I am writing in reply to the letter by Mr. Huetteman. First, Mr. Huetteman asserts that no one has yet proposed alternatives to our societies use of wood products. Alternatives to using wood for paper include agricultural wastes (corn husks and stalks, for example), hemp, and most importantly, post-consumer recycled paper. Instead of using wood for homes, they could be built into hillsides (earthen homes). This list of alternatives is far from exhaustive.

Mr. Huetteman also presents a common misconception about environmentalists, that they think that no on tree should ever be cut. As an environmentalist, I certainly recognize our need for wood, what I oppose is when it is wasted and used needlessly.

I also oppose logging when it is on public land, uses the American public’s tax money to build the logging roads and subsidize the sale, and then charges the American public again when they buy the wood products and pay sales tax.

Advertisement

An excellent example of this practice is the Cripps Bend timber sale. First the Forest Dis-Service built the logging roads, then they subsidized the sale with the taxpayer’s so that Carbondale Veneer would only have to pay fifteen cents per board-foot (as compared to $2.50 to $5.00/ per board foot on private land). Once this wood is manufactured the public will have to buy the wood they already paid for r and then pay sales tax on it as well. Compounding the problems with the Cripps Bend sale is the fact that it is home to many endangered species, and that logging this area will break open the largest tract of undisturbed forest left in Shawnee.

Lastly, Mr. Huetteman, I hardly consider you a hypocrite for supporting environmental protection and tree harvesting. On the contrary I applaud you for recognizing the need to tread on the earth lightly and use our resources wisely, but please don’t insult me, or other environmental zealots by calling us hypocrites when you don’t know our view on forest issues.