How about for every tree cut down in the wilderness, the industries must plant a sappling and spread a handful of seeds in the area. Doesnt have to be in the same area just anywhere to make up for the killing
Most of them already do that. Problem is most trees don't grow fast enough for it to make any difference.-Kate
Another problem is that there is less and less places to plant new trees. Look at all these little neighborhoods popping up all over the place...you know the ones where the houses are 1 foot apart and your backyard is big enough for a person to stand in. And there has to be a Walmart on every corner...and a chain drug store...or three. Our world is becoming a pavement, treeless wonderland.
It does make a big difference. Total forest cover in the United states is actually increasing annually as a result. Its been increasing for a few decades now.
Exactly. No matter what your neighberhood hippie telsl you, the number of trees has actually grown in the last 50 years because of cooporative tree planting and such.
Yeah, most of the timber companies do replant. Except when they replant they spray the area with herbicide to kill the native plants that spring up first. That way their monoculture of commercially-valuable trees won't be shaded out and they'll have a nice cookie-cutter tree farm in thirty years. Just because there's trees doesn't mean its wild.
exactly. Don't be so ignorant people, it's not just about quantity, but quality also. A tree plantation is not the same as a natural forest. The focus should be on preservation of ecosystems and biodiversity. Old growth cannot be replaced.
It's like humans think they're gods and want to cut down the trees but plant new better ones and take away this but put this in, etc, etc, etc. Why can't we just leave the earth the way it is and leave it up to nature to decide which trees stay and which ones don't? Oh, I forgot, you can't make money off of that. ~Madeline
And those pine plantations are only going to be cut again: no nutrients in the soil, not enough underbrush for erosion control, no good grundcover for the wildlife that returns, and yes, those lovely herbacides running off into the nearest watershed. Drink up! However, Uni of Arkansas researchers found MORE old-growth forest /primeval forest in Colorado a couple years ago.
NAMASTE Cut down on the use as much as one can on on the few resources that we have left is a start.Car pool ,ride a bike or best yet walk when you go somewere.Live in co-housing,communal living are ways to cut down on making new homes in turn cut down on the use of wood products.There are many ways to help do this but it starts with us.and are impact on a whole on the enviroment.In short we all need to do are part.
Tree plantations amount to a very small precentage of forest cover. There is alot of quality forest in the US, and quality forest can regenerate. How do you think it grew there in the first place?
Over thousands of years, that's how it got there. Once old growth is cut down it will never be "old growth" again. Don't be so ignorant. Go ask some of the professors at UW-Madison, surely they can help inform you.
It does not take thousands of years for all forest to regenerate. Indeed there are some that may, redwood forests would be the obvious example. If what you say were true, wouldnt the country be devoid of old forests entirely? It certainly doesnt take millenia for areas to recover from forest fire. Why would it take millenia for a forest to recover from controlled logging, especially if new trees are planted in place of fallen ones?
Clearly you did not seek the expert advice like I suggested.... Yes, in fact there is very little old growth forest left. We've logged about 95 percent of old growth forest in the last 100 yrs. in the U.S. It takes many centuries for a forest to reach this stage. The entire ecosystem is not replaced simply by planting more trees. Why do I have to keep repeating myself? Forest systems are supposed to run in cycles of 500 to 1200 years, due to our shortening of these cycles, the ecosystems will eventually collapse. What so you consider "recovery", Aspens? Succession takes centuries. Ancient forests are complex and what I'm talking about is an complete ecosystem, not just the presence of trees. There are certain species that can only live in old growth. What should they do, just go extinct?
