<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.23532"></HEAD>
<BODY style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" id=role_body
bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 rightMargin=7 topMargin=7><FONT id=role_document
color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial>
<DIV>
<DIV>Kevin and Stovers, </DIV>
<DIV> I am desperately wanting to farther study points
1,2,5 and 6. You got my attention buddy. Sorry, I don't have a 100 year old
experiment to show you the results of my work. I do not do research papers
because I'm an illiterate idiot. Many of you who have been on this list a while
may remember- this letter will be a small record of the state of a sample of my
research. Nobody has me asked this lately but you, Kevin. I'll probably die
knowing and wanting to know way more than I can ever tell, if I talked the rest
of my life. It just seems to bore everybody but some Biomass people. I miss you
all out here alone trapped in the future. </DIV>
<DIV> My extensive experience with landscaping and
gardening suggests we have only begun to barely scratch the surface of
multicropping research. Mother Nature has done an amazing job of this, but we
are not after the same goals as her. Typical natural forestry suggests that a 3
layer canopy is most efficent in biomass productive environments. As we push
into less productive land, that will be different in both directions. .
What each layer consists of for any given set of environmental conditions is has
wide increasingly complex variables. Someday 100 years from now, a computer
program will be crunching in whatever is the Cray Super Computer of that age. It
will tell the then modern forester what works best- maybe. Then, only
experiments to compare the real time data to to the computer model will fine
tune the long term plan. </DIV>
<DIV> Modern complex forestry computer programs mostly
focus on select harvest models. Computer planting programs just use current
harvest data to optimise plantation - type management. How do you get data
on trees that take 300 years or more to be fully mature? Recent studies
suggest that 1000 year old Redwoods are still increasing in biomass production
over younger trees. Got 1000 years to collect data?? Maybe we should be breeding
many trees to grow 1000 years. </DIV>
<DIV> If we make half the progress growing trees that we
have made in a typical productive vegetable garden in 4000 or more years, you
can throw out the predictions for production numbers. New numbers may be easily
a power of ten more productive. Just look what small changes have brought us.
When you consider the efficiency of photosynthisis to convert sunlight into
chemical energy, that number theoreticlly can go two powers of ten or more. Not
only do we need to first optimise growing technique, but then optimise breeding,
and back to growing technique and so fourth. </DIV>
<DIV> I don't even want to consider pandoras box
of geneticly modified plants. I think outer space is the best place to
release them so they don't contaminate our biosphere like GM corn has. I
considered that thought over 20 years ago and it merged with my childhood
idea of growing trees on the moon and on orbit. That is why I've wanted to
merge a greenhouse with a blacksmith shop. It's how space homesteads will do it.
I discussed this issue at a hydroponics conference in the early 1990's and
everybodys eyes rolled, so I just went out and worked on it with what I had.
Nobody came to collect the amazing data I saw everyday for twenty
years. A few years ago, my greenhouse was forced to close and my finacial
situation has nearly halted all my research. I hope to slowly get back in the
game if I don't loose my new 5 acre farm. It is Gods gift to me for my study.
Most of the assets of this land are hidden and only of use to me. </DIV>
<DIV> Most of the forests today are being primarlily
managed for lumber of some type. Hunting wildlife is about the only large
second crop. Small private lands and prototype corporate plantations are where
the experiments are being done. When we start to combine orchard and vegetable
production with forestry, the sky is the limit. I take that back, how far has
the Big Bang blown things open today? That is the limit. And this is how we will
get out there if we do, over a billion years of future evolution and space
travel. Call me crazy, but I saw a powerful vision as a child that told me this.
You just keep moving the decimal point on the equation. Carl Sagan must have
seen a vision like mine, and so I supported his work long ago. Most thought he
was craazy too. Thanks Carl. </DIV>
<DIV> I have been blessed to spend a little time with one
of the greatest foresters of our generation. John Guthrie of Wiggins Mississippi
fame. My crash course in Southern USA forestry, shortly after Hurricane Katrina,
taught me the following: The closer we get to understanding the original native
environment, the better we can merge our needs to the use of the land given to
us. </DIV>
<DIV> John would be first to tell you that if only a
higher power can make a tree, who are we to decide how and where to grow it?
That has led him to push the reintroduction of missing native tree species which
have been eliminated one at a time. Grown in plantations to examine and
focuse on each, longleaf pine is a good example. It was like the White Oak tree,
the king of the forest, until it was logged nearly to extinction. Currently,
burning of undergrowth is done like the Natives did for management in early
stage plantations. Timing is everything. We had lively conversation about
grazing and/ or underplanting of numerous shrub species to reduce this practice.
I think I opened up his mind by the smile on his face. Some private plantations
were doing this on a very basic experimental level in 2006. </DIV>
<DIV> The forest plot I was camped in, had longleaf pine
being interplanted where select thining was being done to young Southern Yellow
Pine, It was John"s land right behind the International Paper plant, so I think
it was a prototype. The thinnings were going mostly to chip and saw for OSB and
other products. The small thinings were hauled at harvest cost for pulp. Katrina
opened it up more - as if God were saying to John " you got the idea boy, now go
with it and I'll help yu". </DIV>
<DIV> Dr. Michler I belive is his name, discussed
his work at Purdue U. with me about 10 years ago. At the time he was pioneering
in the selecting of 3 hardwood species: Red Oak, Black Cherry, and Walnut.
An Indiana nursery was selling the products of tissue culture of the best
selected species. Breeding of hardwoods was still in it's infancy. The new
science then was using gene mapping to select known genes to assist breeding of
trees which were only starting to bear fruit. That is very exciting -more
productive and safe than GM plants. I called because I wanted to know if
anybody had studied growing trees to make charcoal fuel and he wondered what
for..... </DIV>
<DIV> Kevin, I would like to add to your bucket list a
huge compounding factor number 7. What happens when we do all of the
above, yet look at secondary and multiple layers of recycling of plants. For a
great example you and I may have discussed the fact that Charcoal production for
an industrial fuel may be the best utimate landfill killer. Demolition waste
must be the largest growing filler of landfills. I have done limited research
into which trees produce the best metallurgical charcoal. What happens when we
breed trees for example, to both build houses, then reuse the wood to fuel a
blast furnace to make the finest iron ever made?. The two uses are very
compatible. Just so happens that some of the strongest hardwoods as well as pine
species make real clean charcoal. The hardwoods make the most dense charcoal by
nature. We can also infuse charcoal with additional hydrocarbons in the
conversion process, with net energy production. If we grow walnut trees for
example, we can produce food and many chemicals too at no additional cost.
</DIV>
<DIV> Nearly every organic chemical can be coaxed from
living material. Don't even get me started on the chemical
refinery/production avenue. I've said enough. I cannot do much more or take time
to record what I've found out or can find out without a break in life
somewhere. That is why I don't contribute much anymore to these lists. It gets
me all excited, and then frustration sets in. I have 3 kids to raise and cannot
waste my time playing with the future of mankind when I need food stamps. </DIV>
<DIV> Enough said. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> Ok , do I have anybodies attention now???
</DIV>
<DIV> I have to get off the computer so my Son can do his
homework, Sorry, no time for editing or additional info tonight. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> Dan Dimiduk </DIV>
<DIV> Shangri- La Research. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 11/13/2013 7:41:16 AM Eastern Standard Time,
kchisholm@ca.inter.net writes:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px"><FONT
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Dear RB</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>OK.... as discouraging as the facts may be, the facts
are reality, and they must be dealt with to avoid future
problems.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>1: Can different species be grown, that have higher Mean
Annual Increments of growth?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>2: Can the woodlots be managed better?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>3: Can cooking practises be changed?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>4: Would more efficient stoves help
significantly?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>5: Can other forms of fuel, or other sources of
energy, be used to take some of the pressure off the
woodlots?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>6: Would some form of "Agroforestry" be possible, to put
the land to a higher use, with multi-cropping?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>...etc...</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Most people like to do things the way they have always
been done. They can't expect different results if they do things the same way
they have always done things in the past. The cruel facts are that if they
want different results, then they will have to find changes that are
acceptable to them, OR choose to live with the consequences of their present
practises. Those seem to be the cruel realities.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Best wishes,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Kevin</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>