I live in Oregon on the dry side of the state. Over sixty percent of the local land area and the majority of the forested land is owned by USFS.
I purchased a mill last year after having purchased a small timber sale. I have purchsaed one additional timber sale but would like the flexibility of buying smaller units of timber.
This spring I had a customer request pine lumber. My wife and I were out to ride horses in the woods and there was an 18 inch pine that had fallen over the paved road. Some one had come along and cut it into logs and pushed it to the side. I went to the USFS and asked to purchase that log.
Well they were really sorry...NO! NO!! and NO!!!
Well my dad was USFS. I grew up a USFS brat and I have two natural resource degrees from college. I really believe in public lands, multiple use and the sustainable renewable resource that a forest is. I went to an adjacent forest and asked them the same question. Got the same answer...they were really sorry...really.
I wrote the Regional Forester. "Why is this", I asked. The USFS talks of "Caring for the land and serving the people." They talk mutiple use, rural economic development and fuels reduction. The answer was that she was really sorry but......NO!
Now I am pretty disgusted. I can keep my mill busy doing other things. I did not buy the mill on the premise that I would have a supply of USFS timber. This is not just about me either. Other local portable mill owners report the same experience. The inability or refusal to sell a single tree on public land to a member of the public seems like a scandal.
What of your experience. Should I just accept that several million acres of local productive forest are off limits? I am not asking to cut over acres of green or big trees. I am asking for dead trees and windthrown trees that are scattered about next to roads. Does your forest sell material to you? My uncle says I should write my congressman. I wanted to ask here first.
Thanks from KD
Quote from: kderby on July 11, 2006, 01:12:07 AM
Should I just accept that several million acres of local productive forest are off limits?
NO, we should never accept stupidity and mismanagement from our own government.
YES, you should write your congressman and tell him how you feel about this subject. Never underestimate the difference one voice can make.
I do believe the problem was NOT created nor desired by the USFS. I am sure that most of the USFS is frustrated by their lack of ability, by law, to manage our forest resources.
It is the US Congress that bears the responsibility for this policy and is a result of senators and congresmen pandering to special interest groups or more pointedly "radical environmential groups." Who knows, your voice may be the one that finally forces some changes in policy.
Just don't bet the farm on it. ;D
"I'm sorry, no" needs to be followed up with "why?" And if that answer isn't forthcoming, then move up the chain of command. Somebody made up the rule for some reason.
Are you offerring to buy it or just remove it for free? It might end up being something as mundance as it being too much paperwork.
I would echo the above response of going to your congressman and senator. A nice little letter to the editor wouldn't hurt. Same goes with hitting a few of the local computer forums and bounce it off of them. When hit with negative press, some of these positions can be changed, and rather quickly.
If someone came to me and asked to buy one tree out of my woods, I can think of a lot of reasons I would not want to do it. Especially if the tree has low value. Who would want to supervise the taking of one tree? It is hard enough for the forest service to sell and manage a timber sale let alone a few trees. I would hate to put my neck on the line for one tree. I hate to be negative on this because I can see that good wood is going to waste.
I can see their point, too. I think it just boils down to the same old thing that causes all the other rules and regs...too many greedy and dishonest people. >:( If people could be trusted to just take down or dead trees, USFS would probably be glad to open things up, but that just isn't the case. Given the vast areas in question, and the lack of manpower, the only way to have any control is to nail anyone coming out of the forest with a log, IF they see you.
I'd like to see some changes in the way timber sales are handled in our Nat. Forests, though. The way it is now, at least in the forest near here, only the big operations are able to deal with all the red tape involved. It would be nice if they could set aside some small tracts for the little guys, with a simplified bid process. They could even have "open" sales, where the public could go cut some wood and pay for it at a check station. They could set up a scale and sell it by the ton to whoever drags it out. ;D 8)
They won't do it here because they've deligated total control to the big forest giants. And those forest giants are a big bunch of whiners when someone suggests change to anything they might have to give up a tiny bit of control over for fear that someone else's approach may be better. Just like a spoiled 5 year old who is used to his own way all the time, bracing his feet and blatting all the while his parents are dragging him off from the toy store for misbehaving. ;) We have a marketing board system here that would gladly manage all these small isolated parcels of crown lands, surrounded by private woodlots. If the government can't put thier trust in the area marketing boards, then I don't see how they can delegate all the control to industry because most of the public 'outside the fence' don't trust the industry. Then, there are also the part of the public that don't care because it's not their job and livlihood on the front lines.
I have had a couple of run ins with the local USFS gang, and have had mised outcomes.
I also have an advantage in that I am still slightly unknown, and can run incognito if necessary.
I work with some of the local fire departments in clearing hazard trees along road rights of way, which get me some nice logs from time to time.
I also take small stuff that are peeler sized, as in 2-6" diameter, for making peeped post furniture.
In an average year, there will be 4-8 large timber sales, from 100 acres up to may thousand acres. I can't take something like that on with my operation, as I am not geared for it, and it's not part of my mission.
Yes, there are a couple of large operators that are somewhat whiney and bend the FS to their will, but there are occasions when the little gigs pop up and the big operators aren't interested as tehy're not cost effective for them, and the FS gets NO bids on those.
Come to think of it, last year they put out 7 sales, and only 3 were bid on, leaving 4 that will be up again this year.
Once the bids have closed, they publish the sales, and they also publish the ones that were'nt bid. When they're not bid on, I go in and make a wickedly lowball offer, and sometimes get a callback from the forester requesting more information, more money, or telling me that I am high. (Not really, but it sounded good)
There are "rules" that the FS must play by, and those rules were written by the lobbyists that have our politicians in their pockets, which violates the premise "Of hte people, by the people, for the people" that I was raised to believe in.
I figure that I can reasonably handle a 10-50 acre thinning project without too much difficulty, with my existing equipment, all by myself.
And, that being the case, and the fact that something that small isn't worth the big operators time and investment, they work well for me, and I have a competitive advantage.
The other factor that I hear often is that "it's an asset, and it must be sold to the highest bidder, and a Request for Bid must be published to be fair to everyone"
And so it goes....
SD
I have gotten the same response from the local landfill. Everytime I go there there are nice logs in the pile waiting for burial. And everytime I ask about them. But the answer is always "No". no_no
The On-Sight person doesn't have any authority to make decisions as to who gets the governments "property". Even if it is trash. If they start giving me logs, then they will need to give someone else the appliances or the furniture or whatever. The irony of this situation is that they have a seperate brush pile that they burn so as not to take up space in the hole, but then they bury the part of the tree that can actually be put to good use. smiley_headscratch
The change needs to be made in policy at the elected office level. But things of course get really complicated then. Which takes my interest out of it real quick. There are easier logs to be had around here.
Of course, a call to the local paper or news team can get politicians moving real quick on these type of "Recycling Mother Earth" issues.
As mentioned previously by Ron W. when the USFS tells you "no" on a request such as for a single tree removal, you need to ask them for the reason "why". Was the tree in a designated Wilderness area, special area, wildlife management area, etc. etc.?
You need to get involved in the local National Forests land & resource management planning process and learn the management direction and the reasons "why".
There are many laws, rules, regulations, and management directions that the USFS must follow in their management of "pubic" lands. Court cases, injunctions, appeals on their management direction from environmentalists, etc. have also greatly affected their resource management.
However, there are many cases where they "can" allow you "free use" or purchase of a single tree depending upon the area's management direction.
Ask for their reason "why" they can't allow something. I'd like to know the reason why they told you "no" also.
kderby, FYI, Ron Scott is Retired USFS. He knows of what he speaks. :)
Very interesting topic fellows. :)
Don't understand why they can't sell some of the logs. Maybe if they did they would not have so many forest fires. They don't seem to mind a bunch of cows stomping around which would seem to do more harm to the forest than removing a few dead or fallen logs.
New York State seems to have no trouble selling wood to indiviuals. Before I owned my own woods I went in with a few other guys on some cordwood on state land. We paid a set price per cord and the state forester marked the trees. They also flagged the boundaries of our sale area. Each tree was marked with two lines of paint and you had to cut between the paint marks. The forester came by once while we were working to make sure we were following the rules and may have come at other times also.
Seems as though if the State of NY can handle selling wood to the little guy the feds should be able also. I think DanG's idea would be a good way for them to sell some.
I don't think you will get anywhere with the FS on this issue. Accountability is a big issue as is administration costs with the FS. There are many legitimate reasons for their reluctance to sell one dead tree. As you can imagine a line has to be drawn somewhere and it is very difficult for them to give away or sell a publicly owned resource given the lawsuits and accusations that many preservationists have used to stop the harvest of trees on Federal land. The volumes of paperwork required and the mandate for competitive bidding for all extracted resources has their hands tied.
It is a shame, but I don't believe anyone will change this. Communities have been allowed to whither or die away as a result of stopping the harvest of trees on USFS lands, and the collective voices of reason in these communities could not change that (If you have any doubts, visit Libby Montana, Elk City Idaho, St. Maries Idaho, Ione Washington, Eureka Montana, Republic Washington). I am afraid that between the Sierra club, Earth-first!, Patagonia clothing advertisements, and the misperceptions of the uninformed public, and the requirements of the GAO; the endangered spieces act, NEPA, etc., the USFS is no longer in the business of managing trees for people to utilize, period.
The real situation. A good explanation as to why the sale and public use of timber differs greatly between State and Federal forest lands.
Quote from: extrapolate85 on July 11, 2006, 10:50:36 PM
I don't think you will get anywhere with the FS on this issue.
It is a shame, but I don't believe anyone will change this.
Quote from: Ron Scott on July 12, 2006, 08:38:38 AM
The real situation.
I know those of you that are close to this issue are frustrated by the lack of ability of the USFS to manage our nations forests. I recognize that the politicians are primarily to blame for allowing this situation to exist. However the reason it continues to exist is because the only people that our congressmen hear from regularly are the special interest groups.
I hope that your frustrations do not mean that you have given up and we should not continue to object to this continued mismanagement.
The situation has improved somewhat as a result of the "healthy forest act" and the USFS has been offering a little more wood for sale. However there is obviously a long way to go and in many places there are not any buyers left nor markets for the wood.
Please do not give up the battle because of past frustrations. Raise your voice when you see a policy like that should be changed. That is the only way it will be changed.
Region 8 of the USFS has done very well in getting salvage wood prepared for market in the Katrina disaster areas, but it took the interest of the local people and Congress to allow them to move forward without "tons" of restrictions and NEPA documentation.
Out in our area I believe it is also a water quality issue on State and Federal sales. They want specific species taken, some snags and islands for wildlife and everything else on the ground to rot and hold moisture. Enormous amount of firewood or pulp lost but I guess I can kind of understand the logic.
Thank you all, for your perspectives 8) 8) 8)
I especially want to thank Swampdonkey whom I think is on to something. The agency people get paid regardless of answering yes or no to a request to purchase trees. It is easier to say no. Some "old school" types would genuinely like to do it but are hamstrung by others and increasingly bitter. I do not know how to change that. I do see it regularly.
Again, I was raised USFS. I have training, a career and a passion for natural resources. I understand the need for wildlife snags and slope stability. I am still upset by the guilty until proven innocent attitude and the double speak of "renewable resource", "caring for the land and serving the people", and "sustaining rural economies." I do have other fish to fry and this is not putting me out of business. I wish I had the capacity buy a few trees from the millions of acres of public land where I live. It would be a valuable tool in my tool box.
I wanted to put this out to each of you and see if I was missing something. Thanks for your time. I will write my congressman. I can read his letter explaining how challenging things are for USFS and asking me to understand that the answer at this time is NO!!! ;D ;D ;D Please trust that I am not cynical yet, give me time. ;) ::) ::) ::)
Also, I should mention that this situation is enough of an issue locally that we have a candidiate running for county office on a platform of "get the USFS off its A$$. He is not likely to win but he is getting some exposure. We are also collectively talking about a "Boston Tea Party". We would go to the woods with church members, children and old folks do some "fuels reduction." We will haul home some logs and donate the milled lumber and firewood to charity. We are looking forward to the news coverage showing US Marshalls hauling off the Reverend Malloy, white collar and all. Yes, we feel that discouraged. Perhaps some of you will come visit me in prison?
Thanks again,
KD
I wouldn't put down the grass roots thing quite yet. Here in Pennsylvania, we managed to get rid of about 50 incumbents due to grass roots efforts. 8) And that was just the primary. More to come in November.
It was all done through grass roots. Talk shows, letters to the editor, and the Internet is how things were turned around. An arrogant bureaucracy really helped our side.
I put up small sales all the time for the state. The problem is making it worth our time and and the need to put it out for competitive bidding. If I negotiate a price on a single tree or even a truck load for you and then the guy down the road comes in and complains that he wanted them and would have paid more, then how do I maintain credibility. Then an advocacy group hears that I cut a "sweetheart" deal on a timbersale with you and I sold timber at below market rates since the other guy would have paid more.
In order to put out a small sale I have to spend very little extra time on it to make it pay. I still have to scale it or cruise it, maybe post boundaries, write the contract, complete the appraisal, submit a notification, get a copy of your insurance (minimum of $500,000 liability), a certified check and then administrate the contract, and submit more paperwork to close out the contract when you are finished. When all these cost are accounted for we could very well lose money and then the advocacy groups have another headline about below cost timbersales. Most of my small sales are about break-even to a slight profit since part of the decision to sell the timber is if we get some sort of stewardship benefit as a result.
The USFS has to deal with all that and file NEPA documents. One way they get around some of the BS is declaring the trees a safety hazard. They can put out small roadside hazard reduction sales with much less paperwork. You still may need to be bonded and will have to have insurance, I think they are at $1,000,000 liability but they may have changed it to $2,000,000.
you guys are goin about it all wrong. You need to get a fuelwood permit (if they offer them in your area). The last time I had one it cost about twenty bucks and allows the holder to take dead standing and downed timber from the Nat'l forest from which it was issued. Haven't had one in a couple of years, but that's what all the rustic furniture makers around here use to gather their wood.
Interesting conversation, this. As a real life District Ranger I'm gonn'a try and give you my perspective on why or why not we in the Forest Service do certain things. First, location. Back in the day when timber was king in Region 6 (Washington & Oregon) it was no problem to sell folks individual logs - whether hazard or no. Then came the spotted owl and all the social diatribe over ruining the environment thereby gutting the "multiple use" portion of managing land for the people. I think you all may be putting too much blame on Congress. Congress serves at the discretion of the citizens meaning the squeakiest wheel gets the grease. I am beginning to see a paradigm shift back toward "level" the mix of protecting the environment and cutting (gasp!) trees, now we just call it fuels management.
Other Regions view cutting individual trees a little differently – whether hazards or no. Here in Region 2 (Colorado specifically) the Forest Service done such an outstanding job running all the major sawmill out of the State – save one, that we are now trying to coax industries back into the mix. We are making small gains but have a long way to go. So, here I jump at the chance of selling an individual log for a use.
Enter NEPA. Here we have a system of Decision making tools that have been so convoluted by the Courts as to hog tie common sense. We had one project that took over 6 years and by my guess $350,000 in planning to get into the works. Appealed three times, remanded back to us twice, but we learned real good. The next one was a CE (Categorical Exclusion) set up for small projects. We were Appealed – first one in this Region and I believe the first one in the Nation, but we sailed through and are implementing that program now.
As a District Ranger please understand we get a little gun shy at times because we are what's called Line Officers. We are the lowest ones on the totem pole who can be held legally accountable for our Decisions and our actions. We are where the buck stops, no matter who on the District committed the "sin".
Bottom Line; Call it risk management, call it covering your butt, the question of why can't I buy that log is a very good one. You deserve an answer, just be aware most of the folks like me have to run through a ridiculous list of hoopla before we can scratch our butts......
Good to hear from someone on the "firing line". Our Baldwin/White Cloud District Ranger, Les Russell, on the Huron-Manistee NF came from the Leadville District some time ago. I've been their a few times myself.
Go Rocky Ranger 8) 8) 8) 8) I am glad you are here!
I do understand the complexity you are faced with. I want the rest of the world to be as disgusted with the demolition of "common sense" as you and your staff are.
In all of my dealings with USFS I have been most kind to the Line Officers. Sure, I get disgusted and even angry. I do not place my anger upon you. You have to work to balance the management of the public owned resource placed in your care. I expect you to accomplish that balance and fight imbalance aggresively. I expect that is what you are paid to do. I get critical when I think you are getting paid and not balancing thing well. The "ridiculus list of hoopla required before you can scratch your butts..." is an accurate description and I want you to lead, follow or get out of the way as I fight it.
Thanks again for your work!
Sincerely,
KD
Here is a tip that you may find useful:
I know for a fact that there are logs placed in our county landfill every day. I want the logs.
I started off by going to the local offices of the EPA and the county health department. I explained that I have a sawmill and I dont cut down trees, but I felt it was an environmental disaster for the landfill to be filling up with valuable resources and I wanted a permit to be an environmental recycler for logs placed in the landfill. (This sort of caught them off guard as they were expecting me to want to buy the logs). I didnt offer to buy the logs, but offered to remove them for free and recycle them into useful wood products.
I got the approval of the local EPA offices and even a knod of approval from them as I explained that I was trying my best to keep logs out of the landfills and recycle the trees into something useful. I also got the approval of the County health department as they are affiliated with the EPA. I also got approval from the County head of the Landfill as trees are big, landfill space is limited, and they have a mandate to recycle as much as possible from the landfill.
I havent got any logs from them yet as they say that most logs are cut into firewood size chunks and not suitable for sawlogs, but the approvals are in place for me to do so.
I figure if you cant fight the environmentalists, the best thing is to use their rhetoric for your own purposes.
GREAT post by Rocky Ranger smiley_clapping smiley_clapping smiley_clapping
Good to hear from you again Rocky Ranger. I hope you have made some progress in your marketing and utilization efforts.
I think you are being too kind to our Congress. I just saw where the overall approval rating for Congress is lower than Pres Bush's. ::)
Nice job Getoverit. Congrats on your success. Now dont forget to post some pics of those logs when you get them.
Thanks for the post Rocky Ranger. Its always nice to hear different angle of a situation.
A local forester had an observation I want to share.
He says, "The US Forest Service and the forest resources in its charge are being managed by courts, public opinion and emotion."
He is disgusted by the position that professional foresters are not allowed to access and address forest health and production issues. The "screens" in place effectively cripple competent and concerned land managers. He used the analogy that if you had to ask public opinion and not a surgeon, the out come of your medical condition might not be what you had hoped.
This is a choice that the USFS has made. Lack of leadership is a huge part of this. The agency has become lost. I do not know the outcome but I do know it is broken. The largest majority of the agency personnel understand it is broken. (There is a dirty little secret inside the agency. A significant portion of the employees are happy to not have any timber sold. They still get paid just as much to say "no" as to say "yes".) For the people with a managerial work ethic, they have learned not to be a loose cannon on a rudderless ship. It is a tough place to work and has been for a while.
I started this thread because I wanted to hear from people in areas not owned in the majority by USFS. The effect they have here is profound because USFS manages millions of acres. They talk about supporting the rural economy and managing a renewable resource while "Caring for the land and serving the people. They are accomplishing little of either. I continue to be deeply distressed by the complete inability or refusal to sell a few trees. If I was looking to demolish vast tracts of prime timber, my concern would be baseless. I am just asking to buy a few blown down fir or bug killed pine. The answer is "No." (I got a call this week from a forest service employee who wants to build a log cabin and the USFS people in the local office told him to call me. They couldn't sell him any logs.)
For as long as they are locked in this pathetic spiral of looking busy while the "renewable resource" is untouchable I will push and cajole. If you get a chance, say something nice to a USFS employee. Then, wonder if the agency can redeem itself. I wonder if USFS should just be melded into another natural resource agency. At least then the National Park and Forest Service would be honest within its mandate and its actions.
Cheers to all.
KD
Your local forester is right, in a small nutshell. These courts are crippling many good decisions attempted by caring people in many different avenues, not just the US National Forests.
However, your complaint or frustration that they should sell you a few trees is much bigger and more complicated than just your analysis of the situation. If the employees could get the US timber for their own use, then it would be chaos in short order. Trees would suddenly show up 'dead' and in need of removal. Same would go for an employee's friends who want trees. Then you, a non employee and a 'non-friend' of an employee would still be on the short end - without a snow-balls chance to get the few trees you want.
Bottom line, are some very strict rules are in place because of abuse over the years, as to what procedures must be followed to get dead trees, used equipment, surplus equipment, etc from the Gov't. It's much deeper than you realize, but the end result certainly does seem rediculous on first blush. Don't lose any sleep over it.
I agree with beenthere. The court system is a problem for many things, not just the USFS.
The post I made earlier in this thread was not meant to try to hijack the thread, but as a suggestion for trying a different approach to getting what you desire, possibly from the USFS. You never know until you try?
Excellent discussions and insights on this thread. We don't have the USFS to deal with... only the BCFS. The British Columbia Forest Service. Different country - same attitude.
Many of the same ideas and attitudes though apply to both parties. USFS is possibly a bit more tree huggy due to your court/environmental processes. The BCFS here basically funnels fibre into the large corporations. The big boys control over 85% of our fibre basket. Basically, about 7 companies control the wood and the BCFS "works" with and for them. Little people like me get the NO, NO, NO response at the main counter of the Forest Service. I get around it partially by buying a lot of my product from sawmillers who are larger than me. They too have trouble with acquiring fibre but we seem to stumble along. Alliances are important. Hard to run a business when you have to compete with Canfor for logs.
So, you have to play the cracks here and stay small enough to stay off the radar screen. Wish it wasn't like this but that's the reality.
Hey Getoverit,
I appreciate your perspective. I am giving it some thought. there is mention of stewardship agreements and I am watching the USFS andBLM develop the concept.
I had the thought today that this culture is similar to the reclusive Eccentric Howard Hughs. Wonderfully full of potential. Lots to offer. Hung up on dirty finger nails and the potential for unkempt results. We want every thing safe, balanced and clean. From meat wrapped in plastic to the children not allowed to play out of doors. Who am I to advocate an elk carcass in the shed or a child playing in a mud puddle full of tadpoles?
Timber sales always look like a mess to the untrained eye. The broken branches and disturbed soil jump out at you. With experience we learn that the exposed soils is actually a seed bed for a new generation. The broken branch is mulch.
As a culture we are correct to recognize that we can not cut all the trees they ask for all the time. How or when do we also learn that on a 1.2 million acre National Forest, There is enough productivity to allow a local rancher to cut some corral poles.
There needs to be a movement that is not bassakwards. A "Movement" that recognizes that it is ok to manually turn soil in a garden if you do not have a name brand roto-tiller imported from overseas. This applies to forestry because our ability to interact with and harvest the fundamental forest product...a tree, is at risk. Any of us with experience in the wood knows that you can create a tree recovery event and leave the area looking like a city park. The economics of that recovery effort you are soon out of business. That is not an argument for rape and run forestry it is an argument for balance. The balance requires leadership and the USFS has lost its focus on balance and leadership in my esteemed and now repetitive opinion.
Thank you again for listening. I will quiet down now and stick to my knitting. Plenty to do even if the opportunity that USFS lands present is not available to me.
regards,
KD
Hey kderby,
I also live in an area that is about 90% USFS land. Small sales are pretty easy to come by in my area, but I have never got a straight answer to the question you originally asked. Which the way I undersood it was, "what about wind fall and deadfall trees?" Until I get an answer this is what I will continue to do. I cut all of my mantels, flooring, shelving, doorway beams, or whatever short stock I need, from these downed trees. Then I use personal fuelwood load tags. As long as everything is cut under 6' I am within the law. I have loaded 6 foot logs, and 6 foot demesional lumber. I have never been stopped or questioned. I would rather take this material in 16 footers, but I would still need to cut stuff short for some of the custom work I do. Ask about the cull of some of the big sales. sometimes good logs get left behind as cull for one reason or another, like not being able to get more than a 1/4 of a load. These logs have already been paid for by someone else and many times the larger looging outfits will let you take these logs.
Quote from: solodan on July 23, 2006, 02:32:51 PM
Ask about the cull of some of the big sales. sometimes good logs get left behind as cull for one reason or another, like not being able to get more than a 1/4 of a load. These logs have already been paid for by someone else and many times the larger looging outfits will let you take these logs.
Probably still need some form of permit, otherwise who'd know of the source when your passing through USFS lands.
SwampDonkey,
Either you can get load tags from the outfit that bought the sale, or sometimes the USFS willl just give you load tags.
You can buy logs off service contracts that have embedded timber sales on USFS sales in region 5 and maybe region 6 too. The logger gets the service contract (defensible fuel profile zone.. say) and buys the estimated wood fiber at a lump sum of $.75 per 100 cubic feet. They can sell to whoever they want as long as the logs are not exported. The logger will supply the USFS load ticket and the logs will be branded and painted according to the sale contract specs. Logs hauled in Oregon require four readable brands to be legal. No load tickets are legally required however most sale contracts , public and private, require them.
The stewardship contracts might be a good source for logs, see who gets them and if it is not a big company you might have a good chance of purchasing logs. The big outfits that usually get them have quite a bit of bureaucracy so selling a few logs to an individual is pretty much impossible. It would cost them more to try to account for the sale than the logs are worth. I have sold one large firm a small pulp sale and getting a check issued was quite a process.
smiley_turkey_dancing
Well here I am again. I went to look at a "Timber Sale." Some time back I went to the two local National Forests (Ochoco and Malheur). They cover millions of acres of public land. I asked to legitimately buy a single blown down pine tree. I was told "No" in a courteous manner by each National Forest. ;D They suggested I look at upcoming sales like this one. Fair enough and I have purchased sales similar to this in the past.
Well, this was at the sorry end of defining a timber sale. Few needles left on the dry and rotten trees. The bark had slipped on most. The two green trees in the sale had severe frost cracks, sweep and forked tops.
I am not sure if I am insulted or still just sad. No one who cared about natural resources would advise an owner of millions of acres to refuse to sell even one tree. Or reccomend that they allow the forest to become dangerously over stocked with stressed, dead and dying trees. Trying to market trees after they are rotten, what type of management is that? I am surrounded by it and I feel both sad and insulted.
Usually I tell my self if I want something to "improve" I should go home and look in a mirror. That keeps me minding my own business. But these are the nations forests. I do not want to join the polarized forces that mine wilderness or hug every bush. I do wish that reasoned leadership would erupt spontaneously somewhere in the USFS and that it would be supported by the courts and administration. Now I shall, for a while, go mind my own business.
Cheers from Kendall