[at-l] Sustainable Forestry

[jbullar1 at twcny.rr.com (Jim Bullard)]

Please refer to my second question to Camo. I also found reports that 
estimated "wilderness" at approximately what Camo reported but... (and it 
is a large but) their definition of wilderness was virtually any land that 
1) has trees on it and 2) is not used for grazing. Some of the reports 
specifically mentioned tree farms and public parks as part of their 
inventory of "wilderness" plus any other property, public or private that 
had trees and was not used for grazing. At least one report noted that the 
majority of "wilderness" (as they defined and inventoried it) was private 
property.

Using such a broad definition of "wilderness" one could count military 
bases, farmers woodlots maintained for firewood or maple syrup production, 
orchards, golf courses and even the medians of interstate highways. In fact 
by that definition my one acre with 35 trees and no livestock could be 
counted as "wilderness" unless you define my picking peas and eating them 
raw in the garden as "grazing". Remember that there are multiple 
definitions of wilderness. The English sometimes refer to a wilderness area 
in their gardens. What they mean is an area of native vegetation that they 
do not cultivate.

You will note in my response to Camo that the 4.7% is *designated* 
wilderness within the meaning of the term as used by Congress. Not all 
public lands (local, state or federal) are designated wilderness in fact 
the majority are not. I live 2 miles from a state forest where they 
recently sold off some standing timber. I myself have purchased standing 
timber from the county forest for use as firewood. These areas are not 
"wilderness" within the meaning that a designated wilderness is. They are 
managed forests subject to sale as opposed to preservation.

At 08:55 PM 7/16/2004 -0400, J Bryan Kramer wrote:
>Well considering that some large western states are mostly public lands:
>National Forests, Park and BLM land I think that 4.7% figure is way too low.
>Ah yes here:
>
>"Almost one-third of total U.S. land acreage is administered by the federal
>government with the largest acreage found in the thirteen western states 1.
>In 1999, approximately 92.3 percent of federally managed land acreage was
>located in the thirteen western states. Contrasting this figure with their
>proportionate share of national acreage, which is 49 percent, shows the
>importance that public land management decisions have on the economies and
>local government fiscal balances of these western states.
>
>The U.S. Department of Interior (2001) reports that the proportionate share
>of federal lands to total acreage in the thirteen western states varies from
>15.1 percent in Hawaii to 82.9 percent in Nevada. For the eleven contiguous
>western states, approximately 47 percent of total acreage is federally
>administered. Alaska, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon and Utah have over 50 percent of
>their land mass federally administered. It should also be noted that these
>western states have state lands that expand the acreage that can be
>classified as public."
>
>http://www.unce.unr.edu/publications/FS01/FS0132.pdf
>
>so his figure seems to be correct
>
>
>Bryan
>
>  Lex et Libertas -- Semper Vigilo, Paratus, et Fidelis!
>
> >
> > At 06:58 AM 7/16/2004 +0000, camojack@comcast.net wrote:
> > >Did you know that we actually have more "wilderness" in North
> > >  America than there is in all of Africa? (Percentage of Africa that is
> > > wilderness: 28%; percent of America that is wilderness : 38%)
> > You should
> > > get the picture by now...but I shan't hold my breath.
> > >-"Camo"
> >
> > Just curious Camo, but where did you get that statistic? And what
> > was their
> > definition of "wilderness"?
> >
> > FWIW - According to
> > <http://www.leaveitwild.org/reports/zogby_poll_results_0103.pdf>
> > only 4.7%
> > of the US is designated wilderness and most Americans don't
> > believe that is
> > enough. That was true of voters from both major parties.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > at-l mailing list
> > at-l@backcountry.net
> > http://mailman.hack.net/mailman/listinfo/at-l
> >