Exactly. I'd say the original purpose of those pines, as ignorantly applied as it may have been, has been served. The trees were on private property in what has historically(and prehistorically) been a prairie. Nothing has been harmed and much will be greatly improved by Belwin's projects. The whinging we've seen here and see whenever a tree is cut down is related to a naive environmental ethic that any tree anywhere is good no matter what it shades out or kills off and ignores the de facto legal status of the property in question. This is NOT a rainforest where the expressions of concern over cutting might actually be merited(if the trees were native). Would that the jokers here that crawled out of the woodwork to complain about this conservation project would bitch every time a development destroys a wetland, woodland, prairie or oak savanna.<quoted text>
So your stand on the environment is that we should never undo to the environment that which we have done to the environment?
Someone planted those trees to fill a purpose at one time. They are no longer needed and now they have been taken down by someone.
What is the problem?
Full story: TwinCities.com
Comments (Page 4)
|Answered Prayers for Male Incontinence Sufferers (Jul '07)||Feb 26||Andrew 48||16|
|Has anyone went to, had a kid go to the Russian...||Feb 21||Anonymous||1|
|MN Who do you support for Governor in Minnesota in... (Oct '10)||Feb 18||Go Blue Forever||811|
|Reporter Rusty Gatenby let go at KSTP after DWI...||Feb 7||no supirse||1|
|US Bank Wayzata provides poor customer service ...||Nov '13||John Doe||1|
|Lake Minnetonka: Toddler tossed overboard in bo... (Jul '13)||Jul '13||Archie Bunker||1|
|S. Fuller (Jun '13)||Jun '13||my bro's guardian angel||1|