Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: goarmy

Is there really anyone here that doesn't agree with protecting resources and using them well, as she said? Do we have to be so paranoid about politics that our knee jerk reaction to environmentalism is that it's completely unnecessary?

I'm sure she's not even speaking of the US, who have been the first to ensure reforestation after logging, and the first to care about our impact on the planet and cleaning up polluting industries. No.... when she looks down and sees a perspective none of us have seen.... I don't feel too threatened by her noticing that from there, the world seems like a beautiful delicate place where in some parts, human influence on it is visible from afar and not always good.


61 posted on 08/04/2005 8:28:32 AM PDT by HairOfTheDog (Join the Hobbit Hole Troop Support - http://freeper.the-hobbit-hole.net/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: HairOfTheDog

I think she was talking about the massive deforestation in the Amazon basin and in Indonesia, in the tropics, in other words...replacing forests with range land. It does have an environemental impact. It directly affects the water shed, how much rain an area gets, and what carrying capacity for growing things the land has.

And they aren't replanting and practicing the type of land management that is used in the US.

This is the reality. Humans have always shaped their enviroments in ways that seem good to the do-ers at the time. Sometimes it's good, like how clear cuts actually work better in some types of forests than selective harvesting, and sometimes it works worse, like daming the Nile, or overgrazing marginal areas.

This is the way the world works. Things change.

Those that worship the environment get stupid about it, like sacrificing lots of land where beetles have killed the trees because they don't want any logging at all, and thus the areas burn hot and the soil sterilizes somewhat and the natural plant succession is interrupted, and they end up destroying more than they save.

Those that understand the real science and aren't pushing an agenda sometimes manage to do something about it in positive ways. This is land management. Poor cultures don't do that nearly as much as rich ones. Therefore, the best way to get the world in good land management use is to encourage the economic development of these areas in the tropics, and get them to the point where they can afford to take care of their lands.


72 posted on 08/04/2005 8:39:30 AM PDT by Knitting A Conundrum (Act Justly, Love Mercy, and Walk Humbly With God Micah 6:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies ]

To: HairOfTheDog

"Do we have to be so paranoid about politics that our knee jerk reaction to environmentalism is that it's completely unnecessary? "

I've noticed that some of the things that freepers accuse the left of doing... freepers do as well. This dogmatic approach to environmentalism helps no one.
There are many rational folks here who recognize the need to be conservative when it comes to the environment. But when something related to environmentalism in any way comes up, they bash it, relentlessly. Dogma. Synchophants.
I think global warming is junk science. But I do believe in climate change.
I think the left does a disservice by promoting junk science, and trying to brow beat people into adopting their agenda.
I think the right does a disservice when they mock all things related to environmental concerns, and spin hard to make those concerned with the environment look like kooks.

And then there is the contingent here that couldn't care less about the environment, country, community, or family. They just want to make $1 more this week than they did last week.


98 posted on 08/04/2005 9:15:29 AM PDT by brownsfan (It's not a war on terror... it's a war with islam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies ]

To: HairOfTheDog
Do we have to be so paranoid about politics that our knee jerk reaction to environmentalism is that it's completely unnecessary?

Judging by the usual comments on threads like these, I'd say "yes". You would think conserving nature would be a conservative principle, also. Sure, I'm as skeptical about global warming and some of the other environmentalist bugaboos as anyone here, but I haven't totally dimissed the possibility that it might be true. Similarly with deforestation - when you see for yourself thousands of square miles of clear cut you can't help but think that it's not a real good idea, although the areas that have been replanted with a single tree species and then sprayed with herbicides to prevent any competition may be even worse. I saw a huge area of this this summer while riding across northern New Brunswick. It was weird - when you stopped you didn't even hear birds, because most birds and other animals can't make a living in these monoculture forests of fir trees.

170 posted on 08/04/2005 12:07:36 PM PDT by -YYZ-
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson