Prepare to be Triggered

[BigHornRam]

This article has something for everyone to get worked up over.

Reduction in elk cover in proposed Little Belt logging project not a concern for FWP

An overpopulation of elk north of White Sulphur Springs is being cited by the Helena-Lewis and Clark National Forest as one reason for allowing a reduction in elk hiding cover

billingsgazette.com

 

[Addicting]

I’m not familiar with the area. I read the article and am not worked up. They are doing some logging and prescribed burns, things that elk love the next year. What am I missing?

 

[BuzzH]

Who cares, Montana treats elk and knapweed the same.

Should help get those pesky elk within objective, cut some trees for RY, what's not to like?

 

[BigHornRam]

I’m not familiar with the area. I read the article and am not worked up. They are doing some logging and prescribed burns, things that elk love the next year. What am I missing?

The litigation factor should work you up then.

 

[Deleted member 38069]

O/U 100 comments?

 

[Deleted member 28227]

This article has something for everyone to get worked up over.

Reduction in elk cover in proposed Little Belt logging project not a concern for FWP

An overpopulation of elk north of White Sulphur Springs is being cited by the Helena-Lewis and Clark National Forest as one reason for allowing a reduction in elk hiding cover

billingsgazette.com

wow no kidding...

 

[Doublecluck]

Am I the only one that read the article and thought.. hmmm! I know what buzz is going to say... and then he did..

 

[El Jason]

Am I only the only that read the article and thought.. hmmm! I know what buzz is going to say... and then he did..

He’s right.

 

[Addicting]

The litigation factor should work you up then.

Not really, from what I’ve seen since I’ve been a member here they have been suing about timber for decades. Why would this be any different. Wasn’t it two years ago that half of region 1 and 2 was on fire? A 20,600 acre project is a drop in the bucket compared to what was lost in those fires.

I guess I am 1500 miles removed from it to understand why that is a bad thing.

 

[Doublecluck]

He’s right.

Not saying he isn’t..

 

[thusby]

Has National Forest ever managed their timber correctly? Addicting is right, we are one dry year from an Australia situation.

 

[Deleted member 18333]

Has National Forest ever managed our timber correctly? Addicting is right, we are one dry year from an Australia situation.

Fixed that for you.

Define correctly? Should be easy to come up with a definition that is completely agreeable by every person, org, group, user, owner, etc. that has a vested interest in Nat. Forest lands.

 

[thusby]

That sums it up pretty nicely.

 

[BigHornRam]

Not really, from what I’ve seen since I’ve been a member here they have been suing about timber for decades. Why would this be any different. Wasn’t it two years ago that half of region 1 and 2 was on fire? A 20,600 acre project is a drop in the bucket compared to what was lost in those fires.

I guess I am 1500 miles removed from it to understand why that is a bad thing.

I'm not surprised that the environmentalists oppose the logging. I am surprised that they now are opposed to controlled burning.

"What they aren’t going to log they are going to burn,” said Sara Johnson of Native Ecosystems Research, a group that frequently challenges forest projects. “It’s kind of a shocking proposal.”

The Forest Service did a poor job rolling out this proposal, and I don't see this project having a snowball's chance in hell in moving forward from here.

Managing our public lands continues to get more challenging and divisive as we go forward.

 

[warmer]

OVER for $50

 

[Nameless Range]

I like the idea of the Federally Managed lands being managed in such a way that collaboration and input from state agencies comes together on projects. The Elkhorns Wildlife Management Unit comes to mind. That said, one obvious point to make is that an HD being over objective doesn't mean that there are too many elk on the forested and public parts of the HD. I can think of more than a couple HDs that are over objective, but almost no elk exist on the forested and public portions of those HDs. Reducing elk security standards could further exacerbate the issue of elk not being on public lands in those places, especially during hunting season. Add to that, on HuntTalk and I think across the state, we all know that an HD being "over objective" does not in any way mean there are too many elk in that area, and is certainly not a argument that should be leveraged in favor of controversial projects.

Elk security standards are an interesting thing, as a large wildfire can make them a somewhat moot point after the fact. Just look at all the burned areas Big Fin hunts, and how there isn't a bunch of security for those elk from glass. All this becomes more complicated because there are so many trees on public land that probably were not historically there, and it can be to the detriment of grazing critters like elk. So on one hand we need to make public lands more appealing to elk, but on the other that might compromise their security. Complicated for sure.

 

[BigHornRam]

Link within the above link.

Forest signs off on Castle Mountains 'restoration project'

Logging and prescribed fires across 22,000 acres in the Castle Mountains has been approved by the Helena-Lewis and Clark National Forest supervisor.

billingsgazette.com

8 years to put this project together.

 

[BuzzH]

All this becomes more complicated because there are so many trees on public land that probably were not historically there, and it can be to the detriment of grazing critters like elk. So on one hand we need to make public lands more appealing to elk, but on the other that might compromise their security. Complicated for sure.

Those 2 things don't need to conflict if you don't beat on elk for 11-26 weeks a year...

The places I hunt elk in Wyoming, on public lands, are wayyyyyyy more open than most all of Western Montana. The elk live, thrive, and use the hell out of public land here. Why? Maybe because we have a month long archery season, 2 weeks of no hunting at all, then 14 day rifle seasons.

Compare that to Montana's 6 week archery season, clear into October, then a 3 day break before youth deer season, then immediately follow that up with 5 weeks of constant rifle pressure.

Outside of fortified bunkers, I don't know that elk in Montana can find any secure areas on public land that aren't "compromised"....