Mud is pollution

brained

Adventurer
Aren't most (all?) of those agents petroleum based?

Used motor/gear oil was/is often used. I can't imagine why somebody would still do that but I've seen it sprayed down in recent years.

Also used is magnesium chloride and calcium chloride (non petroleum/oil based),
Lignin sulfonate (non petroleum/oil based), Soapstock (non petroleum based), and polyvinyl alcohol (non petroleum/oil based). I'm sure there's more but those are the ones I know of.
 

RR1

Explorer
Used motor/gear oil was/is often used. I can't imagine why somebody would still do that but I've seen it sprayed down in recent years.

Also used is magnesium chloride and calcium chloride (non petroleum/oil based),
Lignin sulfonate (non petroleum/oil based), Soapstock (non petroleum based), and polyvinyl alcohol (non petroleum/oil based). I'm sure there's more but those are the ones I know of.

Will those products have any ill effects on the local flora and fauna? Which seems to be the issue here with simple natural silt.

I don't know how many of you river fish, the streams will fill with silt after a heavy thunderstorm with no roads around. At least where I fish.
 

brained

Adventurer
Will those products have any ill effects on the local flora and fauna? Which seems to be the issue here with simple natural silt.

A check of the MSDS would be in order - Lignin sulfonate is tree sap and Soapstock is a vegetable oil. Seems like they would be pretty mild.
 

T.Low

Expedition Leader
Will those products have any ill effects on the local flora and fauna? Which seems to be the issue here with simple natural silt.

I don't know how many of you river fish, the streams will fill with silt after a heavy thunderstorm with no roads around. At least where I fish.

Excellenet point. The mountain rivers i paddle are always silty after a hard rain...and there are minimal roads around.
 

DrMoab

Explorer
Excellenet point. The mountain rivers i paddle are always silty after a hard rain...and there are minimal roads around.

Welcome to the world of extreme environmentalism. These groups have so brain washed people that even a good number of people who are smart enough to normally have common sense have been won over.

These so called studies? Who funds them? Is it unbiased groups of people who want to find out if there are really problems or is it groups of people who religiously believe there is a problem and want to prove their point?

It really amazes me that on a site like this...dedicated to vehicular travel in the back country there are as many people who refuse to see this and are so willing to cut off their noses despite their face.
 

paulj

Expedition Leader
This court case was in the Pacific NW, where salmon are an important species, historically, ecologically, and economically. The optimal steam conditions for their spawning are well known. That includes relatively clean gravels. Too much silt is bad, but so is bare bedrock. The surrounding hillsides are typically steep, but well vegetated. Heavy silting after rain storms is not common, though there are occasional landslides.

Urban development, logging, and roads have all been shown to produce changes in run off and in its sediment load. These changes not only affect the salmon, but also communities downstream, making them more vulnerable to flooding.

As a historical note, one of the first cases of environmental law arose in California over sedimentation. Specifically farmers in the Sacramento area objected to the vast amounts of sediment that washed on to their land as a result of hydraulic mining in the mountains. This dates back to the second half of the 1800s.

The Colorado is not a salmon stream. Sediment plays a different role. Dams have produced more changes than roads, since they block much of the sediment. They experimented with some high volume discharges from Glen Canyon trying see if they could restore some of the sandbars in the Grand Canyon portion.
 
Last edited:

RR1

Explorer
This court case was in the Pacific NW, where salmon are an important species, historically, ecologically, and economically. The optimal steam conditions for their spawning are well known. That includes relatively clean gravels. Too much silt is bad, but so is bare bedrock. The surrounding hillsides are typically steep, but well vegetated. Heavy silting after rain storms is not common, though there are occasional landslides.

Urban development, logging, and roads have all been shown to produce changes in run off and in its sediment load. These changes not only affect the salmon, but also communities downstream, making them more vulnerable to flooding.

As a historical note, one of the first cases of environmental law arose in California over sedimentation. Specifically farmers in the Sacramento area objected to the vast amounts of sediment that washed on to their land as a result of hydraulic mining in the mountains. This dates back to the second half of the 1800s.

The Colorado is not a salmon stream. Sediment plays a different role. Dams have produced more changes than roads, since they block much of the sediment. They experimented with some high volume discharges from Glen Canyon trying see if they could restore some of the sandbars in the Grand Canyon portion.

Humans...

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlY-TNsbcMI"]YouTube- Humans![/ame]
 

DrMoab

Explorer
I'm curious though, what do you do for a living? Do you have a background in the sciences or ecology? I'm constantly suprised how many people on this site instantly assume any conservation measure equates to environmental extremism.

I don't instantly assume anything. I also believe in a lot of conservation efforts and while I agree with you that there are a ton of people out there (both on this site and not) who think that any effort to help further clean and keep our environment pure is automatically considered a "wacko" there are just as many who see everything with a green label as a noble enterprise.

After seeing a number of my favorite places closed because of an imaginary insect population decline or any other reason the real environmental whack jobs can come up with it just sickens me that so many people who obviously love the outdoors and the ability to spend time there in their vehicle can fall so hard for the bogus info they put out.
 

ScoutII

Adventurer
You guys are missing the big point in this.

This doesn't just apply to logging. This will effect all roads/trails in the National Forest system used for ingress/egress for any commercial use. Not just commercial timber harvest could be impacted , but potentially mining, commercial firewood, or even the placement and maintenance of communications systems could be effected.

The USDA doesn't have money now to maintain the inventory of roads/trails. All most every side road or trail in the high country of AZ has been and will be used again for timber harvest. If they are forced to make improvements to them, the only option they will have is to remove them from the inventory.

This is a de facto way of forcing closure on public lands. The Anti-Recreational Use/Environmental groups know very well the long term implications this has.

Mark

I wonder if the Mexican Mafia is financing these folks too. Seems like we here in California have made so many areas off limits that they make great pot growing farms.

By keeping the forests open to the public we can keep an eye on our public lands.
FWIW the environmentalist try to pit one group of users against another. don't fall for that.
 

Attachments

  • McClintock_Plumas_Appeal.pdf
    138.9 KB · Views: 8

constructeur

Adventurer
More than likely some ruling will pass down stating that a site geotech will now be mandatory on logging projects, as they are on all commercial/civil, and many plat projects today.

More than likely this, or some variation, will be the result:

In regards to summer 'fugitive' dust control, they'll require a sprayed on binding product that lasts a few months. Most binders are a soy or molasses based product, and are obviously biodegradable.

example of a binder:
http://www.dustlock.com/

In the winter , as stated on the first page, logging outfits will more than likey need to use silt fence around high traffic areas, and maybe even build or install a mobile sediment catch (rain for rent, etc.).

A winter time flood is a natural 'pulse' event, and differs from silt that is introduced 8+ hours a day (usually with fuel, oil, and grease also in it), 5-6 days a week for months at a time by some access roads.

I'll follow up tomorrow with some logging specific data, I'm sure there's atleast one memeber out there that will dig it.
 

laxtoy

Adventurer

aaaannd... now i'm depressed. you know, having grown up there, and having seen pristine areas ground down to stumps, i'm cool if they slow down logging. i've also been a remodeling carpenter for the last 15 years, and there is no better insight into the wasteful habits we have than to see over a ton of 100 year old studs that were likely 200 year old douglas firs when they were harvested go into the recycler. i know it was my job (unemployed since my relocation, so i have extra latitude when complaining about the industry:)), and preaching against it is insane, but it is also my old backyard. anyone from az, or nevada, you know what, it's not the same where you are. we get a lot more rain, and have a lot more trees, and have a lot of fish to boot. fish that are part of the life cycle we are recording as suffering. a lot of this run off is unavoidable once you fell the forest, considering the forest is what is, duh, holding down the dirt. dirt goes in small streams, clogs salmon runs, salmon runs get less and less every year, orcas and other animals like local fisherman suffer the hit. i will tell you, a few years ago when i took my excursion to alaska, on my return trip my now wife and i went through a town in canada, and we counted at least 7 operating log mills. in one town. i know there have been massive closures of lumber companies nationwide, and i feel for those who are out of a job, but it may be a strong indicator of the changes that need to be made. i don't want them to close what we have now in terms of off pavement travel, but when they see a lumber company blaze a trail through a perfectly good forrest, i see why they would be up in arms, and look for whatever victory they could get, no matter how seemingly petty or cheap. the recession is hurting many right now, take it from someone with little hope of finding work in one of the worse off areas in the country for my line of work, but i am okay with it if it keeps them cutting less.
 
Last edited:

constructeur

Adventurer
On logging practices of yesteryear:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...d=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com

Salmon specific data:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...d=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com

Effects of logging on freshwater habitat:

http://www.olympiccoast.org/pdf/OCA_Habitats.doc


A down and dirty version of all of that is that mud and pollution screw with the plants, soil, and eggs, fish, and habitat. If caring for the environment means that I need to pay more for lumber, or that I have to hike into an area as opposed to driving into it, then I'm o.k. with that.
 

PirateMcGee

Expedition Leader
Actually the real culprit is degradation of the riparian area which has been heavily damaged due poor logging, farming, and ranching practices. In the natural state during muddy runoff much of the sediment is trapped within riparian vegetation but in the US much of this important veg has been wiped out. Furthermore, due to over use of water the natural flushing cycle that would normally clear out impacted sediment has been greatly reduced. Coupled with reduced snowpack, over fishing, dams, and eutrophication due to fertilizer/waste runoff you get the a situation in which the environment is severely degraded along with salmon populations.
 
Last edited:

PirateMcGee

Expedition Leader
means that I need to pay more for lumber, or that I have to hike into an area as opposed to driving into it, then I'm o.k. with that.

that would mean actually getting out of your truck................oooooo scary:elkgrin:

not all environmentalists are members of Earth First! and looking to shut down public areas but people need to realize that human action DOES cause damage to the environment. It is only within the last 100 years that we have had so much access to the “wild” and look at what has happened, little to no true untouched areas are left. If we don't take steps to mitigate those effects it ultimately affects us. The earth is basically one big ecosystem and the basic environmental principles apply to us.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
188,404
Messages
2,904,392
Members
230,329
Latest member
Marka1
Top