Headwaters Forest Video Available

Don Staples dstaples at livingston.net
Sat Sep 6 08:57:49 EST 1997

Joseph Zorzin wrote:
> Don Staples wrote:
> > Mark Shippey does a good enough job defending himself, so I wont try.
> > But, your attack on Hurwitz is in the same vein and contention that
> > Mark's is about EF!'ers.  You have Hurwitz a criminal (unconvicted)
> > indicted (untried) and define his works as criminal (unconvicted).
> > Perhaps it is a damn shame, in your view, to what his company is doing
> > or plans to do to Headwaters, I wont judge, but, still, it is private
> > property.  Not government, not yours, not mine, not the states.  Buy it,
> > and you can do with it what you want.
> >
> I don't know the details of this situation, but a landowner doesn't
> really have total rights to do ANYTHING with their land. They don't have
> the right to destroy the streams, cause fire hazards or other
> environmentaly destructive actions. Clearcutting is often really just an
> aesthetic problem not an environmental one- and I've done a few small
> clearcuts myself (as a forester). But pillaging a large forest for short
> term gains, if it hurts the local economy is morally wrong and
> economically destructive to the rest of society who will be paying the
> welfare checks for the ruined families. Again, I don't know the details
> here, but I wouldn't agree that a landowner can do ANYTHING. After all,
> we are a SOCIETY with some responsibilities to others. Of course
> conservatives speak with a fork tongue- they preach Christianity out one
> side of their mouths while ferociously screeming about THEIR property
> rights out of the other side of their mouths. Such a selfish attitude is
> foolish as - in the long term we're all gonna end up in the Earth
> anyways. If we're gonna end up in it- we ought to take a stewardship
> approach to our future home.

You reinforce my comments.  I don't know the property involved, nor do I
know Horwitz's business acume in forestry.  However, you know as well as
I that the EPA will shut him down on stream mismangement, particularly
in the Peoples Republic of California.  And my web page indicates my
feelings on ownership.  It is indeed stewardship for the future.  But
the fact remains, it is private property, not federal or state, and I
have to assume that they fulfill the requirements of the California
timber laws, or California would shut them down.  I have a client with
3000 acres of second growth redwood that talks my ear off on the
requirements to log, and restore, his timber.  The whole question is the
right of private ownership, and EF!'ers desire to shut down this piece
of private property.  Who's will they choose next?

Ego Stroke:  http://www.livingston.net/dstaples/

More information about the Ag-forst mailing list