Forest Harvest Does Not Benefit Wildlife
Speaking about the “impoverished U. S. Southwest,” Jason Rasamond, Good Earth Power’s global CEO, promised, “As our key commitment is to people and communities, we will reinvest 50% of our profits to deliver everyday practical benefits at the local level with a focus on education and healthcare.” Rasamond did not identify specific programs or actions.
One community scheduled to benefit form the deal was Winslow, Arizona, but according to local residents, Good Earth dropped plans for a wood processing plant there.
Today, when wildlife and natural habitats are declining around the world, continuing the same harvest practices of the past seems even more unreasonable than it did a century ago. Rather than thin forests, perhaps management should be devoted to restoration of biodiversity. Concerns could be invasive species, global warming, livestock grazing, roads, recreation, soil protection, and restoration.
Perhaps our forests need to be allowed to mature, to become “old growth,” and not be harvested at all. If management can contribute to this goal, fine. But if supporting the profits of private companies is the primary goal, then the real renovation we need is within the personnel of the U. S. Department of Agriculture and its Forest Service.
Forest Harvest Deal Links:
An Editorial from a Pro Harvest source: http://evergreenmagazine.com/web/Power_To_Good_Earth_.html
Press Release by Good Earth Power AZ, LLC: http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5444076.pdf
Press Release by U. S. Forest Service: http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5435935.pdf