Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

Knowledge of Forest Certification Program needed

I don't think we've properly tied all this together yet. This isn't getting so hard to understand anymore. I'm gonna repost some things here as well as some other things I've found interesting. First the case:

*Pennsylvania went after FSC certification in 1998.
*Minnesota did it in 2005.
*Pennsylvania got to collapse stage and finally took some investigative action in 2012.
*Minnesota hasn't yet.
*Start laying these maps on top of each other and reference the findings from Pennsylvania.
*Minnesota now boasts the largest number of acres in the FSC program. o_O

forests.PNG

Here's the Pennsylvania legislative study MoBuck posted earlier:
deer 9.PNG

Here's Minnesota's deer zone map
zone map.PNG

Here's the anemic response to lower herd numbers as shown by the bucks-only zones. I have always believed our zone 172 on the edge of the BO zones should have been included, and probably many more zones west and south of the BO zone boundary.
BO zones.PNG
Here's where the smoke starts rolling out the barrel. This is the FSC & SFI certified forest map.
certifiedforestsmap.png
 
SD51555 said:
I don't think we've properly tied all this together yet. This isn't getting so hard to understand anymore. I'm gonna repost some things here as well as some other things I've found interesting. First the case:

*Pennsylvania went after FSC certification in 1998.
*Minnesota did it in 2005.
*Pennsylvania got to collapse stage and finally took some investigative action in 2012.
*Minnesota hasn't yet.
*Start laying these maps on top of each other and reference the findings from Pennsylvania.
*Minnesota now boasts the largest number of acres in the FSC program. o_O

View attachment 3997

Here's the Pennsylvania legislative study MoBuck posted earlier:
View attachment 3993

Here's Minnesota's deer zone map
View attachment 3996

Here's the anemic response to lower herd numbers as shown by the bucks-only zones. I have always believed our zone 172 on the edge of the BO zones should have been included, and probably many more zones west and south of the BO zone boundary.
View attachment 3994
Here's where the smoke starts rolling out the barrel. This is the FSC & SFI certified forest map.
View attachment 3998
Click to expand...


Fill in some more dates and blanks....

... worked in Pennsylvania under...., then ..... became employed by .......
 
I found the link to the independent study. I just started thumbing through it, but it smells terribly similar to where we're at. I can't help but feel our legislators are way behind on the issue. Perhaps at this point the audit is still important, but more important may be an investigation into the actions taken to get to forest certification and who was involved.

http://www.acsl-pa.org/
 
Nice work SD
 
This needs to be posted on Mn Whitetail Alliancd fb page at some point. A lot of people have been mislead.
 
Digging deeper...

http://chportal.fsc.org/PublicMemberSearch

You will find anti-hunting organizations and many of their affiliates in other countries as members of the SFC like The Sierra Club, Greenpeace, and The World Wildlife Federation.
 
Skoog - We need to pow wow on a day with exposure to get some light shining. I am supposed to have a channel 4 news appearance this week. Please ring me when you have a chance tomorrow.

We need to make this something our DNR and elected can not ignore. The PA harvest is bouncing back. We may as well speed up the healing here in MN with exposure to the issue.

I tip my hat to SKOOG (SD1555) for his mining efforts over the past 4 days- Fine work.
 
I tip my hat to both of you! Incredible work!
 
Take your time going through the Huntingpa forums. There are a decade of these posts. I would guess 10s of thousands of posts. Unfortunately, the site's search function is really bad so it is best to search it from google.
 
Congrats all, I think the boogeyman may have been exposed. Whatever or however you decide to present this, do not lose sight of the financial aspect of this whole process. It is the one thing that will get everyone's attention. All these states that have jumped on board with this Forest Certification thing are losing their a$$es on the deal. And in the end, it is just so some tree hugging special interest groups can have a feel good agenda to follow. The reality is the timber industry will be exploiting the resource the whole time the forests are being harvested. Most of them are crooks as it is. The states are losing hundreds of millions of dollars in license revenue and businesses are losing huge money on hunter based expenditures every year that this takes place. This needs to be brought to the attention of those business owners as well as the hunting public. Ask those hunter-based business owners how much money they make off the logging industry each year and how it compares to the amounts they are losing from reduce numbers of hunters. I really think this whole thing will have far reaching affects before it is all said and done, well outside the borders of MN. Do not let the elected ignore the money, ask them if the Forestry Certification groups are going to make up for the lost revenue to the state and it's tax-paying business owners.
 
Last edited:
I've been burning up the keyboard digging for the smoking gun. I think we're getting darn close. Brooks, check your email, I sent you more stuff that may get us going in the exact direction we need to find the smoking gun. Best part is, I believe it absolutely must be made available to the public.

FSC and SFI perform annual audits of certified lands in MN. In those audits, specific infractions they do not like are called out and specific actions to correct are included. At the end of each annual audit, the auditor makes a recommendation as to whether or not the holder should retain their certification. It almost seems as if this is ready to be summed up and sent to the policy makers. Steve Merchant himself said last week in the hearing that the population had to come down to keep the certifications. We just have to find the audit or similar document stating so.

See for yourself: http://dnr.state.mn.us/forestry/certification/auditingreports.html
 
wiscwhip said:
Congrats all, I think the boogeyman may have been exposed. Whatever or however you decide to present this, do not lose sight of the financial aspect of this whole process. It is the one thing the will get everyone's attention. All these states that have jumped on board with this Forest Certification thing are losing their a$$es on the deal. And in the end, it is just so some tree hugging special interest groups can have a feel good agenda to follow. The reality is the timber industry will be exploiting the resource the whole time the forests are being harvested. Most of them are crooks as it is. The states are losing hundreds of millions of dollars in license revenue and businesses are losing huge money on hunter based expenditures every year that this takes place. This needs to be brought to the attention of those business owners as well as the hunting public. Ask those hunter-based business owners how much money they make off the logging industry each year and how it compares to the amounts they are losing from reduce numbers of hunters. I really think this whole thing will have far reaching affects before it is all said and done, well outside the borders of MN. Do not let the elected ignore the money, ask them if the Forestry Certification groups are going to make up for the lost revenue to the state and it's tax-paying business owners.
Click to expand...

There are all sorts of problems with the certifications. It's too soon for me to render an opinion, but my guess (and I'm not committing to this yet) is the industry stakeholders were blackmailed into these programs to get that little "Sustainable" stamp on their products to make the uninformed consumer feel good about buying a reem of paper, a board, or sheet of plywood. Not such a big deal until your customers (the end users) start getting pressured by groups to use "sustainable" materials as defined by some group of who-the-hell-knows from Bonn Germany.

Read one of those audits. The boss is no longer the logger, miller, retailer, or the state of Minnesota.
 
SD51555 said:
Read one of those audits. The boss is no longer the logger, miller, retailer, or the state of Minnesota.
Click to expand...
I would agree SD, it is the same in the WI audits I have read, from 2008 until the most recent in 2014. It makes me wonder how much the "certification" process adds to the cost of the goods to the consumer. It is no different than Excel Energy trying to sell me wind power for a premium cost. I'm all for green, but the costs are already getting out of hand and then you have the b*ll$ to try and guilt me into paying more for green power, they can stick it!
 
Its my understanding there are rebates to business that use 'green wood'
Construction, printers - anybody that uses wood.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top