Replies

Tree harvest is not “exploitation”. On the contrary, it is a very necessary step in the successful management of our forest resources.

Wood is, and has been for centuries, a very necessary component in housing and as a source of energy. Forest products include a wide range of highly valuable adjuncts to our current standard of living, from the paper we read in the morning to the natural filtration of pollutants from the air, to the conservation of soil and water deemed so necessary to maintaining the balance of life. But the trees have to be HARVESTED to complete this balance.

Old-growth forests are the most inefficient means of carrying out any of these functions. These old stands of trees have effectively smothered out almost every other plant life in their shadows, they sap the moisture from the surrounding soil, and they contribute little in the capture of carbon dioxide from the air, as compared to young, swiftly-growing plant growth, be it grass, young trees, or algae growing down on the pond.

Nature’s harvest, of course, is at a much slower rate than mankind’s, through beetle infestations the kill trees, the rot and decay of dead trees through the actions of bacteria and saprophytes. Much swifter and more effective are the natural fires that start in old-growth timber, and burn away all the accumulated fuel, a process that had been going on for countless eons long before mankind appeared on this planet. After the passing of the fire, new growth springs up almost immediately, as seeds from suppressed species of plants sprout, and an immediate demand for the raw material of this growth, carbon dioxide, clears the atmosphere swiftly, replacing all the oxygen that was consumed in the vegetative fuel burn.

Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant, and never rises to level much above its current ratio to other gases in the atmosphere, as long as there are plenty of young, growing plants and adequate energy from sunshine. No matter HOW much “fossil” fuel is burned.