Comment Log Display

Here are my comments:

1. The plan is not grounded in a clear picture of the current
situation our forests face - and doesn't reveal whether California
forests are sequestering more carbon dioxide than is released by
harvesting, fire, and mortality. The inventory of forest lands
being used covers the period from 2001-2010.  It does not cover
recent drought and beetle infestations. Other inventories listed in
the materials provide very different results blurring the picture
even further.

2. Although the presentation includes a goal of increasing the
number of large trees and the diversity of trees,  there is no
actions mentioned that would result in this end result.  Thinning
and prescribed burns would remove some small trees, but no actions 
are suggested which would result in more large diverse trees being
retained.  

3.  Clearcutting must be banned as a harvesting method from
California forests as it results in dense small trees - just the
situation that we now must use thinning and prescribed burns to
correct. Clearcutting also increases fire risk.  There are many
recent examples in which natural or selectively logged forests burn
in a mosaic pattern and plantations (the end product of
clearcutting) are burn completely.

4. Scientific studies have shown that thinning is most effective
when done in conjunction with prescribed burns. Thinning alone can
increase fire risk.