Thought-Factory.net Philosophical Conversations Public Opinion philosophy.com Junk for code
parliament house.gif
RECENT ENTRIES
SEARCH
ARCHIVES
Commentary
Media
Think Tanks
Oz Blogs
Economic Blogs
Foreign Policy Blogs
International Blogs
Media Blogs
South Australian Weblogs
Economic Resources
Environment Links
Political Resources
Cartoons
South Australian Links
Other
www.thought-factory.net
"...public opinion deserves to be respected as well as despised" G.W.F. Hegel, 'Philosophy of Right'

Native Forests: more debate « Previous | |Next »
January 10, 2004

These comments by Frank Strie were made in the comment box of the previous post. They address the opinions of Greg Barnes at Crikey.com.au in an insightful way as Frank widens the debate from trees to ecosystem. They are too important to be left buried in the comments as they point towards the idea of ecological integrity.

I have edited the comments so they flow more easily. This is what Frank said:

"For Greg Barns it, (the issue) continues to be still all about trees and trees again.
No matter how often one points this out to him, (see under letters on Tasmanian Times). Barns ignores to see the forests, the creeks and ecosystems. He also ignores the serious debate about good water quality and quantity, clean air and the great loss of opportunities due to resource destruction. Barnes simply will not recognise that forests (not only trees) are the issue.

In reality, the logging debate is much wider than just a fight about big old growth and tall trees, just between the Wilderness Society and Forestry Tasmania and it's Industry lobby. Greg Barns appears simple-minded, as he can only see two opposing sides, just as he uses the example of two countries at war.

What about the local community what about the world community? All around Tasmania there are communities confronted with destruction of landscape, water resource, 1080 poison, chemical spray etc. etc. Just have a look at Discover Tasmania or Tarkine or Doctors for Forests.

Is the broader population not involved in the debate? Are they not participating on talkback radio and letters to the editor and other forms of debate? Is the public community just outside observers for G. Barns? Is every critical voice a typical greenie? If so what a narrow view!

For me and my associates in the 'for forests movement' (Doctors for Forests) the debate is not simply about economic versus environmental arguments; it is actually about social, ethical and intergenerational issues too.

Typical negotiated 'compromises' and handshakes behind closed doors are just old fashioned ways, in contrast we are working on real solution with the community. The problem is that in the meantime the destruction continues:...( here and here.)

The Forest Practices System is self-regulated in Tasmania. Just as in other industries around Australia, self-regulation does not work; and in the case of forests,after its gone it takes hundreds of years to get back to what it was, if ever again!

Back to positive contributions.One example of committed work can be found here and ProSilva, or the quality management in our forests. Nearly 10 years ago this paper was first written and presented, however it was ignored and by some just dismissed outright.

The destruction continued, the problem has become more than just a "challenge" of our time. Isn't it time to work out the positive changes, not just with the traditionally two opposing sides? Together with the local community and to make really sure it will work we should not forget to involve the world community."
For a positive Tasmania
Frank Strie, FWM
Schwabenforest Pty. Ltd.

| Posted by Gary Sauer-Thompson at 9:37 AM | | Comments (0)
Comments