Hacker News Reader

Comment by soupbowl | Hacker News Reader

Right, but you don't know what a clear cut is. I see wild life tree patches. Besides that this area will be replanted quickly.

View on HN

> you don't know what a clear cut is.

Do you see evidence of selective logging there? I don't. If you're going to say I don't know what I'm talking about it sure would be good to hear why.

Does that picture show huge empty field were a forest was or sections of logged areas with large patches of trees between sections? It is not selective logging but it is also not a clear cut.

In the past you would see a similar cut block with select large trees kept in the empty areas but that practice was stopped years ago due to safety. The large trees left in the open had a high chance of being blown over.

It's a high altitude shot. There are large deforested areas, that's what the report is about. This clearly isn't an example of sustainable logging.

The area is not as large as you think and it will be replanted next year. What is sustainable logging to you? Not logging at all I would guess.

After replanting, how long does it take for the old growth trees to return? /s

Do you think that all "old growth" forest is huge, healthy, high quality trees? In 30-40 years the planted trees will be large enough to harvest again. The cut block is not as large as you assume , that ecosystem will be fine.

I'm just judging by the multiple 200+ year old trees in my own yard. There is no way anything remotely close to these trees will grow back in 30 years. Or go walk around Olympic National Park, which is very close to BC both in distance and climate. Ask yourself if it's possible to replace that forest in 30 years.

I could not edit my post 40-50 is what I meant. I have logged blocks with people that logged them as teens 40-50 years earlier. Not ever tree logged is 100 feet long and a meter wide.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com