Salvage-logging serves greed, not forest health |

Salvage-logging serves greed, not forest health

Post-burn salvage-logging is believed by many foresters and scientists to be one of the most ecologically dangerous practices in modern forestry, and is a deceptive excuse for timber companies to access our remaining old-growth forests.

Fires don’t typically consume large trees, but leave behind a rich legacy of nutritive snags and burned wood. The wood provides a slow release of nutrients, animal homes, and fish habitat. There is no scientific evidence demonstrating that leaving partially burned wood in a forest results in a higher risk of re-burn. Instead, research shows that removing the largest trees from a forest, even an already burned forest, increases the likelihood of severe fires by removing shade and creating hotter, drier conditions on the ground.

Let’s call post-fire salvage-logging what it is – a deceptive plan which manipulates the public’s understanding of fire ecology to further exploit the scant remains of our public old growth forests to profit a few. Logging the Gap Fire area near I-80 and future burned old forests is a very bad idea. Tell the Tahoe National Forest supervisors that you don’t buy it.

Greg Sherr

Nevada City

Support Local Journalism

Support Local Journalism

Readers around Grass Valley and Nevada County make The Union’s work possible. Your financial contribution supports our efforts to deliver quality, locally relevant journalism.

Now more than ever, your support is critical to help us keep our community informed about the evolving coronavirus pandemic and the impact it is having locally. Every contribution, however large or small, will make a difference.

Your donation will help us continue to cover COVID-19 and our other vital local news.


Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.

User Legend: iconModerator iconTrusted User


See more