|
|
Topic started on 30-10-2009 @ 11:41 PM by ProfEmeritus
|
www.guardian.co.uk...
Canada sets aside its boreal forest as giant carbon vault
By banning logging, mining and oil drilling in an area twice the size of California, Canada is ensuring its boreal forests continue to soak up
carbon.
n the far north latitudes, buried within a seemingly endless expanse of evergreen forests, the authorities in Canada are building up one of the
world's best natural defences against global warming.
In a series of initiatives, Canadian provincial governments and aboriginal leaders have set aside vast tracts of coniferous woods, wetlands, and peat.
The conservation drive bans logging, mining, and oil drilling on some 250m acres – an area more than twice the size of California.
The sheer scale of the forest conservation drive is somewhat of an anomaly for Canada, whose government has been accused of sabotaging the global
climate change talks by its development of the Alberta tar sands and its refusal to make deep cuts in its greenhouse gas emissions.
Last week, a former adviser to Barack Obama urged Canada to do more to keep up with America's moves towards a cleaner energy economy.
In the latest addition to the carbon storehouse, the provincial premier of Manitoba, Gary Doer, this month announced a $10m (£5.6m) Canadian fund to
protect a 10.8m acre expanse of boreal or evergreen forest. It was one of Doer's last acts as premier; he took over as Canada's ambassador to
Washington this month.
The $10m will go towards efforts by indigenous leaders to designate boreal forest lands in eastern Manitoba as a Unesco world heritage site. The
Pimachiowin Aki world heritage project, which straddles the Manitoba-Ontario border, extends efforts by Canadian provincial leaders to protect the
wide swaths of pristine forests in the north. It also ensures the survival of one of the best natural defences against global warming after the
world's oceans, environmentalists say.
A report by the International Boreal Conservation Campaign said the forests, with their rich mix of trees, wetlands, peat and tundra, were a far
bigger carbon store than scientists had realised, soaking up 22% of the total carbon stored on the earth's land surface.
|
copyright & usage
|
Click here for more Fragile Earth topics
Hot Topics
|
Top Topics
|
This Week
|
Subscribe
|
Home
|
reply posted on 30-10-2009 @ 11:44 PM by ProfEmeritus
|
I believe this is one of the most important things that ANY government has done, to aid the planet.
TheRedneck and I last year vowed to plant more trees to soak up carbon, and now this news comes along. If all nations were to do this, we wouldn't
have to worry about "Carbon Credits" or "cap and trade" laws.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 31-10-2009 @ 12:11 AM by purplemonkey
|
I think that if you cleared that forest there would be bigger problems than lack of carbon sequestration. Forests play a big role in global climates
and removing large amounts would no doubt stuff up the 'equilibrium'.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 31-10-2009 @ 12:11 AM by unfndqlt
|
Hey that's awesome... Bigfoot needs a place to roam around without having to worry about being seen by anyone....
seriously though Good for Canada, now what they should do is create a few hiking paths through them for some of us adventurous types...
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 31-10-2009 @ 12:12 AM by TheRedneck
|
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion. 
Let's see, double the size of California... that's approximately 320,000 acres.
Population of Canada is reported to be... about 33,800,000.
That would be the equivalent of every person in Canada setting aside a hair over 6 acres! I say we should all give Canada a big thumbs up for this!
One thing concerns me, and that is a complete moratorium on logging... and this only because the forests I am familiar with actually need some
of the old growth cleared away from time to time. However, this is at a much higher latitude than I am familiar with, so that variable may be
different. And of course, no logging is far preferable to too much logging. I think we are all familiar with any government's definition of
'controlled' logging practices. 
My family of 4 saving 90 acres still beats them out (  ), but it's still a great idea, and the wonderful thing is, it doesn't cost the people of
Canada anything in taxes. This is how you care for the planet, people! Consider this post an invitation to plant a tree yourself next
spring.
A great find Prof!
TheRedneck As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 31-10-2009 @ 12:23 AM by jam321
|
Way to go Canada 
Not often that mother nature takes priority over max profits.
I just hope future government respect the land that has been put aside.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 31-10-2009 @ 01:37 AM by out west
|
I've been to the northern territories and I see this as a non starter.
!. You can fit cali in the back pocket of this area.
2. The borrel forrests are nothing but # lumber. not good for logging. The giant fir forrest of western BC is where all the money trees are at. In
fact some of the largest clear-cuts in the world are there. You can see them from space.
3. There are probably no roads to this area & it would cost alot to get there and develop it. They can do better with natural gas in the NWT.
4. Canada has been trying to pay off the First Nations now for years. Not like america they never signed any treatys. This I think is a buy out for
this tribe. They gave them some land and 10 million which wont go very far now days as this is probaly is a one time pay out.
5. The more i read this the more I think BS. The conservation drive is on 250m acres But they only give the Nations $10m to protect 10m acres. This
sounds like a lot to us south of the border but the key words are "endless expanse of evergreen forests". Northern canada just goes on & on & on.
6. In fact they dont even speak of acres up there, its all in hectors.
7. Remember, dont believe anything these media & government pricks tell ya.
Cheers
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 31-10-2009 @ 09:28 AM by TheRedneck
|
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion. reply to post by out west
I'm not sure what it is you are trying to convey here: You can fit cali in the back pocket of this area.
Are you saying they didn't set aside enough?
The borrel forrests are nothing but # lumber. not good for logging. The giant fir forrest of western BC is where all the money trees are at.
In fact some of the largest clear-cuts in the world are there. You can see them from space.
That would appear to me to be a good reason why they should use it as an untouchable resource. The quality of the lumber in the area has no bearing on
the amount of CO2 it uses or the amount of O2 it produces.
If we (humans) want to have homes and buildings, we have to have something to make them out of. Lumber (wood) has proven itself to be an excellent
material for this usage. Pound for pound, it is stronger than steel, it is easy to cut and shape on site, and it is fairly inexpensive compared to
other materials that are available. (I just saw yesterday 8' 2x4s (pine) being sold for $1.97 each; the same store charges upwards of $10 for a
similar plastic piece of building material.)
Also, just because the wood is not straight, it does not follow that it is useless by any means. A tremendous number of trees are logged for paper
mills, where they are chipped into tiny fibers. The shape and clearness of the wood, qualities that are sought for lumber, are irrelevant when used
for paper.
There are probably no roads to this area & it would cost alot to get there and develop it. They can do better with natural gas in the
NWT.
I am taking this as meaning that drilling for oil deposits is not very feasible in the area. That is a good thing. It's another reason why setting
this particular area aside is a good decision. Canada is making the most use of its resources by setting aside areas which are less commercially
viable, as opposed to those which could produce oil or other hydrocarbon fuels.
You do realize a great deal of that gasoline you use to travel from point A to point B comes form Canada, right? They are our major supplier of oil,
far above the Middle East.
Canada has been trying to pay off the First Nations now for years. Not like america they never signed any treatys. This I think is a buy out
for this tribe. They gave them some land and 10 million which wont go very far now days as this is probaly is a one time pay out.
In a series of initiatives, Canadian provincial governments and aboriginal leaders have set aside vast tracts of coniferous woods,
wetlands, and peat.
{emphasis mine} Source: www.guardian.co.uk...
That doesn't sound like they gave the land to the aboriginals; rather it sounds like they agreed to set it aside with aboriginal approval.
The more i read this the more I think BS. The conservation drive is on 250m acres But they only give the Nations $10m to protect 10m acres.
This sounds like a lot to us south of the border but the key words are "endless expanse of evergreen forests". Northern canada just goes on & on &
on.
$10 million does not indeed sound like much, especially when compared to the sums of money our government tends to throw at whatever problem we happen
to be interested in on a particular day. But then again, consider what the money would be for: it's to do nothing to the land. I all the years
that I have owned this forest behind me that I alluded to before, how much money do you think I have spent on 'saving' it? The answer: $0. It
costs nothing to do nothing.
As to the endless expanse, yes it is an endless expanse, but under this at least 250 million acres will always be a part of that endless expanse. Are
you saying it's not enough?
In fact they dont even speak of acres up there, its all in hectors.
Area is area. 1 acre = 0.404687261 hectares. 1 hectare = 2.471 acres.
How are the units used relevant?
Remember, dont believe anything these media & government pricks tell ya.
Are you saying this is not happening? That the area was not set aside as indicated in the OP? What do you base this on?
TheRedneck As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 31-10-2009 @ 01:28 PM by ProfEmeritus
|
reply to post by TheRedneck
Great post, Redneck. You beat me to the punch with your response. The amazing statistic is that this forest alone handles 22% of the free carbon.
Although they are banning logging, I would think that they have a way of clearing trees that need to be replace, but that is a great point.
Thank you for posting.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 31-10-2009 @ 02:19 PM by unfndqlt
|
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
The amazing statistic is that this forest alone handles 22% of the free carbon.
Really? Not saying your wrong, that just seems surprising... can you post source?
I was of the understanding that an overwhelming majority of the O2 was produced by algae.
[edit on 31-10-2009 by unfndqlt]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 31-10-2009 @ 02:19 PM by tothetenthpower
|
Well here's another reason that I am proud to be Canadian. This is a great initiative by our government and the aboriginals who care for these
places far more than we will ever understand.
Good on us and I hope they set aside even more in the future for these sorts of endeavours.
Ohh and way to stick it to him RedNeck!
~Keeper
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 31-10-2009 @ 02:22 PM by ProfEmeritus
|
reply to post by unfndqlt
Really? Not saying your wrong, that just seems surprising... can you post source?
Sure, it's the caption on the picture in the article in the OP.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 31-10-2009 @ 02:23 PM by ProfEmeritus
|
reply to post by tothetenthpower
Well here's another reason that I am proud to be Canadian. This is a great initiative by our government and the aboriginals who care for these places
far more than we will ever understand.
Good, you have every right to be proud. Canada is a great country, and so are its people. Sometimes, I wish our politicians would take a hint from
some of the innovative things that Canada has done.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 31-10-2009 @ 02:31 PM by Seiko
|
This is spectacular. I wonder if the united states can claim it's park system against carbon credits if the copenhagen treaties is signed.
On a side note someone mentioned a place for bigfoot, Bhutan has a yeti reserve.
I do support leaving areas pristine and untouched regardless of science on carbon and global warning. It just makes sense to give nature it's space.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 31-10-2009 @ 02:46 PM by unfndqlt
|
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
yeah that's embarrassing... Thanks
Canada's boreal forest soaks up 22% of the carbon stored on the earth's land surface
I think I was correct though. This stat just concerns CO2 over land and not world wide...
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 31-10-2009 @ 02:58 PM by ProfEmeritus
|
reply to post by unfndqlt
I saw that. I would have liked to have seen a more complete set of statistics on that in the article, as you pointed out.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 31-10-2009 @ 03:12 PM by Zosynspiracy
|
AWESOME! This is the kind of news that really gives me hope and makes me say hell yeah!
This whole global warming thing is crap. It's not about global warming it's about pollution and deforestation. Clean up our planet and keep our
forests intact and the planet will be kind to us.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 31-10-2009 @ 03:16 PM by Duzey
|
I'm a little torn on this. On the one hand, I like the kudo's we're getting and it's nice to hear positive things said about your country. On
the other, I don't think 'Canada' should get the credit but rather the Premiers of the respective Provinces involved. 'Canada' could care less
about the environment and we're among the top polluters in the world. Certain 'Provinces' seem to care deeply and do what they can to mitigate that
lack of interest.
I guess what I'm saying is that the people of Canada are getting it done without the support of our federal politicians. Please try to remember this
when we refuse to sign anything that might restrict the amount of crap we spew out from the tar sands.
[edit on 31-10-2009 by Duzey]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 31-10-2009 @ 03:24 PM by TheRedneck
|
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion. reply to post by Duzey
A very wise man once said:
" There is no limit to what a man can do or what he can achieve, as long as he doesn't mind who gets the credit."
The credit for this can go to a schizophrenic leprechaun for all I care. The benefits will always be to those who inhabit this planet.
TheRedneck As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 31-10-2009 @ 03:27 PM by Duzey
|
reply to post by TheRedneck
I'd prefer that pressure be kept up on the people who are doing the polluting, instead of a false impresison being created by fluffy news pieces.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
