Have the Enviromentalist's Gone Too Far?

[ELKCHSR]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Not trying to be a smart-a$$, but the thought escapse me. Maybe I am just not very bright.

The other comment also could use some explanation, for those of us, including myself, who do not know what the private timber industry is up to right now.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I know what the private timber industry is basically up to right now, and that is great, but the FS job is in a different category. The first is to make a profit, even if they have to sit on their resource for a little while waiting for the market to change <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
It has been stated time and again that the market is down, so the heavy clear cutting as has happened back in the mid 80's and 90's has been drastically reduced, the Japanese are not buying like they once were. You are not stupid, no matter what you may want to post, and it is easy to see that you are just being manipulative, but I will indulge you this for whatever reasons you wish to portray. On the other side of the card, where you quoted Buzz, that is a very simple matter as any one can see if they only look, either one of two things are probably taking place:
1. They see the handwriting on the wall with new regulations coming in as happened in Washington in the 70's and they are getting every thing they can before the over regulations come into effect, as they did in Washington State.
2. They are getting ready to sell the property and they don't get any more whether the timber is left or not, so being business minded, they will pull all of the available dollars out of the land before it goes on the chopping block.
Now, I could be way off and totally off the mark on this, but I have seen some of this in the past and if one just uses past lessons to see some things that can happen in the future, these are the two scenarios that come to mind.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> In my simple mind, there would be two styles of managing Private Timber lands. The first, would be to manage it for the maximum long term sustainable wealth for the owners. The second, would be for a quick source of revenue, and then move on, with little regard to the area left behind. I think that is what Buzz was commenting on when he said: <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
The one cool thing about Mother Earth is the fact of its regenerative properties, we as humans see five years as being eons because we are such short lived creatures in conjunction with the time lines of the earth, it is hard to comprehend billions, millions, or even thousands of years for that matter. Now this does by no means give people the right morally to destroy every thing, but keeping with in the laws written by man, these practices are acceptable and legal. All I can say to fix this is for you personally to become a lawmaker and get the rules changed. Challenging me or any one else on this board for that matter for others actions is not only silly, but gets you nowhere, unless you are just trying to instigate some thing. Then if that's the case, we all like to play these useless games. Besides if it were anywhere near as bad as Buzz portrays here, then it would be Oh so very obvious no matter where you go. I have asked him to give me places to see this total laying to waste before, I will, when given time and these places to go, if in fact they exist to the extent that is espoused here, go personally to these areas when I am around the region and take pictures of them to show all of you, I still to date have not received one place to go look. This is a big state, even going just into the Bitterroots and looking around could take weeks or more trying to locate them. If it was so rampant, then I should be able to get dozens if not hundreds of locations one would think. This is nothing more, from what I can see, as some one attempting to beat a dead drum and hoping beyond hope, some one will jump in and help, well if you want to help out Buzz’s cause, give me coordinates and show us all that what is said is true.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> if this is the Forest Circus' goal, and I am not sure if that is the goal, then I don't see the objective of the Forest Circus to be the "supplier of last resort" to the Tricon mill. That would be a much different objective. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Lets see, you only saw what you wanted as usual, took things out of context and jumped to conclusions, which is starting to seem the norm. Re-read my post, and look at it as an opinion, nothing more. It is what they should be doing, but because of politics and sticking their fingers in the air, they have veered onto other tangents away from what they really should be doing. What they do with some individual company shouldn’t bother you any way; you still have all the luxuries that logging and mining provide. Your computer alone proves that.
One last thing, I find that when one is starting to lose on a debate on this board, they start going after ones english, I will thank you for proving that one, once again with your opening line.

 

[ELKCHSR]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Paul, "Wait a couple of more years and they will have no value." Do they have any value when they rot and the nutrients go back into the soil? Do they provide any shade at all for seedlings? Do they provide any habitat for small animals when they fall over? Do insects inhabit them as they rot? Do any birds eat the insects?

Aren't those things valuable? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Just a little FYI!!!
When I attended the Montana saw confrence early last month, there was studies done on how many snags (dead standing trees) that were in the Lolo NF alone, not counting burned areas, and it hit at some five million plus, I don't know how the estimates were done, nor who did the counts. I just know what was presented to us. So habitat for bugs and rodents, really isn't an issue. Not unless you just want to save every thing, and that isn't really feasable. Seedlings may be another matter, but no one was saying to go in and take every thing, they can and have taken, lets say 50% of the wood and still sustain lots of every thing for every one, except for those that just don't want to see machinery or man in the woods...

 

[JoseCuervo]

Elkchsr,

I didn't know there were winners and losers on the board. Who keeps the score? My guess is that there are just opinions, and sometimes links to facts on these boards. If there are truly winners and losers, let me know how to tell.

I apologize if you felt like I attacked your English, as that was not my intent. I know you have posted comments on my spelling, that I tried to brush off with a joke back to you. Now I know that the basis of your comments on my spelling was an indication of you losing the debate. Did that mean I was winning???

My post asking you to clarify the long sentence was to avoid mis-statements, or mis-interpertation. You have made numerous comments about people reading too much into what you post, and out of respect, I asked for clarification. I still don't know what the thought was in that statement, so I still must not be very bright. I will be one of the first to admidt I am not very smart, and I am sure I can find many others who will concur.

I would actually like to hear facts and ideas here, and on similar topics, as I feel I have much to learn, and I do respect other's opinions, or at least their right to the opinion.

If one was to read through this thread, you would see my comments tend to be oriented toward the tactics the loggers and the Conservationists use, and my thoughts on the chance of success. And then after the second news article was posted, I have commented on the appearent bad management of the Tricon mill, and how it is not the Forest Circus' role to provide timber to the mill, to keep the private company afloat. That would be nothing more than a form of either Socialism or Communism (I get them mixed up...) And then I posted the insight of the great Bob Dylan, and his view on the subject.

Cheers.

 

[ELKCHSR]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> I apologize if you felt like I attacked your English, as that was not my intent. I know you have posted comments on my spelling, that I tried to brush off with a joke back to you. Now I know that the basis of your comments on my spelling was an indication of you losing the debate. Did that mean I was winning??? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I hadn't realized I had said any thing about your spelling, the only one I remember doing this to was Buzz, and that was only to prove the point that his is not either. If I had on yours, I will apologize. But honestly I don't remember doing such.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Socialism or Communism (I get them mixed up...) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
From what I have seen, these and also if you toss Liberalism into the mix, are just all varying degrees of the same thing, I didn't do well in high school on these subjects, but that was some twenty five years ago and there has been a lot of living in that time, including in foreign countries including very socialist and/or liberal. I only know that from what I have seen on these three political topics that they all have a lot of things in common. I understand what you are saying about the long sentence, and only saw it as a tactic (Tack Tick for Buzz) to try attacking in what ever form me personally, this has been used quite a few times in the past on this board when certain individuals started running out of things to counter what I have stated. One thing I don't really put to much credit in, is what news articles, or findings of what some "scientists" or some "biologists/scientists" purport as gospel just because it is their opinion and it is put out into the general public. I have seen and experienced different, I have shown in the past on this board that quite a few things that have come across the board, mostly some of the things that Buzz puts out as being rampant and covering the earth with pestilence and destruction, just isn't true, not to the extent that is touted. This is where I am coming from, and I know you’re new and have your own set and deep-seated opinions, as do we all. I will also let you in on one of the reasons I put pretty much every thing that you or any one else say that I want to comment on in quotes all the time is I have been accused of taking things out of context, rambling all over and saying things that weren't quite true about some one else’s statement. So now, to keep things clarified and in order, I put each one in quotes so as to not take any one out of order and they see exactly what I was commenting on with their topic, nothing more. Especially when some will put a post up, like this one right now that is over long winded and just seems to keep going...LOL...

 

[BigHornyRam]

Ithaca and Gunner,

I was talking about commercial value. You know, the kind that produces dollars and cents. The money from the sale of these trees were to be used by the Forest Service to transplant seedlings, repair roads, and decomission roads. These are all items that the enviromentalists would like to have done. They do require dollars however. By stopping this sale, they are stopping this good work as well. In the publics eye, the enviromentalists are going too far in this instance, and it will hurt their cause in the future.

Of the small percent of burnt trees that get harvested, the stumps and limbs go back to the land, and we humans get the trunks for our needs. Resonable compromise in my opinion. I prefer my stick framed house to living in a cave, how about you guy's?

Lastly you state that there will be more fires to come to provide logs for the mills. True, but where will they occur? You know that mills can only economically utilize logs from X amount of distance from the mill. Fires in Colorado, do not provide logs for mills in Montana. The marginal timber Tricon utilizes has to come from very local sources to be profitable.

It is very obvious from both your posts that neither of you would lose any sleep if the zero cut agenda is releized. No remorse for the lost jobs, and lost businesses. It is this attitude you share with the other enviromental extremeists, that will lead to the failure of your cause. There is a time to compromise and this is one of them.

Paul

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 05-05-2003 07:24: Message edited by: Paul C ]</font>

 

[JoseCuervo]

Paul,

I really don't think Zero cut is the answer, nor do I think total clear cutting was the answer. And since this timber sale is in Montana, I really don't care if it is environmentally destructive. Most of my comments were on the Law vs. tears of the town, or the management of the Tricon mill, or finally, the responsibility of the FS to keep the mill going.

About 5 or 6 years ago in Idaho, we had some big burns, one was just outside of Boise, and another was up on the Payette system. When they put the burnt timber up for sale, it was all bought up by the Oregon mills, and the Idaho mills got none. There were logging trucks running downtown Boise, other trucks running past 3 of Boise Cascade's mills on their way to Oregon. My point is, the Tricon management is in a tough spot, if they are dependent upon local burns of Forest Service timber. Remember the orginal article said they had a millon board feet in the yard (2 weeks), and 2 million purchased, still on the mountain (4 weeks). They had HOPED to be able to buy some of the 30 million left.
I don't know what standard industry practices are in the timber buisness, but that would seem a bit close on supply, to keep a mill going. I would not run another kind of factory like that.

So no, I am not zero cut, and in Idaho, I would like the laws enforced, and the streambeds protected, so the Salmon and Steelhead can survive. As for my house, I have a preference for stick framing, and I prefer 2x6, so the Tricon mill may not even be able to cut my framing material with the marginal logs. My current house needed quite a few good 2x6x18', and they were a bit tough to find. But to be honest, I have no problem standing up walls with Canadian Timber, at a 29% discount to the US timber. No more difficulty than I have watching Idaho, Oregon, and Washington timber being shipped to Asia.

 

[Ithaca 37]

Paul, Wrong again!

"It is very obvious from both your posts that neither of you would lose any sleep if the zero cut agenda is releized..."

How many times do I have to tell you that logging is an important option to keep?

In this case what you have is a mill whining that they have to be supported by the FS, no matter what.

 

[BigHornyRam]

Elkgunner,

I do like your style of debate. Much more intellegent responses then from your counterpart. I would have to agree with you on the Canadian tariff deal. If the Canadians can produce their lumber and ship it here for less, then so be it.

I'm sure your house had some 2" x 4" interior partitions, so it could be possible that Tricon did indeed provide wood for your house. Not real likely but possible. But their production could very well have a direct effect on the price you paid for competing products. Something to think about.

Paul

 

[1_pointer]

What is the real issue? I don't see it as only taking the 'side' of either the loggers/logging industry or of the conservationists/environmentalists. IMO, the issues are clouded (thus causing a controversy) because the three things that must be addressed weren't. That being the economical, ecological, and societal influences that in concert are apart of land (especially public) management. Obviously (in this case) the biggest contention is between the economical and ecological aspects. Neither side is going to 'win', so how do we learn from this to prevent this in the future? Would the enviromentalist have been better served by addressing the impacts to the societal and economical values of this sale, so as to be able to ascertain more than just the ecological impacts? Would the logging industry have been better served to meet their economical values of the timber had more foresight/research been conducted to be able to know (quantitatively) what the ecological impacts may be?

Personally, I believe both sides are at fault as the ability to choose the best scenario (for both sides) was removed. This was done by not adequately addressing the 'opposing side' and then no choice can be made, but the decisions mandated.

 

[BuzzH]

Elkchsr, seriously, you need to read the NFMA, the goal of the FS is not to maximize profit from the land...its all there for you to read in black and white.

As far as PC lands that are nuked, I've already told you a hundred times where to go. Head NE of Missoula MT then direct your attention to the Gold Creek Drainage, in particular Sunflower MTN, Black MTN, Belmont Peak, the West Fork of Gold Creek, the entire Burnt Fork drainage, Cow Creek drainage, Game Ridge,...basically anything on the North Side of highway 200 between Twin Creeks and the Clearwater Highway. Also the chamberlain Creek area is nuked pretty bad.

Oh, and also for the hundredth time, I am not against logging at all...not one bit, as long as its done responsibly.

In this case, I'm all for getting the burnt logs to markets where its possible to do so without degrading water quality, building unnecessary roads, breaking laws, etc. But what I wont accept is the extractive resource industry crying about how we should throw all our environmental laws aside to get at some burnt trees. Nothing, and I mean nothing is wasted in the woods.

Timber absolutely is a renewable resource, but what Plum Creek, and in some cases the FS, has failed to realize is that merchantable trees have about an 80 year rotation, at best, in MT (as well as most of the interior west). Therefore, it really makes sense to log at a much slower rate than what has happened on most private and public timber lands in MT to ensure "the greatest good for the greatest number for the longest time."

I'll agree that nature is resiliant, but everything has a breaking point and it makes sense to me to proceed with management (when possible) at a rate where we can understand what impacts we're having. Its pretty irresponsible and wrong to assume that nature will just magically take care of itself when we screw up. The fact is, the effects of the management decisions we make today on ecosystems, wont be realized until most of us are worm shit. Proceed with management slowly...and do it as correctly as possible.

Thats not to be confused with "doing nothing".

 

[JoseCuervo]

Paul,

You are right, there was plenty of 2x4 partition walls, but the cost of them sure didn't come close to the 2x6 for the exterior walls. But then again, this house was not designed to be cheap to build. I think my initial quotes when I built it were for $560/1000BF, and when the lumber started showing up, I ended up at $360/mil. With what I saved on lumber, I upgraded my windows to some incredibly nice MillGuard windows, that seem to be incredibly energy efficient. So, yes, if Tricon was contibuting to the supply, and since lumber is a Commodity, then Tricon helped drive the price down on my 2x4, and I was the beneficiary.

I know when I send plans to the lumber yard for take-offs and the framing kit, I have never considered asking for USA lumber, and certainly not Tricon lumber. It is all a commodity, so I want the grade I need, and the lowest price. I am pretty sure I could never convince an appraiser to give me a higher value, due to the origin of the timber.

And thanks for the comments on my style of posting, but I am not sure I have a counterpart. If you are lumping Ithica in with me, then you are doing him an injustice, as I would guess he has far higher standards and prinicples than I do. I am definitely not an environmentalist, as I think recycling beer cans means throwing them out the window of my pick-up, so that others can pick them up and recycle them...

But, on the other hand, when I am on the Middle Fork of the Salmon, or on the Main Salmon, I will pull a raft or a kayak over to the bank to pick up a single soda can. I will kick horse shit into the brush, and comb a campsite with a fine comb, removing all trace of human garbage.

I also do not have the patience to wade into the quagmire that is Idaho politics, and certainly the politics around the Fish and Game. I am not sure how messed up other state's commissions are, but this one is a continual circus.

I should probably meet Ithica sometime, and even buy him lunch, just to be one of the few hunters in this state who says "thanks" for trying to represent the hunter. Hell, I have ate lunch with Moosie a couple of times, and I don't even buy him lunch....

I end up spending 25-30 nights a year, outside, in a sleeping bag, so all of my concern for the environment is to support my life pursuits. I don't give a sh!t about Acid Rain in New York, nor do I care about Global Warming due to Rush Limbaugh's mouth spewing hot air.

Those are other people's issues, and they are "not in my backyard". Give me plenty of animals to shoot, plenty of Salmon and Steelhead to catch, and the assurance that my kids will have the same, and my grandkids will have the same, and etc..etc.. and I will be happy.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 05-05-2003 22:56: Message edited by: Elkgunner ]</font>

 

[BigHornyRam]

Buzz,

That's got to be the best post of yours I have read to date.

Most of the forest I can see out my window, was last harvested in the 1910 Big Burn. Very few trees have been cut or thinned. I doubt much of it ever will be harvested.

Elkgunner,

I would like to see plentyful wildlife and fish for your kids and grandkids. I would also like to see good jobs and a strong country for them as well. I think we can have both.

Paul

 

[ELKCHSR]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Elkchsr, seriously, you need to read the NFMA, the goal of the FS is not to maximize profit from the land...its all there for you to read in black and white. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I understand that is not their goal and have looked at my posts twice, which on this thread seem to be very leangthy. I just don't see where you read into any thing I wrote that they are supposed to make a profit, unless you were agreeing in your own way.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> As far as PC lands that are nuked, I've already told you a hundred times where to go. Head NE of Missoula MT then direct your attention to the Gold Creek Drainage, in particular Sunflower MTN, Black MTN, Belmont Peak, the West Fork of Gold Creek, the entire Burnt Fork drainage, Cow Creek drainage, Game Ridge,...basically anything on the North Side of highway 200 between Twin Creeks and the Clearwater Highway. Also the chamberlain Creek area is nuked pretty bad. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
As for this, maybe in your mind you told me, but this is the first time you were this specific, now I will put this on my maps, and when in the area, not sure of dates, or times, I will take the time and look them up...

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> I'll agree that nature is resiliant, but everything has a breaking point and it makes sense to me to proceed with management (when possible) at a rate where we can understand what impacts we're having. Its pretty irresponsible and wrong to assume that nature will just magically take care of itself when we screw up. The fact is, the effects of the management decisions we make today on ecosystems, wont be realized until most of us are worm shit. Proceed with management slowly...and do it as correctly as possible. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I will bring this up again also, since there are a few new people on the board to know from some aspects I am coming from.
You like to speak of devastation to the point of no return. I will bring up the event of Mount St. Helens, this is a perfect example of total devastation, burned ground feet deep, hot mud covering and smothering every thing in it's path, a whole lake disappearing in the onslaught and every creek and stream filled to over flowing capacity with mud, debris, silt and sludge.
Every living thing we could find was gone. The scientists of the area and the world that involved them in this event, decided to just let the whole place be and not try and reclaim much of any of it. Well except for the logging of the downed timber that I had a part of... They found out that nature rebounded far faster and far more effectively than they could ever have dreamed possible. It was written in the newspapers at the time of their findings and explained on the TV evening news of the new things they were learning.

I hike the mountains around here a lot, and yes, that eighty-year number is a very good one for about the time it takes for things to come back. By looking at some of the old logged areas that have re-grown, and the mining areas that have been stripped to the bare soil, and have come back on their own accord.
But all the areas I have been in have come back. The only place that I can recall that wasn't coming back, was the area at the east end of this stack, and that is because of all the poisons that came out of the stack in the past. That is being rectified now by covering it all up with several feet of clean dirt and rocks and laying a layer of good soil over the top of it all.
Then they are covering it all up with a layer of straw to help with erosion and get plants started over the whole area.
Yep, it may be wheat that sprouts, but they eventually will end up dying off and the natural fauna and flora will take over, as is the true nature of any area. It will be great if when 1pointer comes into this area, to take him to the project, just to show him the immensity of it all. I will agree, some projects need to be addressed, as this one did, and finally is.

 

[1_pointer]

Elkchsr- How much precipitation does St. Helens get? Those areas that you see recovering in MT, are they native or invasive species? I don't know much, but for the general public, if it is green it is healthy. That just ain't so, bucko. Nature is resilient, look at what it has overcome since the Ice Ages. The problem is that humans (as pointed out above) don't operate in that time frame or rate. In many areas, the capacity of the land to heal itself and be productive has been permantly decreased, which could and should be avoided.

 

[ELKCHSR]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Elkchsr- How much precipitation does St. Helens get? Those areas that you see recovering in MT, are they native or invasive species? I don't know much, but for the general public, if it is green it is healthy. That just ain't so, bucko. Nature is resilient, look at what it has overcome since the Ice Ages. The problem is that humans (as pointed out above) don't operate in that time frame or rate. In many areas, the capacity of the land to heal itself and be productive has been permantly decreased, which could and should be avoided. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
As far as I could tell, the plant life was pretty much all native, cept maybe for some of the blow in's, such as dandy lions and thistles. But the rest was tall fast growing trees that come back first after the cycle of the great old growth forests die out, and usually come back first. That region is really designed all the way around to come back into it's own on a fairly quick rebound.
The next place that I have seen that was devastated beyond redemption was Yellowstone, just after the fires came thru and the scientists again said it would be hundreds of years before it was even close to where it would be productive again....LOL...
It really looked hammered from what I saw, but two years later when I went back thru for another visit, you couldn't hardly see the ground for all the green native life that was rebounding and coming back..
If I hadn't seen these places with my own eyes, and witnessed the power nature really does have to offer, I would probably be a dyed in the wool skeptic also...

bucko-That's rich..LOL...

 

[1_pointer]

I completely understand and am awed at nature's regenerative power. My gripe is that all to often we reduce many area's ability to do so. By measuring the amount of plant growth, an area formerly comprised of sagebrush and grass now infested with cheatgrass can be more 'productive'. But, the variability of that production (from year to year) and the lands capacity to do so will be deminished over the long run. This can happen with other management mishaps as well. I can't remember which species of tree it is (I'm thinking it's Douglas Fir), can regenerate after clearcutting. This leads to more soil erosion, less soil organic matter and moisture retention. Thus, the clearcut area will have a reduced productivity in the future.

Who's Rich? I'm Tyler!

 

[Washington Hunter]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>the plant life was pretty much all native, cept maybe for some of the blow in's, such as dandy lions<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Dandelions aren't native? Hmm, I didn't know that. Well if they're not, I'm glad they got introduced. The blue grouse around here sure love to eat them. I always look for dandelions, and when I find them I start finding grouse

 

[BuzzH]

Elkchsr said, "The next place that I have seen that was devastated beyond redemption was Yellowstone, just after the fires came thru and the scientists again said it would be hundreds of years before it was even close to where it would be productive again...."

HUH?

Where do you come up with the crap you post? What scientists said that and where did they say it?

Please reference one peer reviewed scientific report of "scientists saying it would be hundreds of years before Yellowstone would be productive again."

Surely, for you to make a wild assed claim like that you must and should be able to come up with at least one article to back up that crap you're trying to sell everyone.

You know, you rant and rave about how worthless an education is...I got news for you, the one person on this board who could use a bit of formal education in Natural resources and the understanding of ecosystems is YOU. I mean for Christ sake, every first year Forestry student understands and learns the dynamics of lodgepole forest life cycles...you know stand replacement. Yellowstone was a totally natural situation, and for thousands of years lodgepole ecosystems have evolved with catastrophic stand replacement fire cycles...usually on about a 150-200 year interval...which is just about the exact age of most of what burned in Yellowstone.

I find it very hard to believe that any credible "scientist" you could cite would have made a claim that Yellowstone was not going to recover. If you do find some literature to cite (I would be shocked if you did), I'd bet good money they dont have a lick of formal education in Forestry. This drives the point home that formal education is very valuable and necessary...and those that have it, wont be duped into believing chicken shit posts that make ridiculous claims.

I think you're confusing science and scientists with the 6 O'clock news and the interviews with the local talent from Cooke City standing in front of their burnt down trailer house,(while wearing their favorite terry cloth bath robe and hair curlers), telling all the viewers how it was "Total pandalerium" and was "devastated beyond redemption."

 

[Washington Hunter]

Buzz,
I didn't even read Elkchsr's assessment of the Yellowstone fire! I quit reading after he said that "dandy lions" aren't native. If I had seen that I probably would have commented also. Elkchsr, I thought this thread was about things people do to destroy the environment. Fires are natural, and necessary! Fire was the best thing that ever could have happened to Yellowstone.

 

[BigHornyRam]

W. H.,

The Yellowstone fire could have been better if it burned down all the lodges and gift shops.

Paul