slick propaganda by Weyerhaeuser??
chrerick at email.msn.com
Wed Mar 31 10:03:26 EST 1999
Joseph Zorzin <redoak at forestmeister.com> wrote in message
news:37022CC3.D6703157 at forestmeister.com...
> Not true. Private forests in America have been raped over and over again
> for centuries. And besides, the American public likes having THEIR
> forests. And, this is not in defense of *&^%$ bureaucrats, as anyone who
> has read this newsgroup would know my opinions in that regard. But,
> regarding public land, the solution is to set those forests up as
> "trusts". The forest economist Randal O'Toole as done a lot of work on
> this. Check out http://www.senate.gov/~energy/transfer.htm#otoole and
The incentives of the last century are no longer the incentives of the
present. Old growth of the past is better thought of as a nonrenewable
nature resource -- like oil or silver -- while second growth, which
characterizes most private land today is much more like a crop. The
incentive is to more intensively manage modern private sector forest.
This is not to say that there aren't incompetant private landowners who
mismanage their land, but the mistakes affect fewer acres than do the
mistakes of the forest bureaucracy.
Private vs. public is a complicated issue with no one answer applying to all
situations. But I stand by the "philosophical" perspective ,all else the
same, private markets are better at managing resources than government.
More information about the Ag-forst