Question to the group, and Gerry.
thopkins at thopkins.demon.co.uk
Mon Jan 26 16:19:31 EST 1998
In article <34CCF031.20EB at livingston.net>, Don Staples
<dstaples at livingston.net> writes
>My background is in agriculture, and forestry.
An advantage I think.
>gentle reader, accept a dyed in the wool consulting forester as a
>My interests are in multiple use in the south, and
South of USA? South of the globe?
>am open minded to any possiblity that will increase a landowners
>use/control/pleasure/ownership of their property.
And I hope the public's use/pleasure.
>I have no problems
>with comments on fungii, high bush blue berries, cattle, game,
>interplanted species, etc, unless they attack rather than educate.
I would welcome anything except futile 'rants' against EarthFirst! of
the 'go and get a job' type. Educate, discuss, disagree, but not to
>Although not a professed "watermellon" like Joeseph, I lean to long term
>uneven aged management, private property rights, and saving the big
>woods, if that is the desire of ALL the people.
As a non-USA citizen, property rights don't get me jumping up and down
with excitement. I am happy to discuss the effect of property ownwership
(sometimes good, sometimes bad). 'Property rights' are deeply American.
So what I guess I am saying is that there are cultural differences
between nations and this means there are differences as to how forests
are managed and viewed.
>This is an excellant group compared to the really crappy groups that are
Woodland owner in Devon, England.
(and also campaigner for the prevervation or genuinely sustainable multiple use
of boreal and snow-forests worldwide. Multiple use being defined by the Rio
Earth Summit in 92...the five "economic, ecological, social, cultural and
spiritual values of forests".)
More information about the Ag-forst