"Natural forest devastation"?

Dano wxdano9 at hotmail.com
Sun May 30 22:00:45 EST 2004

lhfotoware at hotmail.com (Larry Harrell) wrote in message news:<7a90c754.0405291804.5b77e6db at posting.google.com>...
> "Ian St. John" <istjohn at noemail.ca> wrote in message news:<9p6uc.65843$tb4.2515519 at news20.bellglobal.com>...
> > Dano wrote:


> Yep, we can't let facts get in the way of a good story.

you can have a reporter not understand the issue and then the purty
fact you wanted to get out is obfuscated. You can control the message
if you're savvy. That's 'control'.

> > Rather than retool mills to try to use the wood as lumber, why not chip it
> > and use it to produce 'cellose ethanol' as fuel??? You could include
> > everything down to the leaf litter!
> > 
> Most mills have already been retooled and the amount of big log mills
> left in this country could probably be counted on two hands. In my
> part of the USA, Ian, cogen plants already get agricultural waste for
> pennies.
> Small unmerchantable trees (less than 9" dbh) cannot be removed
> without some kind of a subsidy. 

that's my point. there's millions of those stems out there and a
market is out there, waiting. Small mills. Small.

> I do hope that those small trees in
> other parts of the country can be used in a good way, as you say.
> "Healthy Forests" and the Sierra Nevada Framework" plans to include a
> few excess medium-sized trees (up to 30" dbh, in some cases) per acre
> in with the projects to make the project sell. In other cases, there
> aren't any excess trees to include, making the project into a "service
> contract".
> > >
> > > If the reporter is not fully familiar with the issue (likely), the
> > > tangent can ruin the message. It is best to stick to one subject.
> > > Perhaps you may want to contact those scientists to ask them about it
> > > before you go passing judgement on what was said in a popular media
> > > article.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > D
> Scientists often have their own agenda and will "design" studies only
> to prove their own views. 

why are you perpetuating this myth?

> While they're talking about it, I'm actually
> out there doing something about the problems. 

so are many scientists. You should talk to some without the attitude. 

> Both the Bitterroot and
> the San Bernardino are in big trouble, with lots of continuing
> mortality. With a warm spring, Douglas fir engraver beetles are
> blooming in Montana and we're seeing fresh sawdust coming out of
> (temporarily) green trees. The answers to these problems are not at
> all simple, as we need to treat them on a site-by-site basis. "Healthy
> Forests" is NOT a one-size-fits-all plan but, a suite of tools
> foresters can use to improve and restore our forests.
> Now for the kicker. There WILL be some instances of the Forest Service
> using the rules to boost cutting and timber income for their local
> areas. It's important for people to continue monitoring what is
> happening in THEIR forests and to take to court projects that favor
> economics over science. 

NOW yer talking. Help get people into the woods to do monitoring that
the monitors aren't doing. I like it.

> I don't feel sorry for the timber industry
> because if they'd have managed their own lands well, they'd have
> plenty of timber left to cut.


Good. We're on the same page.


More information about the Ag-forst mailing list