Talk:Illegal logging

Forestry Start‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Forestry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the profession and science of forestry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ForestryWikipedia:WikiProject ForestryTemplate:WikiProject ForestryForestry articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Environment Start‑class

	Environment portal This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.EnvironmentWikipedia:WikiProject EnvironmentTemplate:WikiProject EnvironmentEnvironment articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Law Start‑class Mid‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Someone care to explain the mass of deletions on this page? Guettarda 17:10, 12 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I cant find anything about Korindo on http://www.eia-international.org, could you be more Specific about the page? I also think it needs more citationsJoshden (talk) 19:15, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tree Species

Looking for a discussion of rainforest tree species commonly targeted by illegal logging operations.

Neutrality?

I think that some of the text should be reworded as it seems biased. There is also an overuse of the word "illegal". The general tone of the article comes across as a "Save the Trees" pitch. Some sentences make very opinionated statements such as: "And since the EU is one of the largest importers of timber and forest products, the consumption of the member states continues to fuel illegal logging and related criminal activities." This seems to indicate that the members of the EU are criminal. I feel the tone really makes it feel like it is trying to make a connection between Illegal Logging and Logging in general. Most of the sources in the document (placed under “notes”) seem to come from the same couple sources. I do not endorse illegal logging, however this article should not be an anti-logging or Greenpeace campaign article. Busfault 00:54, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How it can be overuse of the word "illegal" in the article which is devoted to illegal logging, not to the logging in general? Audriusa 18:47, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Busfault - You are obviously an apologist for the MNCs and countries like China who are quietly supporting the various timber companies that are raping the rain forests while pretending they somehow give a hoot about the environment.Ndriley97 21:42, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well if china is allowing it then it might not be illegal then Ben920 11:00, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

the point is simply that 'illegal logging' has become a political catch phrase for a political agenda, and has little meaning other than that. 'Illegal logging' has simply become logging that the author doesn't approve of. Forexample we don't have a page for 'illegal pot smoking' though most is illegal.Rvannatta (talk) 19:04, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All in all, the article represents a neutral point of view. Some of the figures are not sound (Russia: >50% is only correct in some areas, but on a national scale, even estimations by Greenpeace and WWF do not exceed 36%), and other passages do not mention relevant backgrounds. Finally, I see vague terminologies and causalities (e.g. "It is thought that logging is a growing concern to the growth of the rainforest's inhabitants." - a) indigenous people do not live in tropical rainforests exclusively, and alone in the tropics, other large forest ecosystems besides rainforests can be found, too; b) I doubt that a majority of specialists would agree to that message). I will do the necessary edits and remove the template message. --Wladmeister (talk) 13:30, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This page is written like a greenpeace pamphlet. This page is very biased. Could someone care to put in the perspective of others (like the loggers) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.184.93.167 (talk) 08:45, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, that there is lack of neutrality in this article. Citation of the "Estonian Green Movement" is ridiculous. It is a fact, that if somebody evaluates activities of the "Estonian Green Movement" according to the same methodology, that they use for evaluating level of illegal cuttings, then 100% of their activities are illegal.--84.50.182.154 (talk) 08:56, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"In June 2009 Obama approved logging in the Tongass National Forest" Why is this in an article on illegal logging? What is the author's definition of illegal? 203.5.68.93 (talk) 22:12, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures

I have several pictures of illegal logging camps in the jungles of Belize, if you think they will enchance this artical I am willing to upload them and place them in the public domain. I took em so they are mine.

That would be great! Béka 19:11, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Report

It says the report outlines what we believe can and should be done. Who's we?

China and Illegal Logging

We all know the truth - the Mainland Chinese are responsible for almost all of the new demand for illegal logging. This becomes clear when one realizes that most of the new activity has been in NE Asia (e.g., Siberia) and SE Asia (e.g., Borneo). I'm not anti-China, but am also sick of everyone skirting around these sorts of issues, particularly commie-lovers who are still clutching their copies of Mao's Little Red Book close to their hearts. I will edit the page accordingly. Ndriley97 00:13, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about China, but the article is sort of dressed up to condemn all logging whether done properly or not and even what's illegal is often in the eye of the beholder.

it's sort of like medical marijauna in California. How 'illegal' it is depends on who you ask.

Wood in an important renewable resource, and one of the bad side effects of reducing timber harvests in north american temperate forests where forest practices are generally responsible, is that it transfers the demand to other places whose management is less responsible.Rvannatta 17:07, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The "China"-passage needs to be fed with references (scientific ones; estimations of a single unnkown ENGO canot be regarded as reputable). Concerning legality, definitions are more or less clear. The mainly argued point is if purchasing somehow illegally harvested timber is a crime. --Wladmeister (talk) 14:25, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I take the missing replies as a sign of approval or disinterest of the passage's author. I will consequently remove the "China"-section. --Wladmeister (talk) 09:41, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]