Letter to the editor: a tree is more than a tree

Letter to the editor on your article from january 20, 2012: "does clear-cutting bring about the desired growth?" leopoldshafen.
i would like to remind you that a forest is the basis of our economic area by contributing to the balance of our ecosystems and decisively determining the value of an advanced culture (apart from sporadic extraction of raw materials).
apart from the pure material value, a tree produces oxygen through photosynthesis and binds co2 and thus contributes to the "enormous oxygen, carbon and water cycle of the biosphere". the forests are used to feed wild animals and plants, although cutting down trees (that bore fruit) used to be a punishable offense. in a forest there are approximately 2.5 times as many animal species as in fallow land (e.g. 40-50 bird species). with the help of its roots, a tree serves as a water reservoir and prevents the desolation of a land. it feeds the soil organisms through the nutrients released into the soil (e.g. 2500 worms/tree on approx. 10x10m). with the increasingly important biologically oriented technology, the tree offers innovation potential for countless inventions.
with its organic waste, the forest represents the beginning of the food chain with its humus formation, provides a shielding effect through wind, noise and visibility protection, and has a filtering or detoxifying effect, e.g. b. exhaust gases, dust, smog even radioactivity, offers vital protection against erosion, debris, roads or avalanches and creates hundreds of thousands of jobs in the forestry industry. the recreational value of the forest with its restaurants and accommodation industry should also be mentioned and that the forest contributes significantly to the stabilization of agriculture.
in summary, "an adult tree of 100 years old represents an economic value of around 260,000 euros over the course of its life and thus almost 2000 times its mere wood value" ("source": vester, a tree is more than a tree, 1985).
finally, i would like to state that, in addition to its economic performance, a tree has the ability to "radiate beauty, security, protection and vitality, even a brotherly relationship with us humans."
if humans (homo sapiens sapiens) look back into their 2 million year old history, it should be clear to them that it is not nature that needs humans, but the other way around.

yours greetings

wolfgang oberacker