If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
A most excellent post Del. I agree with everything in your response.
It's high time to get this overbearing, out-of-control federal government out of the business of micro-managing states for the betterment of the mother country or the party... Do they work for us, or do we work for them? The current monster is five times the size it should be (I favor a very weak central gov.) So the environmental druids won on the North Slope and the Fed has banned any energy development there. Instead we're open pit mining in the Rockies on new tracts as a result. The unintended consequences of these do-gooders will be the ruin of us all. If they want to save stands of old timber, then they need to quit producing excess babies who grow up to live in wood houses. I bet a hundred years from now there will be a thriving black market in forest products. And federal taxes will shoot up to pay for "the war on woodworking." All this proves to me that the Federal Government is an incompetent custodian of U.S. lands. Much of the BLM stuff where I grew up should be auctioned off to U.S. citizens who would take care of the land far better than any big corporation in a federal lease program. And then there's these Sierra Club fanatics that in CA continually strive to prevent over flights by GA aircraft. And for what reason? The noise. No, it doesn't pollute the environment in any measurable form. They just want a sterile re-creation of the 1800's for *themselves* to go hiking in. Somebody stop them. They caused the Southern California wildfires that everybody as far as Vegas had to breath for three months. Who are these morons who would implore the state to prevent landowners from clearing dangerous scrub brush against their properties? All to save a handful of rare plants (weeds, that by their logic, must be immune to fire ;-) Please tell me an anti-sierra club I can join to fight them. pacplyer – out Del Rawlins wrote in message ... In Veeduber wrote: Japanese manufacturers expect to have depleated all of the easily raped stands of the Tongas National Forest within the next ten years or so and are already working on deals to do the same in Siberia. Presently they pay US taxpayers an average of $1.70 PER TREE and clear- cutting is their preferred method of logging. **** the US taxpayers. Those are Alaskan trees that belong to Alaskans and it is Alaskans who make their living harvesting them. You wanna whine about the evil forest service, the timber industry, and the japs cutting down trees look no further than the wooden house that you probably live in, the wooden airplanes you build, the newspaper/ magazines you read or the t.p. that you wipe yourself with every day. If you are gonna cast stones take a good look in the mirror first. Furthermore, I submit that $1.70 a tree is a hell of a deal for the federal government. Standing timber in and of itself is worth not a whole lot, particularly in Alaska. It is expensive to harvest and expensive to get out, as compared to other places in the world. It takes loggers, engineers, pilots, mechanics, heavy equipment operators, etc. ad nauseum in addition to the businesses and individuals who supply them. All of these people pay taxes to the federal government in comparison to which the $1.70/tree pales. Development of natural resources helps to lower your taxes, boosts the local and national economy, and makes available the products we all use in our daily lives. One of the reasons clearcutting is usually the method or choice is because it is one of the most ecologically sound methods when promoting the long term health of the forest is a priority. The selective cutting practices that are currently being advocated are beneficial from an aesthetic standpoint only. The best timber is systematically removed, leaving only the sick, genetically inferior, and the damaged (which are now vulnerable to disease) trees in their place. When a tree is felled among other, standing trees it inevitably damages everything in its path, often leaving hanging widowmakers which can be deadly for weeks or even years into the future. But, the forest still looks pretty which is all that the self proclaimed environmental types really care about. By contrast, in a properly done clearcut, whichever species do grow back will have a more normal genetic diversity making them less susceptible to disease, they will harbor a broader variety of wildlife than an old growth forest. And the new trees will be available for re-harvest in decades, rather than in centuries. Yeah, it is ugly visually for the first few years after harvest. I would rather my kids and grandkids see the forest healthy again in their day, rather than eventually stunted by the spread of disease and the removal of the best stock. Finally, I reject the notion that Alaska should somehow be locked up like some sort of demented national park where no development is allowed. Those of us who are here have to make a living in spite of the fact that it would be more convenient to the Sierra Club et al if we just went away to live in some city in the 48 and quit filling up their playground. Resource development in Alaska has benefitted from 200+ years of experience down south and elsewhere, and for the most part we do it better and we do it cleaner than it has ever been done before. The national forests are just that; they are not parks. They exist to be used beneficially and timber sales are an important part of that use. There are millions of acres of old growth forest set aside in national parks that will NEVER be touched and that is as it should be. ---------------------------------------------------- Del Rawlins- son and grandson of loggers Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email. Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website: http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/ |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
I think the reason why the Wrights, Chanute, Herring, Avery, etc. prefered
spruce, aside from obvious factors, was that it was very impact resistant. In the pioneer era, it was considered normal to smack wingtips, chaw turf, noseplant, WHACK, and otherwise "crash" on a routine basis. For example, the landing gear on my 1902 glider consists of twin 6" high x 1" wide skids... that's it. Ya wanna land? You're gonna smack the sand with some part of the plane. Later, my best guess is that the availability of good spruce, and its cost relative to aluminum, made it the defacto standard until aircraft speed, size, and power dictated switching to all-aluminum. Of course, in small aircraft if you don't have a reason to change, why change? Now that most of the good spruce is gone, we have a reason to start looking again. Either that, or a good excuse to drive to Highland. (No Grandma, I really came here to see you! Oh that lumber on top of my car... oh, that's um.. uh...that's uh... I'm building a pipe organ... yeah, that's it... a pipe organ) Harry |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
In pacplyer wrote:
And then there's these Sierra Club fanatics that in CA continually strive to prevent over flights by GA aircraft. And for what reason? The noise. No, it doesn't pollute the environment in any measurable form. They just want a sterile re-creation of the 1800's for *themselves* to go hiking in. Somebody stop them. I am all in favor of setting aside periods of time free of aircraft noise for the Sierra Clubbers to enjoy their 1800s experience, so long as it also includes hostile indians and encounters with the grizzly bears and wolves which they are bent on reintroducing to areas where they were wiped out for good reasons. ---------------------------------------------------- Del Rawlins- Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email. Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website: http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/ |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Ron Wanttaja wrote: You might be on to something there, Harry. The wingtips of the Fly Baby are made of laminated spruce, and they're incredibly hell-for-stout. One of our number had an engine fail on takeoff about a year ago, and the airplane cartwheeled. The spruce wing bows are intact. I couldn't believe it, even questioned the guy's son (pilot hurt, recovered OK). He swears it cartwheeled. I've got a writeup on the case (including photos of the wings) at: http://www.bowersflybaby.com/safety/horsten.html Ron Wanttaja ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Hmmmm. Perhaps you just need more power, weight, speed... or a professional. I could break spruce wingtip bows on 235 hp Pawnees with relative ease. However, since it was not good for business, I eventually ceased the unprofitable behavior. Barnyard BOb - |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
All the wood that went into my stick built new house came from Canada, not Alaska. Get your facts straight.
If what I hear is true, there is very little american wood left in Alaska, it is all deeded to the JApanese. I think the primary concern is that our federal 'government' sold out. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
In Blueskies wrote:
All the wood that went into my stick built new house came from Canada, not Alaska. Get your facts straight. The point is you live in a wood house and that wood had to come from somewhere. Bemoaning the harvest of trees while you sit in your nice new house made from harvested trees is hypocrisy, plain and simple. It stands to reason that Canadian loggers gotta make a living too, eh? If what I hear is true, there is very little american wood left in Alaska, it is all deeded to the JApanese. I think the primary concern is that our federal 'government' sold out. I've never seen a Japanese logger in Alaska. They probably exist, but those that I have met are all Americans, they buy stuff from the local businesses where they work, and they pay taxes to the federal government, just like you and I. The Japanese happen to be willing to pay more for a quality product, which is a good attribute for a customer to have in whatever business you are involved in, not just logging. This helps make the expensive logging operations possible and it helps reduce the trade deficit with Japan. Most of the nice old growth spruce isn't used in the US simply because aside from a few specialty industries, there just isn't much need for it here. I don't know this for a fact, but I suspect the reason your house is built from Canadian trees has a lot to do with the value of the canadian dollar as compared to our own, which makes it possible to harvest the timber at a cost that Americans are willing to pay. ---------------------------------------------------- Del Rawlins- Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email. Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website: http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/ |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
If what I hear is true, there is very little american wood left in Alaska
Son...you haven't got a clue! And you have been listening to NPR for too long ;^{ The loggable area in the Tongass ALONE is the size on Conneticut, and the hoopla is over a few square miles... Look at the following text copied from one of the environmentalist web sites. "" A surprising amount of the Tongass National Forest isn't forest at all. Actually, two-thirds of the 17-million acre Tongass is rock, ice, muskeg (wetlands), and scrub timber. While one-third of the Tongass is considered commercial forest, the biggest stands of old-growth forest make up only 4% of the National Forest. These lush valley-bottom and beach fringe areas are most in demand--they provide critical habitat for fish and wildlife and are the most lucrative forest for logging. In the past 50 years, over half of this habitat has been clearcut. " Has 17 million acres been clearcut? Well No... Has 30% (the part covered with huge trees) been cut? Well no... Has 4% been cut? Well No... Has 2% been cut? Yea, OK - But that took 50 years! And that's using THEIR numbers. When I was in engineering school, we had a whole semester on "engineering economics". The last half turned into a course on "How to LIE with statistics". These people seem to have used most of the methods. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Ron Webb wrote:
When I was in engineering school, we had a whole semester on "engineering economics". The last half turned into a course on "How to LIE with statistics". These people seem to have used most of the methods. Statistics are like a bikini: what they reveal is interesting, but what they conceal is vital. [paraphrase of Aaron Levenstein] Russell Kent |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Off Topic - Spruce Goose | Steve Beaver | Home Built | 30 | January 24th 04 05:59 AM |
Doug Fir vs: Sitka Spruce | Lou Parker | Home Built | 40 | November 10th 03 05:36 PM |
Sorry, Spruce and Jim Irwin | Larry Smith | Home Built | 79 | October 20th 03 05:34 PM |
Wood questions - Public Lumber Company, determining species at the lumberyard | Corrie | Home Built | 17 | September 17th 03 06:51 PM |