bush's new logging laws

“I'm all for forest and timber management, but I agree that this is just a timber grab by Bush and those lining his pockets.

I recently inherited about 50 acres here in Indiana and I'm working with the local forest office on a plan for sustainable growth. They call them "Tree Farms" here.

The plan is not driven by timber harvest. Harvesting is only done to thin and create good growth environment for hard woods and other trees. It's a constant cycle of planting and harvesting that never includes clear cutting any portions except on some larger tracts to create natural vegetation areas for wildlife.”

“It always makes me wonder how this administration's "Environmental Solutions" always seem to come out exactly as the industry involved has been lobbying for. What a huge coincidence.”

“First of all:

Rotting and falling down trees are normal in a forest to a certain extent.

Second of all:

Many forests are cut down and are replanted with one specific type of tree that is acceptable for cutting once again in the future. This drastically cuts down on the biodiversity in that given area.

Third of all:

I am not against logging, just the nonsustainable acceleration of logging in effort for a "get rich" scheme to line the pockets of big companies. Do you really think they are looking at logging these areas long term to help create a stable job market for the logging industry in those areas? Or do you think they are going to hire a given amount of people, cut down the trees and get the heck out of there!

I am not blind sighted by the excuse that we need to "thin" out the woods to prevent forest fires. The reason there is so much debris to begin with is because we curb the forest fires to begin with.

My 2 Cents”

“The lobbyists have more power then us the Voters "We the People" should be "We the Lobbyists"”

“oops...that last sentence is rather redundant isn't it?”

“Does anyone know when the Senate votes on this one?”

“It sounds like a Senate version of the bill is still in the works if the Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee is about to hold hearings (according to Sen. Larry 'Salvage Timber' Craig).”

“Loggers clear-cutting for "the moment" is the equivilant to farmers eating their seed corn.

Down south, timberland regenerates at an astonishing speed. Out west is different, tho. Burns leave a lasting impression for years - nay! a generation. U-G-L-Y! Even uglier than clear-cutting (not that that's gonna happen).


I can see both sides of the issue, so I don't have a definite opinion. The Friendly Ranger does, though: She's all for thinning. Therefore, I tend to side with her.”

“The problem is that they aren't going to properly "thin"...

I'm not sure of the specifics but the last I heard that there would be a deal where the logging companies would clean the forest for us while taking "some" trees in return? So in other words it would be like us paying them to take some trees....???
In the past our tax dollars have paid for the roads for them to log and they pay an extremely low amount for the trees they take.”

“During the debate on C-SPAN yesterday, opponents of this bill were saying that there's not nearly enough money in this bill to pay for the "thinning". In fact, they said there was NO money in the bill.

The timber companies will be paid in trees... and they can't make the cash without cutting bigger trees. So the idea that they're just "thinning" out the smaller trees and clearing underbrush is bull.”

“Thinning the larger trees would open the canopy wider, therefore allowing more sunlight.

That should tickle the little ones...”

“Hmmmm... More timber for more lumber for more houses for more subdivisions for more urban sprawl... Right up to the borders of the Chattahoochee National Forest so they'll have to cut the trees back a mile of two to protect the subdivisions of those 'nature-loving' folks from forest fires.

Then "thin" the rest.”

“tilt is right, when they say thinning, they will be cutting the larger trees, not the undergrowth, which is the source of the severe fires.”

“Good rule of thumbis 18".
Anything bigger then that is good for logging.
There are a ton of A-hole loggers out there.
So having them running around millions of acres of national forest with Husqvarna's would probably be like a kid in a candy shop.”

“i have never seen anyone else say this, but i've said it on here before. why don't we stop illegle immigration so we don't need to build so many friggin houses and use up all our land?

selfish? yeah, maybe, but i think it's a real part of the problem.

i agree with snafu and adventurist.....

i mean we could build houses with steel studs instead....but then you gotts remove mountaintops to get the steel......anybody ever seen that before? and steel doesn't grow back.

the argument that a company will slit it's own throat by not replanting a renewable resource is ludicrus...replanting is easy and cheap...”

“Did any of you actually bother to read the text of the law instead of listening to the distortions and falsehoods regurgited by the environmental industry?

I didn't think so.”

“not likely gordon...”

“When we want the timber industry POV, we'll call Gordon.”

“Yeah. And all those wetbacks buying up the $450,000 McMansions.

Get a clue....”

“This is an amazing assertion on the part of Stratdewd:

Illegal immigrants are to blame for housing shortages in the US.

If true, this could explain the lumber shortage in mexico, and the real reason for the invention of adobe.

Wow.”

“environmental industry??? Surely it's not an industry??? - So what are these flasehoods Gordon?”

“Gordon's newspeak: Call environmentalism an industry to try to discredit the movement.”

“Gordon's newspeak: Call environmentalism an industry to try to discredit the movement."
Phaedrus
11:06:06 AM
05/22/03

The environmental industry does not need me to discredit them. They are doing an excellent job discrediting themselves by their own words and actions.”

“And you yet again fail to come up with anyhthing to back up your words.”

“Gordon, you raise good points. I'd like to know what the actual text of the bill is. Can you supply a link or address?

Personally, I think the environmentalists come off as a bunch of extremist tree huggers. I am aware that the media wants spectacular also, so those who are completely whacked out are gonna make the news.

I would like real perspective and balance and facts. Can you supply the link?”

“http://thomas.loc.gov

Search on H.R. 1904
The 'Engrossed' version is the final bill passed by the House.

As you read the bill, notice that the claims of the environmental industry about '1000 acre clearcuts' and no environmental analysis are not true.

Careful, though. The environmental industry does not really want you to read the bill and get the true facts.”

“Clear cutting is definitly the enemy to all here. It may be the way to finacial salvation for some but it is the number one cause for the loss of biodiversity world wide. I don't deny that lumber is a needed resource but we must stop exploiting it. There are several alternative methods, and though they are more costly in the short run the long term savings far outweighs any economic burden.”

“Searching on "Healthy Forests Restoration Act" yields:

1 . Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by House)[H.R.1904.EH]
2 . Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 (Introduced in House)[H.R.1904.IH]
3 . Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 (Reported in House)[H.R.1904.RH]”

“I have not read the bill. I am wholeheartedly in favor of thinning forests here in Northern Arizona. Since almost all logging was stopped here about 20 years ago there are a million jack pines crowding each other meaning none of them get enough water. Our forests have never been clear cut and I thought they used to do a pretty good job out there. Either the loggers come in here ao the whole mess will burn. The bugs have killed a mess of trees that need to be removed too because they are dead and dry.”

“1 . Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by House)[H.R.1904.EH]”

“No luck with that Mark.”

“Mary, Thinning is definitly one of the better solutions to the lumber issue. It sure beats clear cuts and burns”

“phaed and rosey. .....

you are honestly telling me that all those illegals don't live anywhere? let me drive you through my neighborhood......they live right here. all the rich democrats(this is a liberal mecca) move out to the burbs and build new houses. you tell me how millions of new people here don't contribute to wood usage. what if there were a billion new people, then would you agree? i'll tell you another thing they do....i went out to a small lake nearby. i used to go there alot in college and go fishing. well, there were alot of hispanics there. and there was TONS of trash. it was hidious. they(generally speaking of corse) don't give one damn about this country or the environment. most of them i have worked with send money back home and plan to return and retire early. they are here to consume what they can. i would too if i was them. with morons like you around, might as well take advantage of your gullibility....


you two are full of it and you bore me....”

“Mary, Thinning is definitly one of the better solutions to the lumber issue. It sure beats clear cuts and burns"
sirpeteofmillwork
07:19:44 PM
05/22/03

Clearcutting is a scientifically sound and ecologicaly appropriate harvest method in many forest types and in many situations. Properly done in the right place under the right conditions it increases biodiversity and overall forest health. The science behind clearcutting is so solid it is not in dispute by anyone with even a basic knowledge of forest ecology.

Clearcutting has been abused in the past. Individual tree selection harvesting has been abused even more so. The forest health crisis in the West is the result of inappropriate individual tree selection harvest. Clearcutting was first developed in Germany in the 1700's to fix the damage created by individual tree selection.”

“You profess to know so much about logging, gordon. I've asked you this before and I don't think you responded: do you work in the timber industry?”

“One other thought here. It used to be that wildfires "clearcut" the woods or thinned them. We have done such a good job of preventing forest fires, that even with what we have, they don't don't get clearcut or thinned naturally enough.

This is akin to us wiping out the wolves and the deer population has no predators, so they overpopulate and all starve without hunting.

I don't work in the timber industry, and I don't hunt. But I do build with lumber, and I love venison.”

“"Clearcutting is a scientifically sound and ecologicaly appropriate harvest method in many forest types and in many situations. Properly done in the right place under the right conditions it increases biodiversity and overall forest health. The science behind clearcutting is so solid it is not in dispute by anyone with even a basic knowledge of forest ecology."





Apparently you know jack shiit about what is and isn't ecologically sound. Perhaps you should look at it this way. If you and those who think like you keep cutting down our forests you will be hiking in a place that looks like the moon.

You really don't belong here why exactly do you stay? for flame?


heres some flame why don't you wash that big L off your forehead”

“Whereas I don't totally agree with Gordon, he does make some good points here. Although it's ugly, clear cutting is not always wrong and is better than high gradinghte forest ( select cutting). It does depend on many factors.........geography, soil type,slope, aspect, size,shape,etc. Nature clear cuts forests sometimes in the form of fires, storms, etc. and the forest recovers. Here in the central Appalachians an acre of clear cut forest will have on average 40,000 sprouts the next year. Again, it's ugly and NO I wouldn't want to hike through it, but that's irrelevant if the forest is managed for multiple uses, of which backpacking is just one. Hey, sir pete....chill it with the innuendo. Gordon is right in a way and there are no sprouting stumps on the moon. A properly done clear cuts with it's increased edge effect, sun penetration and wildlife activity CAN BE ecologically sound... much more so than the roads we drive on, our lawns, etc.

I love to backpack in pristine forests but I remember that by law National Forests are managed for multiple use and sometimes that means cutting trees. The devil is in the details and should get our attention. Hopefully this bill will get the attention and scrutiny it deserves.”

“Well, I can't say that I'm a well versed environmentalist or politician, but it sounds to me that there are extremists on BOTH sides. There has to be a compromise in this. We all love our hardwood floors, our wooden furniture AND our beautiful forests. But it is my opinion that if it is truly to be a forest, the gov't needs to be hands off! A beautiful forest consists of living and dead trees, old and young trees, bugs, shrubs, wildlife, etc. Thinning will only put another destructive aspect from the human race into nature. But there is most definitely a need for logging. Some depend on it as a livelihood, others depend on it for shelter.

To think that the environmentalists are absolutely right, is wrong. Same for the politicians (which is generally the case, anyway). It's interesting that the Bush-appointed leader of the EPA has resigned. Anyone know why? I don't, but perhaps it's because Bush's admin is environmentally unsound.

And as for those damn immigrants taking up our land... why don't they ALL leave and let the Native Americans have their land back. They lived here for thousands of years and never had a problem taking care of the forests!

As for what to do... let the forests burn naturally when they do, let them grow as they do and if you live where a forest fire would burn you out - BUY INSURANCE! It's like moving next to an airport and complaining about the noise. Reserve massive tracks of land for BOTH untouched forest and logging. If the loggers clear cut their land and don't replant, too bad, they'll go out of business.

Personally, I'd much rather have wood furniture than plastic. At least the wood will decompose after a few hundred years. I don't think the society 20,000 years from now would like a plastic desk.”

“Strat:

The more you write, the more you come across as a racist. For close-minded people like you, one personal experience defines a whole nation for you, a whole race. What we can infer from your previous post are sweeping generalizations that Mexicans are dirty people who don't care about the environment and pollute everything in the U.S. to their advantage.

Let's go with your pitiful example on this. Now, why would Mexicans be this way? Ever been south of the border and seen all the American maquilladoras (factories) pumping toxic crap into their rivers and streams? For decades, U.S. companies have known the environmental standards are lower in Mexico and therefore exploit that to their advantage. Given your lame example, why should the Mexicans come across out borders and be motivated to do anything differently?

You should also be aware that most of the wood harvested in this country is exported to places like China and Europe where the lumber industry can get a much higher price for it. We now get a lot of our wood from S. America, through processes like deforesting the Amazon.

I agree that immigration should be adressed more aggressively but trying to blame deforestation in the U.S. on illegal immigrants just shows a complete lack of intelligence on your part. Counties want to generate revenue. They open their lands to development. New houses are built. People buy them because they want a brand-new, gigantic house in the 'burbs. It has absolutely nothing to do with Mexicans coming in and "taking" their property as would like us to believe.”

“Laying the blame for US deforestation on illegal immigrants is the lamest excuse for an opinion I've heard in years. This idea is completely devoid of merit. Shame on you.

Further, Stratdewd, you should be ashamed at the example you are setting for your children if you voice xenophobic opinions like this around them. Shame on you.

This is an opinion similar to laying the blame for the large US proportion of gun-violence in relation to other countries on the fact that the US is more racially diverse than other nations. Specious, xenophobic, and poorly thought through. Shame on you.

In short, shame on you.”

“Kno what?
IT IS ALL THEM TREE RATS!

O! Wooo is me!
My goodys - did yall ever see all them tree rats walkin aroun in the woods and crallin aroun on them trees to? All them tree rats are trubbel! They MUST ALL GET DED!”

“it's hypocritical for people to judge and criticize immigrants since all of us are a product of them.

and the truth is the vast majority of immigrants aren't grubbing for welfare, but are hard workers who want a better life for their families. can we blame them? are we prepared to blame our forefathers?”

“National Forests
trees and trees everywhere
not for long says Bush”

“Get this outa here”

“it's an old thread, Matt has to change it to a fuego symbol.”

““The most beautiful thing about trees is what man makes them into after they get cut down”

-Rush Lindbaugh”