[Schroder]

You guys are obviously not familiar with the Reiter and Wallace Falls forest at all or all the future planning and trail development that's gone into this place. It's not an old growth issue. It's not an issue whether there's enough timber to cut. I don't think you'll find much opposition to logging 3/4 of the proposed area. It just the Singletary stand that's along the river that's raising the objections. There were large sawmills a couple of decades ago in Gold Bar, Sultan, Snohomish and Everett. They're all gone now and there's not a single survivor in the valley. They didn't fold up because there was no timber for them. It was all economics.

[Schroder]

[treeswarper]

160 acres here, 160 acres there, yup, it would never add up to anything....sarcasm. Meanwhile, how many homes have been built in the past 30 years on how many acres of forest? What part of hypocrisy do you not understand?

[Ski]

[altasnob]

Maybe Conservation Northwest should get involved to try to prevent the logging near Wallace Falls like they did with Oyster Dome? They still have their lawsuit pending against DNR where they are arguing DNR must take into account recreational and environmental considerations when deciding which land to harvest, and not simply manage the land to maximize returns for the school districts. The lawsuit brought by pro-timber harvest counties (Skagit, ect) against DNR is also still pending (arguing DNR has not harvested enough trees and must now pay damages). Snohomish County is not one of the counties bringing the pro-timber harvest lawsuit. https://www.conservationnw.org/saved-blanchard-mountain/ https://www.conservationnw.org/to-court-for-state-forests/ https://www.nwhikers.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=8031130&highlight=timber+plan

[Schroder]

[Ski]

If that is the case, why can't they withdraw that unit from the sale and proceed with the rest? How did this become an "all or none" deal? That seems a bit odd, considering that on sale proposals on USFS lands oddball units are withdrawn at the eleventh hour quite often. Honestly, I think that their buffer requirements along riparian corridors are more than adequate, particularly where they concern Class I and Class II streams. re: pricing on the materials for that fence repair job: Yes, I could have driven out of my way to run over to Gray Lumber and most likely gotten better material (although at a higher price, which is a given when dealing with Gray), but the homeowner wanted "right now and cheap." I do what the client asks for - particularly THAT one because in addition to paying instant cash they usually fix me a fabulous lunch too. That aside, I have some serious issues with exporting any industry out of country. Whether that's cast-iron forgings for brake cylinders and calipers (most of which went to Canada in the mid-1970s) or fabrication of automotive exhaust components (again, almost all of which went to Canada in the mid-1970s) or automotive seat fabrication and washing machines (almost all of which went to Mexico in the 1970s and 1980s), not making stuff here domestically leaves us in a precarious position should the need arise to start making stuff for more important needs, as happened 78 years ago. There are also the economic considerations: not every man can be a college-educated desk jockey - that's simply not realistic.

[treeswarper]

[Ski]

[Sky Hiker]

[altasnob]

[Ski]

^ Well... that might be a good argument were it not for the fact that when those areas you've mentioned were acquired by the State of Washington, they were out in the middle of nowhere and far away from population centers. That they are now close to population centers is the result of the commercial and residential development that has taken place over the course of decades. As the population increases - as it doubtless will - DNR managed units will become ever closer to population centers. The logical and inevitable result will be that you'll be using that same argument when they're putting in subdivisions out on the west side of the Olympic Peninsula at the lower end of the Clearwater River, and contending that those lands should be set aside for mountain bikers and hikers as well. Rather than allow those with means to fulfill their fantasies about having their own little "cabin in the woods" and building right up to the borders of forest lands, how about we tell them to stay in the cities in high-density housing so we don't have to listen to them whine about having to look at managed timber lands being managed? Considering that we're in a position here to grow merchantable timber faster and better than almost anywhere on the planet - you cannot grow Douglas Fir any faster than you can in Pacific County, Washington - it seems imprudent not to take advantage of the opportunity to use timber revenue for the benefit of the pubic as a whole. While it may well be true that the DNR might well only contribute 5.6% of the money for public schools, I'd submit that hikers and mountain bikers and other recreationists contribute far less. If we had more money for public schools, maybe my property taxes wouldn't keep going up every year, and maybe we wouldn't have such a glut of stupid people in this country.

[Slugman]

Treeswarper demands that all decisions about forests should be made by people who profit from cutting trees. She claims they are the only experts. Then she claims not cutting right next to the lower falls will cause a cascading effect where all wood will be imported from places with invasive insects. Her posts add up to utter nonsense, and 100% selfish dishonesty. Her claims of hypocrisy are a hilarious lie. Shame on anyone dumb enough to fall for this gigantic load of crap.

[treeswarper]

[Ski]

^ Honestly, treeswarper, I'm surprised that you even bothered to respond to that. I thought the part about "profit" was hilarious, especially considering that the project planners and silviculturalists and surveyors and administrators and secretaries involved in putting sale proposals together are all salaried employees, and those involved who actually stand to "profit" have effectively no say-so at all regarding which tree gets cut and which doesn't. But hey, it was good for a laugh.