51–59 of 59 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sociopathic post, tbh.
Killing a tree in my own land is "sociopathic"? That's a pretty loose interpretation of the word.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Oh no, my trees have been attacked by an unknown disease and they're all dead now! I guess we'll have to cut them down :'(" A well placed hole with a 1/2 inch drill bit, and 100% glyphosate does wonders to a tree. Make sure the hole is slanted downwards, so the glyphosate stays inside to be transported by the cambium.
If you get caught they will make you replace them and or pay a 10-50k fine.
I have seen a couple of these in Berkeley. They were all the rage and still are in some ways. I personally was initially enthusiastic. However, I think there is much easier ways to get the benefits. For example, by adding trees and landscaping in Parks, medians and other public spaces. Once a forest is added to an area, it becomes completely inaccessible because of how dense it grows. All of the ones I have seen are…
It sounds like your describing parkland, which is a different beast entirely
For those wondering, the Miyawaki method differs from normal planting by doing the following: - heavily pre-treat soil with organic matter (simulating forest floor) - plant a mix of native plants that will make up canopy, tree, sub-tree, and shrub layers - densely planting plants (3-5 saplings / m^2) - heavy mulching after planting (weed suppression, moisture control, nutrients) This encourages rapid growth into a bi…
It's counter intutitive because a lot of gardening or agriculture or artificial horticulture in general is very spaced out intentionally for access for humans to care and maintain.
In hindsight though it does make sense, the density stops certain fauna and flora from competing making the ring fenced area immediatley established.
Works well in some ecosystems when people choose the right plant material. With the wrong ecosystem and the wrong plant material it's one of those ideas from the temperate core that fails in the tropical periphery.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XfnDAEi4JY
This location is as tropical as it gets - 8 degrees north of the equator.
Now these mini forests are coming up everywhere in this city.
Just saw a really interesting Nova centering on Crowther Labs at ETH (recently disbanded). https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aax0848 was held up as encouraging unsustainable reforestation for greenwashing PR. But the most interesting part was a segment covering how tree roots engage in aggressive recruitment and exchange of resources with an underground biome of bacteria and fungi.
You should also look at the follow-up paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06723-z (and the erratum for the 2019 potential paper https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abc8905 )
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sociopathic post, tbh.
Killing a tree in my own land is "sociopathic"? That's a pretty loose interpretation of the word.
You are talking about killing a tree in a deceitful manner designed to subvert local norms, regulations, and the concerns of your neighbors. You aren't the only person your actions affect (and you know this, because you opened your post by saying you should lie about killing the tree.)
I think the word fits quite comfortably.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The density and inaccessibility (to large birds and mammals) is critical for sensitive species like butterflies. I'd wager we'd see a resurgence in some declining insect populations if there were more dense pockets of forest.
This is a point made well in the film Wilding - https://www.wildingmovie.com/ - about a rewilding project in the UK. You need change and open ground for any biodiversity benefits. It's a bit like the close-planted commercial forestry fir plantations that are entirely silent and dead aside from the trees themselves.
Such forests are very rare in USA because even the vast "wilderness" is man-made for ranching, hunting, hiking, sightseeing.