Iceland's attempts to replant its forests • Hacker News Board

Re: Iceland's attempts to replant its forests

#251

Post by SiempreZeus » Sat, Oct 21, 2017, 3:03 PM UTC

What drives me crazy is how they make 3 million trees sound like a lot. I am a Forester and we typically plant over 600 trees per acre so 3 million is only about 5,000 acres. Which is not a particularly large forest. Hell I have 5 times that in a moderately size metropolitan area.

A decent crew of 5 people can plant that in a few months.

I'm sure their prices are extremely high but we pay less than 10 cents a seedling and that is for high end seedlings.

Planting doesn't cost much more than that either.

Once again I am sure it is different in a place that doesn't have a forestry industry, but if it is a national priority they could make it happen.

Re: Iceland's attempts to replant its forests

#252

Post by Companion » Sat, Oct 21, 2017, 3:05 PM UTC

Good for them, I think this is a great way to help the fight against climate change and regenerate their ecosystem. Who doesn’t like trees?

Re: Iceland's attempts to replant its forests

#253

Post by openasocket » Sat, Oct 21, 2017, 5:06 PM UTC

nkurz wrote: post #236

rconti wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is an effing joke, as the federal government charges pennies on the dollar for grazing rights compared to what a private landowner would charge. And yet, the Bundys want the taxpayers to take it in the shorts even more for their privilege and profit.

While there are many that share your view, the legal situation is far more complex. While disputed, there is in fact legal precedent for considering "grazing rights" to be private property, with the annual fees being paid for the administration of the program rather than being a rent designed to be equal to the free market value of the grass. Did you know, for example, that grazing rights aren't something that is ava…

Let's go into the Bundy case here. His family has had grazing rights over this land in Nevada for generations. Then in 1993 the federal government restricted access to much of that land to protect an endangered species. They seized the land but he refused to sell, continued grazing, and stopped paying his grazing fees. He could have challenged the seizure in court, but he did not. He could have kept paying his grazing fees, but instead he went to court and tried to argue he should be allowed to graze for free. When he lost, he continued grazing his cattle there and refused to pay for it, at which point the government took his grazing rights for lack of payment.

Whether or not grazing fees count as private property is actually irrelevant. He lost his grazing rights by refusing to pay for them. If he had kept paying, and actually challenged the seizure and sued, that would be an interesting case, but he did not.

There are interesting argument here, but Bundy is not the one making them. He doesn't even acknowledge the authority of the federal government, and instead fell into the crazy Sovereign citizen crowd.

(Also, even if grazing land is considered private property, the federal government could seize the land: https://www.fws.gov/refuges/realty/faq.html )

Re: Iceland's attempts to replant its forests

#254

Post by crzwdjk » Sat, Oct 21, 2017, 6:46 PM UTC

dmix wrote: post #176

avar wrote: post #6

For reasons I won't go into the farming lobby is really strong in Iceland. Sheep run free-range around the entire island, if you'd like to grow something that sheep like to eat you need to fence it in. It's not like pretty much anywhere else in the western world where people who own grazing animals need to fence them in. Thus the sheep range far and wide and destroy Iceland's native low-lying forests. Iceland's nativ…

I'm confused, there's no private property laws to prevent farm animals from grazing on non-farm property? Nor is there crown land to build national parks with giant forests? An effective farm lobby wouldn't be able to affect either of those things in almost any other western countries... The problem doesn't seem to be the lobbyist but some strange lack of fundamental laws, if the government can be coerced into allowi…

The US also has lots of federally owned land which is "public" but used primarily by ranchers for grazing their cattle. It's not that unusual of an arrangement, and the ranchers have way more political pull than environmentalists.

Re: Iceland's attempts to replant its forests

#255

Post by poopchute » Sat, Oct 21, 2017, 6:54 PM UTC

njarboe wrote: post #124

avar wrote: post #6

For reasons I won't go into the farming lobby is really strong in Iceland. Sheep run free-range around the entire island, if you'd like to grow something that sheep like to eat you need to fence it in. It's not like pretty much anywhere else in the western world where people who own grazing animals need to fence them in. Thus the sheep range far and wide and destroy Iceland's native low-lying forests. Iceland's nativ…

I was in Iceland a few weeks ago and the people, museums, info plaques, etc. talked about deforestation and how the early settlers chopped down all the forests. Also mentioned was forestation and how they were slowly replanting. The grazing by horses and sheep were never mentioned as a problem. I did hear about how flocks of sheep are just let loose in the highlands in the summer to graze and the sheep herders separa…

That is a cool shot. I like how the trees are perfectly camouflaged and even the shape of their foliage matches the rolling hills

Re: Iceland's attempts to replant its forests

#256

Post by farseer » Sat, Oct 21, 2017, 6:57 PM UTC

chimen wrote: post #219

In Romania we're losing 150 acres/day (or 60 ha) to illegal cutting done by some german and austrian corporations. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/oct/21/holzindu...

I think regrowing forests in Romania would be an easier task than Iceland, nevertheless its worth preserving what you have.

Re: Iceland's attempts to replant its forests

#257

Post by ivix » Sat, Oct 21, 2017, 8:38 PM UTC

Normal_gaussian wrote: post #29

eatonphil wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is one of the coolest articles I've ever seen. The subtle high-res videos are a really great complement to the content.

And they lagged like nobodies business when they were loading despite having 11Mbps down all to myself.

I had that speed in 2005 and it was slow then, too.

Re: Iceland's attempts to replant its forests

#258

Post by astrodust » Sat, Oct 21, 2017, 8:39 PM UTC

rconti wrote: post #208

Kluny wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know what the case is in NE US, but in my town in British Columbia, the deer population is out of control in the metropolitan area, and every time a cull is mentioned, animal rights activists put a stop to it through loud and effective lobbying. It's quite irritating.

In New Zealand they consider the deer to be an invasive species and were actually shooting deer from helicopters . https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helicopter-based_hunting_in_Fi...

Why not bring back the giant Moa from the dead and have them crowd out the deer?

Re: Iceland's attempts to replant its forests

#259

Post by vram22 » Sat, Oct 21, 2017, 10:31 PM UTC

adrusi wrote: post #235

vram22 wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. Speaking of those fosses, Gulfoss is pretty cool. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gullfoss Images: https://www.google.co.in/searchq=gullfoss&tbm=isch Often when I read about Iceland, it reminds me of the Jules Verne novel "Journey to the Centre of the Earth", which I read as a kid. Good novel.

Journey to the Center of the Earth is set in Iceland, if you weren't aware.

Yes, I was aware of it, thanks though. That is why I mentioned the novel in the first place. Was going to mention the jökulls too, as sibling comment does. One of them was Vatna or some such, need to check - it was long back that I read it :)

Update: Checked, that's the name:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vatnaj%C3%B6kull

Update 2: There are some interesting points in that Wikipedia article.

Re: Iceland's attempts to replant its forests

#260

Post by spraak » Sat, Oct 21, 2017, 10:37 PM UTC

phkahler wrote: post #228

spraak wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Allan Savory's theories are wildly unsound and have been debunked... But it seems like good intention.

Except that the land they tried his ideas on really did start growing stuff again. Nobody refuted the results he shows in the presentation. What may have been "debunked" is the notion that it's somehow good in terms of CO2 production, but even that isn't clear to me - plants take CO2 out of the atmosphere, and animals put it back.

https://youtu.be/_EDpuQMpyYw