(NFR) Bush administration changes to NW Forest Plan/Aquatic C...

Jim Wallace

Smells like low tide.
Bush administration changes to NW Forest Plan/Aquat...

No, I'm sure all that didn't happen until the 70's, and it was Cheech & Chong who engineered a van using hemp, and it was produced in Mexico. I've got a good grip on history, man...at least on my own version out of the eighteeen gazabazillion versions of history that are out there, so take my word for it and don't argue with me on this one!

Almost forgot to ask. Do you know any good hemp fly patterns? Aside from a miniature net-on-a-hook?

Jimbo "One person's "excessive government regulation" is another's "reigning in of mindless greed.""


Oncorhynchus clarki clarki
Bush administration changes to NW Forest Plan/Aquat...

Hemp is a great resource for a lot of things, like paper. One acre of hemp is equal to 3 to 4 acres of trees when made into paper. Also it takes hemp a very short time to get large enough to harvest not even a full year, trees on the other hand take multiple years. Hemp used to be used for everything back in the day. It is true about the hemp car. Also hemp oil used to be used as a resource for multiple things, its main uses were in cars, lanterns, paint, paper, clothes, and multiple more. Our constitution was written on hemp paper. The first paper money was made on hemp paper. Not only can an acre of hemp produce more pulp than 3 acres on trees, but it also produces much more durable goods. Hemp paper is about 10 times as strong as normal paper. Right now the current standing on hemp in the USA is that one can grow and harvest hemp plants, but it is taxed so extremely that the harvesters make no profit, just loss. One argument for why it is taxed so much is because they claim that a person that is growing hemp plants, which are male plants, can hide a female marijuana plant in with the male plants and sell drugs. This argument is not very strong, most people can pick out the difference between a male and female cannabis plant very easily. Also another reason why this argument doesn’t stand is that if a female plant were to be in with the male plants they would pollinate, and the female plant would then be a heterogeneous cannabis plant that cannot produce any buds that can be smoked. Another argument that the government makes is that it would hurt the logging companies. This is true, but not all of them. Wood would still be needed for multiple things, like building with. Also the loggers could transfer into the hemp harvesting because this is currently not really being done, so there would be a huge opening in the market for it. Also people lose jobs all the time, but they find more work. The government seems to righteous to admit that it was wrong, and it wont go back on its huge tax. In other words, what I am saying is you are right they should use hemp. I have a lot more to say on this kind of thing, but I will stop here.

In case you were wondering how I know all of this stuff, my brother had to do three papers on this topic for three different classes last year at college and he told me about it.

I hope I didn't offend anyone.


Jim Wallace

Smells like low tide.
Bush administration changes to NW Forest Plan/Aquat...

Wow, man! I stand corrected on the hemp car!
Yes, hemp was demonized in the '30's, and DuPont Chemical suddenly found a huge market for its then new synthetic fibers, especially in rope making. The timing was no coincidence, either. DuPont lobbied hard against hemp so they could take over most of the rope market. Alot of hemp came from overseas, and the argument was that in times of war, synthetic rope that could be manufactured at home was strategically better than rope made from imported hemp. And Dupont didn't want to see hemp being grown domestically and compete with their synthetic product.
Yes, the arguments against hemp are pure hogwash.

Hey! Anybody besides me get the feeling we're being lied to?

"It can't happen here." - Mothers Of Invention

More thoughts

Clearly we have raised some important topics, and most assuredly beyond flingin'feathers.
This nation is in desperate need of sound leadership and sooner or later it will have an impact on each of us.
I dont seriously believe anyone is going to trade in their new pick-up for a "hempmobile".
Wether the point be drilling in alaska, bombing Iraq, or harvesting our forests. these decisions are made by elected officials placed in power by a supposed majority (you & me). The nation is divided, and the outcome of this next election will certainly test the metal of our future.
Staying in the outfield is no longer an option.
I made a statement earlier about "burgeoning population"
I stated this as a broad based observation, but case in point; I have lived in Washington since 1969. I am sure alot of you have been here even longer and can remember what is what like then, and have seen the population here in the state increase to beyond what the infrastructure was designed for.
I-5 corridor is in dis-repair, Alaskan way viaduct is an issue. The Narrows bridge commute is un-believable.
Is a toll bridge going to make a difference?
Is mass transit going to get YOU out of your car?
How many people do you see on the highway carpooling?
The point I was trying to make is that unless we ALL start to really take a serious look at where we are going it may be too late.
I dont mean to preach, and I know I dont have all the answers. I just get a little frustrated sometimes.


youngish old guy
Bush administration changes to NW Forest Plan/Aquatic C...

Boys, Bush is the worst president of the United States of America ever by a long shot. I didn't live through the Nixon years, but the world has changed since then, and at least he was halfway intelligent. I see little to be optimistic about in the future of our country. We are losing our civil liberties by the moment, the world hates our guts, our environmental laws are being destroyed, our economy is being degraded, our election system doesn't work , our country is run by big corporations and christian fanatics, etc. etc. etc.:reallymad Man oh man oh man. We're screwed. It will take a hundred years (maybe longer) to recover from the Bush era. He is an embarrassment and menace to the world. Hate me if you wish, but my generation has to deal with the aftermath of this jack@$$. And most of us aren't too happy about it.
Bush administration changes to NW Forest Plan/Aquatic C...

I am totally for Bush's "Healthy Child initiative", and "No Forest Left Benind Initiative". Oh, wait, did I get the words mixed up?


Workin in a sweet mullet
Bush administration changes to NW Forest Plan/Aquat...

yeah cheech and chong were just trying to copy Henry Ford. I could go on and on about DuPont and their lobbying to ban hemp in the 30s, but thats old news and it never goes anywhere.
Dupont owned the companies that made newspaper (the actual paper) for almost all newspapers in America back in the 30s. Someone came along (cant remember names...:smokin ) but they invented a pulp press that made hemp 95% efficient in making paper, way more efficient than regular wood pulp newspaper. DuPont was afraid of losing their grip on the market, so they pulled their weight and began their "demonization" of hemp.
Have you ever seen "Reefer Madness"? They were showing that movie in congress as late as the Regan era rationalize their argument. What a crock of pooo...

Andy - the would have majored in hemp if I could have, lord knows I did enough....:smokin research kinda guy
Bush administration changes to NW Forest Plan/Aquatic C...

I dont think anyone on this forum is going to hate you for expressing your opinion. As a matter of fact...I think we would all be better off if everyone did express their opinions to our legislature, and our government.
Too many of us dont.
That is the only way it will change.

Mike Etgen

Not Quite A Luddite, But Can See One From Here
More thoughts

New River Mike


You're absolutely right - "We've met the enemy,and he is us."

It's the absolute last place we look...and it's so much easier to blame someone else (politicians, democrats, republicans, immigrants, old white guys, etc.)

As far as population is concerned, there's no question we've grown - and more critically - moved. The population has followed the jobs, which for the most part have moved towards the coasts in general, and towards cheap labor markets and away from dying industries (mining, family farming, manufacturing, etc.) and the heartland.

Cheap, subsidized industrial, commercial, and residential development is followed by migrating populations. We bring with us those same desires for the better life that settled this continent in the first place. Few of us look at the real cost of providing the infrastructure that supports the housing and transportation of goods, services, and people.

It's the WalMartization of America, and we're all pushing a shopping cart.

You gotta laugh, because it's so sad...

Bush administration changes to NW Forest Plan/Aquatic C...

Every time I see an article about this administration that pisses me off (happens quite often lately) I send it to every friend I have. My hope is that this type of grass-roots information spreading may help people open their eyes enough to get out and vote. This new change will place even more weight on local and state jurisdictions to hold-up buffers, approve (or disaprove) forest practice applications, and oversight of critical areas. All the while having their own budget's cut because of Bush's war. Now I'm steaming...
Bush administration changes to NW Forest Plan/Aquat...

Another rich topic.

The original post brought a press article into focus which, in my opinion, is of great importance to Americans, especially Washingtonians.

Every year there are incremental changes in policy, such as the one highlighted here, which weaken our protection of the environment. We consistently chose to use the environment at the cost of finding other, more costly solutions for housing, land, etc. It is essential that we begin to budget our consumption such that our way of life is sustainable.

It's not the salamander, the owl, or the fish around which we must rally in order to protect forests. Rather, we must see ourselves as patrons of a mighty yet delicate environmental system which we have been given to use, protect and sustain. We must protect all of the environment in a sustainable fashion.

I do not feel that this recent change in regulations is consistent with an attitude of sustainable patronage of our environment.

This change of regulations is, in my opinion, an attempt to get cheap wood on the market quickly at the cost of non-replacable resources. Legitimate and well designed tree farms could provide adequate wood in amounts which would equal the expected gains brought about by the above mentioned change in regulations. However, this would take something like 8 years. And this sustainable solution would be too slow and too costly. In addition, selective logging should leave about 60% of all trees standing---not just a decorative hedge---in order to be effectively managed over generations of forest life.

The proposed change will eliminate valuable forest resources.

Sincerely, Chris.

Jim Wallace

Smells like low tide.
Bush administration changes to NW Forest Plan/Aquatic C...

Most major corporations in the U.S.A. don't like "being shackled and hobbled" by environmental protection, as they compete globally with corporations from other countries that do not have much, if any, environmental protection going on within their borders. Also low wages and lack of workers' rights as well as outright human rights violations going on in many of these countries (China, for example) give them an unfair advantage in keeping their costs of production down.
Rather than go back to the dark ages of unfettered rape and pillage and pollution in this country, as the Bush Administration would do, we should simply boycott products imported from other countries whose people or governments allow these violations (of human rights and enlightened stewardship of the planet) to continue.
I'm doing my best to NOT BUY ANYTHING MADE IN CHINA anymore, or Brazil, or Indonesia, or any other place where such violations are rampant. Also, I try to make educated choices when buying ANYTHING, no matter where it is produced. Consume less. Recycle. Blow up your TV.


Oh yeah, get your "tubes" tied after the first two mini me's. Those cute little babies grow up to be full-on resource-consuming eco-disasters, in spite of themselves, just like me and you. Worse yet, they become "teenagers" for the last few years of your watch over them, causing you untold grief, expense, and gray hairs. I am thankful that I avoided this fiasco! :dunno

Jim Wallace

Smells like low tide.
Bush administration changes to NW Forest Plan/Aquat...

This proposed change is part of the Bush plan to relentlessly attack environmental legislation on all fronts and in every niche. These rapists are not just greedy, they are vindictive and mean-spirited.
It has been called "The Texas Cheney Saw Massacre."

Bush administration changes to NW Forest Plan/Aquat...

Being that I work in the lumber business, I felt compelled to comment on the issue. Lumber practices now are much more advanced than in the past and there is a much greater effort being made by lumber companies to be environmentally responsible. In fact, a few years ago a movie was made by a former green peace leader about how current logging is indeed environmentally responsible and not harmful (long term) to the environment. I agree, clear cuts are definately an eyesore and not pleasant to look at, but I would also like to point out to all conservationalists that the more restrictions placed on lumber companies the more the price goes up and the more expensive housing becomes. The more expensive housing becomes, the higher your property taxes are. It is a decision that affects everyone, not just fish and wildlife.
I you don't mind paying an extra $20-30K for your house and an a couple extra hundred per year on property taxes, by all means lobby against this new law. From my experience in the lumber business, many of people's concerns about the environment are a direct result of the media and other groups who blow things way out of proportion. In fact, environmentalists hire people to work for $350-500 a week as activists for them. I'm not trying to slam anyone or imply that you don't have valid concerns, but don't buy into everything you hear in the media. Do your own research and see what you find. And by all means don't complain next time you go the lumber store and want a 10ft peice of clear cedar that costs $40 a peice.

"10% of the anglers catch 90% of the fish." Happy fishing!
Bush administration changes to NW Forest Plan/Aquat...

Mike you can fish with me any time. More and bigger possesions does not mean better you are very right.

Why are houses getting bigger and the number of people living in each one getting smaller. Bigger houses are harder to clean, cost more to heat or cool, more up keep and I feel are the reason that families are not as close as they used to be. I was hard for Jimmey to hide his playboy from mom and dad in a 1400 sq ft home. Now days is some of the huge houses out there today Jimmey can be gone for days and Mom or Dad not even know or Jimmey can hide in the house with his crack pipe in hand and even the smoke is not noticed.

Give me a small house so when I get around to having a family I can keep my family close. Keep me from giving my children so many things that I forget to give them love.