It's amazing how often arrogance and ignorance go together and frequently in the same sentence. There is so little evidence for global warming apart from minor cyclic variation, that Al Gore has been forced to couch his campaign in religious terms. The science just isn't there - just a lot of anecdotal cherry picking. CO2 just doesn't have a significant greenhouse impact as water vapor is the dominant greenhouse gas by far so as to be the only one that matters. If you're going to do anything about reducing water vapor by any significant amount you'll have to cover much of the oceans with a vapor barrier since that's where 99% of evaporation takes place. So what'll it be - paper or plastic?

Charles Nixon, Gamerco, USA/New Mexico

"Food service jobs" for those farmers who cut down trees...hmm. And WHERE is the food going to come from? Being an island continent, surrounded by oceans, it is very expensive to have to import ALL the food. It makes sense for the government to work out a way for the farmers to be able to GROW the food without too much interference. Farmers are very interested in the health of the environment -- it's their livelyhood! The government has no right to take what doesn't belong to them. If they want the trees to stay, they should pay for them. They need to talk with the farmers and come to an agreement, not make sweeping laws that don't consider anything but international opinion.

Lara, New South Wales, Australia

It sounds like this this story is a massive beat up. Every farmer in Australia knows they need trees to stop erosion, soil loss and salinity, 3 massive problems for them right now. The archaic Euro Ideology of farming is almost dead in this country. Yes we have problems with water, and clearing etc. But this article, I'll wager, would not exist if there was a mechanism in place for publications to be made responsible for what they publish. I have many friends who are farmers, and they would laugh at this article. This next generation of farmers are becoming greener all the time.
Just so you know, I am A paid up member of my local wilderness society, and Greenpeace. I do what I can. I won't vilify farmers. They know their livelyhood relies on the land.

Steve, Adelaide, South Australia

My recollection is that well-maintained grasslands sequester way more carbon than shrub and tree encroachment into grasslands. Also, look at the water cycle - those trees and shrubs encroaching into grasslands take way more water and from deeper in the soil profile than grass does. Finally, to ban shrub and tree management in favor of taking away the productivity of the grasslands for low intensity uses like livestock grazing will encourage things like housing developments that permanently stop carbon sequestration. This of course assumes that carbon sequestration has any scientific validity at all.

Dan, Cheyenne, WY

"Farmers who fell trees ought lose their farms without compensation"

Are you kidding me? In the US, the government has to compensate for any "takings".

Bill Wilson, Georgiana, AL, USA

If Mr. Kenney of Redwood City (high rate of breast cancer from woodsmoke) declares environmentalism a disease, what is his idea of a cure for this malady? A strong dose of benzene, perhaps?

Mary Giacoletti, San Simeon, California

The new lexicon of the mental illness called environmentalism, if you hear these words you are dealing with a severely disturbed person: Global warming and climate change; biosphere; carbon dioxide; carbon emission; carbon footprint; Earth; endangered species; environment; greenhouse gas; healing; planet; save (followed by any number of things); sustainable; and many more. Just smile and take them with a grain of salt, their hysteria is borne of ignorance and socialist rabble rousing designed to destroy freedom and capitalism, while gaining power for politicians and governments. There is of course no problem except in their delusional minds.

John Kenney, Redwood City, California/USA

Trees encroach on fields every year if the scrub brush and/or perimiter trees are protected then the useable part
of the land will be reduced each year , the real shame here
is that once again the people making the rules didn't bother
to look at the facts before passing the new laws ,and the
farmers only chance to be heard is to do something that
attracts the press . The urban tree huggers fail to face that
everything they consume has to be produced somewhere
and rather than consume less they make themselves feel
better by complaining about the producer

Kendall Acors, Kilmarnock, Va. USA

farming takes a lot of time and patience, so it's sort of bizarre that these farmers are taking such a short-term view of things. just when world governments start to take action on climate change, the people revolt. what a hopeless situation we've got ourselves into.

David Bowman, Charlottesville, VA, USA,

If I am ever invited to appear before the Gore Un-environmental Activities Committee (GUAC) and they ask me "Are you now or have you ever been a carbon criminal?" I will answer "No but I have a list of my neighbors. All of them are carbon criminals."
What I'm hoping is that they will ignore my obvious lies and go for a two-for-one deal. I would sacrifice everyone I know to stay out of jail and if Kyoto is ratified, I'll have to make up names because I don't have enough friends.
It's coming and you don't know how to stop it. Sniffle, snivel.

Colin Butts, Milton , Florida

Farmers who fell trees ought lose their farms without compensation. Perhaps there are food-service jobs for such soon-to-be former farmers in nearby cities. Healing the biosphere ought be our primary concern, even as lifeways must be altered from those induced and enforced by western civilization.

Teresa Binstock, Estes Park, Colorado usa