5 ms·
There's a lot to be said for building little villages all over the north state to support the amount of forestry that needs doing these days, which is quite a b
by jeffbee 3y ago
There's a lot to be said for building little villages all over the north state to support the amount of forestry that needs doing these days, which is quite a bit. The state says it wants to do preventative cutting and burning on a million acres per year but so far has been doing something between .1% and 1% of that goal. There's no money in it, so the state would just have to pour in the funds. But that's no different to the way everything else is paid for in that part of the state.
- ls612 3y agoIf they want to cut parts of the forest now and then as part of lifecycle management why not allow logging for profit?
- theptip 3y agoClearing out fuel/undergrowth is a very different activity than logging trees. No money in the former.
- xp84 3y agoI think if they’re burning it though they could allow logging it (maybe with the stipulation that you also remove undergrowth?), it’s not like fire leaves the trees alone. But someone else pointed out that apparently logging up there is much more difficult than getting easy trees in the less remote, flatter southeast, so it’s probably still not an exciting reason why this logging isn’t happening.
- jeffbee 3y agoThey offer the entire state for cutting every year at auction. Nobody wants to bother, because cutting trees on a mountain can't compete economically with forests in the southeast, that are basically farms.
- TinkersW 3y agoScotia is in the coastal redwoods, these trees are largely immune to forest fires(don't confuse them with giant sequoia)