Forest Certification

[Kodiakmac]

The only rural Landowners in this neck of the woods who will have anything to do with 'forest certification' or 'sustainable development' are city folks who have moved out here from the cities. 

Long-time rural Landowners and Farmers get nervous when they hear words like that - with good cause.  Too many of them have gone down the 'Managed Forest' route with good intentions, only to have some, or all, of their property put under government 'protection' because it is deemed to be a wetland, an old-growth forest, or a loggerhead shrike was spotted.  'Protection' means you can't touch anything.  Your private land has been seized for the public good. It's legislated theft.

So we don't let people into out forests.   What they can't see won't hurt us.

[SwampDonkey]

 

Most of the time you wouldn't have to worry about anyone being there as long as there is no road. People are generally lazy when it comes to walking in the woods. Only people like me and folks passionate about their woods will ever leave the roads. Ask the majority of woodlot owners here when they last walked their woods and most will tell you hardly ever and can't remember.

[thompsontimber]

That's true around here too SwampDonkey.  Run across quite a few landowners that don't even realize they have timberland until someone tells them.  Recently purchased a tract of timber adjoining another tract I was working on...it was 79 acres of mixed hardwood and Virginia pine, and from the ajoining property I could see a rather large disturbance had taken place within a portion of the pine stand.  I made my way over to inspect it closer and it indeed had a pocket of dead pine several acres in size from an old SPB infestation.  I contacted the landowner to inquire on the forest management aspects of the property, and they were surprised to hear they had enough timber to worry with forest management.  It was inherited land and they simply paid the tax bill when it arrived, and assumed that the acreage was small since the tax bill was relatively small.  They actually thought I had contacted the wrong people and was mistaken about the property, but when they retreived their tax records were surprised to realize they did indeed own 79 acres, and every bit of it in timber.  I had to privelage to walk them over their woods for the first time. 

[Kodiakmac]

Well, the breed of eco-nuts that we have in this province are not lazy.  They're sneaking about in our creeks and bushes.  5 years ago my brother refused entry to his 100 acres of hardwood to a few harmless-looking summer students from the local Conservation Authority; they just wanted to do a 'species inventory'.   That didn't deter them.  They made their observations from neighbour's lands and the next thing we knew, my brother's forest (and the neighbours') had been declared an "Area of Natural and Scientific Interest" ...ANSI for short. 

It is now 'protected'....even from him.  He still has the right to pay taxes of course, and he can walk in it, but that's about it.  He certainly can't log it.   

Welcome to the new Ontario, where public management of private lands is the new reality.  Land seized for the 'Public Good' without a penny of compensation.

[SwampDonkey]

I'd cut what I wanted to cut and challenge the bums in court, wouldn't give them notice of intent or what I was up to.  If the government wasn't creating their job they would be home bumming off their parents.

[thompsontimber]

ah, can understand your tone after hearing that story Kodiakmac.  Not quite that bad down here, but its bad enough.  We can thank public domain for one of our state forests here though.  A private developer had purchased the land and built very nice roads and wooden overhead bridges, very nice place.  His plan was to sell off lots with acreage for high end homes.  The local enviromental groups started applying pressure to halt development on the property and pushed for the state to purchase the land from the developer.  The state made an offer for it that was far beneath its market value, and with the improvement expenses already invested in the land, the developer refused the offer.  After added pressure, the state simply condemned it and took it.  Now the state has a forest with very nice roads and bridges. 

[thompsontimber]

Back several years our eco-nut problem was worse.  We had a local group that purchased an airplane back in 2002.  The purpose for the airplane was to survey active logging sites in the county from the air and report BMP violations to the Department of Natural Resources.  They commenced to seeking out the bad loggers and began making their reports to the county forester.  State law requires him to investigate any complaint by citizens for harvest activities and make sure regulations are being followed.  The county was undermanned and were getting swamped with complaints from this group.  Every time they would spot a logger, they would file a complaint for insufficient streamside buffer zones.  Problem was, this remained true even for logging sites with no stream on it.  Didn't take long for the DNR to get fed up with complaints about stream damage when no stream existed.  Not sure if they are still flying the spy plane, but the harrassment has since ceased. 

[Kodiakmac]

The local Conservation Authority has just finished a million dollar waste of tax-money on a 'Natural Heritage Strategy'.  One of the recommendations (that they have passed on to County government) is that ALL woodlots be 'protected'...that will mean that you'll need permission to cut a tree on your own property.  This is the situation today in many rural areas of this province.

We can blame the eco-nuts, but it's only happening because rural Landowners - because of their laziness, lack of curiosity, lack of concern for neighbours or downright cowardice - are allowing it.