This is Gardening related isn't it?

[tedln]

[gixxerific]

If I had my choice I'd go with the seal.

You know how many squirrels you have to skin to equal that much meat?

[tedln]

If I had my choice I'd go with the seal.

You know how many squirrels you have to skin to equal that much meat?

I'm with you Dono. The blubber is especially tasty.

Ted

[applestar]

Is this a way to avoid really thinking about the images I posted?
I suppose you two would be the ones clubbing them down.
Not remotely funny. [img]https://www.monarchwatch.org/forums/images/smilies/eusa_naughty.gif[/img]

Shoo! Take your comments to the humor test thread.

[tedln]

Sorry applestar, I wasn't trying to marginalize your environmental concerns. I just didn't think the photos from the guardian did a very good job of demonstrating the point they were trying to make. If you look at the deforestation photo and the size of the trees in the photo, you can tell the photo was taken at low altitude making the deforested area look really large. I would guess it is no more than 50 acres. While all deforestation is bad, less is not as bad as lots. If you want to talk deforestation, take a look at some satellite images of the Amazon basin especially in Brazil. Here is a link showing agricultural deforestation in Brazil. Brazil claims they have reduced the practice this year. In fact, the lower price of commodities has simply slowed the practice.

https://news.mongabay.com/2005/0827-brazil.html

I really don't understand the second photo of cotton harvesting. Is the point the guardian was trying to make that cotton shouldn’t be grown or harvested? I think cotton farmers would disagree. I also would think environmentalists who want more natural fibers used and less chemical fibers used should disagree. If they had highlighted the fact that the photo was taken in Brazil on possibly deforested land, I would agree that it is a bad practice.

What we are seeing every day is horrible, but what can we say to the small farmers in the Amazon basin who clear some land, farm it until the soil wears out and move on to clear more land. I don't think we can tell them it is better for you and your family to starve to death than for you to keep cutting trees down and feeding your families.

What can we tell the natives all over Africa who are harvesting bush meat from the forest and then cutting the trees down to make charcoal to cook the bush meat. Can we tell them to stop killing the forest animals and stop cutting the trees down and simply starve quietly? We can't really expect their governments which barely exist to do anything. The United Nations is totally ineffective in trying to stop the activities so working through the U.N. is a waste of time.

Realistically, what can be done? I don't think a bunch of protesters waving signs will help solve the problem. They had to cut some trees down somewhere to make the pulp for the paper and the wood for the signs.

I guess it would be worth the effort to be concerned about deforestation in the United States where we might actually have the ability to influence it, but the total forested area in the United States hasn’t decreased in almost one hundred years. The Native Americans had about one billion acres of forest before the Europeans arrived. Today, we have about seven hundred and fifty million acres which is about the same as it was one hundred years ago. I guess my biggest complaint would be the fact that we have lost a lot of diversity in our forests. The fact is we make houses, newspaper, insulation, magazines, and toilet paper from wood. I wouldn’t ask anyone to give something up, but I am curious which of those things are the least necessary. Remember, paper can only be recycled a few times. After that the fibers are worthless to make something else.

If anyone is wondering where I got my numbers, check here. I got them from our government.
https://www.nationalatlas.gov/articles/biology/a_forest.html
Ted

[BewilderedGreenyO.o]

Paper can be made from stone. Its called "stone paper" lol go figure of course it weighs a whole lot more then paper made from wood there is also paper that is made from other things that are "tree free" So no worries there we just gotta get people to use the tree free stuff instead.

The one thing that may be impossible to give up is our homes which are made out of wood.

[applestar]

I can't look at either of the first two photos without feeling the loss. Maybe I'm just not used to seeing something like that. Maybe you are.

There's an echoing emptiness in that deforested area -- there's nothing left. It's like a huge scar.... I can't say it's not that bad or it's a small area relative to the rest of the area. It looks like it hurts! I've seen similar sites actually, over 10 years ago, when flying over Washington state on the way to Alaska.

In the second photo, it's obvious there's nothing but cotton there, and to my eyes, it looks like a photo of a desert (and an actual desert would contain more life). A real dilemma for me since most of my clothes are as 100% cotton as possible.

Just recently, I invited someone who's never seen my garden to join us as we looked for Monarch butterfly eggs/caterpillars and collected Milkweed leaves to feed them. As we walked around, we saw/I pointed out different butterflies including Monarchs and other insects, and a couple of hummingbirds provided an aerial show. She commented that my garden is "...so, ... so, ... VIBRANT!" That everywhere she looked there were insects that she's never seen before. That she felt like she should bring her kids to my garden for nature study, rather than taking them to local parks. I replied that I'm always planting and tending the garden with an eye to diversity, and love knowing that there are at least 10 different kinds of plants in any direction I look.

Sadly, and I said this before --- when I Google Earth my house, it's a tiny blip. I know how little impact I'm making in the overall scheme of things. It's also very obvious that our property looks completely different from other properties in the neighborhood... and how MUCH difference it would make if the commonly accepted -- actively promoted and marketed -- version of suburban landscaping were NOT what it is.

[tedln]

Paper can be made from stone. Its called "stone paper" lol go figure of course it weighs a whole lot more then paper made from wood there is also paper that is made from other things that are "tree free" So no worries there we just gotta get people to use the tree free stuff instead.

The one thing that may be impossible to give up is our homes which are made out of wood.

Okay, They can make paper from stone! Please help me understand if someone wants to make paper from stone, why someone else wants to make stone from paper. They call both activities ecologically friendly and sustainable. Why don't they just let paper be paper and stone remain stone?

https://www.paperstoneproducts.com/

Ted

[BewilderedGreenyO.o]

I suppose because paper makes good stone and stone makes good paper. The stone paper was kewl Not sure about paper stone though... we have plenty of stone as far as I know so... why would you make stone out of paper if we don't have plenty of wood? Boggling really.

[tedln]

I suppose because paper makes good stone and stone makes good paper. The stone paper was kewl Not sure about paper stone though... we have plenty of stone as far as I know so... why would you make stone out of paper if we don't have plenty of wood? Boggling really.

Yep, I guess the next big thing will be making stone out of recycled stone paper and calling it sustainable. I wonder if we might have too many people trying to get on the "Go Green" bandwagon to make a buck.

Ted

[applestar]

I think the "fuss" should be about the loss of basic awareness and connection to our environment. And I don't mean "environmental awareness" as in recycling programs and energy savings. I mean simple sense of our connection to living things and this planet.

By the way, some of the indigenous practices in various parts of the world to clear areas of forest and "move" on -- South America, Africa, Australia -- have been re-evaluated and have been re-discovered to be a much more complex process of renewing the forest while preserving diversity, with deeper understanding of the local intricacies of life and ecology. I will post link to source later.

There's too much of "don't worry" going on. It's not what we can do to make other people change what they're doing, it's what we can do to change ourselves. It's about brainwashing, subliminal messaging, propaganda and marketing that we're allowing ourselves to be influenced by. Instead of using our abilities to think, we're allowing ourselves to be used and influenced.

If we all did our own thinking, these "programs" would lose meaning -- I.e. be moot/unnecessary -- because it would be as natural as self protection and self preservation, and -- moreover -- our instinct to protect our children from harm.

[rainbowgardener]

It isn't the indigenous people doing what they have always done that worries me. Most of the clear cutting going on in the Amazon these days is to turn forest into cattle ranches to grow beef, which is shipped to US (and Europe which has become very Americanized) for our hamburgers.


Cattle ranching is the leading cause of deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. This has been the case since at least the 1970s: government figures attributed 38 percent of deforestation from 1966-1975 to large-scale cattle ranching. However, today the situation may be even worse. https://rainforests.mongabay.com/amazon/amazon_destruction.html

And no I would never think the answer is to ask people to starve. But in many places the answer is to try to preserve native/ tribal cultures. Because the aboriginal lifestyles were based on the diversity of the forest, not on use of any one product. So maintaining the ancient lifestyle means maintaining the diversity of the forest and having native peoples there helps to protect it.


"The fact is we make houses, newspaper, insulation, magazines, and toilet paper from wood" Because that is a fact doesn't mean it is one we are stuck with. Houses can be made of brick, stone, straw bales (we have a recent thread on that) and many other materials. Magazines/newspapers can be on line and not use any materials. (I have never in my life subscribed to a newspaper; it always seemed so wasteful because more of that paper is advertising than content) . Insulation can be rock wool, fiberglass, vermiculite, cellulose (which does not need to come from trees) or you can build that straw bale house which is self insulating.

For TP and many other paper uses there is a tree-free paper:

What is “kenafâ€

[applestar]

https://www.helpfulgardener.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=29932

[applestar]

I believe the most recent reference to the indigenous practices came from Toby Hemenway's lecture in which he sited specific research:
https://www.helpfulgardener.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=163908#163908

I can dig for more direct links which I have around here somewhere, but I think rombre posted links to articles that explains it pretty well in the above thread. (Don't get side tracked by the P-culture controversy which we addressed elsewhere -- there are somethings to be learned here.)

[tedln]

I think the "fuss" should be about the loss of basic awareness and connection to our environment. And I don't mean "environmental awareness" as in recycling programs and energy savings. I mean simple sense of our connection to living things and this planet.

As a conscientious gardener, I have to agree with you.

By the way, some of the indigenous practices in various parts of the world to clear areas of forest and "move" on -- South America, Africa, Australia -- have been re-evaluated and have been re-discovered to be a much more complex process of renewing the forest while preserving diversity, with deeper understanding of the local intricacies of life and ecology. I will post link to source later.

I'm not so sure about that one. Sounds like another example of some "expert" changing the facts to fit the theory. I would think if a tree is cut down, it is cut down. It doesn't really matter who cut it down. It's down, its dead, and its gone.

There's too much of "don't worry" going on. It's not what we can do to make other people change what they're doing, it's what we can do to change ourselves. It's about brainwashing, subliminal messaging, propaganda and marketing that we're allowing ourselves to be influenced by. Instead of using our abilities to think, we're allowing ourselves to be used and influenced.


I can't disagree with that. The entire point I've been making is about individual responsibility. Clean up your own mess before you start telling everyone else how they should clean up their mess.

If we all did our own thinking, these "programs" would lose meaning -- I.e. be moot/unnecessary -- because it would be as natural as self protection and self preservation, and -- moreover -- our instinct to protect our children from harm.

Not so sure about that one! In the previous paragraph, you indicate we as individuals should have the self awareness to change our environment for the better. In this paragraph it seems your okay with letting someone else do your thinking for you. I can't imagine succumbing to group think and group propaganda from either viewpoint. I don't have the ability to read the latest book from some self appointed, self anointed guru; and simply agree with everything he writes simply because his name is recognizable.

Sometimes it seems "being green" is just another form of big business. To me "being green" is individual thought about individual actions and taking the responsibility for those actions.

Applestar, You are probably the most honestly green person on this forum. You not only go to great lengths to modify your environment, you also make a real effort to teach your daughter the principles of healthy sustainability. You try to teach other peoples children the same principles. I can't think of anyone else who would go to the effort to grow rice in their backyard.

RBG does a good job because she is willing to put her money where her mouth is. She looked around her house and kept asking the question "How can I lower my carbon footprint?". She then spent the money to do it.

BewilderedGreenyO.o has created a web page to detail her reasons and actions for (in her words) "being a tree hugger".

I suppose I get a little tired of all the people who talk the talk, but don't walk the walk. I get a little tired of listening to people spout the propaganda from some guru who got a huge speaking fee and then rode in his limousine or gas guzzling auto to his 10,000 square foot house where he lives alone. I get a little dazed by the group rhetoric pontificating what everyone else should have done differently and should do in the future, but never mentions what he or she should do as an individual.

In short, we as individuals should think about our actions and be responsible for our actions.

Ted

[DoubleDogFarm]

Not so sure about that one! In the previous paragraph, you indicate we as individuals should have the self awareness to change our environment for the better. In this paragraph it seems your okay with letting someone else do your thinking for you. I can't imagine succumbing to group think and group propaganda from either viewpoint. I don't have the ability to read the latest book from some self appointed, self anointed guru; and simply agree with everything he writes simply because his name is recognizable.

and this is the main reason I don't go to church. The mentality, don't worry about it, it will all be fixed one day.

I suppose I get a little tired of all the people who talk the talk, but don't walk the walk. I get a little tired of listening to people spout the propaganda from some guru who got a huge speaking fee and then rode in his limousine or gas guzzling auto to his 10,000 square foot house where he lives alone. I get a little dazed by the group rhetoric pontificating what everyone else should have done differently and should do in the future, but never mentions what he or she should do as an individual.

and here again religion. Those television preachers, talk about big money business. Jets and Rolls Royce.

In short, we as individuals should think about our actions and be responsible for our actions.

Like the guy at the intersection. You've the seen guy with the cardboard sign. "Work For Food" "Homeless" "Veteran" He doesn't want work or food. He wants your cash. He needs gas for his Mercedes parked around the corner.

Guru, means teacher. Are you against paying teachers. To advance myself in the small engine repair business, I've taken classes. These are not free.

Some off topic.

Eric

[tomf]

There is more fiber in hemp so we could grow more hemp and then we could; oh I forgot what I was saying.
Just kidding as I do not smoke weed but there is a hemp that is just for fiber and it even can be made into clothing. There are a lot more products other than wood and paper that come from trees. Trees are a renewable resource but like any thing if the demand on resources is to high and can not be sustained then we are in hurting our selfs and the Earth. The slash and burn farming of the rain forest is the worst thing that can be done; I forget how many acres are cleared a year but it is one H of a lot.

[tedln]

Tom,

We may be overlooking one obvious replacement for wood to make paper. Cotton makes great paper. I've used it. We wouldn't have to invent new farms or new farming techniques. We wouldn't have to clear cut some more forests to make room for the new alternative fiber farms. We are already growing cotton and we are harvesting and processing it mechanically in a very efficient earth friendly way. No one needs to drag those twenty foot long cotton picking bags behind them any longer as they hand pick that cotton. Just a thought.

Ted

[applestar]

Not so sure about that one! In the previous paragraph, you indicate we as individuals should have the self awareness to change our environment for the better. In this paragraph it seems your okay with letting someone else do your thinking for you.

That's because you're a super cynic and won't subscribe to my weakness -- (blind) optimistic trust in the ultimate goodness of/and human ability to evolve and become a superior being -- a slim to apparently non-existent chance and hope that I insist on holding onto.

(A combined product of influences by pure-hearted/dedicated Japanese action heroes like Ultra-man, Rainbow-man -- which was interpreted as Power Rangers -- a completely different storyline, Gotcha-men -- translated into the Battle of the Planets cartoon series, Kimba the White Lion, Speed Racer, Atom Boy, etc. in my childhood; plus immersion reading classic sci fi stories by Isaac Asimov and a few similar authors in my youth).

--

Thanks for the kudos, a bit idealized I fear -- it's a good thing you can't see the tarnished feathers -- but thanks

--

As for making paper -- why intentionally GROW monoculture of anything or cut down/destroy diverse and healthy ecosystem. Maybe if we develop ways to ecologically (is that the right word?) harvest and use [url=https://invader.dbs.umt.edu/Noxious_Weeds/]NOXIOUS WEEDS[/url] like Phragmites australis, Kuzu, Callery pears, Autumn Olive, Oriental Bittersweet, etc. it would solve that particular problem....

[tedln]

Applestar,

You have a kind and gentle heart. You have a sincere concern for mankind and the future of this planet. I wouldn't change your way of thinking if I could. We need more people with your sensitivities. You chose the right heros.

I am different. My concerns are the same as yours, but we simply approach the same things from different points of view.

I think I said before that I am a conservative. One of my heros was a black, gay, female, extreme liberal, United States representative from Houston named Barbara Jordan. We totally disagreed politically, but we totally agreed that you should always stand on your principles with honor and integrity. She has been dead now for about ten years and I haven't found anyone else with her integrity.

When I find people with her integrity, I just want to hold on to them and not let them go. People don't have to agree with me for me to hold them in high esteem.

Ted

[applestar]

If we all did our own thinking, these "programs" would lose meaning -- I.e. be moot/unnecessary -- because it would be as natural as self protection and self preservation, and -- moreover -- our instinct to protect our children from harm.

Ted I just re-read your comment to mine and realized may be I made one of my fanciful leaps and lost you back there.

What I meant by this is that artificially created and enforced "programs" would be/become unnecessary because preserving the environment, ecology, and Earth would be as natural as breathing... Something that is obvious and given... An instinctive reflex that we seem to have lost somewhere along the way.

[tedln]

You are right. I misinterpreted your comment. I agree with your last comment.

Ted