Basic forestry

[banksiana]

What would it take to come down there and work?  Are there any jobs?  Data collection?  Research projects?

[jim king]

banksiana :
I don´t know of a way that anyone could come down here and study the forest without having a University , a government  or some other type organization supporting them.  I have seen a few students come thru but they dont last long.  The cost of being in the jungle and everything that goes with it are high.

You would think that with all the promotion of the Amazon and all the supposed problems some one would have something other that some Google Earth Sat photos and a photo of an Indian from a helicopter.

As for working here there is nothing available and it is not legal without a work permit but having said that there are many foreighners here that simply stay out of sight for one reason or another and have no problems.

Tropical forestry is fun and always comes up with a new species nicer than anything you have seen before but tropical forestry will never be a significant factor in the worldwide industry.  The diversity of species makes it difficult to have a production level sufficient for an industry.  With a hundred species per acre and half a dozen trees with a market it is not going to happen not to mention the elements to fight.  That is why you see pictures of burning jungle for pasture , palm oil plantations etc. as the wood is so diverse in species and mostly useless people don´t waste time with it.

The only people who are making money in the Amazon related to wood is the Non Profit Industry telling the world they are going to save it and just send money.  Angola, the Congo and many other areas have problems much greater than the Amazon but the names are not magic money draws as the Amazon. 

To make it short I don´t know how you could accomplish your goal of living and studying here without a large corporation or some other source taking an interest.

[banksiana]

Must be that it happens to all developing countries.  Here in Minnesota we supposedly had vast resources of white and red pines that could have been managed better and we still would have them.  But instead the lumber companies cleared them out.  Only after it was done did we get into decent forest management practices.  We do have very nice forests now however.  Aspen is king up here now, and as it turns out, aspen is an extremely easy species to manage for, so we are lucky.   

[MFinity]

Jim,

Sounds like you've researched your own area as thoroughly as anyone, so you may already know there is an International Society of Tropical Foresters - a much smaller outfit than it sounds like  :- but you may (or may not) find some helpful contacts.

http://www.istf-bethesda.org

Cheers and good luck,

Mike

banksiana :
I don´t know of a way that anyone could come down here and study the forest without having a University , a government  or some other type organization supporting them.  I have seen a few students come thru but they dont last long.  The cost of being in the jungle and everything that goes with it are high.

You would think that with all the promotion of the Amazon and all the supposed problems some one would have something other that some Google Earth Sat photos and a photo of an Indian from a helicopter.

As for working here there is nothing available and it is not legal without a work permit but having said that there are many foreighners here that simply stay out of sight for one reason or another and have no problems.

Tropical forestry is fun and always comes up with a new species nicer than anything you have seen before but tropical forestry will never be a significant factor in the worldwide industry.  The diversity of species makes it difficult to have a production level sufficient for an industry.  With a hundred species per acre and half a dozen trees with a market it is not going to happen not to mention the elements to fight.  That is why you see pictures of burning jungle for pasture , palm oil plantations etc. as the wood is so diverse in species and mostly useless people don´t waste time with it.

The only people who are making money in the Amazon related to wood is the Non Profit Industry telling the world they are going to save it and just send money.  Angola, the Congo and many other areas have problems much greater than the Amazon but the names are not magic money draws as the Amazon. 

To make it short I don´t know how you could accomplish your goal of living and studying here without a large corporation or some other source taking an interest.

[banksiana]

Round trip flight Minneapolis to Lima is 1500 or so.  Considering this country for a vacation now that I am intrigued about it.

[SwampDonkey]

Is there a "Golden Arches"? :D

https://forestryforum.com/board/index.php/topic,21706.msg308281.html#msg308281

[Phorester]

In addition to all the above discussion, a very basic underpinning for you (and the rest of us too):

In the broad sense, I don't think your problems are any different than in the USA.  You are dealing with people  (mainly politicians) who know squat about trees or woods or jungles.  They respond only to loud vocal touchy-feely politically correct environmental groups who jump on the latest know-it-all environmental bandwagon who also know squat about trees or woods or jungles.  In your case it may be a world-wide perception regarding rain forests in general that your govt. also feels pressure from.

I think the bottom line is that foresters have to come at this from a very basic biological perspective.  Trees are plants. They need dirt, water, and sun to grow. People can understand this. It cannot be argued against. Forests are collections of plants.  All a forester does is manipulate that dirt, water, and sun to favor the plants (trees) that are wanted.  

We have no control over the soil.  We can conserve it and protect it from degradation, but we cannot effectively improve the fertility, depth, structure, etc. We have to work with the soil that is already there.  

We have no control over the water.  We cannot make it rain or snow.

We do have control over sunlight. We use different cutting practices; thinnings, selective harvests, clearcutting, shelterwood harvests, etc, etc., etc., to manipulate the amount of sunlight that gets to the trees we want to grow. All a forester does is manage sunlight in a forest.

So a basic point is to emphasize that it is basic plant biology, nothing more.  This cannot be intelligently argued against. It can be evaded, ignored and downplayed, but there is no effective argument against basic plant biology.  

Therefore, forests should be managed by basic plant biological concepts, not by administrative decree.

I think that if you start from this perspective you will have the strongest argument possible. Your politicians also need to realize that this is their strongest argument for effectively and properly managing their jungles.  They need to be made aware that their opponents cannot effectively argue against this position.  It is what's best for the jungles based on basic biological principles.

[BaldBob]

Phorester,
All that you say is true (though there is evidence of several instances  in Central and South America where native people vastly improvved  the fertility and structure of the soil on fairly large tracts by layering waste and charcoal). However, the problem  you are addressing lies largely in the fact that there is no concenus in society on what the desired outcome of any management should be - i.e. what is "best'".  If you don't know where you are going, any road will get you there.

[Tom]

From having read so many of Jim's missives, I gather that Forestry isn't the only concern.  It seems to me that misinformation and politically motivated decisions are keeping the population's working class in an ever continuing social incarceration of poverty. 

Whether the Jungle's Species have been defined or not, the rules laid on these people have them indiscriminately clearing the land with fire to be able to do subsistance farming and growing of drug crops.   It's the backing of the Science of Forestry that Jim is asking for more than wanting manpower help.  He needs people who have been schooled to provide the books, the reports, the schooling, the ideas, anything that would get the political system to look at Forestry as a solution to so many of the country's other social problems.  The only ideas are coming from desk jockeys  who are pushing for dollars to be pumped into the area through agencies whose agenda is the gathering of the money under the auspices of Save-the-world environmental green-speak.  All the talk in the world isn't going to do any good if the players don't know the rules.   The plea is for help identifying the rules.

At this point, there isn't enough knowledge to ask a question, so to speak.  I think that the request for Forestry oriented books and reports and philosophies is an effort to get the people (and the government) knowledgeable enough to ask a question.  I also personally believe that It is up to the people of Peru to make their own educated decisions.  The influx of NGO's and Politicos from other countries, who make a showing just to benefit their economic standing or to place themselves in the decision making hierarchy of Peru is a detriment to the ability of a sovereign nation to self-govern.

Whew!

[BrandonTN]

Waayyy back, Tom said:

Big business and higher politics may have there hearts in the right place, but the humans on the planet can't be ignored for the preservation of a garden.  Buzz words like Forest Biodiversity, ecology, destruction, deforestation, clear cutting, mono culture, protection, etc. are the tools of inflammatory rhetoric used by those with agendas other than  co-existence and the value of the human race.

Forestry is as much a social puzzle as biological & economical.
Yep...Politicians do politics as their source of bread, butter, and Benz. They use what's in the spotlight (ie sustainable forest resource management, biodiversity) as their "buzz words", while the eco-extremists scream for protection emotionally and blindly. The two work together...Politicians win votes by emotions!!  It's a shame that people are being robbed of their natural right to survive via the forest because a far away politically pushed decision prohibits "destruction" when stewardship education is obviously the practical solution.  
...But forest scientists also use the words: forest biodiversity, sustainability, ecology health... They are good concepts to be studied...but I think their is a huge gap between the knowledge and, like you said, the how-to. We need people to bridge this gap on the ground, in the real world.

But in Jim's case and the tropics, I guess even the biological knowledge is scarce. I agree, the Peruvian government should handle it. The US sending a few supplies for them to build a house on sand won't help. There is always a bigger picture to see, that is the challenging part. So complex to see...especially for an outsider.

Tom said just before:

I also personally believe that It is up to the people of Peru to make their own educated decisions.  The influx of NGO's and Politicos from other countries, who make a showing just to benefit their economic standing or to place themselves in the decision making hierarchy of Peru is a detriment to the ability of a sovereign nation to self-govern.

...Re: the NGOs: Good point. The extremist in me wants to protect tropical forests blindly, but it's not as easy as that.  I know little specifics about what is the situation in the tropics. The Peruvians know, though!

[jim king]

I know little specifics about what is the situation in the tropics. The Peruvians know, though!

As of last count there was 86 species with incomplete vouchers in the complete governmental and University of Peru.  Only missing a few thousand.

[SwampDonkey]

Jim, I think the situation with the government investing in forestry is similar to here. If the minister is not popular he's taking up space and the sector will suffer. If he's at least half way knowledgeable about what he's doing the department gets more funding to get things done. When the sector is generating small revenues compared to others the government is not as friendly to the small producer. They only think on the big scale, not you and your workers and small volumes. It's not right, but that's how they do it here. This gives the government fewer players to deal with. If we didn't have marketing boards up here it would be the same. They only want to talk to one voice, marketing board, forest products association, forest products commission.