Skip to comments.
Forested Area of Scotland Returned to Bog
AP ^
| Dec 30, 2002
| JANE WARDELL
Posted on 12/30/2002 11:42:30 AM PST by Tailgunner Joe
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-57 next last
To: Tailgunner Joe
And these preservationists think they have how much control over what the world will look like in 3000 years?
2
posted on
12/30/2002 11:47:23 AM PST
by
maica
To: Tailgunner Joe
The bogs are of massive international importance Right..."I want my B.O.G.!"..."Got Bog?"..."Bog me up Scotty!"..."Bogzilla!"...
I mean the bog has contributed to every facet of life on the earth, hasn't it?
FMCDH
To: *Enviralists
To: Howlin; Ed_NYC; MonroeDNA; widgysoft; Springman; FreedomPoster; Timesink; AntiGuv; ...
Resistance is futile
"Hold muh beer 'n watch this!" PING....If you want on or off this list, please let me know!
5
posted on
12/30/2002 12:01:21 PM PST
by
mhking
To: Tailgunner Joe
I think you need a couple of good hounds to have a good bog, eh, Sherlock ?
To: Tailgunner Joe
... and use the discarded timber to block up the ditches that were dug to drain the peatlands 20 years ago. God forbid they should actually do somethong useful with the timber. It's been thirty years, time to harvest those trees anyway, let's at least make somthing useful/beautiful with them.
To: Tailgunner Joe
ripping out thousands of trees [...] to preserve the habitat Ummmm. Sound's like they're returning the habitat, or converting the habitat...certainly not preserving it.
8
posted on
12/30/2002 1:28:52 PM PST
by
lepton
To: The_Victor
They are doing something useful with it. Why is it that being conservative seems to mean always exploiting the environment. I'm no green but Christ, looking at US sprawling unplanned development, clear cutting and ripping the very dirt upto the clay looks like crap. The pollution and massive traffic are just so fun to live with, as are the absolute lack of good parks in many cities to take your kids too. And the one line of trees on either side of a creek, over run with construction run off, is not preserving nature. I don't know about you, but I have no desire to live in a McWorld of run down strip malls and super highways everywhere you look.
9
posted on
12/30/2002 1:53:09 PM PST
by
Stavka2
To: Tailgunner Joe
Bog (bog)
n.:An area of ground that is permanently wet and spongy, formed of decaying plants, etc.
...and occupied by all kinds of nasty crawling, creeping, flying things that sting, bite, infect, poison, and carry diease. Oh! and let's not forget that "unique" biological soup formed by all that stagnent water and rotting plant life.
To: Stavka2
Uh-oh. Someone will flame you. Not me, because my two acres are now home to about 50 new racoons that moved in when these idiots came in an decimated 20 acres of trees to add a development of one-story tin storage barns. Oooh. So very nice. So very legal. No long-term land use planning in Texas.
To: The_Victor
Conifers were planted in the late 1970s and a subsequent tax concession introduced by the government of former Conservative Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s led to huge investment in forestation of the area.They're leaving out a prefix....we're talking re-forestation. Of course the original forests were cut down a long time ago by the British crown to fund the ship building industry. So these lands turned to bogs. At least that's the story they were writing in Scotland during the 80's re-forestation.
12
posted on
12/30/2002 4:10:44 PM PST
by
Katya
To: yankeedame
Bog (bog)n.:An area that is permanently wet and spongy, formed of decaying matter, usually referring to a liberal ecofreak's brain.
To: Katya
Aye, that's what I was thinking as well. I have a hunch the green types were behind the replanting of trees back then as well.
To: Stavka2
I'm no green but Christ, looking at US sprawling unplanned development, clear cutting and ripping the very dirt upto the clay looks like crap. The pollution and massive traffic are just so fun to live with, as are the absolute lack of good parks in many cities to take your kids too. And the one line of trees on either side of a creek, over run with construction run off, is not preserving nature. I don't know about you, but I have no desire to live in a McWorld of run down strip malls and super highways everywhere you look. Oh please, Urban Sprawl is such a myth. A few areas are growing because most people are living in few densely populated urban areas leaving the countryside with shrinking populations. I was just reading the other day how the forests and population of wild animals was greater today than at the turn of the century (i.e. 1900, not 2000. wink, wink).
And to be frank for you and your family's sake, I hope that you don't live in a community that is trying to defeat urban sprawl by planning development. They were trying to do that in the Twin Cities when I lived there. Controlled Development means no devlopment. They were trying to make it more difficult to live in the outlying suburbs, not make city life better. They were actually replacing 4 lane bridges with 2 lane bridges. Can you imagine what that does to the commute time? Their other great idea at the time was to make the suburbs build their own low income public housing projects. Better to spread the bad housing and high crime around, then try to fix the problems of the major cities.
To: Sci Fi Guy; Stavka2
The all time masters of planned development were the communist party leaders in the Soviet Union. Their plan to concentrate people in cities(no sprawl), oversee the design of every building, and the infrastructure planning they did(5, 10 and 20 year plans) are mimicked exactly by the new urban planners.
Don't you remember the horrible cement high rises with the tiny apartments and decade long waiting lists in the Soviet Union? The bread lines, shoe lines and long lines for any other necessities? The electricity which was only turned on to the high rises for a couple of hours every night? That is a result of careful "planning" by the soviet party leaders. None of the beautiful homes and communitities built in the first 250 years of the establishment of our Republic needed planners or commissions or councils to tell individuals how to build their homes. Let people alone. Some communities will turn out great, others not so great, but let people be free!
To: hedgetrimmer
"The all time masters of planned development were the communist party leaders in the Soviet Union. Their plan to concentrate people in cities(no sprawl), oversee the design of every building, and the infrastructure planning they did(5, 10 and 20 year plans) are mimicked exactly by the new urban planners. "Exactly, and they keep harping on the point that they just didn't have the right people.
17
posted on
12/30/2002 6:30:01 PM PST
by
spunkets
To: Tailgunner Joe
To: maica
It's ALL about control, ain't it? Doesn't much matter that species have been coming and going for eons - we have to freeze the planet in its present configuration. That's very important, for some reason. ;-)
To: maica
In 3000 years there will be people living in the Scottish bogs, shoulder-to-shoulder and they'll be killing and eating each other: soylent green. Those birds will be long forgotten.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-57 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson