Damn those loggers
 

Just wanted to rant a bit. I hate loggers that are not thoughtful. Those I am angry at in particular (and please if anyone has an advice how to properly curse them with some bad luck and illness) have this winter cut down about half of the trees, mostly oak and beech trees on a sacred place nearby. They drove there with heavy machinery, cut a new logging "road" and then selectively cut the trees on the site. It is an ancient site built by the celts, a square mound. It is not really known what the purpose of them was - towns, settlements or sacred sites, but they are sacred sites to all who are trying to reconnect to ancient local spirituality and connection to the land. There was even a little sign there (which now is missing) that told peopl to take home trash if they visit the place. People obviously had rituals there among the oak trees. Luckily (for now?) they left the largest of the trees standing and they did not put the machines on the mound - I guess that would be against the law that protects archaeological sites - but I still think this is a very sad event - dead oak tree branches all over the site... :shock: :S
This is the thrid time people are destroying sacred places in this area - I feel like there are soon no such places left. The other ones was that someone set fire in a living hollow tree that was standing on a peninsula of a lake nearby and the other was a clearcut next to a very beautiful piece of forest. The hollow tree even had a christian cross next to it, so it was at least a double sacred place (the cross also burned). :'(
:war:

If they didn't touch the mound, I'm not sure what the problem is.

I suppose in Avatar terms, this would be like having a bunch of dead trees falling over into the well where the Tree of Souls is and the whole area generally looking like it was recently disturbed all around. Not the absolute worst thing that could happen, but still pretty bogus for the people who really cherish the place. The atmosphere of it all just wouldn't be the same anymore.

Its more a bit like - they drive those big bulldozers in Avatar right up to the Tree of Voices, then build a road right up there, cut down all the trees except the tree of voices itself and then say "hey, we did not touch that tree, so you can still go there if you want, blue monkeys."

The point was not just the mound - of course it is a visible mark of the past, so that is important too, but people who came there in the recent century did not go there and celebrate the mound, they celebrated the earth and the trees, presumably at least in some distant way similar to the builders of the mound - the mound is more or less a backdrop, a reminder of the ancients, but the celebrations and rituals were very much also about the present. Why would people plant oak trees and yew trees there if it was not also about trees and the future. They certainly did not plant these trees there to be cut down for profit.
But what am I talking - anyone who cannot SEE what is wrong with this probably cannot be helped. :(

Oe mllte oeyä tsmuke

this is very sad only :( I can feel with this. Trees take a Long time to grow, think of any old tree, how many things it could have Seen over the centuries? it is not only about the shade & the oxygen the trees produce, there is something that cannot be compensated with commercially planted forests.

I am angry about the mindlessness of this cutting. There is a forest 'way up in the mountains' that I used to go for mushrooms to, & it was very... balanced. Trees, bushes, grass, plants, forest life... it was all 'in tune'. Well some eejits, like those you mentioned, decided to 'clean the forest' & cut, like, 3:1 trees & also lots of underbrush, it looked naked afterwards! Guess what happens next? a hurricane happens, & most of the trees that were still standing fall down! there was too much space between them :( they were mostly beech trees with very shallow roots, so they couldn't support each other anymore :( of course the greedy RDA were happy I guess - more fire wood for them! Skxawngs :angry:

Can you perhaps find anything out about why they did it via the internet?

@apache: Well the trees were mostly not that ancient. My guess is the oldest ones are up to about 100-200 years maybe - they are not ancient, but old. Most of them are younger though. They took about 1:3 or 1:4 I guess, probably they call it sustainable logging. I'll try to do photos if I can.

@Raiden: You asking me or apache? In any case I dont think there has to be a special malovelent reason. Someone owns that forest or at least logging rights to it, so they go there and cut down trees, pull them out and make them into something - most likely firewood. They get money for it and its their business. They do that to forests here all the time in varous places, but most of that forest is farmed fir trees, so I never liked them doing that but did not object too much yet, but to touch these places ... sigh.

AGAIN, what we have, is a POPULATION PROBLEM. What we NEED as a Species for the good of the Planet, is for Eywa to arrange some worldwide, not just the "Third World", PANDEMIC that takes out about half the population of the Planet. Rich, Poor, Developed Nations, Undeveloped Nations alike. Half the people, half the destruction of the planet, perhaps even lest damage than half. FACE IT, when it comes to the damage, some of it WILLFUL in the name of GREED, Humans are VERMIN that the Earth can do with a lot less of.

Oh. :/

Here (here being Oregon), there are a ton of land-use laws that prevent people from being able to do things like that, depending on how the land is "zoned".

Probably 90-95% of the really valuable forestland is strictly protected, and so any activities that impact it must be passed by the relevant land-use boards before it is approved.

So, I asked because I was wondering if your government has similar laws in place, which would mean that whoever cut the trees would have to obtain permission first.

But it doesn't look like that's the case, unfortunately.

Land use laws aren't everywhere, but I'd be surprised if Germany didn't have them. If there are protected species there, you might have a way to prevent it from happening again, but otherwise it becomes more difficult.

I guess it is zoned for forestry use. It is not like that place is a tourist attraction, a place for endangered species or anything like that. At best for the government it is a potential archaeological dig site which means the trees dont matter at all (or will eventually be cut down anyway in case they want to dig up the bones there). And they did not drive their trucks up the mound, so I guess they are probably not allowed to do so by their land use rules.
In Germany, most of the forest is managed woodland, I think it is about 0.5% that is old growth forest and protected. From the remaining 99.5%, many parts are in some way protected, mostly by "landscape protection" laws though, which basically means that you cannot do a large clearcut and have to reforest in some way (natural or by planting). But logging is almost always allowed, if the forest is in some way special, they are trying selective logging, which is what they did in this place, and call it sustainable. Basically this means they "thin" the forest by cutting every 3rd or 4th tree and not all of them. They still are allowed to cut down more trees to make an access road for the big logging trucks though. In very very very few places they are using horses to pull out the trees, because either the people there want it that way or because the forest is protected a lot more than elsewhere. But I think except the 0.5% old growth and a couple of deliberately created nature reserves, all forest is managed and logged in some way - selectively, by small clearcuts or by larger clearcuts depending on the regulations.

@Niri Te: I would agree that overpopulation is a problem, but I would slightly disagree about some 50% die-off helping the problem much. At the present rate in growth of consumption, this makes a dent of barely a couple of years or maybe a few decades in the curve, because in the end consumption times population gives total consumption and that is what is killing the natural world and to stop this, the total consumption has to go down long term, probably by reducing both - population AND individual consuption. Though admittedly a plague as you wish for certainly would also bring the globalized economy to a halt and thus may also reduce individual consumption - at least in the short term and maybe it would not be able to recover. After all, countries like Germany are already suffocating from the complexity and do not manage anymore to build a large airport or train station anymore.

Are they using the wood from the trees for construction?

I'm kind of surprised that a place with so few forests remaining (and a place that tries to promote a sustainable image) would still be cutting trees down.

I don't know if there are any alternatives, but it seems to me that there would have to be some kind of material that could be used instead of wood for building things.

And not stone, either. Something that could be manufactured.

THEN you have to deal with the air, landfill, and water pollution of the manufacturing process. There is no "free lunch" when it comes to pollution, the more people, the more pollution, all that can be done, is to shift around the TYPE of pollution that is done.

Do you want some help climbing out of that box?

It's really nice out here.