Thinning on the Angeles National Forest
Ian St. John
istjohn at noemail.ca
Mon Feb 23 10:16:03 EST 2004
"Bob Weinberger" <bobsstuff at verizon.invalid.net> wrote in message
news:J4k_b.53028$5W3.1661 at nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
> "Ian St. John" <istjohn at noemail.ca> wrote in message
> news:ubh_b.2542$253.314880 at news20.bellglobal.com...
> > "Bob Weinberger" <bobsstuff at verizon.invalid.net> wrote in message
> > news:s3g_b.66635$1S1.24923 at nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
> > > While this ratio may not pass the giggle test for
> > > someone who is clueless about the nature of the forests in the
> > > Pine type, it is a well documented phenomenon.
> > Apparently you are still trying the 'argument by authority' and 'trust
> > would we lie' approach. Fact is, yes you would. Your paycheque depends
> > it.
> No I'm not trying the "argument by authority" and my paycheck is in no way
> shape or form dependant on, or affected by, what I write here.
You are using argument by authority since you present no facts and instead
make blanket assertions with the usual empty rhetoric for anyone who
challenges your assertions.
As to the subtle lie about where your funding comes from, of course it does
not come from what you write here. As a pure shill you are not competent to
create good propaganda. It is too easy to see through. However, the claim
was that your ties with industry and the forest service make it necessary
for you to come up with the 'right' answer to maximize logging.
P.S. 100 TPA would be one in every 2.35 foot square plot. With any decent
diameter of the tree, it would be something like the Amazon Rain Forest. Any
picture of such density? No? thousght not.
There is nothing new in your blank assertions below so I have snipped them.
I am surprised that you still try to push the line that the water levels
that have created this 'jungle' are inadequate to the remnant population of
trees after the 'near clear' cut. It is also obvious that the cutting will
mainly be in the smaller 'virgin' north rim where the logging values are
highest. I imagine the subsidized brush clearing will be mainly in the
remaining forest. This 'dilutiion is the solution' to the numbers game is
really an obvious ploy and one reason you do not break down the numbers into
regional assessments as they do in the east rim study.
More information about the Ag-forst