Group Appreciation

Joseph Zorzin redoak at
Mon Mar 9 20:10:38 EST 1998

LRLake wrote:
> Ron Wenrich wrote:
> >Let's interject a little realism.  There is nowhere, that I know of, where
> >foresters
> >are required to work on private lands.
> Try California.  If you own the land, you are exempt from "practicing forestry"
> when acting on yur own behalf.
> There are few other exceptions.  The Feds can do their own thing but require
> Licensed contractors for work which is considered "practicing forestry" under
> California law.
> Lawrence Lake, RPF
> Redding, CA

Cheers for California, over there on the left coast, with the most
progressive forestry in America!

In most of America- you have to be licensed to cut hair, you have to be
licensed to sell real estate, you have to be licensed to pick up
garbage, you have to be licensed to be a dog catcher, you have to be
licensed to practice law or medicine or pull teeth, but anybody with
chain saw can go practice silviculture, according to 49 chief foresters,
hundreds of service foresters, thousands of state representatives, 49
governors, the SAF, and just about everyone in the net forestry
newsgroups. Only one crackpot forestmeister actually strongly believes
it makes no sense.

Joe Zorzin

More information about the Ag-forst mailing list