hello gay little people on my gay little website i just wanted to remind you to -dink water -smile -show childlike wonder at gods creation -bite at least one person you dont like -meow
hello gay little people on my gay little website i just wanted to remind you to -dink water -smile -show childlike wonder at gods creation -bite at least one person you dont like -meow
[ID: Old-Growth Forests vs. Second-Growth Plantations - The Differences:
“So a common thing that people often say is, ‘What’s the big deal if you cut down the old-growth forest and you replant the trees? For every tree we cut down in BC, we’re planting three more.’ So what we’re trying to explain to people is that it’s not a tree issue—it’s an ecosystem issue. The question is not whether trees grow back after cutting the original old-growth. It’s a question of whether the ensuing second-growth tree plantations adequately replicate the original old-growth forest. And the answer is, they don’t. They’re very different structurally and also in their composition.
What are the differences between tree plantations and old-growth forests? These second-growth tree plantations, which are harvested every fifty to sixty years, never to become old-growth again, they’ve got closed canopies, meaning that the trees grow together, blocking out the sunlight. That means down in the understory, there’s very little vegetation growing because the sunlight is blocked out. The trees are of the same age class, instead of trees of a thousand years old, five hundred years old, a hundred years old, fifty years old and seedlings. You don’t get the multi-layered canopies, trees of different heights that you get in the old-growth. So you’ve got closed canopies, single-layered canopies, poorly-developed understories, and a lack of large diameter and woody debris. There’s just less dead wood, especially of large diameter.
Now, going from this plantation, if we just walk a few steps over this way, we’re going to head into an old-growth forest. So come over here. And you see now, as we head into the old-growth, the canopy gaps, where trees have died and fallen, have let sunlight through, and you get well-developed understories: a lot more plants and food for wildlife in the understory. On top of that, you can see that you have trees of different ages and heights. So you’ve got small trees, you’ve got medium-sized trees, you’ve got real big giants, like this huge red cedar over here. So that means that you have multi-layered canopies: trees of different heights and different species live in different heights in the canopy. And you’ve got a lot of standing and fallen dead wood, woody debris. For example, there’s a snag over there; it’s a dead standing hemlock, actually, that has become a wildlife tree, and there’s a lot of wildlife habitat in the dead wood, standing and fallen.
So these are the characteristics that distinguish old-growth forests from the second-growth tree plantations that they’re being replaced with. And because they’re re-logged every fifty to sixty years on BC’s coast, you don’t get the old-growth again. Old-growth logging is not a sustainable activity in British Columbia; it’s like ‘forest mining.’ That’s why we need to save what remains of the old-growth and then sustainably log the second-growth that dominates the landscapes now.”]
wonder how the "diy discourse" will evolve once they manage to pass a nationwide all-ages ban on hormone therapy and make estrogen a schedule III restricted substance as well and/or move both estrogen and testosterone up to schedule II or I. you think we're still gonna have ppl shaming others for talking abt diy as a means of transition when it's both illegal for everyone and the only option left for everyone in the whole country?
Why is Macklemore in your top 10 most played artists are you not embarrassed
@Anonymous
i am ! sorry before i became a hot girl i had an overcompensating white “boy” phase
but hey! i stand by my past mistakes, i could've just recreated a new lastfm but i didn't !! it's funny to see how shit (derogatory) my music taste used to be and how shit (gay, positive) it is now
whats with people who are like "of course i respect sex workers i just dont respect anyone who would ever pay for sex or sexual content theyre all cumbrained freaks" like so do you want sex workers to have jobs or not
eye-opening tumblr post for me included the words "people are meant to be burdens" as in humans rely on and support one another and it's not a bother it's our purpose; to love and be loved in return. so if you ever think you're being annoying just remember we were made to love and it's going to be okay
coming from the perspective of an addict in recovery. i'm a lot, i need help, i am a burden, and i am so, so loved and supported by my friends and family. i owe them my life and my heart
I appreciate the seed bombing of public spaces as a form of environmentalism as long as you're using native seeds but please don't do it to someone's front yard. I spent nearly six months constantly removing a plant I was incredibly allergic to only to catch someone seedbombing it back because it was 'pretty' and 'had every right to be there'.
My front yard is already filled with pretty and native plants. Even if it wasn't, putting seeds in someone's yard is a jerk move when you don't know them or their history.
I can't take care of a yard filled with plants that make me sick. My yard accounts for most of the neighbourhood's butterfly population on account of everyone else poisons anything in their front yard that isn't grass because of this kind of bad behaviour.
Yes, I'm cutting back a lot of the extra growth out front. It's a fire hazard, there's too much underbrush and I don't intend to be responsible for burning down the neighbourhood. Cutting back plants to reduce fire danger and ensure that I can take care of a garden neglected for over a decade is not a bad thing.
We got twice as many flowers this year because the flowering plants could actually reach the sunlight.
Stop seedbombing my front yard dammit!
Looking through the replies and tags and I have no idea where so many people got the idea that seedbombing golf courses is in any way effective.
General rule of thumb with seedbombing is that blasting your seeds into private property (especially gated/fenced property) is way more risk than its worth. Not only is there a risk of getting tangled up in some dusty ass low level court, but cookie cutter suburbs and manicured golf courses with evergreen lawns and not a dandy in sight are far from prime seedbombing soil, as they'll most likely be herbicide-ed into an early plant grave.
And just to be clear, that's not a bad thing just because your efforts have been wasted or because the seeds were wasted, but rather because it just gives the owner another reason to bust out their Plant-Killer 3001EX and squirt a gallon of chemicals into the earth. Maybe that's an exaggeration, but depending on where it is and how much you shoot, it might not be that far off.
Anyway, I'm just gonna speak practically for a second here. Who is seriously out here spreading the idea that seedbombing a golf course (definitely private property, definitely manicured grounds) is somehow better- morally, logically, whatever -than seedbombing someone's frontyard (also private property, also has to be manicured to some degree). Take a second and really think about these things.
I've been saying this for a while
Guerrilla gardening has its place and that place is in empty, neglected areas that receive no attention apart from getting mowed or weed-whacked every month or two.
The idea is this: when your area was developed and buildings and roads were constructed, many plant species were extirpated from that area, and most plant species are becoming more and more isolated with populations in increasingly scattered locations
You are re-introducing plants into areas that either are suitable habitat, or where you could feasibly care for them
But the thing is
Guerrilla gardening appeals to the part of your brain that wants to stick it to The Man and do something exciting and risky and cool and "punk"
And I think that part of your brain can be ultimately self-serving.
Because many of the most effective actions you can do don't FEEL badass and subversive. They don't LOOK badass and subversive. Direct action is often boring as fuck and not illegal and won't be recognized as courageous and cool because it's very mundane and often tedious and sometimes gruelingly hard.
The truth is
This type of popular image of "direct action" glorifies and lionizes this idea of an individual person doing something Cool and Illegal, and for the most part, this is a fantasy and a lie and a product of the terribly anti-human, anti-community, hyper-individualistic type of society we are in
Do you want to make your neighborhood into a lush paradise for native species? Talk to your neighbors. Do you want X institution to stop using pesticides on their grass and start a pollinator garden? Call them. Email them. Now find other people in your area who can support you and try again. See if your library can tell you about local environmental organizations. Reach out to the guy who runs the farmer's market or the lady who is in charge of the gardening club. Build up a list of contacts.
Do you know how you can get people to grow native plants? Do you know the number one super easy way to get people around you into growing native plants?
Grow native plants yourself, and when they spread or produce seeds, offer everyone free plants.
I cannot possibly recommend this method enough.
If you would throw seeds into someone's front yard instead of knocking on their door and asking, "Hello, do you want some seeds?" ask yourself why. Because the second thing has a much higher chance of actually having good results.
Also, as mentioned above
Why?
Here's a small lesson about nature: the golf course is constantly being seed bombed already, by a group of plants we know as "weeds." (The more technical term is pioneer species or disaster species.)
These plants are specifically adapted for the niche of re-populating barren and destroyed areas. And activities like mowing, tilling, and spraying simulate extreme disturbance that in nature would result from floods, tornadoes, extreme overgrazing, and the like.
Thus, heavily manicured areas have to constantly use herbicides to kill weeds.
My use of dandelion as an indicator is based on my observations of it in the Eastern USA, so this may not be true of some areas...but if there is nothing but manicured grass in an area, with no dandelions, it's safe to assume that virtually any plant you could seed-bomb isn't going to make it either. Either because of spraying or because the area is just extremely hostile.
Dandelion is nature's perfect seed bomb and I'm not sure any human could improve upon it. What I'm saying is, if it's POSSIBLE for flowering plants to establish and bloom in a manicured area, dandelions are already there. If there's turfgrass and no dandelions, I would assume that the area is being sprayed or that it's simply too hostile for most life.
The value in guerrilla gardening is not "put flowers where there aren't any flowers" it's "re-introduce species that haven't been present since the area was bulldozed and buildings and roads built upon it." Ergo, you want to hit vacant lots, awkward little areas that get weed-whacked on rare occasions and are otherwise ignored...places like that.
Thinking about the Library of Alexandria.
Or at least the *myth* of the Library of Alexandria. You know, the greatest Library in the world, a monument of learning and reading and culture, cataclysmically destroyed in one terrible fire, knowledge lost forever, etc etc. It feels like this great tragedy of history, this terrible loss to humanity.
And it's not...true.
We actually have a lot of sources that show that the library had been in decline for a few centuries before then. Between some scholars getting exiled, a general diaspora of the scholars who remained, lack of funding, and diminishing prestige, it seems that the library's collection and scholarship was already greatly diminished, moved elsewhere.
It's true that Caesars troops did set fire to some ships in the harbor in 48BCE, and that fire did spread through the city. The Library was likely damaged, and some of its materials likely destroyed... but not completely. And it was repaired or rebuilt not long after. (One source even hints that it wasn't the library proper, but some warehouses owned by the library near the docks that burned.)
And the Library continued to exist for at least a few more centuries. Never at the same scale and prestige as it has at its height, but still there as a resource to scholars until at least the 270s CE.
But that's less exciting I guess. Less tragic, maybe. Less dramatic. That instead of it being a terrible accident, an act of the Gods, a perfect symbol at how the folly of war can tumble great monuments- Instead its just...about how underfunded Institutions and lack of support from the government towards academics will rot these great institutions slowly but surely.
And I wonder what it says about us that we find one of those stories more emotionally compelling and evocative than the other.
trans women cute reblog if you agree
cute date idea: sleep for 8 hours
god im feeling so slutty today i could sleep for 12 hours