The government office called the Natural Resources Conservation Service, which also has a PA central office in Harrisburg, issued a Practice Standard regarding slash.
Mt. Gretna's nuisance lot violates almost every suggested criteria or consideration given in that two-page publication.
You can find it yourself at
ftp://ftp-fc.sc.egov.usda.gov/NHQ/practice-standards/standards/384.pdf
In fact,this office is within the USDA, and the resources conservation coordinator for our area can be reached at:
john.metrick@pa.usda.gov
The PA NRCS website is http://www.pa.nrcs.usda.gov/
Saturday, July 25, 2009
Pictures of slash presenting fire hazard to Mt. Gretna
As you look at these pictures, I ask you to think about two things:
First, please compare this slash with the slash left on the harvested blocks that are easily visible from Pinch Road and State Road 117. Notice the size, or diameter of the trunks of the wood left behind, notice the arrangement of the slash and its piles, and notice the size of the slash piles themselves.
Second, please look at the size of the wood left behind in the nuisance block. Also note the continuity of these slash piles--as they seem to go on for the length area of the nuisance block.
For comparison, here are some photos of the slash left behind on the SR 117 harvested block, on the other side of Mt. Gretna:
The east end of the 117 block:
A closer view of one side of the harvested block that abuts the homes of several Mt. Gretna residents, aka nuisance block:
A larger view of the overall block:
First, please compare this slash with the slash left on the harvested blocks that are easily visible from Pinch Road and State Road 117. Notice the size, or diameter of the trunks of the wood left behind, notice the arrangement of the slash and its piles, and notice the size of the slash piles themselves.
Second, please look at the size of the wood left behind in the nuisance block. Also note the continuity of these slash piles--as they seem to go on for the length area of the nuisance block.
For comparison, here are some photos of the slash left behind on the SR 117 harvested block, on the other side of Mt. Gretna:
The west end of the 117 block:
The east end of the 117 block:A closer view of one side of the harvested block that abuts the homes of several Mt. Gretna residents, aka nuisance block:
A larger view of the overall block:
A view of the other side of the nuisance block:
In all honesty, in all of my experience with forestry in the Maine woods, I have never seen a harvester leave a block in this condition. Never. And, I have never heard any official try to convince anyone those conditions were forestry's "best practices." Never.
In all honesty, in all of my experience with forestry in the Maine woods, I have never seen a harvester leave a block in this condition. Never. And, I have never heard any official try to convince anyone those conditions were forestry's "best practices." Never.It is clear that this wood provided the contractor with little merchantable wood, given the multi-branched trunks and their lack of straightness, and, therefore, he deemed it not a good business choice to spend any money or time hauling it out or chipping it, and calculated that no one would see it from Pinch Road and be concerned about it. He probably also relied on lax enforcement of the contract, and of forestry's true best practices, by the PA GC.
Even though the PA GC has stated that the purposes of the harvest were to salvage dying trees and to create feeding habitat for deer, after seeing the huge slash piles up there you have to ask yourself:
1. how are trees to be planted on this block, and how is any vegetation to grow there,
2. how is game--especially a large mammal, to traverse that block, and
3. how long will that fuel take to decompose, given its large size.
Even though the PA GC has stated that the purposes of the harvest were to salvage dying trees and to create feeding habitat for deer, after seeing the huge slash piles up there you have to ask yourself:
1. how are trees to be planted on this block, and how is any vegetation to grow there,
2. how is game--especially a large mammal, to traverse that block, and
3. how long will that fuel take to decompose, given its large size.
Given the current condition of this block, it is extremely difficult to see where the latter goal is being pursued, suggesting that the harvest was really pursued to generate revenue.
Further, the harvesting contract requires that the contractor not damage trees marked to remain, and to complete all terms of the contract before getting his bond back and being allowed to harvest any other blocks. A closer inspection of trees remaining on all these blocks reveals significant damage from the harvesting, in addition to the slash/fire hazard issue here. However, a PA GC officer stated Friday that they consider the contract closed and, ergo, the contractor is able to get his bond back and to trash and threaten some other shmuck's backyard.
Thursday, July 23, 2009
forestry's "best practices"
At the recent Chautauqua annual meeting, Mount Gretna Borough's Chuck Alwein responded to members' concerns about the seemingly abundant amount of wood "fuel" (or "slash") left behind by the Pennsylvannia Game Land's timber harvester. He assured us that they used "best practices."
So, I did a little research of forestry best practices. Here is what I found.
"Best Management Practices for Pennsylvania Forests" (by Chinko and Wolf)
BMP #6, on page 29 states:
"6. Use as much of the harvested wood as possible to minimize debris."
and BMP #5 on page 20:
"5. Consider the effects of planned activities on surrounding properties."
Then I went to the bible of silvicultural practices, David M. Smith's "The Practice of Silviculture" ["Silviculture" is the term for the art of producing and tending a forest.]
On page 222, Mr. Smith emphasizes that site-preparation may be the most crucial consideration given the type of regeneration planned. Here, in Mount Gretna, the PA Game Commission has repeatedly stated that it is going to replant thousands of trees. For this plan, Mr. Smith states "slash disposal is very often done to reduce the physical impediments to hand or machine planting." page 224
It seems fairly obvious that, given the size and amount of slash left behind our little village, that physically moving through the area to plant anything is near impossible, as well as dangerous. Further, the egregious amount of slash left behind also suggests that site-prep activities have really not be conducted--how could they be? Perhaps there was no plan for site prep. Perhaps the harvester is not done yet...
More importantly, on page 223, Smith states
"most slash disposal is still applied primarily to reduce the potential fuel for forest fires"
(citing Brown and Davis, 1973, Chandler et al, 1983, andPyne, 1984). He further states
"Slash is a fire hazard because it represents an unusually large volume of fuel; it is often so distributed that it dangerously impedes construction of fire lines...
Mr. Alwhein further comforted us by alleging that our fire risk is lower now that a fire can't spread from tree top to tree top behind our little village. Here is what Mr. Smith has to say about that:
"the greatest menace exists during the ...period in which the foliage and small branchlets remain on the slash; they are readliy ignited and burn rapidly....[W]hen conditions are favorable to very hot fires, the size of [large] units of fuel is no longer a factor limiting the rate at which a fire will spread....[F]ires can burn rapidly in large concentrations of slash and may 'blow up' into well-nigh uncontrollable conflagrations." page 223
Well, given that lightening is known to favor striking right where all this slash is piled up, that there are plenty of humans out there every day--some of them even smoking, and that there is plenty of duff and "small branchlets" up there drying out in the unfettered sunshine, whose take on things should we err towards?
So, I did a little research of forestry best practices. Here is what I found.
"Best Management Practices for Pennsylvania Forests" (by Chinko and Wolf)
BMP #6, on page 29 states:
"6. Use as much of the harvested wood as possible to minimize debris."
and BMP #5 on page 20:
"5. Consider the effects of planned activities on surrounding properties."
Then I went to the bible of silvicultural practices, David M. Smith's "The Practice of Silviculture" ["Silviculture" is the term for the art of producing and tending a forest.]
On page 222, Mr. Smith emphasizes that site-preparation may be the most crucial consideration given the type of regeneration planned. Here, in Mount Gretna, the PA Game Commission has repeatedly stated that it is going to replant thousands of trees. For this plan, Mr. Smith states "slash disposal is very often done to reduce the physical impediments to hand or machine planting." page 224
It seems fairly obvious that, given the size and amount of slash left behind our little village, that physically moving through the area to plant anything is near impossible, as well as dangerous. Further, the egregious amount of slash left behind also suggests that site-prep activities have really not be conducted--how could they be? Perhaps there was no plan for site prep. Perhaps the harvester is not done yet...
More importantly, on page 223, Smith states
"most slash disposal is still applied primarily to reduce the potential fuel for forest fires"
(citing Brown and Davis, 1973, Chandler et al, 1983, andPyne, 1984). He further states
"Slash is a fire hazard because it represents an unusually large volume of fuel; it is often so distributed that it dangerously impedes construction of fire lines...
Mr. Alwhein further comforted us by alleging that our fire risk is lower now that a fire can't spread from tree top to tree top behind our little village. Here is what Mr. Smith has to say about that:
"Fires on cutover areas almost invariably start and spread in the litter of the old forest floor."...Page 224, and:
"the greatest menace exists during the ...period in which the foliage and small branchlets remain on the slash; they are readliy ignited and burn rapidly....[W]hen conditions are favorable to very hot fires, the size of [large] units of fuel is no longer a factor limiting the rate at which a fire will spread....[F]ires can burn rapidly in large concentrations of slash and may 'blow up' into well-nigh uncontrollable conflagrations." page 223
Well, given that lightening is known to favor striking right where all this slash is piled up, that there are plenty of humans out there every day--some of them even smoking, and that there is plenty of duff and "small branchlets" up there drying out in the unfettered sunshine, whose take on things should we err towards?
Hello All!
I started this blog because I thought we could use a forum for actually talking with each other.
I will try to keep it informative by posting documents, study results, etc., that keep the hyperbole and "misinformation" to a minimum. Feel free to contribute in the same manner.
I hope everyone stays respectful and enthusiastic about participating...
Just trying to keep my dharma upbeat instead of beat up!
Ur Naybor
I will try to keep it informative by posting documents, study results, etc., that keep the hyperbole and "misinformation" to a minimum. Feel free to contribute in the same manner.
I hope everyone stays respectful and enthusiastic about participating...
Just trying to keep my dharma upbeat instead of beat up!
Ur Naybor
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
