Originally Posted by Donutz
Maybe we're misunderstanding each other, but that's what I said. So I'm misinformed but you agree with me???
Oh for Christs sake. So where are all the people living now that weren't here 100 years ago? In the desert? In the bottom of the rivers? C.B., I'm old enough to remember the lower mainland in the 60's and there's NO FUCKING WAY there's more trees here now. I have pictures in my photo album of the north shore with almost no houses on it (now it's houses almost all the way up).
Ever heard of clearcuts? BC in particular is lousy with them. The natives in the Amazon are being forced out of their traditional lands by deforestation. There are satellite pix showing before and after, and there are a lot less trees than before. So where are all these magical new trees going in? The desert, again?
Sometimes the bullshit that comes out of the republitard grist mill just drives me goofy.
And with this post, I realize I'm going to have to move this thread. Sorry, OP. You've been threadjacked.
Actually I was saying there's less wild fires now than there was in the past, which is true partially because of our suppression efforts, and partially the because forest in noth America is maturing (relative to 100 years ago).
Clear cuts are often the best way to harvest trees because they mimick catastrophic fires. That's basically the only way we harest trees in the lake states (the primary exception being when the water table comes into play)
I'm actually a forestry student at a very liberal college, and anything but a "republitard" nothing I ever said was politically motivated. I was simply providing some information about things that I study every day that is mostly missunderstood by the general public.
If anything we should be utilizing our forest as a sustainable resource, and that's my point.