3 ms·

Yep. America wants environmental laws locally, but they don’t want to import them for convenience’s sake. Nobody wants to fundamentally change their lifestyle.

Yep. America wants environmental laws locally, but they don’t want to import them for convenience’s sake. Nobody wants to fundamentally change their lifestyle. Take timber for instance. We rape Canada and South America for their trees, but protect trees domestically. This is completely absurd if you accept that environmental problems are global problems. It’s stupid to save a Spotted Owl and the forest locally if you’re letting Canada, China, Brazil or whoever do something 1000x worse while paying them for it. America needs to dog food it. Don’t like it? Don’t consume so much wood and export your catastrophe.

meristohm 5y ago
Yes and—-we in the USA carry on taking resources from other places as if the people there need it less, and we continue to do it domestically; there were people here before my European ancestors, and their descendants continue to be shut out of ancestral lands. Shortsighted logging practices mean less for future generations. There are better ways to harvest trees (look at the Menominee in Wisconsin, for one). Suzanne Simard is one logger-turned-researcher (they can also overlap) whose publications I find helpful for managing the forest on the land I live on. Collectively using less seems key. To that end, some combination of regulation and culture shift?
- yeetaccount4 5y ago
  My personal opinion is that we need to supply ourselves domestically (dog food it) and adjust prices to reflect the true cost. As for American Indians, as far as I know, they practically can’t do anything productive on their lands without an Act of Congress, it’s a crime. Small- and medium-time loggers are hardly paying rent though. I don’t know where the money is going. I’ve worked in supply and demand. It’s all crooked. Millers are thieves, as are others, etc.
nradov 5y ago
There really isn't much logging of old growth Canadian forests any more. Most timber production is from trees specifically farmed to be cut down. Complaining about consuming too much wood is like complaining about eating too much wheat.

meristohm 5y ago

Yes and—-we in the USA carry on taking resources from other places as if the people there need it less, and we continue to do it domestically; there were people here before my European ancestors, and their descendants continue to be shut out of ancestral lands. Shortsighted logging practices mean less for future generations. There are better ways to harvest trees (look at the Menominee in Wisconsin, for one). Suzanne Simard is one logger-turned-researcher (they can also overlap) whose publications I find helpful for managing the forest on the land I live on. Collectively using less seems key. To that end, some combination of regulation and culture shift?

yeetaccount4 5y ago
My personal opinion is that we need to supply ourselves domestically (dog food it) and adjust prices to reflect the true cost. As for American Indians, as far as I know, they practically can’t do anything productive on their lands without an Act of Congress, it’s a crime. Small- and medium-time loggers are hardly paying rent though. I don’t know where the money is going. I’ve worked in supply and demand. It’s all crooked. Millers are thieves, as are others, etc.

nradov 5y ago

There really isn't much logging of old growth Canadian forests any more. Most timber production is from trees specifically farmed to be cut down. Complaining about consuming too much wood is like complaining about eating too much wheat.