On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 20:22:50 -0400, wrote:


I suppose to be fair, when the US "takes a forest" they plant another
one. When they do it in brazil they plant sugar cane ... but that is
another issue. Our "forest" issues involve "old growth wilderness" vs
"farming trees". We have more trees now than we did at the end of the
civil war but they are in managed areas. I like to vacation in the
west and I have seen a lot of managed forest and a lot of wilderness.
Most folks couldn't tell the difference.,

Most "wilderness" forests I've been in have many trees more than 2' in
diameter. That's a good clue. Even those may have been forested long
ago.
I wonder if the lumber products companies plan growth for bigger
lumber in harvesting plans.
How many 2"X12"s from a tree for instance.
I had to special order a 22 or 24 foot 2X10" a few years ago to add
a joist to my garage. Douglas fir only. Used to be able to get pine
that size at the lumber yard.
Interesting subject.
Saw some time ago that builders were using glued composite "wood
products" for bigger dimensions.
Wood is great stuff. Don't like leaves in the gutters though.

--Vic

On Mon, 20 Apr 2009 09:24:03 -0400, wrote:



That is an interesting thing. We were in the Black Hills a couple
summers ago and they have huge piles of Doug Fir everywhere that they
are just going to burn. The Park Service goes through and thins out
particular trees all summer and then, as soon as it gets enough snow
on the ground to avoid a forest fire they burn these "slash piles".

http://gfretwell.com/ftp/slash%20pile.jpg

The best explanation I could get was they were banned from "logging"
there so they had to burn them instead of giving/selling to a saw
mill.
Environmentalists and inintended consequences or just protecting tree
farmers and propping up the price of wood?
Anyone's guess.
It is some nice looking "lumber" to be burning.

Probably just the inefficiency gov suffers from in trying to keep
clean hands.
If they sold it they'd run into accusations of corruption and
favoritism, true or not, so they take the easy way out.
Too bad there aren't more people with plain business sense in the gov.
And where there is massive fraud, like Medicare and SS disability,
they don't hire investigative staff, which would pay off 10 to 1,
because they'll be accused of "growing the government."
Back to that brush pile - imagine the air pollution from burning it.
Just doesn't make sense.

--Vic

Vic Smith wrote:
On Mon, 20 Apr 2009 09:24:03 -0400, wrote:


That is an interesting thing. We were in the Black Hills a couple
summers ago and they have huge piles of Doug Fir everywhere that they
are just going to burn. The Park Service goes through and thins out
particular trees all summer and then, as soon as it gets enough snow
on the ground to avoid a forest fire they burn these "slash piles".

http://gfretwell.com/ftp/slash%20pile.jpg

The best explanation I could get was they were banned from "logging"
there so they had to burn them instead of giving/selling to a saw
mill.
Environmentalists and inintended consequences or just protecting tree
farmers and propping up the price of wood?
Anyone's guess.
It is some nice looking "lumber" to be burning.

Probably just the inefficiency gov suffers from in trying to keep
clean hands.
If they sold it they'd run into accusations of corruption and
favoritism, true or not, so they take the easy way out.
Too bad there aren't more people with plain business sense in the gov.
And where there is massive fraud, like Medicare and SS disability,
they don't hire investigative staff, which would pay off 10 to 1,
because they'll be accused of "growing the government."
Back to that brush pile - imagine the air pollution from burning it.
Just doesn't make sense.

--Vic




Almost all Medicare fraud is committed by private sector businesses
against the government. Also note that social security disability is not
easy to obtain.

On Mon, 20 Apr 2009 09:24:03 -0400, gfretwell wrote:


http://gfretwell.com/ftp/slash%20pile.jpg

The best explanation I could get was they were banned from "logging"
there so they had to burn them instead of giving/selling to a saw mill.
Environmentalists and inintended consequences or just protecting tree
farmers and propping up the price of wood? Anyone's guess.
It is some nice looking "lumber" to be burning.

I hate to say it, but the Interior Department has become the enemy. I
know an "inholder" (his land is almost surrounded by a National Forest).
There's not a year goes by that the Forest Service doesn't find a new way
to hassle him. I've tried to make sense of their BS, but I've come to
the conclusion they want his land, and figure if they make his life
miserable enough, he'll sell it. Unfortunately, from my readings, he is
not alone in his dilemma.