I agree with most here, that the loggers do a pretty good job of their own enforcement. Milt roe has pretty much nailed the point, which is that the logging companies have a pretty big role in creating these rules. IMO, I have seen less attention paid to RMZ rules on DNR timber sales, than on private forest sales (Weyco, PortB, Green D, Hancock, Etc).

I have seen a gyppo timber crew's foreman come absolutely unhinged on one of his cutters for taking a tree that was obviously within the RMZ. I seriously thought he was going to punch the poor guy.

Providing a bigger RMZ can only help, but the difference in stormwater quantity delivered to a stream from a completely forested hillside, and one that is denuded with seedlings planted on it is exponentially different. I think that the forest companies and DNR realize that they need to give incremental environmental cookies out (like the one you see here), to keep more stringent environmental agencies (DOE) from trying to enact storm and erosion controls that will significantly drive their infrastructure costs.

To me this is just another political feel good story, Mr. Goldmarks first bean in the jar so to speak. I doubt that in 10 or 20 years this change alone will have any positive impact on wild and native fish populations, or hell even keep our favorite rivers from blowing out that often.