Loggers support Trump's claim that wildfires caused by 'poor forest management'

[Lesh]

LOL, you're an idiot. Cleaning up ground cover is a huge part of management. You want some of this? Oh wait.....you'll run crying to mommy.

Oh?

I wonder why it wasn't mentioned in your first post on the subject

 

[Markle]

A State Corp of Engineers could prescribe burns where it is most practicable to build more watershed inputs.

That's the job of the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. What a laugh!

 

[Doc1]

LOL, you're an idiot. Cleaning up ground cover is a huge part of management. You want some of this? Oh wait.....you'll run crying to mommy.

Oh?

I wonder why it wasn't mentioned in your first post on the subject

Go for it kid, prove me wrong.

 

[Markle]

Thanks Jerry Brown! Thanks California Democrats! Thanks Environmental Lobby that OWNS THEM!

Wildfires have been burning throughout the temperate North American rainforest all summer long, not just in California but across northern Canada as well.

This has been the worst year in history for forest fires and one of the worst for hurricanes but it’s important that Trump continue to deny climate change so his billionaire buddies don’t have to start using green energy.

Lol
You guys can use green energy if you want… Most Americans can’t afford green energy… Live with it

If you add in the tax burdens created by the wildfires, and the loss of potential revenues, and the loss of life associated with upper respiratory illnesses assosciated with the burning of fossil fuels, Americans can't afford to continue to deny the effects of climate change.

I used to have to rush to emergency at least once a week in the summer months due to asthma attacks. I haven't done that once since Ontario eliminated coal fired electrical plants. Extrapolated across the millions of asthmatics across North America, what's the dollar cost in that savings. I know personally, it's eliminated the $200 inhaler I used to carry with me everywhere, not to mention the health effects of huffing on steriods every day.

And here's a clue for a Trumpbot: The cheapest price isn't always the best deal or the wisest decision. If the cheapest form of electricity causes the people to get sick, the water to be polluted and the air to be turned into potential acid rain, damaging buildings and infrastructure, then the costs of cleaning up the mess it creates are much greater than the savings on the electricity.

Not to mention we are generating billions of dollars in new jobs and investment in solar energy and windmills, while coal miners are still losing their jobs across America. Why not retrain them in new technologies rather than sending them back into the mines to die of black lung disease?

Talk about picking up the peanuts while being trampled by the elephants!

How is all that working out for Germany?

And then there is....

 

[danielpalos]

A State Corp of Engineers could prescribe burns where it is most practicable to build more watershed inputs.

Not what your environmentalists say. You caused this mess, up to you to fix it.

lol. learn how to read.

 

[danielpalos]

A State Corp of Engineers could prescribe burns where it is most practicable to build more watershed inputs.

That's the job of the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. What a laugh!

Not a State Corps of Engineers.

 

[otto105]

Loggers support Trump's claim that wildfires caused by 'poor forest management'

LOGGERS: If you would just let us cut down all the forests, presto! No more forest fires!

Na, Loggers are actually out in the woods doing productive things… The same cannot be said for environmentals

Sure, says Dr. Seuss.

 

[Dragonlady]

If you add in the tax burdens created by the wildfires, and the loss of potential revenues, and the loss of life associated with upper respiratory illnesses assosciated with the burning of fossil fuels, Americans can't afford to continue to deny the effects of climate change.

I used to have to rush to emergency at least once a week in the summer months due to asthma attacks. I haven't done that once since Ontario eliminated coal fired electrical plants. Extrapolated across the millions of asthmatics across North America, what's the dollar cost in that savings. I know personally, it's eliminated the $200 inhaler I used to carry with me everywhere, not to mention the health effects of huffing on steriods every day.

And here's a clue for a Trumpbot: The cheapest price isn't always the best deal or the wisest decision. If the cheapest form of electricity causes the people to get sick, the water to be polluted and the air to be turned into potential acid rain, damaging buildings and infrastructure, then the costs of cleaning up the mess it creates are much greater than the savings on the electricity.

Not to mention we are generating billions of dollars in new jobs and investment in solar energy and windmills, while coal miners are still losing their jobs across America. Why not retrain them in new technologies rather than sending them back into the mines to die of black lung disease?

Talk about picking up the peanuts while being trampled by the elephants!

The fires have nothing to do with climate change, dingbat. AGW is a hoax.

The fires have EVERYTHING to do with climate change. They're burning all over the world. Trying to sell the idea that you need to rake leaves to prevent forest fires is the HOAX, but I don't expect you to have a clue, ever. You're just not that bright. You want to remain an ignorant fool all of your life.

On that point you have no equal, you are the quintessential idiot. Good forest management indeed includes cleaning up ground cover and thinning out the forest, especially of dead timber. NOTHING prevents forest fires but everything I put out there helps to limit them.

Well there you are parrotting Dumb Donald's dumbest suggestions. What a tool of the idiot-cracy you are!!! Good forest management does NONE of those things, you stupid fool. The best forest management is to leave well enough alone. You leave the leaves on the forest floor you dolt! They nourish the new growth and provide a layer of moisture and protection for the roots as they compost.

The forests have been taking very good care of themselves since dinosaurs ruled the world, without any "forest management" whatsoever. The forests and jungles of the world are self-sustaining biospheres. It is only ignorant assholes like you and Trump who think that there is some trick to "managing" these resources.

Here's a link to a report from Trump's own government which outlines the costs of ignoring climate change.

Major Trump administration climate report says damages are ‘intensifying across the country’

You really are stupid twit honey.

"
Thinning Harvest
When trees are crowded together, they are in greater competition for sunlight, nutrients and water. As a result, they tend to be less healthy and to grow less vigorously. To improve the health and productivity of the forest, forest managers may remove a portion of the trees in the early stages (10-15 years) of a growing stand of trees so there is less competition for sunlight, water and nutrients. The forest is ‘thinned’ by taking out a certain percentage of the trees. The remaining trees will grow faster, stronger and larger. The thinning also improves the growth of the forest’s understory such as wildflowers and native weeds by increasing the amount of sunlight that reaches the forest floor. This growth provides more food and cover for animals such as quail and rabbits.

This type of harvest is typically referred to as a “pre-commercial” harvest since the costs associated with the forest management (road maintenance, harvesting, etc.) often equal or outweigh the money earned on the harvested trees for the landowners. These type of harvests result in pulpwood size trees, which are smaller in diameter than trees that would be made into lumber.

Clearcut Harvest
Clearcutting removes all the trees in a given area, much like a wildfire, hurricane or other natural disturbance would do. It is used most frequently in pine forests, which require full sunlight to grow, and in hardwood forests with yellow poplar, sweetgum, cherry, maple and other species that require full sunlight.

Clearcuts are an efficient way to convert unhealthy stands to healthy, productive forests because they allow forest managers to control the tree species that grow on the site through natural or artificial regeneration.

While a clearcut removes all canopy cover and is unattractive for a short period of time, it is an effective method for creating habitat for a variety of wildlife species. Animals that eat insects, such as turkeys and quails, and those that eat annual and perennial plants, such as bears and deer, thrive in recently clearcut areas. Many creatures also find shelter from weather and predators in the low growing grasses, bushes and briar thickets that follow this type of harvest. In addition, clearcutting is an important forest management tool because it can be used to create edges – areas where two habitat types or two ages of the same habitat meet. Because edges provide easy access to more than one habitat, they usually have more diverse wildlife communities than large blocks of a single habitat.

A clearcut harvest will produce a mixture of pulpwood and sawtimber products for the forest products industry based on the size of the trees and whether the trees are softwood (pine) or hardwood (maple, oaks, etc.). Loggers sort the trees onto different trucks for their different locations. The smaller diameter trees, typically called pulpwood, will head to a paper mill or energy facility. The larger diameter trees, typically referred to as sawtimber, will be sent to a sawmill. Again, different tree species (whether softwood or hardwood) are sent to specific markets.

Shelterwood Harvest
In a shelterwood cut, mature trees are removed in two or three harvests over a period of 10 to 15 years. This method allows regeneration of medium to low shade-tolerant species because a “shelter” is left to protect them. Many hardwoods, such as oak, hickory and cherry, can produce and maintain seedlings or sprouts in light shade under a partially cut stand. However, the young trees will not grow and develop fully until the remaining overstory trees are removed.

One benefit to shelterwood harvests is that they provide cover and early successional food sources for wildlife. However, this method of harvest is not recommended for trees with shallow root systems because the remaining trees are more susceptible to wind damage after neighboring trees are removed. Another disadvantage to shelterwood cuts is that they require more roads to be built through the forest, and increase the risk of soil disturbance and damage to the remaining trees during harvesting.

Seed Tree Harvest
In a seed tree harvest, five or more scattered trees per acre are left in the harvested area to provide seeds for a new forest stand. These trees are selected based on their growth rate, form, seeding ability, wind resistance and future marketability.

Wildlife benefit from seed tree harvests in much the same way as they do from a clearcut harvest, except that they also reap the benefits of the seed trees themselves. If left on site indefinitely, seed trees eventually may become snags or downed logs, which are important habitat components for woodpeckers and many other species. Seed trees are also excellent food sources and nesting sites for hawks and other birds.

One disadvantage to seed tree harvests is that the remaining trees are at increased risk of damage from wind, lightening, insect attack and logging of nearby trees. This type harvest may also require the landowner to make future investments in thinning and competition control because of uncontrolled reseeding."


https://www.ncforestry.org/teachers/forest-management-basics/

Dumb bitch.

Proving my favourite point: That a woman never makes a fool of a man. She just gives him leave to develop his natural tendences.

These are the very "forest management" techniques that people are laughing at Trump for promoting. These "management techniques" would indeed encourage forest fires, because there's nothing to hold the moisture close to the soil, so it would dry out more quickly. Not to mention that these aren't forests, they're tree farms. They're not a sustable ecological system, supporting an interconnected supply of both vegetable and protein food sources to a wide variety of species and lifeforms. They're growing trees for harvest. The language is very clear - the point is to grow large stand of timber suitable for a profitable harvest.

What's hysterically funny is the paragraph that starts "Wildlife beneft from seed tree harvests in much the same way as they do from clearcut harvests". There is no way that wildlife benefits from clearcut harvest. None. Wildlife never benefits when their habitat and food sources are destroyed.

A forest is an ecological system where an entire system is nurtured and provided for. This is how to manage a tree farm, not a forest.

Would you care to try posting and again just in case there's anyone left who doubts you're an idiot. We want to remove all doubt.

 

[Dragonlady]

Thanks Jerry Brown! Thanks California Democrats! Thanks Environmental Lobby that OWNS THEM!

Wildfires have been burning throughout the temperate North American rainforest all summer long, not just in California but across northern Canada as well.

This has been the worst year in history for forest fires and one of the worst for hurricanes but it’s important that Trump continue to deny climate change so his billionaire buddies don’t have to start using green energy.

Lol
You guys can use green energy if you want… Most Americans can’t afford green energy… Live with it

If you add in the tax burdens created by the wildfires, and the loss of potential revenues, and the loss of life associated with upper respiratory illnesses assosciated with the burning of fossil fuels, Americans can't afford to continue to deny the effects of climate change.

I used to have to rush to emergency at least once a week in the summer months due to asthma attacks. I haven't done that once since Ontario eliminated coal fired electrical plants. Extrapolated across the millions of asthmatics across North America, what's the dollar cost in that savings. I know personally, it's eliminated the $200 inhaler I used to carry with me everywhere, not to mention the health effects of huffing on steriods every day.

And here's a clue for a Trumpbot: The cheapest price isn't always the best deal or the wisest decision. If the cheapest form of electricity causes the people to get sick, the water to be polluted and the air to be turned into potential acid rain, damaging buildings and infrastructure, then the costs of cleaning up the mess it creates are much greater than the savings on the electricity.

Not to mention we are generating billions of dollars in new jobs and investment in solar energy and windmills, while coal miners are still losing their jobs across America. Why not retrain them in new technologies rather than sending them back into the mines to die of black lung disease?

Talk about picking up the peanuts while being trampled by the elephants!

How is all that working out for Germany?

And then there is....

You're quoting statistics on CO2 emissions from an oil company. Hardly a reliable source of information, given the subject.

 

[eagle1462010]

 

[Markle]

Thanks Jerry Brown! Thanks California Democrats! Thanks Environmental Lobby that OWNS THEM!

Wildfires have been burning throughout the temperate North American rainforest all summer long, not just in California but across northern Canada as well.

This has been the worst year in history for forest fires and one of the worst for hurricanes but it’s important that Trump continue to deny climate change so his billionaire buddies don’t have to start using green energy.

Lol
You guys can use green energy if you want… Most Americans can’t afford green energy… Live with it

If you add in the tax burdens created by the wildfires, and the loss of potential revenues, and the loss of life associated with upper respiratory illnesses assosciated with the burning of fossil fuels, Americans can't afford to continue to deny the effects of climate change.

I used to have to rush to emergency at least once a week in the summer months due to asthma attacks. I haven't done that once since Ontario eliminated coal fired electrical plants. Extrapolated across the millions of asthmatics across North America, what's the dollar cost in that savings. I know personally, it's eliminated the $200 inhaler I used to carry with me everywhere, not to mention the health effects of huffing on steriods every day.

And here's a clue for a Trumpbot: The cheapest price isn't always the best deal or the wisest decision. If the cheapest form of electricity causes the people to get sick, the water to be polluted and the air to be turned into potential acid rain, damaging buildings and infrastructure, then the costs of cleaning up the mess it creates are much greater than the savings on the electricity.

Not to mention we are generating billions of dollars in new jobs and investment in solar energy and windmills, while coal miners are still losing their jobs across America. Why not retrain them in new technologies rather than sending them back into the mines to die of black lung disease?

Talk about picking up the peanuts while being trampled by the elephants!

How is all that working out for Germany?

And then there is....

You're quoting statistics on CO2 emissions from an oil company. Hardly a reliable source of information, given the subject.

Show us where my information is wrong. Otherwise, as always, you have nothing.

 

[Markle]

The fires have nothing to do with climate change, dingbat. AGW is a hoax.

The fires have EVERYTHING to do with climate change. They're burning all over the world. Trying to sell the idea that you need to rake leaves to prevent forest fires is the HOAX, but I don't expect you to have a clue, ever. You're just not that bright. You want to remain an ignorant fool all of your life.

On that point you have no equal, you are the quintessential idiot. Good forest management indeed includes cleaning up ground cover and thinning out the forest, especially of dead timber. NOTHING prevents forest fires but everything I put out there helps to limit them.

Well there you are parrotting Dumb Donald's dumbest suggestions. What a tool of the idiot-cracy you are!!! Good forest management does NONE of those things, you stupid fool. The best forest management is to leave well enough alone. You leave the leaves on the forest floor you dolt! They nourish the new growth and provide a layer of moisture and protection for the roots as they compost.

The forests have been taking very good care of themselves since dinosaurs ruled the world, without any "forest management" whatsoever. The forests and jungles of the world are self-sustaining biospheres. It is only ignorant assholes like you and Trump who think that there is some trick to "managing" these resources.

Here's a link to a report from Trump's own government which outlines the costs of ignoring climate change.

Major Trump administration climate report says damages are ‘intensifying across the country’

You really are stupid twit honey.

"
Thinning Harvest
When trees are crowded together, they are in greater competition for sunlight, nutrients and water. As a result, they tend to be less healthy and to grow less vigorously. To improve the health and productivity of the forest, forest managers may remove a portion of the trees in the early stages (10-15 years) of a growing stand of trees so there is less competition for sunlight, water and nutrients. The forest is ‘thinned’ by taking out a certain percentage of the trees. The remaining trees will grow faster, stronger and larger. The thinning also improves the growth of the forest’s understory such as wildflowers and native weeds by increasing the amount of sunlight that reaches the forest floor. This growth provides more food and cover for animals such as quail and rabbits.

This type of harvest is typically referred to as a “pre-commercial” harvest since the costs associated with the forest management (road maintenance, harvesting, etc.) often equal or outweigh the money earned on the harvested trees for the landowners. These type of harvests result in pulpwood size trees, which are smaller in diameter than trees that would be made into lumber.

Clearcut Harvest
Clearcutting removes all the trees in a given area, much like a wildfire, hurricane or other natural disturbance would do. It is used most frequently in pine forests, which require full sunlight to grow, and in hardwood forests with yellow poplar, sweetgum, cherry, maple and other species that require full sunlight.

Clearcuts are an efficient way to convert unhealthy stands to healthy, productive forests because they allow forest managers to control the tree species that grow on the site through natural or artificial regeneration.

While a clearcut removes all canopy cover and is unattractive for a short period of time, it is an effective method for creating habitat for a variety of wildlife species. Animals that eat insects, such as turkeys and quails, and those that eat annual and perennial plants, such as bears and deer, thrive in recently clearcut areas. Many creatures also find shelter from weather and predators in the low growing grasses, bushes and briar thickets that follow this type of harvest. In addition, clearcutting is an important forest management tool because it can be used to create edges – areas where two habitat types or two ages of the same habitat meet. Because edges provide easy access to more than one habitat, they usually have more diverse wildlife communities than large blocks of a single habitat.

A clearcut harvest will produce a mixture of pulpwood and sawtimber products for the forest products industry based on the size of the trees and whether the trees are softwood (pine) or hardwood (maple, oaks, etc.). Loggers sort the trees onto different trucks for their different locations. The smaller diameter trees, typically called pulpwood, will head to a paper mill or energy facility. The larger diameter trees, typically referred to as sawtimber, will be sent to a sawmill. Again, different tree species (whether softwood or hardwood) are sent to specific markets.

Shelterwood Harvest
In a shelterwood cut, mature trees are removed in two or three harvests over a period of 10 to 15 years. This method allows regeneration of medium to low shade-tolerant species because a “shelter” is left to protect them. Many hardwoods, such as oak, hickory and cherry, can produce and maintain seedlings or sprouts in light shade under a partially cut stand. However, the young trees will not grow and develop fully until the remaining overstory trees are removed.

One benefit to shelterwood harvests is that they provide cover and early successional food sources for wildlife. However, this method of harvest is not recommended for trees with shallow root systems because the remaining trees are more susceptible to wind damage after neighboring trees are removed. Another disadvantage to shelterwood cuts is that they require more roads to be built through the forest, and increase the risk of soil disturbance and damage to the remaining trees during harvesting.

Seed Tree Harvest
In a seed tree harvest, five or more scattered trees per acre are left in the harvested area to provide seeds for a new forest stand. These trees are selected based on their growth rate, form, seeding ability, wind resistance and future marketability.

Wildlife benefit from seed tree harvests in much the same way as they do from a clearcut harvest, except that they also reap the benefits of the seed trees themselves. If left on site indefinitely, seed trees eventually may become snags or downed logs, which are important habitat components for woodpeckers and many other species. Seed trees are also excellent food sources and nesting sites for hawks and other birds.

One disadvantage to seed tree harvests is that the remaining trees are at increased risk of damage from wind, lightening, insect attack and logging of nearby trees. This type harvest may also require the landowner to make future investments in thinning and competition control because of uncontrolled reseeding."


https://www.ncforestry.org/teachers/forest-management-basics/

Dumb bitch.

Proving my favourite point: That a woman never makes a fool of a man. She just gives him leave to develop his natural tendences.

These are the very "forest management" techniques that people are laughing at Trump for promoting. These "management techniques" would indeed encourage forest fires, because there's nothing to hold the moisture close to the soil, so it would dry out more quickly. Not to mention that these aren't forests, they're tree farms. They're not a sustable ecological system, supporting an interconnected supply of both vegetable and protein food sources to a wide variety of species and lifeforms. They're growing trees for harvest. The language is very clear - the point is to grow large stand of timber suitable for a profitable harvest.

What's hysterically funny is the paragraph that starts "Wildlife beneft from seed tree harvests in much the same way as they do from clearcut harvests". There is no way that wildlife benefits from clearcut harvest. None. Wildlife never benefits when their habitat and food sources are destroyed.

A forest is an ecological system where an entire system is nurtured and provided for. This is how to manage a tree farm, not a forest.

Would you care to try posting and again just in case there's anyone left who doubts you're an idiot. We want to remove all doubt.

Please show us your source and link proving all the land in these fires are tree farms.

Forests, like tree farms, need to be controlled with burns to clear out the dead trees, fallen limbs, and leaves. This clears the undergrowth for fresh growth, both weeds, wildflowers, and trees.

"Fire is one of the best management tools for continued invasive plant control. For more than a decade, our trained ecologists have been applying prescribed fire in the Chicago region and beyond. After inspecting the site and acquiring state and local permits, we prepare and implement a detailed, fiscally responsive burn plan. We safely execute burns on any scale, from backyards as small as a half-acre to prairies hundreds of acres in size."
[...]
Understanding More About Controlled Burns: it's a science
WHY: Prescribed burning is used for a variety of reasons. One of the most notable contained burning benefits is to maintain the health of an existing natural area containing native plants. The fire helps manage weeds and other growth and thus helps to reduce the risk of wildfires, but it also can help restore nutrients and help lead to more desirable plant growth in the future. Woodlands, prairies, and wetlands are perfect natural communities for contained fires."
[...]
Benefits of Prescribed Burning and Controlled Burns to Restore Diversity

 

[eagle1462010]

The fires have nothing to do with climate change, dingbat. AGW is a hoax.

The fires have EVERYTHING to do with climate change. They're burning all over the world. Trying to sell the idea that you need to rake leaves to prevent forest fires is the HOAX, but I don't expect you to have a clue, ever. You're just not that bright. You want to remain an ignorant fool all of your life.

On that point you have no equal, you are the quintessential idiot. Good forest management indeed includes cleaning up ground cover and thinning out the forest, especially of dead timber. NOTHING prevents forest fires but everything I put out there helps to limit them.

Well there you are parrotting Dumb Donald's dumbest suggestions. What a tool of the idiot-cracy you are!!! Good forest management does NONE of those things, you stupid fool. The best forest management is to leave well enough alone. You leave the leaves on the forest floor you dolt! They nourish the new growth and provide a layer of moisture and protection for the roots as they compost.

The forests have been taking very good care of themselves since dinosaurs ruled the world, without any "forest management" whatsoever. The forests and jungles of the world are self-sustaining biospheres. It is only ignorant assholes like you and Trump who think that there is some trick to "managing" these resources.

Here's a link to a report from Trump's own government which outlines the costs of ignoring climate change.

Major Trump administration climate report says damages are ‘intensifying across the country’

You really are stupid twit honey.

"
Thinning Harvest
When trees are crowded together, they are in greater competition for sunlight, nutrients and water. As a result, they tend to be less healthy and to grow less vigorously. To improve the health and productivity of the forest, forest managers may remove a portion of the trees in the early stages (10-15 years) of a growing stand of trees so there is less competition for sunlight, water and nutrients. The forest is ‘thinned’ by taking out a certain percentage of the trees. The remaining trees will grow faster, stronger and larger. The thinning also improves the growth of the forest’s understory such as wildflowers and native weeds by increasing the amount of sunlight that reaches the forest floor. This growth provides more food and cover for animals such as quail and rabbits.

This type of harvest is typically referred to as a “pre-commercial” harvest since the costs associated with the forest management (road maintenance, harvesting, etc.) often equal or outweigh the money earned on the harvested trees for the landowners. These type of harvests result in pulpwood size trees, which are smaller in diameter than trees that would be made into lumber.

Clearcut Harvest
Clearcutting removes all the trees in a given area, much like a wildfire, hurricane or other natural disturbance would do. It is used most frequently in pine forests, which require full sunlight to grow, and in hardwood forests with yellow poplar, sweetgum, cherry, maple and other species that require full sunlight.

Clearcuts are an efficient way to convert unhealthy stands to healthy, productive forests because they allow forest managers to control the tree species that grow on the site through natural or artificial regeneration.

While a clearcut removes all canopy cover and is unattractive for a short period of time, it is an effective method for creating habitat for a variety of wildlife species. Animals that eat insects, such as turkeys and quails, and those that eat annual and perennial plants, such as bears and deer, thrive in recently clearcut areas. Many creatures also find shelter from weather and predators in the low growing grasses, bushes and briar thickets that follow this type of harvest. In addition, clearcutting is an important forest management tool because it can be used to create edges – areas where two habitat types or two ages of the same habitat meet. Because edges provide easy access to more than one habitat, they usually have more diverse wildlife communities than large blocks of a single habitat.

A clearcut harvest will produce a mixture of pulpwood and sawtimber products for the forest products industry based on the size of the trees and whether the trees are softwood (pine) or hardwood (maple, oaks, etc.). Loggers sort the trees onto different trucks for their different locations. The smaller diameter trees, typically called pulpwood, will head to a paper mill or energy facility. The larger diameter trees, typically referred to as sawtimber, will be sent to a sawmill. Again, different tree species (whether softwood or hardwood) are sent to specific markets.

Shelterwood Harvest
In a shelterwood cut, mature trees are removed in two or three harvests over a period of 10 to 15 years. This method allows regeneration of medium to low shade-tolerant species because a “shelter” is left to protect them. Many hardwoods, such as oak, hickory and cherry, can produce and maintain seedlings or sprouts in light shade under a partially cut stand. However, the young trees will not grow and develop fully until the remaining overstory trees are removed.

One benefit to shelterwood harvests is that they provide cover and early successional food sources for wildlife. However, this method of harvest is not recommended for trees with shallow root systems because the remaining trees are more susceptible to wind damage after neighboring trees are removed. Another disadvantage to shelterwood cuts is that they require more roads to be built through the forest, and increase the risk of soil disturbance and damage to the remaining trees during harvesting.

Seed Tree Harvest
In a seed tree harvest, five or more scattered trees per acre are left in the harvested area to provide seeds for a new forest stand. These trees are selected based on their growth rate, form, seeding ability, wind resistance and future marketability.

Wildlife benefit from seed tree harvests in much the same way as they do from a clearcut harvest, except that they also reap the benefits of the seed trees themselves. If left on site indefinitely, seed trees eventually may become snags or downed logs, which are important habitat components for woodpeckers and many other species. Seed trees are also excellent food sources and nesting sites for hawks and other birds.

One disadvantage to seed tree harvests is that the remaining trees are at increased risk of damage from wind, lightening, insect attack and logging of nearby trees. This type harvest may also require the landowner to make future investments in thinning and competition control because of uncontrolled reseeding."


https://www.ncforestry.org/teachers/forest-management-basics/

Dumb bitch.

Proving my favourite point: That a woman never makes a fool of a man. She just gives him leave to develop his natural tendences.

These are the very "forest management" techniques that people are laughing at Trump for promoting. These "management techniques" would indeed encourage forest fires, because there's nothing to hold the moisture close to the soil, so it would dry out more quickly. Not to mention that these aren't forests, they're tree farms. They're not a sustable ecological system, supporting an interconnected supply of both vegetable and protein food sources to a wide variety of species and lifeforms. They're growing trees for harvest. The language is very clear - the point is to grow large stand of timber suitable for a profitable harvest.

What's hysterically funny is the paragraph that starts "Wildlife beneft from seed tree harvests in much the same way as they do from clearcut harvests". There is no way that wildlife benefits from clearcut harvest. None. Wildlife never benefits when their habitat and food sources are destroyed.

A forest is an ecological system where an entire system is nurtured and provided for. This is how to manage a tree farm, not a forest.

Would you care to try posting and again just in case there's anyone left who doubts you're an idiot. We want to remove all doubt.

Thread after thread on this I've posted data from the experts............saying that if they don't thin the forest and get rid of dead wood the fires would be out of control.

I even posted a GAO report on the legislation under Bill Clinton saying that this would happen with the law Roadless........to PROTECT THE FOREST.......

Not only did this end the Forestry service from building roads to remote areas.......it outlawed clearing up the dead wood and doing forest management. The let it burn policy is a result of it.

40 Trees per acre is a healthy forest............they have hundreds per acre now.......limb to limb......large dead wood on the ground.......when a fire hits it's an inferno..................Not to mention the bug infestation from the rotten wood.............

Bush did try and challenge that law...........courts shot him down..........Then Obama hung on to the policy...........

But hey...........we needed to save the trees right............some estimates are over a 100 million dead trees in California now. Worked out real well didn't it.

 

[Lesh]

A century of fire suppression is why California is in flames

Interesting subject.

Sweeping the floors of course is not a thing...but back burning is. Let's assume that;s what the Orange Idiot meant

Unfortunately it can only be done "out of the burning season" so that it doesn't take off on it's own and with climate change the burning season is getting longer and more severe in terms of temp and wind.

 

[Markle]

A century of fire suppression is why California is in flames

Interesting subject.

Sweeping the floors of course is not a thing...but back burning is. Let's assume that;s what the Orange Idiot meant

Unfortunately it can only be done "out of the burning season" so that it doesn't take off on it's own and with climate change the burning season is getting longer and more severe in terms of temp and wind.

Why do you find it necessary to ridicule our great President's name when you even agree he is right...again?

 

[Wyatt earp]

A century of fire suppression is why California is in flames

Interesting subject.

Sweeping the floors of course is not a thing...but back burning is. Let's assume that;s what the Orange Idiot meant

Unfortunately it can only be done "out of the burning season" so that it doesn't take off on it's own and with climate change the burning season is getting longer and more severe in terms of temp and wind.

You would think the fucking idiots in California would have this whipped by now. .



After the country built them the Hoover damn and made lake Mead..



God are they stupid

.

 

[eagle1462010]

A century of fire suppression is why California is in flames

Interesting subject.

Sweeping the floors of course is not a thing...but back burning is. Let's assume that;s what the Orange Idiot meant

Unfortunately it can only be done "out of the burning season" so that it doesn't take off on it's own and with climate change the burning season is getting longer and more severe in terms of temp and wind.

LOL

Yes forest need to burn for their own good and controlled burns are part of that equation to get rid of low lying fuel. However heavy equipment can absolutely mulch the dead rotten trees at ground level to dust...............You don't have to do this everywhere..............but if you want to protect population areas you need to do this for miles around these areas......Which would include getting the trees down to maximum of about 40 trees per acre.

 

[Lesh]

A century of fire suppression is why California is in flames

Interesting subject.

Sweeping the floors of course is not a thing...but back burning is. Let's assume that;s what the Orange Idiot meant

Unfortunately it can only be done "out of the burning season" so that it doesn't take off on it's own and with climate change the burning season is getting longer and more severe in terms of temp and wind.

You would think the fucking idiots in California would have this whipped by now. .



After the country built them the Hoover damn and made lake Mead..



God are they stupid

.

Newsflash...the problem exists all across the west

 

[eagle1462010]

A century of fire suppression is why California is in flames

Interesting subject.

Sweeping the floors of course is not a thing...but back burning is. Let's assume that;s what the Orange Idiot meant

Unfortunately it can only be done "out of the burning season" so that it doesn't take off on it's own and with climate change the burning season is getting longer and more severe in terms of temp and wind.

You would think the fucking idiots in California would have this whipped by now. .



After the country built them the Hoover damn and made lake Mead..



God are they stupid

.

Newsflash...the problem exists all across the west

Most of the west isn't as heavily populated as California.............The purpose is to protect people living there with management of the forest..........doesn't mean you have to necessarily do the entire forest........

 

[Lesh]

A century of fire suppression is why California is in flames

Interesting subject.

Sweeping the floors of course is not a thing...but back burning is. Let's assume that;s what the Orange Idiot meant

Unfortunately it can only be done "out of the burning season" so that it doesn't take off on it's own and with climate change the burning season is getting longer and more severe in terms of temp and wind.

You would think the fucking idiots in California would have this whipped by now. .



After the country built them the Hoover damn and made lake Mead..



God are they stupid

.

Newsflash...the problem exists all across the west

Most of the west isn't as heavily populated as California.............The purpose is to protect people living there with management of the forest..........doesn't mean you have to necessarily do the entire forest........

Heavy population density makes the problem worse. But it's a problem even in low density population RED states