"Wuffman" wrote in message
t...
I agree with much of what you Say.
Oregon ( USA) is one of the main states that provide lumber and wood base
products in the USA. In the 50's we provided close to 28% of the USA's
wood product needs. and about 12% of our production was shiped over seas
in the form of products. in the last 10 years only about 18% of our
production stayed in the USA and about 21% was shipped outside te USA in
the
form of raw timber. Oregon has the highest Unemploymnet rate right now in
the USA followed by Washinton ( the state above us) I am very lucky to
have
the Job I do.. as I know many people that have gone from 12 -15.00 an hr
jobs to 6.75 a hr jobs ( if they are lucky to get one) a recent news story
told of 3 men that just graduated college with masters degrees in
enginering
that are working at a fast food joint.

Percentages don't say a lot. How has total production changed? Is the US
cutting less wood? (especially, will it in the future given YKW in the white
house?)

I agree with you that product packaging needs to be alot more conserviate
and I have to say " THANK YOU" to the PC gaming Indrustry, I have noticed
many game on the store shelves come in 2 differnt boxes the 2nd being
1/3rd
the size. I like this for 2 fold its more responsable as well as nice
for
me cause I save the boxes for games I want to sell later....


As far as tre and forest conservation I suposrt it and Oregon State
University has recived many rewards for agriculture acchevments for
developing tree species that grow to a harvestable size in 1/2 the
time....
I just hope that over the next 20 -25 years we can start releasing more of
Oregons land to be harvested for timber now...

As far as recyling... oregon is one of the leading states in Paper
recyling... We are a close 2nd to New York... I just read in a magazine
that the USa recyles close to 28% of its paper.. I know that kind of low
and
we have a long way to go... metal and Plastic needs way more improvment
too... but we are getting there....

but to say that its just the US that has a problem alot of Europian
countries are way worse than the us for waste.... BTW, The Big dog
always
gets blamed for the mess...

Better if all dogs stopped sh**ting in the wrong places rather than we all
blaming others?


"Unicorn" wrote in message
.. .

"Steve Newport" wrote in message
...


Your comment highlights a very important point. Conservation DOES
require sacrifice, even, god forbid, a mans living.

Steve,

While your opinion is good and your espoused beliefs are well based and
I
agree that conservation is needed. Conservation does not have to be
painful.
If the community makes decisions about what they want conserved and how
they
want it conserved, then they may. BUT and this is the big but in every
conservation debate. That community must share the costs and the
financial
pain the decision brings.

When conservation action results in one mans living being lost, then the
community which imposes the conservation has a responsibility to share
their
"living" with those affected by the decision. That is only fair and
equitable.

I know nothing of you apart from you post here. But please if you want
to
foster conservation of anything start by considering the needs of those
disadvantaged by the conservation decision and how to ease their burden.

I live in a small town in Australia, which over the past 40 years has
seen
the loss of three of the four sawmills which paid for this community to
exist. All in the name of Forrest conservation. I am aware of the
conservation arguments. In the case of managed Australian Forestry they
are
lots of emotive balderdash with basically no foundation in truth or
fact.
(They do however buy votes in cities).

This community is now officially recognised by our government as the 7th
most disadvantaged in the State, after 6 city welfare slums. I am yet
to
see any form of compensation or reconstruction in the town to replace
the
200 jobs that were lost when the city based protesters and activists
arranged for the local people to be plunged into an economic downward
spiral
that has seen unemployment above 20% for two generations.

The place for conservation to start on this planet is in the cities of
the
western world. There is little point in even trying to start to
conserve
the worlds resources until the western world, and the urban dwellers in
particular, start to conserve the material and resources that they drain
from the rest of the planet.

They burn energy like it is an endlessly renewable perfectly clean
resource
to make their lives comfortable, convenient and pleasant.

They refuse to consume fruit, vegetables and Meat unless it is in
perfect
condition without blemish or flaw.

They can't utilise enough of their god given intelligence to purchase a
product unless it is contained in at least three times as much packaging
as
is necessary.

They fool themselves with reducing landfill and recycling programs which
conserved nothing. They are a panacea for a guilty conscience which
achieves nothing in the form of real conservation but meet the
politically
driven statistical notions of international agreements.

A great man once said "There are lies, Bloody Lies and Statistics"
before
you ever espouse anything in this life, make sure that our argument is
based
upon more that statistics. Winston Churchill was a very astute man.

All conservation arguments are based upon population and sampling
statistics. Neither of which can be relied upon as either accurate or
unbiased. Conservation groups tend to only include the results which
aid
their cause. Their opposition does the same. The truth is somewhere in
the
mire in between.

Matt

PS I include myself in the "They" . I would not be on the Internet
using
resources if I was not.