Click on Picure to buy a sticker.
EBUCK
Posted on 07/25/2002 11:45:34 AM PDT by EBUCK
Due to the hot weather and extremely dry forest conditions, Weyerhaeuser is temporarily closing its tree farms to public recreational use in all but two western Oregon counties.
The closure affects approximately 1.2 million acres in Linn, Lane, Marion, Polk, Clackamas, Coos, Washington and Yamhill counties. There will be no foot, horse or vehicle access until significant rainfall occurs or until further notice.
Only Weyerhaeuser's north coast lands in Clatsop and Tillamook counties are open for recreational use.
Tuesday's decision is a result of high fire danger in inland Oregon. Compounding the problem, there is a lack of firefighting resources because most are committed to battling major blazes in other parts of the state, according to Rich Wininger, director of Weyerhaeuser's timberland operations in Oregon and Washington.
"We know this decision will inconvenience people who come to our tree farms for recreational activities," Wininger said. "The combination of very dry conditions and hot weather make for a very volatile potential fire situation. Safety is our most important priority, so we must close most of our properties for the time being. We appreciate the public's understanding and cooperation during this temporary closure."
Click on Picure to buy a sticker.
EBUCK
EBUCK
EBUCK
Yup. According to them it's their fault for being there in the first place. Can't wait for them to feel the pinch in some BIG way.
EBUCK
It's less expensive to pay extortion than to fight the whacknuts.
And yes, Weyerhauser timber is worth more money when it isn't burnt to a crisp.
Once you start looking you'll see it everywhere, from real estate deals in your home town all the way to Kyoto, military actions, and treaties. I call it Higly Organized Crime, or (if you like) Add HOC ;-)
Remember the first law of politics:
Nothing big and bad goes on for very long unless BOTH SIDES are dirty!
It's beyond time to clean house, we may have to start by mitigating DC. I'm thinking a fleet of D-10s may be necessary.
That's what it was maybe ten to fifteen years ago. Since then, the big players have learned to turn the game to their advantage, using expensive regulations to drive the competition out of business.
FReegards,
not fried in Durango
FMCDH
High-level executives in target industries are usually smart people. Once government gets its hands upon the factors of production, it isn't long before industry leaders recognize a patronage system for what it is. Those with sufficient political pull are obviously tempted to sell out their competitors and manipulate the deal. They can salve their guilt with the excuse that, when a system is capable of either handing them an oligopoly or destroying them, they had better take advantage of it to survive. Of course, being one of the winners in the marketplace doesn't hurt so much either. Once they learn the game and start to take control of it, the temptation to dominate the market with public money becomes addicting.
The corporate winners can then use their profits to start a tax-exempt foundation with which to fund political advocacy without the annoyance of campaign contribution limits. They use the funding to lobby politicians and direct groups of NGO activists to gather data supporting specific action.
The regulatory system thus ends up as a troika of NGOs, industry oligopoly, and government regulators. The strategies take several forms. To provide an intuitive framework with which to understand some of the behavioral undercurrents, we will use those famous fables from Uncle Remus, respectfully and faithfully recovered from Afro-American Oral History by that noted (and unjustly maligned) anthropologist, Joel Chandler Harris. We will refer to this example as "The Briar Patch Effect." The principles are as follows:
1. There are economies of scale associated with regulatory compliance, as with any other cost of production. Capable compliance to rules becomes a barrier to entry and a means to target existing competitors.
2. Rules can be tailored to the advantage of those possessing property with favored attributes. Competitors can be targeted by similar means.
3. Selective enforcement, through bribes, friendships, and political connections, is a problem as old as government itself.
4. Regulatory constraint of supply can raise the capital value of remaining assets in production through monopoly profits. Advocacy can be a very a good investment.
So let me get this straight -- a company can actually increase its revenue stream by reducing its level of production?
As a result, the market for U.S. lumber exports to the Far East has almost disappeared.
Oh, well.
CA water & power utilities do it repeatedly! We are told we must conserve in government hyped conservation programs in drummed-up droughts, then they run to the Public Utilities Commission and secure a rate/unit increase because their revenue has fallen off.
Then of course the drought goes away while their profits rise and they never go back to request a decrease... same principle! You were being facietious, right? You know the drill! Same thing with gasoline shortages, etc.
In some industries with fixed supply and relatively few players that works. It is part of the game played during the California power crisis. In the case of timber there is a worldwide glut. The game is directed at preventing harvesting by the competition: small landowners and the National Forests.
This is not unusual in the slightest. Left wing groups frequently collude with big business to kill competition and create or protect monopolies. Big labor does the same thing. Try to explain that to the typical liberal, however, and you get nothing but blank stares.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.