Thank you so much for the Aug. 2 article "Timber harvest raises an outcry."

I learned last summer that the land adjacent to mine was being auctioned for logging. (You might say it's across the road, but I own a bit across the road, too.) It hasn't been cut yet, but lots of work is being done on the dirt road I live on, and I presume this is for the loggers' benefit.

Last summer I tried to convince the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources not to cut the trees, since this is old-growth forest, too, with giant pines. One pine by my house is 90 inches around, and one by the garage is 100 inches. These are just two of many huge pines, and those on the land next to mine are also giants.

This land does not need to be managed. The good Lord has managed it perfectly. It has a pond where loons nest and beavers live, and a wild forest. But it is school trust land, and the DNR has the right to log it.

But ethically, should it be? The road it adjoins is a dead-end dirt road about 2½ miles long that many people enjoy walking. Should this glorious forest be cut to support the forest-products industry, or should it be left to give joy to the many people who live here or visit? Northern Minnesota thrives because of the many people who come here because of the lakes and trees.

I'm very disappointed that Gov. Mark Dayton is behind the push to cut more trees. He has a big push to clean up the water, but the lakes are protected by the trees, too. He needs to protect the trees and value them for the living beings they are and the joy they give to so many.

Karin Arsan, Hackensack, Minn.

• • •

We need trees for nature, wildlife and scrubbing our waste, but we also need them for building and the economy. As a big outdoorsman, someone who makes a living from nature and as woodworker, I can see the argument on both sides.

As long as the forest is being replenished, I don't see a problem. It is a win-win for everyone. While old growth is impressive and with some species should be allowed to remain, to a point, such as California redwoods, in many instances there is more of an advantage to cutting the trees. With that said, I don't endorse "clear-cutting" of entire areas. We should have a balanced amount of new, medium and old-growth trees throughout all the areas. If this is done correctly, every generation would have the ability to cut old-growth trees.

I don't agree with having any sort of quotas or cutting certain areas just because an industry or a politician wants you to. I also don't agree with going on a purely emotional stance of not cutting certain areas. There are many things that need to be considered when doing forest logging and maintenance of an area. Things like lobbyists, businesses that stand to gain directly financially and quotas should be lower on that list. The No. 1 job of the DNR is to protect, nourish and grow our natural resources. For a few decades now, it has failed miserably at that job, and perhaps someone else should be involved in the decisionmaking as well. Many Minnesotans have lost faith in the DNR and its missions, but that is a whole different discussion.

The only problem I see with replanting is if the new trees are not properly cared for at the beginning stages, they can easily die off, be eaten or face other issues. Seedlings are relatively cheap, so I would recommend a replanting rate of at least 5 to 1, depending upon the area and the circumstances. We should not treat this sort of situation with a "by the book" approach. Each instance should be considered separately.

This also would be an awesome thing for 4-H Clubs, the Future Farmers of America or other school organizations to get involved in — doing the planting labor of these "replenishing trees," while the timber industry provides the seedlings, tools, water, lunch, etc. It could be an excellent teaching and civic moment, helping the economy and nature.

Tom Helcl, Ottertail, Minn.

The writer is a resort owner and a woodworker.

ETHICS IN FINANCE

Wells Fargo is at it again; what will be the outcome this time?

Absolutely incredible, or shall I say de rigueur, that Wells Fargo has been caught again snapping up its customers' dollars in an illicit manner ("Wells Fargo faces new lawsuits," Aug. 3). Dear Lord, what is it this time? Obviously, a sense of shame or respect for common ethical standards has no play here.

Please let the finger-pointing and PR spin about "dedication to customer service" begin. Yes, please say you're sorry and you will fix this mess and we the public will forget about it in a news cycle or two.

I'm sure strict measures will be taken. Millions of dollars will be clawed back from hundreds of millions of executive salaries and stock options. Ever the darling of Wall Street, Wells Fargo will simply pay its fines and talk of moving forward. The Next Stage, after all.

Real justice would be seeing executive management in prison garb. Who was Denny Hecker? Who was Dennis Kozlowski? Who was Tom Petters? While it is quite satisfying to see the high and mighty brought low, imprisoning them serves to keep the rest of us safe. I know quite a few people for whom a couple hundred dollars is the difference between paying the rent and buying groceries.

Charles Krumrie, Minneapolis
AIRPORT TRANSPORTATION

Ultimately, traditional cabs and new services need same rules

Concerning "MSP cabbies riled over new credit card rules" (Aug. 4): Uber, Lyft and traditional cabs should be regulated by the same laws. They are in the same business — strangers transporting strangers for money. The risks are the same for passengers and drivers. If the laws are too restrictive, change them. If they are not too restrictive for cabbies, they are not too restrictive for others.

Jim Strand, Plymouth
MINNEAPOLIS AND TOBACCO SALES

There's another argument in menthol debate, and here it is

To the Minneapolis City Council members: I can only imagine that if President Donald Trump tried to ban the sales of menthol tobacco products, you'd be front stage with most of the media screaming "racism!" ("Menthol tobacco limits await OK," Aug. 3). And if you don't know why, you'd better do your homework, see who your constituents are or resign your office.

And on a related topic, please show me any study that points out definitive proof that vaping causes actual, direct harm to anyone. Prior restraint and what-might-happen conjectures don't cut it.

"Because we said so" is not a valid reason to ban any legal product.

Oh, and since you claim that this is all because menthol and other flavors are only there to entice children into a bad habit, what's next on your genius agenda? Banning whiskey that is flavored with cinnamon? Rum that tastes like coconut?

Please, just do your jobs, and stay out of everyone's personal, legal lives.

Jim Sullivan, St. Paul
RACE RELATIONS

It seems we're going back toward segregation, this time voluntarily

Regarding the Aug. 2 article about yoga for women of color ("Stretching in their comfort zone"): In the 1960s, white supremacists in the South talked about how black people would be so much happier with their own schools and churches. Now we seem to be moving in that direction, from integration back to segregation. Is this progress? Does anyone really feel threatened in a yoga class?

Marion Levy, Minneapolis