EF! Fined $1million in Idaho

D. Braun dbraun at u.washington.edu
Sun Feb 23 18:59:14 EST 1997



On 22 Feb 1997, wbg wrote:

> Madd DOG (GET at BENT.U.NWO.ASSHOLES) wrote:
> : David Whitt wrote:
> : > 
> : > >
> : > >Go back in 20 years. The forest can be selectively cut and NO evidence
> : > >of past logging exists.
> : >
> : > Maybe its because the timber industry is not replanted at the rate 
> : > they are depleating. 
> 
> Au contraire - over the past several decades, at least in the West, the 
> number planted has exceeded the number cut by a comfortable margin. Of 
> course the newly planted aren't "Old Growth".
> 
> : > to help filter the air and produce oxygen.  We need not fewer trees but
> : > more and because of the myopic vision of people like you, the CO2 levels
> : > have risen over 12% since 1900.
> 
> Give me a break, and check your facts before recyclying the 
> anti-capitalist Greens crap. We have more trees today in North America 
> than we had in 1900. Since that verifiable fact might impair your 
> ideologically bent polemics, you'd prefer to pretend it doesn't exist>

Straight from the Limbaugh show.  This "more trees..." factoid is a stinky
red herring that someone should cart off and bury.  The issue isn't the
number of stems/ac, its the wisdom of swapping intensively managed,
roaded, short rotation tree farms for primary forest. Somewhere around 5%
in the lower 48, and somewhere between 8 and 15% in the PNW.  
 Our society uses wood products, fine--- but we don't need to grow them on
every acre. There are other considerations. 

> : > Environmental laws have created more jobs than those lost. 
> 
> Do you happen to have any documentation for this rather dubious assertion?

It is true that in a period since the Dwyer injunction (1989?) against
cutting NSO habitat, around 100,000 jobs accrued in OR--- which replaced
the jobs working in the timber industry in that period several times over.
Based on my recollections of this issue as reported in the media, around
10 -20 thousand jobs were lost due to a reduced supply of old-growth logs.  
 Clinton supported $ for retraining, business development, and habitat
restoration--- and has had amounts reduced by the Repubs.
Much of the job growth in OR and WA jas been tied to the quality of life
here, causing people to move here and start businesses--- and part of the
quality of life is wilderness, designated or otherwise.
And, there are the recreation jobs.

> : > The problem is, you don't want to keep it that way.  You want this land to
> : > be your land for your profit.  If this land is our land, why not share
> : > your profits with us?
> 
> "Share your profits with us" ??? sounds like redistribution to me. 
> 
> Take it at gunpoint if you can, bucko.

Here we have not only an expression of ignorance (the old-growth we are
talking about is nearly all on public land), but of violence. Careful---
violent threats are taken seriously by some, whether made seriously or
not.

		Dave Braun


> 
> 
> --
> ***********************************************************************
> W. Brewster Gillett	wbg at hevanet.com		Portland, Oregon USA
> ***********************************************************************
> 
> 




More information about the Ag-forst mailing list