cut new roads into roadless areas?

If the Forest Service wants to allow for logging, they should charge an amount to make $$$$$ for the taxpayers. God only knows how much we need the money to pay for the federal deficit.

B posted, "Any one else hear know a thing about logging on 35 degree slopes or serpentine soils? Comparing it to the low lands around coos bay is ridiculous"

That was classic. If you're so smart why can't you read?

I was talking about a huge area in SW Oregon that has regrown since the hey day when Coos Bay was the timber capital of the world. If one drives the logging road I mentioned off the Merlin to Gold Beach you'll be driving along crest for miles with views of big timber regrowth as far as the eyes can see. On all types of slopes.

<h2>There is no reason a sustainable level of logging should not be allowed.</h2>