I like trees, timber/forests, planting trees, etc. Around here before the pioneers it was prairie and mixed patches of timber. Around here every piece of timber has been logged at one point or another. Some may have been logged 100 years ago but logged none the less. I have always thought it would be neat to be able to go through some timber/forest that has never been logged. Is there any around you? Any pictures?

Plenty here in the west its like an old folks home dead and dying nothing last forever. Its not like you would think I have also seen the redwoods those trees live a lot longer and more moister different story. I have been to places in Canada where it has never been logged a lot of sick dying trees. Forest fires need to clean out a lot of old growth Smokey the bear is not always right. It all depends on the kind of trees most should either be logged, but not out of existence or allowed to burn to stay healthy. Some trees are long lived and can withstand burns drought and other things nature throws at them.

There is some old growth timber here, earmarked to be saved...and wasted, if you ask me.

Been in a lot of forest that have never seen a saw.

Non logged old growth boreal forest has a lot of coarse woody debris on the ground and a lot of standing dead chicots.Both of these result in extremely productive habitat for a lot of furbearers by providing cover for the microtines that they prey on and the ability for them to hunt them under deep snow.The chicots provide nesting sites for prey and predator alike.
This is known as core habitat and trappers work with the forest companys to ensure there is ample amounts of this type of habitat left on a trapline after logging takes place.Of course different age succession areas are also important to have on a productive trapline.
Fires as well as logging provide for the patchwork of different age forest habitat on the landscape.

Exactly right. Like all things, forests need to be managed, whether that be from natural causes (wildfire) or man-made (chainsaws). Always found it funny how the tree huggers hate logging but love wildlife... well, most of the wildlife I see is in clearcuts.

A renewable resource little wildlife benefits from a mature forest, cut areas provide needed cover and habitat for years after a cutting. Sure not very pretty but effective! Did a lot of wildlife cuts for the DNR when I lived in the UP.

Some paper companies don't let natural growth come back after a cut they spray then plant red pines that are not so great for wildlife nutrition wise but grass will grow around them.

The "Old growth" in my home state is not real common. There is a small section called Hartwick Pines a short drive north of here. There are also a few areas of the UP that were never logged and saved by being in state parks. My family on my mother's side followed the White Pine out of Ontario to this part of the state in the mid 1880's. They (my Gr. Grandad and his boys)got in on the last of the White Pine logging that made this area so famous. I have paid my bills with a chainsaw a couple different stretches when a young guy too, so I appreciate timber and all it's benefits.....but wouldn't it have been something if the powers that be 150 years ago would have seen fit to save some of those forests for the spectacle they were? I've hunted the untouched rainforests of S.E. Alaska in the past, and to say those forests are awe inspiring would be an understatement. I don't believe letting old growth alone is necessarily "wasting" it. Yep, all those ancient trees will all die eventually, but they will also be replaced by the other, younger trees that grow up in their place. We don't have to extract every board-foot of timber to consider it not wasted.
The last of the real big tracts of "cork" pine (old growth White Pine)logged in the Lower Peninsula was the Deward Tract, an 80,000 acre chunk of pine owned by a lumberman by the name of D.E. Ward. He died in 1900, and his family and shareholders got together to hash over just what they could do with D.E.'s holdings. It was decided, of course, that the land was to be stripped of its trees. They figured the logging operation would take the crews until 1930 to finish. My granddad and his father and older brother were in one of the last camps to cut down and haul away the very last bit of it....in 1912. The old mill-site of Deward is now famous for mainly one thing.........vast areas of weathered pine stumps that are all that's left of the forests that were cut. Gone along with those pine forests along the upper Manistee river are the Arctic grayling that were once in the river in unbelievable numbers, the Eastern Elk, Passenger Pigeons, Fisher, Eastern Cougar, etc. Imagine if old man Ward had said in his will... preserve it all as-is, for the future people to see from now on. I'm sure fires would have burned parts, storms would have flattened other parts, and who knows what all would have happened to it, but it would still have been one heck of a gift to the generations to come.

West Virginia has some small patches. They're awsome, not a branch for 30'.

Equally neat to see are the stumps from where they did timber. Stumps are belly high from being hand cut.

In most places here the stumps are about the same, but some areas have stumps 6-8+ feet high on account of the trees being cut while the shanty boys stood on top of the deep snow. Those high stumps are more common in the U.P.

Near Robbinsville,NC there is Joyce Kilmer forest. Supposed to be the last virgin stand in WNC. It's truly impressive. It's hard to recognize some of the types of trees by their bark they are so big compared to what you normally see. There's more game in other nearby areas that have a mix of cut timber. You'll never get that through a tree huggers noggin though!!!

I went to the lost 40 in Minnesota while I was there Grouse hunting that was pretty cool.

Managing a forest should be managing an ecosystem not just trees. I'm not saying there shouldn't be logging because there should be. But it shouldn't be the only consideration. I've spent more than a few days in never harvested areas and clear cuts, and have benefited from both. Moderation and timing of harvest for the entire ecosystem should be considered

There's lots more to a forest than just trees

There are various tracts of "old growth" forest in Oregon. They are amazing to behold and we owe preserving them for future generations. But for sure there is more volume of species in regenerating stands of timber aka clear cuts. But some of the species require old growth and that's nature for you.

All depends on the type of trees. The coastal conifers (Redwood, cedar, Sitka Spruce and some Firs on my coast) live a lot healthier and longer than the inland conifers here. Mountain trees seem to live longer than flatland too. The inland white spruce here gets killed off by beetles about every 30-40 years, and if they don’t get cut they rot or burn. Deciduous trees have a different lifecycle and are less susceptible to disease and fire. Here in my immediate area I can find all levels of the cycle- New burn, old burn, new logged, old logged, virgin dead spruce, virgin live spruce, virgin deciduous, regrown deciduous. It’s interesting to take note of for sure. When logging takes place, it’s definitely good to leave refuges intact for a few years until regrowth provides some cover. After the regrowth is established many critters all but abandon the old growth, it seems.

me too.

But have you been a forest that's never seen a saw while standing in a stream that's never seen a seine?

I cut logs for a living,and as much as I like cutting big wood I really enjoy looking at and being a forest that is old.some of it needs to be protected for all to see and enjoy.now to get the phones out of their hands and get them in the woods.

I hiked into pine orchard in the Adirondacks.

For 27 years I work in old growth forest that never ever seen a chain saw or ax. It was 2300 feet under ground in a coal mine but still, lol.