[Agroforestry] Re: Use of Poplars in the UK

Nick Maclaren nmm1 at cus.cam.ac.uk
Fri Sep 23 13:17:39 EST 2005


In article <mailman.710.1127494353.29381.ag-forst at net.bio.net>,
Gerry Lawson <gerrylawson at ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>Nick, I think you are too negative.  Have a look at:

Well, I didn't see any that addressed my points.  I fail to see
why we (as a country) should subsidise the more extreme aberrations
of the twitchers, for example.  Golden Orioles are a fairly rare
summer visitor to the south-east.

I have been given almost identical responses by the solar power
brigade (and I mean electricity generation here).  The simple fact
is that, in the UK, more energy is used and more pollution is
generated making the panels than is saved in their lifetime.  And
that is NOT due to a lack of development, but to our latitude and
climate.

I liked the Bremay document:

One definition of marketing is roughly: "selling something of which you
have too much, to someone who doesn't want it, for a price above that which
anyone wants to pay".  This is not always appropriate, either partly or
wholly, but perhaps reminds some of the UK Sitka spruce sawlog scenario.

...   He pointed out a
number of misconceptions, generally suggesting that modification is not a
magic wand - if you put rubbish in, you will get modified rubbish out.

My comments are not aimed at agroforestry, which is most definitely
viable, but are about the wasted effort in growing unsuitable trees,
and then trying to market the rubbish.  I supposed that I am
somewhat jaundiced, having been a victim :-)


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.


More information about the Ag-forst mailing list