lol I'm finding this too with all my friends. Everyone is reasonably well off, and yet zero fucks seem to be given.
EDIT: thanks for the sticky, mods!
EDIT2: Hey we made it to page 2 😐
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
ERA's tree planting thread - 40k Earth Day update
- Thread starter Pomerlaw
- Start date
lol I'm finding this too with all my friends. Everyone is reasonably well off, and yet zero fucks seem to be given.
EDIT: thanks for the sticky, mods!
EDIT2: Hey we made it to page 2 😐
Great thread, great initiative, thank you! I've donated some trees through treesforall recently and planted two trees myself early this year.
I sometimes wonder though, for some of the projects, who provides the land for the trees and what would otherwise happen to it? Do some organizations own the land or are they asked to plant trees there by governments? If the latter, thus using these donations to fund the trees so that governments don't have to pay for them?
I'll go read into some of them. I'll do my part tomorrow for this campaign.
I sometimes wonder though, for some of the projects, who provides the land for the trees and what would otherwise happen to it? Do some organizations own the land or are they asked to plant trees there by governments? If the latter, thus using these donations to fund the trees so that governments don't have to pay for them?
I'll go read into some of them. I'll do my part tomorrow for this campaign.
Last edited:
I appreciate you making this thread. I try to get out and plant trees at least once a month when we can here in my state.
I spent a good ten minutes arguing with a family member about them planning on spending an exorbitant amount of money on some Japanese maples for no real reason except competing with a neighbor.
I spent a good ten minutes arguing with a family member about them planning on spending an exorbitant amount of money on some Japanese maples for no real reason except competing with a neighbor.
How reliable is this program? I'm on mobile, but their website doesn't really show much accountability info as far as I can see.
Basically, I'm ready to donate to this or another tree-planting initiative, but I want to read up on their reliability first. Anyone able to source if the OP link is a legit organization?
Basically, I'm ready to donate to this or another tree-planting initiative, but I want to read up on their reliability first. Anyone able to source if the OP link is a legit organization?
It used to be the Billion Tree Campaign - the organization Plant for the Planet is a project by the UN.
if I find a good source on it, I'll link it unless someone beats me to it.
that said, there's lots of great tree and environment conservation groups that do this.
a popular filter for ratings and categories is https://www.charitynavigator.org/
We planted a weeping willow in our front yard, been trying to keep it alive in this Texas heat. Also, plan on planting another one in the backyard.
I think OP is only counting plants done during the thread, but the principle is correct!
I just used the Windows snip tool to take a screenshot.
66 posts in this thread. Cmon people ffs. Let's be having you.
Why not? Is it necessary that money must be transfered to another company?
As helpful as it is to support such projects, as important is it to plant trees locally. Let him post a picture and done.
A high variety in trees in a neighbourhood makes it less likely that the trees fall ill to illnesses.
We just lost a a few dozen trees here due to monocultural tree growth illnesses.
Our local museums park used to have a lot of different and partly exotic trees which is why it is not as vulnerable as trees in other parts of the city. And that's good. So the "expensive tree" is not necessarily a waste of money. That's what makes me dubious about these websites. Every tree 0,10 cent means it must be monocultural or at least very strong tendency to one kind of tree. Also they dont specify what kind of rules apply to the reforestation.
To blindly plant trees is useless, it must be a good and healthy mix of trees. Many of those projects ignore that, the newly grown forests are later even partly used for wood production etc.
That's why I wont donate to such projects but rather support local, not here accepted, forms of reforesting where I know what happens.
Last edited:
Donated 50 trees to:
Greening and Conserving for the future, UG
Donated on 28 Sep 2019
Planted by Rwenzori Rural Health Services – Natural Resource Department
Want to donate to Eden but got declined, will attempt again tomorrow.
This is an interesting point.
I know nothing about this, forgive my ignorance, but started reading this paper and it offers some helpful insights:
From a biodiversity standpoint it makes perfect sense that mixed-species reforestation would be preferable to monoculture-based reforestation. This article concludes that, while more challenging to implement, mixed-species forests are the way to go.
It makes sense that it would be a problem down the line in terms of the spread of disease and the negative impacts that only one species of tree would have on local flora and fauna biodiversity. It seems to depend on the climate and natural local ecosystem, but especially in places that have incredibly high levels of variety in their native species this would be a huge problem. It does seem that some tree species planted monoculturally in some climates lead to "acceptable" diversity in the final forest habitat when compared to others (where as you say monoculture actually results in a LOSS of biodiversity and animal habitation).
Edit: I changed my final statement after reflection, fundamentally I agree with you and this article.
Mixed-species seems like the way to go, monoculture may be useful in low-diversity environments but if you're gonna plant massive amounts of trees you should put some thought into the flora and fauna that will depend on them, and also their disease-resistance (i.e. avoid the problems of monoculture).
Greening and Conserving for the future, UG
Donated on 28 Sep 2019
Planted by Rwenzori Rural Health Services – Natural Resource Department
Want to donate to Eden but got declined, will attempt again tomorrow.
This is an interesting point.
I know nothing about this, forgive my ignorance, but started reading this paper and it offers some helpful insights:
From a biodiversity standpoint it makes perfect sense that mixed-species reforestation would be preferable to monoculture-based reforestation. This article concludes that, while more challenging to implement, mixed-species forests are the way to go.
It makes sense that it would be a problem down the line in terms of the spread of disease and the negative impacts that only one species of tree would have on local flora and fauna biodiversity. It seems to depend on the climate and natural local ecosystem, but especially in places that have incredibly high levels of variety in their native species this would be a huge problem. It does seem that some tree species planted monoculturally in some climates lead to "acceptable" diversity in the final forest habitat when compared to others (where as you say monoculture actually results in a LOSS of biodiversity and animal habitation).
Edit: I changed my final statement after reflection, fundamentally I agree with you and this article.
Mixed-species seems like the way to go, monoculture may be useful in low-diversity environments but if you're gonna plant massive amounts of trees you should put some thought into the flora and fauna that will depend on them, and also their disease-resistance (i.e. avoid the problems of monoculture).
Last edited:
If by acceptable you mean they have a lifespan of 60 years that's true. Enough to harvest cheap wood.
I do not think that planting 1 trillion trees that must be replaced in 60 years is the idea of the campaign.
In the end every tree is a win, but its not only about the temporary solution but we want a long term one. For that we need forests that last us centuries.
10$ for 100 trees makes me suspicious. How can they be so cheap?
Do they plant seeds?
I have look into this in the last, and in my country, for one local species tree is like 15-20€
I know a lot of these projects are in third world countries, but still, staggering differences.
Do they plant seeds?
I have look into this in the last, and in my country, for one local species tree is like 15-20€
I know a lot of these projects are in third world countries, but still, staggering differences.
Highly suggest people look into the actual pages if they have any questions/concerns.
For anyone unsure or confused, the one trillion trees site isn't saying they are going to plant all 1 trillion trees themselves — it's more like an aggregator for other organizations. The only one that the site seems actually affiliated with is the Yucatán one, and that one is $1 per tree. A quick search says they plant 8 different native species in that region.
The one most people have been donating to — the $0.10 per tree Eden Project — if you check the org's actual website, you'll see they actually give a range for what the trees cost. And what they plant depends on the location. For example, in Madagascar it says they started by planting one type of tree. By 2012, they had expanded to several varieties of native trees, they have local workers harvest the seeds from the remainder of the existing forests. But saying $10 can plant 100 trees is obviously a great hook so can you blame them for keeping it simple?
Many of these organizations also have other purposes, such as improving the livelihoods of the local population. For example, in Haiti, where people are still struggling to recover from ecological issues and extreme poverty, it says they plant mostly agroforestry trees so the people can make a living and also to help with food security; in this case a smaller proportion of the trees planted are for native reforestation.
I saw one organization that wanted to plant coffee trees; I saw another that included bee-keeping. Many have clean water concerns. I understand that there is a "best" or better way to reforest areas. If anyone has specific concerns about any of the orgs on the site, I'm sure all of us would be grateful to hear it.
I'll kick off with one — I didn't donate to ForestNation because this is what they say they do: ForestNation is a for-profit social business that provides corporations turnkey environmental impact marketing collateral to benefit their bottom line. Their main aim is apparently to "re-connect us with each other and nature" via planting trees or something. Which is fine, I guess, but not what I was looking for. My point is, this information is out there. Pick one that works for you.
For anyone unsure or confused, the one trillion trees site isn't saying they are going to plant all 1 trillion trees themselves — it's more like an aggregator for other organizations. The only one that the site seems actually affiliated with is the Yucatán one, and that one is $1 per tree. A quick search says they plant 8 different native species in that region.
The one most people have been donating to — the $0.10 per tree Eden Project — if you check the org's actual website, you'll see they actually give a range for what the trees cost. And what they plant depends on the location. For example, in Madagascar it says they started by planting one type of tree. By 2012, they had expanded to several varieties of native trees, they have local workers harvest the seeds from the remainder of the existing forests. But saying $10 can plant 100 trees is obviously a great hook so can you blame them for keeping it simple?
Many of these organizations also have other purposes, such as improving the livelihoods of the local population. For example, in Haiti, where people are still struggling to recover from ecological issues and extreme poverty, it says they plant mostly agroforestry trees so the people can make a living and also to help with food security; in this case a smaller proportion of the trees planted are for native reforestation.
I saw one organization that wanted to plant coffee trees; I saw another that included bee-keeping. Many have clean water concerns. I understand that there is a "best" or better way to reforest areas. If anyone has specific concerns about any of the orgs on the site, I'm sure all of us would be grateful to hear it.
I'll kick off with one — I didn't donate to ForestNation because this is what they say they do: ForestNation is a for-profit social business that provides corporations turnkey environmental impact marketing collateral to benefit their bottom line. Their main aim is apparently to "re-connect us with each other and nature" via planting trees or something. Which is fine, I guess, but not what I was looking for. My point is, this information is out there. Pick one that works for you.
Hmm, no Paypal option for the Eden donation, had to enter my card details... hopefully the transaction is fully safe.
Here's my small contribution:
Thank you, bought 2 shirts and got 1 free. They say each item sold translates to 12 trees, but does that amount to 24 or 36 trees in this case?
Here's my small contribution:
Thank you, bought 2 shirts and got 1 free. They say each item sold translates to 12 trees, but does that amount to 24 or 36 trees in this case?
Last edited:
OP
OP
I'm sorry you got that from what I posted.
Local planted trees are great and I do count them but only if they are planted now. They must be new trees! :)
I don't have time to update the total now, I'll be back later! Thanks
I want to donate trees to Haiti but don't don't see it here as an option. Is it one of the featured projects?
That's why things are the way they are.
Most people are all talk no action.Just did 150 trees with Forest Nation. I'll try do this every month.
I'll also be disappointed if this thread doesn't get significantly more attention. Or is Era just all talk and no action?
That's why things are the way they are.
Last edited:
I donated 10 trees to the Sustainable Timber and Household Woodlots protect with Bulindi Chimpanzee & Community Project and might look at some others later. I've previously donated to https://mossy.earth/ project for trees in Ireland and Romania.
https://treesforlife.org.uk/ probably deserves a rep too as they are reforesting Scotland.
https://treesforlife.org.uk/ probably deserves a rep too as they are reforesting Scotland.
Fast out of the gate. Fun to watch. I'm standing back on this one and looking at it as a USA thing. Didn't see a lot of US climate marchers. Not in the sense of when Americans take something serious. I mean really serious. I understand though. Y'all have a couple things on your plate and enjoying a bit of well earned dessert after so much meat. :p
Prepare to burn off those calories.
Prepare to burn off those calories.
I meant it friendly. :) and get some eyes here. c'mon weekend era!
I don't really like the SetUp of that site. Does anyone have experience with https://tree-nation.com?
I want to see headlines with little subtext like this next year
US Ambassador Williamson says US should destroy Canada
While speaking on climate strike attendance...
US Ambassador Williamson says US should destroy Canada
While speaking on climate strike attendance...
Yeah idk, I made a thread about sharing stories and pics from the marches people went to and the only reply was from Canada. Friendly reminder that there is no climate justice without economic and political justice. We can't tree plant our way out of this one.
Last edited:
OP
OP
9100 !!!! Hope I didn't get it wrong!
We rock! Only 900 to go!
There was almost as much people in Montreal as in all the US on friday. I'm sure americans will do better once the political landscape changes for the better.
We rock! Only 900 to go!
There was almost as much people in Montreal as in all the US on friday. I'm sure americans will do better once the political landscape changes for the better.