Kinda makes you appreciate how the real "old school" guys used to do it.
And looking at the old pictures (sepia, tin type) with the guy gaffing up a tree with ax and misery whip tied on to his belt.
I've seen pictures where loggers hollowed out the big stumps and formed shanty towns out of them.
WWII's silk shortage made Rayon a viable product so they could get the economies of scale going. Then all the old pine stumps became merchantable, so they disappeared even cypress from the deep swamps.
I hear when the forest is logged, its destroyed. Funny how some places on the Island have been destroyed three times already, how is that possible?
Is a forest just a grouping of trees, or the associate and associative organisms that live there? Think back to the big old virgin trees you've been in and then compare them to second growth that could be 100 y/o and then younger 20-40 y/o trees.
The big ancient trees are micro-ecologies with fern and moss gardens in the hollowed limb tops. How many species of plants and invertebrates went extinct with the logging frenzy of the late 1800's?
How shortsighted is the view to cut a tree just because it is there? If it has traits you like, then a huge tree will pass on those genetics. Clear cutting and creaming takes that away. from a sustainable management view, creaming is even worse, because then you just have the crappy trees spreading seeds.
On the aesthetic side of the argument, cutting down a 1000 would take ~25 generations to replace. Or like the bumper sticker on Tom D's old truck says "it takes 100 years to grow a hundred year old tree"
