Malamute logged

[Tyrone Brett]

Hi,

Sad news to report from Squamish. The north slope of the Malamute was logged sometime in the last few days. It's a clearcut. We are working on determining the details- they will most likely be posted on an SAS access newscast in the near future and the link will be posted to this site. We've started contacting other public and private organizations involved on the access front.

If you go and take a look, take a friend, or something you can punch.

Tyrone Brett

[rich k]

3 dumptrucks in the parking lot and a clearcut across the street. ya, i saw that too. absolutely ridiculous. let me know if there's anything i can do: letters, phone calls, tree planting, random acts of violence...

[XXXX]

Who did it? Isn't it owned by the railroad?

[numa_cruiser]

All I've got to say is "what the crap!?" How is this backward way of trying to develop squamish on the map as a recreation destination going to pan out when we're letting resources like the Malamute and the base of the Papoose get raped by knuckledragging loggers and money hungry beurocrats with nothing but a desire to fill their pockets on the backs of everyone else who has a vested interest in this town?!!

Visitors without the facts on what is really going on, are just going to think that the highway project slipped with their chainsaws and took out a couple extra trees...Woops...oh well...at least the Olympics are coming. Good thing they'll have nothing left to look at when they get here. We've got to get some more foreward thinking people into the decision making processes around this town and get things protected that need to be protected.

I'd love to know what I can do. Sign me up.

[Peter]

Who did it? Isn't it owned by the railroad?

It's private land owned by one individual as far as I know..........

[Aaron]

Who did it? Isn't it owned by the railroad?

It's private land owned by one individual as far as I know..........

My two cents.

Owners of private land should be able to do with their land what they want. So long as what they do doesn’t come into conflict with conservation laws, or the criminal code. "Ugly" is a subjective term, if the people of Squamsih are upset with the aesthetic impact of some trees being removed from the Malamute they should consider buying the land.

In a not entirely related side note. The best thing that happened in the Smoke Bluffs in recent years was the tree removal from below the power lines. I love the sun sunshine.

[erock]

Aaron! Do you really think that private land owners should be able to do what they want? Lets say I was your neighbour and on my front lawn I erected an giant penis statue because I think it would be funny... maybe I would even make money off of it by claiming it was a site of immaculate erection? I doubt you would be stoked to live next to the penis house. Why? because it's an eyesore! But like Aaron said, thats totally subjective.

Anyways! There really isn't a point in arguing what this land owner can and can not do because he's already done it.
And since the town of squamish is going to be the corridor for the 2010 games and much tourism, it would be in the best interest of the town to keep these types of things from happening again. This may be done possibly with by-laws or out right purchase of the land. In this case a conservation easement would be an excellent choice.

Now, the whole logging topic/incident brings up what seems like a festering case of NIMBYism, which is what eveyone is discussing, and not that i'm an expert, but I think there is more to it than that.

I'm going to see if I can talk to someone about it but it seems logical that since the trees logged were likley on thin soil overylying granite (or granodiorite if you please) that:
1. the site is going to be very difficult to reclaim, as soil quality may not be the best, and since it's windy sometimes, the blowdown effect is going to be quite bad in that exposed area
2. The run off of soil and nutrients will degrade the water quality, potentially causing environmental damage in the sound. Mind you I imagine the mill was doing a pretty good job of that one already.

If I was right about any of the above, do you think it's still ok?

[Aaron]

I doubt you would be stoked to live next to the penis house. Why? because it's an eyesore! But like Aaron said, thats totally subjective

What are you talking about? I love my neighbors 12foot high penis statue.

Thankfully I live in the town of Castlegar were the tolerance of such things are high. And more importantly there are no bylaws against it. Now in the town of Squamish they may have be bylaws against such a thing, or even such things as removing trees from you property without due course and counsel.

And wada-ya-know there is!

So like I said in my original post, if the guy didn't break any laws then its still his right to do what he wants with his property, and anyone with a problem with that can go pound sand.

Some would say that he has broken the law, and if he has, then I say hang him from the highest branch.

[Aaron]

PS.
Could some please post a photo or two so rest of us can see what all the fuss is about.

[numa_cruiser]

Aaron, by the way you've glommed on to the issue of private land use rights I would hazard a guess to say you've been burned by such issues in the past. Your post is full of uninformed conjecture and bypasses the true issue here. The issue is that a piece of land that contains biomass and habitat that is important to the balance of our local ecosystem. (old growth etc.) Whether or not the owner had the right to log or potentially quarry this piece of land will be determined by those responsible for doing so. If indeed you had personally seen the devastation or at least seen photos of the clearcut (on land has been the subject of genuine interest for future park inclusion), you might have some cause to make any such "fuss". Maybe you could come down and offer to plant some of those giant penises you are so fond of.

[c-plus]

Here's a pic from the squamish access society's website:

http://www.squamishaccess.ca/News/large ... &x=87&y=58

For what it's worth, if people really think that it's important that logging in certain places should be restricted, then they should lobby their local government to change the current policies. Otherwise, as distasteful as it might be, people who log their own, private, property, are clear to do it as long as they follow whatever meagre guidelines there are. (before the flaming starts, i'll say now that i don't condone the clear cutting one bit and think that raping the earth purely for profits is a nearsighted, selfish thing to do).

[original gorby]

Aaron you're a prick... go pound sand yourself.

[monkeyboy]

Now if they would just take down a few more, you could fit a sweet motocross track in there. How sweet would that be to be climbing the chief with the smell of 2stroke in the air!

[Aaron]

Aaron you're a prick... go pound sand yourself.

And your a totalitarian, or a fool, I'm not sure which.

I never said that the logging of the Malamute was a good thing. Now that I see the photos I see that the removal of these trees will not have any improvement on the areas climbing, unlike the logging that occurred in the smoke bluffs. My only bent was to remind the environmental zealots out there we live in country where the whims of the majority will not inflict on the rights of minorities. Call me crazy but I tend to get my back up whenever the mob decides how any one individual should live. These rights include civil rights, human rights, aboriginal rights, gay rights, and yes even property rights. Should we as a group decide how one man should use or not use his land? Just because we like to look at the trees he owns and walk through his property on route to our climbing areas. Should we be able to dictate his use of his land (and therefore dictate how he lives his life) so it appeals to our sensitivities?

To clarify, I’m a big fan of the rule of law. And even though I’m a supporter of property rights I recognize the importance of placing limitations on them. It would appear that the owner of the Malamute could be found in violation of certain bylaws, and if he is I hope he’s punished to the full extent of the law.

Unlike some, I don’t see this issue as a black and white case. It’s a fine dance between maintaining our freedoms and maintaining order.

[Aaron]

The issue is that a piece of land that contains biomass and habitat that is important to the balance of our local ecosystem. (old growth etc.).

Habitat? Habitat for what? Discarded beer cans from passing cars? I admire your zeal for environmental protection, but come on. You're talking about a strip of land sandwiched between a (soon to be) four lane highway, a cliff face and rail road. The watershed from this land empties into an industrial park, and old growth forest hasn't been on that land for at least the last century. If I had to guess I would say that this is probably been the third time that this land has been logged.

If you intend to purse this issue beyond this forum, and want to be taken seriously I suggest you ditch the whole environmental issue and focus on the real impacts here. Esthetic impacts.