← Back to context

Comment by contingencies

5 hours ago

The government of Tasmania is still allowing logging of the forests which is utterly insane. See for example this current court case: https://mailchi.mp/wilderness/swift-parrot-court-case

Logging of the forest that the Tasmanian government planted, to log. Fear not, a Tasmanian tiger never saw the forest they are logging.

Environmentalists trip over themselves on what “old growth” means.

It is a renewable resource, and Tasmanian forestry is one of the most advanced and sustainable industries in the world.

  • That leaves a few questions though (which I'm not implying that I know the answers to):

    Did this planted forest (used for logging) replace another forest that was used as a habitat for animals? Is it counted as an equivalent to non-logging forests to justify the destruction of non-logging forests?

    Can this sustainable industry sustain suitable living conditions for animals in the forest? Or can the industry only sustain itself and its own interests in future resource extraction?