quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:

quote:

Originally posted by madbaum:

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:
Most of the large fires in the west occur on Federal Land, the state has no say in how it is managed.

Look up the Florida Fires of 1998.

When did Florida become western? I lived there for a while and distinctly recall it being on the eastern seaboard.

We have vast tracts out Federal land out west, very different from the east cost.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:
As you can see, all 20 of Colorado's largest wildfires have occurred since the year 2000, don't tell me things have not changed.

https://dfpc.colorado.gov/sect...wildfire-information

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:
As you can see, all 20 of Colorado's largest wildfires have occurred since the year 2000, don't tell me things have not changed.

https://dfpc.colorado.gov/sect...wildfire-information

Think it has,much to do with all those pine beetle killed trees the feds left standing????

I so.

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:
As you can see, all 20 of Colorado's largest wildfires have occurred since the year 2000, don't tell me things have not changed.

https://dfpc.colorado.gov/sect...wildfire-information

Think it has,much to do with all those pine beetle killed trees the feds left standing????

I so.

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:
As you can see, all 20 of Colorado's largest wildfires have occurred since the year 2000, don't tell me things have not changed.

https://dfpc.colorado.gov/sect...wildfire-information

Think it has,much to do with all those pine beetle killed trees the feds left standing????

I so.

The pine beetles that extended their range following the warmer weather?

Those pine beetles?

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:
Some interesting historical pictures of the area that I live in. You can see the same areas today with Onx or Google earth. Today we have way, way more trees on the mountain.

https://westernmininghistory.c...84/historical/towns/

When I was young…I knew people alive in 1883. Very short time frame when speaking about habitats like the Rocky Mountains.

But I am all for going back to BLM philosophy of the 50s-60s.

The mistakes were being implemented in full force in the 50's and 60's.

What period of time do consider well managed and what were the practices differences?

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:
Lane,
There is no question that the 100% suppression policy was a mistake. How can your question possibly be answered?

If it can’t be answered…it means we don’t know the answer.

We have a very short history in the west.

Exactly! Thus saying the fires of recent are the worst is a misleading.

The policies established when we settled the area proven to be flawed.

The forest needs to be thinned, the Feds need to allocate the money to do it.

Why not sell the timber to private logging companies?

I think the natives did a fine job managing the forest.

How so?

Times have changed, we now have houses, businesses and a whole bunch more trees than we had back then.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:
This has nothing to do with timber harvest. Many of the areas that have excess fuel on the ground cannot be logged in a profitable manner, certainly not where I live.

Why?

No, not misleading at all. We have a history here, just not a very long one. The recent fires have been HUGE. There is no reason to try to minimalize them.

Fire was used by the natives as a management tool, they would burn areas and then years later hunt the grasses that grew back before the trees became re-established. Controlled burns are much trickier today, the area is settled unlike when the natives were here.

The forests need to be thinned,

How?

the Feds need to fund it.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:
Because of how steep and treacherous the terrain is combined with the low value of the densely dispersed second growth lodge pole pine. A small area East of me was cut for fire mitigation about 15 years ago, they used helicopters to bring in equipment and remove the timber, which likely was chipped because it is not good for much else.

Controlled burns are not feasible in many areas, trees will likely need to be cut. I am not against logging for profit where it works, we should log wherever it is needed and possible to do so. Other areas simply need a very costly thinning, not as costly as fighting these fires every year is my opinion.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:
Because of how steep and treacherous the terrain is combined with the low value of the densely dispersed second growth lodge pole pine. A small area East of me was cut for fire mitigation about 15 years ago, they used helicopters to bring in equipment and remove the timber, which likely was chipped because it is not good for much else.

Controlled burns are not feasible in many areas, trees will likely need to be cut. I am not against logging for profit where it works, we should log wherever it is needed and possible to do so. Other areas simply need a very costly thinning, not as costly as fighting these fires every year is my opinion.

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:
Hard to believe we have all these expert fiscal conservatives/ forestry management specialists and not one has mentioned how we are going to spend more to build the roads for the loggers to use than we'll be paid for the timber while cutting the taxes that pay for the road building.

Why does "profitable" only matter as regards the (largely) Republican-owned timber companies? Shouldn't the American People, who OWN the National Forests, be able to expect a reasonable return for THEIR timber instead of losing money on every tree they give the loggers?

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:
Hard to believe we have all these expert fiscal conservatives/ forestry management specialists and not one has mentioned how we are going to spend more to build the roads for the loggers to use than we'll be paid for the timber while cutting the taxes that pay for the road building.

Why does "profitable" only matter as regards the (largely) Republican-owned timber companies? Shouldn't the American People, who OWN the National Forests, be able to expect a reasonable return for THEIR timber instead of losing money on every tree they give the loggers?

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:
Hard to believe we have all these expert fiscal conservatives/ forestry management specialists and not one has mentioned how we are going to spend more to build the roads for the loggers to use than we'll be paid for the timber while cutting the taxes that pay for the road building.

Why does "profitable" only matter as regards the (largely) Republican-owned timber companies? Shouldn't the American People, who OWN the National Forests, be able to expect a reasonable return for THEIR timber instead of losing money on every tree they give the loggers?

I mentioned previously the cost of fire suppression, I don't remember the number but it's easy to find.

My contention is that it's more expensive to fight fires and rebuild after fires than it is to prevent.

Even if it isn't less expensive to prevent, doesn't it make sense? You drive past an entire mountain covered in tinder dry fuel don't you say to yourself it's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when? I see no wisdom in letting property be destroyed, lives lost and wildlife habitat erased when mitigation can be obviously done.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
hey, if the gov't will pay, i can buy a couple dozen hydroaxes and skidsteers -- i charge by the hour, per machine, per operator, with support costs

quote:

Originally posted by Huvius:
That is partially correct but there was a lot of easily accessible beetle kill that was not permitted for private harvest. The heart wood in beetle kill is just fine and even the bored wood is desirable for some interior designers - don’t know why really.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
Steve,
I pay. But I don't have a big enough piece to make it pay for itself for resource recovery