Paul/Marc/Steve/Chris/ENTS- I suppose I sensed there might be differing opinions, when I commented about it being "can of worms time". I am not as near the wordsmith Paul is (or I would not feel like I should reword, schmooze, apologize or speak and further sink myself...;>), but in reviewing my pronouncements through the series of threads that emerged, I was trying to be careful what I said. What I didn't say I guess is getting me in trouble...while I spent years in the field as a forester, and some years at colleges and universities broadening my education, I'll forthrightly say that I'm not an academically prepared urban forester/arborist. I respect this chosen field, and I worked closely with arborists in Flagstaff area for pruning and falling tasks at Grand Canyon National Park...I have several rolls of film taken of spectacular arboreal work done on cottonwoods growing down in the Canyon at Phantom Ranch...I had our Hazard Tree Technician trained through an 18 month NPS Training Detail that used National Parks in the East for training sites. I required ISA certification of our arborists. So to the extent that Shigo IS arboriculture, then he is to be credited for it. Lee F's post on how Shigo rates in terms of peer reviewed publications can't be ignored. I think my criticism related to his penchant for new jargon, which I'll continue to maintain. Paul is right, I'm sure my perceptions of Shigo to some extent were clouded by one of his adherents, John Keswick, who participated in this forum some time back. John was not Shigo's best representative. So Chris, I recall that you're an ISA Certified Arborist...if I've offended you or your profession, please accept my apology, there was no offense intended. ANY of us on this forum I think would be proud if we'd performed in a manner that merited your certification...it is a serious undertaking that risks life and limb, often daily in your line of work. Please feel free to speak freely in this forum, there are many tree people here who I'm sure are interested in your view of trees (hugging trees is not near as "up close and personal" as being rigged up, out on a limb!). Steve, I've said it before and not too long ago, you're a credit to your profession (it's just to bad you're so under-informed on the climate change thing...;>), and I apologize if those who came before you sullied my basically uninformed views of Shigo...the trees in your charge are much higher value trees than I dealt with while at Grand Canyon (but more saw mine...;>)
As to 'symplast', 'symplastless' as improvements on CWD (coarse woody debris), none of the multitudinous researchers attempting to define, describe, and comprehend the role that CWD played in old-growth ecosystems thought it lifeless, without value or purpose. To the contrary, CWD was one of the sources of what I refer to as resiliency in a forest ecosystem, one of the sources of moisture storage, fungal decay, soil nutrition, habitat for many seldom seen/appreciated denizens of the forest, all permitting the ecosystem with enough "reserve" to sustain natural cyclical disturbances that befall any ecosystem laying in their path. It's as close as I get to believing in magic. But I'm likely soon to refer to CWD as symplast...no offense, it just changes the magic for me. Now, on to beer, anybody familiar with Dogfish Head offerings? -Don Bertolette Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 09:53:30 -0500 Subject: [ENTS] Re: Even if you think it is a hoax From: [email protected] To: [email protected] All, >From the "outside" looking in, these are my observations: Shigo brings up >mixed feelings on this site due to the audaciously demeaning manner in which >he was presented to our members by the author of the treedictionary site. >With no apparent formal education in related fields other than attending Shigo >seminars and then reading his past works (according to his own online resume), >he went on to defiantly challenge practically every basic statement that ENTS >members made in dialogues with him, and then insulted the professional >credentials of anyone that entered into open debate with him. He would act as >if he wanted to open a debate but was never really open to any true debate or >open-mindedness - seemingly more interested in preaching in hopes of changing >other people's minds with an unwillingness to even slightly evolve his own >positions in the face of scientific facts. This went on to a much greater >degree with him than the recent global warming "debate". Please don't ask me to quote any specifics. The dialogues are all in either the google or topica history of ents. Paul J. On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 8:24 AM, Marcboston <[email protected]> wrote: Don, I agree with Steve. I had meet Shigo back in college and found his information sound? What doctrine are you referring too? On Apr 13, 9:50 am, "Steven Springer" <[email protected]> wrote: > Don, > > IM ALL FOR THATI HOPE YOU ARENT ONE OF THOSE ARBORISTS THAT SUBSCRIBES > WHOLLY TO THE SHIGO DOCTRINE;>} > > My curiosity is peaked, to what portion of the Shigo Doctrine do you > refer? I am convinced of the Compartmentalization of Decay in Trees > (CODIT) and the lateral pruning methods are sound. > > Steve > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > > Behalf Of DON BERTOLETTE > Sent: Friday, April 10, 2009 3:11 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [ENTS] Re: Even if you think it is a hoax > > Steve....I'm responding in SMALL CAPS IN THE BODY OF YOUR TEXT BELOW... > > All, > > My objective(s) in raising this issue of Global Warming before this > board was to (1) recognize that the perceived consensus promoted is not > as wide spread as perhaps thought; WIDESPREAD ENOUGH THAT I FEEL THAT > THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE SHOULD BE APPLIED TO YOUR ASSERTION THAT IT > ISNT, AND THAT STEPS SHOULD BE TAKEN TO DIMINISH OUR IMPACT ON THE > EARTHS ATMOSPHERE, WATERS, AND TERRAIN UNTIL WE CAN CONCLUSIVELY > DETERMINE OTHERWISE... (2) the reliable data (that which has not to have > been shown faulty) is not as conclusive to an applicable world-wide > crisis WHILE I HAVE PROVIDED A NUMBER OF LOCAL AND REGIONAL LOCATIONS > THAT SUPPORT THE DATA, FROM MY OWN PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, THE LIST OF > OTHER ANECDOTAL ACCOUNTS IN ACADEMIC PERIODICALS (READ CURRENT > REPUTABLE, REPLICABLE SCIENTIFIC SOURCES) IS SO WIDE SPREAD (READ > GLOBAL) AS TO BE ACCEPTED AS CONCLUSIVE ENOUGH, NOT TO CONTINUE WITH A > MAINTAIN STATUS QUOAND DONT BOTHER CHANGING OUR ILL-ADVISED, ENVIRONMENT > DESPOILING WAYS.. > > My experience regarding this consensus gathering has been limited to > those boots on the ground colleagues in the Forest Service, at the > Federal and State level (remain un-named to protect the innocent!). > STEVE, I STARTED WORKING FOR FEDERAL AGENCIES (BLM IN 1967; USFS IN > 1969, NPS IN 1998)AND ITS NOT BEEN SINCE 2002 THAT MY BOOTS (WHITES > LOGGERS, FOR THE RECORD) DIDNT HIT THE GROUND EVERY DAY. I HAVE BEEN > ALTERNATELY A LAND SURVEYOR, A ROAD DESIGNER, A TIMBER MARKER, A GIS > TECHNICIAN, AND FINALLY A RESTORATION FORESTER. If one chooses to > research this issue deeper, there are many in the scientific field at a > world-wide scale that are very skeptical and will not mince words in > calling those who are convinced as fools! IVE HEARD THIS SAID, BUT I > CANT IMAGINE THE STATE OF DENIAL THAT THEY MUST BE INIT IS WISE FOR > SCIENTIST TO BE SKEPTICAL, INDEED IT IS THE BASIS OF THE SCIENTIFIC > METHOD TO QUESTION ASSUMPTIONSBUT THE STATE OF DENIAL THAT COMES TO MY > MIND THAT REPUTABLE SCIENTISTS WOULD REFER TO THOSE WILLING TO ACCEPT > THE PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF MANS AUGMENTATION TO THE > CAUSES OF THE GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE CURRENTLY UNDERWAY, BEFUDDLES ME. > It is common to be of the opinion that only the Rush Limbaughs and Sean > Hannitys promote this skepticism, this is erroneous. UNFORTUNATELY THEY > ARE NOT A SMALL SOURCE OF THIS SKEPTICISM I suppose that if a true > consensus was conducted among us world-wide, the split would lean more > toward the skeptic rather than the convinced WE REALLY DIFFER IN OUR > PERCEPTION OF THE WORLD HERE!!!; or at best only half NOT EVEN CLOSE, > PROVIDE YOUR FIGURES. Does this make morons of one side? NO, I AGREE > THAT YOU DONT HAVE TO BE A MORON TO BE IN DENIALNo, this reveals an > effective argument for conclusion has not been made. NOT TRUE, AN > REPUATABLE AND REPLICABLE ARGUMENT HAS BEEN MADEITS JUST THAT APPARENTLY > THE OVERWHELMING SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS HASNT BEEN EFFECTIVE WITH YOU, AND > OTHER INTRANSIGENT SKEPTICS So, why arent more speaking freely regarding > their opposition? It is recognized as politically correct and job-safe > to remain silent or non-committal. THROUGHOUT MY UNHERALDED CAREERS, I > FUNCTIONED AS AN AGENT OF CHANGE, DIDNT REMAIN SILENT, AND NO ONE WHO > KNOWS ME WOULD ACCUSE ME OF BEING NON-COMMITALIM NOT TAKING THIS > PERSONALLY, MERELY REBUTTING YOUR ASSUMPTION. AS IM SURE, MANY ON THIS > FORUM WOULD, WERE THEY NOT AS OUTSPOKEN AS I;>} > > Much of the data (not all) presented has been refuted or shown to be > flawed (the hockey-stick analogy for instance). We all recognize that > conflicting data or that which reveals itself to be inclusive, causes us > to fail to reject the null in statistical probability. While many have > done well, detailed work concerning climate change and its cause and > effect, there still is not enough evidence to reach a sound conclusion > regarding a world-wide crisis. This fact is evident even in some of the > responses given on this post. STEVE, YOU STILL HAVE NOT RESPONDED TO > THE LEE FRELICHS COMMENTTHIS ENTIRE PARAGRAPH PROVES YOUR UNWILLINGNESS > TO CONSIDER INFORMATION NEW TO YOU, INFORMATION THAT ISNT FLAWED, > INFORMATION THAT ISNT CONFLICTING, AND NOT DOUBLE NEGATIVE GOBBLEDY GOOK > ABOUT STATISTICAL PROBABILITY. YOUVE OTHERWISE SHOWN SIGNS OF > INTELLIGENCE, FLAWED ONLY BY YOUR RELUCTANCE TO CONSIDER ALTERNATIVES. > > So what is going on? Well, I do not have all the answers. I can only > critically examine that which is around me and the works of others then > make my surmising, like you. The reliable and conclusive data that we > have to this point reveals a sometimes volatile, variable and > inconsistent patterned planet. At a micro level we can sometimes > establish caused weather patterns, other times we cannot. At a macro > level, this is an ardent undertaking, which may be above the ability of > mortal man. There is much that we will probably never understand about > our natural world. Perhaps, we should consider that the world changes > naturally (coastlines, Greenland, et. al.) and without recognizable > patterns and we are unable to understand or explain. Is the United > States in the early stages of a collective micro climate change? > Perhaps, is it because of our doing or could it be part of an > unexplainable natural process? We may never have the answer. > > READ LEE FRELICHS POST, AND WE CAN CONTINUE THIS DISCUSSIONOTHERWISE > WELL HAVE TO AGREE THAT YOURE GOING TO CONTINUE TO DISAGREETHAT SAID, I > AGREE, LETS TALK TREES, AS IVE SAID ALL IM GOING TO SAY, UNLESS ITS TO > DISCUSS THE FRELICH POST > > One of the main tenants of Global Warming is that man; particularly > those citizens of industrialized nations are to blame. It is true that > we can degrade our local environment, contribute a non-point pollutant > for our neighbors, or even manipulate weather patterns to a small > extent, at a micro level. But to make the assumption that the way it is > in my backyard is conducive to the whole world is a bit unfounded and > illogical. This one tenant in this issue perhaps draws the deepest > battle lines. > > With all this said, I respectfully stand beside my arguments as > presented. As one who may appear to you as crying from the wilderness > regarding this issue, I am not beside myself among those in our field. > > I am new to this website and have come to enjoy it! Now, we can move on > to talk about the trees (large, champions) rather than the forest! AS > IVE STATED ABOVE, IM ALL FOR THATI HOPE YOU ARENT ONE OF THOSE ARBORISTS > THAT SUBSCRIBES WHOLLY TO THE SHIGO DOCTRINE;>} > > I'D ALSO LIKE TO ADD THAT YOU'VE ACQUITTED YOURSELF WELL, SPOKEN > RESPECTFULLY ABOUT TOPICS THAT AREN'T ALWAYS UNIVERSALLY AGREED UPON, > AND WE APPRECIATE YOUR FORUM PRESENCE. > > SINCERELY, > > DON > > Respectfully > > Steve > > ________________________________ > > Windows Live: Keep your life in sync. Check it out. > <http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_allup_1a_explore_04200 > 9>- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - _________________________________________________________________ Rediscover Hotmail®: Get quick friend updates right in your inbox. http://windowslive.com/RediscoverHotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Rediscover_Updates2_042009 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Eastern Native Tree Society http://www.nativetreesociety.org Send email to [email protected] Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/entstrees?hl=en To unsubscribe send email to [email protected] -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
