Our leaders have lost their minds

[ScareCrow57]

...The conference was given another shot in the arm tonight when a group of developed nations, including Britain and the United States, announced $3.5 billion in fast start funding over the next three years towards slowing - and eventually halting - deforestation, virtually the only sector on which the Copenhagen negotiations have made visible progress. ...

P.S. There is more to this article

How can a country so far in debt and in such terrible financial trouble afford to spend any money on this fictitious problem? This is just complete and utter incompetence and a total disregard for doing the right thing

[Firetacoma1]

Deforestation is fictitious?

[MalahatTwo7]

P.S. There is more to this article

How can a country so far in debt and in such terrible financial trouble afford to spend any money on this fictitious problem? This is just complete and utter incompetence and a total disregard for doing the right thing

Topic spans: 1958 - 2002
Clearcutting and Logging: The War of the Woods
Vancouver Island's Clayoquot Sound. Manitoba's boreal forests. The Central Avalon Peninsula of Newfoundland. These picturesque locales have served as the battlegrounds over the controversy of clearcutting — the logging practice that strips a forest bare by cutting every single tree down. On one side are the environmentalists. On the other, logging companies. In the middle are native people. The fate of Canada's old-growth forests and the forestry industry as a whole rests in the balance in the 'war of the woods.'
The aerial photo of a logging operation near Prince George, B.C. is courtesy of D&J Huber, via Flickr.

see: http://archives.cbc.ca/environment/e...pics/679-3918/
===
or:

http://smig.usgs.gov/SMIG/features_0902/clearcut.html
===

Shall I go on? I could, and I'm not even a "Tree-Hugger". Oh ya, and that only took about 90 seconds to find/select those two article links.

[scfire86]

Our leaders have lost their minds

How can you tell?

[MalahatTwo7]

How can you tell?

Benchmark Empirical Data/Experience?

[FireMedic049]

How can you tell?

Maybe it's an "it takes one to know one" thing?

[hwoods]

There isn't anyone on here, Left or Right, That will not complain about someone who Wants to make a speech, but has no clue about the subject. Happens all the time. And That is exactly what you have with these Anti Logging "Experts" or as I prefer to call them, "Idiots". There is nothing wrong with cutting down Trees. Yes, I said That. And it is Correct. Cutting Down a Forest is more often Beneficial than not, yet "Idiots" who haven't a clue jump up screaming about it.

People like these well meaning, but clueless, folks in Copenhagen, need to leave what and when to cut, or not, up to Foresters who know how to manage a Timber Harvest. Trees are our second most valuable Resource (after Water) but that does NOT mean that every Tree should be allowed to grow until it dies. Timber MUST become a MANAGED RESOURCE in order for this world, and it's Peoples, to continue on. A halt to Logging will wreak havoc on the economy, and eventually harm the Environment more than if logging continues as it is now.

[PaladinKnight]

If you do not thin out the trees, you end up with CALFIRE type job security.

[MarcusKspn]

Trees are our second most valuable Resource (after Water) but that does NOT mean that every Tree should be allowed to grow until it dies. Timber MUST become a MANAGED RESOURCE in order for this world, and it's Peoples, to continue on. A halt to Logging will wreak havoc on the economy, and eventually harm the Environment more than if logging continues as it is now.

Harvesting trees is a lot like hunting in that regard.

But of course if we talk about hunting we will introduce a whole new set of idiots to this topic....

[GeorgeWendtCFI]

There isn't anyone on here, Left or Right, That will not complain about someone who Wants to make a speech, but has no clue about the subject. Happens all the time. And That is exactly what you have with these Anti Logging "Experts" or as I prefer to call them, "Idiots". There is nothing wrong with cutting down Trees. Yes, I said That. And it is Correct. Cutting Down a Forest is more often Beneficial than not, yet "Idiots" who haven't a clue jump up screaming about it.

People like these well meaning, but clueless, folks in Copenhagen, need to leave what and when to cut, or not, up to Foresters who know how to manage a Timber Harvest. Trees are our second most valuable Resource (after Water) but that does NOT mean that every Tree should be allowed to grow until it dies. Timber MUST become a MANAGED RESOURCE in order for this world, and it's Peoples, to continue on. A halt to Logging will wreak havoc on the economy, and eventually harm the Environment more than if logging continues as it is now.

Boy do you sound foolish. What do you think, that you can plant new ones? Please.

[hwoods]

boy do you sound foolish. What do you think, that you can plant new ones? Please.

Well, uh, yeah, sorta.......

[PaladinKnight]

Isn't just amazing that we humans tend to believe we can control the forces of the planet?

Mother Nature has been doing her thing for a long time; climate, thunderstorms, floods, hurricanes, volcanos, earthquakes.

Our belief that we can live below sea level, in the wilderness, on a fault line or under the shadow of a volcano and feel safe, is wrong headed.

It isn't wrong to desire to live there, but it is wrong to assume it has no risk.

Those that really believe we can have an impact on the climate, should have paid better attention in school. Science is for us to take advantage of, not rewrite.

Isn't it funny that many do not want controlled burns or want to put punishing controls carbon emissions? Where are they when California is on fire or Mt St Helens explodes? I don't see them out there in front of the catastrophie insisting that Mother Nature stop it. There isn't much we can do about that 'damage' to the planet is there? And to think we can compensate for what naturally occurs does nothing but make a few feel better, even if it makes the majority uncomfortable.

While we might have the ability to change some aspects of the planet, I tend to think if Mother nature wishes to warm the planet or give us an ice age, it is her prerogative and there isn't much we are going to do to change her mind.

Like that old saying, if you mind your own business, you will be busy all of the time. Unfortunately, there are alot of people who are ready to go down a road in the name of progress, that will set back progress. If they want to give up cars, planes, heat, air conditioners, leather, meat, guns, and all reasonable thought... I just hope they will jump off a cliff and leave the rest of us the hell alone.

[MalahatTwo7]

If you do not thin out the trees, you end up with CALFIRE type job security.

True to some extent. But part of the problem is husbandry. There's way more in that, but would take too long to explain, suffice to say that you are in fact, partly correct. But there is a big difference between husbandry (clearing out dead brush) and clear-cutting huge tracts of land, and making a "moonscape" out of an area.

[MarcusKspn]

True to some extent. But part of the problem is husbandry. There's way more in that, but would take too long to explain, suffice to say that you are in fact, partly correct. But there is a big difference between husbandry (clearing out dead brush) and clear-cutting huge tracts of land, and making a "moonscape" out of an area.

I think when people think of "deforestation" they think of the pictures of wast stretches of rain forrest burned to the ground or bulldozed tracks of land.

I do think that this kind of "deforestation" is not ideal, and it is one extreme of the spectrum.

The tree-hugging "don't touch a single tree" crowd is the other extreme.

But if handled correctly, logging is a perfectly sustainable resource.

Replace what you cut down, it's not really rocket science.

[BryanLoader]

I think when people think of "deforestation" they think of the pictures of wast stretches of rain forrest burned to the ground or bulldozed tracks of land.

I do think that this kind of "deforestation" is not ideal, and it is one extreme of the spectrum.

The tree-hugging "don't touch a single tree" crowd is the other extreme.

But if handled correctly, logging is a perfectly sustainable resource.

Replace what you cut down, it's not really rocket science.

Very true Markus, but the problem in a lot of areas we are playing catch up after many years of clear cutting. Takes about 60 to 100 years to replace a Douglas fir. Its fairly well under control here now, but the worrisome areas are the Amazon, Indonesia, Phillipines.

[MalahatTwo7]

I think when people think of "deforestation" they think of the pictures of wast stretches of rain forrest burned to the ground or bulldozed tracks of land.

I do think that this kind of "deforestation" is not ideal, and it is one extreme of the spectrum.

The tree-hugging "don't touch a single tree" crowd is the other extreme.

But if handled correctly, logging is a perfectly sustainable resource.

Replace what you cut down, it's not really rocket science.

Just to help with the definition: (from Dictionary.com)

deforestation (dē-fôr'ĭ-stā'shən)
The cutting down and removal of all or most of the trees in a forested area. Deforestation can erode soils, contribute to desertification and the pollution of waterways, and decrease biodiversity through the destruction of habitat.

The American Heritage® Science Dictionary
Copyright © 2002. Published by Houghton Mifflin. All rights reserved.
Cite This Source

But essentially, you make good points Marcus. Coming from a family that largly relied upon forestry products, the whole concept of reforestation is rather close to my heart. However, I am NOT a Tree-Hugger!

[CaptOldTimer]

Well, uh, yeah, sorta.......

LOL He called you BOY!!!

Its been a LONG TIME HUH HARVE?

That is a good one....

[doughesson]

Boy do you sound foolish. What do you think, that you can plant new ones? Please.

Yes,they do.You cut down selected tress to thin out the canopy to allow sunlight to reach the gound and let other smaller and more diverse plantlife to flourish.
It's amazing when you realize it.Plants grow back.It's like they're living organisms or something.
Logging companies DO replant what they grow.Otherwise sooner or later,they'd cut down every tree and then have nothing to cut so they'd go out of business.
Maybe instead of excoriating the United States for deforestation,the Copenhagen conventioneers could get onto the South American nations that cut down the rain forests a little more.I am told that with reforestation efforts of logging companies,there are more trees in the US now than there were when the Pilgrims landed.

[GeorgeWendtCFI]

Yes,they do.You cut down selected tress to thin out the canopy to allow sunlight to reach the gound and let other smaller and more diverse plantlife to flourish.
It's amazing when you realize it.Plants grow back.It's like they're living organisms or something.
Logging companies DO replant what they grow.Otherwise sooner or later,they'd cut down every tree and then have nothing to cut so they'd go out of business.
Maybe instead of excoriating the United States for deforestation,the Copenhagen conventioneers could get onto the South American nations that cut down the rain forests a little more.I am told that with reforestation efforts of logging companies,there are more trees in the US now than there were when the Pilgrims landed.

You could not possibly have missed the sarcasm in that post, could you?

[ScareCrow57]

Deforestation is fictitious?

NO!!! Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) is. And the greeny weenies will do anything to support their cause. The environuts are using the fictitious cause of AGW to support all of their environmental nonsense.