Magazine article American Forests

Letters

Magazine article American Forests

Letters

Article excerpt

KUDOS

editor: Yesterday afternoon I enjoyed reading the Autumn issue of American

Forests. The magazine has emerged as an interesting, attractive, and useful publication. As a lifetime member I'm delighted!

Also, it appears that AMERICAN FORESTS has grown in size and innovation under Deborah Gangloff's leadership. Keep up the good work.

Rich Patterson

Cedar Rapids, Iowa

NAME-CALLING

editor: I was amused, and also saddened, by the letter from Joe Monahan (Letters, Summer 2000). I enjoyed Jane Braxton Little's article about preservation in the Cedar River watershed ("Flowing from Forests to Faucets," Spring 2000), and I have seen enough tree stumps in Washington state to know that its old motto "The Evergreen State" is far less appropriate now than it once was. Given 1,000 years without "forest management," perhaps some of it can recover. But we won't live to see it.

Yet Mr. Monahan categorizes those altruists who seek to preserve and restore a bit of nature, for no personal financial gain, as "political" and "special interest" groups. Then he refers to those who prefer to line their pockets with profits from the residues of Washington's once-great forests as "professionals" who practice "successful management" and who now must rely upon "natural processes" (for example, arson?) to undue the "mistakes" of those who tried to save a scrap of something for posterity.

Regardless of which side you support, have you noticed lately that in any discussion, the speaker always claims to be the professional, while the spoken-of is dismissed a as political special interest?

Guy Sternberg

Pertersburg, Illinois

editor: All vegetation (trees, farm crops, flowers, etc.) are composed almost completely of carbon dioxide (CO2) and water in roughly a 45 percent to 55 percent ratio, respectively, with trace amounts of other materials, such as minerals and nitrogen.

When controlled tests were conducted varying the amount of CO2 over and above the normal atmospheric levels (double, triple, and quadruple), the vegetative growth rate increased dramatically. With the elevated growth came huge increases in the normal benefits of vegetative growth-food and fiber, summer cooling, flood relief, air and water purification, and much more.

The key to this bonanza is increased CO2, not less. With more CO2 we can reduce our summer cooling costs, harvest more food for the hungry, provide more building materials, breathe purer air and drink purer water, create more oxygen, enjoy better health, and more.

It's time we recognize carbon dioxide for its prestigious position as the cornerstone of nature's most perfect recycling system-vegetative metabolism-the foundation of all life on our planet.

Donald E. Dvorsky

Cedar Rapids, Iowa

MISREPRESENTED?

editor: I find myself strongly opposed to two positions advocated by AMERICAN FORESTS' board. The first is your support for President Clinton's roadless area proposal (Washington Outlook, Autumn 2000).

There are many reasons to oppose the roadless area proposal, not the least of which is that it violates the National Forest Management Act. NFMA identifies the forest planning process as the tool to allocate different lands to different management prescriptions. Clinton's top-down proposal is a slap in the face to that direction.

I also oppose your support for CARA (H.R. 7010). This is a bloated program to spend $45 billion on an assortment of projects over the next 15 years, $6. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.