Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am writing here to implore you to sign my petition regarding saving the trees from being cut down for construction purposes, such as building a "dream" home. Think of everything cutting down a tree does. It makes it so every animal and insect living in the tree is homeless. This is not to mention the fact that the organisms that use the tree as a food source will not have an easy way to eat anymore.
Now, I am not saying that the government should ban cutting down trees whenever one wants to do construction. That would be ridiculous. But, we, the American people, need to demand that we at least the amount of trees being cut down due to construction.
Just because one owns land does not mean one should be entitled to do whatever one wants on it. We have to remember that we are not the only ones living on it.
With a LOT of Empty Homes on the Forclosure list Building should be STOPPED! Same as Stores! We have Several Empty stores in my town & yet they keep building more!
You know, my recent trip to Florida, where I saw an area once abundant with trees cut down, presumably to build a house really affected me. I am just afraid that eventually, and I think this is the way this country is going, we are going to just wipe a lot of the countries nature out due to people wanting to build "dream" homes, and the overall sprawl of the country.
David, while it's noble to want to save the world, you're totally clueless about forestation. You assume that loggers go into an area and cut trees down and drive off. Nothing is farther from the truth. All areas are replanted with new trees. You assume they go in an area and cut everything for miles- that's also wrong. You assume, like most folks, that trees are the supplier of oxygen to the world and make oxygen only. Old growth trees consume oxygen, my friend. And nothing goes to waste in the industry. Even the saw dust is used.
Might want to read about the forest industry sometime. Here's a couple of links for you to start on: Reforestation FOPAP: The truth about trees
Quote:
Just because one owns land does not mean one should be entitled to do whatever one wants on it.
So if the Gov't came in and said David, you can only drive your car 1 day a week, you'd be fine with that? What if you owned vacation property and the Gov't came in and said David, you can't use this anymore but the taxes are now due- you okay with that? Or what if the Gov't came in and said David, you have to move out of yer house so we can move a homeless guy and his family in here- you're okay with that? The statement would be considered communistic anywhere in the world. Are YOU willing to give up your rights and march to the same music like they do in North Korea? That kind of thinking is dangerous David.
David, while it's noble to want to save the world, you're totally clueless about forestation. You assume that loggers go into an area and cut trees down and drive off. Nothing is farther from the truth. All areas are replanted with new trees. You assume they go in an area and cut everything for miles- that's also wrong. You assume, like most folks, that trees are the supplier of oxygen to the world and make oxygen only. Old growth trees consume oxygen, my friend. And nothing goes to waste in the industry. Even the saw dust is used.
Might want to read about the forest industry sometime. Here's a couple of links for you to start on: Reforestation FOPAP: The truth about trees
So if the Gov't came in and said David, you can only drive your car 1 day a week, you'd be fine with that? What if you owned vacation property and the Gov't came in and said David, you can't use this anymore but the taxes are now due- you okay with that? Or what if the Gov't came in and said David, you have to move out of yer house so we can move a homeless guy and his family in here- you're okay with that? The statement would be considered communistic anywhere in the world. Are YOU willing to give up your rights and march to the same music like they do in North Korea? That kind of thinking is dangerous David.
I am afraid you misunderstood me and am sorry I didn't explain myself better. I am talking about when people just will cut down a ton of tees to build some giant home of theirs. I'm not talking about logging, but rather the rich buying land and just doing whatever they want on it, with little regulation from the government. This is not about me "being noble", but rather me protecting the organisms in which we coexist with.
As for your second point, I am, again, afraid you misunderstood what I said. Yes, we did technically buy the land, but does it really mean that it is ours? Picture this, a wealthy couple buy a couple hundred acres of mostly forested land in Montana. There are hundreds of different animals making that land home well before the couple bought the land.
Perhaps this couple wants to build a huge farm on this land. Should they really be able to do build that farming complex, or do what they want, at the expense of the many, many animals already living there. I mean we did "buy" the land. At the end of the day, though we are just paying an amount of money to take the land. Do we really have a "right" to it. I mean animals have been living there much longer than us. If you get rid of our government, then "buying" a house is useless. I am going astray from my point, though.
I relate this to the Europeans coming into Latin America and just taking over, no regard for the people who lived there. Do you consider that "right".
There are so many individual situations that there is no single answer, such as a petition. Just about all of New England was clear cut and farmland at one point. There were a few of the taller mountains that escaped, but fully 90% of the land was farm, pasture, or otherwise used. Much of the entire country was regularly burned by the natives prior to the influx of Europeans. In point of fact, many of the forests in the west are dangerously overgrown. In Alabama, trees are crops with about a twenty to forty year crop cycle. The issue you seem to be focused on is not so much the above, but the spread of McMansions and such.
I think the worst of that phase is already over. Economics and societies have ways of enforcing retreat from unsustainable positions. In my immediate area there are literally dozens of abandoned houses that are going back to nature. In Vermont, which suffered from a lot of ski lodge growth in the 1960s and 1970s, it is much rarer for a new one to be built, and the cost of upkeep presents real problems for current owners.
Most people want to be close to shopping now. The lure of consumerism and easy job commutes has caused declines in rural populations.
Do we really have a "right" to land? The short answer is yes. We are the dominant species on the planet and we get to do what we want. If we were naked savages and dinosaurs ruled, they would get the choice. The Janist and European apologist philosophies simply do not hold up to scrutiny. Before Europeans, the natives dominated the landscape, burning forests at will, harvesting animals on a large scale, and introducing agriculture to significant areas. They died out due to European diseases, leaving what APPEARED to be an untouched landscape which in fact was drastically different than pre-human times.
Ecology and current lifeforms in any area are CONSTANTLY changing. It is the Freshman mistake of those who claim to be nature lovers to not understand that every part of the planet is in constant flux. Much of it is from invasives, and yes, man has a lot to do with that, but it is something that is not going to stop at this point. Plants that are stronger than "native" plants (which were likely invasives from some earlier age) will win out. That is the way of nature. When you try to keep a copse of trees exactly as it was when you were a child, you find that by the time you are an adult some of those trees are dead, others have taken over, and the floor plants have changed.
I totally support your cause, David.
Developers have had as much of a negative impact on our society as has crack or chronic, hyper-overbreeding.
I support any efforts to spay and neuter both developers and humans
@harry chickpea: I understand what you are saying, and am happy many abandoned houses in your area are going back to nature. I'm not dissing the rural life. I think it is the best lifestyle in the United States. Who I am upset with are the rich people who use wooded land to build a "second home". I don't mind having a second place to go, but I think we should have a little more respect for the world around us. And that's why I started the petition.
@thunderkat59:Thank you so much for your support. I am so glad that we are even having this discussion. This is a discussion that needs to be had, and I am so happy that this issue is at least being brought up.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
