Archaeological anthropology

[jdtuttle]

My daughter recently wrote a paper on logging for school. Here's the definition of what her degree will be. Archaeological anthropology; attempts to reconstruct the cultural forms of the past and to trace their growth and development in time. It's a few pages long so I'll try to make an attachment. That didn't work :( Guess its copy & paste.
Mak loves the environment, She enjoys bow hunting with me & running the sawmill. Gives me hope for the future. Hope you enjoy it. 
            Final Paper
December 6, 2012
Binghamton University
Logging Practices and Ecological Impacts
By Makenzie

   Logging has had a long history in our civilization and culture. Wood is the foundation upon which societies were built (Perlin 1989). Throughout our human history technological advances have placed a higher pressure on forests to produce and meet our escalating consumption. This has led to irreparable damage to numerous forest ecosystems, and current practices are doing these systems no favors. Although far from sustainable there are some methods of logging that are on the right track, as well as older methods that are still employed and could be considered sustainable. Logging practices have myriad effects on forests, and deciphering those that are more destructive than others is not all that difficult a task.
   There are so many detrimental effects that logging has on an environment. Most of these come from modern logging practices, but history has shown that the frequency of clear cutting has rendered severe damaging costs to ecological systems. Forest ecosystems currently occupy nearly 31% of the earth's terrestrial surface, and of those 4 billion hectares, approximately 60% is either partially disturbed or human dominated (Clark&Covey 2012). Infrastructure is arguably one of the most damaging aspects of logging practices, both historically and currently. The infrastructure developed to facilitate logging access often makes areas more accessible following logging, dramatically increasing the likelihood of chronic anthropogenic disturbance, and the nature of human disturbance does not allow degraded systems time to recover pre-logging levels of richness (Clark&Covey 2012). By creating roads, logging companies are not only violating a forest, but they are inviting people to continue to do so after they have finished logging it.  Roads may also negatively impact biodiversity, possibly resulting in habitat loss, mortality and genetic isolation, increased dispersal of exotic plants, increased predator movement, and increased access to the forest (Titter et al. 2012). This road production must be reduced because it leads to such high impacts, as well as facilitating poor logging practices.
Selection of trees for harvest is not always done through the most ethical of methods. The largest and highest quality trees appear to have also been disproportionally selected for harvest; a practice known as "high-grading", traditionally common in selection harvest systems and is the most extreme in illegal logging (Clark&Covey 2012). This process results in extreme disturbance to a forest, and not only affects its current health, but also its production and health in the future. Some other methods are suggested for a lower impact on forest systems with a still high production yield for the industry. Under triad zoning, the forest is divided into (1) a biodiversity conservation zone (protected areas) where no logging occurs; (2) an intensive production zone, where silviculture is used to maximize timber yield; and (3) an integrated forest management zone, where the needs of the timber industry are balanced with the needs of other users (Titter et al. 2012). This seems like a fair plan, and may be a decent middle ground for conservationists and companies. But the costs incurred by the intensive production zone could ultimately offset the benefits that the other aspects the triad offers. Another method is called dyad zoning. It is the setting aside of large protected areas involving two zones: a biodiversity conservation zone (protected areas) and an integrated forest management zone (the rest of the productive forest). Integrated forest management implies the management of the forest to satisfy various uses, be they economic, environmental, recreational, or spiritual, on the same piece of land (Titter et al. 2012). A recent study of these zoning methods reveals that in this scenario not many significant differences between zones occur. Within these landscapes 0 ha would indicate a landscape completely devoid of old growth, 430 000 ha would indicate a landscape entirely made up of old growth (no fragmentation), and values in between would indicate a landscape with some old growth divided into patches of various sizes (Tittler 2012). Despite this, Tittler still states that "larger patches are of greater ecological value." The study shows that zoning results in greater percentages of old growth, but that there is little difference between the types of zoning and their effects on this. Zoning is shown to be absolutely helpful for promoting old growth in this study, and significantly fewer roads were constructed in the zoned areas versus the non-zoned areas. In terms of logging, the scenarios were not as successful for profit. Harvest volume was highest for scenarios run on the simulated natural initial landscape, and was higher under no zoning than under any of the zoning options (Tittler 2012). Between the zoning scenarios the triad option proved to have higher harvest volumes than the dyad. Like road construction, harvest volume was negatively affected by maximum cutblock size (Tittler 2012).  Although in the short-term these zoning methods to reduce impact seem reasonable, ultimately they would have the same impact as traditional logging methods. This scenario lends to Jevons paradox, whereas the resource extraction will not remain contained indefinitely. When the value of the zoned land is exhausted, the logging operations will move to the previously protected land. This inevitability negates any good intentions of the proposed zoning methods. What this means is that no matter the intention, any sort of industrial logging is going to be severely damaging to an environment.
Although there may be other important differences between managed and unmanaged landscapes, to reduce deleterious effects, forest management should at least aim to increase old growth, limit fragmentation, and reduce road construction (Titter et al. 2012). But triad and dyad processes could still not claim to be sustainable, and are merely less damaging in the short-term than other industrial processes such as clear-cutting. Lower-scale and more sustainable methods of logging are available, but not at the profit level of industrial logging. But the inverse benefits are incalculable for the health of the environment. There are other methods that can claim to be truly sustainable, when done correctly, and tout a closer connection to natural systems than any minimization of logging roads or concentration of harvesting could.
One of the best methods of logging, traditionally accomplished on a small scale, is that of draft horse logging. Other ungulates such as mules and oxen can be used as well, but draft horses are now the first choice. Their hooves lead to significantly less soil compaction than heavy diesel fueled equipment, leaving the forest floor healthier and the roots of trees free for expansion.  Animal powered forestry operates on solar fuel in the form of hay and grain and requires less fossil fuel than machines, and produces fertilizer as a by-product, not carbon monoxide (Rutledge). The energy efficiency of these animals means that they contribute less to climate change than the use of heavy machinery, therefore making draft horse logging the environmentally sound choice between the two. This process of logging also tends to keep profits locally, and the fuel required to harvest timber with animal power is produced locally and reduces dependence on fossil fuels.  This sourcing method keeps more of the money produced from the forest resource in the community that it came from. Animals are truly renewable, and replace themselves, and this requires cultural skill, animal husbandry, and a relationship between animals and people (Rutledge). The relationship formed between a logger and their horses also has a major impact on logging practices, which results in a more thoughtful approach. Again this requires an understanding of animal care and husbandry, but ultimately offers many intangible benefits to the animals, loggers, and especially the forest. Because of this, animal powered forestry is labor intensive and has low volume production, and these are often seen to be negative features of the heritage-based technology by conventional forestry interests (Rutledge). In actuality these are really a huge benefit, controlling the amount of trees harvested in a low impact manner focusing on the health of the forest and the well-being of the work animals.
As stated before, animal powered logging is usually performed on a small scale, so this makes it beneficial to harvesting from smaller tracts of land.  Animal powered harvesting systems are low cost enterprises that can economically harvest these smaller boundaries (Rutledge). Because we now realize that over consumption of wood is not sustainable, small scale extraction is becoming a much more appealing option to getting the wood needed for human consumption. Small sized tracts of timber cannot be harvested with conventional methods that require higher capitalization and expensive moving cost, and the economic pressure in conventional forest harvesting operations influences most loggers to feel that they must cut all the trees to make their work cost effective (Rutledge). Animal powered forestry hinders this process, and is simply not capable of clear-cutting a forest economically. Again, draft horse logging is one of the most sustainable methods of harvesting trees. Its low impact and closer connection to natural processes makes it the obvious choice, especially when compared with the alternative of fossil-fueled, damaging heavy machinery. And after all, no one has ever found a baby skidder in the woods one morning, and that can only be a good thing.
Another of the more sustainable methods is known as low-impact logging. It is accomplished on a small scale, and usually on privately owned land. Similar in scale to horse logging, many small logging operations use certain tools and small vehicles to cut and remove logs. Although not as sustainable as horse logging, these methods are by far much better for the forest than industrial methods.
Low-impact logging is often considered to be one of the only sustainable methods. This is most often accomplished by private landowners on smaller woodlots. This sort of logging used to be a regular occurrence, and was seen as one of the tasks of land ownership. Now, interest is currently being renewed, with a concern focused on management for wildlife, recreation, and aesthetics, along with timber management. There have been increasingly expressed interests in forestry operations that are sustainable, produce income, and support local community interests, and low-impact logging methods are looked at as a way to help meet these changing landowner objectives (Milauskas). Low-impact logging consists of a similar consideration for the forest that horse logging embraces, and it aims at using technologies to leave a smaller footprint in the forest after extraction. Small woodlot loggers use farm tractors with specialized attachments such as grapples, winches, blades, and log forks to harvest and process their own timber (Milauskas). Using these sorts of machines and tools has a much lower impact on the forest than industrial machinery such as skidders.
"A wide assortment of machines and equipment have been designed or modified for the small-scale woodlot logger. Felling by chainsaw is common. Skidding can be done with several techniques. The most common method is a four-wheel drive farm tractor with a winch or grapple. The tractor should have rollover protection. Remote radio-controlled winching can be an option. The winch allows the tractor to stay on a road or trail, which reduces soil compaction and disturbance. Some special attachments are now made to adapt all-terrain vehicles for skidding smaller logs. Log loading can be done with a farm tractor's front-end loader equipped with forks or tines. Farm tractors can also pull specially built trailers equipped with an attachment that loads the logs and keeps them off the ground (forwarding). This will minimize any ground disturbance," (Milauskas).
These technologies also work within the forest, requiring minimal road building, and utilizing techniques to move trees through the forest rather than plowing over everything in its path, thereby leaving far less damage. Using forwarders to carry logs rather than skidders that drag logs can also reduce the number and density of necessary roads; this will reduce impact to the site and stand because forwarders carry logs on wheels, they can be driven on truck roads without causing much damage and can usually operate economically at farther distances than conventional skidding (Milauskas). This method does leave the forest with some damage, but when compared to industrial methods it has a minimal impact, with a better chance of recoverability. With a chainsaw winch and a snatch block (pulley) up in a tree to keep the front of the log out of the dirt (and minimize friction) one person can easily move forty foot logs (Dick 2012).
Logging on small woodlots is more time consuming and requires more prior planning. But its consideration for the ecology and lack of large machinery far outweighs the values of industrial methods. Many old logging methods exist out of necessity and a lack of technologies, yet efficiency reigned while maintaining a low impact on the woodlot. For example, skidding can sometimes be accomplished utilizing the trees being cut. First fall the tree, limb it, and peel it, then skid the logs out of the woods on the smooth bark; the slippery logs are easy to move on the equally slippery inner bark that was just removed from the trees (Dick 2012). The whole point is to reduce friction, but ruts in the ground are also eliminated, and leaving behind as much of the cut tree as possible is ideal. Another skidding method is to cut a spruce tree about six inches in diameter in three foot lengths, peel them, and split them in half; laying them on the ground with the round, smooth side up, the logs can be skidded out of the woods on top of them (Dick 2012). By using what is available, the logging operation reduces its impact while preserving as much as possible.
With so many destructive forms of logging, and the obvious quest for profit over conservation, it is difficult to determine what the future of logging looks like. It can be said that if current mainstream practices continue, the health of our planet and its ecosystems will persist in declining. If changes to sustainable methods are not made then there will be no forests left, for both harvesting resources and the intrinsic value they hold will disappear. A return to older methods of logging is required to halt the degradation. Current overconsumption must be addressed and reduced. Humans will always need to use trees, and a shift to sustainable logging must happen if we are to maintain that dependence.

[CCC4]

WOW! Unfortunately I have to load up and head to the woods, my eyes crossed half way through the read. Excellent so far though! Congrats! Smart girl!

[Ironwood]

Well, yes she is a smart one.

I am environmentally minded, but as I read it I got the idea she was anti-logging, which is fine except that if we dont harvest wood, then what....more steel studding?, so more open pit ore mining? Personally, I perfer scarring only the surface for resource extraction. I am a witness to ALOT of surface strip mining in my home state of Ohio, we had, limestone and coal quarries within 5 miles of my home town in multiple directions. Not good, and VERY finacially intensive to remove overburden. Just my two cent.

Additonally, it is currently NOT economically feasible to "reuse" wood constructon material except for only high end "boutique" uses (floor, trim, etc...). I volunteer for a non-profit building material reuse facility here in Pittsburgh and I see the economic "dis-incentive" both there and here at my operation. The additonal burden of Uniform Construction Code nationally also impeeds this reuse effort as well as it's requirement of "stamped" framing material (even for private home use). The "greenest" building is one that already exsists  : Regardless of how you document "LEED" certified tonnage.  :


Well written paper though,.....she's going somewhere.........

Ironwood

[lumberjack48]

Shes talking about bringing the logging methods back that we used in the 60's and early 70's.
Everybody and his brother had a small logging operation going on. You could go to the state and ask for x amount of stumpage. They'd take you in the office and get some aerial photos, and show you what they had available.

This is when you could get a section one sale from the Federal. Go in and tell-em what you need, x amount of Aspen, Jack pine, ect. They'd go out and throw a block together for you. Like if you needed 200 cds of Aspen, to fill a contract from Blandin's.

This is when basically anybody could go in to Bandin Paper Co. and get a 100 to a 500 cd contract. And just about every town had a Timber broker, that would buy 10 cds and up. They handed out load tickets, you could go in any day of the week to get-em. Then when the wood was hauled, the trucker brought scale tickets back. You could take your scale tickets to the Timber broker any day of the week and get payed. When he payed you, he'd ask how many more tickets can you fill next week. This is the kind of logging i did, and loved it, you had goals every week. I got a few more load tickets then i could fill a few times, rain or a breakdown. I wasn't going to tell the broker that i couldn't fill the tickets. This looked bad, next time you'd have a hard time getting that many tickets. I'd go around to other loggers and buy what i needed of fill my load tickets.

Back in the 60's we couldn't sell rotten pulpwood. We cut only the good trees and left the punky ones standing, this is the worst practice ever used when cutting Aspen [poplar] Aspen stands should always be clear cut, this way you get a perfect regrowth back.
This is the same with farmed Jack pine, like what the C. C. Boys planted around here. We tried row cutting, when we did this the rest of it blew down. I told the Rangers it was a waste of time. The first good wind we have I'll be back to clean the mess up. Well thats what happened, now we had busted up, twisted wood to cleanup, what a waste. What I'm saying this type of Jack pine should be clear cut and replanted.

Back in the late 60's on a clearcut Aspen sale after we were done logging. All the landings and skid trails got tilled up and we planed Clover for the Rabbits, Grouse, Deer and who would ever eat it. The Federal payed the logger to do this. Then in the 70's this practice played out, i don't know why.

Here in the Chippewa National Forest they have a good program to keep the forest producing. But when we have these big wind storms really takes a tole on it. The storm we had this summer took a swot 70 miles long though some of the nicest pine you'll ever see. I'm going to try and get out this coming summer to get pictures of it.
barbender has been cleaning up blow down from this storm around big Ball Cub lake.

[samandothers]

Very interesting read!  I like what she is promoting.  I wonder if it is possible for the industry to change its ways from what I understand may be some of the current practices.

[1270d]

Definately sounds anti commerial logging.  I would beg to differ that we ll run out of forests with the management practices currently in use

[chevytaHOE5674]

I would beg to differ that we ll run out of forests with the management practices currently in use

According to the Michigan Chapter of SAF the state is growing a little over twice the volume that is harvested every year.

This is true across many states, so I don't think we will be run out of wood to harvest.

[Jeff]

I think she is using a lot of dated information for her paper actually. Dated by years in fact, but the topic is titled Archaeological anthropology so it fits the class I suppose.

[beenthere]

She does write well, and the paper may be written to please the position of her Professor (which is important). But I believe she is quite naive about the facts, although probably based on contents of her published citings that were just assumed to be facts. She lacks the actual experiences to think otherwise.
The volumes of wood we harvest (even today when those volumes are down) simply cannot be produced with horses and/or small tractors, etc.  Many could come up with how horse hooves are more damaging to the forest floor per volume of wood moved than the big tired harvestors. And to think anyone is going to peel bark and lay it slippery side up to skid out logs for any distance beyond a few feet, or cut small wood and make a dragging trail for any distance just doesn't know.
Bless her heart, as she likely cannot know these things.

But have to say a well-written paper, just not very convincing. Hopefully she rec'd a good grade for developing a situation and collecting supporting information for her conclusion. Too bad her supporting info was shaky at best.

[chevytaHOE5674]

Many could come up with how horse hooves are more damaging to the forest floor per volume of wood moved than the big tired harvestors.

Since you pointed that out a horse puts down ~25psi on its hooves. An 8 wheeled 50,000lbs machine with 20tons of wood on its bunk has a ground pressure of around 13psi and with tracks that can be dropped to 7psi (according to timberpro).....

Couple that with the fact the horse would have to make many many many trips to haul 20ton of wood and you can make a clear case for horses being harder on the soils....

[mad murdock]

If written 30 years ago it wouldn't ring more true. Has a lot of things in it that are by no means correct by today's SFI standards. Way more wood and forested land is present in n America today than since the recorded record has ever registered. As far as form and such it is a well written paper, I hope she gets some funds awarded for it.

[SwampDonkey]

I think the paper is well written. However, I think it's written for the small woodlot owner who does his own logging or cares for his woodlot more than many do and not just a one time harvest in his life. Many woodlot owners could never afford the machinery required for production logging and it would be overkill for a woodlot. I think the paper gives a few examples to consider for harvesting and extracting. Some are a little ambitious, time consuming and labour intensive though. That being said, there needs to be an understanding of tree ecology before one turns against clearcutting and assumes something like single tree of group selection could replace it. One example given by one of the members here is aspen, this is also true of balsam fir. They are short lived pioneers.  You could start with a light thinning to mimic decadent fir and promote new regen and come back to clear it in 10 years or so while protecting the regen. If you leave the stand dense it won't regenerate. Ever walk in under fir with nearly 100 % crown closure? No regen.

Another situation. What do you do when the bugs are eating up your SYP stand in the south? You just can't simplify ignore such things in management.

We have a lot of woodlot owners on this forum who harvest very small volumes from their ground and done so over many years. We also have a few one timers that cut it all now and nothing later. And some in between, but probably cut it a little hard. ;)

Many of the things mentioned on the industrial side of things are being practiced. At least here in New Brunswick. Just not those fancy new terms. Trouble is the companies have admitted for at least two decades that there was to be a wood shortage. That was easier to say than over harvesting and over capacity. ;) It has put more pressure on the reserve areas and riperian areas. However, that put gears into motion in the 80's to promote silviculture activities like planting and thinning to soften the blow. The numbers didn't reflect harvests off woodlots because there was uncertainly as to how much would be harvested, when and where it would be sold (a lot of woodlot owners sell to the US market). License holders on public lands here know where, when and how much from their management plans with some risk factors worked in.

On the industrial side of things, since the 80's there has been a big move for worker safety, production and reducing risk and cost per cubic meter of wood. One way to reduce risk and cost is to have as few operators on public land as possible and use high production machines. You have to deal with fewer people and deal with fewer conflicts and risks and a whole lot easier to manage it all with less cost.  This I suspect is why a lot of those old ways of working through wood brokers on public lands have gone away. The 80's had a lot of money invested in machine development. More than the 4 decades just after WWII in my opinion. I mean a skidder is just an articulated tractor with a winch and blade.  ;)

I hope your daughter does well on her paper.