Faculty position - Silviculture

Joseph Zorzin redoak at forestmeister.com
Wed Dec 24 05:45:38 EST 1997


Al Stangenberger wrote:

> The one week section is silviculture -- the summer field course is 8 weeks,
> which we all feel is too short but that's how the calendar works out...
> 

Not picking on you here of course, but this short field requirement
thing really shows how the forestry "intelligentsia" trully has no
respect for forestry field work. I've seen this over the years - working
as a "mud" forester- that the forestry "leadership" in government and
the ivory tower- consider work in the field- as no more worthy than
picking cotton.

A few months ago I received my U.Mass. forestry dept. newsletter- and
never once in there was any mention of foresters that actually work in
the woods- and this is in a state that is 3/4 forest land. Or read
almost any SAF journal or other "high falutin" such journal- where
you'll read about some research- which in my opinion is as worthless as
the paper it's printed on- or about some "brilliant" thinking being done
by national forestry "leadership" which I consider not so brilliant at
all. In my opinion the forestry "intelligentsia" just don't have a clue
about forestry and they're living in a fantasy land.

And because these "leaders" are disconnected from reality, the education
of foresters is greatly lacking and the "big" decisions made at high
political levels is often just not very bright.

When I graduated from forestry school with straight "A's" I had no idea
how to actually peform on the job and neither does anyone else in my
opinion and I say there is no excuse for this. The argument is made that
the unviversiy isn't suppossed to be teaching such "low" skills, only
how to think at a sophisticated level- so as to be able to go anywhere
and then adjust to local environments- that's crazy- the real reason is
that the professors have never done "it" so they can't teach it.

And as for government "leadership", in my opinion - this profession of
forestry hasn't seen any- ever. I could write a book on just how bad the
leadership is, but I'll save that for another day. But in short, in my
over 20 years experience out in the mud, the issues I face are NEVER
reflected in the forestry literature or NEVER comprehended by the so
called leadership- we mud foresters are in a different universe. The
ivory tower and leadership ARE NOT CONTRIBUTING TO SOLVING THE REAL
WORLD PROBLEMS OF FORESTRY.

I always remember how in the '60's the Chinese sent the profs out to
Mongolia to work in the rice paddies. I think our ivory tower and
government foresters should go spend a few years out in the mud. It
would be good for them.

Ten or more years out there "picking the cotton" should be an essential
training for the ivory tower or high leadership in government.



More information about the Ag-forst mailing list