Post by: bobcat on January 22, 2013, 10:08:45 AM
Quote
January 22, 2013
An Arbor Day Foundation grant will pay for 100,000 seedlings to reforest a portion of state trust lands in the Naneum Ridge State Forest, burned during the Table Mountain Fire last September. This is just the first step of many that will help regrow a healthier forest. The Table Mountain Fire damaged portions of 9000 acres of state trust lands in the Naneum. The wildfire burned so hot and fast that it scorched swaths of trees in its path.
The Arbor Day Foundation works in partnership with the National Association of State Foresters to identify reforestation projects that help support healthy state forests. Forests recovering from fire, storms, disease, and insect damage are candidates for grants to help pay for reforestation.
Washington State DNR was awarded $50,000 to buy 100,000 seedlings to be planted in October 2013. DNR plans to continue to apply for grant funding each year, as this will be a multi-year project.
Additionally, the DNR will purchase 350,000 seedlings from the Webster Forest Nursery at an approximate cost of $170,000 for planting in 2014. The availability of future funding will determine the ability to, and timeline for, reforesting the remaining burned acres that are not part of any salvage logging activity.
Currently, 1,800 acres of the burned area is being salvage logged before it is too damaged to be financially valuable. A portion of the trees will be taken to market, while some will be left as snags and down wood for future habitat and forest structure. As ‘school trust’ lands, they are managed to earn revenue for the state’s K-12 public schools, provide habitat for native species and provide recreation opportunities.
The forest that was heavily affected by the fire is vital to many species of wildlife including the northern spotted owl. The most important environmental benefits are to re-establish a healthy forest more resilient to fire events in the future, and to quickly reforest areas growing suitable habitat for the threatened owl.
The project will reforest approximately 850 acres of burned northern spotted owl habitat that is designated as Nesting, Roosting, and Foraging habitat under the state trust lands Habitat Conservation Plan. The owl habitat borders U.S. Forest Service ownership to the west that also burned. Rapid reforestation also will aid in the recovery to help reduce erosion risks and flooding downstream.
Acting quickly to establish tree seedlings, DNR will take advantage of the site preparation and the available nutrients that were provided by the burn. Plus, DNR will get a jump start on competing grass and brush vegetation, and prevent soil erosion and sedimentation of the area’s fish-bearing streams.
Post by: kentrek on January 22, 2013, 10:26:10 AM
are they replanting for future logging or to save the spotted owl ?
and what happened to the spotted owl before there were humans and there was a big fire ?
shouldnt mother nature be able to replant this area ?
wont replanting a huge area with all the same age trees make fore increased fire risk in the future ? no barriers ?
wouldnt the burn help big game ? covering them up with trees kinda kills alot of feed
couldnt the money be better used else where ?
idk maybe i just feel if mother nature does something then it prolly needed to be done, humans dont need to save every blade of grass and "play god" esp since it cost someone lots of money..
am i thinking about this the wrong way ?
Post by: bigtex on January 22, 2013, 10:42:13 AM
okay im relatively uneducated on the subject so maybe some can fill in some gaps..
are they replanting for future logging or to save the spotted owl ?
and what happened to the spotted owl before there were humans and there was a big fire ?
shouldnt mother nature be able to replant this area ?
wont replanting a huge area with all the same age trees make fore increased fire risk in the future ? no barriers ?
wouldnt the burn help big game ? covering them up with trees kinda kills alot of feed
couldnt the money be better used else where ?
The planting of trees will 1- begin to rebuild the forest that the state uses to log to bring in revenue 2- reforest the 850 acres of spotted owl habitat
Most fire areas actually do get replanted, most areas that are not under the NPS jurisdiction get planted with seedlings after a large fire.
It is grant money not state tax money.
Post by: kentrek on January 22, 2013, 10:52:01 AM
okay im relatively uneducated on the subject so maybe some can fill in some gaps..
are they replanting for future logging or to save the spotted owl ?
and what happened to the spotted owl before there were humans and there was a big fire ?
shouldnt mother nature be able to replant this area ?
wont replanting a huge area with all the same age trees make fore increased fire risk in the future ? no barriers ?
wouldnt the burn help big game ? covering them up with trees kinda kills alot of feed
couldnt the money be better used else where ?
The planting of trees will 1- begin to rebuild the forest that the state uses to log to bring in revenue 2- reforest the 850 acres of spotted owl habitat
Most fire areas actually do get replanted, most areas that are not under the NPS jurisdiction get planted with seedlings after a large fire.
It is grant money not state tax money.
i reread it alil better an ya it sounds like there just replanting there product which makes more sense..i skimd it earlier and thought they were doing this just for the owl :chuckle:
Post by: Knocker of rocks on January 22, 2013, 10:52:25 AM
Most fire areas actually do get replanted, most areas that are not under the NPS jurisdiction get planted with seedlings after a large fire.
I would say that that is debateable. Certainly the large areas of non protected USFS land burned in the 1994 and 2002 Leavenworth fires saw little or no replanting. Neither did the burns in the Harts Pass area in 2004
Post by: Heredoggydoggy on January 22, 2013, 11:16:46 AM
When and if the burned areas get replanted will be up in the air for years, especially with the budget problems that there are now.
Post by: Sumpnneedskillin on January 22, 2013, 11:52:23 AM
I was in San Diego after the big fires out there. The only thing that grew back right away was invasive weeds.
Post by: Heredoggydoggy on January 22, 2013, 12:17:12 PM
The other problem that happens with wildfires now vs then is they burn hotter. Which in turns burns more and even sterilizes the soil. When fire was a common occurance not everything burned to the ground which is common place now. You had some trees and islands of trees that served as seed trees.
I was in San Diego after the big fires out there. The only thing that grew back right away was invasive weeds.
Very true--when the fires were just getting started, I was up on the Mission Ridge Trail, and when I saw the amount of dead wood built up under the live trees, I thought that if the fires reach here, the trees are toast--literally! The "Only you can prevent forest fires" BS is coming back to haunt us.
Post by: lokidog on January 22, 2013, 01:24:43 PM
I'll address this one - they dispursed to other suitable habitat. There is little to none left for them to dispurse to now. For this purpose, this planting is pointless as the Spotted Owl needs old growth forests that generally have a continous canopy and would include large snags with nesting holes. Without suitable habitat surrounding this burn, there is nowhere for the owls to go for several hundred years while these plantings grow, so pointless for this purpose but sounds good to any enviros on the board deciding who to give grants to.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on January 22, 2013, 01:32:08 PM
Post by: lokidog on January 22, 2013, 01:50:38 PM
spotted owls do well in pre-thinned reprod, not just old growth. From what I've read about them, one of their big flaws is they are picky eaters and only really like flying squirrels. The flying squirrels like the growth under the old growth canopy and the reprod.
Where is this from? I worked three seasons doing owl surveys in OR and WA and never found them in these areas. They also eat various rodents including red voles. We would feed them pet store mice, it was pretty cool. The habitat you describe is more utilized by Barred Owls which are more aggressive and outcompete Spotted Owls in degraded habitats.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on January 22, 2013, 02:14:41 PM
Most of the owls I see are on DNR and USFS land that isn't old growth. Only saw one in the old growth this year.
Post by: logger on January 22, 2013, 02:22:11 PM
Planting trees to improve habitat goes against everything we were told when they implemented the spotted owl recovery, they could only live in old growth, guess they were wrong in crippling the industry then. On the subject of degraded habitat I would say that most f.s land is just that. I am all for replanting, just think using the spotted owl is a bit of a strech for justification.spotted owls do well in pre-thinned reprod, not just old growth. From what I've read about them, one of their big flaws is they are picky eaters and only really like flying squirrels. The flying squirrels like the growth under the old growth canopy and the reprod.
Where is this from? I worked three seasons doing owl surveys in OR and WA and never found them in these areas. They also eat various rodents including red voles. We would feed them pet store mice, it was pretty cool. The habitat you describe is more utilized by Barred Owls which are more aggressive and outcompete Spotted Owls in degraded habitats.
Post by: lokidog on January 22, 2013, 06:53:53 PM
http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1957/25772/FORECO9370%2c%20revised%20Aug%202011.pdf?sequence=1 (http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1957/25772/FORECO9370%2c%20revised%20Aug%202011.pdf?sequence=1)
Most of the owls I see are on DNR and USFS land that isn't old growth. Only saw one in the old growth this year.
I'd bet dollars to donuts you are seeing barred owls. The abstract of your posted article indicates a negative impact on squirrel populations of thinning as well as them preferring a continuous canopy forest. When I was in the field, it was accepted that flying squirrels and red voles were the primary food source, red voles need the older forests as well. Yes, Spotted Owls can live in non-old growth forests, temporarily, but they cannot survive as a species, especially if they have no food and can't find a nest cavity.
In three years of surveying back in the 80's and early 90's, I did not see or get a response from one single owl in an area of trees less than about 100 years old. Logger, you are correct since unless there is suitable habitat and enough of it nearby, they cannot survive long enough for the forest to mature enough to support their needs. There is pretty much zero chance of survival of this species in any area that is/has been/will be logged/burned in our lifetimes unless the trees are put on a 100+ year rotation which is not practical or realistic.
Sorry about the thread jacking. :rolleyes:
Post by: Skyvalhunter on January 22, 2013, 07:01:45 PM
Post by: winshooter88 on January 22, 2013, 07:32:04 PM
Post by: JLS on January 22, 2013, 07:35:56 PM
http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1957/25772/FORECO9370%2c%20revised%20Aug%202011.pdf?sequence=1 (http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1957/25772/FORECO9370%2c%20revised%20Aug%202011.pdf?sequence=1)
Most of the owls I see are on DNR and USFS land that isn't old growth. Only saw one in the old growth this year.
I'd bet dollars to donuts you are seeing barred owls. The abstract of your posted article indicates a negative impact on squirrel populations of thinning as well as them preferring a continuous canopy forest. When I was in the field, it was accepted that flying squirrels and red voles were the primary food source, red voles need the older forests as well. Yes, Spotted Owls can live in non-old growth forests, temporarily, but they cannot survive as a species, especially if they have no food and can't find a nest cavity.
In three years of surveying back in the 80's and early 90's, I did not see or get a response from one single owl in an area of trees less than about 100 years old. Logger, you are correct since unless there is suitable habitat and enough of it nearby, they cannot survive long enough for the forest to mature enough to support their needs. There is pretty much zero chance of survival of this species in any area that is/has been/will be logged/burned in our lifetimes unless the trees are put on a 100+ year rotation which is not practical or realistic.
Sorry about the thread jacking. :rolleyes:
Very interesting, I learned something here. Thank you.
Post by: huntnphool on January 22, 2013, 07:37:00 PM
Post by: 6x6in6 on January 22, 2013, 08:52:34 PM
I think bigtex was talking about State land and particularly DNR land intended for logging purposes for revenue. Not necessarily Federal land.
Most fire areas actually do get replanted, most areas that are not under the NPS jurisdiction get planted with seedlings after a large fire.
I would say that that is debateable. Certainly the large areas of non protected USFS land burned in the 1994 and 2002 Leavenworth fires saw little or no replanting. Neither did the burns in the Harts Pass area in 2004