cupo,

All autos burn oil. Every one.

Sometimes, incremental change isn't good enough. I agree that it is the best way to address forestry/fish management techniques, but in some cases incremental change translates to foot-dragging.

For instance, the Monsanto Corp. manufactured PCB's for a variety of uses in Alabama. When the US gov't discovered that PCB's were a carginogen, and outlawed their production Monsanto continued manufacturing and dumping them for another 15 years. The people living in the area measure astoundingly high in PCB concentrations.

Yet the EPA warned no one. Why? Because the government thought Monsanto was making incremental changes in the way the handled and disposed of PCB's. Even a realist can see that this is wrong. Things should have been changed immediately.


OK, then on the forestry issue. I think that timber companies have done an admirable job of making their land salmon-friendly. You don't see the things in the woods you used to see when I was a kid. Logging has visibly less impact on the area than it used to. It is obvious to me that timber companies are moving in the right direction .

As far as their past sins, people must remeber that they're looking back on 1970's and 80's logging practices through 2003 eyes. I don't think anyone was aware at the time what was being done to our future fisheries. Hell, back then WE were whacking natives and thinking it was cool.

The damage that was done is done. The smart thing to do now is prevent future damage not lament past damage. From what I've seen timber companies are going to great lengths (on the whole) to prevent the dmage that was commonly seen in the past.

Skywalker-

Actually it's a little of everything you mentioned, but tends to depend on the type of slide and the amount of damage you want to correct. There were many attempts in the early 80's to develop a machine that would remove sediment from gravel, but the feasiblity (financial and technical) just wasn't and likely isn't there. Some of you may even remember the UofW's gravel gertie that was developed to clean spawning gravel. There's also the issue of the cure sometimes being worse than the disease.

On a large slide that dumps thousands of yards of dirt and sediment into a river, you'd have to build haul roads in riparian areas just to move the sediment exctracted from the stream. In the process, you'd loose riparian cover, create fish passage issues when crossing tributaries and a variety of other issues. You'd also have to imagine this huge machine chugging down the river disturbing the streambed and any fish present. Not a pretty picture in my mind.

Just for the record, I've seen a couple of big slides that I actually thougth improved the stream dramatically. I know this sounds counterintuitive, but a stream that lacks large woody debris and gravel can actually benefit from a slide or debris torrent. I know in one instance that within a couple of years of the slide I found a lot of new pools and riffles that provided excellent fish rearing and spawning habitat that previously didn't exist.

As for the slide itself, that's another ball game. Slides that strip all the soil and leave nothing but rock are extremely difficult to restore. The only way to really restore the slide area is to import soil and plant vegetation. Then there's the issue if the soil can be made to "stick" to the rock and not runoff in the first big rainfall. There's also the problem of accessing the site to get the soil to the slide. On steep slopes your only real option is to use a helicopter and moving thousands of yards via helicopter would bankrupt most landowners.

In a situation like this, if the sky was the limit I'm sure we could develop some sort of mitigation, but I'm not sure what it would be. On slides that don't strip all of the soil it seems best to revegetate the slope and identify the trigger mechinism so we can make sure it doesn't happen again. Sometime this means removing or improving roads or improving drainage features.

There's a lot to evaluate when it comes to slides and I could spend days writing about it, but hopefully this sums things up enough to answer your questions.

One additional thing I'd like to add relative to forest practices and forest land and that is the ever increasing damage done by quads. I recall several situations where logging was being blamed for increasing sediment in a stream and upon investigation it turned out to be quads. These kids were racing up and down a slope that was probably 800 feet long and crossing back and forth across the stream at the bottom. The ruts on the slope were getting so bad that water and sediment was funneled directly into the stream. It was worse than a lot of other problems that I've looked at. If the sediment was coming off an active haul road, they company would be shut down until the situation was corrected.

Can anyone tell me what is the required streamside set back under the current forrest practrices act in Washington. I heard it was only 50 feet. Is that true?

As for the timber industry only doing what was leagal in the past, lets not forget they fought long and hard to be allowed to keep up their destructive practices. Sure they knew about the harm they were doing. But the almighty dollar always comes first. Weyhauser, one of the largest, recently was found guilty of price fixing in an attempt to force small mills out of business. That tells me all I need to know about their corporate citizenship.

Surecatch-

Buffer zones are based on stream type/width, sight potential tree height and basal area along with a couple other factors that play a lesser role. The 50 feet that you heard represents the core zone which is a "no touch" zone, with a couple of exceptions involving roads. Outside of the core is the "inner zone" and then there's the "outer zone". Some management (ie harvest) may take place in the inner and outer zones depending on existing basal area. There are essentially two options that a landowner may choose from. In western washington, the total buffer zone on fish bearing streams can be anywhere from 90-200 feet in width. It's different on the eastside and I don't remember what they are. Buffers are also required on non fish bearing streams, but their is a table that would be difficult to reproduce here that is used to determine the extent of the buffer.

The Deer Creek slide on Deer Creek of the North fork of the Stilly is a lindslide that was caused by logging on fragile soils.

It has all but decimated the Deer Creek run of steelhead.

The damage done by logging is huge, as this is but one example, and many are not nearly as clearly caused.

Wolley:

You are 100% right about the Deer Creek slide, but even then the logging companies tried desperatly to wiggle out of responsibility. I dunno if they ever did fess up, but its' clear they caused that slide.

I see many such slides in the Queen Charlottes where huge clearcuts on steep slopes result in major slides into streams.

How long ago did the deer creek slide happen? Is it a hard one to find? I might have to make a drive to check it out when I have time. Thanks

Dan,

Good point, but an argument could also be made that the changes concerning DDT and its use was one incremental step in changing the way we use chemicals. That is an example of another industry that has had an impact on our environment.

I was over simplifying things, suggesting that the folks who hang out in trees for a few months in a tree they named as the idealists, the folks who say stop logging at all costs. Where the realists look at ways to recycle old timbers, use more recycled paper content in finished goods like cardboard, newpapers, and copier paper, and look at different types of fiber like the hybrid poplar/cottonwood trees.

Eddie,

Another change that has been made as it pertains to export logs is that only trees from private forests may be exported. Trees from State and National forests may only be used for finished products like dimensional lumber, poles etc. This change was made to ensure that our economy benefitted from a number of transaction cycles, not just one or two.

I must say that this conversation has remained very civil, even though this issue has brought out emotions in a number of folks. Good job on sticking to the facts, and refraining from the name calling. I wish more discussions would be like this.

Dogfish, I agree with you about the log exports. One thing to remember however, the "private lands" (Weyerhaeuser, Simpson, Plum Cr., etc) were very often given to these companies for free with the railroad lands that were given in the 1800's. However, they do own the land and I don't know that I or anyone else can question their tactics unless they impact streams or land outside their title boundaries. I would love to see the export of logs stopped so that we can put our very own wood industry professionals to work. But, at least they are not coming from the National Forests. I will say however that taking the amazing stands of the Tongass and turning them into pulp and paper is a real waste and one more example of Sen. Ted Stevens bringing home the bacon for his electorate. Such a waste. I hope that the Forestry industry cleans up their act and protects the environment. As before, I will trust but I will verify.

Dogfish, do you know if the export restriction extends to county and city timber? Just curious, because I think I recall seeing invitations to bid on county timber in the paper that said the timber was export restricted. I was wondering if that was a county decision or it was the same as state and federal timber.

Any municipality. Federal, State, County or City. The City of Bremerton has a HUGE watershed that they manage actively, but none of it can be exported as raw timber.

BTF-
The Deforest Creek Slide (aka Deer Creek slide) occurred during the winter of 1983/84. This event was more of an erosion event than what would be considered to be a "slide". A debris torrent (old logging debris a major component) flowed down Deforest Creek and opened up the toe of the bank. Since the hill side was mostly layered sands and gravels with water piping through the sand lens the exposed hill side "calved" much like a glacier moving upslope. The water flowing out the sand layers would cause the sand to erode away and the layers above would collapse keeping the eroding face more or less vertical. The result is a very impressive (or depressing) scar in the hill side.

It has been estimated that more than a million yards of material flowed into Deer Creek from just this one source. In the 18 months that the "slide" was most active it was estimated that 1,000 yards of material was entering the creek daily. To picture how much material this consider that a 1,000 yards is the same of 100 dump truck loads of material entering the Creek at a single point each and every day. The really depressing stat is that the Deforest Creek was the source of only about 1/2 of the eroding material entering Deer Creek during the 1980s and 90s.

The slide is isolated behind locked gates. However it can be seen from a Forest service road. If one access the upper Deer Creek basin through Seagleson Pass (north and west from Darrington) and continue west you encounter several spots to view the slide from a distance.

Regarding past logging practices - The damage caused to many of our watersheds by excessive logging rates and poor land management decisions means that most of the watersheds will not recover in our life times. It will take decades or even centuries for them to heal. In the trashed basins any continued logging (even with more beign prescriptions) will delay the recovery time. It is akin to picking at scabs keeping the wound a raw sore - which in my opinion is exactly would the current Forest and Fish Laws are doing for many of our basins.

Tight Lines
Smalma

For anyone that is intrested in seeing quite a site, follows Smalmas directions to the Upper Deer Creek basin and see the massive desctruction from the Deforest Creek Slide.

This past summer I drove up into the Deer Creek watershed for the first time to satiate a certain curiosity.

I was impressed by the size and the beauty of the valley but as I previously mentioned, some of the destruction (and in particular the Deforest Cr. slide). as well

Smalma-

That is definitely the biggest event outside of Mt Saint Helens that I've heard of. Sounds like one I need to go see. The 18 months alone would have been close to 1/2 a million yards. I've seen a few slides that probably moved a couple hundred thousand, but nothing that big. The last big slide I looked at was on the humptulips on the donkey creek road. I keep saying I'm going to take the time to calculate how much material came off the hill, but never have the time. It was an interesting slide since it actually ran down the hill and across the river and a couple hundred feet up the oposite bank. We figure when it shot up the other hill it probably created a "dam break flood event". Uggly no matter how you spin it. Thanks for the information.

here is an aerial photo of the deer creek slide...
un-freaking real devestation



thanks to
http://terraserver-usa.com

Thanks for posting the picture piper. I was off doing google searches looking for some additional information. Now if I could only get my stereoscope to work on a computer monitor I've got to talk to a friend of mine tomorrow that works up that way and I'm going to see if I can't con him into taking me in there. Thanks again everyone for the information.

BTF,
If you find your way up there shoot some photos to post. I dont think the aerial does the slide any justice...

I'll bet it is friggen enormous