4 ms·
>it unfortunately leaves out a lot that a true forest requires and the resulting land will be less ecologically productive and every time the same region is re-
by itsoktocry 3y ago
>it unfortunately leaves out a lot that a true forest requires and the resulting land will be less ecologically productive and every time the same region is re-logged a good amount of topsoil is lost
What is a "true" forest? When a forest burns down and regrows, is it still "true"? Do you think that's better than logging and replanting?
- acc_297 3y agoOh replanting is much better than leaving a cut block to nature but a “true forest” in this sense would have an ecosystem - many different plants which support a population of animals etc… Without that it’s more or less a wheat field in ecological terms it’s just a monoculture of trees which actually don’t draw down much carbon until the forest is mature ~200 years or so whenever there’s enough ecological productivity to bury dead trees before they can fully decay
- gyanreyer 3y agoWhen a forest burns down and regrows, it does so in a much more natural way than if humans just slap down some trees and nothing else and call it a day.
- kruxigt 3y ago[dead]
- flakeoil 3y agoA natural forest doesn't burn as easily as a planted forest.