Comment Log Display

Inclusion of forest clear-cutting in the cap and trade program
makes no sense because it encourages multi-fronted environmental
damage with far more potential climate damage than any
sequestration gains from resulting lumber products.  Clear-cutting
is a systemically destructive process opening the landscape to
erosional damage. The resulting even-aged monoculture tree
plantations are more vulnerable to population colapse than forrests
of diverse age and species. Deforestation is the precursor to
worsening climate change, (e.g. Easter Island, Middle East,etc.).
Healthy (uneven aged) forests are natural buffers against
desertification, modulating humidty, consuming CO2, and stabilizing
soil carbon (a huge unmeasured reservoir).  It takes many many
decades for a tree plantation to reach the three dimensional carbon
density of leaf mass in a mature uneven-aged forest.  Though lumber
companies may claim that sequestration of carbon in lumber products
is most efficiently handled by clear cutting, their claims are self
serving. Lumber from judicious mature tree harvesting provides
enough offseting benefit for lumber harvesters. There is no need to
encourage clear cutting with its poorly understood environmental
liabilityes. This cap and trade program should not be encourage
smokestack industries to pay for raping our landscape.