IFish Fishing Forum banner
1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,680 Posts
Originally posted by Barviewrocks:
Douglas Fur was the primary rebuilding stock chosen and both saplings and seed stock from the western cascades was used as it was one of the most immediately available options.
· This choice of planting fur has resulted in a 72% “closed single canopy” forest structure. The most recent forest scientific theories suggest a diversity of structure types and plants as ideal for healthy forests, animal habitat, and resilience. One suggestion is the steep and wet slopes of the Tillamook drainage is perhaps not the ideal environment for a dense tree population of primarily Douglas fur. Rather, a mixture of spruce, hemlock and diverse ground coverings may be closer to the native fauna and would be more in keeping with natural coastal fauna. Unfortunately, this diversity of fauna is a very small portion of the forest.
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">This is exactly what I have tried to tell our retired forester friend here about the plantations in most reforested clear cuts of the west side.

It sounds and looks like this was a very informative tour. It appears you got to see a lot of habitat rehabilitation work. Did you see any areas where there are still negative impacts apparent from past work?

Thanks again Dan and Barview and all for sharing this info.

Dan,

I cannot speak for Liz and am not speaking for NSIA. However, I do know that this is only one of many, many issues NSIA is involved with to help ensure we are able to continue fishing in the future. I also figure this is not a huge priority since NSIA is a 'sign on' to the coalition, in other words, not the lead organization on this matter. Please consider that we have hatcheries under attack, license fees to be settled, river access rights on the table, the Columbia Compact discussions going on, hydro spill rates to fight for, continued marking of hatchery fish, rock fish issues, springer fishing going full bore, families and a life to consider. Somewhere in there you might find the answer to your question of "where was Liz?"

[ 04-30-2003, 06:38 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,680 Posts
Rebell,

You make a valid suggestion as to what we might do as we go forward. I respect your right to express your opinion.

However, I would respectfully suggest a much different approach.

I would suggest we learn from our mistakes and realize what differences all of the things you mention make. With those in mind, I would suggest we move forward cautiously and perhaps with more prudence than the attitudes that created Portland and the other habitat destroying development you mentioned.

How far do we go? I don't know. I guess that depends on ones value and vision of what he would like to leave behind. :wink:

Dan,

Thanks for your straight forward answers to my questions! :cheers:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,680 Posts
Brion,

You left out the part about how we, the public, are paying for so much of the restoration work that is going on to repair the mistakes of the past in our public forests. Not mistakes we the public made, mind you.

I sit on a committee that appropriates Title II funds for forest and habitat rehabilitation. So much of is related to past mistakes in the woods by an industry that, like it or not folks, has a history of ****** and running.

Dan,

In all fairness, Brian has been calling for the public land to be off limits to logging since you guys first started sparring. Further, homes built from wood harvested on private ground work just as well as homes built from wood harvested on public ground........ might be time reevaluate that worn out cliche' of an argument.

I am not advocating for totally making public ground off limits to harvest as Brion is. However, I believe if we take an honest, open minded look at our past it is fair to say we should error on the side of caution if we are to error at all. And I am one of those odd balls that have lived here my whole life so your comment about "before you even moved here" impresses me even less than the cliche' about wood homes, etc. (I realize it wasn't directed at me but still, the "who got here first" argument is kind of warn out too.)

Another thing that gives me pause to think...... you are consistantly lamenting the "over exploitation" of Salmon, especially the coastal Salmon and the Tillamook area. At the same time, you post pictures and commentary touting the Ling fishing in your area. As you know, Ling fishing regs have been adjusted down over the years to protect the resource. Why would you lament the "over exploitation" of one species while promoting it on another species? I don't want to believe it might be because you sell plastics for bottom fishing but as one that has been on the recieving end of your accusations concerning my motives, I have to use the same logic in trying to figure out your approach to the Ling fishery. :whazzup:

Rebell,

Just a thought and I don't know but am wondering........ might some of the estuary problems in the Tillamook be related to siltation from what sounds like a whole bunch of roads in the Tillamook Forests?

The road issue is exactly why I asked Dan earlier if one road in his photos will be rehabed further. There is a small slide visible just up the road from the confluence with the stream. Further, my experience tells me that those members of the off road enthusiast crowd that are less ethical than others will likely, eventually, find a way to access that road and tear the dickens out of things in the process. Looks like a prime candidate for road obliteration project (at public expense, just like the culverts replacement, LWD placement, mulching, etc, etc.)to me.

[ 05-01-2003, 09:27 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top