need help with response to timber industry apologist !!

[niyad]

the comment below is part of an ongoing discussion brought about by a recent DU post on *'s crimes against nature. according to her, the EPA is doing an excellent job, and those nasty enviro's just get in the way. (also, according to her, we are doing a FANTASTIC and altruistic job of rebuilding iraq) Can someone help me with some pertinent info?


"Perhaps you're thinking of the logging companies of the past, the Timber Industry has planted more trees than they've cut down in the past 30 years or so. They are not about to cut down all the trees for no darned reason, that would put them out of business. There are tree farms all over the US, and after all Chthlu timber is a renewable resourse. "

(in case any of you are wondering, she really has drunk the kool-ade)

thank you in advance for all your help.

[muntrv]

1. Legalize hemp.

That is also a good source of paper.

[GreenPartyVoter]

7. And clothes and shoes and food and fuel..... More below

http://www.thehia.org/

[niyad]

13. believe me, I agree with you--why doesn't the gov't subsidize hemp

instead of tobacco and timber/logging?

[Lefty-Taylor]

2. Well, she's got the IQ of a fence post, to quote

Tom Waits. But you can tell her that a tree farm is NOT a forest. You can also refer her to two investigative studies I researched and wrote in the mid-1990s (not that she'd read them but the titles would give her an idea): "Chainsaw Justice" and "Sleeping with the Industry" -- both of which detail the abuses of the timber companies and the collusion and corruption of the Forest Service. Things have only got worse under Bush. He appointed a former timber industry mouthpiece and lobbyist to run the Forest Service.

Again, though, she's nuts; you might be best advised to ignore her or talk to her only about flowers, the weather and your favorite pies. Good luck.

[niyad]

12. welcome to DU--and thank you for the information--are your studies

available online? I would love to point her to them.

I manage to ignore her most of the time, but some of her remarks are so egregiously stupid that I have to say something.

[noamnety]

3. The Tongass forest is a good example

The trees -- some of them stripped, stacked beside a new road and awaiting a logging truck that apparently will never come -- are the abandoned tail end of a timber sale that, on the front end, earned the U.S. Treasury about $45,000 but cost American taxpayers about $2 million to set up.

<snip>

That sale is one of 10 that the federal government, in an attempt to keep the timber industry above water, has this year allowed local companies to walk away from.

"It seems crazy to me," said Floyd Peterson, a commercial fisherman who, as a member of the local Tlingit tribe, can drive his all-terrain vehicle across native land to this otherwise inaccessible corner of the forest. "Why do the politicians want this timber cut when there is no market for it?"

The abandoned sale, known as the Humpback-Gallagher sale, is part of a U.S. Forest Service logging program that, on an annual basis, is costing the federal government between $30 million and $35 million more than it collects in timber sales.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A31070-2004Jul31?language=printer

[niyad]

14. thank you, I put that link in my response.

[Botany]

4. I have a little knowledge in the subject.

How was the timber harvested?

Did they keep buffers by the creeks & rivers?

Was it an even age stand of timber?

Did they leave enough old logs on the ground along w/ leaf litter &
some mature trees to allow the ecological conditions for the forest to
rebound?

Planting a seedling is not compared w/ the harvesting of a 100 + year old tree.



vs



But just remember people see what they want to see and to some facts are
just a test of the faith of a true bleever.

[niyad]

15. thank you for your questions--and the pics--maybe SOME will see the

difference, although I doubt she will be one of them.

[Shakespeare]

5. Oh? Bullshit.

Maxxam Corp. bought out Pacific Lumber in the '90s and promptly began mass clearcutting of redwood forests in Humboldt county. A little googling will show you how the clearcutting has devastated the region's watershed (mass flooding, erosion, slides around Scotia and other areas where logging was done).

And I've never known of an old-growth redwood forest that could be reconstituted in 30 years. Or even 300.

[Gregorian]

8. That's right.

That takeover was all about investor's return on their money.

I spent much time in those forest. More time than my phd forest pathologist friend. There is almost not a single fish in any of those rivers. AND talking to locals, those rivers were teaming with salmon in 1968. I've heard people describe it as if one would walk across the water on them.

I've seen the erosion.

The funny thing is, Fish and Game kicked me off and was going to arrest me, but all I was doing was riding a bicycle. But they'll allow semi trucks and goons with chainsaws to literally dismantle the forest.

We know the truth. But it's a tough job to get people to see. I didn't see until I saw it with my own eyes. Out of sight, out of mind. City people just go to the lumber store. There is no connection to forests and animals and rivers.

And I believe we have dug our grave.

[niyad]

16. I remember driving through the redwood empire for the second time in

the mid-80's as a friend and I were going to the coast for a few days. I was so excited, looking forward to being able to see those magnificent trees again. when we hit the forest-- I was in shock--acre after acre of nothing but stumps. I just sat there and cried. I don't even want to think about what it looks like now.

[Gregorian]

6. There isn't much help.

Yes trees grow back. If I smack you in the face with a two by four, it won't hurt in a few months.

You either love forests, or love logging. It's about aesthetics, nature, environment, OR money.

20 percent of the carbon dioxide that is in the atmosphere, above and beyond normal concentrations, is due to deforestation.

Freepers laugh, and I don't even use this as an argument. But it's true that the mentality is that forests are not forests, but tree farms. Logging is disruptive. In Oregon, they clearcut. Then they burn. And every living thing is killed on 120 acre areas at any given time. Deer have no incentive to live in those areas for long periods of time after they are cut.

Let's see if I can make more analogies. Forests aren't forests, they're tree factories. Humans are people, they're workers. Earth isn't home, it's a big resource for manufacturing.

Right now I am preparing myself to have a huge part of my neighbor's property logged. Essentially it is the one thing that attracted me to my place. Several hundred acres of big old trees. They sold their property a year ago. And that new owner is cutting the roads as I speak. Any one of these mornings, the gang of chainsawers is going to descend upon the forest and turn it into stumps. I am absolutely furious. And not just because of the loss of trees, but because these fucking operations go on all night. I will literally have to move away from my land for about four months. Did I say I'M FURIOUS? And the company that's doing it is called Roseburg Resources. Resources. That is the key word. It's no different than Rove. It's words. Loggers would be people who put logs in the forest. Deforesters would be those who chop trees for lumber. That would be honesty.

Again, it's about ME versus WE. When we think me, we think pocketbook. When we think we, we think about the planet.

Having said all of this, it's not the loggers that are the problem. The problem is the source. And the source is people who want kids who want houses. It's demand. If there were no more people asking for lumber, there would be no reason to cut the forests.

And to think I didn't even care about this issue ten years ago. Ask anyone where lumber comes from and they'll say "lumber store". No, the right answer is "a forest".

I know I still didn't answer your question. But it's like going into Iraq. We didn't know why, but we do now. If every American knew the truth, they'd be livid. If we can think about the world our children will live in, we will be more careful with our planet. I still can't answer your question. People who want to be reckless with forests will do so. We are at the mercy of the aggresive. It's sad. If they can't see a better world, then we have to get smart and figure out how to keep their little hands away from the cookie jar. Until then, cut cut cut, burn and slash.

[niyad]

17. thank you for your insights.

[roguevalley]

9. tell her to fly over oregon. the fuckers have ruined the state. as for

tree farms, fine. reseeding other areas? doesn't a habitat for animals make. they are sterile places and too few.

RV, whose dad was a logger for thirty years. (PS. Tell her I think she's a shithead. I can't bear to cut a tree and neither can my dad anymore.)

[niyad]

18. unfortunately, on that forum, we cannot use such language, even though

that is exactly what she is.

[blm]

10. A sister is married to a paper company president and even he has been

expressing worry about Bush's enviro-policies, and he's even a full-fledged fundie to boot.

[niyad]

19. then we know the situation has to be truly desperate.

[Greyhound]

11. The timber industries problems are 100% self-inflicted

and, as such, they should have to bear the price.

Another example of gross negligence and mis-management that the taxpayers get to foot the bill for.

[niyad]

20. the concept of responsbility sees to be non-existent for *'s "base"

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

21. You can't replant old growth forest.

http://www.eugeneweekly.com/2006/05/11/news2.html

[SmokingJacket]

22. Tree farm does not equal Old Growth Forest. nt