Fire up the saws!

[Justabirdwatcher]

Immediate Expansion of American Timber Production

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered: Section 1. Purpose.

www.whitehouse.gov

Did you know "our inability to fully exploit domestic timber supply" has led to the "degraded fish and wildlife habitats?" Interesting take.

Lots of potential impacts here, some good, some not so good.

Proposed:

CatEx for thinning and salvage and CatEx reciprocity between agencies.

Delegation of sec. 7 review responsibilities from FWS to other agencies.

MBF annual targets.

"Endangered Species Committee"

among others...

This could have some huge impacts on federal lands, especially in the west.

 

[Mallardsx2]

80% of our national forests should have been logged 30 years ago. I fully support logging and making lumber affordable. I hope the clearcut the CNF by me. I would fully support that. It’s a truly renewable resource folks….and It would actually make habitat for animals to live in.

$6 for a 2x4x8 lmfao

 

[Rie Bread]

It’s all good I use veggie oil mixed with mushroom spores for bar oil.

Rack the forest LLC here we go!

 

[Salmonchaser]

Be interested to know how the order gets around all the lawsuits that get filed anytime the Forest Service tries to let a timber sale go. I’ll have to read up on this one.

 

[Forkyfinder]

Many of public lands in the west need dramatic thinning.

It will be interesting how the recent supreme court ruling rescinding chevron deference will impact actions like this - now and in the future.

 

[Sytes]

If they modeled thinning projects and timber operations after the likes of The Nature Conservancy, our wildland flora and fauna would receive the greatest benefits, followed by American timber production, jobs, and sales.

 

[Straight Arrow]

There are enough urban wildland interface wildfire prevention potential projects to provide a lifetime of timber harvesting. Unfortunately, currently there are not enough sawmills to deal with the amount of timber to be milled. But it would be possible if made a real priority more extensively.

Thinning the vast millions and millions acres of public and private forests across the country to the extent of preventing wildfires is impossible and certainly not feasible, considering the number of timber harvesters and sawmills required. 'Sounds like a good idea ... until quickly realizing the enormity of it. Albeit it would be beneficial in specific smaller areas.

 

[Nick87]

Thinning the vast millions and millions acres of public and private forests across the country to the extent of preventing wildfires is impossible and certainly not feasible, considering the number of timber harvesters and sawmills required.

Would thinning what we can be a good start? Serious question, as I know zero about timber management. Not many trees around here.

 

[TheTone]

They going to drastically subsidize the cost to haul backcountry logs to front county mills?

They’re also going to need to dramatically reduce stocking rates on new trees they plant post harvest if the too many trees in the woods argument is to be believed. I’m always frustrated when I see a plantation thinned at a 50+% rate when the trees being thinned are ones that were just planted 10 or so years earlier. Sure seems like it would make more sense to have planted less to begin with

I’d also be happy to see replanting done with wildlife/habitat in mind. Monocultures of trees planted simply for production aren’t what I see in a natural forest, plus it would be nice to see areas left unplanted to allow for openings and natural forest succession

 

[Straight Arrow]

Would thinning what we can be a good start? Serious question, as I know zero about timber management. Not many trees around here.

Yes, as I expressed urban wildland interface forest thinning should be a priority.
As an example, the forests south of Bozeman, MT, are thick with bug killed and otherwise dead timber with many thick stands of timber near the city and also along the river corridor up Gallatin Canyon, then in USFS national forest close to Yellowstone Club and Big Sky. Although there is limited thinning near Bozeman, there is potential for much more. Near where I live is South Cottonwood Canyon with many fulltime residences up a deadend canyon. In the event of a wildfire up that canyon, it would be a real challenge to get people and livestock out of there to safety ... let alone get firefighters and equipment in there to suppress the fire.

 

[INMT]

Unfortunately, currently there are not enough sawmills to deal with the amount of timber to be milled. But it would be possible if made a real priority more extensively.

Not to mention the untold number of recently terminated foresters and timber cruises and admin folks that plan, implement and manage the timber sales.

 

[Mallardsx2]

They going to drastically subsidize the cost to haul backcountry logs to front county mills?

This is a valid point and a major issue with backcountry logging.


I talked to a logger who was logging waaaaaay out in the middle of the national forest in Colorado back in 2018 and he told me it was just barely worth it to cut timber there and if he had any other job lined up he wouldn’t be doing it.

To make matters worse some idiot kept cutting his brake lines every night on his log truck.

Know this, he was literally going to kill the person if he caught them. I saw the gun. Lol

 

[INMT]

I find it to be an interesting executive order. And I do believe there could be better forest management, especially beginning with the WUI. The maps of homes being built in the WUI vs 30 years ago are staggering.

And could harvesting more local lumber vs importing from Canada help alleviate the housing crisis? Hopefully, but I think there is more to that than the price of a 2x4.

All of this comes back to infrastructure though, as @StraightArrow pointed out. Timber extraction will never reach the levels of the 80’s - early 90’s because the loggers, haulers, and mills just aren’t there anymore.

You can sign all the executive orders you want, but unless you can convince people that this is lasting and is a good investment, the infrastructure and the small logging communities will never come back.

 

[Justabirdwatcher]

The WUI is nearly everywhere now, thanks to Covid/telework, a lack of regulation on where homes can be built and where they will (or won't) be insured.

Thinning can be incredibly beneficial in places. Logging mature forests is rarely beneficial unless a person is more interested in early successional species than late successional species. Keep in mind, most of our game species benefit from openings and edge, so there will be pressure to create openings even in mature forest that should be left the he.. alone for those species that depend on it. Not everything benefits from logging or even thinning. The idea that it is always "necessary" is something promoted by industry and its allies. Our forests managed themselves quite fine and dandy long before europeans showed up.

A balanced approach toward thinning and an abundance of fire would start to get things back on track, but I didn't see anything in the EO addressing smoke management and burn plans, so one without the other is nothing more than a financial grab with no effort to actually care for the land we all own.

As I said, there are some good things that could come out of this. And some bad. All comes down to how its applied on the ground. CatEx'ing thinning and salvage ops is something that would definitely get things moving faster though. Nothing more frustrating than seeing doghair stands of spruce and fir that are virtually food deserts, and no ability to open them up.

 

[Sytes]

Not to mention the untold number of recently terminated foresters and timber cruises and admin folks that plan, implement and manage the timber sales.

*serious Q for those, in the know : Is the staffing for foresters, timber crews, and admin based strictly on probationary employees, i.e. less than one year on the job?
If seasonal (maybe some of the *forestry tech INTERN positions?), then these people do not retain SF-50 Permanent status, i.e. benefits towards retirement, etc. However, forest engineers, foresters, procurement foresters, etc, the majority of the staffing maintain "Permanent" status.

I know tensions currently keep people in one trench or the other, so likely challenging to get an honest assessment.

Example: base level Forestry tech are "Permanent" positions.

Forestry Technician

These integrated entry-level Forestry Technician positions coupled with career ladders, provide a sequence of training steps that lead to progressively more advanced jobs and skillsets throughout a Forest Service employee's career. Recruitment Incentives may be offered to qualifying...

www.usajobs.gov

 

[wytex]

Not a clearcut fan at all and they are logging our forests every year.

This was elk habitat but in about 50 years we'll have some timber back.

 

[Treeshark]

I am certainly no logging expert, but the mule deer hunter in me says the more logging the better.

Hard to think of any man-made activity that would be more impactful towards improving mule deer populations in a lot of areas in the west than increased logging.

 

[Treeshark]

Not a clearcut fan at all and they are logging our forests every year.

This was elk habitat but in about 50 years we'll have some timber back.
View attachment 362570

I agree that it would be nicer if that was not completely cut, but that looks like ideal mule deer and elk habitat next year already to me personally.

 

[sapperJ24]

*serious Q for those, in the know : Is the staffing for foresters, timber crews, and admin based strictly on probationary employees, i.e. less than one year on the job?
If seasonal (maybe some of the *forestry tech INTERN positions?), then these people do not retain SF-50 Permanent status, i.e. benefits towards retirement, etc. However, forest engineers, foresters, procurement foresters, etc, the majority of the staffing maintain "Permanent" status.

I know tensions currently keep people in one trench or the other, so likely challenging to get an honest assessment.

Example: base level Forestry tech are "Permanent" positions.

Forestry Technician

These integrated entry-level Forestry Technician positions coupled with career ladders, provide a sequence of training steps that lead to progressively more advanced jobs and skillsets throughout a Forest Service employee's career. Recruitment Incentives may be offered to qualifying...

www.usajobs.gov

The answer may vary based on the specifics of the forest or region, so this will be a bit general.

Foresters are generally not on probation as they have usually worked their way up. However, timber crews are entry level and were mostly or completely made up of probationary employees (recent converts from temporary 1039 to perm 13/13 seasonals via the USAjob post you shared). The probationary timber crewmembers were recently (2/14) terminated, however, some have been reinstated in some locations in Region 1.

I'm not sure which positions you're specifically referring to by admin, but I would speculate they could be a mix of perm and recently terminated probationary perm.

No non-fire temporary seasonal (1039) positions were flown or offered due to last year's budget shortfalls.

One things that adds confusion to the discussion is the use of the term 'seasonals'. Historically, temporary 1039 employees referred to themselves as seasonals, but the agency used seasonals to describe non-year-round permanent employees on a 13/13 or 18/8 appointment.

Hope this helps.

 

[shoots-straight]

To think logging hasn't been going on is wrong headed. Economics play the biggest part in logging our national forests.

We logged and roaded everything in my neck of the woods, in the 70's and 80's. What was onces a beautiful forested region turned into a roaded, clearcut and burnt forested region.

There was one clear cut up the East Fork we liked to call "The OH my God" clearcut. It was during that time the foresters were trying a method of "reforestation" to cut everything on the mountain, bulldoze all the garbage debris into rows and light them on fire a few dozen times.

Then after that they would go in and plant millions of Ponderosa Pine saplings.

After all the saplings died the clearcut would grow wildly as Mother Nature would see fit. Usually less desirable merchantable timber and brush.

Now if you ask them, they will take you up to a couple of "reforested" patches where the Ponderosa trees did fairly well. Low elevation areas and usually terraced hills.

Where I hunted big bulls, the roads and clear cuts took the cover away, and those Elk either died quickly that year, or found other suitable places to hide.

Brush really doesn't pay the bills, and so the mills need bigger trees to make a profit. Usually the trick to to claim it's a thinning project but actually a regular timber sale with some thinning done.

Urban interface areas that are thinned to protect people and houses have been done all over the Bitterroot NF. They had just completed an area up the East Fork of the Bitterroot to protect a major developed colony the year before last, and then this past year a major fire burnt to it, and through it. I'm sure without the logging that developed area would have seen a loss of homes.

Those thinning projects have been going pretty well as far as I could tell but this, go and blow with no NEPA has me largely feeling like we're going back to lawless times.

You can't have Elk without cover and long hunting seasons. Roads are needed to get the timber out. So now you removed more cover.

I hope I don't need to bring up studies where Elk (on public lands) stay away from roads and lack of security areas.

I will also say that much of our NF's have burnt. So there's not the volume of timber left to selectively cut from. Here in Montana the higher elevation areas grow very slow and usually a undersierable tree. The rest had beetle kill a few years ago and now's a mess. That kind of forest won't generate much revenue. It's usually sold as a deficit sale. Are we going to do those anymore?

Be careful what you wish for.