Thu 10 Apr, 2014 10:58 am
Thu 10 Apr, 2014 11:50 am
maddog wrote:G'day NNW,
Not an industry stooge. But quite happy to discuss the facts (very few of which are derived from Forestry Tasmania btw). If we focus on the the facts, rather than allow passion and speculation to dominate over perspective and the science of forestry, there is little dispute - the forests are in safe hands.
Cheers.
Thu 10 Apr, 2014 6:22 pm
Nuts wrote: a hint of disagreement or exposed 'position'[/i].
Thu 10 Apr, 2014 9:10 pm
Thu 10 Apr, 2014 9:28 pm
Thu 10 Apr, 2014 10:17 pm
north-north-west wrote:Nuts wrote:...I believe there is a good case for maintaining a small, efficient, native (looking) forest zoned for a higher level of management- multiple uses and some 'high end' product return. Additional to parks & WHA.
I doubt if there are many reasonable people who would disagree with that. Although we do need to reach a consensus on the precise meaning of 'small'.
Part of the problem, however, is that the reasonable people aren't in charge.
© Bushwalk Australia and contributors 2007-2013.