grassroots forestry

Mon Jul 25 13:16:23 EST 1994

In article <aultCtG923.LsC at>
ault at (Stanley K. Ault) writes:
>Mark Whitaker (Mark.Whitaker at wrote:
>: Sunday, July 3, 1994
>... The
>one caution I would offer is that the local management system must be
>designed so that no single individual or special interest group can reap
>large profits from the management plan. Otherwise, the management of the
>local area would eventually be driven by the profit motive of the managers
>rather than by what is really good for the land and the community.
I see no reason to assume that the two are mutually exclusive.
>An example of this can be found in the area in which I live.  The local
>city management is made up of a small group of housing developers, so the
>local land is being raped to plant houses as close together as possible
>with very little green space. If you or I wanted to divide up this land,
>build on it, and sell the finished product we would find it nearly
>impossible to get county approval, but a member of the clan of developers
>always seems to be able to find a way to get a variance and build anyway.
>(Helps to have friends in the county offices.)
This sounds like more of a problem of too much government control,
not a 'profit' problem.
>The net effect is that the
>ranchers are being driven out by annexation, but they aren't the ones
>making any money on the sale of their land because they aren't the ones
>who are allowed to divide, build, and sell.  Instead, the developers buy
>large tracts, the rules get changed to allow building, and the developers
>make the bucks.
Exactly. And this problem would likely solve itself if the local
government did not have the power to 'zone' other people's property.
>The danger in your plan is that it must be carefully designed to avoid
>putting too much control into the hands of a few.
Yep. A few city councillors, who are then subject to temptation.
Ken Wiebe
Ministry of Health

More information about the Ag-forst mailing list