120 new acres

Joseph Zorzin redoak at forestmeister.com
Mon Oct 6 09:05:49 EST 1997


Jostnix wrote:
> 
> Joseph, you write:
> 
> > They don't learn
> >from the vast legions of state service foresters, extension agents, ad
> >infinitum.

I was thinking of you when I wrote that - and was wondering how'd ya
react. <G>

Actually I don't blame those folks for the problem - I blame the failure
of the leadership. The leadership positions are filled with "hacks"-
mostly political plum jobs. If your state can manage to fill leadership
positions with the best people you can find- congratulations for having
a progressive state. Massachusetts has always been progressive in many
ways. Large scale public education started here, the abolitionist
movement started here, much of the environmental movement (clean air -
clean water), etc. But our state government is INFAMOUS in it's failure.
ALL jobs are political plums. Go to most agencies looking for work and
they'll shamelessly say, "be sure to talk with your favorite
politician". When I first heard that I almost had a heart attack. I was
shocked; having been a '60's idealist. And it hasn't changed in the past
quarter century; but gotten worse.

> 
> Don't know about the Socialist States of New England (grin),  but there
> are ten procurement foresters and "wood buyers" for every consultant or
> service forester in the South and the ratio is expanding with cuts to state
> agencies.  And who do you think the landowner sees first?
> 

Well we're lossing our socialism real quick. The state "leaders" knew a
big issue popular with voters when the "screw those welfare queens"
issue swept the land; so they quick enough put the screws to those
desperate folk; while giving themselves and their flunkies in the
bureacracies raises. And now we've got a 12 billion dollar handout to
the road builders to build an idiotic new tunnel in Boston, which could
have been avoided with more socialist public transporation. Regarding
procurement foresters- it may be that in the south (on the coastal
plane), you have a simpler type of silviculture- so the procurement
guys/gals forestry may not be too different. Hey, a clearcut is a
clearcut. <G> Up here, we Yankees have far more species on more complex
geology. Silviculture really is an art that takes both a good education
and years of experience to do it right. The procurement foresters are
only looking to the short term to satisfy the needs of their mills so
here they DON'T do silviculture; they just rip out of the woods any tree
that pays it's way. And this is allowed because of EXTREMELY LAME state
forestry laws. Now if had anything to do about it I'd make those
procurement foresters memorize Walden Pond before I'd let'em lose in the
woods. <G>

If any of my state forestry officials or state politicians would like to
defend themselves, now's the time, but of course they aren't smart
enough to come to this "people's forum"- the ultimate in democracy and
egalitarianism (where they can't control the show)- a place where you
can't hide behind your office door acting imperious.


> The service forester/consultant gets the property after the sale.
> Sometimes you just want to throw up your hands.  I qualify this by saying
> that there are wood buying foresters you can well trust your timber to.  In
> Alabama they are accountable through the registeration process.  But you
> better be damn sure...

I recently had a landowner show me his fine stand of mature redoak. I
explained to him how I'd handle a sale while doing long term
silviculture. He instead sold his timber to a local infamous logger who
raped the place. Then the landowner called me and asked if I'd do a
state (tax reduction) forestry plan!!!! Yuh, I'm gonna plan your forest
after you let some guy rape it! And that's what I told him! The funny
thing is that I'd have gotten him more money while leaving the forest
looking like a park! So I walked away from an easy $1,000 fee. The iron
of this is that the state wants to buy the land as it's next to a state
forest. When I called them to suggest they might like to influence what
happens on that parcel they said "heck, nuttin we can do about it".
That's just the point, under current laws- most logging in Mass. is out
and out land raping. So, while those "ecofreaks" fight to save the
redwoods they should fight also to bring modern forestry to ALL the
forest lands of America. Landowners shouldn't have the RIGHT to rape
their property. It may be THEIR land in our capitalist private property
owning nation, but raping the land hurts everybody in the longterm.

> 
> The new county of SSNE...Yeah, I like that.  Kinda like CSA.
> 

I certainly won't be found defending governement in Yankydom; but for
different reasons as I mentioned above. On the other hand, the state of
New Hampshire is considered bedrock conservative with a minimal state
government compared to Vermont with the only socialist Congressman.
Drive around New Hampshire and see the endless strip developments, that
look almost as bad as those I saw in Florida and Los Angelas. You won't
find that WASTAGE of land in the People's Republic of Vermont. As a
result, Vermont is getting to be a tourist mecca, much more so than New
Hampshire, bringing in a lot of NYC money, raising land values to the
betterment of the landowners and creating a very beautiful state with a
thriving tourist industry; which is vital now that America has exported
its blue coller jobs to slave nations.

Politics is a lot deeper than just left vs. right. It's more
intelligence vs. stupidity. Unfortunately I consider the world of
forestry to have more than it's fair share of the later.

DER FORESTMEISTER



More information about the Ag-forst mailing list