What makes a Forester A Forester?

[Jeff]

A couple incidents here on the forum have me pondering this question. What is the definition of a forester? What gives the right to an individual to proclaim themselves as a Forester other then it is not against the law in that particular state? A Forest is a living, changing, complex thing. Yes it is a resource, a renewable resource, but it certainly is more then trees to be cut. Just because someone, through experience in the business, knows how to get more for your trees in the market place,  does this make him a forester?

My perception of the definition of a forester has always been someone trained in all aspects of this bio system, from the soil to the trees to the creatures that inhabit it.  

I found this link on the Society of American Foresters website:
http://www.safnet.org/policyandpress/lrcinfo.cfm

How do accredited foresters feel about timber buyers or people without any formal education out there calling themselves foresters?

My non-forester position is, is that it is at the best, in this day an age, deceptive, and at the worst, fraudulent.

Certainly someone that has spent years in the woods, observing and caring, and trying to do the best things for the resource should be able to say they are a "Good Forest Steward" or something like that, but I believe the term "forester" is viewed as a professional title, somehow earned, and recognized by peers.

[Ron Wenrich]

Technically, anyone with a BS degree or higher is considered a forester.  Those with degrees below that are forest technicians.  The degree bestows the title.  Going through the process, I don't like the idea of just anyone calling themselves a forester.  You want the title, start by getting the education.

Some states bestow licenses on foresters.  This can be from either a test or from experience or both.  Licensing is just another hoop to jump through, and others can call themselves something similar to a forester; like a timber agent or forest agent or the like.  Licenses are pretty meaningless.  No one really checks anyone's work to see if it is up to snuff.

Application of the science is a different matter.  I've seen guys with no degrees do better than those with the degrees.  It depends what is the driving force in their life.  If its greed and money, then the stand will be gutted - an economic clearcut.  

If they answer to another ideal, then the application is a lot different.  Crop trees are left to grow, surpressed trees are thinned out.  Stocking levels remain at good levels, which insure good quality.  The basis of the cut isn't how much money it generates, but what type of stand is left behind.

Good foresters make recommendations on what the stand dictates, not the market.  Our state-owned forests are probably the better managed forests, in my locale.  They address a lot of different markets.  But, throwing paint on a tree because it has reached a certain size and markets are good aren't a driving force, and their forests reflect that.

I've said it many times,  good forest management is more about what you leave behind than what you cut.  A good forester knows the difference and follows through.  The rest are just timber agents...degree or not.

[Larry]

Cetainly someone that has spent years in the woods, observing and caring, and trying to do the best things for the resource should be able to say they are a "Good Forest Steward" or something like that, but I believe the term "forester" is viewed as a professional title, somehow earned, and recognized by peers.

I agree Jeff.  For many years at the telephone company I had the simple title of "Engineer".  Never felt comfortable with the title as I do not have a engineering degree.  Think there were even a few legal actions long ago....maybe that is why the real engineers have P.E. behind their name.

Last 10 years my title changed every year or so....last title was Manager - Outside Plant Engineering Design....big mouth full but maybe not as deceptive as the simple title of "Engineer - Outside Plant".

Ron had a great response that sometimes a title doesn't mean much.  I still think there should be a clear distinction between somebody with a forestry degree and somebody without.  Maybe the foresters need to add P.F. behind their name?

[Ron Scott]

Forestry is a science. A "forester" is a professional engaged in the science and profession of forestry. A "forester" must have a minimum of a baccalaureate degree in forestry from a credited University and then at least 5 years of practical experience to become certified.

Sometimes the BS degree may be waved with equivalent experience and usually passing a comprehensive examination. Such individuals are few and far between especially now days. Some came up through the ranks that way during the CCC days and WWII. They were called "mustangs". One of my early mentors in the USFS was one such individual.

[Texas Ranger]

Interesting discussion.  Here in Texas, and from what I gather in the south in general, loggers have taken to calling them selves Forestry Consultants, or Forester Planners, of any other mix that can be confused with forester.  

Ron has the definition down pat, degree and all, and experience, and goal, and ethics, etc.  Loggers that call themselves foresters of any ilk are frauds, trying to delude the public.  With the slow market down here now, the loggers have taken to hire out of work foresters who turn into timber pimps, selling the same junk cutting plans the loggers do, so the difference can be very small between one and the other.

What makes it worse is the Society of American Foresters have opened their membership to non-foresters, biologist, one lawyer I know of, surveyors, etc.  Only further blurs the line on who is and who isn't.

Good loggers are just that, good loggers, same on foresters, and the two have worked hand in hand for decades.  The schism between us now is driven by the frauds, and economics.

It doesn't help that the public thinks of us a forest rangers, and that loggers are foresters.

[Ianab]

Maybe a better question is.. Who is the 'forester' working for?

If he's working for the landowner, (and is qualified .. or at least experienced, and honest ) then a the result is likely to be good, for the land owner.

If he's employed by the mill or the logger then you automatically have to suspect. He may not be dishonest or incompetant, he may be qualified /  licensed,  but he's payed to look after the mill / logger. He may do a decent job, but is it necesarrily the BEST for the land owner?.. Not very likely.

Maybe a better option is to promote the use of independant  or government foresters to work FOR the landowners, giving them good advice and preventing them from getting ripped off?


Ian

[Ron Wenrich]

I hate to say this, but I totally disagree with your assessment, Ian.  I've worked both sides of the fence, being both a procurement forester and a consultant.  As long as they are ethical, the employer doesn't matter.  Its more a reflection of the employer, since they set policy.

I've seen many private consultants that will mine timber just as good as logger.  Their goal is to sell timber, not to manage forests.  There are a ton of these guys out there, as well.

The paper company in our area does much better work than most consultants.  But, they have select loggers they will sell to that will guarantee that the wood comes to them.  

A few mills have some good foresters, as well.  The biggest problem is that after a woodlot is thinned, that opens the door for the next guy to come in and high grade it.  

[Ianab]

Ron...
This is true... a GOOD company can set standards for their employees that ensure the job is done properly. But how can Joe Landowner know which company is working to a high standard, and which is just out to get his timber cheap?

Its more a reflection of the employer, since they set policy.

thats Kinda my point

I'm not blaming the forester thats working under a policy, it's just who's policy and is it a good one for BOTH parties?

I guess if it was simple it would have been solved years ago.

Maybe another analogy is when I was farming...
We had 300 cattle...
We would not say to the buyer... came and pick the cattle you want.. and leave the runts and the old stringy one behind  :-/

We would talk to an agent we trusted, discuss what cattle we should sell now, what we should keep for breeding, what we should fatten and sell next year and what we should cull.

Of course this relied on some knowledge on our part and trust with all parties involved.
Isn't managing a forest something similar?

I'm just saying that from the forest owners point, they need to be hiring a good forester. Not a crook posing as a forester, not a qualified forester who is working to someone elses agenda. But someone with their interest at heart.

And of course knowing what you have to sell.. and something about managing your forest / cattle herd is important. But thats down to education of the forest owners.

Ian

[Tom]

I stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night.  Does that make me a ......?

I think that knowledge is what make you anything.  Sheepskins tell others that you are supposed to have the knowledge.  That being the case, a degree in Underwater Basket weaving doesn't make one a Forester.  By the same token, a life in the woods doesn't make one a Forester either.

I've seen a lot of degreed folks that haven't the sense to tie their shoelaces, and a lot of guys brought up in the woods that don't know a Loblolly bay from a Loblolly pine.and think that all wood is classified as only hardwood or softwood. Yep, some think that Red Maple is a softwood cause it's .....soft.

If you really want to be a Forester of note, then you should pass through courses exposing you to the knowledge of "all" of the science of the woods. That means that you should have some modicum of knowledge of all plants everywhere, not just the tree in your backyard.  You should also know what makes it grow, what kills it, what it is used for, appreciate its place on the stump and its position in the make-up of the world.  You should have a knowledge of insecticides, insects, virus', bacteria, fertilizers, soil types, and the wildlife of the forest.  You should be able to apply this knowledge to provide the world with building materials and fiber, the land-owner with pleasant surroundings and an income, and the Forest with an ever-renewing health.

You should carry the skills of a teacher, lecturer, child educator, businessman, mathematician, survivalist and mechanic.  You should be able to discern those things that you know enough about to teach.  You should know when to speak up and have the fortitude to do so.  Know when to open your ears.  Know when to shut your mouth. Acknowledge those things that you don't know rather than pass on B.S. to an ignorant public. Stand as the spoke person for the forest and its wildlife, being always a knight in shining armor between the genuine land-owner and the tax man, the developer and the opportunist of the world.

[Ron Scott]

Frank, by the definition, No  ;) But you have a lot of experience and knowledge in forestry to give forestry advice that could be endorsed by a forester.

It gets down to being accepted and recognized by your peers in the profession of forestry. Another test is, if you are recognized and certified to give "expert" witness testimony in a court of law concerning matters related to the science of forestry.

I have an individual working for me with 39 plus years of forestry experience wworking in the USFS and research. He is very knowlegeable and well respected in forestry circles here, but he doesn't have the BS degree in forestry, thus his title is Forest Technician and not Forester. I must oversee and sign for his work as "the forester". :P

[SwampDonkey]

Don't look at me.  You all said it. ;)

[Ron Wenrich]

Ian

Your cattle analysis is right on for timber, especially if all you want to do is to sell it.  Would you use the same guy to come in and tell you how to manage your herd?  How about telling you how to manage your pasture or its runoff?

There's more to forestry than selling timber.  If all the forester talks about is selling trees, then maybe you should be looking for someone else, unless that's all you want to do.

Selling timber really isn't that hard.  Its not the forester that makes the deal, its the process of competitive bidding.  The forester levels the playing field by giving data to all parties...both buyers and sellers.  Landowners can sell their own, if they are coming from some point of knowledge, which a forester can provide.

If the only time a landowner uses a forester is for timber sales, then they've pretty well missed the point.  Foresters should be used in the planning and analysis of the woodlot.  The first time you should use a forester is when you purchase your land.  Its like only using a doctor to do an amputation, but never seeing him any other time.

The other thing to remember about consultants is that most are their own company.  They set their policy.  Some are in it only for their own gain, some have higher ideals.

[Ianab]

Ron W, I 100% agree with you about the total management of the forest is what the Foresters job is all about.

I guess my point last night was that no cattle farmer would run his farm the same way as many people run their forests. ( well no successfull farmer anyway ) Of course most people dont have the knowledge to manage a forest. This is where a good forester comes in, and should be working primarily for the forest owner on the longterm management of the forest. Selling some logs is just part of the process.

If you had a cattle farm, but knew nothing about running it, you would hire a manager or a consultant to assist / advise you in the overall running of the farm. You would expect them to have a degree, a diploma or at least plenty of experience, but they would be working for you, not for the meat processing plant.

thats my 2 cents anyway   ;)

Ian

[Oldtimer]

I am just a lowly self employed logger, scum of the earth in a lot of eyes. Here in NH, it is illegal to pass yourself off as a forester if you are not indeed a licenced forester. I make  it a specific point to tell landowners I am not a forester, it's even in my contracts.
There ARE decent well intentioned foresters here.
There are foresters here that are nothing but lying crooks too, only in it for the dollar. There are foresters here that attend every conference, every conservation meeting, every public discussion, pontificating on and on. One such forester, who works for a very large, very well known forestry consulting group with offices in several New England states, came to me and asked if I would go to bat with a landowner I was cutting for. He wanted to put in a 1/2 mile log truck road over the property to access timber on a mountain behind. I walked the route with him, and said sure,  if I say so, it's not a problem, they will allow it. On the way back out, I asked if he thought I could harvest 35,000 BF of white pine from my lot without undue damage. His response? "I get paid for my opinion."  Guess what? He never did make that truck road. He considers himself a demi-god, and me an ant. Jealous [I have typed a profane word that is automatically changed by the forum censored words program I should know better]. I had 130 acres of virgin pine because I asked, and the landowner trusted me. Doom on him. My point here is that a degree don't mean squat. I have done a better job on my own than most foresters I know of. I have only met 2 foresters who are worth a pisshole in the snow. It is a knee-jerk reaction to think all foresters are saints. they are not.

And to those members who dislike what I say and how I say it, too bad. I speak the truth as I know it.

[SwampDonkey]

I'de like to say a word concerning some (not all) professional forester associations. There are some associations out there that are more of an old boys club. Oh, of course you have to write an entrance exam, but that doesn't prove much. Just that you are good at memorizing text. Some of these associations are unto themselves and have no public exposure at all. There is no peer review process of the forester's work. Sure they have a code of ethics and a Forester Act, but they don't enforce it. In all the years I've practiced forestry I don't remember the Association inviting the public to any meeting on any issue and I've never heard of any kind of repromand made on a member. I have known some members with questionable reputations. Some real discusting individuals.

To digress a little here: I don't know if the general public even trust foresters, since most are seen as industrial foresters. And alot of private woodlot owners don't trust the forester's employers, because of past history. I can remember a good many trips to the provincial legislature concerning the rights of woodlot owners versus coorporate giants. This is partly the reason there are Marketing Boards in my province. Woodlot owners and loggers are still fighting over the rights to crown land access and primary source of supply. Just recently the CBC program, 'The Nature of Things' profiled a couple of loggers from New Brunswick who spoke about how industry controls our  public forest and have no intentions of allowing community based forestry. These are industrial foresters and executives telling the people of this province, 'it's hand off'.  Not many independent consulting foresters in my province at all and I believe this is a result of industry having total control of public forests. I believe community based forestry would demand independent foresters and would create more local employment for communities. For some reason the corporations think they have the magic touch and the private woodlot sector is seen as 'no nothings' or they don't have the capacity to understand. :  As a forester I get tired of seeing this perpetual gobly gook from industrial foresters and industry execs.

OK, I said enough.

[Kirk_Allen]

Oltimer I think we all agree that there are bad apples in any orginazation but lets not miss the what I think is the main point of the post.

What Makes a Forester a Forester?

I think the question was asked because of some of the recent fraudulent claims people have made about their credentials.  

I think what we should take from all this is the realization that a person MUST ask a couple of questions.  Two that we incorporate into our corporate program of accountability are:
1. Says Who?
2. With What Proof?

I cant tell you how many times those two simple questions have sent people the other way because most crooks cant get past the first question and if they do, then they cant come up with the credentials to support what they say.  

Simply keep people accountable to their word no matter what industry they are in.  

I have only met one Forester in my life and my experience has been great.  He was a saint.

[Oldtimer]

What makes a Forester a forester?

Beyond the framed certificates on his wall......?

If he does right by the woods first, landowner second, harvester third, himself last. Thats what, in my humble opinion.

[Jeff]

The plaque on the wall is a start

 The rest, with out the plaque tells me, Joe Land-Owner nothing. It does nothing about protecting one against Mr. Lets-Pretend-I-am-a-Forester so I can get your trees.

Is that how you would consider picking someone to take your appendix out? Wouldn't the first thing you want to know is when he said he was a doctor, it wasn't just because he proclaimed himself a Dr.?

I have no problem if someone proclaims themselves an idiot. That has no effect on me.  Ya want to call your self a sword swallower? Have at it, it aint my innards.

I wired my whole house. I certainly would not call myself an electrician. Would you? What would you think if I did, then wired your house, did it well, but the next week you found out I never had a bit of elecrical training other then I had wired my own house. Wouldn't you maybe wonder if down the road your house just might burn down?

[Jeff]

Oldtimer, I had to take a road trip and pick up some X-ray films for a doctors appointment and I was thinking about this some more on the way.

I want to ask you this and see what you feel. It may be partly hypothetical, but you should be able to put yourself inside the question for discussion purposes.

You are a Logger. Its all you have ever done since you left high school. All you ever wanted to do. You do a good job. You are conscientious and really care , not only for the quality of the job you do, but for the future of the forests in which you work. You want to make sure that 10, 15, or even 20 years down the road, you will have a chance to go back to these same forests and find them a better place because of the good job you did while you were there. You may be able to log them again, or perhaps you have a son now that is in the business and you have brought him up with the same values that you have and now its his turn to work in that forest. You have done well as a logger. You know it, the people you work with and for know it. You can be proud of the work you have accomplished.

Having said all this, at what point, do you feel, that you can start calling yourself a forester?

[SwampDonkey]

Well I'll say this....
It sure is good to here positive experiences with foresters, especially when it comes to private woodlots. It's vocal woodlot owners that get the message across about a forester who was of great benefit to develop a sound approach to managing their land. I am equally pleased to here positive dealing with forest technicians and technologists. These folks also have exposure to alot of the sciences the forester studies and shouldn't be discounted. There have been quite a few knowledgeable forest technicians that have become extension staff with government, whose job it is to educate the public. Sadly, our local government has lost site of this value, so the provincial marketing boards had to come together to form a type of extension with the staff capable to deliver courses for the private woodlot owner (www.infor.com). I will acknowledge that alot of folks, specifically woodlot owners still confuse techncians for foresters. But, if you ask any technician, or at least in my experience, he/she will acknowledge himself as a technician. They are equally as proud as any forester would be. Sometimes, the confusion or mistake in differentiating who a forester is, comes from the fact that some technicians start out in Forestry school, then later decide to take the technician course instead. For whatever reason, personal or otherwise. Then you have family members who call their son or nephew a forester. I've seen this quite a few times. Some technicians are even called forest rangers, which may or may not be true either, because some foresters are forest rangers as well as some technicians are rangers. It all depends on weather thay have taken enforcement. Also, the old forest technician school was nick-naked forest ranger school, lending to the confusion also. I had relatives that actually graduated from the forest ranger school as technologists who worked in surveying and constructing mill sites or railway lines, even for the power corporation. In those days the course was alot more different and more geared toward engineering than to forestry.

[rebocardo]

> What Makes a Forester a Forester?

To me, it is a person that has the degree in the related field, is licensed, and has the best interest of the woods in mind for the next 50-100 years whenever he draws up a plan for harvest.

The person that loves the woods, likes to hunt, encourages the planting of trees, etc. A whole life decision, just not a quick buck.

Personally, I would avoid anyone that worked for the logger or lumber company and thought it was okay to ship logs wholesale out of their own country. No matter what country you live in, USA, Canada, NZ, Brazil, Malaysia, etc.

I am all for logging of national forests too, within reason, but, I hate plundering of natural resources that should be used for the betterment of the local population.

To me a forester is well educated in their field, licensed, and looks out for the well being of the forest for their country and the landowner.

[Ron Wenrich]

What difference does it make which country uses the logs?  That seems a strange statement, especially if you believe in the free enterprise system.

The European import business has been very important to US hardwoods for many decades.  They've been importing logs for the US and Canada, and paying better prices then their US competition.  

A few years ago, black cherry spiked to an all time high of $8/bf.  The reason was the European market.  They have restrictions on tropical hardwoods.  That caused mahogany to be almost non-existent to their markets.  English furniture makers use a lot of it.  The alternative was US black cherry.  Demand outstrip supply and prices spiked.

Could we have supplied lumber to the European markets?  Nope.  We refuse to accept the metric system, so we freeze ourselves out of a market.  Besides, the Europeans are more efficient with their resources.  

The US landowners benefit from an increased demand for our raw materials.  Without worldwide demand, stumpage prices would be a lot lower.

[SwampDonkey]

I agree with Ron,

All our veneer (locally) is exported to US veneer buyers. Your just shooting yourself in the foot if you want to operate in a closed market.  If we couldn't export hardwood we'de be stuck just selling stovewood and our stumpage rates would be very low. In fact in some areas of the province that are not in close proximity to the US markets, their stumpage and log prices for even softwood are much lower. In my marketing Board area our prices are the highest because of US competition for the resource. I live 2 miles from the nearest board crossing, there is one both 30 miles north and 30 miles south of me even, which covers my two counties and offer close proximity to market for our producers. Industry also import alot of softwood from the US market too and there are alot of wood brokers besides marketing boards that move wood back and forth.

[Oldtimer]

Oldtimer, I had to take a road trip and pick up some X-ray films for a doctors appointment and I was thinking about this some more on the way.

I want to ask you this and see what you feel. It may be partly hypothetical, but you should be able to put yourself inside the question for discussion purposes.

You are a Logger. Its all you have ever done since you left high school. All you ever wanted to do. You do a good job. You are conscientious and really care , not only for the quality of the job you do, but for the future of the forests in which you work. You want to make sure that 10, 15, or even 20 years down the road, you will have a chance to go back to these same forests and find them a better place because of the good job you did while you were there. You may be able to log them again, or perhaps you have a son now that is in the business and you have brought him up with the same values that you have and now its his turn to work in that forest. You have done well as a logger. You know it, the people you work with and for know it. You can be proud of the work you have accomplished.

Having said all this, at what point, do you feel, that you can start calling yourself a forester?

I can't ever. That is why I said I specificly tell landowners I am not a forester, and why I put it in writing in the contract.

I do tell them I don't need my hand held to go cut some wood and leave the place in good order for the future. If it's just "I need some cash, my woods are full of it, but leave the integtity of the woods intact." I can do just fine for a guy here. If they tell me they want to manage the place for certain game, or to be certain a specific crop takes root, I tell them to get a well known and respected forester.
If they are hesitant about letting me go it alone, I tell them to call a forester. I have no problems working for them. It is irritating to see one stick of pulp marked in a thicket of fat high value timber though. Some of these guys mark wood for a cable/sawhand like they were a mechanized crew. How they think I can take the one tree from a thicket of nice wood without cutting / scarring one or more of the others eludes me still.

I am not a forester. I am the guy who does all the hardest work, and makes the forester look like a hero. Without a logger who knows how, and cares enough to try, the forester would be up a creek.

Raining here now. And it'll be 20* by 10PM. Crazy NH weather.

[Jeff]

I can't ever. That is why I said I specificly tell landowners I am not a forester, and why I put it in writing in the contract.  

Good for you!    The biggest reason I started this thread was because of a sawmill owner that calls himself a forester because he has been in business long enough to think that he can, and hires timber buyers and tells them that their job title is "forester", another name for a timber buyer he says. As far as I am concerned, doing this is a lie, and only done for deceptive purposes.

[Ron Scott]

There's a lot more to forestry than just "the trees", and it's ok that there are timber buyers and loggers who are after the monitary values the tree provides them.

But what about the many "nonmonitary values" a forest provides, such as those that aren't turned over in the market place, i.e. soil, air, water, wildlife, aesthetics, recreation wilderness, E, T, & S species, etc. Some may even be priceless or the last of it's kind.

If the timberbuyer or logger has training acceptable by society and a degree in the sciences involved to integrate all forest resources, then they can call themselves whatever they want to be called.

There is a variance of degree in knowledge between foresters also, but anyone working in the forests should not violate the minimum resource standard of any one resource at the cost to the rest.

Buying and cutting trees is only one activity in forest management. A"good" forester should know a little more. :P

[SwampDonkey]

Oldtimer,

I don't know your circumstances, but if the forester has any credibility at all he'll be giving you due credit for the fine work he hired you to do. If he isn't than he's got some personal issues. Because hiring the right fella, like yourself makes him look good as well. Why would the forester wanna hire a slobber logger and look like an @$$ unless he has other motives, possibly under-handed ones. Goes without saying. ;)

Jeff, your right. It's very deceptive and in a couple provinces (BC and Quebec) if someone tries to pass themselves off as a forester, and he isn't, then he's breaking the law. And in order to practice forestry you have to be registered, as it is regulated in these provinces.

Forester- British Columbia

[Ron Scott]

Amen! to good loggers making a forester look good. ;)  

Foresters need to give loggers credit for their good work and I agree that some foresters have personality problems as well.

Good loggers will continue get wood to harvest and be kept busy.

[Oldtimer]

Oldtimer,

I don't know your circumstances, but if the forester has any credibility at all he'll be giving you due credit for the fine work he hired you to do. If he isn't than he's got some personal issues. Because hiring the right fella, like yourself makes him look good as well. Why would the forester wanna hire a slobber logger and look like an @$$ unless he has other motives, possibly under-handed ones. Goes without saying. ;)

The forester I am cutting for now loves my work. He just wishes I could produce more. (This is why I want a nice 648 D/A with a winch!)  With my personal life subject to "don't go to work, I need you to_____" and the weather, and the fact that I run one tank of saw gas out  cutting tops and brush down under 4' (all burly nasty 50-60 Y/O oak up on a ledgy mountain!) for every tank spent chopping and limbing, the production is slow to say the least. He says that the quality of the job comes before the production, so he's all good. The other forester I cut for was the same. He couldn't believe I'd put a skidder where I did. He was going to write the lot off as un-harvestable. No such thing in my book.

[rebocardo]

> What difference does it make which country uses the logs?

Because shipping logs wholesale out of a country robs the country of milling jobs and ends up squandering a natural resource that could be used for the betterment and employment of the local population.

[sawmillsi]

Hi guys,

Just thought I would wde into this one.

I fully agree with you Rebocardo, and even in developing countries like Papua New Guniea it is almost impossible to export whole logs with out some kind of processing.

I find it easy to believe that the US would export high quality logs, as it is easy to argue that your current administration is mis-managing your natural resources quite well (how it looks from this side of the Pacific).

Back to the forester question. I call myself a 'Community Forester". My qualifications are:

10 years full time experience in all aspects of the timebr industry in Australia and 2 years of experience in PNG and the Solomon Islands (thhis includes pre-harvest, harvest, milling, and down stream processing).

3 years study (still going) at Southern Cross University (one of 3 University's in Australia to offer a Forestry degree) towards a Bachelor of Applied Science Forestry.

Associate membership of the Institute of Forestors of Australia (recognised as a working forester with valuable experience but no degree).

Am I leading people on when I work for them?

By the way, I am leaving for the UK and then Angola in about 4 hours. I am doing a community development project in Angola that includes developing harvest plans, implimenting them and some down stream processing.

At all times when I do work, I let people know that it is my opinion and if they are in doubt they should seek a second opinion. But i also tell them of my experiences and that usually helps alot.

I know that i have made mistakes before, I try to make them small ones. But I am human, just like you's guys.

If I am talking to an 'older, more experienced' person/professional, dosn't matter degree or not, I always listen. They usually will look at the problem a slightly different way and that always helps.

In Australia, foresters have little to no respect in the industry as they usually have only paper degrees and no practicle experience.

I feel that the statements by Ron Scott are right on the money.

I'll check in while I am away and see what mess I have stired up.

I'll also take some pictures and post them later.

Simon

[SwampDonkey]

Simon,

I don't think you stirred up too much, not with me anyway. ;)

Forgot to mention a couple posts back, that our provincial crown sourced timber can not be exported as logs, it has to be processed first. Freehold and private wood can be shipped as logs out of the country though. If you have a look at the thread I started on the Wood yard at our local Forest Products Marketing Board you'll see that is all private sourced wood and you may learn a little about our system if ya read through it and check the links out. ;)

Also, some forest associations allow you to become members if you don't graduate as a forester from a recognized forestry school, BUT you will have to take some extra courses and complete an entrance exam and field experience before being considered. Sounds sorta what your in the process of achieving if I haven't misread your posting. ;) Mill workers here are engineers, mill wrights, sawyers, scalers etc and the foresters do the 'policing', planning, wood purchasing and supervising on the land base when it comes the industry. They are typically the ones (or Forest Engineers) sent abroad to look at markets and find new ideas in far corners of the globe for their company. By the way, a forest engineer is recognized by the forestry association (RPF) as well as the engeering association (P Eng) as a registrant. That's one occupation no one has mentioned yet in this thread. ;) I know a number of Forest Engineers and they took alot of the same courses in the first 3 years of study, plus engeneering on top of that.

cheers

[Furby]

Sorry guys, I'm with Rebo on this as well!
I can totally see the point about the increased profit from the log it self, by exporting the log, but heck, these are more American jobs you all are talking about. This part of the thread has been a total 180 degree turn from another thread where were talking about jobs going over seas.
Sorry, this is just a sore spot for me.

[Jeff]

There have been times over the years, that selling our high quality veneer to the canadian market kept us from possibly closing up. Keeping me from losing my american job.

[SwampDonkey]

And the situation in New Brunswick is that we wouldn't have the volume of veneer to even keep a veneer mill running. Our hardwood is on the fringe of the range and is mostly pulpwood. Without the Kraft pulp mill that just went bust, the hardwood (90 % or it) was worthless inside the confines of the province. Napadogen Veneer has to import it's wood to keep the mill fed. Large diameter hardwood you guys talk of for logs and veneer down there are junk up here with frost seems and hollow heartwood.  :

[Phorester]

To be called a Forester in the USA (and I hope the rest of the world), you need a minimum of a Bachelors of Science degree in forest management.  All the other things; doing right by the woods, loyalty to the landowner, etc., comes after that degree.

There are good doctors, bad doctors, and incompetent doctors. We see the last catetory on the national news a lot. But to be called a Doctor, they all have to have that medical degree.  That's where it starts.  What they do with it, how they conduct themselves as doctors, comes after the education.

Same with a Forester.  This is not some personal philosophy, or spending 20 years in the woods.  It's a profession with basic educational requirements to be properly called a Forester.  What the person does with the degree comes after it's earned.

There is local Campground Manager who owns a little over 2,000 acres of forestland where his campground is located.  He does his own logging, and sells his own logs. He calls himself a Forester because he chooses what trees he will cut down.  Well, I've camped in a couple dozen campgrounds throughout my life , does that mean I can call myself a campground manager?  Don't think so.....

[jrdwyer]

Many good points have been made. I'll add a some more.

As an independent forester working for private landowners, I always put the landowner's objectives first. Assuming what the owner wants to do is legal, I help them meet their goals. This sometimes means good forest management, but not always.

A good example would be a client who has inherited a property and makes a decision to sell merchantable timber and then auction off the property following the timber sale. This is often done to maximize total dollar return. I will inform the client of the negative aspects of cutting small diameter trees (mostly tie and pallet sized) on the future value and compostition of the forest. I will also inform them of the value of such small diameter hardwoods. In the end, they usually decide to cut everything but standing pulpwood sized trees so as not to reduce the visual appeal of the woods when the land is auctioned. To the average person, a 14" DBH diameter limit cut in hardwood stands does look MUCH better than a clearcut. In many of these situations, a true clearcut would be the best type of harvest plan but the low dollar value of standing pulpwood in this area combined with the lack of loggers who can profitably cut small diameter trees leads to not many true clearcuts being done.

At the other end of the cutting spectrum would be a light selective harvest. A good forester will mark and measure the junk trees in addition to the high value mature trees in order to improve the composition of the forest over time. In our area, even the best loggers will leave 30%-50% of these low value junk trees because their time is valuable and they need high production. Hence, the need arises for Timber Stand Improvement even after a well-performed light selective harvest(grape vines need cutting too). Some landowners think long-term and will pay to complete this service after a harvest and others will not.

For my business, I use my name followed by "Forestry Consulting". I chose this route over the "Forester" or "Forester (credentials)" option because it is more descriptive to the average person. I think anyone who uses the word Forester or Forestry Consulting as part of their business needs the basic educational qualifications as described above. Following that, it is up to the client to ask questions concerning the forester's experience and credentials and always ask for references if you are not sure.

Along this same line, there have been large legal judgements against both timber brokers and the mills they sell to when the timber broker pretends to act as an independent agent for the landowner but in reality is nothing more than a timber finder for one particular mill. Check out this web site for an example:
http://www.mslawyer.com/mssc/cases/20001122/9901799.html

Finally, Mr. Allen, I am glad your brother had succes with his timber harvest and the forester was skilled and provided a great service. But, state employees should not be performing services provided by private consulting foresters (there are quite a few in IL). It is philosophically wrong for consulting foresters in IL or any state to pay taxes to the state government and then have the government compete against them with below cost services. An analogy would be the state property department listing and selling your home at 2% commission or the doctors at the local VA hospital providing office visits for $10 to anyone who is sick. The only reason this still happens with forestry is that we consulting foresters are a small independent bunch and small in numbers. But we are working for this positive change.

[Buzz-sawyer]

i am not so sure that state employees should not be providing free services to its citizens.
 I can see why you would feel that way, since they are your direct competition,.
The us  postal service provides competition to ups and fed ex also. Should teat be eliminated?
I enjoy the service I pay for , which the state of Illinois provides to me via state foresters.
They provide hunting opertunities as well, is that unfair to game farms and shooting clubs?
Is it wrong for state police to investigate, unfairly competing with private investigators...........??

[Tom]

Good post, JR.

I think there is a reason for State Foresters to be involved in some land management or at least consultation.  Most of the landowners here are growing trees on small acreage. A "farm" may be from 10 to 100 acres, whereas the private foresters are only interested in catering to the 500 to 10,000 acre farms.  You wouldn't believe how difficult it is to get management advice from a bonafide Forester unless you have enough acreage to warrant his taking a day out of his "busy" schedule to spend a moment with you.  As small land-owners, we are pretty much on our own unless we can interest a State Forester in helping us out.  While the State Forester might not be able to spend the dedicated time warranted, he is more apt to be available and willing to spend time with you to suggest plans, design plantings, recommend care, help arrange harvests, etc.

Without the State Foresters, we small landowners would be without much help.

It's becoming even more difficult to interests State Foresters in small farms.  They have their future to look forward to, and have their eyes set on becoming the managers of the larger farms.   When they retire or even before, if they are gung-ho, they feel that they will be better compensated by a company or individual who owns thousands of acres than the ones who have 50.  I can't disagree with their logic but it still leaves a void in the Tree Farming society for available expertise.

[Texas Ranger]

Tom, obviously things are different in Florida.  Here in Texas I have helped on several lots in a subdivision, and I can get a couple of days work and pay out of ten acres or so, depending on what we are doing.  

Maybe y'all have to many or not enough foresters, or just pay 'em to DanG much.

[Texas Ranger]

And just for fun since this is my 1000 post, I would offer to come on over and do ya a plan, but think Florida may have me shut out because of registration.

[Tom]

How 'bout that, Tex.   You've become a 4 digit zero!  :D   1000
That's quite a few posts when it's commonly known that Texans are notorious for short conversations.  Most I've heard sounded like this.  

"yep".

Well, that's the way it is in the movies anyway.  Gary Cooper hardly ever said anything.  :D :D

I think our problem is a lack of Foresters.  With the demise of the paper mills and divestiture of the corporate owned forests, the only jobs available for a fledgling forester are getting to be in the Government sector.  It doesn't help that Foresters seem to be fairly inactive when it comes to marketing themselves to the public.

Perhaps the public sector hasn't enough money or isn't willing to pay enough to interest a Forester.  That would make a new graduate run the other way.  Perhaps the public isn't aware of the value of a Forester.  They get junk mail from the department stores every day about sales and  merchandise, almost to the point of harrasment.  I don't know of a single ad I've ever seen of a Forester looking for a client.

Perhaps Florida is just destined to become the Disney of the USA.  The wall to wall apartments and parking lots.  The corporate community.

Heck, we even import California oranges now. :-/

[SwampDonkey]

Tom,

Quite a number of us are glad to work on 15 acre lots, with preference  to 50 acres plus. But, if I were to give a landowner a hand on what to harvest from his 15 acre stand by tree marking and trail marking that's a full day's work and likely half the next by the time you have everything discussed with the owner. Most of my rates are based on production plus forseen expenses factored in.

I'm also pretty sure alot of foresters on here have advertised and continue to do so. I send more or less randomly selected mailings to landowners every 2 to 3 months. I advertise in a well known forestry magazine that alot of landowners subscribe to. Plus I attend woodlot owner meetings in the spring.

We are kind of in the same circumstance here with marketing boards that compete with services as well, sometimes below cost. But not really, in reality it's cost sharing among the membership. For instance on all wood sold and marketed off private land there is a 2.2 % levy that pays wages, less a 0.5 % portion going into forest management. You might never cut a stick of wood, but if you want to plant trees on an old feild you get the same subsidy as the guy that cuts 500 cords of wood per year. Also, you get free courses that others have contributed to by marketing their wood. On the same token there are the cut and leave types that clearcut land and sell it and the new owner wishes to have the regrowth thinned in 10 years. Do we deny these folks the opertunity because they want to improve his new woodlot, where someone else scalped it?

I agree with Jr on the fact that the owner is the boss, why would you want to work against the grain and shoot yourself in the foot?

Are our marketing boards competition? I don't feel the marketing board really competes with me because they will actually give me work, more work actually than they take away. My rates are very competitive and sensible. When I worked for the marketing board there was alot of running all over and not much revenue from that running, so that levy is needed in order to run the outfit and maintain vehicles. It has recently restructured itself to offer its services on a cost recovery basis with room for a small profit. Keep in  mind it's a not profit organization. It has to submit a marketing and management plan annually to a commission (forest products commission) that are a watch dog of the organization made up of private, industry and government members. ;)

cheers

[Ron Scott]

The Association of Consulting Foresters of America, Inc. Directory lists 14 foresters for Florida. I'm sure that there are many more who aren't members.

A forester should be willing to provide advice or assistance to any landowner that calls them. I've looked at many a small woodlots. Many times a small woodlot job has lead to a much larger job. One never knows how much forestland a landowner has when they call for assistance on what might be a small parcel.

Small parcels are often in the "publics view" and are a good place to demonstrate yourself as a "forester" with good forestry practices.

    

[jrdwyer]

Buzz,

It really takes creative accounting to add up the total cost of state government services (employee salaries, benefits, office space, trucks, bureaucracy, etc) and come to the conclusion that such forestry services are "free." What you are getting is subsidized service courtesy of all the other taxpayers who most likely have never heard of forestry, let alone ever use this service. If the state government actually had to charge their real cost of the service to the landowner, then I would have no competition whatsoever.

As an example, the State of Kentucky charges landowners $4 per thousand board feet marked for its timber marking service. Consultants generally charge 8-10% commisson on a timber sale. So using a conservative average stumpage price of $250/MBF, consultants charge around $25/MBF marked versus $4 for the state. Obviously, this is a subsidized service.  I have lost a number of really nice quality timber sales because of this.

Using your logic, it would seem reasonable for the State of IL to employ its own logging operators for private timber harvesting in order to guarantee to every citizen  that logging is done to the highest standards. Shall we set the skidding and hauling fee at $4/MBF?

Given the huge state and federal budget deficits currently in place, eliminating subsidized government services should be a priority for all citizens of this country.

And in case you were not aware of it, many state forestry budgets get 20%-50% of their revenue from the US Forest Service through State and Private Forestry. So in other words, all taxpayers in the US may well be subsidizing your local state forester.

Hopefully, the conservative administration, through lobbying efforts by consulting foresters, will use the threat of witholding this funding to stop subsidized forestry services at the state level. Their are plenty of other educational or extension opportunities for state foresters to work on that do not directly compete with consulting foresters.

[rebocardo]

JeffB (USA)
"There have been times over the years, that selling our high quality
veneer to the canadian market kept us from possibly closing up"

swampydonkey (Canada)
"And the situation in New Brunswick is that we wouldn't have the volume of veneer to even keep a veneer mill running"

Proof positive that paying jobs at a veener plant were exported to another country by shipping logs out of the country. Maybe it would have been easier to stay in business had the veener business stayed in the U.S.

To me a professional Forester does what is good for the forest and his country and making money comes in second.  It should be a passion, not a buck.

Someone that pretty much rapes or clear cuts the land of an unsuspecting land owner to send the logs overseas for his company/boss without generating jobs in his community is not a forester in my opinion. But, a money grubbing criminal.

Not only do I dislike it happening in the USA, I positively hate it happening in developing nations where local villages are starving to death and people do not even have firewood for cooking. While the guys doing all the dangerous work, including dealing with spiked trees, do not even make $5 a day sometimes, and can not even cloth their children.

imo, It is simply wrong.

[Buzz-sawyer]

Buzz,

It really takes creative accounting to add up the total cost of state government services (employee salaries, benefits, office space, trucks, bureaucracy, etc) and come to the conclusion that such forestry services are "free."

Free is relative term used in relation to charges made by Commercial foresters vs. state foresters.
In Illinois trees are considered crops and under that , are regulated as corn and beans


What you are getting is subsidized service courtesy of all the other taxpayers who most likely have never heard of forestry, let alone ever use this service. If the state government actually had to charge their real cost of the service to the landowner, then I would have no competition whatsoever.

My state charges NOTHING...There is no fee to residents...regarding the REAL cost of the services...they are paid Directly through  tax payed by timber sales


. Obviously, this is a subsidized service.  I have lost a number of really nice quality timber sales because of this.As I stated earlier,

I understand you feel the state is your direct competition...so all of your comments Are viewed in this light

Using your logic, it would seem reasonable for the State of IL to employ its own logging operators for private timber harvesting in order to guarantee to every citizen  that logging is done to the highest standards. Shall we set the skidding and hauling fee at $4/MBF?

I believe in supply and demand, My loggic states that the state of Illinois provides many agricultural services, and that the people requested them or enable them to do so. And that your argument that the state has no right to provide thwe services it does, is weak in that the state is in existence to Govern and regulate and serve the residents, therefore providing FREE timber services is no different thaan the soil management expert, or the crop analyst offering advice, it only serves to produce a stronger state.

Given the huge state and federal budget deficits currently in place, eliminating subsidized government services should be a priority for all citizens of this country.

Our state forestry program is self sufficient your argument is not relevant to it.

And in case you were not aware of it, many state forestry budgets get 20%-50% of their revenue from the US Forest Service

So? I have read the statutes that our logging laws are based on and to the best of my knowledge we recieve NO federal foestry money and are self sufficient

[Jeff]

Buzz, if your state forestry is paid for through taxes, it is certainly not "self sufficient"

[Buzz-sawyer]

Meaning within the context of the state Government,
I was replying to the assumption we recieved 20-50% of our funding from the federal government.
And the comment that forest management was being payed by people that dont know what forestry is.....Rather, it is definetly being payed for within the realm of people who are selling thier timber and managed in large part by loggers..
Self sufficient on state level , and payed out forestry/agricultural tax revenue Not by general fund.
Not self sufficent in regard to self propigation...ALL government is parasidic.



to put it plainly MANY people would be without ANY resource were it not for the helpful and decent folks like my district forester.....They guide the willing in the right direction , particularly the small timber lot owner....I

[Jeff]

I agree with jrdwyer on his explanation of "free". I have the opportunity to sit on a board of an organization that lets me have a peek at many of the costs of things having to do with public forestry outreach programs. I have also sat on commitees with a national reach as in the "Tree of Hope" project, the U.S. Capital tree project of a few years ago. (easy to find more about with a forum search)  The public got to do a lot of "Free" things involved with thiat program. As just an old mill hand, I was dumbfounded and confounded on the amount of moeny it takes to provide something to the public that is "Free"

[Phorester]

Remember that taxpayers in a particular State pay Federal taxes, too.  So if their State gets Federal money for whatever purpose, those citizens are getting back some of the money they paid in to their Federal taxes.

[Ron Wenrich]

When I started out, the state had service foresters that went out and worked with landowners.  They really didn't take that much business away from the consultants, since they didn't put private timber out on bids.

But, that changed when the consultants started to complain about state foresters supposedly taking away work.  The state stopped providing service.  

But, that wasn't good enough.  The consultants wanted the state to give their names out to the landowners.  In essence, the state became a work finder for the consultants.  Seems like that is a type of subsidy.

Then the procurement foresters wanted to be put on the list.  Consultants complained for fear of eliminating the middle man.  In the end, anyone who had a BS in forestry could get their name on the list.  It was a very long list, and very confusing.  It still seems like an industry subsidy.

In the process, the landowner has been forgotten.  Landowners became confused with the list and ended up doing nothing.  Consultants and procurement foresters didn't really get all that much business.  Service foresters were phased out.

The nice thing about service foresters is that they had no economic interest in the outcome of any timber sales or recommended work.  I've seen a lot of work done by business that is no more than high grade operations.  Business economics supercede forest management.  No one reviews the forester's work or recommendations.  Is the landowner better served?  

Our society keeps on breaking down to where we are scared that the guy across the street is going to get more then we get.  We've become a bunch of individuals living in the same place, and community no longer exists.

[jrdwyer]

There has, and will always be, the need for state foresters to educate landowners, or school children, or citizens about their forest resource and the best ways to manage it. Educational services have always been part of the public domain. No argument there.

Historically, there has been a shortage of consulting foresters available to assist the private landowner. But times change. Today, in most states, there are an ample number of private consultants to assist landowners from 10 acres to 10,000 acres. Thus, the need for state foresters to provide all and every service to a forest landowner is outdated.

So what we are talking about is the scope of public forestry versus private forestry.  In the arena of assisting landowners with timber sales (marking, measuring, appraising, soliciting bids, helping to write contracts, enforcing contracts, etc.) the private independent consulting forester provides a superior service to the public forester.

As an example, I recently helped a landowner in KY who used the states' subsidized forestry marking service and did everything they said and got 0 bids on the marked timber. So in the end he called me and I found a buyer and helped him write a good contract and he got paid and was very happy. Unfortunately, the state of KY wasted a lot of time, money, and effort for nothing.

In Indiana, the DNR provides both a consulting forester list to landowners and a directory of professional loggers. So the landowner can choose whoever they want.

Finally, I have assisted landowners with timber sales in IL who were shocked that the state imposed a 4% timber sale tax.  In the end it just reduces their stumpage prices by 4%. So not every landowner in IL agrees with that tax.

[Buzz-sawyer]

I dont like the tax....and especially dont like explaining it to land owners, and particularly dont enjoy being forced to administer it and do the paper work.

[ppine]

Foresters have become much harder to find these days.  I think they are going to be making a huge come
back. 
I am tired of running into people with degrees in Environmental Science and other generalist 5!@#%^&*. 

Universities are expanding their programs but it may be too late. 
I lot of what we learned 50 years ago is buried in the basements of libraries.  I keep hearing studies that sound like it is all brand new.  A lot of the old research has never made it to the internet.  We know how to manage forests.  Just get the lawsuits and environmental compliance requirements out of the way. 

[peakbagger]

In the Northeast most large landowners have sold conservations rights to their lands. Usually they get money up front not to chop up the land into development lots and agree to use sustainable forestry that is inspected by third parties that are going to include foresters. I also think a lot of the forest carbon programs has the same need for foresters. Its a different sort of forestry but the folks doing it still need the fundamentals and certifications. 

[beenthere]

ppine
You have it right. 50 years ago the 'ists (ecologists, zoologists, geologists, etc., etc.) were graduating and being hired within the USFS with the ideology that clearcutting trees was "WRONG" and it fit right in with the activists ranting about clear-cut lands managed by the USFS, states, and BLM. The trained Foresters with their degrees and knowledge were then forced out as having no expertise or reason to be respected. That is putting it way too simple but in general that is my understanding of the problem. 
The effect snowballed into the problems we have now. Recovery, as ppine says, is trying to pick up with the sad state of affairs in the Forestry education field and in finding the experienced instructors and professors who have now long-been retired. 
Has been very sad to see this happen since the 60's. 

[ppine]

There can be no doubt that logging fizzled after the spotted owl mess in the early 1990s. Environmental groups figured out how to stop timber sales in court by filing lawsuits.  The NEPA process became very slow partly because the USFS has been arbitrary in the interpretation of it.   A lot of foresters kind of gave up.  Many retired.  But I don't think the agency was overwhelmed by liberal people with other interests.  I blame lawsuits and the environmental review process. 

[SwampDonkey]

The Irvings are always telling us they are looking for foresters. The fact of the matter, even in the days of 250 graduates from UNB, they hired very few, maybe 2 a year. Most went elsewhere. How long do they think a forester is going to wait around for a job with 100's of others after it to? Fact is, the Irvings and most mill owners hire forest technicians, not many foresters at all. A forest technician graduate has only been in school one year. He/she gets special status in the fact he/she can draw EI while in school, while a forester is denied. That is actually enshrined by the CRA with the Forest Technician college. That goes back for years in the past, since the 50's at least. I can tell you though, any attempt to go against the status quo in the college and you'll be ejected. That means anyone going against how forestry has been traditionally practised in NB. You make waves, might as well say good bye. There has been one instructor there in recent years who tried and he didn't fare well. Even DNR ousted him before he became an instructor.

[ppine]

An education and some experience. 
Foresters understand how a tree population behaves.  Horticulturists, arborists and some other ists can never be foresters because they only understand one tree at a time. 

[Ron Scott]

Yes, foresters are professionals in the knowledge and practice of Silviculture where many of the "ologists" have no knowledge of it. They must depend on the services of a forester to practice integrated resource management.

The USFS hired mostly foresters up until the Monongahela Controversy in 1974 and enactment of the National Forest Management Act of 1976. Those with a forestry degree were the "best bang for the buck" at the time for applying multiple Use and forest commodity outputs. 

Timber management was a primary focus at the time.

[Ron Scott]

Earning a Forestry Degree: What to Know U.S. News & World Report, March 6, 2023 Though forestry programs have evolved and spread across colleges nationwide – especially at land-grant institutions – many prospective and current college students remain unaware of this major, experts say. READ MORE

The E-Forester

[Autocar]

I have always felt that a forester should be a logger in the beginning because all the state foresters I have dealt with want to mark to much junk trees and a few good trees making it hard to make a living. And a few keeping the better trees so when they retire they become a consultant and get paid a percentage of the job. Probably my most unfavorable subject foresters ! Just my two cents. And here in Ohio the forester wants to cut most of the den trees and the game warden wants to keep more of them and they never set down and talk about what's the best of both worlds.

[barbender]

 In my opinion, a "real" forester also understands the realities of what it takes for loggers to get wood to the mill, and without any loggers they can't accomplish their management goals.

 I say this because we'll get some new guys, fresh out of college that can be a real pain to work with. They'll put up sales that don't have enough timber of any value for any loggers to bid on, and they can't figure out why. The sales loggers do buy, these foresters seem to make it a mission to keep the logger from making any money. 

 Most come around after a few years. Others never do, and agencies have whole areas where they get zero bids for timber because no one will work with the forester. 

 I was cutting a tract this month that a fairly new forester put up. These young guys have drank the global warming Kool-aid pretty heavily and are doing some really stupid stuff (imo) because of it. Leaving a 40 acre tract of 60-70 year old Balmy, Balsam Fir standing because it's "old growth" and sequestering carbon. Other tracts, cutting all of the aspen, leaving the birch and balsam. In both of those cases, most of that wood will be dead in 20 years. If there were sound management reasons for leaving it standing, fine. But sometimes I think it is nothing but virtue signaling. 

[doc henderson]

wood put in a house, continues to sequester carbon, unless the house burns down.  even then it is net zero.

[barbender]

 Yep I didn't say they made sense, Doc. Just what we are dealing with out on the ground. Some of this stupidity is somewhat humorous when read about in headlines, not so much when real people come out and start screwing up your day to day with this foolishness.

 If he was that concerned about global warming, he could've came out to the job once to paint the one boundary line needed, and put up a ticket box. I saw him up there at least 5 days, and this job is 70 miles from the office🤦 There always seems to be a major mental disconnect with these people.

[doc henderson]

 

[SwampDonkey]

Don't forget that most all field staff looking after such jobs are technicians and very few foresters. I get to see them every so often on our thinning blocks, they aren't foresters. Over the years I hear from a logger now and again, 'my forester so and so....', when I know the guy and he's not a forester.

There is going to be a few guys who never got educated well in the local ecology they end up working in with regards to stand dynamics when there are interventions, man made or natural. What we get to cut now is the results of someone elses' job before. So if we keep taking the best because we can't make money, we might as well let it fall down I guess. We cut a mountain of low grade up here, rolls by here non stop, mostly due to the site and a lot that was never thinned out in time, and then because the time between renewel has shifted from 80-100 years to 30 or 40. In the north, a 40 year old hardwood isn't very big. Aspen and fir can be good sized on a  good site, but they aren't money trees, they yield more volume per hr during harvest, less handling to get the same amount of wood.

[beenthere]

Agree what barbender says, and another example back in the day (90's) when the rage was all about the Pacific yew trees yielding taxol. The demand for the Pacific yew to be harvested from the set-aside acres of old growth forests was upsetting the minds of the Sierra Club type. 
Long story short, was on a forest in Oregon to assist with plans to harvest Pacific yew. While there, a USFS employee (not sure which 'ologist she was) was giving a short tour of the harvesting plans where some "old growth" 30+ diameter Doug fir trees would be harvested along with the Pacific yew. The diameters were small to large in a bell-shaped curve. Were told which trees could be harvested, and which perfectly good trees would have to be cut down and left laying on the ground to rot "for the ecosystem" to remain perfect. Trying to satisfy everyone. 
Most interesting was the response from a couple ladies in this group from California who put up a big stink about "wasting" those perfectly good trees. Had a good laugh about how that stung under their skin. 

[SwampDonkey]

I remember the yew craze. They looked at Canada yew in this region. Not many were interested in harvesting it because the harvestor was usually the land owner and they wasn't going to get much $$ to bother with. I think you could make more money picking fiddleheads by the lb and less work. And you could sell them like strawberries as fast as you can pick'm. :D

[Peter Drouin]

The only time I would need one is to go and figure out the BF I have in R Oak-Pine-Hemlock or whatever on the land. 16" DBH and up.
Is what I tell customers when they ask me what I think about cutting.
Mark your main road into the land, let the logger do the short roads off that. And leave all the slash, cut up to be no more than 4' tall, less is better.
I have Foresters here, All they think about is the $$ they will make.
I do have some good ones too.
Like any trade, you have the good, bad, and ugly. ;)   

[SwampDonkey]

Since a lot of old forestry schools now do not have undergraduate degrees this is all it takes now to be an RPF, a 16 month Masters Degree in Forest Conservation.

Peter Kuitenbrouwer - School of Journalism - Toronto Metropolitan University

https://www.sgs.utoronto.ca/programs/forest-conservation

[240b]

if you look at the nh state license application under qualifications of applicants.
 its possible to obtain a license without any degree. 
  The state of Vt grandfathered a bunch of people (without forest degrees)who had been writing plans when they enacted licensure a few years ago.  
   

[Ron Scott]

The Little-Known Field that Protects the Environment and Pays Well Rayonier, July 26, 2023 A forestry major offers a wide range of high-demand job opportunities in a field that plays an important role in carbon sequestration, protecting threatened and endangered species, and improving air and water quality.  Read More

The E-forester