Hat's off to a timber industry giant!

Straydog · 09-09-2003, 08:16 AM

Thank you Boise Cascade! [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img]

Cool Texan · 09-09-2003, 08:24 AM

[img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img]

lost_sailor · 09-09-2003, 09:22 AM

[img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img]

That suits this treehugger perfectly! NICE

OceanBlue · 09-09-2003, 09:31 AM

[img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img]

crabbait · 09-09-2003, 09:52 AM

"We compliment Boise Cascade on the new policies, and urge other wood products firms to do the same."

Smart decision for Boise Cascade. I salute them. [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img]

Bait O' Eggs · 09-09-2003, 10:18 AM

I was talking to my brother this weekend who is a logger from the coast. He was telling me of all the wood he is leaving on the hill to rot where they are working. [img]graemlins/stupid.gif[/img] The mill they are delivering to can only handle logs up to 19 inch diameter.

Anything larger will be rejected and not received. They are commonly dumping 15 or 20 foot logs off of the butt of the tree keeping the logs down to 19 inches at the butt end. :shocked: :shocked:

Most mills today cannot deal with old growth logs as the machinery they are using wont handle an old growth log.

Might be partly why BC isnt receiving any old growth. :whazzup:

[ 09-09-2003, 11:19 AM: Message edited by: Bait O' Eggs ]

Freakwater · 09-09-2003, 10:45 AM

Somebody pinch me!

Cool Texan · 09-09-2003, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Freakwater:
Somebody pinch me!

Sorry, we have a "No Touching" policy here at iFish. You'll have to pinch yourself...but please do it in private.

freespool · 09-09-2003, 12:11 PM

I truely hope this is a sign of the times. I'm sure other large timber interests are watching this very carefuly to see if Boise Cascade makes this go. BC just became my go to lumber source.

GutshotApe · 09-09-2003, 05:22 PM

I wouldn't make too much of this...

1. Its a marketing ploy to regain & increase sales.
2. Relatively little "old growth" is sold anymore...as the article stated.
3. As long as there is a demand, tropical hardwoods will still be available from other suppliers.
4. Buying only from "Certified Forests" in most cases means just more paperwork. To be certified the main thing is to demonstrate Best Mgmt Practices (adherance to the FPA) and a long-term sustained yield plan...Most large corporate timberland operations in the Pacific Northwest qualify...but not yet "certified" as such. Certification costs money and until the market demands it, timber producers will avoid the expense.

Boise's move may herald a trend...but its mostly a business & marketing strategy...and won't make much real on-the-ground difference unless the idea spreads.

My 2 cents.

TheRogue · 09-09-2003, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by GutshotApe:
I wouldn't make too much of this...

1. Its a marketing ploy to regain & increase sales.
2. Relatively little "old growth" is sold anymore...as the article stated.
3. As long as there is a demand, tropical hardwoods will still be available from other suppliers.
4. Buying only from "Certified Forests" in most cases means just more paperwork. To be certified the main thing is to demonstrate Best Mgmt Practices (adherance to the FPA) and a long-term sustained yield plan...Most large corporate timberland operations in the Pacific Northwest qualify...but not yet "certified" as such. Certification costs money and until the market demands it, timber producers will avoid the expense.

Boise's move may herald a trend...but its mostly a business & marketing strategy...and won't make much real on-the-ground difference unless the idea spreads.

My 2 cents.

GSA...I concur completely. Just a marketing ploy, simple as that. Money, as usual, is the driving force here. Big timber companies make more money by keeping federal old growth OFF THE MARKET...old growth being a much more efficient raw material than 2nd or 3rd growth, with a larger profit margin.

My 2 cents

TR

freespool · 09-09-2003, 05:50 PM

You can fluff it,perfume it,or even put lipstick on it, any spin you want. The fact of the matter is, this is a landmark move on Boise Cascades part.

TheRogue · 09-09-2003, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by freespool:
You can fluff it,perfume it,or even put lipstick on it, any spin you want. The fact of the matter is, this is a landmark move on Boise Cascades part.

Yup, you can spin it anyway you want to, it's a BUSINESS DECISION based on simple economics, nothing more.

TR

freespool · 09-09-2003, 06:51 PM

TR,oh I think it's much more than just a business dicision on BC's part. One may constrew that they caved into enviornmental pressure,due in part to the boycott on nonsustainable timber products. In case you haven't seen it,there is a sign at Home Depot that declares their wood is from a sustainable source. I think this may set a presidence,kind of the greening of America.

El-Kabong · 09-09-2003, 11:15 PM

Three Cheers for a responsible corporate citizen!

TheRogue · 09-10-2003, 05:05 AM

As long as you're happy believing what you want to believe, go for it!!

TR

skein · 09-10-2003, 05:47 AM

TR, I tend to agree with you that what we're seeing is bottom-line economics, not a (suddenly) kinder, gentler timber company.

BOE, do you mean they are clear-cutting an area, bucking the trees down to 19 inches and leaving the rest lay on the ground? That's not a pretty thought.

And what of exports? We still ship raw timber overseas, and I wonder if local mills use the little stuff while the big trees head to China.

Speaking of which, some guy back in the Midwest was given an award not long ago because he devised a way to ship logs back to Asia in the EMPTY container ships. You know, the ones who bring us everything we buy, but take back nothing that we make. (Usually referred to as Trade Deficit)

Might be interesting to look deeper into all this.

Skein

Straydog · 09-10-2003, 05:50 AM

Interesting responses.

If GSA is right and there will be no change as to how things work on the ground, I guess then it is indeed no big deal. I guess time will tell that one.

As for some of the other respones, to me, it is kind of like discounting the accomplishments of the alcoholic that avoids drinking because some perceive they didn't do it for the right reasons.

It would seem to me the victory is in the fact they quit drinking, not what finally motivated them to do the right thing.

BTW, trees left on the ground to deteriorate and feed the multitude of organisms that benefit from them are not "wasted" anymore than the fertilizer you pay money for and put on your lawn is wasted. In fact, some people would argue there is more actual waste in fertilizing your lawn. :smile:

[ 09-10-2003, 07:08 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

SouthCoastStu · 09-10-2003, 06:32 AM

Good statement by BC. However, there are very few mills left that can handle logs over 26" on the big (butt) end now-a-days. Stumpage sale values for comparable quality oversize (over 26" on the butt-end) logs vs. logs under the 26" size are generally worth less (net) in this area because of the increased transportation cost to Roseburg or Eugene (the closest mills that can mill the bigger logs). As an example, the GP mill here (Coos Bay), and Weyerhaeusers mill in Cottage Grove only take logs up to 26" on the big end. Second growth is what most of the big timber companies are geared up to process.

Interesting reactions to wood being left on the ground. FPA requires 2 logs per acre be left. If they aren't already available naturally, they are "manufactured" (i.e. cut from standing timber). I know bio's that don't think this is enough for wildlife needs and would like to see considerably more left.

Quote:

...there is a sign at Home Depot that declares their wood is from a sustainable source.

FYI, Home Depot is one of Weyerhaeusers biggest customers for dimensional lumber :grin: .

GutshotApe · 09-10-2003, 06:49 AM

DiamondBack - As I think you know, Weyco (like all other industrial timberland owners) has a detailed, perpetual, sustained yield plan for their forests. People need to get past the erroneous idea that clearcutting somehow is the end of the line. And if they adhere to the state FPA, they qualify for most certification programs which, by the way, are nothing really new. Boise Cascade is just re-stirring that issue...to their benefit.

Skein - Most US log exports go to Japan...virtually 100% of the logs they buy are what you would call 2nd growth. The Japanese market demands near-perfect logs that are 10 meters long plus trim, generally more than 8 rings/inch with small, tight knots. Log exports are way down from what they were in the '80s and '90s.

Wouldn't it be a neat piece of business if the ships bringing the millions of Toyotas & Hondas over here from Japan could take logs back? Think of the efficiency

. I know, it would be better if we exported lumber...but we don't require wheat farmers to export bread and we don't have a problem with importing finished goods i.e. Toyota/Honda.

Straydog · 09-10-2003, 07:58 AM

Does lumber spoil like bread does?? :whazzup: :grin:

[ 09-10-2003, 09:11 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

GutshotApe · 09-10-2003, 08:26 AM

OK, if you don't like that analogy, change "bread" to "wheat flour"...or Twinkies (they're chemically preserved...what's that? the Pakistanis don't like Twinkies...too bad...).

The point being that people look at log exports (which all come from private timberland) differently than exports of other raw or semi-processed materials. And many who oppose log exports ("you're exporting jobs!") have no problem with importing finished goods...like cars, fishing tackle, clothing, etc, etc, etc without regard for what that does to the US manufacturing sector.

Straydog · 09-10-2003, 08:30 AM

Yes, good point.

Fishing tackle???????? Who imports fishing tackle? :grin:

[ 09-10-2003, 09:31 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

maggot · 09-10-2003, 09:49 AM

If there is money to be made, companys are going to tell people what they want to hear. Sooner or later , they will sugar coat a reason why its neccessay to cut old growth.
I used to be in the musical wood business. Old growth Engleman spruce was the hot ticket. Our major competition, were pulp mills making toilet paper. Somwhere , someone will find a reason.

Tilla · 09-10-2003, 12:11 PM

So how old is old growth?

10, 100, 1000, 10000, 100000 1,000,000+ years

Just thinking. I am really not looking for a response. People dealing with some undefineable terms in the life of a planet. Silly humans. The tree huggers don't know, that's for sure. Ask one.

lost_sailor · 09-10-2003, 12:16 PM

Hardly "undefinable". Old growth is a forest that has not been logged. The trees will be between 0 and 1000 years old, typically 100-200.

So ... I don't know the answer? Correct me.

[img]graemlins/berry.gif[/img]

[ 09-10-2003, 02:48 PM: Message edited by: lost_sailor ]

Reelentless · 09-10-2003, 02:57 PM

It is more accurate to define an old growth forest based on its structure rather than its age. Old growth forests have a multi-layered canopy with large diameter trees overtopping a smaller understory.

An intensely managed second growth forest can have old growth characteristics within 70 years in typical coast range soil types.

An unmanaged forest will take much longer to achieve the same characteristics.

lost_sailor · 09-10-2003, 03:11 PM

I prefer the term "ancient forest."

fish_on · 09-10-2003, 03:45 PM

Cut them all,let the sawmill sort it out
[img]graemlins/icon_argue.gif[/img]

STGRule · 09-10-2003, 04:42 PM

Fish_on: I�ll just pretend your kidding. After all, if we cut down all the forests, how will we have water, temperature control, carbon banks, or more importantly, oxygen? Then there are all the other little things like salmon, deer, elk, bunnies for the huggers, and stuff like that.

fishisabonus · 09-10-2003, 07:20 PM

It's a ploy.

I am a loggers daughter and I am pretty knowledgeable on what an old growth tree looks like going down the road. The last real old growth was harvested when Mt St Helens blew in 1980 and that was "salave logging". My dad came home smiling and singing the blues away every night. I would ask him how many loads he got out and what they were: 20 loads from side one, 21 loads from side two.... 1, 2, and 3 log loads of #1 & #2 peelers!

Anyone who had a contract with Weyerhauser was up there dealing with the ash and salvage logging. It was miserable work. That ash was hard on the men and the equipment. "Salvage logging" was the last of the big logs, plain and simple.

You NEVER see loads going down the road like that. Why? Because most of what is left is protected. Most of what the logging in the Pacific NW was protected in the late 70's and the only reason the were allowed to log St Helens was to salvage what was left.

To answer your question.. yes, logs will go bad

if left just like your bread will mold if left on the counter.

When Dad retired in 1983, he had a hard time selling his bigger equipment. There was no use for that kind of equipment in the lower 48 since there was no big timber left open to harvest. I am sorry to say.. due to over harvesting in the 60's and 70's and the blow down from St Helens, that's all mother nature had to give. I cried the first time I flew over the blow down area. :depressed: My back yard was gone. I was only 17 yrs old and I knew the way of life I had grown up loving was not going to be the way I raised my family.

The mills were following the new trend and shutting down and/or downsizing their equipment. Unemployment was terribly high and there were many programs established to retrain the displaced logger and mill workers.

The last piece of equipment Dad sold was a huge tower and a firm in Alaska bought it.

However, any efforts to protect forests overseas is needed. I am in no way shape or form a tree hugger.. but the rain forests are in great danger. I don't think they qualify as "old growth" though... so Boise Cascade is shooting the bull and I am not buying it.

[ 09-10-2003, 08:28 PM: Message edited by: fishisabonus ]

GutshotApe · 09-11-2003, 06:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by fishisabonus:
You NEVER see loads going down the road like that. Why? Because most of what is left is protected.

Maybe not in Clark County...but you can still see 3-log loads coming into Eugene & Roseburg from private lands in SW Oregon. You're right though...most public-owned OG is off limits to logging...and there is still a lot of old growth out there on public land.

STG - Even if all the world's trees could be cut at once and the ground paved over, there would be little or no detectable difference in atmospheric oxygen or CO2 levels. The biomass of oceanic algae and its combined oxygen production vastly outweighs that of all terrestrial plants, including forests...or so I learned at forestry school...or maybe it was a NOVA program... :whazzup:

Normally, when a terrestrial plant dies it decomposes, reversing the photosynthetic equation thru slow or rapid oxidation, which uses up all the oxygen the plant ever created. But algae in oceans create oxygen during life, then die and sink to the anerobic conditions at the ocean bottom...effectively sequestered in the ooze. Our atmosphere of 21% oxygen is the result of 5 billion years - give or take a couple billion - of green plants creating oxygen thru photosynthesis then being removed from the system by dropping to the ocean bottom or by being turned into coal, gas & oil deposits...

Extensive, wholesale burning of fossil fuels, as is ongoing throughout the world, is the most significant and probably only real threat to the composition of our atmosphere. :depressed:

[ 09-11-2003, 07:54 AM: Message edited by: GutshotApe ]

FrogPond · 09-11-2003, 07:24 AM

It doesn't surprise me that BC has made this announcement. They are phasing out their lumber production and changing focus to providing office supplies.

FIB & GSA-
Very well written comments from you both.
Thank you.

[ 09-11-2003, 08:26 AM: Message edited by: FrogPond ]

STGRule · 09-11-2003, 07:31 AM

GSA, but we would still have the carbon load, temperature moderation and water problems, not to mention fuzzy bunny homes.

[ 09-11-2003, 08:36 AM: Message edited by: STGRule ]

lost_sailor · 09-11-2003, 07:47 AM

I'm so old, I remember 3-load logs!

STGRule · 09-11-2003, 08:31 AM

Me too. :depressed:

FrogPond · 09-11-2003, 10:35 AM

They are very noticable these days. I remember seeing a 1 log load rolling through Ashland when I went to school there. That was amazing!
In the past month I have seen some 3 log loads rolling along Hwy. 20/34 toward Philomath. I don't know where these are comming from or going to, but a pretty impressive sight too.

freespool · 09-11-2003, 02:42 PM

Amount of old growth still standing. OK how much low altitude Doug Fir west of the Cascades? Lots? Not hardly,try 5-10% tops, of what was here originally. Here's a rule of thumb when trying to determine if a forest is old growth or not. If after you clear cut,you see stumps with spring board notches in them,it ain't old growth.

lost_sailor · 09-11-2003, 04:16 PM

Wouldn't those stumps be there BEFORE you clearcut?

freespool · 09-11-2003, 07:16 PM

Lostsailor,precisely,if man has logged it before,it's not old growth. It's reprod,which is growing on a 50-70yr harvest cycle. Similar to corn,only a little longer.

Straydog · 09-11-2003, 08:10 PM

I drive from Grants Pass to Meford twice a week. I drive from Grants Pass to Sutherlin once a week and to Roseburg twice a week, every other week.

Yes, you see a three log load once in a while. I would say at about a 20 to one ratio with loads of what we used to call "****** poles".

We do not and will not see those types of loads in any significant number any time soon.

lost_sailor · 09-11-2003, 09:30 PM

So, to review ...

Quote:

Originally posted by lost_sailor:
Hardly "undefinable". Old growth is a forest that has not been logged.

:smile:

Reelentless · 09-11-2003, 09:43 PM

Using that logic, a logged area can never even become old growth, which is ludicrous.

A second growth forest can be as diverse as any native forest.

GutshotApe · 09-12-2003, 04:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Straydog:
Yes, you see a three log load once in a while. I would say at about a 20 to one ratio with loads of what we used to call "****** poles".

We do not and will not see those types of loads in any significant number any time soon.

Well Straydog, 3-log loads don't dominate the mix anymore but 1 in 20 (5%) is still significant, especially if your job depends on that 5%. By the way, those loads of small logs & poles that many derisively dismiss as "Pekker poles" are quite likely thinnings...isn't thinning a good thing?

With the 500,000-acre year-old Biscuit burn in your backyard...200,000 acres of which burned hot and killed oldgrowth timber, you could again see large numbers of trucks hauling 3-log loads. Asst Sec. of Ag. Mark Rey (former timber industry lackey

) and others in the Bush administration are trying to overcome bureaucratic inertia and environmental roadblocks to see that at least some of the timber resource is not left to rot on the stump. Last I heard, there would be revenue sharing with local communities if a salvage effort materializes...sure seems like that would help the local school funding situation. :whazzup:

Straydog · 09-12-2003, 06:42 AM

Thinning is indeed a good thing. I saw nothing in this thread that would indicate otherwise. Why do you bring it up?

The point is, 5% is not very significant in the big picture regardless of the fact that it would be significant to those directly involved in their production. However, those benefits are just as real and even more significant to the big picture when they are derived from loads of "pekker poles" due to thinning. I did not use that term to dismiss anything, merely an indication of the true size of the vast majority of log truck loads coming out of SW Oregon, contrary to the myth perpetrated in an earlier post.

[ 09-12-2003, 07:44 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

skrimmy · 09-12-2003, 08:24 AM

Interestingly, after dogging Boise Cascade (Which by the way, recently changed their name to only "BOISE") for an eternity, the environmental group RAN (Rainforest Action Network) ran a FULL PAGE page ad earlier this week in the New York Times which stated only this: "We'd like to thank Boise Cascade Corporation for its commitment to forest stewardship and old growth forests around the world"

Having a spouse who has worked for Boise for pushing 30 years, I've followed a bit of what's going on recently. Remember, they recently purchased Office Max and at that time, they enlisted the services of Goldman, Sachs and Co to help research "Strategic alternatives for our paper and building products business" . When the current Boise CEO George Harad took the helm of the company years ago, he made it clear that he wanted to move the company more towards a distribution company and not a manufacturer. So, it's clear that he is doing this with the purchase of Office Max.

Their statement earlier this week, to me, looks like they killed two birds with one stone. They are showing that they are downsizing, with the possibility of totally exiting, the paper business as they expressed in their earler goals. A convenient byproduct of that goal just happens to be the favorable press they have recieved this week. Would they have made the decision they made this week if they weren't trying to exit the paper business? I believe their decision was driven by the first goal and saving oldgrowth was secondary. either way, I'm glad to see it.

fishisabonus · 09-12-2003, 12:01 PM

My Dad started logging in the late 40's. There was one sale my Mom just told me about that they logged in the early 50's. There was a big protest recently about this site being "old growth" timber, and should be protected. The experts [img]graemlins/dork.gif[/img] went in and measured the trees and because they were so huge, they were convinced they were "old growth". They even counted the rings, and were still calling them "old growth".

There was a lot of clear cutting going on in those days, so there may not be stumps from the first cutting.

freespool · 09-12-2003, 02:49 PM

Refer to my previous post. If after you clear cut you see stumps with spring board notches cut in them,it ain't old growth. Come on,you mean they walked out there and measured the trees and looked at the old stumps,and said,we can't tell if these are old growth? Better posibility is there were pockets of old growth left uncut. In those days they cut above the swell of the butt,and did not remove the stumps. Next time you see a second growth clear cut,check out all the old stumps.

[ 09-12-2003, 03:55 PM: Message edited by: freespool ]

fishisabonus · 09-12-2003, 04:44 PM

The clear cuts I remember were exactly that, cleared. The stumps were pushed up by a cat, put into big burn piles and then a "controlled burn" was conducted by the forest service. I am not sure how many stumps actually were left. There were a few, but they rotted way over time. After the burn, they replanted.

The largest log Weyerhauser Company harvested was cut northwest of Mt St Helens in 1944. It measured 124 inches in diameter at the stump and scaled out 71,684 board feet.

The old growth forests that I remember were huge. There was very little brush growing on the ground because the huge trees didn't allow much sunlight to make it to ground level. The ground floor was mostly pine needles. There were NO stumps.

The spring board type cutting was done before the 40's. Those replanted forest probably are in the 3rd growth of trees by now. The growth cycle for forest lands was 50 years or better. But now it is down to about 30-35 years.

[ 09-12-2003, 05:47 PM: Message edited by: fishisabonus ]

freespool · 09-12-2003, 06:08 PM

I grew up on the Oregon coast where they took out what they wanted and burned the rest. Pushing debris into piles is a fairly new technic. Besides a cat could spend hours trying to pull out a old growth stump. Time is something that the old timers didn't waste on any kind of clean up. The amount of debris that was left was huge,creating a very hot slash fire.

GutshotApe · 09-12-2003, 07:30 PM

Pulling the stumps was never done in commercial forestry unless the land was to be used for something beside growing another crop of trees. Good tree planters always plant seedlings around stumps...often right up against the base, between the buttressed roots. On hot south slopes sometimes only the seedlings planted on the shady northeast side of stumps survive. And, if the area was cat or tractor logged, the soil around and under stumps is completely uneffected and not compacted...loose & fluffy soil. New seedlings grow noticably better up against a stump than away from one.

freespool · 09-12-2003, 07:53 PM

GSA,what do you think of the earlier post about mistaking reprod for old growth, from a clearcut that was done in the early 50s?

GutshotApe · 09-12-2003, 08:05 PM

No experienced forester, logger or botanist would mistake 50-yr old "2nd growth" for old growth...although it is possible to achieve old growth characteristics in 2nd growth stands in 60 to 75 yrs on good sites. Stanley Park in Vancouver BC was clearcut logged in 1899...a real eyesore back then. It wasn't replanted...brush and trees came back naturally. Now, a little over 100 yrs later the forest in Stanley Park is for all intent & purposes an old growth forest. The only real clue most people would detect of it's 2nd growth status are the huge old stumps with springboard notches...some still evident here & there.

lost_sailor · 09-12-2003, 11:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Northriverman:
Using that logic, a logged area can never even become old growth, which is ludicrous.

A second growth forest can be as diverse as any native forest.

Ancient forests cannot be replaced - not in any reasonable amount of time.

We don't need old growth for PAPER anyway - that's why we have hemp. Oh yeah ... illegal ...

fishisabonus · 09-14-2003, 08:19 PM

Well they did. My folks were appalled when they were calling this one particular logging job that they had logged in the 50's "old growth". They followed the story closely because they knew for a FACT that Wilson & Sutton trucks had hauled the trees away 50 years ago. Guess the so called experts weren't as bright as they should be.

As far as clear cuts, I have been on many sites when I was a kid. See, the bosses normally worked on Saturdays doing crap work like that cause it didn't pay but was part of the job and many times, we would surprise my Dad or my uncle with a picnic. I don't know what kind of sales they all were. But there were stumps in them. I also remember being on jobs where there were huge stumps, 12 feet high or more. They always had a little scraggly tree growing out of them. We got yelled at and were told not to try climbing them because they were so rotten. So, I betcha those jobs were 2nd grown logging and are now just about ready to harvest again. Ya think?

[ 09-14-2003, 09:20 PM: Message edited by: fishisabonus ]

GutshotApe · 09-15-2003, 07:31 AM

It would be easy to believe a TV news crew or newspaper reporter might call a 50-yr-old stand "Old growth".

Quote:

Originally posted by fishisabonus:
I also remember being on jobs where there were huge stumps, 12 feet high or more. They always had a little scraggly tree growing out of them. We got yelled at and were told not to try climbing them because they were so rotten.

Speaking of oldgrowth stumps...a few years ago a grouse hunter came upon a pickup truck parked on a wide spot in a clearcut west of Cottage Grove. There was a 1-yr-old child sitting in the cab, the doors were open, a .22 rifle & ammo lay on the hood, but no adult was around. After looking around for a while the hunter found the child's Dad hanging upside down helplessly and nearly unconscious, stuck in a tall, hollow stump 100' out in the clearcut. He had been shooting at bottles he'd set on the rim of the stump, had gone out to set up more, dropped something into the hollow stump which had about 6' of hollowed-out interior, and tied to reach down to retrieve it...and went in too far, then couldn't get back out. The guy had been upsidedown in the stump for 5 or 6 hours, and as I recall reading, probably wouldn't have lasted thru the night if the

hunter hadn't come along when he did just near dusk.

[ 09-15-2003, 08:36 AM: Message edited by: GutshotApe ]