Nearly 70% of Argentine forests lost in a century

Forests that spread across 100 million hectares (247 million acres) in 1900 have dwindled to 33.19 million hectares (82 million acres), officials said.

"In 100 years, we have lost between 60 and 70 percent of our forest heritage," Environmental Undersecretary Sergio La Rocca told reporters on Friday.

The UBA study found that in 2007, "the highest rate was reached: 2.1 percent of forests destroyed in a single year."

The scourge of desertification directly affects 200 million people, according to UN figures.

Link

Wow, that's unreal! I live in the rocky mountains and I can't even fathom seeing 70% of the trees just disappear, even 2.1% in a single year!

You know what this will lead to though. After the region is transformed into a desert, 200 million people will be looking for a new home in neighboring countries. No doubt this will soon become a trend over time, where will they go?

Wow we are destroying the earths forests so much and for what some conveniences and corporate profits. I don't know why they destroyed that much of the forest and all the reasons for it. I don't think they wanted to do this, i think it is land investors and globalism that has caused this problem i bet they will regret it in the long run if they haven't already. We all use to look forward to the future but now we are trying to fix it. Every step we take we take two steps back whether we realize it or not.
Your avatar looks like gir




[edit on 28-9-2009 by SimpleKnowledge]

thats books, writing paper and toilet paper to you

Originally posted by platipus
thats books, writing paper and toilet paper to you

True but do they need to cut that much down when i think about it many countries have forest that are not nearly that depleted i don't think they used it all for books and tp and am not against cutting down trees for a log cabin, house and books, now there are tree farm so it not as much a problem i just think they are losing alot as it can be a diverse ecosystem and should care a little more about their environment thats all.

Originally posted by SimpleKnowledge

Your avatar looks like gir

What's a gir?? lol

We destroy the environment. We cause climate change (removing forest affects local precitation patterns as well as having an impact of global albedo - hence temperature - etc) and for what? Some cheap soya products we don't need

reply to post by ZombieOctopus


This is Gir.



He is the avidly retarded side kick of an irkin alien invader known as Zim.

What an ecological tragedy. I really worry about the forests here in the Pacific Northwest.

reply to post by Donnie Darko


Well I don't know why we are so taken back by Argentina. The USA has destroyed A HUGE amount of forest since its inception. Do you all not realize that? And our country is what twice to three times the size of Argentina? We used to have old growth forests stretching coast to coast. Now we have a tiny lot of old growth left on the west coast. Look at all the logging that still goes on today in the Northwest. It's disgusting. There is no reason with 21st century technology we have to resort to cutting down 100+ year old trees. We could probably grind up all the plastic we throw away every year and have enough plastic "lumber" to build all the houses in CA twice over.

Originally posted by Zosynspiracy
reply to post by Donnie Darko

 

Well I don't know why we are so taken back by Argentina. The USA has destroyed A HUGE amount of forest since its inception. Do you all not realize that? And our country is what twice to three times the size of Argentina? We used to have old growth forests stretching coast to coast. Now we have a tiny lot of old growth left on the west coast. Look at all the logging that still goes on today in the Northwest. It's disgusting. There is no reason with 21st century technology we have to resort to cutting down 100+ year old trees. We could probably grind up all the plastic we throw away every year and have enough plastic "lumber" to build all the houses in CA twice over.

You're right, the eastern woodlands once extended all the way to Illinois.

There is a very interesting book I've been wanting to read called DIRT: The rise and fall of civilizations. It basically says that the most important factor for the push westward by settlers and early American colonists that many people over look was for better soil. They deforested and depleted so much of the land on the East Coast early Americans didn't have any choice but to move westward in search of more fertile soil. Interesting. I can only imagine what this country looked like before Columbus found it and the Native Americans were living here. If you've ever stepped foot in some of the old growth forests in CA like Sequoia or Redwoods you'll understand. So amazing!

Originally posted by Zosynspiracy
reply to post by Donnie Darko

 

We could probably grind up all the plastic we throw away every year and have enough plastic "lumber" to build all the houses in CA twice over.

That's actually a really good idea... does anyone do that currently? Sadly, industry would probably plow over an ancient forest to save a nickle on every wooden beam over reused plastic

I realize that endangered forests aren't as exciting as "real" conspiracies but it's really depressing to think that I'll personally outlive much of Earth's forests.

Originally posted by DaMod
reply to post by ZombieOctopus

 

This is Gir.



He is the avidly retarded side kick of an irkin alien invader known as Zim.

Haha I guess I see the resemblance, my avatar is actually a macro photo of a key-chain.

I truly wonder what the forests might look like today if hemp was never demonized. More fibrous and can grow quite larger quickly.

reply to post by ZombieOctopus


I really doubt that would pass safety standards. Just like the plastic car from India. If that were to burn, it would be incredibly toxic.

Originally posted by unityemissions
I truly wonder what the forests might look like today if hemp was never demonized. More fibrous and can grow quite larger quickly.

I'm all for hemp, but I don't know if you can really compare it to "real" trees.

reply to post by ZombieOctopus


Yes when I worked for Home Depot there were many companies that plastic lumber or it was called "Trex" decking. They built beautiful decks out of it. It was awesome and came in different colors. You never had to paint it, it never cracked or splintered, it was held together with screws. It cut like wood etc. It was way more expensive but over the long term seemed like a pretty good alternative. I haven't kept up with the technology and this was over 7 years ago. I'm sure a lot has changed.
www.plasticlumber.com...

But then again I'm sure all we need in our environment is more plastic leaching into our bodies.

reply to post by Zosynspiracy


Ohh, yeah I've seen floors made from that, I was thinking more along the lines of 2x4's and the sort of stuff you'd build structures out of. The amount of plastic in lumber sized units would probably be a lot.

Even if it were possible to mass produce here, I can't see places like Argentina or elsewhere in South America using more expensive alternatives over cheap wood. Maybe someone will figure a way to make it happen.

The forests of the Northwest, area-wise, pale in comparison to the former extent of the forests of the eastern United States.

Actually, much of the eastern United States is still wooded, but there's almost no old growth left and the ecosystem is extremely fragmented and disturbed. 300 years ago, a squirrel could hop branch to branch from Maine to Oklahoma and never touch the ground.

reply to post by Donnie Darko


Our governments are reactive in nature. They'll do nothing to stop it, even if it's clearly on a path to complete destruction. Once most of the woodlands are gone and desertification starts creeping north and no one can grow crops on the land, they'll declare there to be a problem and spend 10 years and 100 billion dollars on think-tanks considering possible options, of which they'll chose the most expensive one and it'll fail miserably.

 

Our governments are reactive in nature. They'll do nothing to stop it, even if it's clearly on a path to complete destruction. Once most of the woodlands are gone and desertification starts creeping north and no one can grow crops on the land, they'll declare there to be a problem and spend 10 years and 100 billion dollars on think-tanks considering possible options, of which they'll chose the most expensive one and it'll fail miserably.

Hopefully this doesn't happen but seems inevitable currently.

gir


[edit on 4-10-2009 by SimpleKnowledge]