The debate

Steve f94m at
Thu Nov 27 13:16:16 EST 1997

kat wrote:
> :>> Joseph Zorzin wrote in message <346E003B.22F7 at>...
> :>>
> :>> >I happen to think government is NEEDED,
> :>> >because without it, we'd be back to the 12th century. I'm actually
> proud
> :>> >to admit to being a LIBERAL. Let's have government but lets have GOOD
> :>> >government. And GOOD government wouldn't waste taxpayers money
> :>> >overseeing me, while 90% of the logging goes on without any forester at
> :>> >all.
> :>>
> :>> The problem here is that you are indeed LIBERAL, too damn LIBERAL, in
> :your
> :>> lust to control other people's land.  Lead by example, not by
> :legislation.
> :>>
> :>> Paul
> :> Owning forest land does not endow the owner with proper knowledge in
> :>hwo to manage and care for that land. Some governmental (whether federal
> :>,provincial/state) regulations and help(ie extensions services,
> :>information workshops,etc) can help those who want to know more. Its not
> :>about controlling peoples land, but it should be about helping those
> :>people manage their land more effectively.
> :>--
> :>The strangeness of my actions are porprotional
> :>to the 'normality' surrounding me.
> :
> :I'm afraid you are too charitable in your interpretation of the comments of
> :the Forestmaster.  He has repeatedly stated that landowners should be
> :required by law to employ foresters to manage the harvest their woodlands.
> would like to point out that it is forestmeister ----  and i agree with him
> 100% - if there were more foresters like joe out there our forests wouldn't
> be such a big hideous mess right now!!!!
> :I'm all for voluntary education and proper land management - I intend to be
> :able to retire early through proper land management.  I'm not against state
> :forestors.  I view them as the proper "cops" for  the woods.
> excuse my skepticism - state forester = woods cops????   too scary to even
> envision.... 'i'm so sorry, ma'am, but policy says i have to clearcut this
> entire forest - according to our growth and yield models......'     whatever
> ......
> what this country (pardon, i mean CONTINENT) needs is some good wood (bush,
> mud, whatever it takes) foresters....
>   I'm not
> :against private forestors and will probably contract with one in the
> future.
> :But I flat-out reject the notion that just because forestry professionals
> :know how to manage woodlots better than most landowners, they are therefore
> :entitled to force their services upon the unwilling.  No matter how much
> :money they can make for the landowner, no matter how much they can improve
> :the forest, the simple fact remains that it just ain't their land.  Freedom
> :includes the freedom to be ignorant and a poor land manager.
> i sure hope you don't own much land, pal !!!  Attitudes like yours are what
> made the amazon what it is!!!  you have a really good point - it is your
> land to do with as you choose - no forester can tell you what to do - screw
> it up as much as you like.  It  "ain't"  their land, but they give a shit
> more than you do.  And they know way more than you.  So, you can be proud of
> yourself for being an  IGNORANT landowner - cheers!!!
> :I'm tempted to propose a bill that would force all pc owners to employ
> :computer professionals in the management and use of their PCs.  Think of
> the
> :lost data on those 95% unbackedup disk drives that could saved!  Think of
> :the money people waste on foolish, unnecessary PC software!  Think of the
> :ravages these users inflict on our information infrastructure from all
> those
> :browers with too small cache size settings!  Damn, we need some more laws!
> Damn!!  it sounds like you know a wee bit more about pc's than trees -
> here's a deal for you - you mind the pc's, we'll mind the forests....
> :
> :Why do many (if not most people) employ financial institutions to help
> :manage their investments?  Because they have a proven track record of
> :success.  Private forestors can do the same - lead by example, not
> :legislation.
> :
> :Paul
> :
> :
> :
> :
I must say I agree with Kat. Foresters are not woods cops. Even to
suggest such is insulting. 
The strangeness of my actions are porprotional 
to the 'normality' surrounding me.

More information about the Ag-forst mailing list