Habitat destruction

[Heath Fred]

	Please recognize that all the "facts" presented by Paul are
propaganda from the California Forest Products Commission as he clearly
notes.
	Sorry to go away from leps, but I have made some comments in caps
for each of these points below.


>From: Paul Cherubini	
>Doug Dawn wrote:

> I was just in the Mendocino National Forest in northern California.  The
> clear cutting has definitely increased.  A very unique habitat, the kind
your
> heart speeds up when you think about butterflying in, a special one I felt
> privileged to discover last spring, was infested with trucks and over
logged
> this time.  Dusty and destroyed for real.  I called the Forest Service
about this 
> infestation of chainsaws and they acknowledged the increases (by the way 
> the trees were hundreds of years old, now a rarity).  They said "they are
on 
> private land within the Forest."

Doug, the California Forest Products Commission says we should worry
more about bark beetles than chainsaws:

-  Insects do more damage to the forest than fires and disease
combined. Bark beetles eat a circle around the trunk, preventing 
nutrients from reaching leaves and roots.
-DO BARK BEETLES KILL MORE TREES THAN CHAINSAWS? I DOUBT IT. AND SINCE
BEETLES ARE PART OF THE NATURAL ECOSYSTEM THEY REALLY DON'T DO "DAMAGE" TO
THE FOREST. 

- California foresters plant an average of 7 new trees for every 
one harvested. For at least 25 years, growth has exceeded harvest 
in California fores
-THESE PLANTING ARE MONOCULTURES, USUALLY OF DOUGLAS FIR. THINK OF A CORN
FIELD WITH VERY TALL CORN. 

- Much of California¹s land has been cleared for housing and 
agriculture.But because of reforestation practices, our forests are
nearly as large as 100 years ago.
-AGAIN THE FORESTS MAY BE AS BIG, BUT THEY ARE NO WHERE NEAR THE SAME IN
TERMS OF BIODIVERSITY.

-On publicly owned lands, some forests are so overcrowded that
300 or more trees compete for light and nutrients in areas that naturally 
support only 20.
-IF THEY CAN NATURALLY ONLY SUPPORT 20, THEN NATURALLY THERE WOULD ONLY BE
20 TREES THERE.  

- 95% of all the old growth redwood trees in California are on 
publicly owned state and national park land, much of it donated by private
timber companies.
-THIS IS BECAUSE MORE THAN 80% OF THE ORIGINAL OLD GROWTH REDWOODS FORESTS
HAVE BEEN DESTROYED FOR TIMBER.

- To provide the products we use, The California Forest Practice
Act requires that all private forest land be replanted within five years.
Since 1952, California¹s total net annual forest growth for all ownerships
has doubled.
-AGAIN, THESE REPLACEMENTS ARE MONOCULTURES

- The Sustained Yield Act requires forest product companies to develop a
plan
that spells out how their forest ecosystems will be sustained for the next
100 years.
-I SURE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE DEFINITION OF "ECOSYSTEMS" USED HERE. 

- Wildlife researchers have found old growth forests are not the spotted
owl¹s preferred habitat. They like younger, open forests that attract wood
rats, 
their favorite food. 
-THE NORTHERN SPOTTED OWL'S (THE ENDANGERED ONES) FAVORITE FOOD IS THE THE
RED TREE VOLE, ONLY FOUND IN OLD GROWTH FORESTS. 

-Geneticists are unlocking the secrets to improving tree growth and 
immunity to disease.What they¹ve learned helps trees mature 35%
faster than just a few years ago.
-THIS IS EXCELLENT FOR THE DOUGLAS FIR FARMS AND MAYBE THE "FOREST PRODUCTS"
INDUSTRY WILL NOT HAVE TO CLEAR CUT ANY MORE OLD GROWTH FORESTS.

- Fire is part of the forest cycle. Native Americans set them to clear
the forest floor for planting and hunting. Today we use controlled burns and

mechanical thinning to help prevent damaging wild fires.
-I'M NOT SURE OF THE POINT HERE. FIRE RETURNS ALL THE NUTRIENTS TO THE SOIL.
CUTTING DOWN TREES AND REMOVING THEM (THE EUPHEMISM: MECHANICAL
THINNING?)DOES NOT.

- The natural cycle of plants and animals in a forest depends on 
disturbances like forest fires. Harvesting techniques are often designed 
to mimic these disturbances.
--AGAIN, REMOVING TREES DOES NOT MIMIC ANYTHING NATURAL. 

- Trees are the only 100% renewable and recyclable resource we have, and 
much more energy and resource efficient than steel, plastic and aluminum.
-I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO PROBLEM WITH TREE FARMING, BUT WE SHOULD STOP AS MUCH
AS POSSIBLE THE  CONTINUED DESTRUCTION THE REMAINING NATURAL ECOSYSTEMS
WHICH ARE NOT REALLY REPLACED BY THESE MONOCULTURES. IN ADDITION, THE
GOVERNMENT SHOULDN'T BE SUBSIDIZING THIS ACTIVITY DIRECTLY BY SELLING TIMBER
RIGHTS ON PUBLIC LAND CHEAPLY AND INDIRECTLY BY BUILDING FOREST ROADS AT NO
COST TO THE INDUSTRY.

	One other question which has bothered me for years: Why is it called
the "Forestry", when in fact it has been nothing but "deforestry" 
	 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/private/leps-l/attachments/20000619/4fabce50/attachment.html