[NatureNS] re Red Herring & Forestry

DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bogan.ca;
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 12:35:34 -0400
From: Larry Bogan <larry@bogan.ca>
To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca
References: <D23EAE43B87A4DBFABFF6F7B858798EC@D58WQPH1>
Precedence: bulk
Return-Path: <naturens-mml-owner@chebucto.ns.ca>
Original-Recipient: rfc822;"| (cd /csuite/info/Environment/FNSN/MList; /csuite/lib/arch2html)"

next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects

Index of Subjects
Stephan 
There is a publication called Forest Biomass Energy Policy in the Maritime Provinces: Accounting for Science at

http://www.scribd.com/doc/293882891/Forest-Biomass-Energy-Policy-in-the-Maritime-Provinces-Accounting-for-Science

Written by East Coast Environmental Law

Is this the one you are looking for?

Larry

////// === ///////
Larry Bogan 
Brooklyn Corner, Nova Scotia
<larry@bogan.ca>

On Tue, 12 Jan 2016 03:09:40 +0000
Stephen Shaw <srshaw@Dal.Ca> wrote:

> I saved the paper copy of the CH article by Aaron Beswick from Dec 23 2015 that started this discussion, on the 42-page biomass burning report by Jamie Simpson.   
> Just re-read the Beswick, and note that he gives no indication of where (or if) one can obtain a copy of the original report.  
> Does anyone know if an electronic copy of it is accessible, as a PDF or whatever?
> Steve
> ________________________________________
> From: naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca [naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca] on behalf of David & Alison Webster [dwebster@glinx.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 11, 2016 5:08 PM
> To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca
> Subject: Re: [NatureNS] re Red Herring & Forestry
> 
> Dear All,                                        Jan 11, 2016
>      Those who imagine that nature knows best will do well to not advance that argument as a reason to back off from abusive harvesting of biomass. That sort of attitude infuriates practical people and would unfortunately generate resistance to change from current deplorable practices.
> 
>     I had hoped to sometime expand on my e-mail of Mar 1(dated Feb 28), 2015, because I have many ideas with regard to possible practical ways to back away from over-mechanized large-scale forestry and some of these might work but it would be pointless to discuss these when "look but don't touch" trumps all other considerations.
> 
>     If no way is found to effect a transition, so that more people can earn a modest living from woodland, then most private woodland over time will be bought up by big business and this is perhaps already under way.
> 
> Yt, Dave Webster, Kentville
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects