These trees are monuments of nature even if they are dead. You destroy the landscape and what will you put in place? This tree need hundreds of years to grow like that.
Google satellite shows enough for me, clear cut square after another, the Cascades look like a checker board, All I know is naturally existing old forest like that of the pacific northwest should be preserved. The Midwest has virtually no natural forest remaining, very few old stands of White and Red pine remain, stands with tree's over 150 years old are hard to come by, and if you find them it is rare for the stand to have a acreage more than 40 acres.
Historically, and with the WOPR (a Bush-era logging plan) the greatest threat t old-growth was logging. Now, uncharacteristic levels of bugs and fire (some global warming spawned) are a threat.
That's why Oregon Wild favors restoration thinning in our federal forests. To do this common ground work, we first have to protect our old-growth forests as Dr. Franklin suggests in the video. That way we can get to the non-controversial work we all agree on.
I am glad to see that you are in favor of protecting old-growth via restoration forestry and needed thinning. Methodology and specs are likely to remain controversial, however.
Tillamook, B&B, Silver Complex, Biscuit, etc., are the most dangerous bug-and-wildfire threats to our western old-growth today -- and, ironically, it is only through well-considered logging ("thinning") projects that we are likely to help maintain the remainder!
Thanks for the comments ORWWmedia. Couple of points:
1)Doug (Heiken) makes reference to the general capabilities of forests to absorb carbon pollution, and alludes to the correct scientific analysis that older trees do the best job at that.
2)Similarly with clean water, intact forest ecosystems (old growth, or forest that is allowed to go through natural disturbance without harmful salvage logging is the BEST source of clean drinking water. If we clearcut all our hillsides, we'd be in bad shape
My comments above (including typos) was merely intended to show that the quality of information in the video did not match the quality of visuals and editing.
Old-growth is currently threatened by competition ("over-crowding"), bugs, disease, and wildfire far more than it is threatened by logging.
Anti-logging litigation, ironically, may be doing far more damage to remaining stands than logging can possibly do!
These stands need to be thinned and managed if they are to survive much longer.
This a very nice and poetic examination of old-growth.
However, Heiken's Global Warming concerns are for "trees," not old-growth; and even if 80% of oregonians get their freshwater from "forests," again, that is not "old-growth."
As an "economic engine," old-growth" is also misrepresented.
In the 1930s Siuslaw NF Supervisor noted that it was an almost entirely "second growth," containing only about 35,000 acres of old-growth (of about 600,000 acres) -- today, the figure is about the same.
These trees are monuments of nature even if they are dead. You destroy the landscape and what will you put in place? This tree need hundreds of years to grow like that.
brv7l 2 months ago
Google satellite shows enough for me, clear cut square after another, the Cascades look like a checker board, All I know is naturally existing old forest like that of the pacific northwest should be preserved. The Midwest has virtually no natural forest remaining, very few old stands of White and Red pine remain, stands with tree's over 150 years old are hard to come by, and if you find them it is rare for the stand to have a acreage more than 40 acres.
DankifiedKunkel 2 years ago
Historically, and with the WOPR (a Bush-era logging plan) the greatest threat t old-growth was logging. Now, uncharacteristic levels of bugs and fire (some global warming spawned) are a threat.
That's why Oregon Wild favors restoration thinning in our federal forests. To do this common ground work, we first have to protect our old-growth forests as Dr. Franklin suggests in the video. That way we can get to the non-controversial work we all agree on.
Thanks for the compliments on the video.
ORWild 2 years ago
You're welcome -- it's a nice job.
I am glad to see that you are in favor of protecting old-growth via restoration forestry and needed thinning. Methodology and specs are likely to remain controversial, however.
Tillamook, B&B, Silver Complex, Biscuit, etc., are the most dangerous bug-and-wildfire threats to our western old-growth today -- and, ironically, it is only through well-considered logging ("thinning") projects that we are likely to help maintain the remainder!
ORWWmedia 2 years ago
Thanks for the comments ORWWmedia. Couple of points:
1)Doug (Heiken) makes reference to the general capabilities of forests to absorb carbon pollution, and alludes to the correct scientific analysis that older trees do the best job at that.
2)Similarly with clean water, intact forest ecosystems (old growth, or forest that is allowed to go through natural disturbance without harmful salvage logging is the BEST source of clean drinking water. If we clearcut all our hillsides, we'd be in bad shape
ORWild 2 years ago
My comments above (including typos) was merely intended to show that the quality of information in the video did not match the quality of visuals and editing.
Old-growth is currently threatened by competition ("over-crowding"), bugs, disease, and wildfire far more than it is threatened by logging.
Anti-logging litigation, ironically, may be doing far more damage to remaining stands than logging can possibly do!
These stands need to be thinned and managed if they are to survive much longer.
ORWWmedia 2 years ago
This a very nice and poetic examination of old-growth.
However, Heiken's Global Warming concerns are for "trees," not old-growth; and even if 80% of oregonians get their freshwater from "forests," again, that is not "old-growth."
As an "economic engine," old-growth" is also misrepresented.
In the 1930s Siuslaw NF Supervisor noted that it was an almost entirely "second growth," containing only about 35,000 acres of old-growth (of about 600,000 acres) -- today, the figure is about the same.
ORWWmedia 2 years ago