Dogfish –
If the trees are growing faster (at less for the short term) may result in increased volume of wood but that does not make the trees older!

I agree that current rules are an improvement over that of the past and the 150 foot leave strips is an important step in the right direction. However many of our watersheds were severely abused by those past practices and re-entering them with even “gentler” logging prescriptions will substantially extend the time needed for those areas to recovery from the pass. In my part of the state there are dozens of basins where the aquatic habitats will not recovery in your or my life times from those abuses.

I still have some major issues with cutting rates within individual basins. The new rules do nothing to address that issue. Of particular concern is the period of time and area that an area remains distribute and the length of time a new forest remains hydraulically immature – that is length of the time in which water discharges from the site remain altered (more frequent floods). While selective harvest is becoming more common (especially on the East side of the Cascades) the fact remains that clear-cuts remain way too common.

A major factor in the increased degradation of fish habitat downstream of logging sites has been related to the densities of roads. While the new forest rules will eventually reduce some of that density (decades or more in the future) I would argue that on some of our steep hillsides or unstable soils any roads is excessive

While you and I will likely always disagree it is my position that addition timber harvest in a particular area should not be allowed until the downstream impacts from past activity has been addressed. For example no new logging until the road density in a sub-basin has been reduced (orphan and abandoned roads returned to a hydraulically stable condition) to acceptable levels. The fact remains that the impacts on the aquatic habitat from timber harvest is exported from the logging site downstream. No one would tolerate a plant spewing toxic fumes down wind of our homes but many seem will to tolerate increased peak flows (floods) and decreased low flows and increased sedimentation of the habitats that support our fisheries resources and drinking water.

I appreciate the use of all the wood products that come from the timber industry just don't feel that those benefits should be allowed to trump all other aspects of our environment.


Tight lines
S malma