Question to the group, and Gerry.

Ross dianaros at
Thu Jan 29 23:05:24 EST 1998

I agree, this could drift some way off topic.

In early years, the worst problem I faced was saw fly. The plantation was
too large and  too closley planted to allow one individual to walk around
trying to spray each tree. The Ministry of Natural Resources provided a crew
and equipment to apply a Bacterial Toxin (BT). This brought an end to the
problem. In recent years PorkyPic (Porcupine) have made inroads in some
parts. The beasts ring the trees near the top. Surprisingly some trees
survive this form of attack. Human intruders are just a passing anoyance.
Red Pine mature after approximately 90 years. I and my children will not be
here to see the cull. There is some probability that the environment will
terminate the plantation before harvest. I planted the forrest to prevent
the land from going to waste, I lack the will or the resources to protect
the growth to maturity.

I view the trees as a crop to be harvested. At the same time, I also do not
want to see them or the forest floor damaged through poor manegement. At
this time we have cut trails (by trimming the lower branches) and enjoy
daily walks (slogs in winter) through the the growth. Over the years,
different animals have used the land as their own. Lynx, Fox,  Beaver
(destructive creatures) and of course the PorkyPic. The odd brush wolf (a
cross bred wild dog/wolf) and many Coyote like to  leave their mark. It is
allways a challenge to the various generations of domestic dogs. Each in
turn will leave their mark and return to find something else is claiming the
same territory. With respect to land claims, there are first nations groups
who claim territory around here.

At this time, these people (collectively) are beginning to challenge the
concept of land ownership in the courts. Unlike the US, the native peoples
in Canada were not defeated in wars. The newcomers believe in the rule of
law, and the natives are learning to use this respect for law as a basis to
reclaim lost land (or to achieve adequate compensation for lost territory).
It is a slow and painfull process. I won't speculate on the outcome of all
the challenges. One culture overan another, the result has not been example
of human understanding and tollerance.


theo hopkins wrote in message <0PW60BAmEG00Ewuk at>...
>In article <34cfaba8.0 at>, Ross <dianaros at>
>>I would offer one perspective on property rights from a Canadian.

>I don't want to get deeply involved in a discussion on 'property rights'
>as it isn't too relvant to trees....the trees will grow just as well
>wether or not there are tresspassers on the land. (Vandalism, petty or
>otherwise, is something else).
>We are all born on the planet Earth, so have to be somewhere all of the
>time. If you don't own property or rent it, then you are probably a
>tresspasser. Probably, if Canadian law is like English law, even being
>on a highway, *unless you are 'going to and fro on your lawful business'
>then you are illegally on the road.
>Your land, I could argue, has actually been stolen from some First
>Nation group. (Who probably stole it from some other first nation
>******However, such a discussion is probably better for a news group
>with a name like <alt. political philosophy!>.*******
>Maybe what I am saying is really 'if this is an international group,
>then we need to understand that there are a lot of cultures out there'
>(which makes life interesting).
>'Property rights' is essentially a North American expression, and for
>historical reasons is deeply embeded in US culture, because of their
>constitution and history.

More information about the Ag-forst mailing list