It's a Worse Law than I Thought

Update: I just reread more carefully the definition of "specialty wood" that I quoted in my previous post, and I realized that the problem is even worse than I thought.

Here's the definition again:

"Specialty wood" means wood that is:
(a) In logs less than eight feet in length, chunks, slabs, stumps, or burls; and
(b) One or more of the following:
(i) Of the species western red cedar, Englemann spruce, Sitka spruce, big leaf maple, or western red alder;
(ii) Without knots in a portion of the surface area at least twenty-one inches long and seven and a quarter inches wide when measured from the outer surface toward the center; or
(iii) Suitable for the purposes of making musical instruments or ornamental boxes.

Note that sub-section (b) of the definition reads "One or more of the following:"

Now while I suspect the intent of the definition was to limit permitting requirements to the species listed, by putting the species list subordinate to this statement, sub-paragraphs (ii) and (iii) apply to ANY species. Since a good turner can make "ornamental boxes" out of practically anything, this means every single piece of wood less than 8' long that I acquire in, or transport into, Washington state, is subject to the permitting requirements.

I think the Washington State legislature needs a new proofreader.