Canada’s Forgotten Rainforest

https://thenarwhal.ca/canadas-forgotten-rainforest/

by Red_Tarsius • 7 years ago

209 62 7 years ago

Have been watching a show called "Alone" on History channel which is a survival reality-TV thing where they drop off 10 candidates in nature and whoever can hold out the longest wins the game. The first and second season were set on Vancouver island. For some reason have always pictured BC as a cold place very similar to where I'm from in (just on a bigger scale). The show really gives an amazing look into Vancouver Island and how the wet climate creates a very unique habitat with thick moss and lichen covering trees, bears and wood so thick you can't penetrate it on foot. Very different to what I imagine when when hearing the word ""rain forest.

jammygit2• 7 years ago

The Mongolia season also made the local plants and animals look interesting

Tiktaalik2• 7 years ago

The producers of this season were clever in that most of the bushcraft 'experts' they found were from the US South and Eastern US/Canada so they struggled so, so hard to make fires and were humbled by the wet environment.

dirktheman• 7 years ago

I enjoyed that show for the reason that they're showing how hard it is to sustain yourself with nothing but you find in nature. I'm a scouts leader and shows like Bear Grylls make surviving look way too easy, and prompts people to take unneccesary risks that will lead to certain death.

What I didn't like about the Vancouver location is that they were prohibited to hunt for food, other than fishing. Especially with winter in view, surviving on plants and fish alone would be very, very difficult, if not impossible.

What baffled me was that most of these 'survival experts' had little knowledge of local flora/fauna. I'm not certain if they knew where they were going on forehand, but if it were me, I'd make damn sure I would be able to spot at least some basic staple foods around the world.

What I like about 'Alone' is that it really shows that surviving isn't just about knowledge or skill, but that psychology plays a vital part, too.

beachy• 7 years ago

Sustainable forests of pine (pinus radiata) here reach maturity in 25 years, when the timber can be harvested, and new trees planted. It's truly horrifying to me to imagine a 400 year old tree being felled.

throwaway13337• 7 years ago

It's a bigger problem than it first appears.

The way we (in the pacific northwest) do logging causes a lot of soil erosion and just makes everything super ugly.

https://www.google.com/maps/@47.7121672,-124.2984644,8635m/d...

Just move google maps around anywhere heavily forested and you will see giant wounds in the hills.

Most countries in Europe don't do this. We could do what they do and use reduced impact logging. Don't cut all the trees at once.

This sort of regulation is much easier to achieve than global carbon caps because it's benefits are realized in the backyards of those that deal with them. It's easy to enforce and it also shouldn't cost us much. We'll pay a little more for lumber but that's it.

sprainedankles3• 7 years ago

Amazing to see the "Duncan Memorial Cedar Tree" so close to a wiped out area (aaaand a quick search reveals it fell just a few years ago. Ouch.)

What exactly does it mean to do "reduced impact logging" in Europe, do you have a link?

Coming from the Northeast where our trees are also of great economic value (and of greater natural value), I completely agree that a more strategic approach to logging should be pursued. But at the same time, we need to develop methods for supporting rural logging towns economically. I'm not sure what the answer is, but ideally it can make use of and build upon existing skill-sets and lifestyles in those areas.

I want to believe that if communities are properly educated and given opportunities to improve their practices, they would.

maxerickson• 7 years ago

I don't think there is really such a thing as a logging town anymore. I mean, I live in a county where logging equipment is manufactured, and regionally logging is quite important to the economy, but it's all itinerant, there's no need to be settled near the work.

ricardobeat5• 7 years ago

Wow, when you look a bit further south it seems like the entire state is being eaten little by little: https://www.google.com/maps/place/46.943860,+-123.486175/@46...

lawkwok• 7 years ago

That is scary. I zoomed in expecting to see farmland but instead they were bald patches. Just like male pattern baldness by the time you notice it, the process is already well underway.

splicer• 7 years ago

Same with Vancouver Island: https://goo.gl/maps/aXADesFXHUbyjPMw8

xemoka• 7 years ago

Interestingly, clear cuts mimic natural disturbance types (particularly in some of the historically fire maintained ecosystems). It's not quite as cut and dry as clear-cut logging is bad. That said, we're pulling far too much wood out of our landscape here in BC, faster than it's able to replenish that's for sure.

oska• 7 years ago

What natural disturbance does clear cut mimic?

No, it certainly does not mimic a forest fire. Nor does it mimic rare events such as the blast effects from a volcanic explosion (such as Mount Helena).

Bayart2• 7 years ago

Most countries in Europe don't do this.

It's way worse where I live in terms of jarring patchwork, and it's still one of the more forested areas in France.

https://www.google.fr/maps/place/@45.5731524,1.8908994,18497...

davidw• 7 years ago

You want to see a crazy patchwork... check this out:

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.7723317,-123.3430591,31329m/...

Those squares are the result of land being sold off to fund railroads.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_and_California_Railroad...

avip5• 7 years ago

First, from a pure narrow CO2 economy POV, cutting down a mature forest is good. Trees peak sequestration at 20-40 years. Second, BC can’t stop logging as long as it’s trapped in a PC First Nations talk.

Tangent, though this is technically a rainforest, it bares little resembles to what the word is usually associated with.

ricardobeat5• 7 years ago

Your first statement seems to have been debunked long ago:

The researchers have found that carbon uptake of trees (as measured by growth rates) continuously increases with their size because the overall leaf area increases as they grow. This enables bigger trees to absorb more carbon from the atmosphere. Thus, the oldest trees in a forest capture the most carbon from the atmosphere. These oldest trees are to be found in ancient forests. Importantly, older trees are also more valuable for biodiversity than younger trees because they support a wider range of species

Coming from Brazil, it pretty much looks like rain forest to me, except all the tree species are different. Besides, what is the point you are trying to make? That this is somehow ok?

avip5• 7 years ago

Pls source your claims https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259766087_Rate_of_t...

Maybe instead of "debunked", you meant to say "this is a controversial issue".

Here's a better source to support your claims: http://www.co2science.org/subject/f/summaries/forestold.php

hackbinary• 7 years ago

The bio diversity of conifer, rain or otherwise, is fractional of tropical rain forests. There are about 5 main coniferous species: Red cedar Douglas fir Sitka Spruce Yellow cedar West coast hemlock

sverige• 7 years ago

Tangent, though this is technically a rainforest, it bares little resembles to what the word is usually associated with.

Odd, because I recall a plaque at Lake Quinault of some sort claiming that the term "rain forest" was coined by FDR when he visited the Olympic peninsula, though it's not mentioned in the article linked below.

https://www.historylink.org/File/5434

strainer4• 7 years ago

Cutting it in that manner is definitely not good because it doesn't regenerate when done so, for complicating ecological reasons. It is the regeneration stage of forestation which is remarkably good at capturing CO2.

Logging could be done in an ecological manner enabling and even stimulating natural regeneration but the industry culture has been powerfully opposed to ecological concern and campaigns that have struggled against its practices for many decades past[1]

Despite potentially offering insightful, fit and adventurous outdoor employment opportunities for humanity, global logging industry has politically lobbied to maintain a brutal strategy of maximum impact and immediate return towards its resource.

These practices are developed and carried out wherever profitable, by well established Western logging companies and professionals. Wildlife is poisoned and culled before work begins to simplify operations - the nature of the whole area is eliminated by design :

" Clearfelling, as the name suggests, first involves the complete felling of a forest by chainsaws and skidders. Then, the whole area is torched, the firing started by helicopters dropping incendiary devices made of jellied petroleum, commonly known as napalm. The resultant fire is of such ferocity it produces mushroom clouds visible from considerable distances. In consequence, every autumn, the island's otherwise most beautiful season, china-blue skies are frequently nicotine-scummed, an inescapable reminder that clearfelling means the total destruction of ancient and unique forests."[2]

[1] https://www.google.com/search?q=eg+greenpeace+logging&tbs=cd...

[2] https://www.themonthly.com.au/issue/2007/may/1348543148/rich...

avip5• 7 years ago

BC law requires planting 3 trees per logged one. So in theory regeneration is there.

No one thinks the logging industry is especially echo friendly. It’s as exploitive as any other.

terminal_city3• 7 years ago

To point out the obvious, referencing a 15 year old article about Tasmania (and an irrelevant google search) that describes historic practices on that Island does not strengthen your position, or add to discussions about forestry practices in British Columbia.

DanBC• 7 years ago

Old growth forests have important ecological advantages over their ability to sink carbon.

avip5• 7 years ago

Obviously. Hence from a pure narrow CO2 economy POV

bobske4• 7 years ago

Stupidity rules the world. Mankind just deserves to die. Eod.

dang• 7 years ago

Ok, but could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments here? We're trying to be ruled by at least a little less stupidity than that, and it takes energy to hold entropy at bay for a bit.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

fallingfrog• 7 years ago

Can any Canadians comment on the political situation that allows this to happen? From our point of view in the us you guys seem relatively left leaning and yet you still have deforestation, Athabasca tar sands, etc going on.

michaelmachine• 7 years ago

Taking away jobs makes people mad. 17% of Canada’s economy is natural resource extraction: mining, logging, hydrocarbons. Greater than 200,000 Canadians are employed by the logging sector [1].

[1] https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/sites/www.nrcan.gc.ca/files/files/pd...

walrus01• 7 years ago

BC's economy outside of major cities remains heavily dependent on logging and mining and other forms of resource extraction. Look at the trainloads of cargo going to the coast and what they contain, and what's getting loaded onto ships in Burrard Inlet and at Deltaport.

ant6n• 7 years ago

Canadians live under the impression that their land is infinitely big, so strip-mining it etc. is only a problem in other, smaller countries.

jammygit2• 7 years ago

On Vancouver island, there is a generally worry about losing jobs related to natural resources. The conservationists want to replace those jobs with tourism, and it’s actually working, but then you have to say no to all the money ‘just sitting there’ after the tourism jobs are created.

Housing prices have almost doubled recently too

Tiktaalik2• 7 years ago

There is a massive gap between the successful economies of urban Canada (especially. Toronto & Vancouver) and rural Canada.

It is politically difficult to turn away from resource development because there are few if any jobs in rural Canada otherwise. This is a problem I've been watching politicians wrestle with my whole life and we are no closer to a solution.

BC's economy took an incredible nosedive in the 90s when there was a secular decrease in demand for its wood and pulp products which were a huge part of the economy (think how phone books no longer exist and you'll understand why). Some regions of rural BC have pivoted toward eco-tourism, but it hasn't been a real replacement.

lucidone• 7 years ago

Many, many, many smaller cities and communities only exist as a byproduct of resource extraction. Taking that away means folks lose their jobs, families are broken up, and a way of life is lost. I had to leave mine to get a job in tech, and I miss the lifestyle and my community every day.

dghughes• 7 years ago

The province BC is like Vermont and the province of Alberta is like (or wants to be) Texas. Imagine if those two states were together in the US.

There is lots of logging in Canada that's how you guys in the US get quite a bit of material for toilet paper and plywood.

getup8• 7 years ago

In the article they state that it's potentially less economically productive to clear-cut due to all the other benefits the forest provides. Maybe they're talking about an idealistic economy where true costs are incorporated but is there any viability in paying people to NOT do their job?

ricardobeat5• 7 years ago

The series of three pictures captioned 'Clear cut logging in the Anzac River Valley' is heart-breaking. How can we allow such mass-scale destruction?

nazca• 7 years ago

I cringe when I see lede's like this. It further reinforces the general perception of logging = evil.

The reality is that our forested ecosystems in north america need fire to be healthy. But we've built homes & towns in areas that need fire, effectively tying our hands. So, we actually need to be logging more rather than less in order to compensate for a natural amount of fire.

Sure, we could be doing less clear cutting and more shelterwood harvests & thinning. But generally logging is now an essential tool for us to manage forest & ecosystem health.

cowpig• 7 years ago

Can you link to something for evidence that this kind of logging can play a similar role as fires in some ecosystems? Because afaik fires don't typically raze down entire forests.

I would encourage you to read the article: it addresses the issues of fire (this ecosystem doesn't go through fire cycles because it's too wet) and talks about this being a case where logging is especially harmful to the environment.

viburnum• 7 years ago

Rainforests are damp and don’t burn. Right there in the name.

TYPE_FASTER• 7 years ago

Logged areas can burn more severely: https://www.fs.fed.us/psw/publications/documents/psw_gtr208e...

cmurf• 7 years ago

There are temperate rainforests in the U.S. as well. I've been to the Hoh rainforest on the peninsula of Washington state, and it's probably similar to the rainforest in this story. Quite a lot of logging has been happening for a long time in the surrounding area that you can see while driving through, but I'm not sure they're indigenous trees as they're tree farms explicitly for logging.

jameswst• 7 years ago

Hey all, Jimmy Thomson here from The Narwhal. We noticed all the traffic coming from all y'all and we've been sharing this discussion on our Slack this morning.

Just wanted to say we really appreciate all the thoughtful comments — it's great to see Sarah's article generating such an interesting conversation, and we hope you keep coming back.

Canada’s Forgotten Rainforest

Related Stories