They haven’t admitted to doing it. One plead not guilty, the other entered no plea. I doubt there will ever be a good reason given, I struggle to even imagine any justification. Sometimes humanity really acts like a virus that earth needs to get rid of 🤷♂️
Neither of the above. The question mark indicates a rising tone (common in informal speech), as a way to reduce intensity and specifically not be a dick about it. It’s a polite and friendly way of letting you know you made a fairly easy-to-understand mistake (it’s basically a mondegreen), and what the correct phrase is.
Miserable jerks are definitely way more common than they should be but cutting a tree is a lot of work. It’s hard to believe they didn’t have some kind of motive beyond just stirring up shit. Maybe we’ll find out during or after the trial.
Edit: Oh shit! SORRY! I looked at the little picture on my phone and truly didn’t see the balaclavas until I just opened the article up on a large PC screen now!
I’ll leave up my mistake (below) as a testament to my poor eyesight.
TBH I never expected the perps to be black. It will quite interesting to unpack their motives and put it into some historical perspective regarding purposeful, inadvertent or ignorant destruction by European colonial invaders in, uh… everywhere else in the world.
TBH I never expected the perps to be black. It will quite interesting to unpack their motives and put it into some historical perspective regarding purposeful, inadvertent or ignorant destruction by European colonial invaders in, uh… everywhere else in the world.
Wanna know how I know you only glanced at the picture?
Good on you for owning the mistake. I will say that even if they were black the premise of your original argument provides no justification for what was done.
I wonder when the point will be that indigenous plants will no longer be the only thing recommended for planting. My lifetime, the next? The article writes like we are already there but I’m not seeing it yet.
Endemic planting is akin to climate change denial perhaps. Here in the “natural area restoration” field, most are recreating pre-colonial consortiums, you know, 250 years ago for us, before climate change was a twinkle in humanity’s eye.
In urban forestry I would say it’s almost the opposite—there is an implicit assumption that introduced plants will do better among many arborists and others that goes beyond the evidence in my view. Basically all native plants are written off as infeasible for urban areas, yet species from Northern Europe, eastern North America, and east Asia are planted unquestioningly, despite big differences between our climate and those areas.
Among the public there is a stronger pro-native sentiment, but then in my experience many people don’t even know what the word means, they’ve just osmosed that it’s something good.
In my view there are many native species that will do well into the future—particularly when planted at the northern edge of a plant’s range. But the truth is, there are no guarantees, and you need to evaluate the tolerance of each species on a case by case basis. Right now I’m very interested in taking a more bioregional view of what it means to be native—it’s clear that northern and mountain natives will not thrive in our area going forward, but species from the broader Southwest region that occupy similar soils and moisture regimes but experience hotter temperatures may be solid for both biodiversity conservation and climate adaptation. Further research is needed to quantify the pros and cons of this topic.
Particularly when native is different from indigenous/endemic. It’s a confusing topic with native tending to mean every national plant without acknowledging native in relation to endemic is the same as exotic and non-exotic. There are plenty of “native invasive weeds” that we need to deal with on a daily basis. We’ve talked about provenancing before, an endemic plant from another range is “exotic” to that area it evolved in but genetically is similar but diverse enough to count in the “pub test” (layperson understanding of plants).
Exotic plants in the urban landscape exist because while an urban landscape is alien; from the soil, to the hydrology, to the wind, to the reflective heat, to the pollution, removing endemic pest/disease pressures gives them a leg up on native plants which means they tend to do better (initially and at the cost of other things). That’s 1800’s to 1980’s urban planning, then we switched to natives, then endemics, and now climate change is like “get fucked”. Back to the drawing board. You’re right, intense study needed.
For sure, but I am interested to see how effective it is specifically in Phoenix which is probably one of the most hostile inhabited climates for trees. If they can make it work there, it can work anywhere. And it could provide information about which species can survive future climates in other areas as well, especially in the American southwest.
The general rule of thumb is that it takes about 40 gallons (150 liters) of sap from sugar maples of the Vermont variety to make one gallon (3.8 liters) of syrup, Hegarty said. For red maples, you need at least 60 gallons (more than 225 liters) of sap because more water needs to be removed in the process of making syrup.
Holy crap, I knew syrup farming was inefficient but dam getting less than 4 litres out of 150 litres is insane.
edit followup thought: i suppose it is better to have the forrest than another industrial complex.
Yeah, some big operations use an osmosis rig to remove some of the water before boiling to save fuel, but most of the time you just spend a few days tending the fire and sap (don’t want it to burn).
Yeah sugar bushing is one of the few forms of agriculture that exists in North America that relies on largely intact ecosystems rather than heavily modified or diminished ones. But it is certainly not the most efficient way to produce food, and that’s why maple syrup is so pricey.
Atlanta, GA, the city of trees, cut down 4-6 mature (1’ thick) trees on a side walk with near construction in midtown… just so they could put scaffolding over the side walk for the construction. WTF didn’t they just put debris scaffolding higher or better debris fencing/netting? 🤦♂️
treehuggers
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.