Home > environment > Green Diamond 10-year harvest map

Green Diamond 10-year harvest map

Ten years of logging by Green Diamond Resource Co. (formerly Simpson Timber) is shown in this Google Earth map put together by the Environmental Protection Information Center.

From the EPIC blog:

This map shows the 10yr logging history on Green Diamond lands in the Maple Creek and Little River areas near Trinidad. This pattern is repeated in watersheds all across the Green Diamond landscape

More.

  1. March 27, 2010 at 12:27 am

    Looks like enough clearcutting in 10 years to ensure now forest will be left in 20 years!

  2. Anonymous
    March 27, 2010 at 7:22 am

    Looks like a jigsaw puzzle.

  3. Anonymoose
    March 27, 2010 at 7:26 am

    The EPIC article says that there are Pacific Fisher in that area. That is amazing. I didn’t think there were any Fisher left in Calif. If its true something needs to be done to protect them. I have seen Marten and Fisher in Northern Idaho/Montana, and they are beautiful creatures.

  4. Bolithio
    March 27, 2010 at 7:40 am

    There are fishers from the 101 to the 5 in most of our northern CA forests. The martin also exists, though it is limited to the coastal forests.

  5. March 27, 2010 at 8:00 am

    deane wrote, Looks like enough clearcutting in 10 years to ensure no forest will be left in 20 years!

    Not quite. I just took a look at the area using Google Earth on the assumption it was a doctored photo. Not sure if it’s doctored, but the photo EPIC is using shows a lot more brown (clearcuts) than I’m seeing when I look at the same area on my computer’s Google Earth.

    One thing you don’t see in the EPIC photo are areas that were presumably clear cut in years gone by that have been replanted and grown back. You can tell by the color. The brown areas you see now will likely show as light green in 10 to 20 years.

    I’m wondering if they colored over the planted areas to make them look like currently bare areas? I was trying to copy the image I was looking at to compare it to theirs but couldn’t figure out how, at least in the few minutes I played with it.

    Be interesting if somebody knew how to make an overlay to compare the two. Then you could tell for sure if the doctored their photo.

  6. Bolithio
    March 27, 2010 at 8:15 am

    I looked at google earth too. EPIC? No question its doctored.

  7. March 27, 2010 at 8:25 am

    It’s obviously not a screenshot from Google Earth. An 8 year-old clear-cut would not look the same as a 1 year-old cut.

  8. Steak 'n Eggs
    March 27, 2010 at 8:26 am

    Of course its doctored. A clearcut is completely greened over in a year or two. Furthermore, ten-year old stands are approaching 20-ft in height.

    Adding some brown helps the phone ring with donations from the relocated urbanites who will save us from ourselves. Thanks EPIC and Heraldo!

  9. Plain Jane
    March 27, 2010 at 8:46 am

    A google earth map is not the same as a google earth photo. Changing the color of the clearcut areas for contrast so they can be seen is not “doctoring.” If you think the areas they show as clear cuts aren’t actually clear cuts then provide some evidence.

  10. Plain Jane
    March 27, 2010 at 8:48 am

    Yes, Bolithio. I see Fishers along Elk River all the time, but not nearly as many as when I was growing up.

  11. Delemont
    March 27, 2010 at 8:49 am

    I am sort of surprised by this post, Heraldo. At each of the recent planning commission meetings you guys are constantly talking about keeping our resource land producing timber. You support the timber industry up until the time they decide to cut town trees???

  12. Scott
    March 27, 2010 at 8:53 am

    Adding brown also shows the areas that were clearcut in the last 10 years as EPIC was trying to demonstrate. Would yellow or purple have made it easier to understand? Of course some areas are green now! And this is what our regulations allow. Don’t like it, try and get the forest practice rules beefed up like they are down south. Try and harvest redwood in Santa Cruz County, it’s a different ballgame.

  13. March 27, 2010 at 8:58 am

    Timberlands should be kept in timber production. But clear-cutting is not sustainable.

  14. Bolithio
    March 27, 2010 at 9:02 am

    “If you think the areas they show as clear cuts aren’t actually clear cuts then provide some evidence.”

    How long is a clearcut a clearcut?

  15. Bolithio
    March 27, 2010 at 9:03 am

    Why not? Explain Heraldo….Maybe we should start by defining sustainable.

  16. 06em
    March 27, 2010 at 9:05 am

    Since this map incorporates 10 years (and it is displaying all the places that were clearcut during those 10) then yes, the map has clearly been altered (that would be “doctored” to a denying climate changey kind of way I suppose) to illustrate the number of clearcuts. As you say, Fred, some of the first clearcut areas have “grown back” and are no longer brown.
    If you have google earth you can see what Fred’s talking about. It is incredible how much of that land has been clearcut and, since it’s privately held land, I can only imagine the direct impact to watersheds and wildlife. If you look at the google earth timeline (click on the clock face icon) and toggle back and forth between May 3rd and June 8th of 2006, you can really see how severe the impact can be in just one month. Check out the area 3 miles east of White Rock.

  17. Plain Jane
    March 27, 2010 at 9:12 am

    “How long is a clearcut a clearcut?”

    IMO, it is a clearcut until it has mature trees. Seedlings and fast growing brush doesn’t count. Other opinions may vary.

  18. Plain Jane
    March 27, 2010 at 9:16 am

    If that map is accurate and shows the clear cuts over the last 10 years, who could possibly believe that rate of cutting is sustainable? Double the brown for 20, triple it for 30. How many years does it take for trees to mature?

  19. Bolithio
    March 27, 2010 at 9:18 am

    Fair enough, so by your definition, a clear cut is a clear cut for 40-120 years depending on the site and tree species in the stand. That of course would make most of this county a clear cut.

  20. Anonymous
    March 27, 2010 at 9:19 am

    Heraldo,
    Do you have the kmz file that is used with Google Earth to generate this site? I didn’t see it on the Epic site. This would allow one to use Google Earth to evaluate the data (zoom in, etc). Sometimes the overlay files also include additional data about the overlay.

  21. Plain Jane
    March 27, 2010 at 9:21 am

    YES, that makes most of this county a clear cut. DUH!

  22. Bolithio
    March 27, 2010 at 9:23 am

    Well, again it depends on what sustainable means. First as has been pointed out, while the map shows us harvest in a 10 year period, but they did not all happen ten years ago. Secondly, the ownership is 350K acres. So generally they are going to work in an area over a few years, then move to other areas. This is tied into the sustainability definition.

  23. Plain Jane
    March 27, 2010 at 9:26 am

    My definition of sustainable in this context is harvesting at a rate commensurate with growth.

  24. Anonymous
    March 27, 2010 at 9:40 am

    Math looks simple to me. Look like about 1/3 of the land clearcut in the last 10 years. Keep going at that rate and you have a 30 year harvest cycle. This doesn’t seem sustainable to me. Am I way off here?

  25. Farmer
    March 27, 2010 at 9:45 am

    If Green Diamond is sustainable then why did their Orick Sawmill have to be shut down?

  26. March 27, 2010 at 9:52 am

    If Green Diamond is sustainable then why did their Orick Sawmill have to be shut down?

    Maybe because much of the timber land they depended on turned into a national park? Never mind how difficult and expensive it can be to cut timber and, to add insult to injury, the market for lumber going south. Surprised they lasted as long as they did.

  27. March 27, 2010 at 9:55 am

    Heraldo wrote, But clear-cutting is not sustainable.

    I’d say a look at Google Earth suggests it is, although it’s hard to say by looking just exactly how mature the trees in some areas are.

  28. March 27, 2010 at 9:55 am

    Do you have the kmz file that is used with Google Earth to generate this site?

    No, I just swiped the image from the EPIC blog.

  29. Farmer
    March 27, 2010 at 9:56 am

    They claim to have a 50 year logging cycle.

  30. March 27, 2010 at 10:00 am

    Google Earth doesn’t offer a full picture when it comes to sustainability. For example, it doesn’t show the number of lost jobs that result from logging too much too fast.

  31. Farmer
    March 27, 2010 at 10:02 am

    The timber from the trees in what is now the park would have prolonged the inevitable mill closure by what, a couple of years? Green Diamonds current timber holdings dwarf the park.

  32. March 27, 2010 at 10:03 am

    Farmer, Good question.

    I wonder when comparing framing lumber for construction purposes (any kind), what is so different between today’s consumer and yesteryear’s producer. Answer – Fads, innovations and profit marginizations.

    Fads and Innovations to maximize uses with natural resource wastes – chip boards (OSB), Glue Lam Beams and framing members, Parallam beams and framing members, pulps, etc… Not to mention recycling of paper products, glass products, ceramic products, wastes, etc… by those who find alternative uses aside from mere recycling for alternate materials like metals and concrete.

    I believe timber will always be used as it should be – it is a renewable natural resource. The question for me is at what point does DEMAND by a world over-populated with consumers begin to hurt the natural resource lands that are to be managed for future needs, hopefully a perpetual benefit at that.

    Like anything else in life – when not enough exists to go around for those in need, something dies off!

    Jeffrey Lytle
    McKinleyville – 5th District

  33. Plain Jane
    March 27, 2010 at 10:07 am

    How mature is a 10 year old tree, Fred? If the EPIC map is accurate, only a blind person could possibly believe this level of cutting is sustainable. Even if they were selectively harvesting over their entire properties, they couldn’t maintain this level of cutting.

  34. too funny
    March 27, 2010 at 10:10 am

    Fred measures sustainability via google earth

    awesome

  35. Phred
    March 27, 2010 at 10:17 am

    Fred learns so much from a glance at Google Earth. That’s why he knows so much about global warming.

  36. March 27, 2010 at 10:25 am

    Google Earth, if nothing else, shows that much of the areas that EPIC is trying to say are barren wastelands from clearcutting, aren’t barren at all.

    But that’s what they’re trying to convey by coloring all areas clear cut in the last 10 years the same color as recently clear cut areas. They want people to think they’re all devoid of trees. And people fall for it.

    I met a guy from LA once that thought redwood trees are nearly extinct. He really believed it from all the enviro crap he listened to. He was surprised when I told him redwoods grow like weeds from stumps of trees that have been cut.

    That’s the whole purpose of that EPIC post: to mislead people.

    I wonder if that gal I heard on the KMUD talk show a week or so ago is an EPIC member? She called in and ranted about how we’re planning on “cutting a huge swath of cathedral trees” down at Richardson Grove just to let trucks in. Many of us know no such plans have been made, yet she went on about it and the talk show hosts never corrected her.

    Pathetic.

  37. Bolithio
    March 27, 2010 at 10:25 am

    Again viewing the photo is misleading. Yes, if you continued at that rate harvest within that area, of course you would not last long. Thats not their plan however. If it was, they would have been out of business along time ago. Remember that you are looking at maybe 5-10K acres of a 350K ownership. When you consider this, the sustainability of harvesting spread out across time and space makes more sense (to a forester lol).

    Jane, your definition is a good one. Lets add some wildlife and watershed values to that as well. There is no way GD is harvesting more than they are growing. I guess you could argue that if there was an opportunity to (i.e. a log market) that they would. Furthermore you could say that it already happened in the 50-60s all over. While true, to balance growth with harvest in time, you also must consider the period of growth between harvest. Which for the majority of the landbase has not only grown more than harvested, but more forest has encroached into places is wasn’t in the past due the the absence in fire (i.e. natural prairie and oak woodland).

    So when you consider this over time, even if a period of high markets result in a heavy cut, the inevitable periods of low market more than make up for the growth. (This premise assumes a forward thinking company that is not in liquidation mode). But even there we have seen that even Hurwitz could not prevent redwood from growing. Remember even with a heavy cut, amusing you dont pave over it with urban sprawl – trees continue to grow.

  38. March 27, 2010 at 10:30 am

    Google Earth, if nothing else, shows that much of the areas that EPIC is trying to say are barren wastelands from clearcutting, aren’t barren at all.

    Where did they say this?

    even Hurwitz could not prevent redwood from growing

    No, but Maxxam did claim to be running out of logs after 20 years of clear-cutting. There’s a difference between trees and harvestable trees.

  39. too funny
    March 27, 2010 at 10:34 am

    So you object to their use of the color brown Fred? I suspect most reasonable people understand that these zones will regrow. The real question is if this method of forestry is sustainable.

    Would you be satisfied if they’d used the color purple instead of brown?

  40. Bolithio
    March 27, 2010 at 10:35 am

    And they were. But now, after periods of growth, they can start to thin stands again. Which they will.

  41. March 27, 2010 at 10:44 am

    Apparently the clear-cutting policy didn’t sustain Maxxam’s venture in the timber industry.

  42. Plain Jane
    March 27, 2010 at 10:54 am

    What is your estimate of the percentage of land that GD has clearcut in the last 10 years, Bolithio, and how many years before those clearcuts will yield timber?

  43. Plain Jane
    March 27, 2010 at 10:55 am

    Another question, do you consider a clearcut to be the same as thinning? Is thinning harvesting marketable timber?

  44. Bolithio
    March 27, 2010 at 11:13 am

    I dont think clearcutting is to blame for Maxxams’ failed(or successful depending on how you view it) mission of exploitation.

    I dont really have an estimate of GD harvest over their landbase. My guess is that its in the realm of 15-20%. But again I dont know.

    Depending on the site, a commercial thin could occur following a CC within 15-30 years. Ive worked in stands were a logger has been there three times in his life.

    Oh and I dont consider thinning to be the same as a CC. duh! (sorry lol)

  45. Bolithio
    March 27, 2010 at 11:17 am

    I think the mills in the area will accept a tree with a 3″ inside bark top diameter. So basically a 10″ diameter tree is merchantable. Anything smaller can be merchantable too, but harvest of this pulpwood material is less common in our area. Very common in the NW and SE states.

  46. Plain Jane
    March 27, 2010 at 11:27 am

    You seem to be mixing up terms as a deliberate attempt to confuse, Bolithio.

    You guess that GD harvest is 15 to 20%, is that per year or per decade.

    You say you’ve worked in stands where a logger has been 3 times in his life, but don’t state whether those were clearcuts, if the work was thinning or timber harvest.

    A commercial thinning (presumably for pulp) is not the same thing as a harvest for timber as you undoubtedly know.

    If they are cutting 20% a decade (which judging from the EPIC map seems like a very low guesstimate) how long can that continue before they run out of mature trees?

  47. March 27, 2010 at 11:42 am

    I wish all the people on here who are trying to deny the seriousness of desertification and salmon extinction were running our banks. People like this can be stolen from without consequence… You could literally drive a double-wide ATA certified truck into their bank and load it up with all their money and tell them that their bank will have plenty of money again in a couple years and no one will notice the difference. And they’d be dumb enough to believe you! Just like the foresters who work for Green Diamond. Stupid is as stupid does! Besides, we don’t need timber jobs anymore. I mean if you only have 10 year old trees… Just sayin…

  48. Steak 'n Eggs
    March 27, 2010 at 12:02 pm

    I have an idea, if you don’t like how GDRCo is doing it, buy some timberland and manage it differently. For years the enviros have been harping on even-aged management, but they never offer a feasible alternative that provides for a reasonable rate of return. Trust me folks, forestry in California is extremely difficult, but the rewards are great when considering how other States and Countries manage their lands.

    There is a global demand for lumber, which is going to be supplied by somebody. Why not support our local industry, which is undoubtedly the “greenest”?

  49. Plain Jane
    March 27, 2010 at 12:12 pm

    I have an idea, how about if you timber industry shills come up with a different argument than “buy it” in answer to valid concerns over environmental degradation which affects us all and no amount of money can fix. A reasonable rate of economic return for the owners isn’t our problem, but theirs. Lumber prices are set by supply and demand. Reduce the supply and the price goes up. Increase the supply (like Maxxam did) and the price drops and forces everyone to increase their cutting just to break even. If timber can’t be sustainably harvested at a profit then don’t. Simple.

  50. March 27, 2010 at 12:26 pm

    Maybe Humboldt County could set a limit of timber harvest at 1% of total harvestable trees per year, and put the permits up for auction. That would set a roughly 100 year cycle and also work towards making any local timber industry sustainable.

    I know, it reeks of socialism.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  51. huufc
    March 27, 2010 at 12:42 pm

    I assume the point is, look at all the harvesting done to satisify the needs of the people in the United States esp. in California. Green diamond never cut a tree and turned it into lumber that someone didnt buy.

  52. Bolithio
    March 27, 2010 at 12:45 pm

    “”You seem to be mixing up terms as a deliberate attempt to confuse, Bolithio. “”

    Really? Thanks for lowering the bar Jane. I was just getting into this too. You seem to be a very negative person PJ.

  53. March 27, 2010 at 12:48 pm

    That’s great logic… huufc! It’s kinda like saying: I bet a banker robber never stole money that he didn’t spend! Or how about saying a wife-beater never threw a punch that wasn’t deserved!

    With people like you around we can do anything we want and feel good about it right?

  54. Bolithio
    March 27, 2010 at 12:53 pm

    “”I wish all the people on here who are trying to deny the seriousness of desertification and salmon extinction were running our banks. “”

    So Deane. While it is true that there places in the world where desert environments are encroaching into new areas, particularly in Africa, I dont see how that relates to salmon extinction. It is true that in the past there were many practices in and near our river systems that lead to serious habitat loss. While there has been natural recovery of this habitat, there has also been lots of effort by man in the recent decades. Still, the truth is that the best way to ensure long term salmon populations is for humans to stop consuming them.

    Also, logging does not create deserts. Just drive our wonderful backroads to prove it.

  55. March 27, 2010 at 1:00 pm

    Also, logging does not create deserts. Just drive our wonderful backroads to prove it.

    He does seem to prove at least one of my points, though. He seems to actually think the brown colored areas designating present and past clear cutting areas are actually all devoid of trees now. I’m sure a number of others that see that picture will feel the same way. That’s why EPIC posted it.

  56. Back On Earth
    March 27, 2010 at 1:08 pm

    We’ve made our choice; Social engineering by the highest bidders has failed miserably.

    I’ve visited dozens of tributaries and rivulets over the last 40 years in Humboldt County. From Korbel to Maple Creek the streams were once teeming with reptiles, amphibians, eels, crayfish and clams, and the frequent otter munching its way upstream.

    They began disappearing 30 years ago, it’s like a “dead-zone” today by comparison, and they haven’t recovered.

    How long will that take?

    Amazing how the forests of the world suffer similar diversity devastation, and yet, we continue to treat the mining of natural resources as a mere property-right.

    Too little, too late.

    Since only 20% of county citizens can afford to buy a home here, we need to allow alternative, in-fill, home-building techniques. Straw-bale homes are already proven safe, well-insulated, attractive, and cost about $10,000 to construct yourself. Less toxic materials, less shipping, less resources, less waste, cheaper and less toxic than a mobile home.

  57. Back On Earth
    March 27, 2010 at 1:24 pm

    We made our choice; social and environmental engineering by the highest bidders has failed miserably.

    Amazing how forests throughout the world are suffering devastating declines in bio-diversity, (some call it one of the greatest extinction events in 500 million years), yet, we continue to tolerate the view of natural resources as mere property-rights.

    I’ve hiked the tributaries and rivulets of this county for 40 years. The forests Between Korbel and Maple Creek once teemed with reptiles, amphibians, crayfish, eels, clams, and the otters that munched their way upstream.

    Today, it’s like a massive “dead-zone” by comparison.

    If the rest of the world is any indication, we have NO IDEA if this kind of loss will recover, or how long it could take.

  58. Back On Earth
    March 27, 2010 at 1:25 pm

    Wow, my first post took a long, long time to appear.

    Sorry.

  59. Anonymous
    March 27, 2010 at 1:32 pm

    Change the name to California Hemp Company. That’s the answer. All of our worries will go away.

  60. annon
    March 27, 2010 at 2:10 pm

    who said the map labeled “logging activity” was equal to clear-cut? there ia all sorts of acreage in a harvest plan that is not clear-cut silviculture.

    also, redweed grows to economic maturity in about 40 years on site II green diamond land. soooo, 25% per decade is very sustainable if that land is set aside to produce timber.

    as for clear-cutting, i mow my lawn every tuesday and friday using tweezers to pick every other blade of grass instead of using the lawn mower which pollutes the air. and the frogs prefer it. spotted owls on the other hand love clear cut margins and the enriched prey base they provide. (Zabel et. al.)

  61. Bolithio
    March 27, 2010 at 2:37 pm

    I know allot of you reading this just cant accept that maybe the strides made in the past 20 years in environmental science has brought us to a better place. If you live for the trees, it is hard for you to find a place for humans – who are marching on eating everything in their path. I get it. I had big time idealistic visions when I first went to college, and I still hold to many of them. However, witnessing the changes made in on the ground practices in the past two decades has effected my perspective on what actually happens during logging. When I compare this to what I have seen first hand in many other states and countries it become even more clear. These places have little or no regulation. The leave it alone solution is irresponsible for many reasons, but mainly because it goes against the principles of the green movement of America. Exporting our resource needs and industrial pollution to other places is hardly a solution.

    So please try to have another look at modern forestry in CA, and learn about how sustained yield plans are developed and implemented (requirements for companies such as GD and HRC). Also take a good look at how these plans are regulated and the quality of reporting that evolved in the process. Where doing a better job than the loud people shouting are giving us credit for.

  62. The Lorax
    March 27, 2010 at 2:49 pm

    Bolithio, A clear-cut is a clear-cut until over the coarse of time it becomes and mixed age and species stand again, which is a long freakin time! Production logging and short term profit is what drives clear-cutting not sustainable management.

  63. Bolithio
    March 27, 2010 at 3:10 pm

    Lorax – Most conifer stands tend to be evenaged. Have you been to any of our OG redwood parks? Try to find a significant second age class that is not on the margin. DF is even more homogeneous in nature. In WA when you start to get into pure hemlock or cedar stands, you are more likely to find true all aged stands.

    Infact landowners who utilize selection are challenged with the stands striving for equilibrium. For instance if you thin from below, the remaining trees tend to increase in diameter rapidly, and their crowns fill in. This will generally limit any productive regeneration from occurring. So you have to create openings throughout the logging area were you can establish your other age classes.

  64. A-Nony-Mouse
    March 27, 2010 at 3:27 pm

    An old growth forest holds water, provides cover, and provides habitat. We have almost none of it left. I’ve read that over 90% of our old growth rewood forest is gone (at least for several hundred years to come). Look at the Eel River in the summer. Yeah, some of it goes down the Russian River but that doesn’t effect the South Fork which becomes a tiny trickle in the summer. Almost the entire county has been clearcut at one time or another with profound effects on wildlife and especially fish populations. At least they don’t drag the logs down the creekbeds any more. When someone talks about all the wildlife and salmon they USED to see, it only underscores the long term damage clearcutting has done to our county. If you don’t think there’s another way, look at Arcata’s community forest. It can be done.

  65. A-Nony-Mouse
    March 27, 2010 at 3:28 pm

    Try flying over Northern Cal and southern Oregon after it has snowed. The snow highlights the cuts. You’ll be appalled!

  66. March 27, 2010 at 3:31 pm

    A second growth forest holds water, provides cover, and provides habitat. In fact, a second growth forest has a much more diverse range of wildlife than old growth. We have millions of acres of second growth all over this country.

    I would imagine we also have hundreds of thousands of acres of old growth, as well.

  67. Steak 'n Eggs
    March 27, 2010 at 4:15 pm

    PJ…you are barking up the wrong tree girl. Everything the industrial timber owners do is permitted by the State. Go whine about it to the Board of Forestry… To me, you sound like another NIMBY with the same old tired arguements but little understanding of hydrology. Do you have any idea of the background levels of watershed impairement relative to today’s condition?…Unlikely.

    Here is something to think about…if GDRCo & HRC (for example) were to close their doors, lock the gates, and walk away, would watershed conditions improve?

  68. dumas
    March 27, 2010 at 4:27 pm

    yep, those trees sure look great after a wild fire roars through them. I’am all for protecting the old growth forest, but its unreal seeing all the trees inland that have been burned out. What a waste

  69. A Non A Me
    March 27, 2010 at 5:53 pm

    Clear cutting in the redwood forest mimics the fire regimen for this coastally influenced area. Although ugly, there are advantages for this management technique. One of the major contributors to sedimentation are roads and with clear cutting roads into the cut are built and then put to bed until the next cut, probably in 40 to 50 years. Even age management has that advantage but if you selectively log or “thin” then you must access the land on a frequent basis and therefore increasing the opportunity for sedimentation from roads.
    I can believe the map just as much as I would believe a map produced by the old Palco. It was produced to make a point, not as a accurate representation of the condition of the forest.
    Lastly, Green Diamond now and Simpson in the past have been very responsible companies and now that the big bad devil is gone, Palco, now it looks like Green Diamond is now moving into the cross hairs of EPIC.

  70. Cheese Dick
    March 27, 2010 at 6:24 pm

    GREEN DIAMOND. It’s right there in their gay ass name.
    Aren’t diamonds artificially made scarce to hype the price?

  71. curious
    March 27, 2010 at 7:21 pm

    If I do the math on EPICs website, Green Diamond has clearcut less than 8% of their ownership in this watershed during the last 10 years, which works out to less than 1% per year on average. Seems reasonable to me that a timber company has to cut some trees. I’d say the true colors of EPIC are coming out. They say the old Palco managed by a timber family and active in the community is what they want, but now it seems otherwise.

  72. huufc
    March 27, 2010 at 7:46 pm

    deane, wrong, no.

  73. Anonymous
    March 27, 2010 at 7:50 pm

    Heraldo Rivera wanna bee

  74. March 27, 2010 at 7:56 pm

    You’re so articulate huufc! I mean you and all your ilk who’ve posted on this thread have clearly stated again and again that there is no reason for logic or natural science or anything else for that matter. The only objective of most of the simpletons / Simpson supporters on here is to cheer for anything that can be done to make money no matter the cost and than lie about it, as well as not even think about consequences, but merely to believe in your lies long enough to get away with it! Charlie Hurwitz got away with the same line of reasoning… for a while. And how many of your friends no longer have jobs because of him? Don’t answer that… This thread has more pro-timber BS lies in it than you could fill a 100 coffins with! It sure is a good thing most environmentalists value being non-violent, as well as honest in all their actions…

  75. A-Nony-Mouse
    March 27, 2010 at 7:57 pm

    Young even-age forests present a huge fire risk compared to old growth. I’ve spent a lot of time on the Eel River and have seen the effect of siltation on the lower river. When you think that river boats used to navigate as far up as Rio Dell and small coastal steamers regularly visited Port Kenyon, there is no arguement that logging has mucked up the riverbed. There is no other factor that could have had that effect.
    And NO, young tree plantations do not hold the amount of water older forests do. That water was slowly released through the year to keep rivers and fish alive. A look at any of our free flowing rivers (Van Duzen, South Fork Eel, Little River) in the summer will show how well the ‘recent plants’ are doing that job.

  76. huufc
    March 27, 2010 at 8:02 pm

    It sure is a good thing deane. Smoke another one.

  77. Mr. Nice
    March 27, 2010 at 9:15 pm

    Clear cutting in the redwood forest mimics the fire regimen for this coastally influenced area.

    A fire doesn’t add 2-4-D, bromacil, atrazine, and metribuzin.

  78. March 27, 2010 at 10:00 pm

    So, what happens when global warming kills all the old growth? Can we log large swaths of Richardson Grove to install a six lane freeway then?

  79. March 27, 2010 at 10:14 pm

    True Mr. Nice,

    Yet, what is the stuff California State Parks is using to control certain invasive plant species…….herbicides?

    Jeffrey Lytle
    McKinleyville – 5th District

  80. Anonymous
    March 27, 2010 at 10:24 pm

    to Steak ‘n Eggs: Jim Able figured out an alternative to clearcutting years ago, when he worked for Louisiana Pacific. Now the Van Eck Forest is managed in this way; selective logging, no herbicides because the understory remains, and the soil stays put rather than bleeding into the creeks.

    Why doesn’t Green Diamond switch to this harvest method? They’d have a much better product and they’d have a company they could be proud of. I guess the masters in Washington don’t want it that way though.

  81. March 27, 2010 at 10:25 pm

    When I look out over all those thousands of acres of beautiful Earth, and then I’m told someone “owns” them, that some entity has “Sold” them all to a company for a dollar an acre. I laugh til I cry. Or is it, I cry til I laugh. Either way, I don’t believe in that kind of ownership. Humans cannot even own land long enough for their bodies to rot in it.

  82. Plain Jane
    March 27, 2010 at 10:30 pm

    I noticed that Bolithio never responded to my last post other than to insult. Not too surprising.

  83. Anonymous
    March 27, 2010 at 10:45 pm

    Why so surprising Jane? That is all you ever do.

  84. Plain Jane
    March 27, 2010 at 11:07 pm

    LOL 10:45

  85. March 28, 2010 at 12:40 am

    Prop 65 money must be running low. Time for a run on the bank – err, the next mark, Green Diamond. Time for them to fork over some protection money.

    Whoever said it above called it right – At each of the recent planning commission meetings you guys are constantly talking about keeping our resource land producing timber. You support the timber industry up until the time they decide to cut town trees??? Or until you need a cash infusion.

  86. March 28, 2010 at 12:47 am

    In a surprise move, rose latches on to a straw man. Unsustainable logging or no logging at all!

  87. Anonymous
    March 28, 2010 at 2:46 am

    Wow! Rose struck a nerve. EPIC, struck out.

  88. March 28, 2010 at 5:28 am

    In a few hundred or thousand years, if the human race still indeed exists, they will look back on this era in time and see the terrible damage we are doing to our world. Only then, after a huge slap in the face, will be realise how foolish and short sighted we are now. One positive point is that like with oil, once it becomes scarce, market forces force us to look for alternatives. I hope that this happens before it is too late.

  89. Anonymous
    March 28, 2010 at 7:33 am

    others would call this sustainable logging. better to get your wood products from overseas, that way the kids over there have jobs and you don’t have to see the mess, right?

  90. stoked
    March 28, 2010 at 7:46 am

    Yea, maybe in a hundred years there will be “wars” for cellulose and water… We better hold out now and import everything til “they” run out.

  91. A Non A Me
    March 28, 2010 at 8:12 am

    California has the most environmental protections of any state for logging. If we stop Green Diamond from being able to operate,then the lumber will come from other less protected environments.

  92. Steak 'n Eggs
    March 28, 2010 at 8:45 am

    Anon 10:24…you are absolutely correct. Uneven-aged management or selective logging can be successfully done on coastal redwood stands as is being employed by HRC/MRC. But here’s the catch…A Non A Me is correct, assumming a sustained yield harvest, there is going to be more erosion and sedimentation generated relative to that of a clearcut from roads and skid trails. Obviously a tough one for many of you to swallow, but true.

    But I guess if it doesn’t look ugly its okay since most of you see the forest from Google Earth or from the inside of your car.

    The notion that “this is good, but that is bad” in the natural world doesn’t work. Ask a Spotted Owl how it feels about a clearcut and you will be surprised with the answer. Its all relative. Climb out of your box and see both sides of the coin because its gonna take everyone’s cooperation to meet in the middle.

  93. March 28, 2010 at 9:50 am

    Ah but S&E, flying pigs can haul them redwoods out of there with no erosion at all!

  94. March 28, 2010 at 10:19 am

    Seems to me – Real ‘clear-cutting’ doesn’t look anything like what you are showing – and you surely know that. It’s the opposite. I remember what real clear-cutting looked like – entire hillsides denuded.

    Logging smaller, staggered areas is EXACTLY what you want timber companies to do if you are against clear-cutting.

    But you’ll surely gin up some fury among the newcomers who don’t remember what real clear-cutting looks like. Just the sound of the word ought to bring in some donations, eh?

  95. Plain Jane
    March 28, 2010 at 10:38 am

    People who believe money is the most important thing in life often project that delusion onto those who oppose the damage their greed causes. Research is needed to figure out what sort of deprivation causes this emptiness that can’t be filled in people for whom there is never enough.

  96. Farmer
    March 28, 2010 at 11:52 am

    Bolithio first says:

    There is no way GD is harvesting more than they are growing.

    And then says:

    I dont really have an estimate of GD harvest over their landbase. My guess is that its in the realm of 15-20%. But again I dont know.”

    If you don’t have intimate knowledge of the company then why do you steadfastly support them? Is it just because they are a timber company?

  97. Farmer
    March 28, 2010 at 11:58 am

    A Non A Me says:

    California has the most environmental protections of any state for logging. If we stop Green Diamond from being able to operate,then the lumber will come from other less protected environments.

    That’s exactly what some folks used to say about Pacific Lumber before the bankruptcy.

  98. FinancialMeltDown
    March 28, 2010 at 12:01 pm

    To them it’s merely a game of who can have the most, or have it all, Jane. They like the competition and make everything into a life and death struggle. It’s how they define their self worth.

  99. Plain Jane
    March 28, 2010 at 12:10 pm

    What sad lives devoid of any real value they must have, FMD.

  100. Toohey
    March 28, 2010 at 12:37 pm

    Clearcut is such a loaded word. It creates a vision of a moonscape over a mountain side. There is nothing wrong with small properly planned clearcuts. They are economical and create edges in the forest that wildlife is drawn to. If any private enterprise cannot make the landscape earn money they will not keep it. That doesn’t mean more parks it means subdivision and rural residential living, probably the worst environmental thing that could be done to that land. Also, if we kill our timber industry the wood will come from places like Siberia where logging is facilitating the extinction of the Siberia Tiger. Forestry is not a black and white issue, its shades of green.

  101. March 28, 2010 at 12:41 pm

    If it doesn’t get cut it burns and then government drops flame retardants that poison the groundwater and mutate children, doing countless damage the the forest genetics.
    Loggers, not firefighters is as plain as the chinese shoes most of you wear.

  102. Bolithio
    March 28, 2010 at 12:57 pm

    Plain Jane Says:
    March 27, 2010 at 10:30 pm

    I noticed that Bolithio never responded to my last post other than to insult. Not too surprising.

    lol

    I insulted you how? Did you accuse you of misleading people? I actually did answer most of your questions. If you really care, take a forestry class at CR.

  103. Bolithio
    March 28, 2010 at 12:57 pm

    (‘did I’ of course =/)

  104. Plain Jane
    March 28, 2010 at 1:02 pm

    These are the questions you didn’t answer, Bolithio:

    “You guess that GD harvest is 15 to 20%, is that per year or per decade.”

    “You say you’ve worked in stands where a logger has been 3 times in his life, but don’t state whether those were clearcuts, if the work was thinning or timber harvest.”

    And I stick to my earlier accusation that you deliberately mix up terms to confuse. If you consider that negative, oh well.

  105. woodsworker
    March 28, 2010 at 1:04 pm

    I have seen comments here that try to point to the map as somehow tampered with so I went to Google Earth. First: Google Earth only shows a 4 year old image, so it’s much worse now. Criticisms of the EPIC map because all the clear cut areas are brown and some would look green by now are only because the person who created the map colored in the clearcuts.
    On Google Earth you can see the clearcuts but the most recent are brown and then there are varying shades of green on the older clearcuts, but, green or brown, they are still clearly clearcuts.
    Green Diamonds ultimate plan is to clearcut huge portions of their land and then sell it for development.

  106. Reinventing The Wheel
    March 28, 2010 at 1:09 pm

    “The best things in life aren’t things”.

    Paul Gallegos at his HQ opening last month.

  107. Not A Native
    March 28, 2010 at 2:25 pm

    I’ve seen clearcuts and the “dog hair” tracts that result. No, of course they’re not brown, as long as soil and water remain, green plants will grow. Rain will continue to fall here regardless of logging practices, but erosion reduces the land’s ability to support a mature redwood forest.

    Residents of Stafford, Freshwater, Elk River, Orick, and others along any river/creek know all about the effects of clearcuts on erosion and floods. And in the eroded places without people, the animals see it, until they lose their “job” of surviving and “go away”.

    Don’t have time to find the reference now, but several broad analyses of sustainable practices came to the conclusion that the local redwood forest harvest rotation should be a minimum of around 70 years. Longer, where the land is steeper and unstable.

    Wide ranging forest animals need continuity of habitat to survive. Contiguous large areas need to be be maintained rather than creating a checkerboard that upsets the balance among the different animals.

    But all that presupposses that a person understands and respects that a concern for the welfare of other species is also in human’s interest because we’re interdependent in ways that aren’t obvious but are continually being discovered.

    And, buy the way, the “demand” for forest products isn’t a absolute that exists outside of supply and other economic factors. Recognizing the natural limits of forest product availability and developing alternatives and being more efficient isn’t just “good sense” its also the outlook of a genuine conservative.

    Or is it better to just use as much as possible as fast as possible, with the least effort(as cheaply) as possible to have the highest amount of economic growth right now, so that many progeny will be incentivized to figure out some other way to subsist. After all if theres a will theres a way. Thats always worked before, or did it?

    Our civilization hasn’t existed forever, it arose out of the suffering and calamity of predessors that exhausted their resources, fought over the declining supplies, died back,and dispersed. Nice legacy to give your descendants, huh?

  108. the reasonable anonymous
    March 28, 2010 at 4:43 pm

    “Our civilization hasn’t existed forever, it arose out of the suffering and calamity of predessors that exhausted their resources, fought over the declining supplies, died back,and dispersed.”

    An excellent book on this subject was “Soil and Civilization” by Edward Hyams. It came out in the ’50s. Way ahead of its time. Anyone who hasn’t read it should.

  109. March 28, 2010 at 7:51 pm

    That’s funny.

    Now big timber supporters want to deny satellite images. Even claim that they are doctored.

    Probably the same people who say there is an endless supply of Redwoods out there. Or that Redwoods always grow back.

    But if you look past the scenic strips along the highways, you’ll see endless destruction. If you look on google earth anywhere along the 101, you’ll see a thin green patch that follows the highway, aside from the state and national parks.

    I believe that is where the remaining 3% of our ancient forest is located, along those scenic highway strips, deep within stream buffers that were miraculously spared, and of course in the parks.

    It’s really sad to see the destruction from the ground, sickening to see it from satellite on computer, and mortifying to see it from a plane, as the poster described the snow covered clearcuts.

    Go hike out on some Green Diamond land and see it for yourself. Go see the giant clearcuts that Rose the doubting Thomas denies. Go see the so called “leave trees” that end up drying out or getting knocked down in storms.

    Go see the dead replanted trees that lack an over-story to thrive in dry weather. Go see the dying 4th or 5th growth redwoods that lack nutrients or topsoil to grow green needles, or even usable timber.

    Why else do you think Green Diamond is getting into the real estate business?

    Green Diamond’s tree-farms are turning into deserts. That’s what happens when you log on a 40 year rotation.

  110. Bolithio
    March 28, 2010 at 7:54 pm

    It was per decade as per your question. The stand I was referring to had been CC in the early sixties, thinned in the 80’s (a commercial thinning meaning sawlogs), then CC again in 2005. These were very productive (site II) redwood stands near Rio Dell. Sorry if that was misleading.

    Most stands however do not grow this fast. The point I was trying to make is that in our region, we have some of the more productive forests. Thats why CCing has not lead to a situation here were there is no timber. We do not have a supply issue here.

    I dont understand why Jane and other people are so quick to assume the worst from people and comment with snippy, mean statements. At first (and maybe in the past) I want to take the bait and argue, but that doesn’t add anything to the discussion. I was raised by hippies, and regardless of what box I fit into now, an open mind is a good thing. I recommend it.

  111. Plain Jane
    March 28, 2010 at 8:31 pm

    We do have a soil erosion problem here that clear cutting exacerbates, washing mountainsides into rivers and destroying fish habitat as well as people’s drinking water. If clear cutting and then replanting with faster growing species was sustainable they would be just cutting and planting the same areas over and over without having to resort to cutting on unstable mountainsides. Of course, that isn’t the case.

  112. Anonymous
    March 28, 2010 at 11:27 pm

    Green Diamond owns 25 percent of the entire 2-million-acre redwood biome. Their lands constitute one of the five most important habitats for spotted owl on the West Coast. Green Diamond has killed more than 100 spotted owls in under 20 years.

    The company is turning a once dynamic and incredibly diverse forest within this 500,000-acre expanse into a plain sheet of cloned, monocultural tree farms.

    The company is also killing salmon, as its “habitat conservation plan,” like its similar plan for the owls, will attest. The death comes not just in unchecked silt plumes, but in massive applications of herbicides to kill the once grand hardwood forests on company land … again, to plant cloned fiber trees that have nothing to do with habitat.

    Green Diamond is the end of the line for the redwood forest. What the company creates can’t really be called a forest, but a fiber farm. Thanks to Maxxam, Green Diamond has had a huge pass from the Humboldt conservation community over the last 20 years.

    Not much can reverse the incredible damage the company has done over the decades, but at least now the immense environmental catastrophe that Green Diamond has fomented will come to light.

    These people are criminals.

  113. A Non A Me
    March 29, 2010 at 7:10 am

    Many of these comments are astounding and have little basis in reality. The last comment is just one example of this. PJ, by the way, what is the basis for your sedimentation analysis for Green Diamond? Just your opinion?

  114. Chicken Little
    March 29, 2010 at 7:28 am

    McMansions! McMansions! McMansions!

  115. Plain Jane
    March 29, 2010 at 7:56 am

    Silly A Non A Me. Where did I do a sedimentation analysis? It is common knowledge that logging on steep inclines causes erosion and that erosion ends up in rivers and streams (and sometimes houses). It doesn’t take an expert to understand that when you tear up the vegetation on a steep hillside, that hillside is going to come down when it rains. As a Humboldt native I have seen this with my own eyes. I’m sure you have as well, but don’t trust your eyes, A Non. Wait for an expert to tell you what you see just like you do for what to think.

  116. Bolithio
    March 29, 2010 at 8:38 am

    Not that is matters what science tells us, but actually vegetation removal is generally not linked to sedimentation. It can be, and certainly in the past was, but this was before vegetative buffers were incorporated around watercourses. This lack of buffer in combination with burning can lead to potential soil loss.

    However, significant sources of erosion are almost always linked to roads and watercourse crossings. In the past roads typically followed creeks or were very close to them. For illustrative purposes, you could have a 80% slope CC unit with no roads that is yarded by a skyline (yarder), compared to a 35% slope selection unit yarded with a cat and have a much higher potential sediment loading issue.

    How have things improved? The understanding of hydrology has led to correct watercourse crossing installations, road fill placement, and erosion control. Roads are not built up creeks anymore. The rules governing stream crossings are extremely tight, and with the listing of coho, we have seen it get even more restrictive.

  117. A Non A Me
    March 29, 2010 at 8:42 am

    Well, Silly PJ, my eyes have seen, and they do not agree with you. I have visited Green Diamond’s lands and have seen the very little sedimentation results from the logging, but the potential for road sedimentation is great. If you develop harvest techniques that minimize roads, then you will minimize sedimentation. It seems that your eyes will only see what you have predetermined as a consequence, and your visual bias fogs any rational conclusions. Silly you.

  118. Plain Jane
    March 29, 2010 at 8:57 am

    And again neither of you dealt specifically with steep inclines which, when the vegetation is removed, slides. Buffers may prevent a lot of it from ending up in the water, but certainly not all, and we all know from past experience, logging companies don’t always following their filed logging plans.

  119. A Non A Me
    March 29, 2010 at 9:02 am

    Actually I have toured Green Diamond lands and find that is not the case. Little River and the North Fork of the Mad River are not sediment impared to my knowledge. Green Diamond is a very responsible company and they have a long term interest in good stewardship so they can continue to oprate. It only makes good business sense.

  120. Plain Jane
    March 29, 2010 at 9:13 am

    What makes good long term business sense is often not compatible what what makes good short term business sense. Trusting a corporation to do what is best for the community or the earth is poor judgment. Their bottom line is all they care about.

  121. Plain Jane
    March 29, 2010 at 9:14 am

    Additionally, weren’t you one of those defending Maxxam’s rape and plunder right up until they closed down?

  122. Bolithio
    March 29, 2010 at 9:46 am

    I haven’t heard anyone defend rape here. There have been some cases made that in spite of “rape”, conditions on the ground and the science driving decisions have evolved. In my view, dragging the weight of history around with me is less effective than learning from it from a neutral perspective. This might make future decision making less clouded with anger for the mistakes of mankind in the past.

  123. A Non A Me
    March 29, 2010 at 9:53 am

    Green Diamond is a privately owned company, does that change your mind PJ?

  124. beel
    March 29, 2010 at 10:01 am

    Is anyone else out there in blog land having deja vu? Didn’t Simpson get into trouble with regulators in the early 1990’s for cutting too much of the Little River watershed in too short of a period? I really think the issue we are dancing around is cumulative effects. How much can Simpson/GD scalp off before there is long term damage to the health and resiliency of the watershed? And it’s not just in the Little River, but across most of Simpson’s local holdings, as evidenced by the EPIC graphic.

    I think it is all about rate and scale of harvest. Remember that these forests suffered serious hits over the last 100 years from boom-bust management practices and lack of consideration for the ancillary benefits of a working forest like water quality and wildlife habitat. So here we are, in the recovery phase after short sighted management of the past, and GD is hammering it again. This time around, their practices are kinder and gentler. However, the ecological impacts from the rate and scale of contemporary harvests are worth debating.

  125. Plain Jane
    March 29, 2010 at 10:27 am

    No, A Non. They are still only interested in their immediate bottom line.

  126. Plain Jane
    March 29, 2010 at 10:31 am

    You must be new to this blog then, Bolithio. A Non A Me never met an earth raper he didn’t love. The earth doesn’t get to start over at pristine because someone else buys a piece of it. Green Diamond owns the mistakes of Simpson today and their logging plans have to take that into account.

  127. Bolithio
    March 29, 2010 at 10:47 am

    You sure have a way of making a newbie feel welcome =)

    “”Green Diamond owns the mistakes of Simpson today and their logging plans have to take that into account.””

    Indeed. This is often overlooked. THPs require the mitigation of these legacy effects and in the last decade or so they have been jam packed with sediment sites. The implementation of the RWQCB’s “Basin Plan” is enforced through the THP process. In other words, if it wasn’t for the implementation of THPs, existing, on going sediment sources would not be treated. This is why we are seeing a decline in sediment yields in heavily managed areas as opposed to other timbered areas with high road use and other agricultural pursuits.

  128. Plain Jane
    March 29, 2010 at 11:06 am

    If companies are monitored closely by regulatory agencies using strict environmental protections and if they actually adhere to their THP’s, which is not guaranteed, they may be able to harvest without harm. I’m not betting the future on any of this occurring. You know that old saying, “Those who fail to learn from the past….”

  129. Ignoranymous
    March 29, 2010 at 11:17 am

    Bolithio Says:
    March 29, 2010 at 8:38 am

    Not that is matters what science tells us, but actually vegetation removal is generally not linked to sedimentation.

    What a moron! What an ignoramus!

  130. Anonymous
    March 29, 2010 at 11:37 am

    “Many of these comments are astounding and have little basis in reality. The last comment is just one example of this.”

    Can you refute the comment claim by claim?

    The comment reflects information found in public documents, most of them (including GD’s Habitat Conservation Plans and Incidental Take Permits for owls and salmon) from Green Diamond itself.

  131. Bolithio
    March 29, 2010 at 12:02 pm

    Thanks, Ignoranymous. Do you like to read? Should be able to find these in the Humboldt Room at HSU:

    Rice, Tilley, Datzman 1967-1976. A Watershed’s Response to Logging and Roads, South Fork Caspar Creek, California.

    Wright, Sendek, Rice, and Thomas 1990. Logging Effects on Streamflow: Storm runoff of Caspar Creek in NW California.

    Bilby, R.E.,K Sullivan and S.H. Duncan, 1989. The generation and fate of road surface sediment in forested watersheds in southwestern Washington, Forest Science, V.35, N.2, pp 435-468.

    C.T. Dyrness. 1967. Soil Surface Conditions Following Skyline Logging, 1967. USDA Forest Service Resource Bulletin PNW-55.

    D.N. Swanston. 1974. Slope Stability Problems Associated with Timber Harvesting in Mountainous Regions of the Western United States.

    Harr, R.D., and R.A. Nichols, 1993. Erosion on logging roads in northwestern California: How much is avoidable? Journal of Forestry, 81(1): 23- 26.

    William E. Weaver and Danny K. Hagan. 1994. Handbook for Forest and Ranch Roads, The Mendocino County Resources Conservation District.

  132. Ignoranymous
    March 29, 2010 at 12:16 pm

    Thanks a buncher, Bolithio. You’re quite a feller, but do you know how to write…

    Got anything current besides what you listed above? Most of those references are dated, even back before the HCP.

    That’s exactly what you get when you ask a logger about sustainable forestry. You get denial of the facts, ignorance of the reality, and references that fit their pocketbooks.

    Welcome to the future (G)reat (D)ust-bowl of the North Coast!

  133. A Non A Me
    March 29, 2010 at 12:19 pm

    Now now, PJ, if I use the voice of reason, I love earth rapers! My feelings are hurt. Your tactic of name calling used against anyone that does not agree with you is troubling. Certainly you have less credibility when using this technique. But sadly, those who will not look can not see. Have a pleasant reply and I await a new name from you.

  134. Bolithio
    March 29, 2010 at 1:10 pm

    Ignoranymous: What do we get from you? Do you have anything offer? Show me your facts, or anything credible that is based in science.

    Also, how does a past study loose relevance? Do you have anything compelling to show us that the above ref. are no longer valid? Some of the older studies were conducted following more intensive logging practices, so we get a look at the results of past practices – something we could not sample or quantify now. Infact, it is the results of many of the past studies that has lead us to our current regulation.

  135. Plain Jane
    March 29, 2010 at 1:11 pm

    Your history of posts speaks for itself, A Non. You have a record of blaming environmentalists for every job loss, denial of logging industry responsibility for any of the damage they do and now denying the appropriate label for your agenda. I didn’t call you an earth raper, I said you loved earth rapers. That isn’t name calling, just stating the facts.

  136. Ignoranymous
    March 29, 2010 at 1:38 pm

    I don’t have to give anything to any of you.

    If you are not sure what to believe, you should get off your ass and go take a fucking hike. If you can’t hike it, google earth it!

    Point is, you have to see this yourself! Don’t trust some idiot with a few outdated opinions(not facts) tell you that the sky is not falling. Arguing about it doesn’t make it disappear, and burying your head in a book doesn’t mean it’s not happening.

  137. Steak n Eggs
    March 29, 2010 at 1:44 pm

    Bolithio is correct about an important but often ignored fact…THPs are the only mechanism for ensuring compliance with Water Qaulity’s Basin Plan. Without THPs, roads are not fixed or upgraded, and Water Qaulity essentially ignores some of the most egregious sediment sources if they are not associated with some sort of a permit. Hell, the County’s roads are not even up the standards of the modern forest practice rules.

    All this whining about clearcutting is kinda amusing really when you consider that in many instances, more sediment is being saved than is being produced….yes even when clearcutting is occurring.

    Each THP offers an opportunity to correct an existing source of sedimentation, which are primarily associated with roads and crossings. Since roads and crossings are the large contributors of sediment, its pretty easy to design a THP that actually “saves” sediment instead of creating it.

  138. Anonymous
    March 29, 2010 at 2:08 pm

    Wow, Ignoranymous really is an ignoramus!
    By his/her logic we don’t need actual studies and documented analysis – we just need to take a hike. This is the same anecdotal nonsense that leads climate deniers to suggest global warming is not occurring because it was cold “when I went outside”. Would Ignoranymous really think it is OK to base logging practices on what a few people “saw on a hike”. How much sediment is natural? What is the variation over years, decades? How does sediment load change with seasonal variations and a variety of human activities? What are natural sources of sediment? I don’t really like the corporate approach of GD, but I’m floored by the anit-intellectual, science illiteracy of Ignoranymous.

  139. Plain Jane
    March 29, 2010 at 2:43 pm

    Your analogy using climate change isn’t a good one, 2:08. Climate change and erosion are both global problems, but erosion occurs locally all over the world and each event is unrelated (in most cases) to erosion in other localities. Scientific studies and theories may give ideas how to prevent erosion, but can’t identify them after they occur. That takes physical presence; you know, a hike for visual inspection, water sample collection, etc.

  140. Not A Native
    March 29, 2010 at 3:13 pm

    There’s no dispute that logging always increases sedimentation above what it would otherwise be. Thats been studied and observed worldwide in every envornoment from the tropics to the arctic. So when citizens are impacted by slides, reduced water quality, flodding, and species loss, they protest to reform logging practices to reduce erosion. Stafford is the most celebrated local example, there are many others that had noticable harm like the Salt river.

    Yeah, timber harvest practices have changed, somehat, but ‘Humboldt crossings” are still being approved in THP’s. That means leveling a creekbed and putting in a soil and debris roadbed across it which the creek eventually blows out.

    And to those who want to say the “bad old days” are all in the past, well, 5 years from now, they’ll be saying the same thing about today’s practices. Their mantra is always the same, “We’re doing the best that is humanly possible and it’s unnecessary and foolish to spend money to do more.” Without residents, activists, and environmentalists being continuously involved and pushing back to improve practices and agitate for enforcement, the resource extractors profit seekers will play their bait and switch game of jobs against environmental sustainability.

    And the science of tree growth isn’t a fixed thing. Just recently a noted HSU professor discoved that redwoods continue to grow at a fast rate for 2000 years.

    Thats scientifically interesting, but of no interest at all to a resource extractor who’s received quick cash through financial leverage and now obliged for payments. Not many capital market “players” are offering 2000 year loans, they want their money in 15 years and along the way expect to get a “cut” of “getting the cut out”.

  141. March 29, 2010 at 3:17 pm

    All this whining about clearcutting is kinda amusing really when you consider that in many instances, more sediment is being saved than is being produced….yes even when clearcutting is occurring.

    Each THP offers an opportunity to correct an existing source of sedimentation, which are primarily associated with roads and crossings. Since roads and crossings are the large contributors of sediment, its pretty easy to design a THP that actually “saves” sediment instead of creating it.

    What? Creating new roads decreases sedimentation? Clear-cutting vegetation and trees around these older and “impaired” roads and crossings saves sediment?

    Next you’ll be calling clear-cuts “even aged management prescriptions” that help repair heavily logged and sediment impaired areas. Whoops, the timber industry already does that.(“Even aged management” IS the new green-washed term for clear-cutting)

    How many “carbon credits” does it take to buy into this junk science?

  142. March 29, 2010 at 3:39 pm

    Click here for a PDF from Trees Foundation, or visit their site: treesfoundation.org, the PDF is located on their homepage.
    Fight Back!
    Forest Defender’s Handbook
    A Citizen’s Guide to Timber Harvest Regulation
    by Jodi Frediani

    Orwellian double-speak is pervasive, and not just within our government, but within industry as well.

    Some would consider them both in the same.

  143. Bolithio
    March 29, 2010 at 3:49 pm

    Not a Native

    Yeah, timber harvest practices have changed, somehat, but ‘Humboldt crossings” are still being approved in THP’s. That means leveling a creekbed and putting in a soil and debris roadbed across it which the creek eventually blows out.

    Nope. This is not allowed. You can install a temporary crossing, but there are very specific and strict rules, such as the channel must be free of all unstable debris, water must be diverted around the work site, the crossing must be engineered to withstand a 50y storm event, the crossing must be removed before the start of the winter period, and so on. Then there are operating specifications, from soil stabilization to stable operating surface requirements and more.

    This is all reviewed by several agencies including the Water Board. Once they approve it, DFG requires an additional stream crossing permit, which they must approve. The DFG code regarding stream alteration is very strict and specific in its language regarding what you can and cant do in riparian areas. Depositing soils in them is not allowed, nor done in practice.

  144. Bolithio
    March 29, 2010 at 3:55 pm

    In regards to the growth rate that study talks about, there are two important things to keep in mind. The first is that GD or any other timber company is not managing for Late Sucsesional (or old growth) trees. The USFS is in their many LSRs, but thats another story. Timber managers have based their rotation cycles based on the culmination of growth over age – which means the time at which the tree has reached its peak of growth over its age and thus cutting a stand and planting it will maximize the rate at which the next harvest can occur (without loosing any potential growth). This does not mean that the tree stops growing.

    There has been some fascinating research in this field lately, and it is true that we start to look at selective logging more closely that the culmination age may increase, especially in Douglas-fir.

  145. Anonymous
    March 29, 2010 at 4:04 pm

    From PL
    “Scientific studies and theories may give ideas how to prevent erosion, but can’t identify them after they occur.”

    Huh? Do you mean we can’t identify erosion after it happens?? This discounts the work of a whole body of earth scientist who study erosion after the fact. Hydrologist in Redwood Park are still studying sediment loads that entered the rivers in the 60s.

    Wow – do you guys even read what you write??

  146. March 29, 2010 at 4:30 pm

    Will the Hubble Space telescope do when lensed up accordingly?

    Jeffrey Lytle
    McKinleyville – 5th District

  147. Ignoranymous
    March 29, 2010 at 4:40 pm

    Bolithio Says:
    March 29, 2010 at 3:49 pm

    Nope. This is not allowed. You can install a temporary crossing, but there are very specific and strict rules, such as the channel must be free of all unstable debris, water must be diverted around the work site, the crossing must be engineered to withstand a 50y storm event, the crossing must be removed before the start of the winter period, and so on.

    Bullshit.

    You should get your ass off the computer and go for a hike more often. Then you could see what you are
    blindly refuting.

    You really think that GD can afford all that road maintenance? Look at GD’s land on google earth, it’s all one big web of roads and clearcuts.

    Hell, Humboldt County can’t even afford paved road maintenance!

  148. Bolithio
    March 29, 2010 at 4:52 pm

    Jeff

    Can you please explain how rules that require active erosion sites to be treated within a THP is “Orwellian double-speak”?

  149. Not A Native
    March 29, 2010 at 4:52 pm

    Sorry Bolio, I’ve trespassed over several Humboldt crossings on commercial timber lands in various states of disrepair and having been recently filled in. You say it isn’t so, but my feet know different. If caught, they ask for a waiver due to illness, equipment issues, untimely weather, dog ate the contract. And maybe pay a modest fine, but usually not.

  150. Plain Jane
    March 29, 2010 at 4:52 pm

    4:04, you can’t be that dense. How do they identify it after it occurs? Not from studies previously done. They go ON SITE, you know TAKE A FRIGGIN HIKE?

  151. March 29, 2010 at 5:24 pm

    It’s so funny how the promoters of this devastatingly obvious industry don’t even know what’s going on in their own back yards. I agree with PJ and NAN, they need to take a friggin’ hike. Literally and figuratively.

    Bolithio, we’re all not as stupid or naive as you are treating us with your continuous references to industry practices. Industry makes regulations through lobbying, and many of us are tired of playing by the industry’s rules. We saw that with Maxxam PL and their PR scams.

    Greenwashing the timber industry is as stupidly obvious as greenwashing “clean coal”. The more you cry about the timber industry abiding by the rules, the more it makes the rules and the industry appear corrupt.

    Because it is.

  152. Bolithio
    March 29, 2010 at 7:17 pm

    I seriously doubt any of you (who keep telling me to take a kike) even come close to the amount of time I spend in the woods. Not that anonymous internet identities have any credibility lol

    Anyways… there are several of you posters here who utilize insults and vague environmental slogans to make your points. Even in the face of credible research, you continue to chalk it up to some industry conspiracy. I have to say it reminds me of religious fanatics denying medical treatment.

    You folks who are so adamant about this so called ‘environmental devastation’ have to understand that you are not going to be taken seriously if your only tactic is trying to bait people into bickering and name calling. This is precisely the thing that turns people off. Your movement will never succeed if you are unwilling to try to understand others, or consider new ideas. How can you ever expect to have an honest discussion with that attitude?

  153. Plain Jane
    March 29, 2010 at 7:33 pm

    Bolithio, you are not only hypocritical, you are blissfully unaware of your insults of how people debate, their knowledge base and motivations. Discounting years of real experience the way you do makes it seem that you have only recently finished school and most of your knowledge is from what you read rather than what you have experienced. We know that regulations are supposed to prevent erosion. We also know that they aren’t always followed or enforced.

  154. Bolithio
    March 29, 2010 at 7:35 pm

    Not a Native:

    I believe you. I too have seen this. I dont see too many humboldts anymore though(to me a humboldt is just logs and dirt no culvert – just to make sure we are talking about the same thing). I am in no way saying that people dont take advantage of the system in places. I will argue that when it comes to FPR or Basin Plan violations, a company like GD is not trying to mess around. Are there operators who mess up? Yes. Intentionally to cut corners? Sometimes. If these guys do this consistently, they are going to get fired – and have. So, in this state of economy, I bet loggers are being very careful. I would bet that you are much more likely to see these violations on small private ownerships where company image is less important.

    Now that said, what I have been arguing is that in face of this, the majority of work that is done is positive. There are some very well respected operators who are known for their compliance record. The amount of sediment saved by the good projects done by far out ways the minority of deviants in the group.

  155. Bolithio
    March 29, 2010 at 7:40 pm

    Well PJ once again you slap an open extended hand away from you. Your assessment of me is wrong, except for the part of me being unaware of my insults to others here…

  156. March 29, 2010 at 7:42 pm

    Bolithio wrote, “I have to say it reminds me of religious fanatics denying medical treatment.

    Exactly. You and that other fellow have won the debate here hands down, imo.

    Plain Jane almost seems insane. She says, “Discounting years of real experience the way you do makes it seem that you have only recently finished school and most of your knowledge is from what you read rather than what you have experienced..

    I’d say it’s the exact opposite: PJ and so many of the rest here are basing all their opinions on what they’ve heard on the internet- that, along with pictures like EPIC posted. Bolithio is bringing up both educational knowledge, and that gained from experience.

    You folks really come off as nut cases to me, and I’m not referring to Bolithio.

    Enough said.

  157. Plain Jane
    March 29, 2010 at 7:44 pm

    Have you started the civil war yet, Fred?

  158. Plain Jane
    March 29, 2010 at 8:01 pm

    I’m sorry, you’re right Bolithio. People who care about the environment ARE like “religious fanatics denying treatment” because believing there is ecological damage still occurring despite all your books and regulations is an insane belief and that isn’t insulting because you believe it to be true. When people attempt to get direct answers from you, it is being negative to call you out on it. Message received. Besides, Fred agrees with you so it must be true.

  159. FinancialMeltDown
    March 29, 2010 at 8:32 pm

    Why don’t we let the 7th generation judge who the nutcases are Fred.

  160. Anonymous
    March 30, 2010 at 7:42 am

    So, let’s recap: We should ignore 30+ years of scientific research on erosion by the Redwood Sciences lab. We should also ignore the large body of research used to craft current forest regulatory laws. Instead we should require GD to comply with the anecdotal observations of a few bloggers who “take hikes”.

  161. Farmer
    March 30, 2010 at 9:44 am

    Speaking of things that are ignored here;

    The near complete loss of the North Coast salmon fisheries.

    The closure of the Orick Sawmill due to the depletion of large trees from GD land.

    The low quality lumber GD is producing from their rapid growing plantations.

    Any counter-evidence to the claim that Green Diamond is logging to rapidly.

    All the questions I asked Bolitihio.

  162. Farmer
    March 30, 2010 at 9:46 am

    My bad for not addressing them all to you.

  163. Plain Jane
    March 30, 2010 at 10:13 am

    It’s pointless to try to debate people who can’t comprehend what they read, Farmer. The recap is anything but. No one said to ignore scientific research, but that’s what 7:42 mistakenly read. No one said that all was needed was to “take a hike,” but that is what they latched onto. Reesearch, scientific theory and regulations are one aspect of preventing ecological damage. Taking a hike to make sure the best forestry practices are being followed and actually having the desired effect is also required.

  164. Bolithio
    March 30, 2010 at 10:38 am

    The timber industry does not shoulder the entire weight of the loss of fisheries. This complicated equation is certainly a good topic to discuss and should include the original coversions (prior to timber), extensive grazing, mining, diversions, damns, roads, agriculture, commercial fishing, and on and on.

    In my view, there is no question that past practices had a tremendous impact on fish habitat. I wonder what things would look like if we dodged the 54 and 64 storms? Regardless, our grandfathers left quite a mess. These slowly bleeding sediment sources have been gradually being fixed through timber harvest.

    When did we stop leaving messes? The FPA was passed in 1976, along with other relevant legislation in the 1970s. Since then there has been a slow and often painful transition to change a industry that had evolved straight out of the pioneer west. It shouldn’t surprise people why this culture took time to evolve, as did the understanding and refining of the bureaucracy created to regulate the whole thing. Im not trying to paint a fairy tale here, just giving the broad touch.

    30 years later we are in a different place. I dont think to many people deny that it wasnt that long ago that practices where still leading to potential environmental impacts. Most of these (potential impacts from logging) at this point in time however are mitigated to non-significance. The approach to watercourses, road construction and road maintenance is now, (albeit through tough regulation) there is little sediment being delivered. This with the requirement to treat legacy sites in the woods is helping the recover of fish habitat.

    —————

    I dont know enough about the Orick mill to speak to that.

    Low quality timber product? That is a potential issue, but that seems like a different topic maybe? Would the wood be better in longer rotations or in stands with more competition? Possibly.

    Id GD logging to rapidly? Based on the amount of logging in the last 5 years Im going with no for now. Have they in the past? Possibly. They are still meeting the demand though. If they did and cant meet the demand at some point is time is yet to be seen.

  165. Farmer
    March 30, 2010 at 10:51 am

    Boltihio, I’m pretty sure you’re not a fan of Maxxam or what they did to PL, am I right?

    Yet the Forest Practice rules and timber industry “evolution” you are standing up for allowed what Maxxam did to the ecology and economy of this county.

    To me and many others, citing these rules is meaningless at best, because regardless of intent, the rules have failed to protect our forests and livelihoods to date.

  166. Farmer
    March 30, 2010 at 11:11 am

    Just found this on the web- Green Diamond is auctioning off a whole slew of logging equipment. Maybe from the Orick Mill?

    Green Diamond Auction

  167. Farmer
    March 30, 2010 at 11:12 am

    Oh, it happened on march 23rd.

  168. Bolithio
    March 30, 2010 at 12:01 pm

    I concede to your point farmer, although I still believe that the real significant changes to the rules – especially in the monitoring aspects, have come about in the last 10 years.

  169. the reasonable anonymous
    March 30, 2010 at 12:48 pm

    Conceding a point — now that’s a breath of fresh air!

  170. woodsworker
    March 30, 2010 at 2:24 pm

    Where to start?
    Low quality timber: there’s no question that with the short logging cycles of GD the timber they are getting is very low quality. There would be no heartwood worth a damn. A redwood needs at least 60 years in order to have some worthwhile heartwood. I have heard rumors that some loggers are using a dye to make the redwood look like heartwood. Don’t know for sure if that’s true or who would be doing it but the examples I’ve seen of logging practices makes it easier to believe that’s happening.
    Erosion: In Maxxams hey day I had the opportunity to tour the Maxxam logging roads and see up close and personal their CC’s on steep slopes over watersheds. Anyone who thinks that logging can be done on steep slopes and have little to no erosion is smoking some heavy duty stuff. I saw the naked hill sides and the brown water below. Let’s not forget the herbicide spraying that follows a clearcut.The intent of the herbicides are to stop “pest” trees and bushes from growing but what’s never mentioned is that it stops anything from growing so there is nothing putting down roots to hold the soil in place. One good rain and bye-bye top soil. The redwood forest has a quite thin layer of top soil comparatively speaking and it takes millennia to create that. I just love the required replanting on those CC’s. Little to no top soil, no shade for the baby trees to grow (redwoods need shade) and herbicides in the soil that doesn’t help them a bit. The survival rate makes the required replanting a bad joke.
    THP’s and forest practice act: I stopped counting when Maxxam got to over 280 violations. Why bother counting when all they got for their violations were fines that were to them lunch money. There is very little incentive for loggers to follow the rules. Small time loggers just do their logging on weekends when the departments are closed. If they can get all the wood down and carted out of the property by Monday morn they’re home free.
    Climate: The more the further removal of redwoods is allowed the less likely the remaing few old growth pockets will survive. The climate here is what it is because of the redwood biomass, continue allowing it to be removed and you won’t be complaining about rain anymore. We have an irreplaceable treasure here and with it comes a responsibility to preserve what little is left for future generations.

  171. Anonymous
    March 30, 2010 at 5:42 pm

    “You really think that GD can afford all that road maintenance? Look at GD’s land on google earth, it’s all one big web of roads and clearcuts.”

    That’s something you can’t deny. Look at all the satelite pictures.

  172. Bolithio
    March 30, 2010 at 7:46 pm

    Where to start indeed, Woodsworker.

    You just made allot of interesting claims – which you state as fact – but appear to be ‘speaking from the gut’. I guess the horse is pretty dead here, but dying the wood? Really? Also whats the basis for 60y being the magic number for “good wood”? Are you considering site class, stand density, and/or competition?

    And what do you mean by “redwood forest has a quite thin layer of top soil comparatively speaking and it takes millennia to create that.”? Millions of years for soil do develop? Also, when you say thin top soil, what are you comparing this with? Our coastal geology generally has given us very deep soils around here…

    Also: “The survival rate makes the required replanting a bad joke.” You have some regeneration studies that we have all been missing? Because I have never seen this problem. Its also technically inaccurate that redwoods require shade to thrive. The data has been in for along time that they grow faster in full light.

    Please dont respond with take a hike, cause trust me, ive spent (and continue to spend) my time in the woods.

  173. Bolithio
    March 30, 2010 at 7:51 pm

    Ok the violations. So ask your self this; if PALCO had received less or no violations in the period would you feel the same way?

    It useless to defend PALCO at this point. I can say however from first hand experience that many of those violations given were for trivial bureaucratic reasons like no shovel on the landing, or unlocked fire box, etc… This doesn’t justify any potential harm done, it just illustrates that sometimes its not always as it seems.

  174. Mr. Nice
    March 30, 2010 at 8:35 pm

    And what do you mean by “redwood forest has a quite thin layer of top soil comparatively speaking and it takes millennia to create that.”? Millions of years for soil do develop?

    Million is one thousand thousands. Mille is thousand. Millennium is 1,000 years. Millennia is several millenniums.

  175. Bolithio
    March 31, 2010 at 7:03 am

    lol I never new that! Thanks MR Nice!

  176. Ignoranymous
    April 1, 2010 at 3:02 pm

    Mr. Nice Says:
    March 30, 2010 at 8:35 pm

    Million is one thousand thousands. Mille is thousand. Millennium is 1,000 years. Millennia is several millenniums.

    Bolithio Says:
    March 31, 2010 at 7:03 am

    lol I never new that! Thanks MR Nice!

    What an ignoramus!

    And this idiot backs up his/her love of 30-40 successional clear-cuts and other forms of unsustainable forestry with industry standards.

    Yet he/she doesn’t even undertsand the concept of time,

    at least out of the framework of his/her lifetime.

    Hence, the issue. Everyone used to think the forest was endless. The oceans too.

    After WWII, when the earth started getting smaller as in shrinking wilderness, regulation stepped in to slow down the machine. The industry literally bought the regulators. The non-profits like saved the redwoods and sierra club soon followed. Money flowed, and reality of our sinking ship(Earth) was ignored.

    Now were all fucked.

    And idiots like this guy say there’s still more left out there to incidentally take.

    Yes you are an idiot, and calling you an idiot is calling you out on your bullshit.

    Industry doesn’t care what happens past our lifetimes, our childrens and grand childrens lifetimes.

    All you have to do is write the book that ignores reality to fit your pocketbook. And this ignoramus has a library full of them.

  177. Mr. Nice
    April 1, 2010 at 3:29 pm

    In the defense of knowledge of time measurements, most people celebrated the “new millenium” one year early.

    Million comes from the Italian term “milione.” A “billion” in Italy, most of Europe, and England until the mid-seventies meant one million millions, not one thousand millions. One thousand millions is/was a millard…

    Given that the same term can mean two different things, the shit is so confusing that I don’t expect anyone to know what millenia are. I prefer unambiguous terms like quintal, kilogram, and megaton. Millenia sounds too wannabe intellectual to me anyway. Just say topsoil takes 5 to 10 thousand years to pile up in a redwood forest. Using big vocabulary for no reason is just jacking off with words anyway. So alla sudden irregardless of a whole nother deal anyway.

    Ignoranonymous, maybe you have ignored how poorly ad hominems do at convincing people of your viewpoint.

  178. Steak 'n Eggs
    April 1, 2010 at 6:46 pm

    “Now were all fucked”…

    Not all of us Ignoramous…thats your reality, not mine.

    Let me crack a beer and propose a toast to your sinking ship.

    Its ‘gotta be tough surrounded by so many idiots. I mean really, how do you get up in the morning?

  179. Ignoranymous
    April 2, 2010 at 3:30 pm

    Steak ‘n Eggs Says:
    April 1, 2010 at 6:46 pm

    Its ‘gotta be tough surrounded by so many idiots.

    I couldn’t have said it better myself.

  180. April 6, 2010 at 4:30 pm

    Bolithio Says:

    It useless to defend PALCO at this point.

    At any point…

  181. Steak 'n Eggs
    April 6, 2010 at 4:34 pm

    Touche

  182. April 7, 2010 at 11:54 am

    Commenters,

    Thanks for all of your interest in the map! I will provide a detailed explanation of how we used public data to generate the illustration of GD’s ten year THP history to anyone interested.

    Please keep reading our “Eye on Green Diamond” reports on our blog, at wildcalifornia.org. I am trying to fix a glitch in the commenting system on our blog, so that we can hear your input directly. We need to work together to figure out how to improve the health of our impaired watersheds on Green Diamond land and elsewhere!

    Also, we will continue to post maps and other detailed, accurate information about Green Diamond/California Redwood Company/Simpson Timber’s logging operations on the northcoast.

    -Kerul from EPIC

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s