• Our friends from the Johto Times are hosting a favorite Pokémon poll - and we'd love for you to participate! Click here for information on how to vote for your favorites!
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.
    Register

global deforestation

girliehhhhhh

safhsdjklhfsdjk;
    • 81
    Posts
    14
    Years
    do you believe that deforestation is good if it is for agriculture and cattle range purposes? what about for housing developments? do you think it would be better to stop cutting down forests or keep up with the production? share your thoughts.


    i believe that we should slow down on deforestation. we cut down more trees in the amazon and never plant all the trees back. what we need to do is get a bunch of countries together to help regulate the cutting of any rainforest or forest area. also a good way to cut down on deforestation is the companies who cut down the trees can get there own land and rotate when need so they can grow trees, cut them down, and plant more trees right after you cut them down. this reduces the amount of wild trees are used created the forests to be less messed with. if we don't slow down deforestation we could lose a lot of unique wildlife due to them not having anywhere to live. Also it speeds up the greenhouse effect because plants breathe in carbon dioxide which gets trapped in the atmosphere and is deadly to humans and the environment. the more trees humans cut down the less carbon dioxide is turned back into oxygen which is important to most lives on earth.
     
    poopnoodle said:
    i encourage it who needs trees
    Click to expand...

    But..trees are awesome...D:

    I think, that people really shouldn't be digging up forests and trees unless they really, absolutely, NEED that land/trees/whatever. Sometimes I feel like people are just going to dig up the planet till there's nothing left...>_< I understand that only certain areas are burned/chopped up, but what's going to happen when we run out of those?
     
    I just think we need a balance. If we're going to be developing more, we must also find a way to nourish our wildlife and greenery so that both nature AND our construction-developments can thrive equally. More development also needs more forests to sustain us (air, pollution, etc.)
     
    The human race is rapidly expanding, so sooner or later we'll have to turn to further deforestation to accommodate our building needs for housing and food. I live in an area of low space and high population, and the population density is so heavy it's borderline unbearable; everybody lives in massive, double-digit-floor apartments, which dot the area. If we continue to populate the Earth, and if we don't attempt to gain more land, well...
    Not saying I encourage deforestation, but there happen to be plantations filled with trees specifically for the purpose of supplying paper and lumber.
    And if the land of forestry is used for agriculture instead, I don't really see the harm to human beings, because agricultural plants need carbon dioxide all the same. Of course I consider all the wildlife deprived of homes as soon as the trees are felled, but humanity's gotten away with monopolising the Earth and stripping it of all it has for the longest time, particularly in the last two centuries. It's nothing we can really help, imho.
     
    While deforestation is important for resources, we shouldn't do it in excess. We do need those trees for producing oxygen for us. Also, if we start cutting down a forest for building a city, we should leave some of it behind, so we can have a bit of fresh air in the city.
     
    Well, if you have to cut down, trees, plant new ones. Who cares about the bloody ecosystems. If it's not going to imbalance the earth enough to kill us all then just cut down the damn trees and plant new ones. Decrease the area for the bloody organisms and increase the area for us to harvest trees.

    Once we move colonize other planets then you rare species can knock yourself out in Earth for all we care.
     
    Yes we must stop deforestation it is harmful to the wildlife!

    Hmmm I have a really good idea which would let us cut down on deforestation! My idea will make it so we don't need to cut down so many trees to make room for houses and also it will reduce the need to cut down trees for building materials. All we need to do is shrink everybody to about five inches tall! That way our houses will not take up so much space so we will not need to cut down trees to make room for more! Also we won't need as much wood to make our furniture and things like that because everything will be a lot smaller!

    Scientists must find a way!
     
    I had to recite an oral essay for this topic in sixth grade, so I know one or two things about deforestation. I disapprove of this way to get energy and how most of it is to make room for our food growth. In this century, most food is made in an artificial matter, and although healthy-eating individuals demand for natural food, why should we destroy our main source of vital oxygen for a group of humans' needs? In fact, if we did this impossibly idiotic crime, then there would be no excuse for legalizing marijuana, because a group of humans would like that as well.
     
    Last edited:
    girliehhhhhh said:
    do you believe that deforestation is good if it is for agriculture and cattle range purposes? what about for housing developments? do you think it would be better to stop cutting down forests or keep up with the production? share your thoughts.
    Click to expand...
    No. My family and ancestors have been living in a small village and they didn't even need to knock down a sing tree. No, I think it would be better to stop it.
     
    Jolene said:
    Yes we must stop deforestation it is harmful to the wildlife!

    Hmmm I have a really good idea which would let us cut down on deforestation! My idea will make it so we don't need to cut down so many trees to make room for houses and also it will reduce the need to cut down trees for building materials. All we need to do is shrink everybody to about five inches tall! That way our houses will not take up so much space so we will not need to cut down trees to make room for more! Also we won't need as much wood to make our furniture and things like that because everything will be a lot smaller!

    Scientists must find a way!
    Click to expand...

    This idea makes your other ideas sound genius. If humans are shrunk, then everything else will be much bigger. And life would be impossible since we are competing with organisms 10 times our size. At least your other bright ideas sound like they had some effort put into it, but this is ridiculous. You have proven your only intent here is to be a trollene.
     
    Preemptive Factoid Alert:
    Cutting down all the trees isn't gonna cut off our oxygen supply. Algae puts significantly more oxygen into the air than trees do.

    CYANOBACTERIA FTW! SAVE THE POND SCUM!
     
    Åzurε said:
    Preemptive Factoid Alert:
    Cutting down all the trees isn't gonna cut off our oxygen supply. Algae puts significantly more oxygen into the air than trees do.

    CYANOBACTERIA FTW! SAVE THE POND SCUM!
    Click to expand...

    Yeah, but high exposure to Cyanobacteria has been shown to cause ALS. D: And it accounts for around 20-30% of photosynthetic operations, which is a lot, but The Amazon Rainforest puts out 20% of all the Oxygen on earth by itself.
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.
    Back
    Top