Hunting Washington Forum
Community => Advocacy, Agencies, Access => Topic started by: fireweed on February 21, 2020, 10:32:43 AM
-
Oregon timber and enviros strike deal to change spray and other logging rules.
https://www.oregonlive.com/environment/2020/02/oregon-environmental-groups-timber-companies-strike-landmark-compromise-signaling-end-to-november-ballot-fight.html
-
Great news now let's get washinton to do the same HOOF ROT .
-
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.
-
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?
-
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.
-
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 ......
-
All of that. Burning is a natural part of the landscape. Has been for millions of years. Our ecosystem is based on burning and regeneration. Many tree and plant species can't germinate new seeds without fire. When you burn slash and use fire to clean cuts, you clean up the junk that just rots, and actually put those nutrients back into the soil. The next group of seedlings have great soil to start in. And as others have said, the other foliage that comes back are deer/elk magnets. Those cuts are highly productive areas. Sprayed cuts are not.
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.
-
Not good enough. Full ban. Burn only.
-
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.
-
Call it what you want for what ever reasons.....its about increased yield that translates to increased profit.
-
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:
-
This "spraying" is HUGE $$$ to Co.'s. I understand the results produced in terms of yield/$ but it is very bad. Gov Inslee( :bash:) is considering tearing down damns to help salmon to help Orcas yet Damns weren't the issue for decades until the 90's??? OR maybe all the chemicals in water could be a problem? Is it coincidence that so many problems started at same time as this practice did? How many are related? Nobody seems to listen to "other" science unless it is paid for by corrupt Co profiting form it. :twocents:
-
With no slash compliance like idaho theres no financial motivation. And like others have said, the smoke restrictions make burning damn near impossible depending on location. If they only let you get 100 tons at a time you might make 6 or 8 trips out just to do landing piles.
Theres some smaller timber companies successfuly using uneven age management, but even age is the go to for the larger reits and chemicals improve your seedling survival and rotation time. I would love to see broadcast burning come back but Im afraid it wont happen.
And yes putting a fireline along an rmz is great on operable ground but on a line strip you generally cant sidehill so you end up doing it by hand which is even more expensive and less reliable.
-
The problem I have is that they can spray anything from the air.
Limit them to spraying 24d and Glyphosate on the ground. Would also be a job booster.
-
Direct exposure is a lot lower aerial spray. Backpack spraying is an unpleasent job to put it mildly.
I am not a proponent of chemicals by any means but those pilots are really good in my experience.
-
Bottom line aerial spraying is the cheapest for reits. They will never go back to burns . If they had to stop spraying they would just plant but they will defend it to the end. $$$$ is #1 and #2 doesn't exist.
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 !
-
Well people aren't happy with the aerial spraying because they make a single mistake and whoops covered your house and kids.
-
No doubt, I am no proponent for chemical spray. Between drift and leaching I am sure theres plenty of spillover. Ive heard claims of such a quick halflife that it is essentially gone in days but who really knows. And humptulips is right, the odds of an audit are low. The guys getting paid 14 bucks an hour to backpack spray through brush are bathing in it though.
-
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
-
Like I said, in my experience.
Write a letter to your congressman, Im not looking to argue.
-
Ok I'm just pointing out that they have already tried aerial spraying and people have been covered.
If the timber companies had been careful in the first place this wouldn't be an issue.
-
Just saw this study. Apparently glyphosates persist in plants that don't die for a year or more. Wonder if ingesting glyphosates is good or bad for wildlife?
https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/the-herbicide-glyphosate-persists-in-wild-edible-plants-b-c-study?fbclid=IwAR18MaYkk217HpQHhSCGQYqoH_uUeBidsn7Kn8_TXleRP0gMm-zv0AI4FdA