5 ms·
I agree that nature doesn't need our help. I'm just saying that there is a demand for lumber. So thinning should be done to satiate the demand, which would ther
by JudgeWapner 7y ago
I agree that nature doesn't need our help. I'm just saying that there is a demand for lumber. So thinning should be done to satiate the demand, which would thereby put the forest back to its natural state (where wildfires could not reach the trees but frequently burned underbrush and fertilized the soil). Instead we let perfectly good timber rot and spread fungus because thats somehow more "eco-friendly" than selling it to responsible logging companies.
- krageon 7y agoI don't understand why eco-friendly is between scare quotes here. It's not a big leap to see that leaving a forest to manage itself is the friendliest option. Yes, you are correct that wood can be converted to money and if we must do that we should do so responsibly. Even given that that is the case, I fail to see how that connects to your obvious disdain for the stance that maybe money isn't the most important thing here.