Data Bases • Custom Term Papers • Free Term Papers • Free Research Papers • Free Essays • Free Book Reports • Plagiarism? Links • Top 100 Term Paper Sites • Top 25 Essay Sites • Top 50 Essay Sites • Search 97,000 Papers @ DirectEssays.com • Search 101,000 Papers @ ExampleEssays.com • Search 90,000 Papers @ MegaEssays.com Free Essays • Term Paper Sites • Chuck III's Free Essays • Free College Essays • TermPaperSites.com • My Term Papers • Get Free Essays • Essay World • Planet Papers	Search Lots of Essays Back to Subjects - Environmental Science The Last Standbook review The Last Standbook review Hurwitz’s Influence on Pacific Lumber In The Last Stand, David Harris shows that the "old" Pacific Lumber practiced "selective cut" and "sustained yield" forestry as opposed to "clear cutting". Under the "old" management, "selective cut" and "sustained yield" were seen as beneficial and a more practical way to manage lumber and timber. When the "new" management took over the company, the process of "clear cutting" was taken into effect. Now in charge of Pacific Lumber, Charles Hurwitz played a major part in the debate on how Pacific Lumber should operate. "Selective cutting" is the practice by which trees are cut down according to certain ascertainable features. If a tree were so old and large that it inhibited the growth of other trees, then it would be a prime target for timber. Trees can hinder the growth of other trees by means of overbearing roots or overgrowth of branches that would not permit sunlight to reach smaller and less developed trees.(p17-18) "Clear cutting", however, takes an entirely different approach. Rather than a few trees that are undoubtedly ready to be timbered, all the trees in the area would simply be cut down. There would be no selection process involved and nothing would be left of the surrounding trees.(p18-19) The last process is called "sustained yeild". Murphy said, "…others might cut themselves out of existence, but his company would never lack timber ready to fell. It’s annual cut would always be limited and never exceed its timberland’s newgrowth."(p18) When the "new" management took over Pacific Lumber the process of "selective cutting" was abandoned and "clear cutting" was adopted. Although "clear cutting" is a way to obtain so-called fast cash, it was not seen as effective by the "old" management. With "selective cutting", there was far more stability in jobs and income concentrating on the long-term perspectives rather than short term. During "clear cutting", timber is cut and sold quickly. Once the crop of trees are cut and gone, there is a time period in which the trees need to grow. Often, the new crops were not given substantial time to grow to full size, as a result timber would be weaker and not quite as good of quality as the old growth trees. Under the "old" management, it is very likely that Pacific Lumber would have kept the process of "selective cutting" and not changed to "clear cutting". Important figures, such as Stan Murphy, advocated for "selective cutting" for a number of reasons. With this process, regular profits were possible rather than one large sum. It was better in the long run because profit was still something that could be expected in the future which provided better stability for employees. Workers had the confidence that they would still have a job in the future. There was very little possibility of being laid off because there was insufficient amounts of work. With "selective cutting", trees were always in circulation. "Sustained yield" had very similar effects to those of "selective cut". The processes are comparable. Both leave trees to grow in the area to keep the land fertile. The difference between them is that "sustained yield" works in a fashion that allows for more profit by timbering trees in respect to a percentage that should and will be cut down. It differs from "selective cut" in that this process doesn’t choose, so much, on which trees are fit to timber. When Charles Hurwitz took over Pacific Lumber, ideas and practices changed dramatically. His ideas and views very closely compared to those of the early colonists who came to New England. He was interested in merchantable commodities while taking on capitalistic views on profit. He did not really care much about benefits for employees and was mainly interested in immediate profits. He didn’t see timber or wildlife as a means for survival but rather as a commodity. This was different than the beliefs of the Native Americans because they used the land as they needed it and did not use it for profit. Both the colonists and Hurwitz shared the similar lack of interest in the habitats of animals in the area. This fact was something that differed from the "old" management. With "selective cutting", many habitats are preserved and even if a tree is cut, there are others in the area that are available for animals to inhabit. When Pacific Lumber was taken over by the "new" management, processes of "selective cutting" were abandoned and "clear cutting" was embraced. Hurwitz saw immediate profit as more beneficial than stability in profit and jobs. Under the "old" Pacific Lumber management, it is quite possible that "selective cutting" would have been sustained. Stability in jobs and benefits for employees was important and with "clear cutting" this stability was nearly impossible. "Clear cutting" became the common practice and "selective cutting" was abandoned. Immediate profit was seen as more desirable because of capitalistic views on merchantable commodoties. Bibliography: The Last Stand by David Harris Changes in the Land by Cronon Word Count: 818
Copyright © 2005 College Term Papers, INC All Rights Reserved.