Porcupine Hills Forrest logging... WOW!

[Headdamage]

"view shed" this is figured out with a GIS program. It allows a timber company to maximize the amount of timber taken out of any area without it being viable from major highways and view points. Satellite imagery allows the common folk to see what is really happening.

[Scott h]

Originally Posted by Newview01

The amount of children does not determine the intelligence or quality of the children. It is the upbringing and lessons taught. Those who believe that a large family is more damaging to the earth than a small do not know what a large family is like or were brought up in the wrong family.

He was merely stating the undisputable fact that there are way to many people in the world.

[ganderblaster]

Run! Forrest! Run!

[Bub]

That's actually funny

Originally Posted by ganderblaster

Run, Forrest! Run!

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by Scott h

He was merely stating the undisputable fact that there are way to many people in the world.

That is not an undisputable fact.

[KegRiver]

Originally Posted by Newview01

That is not an undisputable fact.

It could be said that no fact is indisputable.

Some people will dispute anything. That doesn't make them right.

[Pekan]

Originally Posted by CanadianEh

Just did some quick research, Douglas firs commonly live more than 500 years and occasionally more than 1,000 years. Apparently they are also quite fire resistant with thick bark acting like an insulator to the fire, as I assume they would have to be to live 500-1000 years. I would bet fire has gone through that forest maybe even a few times long before we were here to ever see it, or extinguish it.

IMHO the argument that these trees should be cut down becasue of fire risk and being they are 200-300 years old when it has a life cycle of 500-1000 years, holds no water. and is likely a logging companies way to lobby government.

AS mentioned, I do not disagree with logging. it has its place for industry and conservation. But to go clear cut massive forests of 300 year old trees is plain ignorant and stupid. Places like this should be SELECTIVELY logged, taking younger trees which regenerate much much faster. Not clear cut.


It pains me that my sons, grandsons, great grandsons, great grand sons will likely never see a stunning valley of trees far older than Canada itself. just becasue of the short sightedness and someone wanting to make a few $$ in the name of industry. These places are the types of places that should be preserved for future generations, for hunting, camping, hiking, OHV. horseback etc etc etc...

p.s. Sounds very tree hugger ( which I am not) but I would like to preserve natural wonders for future generations. Also, I cannot personally speak to the wildlife, they have never spoken back to date.. so I have not had in depth conversations with them as to their "love of it"

I need to point out that starting a comment by saying "I just did some quick internet research".... Is pretty much whats going wrong with social media and citizen activists these days.
So what you know about forestry and forest ecology you just learned in 5 minutes on google?
And you know that this particular logging operation is wrong, however the foresters and professional biologists, ecologists with degrees is this stuff who were involved in the decision to lay out this cut block, are somehow less informed on the issue?
WOW!
NOT every opinion is equal. Some people are actually qualified!

Logging is sad for some people. I get that. It's nice looking country, fine. Is your house made of wood? Mine too. Guess where 2x4's come from.

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by KegRiver

It could be said that no fact is indisputable.

Some people will dispute anything. That doesn't make them right.

That is disputable.

Now the word sounds funny.

[Okotokian]

"Environmentalists" love pictures like that.... SO SHOCKING. People (I'm not referring to the OP) need to look at it in proportion, in totality, not just what can fit in the camera viewfinder. A strip mine or cut block can be made to look terrible in a photo, but if it's 1% of the total land area, and is scheduled for reclamation, big whoop.

[Okotokian]

Originally Posted by KegRiver

That doesn't make them right.

With the advent of alternative facts, everybody can be right. It's a wonderful new day.

[Pekan]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

With the advent of alternative facts, everybody can be right. It's a wonderful new day.

Alternative facts. I like it

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

"Environmentalists" love pictures like that.... SO SHOCKING. People (I'm not referring to the OP) need to look at it in proportion, in totality, not just what can fit in the camera viewfinder. A strip mine or cut block can be made to look terrible in a photo, but if it's 1% of the total land area, and is scheduled for reclamation, big whoop.

This is exactly what the greenies are doing with Castle. They zoom in on one or two "problem" spots, and have blown everything out of proportion.

Sorry for the derail.

[Red Bullets]

Trees are one of our renewable resources if managed properly.

Use the Google Earth Engine to look at a time lapse of Alberta since 1984 to present. It will give you an accurate idea of changes in 33 years. It's satellite imagery.

Just zoom into the property you were checking out and you can how it was deforested since 1984. You can check out every place in Alberta or on the globe. Stop the animation and manually go year by year. There is a legend of where you are in the upper right corner.

*West of Whitecourt and Fox Creek area really shows the difference in the bush being opened up and leases being developed. Looking at the Edmonton/Calgary corridor expansion is interesting too. Heck you can even look at your yard.

https://earthengine.google.com/timelapse/

[LKILR]

Was out in the porcupine hills yesterday and noticed some more logging. All around the lookout tower. Harvesting a lot of old fir trees. Hope they clean up the mess they make! Sure do destroy the landscape. Especially where they build the roads.