>Gene GeRue wrote:
>> But my friend, someone who long fought the good
>> environmental fight and now refuses to be called one because of the way
>> modern environmentalists have acted and continue to act, feels that the
>> best way to preserve forest is to make it economically viable.
Doug Fields:
>No offense meant, only curiosity: would you care to elaborate, Gene, on
>the actions of modern environmentalists?
I won't speak for my friend. I have forwarded your post to him. Personally,
I have been and am dismayed by most modern professional environmentalists.
They have become as politicians, focussing on collection of monies, using
buzz words and phrases, creating media hype, putting out known
exaggerations and hyperbole (I have been reading envirostuff for nearly
forty years--population/oil depletion/starvation projections have been
unconscionable) for the sake of padding their jobs. That said, I do
recognize that many professional environmentalists are responsible for
having gotten good things done.
Some years back I was on the verge of sending a check to the Sierra Club.
On my desk that day also came info on the proposed Natural Streams Act here
in Missouri. The NSA was pushed hard by the Sierra Club. I held off on my
donation while I gathered the facts. Turns out that the NSA had a lot of
powerful images and buzz phrases going for it but was a very badly
thought-out initiative. It would have created a police state, with stream
cops patrolling all the watersheds looking for those who built a fence, or
mowed, or did the hundreds of things that landowners do that all affect a
watershed. Good intentions, very bad implementation. I put my weight
against it. Because I traded open letters with the Sierra Club rep in
St.Louis and because I got the facts on both sides, I saw clearly that the
SC was in it strictly for publicity to gain membership dues, did not really
understand or care about the impact of the initiative on the land and
landowners. A massive community of rural people arose and fought it.
Missouri voters, most of whom live in cities, defeated the initiative.
>My wife and I own/pay taxes on/protect 80 acres of forest, sedge meadow,
>alder thicket, and grassland. Very little of it pays its way
>economically. I've also worked for the Forest Service and state DNR as
>an ecologist, evaluating forest stands for their potential as protected
>natural areas. I'm not sure if that gives me the right to spout an
>opinion or not.
It sure does by my standards. I look forward to your future posts.
I guess I have just become impatient with the knee-jerk masses who think
they are wonderful because they send checks to organizations that get good
enviro-press, think that gives them a portfolio for spouting the
enviro-party line, which is often incorrect, see above. The Natural Streams
Act fiasco really opened my eyes. I am highly sensitive to the natural
world--anyone who scans my book knows my positions. I searched the 48 and
purposely came to this semi-wild place for my final home. So my position is
that of an ecologist and a landowner who has paid and continues to pay the
price in all ways. Sounds like you do, too.
>Nevertheless, I partly agree with you. As Jeff noted for Oregon, in my
>state a cut forest generally makes more economic sense than a standing
>one. The fault lies mainly with our forest tax laws and with landowner
>perceptions.
Tax laws are made by politicians. Politicians are the lackeys of big
corporations, including those that own forest land. The corporate landowner
perception will always be that the land is to be used to produce maximum
profit. As long as gold is god, economics will rule the land.
The forestry profession has done an excellent job of
>convincing us that an old forest is a "decadent" one and must be cut for
>its own good. When we as a society perceive and acknowledge the value
>and services provided by natural woodlands, and reward the landowner who
>preserves them accordingly, then maybe the balance will tip from
>economics to ecology.
Yeah, that's my fantasy also. I dream of the day when forest land owners
get a special tax break or are paid to leave the land natural. I used to
believe in Santa Claus, too.
Gene GeRue, author,
How To Find Your Ideal Country Home: A Comprehensive Guide
http://www.ruralize.com/
