Source Paging all foresters
A 7 mile road and 380 acres of it will be cleared by local milling companies in the Alaskan Tongass Orion North.
I'm a tree hugger. I don't think that surprises anybody. I'm also a proponent of good land and forest management. I'd be curious to know just how much this actually qualifies as a "bad" decision on the part of President Obama or Secretary of Agriculture Vilsack.
Pristine?
It's "roadless". It's "pristine" rainforest with perfect everything and we're gonna "ruin" it. There are laws, created during the Clinton era, to prevent this very kind of thing from happening.
It's roadless because the native people who live there... don't live in that area. It's uninhabitable by people for whatever reason. It's for animals. The endangered species among those "regular" animals (nobody stands up for the regular animals?), they all have arms and legs and wings and whatnot and they move to new territories within the larger percentage that is not being clear cut. They move and survive. As our scientific or metaphical ancestors, we should give them some credit for being able to adjust and adapt in ways that humans have trouble doing.
What do we do
The U.S Forest Service, the leaders of preservation and management in our country, agreed to the clearing. Just building the road will cost four times as much revenue as the Forest Service is going to get from the timber sale.
So if it's not money, then what is it for?
Forests like the Tongass see natural de-forestation by means of fires or other natural occurrences all of the time. Its largest threat right now is not logging. It's global warming. It's Alaska, where
residents are capturing the
effects of global warming in ways that
only they are noticing.
The world is changing. If the trees are dying anyway, then it's a progression of nature that people will not be able to prevent, but rather have a huge responsibility to manage for the benefit of all, and do it as well as we can.
Doomsayers have to have doom
All the Greenies seem to be turning on Obama because he isn't tying little ribbons around every tree in the contiguous US. All I can see is this: here's a man who vouched for a conservation law that previous Presidents ignored and now he's ignoring it, too. Could it be that he's now privy to information that makes that law untenable in ways that he didn't previously understand?
I'm not trying to argue that all eco organizations are as rabid and illogical as PETA has become in recent years, but the point is the same: we all have our agendas often to the exclusion of new and profound circumstances that should force us to revisit those opinions.
-
Hm
What are your thoughts? All knowledge welcome.