Death of a Sawmill

Wall Street Journal on Line ^ | December 29, 2005 | JIM PETERSEN

[yoe]

EUREKA, Mont. -- My friend Jim Hurst auctioned his sawmill in August.

Jim's decision to pack it in after 25 years of beating his head on the wall made big news here in northwest Montana but, alas, not a peep from this newspaper or the New York Times. That's too bad, because the loss of our family-owned mills also signals the loss of technologies and skills vital to our efforts to protect the West's great national forests from the ravages of increasingly fearsome wildfires.

You would think environmentalists who campaigned against harvesting in the West's national forests for 30-some years would be dancing in the streets. ... Railing against giant faceless corporations is easy, but facing the news cameras after small family-owned mills fold has turned out to be very difficult.... across much of the West there is a gnawing sense that environmentalists have hurt a lot of underdogs in their lust for power.

[snip] Environmentalists also face a problem they never anticipated. Recent polling reveals some 80% percent of Americans approve of the kind of methodical thinning that would have produced small diameter logs in perpetuity for Jim's sawmill. We Americans seem to like thinning in overly dense forests because the end result is visually pleasing, and because it helps reduce the risk of horrific wildfire -- a bonus for wildlife and millions of year-round recreation enthusiasts who worship clean air and water.

[snip] ..."Environmentalism increasingly reflects urban perspectives. As people move to cities, they become infatuated with fantasies about land untouched by humans. This demographic shift is revealed through ongoing debates about endangered species, grazing, water rights, private property, mining and logging. And it is partly a healthy trend. But this urbanization of environmental values also signals the loss of a rural way of life...

[yoe]

Environmentalism for votes like Political Correctness for votes is sinking America. The laws are already on the books for the environment - we do not need more people in the Congress or the Senate who pander to the special interest enviromentalist - shun them rather than vote for them.

[Wolfie]

So who bought the mill?

[Carry_Okie]

...across much of the West there is a gnawing sense that environmentalists have hurt a lot of underdogs in their lust for power.

As do the private, tax-exempt "charitable" foundations of major corporate stockholders, many of whom are invested in (drum roll please) competing sources of timber from overseas.

The environmentalists will "rediscover" forest stewardship once the competition is dead and the market has consolidated in the hands of moneyed interests. The rest of us will pay through the nose, especially on the interests on the loans to purchase goods requiring large amounts of raw material at inflated prices, particularly homes.

There is an alternative. It starts with private property.

[backhoe]

The general "too much interference" applies across the board, and it's worse for small businesses, who usually lack in-house lawyers, accountants, and other such personnel to deal with it daily. I left retailing in 1985, service in 1999, and firearms in 2002, and while there were a number of compelling reasons, too many taxes, and too much regulation were strong parts of it.

If the average Soccer Mom had to put up with the Mickey Mouse rules businesses are subjected to, there'd be a revolution in this country. The average person has no idea how onerous it is.

[Mr Ramsbotham]

The environmentalists will "rediscover" forest stewardship once the competition is dead and the market has consolidated in the hands of moneyed interests. The rest of us will pay through the nose, especially on the interests on the loans to purchase goods requiring large amounts of raw material at inflated prices, particularly homes.

You need to read Thomas Sowell's "Basic Economics." Everything you're saying here is little more than sententious nonsense, with emotive catch-phrases thrown in for seasoning.

[2banana]

So who bought the mill?

Someone who is going to "flip" it to make a quick $100,000...

[barj]

Yes. I agree 100%. It is interesting though that this idea of interference didn't bother anyone when it was the FDA, but they can hinder small scale food producers just as badly.

Thanks

[mugs99]

As people move to cities, they become infatuated with fantasies about land untouched by humans

They can't solve the problems of filth and crime in the cities they love, yet they dictate to those in the countryside how to live...Revolting!
.

[llevrok]

I grew up in a coastal Washington logging and lumbering town. The early '80's brought the spotted owl and the end of 7,000 high paying jobs in my community alone.That directly impacted 21,000 others (families, businesses...).

Recently, enviro scientists announced that the owl lives in greater abundance than they estimated 20 years previous. Much greater, in fact. Those of us who make our living from forest products told them that back then.

None-the-less, no apologies for their little mistake. In fact, there is no action being taken to de-list the spotted owl from the Endangered Specicies Act listing. Why?

Environmentalists now say that the closure of the so called old growth forests has been a good move, owl or no owl.

[PsyOp]

So who bought the mill?

Probably some environmentalist who will now produce "organic" lumber, sold at a premium, to finance more environmental whacko-ism.

[Carry_Okie]

You need to read Thomas Sowell's "Basic Economics."

No I don't. Sowell needs to read my book, and agrees with many of my findings, although on a rather childish level.

Everything you're saying here is little more than sententious nonsense, with emotive catch-phrases thrown in for seasoning.

Back it up. I already have.

[oyez]

As people move to cities, they become infatuated with fantasies about land untouched by humans

Before the advent of the white man many of the Southern forests were ravaged by fire, insects and disease. What we now see as robust woods were patches of scrub hard wood. Only the bottom lands produced the climax forests.

[nightdriver]

If the enviro-nazis were half as interested in preserving forests as they would like us to believe, they would not stand in the way of removing diseased stands of trees or the building of logging roads so that fire-fighting equipment could have access.

It's obvious that they are only after control and imposing their wills on everyone else and not protecting any environment.

[B4Ranch]

>>But this urbanization of environmental values also signals the loss of a rural way of life...<<

As is intended per Agenda 21. We may thank our United nations, local, state and federal politicians for this warped sense of sustainability.

Just for the heck of it, call your local City Manager and ask if they know about Agenda 21. The response will be, "Yes, of course I do." Then ask why these words, "Agenda 21" are never mentioned at Public Meeting of the city officials.

Do they not want the locals to know that they are operating under a global plan? No, they do not!

[mugs99]

Where I live, fire kept the forests healthy. Logging later did the same as fire. Now that we have curtailed logging, the forests are a fire trap. That's why wilderness roads that were available for recreation are now closed.
.

[jmaroneps37]

It's such a shame that a great state like Montana has been infected with vermin from Mexifornia and other nearby rat producing states. The good people of the state were asleep at the switch. Come home Montana, come home.

[American in Israel]

So who bought the mill?

Let me guess, SPI. One thing about environmentalists, they are hell on forests, but great for big business.

[AxelPaulsenJr]

So who bought the mill?

The word, "auction" in the story would imply that the mill was dismantled.

[HuntsvilleTxVeteran]

There are hidden contradictions in the minds of people who "love Nature" while deploring the "artificialities" with which "Man has spoiled 'Nature.' " The obvious contradiction lies in their choice of words, which imply that Man and his artifacts are not part of "Nature", but beavers and their dams are. But the contradictions go deeper than this prima-facie absurdity. In declaring his love for a beaver dam (erected by beavers for beavers' purposes) and his hatred for dams erected by men (for the purposes of men) the "Naturist" reveals his hatred for his own race, i.e. his own self-hatred. In the case,of "Naturists" such self-hatred is understandable; they are such a sorry lot. But hatred is too strong an emotion to feel toward them; pity and contempt are the most they rate. As for me, willy-nilly I am a man, not a beaver, and H. sapiens is the only race I have or can have. Fortunately for me, I like being part of a race made up of men and women, it strikes me as a fine arrangement and perfectly "natural."

ROBERT HEINLEIN