Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (195323)	10/24/2001 7:48:16 PM
From: ManyMoose	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

No, I am talking about national forests, which are managed under the Department of Agriculture and since inception have been managed for forest products, among many other values. Bear in mind that Clintonesque policies were applied to national forest land, the demand for wood made trees so valuable that everybody with a few of them was making a little clearcut in town, next to town, next to salmon-bearing streams, and in general where they are in your face instead of miles from town. While the forestry plans I developed for public lands were being thwarted, private land owners were cleaning up on their cash cows while they had the chance. I drove six miles to work at the time, and counted no less than ten new clearcuts between my house and town. Clinton's policies, and those of people who promoted them, fell under the law of unintended consequences at almost every turn. I'm told there are places in California where you have to get a mother-may-I from the local "arborist" before you can cut a tree on your own land. That is an unacceptable situation. You said: Are you saying that Clinton, or one of his policies, means that you cannot grow trees on your own land and sell it for timber?