Dear Bruce, > Sorry for the cheap shot, I just got a bit frustrated that you seemed > not > to be reflecting what I know you know (if you know what I mean)... That's OK, apology accepted. No problems here. > Yes, and the approach to management is different in each state. In > our > state, the pulp and paper industry is very influential in our schools, > > subsidizing most of the training programs for our future foresters - > so > there is not an abundance of fresh, new science coming along. We > critically need people who look closely at anthropogenic assaults > which > are showing up with alarming regularity, we need people studying the > effects of ionization of soils and nutrient flushes and biomass > cycling > and carbon sequestration and carrying capacity for harvest. What we > have > is a state forestry department doing 'demonstration clearcuts' and a > water quality law that exempts forestry activities from its > stipulations > and voluntary 'best management practices' with no teeth and no-one to > check to see if they are followed. So, we have logging trucks using > streambeds for roads and no regulatory infrastructure to oversee the > chippers. Yes, you are correct, what we have is a forest resource > management PROBLEM. The market has changed faster than our > infrastructure could possible react to new conditions, thus we have > called for a moratorium on new chippers and a study of regionwide > cumulative impacts of existing mills so as to lay down baseline data > from which to put together some meaningful policy decisions. In our > region, if a chipper takes all the 40 year ageclass trees within reach > > of three sawmills, it puts them out of business because the trees they > > would have utilized in 15 years have gone to chips along with the > rest. I understand what you have said so far. But I would encourage you to read what Jason Thompson from CSIRO had posted earlier to the list. It's a very thoughtful piece, supported by good scientific examples. Maybe what you need in the USA is a national forestry council, chaired by ,say, VP Al Gore. He seems bright & energetic enough. You can have the USDA FS, state governors, & various federal law-makers in the exco-committee. Here you can harmonise the various state laws with federal regulations/laws. We have a national forestry council here in Malaysia chaired by our DPM. We have learned much from your country. Maybe it's time your country learn something from us. > But the chipping industry is highly automated and mechanized - > employing > only a handful of people. As I said, it uses up resources in a > boom-bust economy destroying the resource that, if used sustainably > and > with selective harvesting, would keep dozens of local economies and > hundreds of people in work for decades. Now you know what developing countries feel when the USA releases certain commodities from its strategic stockpile. Many tin & rubber producing countries have suffered much economically as such. > I agree, but it's because for all the talk about the paperless > environment - the opposite has proven true. I create software and > promote integration of handheld computers, barcode and transponder > scanning and electronic data interchange, but many companies would > rather continue losing money than spend some to reduce cost over the > long run. And they have all discovered that IT carries a higher paper > > demand than their old methods did. Heck, most of the chips and pulp > exported out of the US are for either high grade printing papers or > relatively low grade computer paper (most). I never said this path is an easy one. The journey of a thousand miles must begin with a single step. He who marches to the sound of a different drummer, must often do so alone. To bring about change (paradigm shift), one must always keep the faith. You'll need the 3 Cs - commitment, character & conviction. >Again, what I mean is the science has not caught up with the pace of change and the evidence that is mounting that things are getting WAY out of kilter.I can only hope that includes efforts to restore the WHOLE of the forest. Again I think it's a question of good forest resource management. The science is OK. Bruce, in life we have to live with the hard facts of life. If we have to nuke half of planet earth to keep our views alive - would that be a good solution? There's a saying, 'a christian is like an ear of corn, the older he gets, the lower he bows his head'. Therefore, whether we are bringing changes to forestry management from without or from within, we must listen & look at all the facts. Keep the lines of communication open. You'll be surprised the Forestry Service may need your understanding & assistance more than you think. > I am appalled at the US's seeming lack of resolve as you are. And I > share the blame as a member of an overconsumptive society - but I do > attempt to limit my resource use, maximize my recycling and advocate > for > change ... only someone who never climbed a two hundred year old oak > to > see over the hill would do less. Well, I'm not a doctor, but this did not prevent me from helping my wife to deliver our baby from the back-seat of our car. Likewise many of us have not climbed a 200 year old oak tree before but this did not prevent us from contributing to the good of forestry & forestry management. BTW, we have no oak trees here in the tropics. God bless. Nelson Wong MTC
Mail converted by
MHonArc 1.1.0