The forestry and logging pictures thread

[jacob j.]

A couple of pictures from the Dixie Fire near Greenville, California:

 

[cus_deluxe]

A couple of pictures from the Dixie Fire near Greenville, California:

thats *f-worded right up man. not a good place to be

 

[Dieselshawn]

Hauled several loads of logs to a log home builder today.



Took a team of craftmen 2 years to build this 7,000 sq foot house.

I started delivering the pieces of this house to a site 1.5 hours away.



Fancy.

 

[Maintenance Chief]

Looks l

Hauled several loads of logs to a log home builder today.

View attachment 303371

Took a team of craftmen 2 years to build this 7,000 sq foot house.

I started delivering the pieces of this house to a site 1.5 hours away.

View attachment 303373 View attachment 303374 View attachment 303375

Fancy.

Looks like the old CCC cabins or lodges.

 

[Funky sawman]

Whole world is on fire over here in idaho now. First I was put on hootowl, now I'm not allowed to work at all! These picts were taken on July 7th, the day that mother nature electrocuted the earth just north of my hershey bar logging camp in the Clearwater mountains

 

[Funky sawman]

This picture is history now, the goat and cougar complex fires ripped through here, it's moonscape now. It was supposed to be my next thinning unit for the floodwood state forest

 

[Swanman62]

I always hate to hear about a guy losing his livelihood. Be safe. We are praying for rain. Thanks for all the work you guys do to keep the woods thinned and the mills stocked with logs.

 

[RI Chevy]

Crap. Sorry. That sucks

 

[bigbadbob]

Im dab smack in the middle of this. Said to be the worst air quality in the world.
Setting off some smoke detectors

 

[RI Chevy]

I'm not liking that post. Hoping for the best for all of you out in the west. [emoji1696]
Hopefully it gets under control soon.

 

[Woodslasher]

I'm not liking that post. Hoping for the best for all of you out in the west. [emoji1696]
Hopefully it gets under control soon.

Well, there's only so much brush and forest that can burn, eventually it'll all be "up in smoke" or the rain will have come, at this point I'm not sure which would be better.....
To clarify, I see so much brush and so many over-forested areas that I know will never be cleared by the homeowners, it would almost be better for a fire to "clear" the land and then maybe the owners will keep it cleared. Or it'll just buy us a few years until the brush all grows back again.

 

[jacob j.]

Well, there's only so much brush and forest that can burn, eventually it'll all be "up in smoke" or the rain will have come, at this point I'm not sure which would be better.....
To clarify, I see so much brush and so many over-forested areas that I know will never be cleared by the homeowners, it would almost be better for a fire to "clear" the land and then maybe the owners will keep it cleared. Or it'll just buy us a few years until the brush all grows back again.

One of the main problems we have out here (apart from negligent land owners) is that the various governments and land management agencies cannot agree on how they want their individual lands managed. In Oregon, the state aggressively suppresses fire and never manages a fire (i.e. allowing a fire to burn to mitigate fuels build-up). They do a lot of prescribed fire but some of their projects aren't all that effective. The local city and county governments do little or no prescribed fire, mainly because they just don't have the expertise. Many of the counties log or thin some of their property but don't dispose of the resulting slash properly.

Many of the federal agencies here aggressively pursue prescribed fire but intensive smoke control regulations shut down a lot of the projects because they'll potentially smoke out a heavily populated area. Some of the Interior agencies have managed fire policies so they can let fires burn when they don't threaten homes or infrastructure, and that seems to be the most effective way anymore of dealing with heavy fuels in the woods (smoke management rules don't really apply to "emergency" wildland fires).

It's a complex problem and the solutions are going to be equally complex, but the bottom line is all the agencies, local & municipal governments, and large private landowners will need to get together, agree on solutions, and then implement those solutions together. I'll bet it takes near to 100 years before we start to get a handle on western Megafires.

 

[Skeans1]

One of the main problems we have out here (apart from negligent land owners) is that the various governments and land management agencies cannot agree on how they want their individual lands managed. In Oregon, the state aggressively suppresses fire and never manages a fire (i.e. allowing a fire to burn to mitigate fuels build-up). They do a lot of prescribed fire but some of their projects aren't all that effective. The local city and county governments do little or no prescribed fire, mainly because they just don't have the expertise. Many of the counties log or thin some of their property but don't dispose of the resulting slash properly.

Many of the federal agencies here aggressively pursue prescribed fire but intensive smoke control regulations shut down a lot of the projects because they'll potentially smoke out a heavily populated area. Some of the Interior agencies have managed fire policies so they can let fires burn when they don't threaten homes or infrastructure, and that seems to be the most effective way anymore of dealing with heavy fuels in the woods (smoke management rules don't really apply to "emergency" wildland fires).

It's a complex problem and the solutions are going to be equally complex, but the bottom line is all the agencies, local & municipal governments, and large private landowners will need to get together, agree on solutions, and then implement those solutions together. I'll bet it takes near to 100 years before we start to get a handle on western Megafires.

You guys are allowed to burn? Heck we can hardly do any burning at all up here because of the cities formally known as roses. If I can burn piles one day at any point that they choose I have to put the piles out thanks to them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jacob j.]

You guys are allowed to burn? Heck we can hardly do any burning at all up here because of the cities formally known as roses. If I can burn piles one day at any point that they choose I have to put the piles out thanks to them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We can burn down here but it really depends on weather/prevailing winds, and how much smoke we're potentially going to generate. There's a formula for tons/acre, species of woody debris, slope, aspect, and which fuel model the burn unit would fall under that determines the potential smoke output. Where I live now, the prevailing wind is mostly out of the southwest, which means we won't be burning those days because it pushes the smoke into Roseland. When I lived near Grants Pass, we usually couldn't burn if the smoke was going to settle into the Rogue Valley, but otherwise would rip it.

The main issue down there was politics.

 

[BonScott46]

This picture is history now, the goat and cougar complex fires riped through here, it's moonscape now. It was supposed to be my next thinning unit for the floodwood state forestView attachment 304037

What are you removing when thinning a unit like that one?

 

[Skeans1]

We can burn down here but it really depends on weather/prevailing winds, and how much smoke we're potentially going to generate. There's a formula for tons/acre, species of woody debris, slope, aspect, and which fuel model the burn unit would fall under that determines the potential smoke output. Where I live now, the prevailing wind is mostly out of the southwest, which means we won't be burning those days because it pushes the smoke into Roseland. When I lived near Grants Pass, we usually couldn't burn if the smoke was going to settle into the Rogue Valley, but otherwise would rip it.

The main issue down there was politics.

Politics is just a piece of it the biggest problem is the people from the cities “knowing” how to do forestry. My wife is from Happy Valley so if I do show her friends and their husbands some of the pictures of what I do it’s not normally looked at as a good thing even after they almost burnt last year. What needs to change here is
A. The political climate needs some balance before major damage is done.
B. One of those fires to go ripping through somewhere like that to really wake those people up.

Another fine example is taking the dogs away for kitty hunting just like with stopping logging they have created a beautiful storm of disaster that all of us in the rural parts of the state deal with because they think they’re cute.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Woodslasher]

Politics is just a piece of it the biggest problem is the people from the cities “knowing” how to do forestry. My wife is from Happy Valley so if I do show her friends and their husbands some of the pictures of what I do it’s not normally looked at as a good thing even after they almost burnt last year. What needs to change here is
A. The political climate needs some balance before major damage is done.
B. One of those fires to go ripping through somewhere like that to really wake those people up. Like Paradise?

Another fine example is taking the dogs away for kitty hunting just like with stopping logging they have created a beautiful storm of disaster that all of us in the rural parts of the state deal with because they think they’re cute.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree, but some people are just ignorant/uninformed. I spent 3 months in a city environment where I was the only hick in the room. In the course of that time I wound up chatting with city folks a lot. When I told them my major interest was forestry, they'd typically respond with, "Oh, are you trying to get a degree in Environmental Sciences (or some similar degree)?" "No, I wanna run a saw." "..... Oh."
Then I would explain how overgrown where I lived was, how dangerous that was, and how thinned out the forests need to be in order to be healthy. I'd also explain how loggers have a vested interest in the survival and re-growth of our forests since that is what their livelihood depends on. The typical reaction was somewhere along the lines of, "Oh, there's too much brush and forests are too thick? They aren't in danger of being logged to extinction?"
I found most people were receptive and interested in what I was telling them, and it obviously was not what they were usually told.

 

[Funky sawman]

What are you removing when thinning a unit like that one?

Any dead standing trees except leaving 2 per acre for wildlife habitat, then taking out green timber with broken out tops and others that won't make good quality saw logs in the future

 

[davidwyby]

Any dead standing trees except leaving 2 per acre for wildlife habitat, then taking out green timber with broken out tops and others that won't make good quality saw logs in the future

Stuff on the ground is left for habitat/fertilizer?

 

[Funky sawman]

Stuff on the ground is left for habitat/fertilizer?

Well technically 1/3 is to be left on the forest floor for decomposition which feeds the living timber. The stuff I do leave gets lopped into 5 to 8 foot long chunks so it can rest on the ground more evenly so it rots faster.