Clear cutting is actually very beneficial for wildlife and controlling devastating wildfires. This can be witnessed in all of the western states where clear cutting was halted on federal properties, primarily. Since this was halted we have had out of control fires that have actually destroyed entire towns. Wildlife do not thrive in large forested areas, they need edge habitat to thrive and clear cutting provides that. Yes, it is ugly and it sucks to lose a riding area but aggressive conservation is needed to keep our forests healthy. Your choice, ride in a clear cut that is managed or possibly get banned from riding in a burn area due to dangerous snags. FYI it is a PIA to maintain trails in a burn area due to the amount of snags that fall across the trail every year.
Honestly, I thought clear cutting was not common practice in North America anymore and that Select Cutting had been adopted. Guess I was wrong though. Might select harvesting be worthwhile as a mutually beneficial compromise?
Honestly, trails consume more wildlife habitat, more permanently, than properly managed forestry. Sorry to break it to you, but mountain bike trail construction is one of the biggest concerns for a lot of species of animals. If you don't believe me, check out the Starkey experimental forest in the PNW. Logging in a recreational area limits impacts to a single area vs logging areas that are free from recreation. This video is an opinion piece and doesn't address the elephant in the room, which is Ugly Rec Ie... recreation's growing impact on wildlife. You are not an ecology guy, but you do not fully understand the science. I'm not pro logger or anti logger. I am a pro conservationist though and also a mountain biker. The mountain bike community needs to bone up their understanding of conservation, so that they can better understand how mountain biking doesn't currently hold much value in the conversation as a stakeholder. Mountain biking groups will not be important stakeholders until they humble themselves with the reality that their sport is consumptive. Recreation is a consumptive use of the land. Period.
Changing the way our forests are managed across the province is a noble cause but far too big of a cause to be addressed in this very localized fight that will be decided within two years. Our focus is on saving the hundreds of jobs, various outdoor activities and the natural escape that this area provides. That said, we do care deeply for nature and want to do our part to limit our effect on it. Allowing 1.7 million residents to connect with nature endears them to and inspires them to join broader fights to better manage our land. As well, the cumulative stress on this area with recreation and logging is not sustainable. There's over 7.5 Million dollars and 100,000 volunteer hours invested towards recreation in the area. It only makes sense to protect the recreation and limit the cumulative effects, such as this massive logging plan on top of the same area. The area is tiny in the big picture, representing roughly 1200ha when the province has 22.5 million hectares of managed forest. Allowing this localized area to be a dedicated land use for recreation would relieve a lot of the consumptive recreation pressure on the rest of the land that you are concerned about.
@@shaunpeter8498 This mindset makes a lot of sense but it isn't playing out in the way we hoped it would. Recreation is causing the development of sometimes smaller areas, but often areas that are in critical locations of habitat for migratory species, especially in the American West/Southwest. Also, mountainbiking is one of the least likely forms of human powered recreation to activate conservation mindset stewardship. As we keep seeing in the US with social/illicit trail use and construction (ppl making their own trails). This video highlights that with the idea that logging elsewhere, expanding the impact of operations to an untouched environment, would be better, without referencing articles supporting that opinion. One mountain biker I talked to before the USFS denied a trails system they were working on getting approval for said it best "Yeah you know you could probably have a pretty good time mountain biking on the moon." You don't need to see elk or deer while mountain-biking to have a good time, so why care? If you want an effective approach to keep logging at bay within a recreation area, approach it scientifically. Logging within a recreation area increases wildlife view-shed and decreases wildlife refuge from the humans using the trails. This is backed up by peer reviewed literature. Peer review is the only way to have substantive activism be effective in these scenarios, at least down in the US.
i would be onboard with your cause but if all you wanna do is save that area to make a deal to destroy another then you lost my vote there is too much destruction with this clearcut style logging
There are 22.5 Million Hectares of harvestable forest outside of the parks across Alberta. This whole area represents roughly 1200ha with 738ha proposed for harvest. Exchanging a tiny slice of land to protect a very localized area for the 1.7 million residents of the Calgary region to connect with nature, is the goal. There's been over $7.5 Million and 100,000 volunteer hours invested into creating this recreation area and the cumulative stress of adding a large harvest plan, combined with the fact that it's located in our headwaters, makes this area far less logical to harvest than others. Fighting to better manage the 22.5 Million hectares of forest outside of the parks is a noble cause but not one that we will be able to resolve before the area is set to be harvested in 2 years. Love your passion to save the land but please understand that fighting to protect this area does not promote further clearcut logging in the province, it only removes it from this tiny pristine and valued recreation area.
Great video. This area is very precious and I hope the work being put in to conserve it works out for the people.
Keep fighting the good fight!
Thanks Tristan, for making the video about this very important subject! Great job!!!
Hopefully the trails can manage to stay in their current state 🤞
Good luck everyone. Keep up the good fight!
Thanks for making this video guys. I'm hoping for the best, and right outcome. Keep up the good work.
Thanks a lot! Make sure to head over to the grow kananskis website to learn more and see what can be done to be heard
Clear cutting is actually very beneficial for wildlife and controlling devastating wildfires. This can be witnessed in all of the western states where clear cutting was halted on federal properties, primarily. Since this was halted we have had out of control fires that have actually destroyed entire towns. Wildlife do not thrive in large forested areas, they need edge habitat to thrive and clear cutting provides that. Yes, it is ugly and it sucks to lose a riding area but aggressive conservation is needed to keep our forests healthy. Your choice, ride in a clear cut that is managed or possibly get banned from riding in a burn area due to dangerous snags. FYI it is a PIA to maintain trails in a burn area due to the amount of snags that fall across the trail every year.
Honestly, I thought clear cutting was not common practice in North America anymore and that Select Cutting had been adopted. Guess I was wrong though. Might select harvesting be worthwhile as a mutually beneficial compromise?
Calgary now has a population of 1.6 million and there is ONE local place for people to ride bikes...
And if we don't do anything, we'll have none...
Great way to use your voice Mr. Great edit.
Thanks Rory! Looking forward to getting some laps in this weekend 🤘
Honestly, trails consume more wildlife habitat, more permanently, than properly managed forestry. Sorry to break it to you, but mountain bike trail construction is one of the biggest concerns for a lot of species of animals. If you don't believe me, check out the Starkey experimental forest in the PNW. Logging in a recreational area limits impacts to a single area vs logging areas that are free from recreation. This video is an opinion piece and doesn't address the elephant in the room, which is Ugly Rec Ie... recreation's growing impact on wildlife. You are not an ecology guy, but you do not fully understand the science. I'm not pro logger or anti logger. I am a pro conservationist though and also a mountain biker. The mountain bike community needs to bone up their understanding of conservation, so that they can better understand how mountain biking doesn't currently hold much value in the conversation as a stakeholder. Mountain biking groups will not be important stakeholders until they humble themselves with the reality that their sport is consumptive. Recreation is a consumptive use of the land. Period.
Changing the way our forests are managed across the province is a noble cause but far too big of a cause to be addressed in this very localized fight that will be decided within two years. Our focus is on saving the hundreds of jobs, various outdoor activities and the natural escape that this area provides. That said, we do care deeply for nature and want to do our part to limit our effect on it. Allowing 1.7 million residents to connect with nature endears them to and inspires them to join broader fights to better manage our land. As well, the cumulative stress on this area with recreation and logging is not sustainable. There's over 7.5 Million dollars and 100,000 volunteer hours invested towards recreation in the area. It only makes sense to protect the recreation and limit the cumulative effects, such as this massive logging plan on top of the same area. The area is tiny in the big picture, representing roughly 1200ha when the province has 22.5 million hectares of managed forest. Allowing this localized area to be a dedicated land use for recreation would relieve a lot of the consumptive recreation pressure on the rest of the land that you are concerned about.
@@shaunpeter8498 This mindset makes a lot of sense but it isn't playing out in the way we hoped it would. Recreation is causing the development of sometimes smaller areas, but often areas that are in critical locations of habitat for migratory species, especially in the American West/Southwest. Also, mountainbiking is one of the least likely forms of human powered recreation to activate conservation mindset stewardship. As we keep seeing in the US with social/illicit trail use and construction (ppl making their own trails). This video highlights that with the idea that logging elsewhere, expanding the impact of operations to an untouched environment, would be better, without referencing articles supporting that opinion. One mountain biker I talked to before the USFS denied a trails system they were working on getting approval for said it best "Yeah you know you could probably have a pretty good time mountain biking on the moon." You don't need to see elk or deer while mountain-biking to have a good time, so why care? If you want an effective approach to keep logging at bay within a recreation area, approach it scientifically. Logging within a recreation area increases wildlife view-shed and decreases wildlife refuge from the humans using the trails. This is backed up by peer reviewed literature. Peer review is the only way to have substantive activism be effective in these scenarios, at least down in the US.
i would be onboard with your cause but if all you wanna do is save that area to make a deal to destroy another then you lost my vote there is too much destruction with this clearcut style logging
There are 22.5 Million Hectares of harvestable forest outside of the parks across Alberta. This whole area represents roughly 1200ha with 738ha proposed for harvest. Exchanging a tiny slice of land to protect a very localized area for the 1.7 million residents of the Calgary region to connect with nature, is the goal. There's been over $7.5 Million and 100,000 volunteer hours invested into creating this recreation area and the cumulative stress of adding a large harvest plan, combined with the fact that it's located in our headwaters, makes this area far less logical to harvest than others. Fighting to better manage the 22.5 Million hectares of forest outside of the parks is a noble cause but not one that we will be able to resolve before the area is set to be harvested in 2 years. Love your passion to save the land but please understand that fighting to protect this area does not promote further clearcut logging in the province, it only removes it from this tiny pristine and valued recreation area.
Get a life