120 new acres

Joseph Zorzin redoak at forestmeister.com
Tue Oct 7 05:57:12 EST 1997

Ron Wenrich wrote:
> Jostnix <jostnix at aol.com> wrote in article
> <19971006112300.HAA21831 at ladder02.news.aol.com>...
> > Joseph, you write:
> >
> > > They don't learn
> > >from the vast legions of state service foresters, extension agents, ad
> > >infinitum.
> >
> > 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?
> >
> > The service forester/consultant gets the property after the sale.
> Seems to be a problem all over the East Coast.  In PA, there are a lot of
> consultants.  Its gotten to the point that they are fighting over work.
> The problem is that the consultants work is just not much better then the
> wood pimps.  Many consultants started in business with no practical woods
> experience.  Others are wood pimps turned consultants.  They still high
> grade the woods.  It is a rare sight to see anything but oak or poplar
> being pumped out of their jobs, leaving undesirables for someone else to
> deal with.

Here in Mass. we went throught the "too many consultants" phase in the
early '80's. Many starved to death; a few retired into the state
bureaucracy <G>; others went for more lucrative jobs like McDonalds; a
few continued because they had other sources of income like rich wives;
one in my area has a huge inheritance so he doesn't worry about it; I
stuck with it because I'm the reincarnation of H.D. Thoreau <G> and I'm
as stubborn as Mussolini and I have unfinished business with a quarter
century struggle with a huge mindless bureaucracy (David vs. Goliath
syndrome); and because poverty has it's merits- one of which is that
it's a great way to test the depth of character of women- the one's just
looking for money from a guy- I weed them out quick. <G>

> The state extension foresters are only limited to 2 days work for any
> private landowner.  This was done by the state ACF.  It is unfortunate,
> since these foresters did quality work, and had no monetary benefit from
> the outcome of the work.  The landowners have been sacrificed to the
> wolves.

Same here with the 2 days. They used to do more and they stoped only
after I did my Mussolini act- since we don't have an ACF. Instead we
FOOLISHLY have a state wide organization of foresters which has ALWAYS
been dominated by the state guys. When I dare to suggest this isn't a
smart idea they look at me as if I have an extra eye in the middle of my
forehead (which I do).

> The few company foresters who did good work had to lower themselves to be
> competitive with the rest of the brood.  Large companies, such as Proctor &
> Gamble, have high name recognitition, but still seem to be lacking in the
> managment field.  They talk a good game, but they don't play by the same
> rules.  Maybe its time to license loggers.  Hell, a barber has to be
> licensed to cut your hair, and that will grow out a lot quicker.

Same here; except we've NEVER had any good forestry done by sawmills
except possibly on their own land. This fact and the fact that their
work is still the majority of all logging TICKS ME OFF. This is ABSURD!
And for the past quarter century I've been trying to persuade the state
bureacracy to do something about this- but they don't give a dam-
because they get paid the same whether good forestry occurs or not- and
because there is NO leadership since all of the leadership appointments
are political plums- our state absoltuely NEVER hires people from
outside the state for these plum jobs- it's always the cronies of
powerful politicians. And as for the legislature - they don't have a
clue about forestry - despite my trying to clue them in all this time.
We finally got a forester licensing law which is utterly useless- one of
the stupidest laws on the books. Massachuestts has always had a
reputation for high intelligence with more colleges per acre than any
place on Earth- but when it comes to forestry- we're still in the stone
age- which is probably why I stick around- this ticks me off so much I
see it as some kind life mission.

More information about the Ag-forst mailing list