"Rico" wrote in message rthlink.net...
"Michael Hagen" wrote in message
.. .

That's a good rational, educated
response. Too bad this is no longer a
pragmatic issue but a philosophical
one,

Saying it's philosophical sounds like giving up, as when
someone says, You can't legislate morality (which is of course
nonsense). Most legislation has some underlying basis in
morality, cultural values, shared goals, etc.

I prefer to split the difference and call it a political
issue, which is to say it's very much philosophical *and*
pragmatic. Take your pick, there's plenty to talk about.

Reconciling the practitioner's knowledge
with the activists idealized goals is
difficult but probably the best function
of this group.

With four newsgroups going here, it's unclear to me which one
you're talking about.

I was going to let Mike answer first but, I find this all too comical.
I know that Eric has an open mind and seems reasonable and objective
but, he couldn't tell a forester from a fly-fisherman from a
backcountry enthusiast from a National Parks fan G. I could say
"What does this tell us about people?" but, a better question is:
"What does this tell us about foresters (or equivalent)?" No one fits
into a neat little narrow stereotype.

Sorry Eric. It was an honest mistake and your heart is in the right
place

Larry, not a forester











I'm better..... I'm a forestry tech! G