One hears continuously that the Forest Service doesn’t clearcut anymore. Of course, what constitutes a clearcut is subject to interpretation. The following photos are all taken on the Deschutes NF in Oregon. These are “forest thinning” projects designed to reduce wildfires and “improve” forest health. How many trees do you need to leave behind so it’s not an “official” clearcut?
Print Friendly
George Wuerthner
George Wuerthner is an ecologist and former hunting guide with a degree in wildlife biology
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
Looks annihilated to me.
Terrible. Just imagine all the wind erosion too! 🙁
The 80 acre clearcuts(40 plus 40 adjacent “patch cuts” – did they think we couldn’t add?)in my town have proven to be an outrage to the public and an embarrassment to the FS and fuel to oppose future shenanigans. At least the trees didn’t totally die in vain…
Talk about clearcuts! and in grizzly bear habitat in the Yaak:
Check this out:
https://www.counterpunch.org/2021/06/01/nonsensical-clearcuts-rage-on-in-our-national-forests/
And then there is the “native invasive juniper” removal operation ongoing in the high desert. Crazy And how much did they get for that project $350 million (?) to buy all the gas guzzling heavy equipment ?
Makes one wonder what made “the cut” and what did not.
unbelievably outrageous!!! How dare they get away with this!!!
Thanks for the link Barrie. The clearcuts proposed in grizzly bear habitat in the Yaak via the Black Ram project are not only going to increase risk to bears by openings but also by destroying hundreds of acres of prime huckleberry patches as well by my estimate. Some of these areas I have picked for over twenty years that are now proposed as clearcuts with reserves. clearcuts + slashing young trees + burning + replanting = no more huckleberry habitat. The evidence is clear, you can walk through the proposed clearcuts with all the huckleberry forage for bears, people, bumble bees, etc., then you can walk right next to these proposed units in the very same elevation and aspect in 25-40 year old clearcuts and only find scattered individual huckleberry bushes. If carried out as proposed I call it a “taking” because it will be taking an essential food away from wildlife like bears. The sad thing is you can also see past selective thinning units in the same areas that maintained huckleberry habitat so it’s possible to log without destroying such a valuable food crop.
That’s awful! You’d think people would want the huckleberries too. 🙁
Yes, a taking. That fits for the dirt bike racetrack in what should be protected habitat in my Forest that the agency WILL NOT correct. Poor quality employees are part of the problem. A taking from the American public and the wild.
Good pickup. That’s definitely significant tree removal. Nobody in their right mind would call that just a thinning.
Heres another intelligent write-up regarding the push to log & construct roads into forested lands! Good one too.
https://www.counterpunch.org/2021/06/25/we-cant-fireproof-fire-dependent-forests-but-we-can-fireproof-homes/?fbclid=IwAR0HEStDD4esif-1ijECgQni1lvq9SIeNy9mkUG0LMA69fbCaqQrkDE2uYo