A lot of lovely words, Mark. But if you really think about it, without a coherent, consistent set of criteria, your argument could be used to rationalize just about anything as long as you can call whatever it is you do "better stewardship".

Lets say you wanted to protect the forest from future fires. A way that would benefit lots of people. You cut fire trails that are wide enough that a tall tree could not fall and make it to the other side every several miles. People could enjoy riding ATV's or even take their 4x4 trucks back in there for hunting. companies could bid on the lumber that would be taken from cutting the trail. It combines, protection to the environment, fun for the people, and revenue for the government selling the wood.

Eric: Lets say you wanted to protect the forest from future fires. A way that would benefit lots of people. You cut fire trails that are wide enough that a tall tree could not fall and make it to the other side every several miles. People could enjoy riding ATV's or even take their 4x4 trucks back in there for hunting. companies could bid on the lumber that would be taken from cutting the trail. It combines, protection to the environment, fun for the people, and revenue for the government selling the wood.

It's an interesting thought, and might have some merit in some areas, probably not others -- especially the ATV part. A lot of the chapparal areas here in CA, NV, AZ, NM, and elsewhere, are too sensitive to allow willy-nilly off-road traffic. That's the bad news. The good news is, it's not hard to find designated off-road areas where you can have a blast. The other thing is that it's not falling trees that provide much threat. Thinning the tree population can slow the progression of a fire when there's no wind. But in high winds, live embers can fly literally for miles. For example, a lot of the fires around here jumped 8 lane freeways within moments. There isn't much defense against them -- except building flame-resistant structures.

Mark,

Well done!!:)

In forest management--you have three main growth phases--old growth, second growth, and new growth.
These are all essential to proper eco/habitat balance.

Old growth--for those bird species you've mentioned, and also for a variety of others, such as the many species of woodpeckers--your older growth timber provides the necessary space diameter wise for woodpeckers to chip out a home to raise their young...when they are finished raising their young, you have a vacancy for any critter of the mammalion specises that might be looking for a home, such as squirrels, squirrels use old woodpecker holes as mating dens, and to raise sever litters of little squirrels, they also store small amounts of nuts in them for possible future bad spells, really cold spells in winter, when they can't get to nuts in the ground, or mast, as we call it.

Raccoons use them for the same purposes.
These old growth trees provide homes for creatures for many, many years at a time.

Second growth timber--second growth timber is a by-product of trees that have been selected in a particular tract which are used for lumber purposes. Second growth trees are a crucial and vital asset in the aid of Migrating songbirds, such as bluebirds, vireos, warblers, and so on.

It is in second growth timber which we find the most tinder for forest fires to ignite and spread, they provide the most fuel, because they are close together in the forest and are competing for rain and sunlight in which to grow.
Second growth comprises anywhere between 15-30ft of growth, thus, everything underneath the dense canopy which does not receive sunlight, dies and falls to the ground, and which, in turn provides the prime fuel for forest fires.

New growth--New growth is the most lush and green stage of the forest, it provides a fresh salad which can be reached by foraging elk, mule deer, whitetail deer, mooses, and all kinds of mammalion. It also provides hiding places for rabbits and so forth. Not only does this stage add nourishment to the animals diet, but it adds moisture so less drinking is required.
------------------------------------------

All these stages of forest are needed for habitat to remain in harmony.

I'd like to add a critical and important point here--Of the three stages in our Nation's forests the one stage that has the most impact on water quality is the Old growth stage, which helps to hold back mud and silt from entering and altering the course of streams whic are tributaries that will in turn affect rivers in the outcome. The cause for this is clearcutting, which has been a heavily debated subject over the past fifteen or so years. Clearcutting has been just in the recent, it's new, and its effects are devastating to any stream life and quality drinking water.
Clearcutting practices are likened to forest fires. As I have mentioned second growth forest and its production of fuel for fires, the clearcutting practices also add to this, due to waste--tree tops, limbs and brush from the harvesting of the lot of timber.
-------------------------------------------------

There are ways to address the issues of timber management, and one major step toward better helping these problems would be to discuss and resolve these issues with Forest Management Officials--who oversee logging laws, regulations etc.
Forest Management officials should make it an ABSOLUTE REQUIREMENT that all clearcutting practices, or ANY logging outfits to remove and dispose of ALL refuse in ALL cleared/logged tracts--That means: Any thing that is not used for--waste wood, brush etc, etc.

Now, as for the sustainable use and reuse, of old growth and Second growth, for migratory songbirds and their nesting grounds, we find they are needed necessities for this purpose, but we are posed with the possiblity of accumilating dead or dying growth which are of little or no use to songbird species, and which, is just waiting for that glowing cigarette butt, lightning strike, or, in this case--Arson--to come by and wreak terror.

In order to eliminate these hazards and threats we must look to the best answer to the problem--It's really simple actually, and requires little work--which ultimately pays off in the end, and saves the forest, animal species, and most imporantly--LIVES!!!

To do this--you clear sections of underbrush, weeds, and debris from the edges of fields around the forest edge, and also in openings within the forest itself, which provide barriers against fire hazards, but we also leave enough understory, or second growth to aid in nesting sites. Also, when harvesting timber, remember to stay at least 100ft away from creeks and streams, to allow shade and which holds back runoff water, and is a constant resuscitator of stream habitat, and filter.
-------------------------------

End note: Just like to let everyone know, I've gotten interested in Bluebirds. If you remember, several years ago, bluebirds were on the brink of extinction---due to the introduction of the English Sparrow and European Starling--which kill baby native bluebirds, and take over all potential nesting sites.

If you might be interested in helping out the recovering Eastern, Mountain, and Western Bluebirds--You can check out the website WWW.SIALIS.ORG--they've got an amazing website, and how you get into bluebirding.

Thanks and God Bless!!
:)

Jeremiah

Jeremiah,

Welcome to the world of Blue Birds. I put out two nesting boxes in the field behind our house in early April, 2001. We had our first nesting pair a few days later. I starting monitoring and keeping a diary in 2002. In 2003 a pair nested up in the woods about 10 feet from our deck, which is somewhat un usual. I started putting out a dish with meal worms on the deck railing and ringing a bell mounted on the back of the house. They were trained within a couple days to come whenever I rang the bell. A raccoon or squirrel got their eggs, and they subsequently nested back out in the field again, but we enjoyed that bell-trained pair for 3 straight summers. The training failed to carry over to their offspring, and I had to start over last year. I had just about succeeded this past July when their last brood mysteriously died about a week after they hatched, and the adults disappeared.

We've had as many as 4 pairs return and stay for the winter each of the last two years. Hopefully, they'll return again this year. They're beautiful little creatures.

Hey, that's Great, Spook! :)

I got into Bluebirds back in the winter, and I started making Bluebird houses, and feeders--I made about fifty some in total--in which I hope to start a Bluebird Trail. I've been searching possible sites that will be productive.

I think I've found the right place--the other day I came to a field with an old house on it, and tall dead trees in front of it ... to make a long story short, out of no where came a flock of ten Bluebirds that lit on the electrical wire in front of the old house, so I stopped and just watched, and every now and then, one would fly down to the ground and catch an insect in its little beek, and fly back to its perch to eat...Just absolutely beautiful!!!

It is soooo amazing, what God has Created!!!

I'm really excited about getting started there next spring!!

I've obtained some good reading, by Author Connie Toops--and Authors--Donald and Lillian Stokes!!

Happy Bluebirding, Spook!!
:)

Jeremiah

Jeremiah,

Thanks for the crash course in forest management - as a city boy, I have no real idea how a forest works...but it just seems entirely illogical to me that a tangled thicket it to be preferred to a well-tended forest. The trees grow better, the animals have a better shot at survival, people can more effectively use it...and we avoid catastrophes.

Forest fires are essential for most forests: it's essential for their soil, it's essential for rejuvenating forests. Clearing a forest (by fire) allows sunlight to reach the forest floor, wich allows new seedlings that require sunlight to grow and become adult trees. Some seeds - like from the Pinus contorta - are't even able to germinate if they haven't been in a fire: the seeds are covered in a resin that will only melt away in a fire, allowing the seed to germinate.

The massive fires in California and in Utah and in Greece this year are - among other things - exacerbated by decennia of ‘fire suppression’. Previously, forest fires only cleared older parts of a forest because newer patches of forest are less susceptible to fire. The cleared part then started to grow again into a new forest, less susceptible to fire and a new fire a couple of years later would ravage through another and older part of the forest, spared in the previous forest fire because it was a young forest then. Etc. etc. etc.

Don't be surprised when in the future you will hear calls from ecologists, park rangers, environmentalists, etc. for ‘controlled fire ecology’: deliberately setting parts of a forest on fire to allow it to rejuvenate itself.
That would be good stewardship.

If we build more homes and businesses, we can increase tax revenues, and increase the number of National Guard troops. That way, Bush won't be able to send them all off to war, and we'll never have a shortage of people to fight these fires.

///sarcasm off///

WVO, one of the few posts of yours with which I agree, although I just read an article this morning that contradicts what you say about being "beneficial to the soil".

Q: What happens now to this land that has been burned so fiercely?

A: The biggest concern, of course, is mudslides. We are coming into a – touch wood – wetter period, a rainy period. Hillside "slumping" is a real problem. The second thing we are concerned with is some of these fires are burning with such intensity and ferocity that forests may not come back. In other words, Forest Ecology 101: Arguably the most important thing in the forest – this is going to sound bizarre – is the soil. If you hammer the soil -- if you beat up your soil, if you burn it so hard that it chars the soil – and then it rains? The soil repels the water and doesn’t absorb it.

In all fairness, I suspect that a "normal" fire would have the effect you describe, but these weren't "normal" fires.

RS: in a healthy habitat with a regular fire regime, mudslides won't be much of a problem. Wild fires in chaparral plant communities like in California tend to be relatively shortlived and are basically ‘crown’ fires: the crown of the plants go up in flames, leaving base and the roots of the plant mostly intact. In more extreme wildfires, roots are only destroyed just below the surface. The deeper roots remain untouched and keep the soil together until they are fully decomposed. When the forest is allowed to rejuvenate, new roots will have taken over before the older roots have decomposed.

Mudslides are caused by massive deforestation where a forest has been replaced by other types of vegetation, mostly agricultural vegetation. Once the deeper roots are decomposed or manually removed, the structural composition of the soil will have been altered.

My reference to fires being benificial to soil is to the chemical composition of soil. The soil in older parts of a forest tend to become acidic (sp?), especially ferns like a more acidic soil. After a fire, the soil becomes more basic wich is benificial for other types of plants. A fire increases biodiversity.

Good grief. What you guys don't know about environmentalism could fill a book. Seriously, if you're interested do some legitimate studying, and not at the Drudge Report or wherever you got your info.

Ricorun,

To reply, I'm glad you kinda like the idea. How it ties into the bible story is the third guy gave back to the Master the exact amount givin to him, no interest even. The Current Forest Management System would be like a fourth guy that lost the money or flushed it down the toilet or something. There is value in Lumber and pulp. When you control burn or don't manage the forest at all and let thousands of acres burn. The value of the wood is zero, zilch, donut holes. So to add to the parable. The fourth guy was given something and returned nothing. You could feed the papermills and lumbermills, create jobs, put food on peoples tables by cutting large Firetrails. They could be cut 1/4 or 1/2 mile wide if your concerned with wind blowing hot embers if your talking about big pieces like 10,000 acres of BLM or Fedral land. Roads to get back into the land are important to access the fire and put it out. The flying fuel tankers the airforce use to refill jets in the sky, and helicopters with buckets that can refill at a lake or pond could be purchased with the money from the lumber.

My reference to fires being benificial to soil is to the chemical composition of soil. The soil in older parts of a forest tend to become acidic (sp?), especially ferns like a more acidic soil. After a fire, the soil becomes more basic wich is benificial for other types of plants. A fire increases biodiversity.

Willem Van Oranje,

I agree with most of what you've wrote--especially with some of the benefical effects fire--which raises the basicity/Ph level of the soil for certain plant species to grow, and that it breaks down the hard seed coatings of certain plant species that require stratification, or in this fire, before germination can take place.

The only real problems I have with controlled burns, or any burning of the forest for that matter, is that it destroys the homes of many species of wildlife, not "create" them; and most trees won't escape the heat of the flames with the ability to rejuvenate ... In effect, the fire exposes the inner vascular system which is basically the life support of the tree, which transports water and nutrients, and the bark works helps to protect the cambium against the harsh elements--in turn, if this vital area is damaged then the roots have no-where to send the life-giving sap. A forest fire and set the forest back many years due to this--You can't reach the same level of beauty in a forest that is two-hundred years old all in one year or even fifty to seventy five years.

And as you know, controlled burns can get out of hand, as was evidenced in 2003, and which can't support a diversity of wildlife species in these areas.

It is also true that areas of the forest that are burned, there is a layer of soil that is loose from destruction--which is gunpowder dry soil in which there is the possiblilty of erosion from heavy rain.

Electrical companies and their creating power line right-of-ways also creates fire hazards, in which the electrical companies make open areas adjoining forest areas in order to reach rural homes, they create areas for weeds and brush to grow, when these areas of brush and grass die in the fall they become dry tinder made perfect for fires to be ignited--These should be cleared perodically to decrease these fire hazards.

As Smokey would say--Only you, can prevent forest fires.

Jeremiah