72 Replies to “Proper Forest Management”

  1. “You there! How many soggy paper straws did you chew today? Are you trying to boil the planet? Chew more soggy paper straws, dammit!”

    If we cut down all the trees and turn them all into soggy paper straws and everybody chews 32,000 paper straws per day…..

  3. The first step in forest management in a non socialist jurisdiction is the security of tenure with private ownership being the most secure and with the ongoing inversion of apartheid in Canada, not even that is secure. The graphic describes intensive management but it is more complex than that and only happens on private forests as licensees on Crown or public forests fulfill minimal obligations due to the first step above. Canada, being the most feudal nation in the western world with 89% Crown owned trending to communist indigenous title, is targeted by NGOs and the UN for preservation given that the cost of propaganda/hysteria/lawfare campaigns sufficient to sway politicians is a small fraction of acquiring private land or government compensation for its taking. The other issue is lack of summer roads in the boreal forest enabling management and fire fighting.

    1. Re the lack of roads, much of the forested area of Canada just is too damned hard to access, much less manage.

      I worked four years in the bush in the Wawa and Thunder Bay areas for the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and my partner and I had to fly in many times to do our lake surveys. Sometimes we portaged.

      And everywhere we went there was nothing beyond but a seemingly endless sea of forest with no access except by float plane, if the lake was big enough.

      1. Some data re road networks:

        The United States possesses the world’s largest road network, totaling approximately 7,044,453 km (as of 2024/2025 data), which is significantly larger than Canada’s network of roughly 1,042,300 km.

      2. Some of the fires were in areas that could have been mitigated. As for the remote nature of some, yes, that’s going to happen.
        However, you bring up a good point: why doesn’t Canada have more road network? Why have you failed to build out your infrastructure?
        This isn’t just a problem re: forest fires, but also economic development. Your logistics networks are so piss poor that it works for us with regards to trade. And honestly, I’m not sure you guys have the money to build out at this point (it is more difficult for you in many areas than us).

        So of course we’re going to use this as a baseball bat to beat you with — why shouldn’t we?

        1. There isn’t enough money or the will, and the extensive Canadian Shield with its million of lakes (many still unnamed), marshes, beaver ponds and rivers is some of the toughest terrain to push roads through.

        2. “So of course we’re going to use this as a baseball bat to beat you with — why shouldn’t we?”

          Thank you encapsulating the current American mindset towards their allies. What happens to all of the Americans coming from overseas the next time you close your airspace?

          1. And thank you for encapsulating the current Canadian mindset.
            This is why you’re probably going to lose this trade war.

  4. My last design job was designing Timber Frame/Stick Hybrid Vacation homes for millionaires at a ski resort near Golden, B.C. There was an extensive “design bible” which detailed setback requirements and exterior materials to be used. The Resort did have an agreement with the Golden Fire Department but it was at least 40 minutes away. Therefore, all the side yard setbacks were 13′-0″ feet so 26′-0″ between houses. As well, only cedar and stone were to be used on the exterior and metal roofs were strongly recommended. The resort had an active debris clearance and thinning program in order to maintain the viability and quality of the Resort. I thought it was a very common sense approach.

  5. This is an unsolvable problem because the government would have to do something with existing resources.

  6. L – Whether by way of clear cut or by controlled burns or wildfires, the natural regrowth cycle supports a much larger population of deer, elk, moose and bear. By way of leased or owned forest, select cut forestry, Sweden produces about 10 times the yearly harvest of moose. Than does British Columbia.

    The provinces would have a venison friendly forest policy, if Gaia worshipers were not controlling resource management. Also, fed. Policy is to reduce meat consumption, firearms ownership and uncontrolled travel and widespread property ownership.

    An Independent Alberta and Saskatchewan, with a self-governing people, would out perform re- wealth per person and quality of life with a return to a trust society. We have nothing to lose but our chains and mind viruses and suicidal empathy.

    1. Sweden’s forests are 80% privately owned and Moose are likely owned by the property owners, IE a private resource on private land. Moose are a public resource in Canada regardless of land ownership, a commons.

      1. A friend showed me a picture of two moose hanging in his frend’s garage.
        I asked him how he got two moose tags.
        He responded that he was Metis so no tags needed.
        If this keeps up, no Moose for you.

      2. Years ago, Pukaskwa National Park admitted that there were more wolves outside the park than inside the park. The wolves followed the moose. The moose preferring the Domtar woodlands clearcut areas surrounding the park, where the new growth provided needed moose food, the old growth park, not as much.

  7. Still waiting for the ‘close your windows’ warning when they know heavy smoke is moving in. I’m not too sympathetic for the natives, but they have a legitimate complaint here.

  8. The biggest fires now are in the Northwest Territories, where forest management is near impossible due to the vastness, remoteness, and harshness of the climate. Even fighting the fires is near impossibe.

    I think that’s where some American politicians are getting confused. They don’t understand what “remote” really means.

    1. Killer…that’s a very poor dodge. Canada has had wildfires that weren’t out in remote areas that couldn’t have been mitigated. And they haven’t been very nice for your own citizens; it isn’t just us.
      We are not at all confused. We understand ‘remote’. We do realize that some are going to happen, but that isn’t a very good excuse for not doing something proactive for the times when it could be managed (to the benefit of all, I might add).
      And we are not attacking Canadian firefighters lack of doing their job (Phantom, looking at you; don’t put words into my mouth) — what we are doing is going after your government (and it also goes after the leftists here — look at any blue state, and some red ones, and you’ll see poor forestry practices…hopefully that will change).

        1. What about the remaining 60% (which is the majority by the calculations you just gave me)?

          2. Note how the fires north of Lake Superior were brought under control relatively quickly, but the fires in the Northwest Territories persist.

          3. Killer, the map I’ve provided can show the fires through time. You can see on the map how long and in which areas the fires lasted, spread, and abated (or are ongoing).

          4. That’s how I knew the fires north of Lake Superior only lasted a few weeks.

          6. Jane, I’m with KM on this one, having worked in Northern Ontario for several years. It’s mostly an inaccessible jungle up there and beyond.

            See my comments above.

        3. I’m old enough to remember when our forests were covered in lookout stations (towers) to constantly survey for fires. To prevent them from spreading as early as possible. And now we even have satellites (that Elon Musk can purpose for that).

          But someone decided that “Fire is natural” … and some species of seeds need fire to germinate … so we stopped PREVENTING wildfires, and knocking them down ASAP.

          I liken that “science” to the “science” Communist China used to create their draconian, inhuman, ONE-child RULE. It was discovered to have very serious unintended consequences.

          1. Fires are natural. The natives used to set them every year. There is archaeological evidence to back that up. You take people setting fires every year out of the equation and the undergrowth gets out of hand. That said, when North America used to have big trees, 300 feet plus, there was enough coverage from the top cover that undergrowth wasn’t really an issue.

          2. But that’s NOT what our “Fire is Natural” National Park Service Employees have been doing. They BURNED half of Yellowstone to the ground. On purpose. Underbrush my ass. They said the forest needed to … transition … naturally.

            Hmmm… where have I heard THAT before.

          2. Seems you’ll copulate with anything won’t you GYM? Dangerous but hey, go for it! An inch off the top would leave you with nothing…

          3. Helicopters are of limited use for fighting fires in the NYT. They aren’t good for covering massive distances, they have small payloads, and they can be grounded by excessive smoke. They’re useful for moving supplies and protecting small communities, but not much good for directly battling a large fire.

            Your arrogant post is an example of people not understanding the logistical nightmare of fighting a massive fire in a vast and remote region.

  9. Kill the jobs, kill the forests.
    IN the US we now burn more wood every year than we formerly harvested via the horrendous practice of timber harvesting.
    Because owls.

    1. I’m of the belief that we can manage our resources better and in such a way that we benefit both ourselves and the owls, because it doesn’t have to be a zero sum game. It will not be perfect, but we can strive to do better.
      You know, Adam’s Task.

      1. What about the annual fires in your pacific northwest and California?
        This is a north american issue.

        1. Yes it is. Never said it wasn’t. There has been an attempt to address this issue in my country — yes, certain states in particular have been a bit…unwilling…it cooperate.
          But, it is a North American issue, as you said — what has your country done?
          You should be asking your government about this as it affects you; just as we Americans should be asking the same of ours. It isn’t a zero sum game…unless it’s made into one.

          1. They conduct controlled burns in BC.
            There have been annual ones in my neck of the woods.
            Of course it isn’t a great system, what with being mired in bureaucratic hoops and consulting with you know who.
            So, some things are being done, at least in areas like the Okanagan where I live.
            As for our vast, remote boreal forest…well, that would require serious and expensive efforts.
            There is also an arson issue, which needs attention.
            It is not a game, zero sum or otherwise.

  10. l once posited with a greenie, was it possible any time in the millions of years there have been forests in north america, and that maybe a cpl million years ago there was an extensive lasting drought, and a large portion of the north american forests burned to the ground, how would that relate to climate change? like, the drought lasted 3 or 4 decades but was overall, a ‘blip’ in avg humidity and temperatures?
    care to comment in relation to your current climate protest?

  11. The Northern Boreal forest, which is Canada’s main forest, has a life span of 80-120 years. Then the forest has aged out, needing to be replaced with a new forest, with the removal of the old forest by fire, or harvesting the wood.

  12. FIRE MANAGEMENT IN US AND CANADA

    Breitbart
    “Canada’s massive forests have historically faced annual fire seasons, which First Nations addressed through traditional practices such as removal of flammable undergrowth and controlled fires. The Canadian government has limited the ability to conduct these practices while investing little in its institutional ability to address the fires. The federal government is largely divorced from the fire situation, having no emergency response agency and no national fire authority”

    Progressive wildfire management fails over and over in Canada and the US (California et al) but the US funds the National interagency Fire Center – “partners work side by side to gather and share information on the current wildfire situation, spanning federal, state, local, tribal, and private lands.” NIFC “coordinates mobilization of resources for wildland fire…”
    https://www.nifc.gov/fire-information

    1. Of course the federal government is largely divorced from the fire situation.

      Federal bureaucrats in Ottawa sleep very well at night at the end of their “work” day. They have no thoughts or cares about anyone else in the vast Canadian hinterlands, they are not personally affected .

    2. …which First Nations addressed through traditional practices such as removal of flammable undergrowth and controlled fires.

      I’d need to see some pretty bulletproof evidence before I believed that malarkey…

  13. Replying to both John Chittick and Killer Marmot:

    1 – yes, seems sensible; but what really drives this is not appreciation for good design, but insurance costs. After the BC fires from, what, ten years ago now?, insurance rates on properties in places like Kimberly went through the roof. One result was better design: not because that made design sense or was good for customer value, but because the underwriters developed lists of landscape and design features eligible for cost reductions on insurance.

    2 – yes, remoteness and lack of access do hamper fire control – but that is itself a reflection of two opposing forces: Canada’s refusal to develop resources; and Canada’s insistence on fighting small fires. One prevents access, the other prevents natural renewal. We could build a resource corridor from Prince Rupert to Churchill first and then Sudbury (through Grande Prairie and Fort Mac) to open up the north – but we don’t. We could stop fighting small fires so fuel doesn’t build, but we don’t – I like to think of it as stupid policy supporting stupider policy..

    2. There is a big fire near Kimberly right now.
      Kelowna had a huge one in 2003, and a few bad ones since then.
      I think that is why controlled burns occur here in the valley. Real estate, baby.
      As for corridors, good idea.
      I also wish they would stop saying that this issue is a result of climate change.

    3. I was told once, by a helicopter company owner who fights fires, that we don’t really fight fires, we protect assets around a fire. Listening to the description of what the fire fighters actually do, I would agree.

      I would also push back on First Nations claiming to take precautionary action to put out fires prior to the “white-man” taking over. What exactly did they do, knowing they had no machines, and no horses before the white-man’s arrival. I would further argue that being nomadic was not taking precautionary measures.

  14. An honest question for the global warmists … why are your forests burning? You’ve signed onto the Paris Accords! I thought that fixed global warming?

    Shouldn’t America be burning? Because the BadORANGEman pulled out (not very manly) of the Paris Accords?

    1. Before anyone fires (ha!) back at you: yes, we are having some forest fires; they happen. But it isn’t because we pulled out of the Paris Accords (rhetorical statement, I know).
      The whole “climate change” bs. has been one massive grift/fraud/virtue signal, as we all know. And it has kept us from conserving real environment.

      There have been moves to address this (on our side):
      https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/06/advancing-regenerative-agriculture-and-strengthening-american-farm-resilience/
      https://naturalresources.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=417198

      1. Shouldn’t America be burning … WORSE?
        There, I clarified my rhetoric. *giggle*

        1. Well, according to some, yes. But surprisingly, no. It’s a giant mystery.

          1. Just to clarify … you aren’t suggesting my rhetoric is a giant mystery?

            Hahahahahaha … no need to respond … I just lurk here to amuse myself. Because taking every minutia of life dead seriously is exhausting… and brain damaging. God gave us all (the sane among us) a sense of humor for good reason.

          2. What? You don’t want me to reply by telling you about our vast “Trump Wing Conspiracy” by which we (our CIA really) teamed up with dragonoid aliens to intentionally set fire to pristine Canadian forest thereby framing Mark Carney and his intrepid team of patriotic trade negotiators (and the Canadian people at large) while also making Mother Gaia (and Greta Thunberg) cry at the behest of Saul Greenburg, of Saul’s Bakery and Takeout Deli (which is of course a Mossad front) so we could usher in the end times and thus overthrow Zeus’ law of xenia once and for all?
            I’m a bit disappointed and hurt.

  15. Trees are made of wood. Wood burns. Trees grow die and burn. Always have, always will. If they’re happening more often it’s probably cyclical and there are a lot of forests that are in the right part of their life cycle to burn. After the trees have burnt, the species THAT NEED FIRE TO RELEASE THERE SEEDS will sprout up and regrow. The only forests that need “managing” are around human settlements. They need to keep the trees thin enough for a distance around town that the town won’t burn down and that’s on them.

    There are a lot of forests that aren’t forests anymore, they’re actually tree plantations. When an area is logged they’re replanted with single species of trees that are all the same age. That’s not a forest, it’s a tree farm.

    1. Are you suggesting that the vast tracts of … naturally occurring … softwood forests covering Canada are all “tree farms”? If man tries to replicate nature … shouldn’t we be replicating what nature has created? i.e. vast tracts of softwood forests?

      1. A good percentage of it is now tree farms. There are huge tracts of trees all of the same age and all of the same species planted in nice neat rows. That’s a tree farm.

        1. OK … OK … so replant the clear-cut natural forests … with an AI generated replication of a natural tree pattern. Done.

    2. Rusty
      Wood does NOT burn, gasoline does not burn. Fumes burn, on the base from which fumes eminate. That is the first lesson you learn when taking fire fighting, and it is a very important point at that.

  16. The next time there are wild fires in the US whose smoke drifts into Canada (there are some big ones in Oregon and Idaho right now), Canadians are going to laugh like hell.

    And then they’ll send fire crews and water bombers, like they always do.

    2. Because we pay them, and well. But Canada doesn’t do the same re: our firefighters.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation