Proposed Forester Licensing in Massachusetts

Ron Wenrich woodtick at
Fri Jun 5 17:09:59 EST 1998

Don Staples wrote:

> At risk of beating a dead horse, one element overlooked in the licensing
> of foresters is the
> protection it offers to the public.  If you use a forester, it would
> nice to know that he is
> qualified for the trust you should put into him.

Our state has taken the stance that since no one complains about bad
forestry practices, there is no need to license foresters or loggers.  The
consultants have fought for years, and it is no closer than it was 20 yrs.
ago.  The state maintains a list of qualified foresters, both consulting and
procurement, but that doesn't mean the landowner has to use them.  I doubt
if a majority of landowners are even aware of the list.  Even without
licensing we are still able to grow timber twice as fast as removals.  I
wonder what we could do if timber production would be a motivating factor in
owning forestland?


More information about the Ag-forst mailing list