Re: RC: RE: trees

[Tivers@aol.com]

In a message dated 8/28/00 8:49:34 PM Pacific Daylight Time, RDCARRIE@aol.com 
writes:

<< Umm, as a wildlife biologist involved directly with forest managemen, I 
have 
 to disagree here.  Some species of wildlife NEED the dense, heavily forested 
 habitats you mention.  Others, as you correctly state, do not thrive in it.  
 Deer are an example - they need early successional (younger, more open) 
 habitat to fine the types of browse they need.  There are plenty of insects 
 in deep forest, and plenty of birds using them.  Some species that come to 
 mind are Varied Thrushes and Winter Wrens in the northwest...I could name 
 more.  What about the famous (infamous?) Spotted Owl?
  >>


Well, we've just lost a few hundred thousand  acres to preventable, or at 
least containable,  forest fires. As a "wildlife biologist involved directly 
with forest management", what's your excuse? Saving 75 trees for the spotted 
owl took all your time? Confiscating another million acres for the federal 
government took all your fire control  resources?  

Perhaps it's time we asked for the same accountability from wildlife 
biologists that we're beginning to ask of other federal payrollees. Talk is 
real cheap these days. Action, intelligent action, is a rarity.

ti