Selective logging is not sustainable.

Firstly, let me post the 'Our Common Future' definition of 'sustainable' lest my opponent should have any difficulty finding it. 'Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. ' In other words, sustainable development refers not only to the sustainability of trees, but also of the forest ecosystem, its energy flow, nutrient cycle, ecological pyramids, and such. In addition to environmental concerns, sustainability must also take into account social and economic sustainability. Let me then refute my opponent's counter-arguments. Firstly, even though the loggers only cut down the stronger and older trees, the removal of such trees reduces the genetic diversity of that type of tree within the area. Furthermore, as these trees have better genes than the weak ones that are left uncut, the stronger genes are removed from the gene pool. This means the existence of this type of tree in the area is more vulnerable than before. Moreover, since only weaker and younger trees are left in the area, the animals which rely on the trees for food will lose a major portion of their food supply. Secondly, because of the continuous nature of the canopy, felled trees, especially taller trees (i. e. emergents and canopy trees), inevitably damage surrounding trees, even with techniques such as directional tree felling. It is estimated that for every tree logged, thirty are hurt. Furthermore, the stability of the trees are lowered as the networks of vines are disrupted. (2) In response to the fact that loggers sometimes reforest the trees after logging, forests after selective logging are generally unable to regenerate quickly because trees need a lot of sunlight to regrow. A large, open area where all of the sunlight can reach the ground directly is more favourable for regrowth. Moreover, loggers often do not wait enough time for the trees to grow again. The loggers of the Amazon are one such example. (3) This shows that economic and environmental sustainability conflict when it comes to selective logging. Also, machinery involved in logging always damages trees. (1 and 2) Studies have also shown that selectively logged areas are more susceptible to forest fires. (5) Although it is against the law to construct roads in national forests, anti-logging laws are often not carried out because of various reasons, including collusion between the government and corporations, bribery and corruption, and lack of manpower. The Brazil Environmental Protection Agency, for example, only collects 6.5% of the fines it imposes. Moreover, every inspector in Brazil has to look after 41 000 square kilometres of forest. Therefore, it is difficult to monitor logging activities. (1) Even in democratic countries such as the United States, collusion between the private sector and government officials is a serious problem. Moreover, multinational corporations from the United States, Britain, France, Belgium and Japan often try to control government officials of developing countries in order to log illegally. (4) I will not refute the constructive arguments put forward by my opponent because I believe I have sufficiently addressed these points in the arguments above. Sources: (1) HKDSE Interactive Geography 3 (my geography textbook at school) (2) . http://www.ehow.com... (3) . http://www.pnas.org... html? sid=f0277676-d603-4d2e-9d6d-7c474bdbbd40 (4) Strangely Like War: The Global Assault on Forests (Derrek Jensen and George Draffan, 2003) (5) . http://conservationbytes.com...