Your thoughts on

[misfish]

Heard yesturday there is a potition going on to stop logging in the park. I thought the park was off limits to logging?

Maybe it,s baecause there are huge trees.

 

Your thoughts on this or anyone have more insight on this.

Thanks

[Photoz]

I worked for a small logging company in the early '70's, along the Park perimiters (Kearney / Sand Lake) taking mostly maple & birch, every winter, by spring our yard at the sawmill was piled high everywhere with HUGE logs, some of those maples were still 2' in diameter 16' up!! There were countless trees being cut by numerous logging companies . . . . I used to wonder just how long this could continue . . . . but they ARE running out of old growth trees now, and are, in a lot of places taking second growth timber . . . . . the small stuff we left 30 to 40 years ago. For anybody going up #11 past Huntsville, there's a big lumber yard on your left at the north end .. . thousands of logs waiting to be processed . . . . my bet is there are very few that are over 18" thick at the butt end! I used to ask the boss what we were gonna do when the timber was all gone . . . he'd just laugh and say there was several lifetimes worth out there and more growing! Well, in another 30 years the old growth will be all gone, second growth also gone, what will be left will barely make a few 2 X 4's!! But . . . . wood is almost as important as fresh water these days . . . . which will we run out of first?

P. S.

 

They have been logging the park for years, every so often a group of 'tree huggers' start making noises, but get ignored. I think it's time we started paying more attention to them, at least on this subject, if it's not too late already!

Edited June 13, 2007 by Photoz

[lookinforwalleye]

Logging Algonquin would be a shame and should not be allowed imho Algonquin is jewel that should be left as is for generations to come.

[wallyboss]

Algonquin has been alive and kicking for 1000's of years, but some logging company thinks that they can improve on that!!!!!The rest of Ontario has been pretty well been clearcut so the park is probably one of the next to be raped by money hungry companies. Hopefully the Ontario Government has enough balls to say NO.

[007]

I have visited Algonquin about 5-6 times in the last few years and love it there, but I was surprised to read in their visitor centre that logging still goes on today as I hadn't seen any evidence of it. When I read more into the subject, it seems that logging does take place but they manage it so that it doesn't take place near any of the roads, trails or canoe routes so it doesn't spoil the visitor experience. My guess is that these days they are into sustainable logging techniques which have less impact and allows trees to regenerate. But even so, with such an amazing park - scenery and wildlife - 'protected' for the people I would prefer that it became a true wilderness park and there was no logging. But those who work the land there I'm sure would disagree.

 

Just my thoughts.

007

[Terry]

I have mixed feelings on this subject

 

trees... good

 

no trees... bad....

 

hate to see it in the parks

 

but trees are a renewable resource

and if managed right is better then using non renewable resources

as are biofuels and and animals for fur and meat.....we need strong management on these things

[Wes Bender]

I don't see a problem with it. As 007 mentioned, he/she has been to the park numerious times without seeing any sign of logging. There must be a strong management plan in place to keep it that way. Most trees have a life expectancy. Maybe these maples and birch are nearing their end so the park decided to not let them fall over and instead generate some revenue by selling off the timber rights. As long as proper management is in place to make sure not to affect the visitor experience I think it is a good thing.

I am biased though, I live in NWO where logging is a major portion of the economy. I see trees, I see $. In Thunder Bay logging is not really the major employer anymore but alot of the smaller communities it is. Most of them have been devistated with mill closures or operation relocation. It is sad when a town of 1500 loses 60 well paying jobs. Most of these closers/relocations are due to the price of lumber and the high canadian $ but my point is, it is still devistating.

[Nemo]

Algonquin is logged heavily and has thousands of kilometres of roads throughout. If you want to know more about it take a peak at Barry Bridgeford's site Algonquin Adventures. Click the forestry tab and there is everything you wanted to know about logging in APP.

 

http://www.algonquinadventures.com/

 

He has a lot of info on Forestry in the park and is an advisor to the Algonquin Forestry Authority.

 

Frankly I think they should drastically limit logging in the Park.

 

Last Year and in 2005 I ran into active logging while travelling the back country. From the noise of logging equipment to having to portage over a huge gravel logging road. This thing looked like a county road.

 

Enjoy the site I know there are also some hard core fisher people on the forum.

[Hookset]

I think more attention needs to be placed on the impact to wildlife that is caused through logging in the Park. Last summer when I was in the park I read an article about a species of Wolf (Grey Wolf I believe) that is in real trouble.. The story as I remember was explaining how the pack is in great jeopardy due to hunting and cross breeding with domestic dogs, and Coyotes. The second reason was hunting and killing by farmers as nuisance animals. This obviously occurred outside the Park boundaries (other than the Coyote issue). But why is this happening outside the Park when historically this was not an issue. Are the Wolves being forced outside the Park due to loss of habitat through logging ????

I'm no expert on the subject but common sense would suggest that changes to habitat always has a dire effect on Wildlife.

 

I would definitely vote to stop the logging. I fail to see how logging in the Park would have a positive effect on anything.

Leave us some form of nature the way it should be. ENTIRELY NATURAL. Give the Wolves, Moose, Deer etc. a sanctuary that they deserve. Once the species is gone or genetically altered it is gone for good, forvever. It will not come back.

We have altered the Park enough as it is. Highways, campgrounds, nature trails etc.

Do we really need to log the Park as well ? Nope !! Maybe someone who is in favor of Logging could explain a positive aspect. Money is not an aspect that should be considered. Wolves, Moose, etc. etc. don't buy their food.

 

 

Hookset.

Edited June 13, 2007 by Hookset

[Bernie]

From another point of view from one who lives nearby. Old growth forests hold little or no wildlife. The trees become so large that little light gets to the forest floor. Undergrowth is required for small animal habitat to continue. Just like if the minnows have no food supply it affects the larger fish and so on. Before man got involved in the whole process forest fires were the loggers creating new growth. I know it isnt quite the same but its close. Two years after they log an area the forest comes alive with new fuzzy animals of all kinds. I dont advocate clear cutting but in my opinion managed forests are a good thing.

[POLLIWOGG]

First off there is no such thing as entirely natural or at least how do you define it. It was natural to have fires start on the west coast and burn all the way to the east coast, so the natural state of the bark could at some point be all burned up but we don't allow that to happen.

 

If they don't cut there they got to cut somewhere else, as photoz points out a large tree in prime condition could replace several smaller trees that can grow to prime condition and replace several others again so its all in the management. If the loggers know they will have access to the area again they will manage it better than if they think its a one shot deal.

 

You would like to think that cutting in the park would be done properly.

[Zib]

I recently watched a program that talked about logging the old growth trees in our parks here in the US. They had stated that the areas that had the old growth trees logged were more susceptible to wild fires & that was the reason why we have so may wild fires out west.

[bbog]

Given our Governments terrible track record for managing anything we should leave Algonquin alone. Logging is not visible for the millions that travel the beaten path - but is a devastating mess for those that visit the upper interior. The Barron Canyon area is a spot that MUST be visited at least once in your lifetime. Stray away from this gem and you will see and hear the effects of "controlled" (more like clear cut) forestry. A real shame!

[Headhunter]

In a somewhat relate vein, I recently saw an interview with the former founder of Greenpeace. This gentleman was born and raised on Vancouver Island, in what was essentially a lumber camp. His desire to "save" the planet, stemmed from his experience as a kid, watching the natural beauty of the forest being destroyed by the lumber companies. He did however, take part in the re-planting of the area, which at the time, was a pretty new concept.

After joining forces with some like minded people, they formed Greenpeace. He did not visit his home on the island for quite a number of years. His relationship with the now huge marketing machine that became Greenpeace began to disintegrate after he realized that they had no solutions to the problems they were attacking, only complaints.

He broke ties with the organization and decided to head home to the island and regroup.

Upon arrival, he was amazed at what he saw... areas that had been completely clear cut, are again healthy, growing forrests that could be harvested within the next couple of decades. He is now an advocate working with many of the largest lumber companies, helping them plan for the future, within this re-newable resource.

Sorry for the long rambling, but I feel that, getting back to the question at hand... properly managed, it's a re-newable resource that carefully nurtured, can be available for many more generations to come.

HH

[misfish]

Thanks for all the replies.

Im not sure what to think about the cutting.

I know when I moose and deer hunt the clear cuts are a great place to sit and wait but other then that,I guess Terry summed it up,they are replaceable but to what extent?

 

Thanks again.

Edited June 13, 2007 by misfish

[lilkynan]

They have logged the park since the beginning of Canada -

 

As with any resource - if managed properly - will last forever

[Hookset]

Yep, I agree.

I don't have a problem with a properly managed forestry and logging.

I just don't think, with the resources we have in all of Ontario, that logging needs to be done in Algonquin Park.

I think the question was about logging in Algonquin specifically.

Algonquin Park wasn't simply chosen at random.

It was chosen, and should be protected, because it is special.

Ontario is a pretty big place.

Maybe we could have just that little piece of it left alone.

If fire wants to clean some of it up, that'll happen.

That's nature.

 

Hookset.

[squiggy]

from my understanding, once the logging contracts are completed with the Park the government wont be allowing anymore logging. this was the answer given at a meeting with the Algonquins of Golden Lake

[Northhunter]

I think more attention needs to be placed on the impact to wildlife that is caused through logging in the Park. Last summer when I was in the park I read an article about a species of Wolf (Grey Wolf I believe) that is in real trouble.. The story as I remember was explaining how the pack is in great jeopardy due to hunting and cross breeding with domestic dogs, and Coyotes. The second reason was hunting and killing by farmers as nuisance animals. This obviously occurred outside the Park boundaries (other than the Coyote issue). But why is this happening outside the Park when historically this was not an issue. Are the Wolves being forced outside the Park due to loss of habitat through logging ????

I'm no expert on the subject but common sense would suggest that changes to habitat always has a dire effect on Wildlife.

 

I would definitely vote to stop the logging. I fail to see how logging in the Park would have a positive effect on anything.

Leave us some form of nature the way it should be. ENTIRELY NATURAL. Give the Wolves, Moose, Deer etc. a sanctuary that they deserve. Once the species is gone or genetically altered it is gone for good, forvever. It will not come back.

We have altered the Park enough as it is. Highways, campgrounds, nature trails etc.

Do we really need to log the Park as well ? Nope !! Maybe someone who is in favor of Logging could explain a positive aspect. Money is not an aspect that should be considered. Wolves, Moose, etc. etc. don't buy their food.

Hookset.

 

The wolf packs periodically travel outside the park to deer yards in the winter. Hunting was pretty much stopped / banned in areas around the park a few years ago, but I don't remember the specifics.

The logging also helped the wolves early on (maybe still does?). Old growth forest is not good moose/deer/beaver habitat (wolf food), but logging opens up areas for "early-successional" stages of forest, where these species thrive.

 

The theory that wolves in the park could be genetically distinct is bogus, IMO. Animals and bloodlines don't recognize man-made borders.

 

I see no problem with the logging. It's been going on for years. If the park is deemed off limits, it could put more pressure on other areas that may be just as spectacular but not as recognized (ie; not deemed as "parks"). Why not keep it where it has attention and is perhaps more easily regulated?

[John Bacon]

The area has been logged from before it became a park and continuously since it became one.

 

As a point of interest; the park was actually created as a logging reserve. The logging companies were worried that development would swallow up available logging areas in southern Ontario and worked with the government to create the park to prevent development so that they would have an area that they could log for the foreseeable future. The camping and fishing oppurtunites were just a fringe benefit from the create of the park.

 

I think that well managed logging is more beneficial than harmfull to the park. As previously mentioned, a new growth forest will actually support more wildlife than an old growth one.

 

As for keeping the park all natural; than means no campsites, no hiking trials or portages...