<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Roundtable Feedback Survey Results Posted</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.tongassfutures.net/news/434/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.tongassfutures.net/news/434</link>
	<description>News and information site for the Tongass Futures Roundtable</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Nov 2010 22:13:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Beebe</title>
		<link>http://www.tongassfutures.net/news/434/comment-page-1#comment-28876</link>
		<dc:creator>David Beebe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 06:57:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tongassfutures.net/?p=434#comment-28876</guid>
		<description>&quot;The 10th edition of the Concise Oxford English Dictionary defined greenwash as &quot;disinformation disseminated by an organization so as to present an environmentally responsible public image&quot;
(http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Greenwashing)

Now that the second attempt at a &quot;solution&quot; of the Tongass Futures Roundtable has been released, there&#039;s little left to speculate upon. The &quot;Tongass Solutions Concept&quot; revealed The Nature Conservancy&#039;s agenda subtitled, &quot;Draft Management Prescriptions&quot;, which would transfer ownership of vast swaths (over a million acres) of the Tongass National Forest into privatized/state-owned tree plantations. 

It should come as no surprise, that the new owners of  this rare gem in our national forest system would be unconstrained by bedrock environmental laws or the nuisance of citizens forcing their government in court, to maintain huntable populations of deer.

 If that were the case, the new owners wouldn&#039;t be able to profit from the short rotation-intensive timber harvest they claim to be &quot;sustainable&quot;.

 Recognizing the difficulty of convincing the public such intensive harvest would be a good thing, &quot;environmental&quot; representatives have been co-opted as the principal greenwashing timber activists of this exercise in devolution.

It hasn&#039;t gone so well for the greenwashing timber activists collaborating at the roundtable. As such, this would be an excellent time to abandon such deplorable exercises in &quot;collaboration&quot;. Roundtable members should hope no further light gets shed on their backroom negotiations. A timely, quiet exit would be in their best &quot;stakeholding&quot; interests.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;The 10th edition of the Concise Oxford English Dictionary defined greenwash as &#8220;disinformation disseminated by an organization so as to present an environmentally responsible public image&#8221;<br />
(<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Greenwashing" rel="nofollow">http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Greenwashing</a>)</p>
<p>Now that the second attempt at a &#8220;solution&#8221; of the Tongass Futures Roundtable has been released, there&#8217;s little left to speculate upon. The &#8220;Tongass Solutions Concept&#8221; revealed The Nature Conservancy&#8217;s agenda subtitled, &#8220;Draft Management Prescriptions&#8221;, which would transfer ownership of vast swaths (over a million acres) of the Tongass National Forest into privatized/state-owned tree plantations. </p>
<p>It should come as no surprise, that the new owners of  this rare gem in our national forest system would be unconstrained by bedrock environmental laws or the nuisance of citizens forcing their government in court, to maintain huntable populations of deer.</p>
<p> If that were the case, the new owners wouldn&#8217;t be able to profit from the short rotation-intensive timber harvest they claim to be &#8220;sustainable&#8221;.</p>
<p> Recognizing the difficulty of convincing the public such intensive harvest would be a good thing, &#8220;environmental&#8221; representatives have been co-opted as the principal greenwashing timber activists of this exercise in devolution.</p>
<p>It hasn&#8217;t gone so well for the greenwashing timber activists collaborating at the roundtable. As such, this would be an excellent time to abandon such deplorable exercises in &#8220;collaboration&#8221;. Roundtable members should hope no further light gets shed on their backroom negotiations. A timely, quiet exit would be in their best &#8220;stakeholding&#8221; interests.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

