Conservationists as "net polluters"


The creator of "Roots of Blood" has developed an interesting argument that "CONservation" organisations actually have a net negative effect on the environment due to the polluting effects of their activities:
"Reducing consumption and fixing carbon is probably the most important and basic conservation requirement of our time. Other projects like planting trees and saving birds should be within that confinement and it should be the conservationists that lead the way in this respect." (Message by Amacmil304, the "Roots of Blood" man, to internet newsgroup uk.enviroment.conservation, 6 Sep 2003)

As well-managed trees convert carbon dioxide to oxygen as part of their growth process, and also absorb other pollutants, organisations such as the Woodland Trust and Amacmil's other favourite target the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds- both large-scale tree planters and woodland managers- can probably claim a sizeable net positive impact on pollution from their conservation work*. Unfortunately, in calculating the polluting effects of conservation groups, Amacmil includes the pollution from members of the public visiting their properties or promotional and educational events.

So, members of the public reading these words, how do you feel about the implications of that suggestion? Should conservation organisations discourage you from visiting their properties- and if they did, what would you do instead? To put it another way, if you perceived your own neighbourhood as having few attractions, because you were discouraged from visiting properties owned by conservation groups, would you choose to stay at home, or to range further afield?

*I calculated, based on carbon sequestration figures from the Edinburgh Centre for Carbon Management that 1 hectare of woodland would carbon-neutralise my 14 km-per-litre car for about 670 km over a year. In fact I had a decimal point in the wrong place, and the true figure should have been 6,700- i.e. assuming that about 60% of the Woodland Trust's 20,000 hectare estate is actually covered with trees, they would carbon-neutralise me for about 80 million km a year. Sooner or later, Amacmil, who seized with great glee on my original figures, may bother to double-check my calculations- or he may even read this page...