Apostate Christians for zero cut

Cporter cporter at mis.net
Mon Oct 19 08:43:26 EST 1998


Mr. Johnson,

I'm sure the author, Ms. Alexander, is a fine person and well educated. 
So my comment is not meant to condescend her with regards to her concerns. 
Only, it is meant to take a jab at the prevailing ignorance in the ever
difficult job of resource management.  Perhaps I should have chosen my
words more carefully.

The tree free brand of toilet paper is certainly a marvelous thing.  I
intend to try it, thanks!  Advances in technology that will
allow for the construction of a totally tree free home and the
production of thousands of other tree free products are certainly on the
rise.  But there are practical products now that are extremely dependent on
wood fiber.  So, until then, and I think that'sgoing to be a long time from
now,
shouldn't we conserve the resource. 

Being someone who is involved in the natural resources profession
on a regular basis, Mrs. Alexander's comment is exemplary of a mis-informed
public with regards to the sustainability of our natural resources.  The
profession of forestry and the science of silviculture takes a bad rap from
those who don't understand resource sustainability.   

Do you know what is so terrific about trees Mr. Johnson?  In my view, it's
that they are renewable on a time scale that is easy to comprehend; it is,
for all practical purposes, renewable for all with a wide variety of uses
(I certainly don't want all the old growth forests to disappear).   Coal,
on the other hand, is a natural resource that formed on a geologic time
scale that is so hard to grasp, that once it's gone, it's gone for
everybody.  It is, for all practical purposes, not renewable to anyone for
the sake of, say,
electricity.  Other sources for producing electicity would have to be
developed.  

To suggest that we not harvest timber and then manage the regrowth would be
quite an ignorant (not stupid, there's a difference don't you know),
impractical, and economically dangerous thing to do in my opinion.  And
this is what Ms. Alexander was suggesting when she said it would be a "sin
of greed and waste" to harvest the forests, presumably all forests.   No
mention was given by her to just old growth; I believe you brought that up.
 I could go on and on, but what good would that do?  I don't know what your
profession is or what your position is------but I don't need to know
either. 

So, in a final note.  I urge you to take a stand! Stop perpetuating the
ignorance that prevails with regards to the mangement of natural resources.
And, I acquiesce to you that it is often mismanaged.   But, It would be
more of a waste to not wisely use this resource than to simply let alone,
which seems to be what is implied.  

A red herring is a red herring is a red herring; in my view, it's ignorance
just the same. 

Have a Nice Day

  

Kirk Johnson <newkirk at olywa.net> wrote in article
<newkirk-1810981949550001 at lisa7.olywa.net>...
> "Cporter" <cporter at mis.net> wrote:
> 
> > I wonder what Ms. Alexander uses for her toiletries or if she has a
nice
> > wooden deck to sit on and contemplate her interpretations of the Bible.

> > Perhaps she lives in a straw house.
> 
> This line sure is a tired, tired bullshit red herring. If anyone is
> interested, the brand of toilet paper "Purely Cotton" is tree-free, made
> out of cotton. If you can't find it in your local grocery and want to
> request that they carry it, the UPC code for a four roll pack is: 7 03999
> 00040 1. Alternatively, there are numerous brands which produce tp with
> 100% post-consumer recycled content, and with lower recycled content. And
> in fact, there are fine houses being built largely out of straw, as well
> as numerous other alternative materials. They certainly don't have to be
> built out of publicly owned, taxpayer subsidized, clearcut, old-growth,
> fish and wildlife habitat obliterated wood.
> 
> Kirk Johnson
> 



More information about the Ag-forst mailing list