X-rated Bob wrote
If you support certain environmental practices you should want to see businesses that are visibly adopting those practices AND remaining viable as a business. They serve as examples and encouragement to other businesses (and to us).
+1.
Quote from Mr Taylor 02m30 "...Taken over ownership of more important species."
This makes me think of the work that the WWF (world wildlife fund) was doing in the 80's, just to get people to realise there was issues with animal conservation. This led to (some) 1st world countries to change their consumption practices and affected animals populations in the 3rd world countries recovered (to a degree). Yeah, there is still significant amounts of poaching - but now we are informed and the convervation practices are far more transparent.
Fast forward a few decades and now we are talking about the poaching of trees. And Mr Taylor and Co are doing something about it -
http://www.foe.org/projects/oceans-and-forests/forests-and-climate/protect-the-lacey-act. If the governments of the countries where the resources can't/won't do something about it, the commercial entities are as part of their own 'risk management' (what are the risks to our going concern).
imho, a good question is this 'greenwashing' (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenwashing) or a concerted effort to ensure both the longevity of his business and the resources he'd like to see his customers and personal family have access to in the future.
I'm voting the latter. Go Bob.
