Amen!

Schroeder


"George" george@least wrote in message
...
C'mon, as a cheesehead you should know better. You _can't_ grow seedling
conifers under mature, and if you thin them enough to get light to the
ground, the big ones blow over. That's why they're clear-cut. Fire used
to take care of the problem by clearing areas - to the ground - which it
sweetened with ashes enough for new growth. Anyone with sense can see
that
the only difference between that and clear-cutting, then spreading lime to
sweeten the acid soil, is that you get to use the wood.

I'm next door, and we're harvesting at touch less than half the rate of
growth, and then only because of private landowners. The state and
national
forests are harvested at around a third and slowing, because of agitation
for roadless initiatives and wilderness set-asides, not to mention my
favorite, the "wild and scenic rivers " initiative which would have locked
up a bit over twenty on my place. Public hearings were held 400 miles
away,
by a group of government officials and environmentalists. Landowners were
allowed up to three minutes to address this unbiased group, even though
they
were the ones who would bear the taking. Fortunately the initiator was
defeated in his downstate district, though not over a measure which was
popular among all those who would not have been affected.

Oh yes, the construction lumber mill up the road, which sawed softwood
equal
in every way to the Canadian, went under recently because it couldn't get
a
guaranteed supply.

"Bob Schmall" wrote in message
...
A common debating tactic with both conservatives and liberals in the
United
States is to assume that the most radical positions of the opposite side
represent the views of every opponent. For example, "those loony tree
huggers want to ban all logging." In fact the vast majority of
conservationists call for RESPONSIBLE cutting and reforestration rather
than
the clearcutting that was the industry norm a few years ago. Even the
lumber industry has bought into that for its own long-term good. In
fact,
shipping a few conservationists to Canada would be a benefit for its
industry and a loss to ours.