Jump to content


Photo

Just Gave Bigfoot 4.0


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
102 replies to this topic

#81 will

will

    Bigfoot

  • Sésquac
  • 4,219 posts

Posted 20 September 2010 - 04:50 PM

That industry is alive and well in the East norcal, or at least there are still plenty of trucks loaded with logs careening down mountain roads.



Sas you said the industry is alive and well. It is alive.

As I said prices have not moved in years.

What you have is the smaller guys being pushed out, and the larger companies are able to make it but it is tough. The large companies are able to better handle the environmental regulations.

In the mid-Atlantic there are large forest that are all locked up (just like in the west) because they (wackos) don't want them touched. Many state officials are concerned, cause a forest needs to be managed, and home owners are not allowd. So there getting die-off from insect infestation's, and invasive species is another problem.

Edited by will, 20 September 2010 - 04:51 PM.

  • 0

#82 will

will

    Bigfoot

  • Sésquac
  • 4,219 posts

Posted 20 September 2010 - 04:52 PM

Hah! I've been playing you saps for 3 pages now - there never was a presentation!



As I suspected

Any other scientific things you would like to tell us.
  • 0

#83 RedRatSnake

RedRatSnake

    Sasquatch

  • Banned
  • 7,906 posts

Posted 20 September 2010 - 04:58 PM

I detect some Saskeptic Sarcasm ~ :)
  • 0

The hard part about playing 'chicken' is knowing when to flinch

Now, look what we have here before us. We got the Habituators sitting next to the Skeptic's. We've got the Witnesses right by the Non Believers. Nobody is wasting nobody. That... is a miracle. And miracles is the way things ought to be.

#84 will

will

    Bigfoot

  • Sésquac
  • 4,219 posts

Posted 20 September 2010 - 05:05 PM

I detect some Saskeptic Sarcasm ~ :)


Who really know's for sure.
  • 0

#85 RedRatSnake

RedRatSnake

    Sasquatch

  • Banned
  • 7,906 posts

Posted 20 September 2010 - 05:11 PM

Kinda like the wise old owl telling you there are only three licks to the center of a tootsie pop but you know there is more. :)
  • 0

The hard part about playing 'chicken' is knowing when to flinch

Now, look what we have here before us. We got the Habituators sitting next to the Skeptic's. We've got the Witnesses right by the Non Believers. Nobody is wasting nobody. That... is a miracle. And miracles is the way things ought to be.

#86 will

will

    Bigfoot

  • Sésquac
  • 4,219 posts

Posted 20 September 2010 - 05:56 PM

:lol:
  • 0

#87 Huntster

Huntster

    Sasquatch

  • Skookum
  • 14,548 posts

Posted 20 September 2010 - 06:28 PM

norcallogger, on 18 September 2010 - 04:26 AM, said: The US timber industry is but a shadow of what it once was thanks to unmerited environmental regulation.


That industry is alive and well in the East norcal, or at least there are still plenty of trucks loaded with logs careening down mountain roads.


Imagine the environmental industry after a bipedal ape is discovered. Think logging will remain "alive and well"?

Funny. Those environmental folks sure are quiet about sasquatches now. Extremely quiet. Not a peep from them on the subject.

Like government, but usually quite vociferous in their zeal to save rare creatures..........
  • 0

"God is dead" - Nietzsche
"Nietzsche is dead" - The Huntster

"The Huntster is dead" - An Unknown, Future, And Correct Sage


#88 Saskeptic

Saskeptic

    Bigfoot

  • Members
  • 4,701 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 06:23 AM

Sas you said the industry is alive and well. It is alive.


So are you going to continue to ignore the phrase " . . . or at least there are still plenty of trucks . . ." or are you prepared to man-up and admit that those trucks are still rolling?

I don't mind being called out when I've made some error - in fact, I'd prefer it - but please look for an actual error next time you feel compelled to call me out.
  • 0

#89 Saskeptic

Saskeptic

    Bigfoot

  • Members
  • 4,701 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 06:30 AM

Imagine the environmental industry after a bipedal ape is discovered. Think logging will remain "alive and well"?


Yes. Clearly bigfoots can find suitable habitat in areas of productive forest land. Simply overlay a map of sightings with a map of forest land and you'll see that bigfoots are by no means restricted to old growth forests. In fact, I was assured here last week that bigfoots are quite happy on the prairies too - they just stick to the narrow strips of riparian forest during the day and come out onto the plains at night so they can hunt deer and raid wheat fields and trap skunks in pvc pipes. So if we are to rely on the observations of bigfoot researchers, I see little justification at all for specific habitat protection clauses for bigfoots.
  • 0

#90 will

will

    Bigfoot

  • Sésquac
  • 4,219 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 10:26 AM

So are you going to continue to ignore the phrase " . . . or at least there are still plenty of trucks . . ." or are you prepared to man-up and admit that those trucks are still rolling?

I don't mind being called out when I've made some error - in fact, I'd prefer it - but please look for an actual error next time you feel compelled to call me out.


Sir what do you know about the timber industry.

You see log trucks rolling down the road, and thats your proof of a healthy industry

Don't feel like I'm calling you out, your a scientist. I would not expect you would understand business or industry. :lol:
  • 0

#91 Drew

Drew

    Yeti

  • Members
  • 2,156 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 11:35 AM

Sir what do you know about the timber industry.

You see log trucks rolling down the road, and thats your proof of a healthy industry

Don't feel like I'm calling you out, your a scientist. I would not expect you would understand business or industry. :lol:

His opinion was based on his observations. He still sees lumber trucks, I'm guessing at a rate similar to that which he used to see. Therefore his opinion is that it is alive and well.

Economics will tell us, that at a certain price point, some timber companies will not be able to operate, obviously, in Saskeptic's opinion, (He's seen consistent truck traffic) this point has not been reached yet.

When the price point is reached where some companies can't operate, the more efficient companies will move in, operating successfully at the lower price point. If they don't, then supply will drop, driving the price upward, at which point companies will move back into the industry.
  • 0

#92 Huntster

Huntster

    Sasquatch

  • Skookum
  • 14,548 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 11:45 AM

Huntster, on 20 September 2010 - 04:28 PM, said:

Imagine the environmental industry after a bipedal ape is discovered. Think logging will remain "alive and well"?


Yes. Clearly bigfoots can find suitable habitat in areas of productive forest land.


Coming from the guy who doesn't believe sasquatches exist?

Please. A simple review of the polar bear and global warming fiasco should be clear enough to all to illustrate that the Endangered Species Act is simply a political tool for the environmental industry. Throw an extremely rare bipedal ape who's primary range is PNW rain forests into the political toybox, and the environmental industry will think Santa Claus made a special gift just for them. To think that the scumbags are sitting on this issue in perfect silence now literally makes me nauseous.

Simply overlay a map of sightings with a map of forest land and you'll see that bigfoots are by no means restricted to old growth forests.


Bullspit. All sighting/report plottings clearly show the highest density of reports in the thickest forests of the Pacific Northwest.

In fact, I was assured here last week that bigfoots are quite happy on the prairies too - they just stick to the narrow strips of riparian forest during the day and come out onto the plains at night so they can hunt deer and raid wheat fields and trap skunks in pvc pipes. So if we are to rely on the observations of bigfoot researchers, I see little justification at all for specific habitat protection clauses for bigfoots.


Well, then, until people with authority and resources get into the search, I guess all you smart folks will have to rely on the "observations of bigfoot researchers", won't you?

Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if the authorities didn't start such a search in the Iowa prairies or ghettos of Detroit.
  • 0

"God is dead" - Nietzsche
"Nietzsche is dead" - The Huntster

"The Huntster is dead" - An Unknown, Future, And Correct Sage


#93 Drew

Drew

    Yeti

  • Members
  • 2,156 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 12:19 PM

Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if the authorities didn't start such a search in the Iowa prairies or ghettos of Detroit.


Good point! a 'scientist' would have as good of a chance in Detroit to find Bigfoot, as he would in any other area in the country.
  • 0

#94 Huntster

Huntster

    Sasquatch

  • Skookum
  • 14,548 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 12:44 PM

Economics will tell us, that at a certain price point, some timber companies will not be able to operate, obviously, in Saskeptic's opinion, (He's seen consistent truck traffic) this point has not been reached yet.


Too bad economics isn't the only factor dictating whether or not logging will occur. If you don't own the land and trees, you won't log. And while there are lots of private lands east of the Mississippi commercially logged, most of the west is owned by government.

Even if you do own the land and trees, you'll log in accordance with environmental rules and regs.

The plain fact is that the timber industry in the United States has been politically decimated beginning with the first Earth Day in 1970 and the passage of The National Environmental Policy Act. The timber industry in the west has been declining ever since. It's a matter of fact. Researchable. Quantifiable. Not "opinion".

The industry in Alaska is virtually gone:

As intended, the Tongass timber sales sustained thousands of year round jobs and a
strong economic base in an otherwise economically depressed region. Sadly, in 1990
Congress passed more legislation - the Tongass Timber Reform Act (TTRA) - that
established additional Wilderness and roadless areas that were allegedly important for
subsistence users but were “missed” in the 1980 package of land withdrawals. The
politicians at that time promised that no jobs would be lost as a result of the legislation,
despite the elimination of the guaranteed annual timber supply mandate that ANILCA
had established as a compromise when the first round of Wilderness, Monument and
Roadless Area set-asides were established (the guaranteed timber supply level was 450
million board feet - net scribner -annually).
After 1990, the industry struggled to maintain operations despite the shrinking timber
supply and as a result, the volume of timber-under-contract was not replenished with new
timber sales and quickly plummeted from over 2,000 million board feet in 1990 to about
100 million board feet in 2007. Most of the initial decline in timber-under-contract was
from long-term timber sale volume; but, the industry had been fully integrated and the
long-term timber sale saw logs were commonly traded for pulp logs and chips or simply
sold to the other sawmills in Southeast Alaska. Consequently, all of the mills were
affected by the loss of the long-term timber sale volume.
TTRA also gave the Forest Service authority to make unilateral contract modifications to
the two long-term timber sales. The changes that the agency ultimately imposed on these
contracts eliminated nearly all potential for profit.
In 1994, the purchaser of the Sitka long-term timber sale closed its pulp mill and
announced plans to construct a medium density fiberboard plant in its place. The
purchaser was negotiating its contract terms with the Forest Service when the agency
abruptly and illegally cancelled its contract.
The market price for dissolving pulp reached an all time high in 1995 and Canadian mills
began bidding more aggressively for native pulp logs from Southeast Alaska, thus driving
the price of pulp logs from about $180/MBF to over $350/MBF. KPC, with the sole
remaining pulp mill in Southeast Alaska, had been denied access to its full contract
volume in the years leading up to this market event and thus was compelled to chip
sawlogs plus pay the unprecedented high pulp log cost in order to keep its pulp mill
operating in 1995. The combined cost of diverting sawlogs to its pulp mill and
purchasing high-priced pulp logs to replace the shortfall in fiber from its long-term
timber sale mooted any benefit from the all-time high market prices. In 1996, after the
pulp market had already declined, the Forest Service appraisal system picked up the high
pulp prices from 1995; and, based on procedures developed pursuant to the unilateral
contract changes that the agency had imposed in 1990, increased the stumpage rate for
KPC from $54/MBF to $144/MBF. This additional stumpage caused an enormous loss
8
for KPC. The lack of adequate pulp fiber combined with the staggering stumpage
increases made it clear that there was no longer any opportunity for KPC to be successful
in the future.
In late 1996, Ketchikan Pulp Company completed the last of the pollution control
improvements for its pulp mill and then negotiated an early end to its contract. The pulp
mill permanently closed in March 1997; but, KPC attempted to facilitate a future for its
logging and sawmill employees by installing a veneer plant that could utilize the small
low-grade logs that had previously been converted to pulp mill chips. In the months
leading up to this final long-term sale termination, the Department of Agriculture agreed
to a three-year continuation of the long-term timber sale in order to provide adequate
timber for a seamless transition into a future without the long-term commitments.
Unfortunately for the industry and most of the communities in Southeast Alaska, the
seamless transition never happened.
In 1997, the Forest Service adopted a new land management plan for the Tongass and the
agency announced that it intended to switch to “ecosystem management”. Under this new
philosophy, timber sales became a by-product of ecosystem management and attention to
timber sale economics was abandoned. The new land management plan included
extremely costly timber sale design constraints that raised the cost of harvesting timber
enormously. These constraints included mandating that 30-50% of the timber be left
standing in most previously developed areas. The harvesting costs in these areas should
have been very low because the roads were already in place; but, the partial-cutting
requirement instead made these some of the highest cost areas to operate. The partial
cutting requirement also raised grave concerns about worker safety. Other costly
constraints included oversize buffers on non-fish streams, a greatly expanded beach
fringe no-cut buffer and a system of old-growth reserves that set-aside over a million
acres of the highest value, lowest cost timberlands.
As the pre-1997 timber sales were harvested and the newly designed timber sales were
advertised, the economic impact of the 1997 land management plan became apparent and
despite good markets for hemlock, spruce and cedar lumber many of the timber sales that
were advertised during this period appraised enormously deficit due to the high cost
impact of the 1997 land management plan. The region’s sawmills initially purchased only
the economic timber sales, but as the mills depleted their volume of timber-undercontract,
they began worrying about mill closures and losing their customers. In
desperation the mills began purchasing marginal and deficit timber sales and by 2001 the
bulk of the timber-under-contract was comprised mostly of deficit timber sales and the
mills were losing money. About this time, Congress began prohibiting the agency from
offering timber sales that did not appraise with a full profit and risk allowance. In 2003
and 2004 many of the deficit timber sales that had been purchased were mutually
terminated when the purchasers, the agency and Congress all recognized that those highcost
timber sales could never be economic. This legislation eliminated most of the deficit
timber sales, but the agency planners did not have an economic mandate and they
9
continued to prepare NEPA documents (Environmental Impact Statements) for timber
sales without regard to economic common sense. Consequently, only a small percentage
of the post 1997 NEPA-approved timber sales were actually ever offered. Environmental
activists recognized a new opportunity to obstruct timber sales - they began dividing the
cost of the Environmental Impact Statements by the small volume of timber that was
actually sold and then urged Congress to stop funding timber sales in Alaska arguing
fiscal prudence. Others more rationally argued that it made more sense to fix the
economic problems than to end the timber sales.
As a result of the changes in management of the national forest, the federal timber sale
program has shrunk by about 90%; and, since the Tongass National Forest encompasses
about 93% of the timberlands in Southeast Alaska, the timber industry has similarly
declined. Manufacturing integration, the economy of scale and a supply of timber
adequate for normal sawmill operations were all eliminated as the timber supply
declined.
The most recent TLMP Amendment, announced in early 2008, must eliminate these
unworkable prescriptions if there is to be a timber industry in Southeast Alaska. The
Forest Service vows this new plan will support an efficient and sustainable industry. With
minimal timber remaining under contract and with a land management plan that looks a
lot like the failed 1997 plan, the future of the timber industry is uncertain.


I know of not a single mill in Southeast Alaska still operating.
  • 0

"God is dead" - Nietzsche
"Nietzsche is dead" - The Huntster

"The Huntster is dead" - An Unknown, Future, And Correct Sage


#95 Drew

Drew

    Yeti

  • Members
  • 2,156 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 12:47 PM

So you are claiming that Saskeptics opinion is invalid? He is not seeing logging trucks in the Northeast?

The gov't regulations would be factored into the cost of course, so they do make it more difficult in some places.

In Michigan, the state government has logging/lease agreements. Where state land can be logged. Also, private land can be loaned to the state, so your taxes are lower, as long as the state is allowed to lease teh logging rights to logging companies.

Edited by Drew, 21 September 2010 - 12:49 PM.

  • 0

#96 Huntster

Huntster

    Sasquatch

  • Skookum
  • 14,548 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 12:55 PM

So you are claiming that Saskeptics opinion is invalid?


I'm stating that it's an opinion, and it is not valid in the Pacific Northwest. Do you need me to draw a picture?

He is not seeing logging trucks in the Northeast?


I dunno. Maybe he'll get run over by one if we wait long enough, yes? Sound like a valid, scientific theory to answer your question?
  • 0

"God is dead" - Nietzsche
"Nietzsche is dead" - The Huntster

"The Huntster is dead" - An Unknown, Future, And Correct Sage


#97 Drew

Drew

    Yeti

  • Members
  • 2,156 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 01:12 PM

I'm stating that it's an opinion, and it is not valid in the Pacific Northwest. Do you need me to draw a picture?



I dunno. Maybe he'll get run over by one if we wait long enough, yes? Sound like a valid, scientific theory to answer your question?


That's just unnecessary. I certainly wish no ill-will of you. Why can't we debate without this stuff?
  • 0

#98 NWSquatcher

NWSquatcher

    Oh Mah

  • Inactive
  • 646 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 01:24 PM

I agree that posts are getting much to personal when trying to prove a point. Let's get this back on topic before it gets closed. This one has just about run it's course anyway.
  • 0
He could say that he is Batman, and I'll say "All right Batman, whattaya got?" FuriousGeorge.

#99 Saskeptic

Saskeptic

    Bigfoot

  • Members
  • 4,701 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 02:24 PM

Sir what do you know about the timber industry.


Well I collaborate with its representatives in research and teaching, and conduct my own research on lands managed for production forestry. I'd say that about 2/3 of the field time in my career has been on public forest land. I'm certainly ignorant of much in modern forestry, but I'm far better schooled than the average schmo. What's your point?

You see log trucks rolling down the road, and thats your proof of a healthy industry


No, I see logging trucks rolling down the road and that's my proof that there are logging trucks rolling down the road. I think the issue you have with my statement stems from a reading comprehension problem on your part. Hint: you might go look up the meaning of the word "or" before you get your shorts in a tighter twist.
  • 0

#100 Saskeptic

Saskeptic

    Bigfoot

  • Members
  • 4,701 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 02:27 PM

I dunno. Maybe he'll get run over by one if we wait long enough, yes? Sound like a valid, scientific theory to answer your question?


Nice Huntster. Very classy.
  • 0