Deforestation

[Faye]

The above map shows the Earth's forests before the widespread use of industrial logging. The lower map shows the Earth's forests afterward (2005). These do not show frontier forests, which are forests that have not had their ecosystems severely damaged by humans. For example, much of the forest in the United States is replanted forest, or new growth.

As you can see, certain areas are in big trouble (like China, India, the Middle East, and West Africa).

This is a very depressing topic because there is no real easy way to rectify the situation. We can replant forests, but we can't repair ecosystems as easily. And obviously we cannot replant forests if the land is being used for something else, which it often is.

www.global-greenhouse-warming.com/images/ForestCover.jpg

What will the map look like when the world population doubles?

 

[magister343]

What is the time frame of the "original forest cover."


I recall from Charles C. Mann's book 1491 that there is pretty good evidence that much of the western hemisphere is more densely forested now than it was before the arrival of Europeans. Native populations kept the forest fairly sparse before they died off from disease. (The first European explorers remarked that it would not be difficult to drive a carriage though most of America's woods.) Humanity has been an integral part of the ecosystem for our entire existence, and can throw things out of balance not only by interfering too much but also by not interfering enough.

 

[Trifoilum]

Ooh, Asia's been really really vigorous in their deforestation. *looks at own country*

It's indeed bad. For example, a lot of deforestation in my country happens because people are seeking woods; so they cut it-- and left it just like that; or sometimes planting something else; but never as big as it was.

I cannot say much about China; one of the worst, really, but also one of the most populated country in the world. And seeing their cities, which all houses is tall apartments.... :|

It's kind of stressful when you think about it. What will happen then?

There's always a movement to plant trees in my city, but no one, me included, ever seems to give it any serious thoughts.

 

[Bird]

What's crazy is where I live it is so green and I am in
the deforested area. Everywhere I look there are trees.


I think we just need more tree farmers.
It pays well, it just takes forty years before any profit.

 

[David54]

we will ultimately pay for it. . . it may take a thousand years,but it will cause serious issues for future generations. .

 

[Faye]

What is the time frame of the "original forest cover."


I recall from Charles C. Mann's book 1491 that there is pretty good evidence that much of the western hemisphere is more densely forested now than it was before the arrival of Europeans. Native populations kept the forest fairly sparse before they died off from disease. (The first European explorers remarked that it would not be difficult to drive a carriage though most of America's woods.) Humanity has been an integral part of the ecosystem for our entire existence, and can throw things out of balance not only by interfering too much but also by not interfering enough.

If you could figure that out, it would be much appreciated. Their website does not seem to specify, but my guess is that it is about 1900.

 

[Norton]

we will ultimately pay for it. . . it may take a thousand years,but it will cause serious issues for future generations. .

We are already paying for it. Every tree that is lost yields a large portion of its weight in carbon into the atmosphere whether the tree rots (slow oxidation) or is burned (fast oxidation). For every tree lost, if there is not a new one to replace it, there is a net gain of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, and we all sweat that much more (regardless of Luddite ideology).