i have witnessed first hand...the |sustainable logging" the logger told me that all the trees that were coming out were dead trees..bug kill..so yes..a large amount was bug kill..but in order for the logger to make more money..he needed alive trees..for weight..thats how he got paid was by wieght..there were alot of alive trees being cut and sold. the reforesting program..really..how long till a tree is full grown.and as far as clean up goes..haha thats a joke
@IRMOZBEY haha, no, it USE to. . . . . not anymore, the people who still log like this are only doing it because they dont want to go through the trouble of assimilating to modern techniques
@AnaLetixoxo there is nothing wrong with cutting down trees in a sustainable manner. We need to meet our needs as much as nature. If it wasn't for timber what would we build things with? Metal? Well that requires mining which requires removal of trees anyway and causes just as much if not more pollution then timber. Plastics? That needs oil, which is a finite resource and emits all sorts of pollutants.
It's a simple idea, but should work. It is so simple and, incredibly, is not understood by some governments as the one in here. Of course money is involved, but the people need goods, including those one who think that we can't touch a single plant, or you don't? The central point is that we should ensure the reforestation.
If they were to chain together hundreds of logs end to end. they could round up mile wide swaths of oil in the oil spill in Louisiana. Pulled between two ships, they could round up vast quantities of oil to vacuum up off the surface.
Wtf...Ice storms, tornado's, and all this kill the trees why not add humans to it? Just because the trees get destroyed naturally doesn't mean its okay to destroy them. If a houses keep falling because of tornado's doesn't make it okay for my to take a sledge hammer and beat your house after you rebuild.
@guitarguy780 The problem with forestation isn't a moral problem of killing trees, as it would be with sledging a house down. The problem is that it destroys ecosystems, which has practical as well as moral (the animals within them die) predicaments. The man is likening their practice to that of natural disasters because both destroy forests in a fairly regular, easily-recoverable fashion. In many ways, in fact, natural disasters can even help forests, just like sustainable logging.
what a joke....an acre of hemp would produce 4 times the amount of paper as an acre of wood, and it could be harvested and replanted every year. "Sustainable forestry" is BS....I've watched the pine trees disappear in south east Texas over the last 30 years...I don't know how anyone honest or sensible can think this is protecting the 'health of our forests'. 3 cheers for a 'leading' scientific magazine pushing the agenda of corporations over truly beneficial ideas and methods.
@Uncalm51 William Randolph Hearst was one major contributor to the illegalization of marijuana because he'd just bought huge acres of trees to pulp for his newspapers and didn't wish his investment to be outperformed by the invention of a new Hemp pulping machine. Dupont was another contributor because he didn't wish Hemp Rope to compete with his new Nylon ropes. Greed trumps logic every time.
Selective cutting is extraordinarily sustainable, i know from experience. If you clear cut an area, you will never be able to harvest from there again. After so many years, say 30 (depending on tree growth rate) you will be able to harvest again. There are plenty of places in CA that were selective cut that are fit to be selective cut again today but are protected by environmental idiots who dont understand how minimally harmless selective cutting is.
@JustinBaker2567 yeah they sold that same shit in Tx.....but over the past 30 years the Piney woods of Texas have been dwindling...except protected parks. And lets see....1 acre of hemp = 4 times the amount of paper from 1 acre of lumber, and you can replant and harvest EVERY year. Hmmm, one of these ideas makes sense and one doesn't.
@Prince67Alpha I completely agree, no more rainforest killing, But look up sustainable logging practices in Alabama, they have already modified poppler trees to grow super fast, while also controlling whether they are hardwood or softwood, they plant 30000 acres, which allows them to log 5 acres a day and by the time they get back to where they started they have full grown trees again, thats what everyone needs to get into :-)
Unfortunately 90% of the logging in the US does not use sustainable methods because most logging companies only care about immediate profits. So the trees are being cut down much faster then they can be replenished. Trees don't just pop up overnight they take years and decades to grow. The US government needs to pass sustainable logging laws but they don't because politicians are corrupt and have been bought off.
Trees and plants produce all the oxygen in the world. Without trees the quality of air goes down and people and animals start to become slowly extinct.
I hope the damage done isn't irreversible, the natural forestry of the world is so little compared to just a few millennium ago...it's really sad and depressing. I hope one day this planet will shine with green like it once did before humans started being greedy and selfish.
we as a species are greatly overpopulated. when an animal becomes overpopulated, the graph goes straight up, then tips straight back down. there will be mass destruction in the near future.
@eLLriDe420: As long as there is someone back there being paid to give a fuck, then I really don't care what you do. One can hope that perhaps at some point you'll learn a bit better. Yes, they grow back, but not in your lifetime.
fuck you clear cuts arnt bad theres 2 huge clear cut areas near my house every year huge mud slides come and flood our hole village last summer they had to rebuild a high way 15k long
The American Indians would burn a forrest that had big trees. Since they blocked out the light vegetation would not grow. With no vegetation no animals. No animals no food. The burning would allow growth , and bring back game.
Wood is a shitty building material. If humans had brains, they wouldn't even need to cut down trees. The ecosystem would be much better off if people just stayed the fuck out of the way.
@neotoy yeah, plastic made of oil is much better. Or would you rather use concrete which also takes oil? Or maybe you can suggest a better building material, hmm?
@Ellroy808 There is such a thing as non-petroleum based plastic and resin, many of which can be made from agricultural bi-products that are normally thrown away. As for concrete, why not use bricks instead, which have been petroleum free and reliable for thousands of years. Although the best solution is to use composit materials that are derived from current waste processes; therefore cleaning the ecosystem and forming sustainable habitats at the same time.
So apparently all of the animals who live in and around these trees aren't affected, because they will eventually grow back. Yeah. Right. What we're doing is like Hurricane Katrina happening every day to these animals. Except hurricanes happen without the actions of conscious humans. There are countries that recycle nearly 100% of their plastics and wood products. What we need is a radical change in the way we do things here so we don't have to continuously cut and regrow the forest.
@Valstein0: Perhaps that is right, but it's not fair to enforce change upon someone such that they loose their livelihood so that you can feel proud. Do you have a plan that will allow loggers and dependents suffer no more than you do yourself? If you don't, then you are deservedly being ignored..
Clear burning forest fire occurs everywhere in temperate forests at not more than every 400 years, usually much less. It is part of the cycle; we've seen what happens when it is ignored.
@Valstein0: First, is those the only solutions that you can come up with? Second, I don't demand that loggers don't change jobs, but I do demand that they not be treated less fairly than you treat yourself in whatever plan you propose (you do have one, right?). It might take a bit more work to come up with one.
The problem is not with cutting down the trees it is with what comes after...No Re-forestation of the forests. They take everything away and just leave it be.
@g0uveia1 Obviously you need to do a little research. Loggers are required by law to clean up a site once they are done, and the company has to bring in people to reforest the area. IE, plant seeds and make sure they grow. It's not go in, cut everything down, rape the animals up the bum, then leave after slating the earth knuckle head, it's a business, and it's better for business to make sure you have more to come back to later.
@Cavman so how do you explain the destruction of several main forests and extinction of so many species? Btw i didn't say all of them do it that way!!!
@g0uveia1 I can explain that as one of two things. Either it a) Happened before people cared enough to not do it, or b) It happens in places like Brazil where anything that could even be construed as passion for the environment is a joke.
@g0uveia1: The explanation is that that law is not yet accepted by everyone worldwide, that other people have different values. You want them to change? You'd better start thinking about ways to engage their interests rather than just telling them to mind you. As the man above said, businesses should be ain a position to be recognizing their long term goals. How are you going to do that?
@km0t0 Then either you haven't done enough, or did it about the wrong country, as they law is existent in the US and Canada and enforced. It's in places like Brazil that there is no law like this.
@Cavman None of the two options, we are starting for the last couple of years. No ofense, but you are probably another ignorant north american speaking of the countries you have never been at and know nothing true about. It is much more complicated to do it in the amazon once we have 60+ species/ha of trees and in american forests you have maximum 6. Sorry, but I think you could get informed before saing bulshit, friend.
Well, the only option that would be greener, is just shutting down the business. So don't be douchebags and agree that since we are using lumber in everyday life, and we need to get it from the forest, this is the way to go.
Watch Burning Trees to Save Trees. Human deforestation prevents fires, ice, tornadoes, and droughts from affecting forests. Forestry isnt an additional plague; rather it reduces the likelihood of all the others. Fires ignite from dry, dead wood & brush. Old trees are more likely to succumb to high winds, the weight of ice, & droughts. In a forest managed for profit, irrigation prevents droughts from spoiling the harvest just as on a farm, & trees are harvested before old age dries them up.
Wild fires that use fallen trees for kindling threaten human homes & lives, whereas human deforestation does not. The video Burning Trees shows how an unspoiled forest poses a higher risk to not just humanity, but the forest itself. Please do research and read before commenting on a video. Thanks to the EPA, we dont have raping of forests, as we once did. Anyone with practical knowledge would understand the differences between contemporary forestry and the massive logging of yesteryear.
great now we have tornadoes, ice, fires, droughts and human deforestation? how the hell is that a good thing lol deforestation even though it is renewable still isnt natural (i would just like to point that out...)
@00Avenger17 Tornadoes, fires, and droughts are all natural. Many forests have adapted to such conditions, and will rejuvenate itself. Fires are naturally cyclical, and clear up many of the older trees that are more likely to kinder; they're essential, as an over-accumulation of detritus and old timber can be devastating. These guys deserve a tip of the hat; these kind of practices of monitoring, restoring, and removing systematically actually saves forests in the end.
@BigBrotherMateyka i wasnt talking about fires, droughts etc i know they are a natural process and they are vital for the continuation of forests however forests have evolved to deal with these natural processes and its in no way like humans are helping forests by doing this i mean they have survived fine for millions of years right? i find that our over reliance on woods like this should be limited to the bare minimum and additional logging in any way is not good :D
@BigBrotherMateyka hehe hey no probs =D =) :D =P i agree with you too =) these guys are doing an awesome job =D the closest thing to preserving a forest =P
Those who believe in the hookum that is manmade global warming should be promoting logging like mad. Mature trees don't absorb nearly as much CO2 as growing trees.
Also, I suggest people look at what beavers do to forests - now that is some really destructive shit. We have more forest in the US now that we did 100 years ago due to fire fighting and despite what schools teach these days humans are not some demonic force.
considering natural disasters happen much less frequently than logging, and those storms LEAVE the trees on the ground to become organic substrate. . . . then no you are not mimicking nature, your raping small chunks of land and using some absurd mental acrobatics to fool yourself and others into thinking its perfectly fine
Its true that they are not mimicking nature, they change the flora and fauna in that area and creates i monocultural enviroment. still, from a global perspective it has little effect on the enviroment.
another thing, if they do not do logging in this way they will have to manually plant new seeds to be able to harvest the forest again wich cost more money.
they are doing nothing wrong (in other words - there is no better, functional way of harvesting lumber in great scale) if we are going to change anything its our demand for lumber.
@SpidermanRun considering you're just an ideological fool that is 10 times smarter than national geographics team (who had done way less than you to help nature, culture and wild life) I gotta say, i agree with you and your 23 thumbs up...'cause you're smart...yeah...
@SpidermanRun Im just wondering what your method of harvesting and managing forests is, ive seen a few videos and im not sure of the most sustainable but economically viable way. We need timber no question , so we need to extract local wood.
i have witnessed first hand...the |sustainable logging" the logger told me that all the trees that were coming out were dead trees..bug kill..so yes..a large amount was bug kill..but in order for the logger to make more money..he needed alive trees..for weight..thats how he got paid was by wieght..there were alot of alive trees being cut and sold. the reforesting program..really..how long till a tree is full grown.and as far as clean up goes..haha thats a joke
jane5sais 1 week ago
Mind boggling
Saja992 1 month ago
@IRMOZBEY haha, no, it USE to. . . . . not anymore, the people who still log like this are only doing it because they dont want to go through the trouble of assimilating to modern techniques
SpidermanRun 1 year ago
but when to you take away the tree, you take away future compost, thus affecting the forest, right?
vinceat852 1 year ago
yeah im a tree hugger..thats why i still dont agree with this...
AnaLetixoxo 1 year ago
@AnaLetixoxo there is nothing wrong with cutting down trees in a sustainable manner. We need to meet our needs as much as nature. If it wasn't for timber what would we build things with? Metal? Well that requires mining which requires removal of trees anyway and causes just as much if not more pollution then timber. Plastics? That needs oil, which is a finite resource and emits all sorts of pollutants.
"Lumber has a thousand uses" - Homer J Simpson
milkyab 1 year ago 2
tits or gtfo
d0861 1 year ago
Brazil has the best trees for furniture etc...
kfaslf 1 year ago
It's a simple idea, but should work. It is so simple and, incredibly, is not understood by some governments as the one in here. Of course money is involved, but the people need goods, including those one who think that we can't touch a single plant, or you don't? The central point is that we should ensure the reforestation.
antolintinez 1 year ago
If they were to chain together hundreds of logs end to end. they could round up mile wide swaths of oil in the oil spill in Louisiana. Pulled between two ships, they could round up vast quantities of oil to vacuum up off the surface.
SeekTruthinLight 1 year ago
Quit trying to make us feel better about the old logging methods.
It's about making money.. pure and simple... Been around 40 years; long enough to know....
dweit4 1 year ago
@dweit4 they think that monney is more important than the health of our planet
polymath101 1 year ago
time to grow industrial hemp.
swankrecords 1 year ago
if we could grow hemp we wouldn't need to use as much timber
Bioreek 1 year ago
@Bioreek nnd more forests would be demolished because they would have no economic value.
WildwomanCannibal 1 year ago
Wtf...Ice storms, tornado's, and all this kill the trees why not add humans to it? Just because the trees get destroyed naturally doesn't mean its okay to destroy them. If a houses keep falling because of tornado's doesn't make it okay for my to take a sledge hammer and beat your house after you rebuild.
guitarguy780 1 year ago
@guitarguy780 The problem with forestation isn't a moral problem of killing trees, as it would be with sledging a house down. The problem is that it destroys ecosystems, which has practical as well as moral (the animals within them die) predicaments. The man is likening their practice to that of natural disasters because both destroy forests in a fairly regular, easily-recoverable fashion. In many ways, in fact, natural disasters can even help forests, just like sustainable logging.
SilenceBeGolden 1 year ago 2
@guitarguy780 I think they replant what they cut down, don't they?
MechaBlazeEagle 1 year ago
excellent work
OuchByGriff 1 year ago
@SpidermanRun
dude,you´re damn right ;-) !
DeuxExMachina23 1 year ago
So why won't all companies do selective cutting - maybe this is something that needs more (governmental) regulation? Just a question!
BelleCheveux 1 year ago
that made me smile.
fakeaname 1 year ago
Kewl !
SirSchumii 1 year ago
doing drug is bad
fackyoudude 1 year ago 2
this, I like.
ANormalGuy 1 year ago
what a joke....an acre of hemp would produce 4 times the amount of paper as an acre of wood, and it could be harvested and replanted every year. "Sustainable forestry" is BS....I've watched the pine trees disappear in south east Texas over the last 30 years...I don't know how anyone honest or sensible can think this is protecting the 'health of our forests'. 3 cheers for a 'leading' scientific magazine pushing the agenda of corporations over truly beneficial ideas and methods.
Uncalm51 1 year ago
@Uncalm51 William Randolph Hearst was one major contributor to the illegalization of marijuana because he'd just bought huge acres of trees to pulp for his newspapers and didn't wish his investment to be outperformed by the invention of a new Hemp pulping machine. Dupont was another contributor because he didn't wish Hemp Rope to compete with his new Nylon ropes. Greed trumps logic every time.
gryphonshire 1 year ago
@gryphonshire
Greed trumps everything every time.
xxxFaustusxxx 1 year ago
Selective cutting is extraordinarily sustainable, i know from experience. If you clear cut an area, you will never be able to harvest from there again. After so many years, say 30 (depending on tree growth rate) you will be able to harvest again. There are plenty of places in CA that were selective cut that are fit to be selective cut again today but are protected by environmental idiots who dont understand how minimally harmless selective cutting is.
JustinBaker2567 1 year ago
@JustinBaker2567 yeah they sold that same shit in Tx.....but over the past 30 years the Piney woods of Texas have been dwindling...except protected parks. And lets see....1 acre of hemp = 4 times the amount of paper from 1 acre of lumber, and you can replant and harvest EVERY year. Hmmm, one of these ideas makes sense and one doesn't.
Uncalm51 1 year ago
why are the boring looking videos being allowed to be viewed here, when the fun looking ones say i can't view them in my country, this sucks
loveabldemon 1 year ago
@Prince67Alpha I completely agree, no more rainforest killing, But look up sustainable logging practices in Alabama, they have already modified poppler trees to grow super fast, while also controlling whether they are hardwood or softwood, they plant 30000 acres, which allows them to log 5 acres a day and by the time they get back to where they started they have full grown trees again, thats what everyone needs to get into :-)
SpidermanRun 1 year ago
Unfortunately 90% of the logging in the US does not use sustainable methods because most logging companies only care about immediate profits. So the trees are being cut down much faster then they can be replenished. Trees don't just pop up overnight they take years and decades to grow. The US government needs to pass sustainable logging laws but they don't because politicians are corrupt and have been bought off.
thequake180 1 year ago
Trees and plants produce all the oxygen in the world. Without trees the quality of air goes down and people and animals start to become slowly extinct.
thequake180 1 year ago
Some people are really ignorant....
I hope the damage done isn't irreversible, the natural forestry of the world is so little compared to just a few millennium ago...it's really sad and depressing. I hope one day this planet will shine with green like it once did before humans started being greedy and selfish.
Territomauvais 1 year ago
we as a species are greatly overpopulated. when an animal becomes overpopulated, the graph goes straight up, then tips straight back down. there will be mass destruction in the near future.
kyle7412 1 year ago
america needs wood. stop bein a pussy. the trees grow right back, who gives a fuck
eLLriDe420 1 year ago
@eLLriDe420
Do you know how long it takes for a 10m tree chopped down in 10 minutes to grow back?
One of the ignorant.
tanhuiz 1 year ago
@eLLriDe420: As long as there is someone back there being paid to give a fuck, then I really don't care what you do. One can hope that perhaps at some point you'll learn a bit better. Yes, they grow back, but not in your lifetime.
puncheex 1 year ago
Forest fires and natural disasters are not as frequent in nature is often as your clear-cuttings do, you moron...
ashthegreat 1 year ago
I love how it sounds as if he's making up for these natural disasters like they don't still happen
unorthodoxJ 1 year ago
fuck you clear cuts arnt bad theres 2 huge clear cut areas near my house every year huge mud slides come and flood our hole village last summer they had to rebuild a high way 15k long
miiror13 1 year ago
The American Indians would burn a forrest that had big trees. Since they blocked out the light vegetation would not grow. With no vegetation no animals. No animals no food. The burning would allow growth , and bring back game.
tidemover 1 year ago
this is NOT sustainability at all.
karnavinash 1 year ago
new youtube makes my searches slower! >:-(
staircast 1 year ago
wtf? why'd they change Youtube AGAIN?
TheAlaricPetz 1 year ago
sustainable logging = retarted
Zao125 1 year ago
@Zao125 theres selective logging that actully is sustainable (wlk thrught the bush and cut only certian trees like 10 in a 1km square radius
miiror13 1 year ago
Wood is a shitty building material. If humans had brains, they wouldn't even need to cut down trees. The ecosystem would be much better off if people just stayed the fuck out of the way.
neotoy 1 year ago
@neotoy yeah, plastic made of oil is much better. Or would you rather use concrete which also takes oil? Or maybe you can suggest a better building material, hmm?
Ellroy808 1 year ago
@Ellroy808 There is such a thing as non-petroleum based plastic and resin, many of which can be made from agricultural bi-products that are normally thrown away. As for concrete, why not use bricks instead, which have been petroleum free and reliable for thousands of years. Although the best solution is to use composit materials that are derived from current waste processes; therefore cleaning the ecosystem and forming sustainable habitats at the same time.
neotoy 1 year ago
So apparently all of the animals who live in and around these trees aren't affected, because they will eventually grow back. Yeah. Right. What we're doing is like Hurricane Katrina happening every day to these animals. Except hurricanes happen without the actions of conscious humans. There are countries that recycle nearly 100% of their plastics and wood products. What we need is a radical change in the way we do things here so we don't have to continuously cut and regrow the forest.
Valstein0 1 year ago
@Valstein0: Perhaps that is right, but it's not fair to enforce change upon someone such that they loose their livelihood so that you can feel proud. Do you have a plan that will allow loggers and dependents suffer no more than you do yourself? If you don't, then you are deservedly being ignored..
Clear burning forest fire occurs everywhere in temperate forests at not more than every 400 years, usually much less. It is part of the cycle; we've seen what happens when it is ignored.
puncheex 1 year ago
@puncheex
I would rather live with the fact that some loggers had to find a different job than live on a dead, gray planet.
Valstein0 1 year ago
@Valstein0: First, is those the only solutions that you can come up with? Second, I don't demand that loggers don't change jobs, but I do demand that they not be treated less fairly than you treat yourself in whatever plan you propose (you do have one, right?). It might take a bit more work to come up with one.
puncheex 1 year ago
The problem is not with cutting down the trees it is with what comes after...No Re-forestation of the forests. They take everything away and just leave it be.
g0uveia1 1 year ago
@g0uveia1 Obviously you need to do a little research. Loggers are required by law to clean up a site once they are done, and the company has to bring in people to reforest the area. IE, plant seeds and make sure they grow. It's not go in, cut everything down, rape the animals up the bum, then leave after slating the earth knuckle head, it's a business, and it's better for business to make sure you have more to come back to later.
Cavman 1 year ago 10
@Cavman so how do you explain the destruction of several main forests and extinction of so many species? Btw i didn't say all of them do it that way!!!
g0uveia1 1 year ago
@g0uveia1 I can explain that as one of two things. Either it a) Happened before people cared enough to not do it, or b) It happens in places like Brazil where anything that could even be construed as passion for the environment is a joke.
Cavman 1 year ago
@g0uveia1: The explanation is that that law is not yet accepted by everyone worldwide, that other people have different values. You want them to change? You'd better start thinking about ways to engage their interests rather than just telling them to mind you. As the man above said, businesses should be ain a position to be recognizing their long term goals. How are you going to do that?
puncheex 1 year ago
@Cavman If there is a law, and no one enforces the law, there might as well be none. I have done my research.
km0t0 1 year ago
@km0t0 Then either you haven't done enough, or did it about the wrong country, as they law is existent in the US and Canada and enforced. It's in places like Brazil that there is no law like this.
Cavman 1 year ago
@Cavman Wrong, we are doing the same thing in Brazil already. You just havent heard about it yet.
martinsmarco 1 year ago
@martinsmarco So, "just haven't heard about it yet" can mean one of two things. a) Failing miserably at it, or b) Not really doing it.
Cavman 1 year ago
@Cavman None of the two options, we are starting for the last couple of years. No ofense, but you are probably another ignorant north american speaking of the countries you have never been at and know nothing true about. It is much more complicated to do it in the amazon once we have 60+ species/ha of trees and in american forests you have maximum 6. Sorry, but I think you could get informed before saing bulshit, friend.
martinsmarco 1 year ago
@Cavman
I love trees
MarlboroAck 1 year ago
@MarlboroAck So do I. :D
Cavman 1 year ago
@g0uveia1 how much do you know of US forest service practices? Because regeneration is not a problem in north america
Ellroy808 1 year ago
I prefer to use human bones.
shunnehling 1 year ago 11
@shunnehling its almost more abundant!, haha
SpidermanRun 1 year ago
Well, the only option that would be greener, is just shutting down the business. So don't be douchebags and agree that since we are using lumber in everyday life, and we need to get it from the forest, this is the way to go.
ArtypNk 1 year ago
Well then that's not really clear cutting is it?
robinsoncrucify 1 year ago 2
WHAT EVER !
5093329225 1 year ago
Watch Burning Trees to Save Trees. Human deforestation prevents fires, ice, tornadoes, and droughts from affecting forests. Forestry isnt an additional plague; rather it reduces the likelihood of all the others. Fires ignite from dry, dead wood & brush. Old trees are more likely to succumb to high winds, the weight of ice, & droughts. In a forest managed for profit, irrigation prevents droughts from spoiling the harvest just as on a farm, & trees are harvested before old age dries them up.
rqtsport 1 year ago
Wild fires that use fallen trees for kindling threaten human homes & lives, whereas human deforestation does not. The video Burning Trees shows how an unspoiled forest poses a higher risk to not just humanity, but the forest itself. Please do research and read before commenting on a video. Thanks to the EPA, we dont have raping of forests, as we once did. Anyone with practical knowledge would understand the differences between contemporary forestry and the massive logging of yesteryear.
rqtsport 1 year ago
bullshit
narezul 1 year ago
i just buy the wood that is the cheapest
hevylifter 1 year ago
@hevylifter LOL
BIGGGY305 1 year ago
great now we have tornadoes, ice, fires, droughts and human deforestation? how the hell is that a good thing lol deforestation even though it is renewable still isnt natural (i would just like to point that out...)
00Avenger17 1 year ago
@00Avenger17 Tornadoes, fires, and droughts are all natural. Many forests have adapted to such conditions, and will rejuvenate itself. Fires are naturally cyclical, and clear up many of the older trees that are more likely to kinder; they're essential, as an over-accumulation of detritus and old timber can be devastating. These guys deserve a tip of the hat; these kind of practices of monitoring, restoring, and removing systematically actually saves forests in the end.
BigBrotherMateyka 1 year ago
@BigBrotherMateyka i wasnt talking about fires, droughts etc i know they are a natural process and they are vital for the continuation of forests however forests have evolved to deal with these natural processes and its in no way like humans are helping forests by doing this i mean they have survived fine for millions of years right? i find that our over reliance on woods like this should be limited to the bare minimum and additional logging in any way is not good :D
00Avenger17 1 year ago
@00Avenger17 I agree with you. My apologies for the misunderstanding.
BigBrotherMateyka 1 year ago
@BigBrotherMateyka hehe hey no probs =D =) :D =P i agree with you too =) these guys are doing an awesome job =D the closest thing to preserving a forest =P
00Avenger17 1 year ago
Those who believe in the hookum that is manmade global warming should be promoting logging like mad. Mature trees don't absorb nearly as much CO2 as growing trees.
Also, I suggest people look at what beavers do to forests - now that is some really destructive shit. We have more forest in the US now that we did 100 years ago due to fire fighting and despite what schools teach these days humans are not some demonic force.
We should be proud to be human.
thegoodlocust 1 year ago 2
considering natural disasters happen much less frequently than logging, and those storms LEAVE the trees on the ground to become organic substrate. . . . then no you are not mimicking nature, your raping small chunks of land and using some absurd mental acrobatics to fool yourself and others into thinking its perfectly fine
SpidermanRun 1 year ago 25
@SpidermanRun Couldn't have said it better myself. Thumbs up for you :D
guitargod909 1 year ago
@SpidermanRun
Its true that they are not mimicking nature, they change the flora and fauna in that area and creates i monocultural enviroment. still, from a global perspective it has little effect on the enviroment.
fillethefish 1 year ago
another thing, if they do not do logging in this way they will have to manually plant new seeds to be able to harvest the forest again wich cost more money.
they are doing nothing wrong (in other words - there is no better, functional way of harvesting lumber in great scale) if we are going to change anything its our demand for lumber.
fillethefish 1 year ago
@SpidermanRun Hey man, we're part of nature, and we need things too.
And you can cut wood in a sustainable way.
AinEstonia 1 year ago
@SpidermanRun couldn't have said it better myself!
eggbaax 1 year ago
@SpidermanRun considering you're just an ideological fool that is 10 times smarter than national geographics team (who had done way less than you to help nature, culture and wild life) I gotta say, i agree with you and your 23 thumbs up...'cause you're smart...yeah...
RobBobMarley 1 year ago
@SpidermanRun Im just wondering what your method of harvesting and managing forests is, ive seen a few videos and im not sure of the most sustainable but economically viable way. We need timber no question , so we need to extract local wood.
hablerz 1 year ago
all logging in the world should be like this
dyingangelo 1 year ago
I still don't think it's the same thing..Difference between nature knocking down trees and man chopping them down
AngelBaby977onRS 1 year ago
hmm.
cruz3nt7 1 year ago