Free: Contests & Raffles.
Quote from: Fishcrazy82 on November 14, 2014, 07:12:00 AMSo is it only on the east side of the state that the DNR decided to rape the state land?So this is how the thread starts. No information, no specifics, just a random rant. Stir the pot and see what happens.How do you end up talking about school class sizes and herbicide spray programs based on this statement? Perhaps he/she was just complaining about feller-buncher tire marks across the clear-cuts. Woodswalker - that's a lot of big statements without any substantiation. I'd love to see some data or proof to justify your arguments about big biz and environmental groups. I agree conservancy groups are trying to grab up some land, but how can that be a bad thing? Your kids or grandkids will benefit from having that land out of timber production. Big game needs old growth too.Regardless of what the original intent of the thread was, I think DNR is doing a pretty good job in satisfying the monetary needs of the state while being pretty good stewards of our public land. Not perfect, but pretty good. If it was me, I would spray the herbicide immediately after the cut is done then require the replanting take place by the next spring. I could complain endlessly about the alder plantations which require plantings every six feet, then thinning around year six. The thinning slash is dangerous to big game animals and leaves those 40 -100 acre cut areas almost unusable to wildlife and hunters for another decade, until the slashed alder melts into the ground. Regardless, I think DNR is doing a pretty good job on minimal funding.
So is it only on the east side of the state that the DNR decided to rape the state land?