August 25, 2012 - Redwood

[ZenGum]

Now, I do like trees, and I like houses too, but this...

18 feet from the house....

... yeah, that's gonna be a problem.


Adak, note as SPUCK says, the critturs living in the canopy. I'll bet there's all sorts of bugs, and birds that eat the bugs, and parasitic plants and stuff up there.

[Adak]

Originally Posted by ZenGum

Adak, note as SPUCK says, the critturs living in the canopy. I'll bet there's all sorts of bugs, and birds that eat the bugs, and parasitic plants and stuff up there.

That web site is very misleading - sort of like the democrats. They think the big problem facing the country is paying for contraceptives, getting illegal immigrants who were raised here, drivers licenses, and college loans.

Anything to distract us from the problems we should be dealing with:

1) We're spending $58,000 PER SECOND, MORE than we are bringing in. You can tax the rich until they're butt naked and you won't put a dent into that degree of spending!

2) They have had NO budget that even ONE senator OR representative would vote for, for three years now.

3) All the jobs they've created -- don't begin to match the number of jobs they have destroyed, that you never hear ONE WORD about. This is the worst recovery in US history. According to the bi-partisan budget office, the middle class has lost 40% of their wealth, mostly from the collapse of the housing market.

Yes, there is life in the canopy of the mature redwood forest. Life is always trying to use every niche in nature.

But the AMOUNT of life in a mature redwood forest, is pitifully small, compared to the life you'd find in a non-conifer forest - especially a forest with some open meadows here and there.

I was watching a "reality" series on survival by an expert, who made the silly mistake of going into a Canadian mature conifer forest. These have more life than mature redwood forests, but not much more.

First day, he killed and ate a porcupine. He couldn't kill the moose he saw that week, (feeding in the lake), so that was the end of his meat. After that, his meals were fish from the nearby lake for breakfast, fish for lunch, and fish for dinner. A few bugs too, but not much.

By the third week, he had become seriously depressed, had lost a boatload of weight, and his heart had slowed down so much, a doctor told him he should quit - which he gladly did.

End of TV series.

Just think about it -

Plants require sunlight for photosynthesis. Redwoods block nearly all direct sunlight from reaching the ground. Redwood duff spoils the ground for nearly all plants - first by providing a further sun block, and second by chemically poisoning the soil so most seeds can't germinate and grow.

Animals like deer, birds, most mammals, require a number of plants to be around them, because the plants or their fruit (berries), become edible only during certain times of the year.

Carnivores require these herbivores, etc., in order to survive. Without a lot of them, most of the carnivores must move on, or die.

You'll see a lot of this "Redwood forests are oh so great!", type of writing. But understand that when the agenda is to promote "something", then savvy writers learn they need to write "something" that fits that agenda, or they'll be writing very little.

[editorial soapbox]
It's like "Climate change". If your research supports man made climate change, you will be funded (most likely), and your papers will be reported in major news or research magazines, and quoted in books and on the net.

If your research does NOT support man made climate change, you will NOT (most likely), be funded, and your papers will NOT be reported in the majority of the major news or research magazines, or quoted in books, or on the net. The value of the science you did will not matter - you simply do NOT fit into the agenda that is now popular.

I never thought I would live to see the day that our media outlets, would be so careless with the truth, so manipulative to make their story line up with what they perceive to be a "popular framework".

The facts don't matter as much as the framework for what's being reported/published/etc.

One example: the Yahoo Washington bureau new chief, had this to say (he thought his mic was off), just before starting his broadcast of the RNC convention:
"Yahoo News has fired its Washington bureau chief, after he was caught on a microphone saying Mitt Romney and his wife were “happy to have a party with black people drowning.” (referring to Hurricane Isaac hitting Mississippi and Louisiana)

Company spokeswoman Anne Espiritu said Wednesday that David Chalian’s remark was inappropriate and does not represent Yahoo’s views. She says Yahoo is apologizing to the Republican presidential candidate and his supporters, and has reached out to the campaign to convey the message.

Do you believe for one second that people like this can report the news, factually? And this guy wasn't just a reporter - he was the bureau CHIEF, of Washington, DC.


[end of editorial]

[glatt]

Wow. That was kind of random.

"Redwood forests are barren, and the Democrats SUCK!" I love election years.

So I can see what you're saying about the Redwood forests being relatively barren, but they are only very thin strips along the coasts. So if a deer wanders into one, it only has to go 10 miles East to get out of it again. And they are nothing like anything else in the world, and take thousands of years to grow, so they are extremely important.

I think they should be protected. My kids have seen them, but I think it would be cool if my future grand kids got to see them too.

[Adak]

Originally Posted by glatt

Wow. That was kind of random.

"Redwood forests are barren, and the Democrats SUCK!" I love election years.

So I can see what you're saying about the Redwood forests being relatively barren, but they are only very thin strips along the coasts. So if a deer wanders into one, it only has to go 10 miles East to get out of it again. And they are nothing like anything else in the world, and take thousands of years to grow, so they are extremely important.

I think they should be protected. My kids have seen them, but I think it would be cool if my future grand kids got to see them too.

Oh, I can do random!

Because of the logging (many years ago), and roads and trails and such that have been cut into them, it isn't as bad as it would be, if we left it all alone. There are even some deer that regularly invade the fringes of them.

If you love the out of doors, you'll swear you're in heaven walking or running through the redwood forests. So beautiful!

Don't worry - the big tree's will be there, waiting for your grand kids.

[Sundae]

Originally Posted by Adak

Oh, I can do random!

Shame you can't do apostrophe's.