[arctichomesteader]

Forest cover in decline across N.E.: Rutland Herald Online

Take careful note of how these people want to take and then make 70 percent of our land inaccessible except to hikers.

[BadJuju]

Because you obviously need access to all of that land. Just chop down all of the forests, level the hills and mountains, and be done with it.

[PAblackbear]

Not good to bar it from being logged. Lots of wild animals benefit from logging. There is nothing better for Moose and deer than some good clearcuts.

[arctichomesteader]

Originally Posted by BadJuju

Because you obviously need access to all of that land. Just chop down all of the forests, level the hills and mountains, and be done with it.

I don't want it all paved over, I'm quite anti-urban and anti-suburban, but this is just some elitists who want it all for themselves. Northern New England really doesn't have a problem with losing forests (for instance, Maine gains forestland every year). Leave a cleared field unworked for not even a decade here and you will find a nice young forest.

There's people living and working in those forests right now, largely unnoticed to those outside the forests; just because some harvard professor can't see we have some good working forests up here doesn't justify throwing everyone out. In the past 50 years previously extirpated species like fisher cats, beavers, etc., have come back, the moose and bear populations have increased, we're even getting lynx and the occasional catamount and wolf now.

Certain species benefit from logging (even clearcutting). Lynx and marten will not recover until there's more suitable habitat available, through either logging or burning. The increasingly dense, brushy forests caused by a lack of logging is actually causing some problems for the wildlife.

Before Whites came there were people here, it's not really natural for there to be no humans living here.