To: tejek who wrote (262538 ) 11/29/2005 1:28:56 PM From: d[-_-]b Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1573827 For decades, we have mismanaged the forests..........leveling them for their wood and/or to build reservoirs and lumber towns. The reservoir in question was built in 1950's, the trees have been down for quite some time under old policies (or lack of policies). Clear cutting works fine in managed tree farms, your point about permits granted near water, watersheds and to salvage are well taken and it't the responsibility of the forest dept to tell us what good management is and how it should be done. Even under Clintons plan there were violations, seems they need some form of enforcement to make it clear the laws should be followed. Interestingly UW put on a really good show about forest management a couple months ago which covered many topics and crushed a lot of popular myths from old studies took a very practical approach to management recognizing we need forest products, but need to protect water, fish, etc to everyones benefit.Responsible forestry goes in and removes only the very old and diseased trees and lives the younger ones to take their place. Not on a tree farm you don't - you thin a couple times and then harvest the bunch - now days they actually leave all the split top trees (useless for lumber) to act as perches for hawks hunting the new clear cuts, and seeders for the area. Clear cuts create a nutrient rich area that suppports lots of life. Of course if done near water, the thinking is it can ruin the streams by raising the water temperature and kill salmon smolts. By law they are not allowed to cut within some distance from streams, do they all follow the laws? Mostly from what I've seen first hand, but the gates are locked - you can;t just drive in and check up on them.