Logging Public Relations

Back in my childhood, logging was a big deal. There were always protests going on, trees being spiked, etc. Now, not so much. I gather that this has more to do with logging companies preventing public eyesores than anything else. I was recently told that computer modeling is used heavily to decide how many trees can be cut before anyone will notice.


The first kind of modeling helps hide clear cuts - obviously you can't clear cut an area that people can directly see, but it is nearly as important to leave horizon views untouched. This means calculating (for all likely vantage points) exactly how high you can cut on the other side a hill before the horizon degrades. This might seem like an easy calculation, but imagine that the possible viewpoints are defined by a nearby highway that twists and turns and has numerous elevation changes.

The second kind of modeling is for "thinning" a high-visibility forest. Again, for all reasonable vantage points, the question becomes how many trees can be be selectively removed before the stand looks damaged. I am led to believe that the average percentage of trees that can be unobtrusively removed is pretty high if it is done right.

I'm curious if this low visible impact style of logging is actually significantly more friendly to the local ecosystems, or if people just can't be bothered to protest what they can't see.

Aside: Another way logging companies use GIS is to game the government bodies who issue cut block licenses. Logging companies typically have better resolution data than the government, so they can plan their roads to go through the highest value portion of a supposedly uniform cut block - and there are no stumpage fees on trees cut for road building purposes.