[saf-news] letter to Northern Logger magazine
karl at daviesand.com
Fri Sep 15 07:47:36 EST 2000
Joseph Zorzin wrote:
> Ayup, our glorious Duh-rector said to that dangerous revolutionary
> that requiring a licensed forester's signature on a logging plan is,
> "a revolutionary change that would profoundly and negatively affect
> timber industry".
Duh Director, aka "The Forester," (his title according to state law)
thinks that forestry is a horrible idea.
> No doubt it would profoundly affect the timber industry and the entire
> forestry establishment, but as to how he concluded that the affect
> would be "negative" is one of the profound mysteries of the universe.
> Perhaps Mr. Frederick will enlighten the world on this subject, and
> how this statement aligns with the mission of the job he holds,
> according to state law, which I posted in my above mentioned "rant".
Don't hold your breath. But it would be interesting to see how he came
to that conclusion. Maybe he figures that growing pallet logs is much
more beneficial to the state's economy than growing grade logs. Lord
knows we need those pallets. And foresters do have this awful tendency
to want to grow grade logs rather than pallet logs. It's part of the
brainwashing they get in those darned forestry schools (which he never
attended). Thank goodness Duh Director's high-grading buddies just
love to grow those pallet logs.
Unfortunately, Duh Director is wrong about this, as he is about so many
things. Grade timber is much more beneficial to the state's economy
than pallet timber. If you figure a minimum difference of $50 per acre
per year on 2 million acres, and an economic impact multiplier of 50,
you get $5 billion per year more from growing grade timber. Then again,
maybe he figures that's just chump change and not worth the bother when
there are deals like the Big Dig in the offing. Who knows? The mind of
Duh Director is an inscrutable thing.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Ag-forst