Future use of biosci.agroforestry

Marius du Plessis mariusdp at icon.co.za
Wed Jan 29 00:53:00 EST 1997


In article <32ED7362.1213 at conknet.com>, b_simm at conknet.com says...
>
>Gerry Lawson wrote:
>> 
>> Re: recent discussion on the need for a new 'Forestry' usegroup
>> 
>> This group was set up in 1989 to meet the needs of the agroforestry
>> community & notionally I'm still the 'discussion leader'.  Over recent 
years
>> I've tried to encourage (with little success) the use of the forum for
>> agroforestry discussion rather than field forestry US style.  I also
>> conducted a poll around 6 months ago asking whether the list should be
>> moderated to screen out junk and irrelevant mail.  However only 12
>> members voted, of which only 9 wanted moderation.  Now that the junk
>> & abusive mail has reduced I'm less keen to take on the hastle of
>> moderating messages & am happy to leave things as they are....
>> 
>> ..... However another usenet group with 'forestry' in the title would 
have
>> the advantage of attacting US users who have a general question but
>> don't want to subscribe to the more specialist international forestry
>> newsgroups (e.g funet.fi (send message to mailserver at nic.funet.fi
>> saying 'subscribe forest firstname lastname)).  Have a look at
>> www.metla.fi/info/vlib/forestry.html for a good summary of forestry 
lists.
>> 
>> So .... if having had a look at the available lists you really want 
another
>> one then by all means set it up.   I'm not sure what the protocol is 
now
>> but you could contact the administrator of biosci
>> (biosci-help at net.bio.net) for advice?
>> 
>> cheers, Gerry Lawson
>> 
>> >>> <server-daemon at dl.ac.uk> 23/January/1997 01:57am >>>
>> The only reason to consider a new group is that supposedly
>> "agroforestry" is something different from field forestry as practiced
>> in America and that those agroforesters (still don't know what that
>> means) might not like us non agroforesters muscling in on their
>> territory. But then again there isn't exactly a crowd of agroforesters
>> here complaining. So.. I guess without a stampeed for a new group, 
we'll
>> use this one. <G>
>> __________________________________________________________
>> G.Lawson at ite.ac.uk                         Institute of Terrestrial 
Ecology
>> ITE Tropical Forestry Section             Bush Estate
>> Tel:  +44-131-445-4343                     Edinburgh EH26 OQB
>> Fax: +44-131-445-3943                    Scotland, UK
>> __________________________________________________________Hi:
>I for one would just as soon stay at this site. I'm an old retired 
>forester and like to read the messages right here. On occasion I do try 
>to add my two cents. So if we're not taking up to much space I say to 
>the foresters lets stay here. By the way. Just what agroforestry? Does 
>someone have an official definition?
>
Hi all Agroforesters and for that sake foresters too. I am a professional 
forester in South Africa, working for one of the big timber growers who 
manufactures paper, board, mine support systems etc. My opinion about 
agro-forestry in a big organisation is that it is intergrated with 
forestry per. se. on a basis where land use is enhanced for the following 
reasons; either it can reduce silvicultural costs by e.g. make weed 
control unnecessary or may-be supply native people living on the land 
with very necessary foodstuffs etc. We have a agro-forestry policy in our 
company which seems to be paying off regarding optimum landuse etc.
I would like to see a true forestry site on newsgroups where may-be 
concepts, like silviculture, forest management, forestry systems etc. can 
be discussed.
This is my two cents worth (As you might know RSA Rands and cents aren't 
worth that much on the international exchange, but still!!)
Have a nice day.
Marius du Plessis 




More information about the Ag-forst mailing list