Implication of the cartoon (Amended)

[pchang]

Dear all,
I am a teacher who is going to teach deforestation. I have seen the cartoon shown in the attachment and have no idea how the cartoon hidden message. Can you give me some insights for that? Thank you.
Regards,
A science teacher

[Richard]

"Can't see the forest for the trees".

It's an old saying, I'm guessing the picture has something to do with that.

[Windguy]

A Bigger contributor to GW than Carbon Dioxide.

Check out this, the scientific papers back it up as localised climate change only though.

Biodiversity is another problem, which most people know about anyway. Check out Koalas since they have a special relationship with certain eucalyptus trees. Deforestation will affect Australia badly where we'll have a thriving population of koalas one minute, then extinction the next if we follow our usual path.

[brianidaho]

I want to complement you for your efforts as a teacher, and for attempting to educate children about the environment. Please, please, take the time to research this issue, and differentiate between responsible forest management (including the utilization of BMP logging techniques) and deforestation prior to teaching to your students. While clear-cutting of Amazon rainforests is an environmental disaster, logging has it's place as a management tool for improving forest health by removing dead and diseased timber; in addition proper thinning improves the health of the remaining trees. All too often the environmental movement sees this big red flag as soon as the "L-word" comes up...a little education helps.

I still remember the "brainwashing" I received as a kid by some teachers on related issues. It makes an impact on young minds that accept what they are taught without question. Items like the cartoon you post is a major warning flag to me.

[Windguy]

Land clearing is far worse than logging, but I haven't seen no study that shows logging is beneficial.

It can be still hazardous to biodiversity of plant and animal species. Besides that there is the usual burn off that takes place for the waste materials such as branches, cutting out the road tracks etc.. which adds to climate change in the forms of carbon soot and CO2 emissions.

[spadlet]

A few quotes from That I thought you might find interesting. This is only talking in relation to broadleaved woodland in the UK.

If ancient woodland is clear felled there is usually little or no loss of plant species, execpt for lichens and other bryophytes, provided it is replanted with native broadleaves (Forestry Comission, 1984)

Which makes me wonder whether the lichen and other bryophyte populations recover over time or are lost forever. At any rate it's alot better than the timber extraction which involves uprooting the stumps and buldozing ground.

Felling to increasestructural diversity in the course of normal management will aid conservation (Forestry Comission, 1984)

This doesn't directly mean that logging is beneficial but some of the timber may be used for such purposes without causing a problem, depending on the extraction techniques used.

Management often brings direct benefits to wildlife and it is these benefits that allow a compromise to be reached betwqeen conservation and timber growing (Steele and Peterken 1982)......managed woodlands usually contain a richer variety of habitats within a limited area and thus more species than unmanaged woods (Watkins, C., 1990)

There was another quote that gave the time period of unmanagement after which species diversity and conservation value declined but I can't find it at the moment.

References
Forestry Comission Bulletin 62 'Silviculture of Broadleaved Woodland' 1984

Watkins, C., 'Britain's Ancient Woodland: Woodland Management and Conservation' 1990

[brianidaho]

Originally Posted by Windguy

Land clearing is far worse than logging, but I haven't seen no study that shows logging is beneficial.

It can be still hazardous to biodiversity of plant and animal species. Besides that there is the usual burn off that takes place for the waste materials such as branches, cutting out the road tracks etc.. which adds to climate change in the forms of carbon soot and CO2 emissions.

Practices that effect forest health vary from area to area, what follows may not apply to Eastern US or European forests. In the Western US, our forest biology is based upon fire. In the past (pre 1850 or so) most forests would typically experience smaller, low intensity fires every 5-15 years. These fires would burn out underbrush and smaller trees, allowing larger trees to survive and typically leaving grasses between the remaining trees. Fire sources were often natural (lightning) but also from the indiginous people (Indians to us non-PC types). Fire not only kept the forests relatively clear of underbrush and small trees, but stimulated growth and propegation of the native White, Ponderosa and Lodgepole pine, as well as native grasses. In addition, it tended to kill off species that are less tolerant of fire, drought and disease. These somewhat open forests were resistant to the effect of devestating wildfires (running crown fires, which kill everything in their path and pretty well steralize the soil). These forests also provide browse and habitat for wildlife.

In more recent times, a great deal of effort and money has been spent on fire supression. In todays political environment, the amount of air pollution, as well as the threat to structures and life has resulted in greatly restricted "controlled burning", which attempts to simulate the natural conditions described above. As a result, many of our forests are way overgrown, with hundereds to thousands of small, crowded trees per acre, rather than the 20-100 that is "normal". These overgrown stands are very susceptable to disease and insect damage, and when (not if) they burn, the do so at a very high intensitity and are very destructive. These overgrown forests also provide very poor wildlife habitat; so little sunlight reaches the forest floor that no browse can grow. Around here, you will see many hillsides covered with dead and dying trees.

Logging provides a means to thin the forests and simulate the natural, fire based ecology, without the resulting air pollution, or at least by minimizing it. Waste (branches, tops), are still typically burned, but this is a fraction of the original mass of material. Some areas use forest waste as a fuel to fire boilers for heating systems, both reducing the pollution associated by uncontrolled burning (a boiler system burns far hotter and cleaner than a slash pile), while displacing fossil fuel usage. In addition, timber provides our one truely sustainable building material and once used in construction materials the carbon in the wood is effectively sequestered.

There are plenty of bad, destructive logging practices, as well as benefical ones. BMP (best management practices) attempts to define those practices which are benefical and minimize the negative environmental impact.

I have put a fair amount of effort into studying the issue; I own a small amount of forested land. Some areas have species that are not "proper" for the location and I'm loosing a lot of them to disease and insects. I have been replanting with more site-specific species and clearing the dead stuff; however I don't expect to see dramatic results in my lifetime.

[brianidaho]

I should also add, I have been (very carefully) burning small areas to eliminate excess downed limbs and waste; it's interesting to see how much this stimulates the plants in the area. Following a burn, the growth of grasses and wildflowers is much greater than in un-burned areas. The exception here is spots where I regulary (more than one time) pile and burn waste. These areas tend to be pretty sterile for a while, I believe due to the heat of a fairly intense fire consuming organic material in the soil. This would be similar to what happens when the densly treed, overgrown areas burn.

[forfismum]

The implication? You don't realise and understand what you have until it's gone.

[forfismum]

They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot
With a pink hotel, a boutique
And a swinging hot spot
Don't it always seem to go
That you don't know what you've got
Till it's gone
They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot

They took all the trees
Put 'em in a tree museum
And they charged the people
A dollar and a half just to see 'em
Don't it always seem to go
That you don't know what you've got
Till it's gone
They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot


That from Joni Mitchell