What are your opinions on timber harvesting?
Asked by
dphhaas (
164
)
December 17th, 2009
I often see people talking about how they think logging and the timber industry are bad, wrong, and ruining the environment. If you have ever posted such a comment, or share similar feelings, have you ever considered the benefits of timber harvesting when done following sound forest practices? You wouldn’t take medical advice from a non-medical professional, so when reading anti-logging/forestry literature, or forming opinions about the subject, do you consider whether or not the author or organization (and members there of) have any formal education, training, or experience in the science of forestry? If you feel this way about forestry/logging, have you ever discussed the topic with a forester, or a forestry professor, or someone educated in the subject matter?
In recent years, California has experienced statewide catastrophic wildfires. Have the effects of these fires (the immediate effects we have seen thus far and the delayed effects that will become evident over the coming years) changed your opinions at all about active forest management? If you believe logging is bad, or believe logging means deforestation, take a look at this link:
http://www.fire.ca.gov/resource_mgt/downloads/2009_Forest_Practice_Rules_and_Act.pdf
These are the California Forest Practice Rules; the rules and regulations that govern timber harvest activities in the state of California. Maybe you don’t realize the tremendous amount of regulations, the resulting work, costs, and planning, and the protection provided by these rules.
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
11 Answers
I think what they’re more concerned with is the timber industry in developing nations. Easily granted, here in the US and many other industrialized nations they watch their intake, plant trees to replace, etc.
The problem is in 3rd world countries where they chop down miles of rainforest a day, or clear cut all the wood in a forest. For every .5% increase in forestation in the US a year, there’s a 2–5% decrease worldwide.
I personally drop a log @least once per day !!
If the company cutting down the trees in the US are re-planting after they harvest I don’t see a problem.
The rainforest is my biggest concern.
I don’t condemn all logging in a manner that some logging is practiced. That is, I don’t advocate “clear cut” and “slash and burn” condemnations of the entire industry. However, those named practices often (usually?) are destructive—of wildlife and fish habitat, water quality (and retention), and destruction via erosion of the very land on which it’s practiced.
I also don’t condemn all doctors because some are quacks, but there are a lot of quacks.
I think you have to take into consideration all of what you said and all of the bad things about it such as plants going extinct and animals not having homes. I think there should be LESS logging but it shouldn’t stop completely. It is all about moderation for the loggers.
I couldn’t read the details, my eyes just glazed over. Sorry!
I don’t think logging in and of itself is evil or bad. I think we need to find better methods of harvesting.
The clear cutting way of the past have given way to some pretty responsible forest management along with reforestation programs. Harvesting trees is necessary and a great industry to boot and the internet itself is having an unintended benefit by encouraging more and more paperless transactions.
For years loggers here clearcut first growth forests. That is irreplaceable. Now it’s happening in the Amazon and elsewhere. If loggers behaved properly it would be different, but they don’t.
I think that there should be clearly defined areas that can’t be logged in with the only exception of fire breaks. A planned replanting should be manditory for clear cut areas. It should also be be more widely known that people with land they aren’t developing, that if they keep it planted in trees, they can get payment from the gov’t for every year they don’t cut it. Here there are large tracts of land planted in pine trees that earn money just sitting. Every ten years, they cut the trees and then replant. Of course we have a paper mill that buys the trees and keeps loggers in business.
Some sustainable logging and forest management and fire lines are fine.
Destroying endangered species and their habitats is not fine. “3rd world” exploitation is not fine. Humans already dominate and abuse too much of the planet. We need to restrain ourselves, cut back, and make more healthy habitat for other species. That doesn’t mean eliminating all well-conducted sustainable forestry.
And turning large amounts of what was or would be lovely forest and habitat for many species into awful wastelands on a large scale is also not so fine.
Answer this question 
Composing members:
0
