[Homestead] "Forest" vs timber/lumber

Toni Hawryluk tonihawr at msn.com
Sun Sep 5 13:18:41 EDT 2004

> We all have our own definitions of everything. I am curious how your 
definition of forestry precludes human entrance. Forests without humans is 
not forestry, it is untouched land that is of no use. 

"Use" to whom ?  "Untouched" does not
equal "no use" to me ....

As for my definition of "forestry", that
is what I am learning from what other
people think it is *to them* - I invited
Walter to "educate me" with his version,
too.  Thanks, Gene.

> Using forests for ambulatory 

At the risk of being an ass (assume
makes an ass of u and me) I am
assuming that you mean two human
feet per person - and not a long
string of those, either. Certainly not
herds of cattle fenced in, fouling
streams and breaking down stream
banks, etc.

> activities creates minimal damage to the ecological systems. For those who cannot walk, driving on established forest roads hurts nothing. 

*Established* when ? and how often
"extended to include *another* "scenic"
view "? Like a crystal wineglass, once
it's broken ....

(snip) It is regrettable that you chose to pick out something about which you could disagree, rather than comment on the vast amount of positive material presented.

Why, Gene, I had expected you to
"understand" what I "picked out" 
to disagree about *was* all that I
disagreed with (on a first reading) -
that "recreation" thing just jumped
up and bit me - ouch !!

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/homestead/attachments/20040905/28552141/attachment.html 

More information about the Homestead mailing list