Which was really my only point.
A re-reading of my posts would reveal that I'm not anti-logging -- I merely object to the facile "it does no damage" claims, which are untrue. Your discussion of "the toughness of nature" is simply a backhanded admission that the large, rapid changes caused by logging are damage.
The real point, on which we agree, is that logging is not the huge disaster the enviros make it out to be. As I noted above, a nice visit to Camp Sherman, OR will show how little long or medium term damage is really done by properly-conducted logging.
i have to hope you won't become discouraged by those here, who risk losing EVERYTHING.
please read this amazing account, here and accept my calming words, that your input is welcome...
it well may be disputed, but welcome.
the response to the enviromarxists is not to destroy the forests...
the proper response is to destroy the enviromarxists. i (merely an individual) appreciate your posts, and your, i think, heartfelt concern for the forests.
this is positive dialog.