women in forestry, affirmative action, fairness

Joseph Zorzin redoak at forestmeister.com
Wed Aug 26 04:03:55 EST 1998


kat wrote:
> 

> field vs. paper pushing - the balance just doesn't seem to be there.
> 

It's just unfortunate that those in the field, by and large, are paid a
lot less than the paper pushers. It should be the other way around.

Instead of starting off in the field, and then years later getting
promoted to a paper pusher job, you should start off in the office,
because that's what you've learned in forestry school- all the theory.
Then after you've proved you can shuffle paper, you get promoted into
the much higher paying field work, where REAL foresters work.

Karl Davies and I have shown what's happened in our state of MA. The
state guys find it repugnant to work in the woods. The "service
foresters" just drive around in those $35,000 Japanese jeeps made by
Mitsubishi- inspecting our work and getting paid a lot more than we do- 
like some kind of slave master on a white horse.

And the the guys that work just on state land only have to (by quota)
"treat" 120 ac. per year, which Karl and I could do in a month- and not
even that- because now they can pilfer the taxpayers to hire consultants
at slave wages to do even this measly amount of work- since they must
have gotten jealous of the service foresters "supervising" THEIR
"nigras" so now they can have their own "nigras"- and stay in their
office- clean and safe from those mosquitos and sweat causing toil.

Glad to see you didn't take offense at this thread I started. It was
just meant for discussion and not meant for offense- since there mustn't
be any sacred cows in this business, although of course there is every
business- items that are verboten to discuss.



More information about the Ag-forst mailing list