Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Options

Earth has more trees than it did 35 years ago - but there’s a huge catch

GwadGwad Member Posts: 2,855
First Anniversary 5 Up Votes First Comment 5 Awesomes
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/08/planet-earth-has-more-trees-than-it-did-35-years-ago/

However, an important distinction needs to be made between tree cover and forest cover.

The study points out that industrial timber plantations, mature oil palm estates and other specifically planted forests add to global tree cover. On paper these areas compensate for the primary forest that has been cut down; 100-hectare loss of primary forest is perfectly offset by a 100-hectare gain on a man-made plantation, for example.

But while they may be equal in area, they are not equal in biodiversity. Primary tropical forests and savannas harbour a wealth of flora and fauna which is lost when these areas are cleared.

Comments

  • Options
    2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes
    But how many trees compared to 400 years ago?
  • Options
    WestlinnDuckWestlinnDuck Member Posts: 14,015
    First Anniversary 5 Awesomes First Comment 5 Up Votes
    Standard Supporter
    But the big issue is CO2 capture which is greater in young trees. Biodiversity in an old growth Douglas Fir forest is minimal. Mammal and bird diversity explodes after a clear cut and replant. Just a little knowledge bomb for you leftards.
  • Options
    GrundleStiltzkinGrundleStiltzkin Member Posts: 61,481
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes
    Standard Supporter
    edited October 2019

    We always loose to Cal
  • Options
    PurpleJPurpleJ Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 36,576
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes Combo Breaker
    Swaye's Wigwam
    2001400ex said:

    But how many trees compared to 400 years ago?

    Maybe more considering we used to burn wood chips for fuel, maybe less because population has exploded. I guess about the same, given how much we replant them. I also hear trees are the earth’s lungs.

    @ThomasFremont @collegedoog
  • Options
    ThomasFremontThomasFremont Member Posts: 13,325
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes
    PurpleJ said:

    2001400ex said:

    But how many trees compared to 400 years ago?

    Maybe more considering we used to burn wood chips for fuel, maybe less because population has exploded. I guess about the same, given how much we replant them. I also hear trees are the earth’s lungs.

    @ThomasFremont @collegedoog
    That’s literally what they do.
  • Options
    BendintheriverBendintheriver Member Posts: 5,401
    First Anniversary 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes First Comment
    edited October 2019

    But the big issue is CO2 capture which is greater in young trees. Biodiversity in an old growth Douglas Fir forest is minimal. Mammal and bird diversity explodes after a clear cut and replant. Just a little knowledge bomb for you leftards.

    You are correct of course. Funny how the left manipulates the truth to force us all to live like they want us to.

    Last week we were treated to an explanation of why the smallest recorded hole in the ozone near the South Pole was no big deal and "probably" didn't have anything to do with human efforts to limit pollution but was "probably" the result of "freakish weather" . I thought that was a funny one. An entire movement based off of repeated references to a growing hole in the ozone layer and when it has shrunk and is the smallest ever recorded it seems to mean nothing. Hilarious. Billion dollar bullshit.
  • Options
    GwadGwad Member Posts: 2,855
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes First Comment 5 Awesomes
    You guys are weird
  • Options
    BendintheriverBendintheriver Member Posts: 5,401
    First Anniversary 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes First Comment
    Gwad said:

    You guys are weird

    Nice rebuttal with facts.
  • Options
    2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes

    But the big issue is CO2 capture which is greater in young trees. Biodiversity in an old growth Douglas Fir forest is minimal. Mammal and bird diversity explodes after a clear cut and replant. Just a little knowledge bomb for you leftards.

    You are correct of course. Funny how the left manipulates the truth to force us all to live like they want us to.

    Last week we were treated to an explanation of why the smallest recorded hole in the ozone near the South Pole was no big deal and "probably" didn't have anything to do with human efforts to limit pollution but was "probably" the result of "freakish weather" . I thought that was a funny one. An entire movement based off of repeated references to a growing hole in the ozone layer and when it has shrunk and is the smallest ever recorded it seems to mean nothing. Hilarious. Billion dollar bullshit.
    Where did you read that one at?
  • Options
    BendintheriverBendintheriver Member Posts: 5,401
    First Anniversary 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes First Comment
    2001400ex said:

    But the big issue is CO2 capture which is greater in young trees. Biodiversity in an old growth Douglas Fir forest is minimal. Mammal and bird diversity explodes after a clear cut and replant. Just a little knowledge bomb for you leftards.

    You are correct of course. Funny how the left manipulates the truth to force us all to live like they want us to.

    Last week we were treated to an explanation of why the smallest recorded hole in the ozone near the South Pole was no big deal and "probably" didn't have anything to do with human efforts to limit pollution but was "probably" the result of "freakish weather" . I thought that was a funny one. An entire movement based off of repeated references to a growing hole in the ozone layer and when it has shrunk and is the smallest ever recorded it seems to mean nothing. Hilarious. Billion dollar bullshit.
    Where did you read that one at?
    A NASA scientist hailed the shrinkage as "really good news," though it seems more a result of freakish weather than reduced pollution.

    https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/ozone-hole-near-south-pole-shrinks-smallest-size-ever-seen-ncna1070211
  • Options
    2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes

    2001400ex said:

    But the big issue is CO2 capture which is greater in young trees. Biodiversity in an old growth Douglas Fir forest is minimal. Mammal and bird diversity explodes after a clear cut and replant. Just a little knowledge bomb for you leftards.

    You are correct of course. Funny how the left manipulates the truth to force us all to live like they want us to.

    Last week we were treated to an explanation of why the smallest recorded hole in the ozone near the South Pole was no big deal and "probably" didn't have anything to do with human efforts to limit pollution but was "probably" the result of "freakish weather" . I thought that was a funny one. An entire movement based off of repeated references to a growing hole in the ozone layer and when it has shrunk and is the smallest ever recorded it seems to mean nothing. Hilarious. Billion dollar bullshit.
    Where did you read that one at?
    A NASA scientist hailed the shrinkage as "really good news," though it seems more a result of freakish weather than reduced pollution.

    https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/ozone-hole-near-south-pole-shrinks-smallest-size-ever-seen-ncna1070211
    Yeah.... That's what a scientist says. So I'll take his word over yours.

    The 1987 international Montreal Protocol — the only United Nations treaty ratified by every country on Earth — banned many of the chlorine compounds used in refrigerants and aerosols. The ban resulted in a slightly smaller ozone hole in recent years, but this year's dramatic shrinking isn't from those efforts, Newman said.
  • Options
    PurpleThrobberPurpleThrobber Member Posts: 41,939
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes

    2001400ex said:

    But the big issue is CO2 capture which is greater in young trees. Biodiversity in an old growth Douglas Fir forest is minimal. Mammal and bird diversity explodes after a clear cut and replant. Just a little knowledge bomb for you leftards.

    You are correct of course. Funny how the left manipulates the truth to force us all to live like they want us to.

    Last week we were treated to an explanation of why the smallest recorded hole in the ozone near the South Pole was no big deal and "probably" didn't have anything to do with human efforts to limit pollution but was "probably" the result of "freakish weather" . I thought that was a funny one. An entire movement based off of repeated references to a growing hole in the ozone layer and when it has shrunk and is the smallest ever recorded it seems to mean nothing. Hilarious. Billion dollar bullshit.
    Where did you read that one at?
    A NASA scientist hailed the shrinkage as "really good news," though it seems more a result of freakish weather than reduced pollution.

    https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/ozone-hole-near-south-pole-shrinks-smallest-size-ever-seen-ncna1070211
    Shrinkage is never good news.

  • Options
    GwadGwad Member Posts: 2,855
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes First Comment 5 Awesomes

    But the big issue is CO2 capture which is greater in young trees. Biodiversity in an old growth Douglas Fir forest is minimal. Mammal and bird diversity explodes after a clear cut and replant. Just a little knowledge bomb for you leftards.

    Noted HCH ecologist heard from
  • Options
    BennyBeaverBennyBeaver Member Posts: 13,341
    First Anniversary 5 Awesomes First Comment 5 Up Votes
    Gwad said:

    https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/08/planet-earth-has-more-trees-than-it-did-35-years-ago/

    However, an important distinction needs to be made between tree cover and forest cover.

    The study points out that industrial timber plantations, mature oil palm estates and other specifically planted forests add to global tree cover. On paper these areas compensate for the primary forest that has been cut down; 100-hectare loss of primary forest is perfectly offset by a 100-hectare gain on a man-made plantation, for example.

    But while they may be equal in area, they are not equal in biodiversity. Primary tropical forests and savannas harbour a wealth of flora and fauna which is lost when these areas are cleared.

    Anyone else watch the Biggest Little Farm documentary?
  • Options
    RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 101,716
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
    Swaye's Wigwam

    Gwad said:

    https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/08/planet-earth-has-more-trees-than-it-did-35-years-ago/

    However, an important distinction needs to be made between tree cover and forest cover.

    The study points out that industrial timber plantations, mature oil palm estates and other specifically planted forests add to global tree cover. On paper these areas compensate for the primary forest that has been cut down; 100-hectare loss of primary forest is perfectly offset by a 100-hectare gain on a man-made plantation, for example.

    But while they may be equal in area, they are not equal in biodiversity. Primary tropical forests and savannas harbour a wealth of flora and fauna which is lost when these areas are cleared.

    Anyone else watch the Biggest Little Farm documentary?
    Couldn't put it down
Sign In or Register to comment.