Likely only talking to myself here in this old thread, so here goes anyway: amazondk, I do note much nuanced thought in your writings and I applaud that, but a few discrepancies have easily been spotted. First, way back up yonder, you speak of the methodology of a "sustainable" harvest, whereby only trees of large size are removed, the rest being left to grow on. Well, many decades ago here in the US, this was recognized for the mistake it is, and is known as high-grading. It can amount to the systematic removal of a given stand's best genetics for profit, leaving the weaker and less vigorous stems behind. Then, you also speak of how in the US PNW, there is so much replanting post harvest. Sure, sure, but it's all one species, so where you had doug fir, w. hemlock, w. red cedar, perhaps grand fir, etc. you now have just doug fir. That's hardly environmentally wise and is certainly not preserving the previous forest genetics. Also, in speaking of, for example, ipe's rapid growth, you do not mention that it is precisely the huge expanse of time which has allowed that and other species' gradually slowing growth rate (As they near maturity) that allows for such high-quality product. Finally, you repeat the long-discredited notion that it is young forests which are sequestering the most carbon. This erroneous thought came about when researchers initially only measured height increment in determining overall use and hence, sequestration of carbon. In fact, the old-growth tree is still, by dint of its immense overall size, still growing "faster" than the young pup, its growth simply being spread all over its many growing points. I learned that 20 years ago. All that said, I do certainly agree with some of your other points. For the best example, the often erroneous portrayal of a logged-out stand as a ruined one. If that's the case, I sure do wonder where all this great woodland here in Wisconsin came from! We supplied half the country with the wood to build this nation, in the case of a little town called Chicago, twice! Yes, nature is resilient and it can bounce back impressively. It is too bad though that your buddy seems to only want to hurl names and stereotypes around in this thread. Everybody else had reasonable things to contribute.

Thanks, Steve, What i meant by "milled badly" was that at one end of a board it would be 5.5inches width and at the other it would be 5.375inches. This required me to go thru all the boards to try and find matching width ends where they butted, or re-rip ten foot ipe boards on site using my Sears 10inch Harry the homeowner tablesaw. It wasnt pretty. The quality of the wood and the sanded sides seem good to me, just gotten dirty and a little gray. Its really noticeable whenever I wet it down. Wet looks incredible, but soon dries back to dusty gray. I will be testing a 50sqft area with sanding then finishing and if I like it better, I will tackle 50-100sqft every weekend until done. Or hire some helpers and get it all done in a week or so. Thanks again for the advice. And if you or Celeste is ever out here on the left coast near Santa Barbara, you should come by for a marguerita! Its really nice here when it isnt on fire, or earthquake, or flash flooding, or locust season, or an election, or... :)

I think your choices sound nice, too. Snowbound should look brighter on the exterior but not too bright. FWIW, this link shows several nice grays with the final choice being Mindful Gray. https://www.addicted2decorating.com/six-inspiring-house-exteriors-and-my-potentially-shocking-final-house-color-choice.html

I don’t have Marvin, my windows are by Andersen. They’re bronze exterior with white interior and hardware. I’m sorry that I don’t know about the screens; I didn’t have them put up. Andersen uses Sherwin Williams so I was able to get the exact color code of the bronze to paint my exterior doors. If you want bronze interior you may want to see if Marvin can provide the color info.