Forester Licensing

Joseph Zorzin redoak at forestmeister.com
Wed Mar 4 13:29:45 EST 1998


mcour at telxon.com wrote:
> 
> In article <34FC7498.EB4D63E9 at forestmeister.com>,
>   Joseph Zorzin <redoak at forestmeister.com> wrote:
> 
> >
> > Sugar mapleing is more farming than forestry. Forestry core work is
> > handling timber sales and preparing forestry mgt. plans. There really
> > isn't anyone other than foresters who should or could be doing this.
> > Less than perfect sugar mapleing wouldn't cause any environmental
> > destruction, but bad logging could cause fires, erosion, and the long
> > term decrease in economic forest production. Our only conflict is with
> > those loggers who consider foresters carpetbaggers.
> 
> I agree that sugar mapleing is closer to farming, but there are enough aspects
> of forestry involved in it that it might be possible for a liscensed forestery
> consultant to use the liscensing regulations to squeeze business away from a
> sugar mapleing consultant without a liscense in forestry.
> 

Probably an intelligent rules and regs. for a licensing law would and
should exclude these exceptions like sugar mapleing and Christmas tree
farming.

> And what about Christmas tree farming?  Would I need a forestery liscense to
> earn a living as a consultant to Christmas tree farmers?  Should I?
> 
 

> Suppose the forestry liscensing law reads something like this:
> 
> 1. Only liscensed foresters can claim to be foresters or perform
> consulting forestry work.
> 
> 2. Forestry work includes management of timber planting, timber sales, and
> timber management.
> 
> If I am planting a stand of sugar maples, I can probably only hire a liscensed
> forester.  If I'm thinning an existing stand of sugar maples or Christmas
> trees, I can probably only hire a liscensed forester (as opposed to a maple
> sugaring or Christmas tree farming expert.)  I can see that there would be
> potential conflicts lke this in areas where forestry overlaps with farming,
> nurserying, and even landscaping.  Bureaucrats have an amazing ability to
> twist regulations so they can control things.
> 

Most consultants around here don't get involved with tree planting. I
can see you are anticipating possible problems but realistically I don't
think they would occur.

My bitch is that loggers continue to highgrade forests. I think that
should stop. Full scale mixed forests need silviculture that only a REAL
forester understands.

And another bitch is that the Mass. DEM has allowed landowners to
prepare mgt. plans on Ch. 61 Forest Tax Law properties where the
landowner gets a 95% real estate tax break. With that kind of break, the
landowner should have to hire a forester.

All the issues you bring up, I personally have no concern about and do
not feel a licensed foester should have to be involved.

> In my 30 years, I have developed what I call "Michael's rule of bureaucrats:"
> 
> If you ask a bureaucrat whether he has the authority to tell you whether or
> not you can do something, he ALWAYS answers YES.

They wouldn't do that with me, because they know that I already
researched the question and if they give the wrong answer I'm going to
their boss and several politicians. Not to mention that I might start
yelling. <G>

In Mass. on a personal level, I've only had a significant problem with
one state character who virtually every consultant and logger in the
state would like to drop a tree on. <G>

This one character has a habit of dropping in on logging jobs acting
like Mussolini demanding that the loggers do such and such, when he has
no such right or power to issue such commands. Even the other state
people can't stand him. In the real world of business he'd have been
fired. So, they promoted him upstairs. <G>

Otherwise, I'm mostly concerened with policies- not personalities.
People are all the same, it's the policies and leadership that matter.
My state has a corrupt civil service system. Everybody in the state over
the age 5 knows this, but the politicians won't fix it because it's
their play thing.

And... the reason policies are so bad ... is that the top honchos have
never worked in the real world.... nor do they have a sopisticated
understanding of environmental issues (same problem as the USFS)...
because they are lifetime bureaucrats... not tempered in the cold cruel
world of business or intellectual debate.

Joe



More information about the Ag-forst mailing list