The Profession of Forestry, Question

Ron Wenrich woodtick at lebmofo.com
Tue May 12 05:20:17 EST 1998



Don Staples wrote:

> In recent posts, and in posts on the Mining Co Forestry Bulletin Board
> there has been a discussion of the "arrogance" of consulting foresters,
> and the "changes" in forestry over the past 40 years.  Along with
> questions on percentage versus hourly wage, etc.
>
> I would like to start a discussion on what you think have been
> significant changes in the Practice of Forestry.  Leave out the politics
> and address the actual application.  I take the position that basic
> forestry has not changed significantly, but has been only refined in
> certain areas.  It may also be of benefit to discuss your definition of
> forester, consulting forester, and any refinement therein.

There has been a significant swing from clearcuts to uneven-aged mgmt
practices.  Aesthetics are much more important than in the past.  Logger
performance is much better.  Skidding through streams and the like is not
the same as 20 yrs ago.  Logging equipment has come from the small dozer to
the large skidder.  It has started to move away from larger equipment to
more site sensitive equipment.  Gone are the days of monoculture.
Biodiversity is the catch word.  Insects are more apt to be controlled
through natural predators instead of drowning in pesticde.

Basic forestry has not changed much.  The application has changed.
Foresters are going to have to realize there are more products in the woods
besides lumber.  Board foot forestry maybe phasing out.  Plantation forestry
never caught on in the NE.  I have worked with mill owners who are at least
20 yrs behind the times.  As foresters, we can't afford to be behind the
times, we have to be futurists.  Where do you fit in?

RDW









More information about the Ag-forst mailing list