If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(LA Times)   Farmers' pesticides and water diversions ruining rural Northern California forest ecosystem and poisoning wildlife. Oh wait, it's pot farmers -- HOW DARE SCIENTISTS MAKE THIS STUFF UP AND SLANDER OUR HOLY, HARMLESS PLANT   (latimes.com) divider line 114
    More: Interesting, water diversion, forest ecosystem, Department of Fish, growers, pesticides, Humboldt counties, wildlife  
•       •       •

4864 clicks; posted to Main » on 23 Dec 2012 at 5:21 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



114 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-24 01:46:12 AM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: If you go to Google Earth, and find Georgetown, CA, then pan East, you'll see forest destruction like you've never imagined

/it's called 'clear cutting', and there are miles and miles of nothing but bare dirt left
//I'm sure it's not an erosion problem, though


you notice how it's not all straight bare? it's plots, and there is almost a pattern to them?

THAT'S BECAUSE IT IS. IT'S MANAGED PRODUCTION LAND YOU MORON.

/know something about modern forestry before you open your mouth
//and learn what national forests are
///clear cutting and replanting a single plot != clearing an entire forest and leaving it barren
 
2012-12-24 01:47:29 AM

Gyrfalcon: jflan17: This is not a problem inherent to marijuana. It could be virtually any other crop and we'd see similar results.

This.

Farming is really bad for the environment. I don't care how nifty and organic your plants are.


"organic" farming is actually a massive gimic that is worse than most 'modern farming' for the environment (due to the lower production and higher lossage per acre)
 
2012-12-24 01:54:58 AM

Kazan: MaudlinMutantMollusk: If you go to Google Earth, and find Georgetown, CA, then pan East, you'll see forest destruction like you've never imagined

/it's called 'clear cutting', and there are miles and miles of nothing but bare dirt left
//I'm sure it's not an erosion problem, though

you notice how it's not all straight bare? it's plots, and there is almost a pattern to them?

THAT'S BECAUSE IT IS. IT'S MANAGED PRODUCTION LAND YOU MORON.

/know something about modern forestry before you open your mouth
//and learn what national forests are
///clear cutting and replanting a single plot != clearing an entire forest and leaving it barren


furthermore.. zoom in. you'll notice plots in various stages of the production lifecycle.

as an environmentalist who thinks first, discusses policy second, and has realistic expectations it really pisses me off when people make fools of environmentalism like you did.
 
2012-12-24 02:01:48 AM
Yes, and this is exactly why I wish the feds would butt the fark out and let us legalize it completely so that we can regulate it. Not only will it decrease environmental damage, it will decrease violence from the cartels shooting people who wander to close to their crop (or each other), defund the cartels, hopefully give more jobs to people who aren't cartel members. And your pot is less likely to be full of pesticides.

Keeping pot illegal is doing NOTHING positive. You can't list one single positive thing that keeping pot illegal does, unless you think keeping prison profits up is a good thing.

It's not just about giving up the stupid puritanical idea that we should punish people who enjoy themselves, it's also about being practical. People can look back and see how stupid the prohibition of alcohol was, I have no idea why the feds can't get their heads out of their asses about pot. This country has enough shiatty problems to deal with without us giving ourselves extra unnecessary ones.
 
2012-12-24 02:10:51 AM

jake_lex: ZAZ: I was just commenting in another thread that "free market" is distinct from "black market" and "anarchy." Here we have a similar problem. It's not feasible to impose health and safety regulations on an underground economy.

Yeah, if I've got an illegal pot farm, I'm probably not inclined to let Dept. of Agriculture inspectors come have a look-see.  Just guessing.


And I'd use whatever products got the desired yield the fastest.
 
2012-12-24 04:20:25 AM
Wyckyd Sceptre:
shanrick: [i.imgur.com image 200x160

Are those as odor-free as they claim?"

Yes.

/not a smoker, but that one's pretty useful. And cute. Charger only lasts a few bowls tho.
 
2012-12-24 04:28:21 AM
Kazan: MaudlinMutantMollusk: "If you go to Google Earth, and find Georgetown, CA, then pan East, you'll see forest destruction like you've never imagined

/it's called 'clear cutting', and there are miles and miles of nothing but bare dirt left
//I'm sure it's not an erosion problem, though

you notice how it's not all straight bare? it's plots, and there is almost a pattern to them?

THAT'S BECAUSE IT IS. IT'S MANAGED PRODUCTION LAND YOU MORON.

/know something about modern forestry before you open your mouth
//and learn what national forests are
///clear cutting and replanting a single plot != clearing an entire forest and leaving it barren

furthermore.. zoom in. you'll notice plots in various stages of the production lifecycle.

as an environmentalist who thinks first, discusses policy second, and has realistic expectations it really pisses me off when people make fools of environmentalism like you did."

To be fair, there are plenty of so-called environmentalists that give the movement a bad name. Maudlin's comment was relatively benign. Noticing something and mentioning it does not require expertise in the subject. No need to flip out.
 
2012-12-24 08:57:05 AM
U mad, subby?

I laughed when I read "responsible grower." Yes, Monsanto, Round Up, patents.

Responsible.
 
2012-12-24 11:01:23 AM

o'really:
you notice how it's not all straight bare? it's plots, and there is almost a pattern to them?

THAT'S BECAUSE IT IS. IT'S MANAGED PRODUCTION LAND YOU MORON.

/know something about modern forestry before you open your mouth
//and learn what national forests are
///clear cutting and replanting a single plot != clearing an entire forest and leaving it barren



No, but it's almost as damaging, especially considering herbicides that are dumped in, the short-term erosion that results, and the mono-species replants that aren't actually forests, but tree farms.
 
2012-12-24 11:04:38 AM

Kazan:
you notice how it's not all straight bare? it's plots, and there is almost a pattern to them?

THAT'S BECAUSE IT IS. IT'S MANAGED PRODUCTION LAND YOU MORON.

/know something about modern forestry before you open your mouth
//and learn what national forests are
///clear cutting and replanting a single plot != clearing an entire forest and leaving it barren



OK, this is the person I meant to respond to. Someone dropped a tag somewhere.

And Sierra Pacific doesn't do anything responsibly. Also, clear-cuts do not in the least simulate natural wild-fires, which tend to leave older, sturdier Ponderosa, Red Fir, and Doug Fir (commercial wood) intact, while clearing out the underbrush, deadwood, snags, diseased and weakened trees, etc.
 
2012-12-24 11:26:03 AM
You mean an unregulated industry is causing harm to the general public? Rick Romero reporting...
 
2012-12-24 11:35:49 AM

kmmontandon: And Sierra Pacific doesn't do anything responsibly. Also, clear-cuts do not in the least simulate natural wild-fires, which tend to leave older, sturdier Ponderosa, Red Fir, and Doug Fir (commercial wood) intact, while clearing out the underbrush, deadwood, snags, diseased and weakened trees, etc.


who said anything about Sierra Pacific? that is designated national forest he was biatching about. the Forest Service _DOES_ do things reasonably responsibly. Yes when they harvest they cut out a plot - however those plots are intentionally fairly small and the wildlife has the neighboring plots to go to and have minimal disruption.

do you know nothing about modern forestry?


/and yes i know how real fires act
//they're actually doing fire-simulated harvesting in replanted sequoia and redwood groves - thinning cuts instead of clear cuts
///plus modern clear cuts leave trees lining sensitive things like streams, etc.
 
2012-12-24 11:48:21 AM

Kazan: kmmontandon: And Sierra Pacific doesn't do anything responsibly. Also, clear-cuts do not in the least simulate natural wild-fires, which tend to leave older, sturdier Ponderosa, Red Fir, and Doug Fir (commercial wood) intact, while clearing out the underbrush, deadwood, snags, diseased and weakened trees, etc.

who said anything about Sierra Pacific? that is designated national forest he was biatching about. the Forest Service _DOES_ do things reasonably responsibly. Yes when they harvest they cut out a plot - however those plots are intentionally fairly small and the wildlife has the neighboring plots to go to and have minimal disruption.

do you know nothing about modern forestry?


Yes ... yes I do.

I was pointing out that clear-cutting is f*cked up, no matter how you slice it. Forest Service management of National Forests is a different situation altogether, and one that I deal with on a very regular basis. The problem is that commercial logging land is intermixed, boundary-wise, with NF. Commercial clear-cuts can, and do, have a negative impact on neighboring nation forests.

/and yes i know how real fires act
//they're actually doing fire-simulated harvesting in replanted sequoia and redwood groves - thinning cuts instead of clear cuts
///plus modern clear cuts leave trees lining sensitive things like streams, etc.


Modern clear-cuts are only slightly less f*cked up than traditional ones. I can see a few out my window (just as I could see multiple forest fires out my window this past summer) - the fact that they have a legal boundary between the logging and the nearest watershed barely ameliorates the practice. The heavy herbicide dumpings, the short-term erosion leading to silt in streams and lakes, the entire destruction of square miles of ecosystem (SPI frequently does 1 mile x 1 mile cuts), which is then replaced by a sterile replant of row after row of Doug Fir ... yeah, there's no real defending that from anything other than a profit motive. And it sure as hell doesn't simulate a fire.
 
2012-12-24 12:12:37 PM

kmmontandon: Modern clear-cuts are only slightly less f*cked up than traditional ones. I can see a few out my window (just as I could see multiple forest fires out my window this past summer) - the fact that they have a legal boundary between the logging and the nearest watershed barely ameliorates the practice. The heavy herbicide dumpings, the short-term erosion leading to silt in streams and lakes, the entire destruction of square miles of ecosystem (SPI frequently does 1 mile x 1 mile cuts), which is then replaced by a sterile replant of row after row of Doug Fir ... yeah, there's no real defending that from anything other than a profit motive. And it sure as hell doesn't simulate a fire.


i'm sure there are a few things more that could be improved but we need to be freaking realists here. it is not feasable to leave everything pristine and untouched. We needed both John Muir and Gifford Pinchot. sure a clear cluit plot is ugly, but they replant. do you know what harvested production forest does that natural forest doesn't? sequester carbon.

Modern man can never make his impact on the land zero, and expecting to be able to do so and maintain lives is completely unrealistic. We can only set aside areas to be left untouched and enjoyed (hiking trails, etc). We must also do our best to responsibly manage the production land.
 
Displayed 14 of 114 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report