Gee jt, like you do? That is when you aren't ignoring the questions you can't, or don't want to answer.
Originally Posted by semiannualchick:
Originally Posted by Quaildog:
I think I will buy the plant
__________
I bet you would pay cash too, straight out of your pocket. 
___________________________________
Probably went upstairs and asked mommy if she could loan him the money.
Do yourself a favor and put QuailDog on ignore.
Originally Posted by direstraits:
Originally Posted by seeweed:
Well, like Dire said, paper is becoming a thing of the past. I never buy a newspaper, and wouldn't even get anything like that if it weren't for the (unclassified) Courier Journal that goes into the trash ,
Probably don't buy a package of printer paper a year. Don't fax or receive faxes any more so no paper used there. I don't even get any bills on killed trees anymore, just inconvenience a few electrons.
Paper towels and toilet paper pretty much make up about 98% of my paper purchases , or consumption. I even send preachers and credit card companies back their mailings in their stamped , self addressed envelope so they can re-cycle that (and help the post office a little).
I can see how the world has changed and will continue to do so. It is sad for the people loosing their jobs, and although the one type of truck that scares me out on the highway is a logging truck , even those guys will have a harder time with that plant closed.
On the good side, maybe all the Republican presidents will not feel as compelled to give away our national forest to the loggers.
___________________________________
I do buy the TD. However, except for a notebook, I use little writing paper, SCA has a plant in Barton for tissue. Does it use much pulp?
Unlike the national parks, the national forests exists to provide timber and forestry products for present and future generations. I'm not aware the Republicans are giving the trees away. From what I've read the Department of Agriculture makes a nice profit. Besides, Democrats have managed the department for the last 4.5 years.
=====
You should recalculate, it was Bush1 that wanted to give the national forrest to his buddy who was CEO of Ga Pacific. GP owned vast areas of western forrest, and they had clear cut them, not managed them in a manner that could be sustained. After he had emptied his cookie jar, then he wanted to put his hand in our cookie jar and grab what was left of ours.
It Was Bush2 who virtually gave away a lot of Bankhead Forrest to logging.
Far as I know, Carter, nor Clinton, nor Obama have done anything like that.
But, as you said, some play by the rules and are allowed to log in the nat forrest in a way that can be sustained.
Originally Posted by seeweed:
Originally Posted by direstraits:
Originally Posted by seeweed:
Well, like Dire said, paper is becoming a thing of the past. I never buy a newspaper, and wouldn't even get anything like that if it weren't for the (unclassified) Courier Journal that goes into the trash ,
Probably don't buy a package of printer paper a year. Don't fax or receive faxes any more so no paper used there. I don't even get any bills on killed trees anymore, just inconvenience a few electrons.
Paper towels and toilet paper pretty much make up about 98% of my paper purchases , or consumption. I even send preachers and credit card companies back their mailings in their stamped , self addressed envelope so they can re-cycle that (and help the post office a little).
I can see how the world has changed and will continue to do so. It is sad for the people loosing their jobs, and although the one type of truck that scares me out on the highway is a logging truck , even those guys will have a harder time with that plant closed.
On the good side, maybe all the Republican presidents will not feel as compelled to give away our national forest to the loggers.
___________________________________
I do buy the TD. However, except for a notebook, I use little writing paper, SCA has a plant in Barton for tissue. Does it use much pulp?
Unlike the national parks, the national forests exists to provide timber and forestry products for present and future generations. I'm not aware the Republicans are giving the trees away. From what I've read the Department of Agriculture makes a nice profit. Besides, Democrats have managed the department for the last 4.5 years.
=====
You should recalculate, it was Bush1 that wanted to give the national forrest to his buddy who was CEO of Ga Pacific. GP owned vast areas of western forrest, and they had clear cut them, not managed them in a manner that could be sustained. After he had emptied his cookie jar, then he wanted to put his hand in our cookie jar and grab what was left of ours.
It Was Bush2 who virtually gave away a lot of Bankhead Forrest to logging.
Far as I know, Carter, nor Clinton, nor Obama have done anything like that.
But, as you said, some play by the rules and are allowed to log in the nat forrest in a way that can be sustained.
seeweed,
The western forest clear cutting was done in patches in climax forests. Climax forests have reached their maximum growth. Little wild life can use them for food as the shade destroys all the browse. Typically, GP cut the trees in patches, to control erosion. The clear cut areas are allowed to regrow. During that time meadows form and browse is available for larger wild life like deer and elk. Sorry, but I am familiar with this portion of GP's inventory and it is sustainable.
As to Bankhead National Forest clear cutting claims -- please provide source of information. Preferably, not Mother Jones, they don't know the difference between private pine plantations and national forests.
Originally Posted by direstraits:
Originally Posted by seeweed:
Originally Posted by direstraits:
Originally Posted by seeweed:
Well, like Dire said, paper is becoming a thing of the past. I never buy a newspaper, and wouldn't even get anything like that if it weren't for the (unclassified) Courier Journal that goes into the trash ,
Probably don't buy a package of printer paper a year. Don't fax or receive faxes any more so no paper used there. I don't even get any bills on killed trees anymore, just inconvenience a few electrons.
Paper towels and toilet paper pretty much make up about 98% of my paper purchases , or consumption. I even send preachers and credit card companies back their mailings in their stamped , self addressed envelope so they can re-cycle that (and help the post office a little).
I can see how the world has changed and will continue to do so. It is sad for the people loosing their jobs, and although the one type of truck that scares me out on the highway is a logging truck , even those guys will have a harder time with that plant closed.
On the good side, maybe all the Republican presidents will not feel as compelled to give away our national forest to the loggers.
___________________________________
I do buy the TD. However, except for a notebook, I use little writing paper, SCA has a plant in Barton for tissue. Does it use much pulp?
Unlike the national parks, the national forests exists to provide timber and forestry products for present and future generations. I'm not aware the Republicans are giving the trees away. From what I've read the Department of Agriculture makes a nice profit. Besides, Democrats have managed the department for the last 4.5 years.
=====
You should recalculate, it was Bush1 that wanted to give the national forrest to his buddy who was CEO of Ga Pacific. GP owned vast areas of western forrest, and they had clear cut them, not managed them in a manner that could be sustained. After he had emptied his cookie jar, then he wanted to put his hand in our cookie jar and grab what was left of ours.
It Was Bush2 who virtually gave away a lot of Bankhead Forrest to logging.
Far as I know, Carter, nor Clinton, nor Obama have done anything like that.
But, as you said, some play by the rules and are allowed to log in the nat forrest in a way that can be sustained.
seeweed,
The western forest clear cutting was done in patches in climax forests. Climax forests have reached their maximum growth. Little wild life can use them for food as the shade destroys all the browse. Typically, GP cut the trees in patches, to control erosion. The clear cut areas are allowed to regrow. During that time meadows form and browse is available for larger wild life like deer and elk. Sorry, but I am familiar with this portion of GP's inventory and it is sustainable.
As to Bankhead National Forest clear cutting claims -- please provide source of information. Preferably, not Mother Jones, they don't know the difference between private pine plantations and national forests.
===========
Clear cut your own damm land if you want, but leave mine alone.
Never said anything in Bankhead was clear cut, but Bush2 sold off a lot of it, don't remember exactly how much tho.
Originally Posted by seeweed:
Originally Posted by direstraits:
Originally Posted by seeweed:
Originally Posted by direstraits:
Originally Posted by seeweed:
Well, like Dire said, paper is becoming a thing of the past. I never buy a newspaper, and wouldn't even get anything like that if it weren't for the (unclassified) Courier Journal that goes into the trash ,
Probably don't buy a package of printer paper a year. Don't fax or receive faxes any more so no paper used there. I don't even get any bills on killed trees anymore, just inconvenience a few electrons.
Paper towels and toilet paper pretty much make up about 98% of my paper purchases , or consumption. I even send preachers and credit card companies back their mailings in their stamped , self addressed envelope so they can re-cycle that (and help the post office a little).
I can see how the world has changed and will continue to do so. It is sad for the people loosing their jobs, and although the one type of truck that scares me out on the highway is a logging truck , even those guys will have a harder time with that plant closed.
On the good side, maybe all the Republican presidents will not feel as compelled to give away our national forest to the loggers.
___________________________________
I do buy the TD. However, except for a notebook, I use little writing paper, SCA has a plant in Barton for tissue. Does it use much pulp?
Unlike the national parks, the national forests exists to provide timber and forestry products for present and future generations. I'm not aware the Republicans are giving the trees away. From what I've read the Department of Agriculture makes a nice profit. Besides, Democrats have managed the department for the last 4.5 years.
=====
You should recalculate, it was Bush1 that wanted to give the national forrest to his buddy who was CEO of Ga Pacific. GP owned vast areas of western forrest, and they had clear cut them, not managed them in a manner that could be sustained. After he had emptied his cookie jar, then he wanted to put his hand in our cookie jar and grab what was left of ours.
It Was Bush2 who virtually gave away a lot of Bankhead Forrest to logging.
Far as I know, Carter, nor Clinton, nor Obama have done anything like that.
But, as you said, some play by the rules and are allowed to log in the nat forrest in a way that can be sustained.
seeweed,
The western forest clear cutting was done in patches in climax forests. Climax forests have reached their maximum growth. Little wild life can use them for food as the shade destroys all the browse. Typically, GP cut the trees in patches, to control erosion. The clear cut areas are allowed to regrow. During that time meadows form and browse is available for larger wild life like deer and elk. Sorry, but I am familiar with this portion of GP's inventory and it is sustainable.
As to Bankhead National Forest clear cutting claims -- please provide source of information. Preferably, not Mother Jones, they don't know the difference between private pine plantations and national forests.
===========
Clear cut your own damm land if you want, but leave mine alone.
Never said anything in Bankhead was clear cut, but Bush2 sold off a lot of it, don't remember exactly how much tho.
___________________________________________________
GP did cut on their own land. Again, they clear cut in patches surrounded by old forest growth. That lessens erosion. Again, the clear cut areas progress from bare ground to meadows to soft wood to hard wood climax forests. Large wild life (herbivores) like elk and deer, hide in the forests, but must have the meadows for food. GP allows hunting in their forests.
Again, please provide info about the Bankhead Forest logging, you complained about. National forests exist to provide timber and other such products to present and future generations. That is their reason for existence and why they are under the Department of Agriculture, not Interior like the national parks.
I buy a newspaper every day. On line reading just don't do the same as holding the edition in my hand. I've never been able to correct a dog or cover a bird cage floor with something on line.
Originally Posted by jtdavis:
I buy a newspaper every day. On line reading just don't do the same as holding the edition in my hand. I've never been able to correct a dog or cover a bird cage floor with something on line.
____________________________________________
Agreed, plus I find print more handy when I wish to read while waiting on whatever away from home. Plus, its good for covering the rug when I polish shoes.
Originally Posted by direstraits:
Originally Posted by seeweed:
Originally Posted by direstraits:
Originally Posted by seeweed:
Originally Posted by direstraits:
Originally Posted by seeweed:
Again, please provide info about the Bankhead Forest logging, you complained about. National forests exist to provide timber and other such products to present and future generations. That is their reason for existence and why they are under the Department of Agriculture, not Interior like the national parks.
=======
googlel is ready when you are.
I plugged in "Bush to sell parts of Bankhead Forest " , this was the first to come up:
http://news.google.com/newspap...&pg=3655,2870617
I had actually pulled that information out of my memory, but since you either have CRS, or are just not that interested in our environment and public lands for it to have been brought to your attention,, I just don't know.
Originally Posted by seeweed:
Originally Posted by direstraits:
Originally Posted by seeweed:
Originally Posted by direstraits:
Originally Posted by seeweed:
Originally Posted by direstraits:
Originally Posted by seeweed:
Again, please provide info about the Bankhead Forest logging, you complained about. National forests exist to provide timber and other such products to present and future generations. That is their reason for existence and why they are under the Department of Agriculture, not Interior like the national parks.
=======
googlel is ready when you are.
I plugged in "Bush to sell parts of Bankhead Forest " , this was the first to come up:
http://news.google.com/newspap...&pg=3655,2870617
I had actually pulled that information out of my memory, but since you either have CRS, or are just not that interested in our environment and public lands for it to have been brought to your attention,, I just don't know.
_____________________________________________________
Typical of the Progressive, you go immediately for the personal insult. Now, as to the article The proposed sell was part of the civilian BRAC proposal, not a massive logging program as you asserted. The tracts proposed for sell are mostly non-contiguous parcels of land. The government has tens of thousands of such parcels and unused buildings that it needs to sell. Why you would be against selling unused building that GSA must spend millions to keep up and vacant parcels of land that do not add to the national forests is beyond me. Not a hater of the environment, I live in it like all conservatives and progressives. Please direct you invectives with more logic.