Re: NANFA-- choices

Robert Carillio (darterman_at_hotmail.com)
Sat, 09 Sep 2000 02:37:30 EDT

I know I am not part of this discussion, however, the rate in which we
consume , far outweighs what we are putting back, and no matter how the
timber companies try to gloss over reality, this fact still remains. While
many timber companies do their best to re-plant the forest, many of those
plantings end up dead, and are not really replacing what was in terms of
plant diversity. While it is true that the very home we are living in
contains timber products, this does not, in my opinion, give us the right to
continue to "suck" the resources dry in the name of progress. A disease can
"progress", but does that mean it's a good thing. I live in Ohio, and am
really not familiar about logging in the west, however, there is no doubt
that here, poorly planned logging has devastated aquatic environments...
FACT... PURE AND SIMPLE... END OF STORY... CASE CLOSED... PERIOD!!!.. Anyone
who trys to sugarcoat the truth herre is in major denial. What we need to do
is to strike a balance. We as humans, the most so called intelligent
species, should be able to strike this balance, and not ruin the very source
that makes it possiple for us to live. There should be more promotion to
restore cities from the core, makeing them more desirable to live in so that
everyone is not fleeing and begining to create all the same problems they
left the city for in the first place. This is unfortunatly going to be our
only choice in the future, if we as a race, and life form expects to carry
on.... I know I am going way off the deep end here and that this
conversation is something I just butted in to, but, I was reading some of it
and could not resist the need to "come to bat" for Jay..... Remember this
simple rule of thumb... Don't take more than you give.... In the case of
timbering... the natural world is almost always getting the short end of the
"stick"... HA!.. Rob...

>From: BR0630_at_aol.com
>Reply-To: nanfa_at_aquaria.net
>To: nanfa_at_aquaria.net
>Subject: Re: NANFA-- choices
>Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 23:12:10 EDT
>
>In a message dated 00-09-08 17:52:15 EDT, Jay wrote:
>
><< When you talk
> about encouraging interactions, I agree, but not when we humans insist we
> get to choose the level of interaction (development, logging, etc.) and
>say
> the animals have to adapt. I believe we need place a higher value on
> protecting habitat than on the rights of humans to develop it. >>
>
>I still get a little hot under the collar when I read this anti-logging
>rhetoric. I think I have cooled sufficiently to make at least one of my
>points. First, Jay, this is not an attack on you, rather a debate of your
>ideas. Do you or do you not have lumber/wood as part of the construction
>of
>your house, furniture, and/or fences? If that wood product is not from
>trees
>in the good ol' US of A, does it make it any more acceptable if it comes
>from
>Canada, Brazil, or Mexico? Do you advocate eliminating all wood products?
>Do you think it would be a good thing to eliminate all logging? If so,
>just
>one of the many consequences might be a season of devastating wildfires
>like
>we are currently having here in Idaho. Regarding the fires, please don't
>tell me that it's Mother Nature's way, and therefore, we must let it be.
>In
>that case, we do nothing to change the effects of floods, hurricanes,
>tornadoes, or earthqakes? All rivers should flow naturally with no levies
>or
>other manmade 'corrections' so as to let the natural way of things and
>their
>consequenses occur whenever, where ever? You know, keep everything
>'natural'.
>
>I agree with setting aside some areas to remain pristine or nearly so and
>to
>conscientiously protect as much natural habitat as possible. I just don't
>think that necessarily means eliminating logging in many places; it's
>already
>been noted that selective thinning actually improves many types of animals'
>habitats. This anti-logging sentiment is, in my estimation, founded on
>flawed reasoning. Condeming all logging because of some bad logging
>practices by a few is much like condeming all automakers and autos/tire
>makers and tires because Ford & Firestone/Bridgestone knowingly performed
>unethical business practices.
>
>Respectfully,
>Bruce Scott
>Meridian, Idaho
>
>/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>/"Unless stated otherwise, comments made on this list do not necessarily
>/ reflect the beliefs or goals of the North American Native Fishes
>/ Association"
>/ This is the discussion list of the North American Native Fishes
>Association
>/ nanfa_at_aquaria.net. To subscribe, unsubscribe, or get help, send the word
>/ subscribe, unsubscribe, or help in the body (not subject) of an email to
>/ nanfa-request_at_aquaria.net. For a digest version, send the command to
>/ nanfa-digest-request_at_aquaria.net instead.
>/ For more information about NANFA, visit our web page,
>http://www.nanfa.org

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.

/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
/"Unless stated otherwise, comments made on this list do not necessarily
/ reflect the beliefs or goals of the North American Native Fishes
/ Association"
/ This is the discussion list of the North American Native Fishes Association
/ nanfa_at_aquaria.net. To subscribe, unsubscribe, or get help, send the word
/ subscribe, unsubscribe, or help in the body (not subject) of an email to
/ nanfa-request_at_aquaria.net. For a digest version, send the command to
/ nanfa-digest-request_at_aquaria.net instead.
/ For more information about NANFA, visit our web page, http://www.nanfa.org