OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

On Wed, 05 Oct 2005 11:50:14 -0500, clifto wrote:

Carter-K8VT wrote:
...and do you think they would re-plant "millions of trees" if they
weren't forced to by the "eco-nazi" laws you love to hate?

Yes. Unlike you, they think a few years ahead and realize that planting
trees now makes trees to harvest years from now.

b-i-o-d-i-v-e-r-s-i-t-y

Some POS Houston company is incapable of restoring a complex ecosystem
like an ancient forest. There's way more to it than a few fir trees.

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

David wrote:

On Wed, 05 Oct 2005 11:49:24 -0500, clifto wrote:

Carter-K8VT wrote:
Well, you are right. Logging a "few" trees won't damage the forest.
However, what logging company is going to set up an operation for only a
"few" trees? Let's try and be a little more realistic here...

Forests, left to their own devices, end up with trees far too close
together for good root growth and effective nutrient absorption. Lots
die. The dead ones end up fueling forest fires that take all the trees.
Most logging companies today would take trees in such a way as to let
the remaining trees have room to grow, so they can come back in a dozen
years and harvest again.
That's the craziest thing I've read in a long time.

You don't read your own stuff, stem?

dxAce
Michigan
USA

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

Forests, left to their own devices, end up with trees far too close
together for good root growth and effective nutrient absorption. Lots
die. The dead ones end up fueling forest fires that take all the trees.
Most logging companies today would take trees in such a way as to let
the remaining trees have room to grow, so they can come back in a dozen
years and harvest again.

That's the craziest thing I've read in a long time.

Uninformed too, but the question is Why?

The North American continent did not become heavily forested since the
last Ice Age because timber companies came in and were able to manage
them effectively by clearcuttiing or heavy selective cutting. Old
growth forests with healthy diversity and heavy plant cover were the
rule prior to that. The combination of climate, diverse soils,
relatively natural processes and yes, fire, created the extensive
patchwork of diverse forests that the early settlers met in North
America. Yes, there are some trees dead or dying in any forest - but
these trees, burned or unburned, make nutrients for the next generation
- and come on, show me any natural system where the dead don't
naturally follow the living and recycle themselves back into nutrients
for the new growth!

It is true that, if we look at it purely from a human use perspective,
a heavily managed forest is, at least over the mid-term, going to yield
more usable timber.

But, people aren't the only living things that depend on the forest for
their lives and livelihoods.

I strongly suggest to anyone who thinks that an undisturbed old growth
forest cannot be healthy, should come west (or even east) and look at
the incredible forests where people have chosen to preserve them.
Except for the cultivated timber tree species and obvious beneficiaries
of managed forests (like deer), the trees are bigger, the soil is
richer, the plants and animal species and numbers more numerous than
anywhere that forests have been disturbed and managed. Compare the
undisturbed Olympic rainforests, the redwood groves, the undisturbed
Sierra forests, the burned and remarkably rejuvenating forests of the
Yellowstone, the Alaskan Tongass, and especially the amazingly diverse
Appalachian forests in the Smokies, with any managed forest anywhere on
the continent. The differences are enormous and occasionally alarming.


If you want diversity and scores of animals and plants and magnificent
trees, old-growth is the way to go. These qualities are valuable and
cannot be maintained by more than inconsequential harvest programs. If
you want monocultures of neat tidy rows of trees ready to be sacrificed
every 40 years for maximum profit, then a managed fire-suppressed
plantation is the way to go. This is valuable too, but in a very
different way.

Bruce Jensen

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

"Carter-K8VT" wrote in message
. ..
MnMikew wrote:


Yes Bruce, but logging a few trees is not going to damage the forest.

Well, you are right. Logging a "few" trees won't damage the forest.
However, what logging company is going to set up an operation for only a
"few" trees? Let's try and be a little more realistic here...

A hundred years ago, before your "eco-nazi" laws, they would clear cut
(can you say "decimate"? Sure you can!) entire forests without batting
an eye.

Don't see many clearcuts anymore now do you. You'll never get America back
to where it was 100 years ago, no matter how much forest you designate as
wilderness. Logging Co's setup all the time for select cutting.

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

"Carter-K8VT" wrote in message
.. .
MnMikew wrote:

This probably does happen on Potlatch owned land though they dont
leave a few trees to reseed, the replant millions of new trees.


...and do you think they would re-plant "millions of trees" if they
weren't forced to by the "eco-nazi" laws you love to hate?

Forced? What happens to a farmer is he dosent replant?

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

"David" wrote in message
...
Now that cars burn cleaner, cows are the #1 cause of air pollution in
the Central Valley of California.

To quote you:
"That's the craziest thing I've read in a long time"

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

Don't see many clearcuts anymore now do you. You'll never get America back
to where it was 100 years ago, no matter how much forest you designate
as
wilderness. Logging Co's setup all the time for select cutting

There is still quite a bit in the Pacific Northwest - try the Olympic
Peninsula o rthe southeast side of Mt. St. Helens, where the State of
Washington and NFS proudly tout their forestry practice on signs in
front of areas of total, utter vegetative removal - although frankly,
there are relatively few areas left outside of parks and wilderness
areas that haven't been clearcut already...so naturally, the available
acres for this type of harvest are getting pretty small.

Bruce Jensen

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

Now that cars burn cleaner, cows are the #1 cause of air pollution in
the Central Valley of California.

To quote you:
"That's the craziest thing I've read in a long time"

CA Central Valley has a remarkable variety of pollution sources, from
dust to ag burning to cows to cars. Each produces a different mixture
of emissions - some more particulates, some more ozone precursors. The
Central Valley has such bad air quality in summer (due to emissions and
climatological factors) that *any* reduction in *any* pollutant is
desirable.

Bruce Jensen

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

bpnjensen wrote:
Don't see many clearcuts anymore now do you. You'll never get America back

to where it was 100 years ago, no matter how much forest you designate
as
wilderness. Logging Co's setup all the time for select cutting

There is still quite a bit in the Pacific Northwest - try the Olympic
Peninsula o rthe southeast side of Mt. St. Helens, where the State of
Washington and NFS proudly tout their forestry practice on signs in
front of areas of total, utter vegetative removal - although frankly,
there are relatively few areas left outside of parks and wilderness
areas that haven't been clearcut already...so naturally, the available
acres for this type of harvest are getting pretty small.

Bruce Jensen



No clearcutting? Install Google Earth and take a look areound Mt. St.
Helens in Washington State.

Clearcutting is easy to see.

It makes it easy to put up an antenna, if you can find a tree still
standing.


craigm

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

On 5 Oct 2005 10:54:45 -0700, "bpnjensen" wrote:

Now that cars burn cleaner, cows are the #1 cause of air pollution in
the Central Valley of California.

To quote you:
"That's the craziest thing I've read in a long time"

CA Central Valley has a remarkable variety of pollution sources, from
dust to ag burning to cows to cars. Each produces a different mixture
of emissions - some more particulates, some more ozone precursors. The
Central Valley has such bad air quality in summer (due to emissions and
climatological factors) that *any* reduction in *any* pollutant is
desirable.

Bruce Jensen

''Dairy cows in the San Joaquin Valley, California, produce more
smog-forming gases than cars, according to local air quality
regulators. The region's dairy industry currently includes some 2.5
million cattle''

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...llution_2.html

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

No clearcutting? Install Google Earth and take a look areound Mt. St.
Helens in Washington State.

Clearcutting is easy to see.

Don't need a satellite picture it is quite visible from the ground :-(
We took a trip to Washington past June and July, and saw a massive
amount of the most gruesome logging practices imaginable. Total
destruction. Mt. St. Helens, Olympic area, near Rainier - lots of it.

Washington calls itself the Evergreen State. Ironic.

Bruce Jensen

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

"David" wrote in message
...
On 5 Oct 2005 10:54:45 -0700, "bpnjensen" wrote:

Now that cars burn cleaner, cows are the #1 cause of air pollution in
the Central Valley of California.

To quote you:
"That's the craziest thing I've read in a long time"

CA Central Valley has a remarkable variety of pollution sources, from
dust to ag burning to cows to cars. Each produces a different mixture
of emissions - some more particulates, some more ozone precursors. The
Central Valley has such bad air quality in summer (due to emissions and
climatological factors) that *any* reduction in *any* pollutant is
desirable.

Bruce Jensen

''Dairy cows in the San Joaquin Valley, California, produce more
smog-forming gases than cars, according to local air quality
regulators. The region's dairy industry currently includes some 2.5
million cattle''


http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...llution_2.html

They should be banned then.

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

"bpnjensen" wrote in message
oups.com...
No clearcutting? Install Google Earth and take a look areound Mt. St.
Helens in Washington State.

Clearcutting is easy to see.

Don't need a satellite picture it is quite visible from the ground :-(
We took a trip to Washington past June and July, and saw a massive
amount of the most gruesome logging practices imaginable. Total
destruction. Mt. St. Helens, Olympic area, near Rainier - lots of it.

Washington calls itself the Evergreen State. Ironic.

Bruce Jensen

I believe when Mt St. Helens erupted is caused a much worse clearcut.

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

I believe when Mt St. Helens erupted is caused a much worse clearcut

For a single event, yes.

But the collective human effect has been greater.

Both of these are fairly small conmpared to what will happen when the
Yellowstone Caldera or Owens Valley Caldera get mad again.

Bruce Jensen

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

We get plenty enough rain here in Mississippi,we don't have to worry too
much aybout wildfires.It's just one of them thangys.
cuhulin

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

Wait a minute,,, there is a Houston,Mississippi www.555us.com but
our Houston,Mississippi isn't crazy like Houston,Texas is.
www.hometownfreepress.com TEXAS
cuhulin

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 14:09:00 -0500, "MnMikew"
wrote:



"David" wrote in message
.. .
On 5 Oct 2005 10:54:45 -0700, "bpnjensen" wrote:

Now that cars burn cleaner, cows are the #1 cause of air pollution in
the Central Valley of California.

To quote you:
"That's the craziest thing I've read in a long time"

CA Central Valley has a remarkable variety of pollution sources, from
dust to ag burning to cows to cars. Each produces a different mixture
of emissions - some more particulates, some more ozone precursors. The
Central Valley has such bad air quality in summer (due to emissions and
climatological factors) that *any* reduction in *any* pollutant is
desirable.

Bruce Jensen

''Dairy cows in the San Joaquin Valley, California, produce more
smog-forming gases than cars, according to local air quality
regulators. The region's dairy industry currently includes some 2.5
million cattle''


http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...llution_2.html

They should be banned then.


No point now that the melting peat bogs are releasing millions of tons
of methane. It's over.

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

Old Book of Kells was found in an Irish Peat Bog many years ago.That
very same Book now resides in a Library in Dublin,Ireland.I own a
reprint Book of the Book of Kells. www.devilfinder.com Book of
Kells
cuhulin

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

You are NOT!!!! going to mess around in Ireland Peat Bogs,,, YOU are
NOT!!!! going to do
it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
cuhulin

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

"bpnjensen" wrote in message
ups.com...
Now that cars burn cleaner, cows are the #1 cause of air pollution in
the Central Valley of California.

To quote you:
"That's the craziest thing I've read in a long time"

CA Central Valley has a remarkable variety of pollution sources, from
dust to ag burning to cows to cars. Each produces a different mixture
of emissions - some more particulates, some more ozone precursors. The
Central Valley has such bad air quality in summer (due to emissions and
climatological factors) that *any* reduction in *any* pollutant is
desirable.

Bruce Jensen


It could be posed that anything (such as a cow) that is a natural part of
the ecosystem cannot part of a pollution problem. Man himself cannot be a
direct part, either, though his machines certainly can as they are not a
natural part of the ecosystem.

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

Let me see if one of them girls next door to me is home over there from
work yet.I hope it's Julie because she cusses just like I cuss.I think I
heard her pickup truck just now.Vanessa is prettier than Julie and
Vanessa doesn't use filthy dirty language either.
cuhulin

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

Raining like a Cow peein on a brown flat rock.It isn't actually raining
here though.I know you will go to www.srh.noaa.gov (or sompin like
that) and see I am not lieing.
cuhulin

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

U.S.fed govts and AWOL GAY BISEXUAL MORON GAY FAGGOT GAY bush LOVES
'''Bald Heads"" JIHAD TERRORIST BUDDY!!!!!.
www.homelandsecurityus.com
cuhulin

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

On Wed, 05 Oct 2005 04:47:51 -0400, dxAce
wrote:



wrote:

On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 23:12:44 -0400, dxAce
wrote:



wrote:

On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 14:09:31 -0400, dxAce
wrote:



David "I don't know a damn thing about shortwave" Rickets wrote:

On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 13:47:22 -0400, dxAce
wrote:




Yep, at least three more years without some brain stem liberal in the Presidency...

You prefer a Nationalist Socialist? Why?

Did I mention anything at all about a National Socialist, brain stem?

Jeez, some parrot taught dzArse a new insult -- now he has
four to use in each posting.


Please try to pay attention, at least once in your life. I know it's difficult, but with
some medication and some therapy, things might actually work out for you.

Why? It did nothing for you, brainless stem.

'Brainless stem' is an oxymoron, 'tard.

Not when the brain has withered off the stem, as has yours.


You'll have to do better than that to beat the 'ol dxAce in most any endeavour.

Easily done, with one brain tied behind my back.

You must have stolen it as you certainly never had one of your own.

Keep trying 'tard boy.

dxAce
Michigan
USA


Lamer, lamer.

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

On Wed, 05 Oct 2005 11:49:24 -0500, clifto wrote:

Carter-K8VT wrote:
Well, you are right. Logging a "few" trees won't damage the forest.
However, what logging company is going to set up an operation for only a
"few" trees? Let's try and be a little more realistic here...

Forests, left to their own devices, end up with trees far too close
together for good root growth and effective nutrient absorption. Lots
die. The dead ones end up fueling forest fires that take all the trees.
Most logging companies today would take trees in such a way as to let
the remaining trees have room to grow, so they can come back in a dozen
years and harvest again.

Actually they scream rape when told to do that -- they'd rther
clearcut, re-seed and move on. They constantly bitch about the cost of
low-impact logging like removal by helicopter. All they want is huge
gravel roads fed from the side by skid roads.

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

Carter - 'decimate' means 1 in 10 [.]

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

On Wed, 05 Oct 2005 11:12:23 GMT, Carter-K8VT
wrote:

MnMikew wrote:

This probably does happen on Potlatch owned land though they dont
leave a few trees to reseed, the replant millions of new trees.


...and do you think they would re-plant "millions of trees" if they
weren't forced to by the "eco-nazi" laws you love to hate?

Millions of monoculture trees, for their own future benefit,
nothing like what was destroyed.

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 12:40:38 -0500, "MnMikew"
wrote:


"Carter-K8VT" wrote in message
. ..
MnMikew wrote:

This probably does happen on Potlatch owned land though they dont
leave a few trees to reseed, the replant millions of new trees.


...and do you think they would re-plant "millions of trees" if they
weren't forced to by the "eco-nazi" laws you love to hate?

Forced? What happens to a farmer is he dosent replant?


Farmers don't move on. The lumber companies do. They'd not
replant if they could get away wih it. What they do replant is only
what they can come back to take again.

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

CLIFTO,

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

RHF wrote:

Carter - 'decimate' means 1 in 10 [.]

Yup, technically you are right, but yours is the third definition of
three listed in the Yahoo dictionary. The first two were what I had in
mind...[emphasis added]:

1. To destroy or kill a *large part of* (a group).

2. Usage Problem
1. To inflict *great* destruction or damage on
2. To *reduce markedly* in amount

3. To select by lot and kill one in every ten of.

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

clifto wrote:
Carter-K8VT wrote:

...and do you think they would re-plant "millions of trees" if they
weren't forced to by the "eco-nazi" laws you love to hate?


Yes. Unlike you, they think a few years ahead and realize that planting
trees now makes trees to harvest years from now.


Yes, but you miss the point. Do they "think a few years ahead" because
they *want* to or because the laws say they *have? to? I contend the
latter, because before the laws were in place, they would clearcut and
then just walk away...

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

MnMikew wrote:
"Carter-K8VT" wrote in message
.. .

MnMikew wrote:


This probably does happen on Potlatch owned land though they dont
leave a few trees to reseed, the replant millions of new trees.


...and do you think they would re-plant "millions of trees" if they
weren't forced to by the "eco-nazi" laws you love to hate?


Forced? What happens to a farmer is he dosent replant?

Huh???

How did we get talking about farmers, with their relatively small
(compared to forests) private plots of land?

But to address your question "What happens to a farmer is he dosent
replant?", the answer is: the gummint pays him to *not* plant. (I'm sure
you have heard of the subsidy program)... :-)

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

Carter,

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

Carter-K8VT wrote:
clifto wrote:
Carter-K8VT wrote:
...and do you think they would re-plant "millions of trees" if they
weren't forced to by the "eco-nazi" laws you love to hate?

Yes. Unlike you, they think a few years ahead and realize that planting
trees now makes trees to harvest years from now.

Yes, but you miss the point. Do they "think a few years ahead" because
they *want* to or because the laws say they *have? to? I contend the
latter, because before the laws were in place, they would clearcut and
then just walk away...

I contend the former, because they will want to be in business ten years
from now. Logging equipment and debarkers and kilns and other lumber-
producing equipment doesn't come cheap, and they can either depreciate
it over a long lifetime at low cost to the lumber consumer or try to
charge a gazillion shekels per board foot to pay for it all.

Check the sites of some of the paper makers. They brag about their
reforestation efforts. Even if their labors are crassly commercial,
they're putting back new trees to replace the trees they take, in
spades.

--
If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination,
my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang Zemin.

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

y'all ain't gonna hug my """tree"""" it's for them crazy wimmins only.
cuhulin

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

So,,,,,, when I mow my yard,,, them cut pieces of grass and mostly weeds
and weird looking thingys them birds "plant" in my yard are screaming
rape? Let em scream.
cuhulin

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

BpnJ,

OT Score One For The Tree Huggers
 

wrote:

On Wed, 05 Oct 2005 04:47:51 -0400, dxAce
wrote:



wrote:

On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 23:12:44 -0400, dxAce
wrote:



wrote:

On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 14:09:31 -0400, dxAce
wrote:



David "I don't know a damn thing about shortwave" Rickets wrote:

On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 13:47:22 -0400, dxAce
wrote:




Yep, at least three more years without some brain stem liberal in the Presidency...

You prefer a Nationalist Socialist? Why?

Did I mention anything at all about a National Socialist, brain stem?

Jeez, some parrot taught dzArse a new insult -- now he has
four to use in each posting.


Please try to pay attention, at least once in your life. I know it's difficult, but with
some medication and some therapy, things might actually work out for you.

Why? It did nothing for you, brainless stem.

'Brainless stem' is an oxymoron, 'tard.

Not when the brain has withered off the stem, as has yours.


You'll have to do better than that to beat the 'ol dxAce in most any endeavour.

Easily done, with one brain tied behind my back.

You must have stolen it as you certainly never had one of your own.

Keep trying 'tard boy.

dxAce
Michigan
USA


Lamer, lamer.

Stem talk?

dxAce
Michigan
USA