DEBATE OF '98- financial resources
kmorrisd at aol.com
Mon Apr 20 23:43:52 EST 1998
OK Joe, I'll byte. What the hell do we need with financial
inducements/incentives for landowners who are already earning 10-15% (net of
inflation) on their forest investments? You know that SIP is just a fraud to
keep the burros (bureaucrats) in the gravy. If forestry is perceived as being
profitable (heaven forbid!) people will logically start to wonder what do we
need all these burros for!
The essential problem is that consulting foresters have gone along with the
fraudulent calculations of the burros and the indos (industrial foresters, who
also have an interest in keeping landowners ignorant when it comes to forestry
leases). Isn't it time we consultants and landowners start to think and
calculate for ourselves?
I'm earning 10-15% (net) on my forestry investments as are all my
clients--unless they have other priorities such as aesthetics or old growth
habitat. That's fine, but it's likely that they're still earning 6-10% (net)
on their high value timber. I don't need SIP incentives, nor do my clients.
The implication that we do need incentives only undercuts what I as a
professional, and my clients as responsible investors, are trying to do.
By the way Joe, thanks for not heading for the hills when things got warm
around here about all the political stuff a while back. And thanks for keeping
things going on the issues that really matter.
Karl Davies, Consulting Forester
More information about the Ag-forst