1940s movie of logging and milling redwoods

  • Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.

    We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.

    We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil.

mar13

Minister of Fire
Nov 5, 2018
506
California redwood coast
YouTube on logging ancient redwoods in the 1940s

It talks up about the quality of (old growth) redwood, but the lumber from the younger trees isn't so great. It hurt to watch some of this, but a different time. The east coast and upper midwest had their giants, but no cameras to record their demise.

My yard has a couple giant stumps from these giants. You can still see where they put in the wedges for the platforms to cut them at about the 8 foot mark.
 
While it’s sad to see the giants go. It’s amazing the work we can do without all gear and technology we have now. Also, I didn’t see the osha safety man in that video lol.
 
Some trees just weren't meant to be cut down. 😢
I’m not disagreeing but some trees had to be cut also. The video opened with saying the trees need to be removed for train infrastructure. Also homes needed built. It’s sad to see them go but they weren’t wasted. I’m not saying it’s sad to see them go but it wasn’t like they were just clearing the brush for a new shopping mall.
 
Hm, homes and trains are needs humans have. Commerce is another. I don't see the difference. It's human living space taking away from nature. It's been like that for thousands of years. Though I am glad we have learned from mistakes and we better (though not perfectly) protect irreplaceable nature now.

The US national parks are a great, great thing. Not enough for ecological stability, but at least good in educating people about wilderness and its intrinsic value.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ericm979
I think about (or less than) 1% of redwood old growth remains uncut. Many of the remaining acres aren't big enough to be a functioning old growth habitat. ( I don't know the exact estimate, but I do recall an expert stating that point about the Head Waters forest which was bought by the govts from a Texas financier who was going to cut if not paid handsomely. Big protests 25 years ago over the threatened cutting. )

What would have been sustainable lumbering involved? Cutting 1/2000 of the ancient trees each year so that replacement equaled the lumbering?
 
I visited an area in Wisconsin that has some old growth white pines. Ooh, a whole 5 acres and one of the only remaining tracts. Seemed to me it was in Forest County or close by. I'm not really a tree hugger type, and think of trees kind of like just an old field of corn stalks - they are plants, with stems, just big and perineal. It was, however, a surreal experience. To hear very large birds nesting and roosting far up in the branches, yet too high up to be able to see them. And to hike the trails, where the trail meanders "around" downed tree trunks, where even when laying flat - were over our heads. It was unlike anyplace else I've been. Nearby the pastures are still littered with the stumps from the 30's, and there are piles of tin cans and tools left over from the CCC camps in the area. It was the depression, and the materials of choice still were wood, leather and iron. But I also think of things like the chestnut blight, or oak wilt, ash borer - things that very well could have decimated the redwoods. Then the cutting and lumbering would have been a rescue mission vs greed. Right now I'm "rescuing" old oaks here. If only they could talk - the things they've seen. There's money in the cordwood, but I'd much rather have the old behemoths standing where they were.
 
I think about (or less than) 1% of redwood old growth remains uncut. Many of the remaining acres aren't big enough to be a functioning old growth habitat. ( I don't know the exact estimate, but I do recall an expert stating that point about the Head Waters forest which was bought by the govts from a Texas financier who was going to cut if not paid handsomely. Big protests 25 years ago over the threatened cutting. )

What would have been sustainable lumbering involved? Cutting 1/2000 of the ancient trees each year so that replacement equaled the lumbering?

Pacific Lumber in Scotia was doing sustainable harvests on their lands. Their harvest plan was used as an example in HSU's forest management classes of how to do it right. Then they got bought by a hedge fund who logged nearly everything, raided the pension fund and bankrupt the company, putting a bunch of people out of work. Yay capitalism!

"functioning old growth" depends on the perspective. Some wildlife species need a large area of contiguous old growth, which we don't really have any more. Other species are ok with more intermixed age stands or even prefer that.
 
Muir woods is incredible. So glad i got to see it. The earth has enough humans in it. Like any species when there are too many they end up dieing from disease, famine or drowning in their own waste. Do we need more humans? Or do we need more fresh air, clean water, and non polluted lands?
 
  • Like
Reactions: stoveliker
Problem is we've gotten too smart in mitigating disease etc. for this natural selection to work.
 
Problem is we've gotten too smart in mitigating disease etc. for this natural selection to work.
Yeah i thought that too till 2 years ago.
Covid has taken out 1 million in the US.
That's 1 out of every 330 people.
Were not as smart or untouchable as we thought.
 
But that 1 million is not enough to change our influence on nature, our need (?) for space.
 
Thought game, Imagine your neighborhood with 1/2 the people gone. In a suburb like mine it would make little difference.
Now what if 9 out of 10 were gone? If food was plentiful it would be a bit strange but i'd still have a bunch of neighbors. It would be fine.
How far can you take this? What if 99 out of 100 were gone. Well i would not have as many friends, but it still would not even be considered "rural".
To be Rural probably about 975 per 1000 would have to be gone from my suburban area.

Makes me think we are pretty full, but in both neighborhoods i'm in in NJ and Utah, the houses keep getting squeezed in tighter and tighter.
 
But that 1 million is not enough to change our influence on nature, our need (?) for space.
Yes I agree, but it shows we are more vulnerable than we could have imagined a couple years ago. That being said we did find a solution with vaccines in a remarkably quick timeframe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stoveliker