Forum Index > Stewardship > Threat to clearcut DeLeo Wall
Previous :: Next Topic  
Author Message
RandyHiker
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 6189 | TRs
Location: Mobile
RandyHiker
  Top

Snarky Member
PostThu May 03, 2018 7:44 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
So if they put up a fence and no trespassing signs, then they would need to actively enforce it to prevent adverse possession.    That doesn't seem to make economic sense for land used for timber production.

Anyway -- I think the desirable way forward is for the land to be acquired and incorporated into the park.

Perhaps splitting the property between the steep upslope portion and the flatter downslope portion would allow the "wall" portion to be incorporated into the park and the lower park could be rezoned for Mcmansion development as is popular in the surrounding area.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
MesiJezi
Member
Member


Joined: 17 May 2016
Posts: 76 | TRs
Location: Seattle
MesiJezi
  Top

Member
PostThu May 03, 2018 2:43 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Not in my backyard - But we still throw away garbage and it goes to a landfill.
Not in my skies - But we still fly when we travel for work/vacation.
Not my forest - But we live in a houses built from timber.
Not on my river - But we turn on our lights powered by hydroelectric energy.
Not in my water - But we flush our toilet like everyone else.
Not in my atmosphere - But we go through electronics faster than jeans.

If not us, then who should bear the burden of our consumerism?

Would it be more appropriate to remove trees from a rural area? From another country?

Why is that more appropriate?
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Malachai Constant
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jan 2002
Posts: 14002 | TRs
Location: Back Again Like A Bad Penny
Malachai Constant
  Top

Member
PostThu May 03, 2018 4:49 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Why? Because it is a woodwd area in close proximity to a large urban area used for recreation by many people including most members of this board. There is no pressng need for the timber except for profit in exporting it as raw logs to asia. There are huge areas of third growth all over the US and Canada. NIMBY is not a valid argument it is called enlightened self interest. Woud you really welcome a feed lot next door to your house?

--------------
"You do not laugh when you look at the mountains, or when you look at the sea." Lafcadio Hearn
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
RandyHiker
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 6189 | TRs
Location: Mobile
RandyHiker
  Top

Snarky Member
PostThu May 03, 2018 6:54 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
MesiJezi wrote:
Not in my backyard - But we still throw away garbage and it goes to a landfill.
Not in my skies - But we still fly when we travel for work/vacation.
Not my forest - But we live in a houses built from timber.
Not on my river - But we turn on our lights powered by hydroelectric energy.
Not in my water - But we flush our toilet like everyone else.
Not in my atmosphere - But we go through electronics faster than jeans.

If not us, then who should bear the burden of our consumerism?

Would it be more appropriate to remove trees from a rural area? From another country?

Why is that more appropriate?

Apparently the trees around Greenlake and in Central Park should be harvested as well. :P
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
crock
Member
Member


Joined: 14 Aug 2004
Posts: 43 | TRs
Location: Newcastle
crock
  Top

Member
PostSun May 06, 2018 10:06 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
The parcel slated to be logged is on the west and south edge of Cougar Mountain Park and touches the park on two sides.  There are two well used trails crossing the property, one above the DeLeo Wall cliffs with wonderful (although disappearing) views, the other trail is used to access Cougar Mountain Park for people living in northeast Renton and southeast Newcastle.


The entire Marshalls Hill area was clearcut in the 1930s and now 80 years later, the trees are getting tall enough that even from above the cliffs, the views aren’t what they were in the picture below from 16 years ago in 2002.  Another 16 years of growth and there will likely be no views at all of Mt. Rainier or Lake Washington and the Olympics.

Mt Rainier & May Valley from DeLeo Wall 2002 n
Mt Rainier & May Valley from DeLeo Wall 2002 n

Logging the DeLeo Wall area would open up views and keep the views for decades to come.  This is not wilderness, if we don’t log here, then where do we log?  Most people have never seen a logging operation.  Seeing a small logging operation in action and the aftermath (both good and bad) would be a good thing for people, giving them information and knowledge of how logging works.

Does the public have a prescriptive easement to use the two trails that cross this property?  This is a grey area.  This link http://studylib.net/doc/18434369/law-of-easements is from 2007 and doesn’t have the 2015 Gamboa case that RodF refers to above, but the link cites other court cases and implies the public has a strong case for a prescriptive easement for trail use across the property.  However, there is no prescriptive trail easement unless someone takes the time and energy to push for it in court.

The land should be added to Cougar Mountain Park, but it would be much cheaper for King County to buy the land AFTER it’s been logged.  Like the case of the 1998 Huckleberry land exchange where the USFS got 30,000 acres of mostly logged land by giving up 4,400 acres of forested land in the White River Valley east of Enumclaw.  The government (society) can afford to take a long term view on this.  Trees will grow back.

I use this area a lot a lot and like it a lot, enough that I built the two trails going across the property.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
thunderhead
Member
Member


Joined: 14 Oct 2015
Posts: 789 | TRs

thunderhead
  Top

Member
PostMon May 07, 2018 7:43 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Not only do they provide views, but logging also provides better habitat for deer and berries - two more things in a public park that people want.

HOWEVER.  In this case there are also erosion concerns on the slopes.  I think if those concerns are addressed, the permit should be approved.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!



Joined: 25 Dec 2006
Posts: 8839 | TRs
Location: Don't move here
treeswarper
  Top

Alleged Sockpuppet!
PostMon May 07, 2018 7:49 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
hbb wrote:
treeswarper wrote:
Remember, there is a market for lumber and lumber comes from trees.  Until you find a viable substitute for wood, we will need to cut trees. 

That market, by the way, is in Asia. Doug fir logs are one of Washington's biggest exports. The value of exported logs exceeds, for example, the value of the state's apple exports.

If we don't harvest our state's timber, a lot of Chinese sawmill workers will be put out of work.

Asia is a market.  Timberland owners make money selling logs to the most profitable buyer. As does Boeing, as does Microsoft. It is a business.  When the recession hit, some loggers were able to stay in business by logging trees for export.  Domestic mills had slowed or stopped operations so weren't buying many logs.  The export market was.

I used to walk daily on a gated  tree farm. It has different ages stands of trees all through it.  I never ran into any other people out on it except during hunting season or when the occasional forester came along.

I found somewhere else to walk when log trucks were hauling because there was a chance that my dog might get in the way.  It's  called sharing and compromise.  No, it wasn't a wilderness experience but my dog and I got exercise in a quiet place. 

That landowner, Port Blakely, allowed non  motorized use behind their locked gates.   They did shut off access when fire danger was high.   

I thought it was great to have that parcel in my backyard.

--------------
What's especially fun about sock puppets is that you can make each one unique and individual, so that they each have special characters. And they don't have to be human––animals and aliens are great possibilities
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!



Joined: 25 Dec 2006
Posts: 8839 | TRs
Location: Don't move here
treeswarper
  Top

Alleged Sockpuppet!
PostMon May 07, 2018 8:02 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
As to the erosion concerns:

Did the area slide in the past?  It sounds as though timber was cut before.  Since there were less stringent rules eighty years ago, there may be evidence of any problem areas.  Not all steep slopes slide. Evidence of that claim can be found south of Packwood and Randle, along with areas that are unstable.

Buffering will be done along streams.  It's required.  Also, landowners must submit a management plan in advance of cutting.  Most have a detailed long range plan written up.  Areas are visited by various experts before harvest is approved.  It s not "Willy Nilly".

--------------
What's especially fun about sock puppets is that you can make each one unique and individual, so that they each have special characters. And they don't have to be human––animals and aliens are great possibilities
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Kim Brown
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jul 2009
Posts: 5245 | TRs

Kim Brown
  Top

Member
PostMon May 07, 2018 8:45 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Regulations and economy aside, I think the majority of people who don’t want to see the cut simply enjoy the birds, other wildlife, and aesthetics of the area as it is.

And there's no argument against that.

--------------
" I'm really happy about this! … I have very strong good and horrible memories up there."  – oldgranola, NWH’s outdoors advocate.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 10785 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostMon May 07, 2018 10:29 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Malachai Constant wrote:
Why? Because it is a woodwd area in close proximity to a large urban area used for recreation by many people including most members of this board. There is no pressng need for the timber except for profit in exporting it as raw logs to asia. There are huge areas of third growth all over the US and Canada. NIMBY is not a valid argument it is called enlightened self interest. Woud you really welcome a feed lot next door to your house?

Let's let the owners of the resource decide what 'need' is, instead of placing you at the top of the subjective pyramid on 'need'....in spite of not being on top of the ownership pyramid.

NIMBY is a perfectly valid argument for something called enlightened self interest when it just happens to be right next door, a very strange coinkydink.

--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
RandyHiker
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 6189 | TRs
Location: Mobile
RandyHiker
  Top

Snarky Member
PostMon May 07, 2018 10:52 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
MtnGoat wrote:
Let's let the owners of the resource decide what 'need' is, instead of placing you at the top of the subjective pyramid on 'need'....in spite of not being on top of the ownership pyramid.

NIMBY is a perfectly valid argument for something called enlightened self interest when it just happens to be right next door, a very strange coinkydink.

Since land usage choices affects nearby property owners land owner don't have complete freedom to do whatever they please. 

Obviously-- since this whole thread is about soliciting public comment on whether the land owner should be granted a permit to harvest timber on land they own.

In rural counties such rules tend to be more relaxed,  but in dense population areas a more regulated approach is appropriate.   Extreme example: Building a oil refinery right next to an apartment complex will have a negative impact on the residents of said complex.    Heck even in Klickitat county you might not welcome it if your next door neighbor decided to build a rendering plant and the county had no regulations concerning where such plants could be located.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 10785 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostMon May 07, 2018 12:19 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Sure that's all true.

But let's not elevate NIMBY above what it plainly is, unless the author isn't living in a home using wood products.

--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
nordique
Member
Member


Joined: 04 May 2008
Posts: 931 | TRs

nordique
  Top

Member
PostMon May 07, 2018 1:22 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Thanks for building those trails, Crock!  Anyone who hikes a lot around here gets to see a lot of logging areas, just driving up to trailheads--and most of it looks like an abandoned war zone.  The trails from Newcastle to De Leo are really lovely paths!
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Bedivere
Why Do Witches Burn?



Joined: 25 Jul 2008
Posts: 7169 | TRs
Location: The Hermitage
Bedivere
  Top

Why Do Witches Burn?
PostMon May 07, 2018 1:46 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
treeswarper wrote:
I used to walk daily on a gated  tree farm. It has different ages stands of trees all through it.  I never ran into any other people out on it except during hunting season or when the occasional forester came along.

I found somewhere else to walk when log trucks were hauling because there was a chance that my dog might get in the way.  It's  called sharing and compromise.  No, it wasn't a wilderness experience but my dog and I got exercise in a quiet place.

That landowner, Port Blakely, allowed non  motorized use behind their locked gates.  They did shut off access when fire danger was high.

I thought it was great to have that parcel in my backyard.

This used to be the case on what was then Weyerhauser land North of North Bend.  I remember back in the '80s you used to be able to drive on those roads and we'd take my friend's boat up to Black Lake and catch trout.  Then Weyerhauser decided they didn't want people all over their lands and they started closing the gates and put up a guard at that major interchange on the county road but you could still drive in if you paid them for a permit.  You could also walk or bike in for free, so I continued going to Black Lake an a couple others in the area on my mt. bike.  Then Weyerhauser sold the land and the restrictions got worse.  Now you're not even allowed to walk or bike on the roads without paying an exorbitant fee for a recreation pass.  It's too bad.  Most of that land is forested and while it's basically a monoculture with dense stands of different ages, it's still outdoors in the woods with birds and bears and deer and whatnot and there are a bunch of nice little lakes with fish in them and it's all off-limits for the most part.

When Weyerhauser put it up for sale there was an effort to get a public group together to buy it with bonds.  The bonds were to be repaid by keeping the land as a working forest until the bonds were paid off, then the logging would stop and the land would be allowed to return to its natural state and be a public resource for the entire Puget Sound region.  I thought this was a great idea but they couldn't get the money together in time.  I think it would have been an even better idea to gift the land to WADNR after the bonds were paid off so that the most productive areas could be kept as a tree farm while the obvious recreational opportunities get developed for public benefit.

As to Deleo - seems to me the best thing to do would be as others are saying, let them log it (providing all appropriate environmental precautions are followed) then add it to the park.

--------------
Photo Portfolio
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Kim Brown
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jul 2009
Posts: 5245 | TRs

Kim Brown
  Top

Member
PostMon May 07, 2018 3:19 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
DNR will issue the permit if the project meets state and local criteria. But according to the letter Nordique received from DNR, the state has concerns. And if DNR has concerns, there are concerns.

--------------
" I'm really happy about this! … I have very strong good and horrible memories up there."  – oldgranola, NWH’s outdoors advocate.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
  Display:     All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Forum Index > Stewardship > Threat to clearcut DeLeo Wall
  Happy Birthday ActionBetty, Andy D.!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
   Use Disclaimer Powered by phpBB Privacy Policy