Does Nature Know Best?

McKenney d_mckenney at conknet.com
Fri Jan 2 07:26:10 EST 1998


I agree with Wenger, nature doesn't know anything.   Much of the
environmental debate taking  place today involves people speaking from a
fact or science based background to others for whom environmental activism
is more in the realm of a religious activity. This makes for generally
heated discussion without much light. One group believes that science can be
used to grow and harvest trees while the other group is worshipping the same
trees.
Jostnix wrote in message <19971231215800.QAA17668 at ladder02.news.aol.com>...
>Karl F. Wenger, in a commentary in the January Journal of Forestry,
indicates
>that "Nature knows nothing...Nature is deaf, dumb, blind, and unconscious."
He
>goes on to say that nature has a destructive potential as well as a
benificial
>potential.  You basically cannot depend on nature for sound forest or
>environmental management.
>
>The ancient Mosaic idea that man is the caretaker of all the earth, has
>dominion over all the earth, is the wise denominator, and Gifford Pinchot's
>idea that science is the answer to all problems comes out strong here.
>
>Wenger suggests that a Nature controlled is a perfect Nature.  Man's
>intervention is the preferred way Mother Nature should be managed.
"Clearly,
>the people's needs are satisfied much more abundantly by managed than
unmanaged
>forests."
>
>Why do we need organizations trying to control the forest resource? What is
you
>take on this...
>
>Steve Nix
>
>      )(
>    ))}{((
>  ))))}{((((
>))))))}{((((((
>``````) (___©______John Stephen Nix
>"Everybodys ignorant 'cept on different things"  Will Rogers
>Alabama Forestry Link...http://members.aol.com/jostnix/index.htm
>http://forestry.miningco.com
>






More information about the Ag-forst mailing list