I'm glad to see someone speaking out against the myth that clearcuts increase biodiversity. Yes, there are stand-replacing disturbances in nature like large wildfires, landslides, etc. But they don't happen as frequently or on as large a scale as clearcuts. And even a lot of large wildfires still display mosaic burn patterns, in which there are patches of relatively untouched forest amid the burned areas that help repopulate the whole region.
A clearcut, on the other hand, involved bulldozing all the plants beneath the trees to make the trees easier to access, and then cutting down all the trees, or leaving a few sickly specimens behind. Then the land is replanted with a monoculture of whatever cash crop tree the timber companies prefers. That's why the Pacific Northwest is covered in closely-planted stands of <60 year old Douglas fir. Those aren't forests--they're just glorified tree farms.
While there is an increasing number of foresters trying to promote more sustainable and ecologically sound forestry practices, your larger timber interests are generally going to be spouting myths that make themselves look better (if they bother to try for better P.R. at all.) They're also busy lobbying against any conservation measures that could affect their bottom line.
And, for the record, they are directly responsible for the closure of lumber mills and loss of jobs here in the United States because it's cheaper for them to just ship logs across the Pacific to Asia to be processed into lumber. It was never about the spotted owls and old growth forests--that was a puppet show to distract people from corporate decisions that ultimately hurt both nature and workers alike.
(i want to try writing here for fun, still trying to figure thing out. English is not my main language, i use help of Google and my experience)
-Reader around 17-18 (or anyage for college). Older than Damian, almost the same age as Tim.-
part 1 (next)
Neglected reader choosing a college major that had nothing to do with Wayne Enterprises,
Thinking when collage graduation finally comes, they want to walk away for good… without ever looking back. Without the name of Wayne around them.
Their department building wasn’t even part of the main Gotham University campus, the one where Tim studied.
So they chose forestry.
Their building wasn’t part of the main Gotham University campus.
Just a short turn, ten meters off the main road, then another into a narrow lane owned by the university.
Trees lined both sides, part of the campus arboretum. Quiet. Green. Distant.
The Forestry building stood at the end.
Isolated, almost forgotten (the building actually new, but its the only building there. In the middle of arboretum) but peaceful. Maybe that’s why they chose it.
Do you know what you’re going to do in forestry? No.
Do you know what kind of job they’ll get after graduation? Maybe. As long as it’s not at that company.
The only thing you're sure of is that choosing this path means cutting the last string that still ties them to that name
____________________________________
rewrite
You’d chosen a major that had nothing to do with Wayne Enterprises. Nothing at all. It was a quiet rebellion, a small corner of yourself untouched by a name that had always followed you, whether you wanted it or not. Still, even as you tried to ignore it, there was a tug at the edges of your mind curiosity, maybe, or a flicker of unease. What would it mean to step away completely? To graduate and move through the world without “Wayne” tracing your every step, without anyone measuring you against expectations you hadn’t asked for?
The department building wasn’t part of the main campus, not where Tim studied or where the other legacies gathered. It was tucked away down a short turn from the main road, then into a narrow lane lined with trees, part of the university arboretum. Quiet. Green. Secluded. A place that almost felt forgotten, though it was new, standing alone among the foliage. That was precisely why you’d chosen it. Here, no one would look at you and immediately think of a family, a fortune, a name. Here, you could just exist, without the weight of someone else’s story pressing down on you.
You didn’t know exactly what you would do with forestry, or where it might lead you afterward. Maybe you’d wander into something unexpected, like you wandered through the arboretum, noticing the patterns of leaves, soil, and light instead of contracts and boardrooms. The one thing you were sure of, the one choice you felt certain about, was that each day spent here was a step toward cutting the last threads tying you to that name.
It wasn’t about the major itself. It was about what it represented: freedom. Freedom to make decisions without someone else’s expectations hanging over you. Freedom to follow curiosity, make mistakes, and shape a path that belonged only to you. It was quiet, subtle, and tentative, nothing dramatic, just a sense of ownership for the first time in a long while.
And yet, there was a small weight in it too. Walking away meant leaving behind parts of yourself that had been shaped by that legacythe cautious child, the wary teen, the version of you that measured every word and action against impossible standards. But in the stillness of the arboretum, listening to the leaves, feeling life move at its own pace without judgment, there was relief. Not triumph, not rebellion, just a quiet acknowledgment that you were claiming something that had always been yours to begin with.
For the first time in a long while, the world felt a little more open. Not because anyone had handed it to you, not because of wealth or name, but because you were allowing yourself to take it. And maybe that alone was enough.
Old-growth forests store 78-89% more carbon than managed forests do.
We found that old-growth forests store 78-89% more carbon than managed forests do, a difference in carbon storage larger than Sweden’s cumulative emissions from the combustion of fossil fuels since 1834. Our new study underscores the much larger carbon storage benefits that flow from protecting forests than using them to produce bioenergy and wood products.
[...]
We found a huge difference in carbon storage between old-growth and managed forests. Old-growth forests store 87% more carbon in the trees, 334% more in dead wood, and 68% more in the soils than managed forests do. Overall, this amounts to 83% more carbon in old-growth forests than managed forests in Sweden’s boreal forests.
Most of that carbon is stored in the soils. Old-growth forests store as much carbon in their soils as the managed forests do in trees, dead wood and soils combined.
