General Question

Mariah's avatar

Would there actually be more trees on Earth if we didn't use paper products?

Asked by Mariah (25883points) December 19th, 2014
7 responses
“Great Question” (2points)

Assumedly there are large chunks of land all over the Earth where trees are grown specifically for the purpose of eventually cutting them down to sell for making paper products. Also assumedly, this land would be used for something else, something more profitable, if we suddenly stopped using paper products. So would it actually be good for the Earth (in terms of number of trees) if we suddenly stopped using paper products? Not taking into account the effects of using whatever material we replaced paper products with.

Observing members: 0
Composing members: 0

Answers

jca's avatar

I think the issue is more that we’re cutting down big old trees that are like 100 years old. Old growth forest where it took them 100 years or whatever to get to this point. We cut them down and plant little saplings that will then take decades to get big enough to be of a sufficient size. In the meantime, in search for more huge trees, we go into more old growth forest to feed our paper habit. Those forests are home to all sorts of animals, and now there are bald spots with tiny saplings.

jca (36062points)“Great Answer” (5points)
LuckyGuy's avatar

I can tell you that, at least in my area, we’d have more trees if there were fewer deer. For about 5 years straight I planted various hardwood, nut, and fruit trees around my property and every year the deer would eat them all. They take every black walnut and hickory sapling that happens to grow from my old 75–100 year old trees. I even tried using the protective, deer-resistant tubes developed by the Soil Conservation Dept. But the deer knocked them down, too. The tubes had 1” x 1” stakes pounded deep into the ground. The deer (or bear) just snapped them off and ate the trees when they got about 3 ft high.
It got so frustrating I just stopped planting and began inviting hunters .

SQUEEKY2's avatar

Well I can say from living in an area that main industry is forestry, paper for the most part comes from the left overs from the lumber process, also from trees that didn’t make the lumber grade.
Not saying when pulp prices are high trees that could have gone to lumber, went to paper but for the most part it is the first way I said.
I do agree with @jca and we should stay out of old growth forests more,and maybe embrace select logging more than just the old clear cut way,but anyways I just told you what I know about it.

gailcalled's avatar

@LuckyGuy:Same here. i no longer plant but watch as saplings spring from the ground for a while before the deer discover them. I have large stands of beautiful hemlocks and millions of seeds sprouting under them, lasting only long enough to make an amuse-bouche.

The wild white pines do grow, fairly rapidly, however. The deer ignore them.

Pachy's avatar

Not in our lifetimes, but someday paper will be obsolete. Of course by then, we may have obsoleted most of our natural resources, too, if not our entire planet.

RocketGuy's avatar

Here is what clearcutting looks like:
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/49/173894130_d3c33fb530.jpg

@SQUEEKY2 is right – most paper comes from leftovers from the lumber process. A lot of clearcutting also occurs to clear land for raising cattle for beef.

jaytkay's avatar

The county in the Michigan Upper Peninsula (UP) where I spend time is mostly owned by paper companies and corporate investors

It’s a giant tree farm – they harvest trees, and plant seedlings on the clear cut area. They come back a few decades later and do it again.

It’s sustainable. The amount of forested land in Michigan is actually increasing. The old growth trees were all taken 100 years ago, so that is not an issue.

Here’s a recent photo of an area that was clear cut in 2007.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.

Mobile | Desktop


Send Feedback   

`