Post by: fireweed on February 21, 2020, 10:32:43 AM
https://www.oregonlive.com/environment/2020/02/oregon-environmental-groups-timber-companies-strike-landmark-compromise-signaling-end-to-november-ballot-fight.html
Post by: bbarnes on February 21, 2020, 10:56:04 AM
Post by: 7mmfan on February 21, 2020, 11:27:08 AM
Post by: WSU on February 21, 2020, 11:30:38 AM
Post by: elkboy on February 21, 2020, 11:45:10 AM
Every little bit helps, but it's not saying they won't spray, just where they will spray and how much notice is given. Good first step. Bring back slash burning, better for everything.
Fire can be very good for deer and elk forage! Fireweed, buckbrush (ceanothus), deervetch, and so much more. We have to ease up a little on smoke restrictions so more ground can be burned under good conditions.
Post by: romaknows on February 21, 2020, 11:49:36 AM
I don't understand the statements to bring back slash burning. That still goes on and doesn't do the same thing as spraying. Am I missing something?
[/
quote]
Purely just my observation, but hunting spayed units verses cleaned and burned units are night and day different when it comes to deer and elk numbers.
I also can hardly navigate a sprayed unit with 3 feet of limbs on the ground,makes me wonder if the animals have a tough time ......
Post by: 7mmfan on February 21, 2020, 11:59:26 AM
You are right in the context that it doesn't do the same thing as spraying. Spraying reduces the foliage load in the cuts so that the seedlings can get a better shot at growing for the first year or two without being choked out. Somehow though, cuts were replanted successfully for a hundred years before herbicides became mainstream.
Post by: Mudman on February 21, 2020, 11:59:54 AM
Post by: cougforester on February 21, 2020, 12:47:10 PM
However, try doing widespread burns on all even aged harvests in today’s political and social climate with smoke management policies, liability and insurance issues, cost.... good luck. Today’s forest practice rules also require larger riparian buffers than they did a century ago (meaning any), all of which would need fire lines installed around them. The logistics don’t work.
I’d rather have some early seral habitat that gets sprayed at first than thousands of acres of late seral, closed canopy Forest Service habitat with no habitat or wildlife value at all.
Post by: buckfvr on February 21, 2020, 01:55:35 PM
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on February 21, 2020, 02:33:36 PM
Burning harvest units post logging would be great in a perfect world.
However, try doing widespread burns on all even aged harvests in today’s political and social climate with smoke management policies, liability and insurance issues, cost.... good luck. Today’s forest practice rules also require larger riparian buffers than they did a century ago (meaning any), all of which would need fire lines installed around them. The logistics don’t work.
I’d rather have some early seral habitat that gets sprayed at first than thousands of acres of late seral, closed canopy Forest Service habitat with no habitat or wildlife value at all.
Unit burns had fire lines on them when they used to burn them, just put the fire lines back from the riparian areas.😉
Not rocket science.🤣
Burning is way better than spraying, I wouldn’t doubt the chemical companies are the ones pushing burn bans. :twocents:
Post by: Mudman on February 21, 2020, 04:37:12 PM
Post by: Buckhunter24 on February 21, 2020, 04:57:06 PM
Theres some smaller timber companies successfuly using uneven age management, but even age is the go to for the larger reits and chemicals improve your seedling survival and rotation time. I would love to see broadcast burning come back but Im afraid it wont happen.
And yes putting a fireline along an rmz is great on operable ground but on a line strip you generally cant sidehill so you end up doing it by hand which is even more expensive and less reliable.
Post by: konradcountry on February 21, 2020, 06:08:04 PM
Limit them to spraying 24d and Glyphosate on the ground. Would also be a job booster.
Post by: Buckhunter24 on February 21, 2020, 06:20:28 PM
I am not a proponent of chemicals by any means but those pilots are really good in my experience.
Post by: Humptulips on February 21, 2020, 07:05:13 PM
The New Oregon rules mean nothing. Come on they increased the spraying buffer around RMZs by 15 feet as if you can fly by with a helicopter and be that pinpoint. Nobody will ever check on them anyway. Don't tell me someone is going to be out there measuring that edge to make sure they only sprayed within 75 feet instead of 60 feet.
Means nothing !
Post by: konradcountry on February 21, 2020, 07:07:02 PM
Post by: Buckhunter24 on February 21, 2020, 07:16:21 PM
Post by: konradcountry on February 21, 2020, 07:18:02 PM
I am not a proponent of chemicals by any means but those pilots are really good in my experience.
Well they have already missed and coated people on the Oregon coast.
WHOOPS so sorry
Post by: Buckhunter24 on February 21, 2020, 07:21:02 PM
Write a letter to your congressman, Im not looking to argue.
Post by: konradcountry on February 21, 2020, 07:28:24 PM
If the timber companies had been careful in the first place this wouldn't be an issue.
Post by: WSU on February 25, 2020, 09:50:20 AM
https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/the-herbicide-glyphosate-persists-in-wild-edible-plants-b-c-study?fbclid=IwAR18MaYkk217HpQHhSCGQYqoH_uUeBidsn7Kn8_TXleRP0gMm-zv0AI4FdA