Controlled Burns

The problem is that the government is hamstring by environmental tree hugging knuckleheads.

No logging allowed, no roads can be put in to get to the logging areas, and the restoration required when a logging company does eventually fight it's way through the public input and 'environmental' groups input is too costly to make any of it worth it.

Here's a hint to the 'environmentalists'. You're harming the environment. There's no such thing as 'untouched by man' anymore. We touched it. We threw it off balance already. Now we have to tend it.

Mtn Gramma wrote:

Seriously, it's time that we begin to harvest trees off of the government lands.

I agree completely.

A few years ago, friends of ours who live near the end of Pleasant Park had the forestry service come in to survey the area and give guidance on thinning trees. The friends then worked out an agreement with a logging company (reduced fee, loggers keep the wood, remove the slash, etc), had the work done with minimal disruption to the property (a couple 100 acres I believe). It can be done if the government is willing to work with the private sector.

Agree, family did it on a parcel in south park.

The red tape for any logger working with the government on federal land would be a nightmare. Most of it will burn through human error or lightning strikes before they get approval.

But have no fear if the public makes a big enough stink, considering this is an election year, Obuma will probably issue an executive order bypassing all red tape whatsoever.

Nobody that matters wrote: No logging allowed, no roads can be put in to get to the logging areas, and the restoration required when a logging company does eventually fight it's way through the public input and 'environmental' groups input is too costly to make any of it worth it.

Here's a hint to the 'environmentalists'. You're harming the environment. There's no such thing as 'untouched by man' anymore. We touched it. We threw it off balance already. Now we have to tend it.

EXACTLY!

It would literally take 10 years to get a logging permit in the Pike National Forest.

With nothing to compare that time frame with, it means nothing.

How long does it take to get everything approved for a ski area in the national forest?

JSG wrote: With nothing to compare that time frame with, it means nothing.

How long does it take to get everything approved for a ski area in the national forest?

How about this comparison.... in 10 years.....there has been three major fires in parts of the overgrown Pike National Forest.

residenttroll wrote: In 10 years.....there has been three major fires in parts of the overgrown Pike National Forest.

What three major fires are those? The Hayman was 10 years ago. That's one. What major fires have occurred since in the Pike National Forest?

The Snaking fire was in April of 2002.

And the THIRD fire was the Hi Meadow Fire,about the same time frame......had we still been in Colorado,we would have been evac. for
the Hi Meadow....because we lived at the base of Mt. Bailey. Nature's method of restoring,reseeding,refreshing it's forest is thru FIRE,
and that process has been circumvented for many decades now. We have a VERY unhealthy forest that we live in,play in,retreat to
for solitude and serenity. Our needing to control Nature is our downfall......IF we do not revisit,rethink our process,we will CONTINUE
to experience devastating destruction and death.JMO

The Hi Meadow Fire was in 2000. 12 years ago.

So basically the "three major fires in 10 years" were three major fires 10 years ago . None since then.

That's your argument?