And Canada Just Voted Against.......

....entrenching aboriginal rights at the UN. To parphrase Chuck Strahl: "Good God! If we voted to entrench AR, they may not let us continue our unresricted pillaging of the resources of this country!"

And so, the spotted owl must go, in the interests of "progress"...........

what was especially

what was especially offensive was the government allowing "special logging" in the middle of manning park, when there was known to be spotted owls in the area.

youd think that a provincial park would provide some kind of last haven for an endangered species, but oh no...

Decline and Fall of an Empire

This is what it's like to watch a species (us) destory the planet. Every day we wake up and think, see, all is well, we're still here. But there is a skill called "Long Term Thinking". Very out of style right now. But quite useful for those capable of planning ahead. And Long Term Thinking tells us that the rate of destruction of our environment is impossibly unsustainable. The loss of the Spotted Owl species (which once lost is logically impossible to replace) will be only one of many lost species. It should really make us feel ashamed. Important work Colleen and the Tyee. Thank you for telling people what we are doing to the world.

"...cut and move on, cut and move on..."

...this is no different than the VI marmots from Vancouver Island. The Mountain Caribou Northern Alberta and B.C. As Bruce Cockburn says "...cut and move on, cut and move on..." Not thought about the lives destroyed, not even their own families from the generations to come.

Industry trumps all. That is how we have lost and will lose more species. The breeding programs are a stop-gap, and a very costly joke. They line the pockets of the breeders, the political leaders, Industry leaders, and the sell-out scientists who are nothing more than industry mouthpieces’. The threatened animal, without habitat, WILL STILL GO EXTINCT EVENTUALLY...

A lone hooting owl is a sad, sad picture… Sometimes I am ashamed to be a part of the human race.

Peace,

Bear

Bow before the dollar

Actually, I think it would be pretty cool if we still had dinosaurs to see and study.

Right now, scientists are studying reptiles and their capability to regenerate limbs to see if that evolutionary success can be transferred to humans. How could we do that if we'd wiped them out?

Sometimes we save things for reasons other than money and development IAMC.

Of course you'd have to be a little bit humane to understand that.

My five-year old daughter told me something yesterday that really stuck with me. It's a quote from a cartoon movie... the kind of wisdom only a kid can convey without seeming ironic.

"The strong stand up for themselves. The strongest stand up for others."

Where do you stand... besides in a dead clearcut?

the document introduced by

the document introduced by snert mentions that barred owl range has been expanding across north america since 1900, coincident with human expansion across the continent.

what that tells me is that barred owls have a competetive advantage in disturbed habitats, and that as territory is logged the spotted owl comes under threat on two fronts: habitat loss, and competition.

more human activity leads to more barred owls? just a thought.

Given time

We shall look forward to a single hybridized bird species - a chimerical amalgam of owl, passenger pigeon, mourning dove and dodo, looking out at the smouldering world from behind the bars of the last dismal cage in the Washington National Zoo.

Not only does one have to endure the insane nightmare of free market social darwinism as applied to the human race and the world economy, it's now also being suggested as the phoenix rising from the ashes of clear-cut forests.

Give me strength! Definitely a half-full sort of suggestion. The question is, half-full of WHAT?

of barred owls and second hand smoke

blaming the barred owl for the decline of the spotted owl is like pointing your finger at second hand smoke as the principal cause of lung cancer. A doctor would never advise a smoking related cancer patient to avoid second hand smoke but keep smoking. Similarly the barred owl is a symptom of a much larger problem which is clearcut logging. The barred owls would not be here in the first place without clearcutting. Their role in the spotted owls decline is much in dispute.

Unexplored - the mystery of the ancient forest

IAMC wrote:

Since you are unable to perceive the Spotted Owl's intrinsic right to existence, (just like yours, IAMC), the sheer evolutionary miracle of its existence, as well as seemingly blind to its wonder and beauty, not to mention the wonder and beauty of the ancient forests it lives within ....then, just in terms of appealing to your ever self-interested world view here's what it "does for you":

When you save the owl you save an entire eco-system. An eco-system that plants, animals and yes, all-important you depends on.

The ancient forest, old growth, are integral to regulating water levels and water quality, cleaning the air, enhancing the productivity of fisheries and enriching the stability and character of the soil.

"The spotted owl is considered an indicator species -- a gauge of the health of the ecosystem that provides its habitat. The steady decline of this species signals the demise of other species, such as elk and flying squirrel, that inhabit these forests, and the disruption of the productive forces of nature that sustain human life."

"The ancient forests and the life they harbor form a complex web of interdependent relationships that play a critical role in preventing soil erosion, floods, and landslides, providing clean water for agriculture and cities, enhancing the productivity of salmon fisheries, enriching the soil with vital nutrients, and ameliorating the greenhouse effect. No amount of reforestation can replace this highly developed and diverse system which has taken millennia to evolve."

And then there is all that has not been explored - what we don't know about the Spotted Owl and its habitat. Or so many other species. A 2004 study stated over 15,589 species (7,266 animal species and 8,323 plant species), 32% of amphibians, almost 50% of turtles and tortoises, one in eight birds, and one in four mammals are all threatened with extinction. And they admit there are major gaps in the knowledge of threatened species - that the numbers and species under threat may be much higher.

and for what?

What really burns me is all the emphasis on retaining logging and timber supply in an extremely recessed timber market. Prices are so low Tembec has suspended lumber sales http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/financialpost/story.html?id=6520cfb7-ede1-4956-af40-5325a9cde6a3&k=59295

As the taxpaying public we are paying a premium environmental cost, and getting a ridiculously low return. The most efficient mills in Canada are unable to make a profit at current prices, and don't even get me started on the excess of wood on the market due to 'sanitation' logging of beetle wood. Personally, I think we are better off to treat this like the collapase of the Atlantic Salmon fishery, and pay foresters not to work. Anything is a better use of money than flogging our natural resources for marginal profit and heavy environmental toll.

A quibble ?

How come none of you picked up on RickW's query?:

There is a multitude of thinga we use wood for. Almost certainly replacements will have to come from oil-derived plastics or energy-intensive metals, and that would be bad news. Some hold out hope for bamboo, a truly remarkable material with almost limitless possibilities. But if we switch over to bamboo, we'll see the destruction of an immense amount of tropical forest for farming it.

So, Rick, what "other means" will "efficiently" replace wood?

So far, butterflies are free

...perhaps it's less about the kind of material and more about the "industrialized scale" of just about everything these days.

I mean if the market could "create" a need, an insatiable desire, for let's say, "butterflies", just watch the size of the nets that would suddenly become "necessary".

...there is better ways is all...

Yes Lynn, so far butterflies are free thankfully :-). Good analogy sis.

It is clearly more about the large scale cutting for everyone, anyone, and anything ie: over 300 year old cedars only are "good" for shingles and cedar siding. For this reason, to cut an old tree, or sometimes called an Elder of the Forest, is shameful when many materials can take it's place. This is a good example of exploitive, unnecessary and absolute disrespect to the Earth, and her bounty. What about the thought of ripping off the resources from our children’s children?? Ouch… I do not think putting a total moratorium on logging is necessary if we log sustainably and leave trees older than 150 years old alone. Perhaps community forests, which are essentially, land logged, replanted and relogged using a rotational method with other allotted pieces of land around a community, is the best we can do... I don't know, as there are better minds more informed on this one than I, but it is good to think about it methinks.

IMAC, what you need to do imo, is sit in an coastal estuary and watch the many lives affected in a perfect way by the salmon and the systems that exist around them, and feel the peace and harmony that exist there, and then watch a salmon farm get placed at the mouth of the stream flowing into the estuary and simply witness the death of the ocean and land communities that exist around that farm. Or sit in a coastal rainforest, primordial and pristine, and witness all the wee lives dependent on it ie: spiders, squirrels, deer, marbled mullets, flowers, and so on...Than watch when the silence gets broken… trucks roll in saws start up and the trees start to fall, animals run, and the peace is broken. Then notice how In the end, all that is left is desolation, death and shingles... Good trade IMAC???

You see IMAC, I have witnessed both and that is where I draw from...from a real place. But you wouldn’t want to sit and watch this would you…Why?...perhaps because the truth gets in the way of a good story. It is a good choice IMAC, because detachment is emotionally safer, and keeps you and your type hard, and still capable of doing these abusive things to the Earth …Knowledge would kill the fun I am sure. It is more comfy to think these animals haven't done anything for you lately. Actually bud, the animals in a very real way, have kept you alive... Believe it now, or believe it later, but eventually, you will believe it...

Peace,

Bear

ME2

Rammed earth? Hempcrete? Recyclable plastics? Recyclable metals? Modular construction? Laminated lumber?

Comment

Thank you for that. Bear, though i have a quibble. Ecosystem sustainability in the Interior demands a rotation of AT LEAST 150 years, or whatever is consistent with fire history. On the Central - North Coasts, where the bulk of the timber is now found and which has little or no natural fire history, the MINIMUM required rotation age for preserving both environmental and economic sustainability is 250 years.

here's one for Ronny

http://www.countercurrents.org/howden080907.htm

And here's one for Lynne (9 hrs ago) illustrating the fallacy inherent in continuous growth of GNP.

http://www.nuclearnecromany.blogspot.com/

Reply to Rick

Good try, Rick

But weak rammed earth will not support taller buildings, and we have to go higher to conserve land and sevices;

Does hempcrete use cement? If it does, then gravel is cheaper. And anyhow, cement is VERY energy intensive.

Yes, recycling plastics and metals makes excellent sense, but cannnot fulfill demand now or in the future.

Modular construction facilitates the use of weaker materials and recycling, and is a step forward.

Laminated lumber relies upon the strength of the original materials. Make it out of
weak, fast-grown second-growth, and the glue is stronger than the chips/strands. Anyway, giving the trees 20-30 more years to grow in a natural "unfarmed" environment is cheaper than using energy to chop up, glue and then bake the product.

Why don't our moneywise Capitalists agree? Because they need a quick rotation to validate their rapid liquidation of what is left of the old-growth.

Comment

ME2 said:

Yeah ME2, a good point bro…

Building homes with straw bails has been very successful, as well as rocks and clay. Straw bails were used for the Zeni Gwetin' people in Nemaiah Valley about 10 years ago. They each cost about $10,000 and they are still living in them. Ultimately we need to drop our “living higher than the hog” lifestyles significantly, as we all know-it is unsustainable for future generations.

The issue of "taller buildings" ME2, I question... Cities imo are likely to collapse in the future. There is absolutely no method known to get rid of the filth and toxins which exist in the urban situations. We are meant to be more nomadic, and therefore allowing our environments in which we live to clean themselves in a sustainable fashion... Small sustainable communities living not so different than they did 100-200 years ago will return if we are to survive.

The question is of course, how is the world going to support this now large population of humans?? It is sort of like hunters killing off many of the wolves on Vancouver Island in an attempt to bump up the populations of Sitka deer. In a short time the deer numbers went form 45,000 to 250,000 because the conditions were "perfect” for these animals. Clear cut logging has played a large role too in creating an increased amount of grass. They will\are dieing off now with the return of some wolves and the clear cuts growing back (tree-planting) This growth of planted trees are creating a canopy with a more arid and dry environment underneath then the original one. It is likely that soon the deer numbers will go down closer to the numbers they were intended to be or below. Interestingly, the human conditions have been "perfect" too, thus the unnaturally large number of us... What will our future look like??? In the big picture, I just can't see cities being in the cards...

Peace,

Bear

Not only a good try, but a successful one as well!

So sorry ME, but that argument then dictates that we all live in one big box. It has been estimated that the entire population of Canada could be adequately housed in in a cube a kilometre on a side.

And while the manufacture of cement is energy intensive, so is everything, and it is the longevity of the product that counts more than it's intial construction.

You assume demand similar to our current demand, and that just ain't sustainable.

The most popular woods for this kind of construction are poplar and aspen, and the strength of these woods are only a secondary consideration.

Forestry in Canada is a sunset industry

I think paddy74 is spot on.

It's a classic case of political interests manipulating the government to maintain a dying 'sunset' industry. The only way they can make any margin on these forests (assuming they are) is because they are granted unfettered access to old growth (some even claim subsidized road construction). The world price of lumber is presumably dictated by the logging of huge Siberian old growth forests. Do we really want to liquidate our remaining natural eco-systems so the industry can compete with that and survive perhaps a few years longer?

A progressive government (such as Japan) would hasten the transition to a modernized industry (smaller scale and sustainable second growth logging) whilst compensating workers and communities affected by the inevitable decline. Investment and surplus labour would then be free to move to 'sunrise' industries. Clearly the transition is painful for many but there's no point in delaying the inevitable fall. (This was all painfully learned in the UK coal mining industry).

Wood subsitutes

Another good discussion this one. There are lots of interesting examples but I don't think any of us sitting here today can honestly predict whether alternatives to wood products will or will not be developed in the future. History shows that the free market economy is surprisingly good at finding and developing substitutes whenever there is a need. For me the key is to protect our valuable natural resources (forests, land, water, atmosphere) and let human ingenuity and technology figure out the best way to build houses and the products that we need. That process won't start until forest habitats are protected.

sadly, bikerhill

I'd have to add a codicil to this:
That process won't start until forest habitats are protected, or until they're all gone.

"Forest Tree Management Plan"

...Right on G. :-)

Or perhaps when there is still one tree left, the neoconidiotes will put together a committee to develop a Forest Tree Management Plan, and then implement a 30' protective perimeter around this last tree, maybe even put one or two armed guards around it. All the while new development on replacement materials will increased...and so on it goes. I guess the thought is, why stop, when you can keep going??

What a lark, or if there is only one tree left, there won't be any larks neither...

Peace,

Bear

sadly

Yes I agree GWest. I think my economics is sound, but due to political feasibility the result will be the latter and that is sad.

Non-market valuation

Ah well, you've got me there. It's very hard to define the value of a forest, and consequently how much should be protected. No two people will agree. If it's any help, economists recognise at least four types of value:

1. Use value: value of present and emerging use (must include all uses such as eco-system services)
2. Option value: potential use benefits from keeping your options open (i.e. not liquidating now)
3. Existence value: Value of knowing something exists (e.g. spotted owl)
4. Bequest value: Willingness to preserve for the benefit of future generations

I'm not one to stick my neck out but I guess I value forests higher than the average citizen and certainly higher than the BC government! I think forests have values that are under-appreciated by governments when making resource decisions. Future generations will value natural resources higher than we do and so when making irreversible decisions such as chopping down old growth I think we should er on the side of caution, and sacrifice a little current income. Problem is the voice of future generations is not often at the table.

If I had to stick my neck out I'd say 100% protection of all remaining old growth. An ecologist would have to define forest habitats. Is there a way to quantify the biodiversity of a particular forest eco-system? Based on that I would support setting aside much more than our current 13% of BC is national parks or whatever it is.

I'm glad most everyone is in

I'm glad most everyone is in agreement with bikerbill who has put the case for the preservation of Old-Growth (OG) forests very well.

Besides the 100% protection of OG, there is a need to extend the rotation age of Second-growth (2G) by at least 20-30 years. The reason for this is that desirable lumber cannot be recovered from short-rotation trees. (The exception is Interior Lodgepole Pine)

In the US, the OG that was formerly available to their mills has been severely curtailed as a result of vastly increased protection in the US National (Federal controlled) Forests. The little available is in the main specialty cut in Japanese/US joint venture mills and shipped to Japan.

What is available to US builders is either Canadian lumber cut from OG, or 2G cut from the multinational's huge plantations. Because of its many superior characteristics, US builders prefer Canadian OG lumber, and so despite protective tariffs which raise the price of it, US builders prefer our product for quality building.

But the US tree-farmers were finding they couldn't sell their product even at much lower prices. So volume restrictions were imposed and remain so. Why didn't our media tell us about this? Because the forest companies don't want opposition to their claim that their 2G will be higher in value than the "rotten, decadent OG" they've been eliminating to make way for their "healthy, vigorous new forests"

Once the OG is gone the enormous volumes of Siberian forest which bikerbill mentioned, and which are yet to be harvested, will dominate the softwood market for decades to come, putting our too-young 2G in the same position as the American wood is now, suitable only for enforced domestic consumption.

I second bikerbill's observation that we could learn lots from the Japanese re manufacturing the OG, but that's not likely to happen. The congenital liars who have systematically raped BC's forests have reneged on their promise to WAC Bennet long ago that they would continuously reinvest and modernise when he gave them the TFLs.

pretty sad

in deed, BC is known to be the most diverse province in the country and the world.

I completely understand the need for new homes to meet the needs of the growing population, with that comes the damage of this beautiful land I call home.

I live right in the middle of two gravel pits on a small reserve called Leqamel. As a result to their blasting blasting and timber falling, the rubble has slid into near by creeks that once were home to salmon spawning grounds, which in itself is a whole different concern.

Then there is the logging. I've grew up in the country and absolutely love mother nature and everything she gives us. But people aren't listening, they're not taking the Flood, the Wildfires and the other disasters happening as warnings.

These money grabbing fools who chase gravel and timber don't realise their absolutely destroying our land, not just for our traditional uses but for the enjoyment of everyone who passed through.
Every year that gravel pit grows more and more and I look across the river and see more bald spots on the mountains.

Its unfortunate that with Land Claims, Environmental Issues and the lack of space to house the growing population that no one can come up with an alternate solution besides destroying forests, habitats, and blowing up mountain sides.

Quote:The exception is

Soon to be extinct, thanks to Pine Beetlemania...........

And this whole topic would likely be moot, if we didn't export lumber. Ya know -- cut only what we can use ourselves kind of thing..........

Where's The Fuss?

This deliberate slow eviction of the Northern Spotted Owl in BC by the BC Liberal government is really quite brazen. In most other jusrisdictions this premeditated species extirpation---much more typical of a Third World country run by generals---would result in a firestorm of negative publicity; yet, in public BC, there's virtually silence. Strange.