2: Cutting down more trees. So, the great thing about lumber harvesting, is that they grow the trees, then cut them down, send them to the sawmill, turn them into planks/plywood/particle board/paper/ etc. etc. Very little of the tree is wasted, and in order to release the carbon stored by the tree you have to burn it. Whereas I'll wager most of the wood goes into making houses. Which don't burn down all that often... at least not intentionally.
So wouldn't the forestry industry be saving the environment from an environmentalist's perspective? Since they grow the trees, the trees eat the carbon, they cut down the trees, and that carbon is then stored in someone's new house, and isn't released until the house is burned down by an angry neighbor. 
They then plant more trees to eat more carbon to turn into more houses.
3: Hunting animals for fur. Mmm... tasty tasty animals... and once you've eaten them you get a nice warm coat out of the deal too... and maybe a new leather couch.
Over hunting is bad. But since human presence tends to drive away predators then hunting animals for their fur is probably a good way of fixing population imbalances caused by human expansion.
Exactly! You beat me to it and these are the points I want to build on.
I'm a senior Forestry major. The Coal/Oil Industry is much more harmful to the environment than the Timber Industry. Trees capture carbon (A lot of friggin Carbon) in the wood from the atmosphere through photosynthesis. When the wood is burned, the carbon that was stored in the wood is released back into the atmosphere, yes. But think about it, there is no additional carbon put back into the atmosphere from burning the wood by itself. The process is a complete wash, like taking a bucket full of water out of the ocean and then dumping it back in. Here is the elemental break down of wood in % dry weight: 49.0% Carbon, 44.0% Oxygen, 6.0% Hydrogen and 0.2-.5% Ash. Using wood as a building material is the best thing we can do for the environment. As a building material, it is more efficient than steel or concrete because it is an excellent insulator (less energy needed to heat/cool a wooden building) and it requires less raw materials/energy to produce. I think what hurt the forest industry's reputation in the eye of public opinion was its stance up until the 80's that "They knew best" and chose to ignore outside opinions. Presently, the industry goes to great lengths to listen to all steakholders and run operations with as little environmental impact as possible. We have more standing timber now in this country than we did 300 years ago, its just not old growth timber. There are even government programs to convert old agriculture fields back into timberland. Forests are dynamic, they're always changing. Sadly, some people's perception of what our forests should look like comes from watching movies like "Bambi", where everything lives in harmony and man is the Factor. There are close to 7 billion people on this planet and to think that we can all survive without affecting the environment at all (staying completely "hands off") is loony, but we are certainly taking steps to reducing our global footprint in ways that are both plausible and realistic. Here is the link to my sources:
http://www.mediafire.com/?pc3ufdb7dgqjdObviously, over-hunting an animal for commercial profits is bad and that was common prior to the early 1900's, but now there are management restrictions in place to attempt to keep populations in a state of equilibrium. Fortunately, we live in a time and society where hunting/trapping is not the only way a person can put food on the table. There are people in this world that are simply misguided and have chosen to only look at one side of the coin. For example, I read a response on a youtube video from a woman who basically said, "shame on you hunters! you are the reason why wild hogs are becoming extinct!"...
. Wild hogs are an abomination to the habitat and reproduce at an exponential rate; currently, hunting/trapping is almost not enough to keep their populations in check. As a hunter, I will take game animals in a responsible way that encourages the longevity of its own species. My family cooks a lot of wild game meat that is very good and filling. We are sure to give away any extra meat we are not planning on consuming; A lot of states have "hunters feed the hungry" programs where hunters can donate deer meat to shelters.
To conclude, there are many activists and organizations out there with different perspectives on issues. Keep in mind that all extreme activists have an agenda to push, and will not stop at misconstruing data to gain a following. Keep your wits about you and don't get sucked into one side of an issue without looking at both sides. Make informed decisions and rational conclusions.
(BTW, my text window keeps shifting back to the top of the post everytime I type. This is extremely annoying, does anybody know how to fix this?)
