environmental activism

sorabji.com: Weeds: environmental activism

By Nate on Friday, August 23, 2002 - 02:17 pm:

    we're losing 10% of our nation's forests this YEAR because of "environmental" organizations such as the sierra club.

    if all the logging companies put all their people into clear cutting forest they could not have done one sixth of the damage that improper custodianship of our forests has done.

    because we stopped fires for so long, that which was once regularly cleaned by fire has built up to horrendous proportion. underbrush, rotten or dead trees. now the fires burn so hot that everything dies. it will take hundreds of years to restore what we're losing daily.

    and out of portland you get qoutes like "it's been shown time and time again that logging and road building increases the fire risk". wipe the pepperspray out of your eyes, college boy. you've been duped.

    bush is actually on the right track.

    and liberals always get high and mighty about how stupid conservatives are.

    you silly fucks.

By Platypus on Friday, August 23, 2002 - 02:33 pm:

    Chaparrel is more dangerous than forests, dude.

By Nate on Friday, August 23, 2002 - 02:41 pm:

    your point escapes me.

By spunky on Friday, August 23, 2002 - 02:43 pm:

By Platypus on Friday, August 23, 2002 - 02:45 pm:

    If you clearcut, chaparrel is what will replace the forst, since it grows faster--I think it's been fairly well determined that chaparrel is more vulnerable to fire than forests are.

    But yes, the fact of the matter is that fire supression has led a bad forest situation in general. However, clearcutting is not the solution. Selective logging is.

By spunky on Friday, August 23, 2002 - 03:00 pm:

By Nate on Friday, August 23, 2002 - 03:19 pm:

    well, yeah. i don't think anyone is talking about clearcutting as an answer. these super hot fires have basically clearcut 6 million acres so far this season. good bye topsoil, hello shitscrub.

    the timber industry can go into a forest and pull scrub and dead trees. they make chipboard and pulp.

    the environmentalists cry about their ancient trees-- the only thing threatening the ancient groves is fire.

By spunky on Friday, August 23, 2002 - 03:22 pm:

    I thought htey were discussing clearing the undergrowth.
    The leaves and bark and small brush underneath the trees, that give fuel to the fire

By Nate on Friday, August 23, 2002 - 03:23 pm:

    look at the sierra club

    Studying and influencing public policy 32,386,400


By patrick on Friday, August 23, 2002 - 03:29 pm:

    that doesnt really say anything, right or wrong nate.

    i don't know enough about forresting to add in on this, but i would say, given Bush's track record, his motion is suspect and should be looked at more closely before implimentation.

    I think there's some truth in both sides, but its not one or the other.

By spunky on Friday, August 23, 2002 - 03:41 pm:

    Anyone want to answer me?

    Why is it a huge deal when a republican proposes even a single little tree gets cut down, the enviromental groups go ape shit.

    But Daschle quietly slips into a spending bill language exempting his home state of South Dakota from environmental regulations and lawsuits and no one says a damn thing????

    Because it is a FAKE FRONT

By patrick on Friday, August 23, 2002 - 03:59 pm:

    fake front?

    what are you talking about?

    first...i dont think its so clear cut trace. Its not simply a double edged sword, even though it looks like one.

    second, the matter here with Daschle (who is a creep) is within his state. the article really doesnt say much about the environmental group reaction with in ND. The article is clearly written by someone who wants to paint the picture you are painting, but who knows.

    Bush is getting reamed because he is speaking about national policy, not just the policy of 700 acres in one state. Bush got reamed for Alaksa because it involved thousands of acres of National Parks

    The Sierra Club admits to supporting the overall policy, just not agreeing with a provision within it. so thats why there isnt such a huge uproar over this.

    Daschle is going to do whats necessary to get re-elected. we expect that from all politicians.

    I can tell you though democrats arent necessarily any better than repubs on the environment.

By spunky on Friday, August 23, 2002 - 04:12 pm:

    What I am trying to get at is this:

    Where was the Sierra Club when Daschle pulled this?

    That is iron clad, you can clear cut SD (UH, there is a hell of a lot more then 700 acres of trees in SD) all you want, and no one can do a damn thing about it.
    Because of language inserted in a SPENDING BILL.
    Dirty, sneaky, untouchable.
    Not a peep from anyone.

    Bush goes to the public and says what he wants to do.
    And it makes sense what he wants to do.
    But, you said yourself "given Bush's track record, his motion is suspect". Why? Because he is open about it?

    Look, the kids out there with signs and in the heat do care.

    The organizers do not.
    It should not matter if it was daschle or bush.
    If your agenda is honestly the environment you would have said something regardless of whom it was that you felt was threatening it.

    It does demonstrate that Sierra Club's & Green Peace's motives are suspect, not necessarily Bush's or even Daschles.

    After all, what would a logging company do if they cut all the trees so there were no more logs?

    That's the magic of capitalism

By patrick on Friday, August 23, 2002 - 04:27 pm:

    I don't think you'll find anyone here who doesnt think democrats aren't sneaky fucks.

    The article implied that this matter was intended for Black Hills, 700 acres to be thinned, not clear cut.

    I know theres more than 700 acres in SD.

    Bush is suspect because he has shown in the past to favor business interests above all else. Thats why its suspect. Wheres the business interest behind this? His motives are suspect.

    It makes sense in theory what he wants to do, who knows if it makes sense in practice.

    I think what you perceive as lack of action against democrats who fuck up regarding the environment is not necessarily unfounded.

    But let me draw a parallel...

    Look at how we are favoring Musharaff and Pakistan. Would we be giving them such favoritism and turning such an eye when Musharaff is seizing power left and right if they were not cooperating with U.S.'s war on terror. Nooooo.

    So, sometimes you gotta go with your best odds. Sometimes you have to turn a blind eye, because democrats do push green policies with a little more effort than republicans. Greens have to patronize one party or the other. They cant get legislation passed if they are in spats with both parties now can they?

By spunky on Friday, August 23, 2002 - 04:35 pm:

    The language did not say it was just for the black hills area, it was for the entire state.
    The article was trying to give a reason why daschle would have done it.

    It should not matter who was doing it.
    It also set a very dangerous presidence.
    It showed what could be done to get around all the bs
    SOrry, I know my spelling is off...

By spunky on Friday, August 23, 2002 - 04:36 pm:

    Again, if your agenda is to protect the environment, I would say yes, go against the Do'er instead of the party

By patrick on Friday, August 23, 2002 - 04:59 pm:

    well yes spunk but this behavior is neither unique or exclusive to democrats.

By Nate on Friday, August 23, 2002 - 08:29 pm:

    three words:

    rough. anal. sex.

    i can hear the sound of violins.

By spunky on Friday, August 23, 2002 - 09:18 pm:

    funny thing is daschle beat his rep oppenent by opposing ANY logging in SD

By Nate on Friday, August 23, 2002 - 09:49 pm:

    no one cares, dude. go home.

By spunky on Friday, August 23, 2002 - 10:35 pm:

    because it is not gwb

By Nate on Saturday, August 24, 2002 - 12:09 am:

    no, because you reiterate your point every time someone points out that what you are saying is conventional wisdom.


    The bar is empty save for a small crowd huddled into a circular booth in one corner, the bartender and MARK THOMAS sitting apart at a piano. A lilting tinkle of a melody twists gaily through the dim and smoky air.

    SPUNKY, southern hunka whiteboy turned father, stands in front of the booth, facing NATE and PATRICK, who sit staring into near-empty glasses. PLATYPUS has passed out curled up on the couch of the booth.

    The sky is as blue as the ocean, but they don't mention that blueness, do they? they only mention it when it is the ocean being blue.

    everyone knows the sky is why the ocean is blue.

    (voice raising)
    the funny thing is, only the ocean is ever blue to them.

    no one cares, dude.

    because it is not the ocean.

    ----CUT TO:


    MARK THOMAS digs in his pocket for his car keys. The parking lot is empty, but he doesn't seem to notice. GOD descends in a chariot with wheels of fire.

    where are those goddamn ke...


    oh, hey God. what's up?

    oh, you know. looking into things. you remember that hooker?

    the one with creamy teeth?

    yeah, fuck. tell me that one again.

    buy me a beer?

    what the hell! climb on board.

    The chariot raises into the air, assuming Mark Thomas into the heavenly host, where only the best beer is served.

    ---CUT TO:


    SPUNKY is as we left him. PLATYPUS is still passed out. NATE and PATRICK have half full drinks and there are several new bottles of beer in front of each of them.

    so, no one says a word when the sky is blue.

    (to Nate)
    I have a claw hammer in the trunk of my car.

    (to Patrick)
    I'll distract him, you run out, grab the hammer, come back and hit me as hard as you can in the forehead.

    (to Nate)
    No... you hit me first.

    (to Patrick)
    won't work. me first. use the claw side.

By spunky on Saturday, August 24, 2002 - 12:20 am:


By blindswine on Saturday, August 24, 2002 - 12:39 am:

    for whatever it's worth, i'd hit each and every
    one of you blathering dorks in the head with a
    claw hammer.


    wake me up when the blood spills.

By blindswine on Saturday, August 24, 2002 - 12:58 am:

    and by the way...

    i want my ten minutes back.

By Nate on Saturday, August 24, 2002 - 01:30 am:

    damn. my intial thought was to have swine descend on the fiery chariot.

    god was my second thought.

By pez on Saturday, August 24, 2002 - 03:04 am:

    i don't care what sierra club and greanpeace do. i'm not a member, i can stand on my own two feet to fight for the causes i want to fight for rather than writing a $20 check every month.

    i love trees. it doesn't matter who's cutting them down, if they don't explain exactly what they're doing and why about those trees i am going i fight tooth and nail....

    selective logging can be a good thing, when it's done properly. the problem is that there are very few solutions to evironmental damages that even the most careful logging can cause. erosion from logging roads, limb damage from helicopter winds.

    one thing about clearing the underbrush is that it isn't partciularly profitable.the wodd isn't the same quality nor as strong as a standard doug fir. and snags? snags are required for the habitat of many threatened species in the woods.

    selective logging is great-- as long as somebody who understands the delicate nature of the environment, rather than the power of greenbacks, keeps an eye on what's going on.

By moonit on Saturday, August 24, 2002 - 05:26 am:

    Where was I in that scene? Dammit don't I get any lines? Don't you know who I am? DONT YOU?

    Goddam you all.

By spunky on Saturday, August 24, 2002 - 09:58 am:

    "i love trees. it doesn't matter who's cutting them down, if they don't explain exactly what they're doing and why about those trees i am going i fight tooth and nail.... "

    Is your house made of steel or is it stone?
    Any furniture made with wood? or particle board?

By Nate on Saturday, August 24, 2002 - 11:45 am:

    "the problem is that there are very few solutions to evironmental damages that even the most careful logging can cause. erosion from logging roads, limb damage from helicopter winds. "

    the fires that have resulted from the 'hands off' approach have been far worse.

    the environmental movement uses fear instead of real science. it's a sham.

    and they can use underbrush. underbrush is harvested and made into chipboard and pulp.

    and as spunky kind of indicates, we need wood products. the more our economy falls apart, the less conservation is possible. it is important to find the balance.

By Platypus on Saturday, August 24, 2002 - 12:31 pm:

    So, do I get to wake up in a later scene?

    The spunkster is right. Logging is not going to go away. All of us use tree products. Personally, I'm all for selective logging. It's good for the forest, it's good for the economy, etc etc. However, I don't think that's what GW is planning. I have a suspicion that he's thinking of something more along the lines of this. (Forgive all the hippy overtones, I was in a hurry).

By pez on Sunday, August 25, 2002 - 02:52 am:

    one. yes, my house is made of wood, but it is almost 100 years old and the home to five people.

    my bedframe is also wood, that which would have been thrown away by one of my coworkers had i not offered to take it.

    but what i really mean is that people need to be informed consumers, demand to know where products are coming from and at what cost. and cost is more than money.

By Greenpiecemealfuckwad on Monday, August 26, 2002 - 12:30 pm:




By pez on Monday, August 26, 2002 - 01:53 pm:

    oh, fukoff.

    it's better to reuse the stuff than throw it away and make a new one. and i'm not a consumer unless i buy something, which i did not.

By semillama on Monday, August 26, 2002 - 08:14 pm:

    I am listening to FZ's Civilization Phaze III, and
    it fit PERFECTLY with that little scene up there.

    What also helps forests are controlled burns
    (which yes, sometimes get out of hand). For
    example, many conifers don't release seeds
    unless the cones are heated, as from a fire.
    Sequoias, for instance, do this, and also are
    not as flammable as other pines, as they have
    water instead of turpines (sp?) in their xylem.

    Of course, a lot of managed forest is sterile
    forest, especially in the north. no undergrowth,
    no habitat. it's good for deer but not much
    else. so, it's a difficult issue.

    Me, I favor selective cutting, but avoiding the
    old growth. concentrate on secondary and
    tertiary growth trees. set controlled burns to
    thin out the underbrush from time to time.

    It's what the natives did, after all.

By Nate on Monday, August 26, 2002 - 08:52 pm:

    the pyrosperm theory isn't really widely accepted anymore.

By semillama on Tuesday, August 27, 2002 - 09:15 am:

    Back it up.

By Nate on Tuesday, August 27, 2002 - 10:56 am:

    can't find a link in five minutes search, so fuck off.

    it's tangental, anyway.

    the important point is that whatever fire ecology exists has been thrown way out of whack because of the unnatural build up of fuels in our forests. fires burn so hot that they effectively clearcut.

    which is a sad waste perpetuated by so called environmentalists.

By semillama on Tuesday, August 27, 2002 - 06:41 pm:

    Well, i agree, especially if the so-called
    environmentalists had any hand in stopping
    controlled burns in those areas.

    I took part in a controlled burn once
    (tremendous fun). Only a couple standing
    trees bit it, and they were half-dead anyway.
    but the living trees came through pretty much

By spunky on Tuesday, August 27, 2002 - 09:15 pm:

    We used to live on a ranch in Kansas, right outside of Topeka. I will never forget when my Dad tried to burn the pasture (they say it is better for hay, the ashes enrich the soil).
    I was maybe 10 or 11. We were out there with snow shovels and flat shovels and blankets when it started going past our fence.
    That was the only time I saw my dad do something that did not go exactly as he thought.

By Cat on Wednesday, August 28, 2002 - 02:15 am:

    And it's a hard, it's a hard, cock's gonna fall. And it's a hard.

    I just sang that in the shower over and over and over. My but it's fun at the Cat household today.

By Cat on Wednesday, August 28, 2002 - 02:20 am:

    Now I'm singing "it's a hard ass, and it's a hard ass gonna fall".

    Just in case you were wondering.

By The Watcher on Wednesday, August 28, 2002 - 12:57 pm:

    Cat, I'm beginning to wonder about you.

    Are you alright?

    Have you taken something you shouldn't have?

    Did somebody slip something into your morning coffee?

    Or, are you just having a weird day?


The Stalking Post: General goddam chit-chat Every 3 seconds: Sex . Can men and women just be friends? . Dreamland . Insomnia . Are you stoned? . What are you eating? I need advice: Can you help? . Reasons to be cheerful . Days and nights . Words . Are there any news? Wishful thinking: Have you ever... . I wish you were... . Why I oughta... Is it art?: This question seems to come up quite often around here. Weeds: Things that, if erased from our cultural memory forever, would be no great loss Surfwatch: Where did you go on the 'net today? What are you listening to?: Worst music you've ever heard . What song or tune is going through your head right now? . Obscure composers . Obscure Jazz, 1890-1950 . Whatever, whenever General Questions: Do you have any regrets? . Who are you? . Where are you? . What are you doing here? . What have you done? . Why did you do it? . What have you failed to do? . What are you wearing? . What do you want? . How do you do? . What do you want to do today? . Are you stupid? Specific Questions: What is the cruelest thing you ever did? . Have you ever been lonely? . Have you ever gone hungry? . Are you pissed off? . When is the last time you had sex? . What does it look like where you are? . What are you afraid of? . Do you love me? . What is your definition of Heaven? . What is your definition of Hell? Movies: Last movie you saw . Worst movie you ever saw . Best movie you ever saw Reading: Best book you've ever read . Worst book you've ever read . Last book you read Drunken ramblings: uiphgy8 hxbjf.bklf ghw789- bncgjkvhnqwb=8[ . Payphones: Payphone Project BBS

sorabji.com . torturechamber . px.sorabji.com . receipts . contact