Trails for everyone, forever

Home News Blog Hikers' Voices Heard on I-90 Timber Sale

Hikers' Voices Heard on I-90 Timber Sale

Posted by Andrea Imler at Jun 23, 2015 10:25 AM |

Over 500 comments from hikers were sent to the Forest Service asking for a timber harvest to be to be balanced with protecting trails. The Forest Service heard hikers loud and clear.

A hiker on the Ira Spring trail. Photo by abertino.

In late March, we asked for your help to speak up for trails along the I-90 corridor. The Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest had proposed a timber sale along some of the most beloved trails in the forest.

Over 500 comments from our Trail Action Network were sent to the Forest Service asking for the timber harvest project to be to be balanced with protecting recreation and trails. The Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest is one of the most visited national forests in the country, and the trails surrounding I-90 comprise the Mountains to Sound Greenway, likely the most popular recreation corridor in the state, offering unique opportunities to enjoy mountain views, wildflowers and alpine lakes.

We’re happy to say that the Forest Service heard hikers loud and clear and made two major changes to their project:

  • The Ira Spring Trail will no longer be used as a road to haul logs on for the timber sale.
  • The Pratt Lake / Granite Mountain Trail will not have logging occur on either side of the trail – the entire unit has been removed from the project.

What the Hansen Creek project will do

The Hansen Creek Vegetation Project will occur over a span of six years and includes:

  • Harvesting trees across a total areas of approximately 1,347 acres with trees ranging from 40 to 120 years old between exits 38 and 47 on Interstate 90;
  • Tree harvesting would take place next to the Ira Spring, Talapus Lake, McClellan Butte and John Wayne trails; and
  • Trail and road closures to recreation sites would be closed when tree harvesting activities are taking place in the area.

What's next?

While the Draft Decision Notice document has been released to the public, the Final Decision will only be made after a 45-day objection period, which began on June 1, 2015. After the 45-day period, the Forest Service will review the objections and respond to them. If there are objections, the Forest Service will respond to them. If there are no delays with the timber sale, the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest had proposed beginning the project this summer.

Become a member of our Trail Action Network

When you become a member of WTA’s Trail Action Network, you’ll have the opportunity to make your voice heard. Please sign up for TAN today and help protect our trails.

Related News

Speak up for Trails in the I-90 Corridor



I can get this started ;) I am sad that the scale of our planet weighs in the favor of humans. The mountain landscapes and expansive oceans are so much more beautiful without us, however humans are everywhere. Maybe we could harness our efforts to as best we can for humanity in our own yards, households, state, country and planet.

That includes the renewable resource of our natural surroundings. I am in favor of harvesting our forest responsibly. Even when we, Washington State, have to feel the effect and lose of gorgeous trails and be faced with the effect of humanity. The positive is that we will as an amazing state replant the same area to be harvested again in years to come. So maybe our grandchildren can love this trail like we do. Don’t we also allow portions of old growth forest and balance other areas for human use? I would rather shift focus on things that aren’t renewable for example waste that we ship to other countries, carbon monoxide and consumerism of excessive items we don’t need.

I’m sure many people feel this is one of those fights - However I’d argue the altruistic larger view of the entire world the greater goal would be HOW this renewable and reusable area is replanted, reused, taken care of, shared with animals, shared with unique plant species and continually valued for years to come. How Washington State can continue to manage the details and pieces of our land? In the bigger picture are we saying that we should never harvest another tree or is it just not harvest these trees? If we don’t reuse these which ones will we reuse? Will it be done more responsibly by anyone else?

Posted by:

carrieb on Jun 23, 2015 11:43 AM