[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[pct-l] Genius

Ron "Fallingtrees" Moak wrote:

>It may come as a surprise to some that there are more trees growing in
>America today than when Columbus first landed.

Rush Limbaugh is a moron.  He has used this quote many times.  Yes there
might be more trees in America today...I can go down to Fred Meyer and have
a fine selection of trees available for purchase.  I can go visit the local
tree farm (National Forest) and see where zillions of trees have been
replanted (this is prior to thinning obviously, but these are still "living
trees".  Your fact is probably true, but it is totally misleading in the
context you are using it in.  How much of the old growth forest is still
here since Columbus first landed, 4% ?  

>As you mentioned, clear cuts and fire cleared areas provide habitat for
>large mammals such as deer and elk. The open spaces allows needed vegetation
>to grow that is critical to their diet. These plants don't grow in the
>forest. After the great Tillamook fire early in the century. The numbers of
>deer and elk increased dramatically due to the increase in forage. The
>forest offer protection, the clearings offer food.

So by this logic I could state:

"Many people are unhappy with their lives, so crack and heroin are good
because they can help them "feel happy for awhile and forget about things
for awhile."

You are right about the increased forage, some of the brush is 25 feet high
south of Snoqualmie pass.  Visit Twilight Lake sometime, it's right on the
PCT.  There is a campsite on the east side of the lake, but the only way to
get to it is by swimming the lake.  The brush makes off trail travel
impossible.  So again, by your logic above I could also state:

"The increased forage forces humans to stay on hiking trails thus confining
their impact to one particular spot, this way thay cannot travel off the
trail and damage plants."

>matter where you go. It's present in our own desires and wishes. Let's also
>remember no trees would be cut if there wasn't a demand. So while it's easy
>to blame all the problems on loggers and timber companies, it's a cheap
>shot. If we didn't buy it, they wouldn't cut it.

Have you ever seen a demolition company dismantle a house and reuse the
wood?  Most likely not, because it is far cheaper to buy new wood than hire
a crew to save the wood upon demolition.  How many people would be driving
their lame SUV's if gas wasn't so cheap?  (When you account for inflation,
gas in the US is cheap)  

>Actually very little of the wood (percentage wise) is use for pulp. What's
>used is generally a by product of generating lumber or plywood. This is
>because pulp from softwoods (Firs, pines, etc. - the evergreen family) makes

Yes, but remember Clayqout sound on Vancouver Island , BC.?  Guess where
all of that clearcut old growth went?  Phone books for the San Francisco
bay area.  Let your fingers do the chopping.

Craig Giffen
Portland, OR

p.s.  http://mojo.calyx.net/~refuse/mumia/index.html

Craig Giffen
Portland, OR

* From the Pacific Crest Trail Email List |  http://www.backcountry.net   *