Access options:
Yes, this means a ton of carbon ends up in the atmosphere instead of in the trees. The right move would be thinning and prescribed burns, but this administration isn’t going to do that.
Access options:
Yes, this means a ton of carbon ends up in the atmosphere instead of in the trees. The right move would be thinning and prescribed burns, but this administration isn’t going to do that.
Can you just find the article about this story that’s not published in a corporate paper instead of posting this link?
It doesn’t take long to find a better source
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_spiking
This is my reccomendation to this news. Remember, put the spike atleast 9ft up, use a non-ferrous material so the detectors don’t catch em, and wood glue the bark chunk back overtop.
Once they destroy more than one saw on randomly selected trees, the logging company recognizes the forest as non-viable due to high cost sawmill blade replacements.
Note: pretty sure this is a federal crime btw, so do with that information what you will
For those who don’t want to potentially kill people with flying saw blade pieces, look up the resistance to the Mountain Valley pipeline. It costs a TON to get this heavy equipment into position and build roads to get the felled trees OUT. Even just establishing a bunch of treesits (or supporting those treesits) in the areas where they’re building roads or planning to log can be incredibly expensive and disruptive to the planned project - and hurt the profit line, which is all that matters.
Ohhh, I always thought it was to break the saw that was cutting them down, not the mill.
Check out Burning Rage of a Dying Planet, And other books by Craig Rosebraugh and Leslie James Pickering, like the yearly global dispatches of the ELF to remind yourself what you absolutely should NOT do to disrupt logging, development and corporate greed.
That’s really interesting. I doubt a comment like this would be allowed to remain on Reddit, which is a shame because it naturally would reach a lot more people.
Why people link to a paywalled article in the first place boggles my mind. You’re not sharing information, you’re just advertising the paper for free.
My best guess is they work for the paper. And we should ban them for advertising