4 ms·
> Some kind of beetle (or was it a fungus?) has killed off a mind boggling number of trees which may be a side-effect of fighting forest fires and the campaign
by JudgeWapner 7y ago
> Some kind of beetle (or was it a fungus?) has killed off a mind boggling number of trees
which may be a side-effect of fighting forest fires and the campaign against logging. higher tree density == easier for fungus to spread. this is why I don't automatically believe anything from the "enlightened" progressive camp. back in the 80's, it was "Stop the Big Bad Loggers! Save the Forest!". Now, had they responsibly thinned the forest, used the timber for logging, that CO2 would be sequestered in homes and the fungus wouldn't have spread through the forest.
- dylan604 7y agoI get the premise of thinning, but nature seemed to do just fine for quite some time before humans brought their theories on how to maintain forests. Man comes up with a theory on how to use the land, but then has to come up with new theories to undo the effect the preceding theory caused. Looking at how nature has coped with out humans in Chernobyl is a good example of nature not needing man's help.
- JudgeWapner 7y agoI agree that nature doesn't need our help. I'm just saying that there is a demand for lumber. So thinning should be done to satiate the demand, which would thereby put the forest back to its natural state (where wildfires could not reach the trees but frequently burned underbrush and fertilized the soil). Instead we let perfectly good timber rot and spread fungus because thats somehow more "eco-friendly" than selling it to responsible logging companies.
- krageon 7y agoI don't understand why eco-friendly is between scare quotes here. It's not a big leap to see that leaving a forest to manage itself is the friendliest option. Yes, you are correct that wood can be converted to money and if we must do that we should do so responsibly. Even given that that is the case, I fail to see how that connects to your obvious disdain for the stance that maybe money isn't the most important thing here.
- maxerickson 7y agoThe huge tree die offs in the US have been from invasive species. A big recent one is the Emerald Ash Borer. Lack of evolved resistance and predators are the key factors.
- JudgeWapner 7y agohow does firefighting play into that? there was no firefighting before the 20th century. now everytime there's smoke it's squashed immediately. that cannot be natural.
- Tharkun 7y agoIs it, though? There have been fires in the arctic for weeks (month?) which haven't been put out. I'm sure firefighters try to put out forest fires asap when they're near human settlements but the world is a big place, and there presumably aren't enough firemen to put out every forest fire. Before the 20th century, there were likely fewer campers setting trash on fire in the middle of a super dry forest. Or maybe not, come to think of it.
- maxerickson 7y agoFirefighting is basically not a factor. Insects can spread pretty far, carry some across the ocean and they'll go investigate the opportunity.