The exception Geoff is that the commercial loggers aren't going to haul up
the slope if they even cut the sub merchantable timber. I can see where a
poorly written or administered contract can actually increase the fuel
loading in the shorterm.
Customary practice in SW Oregon 20 years ago wasn't to burn in the
"commercial thinnings".

"Geoff Kegerreis" wrote in message
...
Now this is a pretty ignorant statement. It's about the equivalent of
saying:
"Driving automobiles does little to get people more quickly to their
destination

than walking."

Duh... Decrease fuel load, decrease wildfire risk. It's pretty much a
no-brainer.
There are obviously too many people with more money than brains that
continue
to fund this sorry psuedo-science.

Later,
Geoff Kegerreis

P.S. When are you going to quit being such a puss and use your real name?

Aozotorp wrote:

http://ens-news.com/ens/jun2003/2003...09.asp#anchor2

Forest Thinning Does Little to Stop Wildfires

SANTA FE, New Mexico, June 11, 2003 (ENS) - There is little scientific
information to guide forest managers when thinning forests to reduce
wildlife risk, according to a new study by the Southwest Community
Forestry
Research Center in Santa Fe. The Southwest center is one of four
regional
stations of the National Community Forestry Center.
"Modifying Wildfire Behavior - the Effectiveness of Fuel Treatments"
looked
at more than 250 of the most current scientific studies that evaluate
three
types of fuel treatment in relation to fire behavior in western
forests -
prescribed fire, mechanical thinning, and a combination of thinning and
burning.

The authors surveyed the literature to evaluate recent suggestions by
policy
makers that commercial logging can be used to treat dense forest fuels.

"Although the assertion is frequently made that reducing tree density
can
reduce wildfire hazard, the scientific literature provides tenuous
support
for this hypothesis," the study concludes.

"This review indicates that the specifics of how prescriptions are to be
carried out and the effectiveness of these treatments in changing
wildfire
behavior are not supported by a significant consensus of scientific
research
at this point in time," the study states.

Henry Carey, one of the authors of the study, said, "The literature
shows
that factors other than tree density, such as surface vegetation and the
distance from the ground to the tree crown, play a profound role in the
spread of fire."

The study found substantial evidence that supports the effectiveness of
prescribed fire as a fuel treatment. "The specifics of how thinning
treatments are to be used and their relative effectiveness in changing
wildfire behavior are not supported by a significant consensus of
scientific
research at this point in time," Carey said.

The study also surveyed the scientific literature to evaluate recent
suggestions by policy makers that commercial logging can be used to
treat
forest fuels.

"We found that the proposal that commercial logging can reduce the
incidence
of canopy fire was untested in the scientific literature," said Carey.
"Commercial logging, with its focus on large diameter trees, does not
remove
the ladder fuels that contribute to fire spread."

The report suggested more systematic field research to provide a sound
scientific basis for evaluating and designing fuel reduction treatments
and
that the idea that mechanical thinning, or a combination of thinning and
prescribed fire, reduces the incidence of catastrophic fire should be
viewed
as a working hypothesis.

In 2000, the United States embarked on an emergency $1.6 billion program
to
reduce fuels on millions of acres, the report states, and the Western
Governors Association calls for sustaining this level of investment over
the
next 10 years. The study calls for a comparable investment in primary
and
applied research to provide a credible scientific basis for the plan.

Read the report at: http://www.theforesttrust.org/.