bionet.agroforestry proposed charter

Don Staples dstaples at
Wed Aug 6 10:19:20 EST 1997

Larry Caldwell wrote:
(Snipped a bunch for brevity)
> I think you can see my concern.  Rather than narrowing the subject matter
> under discussion, I would like to see it widened.  I've crossposted to some
> regional discussion groups, because like it or not, forestry has become
> a political football.  Policy ends up being made on the opinions of urban
> dwellers who have never even talked to a person who raises and harvests
> trees.
> If and when the new forestry groups pass, I will cheerfully cease all
> agitation, and leave this group strictly to agroforesters.  For the
> moment, that's not possible.

Well put commentary, I, for one, have never met an agro-forester. 
Growing trees is growing trees.  Some of us with a specific training are
callef foresters, others arboists, botanist, entomologists, etc ad
infinitum.  But the conversation is about trees.  I for one care little
about an industrial, since I am what is referred to as a
"dirt" forester and industry is where I sell my product, not make my
living.  Bionet.Agroforestry suits me fine, to share my little knowledge
with others, and learn from them.  So far I have learned that foresters
and forestry across the nation share the same problems, with different
enphasis when it comes to species and sites.

I have asked this question before: "What is an agro forester?"  I will
extend the question with "What is agroforestry other than raising
trees?"  With out the trees it is just agro, corn, beans, cows, what

Keep on talking folks, one news group with 2-10 posts a day is not what
you would call a heavily travelled road, sort of a foot path through the
woods.  My kind of travel.

Ego Stroke:

More information about the Ag-forst mailing list