This "Aozotorp" has consistently pushed his preservationist agenda on this forestry
usenet group while remaining anonymous. Most of his logic is seriously flawed and
s/he knows it. If I had to guess, s/he's probably at least a member (if not
personally one
of the upper managing members) of the Native Forest Council. This is the group that
wants all logging to stop on federal lands and has sued and sued and sued the USFS
over completely legitimate timber sales that help increase the health of the trees
and allow conditions for future management as well as offsetting federal taxes that
we
all pay. The lawsuits essentially, force the USFS to lose money on their timber
sales
which allows further support of the preservationist's argument for recreation over
timber
interests, furthering this ill-natured agenda, but worse yet, it increases the
citizen's tax
liability. Frankly, I am tired of paying additional taxes to our governments,
including
(and especially) the latest "recreational fee" taxes that have been in place over the
last
4-5 years to help re-coup some of these frivilous lawsuit costs (of course it costs
money
to fight even if you win).

While conservation efforts are worthwhile of serious kudos, this idividual's
preservationists rhetoric
undermines our rational discussions about management and other worthwhile discussions

on this group. Regardless of the precision of my speculation as to who this
individual is, his
(or her?) views are strong enough to warrant complete sincerity which means stepping
in front
of their fake name and taking the responsibility to be publicly humiliated for the
absurdity of their
blatantly illogical views.

No, John - I don't like that person very much :-)

Hope everything is going good for you!

See ya,
Geoff



John Ponder wrote:

Why you being so harsh Geoff? Is this someone you dont like?
On Mon, 21 Jul 2003 12:05:43 GMT, Geoff Kegerreis
wrote:

It's not like fires don't travel, you anonymous yellowbelly.

Aozotorp wrote:

Terri Barton, the arsonist who started the Hayman fire in Colorado last
year, has been sentenced to 6 years in prison for her crime. She still
faces state charges, where she could be sentenced to up to 12 years.

Yea, and the Republicans in Congress on C-Span were saying the fire was so big
becuase it was Roadless area burning = She set the fire right off a road!

This is the Usenet, not the SAF members only list. Any warm body having
anything to say vaguely related to forests, the ground under forests,
forestry as it is or should be, forestry politics, foresters, the
deranged opinions of ex-foresters or the letter F can chime in.

Even preservationists are practicing some kind of resource management.

This place is way quieter than it was back in the old agroforestry list
days - now there was a flame catcher. We could use a few ranters with
time on their hands. This is the field season in NA and most of us
don't have time to waste on the net.

If it gets nasty, we've all got a delete key.
Mike H

Geoff Kegerreis wrote:

This "Aozotorp" has consistently pushed his preservationist agenda on
this forestry
usenet group while remaining anonymous. Most of his logic is seriously
flawed and
s/he knows it. If I had to guess, s/he's probably at least a member (if
not personally one
of the upper managing members) of the Native Forest Council. This is
the group that
wants all logging to stop on federal lands and has sued and sued and
sued the USFS
over completely legitimate timber sales that help increase the health of
the trees
and allow conditions for future management as well as offsetting federal
taxes that we
all pay. The lawsuits essentially, force the USFS to lose money on
their timber sales
which allows further support of the preservationist's argument for
recreation over timber
interests, furthering this ill-natured agenda, but worse yet, it
increases the citizen's tax
liability. Frankly, I am tired of paying additional taxes to our
governments, including
(and especially) the latest "recreational fee" taxes that have been in
place over the last
4-5 years to help re-coup some of these frivilous lawsuit costs (of
course it costs money
to fight even if you win).

While conservation efforts are worthwhile of serious kudos, this
idividual's preservationists rhetoric
undermines our rational discussions about management and other
worthwhile discussions
on this group. Regardless of the precision of my speculation as to who
this individual is, his
(or her?) views are strong enough to warrant complete sincerity which
means stepping in front
of their fake name and taking the responsibility to be publicly
humiliated for the absurdity of their
blatantly illogical views.

No, John - I don't like that person very much :-)

Hope everything is going good for you!

See ya,
Geoff



John Ponder wrote:

Why you being so harsh Geoff? Is this someone you dont like?
On Mon, 21 Jul 2003 12:05:43 GMT, Geoff Kegerreis
wrote:

It's not like fires don't travel, you anonymous yellowbelly.

Aozotorp wrote:

Terri Barton, the arsonist who started the Hayman fire in Colorado
last
year, has been sentenced to 6 years in prison for her crime. She
still
faces state charges, where she could be sentenced to up to 12 years.

Yea, and the Republicans in Congress on C-Span were saying the fire
was so big
becuase it was Roadless area burning = She set the fire right off a
road!

mike hagen wrote in message ...
This is the Usenet, not the SAF members only list. Any warm body having
anything to say vaguely related to forests, the ground under forests,
forestry as it is or should be, forestry politics, foresters, the
deranged opinions of ex-foresters or the letter F can chime in.

Even preservationists are practicing some kind of resource management.

This place is way quieter than it was back in the old agroforestry list
days - now there was a flame catcher. We could use a few ranters with
time on their hands. This is the field season in NA and most of us
don't have time to waste on the net.

If it gets nasty, we've all got a delete key.
Mike H

Geoff Kegerreis wrote:

This "Aozotorp" has consistently pushed his preservationist agenda on
this forestry
usenet group while remaining anonymous.

"Can't we all just get along?!?" Apparently not. "Aozotorp" is your
basic run-of-the-mill preservationist spammer, nothing more. Actually,
he's a bit less militant than most and brave enough to venture into
our little corner of the Internet. I've had my share of run-ins with
those other sorts in other newsgroups and they seem to have been
graduates of the Earth First School of Internet Warfare. Those types
make it very personal with all sorts of techniques to make your life a
mess. I've heard various horror stories which I wouldn't want to
experience myself. Their desperation level has now gone critical and
the public seems to ignore their emotional pleas. At one time, I did
consider posting anonymously in other newsgroups but, it's apparent
that the public already sees througn most of their "flawed reasoning"
and slanted newspaper articles. Even some Democrats have seen the
light!

Us foresters DO love our forests and I will continue to do what is
right for them, within my organizational limitations. With Bush's
forest policies almost in place, I'm afraid that Americans will just
have to trust us to do what is right for the land.

Larry Federal eco-forestry rules!

"Larry Harrell" wrote in message
om...
mike hagen wrote in message
...

Us foresters DO love our forests and I will continue to do what is
right for them, within my organizational limitations. With Bush's
forest policies almost in place, I'm afraid that Americans will just
have to trust us to do what is right for the land.

Larry Federal eco-forestry rules!

Damn, now there is a concept, trust professionals who have been trained in
their field! And been doing so for over 100 years, and the results are we
still have forests, and old growth as well.

Who'd a thunk it.

Larry Harrell wrote:
mike hagen wrote in message ...

This is the Usenet, not the SAF members only list. Any warm body having
anything to say vaguely related to forests, the ground under forests,
forestry as it is or should be, forestry politics, foresters, the
deranged opinions of ex-foresters or the letter F can chime in.

Even preservationists are practicing some kind of resource management.

This place is way quieter than it was back in the old agroforestry list
days - now there was a flame catcher. We could use a few ranters with
time on their hands. This is the field season in NA and most of us
don't have time to waste on the net.

If it gets nasty, we've all got a delete key.
Mike H

Geoff Kegerreis wrote:


This "Aozotorp" has consistently pushed his preservationist agenda on
this forestry
usenet group while remaining anonymous.


"Can't we all just get along?!?" Apparently not. "Aozotorp" is your
basic run-of-the-mill preservationist spammer, nothing more. Actually,
he's a bit less militant than most and brave enough to venture into
our little corner of the Internet. I've had my share of run-ins with
those other sorts in other newsgroups and they seem to have been
graduates of the Earth First School of Internet Warfare. Those types
make it very personal with all sorts of techniques to make your life a
mess. I've heard various horror stories which I wouldn't want to
experience myself. Their desperation level has now gone critical and
the public seems to ignore their emotional pleas. At one time, I did
consider posting anonymously in other newsgroups but, it's apparent
that the public already sees througn most of their "flawed reasoning"
and slanted newspaper articles. Even some Democrats have seen the
light!

Us foresters DO love our forests and I will continue to do what is
right for them, within my organizational limitations. With Bush's
forest policies almost in place, I'm afraid that Americans will just
have to trust us to do what is right for the land.

Larry Federal eco-forestry rules!

I don't mind 'torps postings, though I'm just as sure as you are he's
far off on one end of the spectrum. The biggest problem working
foresters face is that they're always off in the woods. It's not part of
the culture to meet people with really different opinions - and when
they do meet, it's likely head-on. Torps beliefs are gospel for a lot of
people and not all of them are hanging in trees. Some of them are
setting policy.

Dan is another case - he's on to something that will make forestry
better- and he's got the enthusiasm (typical consultant ) to push it
endlessly.

What bugs me and sets off my news filter is crossposting. When some
yahoo blatts their opinion across a dozen newsgroups - no one is
expecting an answer, just a fight. Who gives a rip what some guy from
alt.nude.lawnmowing thinks. They do their own case no good.

Back to serious news: the local Guild secretary (washington state) took
a tour of what I can only guess is an early experiment in the fuels
reduction harvests on the Olympic Peninsula recently and posted a review
for the members. It passed with flying colors, the local FS did a great
job of leaving the big ones while reducing fuel loads. The fear of
loggers and incompetent Sale Admins creaming the stand and leaving
behind the burnables didn't happen. I'd post it but her formatting is
messed up.

I guess that stuff doesnt bother me much because we will level what we
want when we want and will answer to no one. We own the land. I forget
that sometimes on this board that yall have to answer to other people
On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 11:44:03 GMT, Geoff Kegerreis
wrote:

(mike hagen) writes:

I don't mind 'torps postings, though I'm just as sure as you are he's
far off on one end of the spectrum. The biggest problem working
foresters face is that they're always off in the woods. It's not part of
the culture to meet people with really different opinions - and when
they do meet, it's likely head-on. Torps beliefs are gospel for a lot of
people and not all of them are hanging in trees. Some of them are
setting policy.

And it is just as rare for those policy makers to have a chance to talk
to someone who actually practices forestry. All they hear is endless
flack from environmental lobbyists and industry lobbyists, neither of
whom get out of DC for more than 2 weeks a year.

--
http://home.teleport.com/~larryc

(mike hagen) writes:

I don't mind 'torps postings, though I'm just as sure as you are he's
far off on one end of the spectrum. The biggest problem working
foresters face is that they're always off in the woods. It's not part of
the culture to meet people with really different opinions - and when
they do meet, it's likely head-on. Torps beliefs are gospel for a lot of
people and not all of them are hanging in trees. Some of them are
setting policy.

And it is just as rare for those policy makers to have a chance to talk
to someone who actually practices forestry. All they hear is endless
flack from environmental lobbyists and industry lobbyists, neither of
whom get out of DC for more than 2 weeks a year.

--

It is hard for anybody disagree with McInnis to get anykind of Non-Hostile
reception!

(Aozotorp) writes:
(mike hagen) writes:

I don't mind 'torps postings, though I'm just as sure as you are he's
far off on one end of the spectrum. The biggest problem working
foresters face is that they're always off in the woods. It's not part of
the culture to meet people with really different opinions - and when
they do meet, it's likely head-on. Torps beliefs are gospel for a lot of
people and not all of them are hanging in trees. Some of them are
setting policy.

And it is just as rare for those policy makers to have a chance to talk
to someone who actually practices forestry. All they hear is endless
flack from environmental lobbyists and industry lobbyists, neither of
whom get out of DC for more than 2 weeks a year.

It is hard for anybody disagree with McInnis to get anykind of Non-Hostile
reception!

What an excellent demonstration of my point! Your idea of forestry is
knowing how some politician will react.

--
http://home.teleport.com/~larryc

(Aozotorp) writes:
(mike hagen) writes:

I don't mind 'torps postings, though I'm just as sure as you are he's
far off on one end of the spectrum. The biggest problem working
foresters face is that they're always off in the woods. It's not part of

the culture to meet people with really different opinions - and when
they do meet, it's likely head-on. Torps beliefs are gospel for a lot of

people and not all of them are hanging in trees. Some of them are
setting policy.

And it is just as rare for those policy makers to have a chance to talk
to someone who actually practices forestry. All they hear is endless
flack from environmental lobbyists and industry lobbyists, neither of
whom get out of DC for more than 2 weeks a year.

It is hard for anybody disagree with McInnis to get anykind of Non-Hostile
reception!

What an excellent demonstration of my point! Your idea of forestry is
knowing how some politician will react.

--
http://home.teleport.com/~larryc


Nope = McInnis is making policy - and his policy is to throw emotional
smokescreens around = Much like you!

Mike, Larry H, Larry C, John, See what I mean?

Warm regards,
Geoff Kegerreis

Aozotorp wrote:



(Aozotorp) writes:
(mike hagen) writes:

I don't mind 'torps postings, though I'm just as sure as you are he's
far off on one end of the spectrum. The biggest problem working
foresters face is that they're always off in the woods. It's not part of

the culture to meet people with really different opinions - and when
they do meet, it's likely head-on. Torps beliefs are gospel for a lot of

people and not all of them are hanging in trees. Some of them are
setting policy.

And it is just as rare for those policy makers to have a chance to talk
to someone who actually practices forestry. All they hear is endless
flack from environmental lobbyists and industry lobbyists, neither of
whom get out of DC for more than 2 weeks a year.

It is hard for anybody disagree with McInnis to get anykind of Non-Hostile
reception!

What an excellent demonstration of my point! Your idea of forestry is
knowing how some politician will react.

--
http://home.teleport.com/~larryc


Nope = McInnis is making policy - and his policy is to throw emotional
smokescreens around = Much like you!

snip
people and not all of them are hanging in trees. Some of them are
setting policy.

And it is just as rare for those policy makers to have a chance to talk
to someone who actually practices forestry. All they hear is endless
flack from environmental lobbyists and industry lobbyists, neither of
whom get out of DC for more than 2 weeks a year.

It is hard for anybody disagree with McInnis to get anykind of Non-Hostile
reception!

What an excellent demonstration of my point! Your idea of forestry is
knowing how some politician will react.

Nope = McInnis is making policy - and his policy is to throw emotional
smokescreens around = Much like you!


ha! If you don't think knowing how the wind blows through the dead wood
- oops, I mean the top FS bureaucrats - isn't important to forests - you
HAVE been in the woods too long. Besides, it's a bit slow around here.
If I filtered these threads, who'd be left? Tub grinder salesmen?