next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
Index of Subjects Hi Bev & All, But just keep in mind that the key to better management and higher profits over the long haul is to get cutting rights perpetual instead of within two years. If that can be changed then the rest will follow. One should be careful to not demonize logging or profits. Logging practices will improve if the truth that selective cutting of uneven aged stands increases profit over the long haul can be widely recognized as valid. Under the current system, companies have no incentive to develop uneven aged stands which make periodic selective cutting possible. Starting with the mess which follows a clear cut it takes a huge amount of work and continuity of effort to coax it back to a stand in which all ages are represented. A company can afford this initial investment only if they hold permanent cutting rights. YT, DW, Kentville On 12/6/2019 11:22 AM, Bev Wigney wrote: > Perhaps it would work if those involved had better ethics and were > responsible and actually cared about our forests and weren't just in > it for the bucks and to grab as much of the forest as they possibly > can, using contractors who often don't even reside in this province. > So much for caring about jobs for our own local forestry workers who > can't even get work much of the time because it's all being contracted > out to guys with heavy machinery that can take out a whole forest in a > few days -- it's being done all over the province. So much for the > small mills who don't have any pull and can't get decent saw logs > because they aren't part of the "in crowd". > > This isn't about forest management. This is all about power and > keeping it in the hands of those who already have it. > > What should probably happen is turn all of the Crown land forests over > to regional forestry cooperatives who would make the decisions for > every forest in their territory based on consultation with local > people, First Nations, local mills, etc.. There should be no large > scale consortium or vertically integrated industrial power calling the > shots on anything in this province anymore. They have failed > miserably with their "so-called management". > > bev > > On 12/6/19, David Webster <dwebster@glinx.com> wrote: >> Hi George & All, >> >> This could take a while. >> >> John is thoroughly convinced that the current harvesting system is >> as perfect as it can possibly be. He does not want to be confused with >> facts. Meanwhile we now know what lies behind this destructive process. >> >> And I hope others will drive in the advantage of perpetual cutting >> rights wedge at any opportunity. >> >> Dave >> >> On 12/4/2019 1:30 PM, George Forsyth wrote: >>> Well done, we look forward to his response. >>> >>> George Forsyth >>> >>> On 04/12/2019, David Webster <dwebster@glinx.com> wrote: >>>> Hon. John Lohr: >>>> >>>> I have wondered for many years why nearly all Crown Land cuttings >>>> are clear cuts; and I think I now understand why. I wrote to the DNR >>>> minister Nov. 21 but I expect he has has no time for public input. So I >>>> am writing you in the hope that some opportunity may arise for you to >>>> personally ask a few pointed questions. >>>> >>>> Some weeks ago I noticed a comment on Facebook which implied that >>>> cutting rights on Crown Land were for one specific harvest as opposed to >>>> perpetual but marketable rights. A reading of the Crown Land Act appears >>>> to confirm this; excerpt below. >>>> >>>> >>>> "Sale of resources >>>> >>>> 31 (1) The Minister may offer timber or other resources from Crown lands >>>> for sale by tender, public auction or other means upon such terms as the >>>> Minister deems expedient. >>>> >>>> (2) Subsequent to a sale pursuant to subsection (1), the Minister may >>>> issue a licence upon such terms and conditions as the Minister deems >>>> appropriate. >>>> >>>> (3) No licence issued pursuant to this Section shall be granted for a >>>> longer period than two years or renewed for a longer period than twelve >>>> months at any one time./R.S., c. 114, s. 31."/ >>>> >>>> If a logging company does not have perpetual cutting rights to a >>>> given block of woodland then they will have no incentive to manage it >>>> for maximum profit over the long haul and every incentive to aim for >>>> maximum immediate profit which naturally will be to clear cut it. >>>> Consequently, for sound management of Crown Land forests, Clause >>>> 31(3) should be modified so that cutting rights are perpetual with >>>> provision to sell rights back to Crown if a company closes operations. >>>> >>>> RATIONALE: >>>> >>>> Apart from soil degradation, bald spots and erosion which may >>>> follow clear cutting the greatest fault is loss of revenue. The >>>> productivity curve following a typical clear cut is described in Farm >>>> Woodlots in Eastern Canada, E. S. Richards, Ottawa, 120 pp., 1939. on >>>> page 15. After a clear cut it takes 30 years to grow 2 cord of Spruce >>>> and yield in the second 30 years is 42 cord. >>>> >>>> The primary advantage of selective cutting, which I have practiced >>>> for 77 years, is that the slow growth of young trees occurs in the >>>> spaces between larger trees. Consequently, in an uneven aged >>>> selectively cut stand, that initial 30 year period of vanishingly low >>>> yield is eliminated. In addition, clear cuts lead to overstocked >>>> regrowth and a huge non-commercial thinning investment. >>>> >>>> Please note that Richards, in this 1939 publication, advocates >>>> selective cutting. And this was a period where felling options would >>>> have been axe or crosscut saw. Currently, using chainsaws or felling &g