ENVIRONMENT: Counting trees

Florida Times-Union ^ | 8/24/03 | Editorial

[Jean S]

More probably could be done to preserve the environment if some would stop elaborating fact, or distorting it beyond comprehension.

For example, we received recently a piece complaining about the environmental policies of the Bush adminstration, which liberals are desperately trying to pump up into a campaign issue for Democrats next year.

[Libertina]

...unless they are making the religious argument that it was ordained by God to forever have a certain amount of forest on Earth.
I highly doubt the left is citing God.

[BiffWondercat]

I still think INDUSTRIAL hemp is a good idea. It's even better than poplar for paper.

[.cnI redruM]

Here's a rebuttal. Becasue of the productivity increases in agriculture, a greater % of Virginia is forested toady than during the Civil War. I guess an environmentalist would argue all those forests consist of plastic trees because they are not 'Frontier Forests.'

[Libertarianize the GOP]

ping

[RonHolzwarth]

We do not even know what is lost.

I am in possession of a book, published in about 1913, written by what was then known as a "naturalist". I am sorry but I cannot supply the title, as it is in storage at the moment. If anyone is truly interested, send me a private message and I will supply the title and author when I am able to get access to the book again.

Maybe I can post the articles on a website, as the copyrights are long expired, and I am sure the author would be very happy to have his work published this way in our modern age. He did make a comment in the preface that he wanted to preserve knowledge of the natural American West, because the wildlife was being destroyed so fast! And, he wrote all this before 1913!

It is a compilation of articles that the author wrote between about 1900 and 1912 or so, about his examination of the natural world of the American West before the clear cuts destroyed the forests. It contains AMAZING information!

The most shocking of which is the description of the "Thousand Year Pine." Seems, that yes, indeed, it was huge, visible for tens of miles, rivaling the size and age of some of the oldest and tallest trees in the American Northwest.

When the deforestation of Colorado took place, he was allowed to examine the stump.

He was able to date the 1811/1812 New Madrid earthquake, by the broken roots. A five pound rock had been thrust into the tree inself in that year, from a landslide, and had grown to be completely enclosed within the tree in the intervening years. He apparently did not know of the earthquake directly, he only noted that it was "after the sap had gone down into the roots in the year 1811, but before it rose again in the spring of 1812". Facinating!

The New Madrid quake caused landslides in Colorado! As well as the often noted events on the east coast, of which there are many references, since that area was of course already heavily populated by the European Imports.

Fires had been started on two occasions beside the tree, damaging it. NOTE! Fires were NEVER started beside trees by the Native Americans, as they believed that trees were living things (imagine that!) and deserved respect, and a fire to close to a tree would damage it. We European Imports don't care about that though.

One of the campfires beside the tree was the very same year as the Louis and Clark expedition, and appears to be "a very large tree" that they camped beside, mentioned in the L & C journal. There was also another fire next to the tree, but I forget the details on that one.

Well, the lumber companies clear cut Colorado, so only California has giant trees now, the Redwoods and Sequoias. And, Aspen and Pine trees have taken over Colorado, now everyone seems to think it was always like that. Nope.

Only reason the Sequoias are mostly still there? Cause the wood shatters when the tree falls, so it is not a commercial product. And the Redwoods were saved by the difficulties of transport.

So, yes, there may be more forests today than in previous centuries. BUT, they are NOT ALL the same species of trees, as fast growing trees took over after the earlier clear cuts.

[farmfriend]

Rights, farms, environment ping.

Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from this list.

[marsh2]

The forests in the West are far more dense with biomass than they ever were. Our area burned frequently. The native Americans burned to renew basket making materials, harvest sugar sap from sugar pine, harvest grasshoppers and hunt game animals.

The pre Euro-American Forest had much sparser trees with wide spacings. The forest floor had less detritus. "Old Growth forests" did not exist. They burned. The trees only lived to around 100 years old anyway, before they died of old age.

Didfferent areas have different forests. You can't apply East coast notions to Western, SouthWestern or Pacific NorthWestern forests. They are all different.

[Sacajaweau]

You're absolutely right. A tree is a tree is a tree. Its' age has no meaning. It's like saying my mother is better than me because she is 90 and I'm only 60.

It's the PURPOSE of trees that is important and their PURPOSE is not to just stand around and look beautiful. It is a renewable source.

Wonder how many of those environmentalists have frame houses with fireplaces.

[E.G.C.]

BTTT!!!!!!

[Salman]

I highly doubt the left is citing God.

Their god. Just as there has been disputation around here as to whether Allah is God. Well, the Arabic word "Allah" means "God" for sure, and Arabic speaking Christians say "Allah", and did long before there were Muslims.

The Mohammedan "Allah" is still a false concept.

By the same token, the enviro-whacks are not old-fashioned Marxist atheists. They worship an Earth god (or goddess), who is hostile to human existence.

No room for humans. Think of original sin without redemption.

[secretagent]

"Old Growth forests" did not exist. They burned. The trees only lived to around 100 years old anyway, before they died of old age.

The diverse forests of the central Cascades of Washington include wet westside forests with Douglas firs up to 800 years old.

Perhaps too wet...

[Libertina]

And they worship themselves...

[teeman8r]

a forest's average age is always changing... there are no original old growth forests, for trees die and are continually replaced by younger trees... circle of life and all that...

yes there may be trees that are fortunate to find that place where fire never strikes, the wind doesn't gale and the ground doesn't give, but eventually, the decay out gains the growth ability and old trees die...

one thing is for certain, large trees are a renewable resource and should be harvested and replenished by man...

teeman

[ridesthemiles]

Wrong- The age of a tree does matter to the people growing them for lumber for the houses and offices and remodeling America does every day of every year. At about age 30, Douglas Fir is in it's prime. It starts to deteriorate and "age" very rapidly after that. Not of much use when over that age. Sorta like picking ripe tomatoes. Over ripe doesn't get it.

[RugerM77]

Lewis and Clark could not have camped by that tree-They did not go through Colorado.