View Full Version : Clear Cut
Yesterday, (December 3rd, 2005) I approached the top of Little Walnut Mountain. The area about 300 yards before the shelter has been clear cut. The trail is only visible from the slight depression in the ground. On a foggy day it may be easy to lose the trail in this section.
By the way the area below the old Little Walnut Mountain Shelter has also been clear cut.
While on the trail I met another hiker familar with logging. He said the water source near the shelter would not be safe to drink because of the herbicides used by loggers to kill weeds.
Kerosene
12-04-2005, 22:33
Where is Little Walnut Mountain? Was this a legal clear cut?
Right next to Big Walnut Mt:datz Naw, its just north of lemmon gap; south of Hot Springs. These days, around here, I'd guess legal.
Right next to Big Walnut Mt:datz Naw, its just north of lemmon gap; south of Hot Springs. These days, around here, I'd guess legal.
It might help a lot of us if you could specify one of the fourteen (14) states through which the App. Trail passes. ;)
Cookerhiker
12-05-2005, 10:41
It might help a lot of us if you could specify one of the fourteen (14) states through which the App. Trail passes. ;)
North Carolina. Isn't Walnut Mountain Shelter fairly close to Roaring Fork Shelter, a better place to stay anyway?
If it was a legal clear-cut then an Enviromental Impact statement should be on file with the forest service as well as an abatement/recovery plan.
There is an article about it here:
www.southernenvironment.org/ newsroom/publications/newsletter_spring05.pdf
North Carolina. Isn't Walnut Mountain Shelter fairly close to Roaring Fork Shelter, a better place to stay anyway?
That's debatable. I had dinner with my daughter at the (old) Roaring Fork Shelter on July 4 of this year. We then pushed on to Walnut Mountain and had the place to ourselves.
The water source is better at the (old) Roaring Fork Shelter, but I liked the Walnut Mountain Shelter. Its older and smaller, but it has some character. I also saw synchronous fireflies there, so that was pretty cool.
Anyway, it surprises me that a clearcut actually crosses the trail in that area. I could see a clearcut adjacent to the trail, but not across it. Maybe there was some kind of insect infestation that this addressed. I'll see if I can get some info from the ATC about this. My curiosity is piqued.
Is the clearcut area on federal or state land? Regulations will differ depending on land ownership, but the local AT club should be informed and involved regarding any impact like that in the trail corridor. In Massachusetts two years ago the state decided to log on state forest land within the trail corridor. We were consulted but ultimately weren't able to stop the logging within the corridor. It wasn't clearcut, though. They thinned some non-native species that were diseased and dying, hoping to return the forest to a more natural condition.
Is the clearcut area on federal or state land?
The clearcut is in the Cherokee NF. The following link has info about the clearcut - before the fact.
http://www.southernenvironment.org/newsroom/publications/newsletter_spring05.pdf
Sorry, I thought Hot Springs would do as reference, The Walnut shelter is one shelter south of the old or new Roaring Brook. Don't count on the old one being there much longer. Loggers spray for weeds?? Water unsafe to drink??? What????
Sorry, I thought Hot Springs would do as reference, The Walnut shelter is one shelter south of the old or new Roaring Brook.
Nean, it's actually one shelter north of the old Roaring Fork.
Here's a photo of the shelter from early July '05.
walkin' wally
12-05-2005, 12:46
Sorry, I thought Hot Springs would do as reference, The Walnut shelter is one shelter south of the old or new Roaring Brook. Don't count on the old one being there much longer. Loggers spray for weeds?? Water unsafe to drink??? What????
If the species they are harvesting is a softwood such as Spruce, Fir, or Pine then they are spraying an herbicide to kill hardwoods which are considered "weeds". When the hardwoods die back then the softwood seedlings and the smaller softwoods left behind will grow faster in their place because of more sunlight. This is sometimes caled "releasing the softwoods". If they are not spraying for hardwoods there then I don't know what that would be for. It may be for an insect problem.
In some ares of Maine when the spraying is done signs are placed at the logging roadsides to tell people not to pick berries there or spend a lot of time wandering in the area that has been sprayed.
In Maine there is a increased desirabity to harvest hardwoods now instead of softwoods. Hardwoods have a shorter fiber length in relation to paper sheet-strength but are cheaper to process.
Thanks Mowgli, that explains why I always end up back at Davenport Gap:datz
Should we have concern about the water if the softwoods were indeed released WW?
Thanks Mowgli, that explains why I always end up back at Davenport Gap:datz
Don't ya just hate when that happens? Deja vu all over again.
fiddlehead
12-05-2005, 15:57
I remember my first hike through a clearcut. I'll never forget it. It changed me big time. I no longer waste paper, cardboard, used wood or let others get away with it without reminding them how they are helping to F%@# up the USA.
It's amazing that people on here only seemed to be concerned with whether it is a legal clear cut or not.
We should be hounding the printer companies for printers that print on both sides, and recycling everything we can. The US is terrible at the waste they produce.
People can live in tune with nature if they don't demand the packaging that takes place in the retail world anymore. Even shipping, haven't you ever recieved a huge box from LL Bean, only to find that 80% of it is air? I have. I bitched too!
Clearcuts happen because of demand. We can all help to keep that down!
Clearcuts happen because of demand. We can all help to keep that down!
No, clear cuts happen because the government is willing to sell forest rights to private firms at a loss to the U.S. taxpayer. If timber companies were forced to grow trees like a crop on private land the problem would be solved.
sparky2000
12-05-2005, 16:20
I've been told that the govt also constructs the logging roads at tax payees expense.
I tend to believe the last 4 post are all correct. I read somewhere hemp would be a viable alternative?
Tha Wookie
12-06-2005, 12:06
If it was a legal clear-cut then an Enviromental Impact statement should be on file with the forest service as well as an abatement/recovery plan.
Not any more, thanks to the Bush Puppet's so called "Healthy Forests Innitiative".
It stripped many of the regulatory steps needed to get permission to clearcut.
When you have a president who got there from oil money, he sends our soldiers for oil. When you have one that owns a timber company (which he didn't even know about), he send our loggers for trail lands.
Research the threads before the most recent stolen elections. It's all there -we knew this would be happening. But no one would listen until they walk up the mountain and see it gone.
This is just the beginning.
We can either let it continue, or do something.
But is that what happened in this case?
BTW Wook, Saw your pictures in Atlanta, beautiful!
Tha Wookie
12-06-2005, 13:23
But is that what happened in this case?
BTW Wook, Saw your pictures in Atlanta, beautiful!
Nean, I'm not sure about this case. This is the first time I've heard of it. I was just pointing out that the procedures to log are different, and thanking the appropriate party for stipping the regulations that used to exist just several years ago. We are skidding backwards, very fast.
I know I might sound pessimistic, but rather am a realist. My optimism was expressed at the photo gallery you saw at REI. I'm very glad you enjoyed. Thanks for the compliment!
JoeHiker
12-06-2005, 14:41
Not any more, thanks to the Bush Puppet's so called "Healthy Forests Innitiative".
Research the threads before the most recent stolen elections.
I didn't vote for Bush nor would I but simple fact is that the the man was elected, period. Rhetoric like "stolen elections" does nothing but lower the signal-to-noise ratio in a debate too full of noise anyway.
I find the Bush bashing interesting. My understanding is that the Department of Interior is putting all tree cutting up for public review. You may want to look into the controversy about the national Christmas tree. Since the judge ruled that all cutting on national land has to be up for review, the Dep. of Interior is following the ruling.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
Now for something I know about. I grew up in a town that produces paper, so I know something about the process, and the trees and what happens after trees are cut in an area. There are reasons to clear-cut or selectively cut. There are also areas that I don’t think need to ever be cut (old growth). There are areas that should be burned completely and low growth burn. Different animals, bugs, and plants grow in the different areas. Different trees will grow in the areas that have be cut or burned. Just because it doesn’t look good today doesn’t mean that it is bad for the environment.
<o:p></o:p>
There was a section of hills that I spent a good bit of my childhood roaming. The forest was mixed deciduous with minimal conifers. The landowners decided it was time to have the trees cut. Some of it was clear-cut some was selectively cut. For the first year or two I was totally disgusted. Then over the course of a couple years the selective cut trees filled out and low growth started in the clear cut. I began seeing more deer and more songbirds. I had more berries to pick. I saw more small and medium sized mammals. If I had known what I was doing I would have noticed the diversity of flowers and other plants. I recently went back, the areas that were selectively cut are becoming old growth. I didn’t see nearly the number of deer, or turkey in that section as I do in the area that was clear-cut.
<o:p></o:p>
As I suggesting that people waist paper? NO, my printer at work prints both sides of the paper. I refeed paper in my home printer when possible.
Am I suggesting that we clear cut everywhere? NO, I am sure there are animals and bug and ….that need the old growth to live.
Am I suggesting a balanced stewardship of the land? Yes, because it is the smart thing to do. Trees are a renewable resource, just like corn and grass.
WESTVACO ( a huge timber/paper company) is selling vast areas of forest land http://www.meadwestvaco.com/forestry.nsf because their ability to grow trees has so improved in the last 50 years. They simply don't need to manage as much land anymore to produce more timber products. BUT, WESTVACO is actually a company that (believe it or not) gives a crap about the environment. Unfortunately, by releasing this land for other uses it falls into the hands of developers. Developers have no souls.
Also, it's the company's that want to go out and rape the cheap timber that bother me. The mountain topping coal companies, the timber rapers, I despise them all.
I have been on land that was strip mined.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
I have nothing good to say about those companies and their practices.<o:p></o:p>
The land will never be the same.
walkin' wally
12-06-2005, 19:28
[QUOTE]
[SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman]There was a section of hills that I spent a good bit of my childhood roaming. The forest was mixed deciduous with minimal conifers. The landowners decided it was time to have the trees cut. Some of it was clear-cut some was selectively cut. For the first year or two I was totally disgusted. Then over the course of a couple years the selective cut trees filled out and low growth started in the clear cut. I began seeing more deer and more songbirds. I had more berries to pick. I saw more small and medium sized mammals. If I had known what I was doing I would have noticed the diversity of flowers and other plants. I recently went back, the areas that were selectively cut are becoming old growth. I didn’t see nearly the number of deer, or turkey in that section as I do in the area that was clear-cut. [quote]
If someone want to see diversity in a forest system go to a 4 or 5 year old clearcut in the winter. The tips of new growth in the clearcut provides the food these animals one way or the other. Go along the edge of older growth areas. In the North look for the tracks of fox, coyote, rabbitt, bobcat, grouse, fisher etc. This is where the diversity is. Provided it isn't seeded to a single species plantation.