Activism Change

HR 842

Question:

The family recently sold the business to outside corporate interests who plan to strip the timber for export. The mill will be shut down. Nothing will be processed locally. (The employees tried to buy the business but couldn’t come up with the financing).

Would you mind providing specifics?  Is anything being done to protest/stop this? —             Lynn Wallace           |           I do not represent E&S.       Salt Lake City, UT 84108     |           Compu$erve:  70242,101               Revenge is a dish best not served at all.

Response:

There is a bill in the House of Representatives, HR 842 – the Ancient Forest Protection Act.  If this passes, it would prevent what remaining old strands of forest we have from being cut down.  When I say "we have" – it is not in some abstract, new age sense – it is literal.  This is public land, land which belongs to all people in the U.S. – our National Forests. It’s a common misconception to think that these forests are protected – they’re not – only National Parks are.

This is a prime example of how the government can’t be relied upon as a preserver of the environment.  Even if HR 842 passes, there’s nothing to prevent them from going back a few years later and passing a new bill allowing trees to be cut down.   The best solution to perceived problems of deforestation is a nonprofit- corporation approach, IMHO.  A private organization with a deed to a chunk of land–a deed that contains a covenant specifying that the trees can’t be cut or the rivers can’t be dammed or whatever–is far more binding and more reliable than a passing legislative fancy of government that can be revoked with a simple vote at any time.  National park forests are protected?  Maybe now–maybe not next year. The Catalina Island Conservancy is an excellent example of the nonprofit corporation idea at work in the real world.  I think that national parklands and monuments should be run the same way, with the deeds handed over to the Sierra Club or some such organization, in order to maximize the parks’ protection and security. — McDonnell Douglas Space Systems Company, Huntington Beach, CA Disclaimer:  Any opinions here are mine, not my employer’s.  Any facts are in the public domain. Boddie for President 1992!

Response:

Thanks, Paul, for bringing up the cartoon.  I think it was in the Seattle Times but I’m not sure either. Your point is a critical one, and one which Earth First! has been trying in Oregon and Northern California to bring to loggers and millworkers through alliance with labor groups. Loggers there realize (because their timber reserves are less than ours) that the rate of cutting does put them out of jobs very soon.  Like before any of them can retire with full pensions. Slowing our exploitation of the forests, through restricting old-growth cutting and stopping below-cost timber sales, and through any other measures you care to name, has the dual effect of ensuring jobs for timber workers in the future and saving our ecosystems and biotic diversity.   Though, as some would be quick to point out, not as many jobs.  But some are better than none.   — Mark Madsen

Response:

A senator from Oregon, I forget which one, said last year: "there’s something wrong with our economy if we have to lose <n-thousand jobs to save a animal". I paraphrase. His point is similar to that made a few times in this thread: what about the people who live there ? I would like to think that one can express a similar depth of concern for people in timber communities by asking "isn’t there something wrong with our economy if destroying species and habitat is the only way to keep it going ? " A cartoon in the Seattle Times (I think) made the point beuatifully: it showed a logger standing at a crossroads – one road led through an uncut timber ecosystem, one through a clearcut wasteland. Both led to the unemployment office. The caption read "a hard choice for loggers, an easy one for the rest of us."

A great cartoon. And how true. The sad part is, if the forests had been managed properly over the past 100 years, there would still be plenty of jobs for loggers and millhands, plus a health forest, on into the forseeable future. Not far from where I live is the Gilchrist Timber Company, one of the last family-owned mill towns left in the U.S.  They owned thousands of acres of old-growth pine which they have selectively cut over the years. Because of their sustained-yield timber practices, the mill was profitable, and Gilchrist workers were well paid and had stable jobs. No more. The family recently sold the business to outside corporate interests who plan to strip the timber for export. The mill will be shut down. Nothing will be processed locally. (The employees tried to buy the business but couldn’t come up with the financing). All Gilchrist employees will lose their jobs permanently. Local businesses have already started to close down. This neatly manicured mill town is history. Oddly, those same Oregon senators who are screaming about loosing logging jobs to “save an animal,” are strangely silent over this example of loosing logging jobs to outside corporate greed. Mike

Response:

A senator from Oregon, I forget which one, said last year: "there’s something wrong with our economy if we have to lose <n-thousand jobs to save a animal". I paraphrase. His point is similar to that made a few times in this thread: what about the people who live there ? I would like to think that one can express a similar depth of concern for people in timber communities by asking "isn’t there something wrong with our economy if destroying species and habitat is the only way to keep it going ? " A cartoon in the Seattle Times (I think) made the point beuatifully: it showed a logger standing at a crossroads – one road led through an uncut timber ecosystem, one through a clearcut wasteland. Both led to the unemployment office. The caption read "a hard choice for loggers, an easy one for the rest of us." I liked that. — UW Computer Science Lab         “to shatter tradition makes us feel free”

Response:

There is a bill in the House of Representatives, HR 842 – the Ancient Forest Protection Act.  If this passes, it would prevent what remaining old strands of forest we have from being cut down.  When I say "we have" – it is not in some abstract, new age sense – it is literal.  This is public land, land which belongs to all people in the U.S. – our National Forests. It’s a common misconception to think that these forests are protected – they’re not – only National Parks are.  I had this misconception until I went backpacking in the Monongahela National Forest, West Virginia, and started passing the logging trucks and open strip mines.  More ‘enlightened’ [...]

Archives are good things to have…                                                 Activists List #11,                                                 Satuarday, June 9, 1990                   Loss of Tropical Forests Is Found                      Much Worse Than Was Thought           By Philip Shabecoff, Special to the New York Times                     Friday, June 8, 1990 NY Times            Study Sees Climate Peril and `Tragedy’ for World "WASHINGTON, June 7 — Tropical forests, which play a vital role in regulating the global climate, are disappearing much more rapidly than previously estimated, an international research group said today. Each year recently, 40 Million to 50 million acres of tropical forest, an area the size of Washington state, has been vanishing…. "The rate of loss, measured in most countries in 1987, was nearly 50 percent greater than the last global estimate, prepared by the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization in 1980, according to the Institute. `"We were startled to uncover this rate of global deforestation’ said James Gustave Speth, president of the institute.. `We were saying we were losing the forests at an acre a second, but it is much closer to an acre and a half a second’… "Senator Patrick Leahy, Democrat of Vermont and chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, said in a statement: `This is the first reliable data we’ve had on tropical deforestation in 10 years. A situation we knew was bleak is now shown to be truly horrendous.’… "The report, `World Resources 1990-91,’ prepared [by the World Resources Institute] in collaboration with the United Nations…was based on remote sensing date from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and Landsat satellites… "Since preagricultural times, the report said, the world has lost about one-fifth of all its forests, from more than 12 billion acres to under 10 billion acres…Brazil, with the largest remaining tropical forests area, is also experiencing the worst losses — between 12.5 million and 22.5 million acres [per] year… Myanmar (formerly Burma)is loosing 1.7 million acres per year, more than 500 times the 1980 estimate by the Food and Agricultural Organization. India, according to the data, is losing its forests at the rate of 3.7 million acres per year. Large areas legally designated as forest land `are already virtually treeless,’… "The group’s report said that in nine major tropical countries, the estimates of total annual losses of tropical-forest acreage were about four times as high as estimates from the years 1981 to 1985…however, in Brazil, the rate of deforestation declined in 1988 from 1987, largely because the levels from the latter year were the highest on record for that country"     Estimated annual loss of tropical forest in nine key countries                        (in Thousands of acres)                 1981-1985 estimates             Recent Estimates Vietnam                 161                             427 Thailand                437                             981 Philippines             227                             353 Myanmar (Burma)         254                             1,673 Indonesia               1,482                           2,224 India                   363                             3,707 Costa Rica              160                             306 Cameroon                198                             247 Brazil                  3,657                           19,768 "The disappearance of tropical forests is regarded by environmental experts as one of the most serious global environmental problems. Through photosynthesis, the forests absorb huge quantities of carbon dioxide, the most important of the gases that are accumulating in the atmosphere. Many scientists believe that carbon dioxide, if not kept in check, will cause a significant warming of the earth in the next century, through a process known as the greenhouse effect "As tropical forests shrink, their capacity to absorb carbon dioxide declines, thereby hastening the onset and increasing the magnitude of the warming phenomenon. Moreover, as the vegetation from the cut forests decays or is burned, it emits more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. "The tropical forests also contain the largest and most diverse population of plant and animal species of any habitat in the world. As the forests vanish, so do many of these species, many before they ever have been discovered, named and analyzed for possible use by human beings. Tropical forest generally have infertile soil because most of the nutrients are in the vegetation, not the soil. Thus, when these forests are cleared they tend to regenerate very slowly, if at all." "the World Resources report also contains a new index of countries that are the greatest net contributors to the atmosphere of carbon dioxide, chlorofluorocarbons and methanes, the major gases contributing to global warming. The U.S. and S.U. are the first and second-largest net producers of these greenhouse gases, the report found, adding that if the European Community were considered a single country, it would rank second behind the U.S.  But the next three countries on the index, surprisingly, were developing nations: Brazil, China and India" [I've re-ordered some of the excerpts from the original article --HB] I’d appreciate people posting this to relevant groups, e.g. alt.activism, sci.environment, etc, (including some I can’t get/don’t know of…) <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<                                         "Activist11:R-forest ALERT"    # Copyright (C) 1990, Harel Barzilai for Activists Mailing-list  #   #       You may copy freely so long as you do not charge         #  #         others for it, and include this copyright notice       #      [Obviously we are not copyrighting the NYT article itself!] <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< To: mlist                                                 Addendum to Activist11 The article I just quoted said    "Each year recently, 40 Million to 50 million acres of tropical forest,    an area the size of Washington state, has been vanishing…" and    "Since preagricultural times, the report said, the world has lost    about one-fifth of all its forests, from more than 12 billion acres to    under 10 billion acres…" The 10 billion figure refers to  *all* forests; in pasting together excerpts from the article, I missed:    "The group said 1.9 billion acres of TROPICAL FOREST remained" So the rate is roughly 50M/2B, or about 2.5% of all rainforests on planet earth are destroyed each year (going by 1987 rates)… I don’t have to lecture to this group about how significant 2.5% (1/40th) is in this particular context…(the excerpts at the end are probably a good indication, however), although *some* people will still want to think of these as "small" figures, not realizing that maybe 5% or 10% per year could well mean "too late" by the time we know what hit us. I’ll be quoting some more interesting/alarming statistics soon, taken from Scientific American’s Sept. ‘89 Special issue "Managing Planet Earth" (is that as in, "General Manager and CEO of Planet Earth" ??) –Harel [Back to April 1991:] The second file in questions, EarthStats, is avail. by email       For more information about ACTIV-L or PeaceNet’s brochure,   # Harel Barzilai for Activists Mailing List (AML) # join AML, just send the message "SUB ACTIV-L <your full name" to the confirming that your name has been added to the list. Alternate

Response:

A couple of years ago, I saw Jerry Garcia of the Grateful Dead testify before a senate subcommitee on the destruction of tropical rainforests.

Now, here is a very credible source. Next we’ll have Homer Simpson testifying at foriegn policy committee hearings. Suprised why the musician would take the time to testify, a senator asked, "Why would you care about this, Mr Garcia?"

The question would have been better phrased as "What expert testimony credentials do you have?" or "What college did you get your degree in Earth Sciences from?" – to which he replied – "Because I am a being that is an inhabitant of this Earth…"

You obviously omitted the "…man, <bhong puff" from the end of this quote. MD — —  Michael P. Deignan                      / Since I *OWN* SBS.COM, —    UUCP: …!uunet!rayssd!anomaly!mpd  /   Represent The Opinions Of — Telebit: +1 401 455 0347              /    My Company…

Response:

There is a bill in the House of Representatives, HR 842 – the Ancient Forest Protection Act.  If this passes, it would prevent what remaining old strands of forest we have from being cut down.  When I say "we have" – it is not in some abstract, new age sense – it is literal.  This is public land, land which belongs to all people in the U.S. – our National Forests. It’s a common misconception to think that these forests are protected – they’re not – only National Parks are.  I had this misconception until I went backpacking in the Monongahela National Forest, West Virginia, and started passing the logging trucks and open strip mines.  More ‘enlightened’ states aren’t exempt either.  If you drive up highway 101 in California toward Eureka, you’ll go through amazing Redwoods in the Redwood National Forest, that will seem to go on forever.  But that is just it – it seems that way.  If you step out of the car and hike in (which the Forest Service says, in supreme irony, is a no-no because there aren’t any trails and that this would cause erosion and packing of the forest floor) you will come to, sometimes less than a hundred yards off the road, a clear-cut wasteland.  The redwoods around trails and roads are like a prop-set of a broadway show – if you step off the set then you see that it’s just an illusion… A couple of years ago, I saw Jerry Garcia of the Grateful Dead testify before a senate subcommitee on the destruction of tropical rainforests.  Suprised why the musician would take the time to testify, a senator asked, "Why would you care about this, Mr Garcia?" – to which he replied – "Because I am a being that is an inhabitant of this Earth…" We all are.  Spend 29 cents and 15 minutes of your time and please write your congressmen, asking them to co-sponsor HR842 – the Ancient Forest Protection Act – to prevent the destruction of what remains of our ancient forests.

Response:

Filed under: Community Activism

Related Posts

• Colorado: Fost-adopter got 190 days for death of child
• Declawing list-please start one
• Gerardi Sign-On Letter
• NAAFA MERIT SCHOLARSHIP 2004
• NAAFA MERIT SCHOLARSHIP 2004
• Part 26, The Casolaro Murder --> The Feds' Theft of Inslaw Software
• Mad Man Marty
• Nature Medicine Editorial excerpts --
• Abuse
• (SFX) Stay Away ACT UP - Round 3!