Death by a thousand cuts.......that's what is happening to our public lands.
Logging if done properly can benefit more than hurt--but it is NEVER all or nothing. Problem is, rarely does the federal agencies require it be done properly. And it may not be cost effective for the private firm buying the timber sale if required to do it properly.
When forests grow back from logging--even select cuts--they grow back differently. Is that better or worse? Often we don't know because these things play out over centuries or millenniums.
The single biggest impact of logging?--the roads that are left when the loggers leave. Logging is a temporary impact, constant use of roads is permanent.
Not to mention even today most timber sales on federal lands are break even at best for the taxpayer, more often than not the taxpayer loses money. Nothing like the huge losses of the timber program during the Reagan/Watt/Hodel era, whose policies engendered such a backlash it effectively ended logging for large and mid size timber sales in the lower 48.
+1, I have seen the devastating effects of clear cuts in Canada. That's part of the reason for the Quebec-Labrador Caribou crash ( big drop in winter food source, easier road access etc) and now the hunting is closed. Plus, no matter how you cut it, streams and rivers are affected and I have seen fishing completely end on some lakes and streams, taking decades to recover, if ever....
