Re: Re: Re: THE HISTORY OF DEFORESTATION

["Ken Hanly" <khanly@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

No the geography is quite different. I am talking about areas that were
mostly native grasses relatively flat or gently rolling hills. The tree
species that settlement let spread are different as well mostly quick
growing, poplar types. What is called white poplar here or quaking aspen and
black poplar. However there are quite a few planted spruce and some other
deciduous trees such as Manitoba maple and ash. I was thinking of rivers as
firebreaks but it is possible that fires jumped them often especially in
late summer when water levels are low. The tree growth I am talking about is
less forest than "woodlots" areas that either were not broken after
settlement, left as pasture with trees, or marginal land let go back to
pasture and woodlot. But before settlement as I mentioned much of the land
was native grassland with some trees in river valleys and some other
specific areas. But the plains were periodically ravaged by fire. Usually
most of the deciduous trees would be burned down and these woodlot areas
could not establish themselves as they could after grid roads of settlement
provided fire breaks.
        Even in the already existing forests in the northern shield--outside
settled agricultural areas- the vast majority of trees are completely
destroyed by fire and this would include the conifer such as different types
of spruce. I gather from the other post I sent that some types of pines
survive or even require fire but I do not think that they are native to this
particular area although shield species may be different further south in
the south part of Northern Ontario.
      The tree growth spread by settlement is not associated with any great
economic boom. In the early days it no doubt provided a source of fuel and
still does but to a limited extent. Of course some of this woodlot was
subsequently cleared too in many areas- to be used to grow grain or forage
crops. My point is that settlement does not necessarily mean deforestation
that some woodlands are a human artifact produced by pioneers.


Cheers, Ken Hanly

----- Original Message -----
From: Tim Bousquet <chicoexaminer@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 1:12 AM
>Subject: [PEN-L:13929] Re: Re: THE HISTORY OF DEFORESTATION


> Ken,
>
> I'm not understanding the geography of your area.
>
> Here, in northern California, the forested areas are
> up on the Sierra, while the valley floor was
> grassland. In between is manzanita bushes, high deer
> concentration.
>
> The sugar pine forest of the eastern Sierra around
> Chico was completely clearcut between 1873 and about
> 1901. In 1877 a 40-mile long flume was built down the
> mountain, connecting the sawmills around the sugarpine
> forests with Chico, which became the lumbering center
> of northern California. The flume caused an economic
> boom that year--1877-- and caused the population of
> Chico to swell to about 7,000, but the flume
> fundamentally changed the lumber industry such that an
> oversupply depressed prices, and there was a boom/bust
> cycle every few years. Chico population dropped down
> to about 3,000 until well into the 20th century.
>
> (It's beside the point, but the flume company brought
> Chinese workers to work the sash and door factory
> associated with their flume, and the local white
> population took umbrage, eventually forming a secret
> society that was dedicated to murdering them outright.
> The Chico mass murders of 1877 so revolted eastern
> society that anti-Chinese sentiment in Congress was
> off-set for a while, and the anti-immigration mesures
> were probably set a decade or two back.)
>
> The forested areas east of town eventually were bought
> by the Diamond Match company, which still maintains a
> large tree farm in the area.
>
> I have a different take on the fire situation. Maybe
> the canyons are steeper here, but creeks have never
> served as a firebreak, fire just jumps right over
> them. During the Depression a roadway called
> "Ponderosa Way" was cut just about right at the area
> where the manzanita land meets the forests-- the
> purpose of the road was to serve as a firebreak. This
> road stretches from Sacramento all the way to Mount
> Shasta--maybe 200 miles. It's not that the fire would
> run up the hill and just stop at the road, but rather
> that the road allowed access for CCC fire crews, which
> could back burn so that the fire couldn't move further
> up into the forest. I assume that this was a taxpayer
> financed protection of corporate-owned tree farms up
> the ridge.
>
> Incidentally, I've found quite a few accounts from the
> 1860s when the Yahi and Yana--really the only two
> Indian nations resisting white encroachment-- set fire
> to the grasslands and manzanita lands of the lower
> foothills, with the expressed purpose of destroying
> cattle grazing opportunities for the whites. But those
> fires never caused any real damage to the forest
> further up.
>
> In short, there's far less forest around these parts
> than before colonization, or rather "settlement," as
> it's called here. As far as I can determine, there
> isn't any single tree at all in this area that's more
> than 130 years old, with two exceptions: a stand in
> the town limits of Paradise, which sits along a
> stretch of the Feather River that was too steep to log
> until helicopters were introduced last year (up until
> then I had seen logging trucks carrying thirty or
> forty logs; last year for the first time I saw I truck
> carrying a single thirty-foot diameter tree). The
> second exception was up in Deer Creek Canyon, in a
> roadless area of the national forest; thanks to the
> Clinton "salvage-logging" rider, however, that is now
> gone.
>
> I don't know if this speaks to your observation.
>
> tim
>
>
> --- Ken Hanly <khanly@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > My understanding is though that in Western Canada
> > settlement had the result
> > of increasing not decreasing forested areas in many
> > areas. Many wooded areas
> > were burned in periodic grassfires on the plainsm
> > and before settlement only
> > natural barries such as streams stopped the fires.
> > With settlement there
> > were section roads that acted as firebreaks and this
> > meant that many
> > woodlots grew up in areas that previously did not
> > support forests. Actually
> > around here marginal grain land is being returned to
> > pasture and woodlot.
> > Louis will be glad to know that even the buffalo is
> > making a comeback. Just
> > five miles down the road the buffalo roam on a
> > couple of sections. Of course
> > an electric fence confines their movements and they
> > are destined to be
> > buffaloburgers. Maybe not what Louis had in mind.
> > Treed areas coexist with
> > the pasture in the buffalo compound.
> >  Also, deforestation may eventually result in
> > reforestation. Forest fires
> > clear very large areas just as much as clear
> > cutting. The forests eventually
> > regenerate through a progressive series of plant and
> > tree species. Traveling
> > through a newly burned out area is just as much or
> > more a scene of
> > devastation as seeing a clear cut area but over time
> > shrubs appear certain
> > species such as birch and as in time the original
> > type of cover..
> >
> >
> >
> > Cheers, Ken Hanly
> >
> > Mark Jones wrote:
> > . A similar process of
> > the pioneer hacking out a life for himself and
> > family in the forest occurred
> > in Canada, New Zealand, South Africa and Australia.
> > In Aus-tralia, for
> > example, nearly 400,000 sq km of the southeastern
> > forests and sparse
> > woodland were cleared by the early twentieth
> > century.
> >
>
>
> =====
> Subscribe to ChicoLeft by emailing
> ChicoLeft-subscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ChicoLeft
>
> Subscribe to the Chico Examiner for only $30 annually or $20 for six
months. Mail cash or check payabe to "Tim Bousquet" to POBox 4627, Chico CA
95927
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
> http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
>