Forest Initiative

plywoody

Senior Chief Petty Officer
Joined
Aug 11, 2002
Messages
685
I watched the pres give a speech this am on his new forest initiative. (Gawd, it is painful to watch him speak).<br /><br />Now here is an issue close to my heart.<br /><br />I guess it is impossible for him to give a speech with any sort of detail and explaination in it. What would be so difficult in just saying here is what we are going to do, and this is how it is going to be funded, I wonder? <br /><br />We found out that he is against forest fires, and against firefighters getting killed. I am glad. I was worried about that.<br /><br />However, as always, the devil is in the details. Every private landowner, especially out west, knows that thinning and managing forests is important for the forest health and timber production. They have spent a lot of money on this and rarely have very significant fires. So far, so good.<br />The US Forest Service, on the other hand, has had both a completely different mandate over the last couple of decades, and a completely different funding model than have private forests. First, the forest service manages not just for timber production, but rather ecosystem management, in that not only are economic goals important, non economic goals are also important, including bio-diversity and the like.<br />Additionally, congress has never appropriated the money for proper forest management in the US Forest Service. Is that going to change now?<br /><br />From what I understand, this is going to be funded by large timber companies. Large timber companies will only spend money for harvesting merchantible timber, and the fire problem comes from unmerchantible undergrowth, which they don't care about, and won't spend money on their own to fix, unless, of course, it is their own timberlands.<br /><br />And, surprise, surprise, the large timber companies were big campaign contributors. Call me skeptical, but my guess is that this is more about increasing harvest of merchantible timber on federal lands than it is about fire suppression, which is of course why the pres did not include any details regarding his plan.<br /><br />This president and administration does understand salesmanship--you have to give him that.
 

martyscher

Petty Officer 1st Class
Joined
Mar 18, 2002
Messages
207
Re: Forest Initiative

Sound's like politics 101 to me.<br /><br />It's never really about "We the people".<br /><br />Anyone that has ever donated to a political campaign, wants something in return and it's the wise politician, that completes the payback.
 

NathanY

Commander
Joined
Mar 16, 2002
Messages
2,408
Re: Forest Initiative

I believe that Tom Daschel did the same thing in South Dakota.
 

FLATHEAD

Captain
Joined
Dec 29, 2002
Messages
3,420
Re: Forest Initiative

Plywoody, Is there anything that makes you happy? You sound exactly like a guy I work with. If I didn't know better I would swear you were him. Always crying about anything that is not the way HE thinks it should be, especially politics. I hope your not as unhappy a person as he is. :rolleyes: No offence intended.
 

plywoody

Senior Chief Petty Officer
Joined
Aug 11, 2002
Messages
685
Re: Forest Initiative

Well, yep, I used to be happy. Back in the days when my job was secure, and my 401k was worth real money, and the economy was rolling along. Oh, yeah, that was under Clinton. Too bad we can't get him back.<br /><br />Nowadays,we just get to suffer through when things are screwed up, and we just get to find out who to blame for why things are all screwed up. Why, its the liberals of course. You can't stop even a single one with an army tank!
 

NathanY

Commander
Joined
Mar 16, 2002
Messages
2,408
Re: Forest Initiative

The House and Senate back then where still Republican.
 

norman158

Petty Officer 1st Class
Joined
Jun 29, 2001
Messages
329
Re: Forest Initiative

Plywoody,<br />What is so wrong with increasing production of merchantable timber on federal lands? It just might give our states economy a much needed shot in the arm.
 

ebbtide176

Commander
Joined
Jan 22, 2002
Messages
2,289
Re: Forest Initiative

i'm so impressed that PW started his own flameworthy topic to whine about. ;) <br /><br />it seems fairly elementary to understand your concerns, master PW.<br /><br />however, i'm still perplexed at how you can only be 29yrs old at the most, and claiming such an understanding of the way our government should run things.<br /><br />- i understand that clinton made everything warm&fuzzy in your lifetime, which = 8yrs. and if voting age=18yrs in most states, i gather you are 8yrs old , or less than 30yrs old
 

roscoe

Supreme Mariner
Joined
Oct 30, 2002
Messages
21,757
Re: Forest Initiative

Lets see, my 401 was trashed while Clinton was still in office. The economy was held together with smoke, mirrors and hype about a ficticious dot com boom, at the expense of the military, CIA, FBI, and now we are having to pay ten fold for his mistakes. And the best 2 jobs I ever had were both sent overseas, made possible by deals brokered by Clinton. So what did he actually get for selling out the livelyhood of US citezens?
 

plywoody

Senior Chief Petty Officer
Joined
Aug 11, 2002
Messages
685
Re: Forest Initiative

What's wrong with increasing production of merchantible timber on Federal lands? Good question. It should be debated.<br /><br />What bothers me is that it is presented as a program that is designed to prevent forest fires, when it in no way is--except for that portion of the forest that is clear cut and slash burned. (Which is not necessarily a bad thing, mind you. Fire is an essential silvicultural tool)<br /><br />Let's have a debate on what we want to use federal forest lands for, and how we want to manage them in a sustainable fashion, and how we are going to fund them. There is lots of science available on this topic, and lots of very knowledgable people in this subject.<br /><br />The problem comes because the citizens of this country own the forests, and there are lots of goals for managing forest lands, and only one of which is timber production. If we want to turn them into tree farms, instead, that should be debated and discussed, and not left to special interests to decide policy. <br /><br />The original reason for the forest shutdown in the west, at least, was overharvesting--pure and simple. I was involved in many a study that made that clear.
 

Skinnywater

Commander
Joined
Mar 7, 2002
Messages
2,065
Re: Forest Initiative

plywoody wrote;<br />"Well, yep, I used to be happy. Back in the days when my job was secure, and my 401k was worth real money, and the economy was rolling along. Oh, yeah, that was under Clinton. Too bad we can't get him back."<br /><br />Yep, it's that negativity thing again. Someone else has brought it to your attention now.<br /><br />To bad you need him (or anyone)for such basic needs. You've allowed yourself to become vulnerable and dependent. This doesn't lend itself to flexability. <br /><br />And again plywoody, it has to be pointed out. You say we make habit of pointing fingers and blaming liberals? While it is yourself that usually casts the first finger and blame, as perfectly demonstrated here.<br /><br />You've boasted of abundant objectivity, while displaying your abundant skills of INobjectivity and prejudace.<br /><br />You and liberals, by your own doing, are becoming increasingly irrelevant. There isn't any need to blame liberals. Because they are thier own worst enemies. They are negative and bitter, continue to live in the past, and have been finger pointing for decades.<br /><br />I'm not suggesting you change your beliefs. However, when you start blaming others for your unhappiness, your job, or investments and other personal needs....... <br />I dunno plywoody, your not any fun to debate with anymore. I'll not bring up your consistantcies again. :(
 

62_Kiwi

Lieutenant Junior Grade
Joined
Jan 20, 2002
Messages
1,159
Re: Forest Initiative

Plywoody,<br /><br />Taken from the facts you've mentioned in your post, I would take the opposite view. Your government seems to be solving the problem of forest fires while at the same time enabling further commercial opportunities for business. Sounds like good government to me...<br /><br />Unfortunately we have the opposite type of government down here in NZ at present - who seem to enjoy blocking the progress of business and business investors with any excuse they can find....a universal left-wing trait I think. ;) <br /><br />BTW our government is copping a fair bit of flack over it's Iraq stance lately....<br /> http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3503342&thesection=news&thesubsection=general
 
Top