tree farming, dual land use, better cash flow

'Toby' H D Bradshaw toby at u.washington.edu
Fri Sep 8 14:06:05 EST 1995


In article <DELI9F.EJx at cunews.carleton.ca>,
thomas macaulay <tmacaul2 at ccs.carleton.ca> wrote:
>
>> "Weyerhaeuser" is the correct spelling.
>
>Orthography has never been my forte

This is obvious.  I'm left wondering what your forte might be.

>although you must admit that
>"Weyer" is an improvement on "Where."

And ignorance is an improvement over stupidity, though neither
is exactly desirable.

>as for the rest of it (in the
>words of Satchmo): "too-may-toe, too-mah-toe, let's call the whole
>thing off)  
>                   
>> Is this near Canida?
>
>that's "Great White North" to you, pops.

It was a joke, sonny, on your spelling of your neighbor U.S.
state immediately to the south.  Sorry to play to your weak hand again.
It was unsporting of me.

>> Please define "scouring", explain how it applies to the private
>> timberlands owned by the company, and how the genetic improvement
>> and silviculture research carried out by Weyerhaeuser around the
>
>When i think of "scouring," a lot of images come to mind. first &
>foremost, i think of the scouring of the stream & river beds by all
>that run-off soil/mineral matter which results from overzealous
>high-grading logging "operations."

Wouldn't that be "silting" rather than "scouring"?  Or are we back to
the "lexicon-challenged" defense?

>Why do you think the salmon stocks
>are being decimated? (yes, it's true, a change in ocean temperature
>has something to do with it).

Then there's overfishing, river damming, urban sprawl, surface water
runoff from paved highways, improper dumping of household waste,
channelization of streams for flood control, and no doubt several others.
It could even have something to do with the raw sewage B.C. dumps
into its/our coastal waters :/

>it is because of the SCOURING of the
>creekbeds where the salmon enjoy spawning.

Nothing like a simple answer to a complex problem.  Are you by
chance a political science major?

>Of course, i also think of the steep slopes that are scoured in the
>process of a clearcutting "operation" (ironic choice of words for
>describing logging, eh? i like it).

Well, you don't seem to like high-grading (selective cutting),
clearcutting, tree farming, or logging of old growth.  Do you
have some alternative suggestions for the production and/or
harvest of wood, or do you favor abandoning wood as a commercial
material?

>as a lifelong inhabitant of
>British Columbia, i do have some anecdotal knowledge re: Weyerhaeuser
>and what they've been up to.

I believe Crown lands are managed under Crown rules, no?  The same
Crown rules that formerly required no re-planting and permitted
clearcutting on a giant scale.  Do you hold Weyco responsible for
the actions of your provincial government?

>I'm well aware of their consciencious
>(sp?) application of silviculture on their monoculture treefarms,

Would these monocultures be on public or private lands?  If the
former, why are you complaining about Weyerhaeuser instead of the
provincial governments?  If the latter, do you also object to
monoculture wheat farms?

>and
>i have no doubt that their practices will become increasingly "green"
>in the future. what i maintain, however, is that in the past, they
>SCOURED the forest ecosystems of old-growth timber. in fact, they
>scoured their concessions of biodiversity.

Proof by assertion?

>why do you
>think the spotted owl is in the corner it now occupies? 

Glaciation.

>I can no more morally judge Weyerhaeuser for its historical behaviour
>than i can Atilla the Hun for doing what he thougtht was
>necessary to build his empire. Weyerhaeuser was
>merely behaving "rationally" in a specific regulatory climate and
>assuming a now antiquated set of assumptions re: forest ecology. i suppose
>they were doing the best they could - if i was back there with them,
>i wouldn't have been any different. but that doesn't mean i have to
>admire this corporation. and i'm also unhappy about introducing
>genetically altered trees into the forest. but that's just a feeling.

"Genetically altered" in what sense, please?

>> BTW, which brand of bum wipe do you favor, and why?
>
>if you must know, i clean up with a hemp/cereal straw-based
>product. i favour it because it contains no trees. the brand-name,
>however, escapes me...

Apparently, that is not all which has escaped you.  This [farcical] cereal 
straw wouldn't come from a monoculture crop on land which was formerly 
part of a highly diverse prairie ecosystem, would it?

-Toby Bradshaw
toby at u.washington.edu







More information about the Ag-forst mailing list