[Eric]

This isnt really about trees especially as the Tongass was already given exempt status as it relates to IRAs back in 03. Well, in Alaska you can make the case that it really still is timber vs. environmentalists or whatever but those days are dying in the lower 48. The media and politicians might still portray it that way as they are used to couching this fight in those terms and certainly logging will still go on and Rey is obviously from that school. But timber and more specifically the timber in USFS roadless areas of the West is small potatoes. The big trees are either protected or already turned into end tables, private land and Eastern hardwoods are in vogue and third world countries and Canada and Russia are cheaper and more profitable places to harvest timber these days for a lot of the same reasons that other stuff is moving overseas. This is about natural gas and oil. That's where the big time corporate profits are at, it is essential to the economic growth and sustainability of at least the next decade or two and it is of foremost importance to politicians.

[Don]

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002265097_roadless06m.html

[Chief Paulina]

[MtnGoat]

[polecatjoe]

Hippocrates- a Greek physician; considered the father of modern medicine. Hypocrites- Persons who profess to beliefs and opinions they do not truthfully hold. Sorry, BPJ!

[Backpacker Joe]

[kayak77]

This really is about putting the decision into those that know the "roadless areas" better. Its about taking the decision out of the federal government and putting it into the hands of the state. The state governor now has control. It really isn't like this is some long-standing rule anyways. It was put into place by Clinton in 2001, right before leaving office as it seems. Why didn't he do this earlier in his term? Anyways, so instead of blaming any new roads in areas that were previously covered by the rule on G.W., look towards your state governor. These areas are resources. They should be used wisely. I don't think there should be much concern in Washington. Even if Dino Rossi is able to overturn Gregoire's controversial win, I'm sure he'd prefer to be re-elected and thats a hard thing to do without being environmentally aware in this state. Just know this, even Gregoire has said that some of the areas covered under the rule will be considered for roads and use. And she's a Democrat. So this really isn't a Democrat vs. Republican issue. It is about putting the decision back into the hands of the states to be in charge of their own land. Brian ------------ http://spaces.msn.com/members/kayak

[MtnGoat]

Interesting point brian. Good post.

[oosik]

The problem is it isn't the states land, it is federal. Should each state create its own collection of specialists to study the land in duplication of those that have historically been in charge at the Forest Service? Or will these decisions be made politically without the opinion of biologists and those that study forest health or whether any of those places should be considered for further protection? Based on the behavior of Governors in states like Utah, I fear the result will be political expediency rather than sound ecology. Business exploitation interests gains the upper hand this way, not the citizens.

[kayak77]

[MtnGoat]

[jenjen]

[Malachai Constant]

I wil only hate you guys if your actions lead to destruction of the areas I love

[Stefan]

How much logging was done in Washington State BEFORE this roadless thing was passed by Clinton? Now I am no expert, and I am going by recollection, but I cannot remember any NEW logging roads for something like 5 years before Clinton signed this bill. Heck, I can't remember when any logging was being done in MBNF. Can you? And if so, where?

[McPilchuck]

I would like to think not too much logging will occur in places that many of us like to go/hike/or climb to, but this new ruling may open that door which has been shut that Stefan has mentioned...and well could be opened further with certain governors or legislators being lobbied in that direction by commercial timber interests. And knowing something about that arena, it's likely we could see a lot more logging operations spark up in this state, as well as the surrounding states due to this new ruling. IMO, it doesn't say much about remaining roadless areas being set aside or protected...a good reason as to why I endorse wilderness designated areas and their creation such as: Alpine Lakes Wilderness, Goat Rocks, Henry M. Jackson, Glacier Peak, Mt. Baker, Boulder River, and so on. Otherwise, non of these areas would be what they are today or tomorrow, there would be less trails and most of it would be logged. It's that simple as far as I'm concerned. I liked the designation of Roadless Areas, even tho I have a 4x4 and enjoy that too. McPil