Bush gives 58 million acres of National Forests to industries

[Drewbacca]

Except for the cutting all the trees down part.

Uhh, no, they dont cut down all the trees. That was my point, smart guy.

And a fine point it is. It's wonderful these helpless trees have been rescued by heroic loggers from the savage claws of the DoI.

Do you use toilet paper by any chance? I'm guessing you wipe your mouth with it after you're done talking.

The point is that you clearly had / have no idea how logging works and assumed they'd just cut down all the trees. They don't do that at all. The loggers won't be any worse off for the forests in the long term.

Also... wow... that post you made was... sad.

[StriderKyo]

The point is that you clearly had / have no idea how logging works and assumed they'd just cut down all the trees.

A) That was never your point, you're trying to change the subject, and

B) I do understand exactly how supposedly environmentally friendly logging works, you're grasping at straws here.

They don't do that at all. The loggers won't be any worse off for the forests in the long term.

Yes. Building logging roads, setting up timber/sawing operations, disturbing wildlife and cutting down trees is exactly like leaving it as a conservation area.

[Drewbacca]

B) I do understand exactly how supposedly environmentally friendly logging works, you're grasping at straws here.

You say you understand but comments like this:

Building logging roads, setting up timber/sawing operations, disturbing wildlife and cutting down trees is exactly like leaving it as a conservation area.

and this:

Except for the cutting all the trees down part.

say otherwise.

I didn't have a point (something we both have in common here). My point was you should STFU and stop bitching about something you clearly have little understanding of.

[StriderKyo]

You say you understand but comments like this:
and this:
say otherwise.

If believing that makes you feel better...well, you're still wrong. I could explain how reforesting is generally performed by people who are paid by the acre, and the job is done quickly and half-assedly, so the seeds are rarely planted deep enough to take root before they're eaten/blown away/moulder. I could point out that old growth forests take hundreds of years to replenish, and despite logging companies' claims that they only go after younger trees, are forested anyway. I could argue that large-scale human intrusions destroy wildlife habitats and upset food chains. I could also argue that removing the protection on this land is unnecessary and was purely politically motivated.

I could argue those things, but really, it's pretty obvious I'm wasting my time here if you think logging an area is no different than leaving it as a conservation area.

I didn't have a point (something we both have in common here). My point was you should STFU and stop bitching about something you clearly have little understanding of.

And here's a warning: there's a line when it comes to insulting someone outside fight club, and that crosses it. And for God's sake, if you're going to attack somebody, at least be funny about it.

[Drewbacca]

I could explain how reforesting is generally performed by people who are paid by the acre, and the job is done quickly and half-assedly, so the seeds are rarely planted deep enough to take root before they're eaten/blown away/moulder.

You could point it out, but it wouldn't matter.

The amount of seeds that actually do regrow is roughly the same amount that a trees seeds would sow and grow (and to be honest, probably more considering a lot of the animals that eat the seeds have left to other portions of the forest without the noisy machinery). This isn't a precise science we're talking about. They plant the seeds and check up on the growth to see if the work was done properly.

It usually is or else they get fined heavily until it is. They aren't just responsible for planting the seeds, they're charged with much more work than that.

I could point out that old growth forests take hundreds of years to replenish, and despite logging companies' claims that they only go after younger trees, are forested anyway.

When they do the initial survey they mark how many older trees are in the area, approximately. Some older trees are cut down, but they don't actively pursue them to be bad little loggers.

I could argue that large-scale human intrusions destroy wildlife habitats and upset food chains.

I already agreed that this is a valid statement.

I could also argue that removing the protection on this land is unnecessary and was purely politically motivated.

It's more economically motivated, and the trees in the forest mature over hundreds of years, yes, but to get the forest back to a healthy state of being doesn't take that long.

It takes us around 20 years to mature and become useful to society. It takes around 30 - 50 years for many trees to mature enough to produce habitats for animals and nice undergrowth beneath. That's all they need. This combined with the older trees they don't touch leaves the forest in a great state.

And I'm not saying politics aren't factoring into it as well.

I could argue those things, but really, it's pretty obvious I'm wasting my time here if you think logging an area is no different than leaving it as a conservation area.

You made comments about loggers cutting down trees absolutely. You even said:

Except for the cutting all the trees down part.

They don't. They certainly won't preserve the forest in its natural state, but they don't destroy it to the ground either and in the end its better for the economy. Little loss for a substancial amount of gain.

And here's a warning: there's a line when it comes to insulting someone outside fight club, and that crosses it. And for God's sake, if you're going to attack somebody, at least be funny about it.

It doesn't cross it. It wasn't an insult in the slightest. Pointing out someone is bitching when they're bitching isn't an insult. Also this is just more of your bitching added on the top. If you can't take it don't dish it out Strider.

[1CCOSA]

I just wanted to say g0zen's ecological argument owns this thread.

"Oh wait, that's when you all get outraged and demand Animal Control come and dope these animals take them somewhere far away."

Riiiight, that's what I do when the deer come up to our back door.

You obviously have never heard of a friendly, furry little friend known as the cougar/mountain lion which is getting increasingly pushed to more urban areas (such as Colorado's urban areas starting in the 80s and a lot more in CA tourist spots) or remote areas like here in North Dakota.

We have a lot of deer around my house which is normal, even welcome sometimes. But in Kenmare which is a few hours away we had 2 sightings in February which is almost unheard of enough (cougar sightings are generally quite rare in ND), but in the same month (February) a mother was spotted with her cubs (the 2nd sighting) by a farmer which has gotta be a first as they normally only pass through our state. It has never been documented for a pair to settle and mate, then raise cubs here.

2 years ago my dad heard one while roofing my grandpa's house. Some wildlife officials theorize they're following the Missouri river all the way up to our state and others (they instinctively follow river bottoms when they want to scavenge or travel long distances), possibly due at least in part to deforestation or other encroachment by man which this logging favor is going to encourage (more animals migrating to areas they are not known to stay in, and not just deer). I'm politically neutral and I can see this.

EDIT: And I should say Joust, it's very lame that someone ragged on you for being a bible reader.

[StriderKyo]

It doesn't cross it. It wasn't an insult in the slightest. Pointing out someone is bitching when they're bitching isn't an insult. Also this is just more of your bitching added on the top. If you can't take it don't dish it out Strider.

If you're trying to prove you're bright, cursing out mods after a warning isn't the way to do it. One month.

[Rumpy]

Holy shit, Andrew got banned?! LOL! I didn't see much cursing though...

[Jeremy]

Well, there's "bitching' and the euphemism "STFU", so it's sort of cussing. Even if it isn't cussing, it is being incredibly insulting when combined with the stuff he said earlier in the thread.

[Brisco Bold]

I don't understand what the fuck Andrew is talking about.