redoak at forestmeister.com
Mon Mar 9 06:30:26 EST 1998
> Ron Wenrich wrote:
> >What should be and what is is two different beasts. Many timber harvests
> >involve foresters. All timber harvests involve loggers. License loggers and
> >teeth in the law, and you will have compliance. I'd like to see both
> Ron hit the nail on the head here. If you're going to try to start somewhere
> and have an immediate impact, I'd choose the loggers. They are the ones making
> the silvical decisions around here. It'd be plum wonderful to have a forester
> on every sale, but I don't see that happening anytime soon.
Sheesh! And why not? Because the state and feds could push for foresters
on logging jobs, but it's in your interest to NOT do so, because YOU
gov. foresters have the limelight- as the advising foresters and you
have YOUR piece of the economic pie, and your pensions, and insurance
and a selfish attitude. It's perfectly common sense that the gov.
agencies should push for foresters on all logging jobs. "I don't see
that happening". No kidding, and do you think it will happen if you gov.
foresters don't help out and make it happen?
And if by law, foresters were required on ALL logging jobs, the final
outcome might be that there would be no more "free" foresters in gov.
service, and YOU and the other gov. foresters might have to go out and
work in the real world, and God forbid that THAT would happen.
Nothing personal, Susan, but working in the gov. for many years can
cause you to lose touch with reality. And I wouldn't be the least bit
surprised if you vote Republican, the party that worship private
This is the reason why forestry is such a low profession. Massive
And it will continue to be this way until consultants smarten up and
play politics, they'll get no help from you gov. foresters, except a
And, loggers ARE INCAPABLE of making silvical decisions. They don't
comprehend forest ecology, silvics, forest economics, wetland ecology,
etc. And you gov. foresters should be ashamed of yourselves even wasting
a second attempting to teach loggers such matters when your fellow
foresters (consultants) should be managing those timber sales. The time
you waste teaching loggers this stuff, you should be spending in the
offices of politicians of your state, stongly encouraging them to write
new laws mandating foresters on every logging job. I'M SICK OF THE
EXCUSES OF GOV. FORESTERS, WHICH I'VE HEARD FOR 25 YEARS.
Essentially, what is a state service forester, but a FREE consulting
forester. Do we have free barbers? Do we have free auto mechanics? Why
the hell should we have free foresters? You're no different than us but
you have a guaranteed lockgrip on the taxpayers pocket book.
In many ways, gov. agencies are really just protection rackets, like the
Mafia; but of course you'll never admit it.
More information about the Ag-forst