15-09-2003, 06:22 PM
|
|
|
"Preservationists" accelerate bark beetle infestations
(Joe Zorzin) writes:
I'm sure some preservationists do oppose all logging- probably after
reviewing the history of logging in North America, until recently as you
say, what they saw was so hideous that they now assume there is no such
thing as good logging. So, who has the responsibility of educating them that
there is such a thing as good logging if not the forestry profession? But
instead of doing that, the forestry establishment just opposes anything
that the preservationists want. So the 2 sides keep up the ancient struggle
and both are at fault.
At least here in Mass. some of us have made an effort to reach out to
enviros, especially the Mass. Audubon, to show them what good logging is
like. This is a better idea than the usual SAF and other reactionary
opposition to enviros.
You are confusing environmentalists and preservationists.
Preservationists pay no attention to the environment, they just want
public lands declared off limits for productive use. It is a religion
with them.
Groups like The Nature Conservancy and The Audubon Society have an
interest in wildlife habitat. When the trees start to crowd out critical
habitat, the trees have to go. The Nature Conservancy uses logging
whenever necessary to maintain habitat, and they don't feel guilty about
collecting the money for logs.
The Audubon Society is the same way. They know that if you don't have
meadows, you don't have meadowlarks. Individual members might not
understand the ecology, but the leaders of the organization would rather
see productive logging in the USA if it protects critical migratory bird
winter habitat in Central America. Preservationists would turn Central
America into a parking lot before they would permit logging in federal
forests.
Preservationism is an irrational extremism. They are not interested in
your forestry. No matter how good you do your job, they see you as an
evil to be destroyed. You just don't run into them there in the East,
because you don't have any publicly owned forests worth mentioning.
I have my own gripe with enviros- now that we have shown them good forestry
here in Mass.- we still don't get much support from them in pushing for
better forestry here, as contrasted with the fact that 2/3 of all logging
here is still high grading.
Environmentalists don't care about high grading. In their minds, a tree
is a tree. If you can figure out how high grading is harmful to a rare
species of animal, you might get their attention.
--
http://home.teleport.com/~larryc
|