Regarding a recent letter to the editor and a commentary about timber sales, people may have their opinions, but when they seek to influence others in a public forum they need to be factual (“Timber sales in county would destroy mature forests,” The Herald, March 26). The reasons offered for why these timber sales should not be sold and harvested are beliefs and inuendo, not real conditions. Even mentioning the Oso slide area is insulting as the geology is completely different and the actual slide is miles away. The author also offers a bait and switch by conflating old growth and mature forest.
Overall, approximately 50 percent of state Department of Natural Resources-managed land is not in the harvest base.
There is not a shortage of old growth forest, and misguided advocates are working to reduce lands available for sustainable forest management and harvest.
Older forests are carbon-dioxide emitters from mortality and decay. Forests 30 to 70 years of age have the fastest growth rates and thus take in the most carbon dioxide. Carbon is stored in long-lived wood products as well as trees. For example, Stilly Revisited, if it were a managed forest of 60 to 80 years, would have twice the volume of wood it currently has.
To have someone use their title with the Legue of Women Voters for such misguided advocacy is sketchy. The LWV is not furthering social justice with this nonsense. All of our sawmills are dependent on a reliable supply of wood including from state trust lands. Their workers and locations are for the most part rural. Loggers and the support industries are also mostly rural. This call is another example of arrogance and opinion hitting an underserved population.
We need to use more wood, substituting it for concrete and steel and their high-carbon emissions. Where will our wood come from? We import 40 percent of our needs now.
Paul Wagner
Darrington
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
