Wildfires Result In Loss Of Forests Reserved By Northwest Forest Plan

[Barrett808]

ScienceDaily (Nov. 17, 2008) — Although the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) significantly reduced cutting of old-growth forests on federal land, forests in the driest regions are now at greater risk of being lost to wildfire than to logging. A team of federal and university scientists recently completed a study and analysis of large-diameter forests and discovered that elevated fire levels in the Pacific Northwest outweighed harvest reductions in the loss of older forests.

"Fire is a more important factor of loss to old-growth than harvesting between 1993 and 2002," says Tom Spies, a research ecologist and co-author on a study on the dynamics of older forests. The study, which was published in the journal, Ecosystems, concludes that although the NWFP helped stabilize the number of large-diameter forests in the Pacific Northwest, fire was the main reason for loss of these forests.

The study, The Relative Impact of Harvest and Fire Upon Landscape-Level Dynamics of Older Forests: Lessons From the Northwest Forest Plan, examines western Oregon and Washington and parts of the range of the northern spotted owl. The team used a 30-year satellite record to identify trends in the loss of large-diameter trees—on private and public land—to harvest and fire. They hope their findings may assist managers and policymakers who are trying to conserve older forests and the species that depend on them.

Spies, who is with the Forest Service's Pacific Northwest (PNW) Research Station, says the findings show that among other things, harvesting of older forests on private lands did not increase as some expected. "The protection of old-growth on federal land didn't result in increased rates of harvest of older forest on non-federal land," he explains. "Some had thought that harvesting of older forests might increase on private lands in response to reduction in harvest on federal lands. Even if the had been implemented as intended, a considerable amount of old growth would have been protected, even though some would have been lost to harvest."

(more)

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/11/081107143853.htm

[BanTheGOP]

1. republicanist policies ensured this disaster would happen

The republicanist policies of suburban sprawl enabled this disaster to happen. If we would have greater control on federalizing land ownership and prevent land from being bought for private development purposes, we would have had a GREATER ability to ensure the fires would not hurt. In addition, global warming is creating the conditions that enables fires in FREAKING NOVEMBER, UNHEARD OF in past years.

Definitely, put the emphasis on banning republican party policies and ensure that the areas burned to the ground are NOT rebuilt, but give the homeowners equity through their insurance companies to live in areas that don't screw up the environment.

[malakai2]

2. I'm shocked

Step 1-cut down ~75-90% of old growth within the US, west of the plains.

Step 2-establish, then quickly forget, that forest mosaics are temporally dynamic.

Step 3-replace the logged acreage with fire-excluded, even aged stands.

Step 4-exclude managed fire from old growth stands.

Step 5-budget cuts.

Step 6-resumed loss of aggregate old growth acres as the failure to grow more old-growth acres on new sites, failure to actively manage adjoining acreages for uneven-aged stands, failure to use fire as a management tool on the appropriate scale, and failure to budget within an order of magnitude of identified needs coalesce into a bureaucratic Paul Bunyan.

Step 7-feign surprise.

Step 8-probably something along the lines of cutting down some significant percentage of the old growth as a sweetener for timber companies to do some fuels thinning within these remaining tracts, more refusal to grow new old growth acres, and continued decline of these forest types.