I seriously do not intend to offend anyone who answered above me, but you need to get some more accurate information about forestry in general. What you are reciting here sounds like propaganda from a Sierra Club advertisement.
The truth of the matter is that there are MORE (I repeat) MORE trees in our national forests presently than there were 150 years ago, at the time of western settlement in the US. Before arrival of white people, Native Americans regularly set fire to the forests to rid it of diseases, promote plant growth which would only respond to fire, and keep too much undergrowth from spreading underneath the trees. Back then the trees were much larger, further spread out, with no huge masses of bushes growing underneath them, a park-like setting, if you will.
Now, after colonization of the west and completely changing the lifstyle of Native Americans, and 60 years of the very successful Smokey the Bear campaign (not saying it is BAD at all), but it worked VERY well... what we have is an EXTREMELY overgrown forest of much smaller trees, fewer pine species (in quantities) and much more numbers of fir... combined with intense undergrowth of small diseased, drought stressed trees and brush... a haystack waiting to burn, if you will. Yes we have more devastating forest fires... because there are too MANY trees, not too little.
What we are attempting to do now with our forests is to make them healthy again, by removing some of those small, diseased, suppressed, unhealthy trees out from under the larger ones, to cut some for sale where it is legal to do so, have prescribed burning in other places, all with the intention of removing this potential fire fuel from the forest, not rape and pillage and make money off of cutting trees down. That does not happen anymore. There really aren't any wealthy foresters out there. It is typically not a career one chooses for money, but one chosen because it is a noble thing to do, like a teacher or farmer, and has rewards which are not monetary.
To think that we will run out of trees... that's silly. It really isn't worth thinking that it's possible...it's like contemplating when pigs will grow wings someday. It just won't happen. That really is the truth. I'm not trying to sound like a smarty pants or anything.
Please, if you doubt my answer, do your own research for yourself. Get answers from real foresters, the people who actually do the job of converting trees to lumber, anywhere along the line, and you will get a much different answer than some propaganda environmentalist group who is just trying to get their sticky fingers into your wallets to support their special interests which are generally, largely based on false information and opinions, not scientific facts.
Below is a good link you can start at to read about what forestry is really like and all about.
2007-04-05 22:31:28
·
answer #1
·
answered by Nelly Wetmore 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
That is pretty much impossible to project. In 1960 there were far fewer trees in the United States than at any prior time since 1492. There are fewer trees now than there were in 1960, but the rate of deforestation has declined for a variety of reasons. One is that we began planting lots of trees in the 1960s. Another is that we began importing more canadian trees about that time as well. We have set aside large tracts of public land. We still build lots of roads, housing developments, and farm land over forested acreage. But we also plant more trees on tree farms and in our cities and suburban areas, offsetting some of that loss.
With climate change forest fires might wipe out more of our forested areas. Fires have denuded more forest in the past decade than in the previous three decades. This situation could get worse, with longer, hotter, drier summers. Or we mgiht engineer fire resistant trees. No way to accurately predict how things will pan out.
2007-04-05 21:15:42
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Well im gonna say by 2030 because of global warming we will loose alot of land, therefore everyone will move inward, thus we will have less land to live on. We will be forced to cut down all the trees to rebuild our houses for everyone that lived in the flooded areas. So....2030 to 2050 is when I estimate the end of life on the planet.
2007-04-05 21:20:28
·
answer #3
·
answered by Sean B 1
·
0⤊
1⤋
Never many trees are grown as crops. We are no more likely to run out of them than we are to run out of wheat.
2007-04-06 04:26:02
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋