Re: To burn or not to burn

• To: Multiple recipients of list FOREST <FOREST@LISTSERV.FUNET.FI>
• Subject: Re: To burn or not to burn
• From: Rob Walker <rob_walker@PCH.GC.CA>
• Date: Thu, 5 Sep 1996 12:05:58 -0500
• content-length: 1152
• Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
• Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
• Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
• Reply-To: FOREST Mailing list on forest research and studies <FOREST@LISTSERV.FUNET.FI>
• Sender: OWNER-FOREST@LISTSERV.FUNET.FI

     Hello,

     Perhaps the situation seems overly simple from a distance but if the
     key question is who should pay for sustaining forest health then I
     think that the answer is all of us. If the price of forest products
     must go up to ensure that forested ecosystems are sustained then
     society has obviously been subsidising the forest industry by swapping
     short term gain for long term problems.

     At the same time, I agree that there must be some commercial return
     involved. Our objectives for public forests must include ecological,
     economic and social considerations.

     Perhaps it is about time that we learned something about the real
     value of our forest resources.

     Rob

     ----------------------------------------------------------------------
     **** The opinions expressed are my own and not necessarily those of
     Parks Canada. ****

     Robert C. Walker

     Fire & Vegetation Specialist
     Parks Canada
     Mountain District West

     Box 220
     Radium Hot Springs, BC
     V0A 1M0

     voice: (604) 347-9361
     fax:   (604) 347-9050
     e-mail: rob_walker@pch.gc.ca

• Prev: Re: To burn or not to burn
• Next: ayuda com mi tesis
• Index: Forest mailing list September 1996
• Thread: Forest list subjects in September 1996