Does an Ancient Redwood Forest Have Value Other Than Its Economic One as Potential Lumber - Assignment Example

1. Does an ancient redwood forest have value other than its economic one as potential lumber If so, what is this value, and how is it to be weighed against the interests of a company like Maxxam Are redwoods more important than jobs An ancient redwood forest has value other than its economic one as potential lumber. Old-growth forests provide the life-sustaining habitat for many species of wildlife, like bats, small and large mammals, and birds. The effects of conservation of legacy trees yield important benefits to vertebrate wildlife associated with biological species (Mazurek & Zielinski, 2004). The destruction of old-growth forests will also mean the extinction of wildlife, most of them already endangered today. Aside from the economic value for potential lumber, large tracts of old-growth forests may also be used to address climate change by sequestration of greenhouse gas emissions which makes conservation a key to the overall strategy of stabilizing atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations (Sempervirens, 2008). A company like Maxxam's interests in the ancient redwood forest of Pacific Lumber is purely a commercial one, a profitable investment, and it seems from the Case Resource, only a source of immediate revenues for personal gain or to solve financial problems occurring in the other areas of business of its owner. There is no doubt that a forest would have economic value for its owner. In terms of this value, the owner should weigh against immediate and huge cash returns from depleting the forest or sustained and long term returns through application of proper commercial forest management. For the owner and the company's employees, it should be important that there be trees and income not only for them but for their children's children (Blencowe, 2008). This author's opinion is that redwoods are equally important as jobs. To maintain the jobs, the redwoods must be maintained. 2. Is it morally permissible for private owners to do as they wish with the timberland they own Explain why or why not What's your assessment of Hurwitz Is he a robber baron or a socially responsible business person, or something in between Although current laws in the United States still hold private enterprise sacrosanct in that property as well as employees are not covered by specific rights but only those granted by the private owners, there is a growing concern for ethical business practices which includes environmental issues. This is forms part of evidence that indicates that it is not only not morally permissible for private owners to do as they wish with property such as timberland that they own, it is also unethical, as well as possibly detrimental to the business and the personal interests of the owners. There have already been several cases which have been publicized involving large companies and their misuse of the environment that it is now incumbent upon companies to seriously implement corporate ethics to comply with laws and regulations, corporate governance, risk management, as well as environment preservation activities and social contribution (Nichicon, 2008). Hurwitz is purely a businessman whose singular objective seems to be to amass money in the quickest way possible. He is indeed a robber baron without any sense of social responsibility. Whereas, the previous owners of Pacific Lumber had been socially responsible in conducting their business by only logging timber at the same rate that trees can be regenerated, Hurwitz had done away with this practice and over logged to take advantage of the high demand for redwood after his takeover. 3. Are mainstream environmentalists right to try to thwart Hurwitz, or are they simply trying to impose their values on others Does a radical group like Earth First! That engages in sabotage go too far, or do its ends justify its means This author's opinion is that it is right for mainstream environmentalists to try to thwart Hurwitz, because Hurwitz was practically destroying the forest to the point of extinction, as well as the wildlife which uses the forest as habitat. Although, this author does not agree with the view that the end will always justify the means, sometimes, only radical action is the only way for attracting attention to a problem. Only when the problem is realized and accepted can a solution be formulated. In this case, the author tends to agree with Earth First's radical actions in the face of the complacency with authorities in issues regarding the environment. 4. Do we have a moral obligation to save old redwood forests Can a forest have either moral or legal rights Does an old growth forest have value in and of itself, or is its value only a function of human interests How valuable is a small but endangered species such as the murrelet In this author's view, if it is acceptable that people have a moral obligation to provide for a humanitarian, if not better, world for future generations, then we have a moral obligation to save the forests. The forest itself does not have moral or legal rights, but people who are caretakers of the world and its natural resources have those rights for themselves and for their children. This author's opinion is that the value of an old growth forest, as well as all other natural resources is a function of human interests. That is why when human interests are threatened either by destruction of maintenance of a natural resource, humans tend to react strongly. Many studies have shown that due to the natural order of things, some species thrive and some do not over time, like the dinosaurs which have become extinct. However, many studies have also shown that man's abuse of the environment has also caused man's own loss because of such destruction. Waterways which have been used for dumping toxic chemicals have eventually caused the death of marine life, which is a source of food for humans. Forest depletion has caused floods which have caused human deaths. So, in the interest of humans, certain resources need to be conserved. As previously stated, conservation of large tracts of forest lands not only sustain habitats for wildlife which is part of the ecosystem in which man is also a part, it is also a good strategy for addressing climate change, which has already been accepted as needing control in order to preserve the planet in which humans live. In this author's opinion, the endangered murrelet, if it would become extinct purely because of natural causes, may not really be of any value to humans, because then, nature would simply regenerate itself. But if its extinction was caused by human destruction of its habitat, then, man would never really know how valuable the murrelet is to man's existence. 5. Before its takeover by Hurwitz, did Pacific Lumber neglect its obligations to its stockholders by not logging at a faster rate What would be a morally responsible policy for a timber company to follow Do we need a new environmental resource ethic Before its takeover by Hurwitz, Pacific Lumber was not logging at a faster rate. This author's view is that this action was not at all neglectful of its obligations to its stockholders. On the contrary, the old Pacific Lumber seems quite obligated to sustain the forest which was the source of benefits of its stockholders. The morally responsible policy for the timber company to follow is to return to the ways of the old Pacific Lumber management. Blencowe of Forest Guild (2008), outlines a philosophy supporting this, maintain an ever-increasing timber inventory by establishing a long-range yield goal while improving stand structure, first by cutting less than the forest is growing until the sustained yield goal is achieved, and retaining the biggest, best quality and most vigorous trees to build future inventory. It would be good if a new environmental resource ethic was established and put into law. 6. How would you respond to the argument that there is no need to try to save the Headwaters (or any other private) forest because there are already tens of thousands of acres of old growth redwood forests in parks and preserves It would have to be the expert environmentalists who will need to assess whether or not Headwaters or other private forests need to be maintained despite the existence of old growth forests in parks and reserves. The decision would need to be based on the actual contribution of each individual private forest to the ecosystem of the area. It may not be ideal that forests should be totally banned from logging. After all, prior to the logging abuses, forests were able to regenerate themselves and sufficiently provided for the needs of other plant species, wildlife and humans as well. 7. Is the deal that the U.S .government and the state of California struck with Pacific Lumber a fair and reasonable one Are taxpayers having to pay too much, as environmentalists think Is Pacific Lumber being squeezed too hard What about Scotia and its laid-off workers The fairness of the deal between the US government, the state of California, and Pacific Lumber would be judged in time to come. At the time the deal was made, it seemed the best way out for the forest to be preserved while ensuring the property right of the owner. At the time the deal was made, it can be said, that since taxpayers needed the benefit of the forest, then they had to pay to acquire the benefit. Pacific Lumber on the other hand, had to sell at its best negotiated price to be able to recoup its investment. Scotia's laid-off workers have unfortunately become part of collateral damage, a natural occurrence within the US' market economy. The forest was being over logged to take advantage of the market demand for redwood. This was beneficial to workers because then, jobs were available. But both the business and the workers had not planned for the future when these actions would create problems for people in general. The business and the workers enjoyed the benefits during the heydays of logging redwood and naturally would suffer the consequences of these actions when the unfortunate times came. If the logging was conducted at a sustainable pace, not as many workers would have had jobs, but those who did, would most probably continue to have these jobs in the longest term. References Blencowe, C. (2008). Building up the forest. Forest Guild. Retrieved December 20, 2008, from http://www.forestguild.org/ecological_forestry/blencowe.pdf. Mazurek, M.J. & Zielinski, W.J. (2004). Individual legacy trees influence vertebrate wildlife diversity in commercial forests. Elsevier B.V. Retrieved December 20, 2008, from http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0oGkjA5vkxJgk8Ba01XNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTByN2s4bDgzBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDNARjb2xvA3NrMQR2dGlkAw--/SIG=12b1fqr59/EXP=1229852601/**http%3a//www.fs.fed.us/psw/publications/4251/mazurek2.pdf. Nichicon. (2008). Living up to our corporate social responsibilities as a member of society. Retrieved December 20, 2008, from http://www.nichicon-us.com/english/eco/csr.html. Sempervirens. (2008). PG&E enters into contract with Sempervirens Fund, offsetting greenhouse gas emissions. Retrieved December 20, 2008, from http://www.sempervirens.org/sempervirensPGEdeal.htm. Read More