[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[ft-l] President's Bush's new forest policy for logging and forest fires
I actually think that the 35/500 number is meant to apply to western pine
forests: lodgepole, logan ect. But just looking out of my window right now
at our 6 acres of forested land I see one heck of a lot of trees, there
can't be more than 4 or 5 feet between trees. This matches my recollection
about hiking in the woods in North Florida too.
The two sources I have for the 35/500 ration were:
1) Ranger talk at Bryce NP. For a long time I thought I misunderstood what
the fellow was saying but apparently not.
2) Whitehouse.gov website has the same number, I posted clips from that site
here including that number.
So I have confirmation from the environmentalist side, NPS, and the other
side the whitehouse.
> -----Original Message-----
> Besides, doesn't the "normal" number of trees per acre vary due to species
> type, soil type, elevation, slope, etc.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Frank Orser" <email@example.com>
> To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Sent: Friday, September 13, 2002 8:22 AM
> Subject: RE: [ft-l] President's Bush's new forest policy for logging and
> forest fires
> [ Converted text/html to text/plain ]
> What is the source for this statement, especially the 35 per acre. Seems
> terribly small.
> "historically there were 35 or so trees per acre, now after 80
> years of no
> burns there are 500 trees per acre."
> FT-L mailing list