2
& its actual & effective incorporation in the current action-
programs).
The "facts" accumulate so that they presently make the currently
established action-programs go sour... but the momentums of the
old "understandings", concepts, Sacred Cows ete, resist, evade &
aviod recognitions of the gone-sourness.  As in re the farm-all up
into the *20s, & in re "wprk all forest" now.
All our foresters "knew all the time" that most of their pine
plantations were going in on Site III or worse, that fire-controls
were letting vast areas "close up tight" with "scrub" , that any
tight stands were bbund to pinch out game etc etc., including the
increasingly dubious economic future of most of their tech-operations.
But "knowing facts" & "recognition of significance" are very
different compartments in the Homo-oritters psyco-machinery.
,nd after the "right-minded & well-informed" have arrived at
such "recognitions", there is due to be an indefEITtly bad lag
before that New & Better Model combination is put into production
via the Administrative (Mfg) & "sold" into general use-on-road.
Your put-it-into-print contention, I take it, contends that such
in-print offerings can & will greatly accelerate the pick-up &
reduce the legs. I'll admit that in theory they might, & that they
"tend to"- - but I'll insist that they are very independable & slow
at best. Does the USFS pay the slightest evident attention to the
Pearson 4:1 ratio between "available" & "needed" forest? It does not.
Did Silcox et al give my gut-hooking "comment" a 100 run-arount?
They did. Of course. Predictable. iMoneheaded to depend on it
if a better short-circuiting device or mechanism can be found &
rigged.
I may be fooling myself about it, but seems to me that I have
over & over made such a device-formula work so as to reduce them
lags a lot.
Via stimulating the is-it-a-sin editorial in Journal, & via getting
more such items 6nto "the literature", & via "planting" gut-hook
papers & discussions in the negional & annual sessions of SAP etc
eto, I'd likely be "helping" some.... & could readily build up
quite a pile of nice separates while doing it. were I attached to
a cappus I'd be acquiring official kudos en route (in direct ratio
to the thickness of that pile of separates?).
But there is another & more effective proceedure &for technic
for lag-stortening - as I suspect or claim to be experimenting with.
And it doesn't much require or involve trying to "educate" the
Bretheren - as via 'papers" in Journal et al. That will work - in
time, & as events help make the sourness of the coanned-doctrinet &
dogmas more efident, but its a poor & independable method... Because
the Homo-critters aren't much, or consistently, or long at a time
"logical", "reasonable", "intelligent" etc. Your "print it" formula
assumes that they are; my (banana-peel) formula-technio assumes they
aren't ... but also assumes that their behavior patterns are very
decently predictable & that it isn't intelligent not to proceed
accordingly. (Refs on that: Mein Kampf & Jim T Adams Epic of America)
So, while I'll plant the is-it-a-sin editorial in Journal, &
get you, Chapman et al to ocument on it for me too as to catch me
some quotable comment for baiting local traps), mostly I'll be

w