[Fwd: Help Stop Logging in Roadless Area!]
redoak at forestmeister.com
Wed Oct 4 04:22:27 EST 2000
POSTED IN ALT.FORESTRY, THE LAST REMAINING OUTPOST OF FREE THINKING IN THE
Jim Campbell wrote:
> Which does the greatest harm to natural resources trees, which include
> all components of the forest/grasslands, including wildlife, trees,
> endangered species helpless to flee:
> A. Loggers thinning the forest and improving access roads, going off
> for serveral years allowing nature to settle down and resume its course?
Loggers sometimes do a good job and sometimes do a terrible job. The
distinctions need to be made.
> B. Raging natural wildfires covering millions of acres harvesting
> trees, wildlife and helpless species that can't flee?
Sure, we don't like that one. <G>
> Compare the damage from either.
You can't simplify the complex ecological/political world that way.
> I challenge anyone to find any
> significant damage at all compared to that of those fires, and the
> deficit will remain for many years.
It's not a question of stopping logging, but doing it much better. The world
has more than 2 choices.
> Are we to call what happened this summer across the western US natural,
> normal and desirable when most of the destruction can be prevented
> through management, including maintenance of a well planned road system?
Roads are nice. But roads don't have to reach into every nook and cranny of
> Why is it good for nature to destroy resources that would have fostered
> jobs, economy, recreation, beauty, but it's wrong for man to continue
> dominion over the earth, harvesting its bounty responsibly,
The problem is that most of that harvesting has NOT been done responsibly,
although there are plenty of propagandists who'd claim it all was done well.
Anyone with an IQ of 50 or greater would know better.
> that their children will experience the wonders for themselves someday?
> Am I to believe bird watchers, animal lovers, botanists, biologists,
> school teachers are delighted at the thought of tons of charred flesh
> mixed in the ash of millions of acres of forest floor is a good thing?
> Those forests were home to countless wildlife residents an people alike.
> I'll bet there's not one advocate of natural harvest that would decline
> to call the fire department if lightning struck, setting on fire THEIR
> outside habitat, posing immediate threat to THEIR home. Am I to believe
> they would stand there and say nature has her rights?
> Where is the sanity in all this? Leave the forester alone to do his job.
Some are crooks. Some are scumballs. Some are incompetent. Many love high
grading and clearcutting because they make more money that way.
> He is the friend of the forest, not its enemy.
Some are, some are not. Your case is too simplistic.
> The enemy is the people
> responsible for neglect of proven management techniques that work.
> Jim Campbell
Please tell us more about yourself. What work do you do and where?
For more on the "black and white" vision of most foresters AND the forestry
party line- check out my rant at
"I also want to ask what is wrong with 'right-wing politics'"
posted in SAF News on 9/11/2000 by
Karl Wenger, 1998 President of the SAF
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Ag-forst