Are they leaving ANY TREES in the new Atlanta developments? (Madison: how much, home builders)

[Dingler]

I read somewhere that thousands of acres of trees are being clear-cut in the greater Atlanta area every year. Sure there are still some trees left in some of the older neighborhoods but the new parts of town are starting to look like Kansas. I have never seen so many fallen trees and deforestation in my life.

If you live in one of the newer neighborhoods around Atlanta, are there any trees left?

[TruBlu]

yeah the trees are still here...They find many ways to cut thru forrest and still leave some trees.

[xxman777]

It is significantly cheaper for home builders to clear cut before they build, so yes, most new areas don't have a lot of trees. You can find new homes with trees but it is usually much more expensive (usually custom). Also in the city you can find new homes in established neighborhoods with mature trees. I guess the clear cutting thing is more noticeable in Georgia then other places because there are more trees here. Ironically, I've been told there is actually a greater percentage of the state which is forested now then say 50-100 years ago.

[xavier132487]

xxman, that's actually true for the entire nation despite popular belief of rapid deforestation by lumber/paper companies. We have more trees in this century than we did in the beginning of the last.

[xxman777]

Now that I'm thinking about it, yeah that is obvious. People think there is less but because of how much more conscious we are to it now they are more trees. I think the problem people have with lumber/paper companies is with destroying old growth forests but that message gets twisted and distorted just like many of the hot button issues.

[kayrob]

They certainly aren't leaving much land either. Throwing the homes on top of each other and leaving you with this little piece of land for a back yard. 1/3 of an acre seems to be the standard.

[BobKovacs]

Originally Posted by kayrob

They certainly aren't leaving much land either. Throwing the homes on top of each other and leaving you with this little piece of land for a back yard. 1/3 of an acre seems to be the standard.

But compared to some areas of the country, 1/3 of an acre is a lot. In central NJ, where we just moved from, the 50x100 lot was standard- that's just over 1/10 of an acre. If you were really lucky, you had 100x100, which is slightly less than 1/4 of an acre.

Who wants to spend the whole weekend maintaining a huge lot anyway?

Bob

[vilehelm]

Originally Posted by kayrob

They certainly aren't leaving much land either. Throwing the homes on top of each other and leaving you with this little piece of land for a back yard. 1/3 of an acre seems to be the standard.

This is a very very short sighted view of things. Compact living spaces leave nice big public tracts for parks etc. Also there is less of a burden on infrastructure. Taxes will be cheaper as well. These people who want mini mansions and private parks (backyards) are the real problem with the way Atlanta developed.

You can't have it both ways if you want to live in a city understand that it is best for all to have a compact environment. If you want acres of land move way out to like Madison and don't ***** about driving hours and hours.

Also, trees grow in Atlanta like weeds. The problem is few people plant smart for the future. Bradford Pears look good for a while but as many people know they fall apart quickly. Pines are good for the short run but they can't take the place of a great oak tree.

The older neighborhoods are great, people should look to those first before adding to the sprawl.

[JPD]

Originally Posted by xxman777

Now that I'm thinking about it, yeah that is obvious.

How is it obvious?

[xxman777]

Originally Posted by JPD

How is it obvious?

Pre 1900 American’s gave very little thought to the environment. Issues such as clear cutting or forest conservation didn’t really exist. By 1900 much of the eastern part of the US had been turned into farmland, lumber companies would just clear cut without any thought of how they were damaging the land, there wasn’t a system in place to protect forests. Post 1900 (this really started with Teddy Roosevelt who became president in 1901) National Forest began to be established (protecting the forests), reforestation occurred with government programs to buy back land, lumber companies became more aware of the problems with clear cutting and started reforesting their lands, etc.