Habitat loss.

• Author: Ayres, Ed

In the last issue, I wrote a note reflecting on the global destruction of forest, and I chose to approach that staggering topic from a very personal perspective - by starting from a view of the woods I can see from my own home on a river near Washington, D.C., then relating that view to the larger picture revealed by a new World Forest Map that had been constructed by the World Wide Fund for Nature.

Shortly after the issue was mailed out, I was taken aback by the arrival of several letters to the editor, chiding me for writing my piece from such a seemingly privileged location. Two of those letters appear in the "From Readers" section on the next two pages. One of the authors, Barbara G. Smith of Lawrence, Kansas, asks, "Did you have any sense of irony as you wrote your pleasant piece? Tell us." Since these letters raise some issues that come close to home for more than a few of us, I would like to respond to them both.

First, a small point of clarification. Both Ms. Smith and the second writer, Paul Schick, seem to assume that someone who lives in a relatively unspoiled, wooded environment must be unconscionably affluent. Yet, that implies that if people are not rich, they must not live in beautiful environments. And, while one of the achievements of WORLD WATCH has been to show how unrestrained exploitation by the rich can indeed inflict environmental deprivation on the less affluent, I can thankfully report that a good part of the world's most beautiful and valuable natural assets have not yet been taken away from those who lack monetary wealth - whether they live in the mountains of Bhutan, the cloud forests of Bolivia, or the wooded hollows of Appalachia.

My essay was about the forest, not about my house or income, of which I said nothing. But no, I'm not up there with Bill Gates, or even with some of the truck drivers in these parts. However, my family and I value our daily connection to the natural environment so strongly that we were willing, when searching for a home, to sacrifice some of the amenities of urban living - the cultural diversity and stimulation, the lack of dependence on cars - in order to sustain that connection. I haven't bought a suit in 10 years, have never bought a CD, and don't have a TV (I pulled the old one out in disgust some months ago), but I can watch blue herons fly over the river.

Even if someone is rich, though, is that a cause to suggest that his or her efforts at reform are hypocritical or unwelcome...