World's First Tree-sitting Weblog

An anonymous reader writes "Amit Asaravala over at Wired News has an interesting article up about the tree-sitters in Humboldt County. Apparently a bunch of tech activists from the Indymedia Center are setting the tree-sitters up with an 802.11b network so that they can blog about all the logging going on up there. Seems like a pretty interesting way to use technology to help the environment, which isn't something you see everyday."

Comments

Re:did I miss a memo?

[Sebastopol]

1. Massive logging on the peaks of the mountains (which is easiest to log) destroys the root systems that sustain the topography. After the loggers are done stripping the peaks, they move on. A few years of rains and the entire hillside washes away, destroying everything below it. THis happens repeatedly. Landowners get fucked by giant mudslides and erosion due to overlogging. I won't even start with the impact of the dirt/mud runnoff into the drinking supplies of people that live near ridge logging operations. Some people do get their water from streams and not the a municiple water company, like city folk. Don't they have rights to clean water? Think joe blow in colorado has a chance to sue BoiseCascade for the damage done to their drinking water a few years after a logging campaign completes? Fat chance.

2. Yes, there are natural forest fires. Nature moves on. But when nature has to absorb the stress of natural deforestation AND man-made deforestation, it can't handle it.

3. The logging companies themselves have no problem clearcutting forests, and then moving on. Suppose you live in a small town of 1,000 people, and Boise Cascade decides to set up shop. They spend 5 years clearcutting all the trees around you, then move on, leaving their abandoned mills, and nothing but dry arid stumpy land. This happens quite a bit. I supposed you don't mind the sight thousands of acres of stumps and dried up land, but many millions of americans enjoy nature.

4. Before you rant about 'everything is made of wood', that's not the point. Some logging companies use sustainable tree farms. This is costly, but eco-groovy. However, we all know it is easier to clear cut old growth than manage your own. Bush lifting national protections is just a field day for loggers to tear through wildlife and destroy at will. Tree sitters are trying to protect the most endangered flora on earth, eg. 1000+ year old forests. If that means nothing to you, then I guess I'm wasting my breath.

5. Next time you're in Arcadia, california, drop by the Sequoia National Park. It looks beautiful on rte 1 while driving, until you hike in a half a mile and witness the stumps as far as the eye can see.

6. When does the greed end? They may not log an entire forest, but ridge-logging effectively destroys everything. Should we just let logging companies blow off sustainability to make an extra buck? Or should we actually do something to protect the shrinking environment?

The issue here is sustainability, and not giving loggers a free pass to clear cut ancient forests.

Again, if you see no value in nature, I'm wasting my breath.