What's an Environmentalist to do?

“It's Natural ID, ls.”

“FORT BRAGG, Calif. -- The Big River tract in California's Mendocino County is a sprawling expanse of towering redwoods and Douglas firs, woods that for years have provided an ideal habitat for rare spotted owls and endangered coho salmon and steelhead trout. Now, it's all up for sale.

Big River, neighboring Salmon Creek and dozens of other forests across the nation have come on the market in recent years as timber companies shed holdings that are worth more as real estate than as a source of lumber. The trend has spurred a land rush that has conservation groups scrambling to raise money to buy environmentally sensitive tracts in competition with private investors seeking to snap up the land for development.

A recent U.S. Forest Service study predicted that more than 44 million acres of private forest land, an area twice the size of Maine, will be sold over the next 25 years. The consulting firm U.S. Forest Capital estimates that half of all U.S. timberland has changed hands in the past decade. The Bush administration also wants to sell off forest land, by auctioning more than 300,000 acres of national forest to fund a rural school program.

"The nation has never seen anything like this," said Conservation Fund President Lawrence A. Selzer, whose 20-year-old group is hoping to raise $48 million in the coming months to buy the 16,000 acres that make up Big River and Salmon Creek. "It has the potential to permanently and profoundly change the landscape of America."

The United States still has large swaths of forest -- much of it private -- that provide critical habitat for large animals such as bears and cougars as well as recreational opportunities for the public. But if the selling spree continues, environmentalists fear, these areas could be cut up into much smaller parcels in which condominiums and trailer parks would replace soaring trees.

read on: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/20/AR2006032001595_pf.html”

“$48 million for that place, to bring it into the public realm, is a bargain. Surely it will happen.

Those bastards I posted about earlier, The Heartland Institute, are terribly against the non-fragmenting of places like that and the remainder of America and the world for that matter

for it will allow a continued short-term gluttonous orgy of consumption for the select few.
last edited: 3/21/06 5:14:13 PM”

“Another point about worldview:

Its not that publicly held land can be managed better than if privately held in terms of benefitting the wealthy or the economy in general, it can't, at least not in the shortterm.

But, the entire world does not need to be subjugated in any particular generation to engineering, enough damage is done to the places, which is most places, where capitalism and freewill are allowed to take their course.

Further, public lands can be maintained at low expense, just leave them there and don't worry about trying to get production out of them.

Someone might come along who just wants to walk there.
last edited: 3/21/06 5:48:26 PM”

“Are we 6 out of 6???”

“What do you mean or should I even ask?”

“lonesurveyor - Same question as above. What is #7? The article says we're #6, so what is #7? Is there a #7? If not, we're 6 out of 6. That's not too bad when you're trying to be last.”

“The current extinction event is ongoing, possibly only barely started, with no way of knowing what might be left in a few decades.

Many cultures including Judeo-Islam-Christianity predict a great cleansing event to occur when the world reaches a very deteriorated condition.”

“Cool!”

“temperatures rise
man-made fires maim nut coves
squirrels despoiled”

“"• This year's world grain harvest is projected to fall short of consumption by 61 million tons. That's the sixth time in the past seven years that production has failed to satisfy demand, notes Lester Brown, president of the Earth Policy Institute in Washington.

He expects the world carry-over stocks of grain, a basic measure of food security, to fall to 57 days of consumption by the end of this crop year. That level stands as the shortest buffer since a 56-day-low in 1956 doubled grain prices.

So prices could rise again."

Copied from: http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0703/p15s01-cogn.html

So where is all the excess grain for biofuels going to come from?”

“get out your tractor.........”

“OK, burn fuel, use more fuel based fertilizer and pesticide, clear more forests, extinct more species, ruin more watersheds, lose additional topsoil, pollute more waterways, invest fuel into further irrigation projects, all in order to make fuel when that is all already being done to about the maximum extent possible just to grow food, its a poor equation.

I farm with a shovel and hoe, more effective than many would think for growing food but would not result in much biofuel.
last edited: 7/05/06 6:14:52 AM”

“got a pair of mules?”

“WTF is the Earth Policy Institute???? WhoTF is Lester Brown---other than the president of the aforementioned???”

“Lester Brown is the leader of one of the most respected enviro-think tanks/research institutes in the world. He's a published author and respected scientist.

Newsflash: There is no replacement for oil.”

“Lester Brown is the leader of one of the most respected enviro-think tanks/research institutes in the world. He's a published author and respected scientist.”
karma police
8:48:40 AM
7/05/06


What does that even mean? Respected by who? For what?

Are there any respected scientists and published authors who disagree with his views?”

“We are talking about a statistic (61 million tons less grain harvested than consumed in the world this year), not a view or opinion. Lester Brown may have incorrectly quoted this statistic and if so that should be easily established. If no one is loud disputing a widely published statistic, then it is probably close to correct.
last edited: 7/05/06 7:02:47 AM”

“I wasn't questioning him or his statistics, I wanted to know where his au-thor-uh-tie comes from.”

“Noncoformist opines:
What does that even mean? Respected by who? For what?

Are there any respected scientists and published authors who disagree with his views?”

Well, there's a tool called Google. I'd suggest you familiarize yourself with it, because it can probably lead you to the answer to many of your important questions.

Lester Brown is respected in academic circles by researchers in peer reviewed academic journals and by what I would call the "mainstream" environmental community.

I don't agree with everything he publishes, but overall, he's generally on the mark.”

“Well, there's a tool called Google. I'd suggest you familiarize yourself with it, because it can probably lead you to the answer to many of your important questions.


I can think of several other tools.”

“Al Gore?”

“You callin' me a "tool"?”

“Among others around here, lol.”

“Nimbletool?”

“And I thought you had a foot fetish.....lol.”

“I find many of these scientists who are in these fringe types of areas like global warming are self affirming. This area of science has become the biggest scare tactic I have ever seen. They got into it, cried that the sky is falling to prompt the research money to pour in and now that they are getting their cash they have to keep us on high alert so their funds don’t dry up. Sadly a lot of that money belongs to you and me.

Bunch of hucksters.”

“yeah, I could buy a good bike with all I throw at em.....and forget the corn.....well, it goes good with a juicy steak......mmmmmmmmmm.”

“The really sad thing is that the harvest is just fine in the US (infact we are paying farmers NOT to grow the stuff). The problem is that most countries refuse to allow us to sell our grain (something about competition being bad) or bar our products. So if NAGGGALAND starves...bummer. Lets also remember that the reason for most of the true starvation Sally Struthers and the like show us is warfare...strangely enough run by Terrorists (oops ISLAMIC TEORRORISTS)”

“I find many of these scientists who are in these fringe types of areas like global warming are self affirming. This area of science has become the biggest scare tactic I have ever seen. They got into it, cried that the sky is falling to prompt the research money to pour in and now that they are getting their cash they have to keep us on high alert so their funds don’t dry up. Sadly a lot of that money belongs to you and me.

Bunch of hucksters.”
----------------------

Well, Lester Brown's work is not totally focused on global climate change. He's done important work on aquifer depletion, alternative fuels, population and food supply and water in general.

His works are heavily referenced and footnoted for anyone that wishes to directly refute his findings and not just throw out broad, sweeping generalizations and indictments.”

“It looked like a broad, sweeping generalization because it was one. I wasn’t speaking about Brown specifically nor was I even referring to your post. The thing that I don’t egt is many of the same chicken little science lovers who believe in global warming and the crackerjack science used to prove it are the same ones who bash on creation scientists. They both hold the same amount water IMHO.

It’s all voodoo science.”

“Karma, throwing out large generalizations is the Liberal Way (LOL)

I have an idea you guys can have a "Rolling HUNGER STRIKE" like the Hollywierds. Yeah, you take the 9Am to say 12 Noon shift, then someone else takes the 12noon to say 3PM, and so on.....(ROTFLMAO)

Each time I read one of these studies I think HOW MUCH was left out. I mean did we consider the SUN is getting hotter? Did we consider there is more radiation reaching the Earth? Did we consider tiny things like...if we are at the end of an ICE age...would that mean it would be naturally Getting WARMER????”

“Go back and look at the predictions these guys were making about what our world was going to be like by this time and we see how full of crap they are. Yes, the world is getting warmer by like 1 degree in the last 100 years. Did we cause it? Maybe slightly.

Look at cars. They said we'd burn up the ozone if we didn't change our oil loving, sunday driving ways. There are more than 170% more cars today yet emissions are down some 45%. How can this be?

Another great scare tactic is that the polar ice caps are melting and we're going to flood the world. Holy sheep shlt! Get the boats! The polar ice caps melting will raise the water levels as much as melting ice cubes make the level of ice tea in a glass rise.”

“Without considering the issue of climate change

is there a great excess of agricultural capacity in the world to grow crops (grains and non-grain crops) to convert to biofuel? I do not think so.

While the politicians do give a lot of money to agribusiness, I think by and large it has had little effect on decreasing or increasing production, just a wasted give-away.

Are the emissions down in China and India? No, emissions are way up over a decade or 2 ago. Its one world.
last edited: 7/05/06 11:55:40 AM”

“"BUZZER" sorry that answer was very wrong Lone....the United States could do a lot more..but we are fighting tarrifs etc. The real problem is that there is a lack of FREEDOM not food.”

“Did you know that if you took the world's popluation and put everyone in Texas they would still have more elbow room than NYC?”

“Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't farmers often paid subsidies to not plant crops to keep prices competitive?”

“Lumber you are CORRECT! My uncle was a farmer in Oklahoma and in the 60s and early 70's his neighbors were buying land left and right betting on the money they would get paid NOT to grow.

When Reagan cut that back...many went PU because they had never plannned on growing on the land.”

“Farm subsidies are a big rip-off of the taxpayers.

From my understanding, most of the farm subsidy money goes to very large multinational corporations to not grow crops on marginal lands that will not grow crops anyhow.

A very little of the farm subsidy money trickles down to small farmers, but look around, there are almost no small farmers remaining.”

“No, not always. There is a subsidy that is still in place from 1954 that encouraged sheep farming because of wool shortages. It’s still paid out to this day even though the shortage had ended after WWII. Subsidies are crappy government spending pure and simple. They sign these things so the people in the center of the country see them doing something for them yet people like Ted Turner have received over $100,000 in government hand outs.”

“So, Nigal, about that Texas argument you just made, I refuted XL's attempt at that shallow statement awhile back.

Lets see, Texas, 267,000 square miles = 171 million acres dived by 6.5 billion people = 38 people per acre which means nowhere in a place the size of the state of Texas if the people were evenly distributed could you get more than 34' from another person.

Maybe thats your idea of Utopia, but not mine.

One step further, 37 billion acres of land in the world of which less than one third is eco-productive (less than one third of Texas is eco-productive either) but still, 37 billion acres at 38 people per acre, so you are arguing this world can sustain 1.4 trillion people, it sounds like.

And, XL, the US nor anywhere else in the world can even sustain the current levels of agricultural production indefinately

so, we sure as heck CANNOT do a lot more

we cannot even continue to do what we are doing.
last edited: 7/05/06 12:19:38 PM”

“OK, I will mention it.

The average American in this link I am posting is said to have an 'ecological footprint' of about 12.5 acres, in other words, 12.5 ares of land is required to support each American's consumption. So, New York City is what? About 8 million people, metro area much more but less just say 8 million people at 12.5 acres per person means 100 million acres are required to support New york City and that is an area over 3 times the size of the state of New York.

Study this link if you like to see why 12.5 acres is the calculated footprint of the average American, its not just food but fuel/electricity, fiber, construction materials, clean water, transportation, waste disposal, the demands of national defense, etc.

http://www.buddycom.com/animal/envirimg/footprint/

Ultimately, in a closed system there can be no real gains, only changes

If you think you have gained here, then you have lost there!

The world can support well less than 2 billion living as Americans do and then only for a very short time.

In all truth, this world is not even large enough to support 300 million at the average American's level of consumption for more than a short while, decades not centuries and certainly not millenia.
last edited: 7/05/06 12:49:09 PM”

“The modern civilized world of consumption is built upon

biodeposits (which make the Earth unigue among the places we know of)

which took eons to form (or as the the Young Earth Creationists state were all formed in place about 6,000 years ago, uh, OK).

Still, the biodeposits are like a bank acount and a large account will allow excessive numbers to live excessively until the account is exhausted.

Types of biodeposits (all non-renewable, once destroyed or used-up could only be replaced by eons of natural processes):

- fossil fuels
- topsoil
- concentrations of metals (many types like iron would largely be diffuse if not for bacterial action)
- gypsum, limestone, marble (if you want concrete)
- current atmospheric conditions
- current oceanic conditions
- genetic biodiversity

These things and others came about mindlessly or by design over eons and are allowing the current and intensifying worldwide orgy of consumption, but if any one of these becomes not available (and several are being stressed), civilization will crash

and some still think we can push the limits even more?”

“"And, XL, the US nor anywhere else in the world can even sustain the current levels of agricultural production indefinately"
Lonesurveyor

Please explain...since US production has INCREASED GEOMETRICALLY since say the 1900's what are you saying? We are going to hit a point or negative payback? Or we are going to stop producing?

LOL....Paul Ehrlich made a similar bet in the 60's...He lost”

“Dinosaurs are extinct, yet I feel fine.”

“As long as anyone is alive, obviously we will not stop trying to produce

but, US agricultural production is based upon oil, and like Karma Police said earlier today, there will be no substitute for oil when it is gone, other than doing without.
last edited: 7/05/06 1:41:46 PM”

“OKay...but we are now able to Grow MORE with less land....”

“in much the same way we're able to be more scientific with less intellect......oops, excuse me.............”

“"which means nowhere in a place the size of the state of Texas if the people were evenly distributed could you get more than 34' from another person."

Ever been to NYC? LOL!

OK OK OK! I give! The world really IS going to implode and be destroyed and it's all our faults. We are evil sad sacks of bastards. You now have my official apology for enjoying my life as the world falls down around our ears. I'm sorry for not being afraid and paranoid. I'm sorry for having good time in life. Please forgive me!”

“Hey Nigal, can I come too....huh, please, please????”