Home > Economy > Bright Life leaving Humboldt

Bright Life leaving Humboldt

The “Bright Life” readies to ship raw logs to Asia out of Humboldt Bay.

  1. Big Al
    April 5, 2011 at 9:11 am

    look at all those mill worker jobs going away, bye jobs!

  2. SNaFU
    April 5, 2011 at 9:45 am

    Fret none; we’ll buy ‘um back at the end of the year.

  3. Mitch
    April 5, 2011 at 9:51 am

    If mill workers are looking for the people who really sucker-punched them, just look for the people on the dock waving goodbye.

    Humboldt has now learned how to get the fewest jobs out of its remaining resources. Not the brightest light in the set.

  4. Bolithio
    April 5, 2011 at 10:03 am

    look at all those mill worker jobs going away, bye jobs!

    False.

    Those mill jobs would have been lost anyways. Domestic lumber is down down down. Not from whole log exports, but from a lack of need for wood, and super cheap lumber coming from other markets. (i.e. Canada). Track domestic lumber prices, building, and so on and you see the issue.

    That barge is a welcomed sight as is does represent jobs. From dock hands to truckers to planners and engineers is the woods. The overseas markets will rise and fall as does our domestic market.

    Farewell Bight Life, hurry back!!

  5. Eric Kirk
    April 5, 2011 at 10:10 am

    Bolithio – if you’re right, then when the domestic housing market picks up, we’ll reopen our mills? We had a boom of construction over the past decade before the crash, including a huge rush of calls for materials when the Iraq reconstruction drained our supplies, and still we didn’t open any domestic mills. It’s over.

    Of course, it’s all the fault of environmentalists and OSHA. If we didn’t have to protect streams and prevent industrial accidents, we could compete with those other countries.

    Bear in mind, timber is exempted from the trade agreements. We can’t keep these jobs open even with tariffs.

  6. Fool On Hill
    April 5, 2011 at 10:23 am

    Protectionism may not be the answer, but that doesn’t mean taxpayers have to subsidize the exports as well. The Harbor District has spent millions on nursing along the industrial shipping sector by financing expensive bar pilots, hiring an overpriced marketing director, and unnecessary dredging. Add in the deep channel dredging and maintenance costs performed by the Army Corps of Engineers…so exactly how many jobs have we generated?

  7. Random Guy
    April 5, 2011 at 10:27 am

    Bolithio, your spin on this makes me sick. You’re really pretty fugged in the head, but I suppose you’re just protecting your own job. Logging needs to scale back bigtime everywhere. Let Chinese developers figure it out for themselves. Humboldt should be an example for the world. $300 per wasnt enough, $500 is. Logging companies aren’t the royalty they make themselves out to be, any moreso than the pot growers. Time for you guys to make a serious lifestyle adjustment like everybody else. Scared you might have to grab an application at the mall, too?

  8. What Now
    April 5, 2011 at 10:29 am

    One of the leading indications of undeveloped economies and of those in decline is the export of raw materials to other nations to produce finished products.
    I’m sure Bolithio and HiFried are all about globalism because financies have no boundaries but worker’s rights and stanfdards of living do.
    If, Heaven forbid, some other nation refuses to have their raw materials exported at what the developed nations deem is a “fair” value for continuing to feed their bloated and bulemic lifestyle we can just send in bombs, bullets, and propogandic bullshit.

  9. High Finance
    April 5, 2011 at 11:32 am

    Bolithio hit a home run on his analysis.

    Does anybody else here even listen to the news here ? New housing starts have collapsed. The economy and the housing bubble burst have greatly contributed to the problems in the timber industry. Those outgoing logs helped keep some timber workers working.

    So the Fool on the Hill (how aptly named is he) asked how many jobs the Harbor District created ? Well, those timber workers as well as the dock workers owe their jobs to the fact we can ship those logs out of the harbor.

  10. daniel del solar
    April 5, 2011 at 11:43 am

    Shipping jobs overseas. Now the US turns into a raw/natural resource, and experiences the same kind of sadness of seeing a somehow unfair situation make impossible your own life…the work is overseas, and you, the “owner” of the natural resource, have no job, no work. This circumstance has led to wide-scale political change at different times throughout history. But the matter is never “settled” if it involves oil, as the changes in national ownership of oil in Mexico are being steadily erroded by international oil cartels.

  11. Anonymous
    April 5, 2011 at 11:48 am

    You reap what you sew, people. Thank the left for the blight.

  12. Fair shake
    April 5, 2011 at 11:55 am

    The real solution to creating jobs in this county/country is to repeal all the oppressive regulations and eliminate every public policy makers job and retirement. The policy makers/regulators should be fired and have their own personal wealth and property taken away(under economic crime law since they acquired it by stealing from working families). Let them live on the street, fill out renter applications, and get a private sector job if anyone will hire them after they have lost their power and wealth. Maybe then we can once again frame some useful regulations and policies that will be fair for all the citizens of the USA and not exploit the poor in other countries.

  13. skippy
    April 5, 2011 at 12:05 pm

    One can see how much less the Bright Life buoyantly sits in the water, above, compared to it’s bright red hull line last week here.

  14. Percy
    April 5, 2011 at 12:19 pm

    The housing bubble burst. That was caused by over regulation of Wall Street and Fanny and Freddy. Free market would have solved it. Kept those mill worker jobs. Socialists and enviros ruining our country!

  15. April 5, 2011 at 12:27 pm

    I am laughing so hard at Percy and his claim that our woes are due to OVERREGULATION of the pirates on Wall Street that I can hardly see!!!!! He/She has it spinning so fast it may melt!

    To keep mill jobs here, why not export LUMBER instead of LOGS? Makes sense to me.

  16. Connect The Dots
    April 5, 2011 at 12:41 pm

    Hand Hi-Fried and Blothio a shovel to dig themselves into a hole and it’s all good…because it’s a JOB!

    IDIOTS!

    We’ve also known all along the importance of economic self-reliance and conservation of natural resources, these were the conservative ideals dear to my republican father, and his father.

    That was before right-wing radicals successfully repackaged the tyranny of the Crown, calling it “trickle down economics”. Ever notice how little real news manages to trickle-down once U.S. media became deregulated and centralized!?

    Whether it’s the loss of our logs, the outsourcing of manual, technical and manufacturing jobs, the invention of offshore tax havens, the sprawl of unaffordable homes miles from downtown, or the saturation of low-wage national retailers in our communities, the beneficiaries remain a tiny minority of elites, largely subsidized by public wealth.

    What predictably trickled-down is the disparity of income not seen since the Gilded Age, without rival among the industrialized nations.

    Those who believe this old tyranny is sustainable either don’t know their history, or they care only for their short, sad lifespan of self-deception.

    You don’t have to be Rasputin to predict where this is headed. When any number of catalysts, (probably the end of cheap oil), eventually force enough Americans to hit bottom, we’ll have our inevitable “Gandhi moment” and we’ll be wondering why the Hell we hadn’t invested our public wealth into our own communities for industrial parks, manufacturing incubators, job training and placement programs, massive infrastructure investments, free public universities, and universal health care, instead of opening the U.S. Treasury to the looters that are already bloated from U.S. military protection, U.S. courts enforcing their contracts, and the costs of maintaining a stable U.S. currency, while they don’t pay a dime in taxes.

  17. Steak n Eggs
    April 5, 2011 at 12:51 pm

    Random Guy, who needs your approval for where a company decides to ship their products? Furthermore, when did HH and his sheep really give a dam about the timber industry anyway. Give me a break.

    How about chaining yourselves to the buoys out there in the Jetty, that will get their attention.

  18. Decline To State
    April 5, 2011 at 12:52 pm

    Looks like simply swapping sawmill jobs for timber and port jobs to me. Hard for anyone to count on a steady income these days. Tough times my friends, tough times.

  19. Mitch
    April 5, 2011 at 1:03 pm

    “You reap what you sew, people.”

    Then don’t knit-pick.

  20. Not bob
    April 5, 2011 at 1:11 pm

    Japan’s crisis may result in a large demand for milled lumber. Don’t know if we’ll feel the effects.

    If these natural resources (timber) were owned by the public or anyone concerned with long term best interest you would of course never sell of the raw resources at the bottom of the market. But that’s not how private companies tend to operate.

  21. just sayin'
    April 5, 2011 at 1:12 pm

    300 to 500 per mbf? Big difference, you have to wonder to what extent major industrial landowners with local milling capacity have been holding down log prices. They can supply their own logs and don’t need to purchase from anyone else.

    Restricting landowners to local log markets dominated by one or two local self-interested players may not be the best strategy to keep actively managed timberlands economically profitable and stable. Doesn’t managing non-industrial timberland count as a job?

    At any rate for landowners at a significant hauling distance to the mill these prices are a welcome relief. I’m sure they’d prefer selling to local mills, but the export market is better than going broke.

    The Canadians are shipping finished wood products to China. Why haven’t local mills cultivated export markets as well?

  22. Percy
    April 5, 2011 at 1:34 pm

    Sorry you didn’t catch it Anony, I was being tongue in cheek. I was trying to conger up my best Glen Beck, but it’s just not the same without the black board.

  23. Farmer
    April 5, 2011 at 1:35 pm

    Explain how jobs exporting logs makes up for 120 layoffs at Schmidbauer.

    When Green Diamond states that exporting logs will keep sawmills open, what do they mean by that? Will GD go belly up without this infusion of money?

    The Chinese market right now is said to be based on them wanting to use up their U.S. dollars asap. They’re building unbelievably huge amounts of housing that is left empty for now, and the wood is used for concrete forms. Highest, best use of our forests?

  24. High Finance
    April 5, 2011 at 1:35 pm

    Connect the Dot doesn’t realize that timber is a RENEWABLE resource.

    I vote for jobs.

  25. Percy
    April 5, 2011 at 2:09 pm

    Yup HF, 80 years from now there will be jobs for the educationally challenged cutting and hauling pecker poles down to the docks. After seeing all the fun the boys on Ax Men have I think I’d prefer to stay in school, if they even have public schools in 80 years.

  26. Anonymous
    April 5, 2011 at 2:14 pm

    Does anyone even know if China WANTS milled lumber? They are buying raw lumber. The companies selling those logs have probably explored that option. So much hogwash here.

  27. Plain Jane
    April 5, 2011 at 2:18 pm

    Is there a new person using the pseudonym, Connect the Dots? If not, Dot’s had a brilliant epiphany.

  28. Mitch
    April 5, 2011 at 2:30 pm

    2:14,

    Excellent point. I think the Chinese will be building log cabins.

  29. Anonymous
    April 5, 2011 at 2:42 pm

    George S can’t buy logs because they are ALL being sold or because the price is too high? Is there a law against selling to the locals at a lower price, so you can sell more logs? Of course the wholesalers in other trades have been choosing who to give a “deal” to for years, those who buy a greater amount of merchandise, etc. Why not cut a deal to locals for the reason that it will come back to them in the form of community health and wealth, as well as community public relations. Is that unethical to give different prices? Or maybe there isn’t enough timber to make that work.

  30. just sayin'
    April 5, 2011 at 2:59 pm

    Canada Wood Group Portal Site: Finished wood products going to China.

    http://goo.gl/JokvV

  31. Plain Jane
    April 5, 2011 at 3:13 pm

    I think it’s a matter of the most profit, 2:42. Corporations (and Republicans) don’t care about community health and wealth. It’s all about the quarterly bottom line. The unbridled greed of corporations is why they must be regulated and watched closely and why they should never have been allowed to participate in the political process. Just as our founders feared, they are destroying this country.

  32. Bolithio
    April 5, 2011 at 3:32 pm

    (Hey Herald’ers dont hate!! You always peg me wrong. Lets talk, not shout =/)

    Eric – you right, partially. New mills are unlikely to open even with a strong demand for domestic lumber. That is why it is vital that our mills are not dismantled. (RIP Samoa)

    However, shut-downs do not prevent start-ups. It is a shame our mills cant offer better prices for our logs right now. Its a shame that outside forces diminish the value our wood. But it doesn’t seem fair to poo-poo a good opportunity for people who haven’t had any real incentive to manage their timber in a long time.

    A brief export market of whole logs is not the beast killing our domestic lumber mills. Unregulated logging in other states and countries, along with subsidized timber industries like Canada are having a much deeper effect. Its not a blame game designed to demonize the concept of regulation in the woods. However you have to acknowledge that CA has the most stringent logging regulation in the world, which devalues our timber compared to elsewhere. Again, Im proud I work in a sustainable industry – I just hope our economy allows us to flourish in that capacity.

    I differ from others’ views who advocate for total deregulation, but I share the belief that duplicative regulation hurts our local timber industry – especially the non-industrial sector where I work. Many of the costly elements imposed on timber harvesting plans have no effect on the local environment and just perpetuate inefficiency.

    Many of the people I work with are excited at the chance to implement their projects thanks to a export market. If they had the choice they would all likely want to sell their logs to a local mill. But until the price of DF gets up to 500 or more, there will be very little management. Alderpoint = 525, Zenia = 550, and so on. The further away you are, the more money you need to make it worth it. Undoubtedly we will see some people log at 450 or 480, but out of desperation to pay that inheritance tax or cover moms hospitable bill.

    The real advantage of this round of exports is the price awarded to white woods which have really been traditionally low. Many good opportunities are opening up in our coastal stands that are due for various treatments. The window is short, and hopefully people have luck implementing their management goals.

  33. Plain Jane
    April 5, 2011 at 3:41 pm

    So are these logs going to a chipper for pulp, Bolithio?

  34. Teacher
    April 5, 2011 at 3:42 pm

    Interesting use of the founding fathers today PJ. I seem to recall them fearing the government growing too large and too much government interference. Also, you don’t think you are making a bit of generalization by saying that all republicans do not care about the health and wealth of their communities? The world is not as black and white as you think it is PJ. An example can be seen by how much things didn’t change with a democratic president and democratic congress. If it was all about the Republicans, why didn’t the Democrats change things? Could it be that they are part of the same problem?

  35. Anonymous
    April 5, 2011 at 3:46 pm

    I would agree with you, Jane, except one of my favorite relatives is a republican who does happen to care about more than wealth. You had me agreeing with you for a second there. I know for certain you can’t over generalize and get people who care to come to your side. I also know many progressives who love their expensive and not very eco toys. Let’s stay with the topic.

  36. Teacher
    April 5, 2011 at 3:53 pm

    Agreed 3:46. I too have an extremely conservative and generous Uncle and I have liberal friends who won’t spend any of their money. The problems in our community and society at large are deeper than simply saying Republicans are to blame. That is a really simplistic way to see the world.

  37. just sayin'
    April 5, 2011 at 4:07 pm

    A brief export market of whole logs is not the beast killing our domestic lumber mills. Unregulated logging in other states and countries, along with subsidized timber industries like Canada are having a much deeper effect.

    Agreed. Although we keep losing the CVD adjudications. The subsidies may not be as great as we think.

    On the other hand their may be an opportunity here for a Humboldt mill, particularly in whitewood, that speaks Chinese and cuts to metric sizes.

  38. Plain Jane
    April 5, 2011 at 4:21 pm

    If your Republican relatives don’t agree with the agenda of their party, maybe they should consider switching to one that values the health and wealth of their community and country over their personal balance sheet.

    Our founders were very concerned over the corrupting influence of corporations because they experienced them first hand in the East India Company and the Hudson Bay Company and they rightly disallowed them federal charter, leaving that to the states. At that time the states allowed corporations to exist for a set period to complete projects for the betterment of communities like hospitals and bridges and certainly never envisioned the immortal multinationals, merging and gobbling each other up, becoming far more powerful than many governments and finally taking control of ours just like the founders feared would happen. Now they are so big and powerful that if they sneeze the whole world shudders and they can hold first world governments hostage for bail outs and tax cuts.

    Any decent person who proudly claim to be a member of today’s GOP isn’t paying attention.

  39. Anonymous
    April 5, 2011 at 4:33 pm

    True, Teacher. Simplistic view, black and white. Not able to see all the colors of each spectrum. Sorry, Jane, you come off as so partisan, there can never be a situation where people could come together where you are involved. I know good people who you wouldn’t even bother to talk to or learn about why they are conservative.

  40. Plain Jane
    April 5, 2011 at 4:34 pm

    Here is an excellent mini history lesson about how corporations gained control of this country and why they are such a danger to democracy.

    http://www.pushhamburger.com/history1.htm

  41. Plain Jane
    April 5, 2011 at 4:39 pm

    I have family members and friends who are conservative, 4:33. We don’t talk politics. Most of them don’t pay much attention to what’s going on and have little interest in finding out. They just vote R because they’ve always voted R and their father voted R as did their grandfather, more the Eisenhower flavor than Walker or Ryan. Conservative in the traditional sense, not the whacked out neofascist sense.

  42. Bolithio
    April 5, 2011 at 4:44 pm

    Thats an interesting idea Just Sayin’. I often day dream about the idea of a co-op mill, that buys local logs, process some, ships some, to domestic and foreign markets. Owning the boat would be nice too – but I really dont understand the costs and risks associated with that type of enterprise.

    Jane – if your talking about the export logs, I dont think they will be chipped. But I honestly dont know.

  43. Anonymous
    April 5, 2011 at 4:55 pm

    No wonder your view is skewed of republicans, Jane. Many are much more well informed that you described. I can’t say I don’t agree with your party more, but I get so tired of hearing people claim to be so open minded and liberal and then not see that there are good, green, and socially responsible people in all the parties who want to improve both their party and the world. Please don’t over simplify any group.

  44. Plain Jane
    April 5, 2011 at 5:16 pm

    If they are well informed and remain Republicans, they must either believe in the Republican platform or they are just registered Republican out of habit. How anyone can be good, green and socially responsible and vote for politicians who are greedy, corrupt and working against the majority for personal gain is a mystery to me.

  45. robash141
    April 5, 2011 at 5:26 pm

    Yeah sure I personally know plenty of nice nice honest people who are Republican or Conservatives Most of them are not particularly politically astute.

    I don’t confuse them with the powers that be who really call the shots in the Republican Party/ Conservative movement are not bood nice honest ethical people , they are power hungry sociopathic scum I don’t confuse those criminals with my neighbors . If anything , Plain Jane was too nice.

  46. just sayin'
    April 5, 2011 at 5:32 pm

    Blothio:
    Was actually thinking about Schmidbauer, but if you want to start up a coop mill more power to you. Does seem like a good moment to be keeping the best and shipping the rest.

  47. Random Guy
    April 5, 2011 at 6:21 pm

    “The further away you are, the more money you need to make it worth it.”

    Oh no! Business is bad for loggers! They already cut down way too many trees in the past, even though everybody’s been begging them to slow their roll forever! No more new 4×4’s and jetboats for the lumberjacks! No vacation homes for management! Lay off half your workforce, cut down way less trees.

    Your arguments about the logging companies owning the land and preserving open space are shlock. That’s a matter of perspective, priorities and cash flow. No sympathy for companies who continue to rape the planet, bolithio. Big change needs to happen. The environment is going to shit while people like you keep spouting “but but but…!” Sorry if you lose your job in the process, you’re a smart guy, you’ll keep a roof over your head. You can’t bullshit anybody…for three times the pay you’re getting now and a phat pension, you’d use all your knowledge of the logging industry to work for a group that protests it. You’re a fricking human too, to lay some sob story on us “let’s talk not yell” Turn the volume down on your computer…screen?

  48. Stay in school
    April 5, 2011 at 6:44 pm

    “The problems in our community and society at large are deeper than simply saying Republicans [Democrats / Liberals] are to blame.

    If it was all about the Republicans [Democrats/Liberals], why didn’t the Democrats [Republicans / NeoCons] change things? Could it be that they are part of the same problem?”

    Excellent question, Teacher. Please ask it of all your Neo-con friends. Ask Rush. Help people get off the Fox fix and learn to think.

  49. Bolithio
    April 5, 2011 at 6:54 pm

    The dearth of understanding in your comments is staggering Random Guy. Did you really read what I posted? [rhetorical]

  50. Plain Jane
    April 5, 2011 at 7:00 pm

    I guess I haven’t made myself clear. The problem is corporate ownership of enough of our politicians in both parties that they can get virtually anything they want or block anything they want. The campaign contributions, lobbyists writing legislation, gargantuan salaries corporations when they leave office. The Republicans are more blatant about who they belong to so most people who are paying even minimal attention know who they are, pretty much 100% of them. Democrats are a bit trickier. Take Dianne Feinstein, for example. She’s a “liberal” by claim, supports choice and all the liberal triggers, but she is as much a corporate whore as any Republican. She was on a committee that approved military contracts, can’t remember its exact name now, and voted to approve a contract for her husband’s firm. He is a partner of Carlyle.

  51. Plain Jane
    April 5, 2011 at 7:06 pm

    This is a rather chilling expose of Dianne Feinstein and her fellow neocon husband, Richard Blum.

    http://www.counterpunch.org/parrish02262010.html

  52. Random Guy
    April 5, 2011 at 7:07 pm

    planet rape to the left,
    planet rape to the right,
    rape the planet some more,
    don’t fight fight fight!

  53. anonymous
    April 5, 2011 at 7:09 pm

    Feinstein is the wrong kind of Democrat. Boxer is much better. But I liked Russ Feingold the best. Bernie Sanders is the best still person still in the Senate. He’s not afraid to say he’s a socialist.
    The right has won in part by making “socialist” a dirty word. We need to get back to being proud of that philosophy and work to apply it the way it is in much of western Europe and Canada.

  54. Plain Jane
    April 5, 2011 at 7:13 pm

    Doesn’t anyone wonder why the Republicans don’t attack Feinstein on her blatant corruption? Why the mainstream media isn’t all over her like a stain on a blue dress?

  55. Plain Jane
    April 5, 2011 at 7:15 pm

    That article, by the way, has a section on her dirty dealings on Headwaters.

  56. Random Guy
    April 5, 2011 at 8:16 pm

    Bolithio said:

    Those mill jobs would have been lost anyways. Domestic lumber is down down down. Not from whole log exports, but from a lack of need for wood, and super cheap lumber coming from other markets. (i.e. Canada). Track domestic lumber prices, building, and so on and you see the issue. That barge is a welcomed sight as is does represent jobs. From dock hands to truckers to planners and engineers is the woods. The overseas markets will rise and fall as does our domestic market Eric – you right, partially. New mills are unlikely to open even with a strong demand for domestic lumber. That is why it is vital that our mills are not dismantled. (RIP Samoa) However, shut-downs do not prevent start-ups. It is a shame our mills cant offer better prices for our logs right now. Its a shame that outside forces diminish the value our wood. But it doesn’t seem fair to poo-poo a good opportunity for people who haven’t had any real incentive to manage their timber in a long time. A brief export market of whole logs is not the beast killing our domestic lumber mills. Unregulated logging in other states and countries, along with subsidized timber industries like Canada are having a much deeper effect. Its not a blame game designed to demonize the concept of regulation in the woods. However you have to acknowledge that CA has the most stringent logging regulation in the world, which devalues our timber compared to elsewhere. Again, Im proud I work in a sustainable industry – I just hope our economy allows us to flourish in that capacity. I differ from others’ views who advocate for total deregulation, but I share the belief that duplicative regulation hurts our local timber industry – especially the non-industrial sector where I work. Many of the costly elements imposed on timber harvesting plans have no effect on the local environment and just perpetuate inefficiency. Many of the people I work with are excited at the chance to implement their projects thanks to a export market. If they had the choice they would all likely want to sell their logs to a local mill. But until the price of DF gets up to 500 or more, there will be very little management. Alderpoint = 525, Zenia = 550, and so on. The further away you are, the more money you need to make it worth it. Undoubtedly we will see some people log at 450 or 480, but out of desperation to pay that inheritance tax or cover moms hospitable bill. The real advantage of this round of exports is the price awarded to white woods which have really been traditionally low. Many good opportunities are opening up in our coastal stands that are due for various treatments. The window is short, and hopefully people have luck implementing their management goals.

    …and I read that three or four times shaking my head that somebody in our community would wilfully be such a PR slinging shitstain, especially to suggest opponents of ‘the industry’ don’t know what they’re talking about and aren’t discussing the matter rationally.

  57. Ponder z
    April 5, 2011 at 8:24 pm

    high regulation of national forest logging and low demand domestically for lumber has lowered the need in the USA. But someone still figured out how to export logs. Not even milled, how sad. On a lighter note the Chicoms have ripped off a boat load of logs. As in left town and have not payed for them. Snuck out in the night. HaHa.

  58. Walt
    April 5, 2011 at 8:51 pm

    That’s OK: we’re still dumping all our old computers on them, and besides, when our economy tanks again, and we have no more money left after three wars, all those T-Bills they have will be toilet paper. HahaHA!

  59. wurking stiff
    April 5, 2011 at 9:16 pm

    OUCH! we just got “globalized” is the new way of saying we just got screwed!

  60. Farmer
    April 5, 2011 at 9:36 pm

    The word “Management”, as Bolithio uses it, is a dirty word. So we have a small window of opportunity to sell trees that the industry usually considers undesirable? That would be good news, if restoration and truly sustainable forestry were the norm. Instead, we’ll probably see a bunch of new clear-cuts in areas of Sitka Spruce, Douglas Fir, Hemlock and other “white-woods”.

    Management does not mean waiting to do anything until prices are high. Management is long term. Your use of the word is a euphemism. Why don’t you just call it like it is if you think your school of logging is so darn cool?

    One more thing, industry reps love to tell everyone that Ca. has the best forestry laws on Earth, but repeating something over and over does not make it true. Do you actually know this to be a fact? Have you researched every countries logging regulations? Do you have anything more substantial than hearsay?

  61. lurch
    April 5, 2011 at 9:58 pm

    I’ve heard a number of times from logging interests in Washington state that theirs are the most onerous, restrictive and costly of all state forest practice regulations. Grass is always greener.

    Meanwhile, those socialists over at NPR noticed something none of the so-called reporters covering the story had picked up: Tom Banse, KUOW

    “…new figures out Friday show construction spending dropped in February to the lowest level in more than a decade. The good news is that timber demand from China is soaring.

    Russia has traditionally been China’s main wood supplier. But an export tax by the Russians combined with the expanding Chinese economy has created an opening for exporters on the West Coast.”

    Hunh. An export tax. By the Russians. Hunh. That’s got to be reaallly bad for their timber industry.

  62. Farmer
    April 5, 2011 at 10:12 pm

    I was looking around online and saw that this isn’t the first time that the activities of the log ship Bright Life has drawn ire.

  63. Anonymous
    April 6, 2011 at 4:58 am

    Its great for local jobs but sad that our timber has
    to be shipped to China. Logging is difficult here
    and costly but we only have so many logs even if they are a renewable resource.

    We need to get our natiional debt and taxes down so we can compete in the market place.

  64. Plain Jane
    April 6, 2011 at 6:04 am

    Yeah, Lurch. Complaining about too much regulation and too high of taxes as the cause of every problem is like a tic in some circles.

  65. Anonymous
    April 6, 2011 at 7:53 am

    a little econ 101 for you jane. the higher the price, the less you sell. taxes, regulations = higher prices.

    it is not the root of all problems but denying that taxes and regulations have a significant impact on our ability to compete in the world marketplace is ignorant.

  66. Stay in school
    April 6, 2011 at 9:16 am

    Back to school with you 7:53, so you might learn to understand that equation and all its complexities. Simple solutions appeal to simple minds.

  67. Farmer
    April 6, 2011 at 9:54 am

    When timber companies run hog wild, it’s the rest of us and the land that pays the price.

  68. April 6, 2011 at 10:03 am

    It is a two-way street. We ship to China our Raw material (Logs)
    China ships us all kinds of manufactured merchandise-
    (clothing,toys, household items)Our GNP suffers!!!!
    Our mills and factories shut down..DO WE CARE???

  69. April 6, 2011 at 10:47 am

    Big business always “designs” the regulations so that they fall on the small-time operators. Dow chemical gets a pass on their plants, but Joe’s painting has multiple inspections every year to make sure he isn’t violating the law by accidentally dropping a latex brush in the trash.
    Same with the tax collecting, the feds have spent millions to investigate regular people making less than $50,000 a year, while Exxon, GE and many others pay no tax at all.
    I call them a bunch of Turn-coats who side with the export of American jobs. Yeah right, let’s trade 500 good paying mill jobs, for a couple of crane operators.
    Damn it! Whose side are these traitors on? It sure as hell isn’t the working guy.

  70. Anonymous
    April 6, 2011 at 11:10 am

    Mitch, I’mm all about the freedom of speech, but every now and then I find someone (you) who actually effs everything they say up so bad so often that I think they should be forced to be quiet for their own good. There is your hint my frined

  71. Thirdeye
    April 6, 2011 at 11:57 am

    If the Chinese weren’t buying White Fir, nobody would be. Sometimes producers of treated wood products in the Central Valley purchase White Fir from the coast, but not in times of high fuel prices.

  72. Mitch
    April 6, 2011 at 12:30 pm

    11:10,

    That sounds like a threat, doesn’t it? Wrong thread?

  73. Thirdeye
    April 6, 2011 at 1:06 pm

    Doesn’t sound like a threat. Sounds like “stop making a fool of yourself with ignorant comments.” There could be a number of reasons the Chinese would prefer purchasing raw logs to finished lumber. Your snarky 2:30 comment showed that you overestimated your own knowledge of the situation.

  74. Stay in school
    April 6, 2011 at 3:48 pm

    “There could be a number of reasons the Chinese would prefer purchasing raw logs to finished lumber.”

    Such as needing/wanting to create jobs for their people. Luckily, we have all the jobs we need here in Humboldt County. Right?

  75. Bolithio
    April 6, 2011 at 5:43 pm

    Do you have anything more substantial than hearsay?

    Sure. But Farmer, it appears you need to practice what you preach. You are convinced that logging is bad. There cant be a good side! Right? Just becuase you say its bad over and over doesn’t make so either…

    http://www.sotsnf.org/pdf/Cal_Poly-Forest_Practices-2003.pdf

    http://www.appropedia.org/Comparison_of_California_logging_laws_and_FSC_standards

    Current state regulations also force an immense monetary burden on California landowners. Because of the high cost of the regulatory process, California landowners are not on a level playing field with competition from other states or countries. Some landowners, particularly small, non-industrial ownerships, find it difficult to not only remain competitive with other regions, but also find it taxing to simply remain solvent. This, in turn, has led to a reduction over time in the amount of forestlands that are actively managed. While some factions who aim to eliminate all harvesting in the state may cheer this trend, it should instead be of great concern to the majority of California’s populace.

    While state regulations are intended to protect California’s forestlands, an unintended consequence of overbearing regulatory expenses will be an eventual degradation of forest health in many of California’s forestlands. The absence of active forest management caused by overbearing regulatory expenses, coupled with a continued absence of fire on the landscape, will and has led to overstocked, unhealthy stands in many forest types in California. These unhealthy stands then facilitate insect and disease epidemics while also contributing to a higher risk of catastrophic wildfire.

    Further, the ever increasing cost to forest landowners for complying with the FPRs could drive some to utilize their land for purposes other than the growing and harvesting of timber. Conversion of lands to alternative activities such as subdivisions cause permanent environmental changes that are far more drastic than forestry activities.

    California has a seemingly insatiable appetite for forest products, yet impedes supplying its needs from its own forestlands due to the enormous expense of the regulatory process, which limits supply. At present, California is a net importer of wood from other regions and countries that have much lower standards of environmental protection. For those who truly think globally, it would seem much more environmentally responsible to utilize renewable resources that are harvested in some of the most legally protected private forests in the world rather than exploit other countries that have less rigid standards.

  76. tied in a knot
    April 6, 2011 at 6:59 pm

    Bolithio, we have a unique product – redwoods. Smart economic development would recognize and capitalize on that. We don’t grow cheap Georgia pine here. Our market niche and marking strategy should be different.

    You tie yourself in a knot explaining how over regulation is killing the timber industry, suggesting that regulations should be loosened or eliminated. However, that negates your argument that “it would seem much more environmentally responsible to utilize renewable resources that are harvested in some of the most legally protected private forests”

    The regulations protect the forests. Get it?

    Why is the regulatory process so expensive? Could the unwillingness of the timber industry to transparently share data have anything to do with the expense?

  77. Farmer
    April 6, 2011 at 7:12 pm

    You’re putting words in my mouth, man. I’ve never said “logging is bad”, much less repeated it over and over. In discussion with some newbie tree-sitters, I’m the one defending loggers. You don’t make that easy, but I’m convinced that there is a better way to do things and that if big timber doesn’t change, they will cease to exist on their own. The main problem with that being it looks like they’ll take the economy and local environment down with them.

    You accuse enviros of a knee-jerk emotional reaction and it seems you have that type of reaction to criticism. So lets both try and analyze the situation rationally.

    I’ll read further and check out your links.

  78. Farmer
    April 6, 2011 at 8:21 pm

    Thanks for the informative links, Bolithio. Interesting comparison of California Forest Practice Rules to Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) standards and Sustainable Forestry Initiative (created by the American Pulp and Paper Association).

    What would really lend cred to your claims of California Forestry Regulation’s global superiority would be a comparison of forestry and related economics in all forested countries.If one does not exist, it will take a multi-lingual researcher to put together. I’d wager this has never been done.

    I’m a little confused on one point that “tied in a knot” touched on. Are you complaining about over regulation, or are you holding up Ca. forestry laws as the most effective in protecting the environment?

    By the way, FSC has a bad rap in many parts of the world. Check this out.

    I’ll admit that up until 5-6 years ago I probably made statements along the lines of ‘logging is bad’, however, I’ve never espoused that in the blogosphere.

  79. Bolithio
    April 6, 2011 at 8:31 pm

    Why is the regulatory process so expensive?

    First off, I have never advocated for deregulation. There is allot of you say this going around – but you must be confusing me with others here. Still, I do believe that eliminating unnecessary duplicative regulations or agencies would benefit non-industrial landowners and not lead to any significant environmental impacts.

    Farmer – Im not trying to play itchy and scratchy. We likely only differ significantly on one thing, clear-cuts. Put that aside for a sec. When I read your post, I can feel your disdain for timber. You dont believe we are managing are forests – and insist we only care about the market. Its just not true. But you have to understand that we do care about the market too – which is the engine that allows management. We aren’t rehabbing stands for free. Fuel, equipment, manpower – all costs money. While we are ok with government subsidies – we cant wait and rely on that for implementing the management that needs to be done. From vegetation to roads.

    Also, I wasn’t complaining about the regs anyways. I was celebrating a good opportunity that this – likely brief – export market will provide to small industrial landowners.

  80. Farmer
    April 6, 2011 at 8:50 pm

    Argg… my last two comments disappeared.

    What? All of the sudden you don’t want to debate?

    Your links were great, but didn’t compare California regs to other countries.

  81. Random Guy
    April 6, 2011 at 8:50 pm

    “Just becuase you say its bad over and over doesn’t make so either…”

    Just because you say it’s good….over and over and over and over and over and over and over…without addressing the basics of what YOU don’t agree with, that YOU guys screwed yourselves despite decades of people all over the world complaining, and you’re now pretending to be all “green” while still milking the woods…sad.

    You’re grasping at straws, Bolithio, always trying to turn the open-eyed facts of the matter into some sort of matter of semantics with winded drivel. It’s all centered around MONEY and you know it. MONEY for YOU and your boss at the expense of real local jobs and the environment.

  82. Random Guy
    April 6, 2011 at 8:55 pm
  83. Farmer
    April 6, 2011 at 9:08 pm

    Oh look, the comments appeared after all. Hey Heraldo, could you remove the first one so as not to be overly duplicative? Bolithio hates that ;)

  84. April 6, 2011 at 9:14 pm

    Your comments were stuck in the spam file. That’s been happening with an annoying regularity lately.

  85. Bolithio
    April 6, 2011 at 9:18 pm

    Farmer – I havent found any good comparisons for international variations. A ‘report card’ would be interesting. What I am finding is that essentially logging in Central and South America is terrible. Russia, Southeast Asia, all bad in the regulatory/enforcement side. These places have serious problems with enforcement of national laws or protected preserves.

    I believe New Zealand is regulated similarly to here.

    Canada has regulations, but they are basic like Oregon. Replant, protect domestic water. The largest clear-cut in earth is in Canada right?

    Ill gladly admit defeat if Im wrong, but Ill put money on CA being in the top 3 if not 1st.

  86. Farmer
    April 6, 2011 at 9:35 pm

    Thanks for the stimulating conversation y’all, over and out.

  87. Bolithio
    April 6, 2011 at 10:11 pm

    Are you complaining about over regulation, or are you holding up Ca. forestry laws as the most effective in protecting the environment?

    Yes. Both.

    There is a body of science that clearly identifies the potential effects of logging. We also have several state laws, and federal, that regulate logging. The vogon nature of our legislature has delegated a host of state boards, commissions, and agencies which lead to vast inefficiencies.

    We have at a minimum CDF, WQ, DFG, CGS & USFWS affiliated with every harvest plan. The jurisdiction of the agencies almost always overlaps and each agency has their own set of regulatory processes for you to complete. A sad portion of the energy required to facilitate all of this is burned up by someone pushing paper around in circles.

    The laws are effective. Or rather, the mitigation’s are effective, and the laws require those. But the trend of agencies to enforce their own random, on-the-spot mitigation during THPs has lead to many questionable practices and huge costs for landowners.

    The timber company can soak some of that up. The cost of doing business. A non-industrial landowner is in a different boat.

  88. Anonymous
    April 7, 2011 at 10:49 am

    Bolithio, so what about the idea that for the sake of the whole entire world, your company stops clearcutting completely? Starting tomorrow? How about you stop lying through your teeth that your company is replanting at the same rate they’re cutting? Sold and subdivided land alone buries that myth right off the bat. You’re a liar, paid to believe what you say.

  89. Random Guy
    April 7, 2011 at 10:50 am

    …that was me. I don’t post anonymously anonymous.

  90. Thirdeye
    April 7, 2011 at 11:10 am

    That alphabet soup is the crux of the problem. Unfortunately, most of the entities involved are more concerned about expanding their authority than facilitating a more effective and efficient process. DFG and WQ routinely flout California Business and Professions Code provisions. CDF knows that, but rather than confronting the issue they look the other way in the interest of keeping the State agencies one big happy family.

    Habitat Conservation Plans such as GDR’s and HRC’s attempt to simplify the administrative process, but they have failed miserably in that regard.

  91. Random Guy
    April 7, 2011 at 12:52 pm

    Notice Bolithio is never quick to respond in casual conversation about this subject. He needs time to consider his replies, so as not to say the “wrong thing”.

    Why don’t you explain to us the negative aspects of “selective harvesting”, Bolithio, and how replanted logging environments are nothing like naturally regenerated forests? Why don’t you describe the type of woods your company is creating vs. native habitats? Why don’t you tell us about all the chemicals used in clearcuts and so on? Why don’t you elaborate on the idea that discontinuing clearcutting altogether is completely feasible, and still profitable, although for a much smaller workforce? Why don’t you tell us how much money you earn in a month from the business?

  92. Bolithio
    April 7, 2011 at 1:40 pm

    It is a fact that there are more trees growing than 100 years ago.

    http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/wilderness-resources/stories/more-trees-than-there-were-100-years-ago-its-true

    Random – does it really matter what I say if your convinced Im a liar? You accuse all the Humboldt families who live and work in the woods as being rapists? Your angle is juvenile and hypocritical. That is unless you are naked – living in woods using a psychic connection to blog. You certainly dont live a wood house, use petrolatum or plastic products, and dont contribute to the pollution you disdain.

    If you really cared about the world, you would be concerned about fire, and how to reduce fuel loads on our forests. You also might consider learning more about forest ecology.

    http://www.calforestfoundation.org/Critical-Thinking/Restoration-Forestry.htm

    http://westinstenv.org/ffsci/2009/08/24/impacts-of-california-wildfires-on-climates-and-forests-a-study-of-seven-years-of-wildfires-2001-2007/

    http://www.foresthealth.org/pdf/Modern%20Forestry%20and%20Climate%20Change.pdf

    “One of the best ways to address climate change is to use more wood, not less. Every wood substitute, including steel, plastic and cement, requires far more energy to produce than lumber.” — Patrick Moore, Ph.D., Greenpeace co-founder

  93. Bolithio
    April 7, 2011 at 5:15 pm

    Why don’t you explain to us the negative aspects of “selective harvesting”

    Selective logging has its share of potential issues when compared to even aged methods. Increased soil disturbance and compaction is a risk from increased frequency of entries in a stand. Selective logging also requires a higher density of roads to ensure the protection of the residual trees and to facilitate yarding. Tree falling is more difficult for the same reason, and also much more dangerous from hang-ups. Cable yarding also is more difficult as the frequency of corridors must be higher.

    In a selection stand there is also risk of genetic degradation over time, through high grading of the better trees. Also trees tend to get damaged during falling operations leading to defect.

    In CA much of this is mitigated through the THP process.

    replanted logging environments are nothing like naturally regenerated forests

    That is not an accurate assumption. It is in true plantations, or where stands are logged very young. Coastal Oregon is good example where stands are on there 6th and 7th rotations. These trees are harvested 20-30 years after planting for pulp. In thee cases, natural succession doesn’t have time to kick in and you see no overstory, or understory – just the crop of trees. Agro-forestry like this is more common in the south east US and Europe.

    In stands managed for sawtimber, they very much resemble natural stands. I bet money I can take you to some of these stands and you would not be able to tell they were logged previously. The biggest difference would be following a regenerative event in nature – the conifers would take much longer to dominate the canopy. Tree planing in essence skips the early 100 years of succession.

    I have never needed/prescribed chemicals following a clear-cut. Occasionally we have used herbicides in restoration efforts in unnaturally dense tanoak stands, but not too often.

    Regarding all your other snippy comments/questions, all I can say is, stop being being such a prick.

  94. Random Guy
    April 7, 2011 at 6:35 pm

    “You accuse all the Humboldt families who live and work in the woods as being rapists? Your angle is juvenile and hypocritical”

    To suggest that somebody who’s opposing the actions of a larger company is blaming working families within the company is typical PR, bolithio. Screw YOU for that. Why are local mill jobs expendable but not yours? What about everybody in alternative resources? What about your industry’s effect on countless related businesses regarding their dealings with the environment? It’s impossible to even begin to calculate the mess logging continues to make, and how we’re ALL carrying that weight. The future is bleak in that sense, because you guys are NOT slowing your roll nearly as much as you could. Not at all.

    “fact that there are more trees are growing than 100 years ago”

    That’s ridiculous to even suggest. How stupid do you think the general public is? How much forest is alive now compared to 100 years ago? Jeebus, bury your head in the sand. And your company continues to sell and subdivide land, no? You’re a lying spindoctor.

    “One of the best ways to address climate change is to use more wood, not less.”

    …spinning like a top. Let’s find a new tobacco substitute while we’re at it, get cigarette smokers addicted to something else.

    Greenpeace is a corrupted crock of shit, that’s another story. You won’t quote Earth First anytime soon, though.

    …etc. etc. etc…

    We all gotta keep food on the table, I know. I bet you can afford to eat pretty well at that. Congrats, you’re among the civilized assholes of our time…prim and proper and full of shit.

  95. Thirdeye
    April 7, 2011 at 6:54 pm

    Decades of high grade selection was one of the things that landed the Pacific Lumber Company in a pickle. It was done to lower the acreage subject to the old ad valorum tax law and to avoid costs associated with mandated reforestation under Forest Practice Rules. It was never about making the land productive or achieving environmental goals. Their lands looked prettier than other timberlands from the highway all those years, but they were headed for a crisis sooner or later, Maxxam or no Maxxam.

  96. Farmer
    April 7, 2011 at 9:57 pm

    Yo, Random Guy, please take it down a notch or two. They’re growing tons of little trees in the space formerly taken up by big trees. While it might be true that there’s more now than before, it’s misleading to suggest that it makes up for the loss of the original forest.

    Regarding carbon storage- the usable portion of a Redwood tree that actually makes it into a finished building will never last as long as a Redwood tree would if you let it grow and stay in the forest after it dies. How many wooden structures last for over 1,000 years?

  97. Random Guy
    April 8, 2011 at 10:46 am

    “Yo, Random Guy, please take it down a notch or two.”

    No. If anything, pick it up several notches yourself. This is the health of the planet, localized. One either grasps that or not. Logging companies can take it down several notches tomorrow, but they’re in it for $$$. The other snippy comments/questions Bolithio refers to, that earn me his title of “prick” are the open eyed facts of the matter regarding profits, operations and the environment that he and his kind simply never acknowledge. He’s a spin doctor who might as well be telling us all “fuck you.” He’s paid very well to believe what he says. I have no tolerance for bullshit, let alone when it comes to this stuff.

    Have a nice day, folks! Bolithio can choke on a prick, though…he’s the expert.

  98. JJ
    April 8, 2011 at 11:38 am

    I’m curious what business you are in Random Guy. You are very aggressive, but don’t seem to truly understand what you are talking about. I’m a biologist and I agree with most of what Bolitio says. Basically I see the US not making anything. First things to make are food, clothing and shelter. Timber is crucial for shelter. (You do enjoy living a wood framed house, sitting at a wooden table on a wooden chair, yes?) While I whole-heartedly believe in restoration, it doesn’t actually make any food, clothing or shelter. I also think that we should try and keep the mills open. However, China didn’t want the milled lumber. Either we sell some whole logs for a few years, and try to wisely invest the generated capital in something worthwhile, or we just let our economy keep collapsing. The prices for those logs are not more than local mills normally pay, but with no-one building houses, no-one needs lumber, so the mills have dropped production and can’t pay the normal value.

    If you think we should add value to the logs here, I’d like to see you open a mill, or furniture shop, or something.

    ps. Yes, I am struggling with the fact that in my chosen profession most of what I make is reports.

  99. Bolithio
    April 8, 2011 at 11:55 am

    Random guy reminds me of evangelical Christians who plug their ears and shout to prevent any sound reasoning from entering their brain. Its the equivalent of glen beck’ism for environmentalists. Hes here to shout – not listen. Talk at you – not with you. He cant tell that I dont work for a timber company because hes not really reading what me, or anyone else for that matter, is saying. Anything I offer is immediately rejected because of paranoid views. He will never relate to rural humboldt life, or open his mind enough to consider the possibility that most timber landowners around here dont fit into the small box he built for them.

  100. Filibuster
    April 8, 2011 at 12:01 pm

    As a geologist involved with erosion processes and problems I would agree with Bolithio that California currently has some of the most, if not the most stringent forest practices rules in the nation.

    This has not always been the case. Before the 1970’s, timber harvest in California was done in horribly destructive ways: vast, cat-logged clearcuts on steeplands with highly erodible soils, with huge amounts of soil disturbance; logs dragged downhill to streams or roads, stream channels used as haul roads, abysmal culverting, etc. The forest practices act passed in the mid-1970’s changed all that.

    It doesn’t mean that we can’t do things better. Logging can be done right, to minimize soil loss, and minimize delivery of sediment to stream channels.

    Roads — haul roads and access roads — are usually the major contributors of sediment. Landslides are commonly associated with the cuts and sidecast that occur during roadbuilding, water and sediment come off the road surface, stream crossings can be problematic where culverts plug and blow out or divert water across the road prism and onto the slope. But all these can be mitigated with proper design and forethought. It’s not cheap though.

  101. Steak n Eggs
    April 8, 2011 at 12:39 pm

    Bolithio, its theater here at the HH.

    When it comes to the timber industry its pretty clear to me that H and his sheep are uninformed. If you try to correct them, than of course you are a stooge for the timber industry, which are all big bad corporations, Right? Ha-ha. The emotional dribble and personal attacks from the completely uninformed is good stuff. We want more!

  102. Random Guy
    April 8, 2011 at 1:33 pm

    …as if dialog on the matter revolves around this blog. Nice additional lot of nothing, still not addressing the bottom line of profits and practice related to the bigger picture…what could be, not what is. The logging industry, and folks like bolithio who do/don’t work for/with them, continue to paint this picture that they’re some kind of savior of our forests and keepers of the local economy…doing everything within their means to serve and protect.

    I don’t participate on these blogs to pat people on the back. I don’t do “social networking”…this is important stuff, to be so blatantly whitewashed under this bullshit guise of civil discussion…been there done that…it’s really twisted shit when you look at the history of the bigger picture, and I refuse to play that game anymore, especially on this blog.

    http://tinyurl.com/3bxubhq

  103. Bolithio
    April 8, 2011 at 4:32 pm

    Thanks RG for further illustrating our point by providing a link showing logging in the Amazon, Canada, and 80 years ago. CA is not only limits the size of clear-cut – as clearly seen in the roll of photos, but employs practices that are superior to most places in the world.

  104. Random Guy
    April 8, 2011 at 5:45 pm

    Bla bla, BLalithio…keep ignoring this roll of photos:

    http://tinyurl.com/y9b8na2

  105. Bolithio
    April 8, 2011 at 7:24 pm

    Bravo! Thats a great way prove your point. Since you have nothing intelligent to say – you resort to linking readers of the conversation to a malicious pop-up site likely laden with spyware?. Fantastic! Your a monkey throwing your poop.

    Its no wonder that the environmental groups around here have terrible credibility. Unfortunately, for people from that community who do have good and reasonable ideas, they get drowned out by Random assholes.

    Heraldo – you should delete that malware laden pop-up link he posted at 5:45. Unbelievable.

  106. Farmer
    April 9, 2011 at 3:11 pm

    I don’t know who you are Random Guy. Are you doing anything to help the forest besides talking smack on a blog?

    You’re helping Bolithio by providing an easy target for debate.

  107. Farmer
    April 9, 2011 at 3:23 pm

    And Bolithio, the idea that Environmental groups have terrible credibility just goes to show what crowd you predominately hang out with, i.e. not at all neutral. I point that out because you are so quick to act like your opinion’s are held by everyone. You were very quick to jump on my case after the Klamath action camp article came out, yet I don’t think you know the first thing about me. Just remember that there is a spectrum of behavior and personalities in every group of humans, especially so in the movement to protect the environment.

  108. Farmer
    April 9, 2011 at 3:36 pm

    One more note Random Guy- whenever possible I try to take a position that is defendable, thats why my strategy doesn’t need to include dumping on Bolithio. Of course I know that the local environment depends on our actions now. I’d remind you of the same.

  109. Thirdeye
    April 9, 2011 at 6:55 pm

    Environmental groups have terrible credibility with those whose understanding of environmental issues is more than superficial. The version of science that environmental groups present is extremely simplistic, fraught with emotionalism, and designed to get a response from the lowest common denominator of the public. If environmental groups continue down that path, they should be held accountable for lowering the level of public discourse.

  110. Mike Buettner
    April 9, 2011 at 6:57 pm

    Quite the contrary.

  111. tra
    April 9, 2011 at 7:01 pm

    Thirdeye,

    Try opening your other two. You are overgeneralizing to a ridiculous degree.

    All environmental groups are not the same, many are quite credible. It’s easy to point at the wingnut types and groups that rely on strident rhetoric not backed up with any substance. But they are just a small part of the overall environmental movement.

  112. Thirdeye
    April 9, 2011 at 7:24 pm

    Unfortunately, mainstream environmental groups such as the Sierra Club play that same game. There is a real unwillingness on the part of the environmental movement to assimilate information that might challenge long-held preconceptions. It looks like it will remain that way until they put raising the level of discourse above saving face and playing for power.

  113. pluto
    April 9, 2011 at 7:29 pm

    California may have the strictest laws but comparing them with states like Oregon and Washington that means nothing. They have stripped their forests in a frightening manner. When driving there one comes to numerous and vast stretches of bare hills and massive road kills from displaced wildlife. May be that we have the strictest laws but that doesn’t mean jack shit.

  114. Thirdeye
    April 9, 2011 at 9:02 pm

    Sure, pluto. I’m sure no fact means anything to you in your gut-level ignorance.

  115. tra
    April 9, 2011 at 11:53 pm

    “…unwillingness…to assimilate information that might challenge long-held preconceptions.”

    I don’t think that’s any more common in the envirnomental movement than the public at large. If anything, environmentalists are less that way than the average person, challenging, as they do, the long-held preconception that we can continue to increase our use of resources and production of pollution without important consequences.

    Probably the most glaring example of unwillingness to assimilate information that might challenge long-held preconceptions is the climate change denialists. Supporters of nuclear power who still buy into the “clean, safe, emission-free source of power” myth are another strong contender for the Living In Denial Award.

    But I don’t doubt that environmentalists can fall into the same pattern of only assimilating information that comports with their current beliefs and discounting or ignoring information that would call those beliefs into question. However, I’m having difficulty coming up with an example. Perhaps you could provide a few examples that illustrate your claim.

  116. Bolithio
    April 10, 2011 at 10:08 am

    Farmer – you hang with a neutral crowd? How about this, i bet we would both be surprised at how open minded me and you really are. So I will acknowledge that I have not always taken the high road on blogs. For us, this issue is our life, right? So emotion is hard to remove when the stakes are high.

    I do have respect for the environmental community – and really – consider my self apart of it. After all, I mitigate logging impacts for living. Can you not see that I am protecting forests now!?

    I am critical of that community though. Especially earth first and EPIC. And I really do believe that these groups deserve credit for past deeds. But times have changed.

    We are guilty of the same offenses. I get jumped on immediately on this blog with any post supporting our logging industry. Im bottom line oriented. Dont care about the forest. A payed industry shill. A republican. Yet none of these accusers ever, or very rarely, are able to switch the emotional track and contribute anything beyond sentiment.

    I have had countless discussion with EF’ers who showed appallingly simplistic world views. Or at least in the context the they were signing up to do something extremely dangerous which often prevented good people from working. Its this pamphlet, arguably religious, approach to recruitment that EF and EPIC employ that – to me – has lost much of their credibility. The relentless suspicion of anyone who works in the logging industry does help either.

    Again! I want to emphasis that I have also met many people in these movements through the years who I respect and am friends with to this day.

  117. Anonymous
    April 10, 2011 at 10:15 am

    “I do have respect for the environmental community – and really – consider my self apart of it.”

    that last part isn’t a typo.

    “I get jumped on immediately on this blog with any post supporting our logging industry. Im bottom line oriented. Dont care about the forest. A payed industry shill. A republican. Yet none of these accusers ever, or very rarely, are able to switch the emotional track and contribute anything beyond sentiment.”

    That’s extract of bullshit. You get presented with bottom line facts that you choose to ignore.

  118. Random Guy
    April 10, 2011 at 10:16 am

    good morning!

  119. Bolithio
    April 10, 2011 at 10:21 am

    However, I’m having difficulty coming up with an example. Perhaps you could provide a few examples that illustrate your claim.

    The Richardson Grove campaign is full of this. EPICs blog is a smorgasbord of misinformation. Read some of the comments in the RG campaign threads and you see people saying things like “I live in the bay area and went to RG as a kid. Dont let them destroy this beautiful park!”

    Err, what? How would someone possibly come to that conclusion? The park is being destroyed by the road re-alignment? Could it be that when you sensationalize the issues people may believe it?

  120. Random Guy
    April 10, 2011 at 10:24 am

    Bolithio: picking and choosing his arguments. Any he doesn’t care to address, especially about the bigger picture, are coming from people who just don’t know what they’re talking about, and are talking about it unproductively. “but but but…”

  121. Thirdeye
    April 10, 2011 at 10:54 am

    Sure, there are plenty of examples close to home. Environmentalists’ ideas on forest practices are frozen in time circa 1970. It was then known, at the height of the postwar logging boom, that there was a major increase in sediment production impacting streams. Exactly what was causing the sediment increase was not known; it was only known to be related to logging. There was conjecture that silviculture was causing the impact, and it quickly gained authority. It turned out to be wrong. Forests Forever was essentially an effort to mandate silviculture based on discredited ideas. Fortunately, the voting public turned out to be wiser than environmentalists.

    There are also examples wrong ideas about wildlife impacts. The changes in the forest landscape have actually increased forage for deer. The understanding of habitat requirements for the spotted owl is rapidly evolving. In the southern part of the range it is not that dependent on old growth. It thrives in advanced second growth. The big bummer for the spotted owl is competition from the barred owl, and that is mainly an issue in old growth.

    The track record of stream restoration efforts on forest lands can hardly be called a success. The best that can be said is that there is no real empirical evidence of their effectiveness. Recently, some improvements in the Eel River salmon runs were touted as resulting from restoration. But there is no evidence that restoration projects are more significant than changes in forest practices under the Forest Practices Act and natural recovery processes. The most quantifiable results of restoration are tons of earth moved, gallons of diesel fuel burned, and money spent. There are numerous examples from the last 30 years of glaring failures among restoration projects. Department of Fish and Game continues to mandate one-size-fits-all, cookie cutter solutions. They have already faced one major embarrassment over the in-stream wood issue and more are coming. Will the approach to stream restoration change? If it does, it will be in the face of “experts” who are vested in warm fuzzy feelings and grant money.

    Interesting you should raise the global warming and nuclear issues. It’s unfortunate that both issues are so iconic to certain ideologies.

    Putting aside the global-warming-issue-is-a-commie-plot types, I believe that there is room for uncertainty and honest debate about the scale and consequences of human-induced climate change, and what to do about it. We are currently living in an era of human-induced climate change due to agriculture. There is also room for criticism of the IPCC’s processes. Groupthink is insidious. The most urgent scenarios for global warming move us closer to the nuclear option, regardless of how many wind and solar installations get built.

    On nuclear power, there’s no question that the consequences of a safety failure are bad, bad, bad. We’ve learned some things since the first/second generation plants were built. We’ve learned how vulnerable their safety systems are to human error and natural disasters. We’ve learned a lot more about natural disasters since the first commercially operated nuclear plant was built on a major fault in a tsunami zone on Humboldt Bay, like a monument to ignorance. The big question is whether or not the evolution of nuclear power technology and management processes can overcome these issues. Historically, new technologies have all gone through a dangerous phase and evolved to a safer phase. The best examples are in transportation technology. So, the historical precedent says that next-gen power plants with passive safety systems and built with appropriate consideration of natural hazards (unlike the consideration of the Tsunami hazard at Fukushima Daiichi) will lower risks significantly. The current technology was pushed into production while it was still way too immature. Even with the current funky nuclear situation, the mortality and, arguably, environmental, costs, of transportation technology outweigh those of nuclear power technology.

    We’ve also learned a lot about radiation in the last 60 years. We’ve learned about biological responses to radiation, the prevalence of radiation in the natural environment, and, thanks to the ghastly Chernobyl experiment, the consequences of a far greater radiation release than we’re ever likely to see again outside of nuclear war. What has been learned does not support an absolutist position.

    Here’s a link to an interview with someone who, like me, has evolved from an absolute anti to an agnostic position on nuclear power generation:

    http://bnreview.barnesandnoble.com/t5/Interview/Stewart-Brand/ba-p/1595

  122. Random Guy
    April 10, 2011 at 11:06 am

    I really don’t have anything else to say on the matter, should some people be withholding their own conversations on account of a lone anonymous internet blogger.

    Bolithio’s homework is to go sit in the middle of a clearcut, eat a handful of magic mushrooms and try not to let his own psychic turbulence cripple him.

  123. p
    April 10, 2011 at 11:21 am

    Random Guy OWNED by Bolithio over the course of this conversation.

    Bolithio: Clear, concise facts and the occasional misspelling, which his detractors seize upon as if this were some kind of proof his being wrong.

    RandomGuy: Random Generalizations and vague accusations of wrongdoing; when corrected with above clear concise facts, RG responds with silly insults and childish namecalling.

  124. Random Guy
    April 10, 2011 at 11:42 am

    If I’da knowed it was all some kind of contest, I’da at least worn a tie. There is a right and a wrong to what’s going on with our remaining open space…we live on a sphere with low ceilings and no exit.

  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