Go to teamtrees.org and lets get some trees planted! And yeah, I really did start off tying to make a video about how Japan got its forests back and came out the other side with the conclusion that chopping down a few (and replanting with a better mix) would be a good idea.
Yeah and Japan 🇯🇵 doesn’t use much of there own Bamboo trees for chopsticks 🥢 but at the expense of other Poorer countries especially countries from south east asia. So yeah of course japan has more bamboo forest
I know that planting a diversity of species is the biological way to go. Just two species is irresponsible. I am sure they know that now. One other reason is that if a natural plague kills off one species, the others will take over. In the 40's-50's every American street was planted with elms, it was beautiful and tempered the microclimates, then the 'dutch elm disease', now nothing.
Isn't it kinda obvious though, that if most of carbon in wood comes from the atmosphere, then cutting down trees after their growth starts slowing down would be the way to go assuming we want to optimize the efficiency of "trapping CO2"?
@@Sk0lzky The question is, when do they "start slowing down"? I just learned that there are trees in the American Rockies that are over 5,000 years old. There are others on the North American continent which live anywhere from one to three thousand years (at least). But those are located in natural habitat where the ecosystem is intact. Also, as soon as you cut down a tree, it will either burn or decompose, releasing all of that carbon again, so your "efficiency" is offset in that way, too.
the trees wont help if they are not cut down, why? because one tree dont actually contribute much to co2 absorption, they breathe most of the oxygen they produce and if they die and decompose naturally, other organisms will absorb them and breathe them away so the solution is planting them, but also cutting them down and either use them to replace plastic or bury them to prevent their decomposition to be absorbed by other organisms
@@Elinzar Trees aren't the solution to CO2. You need those trees to decompose for the very reason that those nutrients are needed by the other forest life. The cycle must be maintained. The CO2 problem only has 1 true solution, stop consuming. (i.e. change your way of life)
Oversimplification so that people gets this better: Natural forests are better than artificial forests which are better than complete deforestation for farm lands. This is not only because of trees individually, but because of diversity. Artificial forests are not worse than not having them at all, but they need to be managed, the benefits are limited, and the lack of diversification doesn't promote the types of ecosystems required for sustainability. This is why it's more important to preserve natural reserves than plant tons of trees. Not that planting trees is bad or anything, it is still a great effort from all these channels to provoke some change. But for the long term, we ultimately need to get to a point of recovering the complexity and biodiversity of forests before we came with industrialization, mass farming and urbanization that destroyed them.
Nature growing on its own and conscious efforts are not mutually exclusive. There's a middle ground like the stuff from permaculture movement(s). You could aid nature in growing. I think the word "protection" is misleading and even harmful, as it most of the time means looking back and holding onto the things instead of looking forward and driving the creative generative force of nature, pushing for growth and flourishing of new stuff. "Protection" often intails "it was better before us", "we only make things worse", "we should retreat... preferably out of existence". Yes humanity did a lot of bad things. Yes we don't understand pretty much anything. Yes we will inevitably make mistakes. But that doesn't mean that we can't do good and drive change in a better way than those large scale radical interventions from the 20th century. If you look at modern design and engineering practices, they are exploratory, interactive, generative, iterative... just like the nature itself, which we are all part of. So it's either "protection", pessimism and self-hatred or design, optimism and trust in potential as well as ourselves. I pick the latter, especially since we are all here already anyways. You can protect all you want, but when I'll become a druid and you will stand on my way I'll turn into a bear summon my animal friends and kindly ask you to stop. The last one is an oversimplification so that you get this better)
@@glebkoshelev I don't completely disagree with you on this, perhaps because you used a perspective of the extremes, but just to talk about some points in your arguments. I don't think we need to protect to the point of our non-existence, but perhaps we have already exploited natural reserves more than we should and it's better we stop now, and start studying it properly so that we can make our situation better. To be clear, my arguments are all anthropocentric. This is all for our benefit, not because I think we should disappear and let nature recover. I'm not really worried about the planet itself, it has gone through worst things than mankind. The problem is that this allowance we have for making mistakes, developing and becoming better with time is running out. The amount of exploitation natural reserves can take before things start going south is finite. Not for the planet, but for the sustainability of our own species. Permaculture is a good example of us doing it right, or at the very least trying to do it intelligently, but unfortunately it's both rare, and hard to implement at large scales. You have small farms that do it, but the industrial farming operations that have most of the land is just not using it. What we have mostly done so far is exploitive, monoculture, and at most crop rotation. None of which are conducive to sustainable rich environments. Some of it can be sustainable as in keeping growing the same stuff without ruining the soil, but it's not comparable to a full fledged rich environment like a rainforest. So preservation is needed not because I think we can't get better, but because we need preservation in order to get there. We need what is left so that we can study it, understand it, and then do it ourselves at some point. We haven't explored or understood enough of it to let it go, and if we lose it we won't be able to do it anymore. Until we haven't fully understood and started making on our own, rich and diverse forest environments, we cannot afford to lose the blueprints of it. I also think it's a very bad idea to become too full of ourselves. The so called miracles of modern science and engineering might look grandiose for us in our own perspective, but it's nothing in comparison to millions of years of natural evolution. The reason why we are in the current situation, which I mean man made climate change, is because we multiple times thought that we understood nature and how to deal with it. We were wrong. We need to step back a bit, understand where we are wrong, and try to correct things. I can't explain everything in a single comment, but I highly suggest watching a documentary called "All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace". One of the episodes explains how the term "ecosystem" came to be, how we thought it worked, and how wrong we were. It's also why I am categorically against stuff like geoengineering. We don't know enough to start messing with things like that. If we can't appreciate and see the value of millions of years of natural evolution, which led to us being here in the first place, we might just not make it. Just remember. Yes, we are part of all this. But we did not get here on our own. From the planet's perspective, we're but tiny babies. We've been here just a fraction of time other extinct species were. If we mean to be here longer than dinosaurs, for instance, we will need all the help to do it, and a whole lot of it will come from the nature that surrounds us, as it has always been. We can't afford to keep destroying it. A whole bunch of the tech we developed over the years, these advanced marvelous technologies that looks very distant from natural sources, were mostly inspired by natural processes. So I think that it's better if we start seeing ourselves as a mutualistic or at least commensalistic species rather than a parasitic one in relation to our planet.
XSportSeeker I think you misunderstood where I am coming from a little bit. I am all for the nature. The nature beats my heart and fills my lungs with air and is most other things I experience. It cares for me. I live because of it. I trust it and I'm trying to be grateful. And I am not about scientism. I was talking about design. Formal analysis (science) is good, but that's not where design begins. Modern design practices are founded on interaction/dialog between the designer and the context. Designs emerge naturally from interaction. Then they can be analyzed, optimized, etc. I think design and interaction is the way forward, not trying to build a perfect model. Nature itself doesn't have models (except for ours), it just generates and everything that doesn't work dies of. And that's one of the reasons I think we should integrate into the nature, not isolate it. The more integration, the more interaction, the better design, the better systems. I agree with you on most of the things you've said. It's true that we need to care for what we have. Probably "protection" is just the wrong word. The way I understand it (within the context of mainstream environmentalism), "protection" would easily get in the way of integration, coz "anthropomorphic" is "unnatural" and as such should be protected from. That's basically built into language. The way I see it, we'd better augment ourselves so we could confidently survive solo in the wilderness, then we wouldn't need to hide from nature in villages, towns and big cities, we would be able to live in nature and cultivate it: grow soil, plant, kill. It's completely unrealistic right now, but I think that's a proper overall strategic direction. And I can totally see how urbanisation and "protective environmentalism" can lead to further separation and as urban life will slowly expand its niche there will be less and less place for humanless-nature (not counting that we affect it anyways indirectly). Humanity probably can survive with vertical farms and things like that, but that's not my cup of tea. And aside from defensive "save the plane", I think just becoming nature's consciousness and logos is a good thing. We should take our place in nature as extensions of its creative potential, as its logos, as its consciousness. Well at least, I think I should. The fact that we are imperfect doesn't make our potential less valuable or rightful than those of beavers or ants. They are not perfect either, yet there's nothing wrong with them integrating into their environment. As far as I know if ants fail, that would be worse for the nature than if we fail (not counting nukes). Anyways, I think we live in a time of the environmental question and so it's reasonable and even good that we have conflicting views. It means there are better ones ahead. In response to your recommendation, I would recommend you to check out Steven Rinella. His perspective is probably the closest I've heard to what's on my mind.
XSportSeeker I've glanced at the documentary you recommended. I'm Russian, so the US history is probably not where I got my views from))) But I will watch it, anyways. The more I'll learn about US, the easier it will be to meddle into the elections lol
Well, their history is applyable to almost every country. Same thing is happening here in Hungary, our forest percentage is rising, but it's all just tree plantations of some tree species.
Same in Finland. Biodiversity is taking a hit because greedy landowners remove anything that doesn't help the forests grow. Such as fallen down trees that are vital for many different species. On top of that they add ditches to their forests so that all extra water flows away. This water then flows into nearby lakes and those lakes sometimes turn from crystal clear to muddy.
Greg, I'm a little surprised you didn't mention Akira Miyawaki, who developed the Miyawaki method of planting mixed-species, bio-diverse forests to create healthy, sustainable afforestation programs.
I did across his work in my research, but unfortunately so much stuff that I wanted to talk about got left out (otherwise it would have been an hour long video).
India is really on the fore front of SRI farming and brining back forest and soil to its prefarming carbon levels. As a U.S.farmer traveling to India I was blown away on the this new type of farming.
In Greece (Crete) we have an olive tree monoculture and its horrible. These trees release alot of pollen in the spring and alot of people become allergic just like Japan. These trees can be planted at any terrain, from plains to mountain sides so they have replaced a big portion of the natural forests of the island including oak trees and cypresses. Olive oil is a big part of our economy though (after tourism) so I dont think the situation will change
So I work in Canada as a professional treeplanter. Yes that's a thing here. Essentially when a tree gets cut down forestry companies are obliged to replant it. Not to be a downer, but 20 million trees is actually not very many trees in the grand scheme of things. This past summer as an industry we planted over 300 million trees just in the province of British Columbia. Canada wide that number was probably closer to 700 or 800 million. Per year. I get that its a big country. But having personally planted nearly 300 000 trees I can confidently say that #teamtrees isn't nearly as impactful or important as everyone seems to think it is. All I can say in favor is that at least some of those trees are being planted in countries which do not have sustainable forestry. But 20 million trees is peanuts guys.
I'm from Sweden, and most of our forest are plantations. Not exactly in the way most people envisage plantation forestry though, not very much of it is on completely flat land or planted in rows (only where old agricultural land has been planted with trees, which happens in some regions where farming isn't very economically viable any more). Most of the productive forest land is clear cut in 60-120 year cycles, but with increasing care for the environment in the form of leaving certain trees and creating habitat/maintaining biodiversity. The forest is then for the most part replanted with a single species (mostly conifers like spruce and pine), but there is an increasing understanding that monocultures aren't good. A lot of the forests in Sweden can be called semi-natural, they're managed and thinned (sometimes not enough, sometimes too much so that it creates monocultures) and then cut down and replanted or left to regenerate naturally and then managed. Due to better management and (unfortunately) planting agricultural land with trees Swedish forests are containing more and more wood. Good for the climate, potentially bad for biodiversity, but improved management practices can hopefully fix that.
Polar & temperate climates (e.g. Sweden, Japan) support a smaller diversity of plant species though I think? Compared to tropical climates (where I thought was the only place the "no light reaching the ground" guideline @ 7:58 can be more appropriately applied to)
Similar issues here in Germany, where reforestation efforts were met largely by planting fast growing conifer species. These trees are more vulnerable to species of Scolytinae that often cause so much damage to the host plant that it dies, and they produce a LOT of fire load in the forest compared to leaf trees like oak and what have you. Fast forward a few decades, up the temperatures a tiny bit, extend the dry season, and suddenly the entire Broken is on fire.
@@makoygaara dunno, it's all supposedly done illegally by the companies, but the fact that it happens every year means the government aren't taking the matter seriously enough, there's probably corruption and stuff
@@davidtitanium22 I'm thinking it might be because of Indonesia's progressive industries in tire manufacture and palm oil. Indonesians might be burning their forest to make way for rubber trees and palm trees. The worst haze we had are the year 2016 and 2019. However, the health experts say the air is still safe to breath and hasn't reach critical level yet.
Our 10 year old daughter is really environmentally aware and was outraged when she saw the tile to your latest film. However, after watching it together she has completely changed her view and understands that cutting down some trees benefits the environment in so many ways. NZ is also grappling with forestry issues and we could relate to many of the points discussed. Thanks for making a film that explains some of the issues so clearly.
It's like when a fire goes through a wood and eats up old, sick and dried up trees. The forest left behind takes a while to come back, but it comes back stronger. Fire, as long as it doesn't get majorly out of control, is a forest's natural clean up. Or how many plants in gardens benefit from selective pruning to clear out overgrown areas.
Did you know 1 gram of (activated)charcoal contains over 1000 square meters of surface area. 1 tree could hold more nutrients in the ground then it would ever be able to use
@@BigBodyBiggolo Sounds wrong. You appear to confuse area and volume, and neglect airborne CO2 contribution to wood mass. Your citation or reference (i.e. not a pol site, or polemic)?
@@edhuber3557 My comment is obviously a random statement so i will elaborate; the surface area of the charcoal is created when normal wood cracks with the high amount of heat (you probably know that). The surface area itself is not in state to hold all nutrients and if it does then water reaches these areas and leaching of said nutrients will occur regardless. By adding mycorrhiza and other microbial lifeforms and fungi the surface area becomes a surface to grow on and then even dead organisms will hold the nutrients regardless of water, and since overtime these things happen naturally i made this statement. I can and will look for verification if you want me to and post the links, i got this information from a book out of a university course i followed, but those do have direct quotes so i can look it up but it is in dutch so i'll have to translate or google the original source.
@@magnusorn7313 how is being densely packed a problem? It is their choice to be so packed. And it hurts no one. They also save money from being densely packed.
Wood is also a great building material. With the use of wood, you "store" the CO2 that gets bound by the trees, instead of generating a plus of co2 emissions "creating" a new building material like concrete or plastic insulation.
I tried to point this out in a Sustainable Cities class that I took and everyone freaked out. The idea of wooden homes, furniture, and other products is sacrilege to them, even though trees are literal carbon sponges, and when harvested from a sustainable forestry program are the best choice for building.
@Steve Sherman The people living in cities are often forced there due to economic conditions. Capitalism is what is destroying the environment, not the individuals being pushed into cities to be able to feed themselves.
I pointed this out to a few friends and they started making excuses like "it doesn't work that way" or "the gain is minimal", while this is exactly what should happen.
@@dashyweaver They have welfare offices out in rural areas as well so stop spreading your feels as facts. People live in cities because they are LAZY not because they are broke. Capitalism has SAVED the environment. Else how would ecological research be paid for?
Lily Machamer Please don’t say that we shouldn’t use capitalism. It is, sure broken, but it is one of the best systems we have implemented. In fact, by your logic, Communism made it worse. Everything owned by the government, and the government is industrializing back in the 20th century. The USSR even drained the Aral Sea due to its endeavors.
@The Guru of Kang California is a long skinny strip like Chile, longer and bigger than most people realize, with a lot more federal forestland. In NorCal a lot of places you can't blame *any* of it on eucs. It's still burning because in the last 30 years it's drier than people have planned their landscapes to tolerate. Plus, the native shrubs and trees are fire-adapted but haven't been allowed to bun for fifty years or more, lots of fuel buildup.. Now, the slightest spark will set tinder going. This is true for the town of Paradise and all those Sierra foothills burns, and many of the higher elevation SoCal forests.
I read a book about “Cherry” Ingram, an Englishman who transplanted some of the rarest cherry Japanese cherry trees in England and basically saved the species. Japanese cherry trees (the ones planted in the cities) are apparently very different from wild cherries, so the variety of cherry trees really was dangerously low if it wasn’t for Ingram and other enthusiasts planting them in other countries. The significance of cherries and how WWII hijacked the previous symbolism of cherry blossoms would be a great video though
James Merryman very true. The book I read was written by a Japanese author, so much of the translated version had to add a lot of extra explanation for non-Japanese who don’t know much about how much cherries and Japanese culture intertwine. Which is why I think that it would make a great video topic where there’s more research than a comment can provide
In researching the Japanese Cedar, I was surprised that this tree is plentiful in plantations, but is quite rare in natural habitats. It is waterproof, so it makes good decks, fencing, and tubs.
Well, Im from Spain and depending in which region you live the tree subject changes. In the east coast most of the trees are cut down in order to plant fruit trees or to plant stuff. We have pine forest, but not too many and sometimes, "accidentaly" (coff coff land requalification) it gets burnt and some nice, rich houses pop in there :) Also the original trees in Comunidad Valenciana are indangered because of this and invasive species
well we in germany now have the problem that the bark bettle kills big parts of our forest - partly because we also bet on monoculture. climachanges makes life easier for the beetle but the lack of water things harder for the tree, so the hotter and drier it gets, the worse it gets. so you could also say that we (have to) cut down the foerest to save it - but in that case really cut it down instead of thinning it out^^
Well in the Harz-region they seem to mainly eat spruces, which were (to this huge amount) artificially planted. There already existed ideas to plant more beeches instead of spruces. Beeches cool down the forest more and don't make the soil that acidic as spruces. Also they are native to the forests and just were replaced by spruces because those would grow faster.
Hi! Last summer I was a university co-op student who got the opportunity to work in Japanese forestry industry (both forest management and forest wood products) as well as forestry-related lab research within the Okayama province. It was so interesting watching your video, I've been following your channel for years, especially before I first visited Japan to start work, and it was so interesting to see everything that I learned in three months summarized. What I can tell you is that there is a huge push by Japanese manufacturers to promote value-added Japanese wood products (such as subsidies for use of CLT [cross-laminated timber], glulam [glue-bonded wood], and other engineered wood). So much that in local malls, some of my employers would host small fairs to make city residents aware of the quality of Japanese wood products (The JAS, or Japanese Agricultural Standard, has extremely in-depth requirements for the strength and presentation of the wood, as it is preferred to be shown and not covered by other material). As for forest management, one of the bigger problems in the industry I'm not sure you touched on is 1) the difficulty of harvest and planting. It is STEEP. Clearcutting isn't really an option in these forests, its hard enough to harvest single trees and get them to market. 2) The age of the forestry workforce. Most of my coworkers at one of the forest management companies I worked at were 40+ years in age, with the oldest employee being 70 years old. Although my company in particular was quite small in their forest department, the lack of new workers (almost all are male too) has been a significant problem, hence why the university that employed me sought to encourage both female and male Japanese students to also intern in their co-op program. All in all, it is hard to stay competitive with Canadian, American, and European markets, especially with how cheap lumber is in Canada, but the look, feel, and tradition behind using hinoki for carpentry is still there. I hope to see improvements with the current government's commitments to promoting the UN's SDGs, (Sustainable Development Goals). Thank you!
In Portugal, there are two types of forest: maritime pine and eucalyptus (invasive) in the north and cork oak and holm oak in the south. Pine has the same story as the japanese cedar: grows fast and straight, was encouraged by the government but it's no longer profitable and most pine forests are abandoned. Eucalyptus is invasive but grows VERY fast and is profitable. Both species have oily sap so because of the dense forests and our dry mediterranean summer, wildfires are big and common. Cork oak and holm oak forests aren't dense so weeds grow easily. This allows for cattle and pigs (fed on acorns) to be raised. Cork also brings a very nice profit.
Eucalyptus trees are native to Australia. They do in fact grow quite quickly especially in plantations, but here in their native forests they are quite beautiful. The trees are tall and different shades of green mixed in with low shrubs and grass and leaf cover. They also provide homes to some curious Aussie animals including the koala. Unfortunately they can spark large fires in the Summertime, but it is also a natural part of their regenerative process, to naturally clear overgrowth. It can be said however that climate change is enlarging this process. Weirdly, there are also conifer plantations in Australia as well with similar monocultures to Japan. We may be headed the same way as the land of the rising sun as our logging industry declines and the forests are left unmaintained.
One note wrt to your forest. The idea that thinning the forest improves is actually IMO older information. The best approach is clear cut, but in splotches. Other countries are doing it, but something interesting happened in Switzerland. In Switzerland around 2003 there was a "hurricane" that essentially knocked down huge swaths of forest. They removed the wood and let the forest grow back. About a year or so ago they reported on how the forest evolved. Apparently the forest had more biodiversity than thinning alone. Thus now what I see happening in the forests are small lots of clear cut (1 to 5 acres).
5 лет назад+545
"What are forests like where you're from?" Me: *cries in Brazilian*
So selective harvesting in some forests is like fire in others: once seen as something horrible, but turns out to be benificial, but only after their absence causes a crisis.
You're leaving out why the Tokugawa Shogunate wanted to restore the forests: previously the local daimyos had been engaged in an orgy of castle building, for both military and political reasons. This consumed so much wood it was denuding hillsides of trees. This in turn led to an epidemic of landslides and flash flooding that wiped out rice farming downstream. And so Tokugawa Ieyasu basically ordered the nobility to live year round in Tokyo instead in modest apartments, and ended this destructive practice.
No, he wanted there because he needed hostages and Damiyos spent a lot of their money on cost of moving the clan from rural to urban. Stops rebellion, never heard of the landslides, the castles were not that big except for the great lord's.
The total road extension distance in Japan is 1,281,793.6 km. The total railway extension distance in Japan is 30,182km. Japan has a land area of 378,000km², but a habitable area of 114,622 km². Forests occupy 70% of the land.
Its the same problem in Sweden and Finland aswell im afraid. There is a lot of treeplantations , mainly sprouse and pine ,but almost no real natural forrests at all. Its a tragedy how we are killing everything on the planet :(
I make a habit to watch every single video you create and I like how sometimes I end up learning about topics that I'd never bother to think about otherwise, but there's always an interesting take on it. I found this particularly fascinating and learned something. I always thought Japan's naturescapes were wonderful, but it's surprising to learn that so much of it is man made in such a way.
Thank you for loraxing this idea with dignity and thoughtfulness; forest ecosystem management is increasingly necessary as globalization introduces invasives, harmful and benign. If silviculture taught me anything it is that the math is complicated and often mixed aged stands are more resilient. I count myself lucky to claim northeast hardwood forest as my home- just planted 5 paw paw trees this weekend! Aspirations of land ownership where I can establish a sugarbush in healthy sugar maple stand!
I've got to say that this one of your best produced videos. I am not usually commenting on youtube but I have got to give credit where it's due. Good job on research and I am looking forward to your new videos. You are one of my favourite youtube creators. Keep up the good work.
Forest thinning sounds like a necessary plan. In the meantime, nuclear power has the lowest deaths to kWh ratio and highest reliability % of any power source and is the most viable option for rapid decarbonization of the world's power production.
Among all the tree videos in the past day, this is definitely the most informative and well researched. I don't think I would have learned all this stuff without your intensive reading. Kudos Greg!
Interesting video Greg. I used to work in Okutama as a forester. We thinned trees for a government programme to make the forests healthy and help reduce the Tokyo pollen problem. I think the main problem is although the government are investing in forest thinning there just aren’t enough young people wanting to do the work. It’s hard and dangerous, I could tell you a thousand stories! Although the last decade has seen more young people moving back to the countryside, they tend to be opening coffee shops or working online and other lifestyle jobs. They could fill this gap with foreign workers but the strict visa requirements currently make this impossible.
Oh man, not Grave of the Fireflies. I almost teared up just seeing that short clip.. such a sad story. Regardless of it being an anime GotF really hits hard on the effects of war on the innocent and innocence of young children. One of my all time top favorite movies and the only one among the top 5 that I’ve only watched once because it’s so heart wrenchingly sad.
Also, thank you for including some info on the co2 issues! It was very interesting to learn about that and biodiversity. I would be very interesting in more similar videos. Perhaps about biodiversity in nature over time in Japan and how people go about it. For example, Japan has a variety of “mountain vegetables” they also use in meals such as fern, types of leaves etc. fern seems to be used rarely and mostly in Shoujin ryouri cuisine or by organic, vegan restaurants that follow a shoujin ryouri type of menu. Why are such vegetables not used that often? What type of mushrooms can be found in the wild? Why are bamboo shoots considered pricy? Bamboo grows very fast and for some time I took a walk along the same path through a small forrest in Japan. From one day to another I tripped over a bamboo shoot. Because it was in the middle of the way I took it too prepare and cook. Or does it have to be a special type of bamboo that people eat? I would really be interested in this historically and agriculturally if that is the right term...
i somewhere heard that bamboo stays very long dorment in the ground, like for years, but only the above ground growth is very fast... but not sure if true...
Our experience in regeneration of native tropical rainforest points strongly to not planting trees at all, but just let the forest regenerate by itself. Eventually bringing seeds of absent species. It worked pretty well right here on the farm from where I'm watching your video now.
It's not just him planting you have to plant some too. Planting trees all around the world would make more sense. I helped plant 20 saplings a few years ago.
Here in Michigan, USA; we have what we call Depression Forests. They were planted during the great depression to give people jobs and revitalize the lumber industry. They represent the same issues here as in Japan, Large swaths of monoculture forests with little else but deer. It's dead silent out there, not even birds bother coming into the forests.
I love Japans nature, so this video is very interesting for me :D Many people- even Japanese often were confused when I told them I liked Japans nature and I liked to go hiking. I stayed in Matsuyama for a year and Shikoku is famous for it’s pilgrimage around the island. It is relatively difficult to go hiking in Japan. Even the pilgrimage is often along normal streets (in cities) or even alongside/on car roads. Often times there are car roads going right to a picturesque sight seeing spot where people get out, take pictures and then get back into the car. However, there are some people who are enthusiastic about nature and there are hiking clubs (to be fair I only met retired people, but those were extremely enthusiastic and happy to show me great spots) so once you’ve figured some things out there are great hiking spots including places you can go climbing. It’s kind of my dream to return to a specific region of Ehime and Kouchi for camping and hiking (and of course also to see other places and cities too)
@@dangonzalezb Hiking is more than just walking. Although the exercise is a very nice side effect- that doesn't even cost a fitnessstudio membership. The nice thing about hiking is that people can get out and explore nature. There is nothing fascinating about seeing a depressed animal in a small zoo cage taking three steps. But when you come across an animal in the wild it can be very special and you have to be careful not to scare it away. There are very many photographers who also love going to the mountains to take pictures of the changing scenery. It is nice to see the different plants grow in spring and wilting in the fall. Getting some sun is also very important, espeically now a days, where people spend way too much time indoors.
I’m a natural resource management major and currently I have to write a 7-15 page paper on Japan’s timber industry, all of its issues, etc. and I could kiss you on the lips for all the cited work in the description.
Germany got a dying forrest since 2-3 years due to drounghts and hotter and dryer summers, we do now plant trees, but I do not think it will help a tree needs 30 years to grow but a hot summer we have now every year.
This video reminded me of a forested area near where I live. The city trimmed and thinned the trees. Afterward, it looked like a bad haircut. People protested that it ruined the forest, the view, nearby property value, etc. The city held townhall meetings to appease everyone. In less than two years, the trimmed and thinned forest has blossomed into a very attractive land with more wildlife (especially birds) and, surprisingly to me, fishes have returned to the streams that run through it. Nearby schools use it as a learning laboratory for their students since it’s bustling with wildlife and new growth.
In Lapland of Finland, Forests tend to have many shorter trees and a floor of moss with other plants like Blueberry shrubs. The light reaches them because the growing season is so short and the trees grow slowly. Trees might grow one inch per year. The floor of the forest is not much affected.
Absolutely fascinating. And good idea letting us in our your process/how you came to the conclusion. Those are the best kind of research videos. And man! Its exactly for these issues that ive been wondering which tree charity is doing it right and to give to for years. Sounds like i finally have an answer. Ill be donating! Really well done!
If you would like to see one of the major negative impacts of not thinning the forests you need look no further than the Paradise Fires that happened in California in 2018. One of the reasons that fire was so bad was because of the massive amounts of fuel in the forest. Underbrush that was never allowed to burn off naturally and the density of trees in the forest. provided excessive amounts that when combined with high winds generated a fire that swept through and burned a town to the ground in a matter of hours. a fire so great that it began to create its own micro climate that only fueled its destructive power. So yeah, forest thinning when done thoughtfully and in line with the natural concentration we find in healthy forests are a good thing.
Saw this after I was figuring out how to help rebuild the Caledonian forest where I am. My mother has already planted 260 trees in her garden and there is certainly more to come. It is so important that we work with our forests to ensure they thrive.
So we can learn from Japan. Keep biodiversity and plant well. We can save our planet if we're smart about it. And Greg is right; thinning isn't a bad thing. Clearcutting, on the other hand, is bad.
Could we "carpet bomb" barren areas with vast mixtures of seeds and just see what grows? Like crop dusting, but to give life rather than take it. Boom, instant diversity.
I thought I read the title wrong at first lmao, this is so different and interesting. Yeah, many forest rangers and scientists/activists say that some organized destruction of forests is necessary for their renewal like natural forest fires (not the humongous blazes that are gong on in recent years but the smaller ones which help remove old rotted trees and foliage allowing young saplings to grow)!
Mirrorwarrior we used to accomplish this by logging. Since the usda has given up on logging for the last twenty five years we’ve had catastrophic fires that get worse every year
@@HubertofLiege it's less a reduction on logging, more an outcry from city dwellers who don't understand a very controlled small fire every so often prevents big catastrophic fires. So anytime a controlled burn is made aware to the public there's outcry over the dangers of fire and that it's so unnecessary and how bad it is for the environment (bull, I know) and so they can't do the burn. They need to, but the city or county or whatever is conducting out backs down due to the opposition.
about 30% of Poland is grown by forests (coniferous, leafy and a lot of mixed forests). we have numerous complexes and reserves, where wolves, wisents, moose and bears enjoy their life. we have a lot of foxes, wild boars, deers and beavers- so sometimes they need to be shot:( the common animals can be seen also in the city outskirts. the best thing about our forests is- they are owned by the state, so everyone can walk in and even take adventage of the forest flor- pick up mushrooms, blue berries, cranberries and hazel nuts. the silviculture is good, in every area is a forester living, who cares about it and is also the ranger (can for example issue a ticket or other procedure towards people who would for example make a bonfire beyond the allowed spot)
In our forests, you can see for miles in all directions, because the trees were planted well apart and in straight lines to facilitate hunting on horseback. This practice became so widely accepted that even forests that were not planted with hunting in mind were planted in this checkerboard pattern. There are only a few small patches of old-growth forests and a few patches where the checkerboard structure was damaged e.g. by storms that look like actual forests.
As a long-term resident and avid hiker, I can attest to the assertions in the video. One of the things that I notice that is not brought up in the video is that soil quality in the monoculture forests is terrible. There are is so little microbial life that leaves remain for years rather than just a season, and there's no "forest smell" of decaying organic matter that is common in healthy biomes. There are few birds, and the number of invertebrates is low. That said, keep in mind that the 67% of Japan that is forested is slopes between 30 and 60 degrees. It's forested for a very simple reason: it's mountainous; you can't do much else with it. One of the reasons that the timber industry collapsed is because so much of the timber that was harvestable by the proverbial wood cutter in the old days - taking a smaller percentage of the trees here and there - is not economical now and clear-cutting results in devastating landslides. Better to take a tax write-off than manage the forests. Japan needs its own Works Progress Administration to grow the economy and put people to work building the sustainable environments it needs for the 21st Century.
omg is that why the trees/nature in japan dont really smell? i didn't smell any nature when i traveled around Japan, I was always disappointed by it. It all just felt.... fake kind of
@@Pepechunya I'm not a biologist or anything, but I grew up in the countryside in the US and I have a hard time finding the kind of rich soil that you can tell is teeming with microbes. I don't know that the monoculture forests are the cause of it -could be the DDT they sprayed all over everything during and after the war - but it is surprising given the climate.
@@ichifish Okay, I literally almost always smelled the trees directly in Japan (when no one saw), to see if they smelled of actual nature. But no. Anyway thank you for your reply :)
Some thoughts. Living in Sweden that has huge forests, what comes to mind is a difference in culture and how we view them. Logging has been an industry long before industrialization, using natural streams to transport trees or using horses during winter (moving trees across frozen land and snow). It's a way of living, though today modern equipment and machines are used. While there are huge national parks that keep some forests intact, the majority of Swedens' forests are therefore kept for commercial purposes, by companies, which has its downsides. Locals tend to get upset when their view out their kitchen window turns into a wasteland after some company cuts down the trees outside of their home. Happens often enough since it's a commercial forest. Even if the trees are replanted it takes a long time before the forest is back. There's also the issue of spruce being popular as it's also more susceptible to storm damage and even forest fires. Monoculture is not a good thing. There are also issues with having all trees being planted simultaneously. That's also bad for a number of ecological reasons (though, obviously, not as bad as not replanting at all). In the end, even though commercial companies might promote the view that it's great to cut down forests every 40 years or so, it's their commercial view on the matter. From an ecological perspective, or just the locals living in view of a forest, it's really not that great. If you wanted to help endangered species and biodiversity, you might want to keep diverse forests undisrupted by humans for several hundreds of years instead.
Really interesting as one of the main reasons I love Japan is all the trees, mountains & rivers. I video many of my local woods here in Essex England & some are ancient having first been recorded 10,000 years ago.
I’m going to see that the video title didn’t mean what I initially thought it meant. It doesn’t mean that we should be now cutting down mass trees. It simply means that Japan has got too many of the wrong trees, and needs to try and go back to the right variety in its forests. I could definitely get behind this way of thinking. All there to do now is locate all the areas where the trees are to densely packed and manually planted by people and start ‘thinning’ them out a bit.
Nice. So good to hear real science that disagrees with the basic idea most people have without a more in-depth understanding of the nature of the balance of things.
The cutting down of trees is highly regulated by multiple levels of government. You wouldn't believe how difficult it is to get permission to cut down trees. At least in Kansai.
Here in Florida, and much of the American South-East, the historical plant community was long-leaf pine savanna. This system has been said to be the second most biodiverse ecosystem, right behind tropical rainforest, although that can be disputed. The dominant species in these is the long-leaf pine, which grows very tall and very old, but because of natural wild-fire cycles, these trees grow pretty far apart. It doesn't look like what people think of forests as. It isn't shady and sheltered, but open and bright. Most of the biodiversity comes from the abundance of ground cover plant species and the insects that live with them. When European settlers came to the continent, they harvested a large amount of these pines for materials. Long-leaf pine wood is very high quality, trees often grow extremely straight, and the oils/saps in the tree were used for treating ship hulls. These trees were highly important in the shipbuilding industry of the time. More important than harvesting, settlers excluded fire from these ecosystems. They felt that their farms and villages were threatened by fires and unlike the indigenous people of the continent, they didn't understand the importance of fire to maintaining the natural community. Without fire, broadleaf, shade tolerant woody species quickly colonized, grew uninhibited, and outcompeted the diverse species of ground cover plants which need full sunlight. Now, 98% of the historical extent of long-leaf pine savanna is gone.
Actually, cutting down trees and making things out of the wood takes carbon out of the system. Then, planting small trees will cause more carbon to be absorbed. Cut down those trees again and make e.g. paper or furniture out of them. They always say that paper is bad for the climate, but actually, by making paper, we are taking carbon out of the atmosphere, as long as the trees are replanted of course.
@@s1lverFoX Have you ever heard about global warming? The two molecules that are cause it the most are methane (CH4) and carbon dioxide (CO2), both of which contain carbon (C). We would like to convert these (especially CO2, but CH4 can be converted to CO2) to the harmless oxygen (O2). For this, we need to get the carbon atoms out of the atmosphere.
@@s1lverFoX it's not that's it's bad in and of itself, the problem comes when there's too much of it in the atmosphere, our current biosphere can't handle it.
I live in England, and right next to one of our most well known forests, the New Forest. It's well known for the New Forest Ponies, a free roaming herd, as well as deer and cattle. Even though I've lived in the UK my whole life, I'm always surprised by how few large forests/woodland we have. A lot of it's farmland, and there's a lot of issues right now between farmers and agricultural scientists, as well as lack of funding (and lack of interest from certain parts of the Government) to protect areas and try to restore lost woodland. Though England definitely isn't "bad" when it comes to taking care of and preserving important natural areas, it's the kinda thing where the government could be doing a lot better.
Really great video on a very complex issue. A very close friend of mine worked for the Oregon Seed Orchard and so a lot of these concepts were familiar to me from his work. Even with all the efforts put into maintaining biodiversity and also preserving original genealogies there was plenty of room for improvement, and still is. Similar to Japans issue, the key is a healthy balance between logging and preservation. I'd love to see if you tackled a video on the issues of lack of apex predators in Japans forest as well. I know I'd heard something about it and it had me curious. Oregon, for example, has very few wolves but an abundance of cougars that have filled the predator gap created. Again, excellent work!
if you cut some of these trees and use their wood, the carbon captured is still in the wood and you have more space to plant more trees that will capture more carbon
Using wood products is good for the environment, but destructive uses like paper, much of which gets destroyed after a short time is not. What's a pity is that wooden items are not popular these days so ornamental trees that once ended up in countless workshops are more likely to get turned into firewood.
Grave of the Fireflies! I remember it well. Beautiful, but I was depressed for days on end after seeing it. I wonder: do the Japanese at all talk about the Second World War? Do history teachers talk about Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
Well, except for the nationalists that try to revise history to erase the bad parts. But I guess every group of humans is going to have assholes like that. It's not exactly a uniquely Japanese thing.
@@UsenameTakenWasTaken you're right on that some events happened in the past didn't make it in our history books because the current authority in that time thought it irrelevant to their agenda.
actually, the germans dont really touch on it too much. You know how American textbooks dont talk about the millions and millions of native Americans genocides, but rather says they just died from disease? Yeah, it's kinda like that. It tells about the 2nd world war but not really.
Cool video. I live in Hamburg/ Germany now. As a kid I grew up north where the saying is you can see who will come for dinner on tje horizon because the landscape is so open and flat. I raise some treelings every year and Guerilla plant them somewhere in the city. This year it were 4 beech trees and an oak. And next year it will be 6 willows.
I'm so happy that you are supporting #TEAMTREES! Yours was the first video I saw supporting them 💚 I just donated and I hope lots of others will too. Thank you for always entertaining and educating me! 🌱🌲🌳💚
James Merryman probably ture I wasn’t taught that at school wen we learnt about the tudors. I knew Henry VIII have 6 wives tho and got rid of the old abbeys.
Thanks for the level of detail in this video. Re-foresting is much more complicated than just “plant more trees”. You need a certain suite of species specific to the region.
Those monoculture "forests" aren't really forests, they're tree farms. Restoring the forests to their natural state is definitely the way to go, even if we have to cut down some trees to get there.
I'm from Canada and it is covered in trees. In Toronto go to the top of the CN Tower and look down, tons 'o trees including some Japanese cherries. They were presented as goodwill gifts.
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
Go to teamtrees.org and lets get some trees planted! And yeah, I really did start off tying to make a video about how Japan got its forests back and came out the other side with the conclusion that chopping down a few (and replanting with a better mix) would be a good idea.
Plant more (of the right) trees
Surprised you didn't mention bamboo forests.
@@CandycaneBeyond well this is about trees, bamboo is a grass
Yeah and Japan 🇯🇵 doesn’t use much of there own Bamboo trees for chopsticks 🥢 but at the expense of other Poorer countries especially countries from south east asia. So yeah of course japan has more bamboo forest
I know that planting a diversity of species is the biological way to go. Just two species is irresponsible. I am sure they know that now. One other reason is that if a natural plague kills off one species, the others will take over. In the 40's-50's every American street was planted with elms, it was beautiful and tempered the microclimates, then the 'dutch elm disease', now nothing.
Things are often more complicated than they see at first, aren't they.
I know you know it! I was glad when I saw your video and thinning was discussed.
heeey! It's the Alabama guy we all love! I love it when I see a youtuber I like commenting on another channel that I also like
@@pootatotree7546 and the left always misses it
Isn't it kinda obvious though, that if most of carbon in wood comes from the atmosphere, then cutting down trees after their growth starts slowing down would be the way to go assuming we want to optimize the efficiency of "trapping CO2"?
@@Sk0lzky The question is, when do they "start slowing down"? I just learned that there are trees in the American Rockies that are over 5,000 years old. There are others on the North American continent which live anywhere from one to three thousand years (at least). But those are located in natural habitat where the ecosystem is intact.
Also, as soon as you cut down a tree, it will either burn or decompose, releasing all of that carbon again, so your "efficiency" is offset in that way, too.
Every youtuber: "save the trees #teamtrees"
Greg: "Why Japan Isn't Cutting Down Enough of its Trees"
Damn it. I wanted to make that comment
the trees wont help if they are not cut down, why? because one tree dont actually contribute much to co2 absorption, they breathe most of the oxygen they produce and if they die and decompose naturally, other organisms will absorb them and breathe them away
so the solution is planting them, but also cutting them down and either use them to replace plastic or bury them to prevent their decomposition to be absorbed by other organisms
@@Elinzar Trees aren't the solution to CO2. You need those trees to decompose for the very reason that those nutrients are needed by the other forest life. The cycle must be maintained. The CO2 problem only has 1 true solution, stop consuming. (i.e. change your way of life)
@@eschelon.silver so did i
Watch the ending
Oversimplification so that people gets this better:
Natural forests are better than artificial forests which are better than complete deforestation for farm lands. This is not only because of trees individually, but because of diversity.
Artificial forests are not worse than not having them at all, but they need to be managed, the benefits are limited, and the lack of diversification doesn't promote the types of ecosystems required for sustainability.
This is why it's more important to preserve natural reserves than plant tons of trees. Not that planting trees is bad or anything, it is still a great effort from all these channels to provoke some change. But for the long term, we ultimately need to get to a point of recovering the complexity and biodiversity of forests before we came with industrialization, mass farming and urbanization that destroyed them.
Planting trees is the first step towards reclaiming that complexity, though. Trees are the most important part of a healthy ecosystem.
Nature growing on its own and conscious efforts are not mutually exclusive. There's a middle ground like the stuff from permaculture movement(s). You could aid nature in growing. I think the word "protection" is misleading and even harmful, as it most of the time means looking back and holding onto the things instead of looking forward and driving the creative generative force of nature, pushing for growth and flourishing of new stuff. "Protection" often intails "it was better before us", "we only make things worse", "we should retreat... preferably out of existence". Yes humanity did a lot of bad things. Yes we don't understand pretty much anything. Yes we will inevitably make mistakes. But that doesn't mean that we can't do good and drive change in a better way than those large scale radical interventions from the 20th century. If you look at modern design and engineering practices, they are exploratory, interactive, generative, iterative... just like the nature itself, which we are all part of. So it's either "protection", pessimism and self-hatred or design, optimism and trust in potential as well as ourselves. I pick the latter, especially since we are all here already anyways. You can protect all you want, but when I'll become a druid and you will stand on my way I'll turn into a bear summon my animal friends and kindly ask you to stop. The last one is an oversimplification so that you get this better)
@@glebkoshelev I don't completely disagree with you on this, perhaps because you used a perspective of the extremes, but just to talk about some points in your arguments.
I don't think we need to protect to the point of our non-existence, but perhaps we have already exploited natural reserves more than we should and it's better we stop now, and start studying it properly so that we can make our situation better.
To be clear, my arguments are all anthropocentric. This is all for our benefit, not because I think we should disappear and let nature recover. I'm not really worried about the planet itself, it has gone through worst things than mankind.
The problem is that this allowance we have for making mistakes, developing and becoming better with time is running out. The amount of exploitation natural reserves can take before things start going south is finite. Not for the planet, but for the sustainability of our own species.
Permaculture is a good example of us doing it right, or at the very least trying to do it intelligently, but unfortunately it's both rare, and hard to implement at large scales. You have small farms that do it, but the industrial farming operations that have most of the land is just not using it.
What we have mostly done so far is exploitive, monoculture, and at most crop rotation. None of which are conducive to sustainable rich environments. Some of it can be sustainable as in keeping growing the same stuff without ruining the soil, but it's not comparable to a full fledged rich environment like a rainforest.
So preservation is needed not because I think we can't get better, but because we need preservation in order to get there.
We need what is left so that we can study it, understand it, and then do it ourselves at some point.
We haven't explored or understood enough of it to let it go, and if we lose it we won't be able to do it anymore.
Until we haven't fully understood and started making on our own, rich and diverse forest environments, we cannot afford to lose the blueprints of it.
I also think it's a very bad idea to become too full of ourselves. The so called miracles of modern science and engineering might look grandiose for us in our own perspective, but it's nothing in comparison to millions of years of natural evolution.
The reason why we are in the current situation, which I mean man made climate change, is because we multiple times thought that we understood nature and how to deal with it. We were wrong. We need to step back a bit, understand where we are wrong, and try to correct things.
I can't explain everything in a single comment, but I highly suggest watching a documentary called "All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace". One of the episodes explains how the term "ecosystem" came to be, how we thought it worked, and how wrong we were.
It's also why I am categorically against stuff like geoengineering. We don't know enough to start messing with things like that. If we can't appreciate and see the value of millions of years of natural evolution, which led to us being here in the first place, we might just not make it.
Just remember. Yes, we are part of all this. But we did not get here on our own. From the planet's perspective, we're but tiny babies. We've been here just a fraction of time other extinct species were. If we mean to be here longer than dinosaurs, for instance, we will need all the help to do it, and a whole lot of it will come from the nature that surrounds us, as it has always been. We can't afford to keep destroying it. A whole bunch of the tech we developed over the years, these advanced marvelous technologies that looks very distant from natural sources, were mostly inspired by natural processes.
So I think that it's better if we start seeing ourselves as a mutualistic or at least commensalistic species rather than a parasitic one in relation to our planet.
XSportSeeker I think you misunderstood where I am coming from a little bit. I am all for the nature. The nature beats my heart and fills my lungs with air and is most other things I experience. It cares for me. I live because of it. I trust it and I'm trying to be grateful. And I am not about scientism. I was talking about design. Formal analysis (science) is good, but that's not where design begins. Modern design practices are founded on interaction/dialog between the designer and the context. Designs emerge naturally from interaction. Then they can be analyzed, optimized, etc. I think design and interaction is the way forward, not trying to build a perfect model. Nature itself doesn't have models (except for ours), it just generates and everything that doesn't work dies of. And that's one of the reasons I think we should integrate into the nature, not isolate it. The more integration, the more interaction, the better design, the better systems. I agree with you on most of the things you've said. It's true that we need to care for what we have. Probably "protection" is just the wrong word. The way I understand it (within the context of mainstream environmentalism), "protection" would easily get in the way of integration, coz "anthropomorphic" is "unnatural" and as such should be protected from. That's basically built into language. The way I see it, we'd better augment ourselves so we could confidently survive solo in the wilderness, then we wouldn't need to hide from nature in villages, towns and big cities, we would be able to live in nature and cultivate it: grow soil, plant, kill. It's completely unrealistic right now, but I think that's a proper overall strategic direction. And I can totally see how urbanisation and "protective environmentalism" can lead to further separation and as urban life will slowly expand its niche there will be less and less place for humanless-nature (not counting that we affect it anyways indirectly). Humanity probably can survive with vertical farms and things like that, but that's not my cup of tea. And aside from defensive "save the plane", I think just becoming nature's consciousness and logos is a good thing. We should take our place in nature as extensions of its creative potential, as its logos, as its consciousness. Well at least, I think I should. The fact that we are imperfect doesn't make our potential less valuable or rightful than those of beavers or ants. They are not perfect either, yet there's nothing wrong with them integrating into their environment. As far as I know if ants fail, that would be worse for the nature than if we fail (not counting nukes). Anyways, I think we live in a time of the environmental question and so it's reasonable and even good that we have conflicting views. It means there are better ones ahead. In response to your recommendation, I would recommend you to check out Steven Rinella. His perspective is probably the closest I've heard to what's on my mind.
XSportSeeker I've glanced at the documentary you recommended. I'm Russian, so the US history is probably not where I got my views from))) But I will watch it, anyways. The more I'll learn about US, the easier it will be to meddle into the elections lol
Well, their history is applyable to almost every country. Same thing is happening here in Hungary, our forest percentage is rising, but it's all just tree plantations of some tree species.
Same in Finland. Biodiversity is taking a hit because greedy landowners remove anything that doesn't help the forests grow. Such as fallen down trees that are vital for many different species. On top of that they add ditches to their forests so that all extra water flows away. This water then flows into nearby lakes and those lakes sometimes turn from crystal clear to muddy.
Ifn they were apple trees you wouldn't be Hungry 🍎🎃
*Applicable
@Erick Segale
Yes, you really have to kill HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS if you want run a successful company.
Greg, I'm a little surprised you didn't mention Akira Miyawaki, who developed the Miyawaki method of planting mixed-species, bio-diverse forests to create healthy, sustainable afforestation programs.
I did across his work in my research, but unfortunately so much stuff that I wanted to talk about got left out (otherwise it would have been an hour long video).
@@LifeWhereImFrom make a part 2,
@@riomio7852 yeah
@@LifeWhereImFrom i would have watched an hour long video about it
@@LifeWhereImFrom we don't mind hours long video!!! lol
Basically monoculture is rarely a good thing, in terms of agriculture and forestry management.
it does help to get a forest jumpstarted though
India is really on the fore front of SRI farming and brining back forest and soil to its prefarming carbon levels. As a U.S.farmer traveling to India I was blown away on the this new type of farming.
In Greece (Crete) we have an olive tree monoculture and its horrible. These trees release alot of pollen in the spring and alot of people become allergic just like Japan. These trees can be planted at any terrain, from plains to mountain sides so they have replaced a big portion of the natural forests of the island including oak trees and cypresses. Olive oil is a big part of our economy though (after tourism) so I dont think the situation will change
@@geokon3 the thing is not a lot stuff can grow in greece so better pland and use ehat can
Even human too lol.
So I work in Canada as a professional treeplanter. Yes that's a thing here. Essentially when a tree gets cut down forestry companies are obliged to replant it.
Not to be a downer, but 20 million trees is actually not very many trees in the grand scheme of things. This past summer as an industry we planted over 300 million trees just in the province of British Columbia. Canada wide that number was probably closer to 700 or 800 million. Per year. I get that its a big country. But having personally planted nearly 300 000 trees I can confidently say that #teamtrees isn't nearly as impactful or important as everyone seems to think it is. All I can say in favor is that at least some of those trees are being planted in countries which do not have sustainable forestry. But 20 million trees is peanuts guys.
Well, dang.
Yeah, there are 3 trillion trees in the world.
Its the thought that counts right?
I'm from Sweden, and most of our forest are plantations. Not exactly in the way most people envisage plantation forestry though, not very much of it is on completely flat land or planted in rows (only where old agricultural land has been planted with trees, which happens in some regions where farming isn't very economically viable any more). Most of the productive forest land is clear cut in 60-120 year cycles, but with increasing care for the environment in the form of leaving certain trees and creating habitat/maintaining biodiversity. The forest is then for the most part replanted with a single species (mostly conifers like spruce and pine), but there is an increasing understanding that monocultures aren't good. A lot of the forests in Sweden can be called semi-natural, they're managed and thinned (sometimes not enough, sometimes too much so that it creates monocultures) and then cut down and replanted or left to regenerate naturally and then managed. Due to better management and (unfortunately) planting agricultural land with trees Swedish forests are containing more and more wood. Good for the climate, potentially bad for biodiversity, but improved management practices can hopefully fix that.
@@Thomas-ui2bd I think IKEA mostly sources wood from cheaper places than Sweden...
Polar & temperate climates (e.g. Sweden, Japan) support a smaller diversity of plant species though I think? Compared to tropical climates (where I thought was the only place the "no light reaching the ground" guideline @ 7:58 can be more appropriately applied to)
@@lzh4950 The first part is true, but the amount of light reaching the ground is still very relevant for understory vegetation in temperate climates.
Amazing work, this is what Japan literally needs in education. I love how you put so much research and effort in your videos too.
本物！
Ryota 747400 いやー、偽物だろー………あっ…まじかよ
わー
We all need an education, we are brothers and sisters in humanity. I hope the best for you.
Similar issues here in Germany, where reforestation efforts were met largely by planting fast growing conifer species. These trees are more vulnerable to species of Scolytinae that often cause so much damage to the host plant that it dies, and they produce a LOT of fire load in the forest compared to leaf trees like oak and what have you. Fast forward a few decades, up the temperatures a tiny bit, extend the dry season, and suddenly the entire Broken is on fire.
the video: mentions my country's logging practices
Me: *sweats in indonesian*
hahaha
Hahaha
Is Indonesia burning its forest? The haze from your country reaches Mindanao, Philippines.
@@makoygaara dunno, it's all supposedly done illegally by the companies, but the fact that it happens every year means the government aren't taking the matter seriously enough, there's probably corruption and stuff
@@davidtitanium22 I'm thinking it might be because of Indonesia's progressive industries in tire manufacture and palm oil. Indonesians might be burning their forest to make way for rubber trees and palm trees. The worst haze we had are the year 2016 and 2019. However, the health experts say the air is still safe to breath and hasn't reach critical level yet.
Our 10 year old daughter is really environmentally aware and was outraged when she saw the tile to your latest film. However, after watching it together she has completely changed her view and understands that cutting down some trees benefits the environment in so many ways. NZ is also grappling with forestry issues and we could relate to many of the points discussed. Thanks for making a film that explains some of the issues so clearly.
Our pine forests are an eyesore compared to that native Bush that should be there
I bet she uses crayons on paper.
your daughter is now smarter than 90 percent of liberals hahaha
It's like when a fire goes through a wood and eats up old, sick and dried up trees. The forest left behind takes a while to come back, but it comes back stronger. Fire, as long as it doesn't get majorly out of control, is a forest's natural clean up.
Or how many plants in gardens benefit from selective pruning to clear out overgrown areas.
Did you know 1 gram of (activated)charcoal contains over 1000 square meters of surface area.
1 tree could hold more nutrients in the ground then it would ever be able to use
@@BigBodyBiggolo Sounds wrong. You appear to confuse area and volume, and neglect airborne CO2 contribution to wood mass. Your citation or reference (i.e. not a pol site, or polemic)?
@@edhuber3557 My comment is obviously a random statement so i will elaborate; the surface area of the charcoal is created when normal wood cracks with the high amount of heat (you probably know that).
The surface area itself is not in state to hold all nutrients and if it does then water reaches these areas and leaching of said nutrients will occur regardless.
By adding mycorrhiza and other microbial lifeforms and fungi the surface area becomes a surface to grow on and then even dead organisms will hold the nutrients regardless of water, and since overtime these things happen naturally i made this statement.
I can and will look for verification if you want me to and post the links, i got this information from a book out of a university course i followed, but those do have direct quotes so i can look it up but it is in dutch so i'll have to translate or google the original source.
@@edhuber3557 but the name of the charcoal that does so is called biochar
@@BigBodyBiggoloOk, surface area on live/dead tree as film holding nutrients. I appreciate the feedback. I'll look into biochar a bit. Thx.
"Japan has too much trees" never heard something like that before
its not the amount, its how densely they are packed and that they are a monoculture
Be a shame if all those trees caught on fire eh 🤔 jkjk
@@magnusorn7313 how is being densely packed a problem? It is their choice to be so packed. And it hurts no one. They also save money from being densely packed.
Ask a Japanese person with pollen allergy.
@@theharper1 Pollen is only mainly a problem with north america. It was a city planning error where all places planted Male tree.
Wood is also a great building material. With the use of wood, you "store" the CO2 that gets bound by the trees, instead of generating a plus of co2 emissions "creating" a new building material like concrete or plastic insulation.
I tried to point this out in a Sustainable Cities class that I took and everyone freaked out. The idea of wooden homes, furniture, and other products is sacrilege to them, even though trees are literal carbon sponges, and when harvested from a sustainable forestry program are the best choice for building.
@Steve Sherman The people living in cities are often forced there due to economic conditions. Capitalism is what is destroying the environment, not the individuals being pushed into cities to be able to feed themselves.
I pointed this out to a few friends and they started making excuses like "it doesn't work that way" or "the gain is minimal", while this is exactly what should happen.
@@dashyweaver They have welfare offices out in rural areas as well so stop spreading your feels as facts.
People live in cities because they are LAZY not because they are broke.
Capitalism has SAVED the environment. Else how would ecological research be paid for?
Lily Machamer Please don’t say that we shouldn’t use capitalism. It is, sure broken, but it is one of the best systems we have implemented. In fact, by your logic, Communism made it worse. Everything owned by the government, and the government is industrializing back in the 20th century. The USSR even drained the Aral Sea due to its endeavors.
"What are the forests like where you're from?"
Me : laughs nervously in Californian because everything is on fire.
relatable
Dennis Durkop its not just that its because of the dry air and not getting rain for a while so everything is dry
@The Guru of Kang California is a long skinny strip like Chile, longer and bigger than most people realize, with a lot more federal forestland. In NorCal a lot of places you can't blame *any* of it on eucs. It's still burning because in the last 30 years it's drier than people have planned their landscapes to tolerate. Plus, the native shrubs and trees are fire-adapted but haven't been allowed to bun for fifty years or more, lots of fuel buildup.. Now, the slightest spark will set tinder going. This is true for the town of Paradise and all those Sierra foothills burns, and many of the higher elevation SoCal forests.
It's terrible and it's the entire state I hope everything grows back and ppl get the aid they need. Shout out to the firefighters
@Dennis Durkop nope ur wrong and very mean so why bother
I read a book about “Cherry” Ingram, an Englishman who transplanted some of the rarest cherry Japanese cherry trees in England and basically saved the species. Japanese cherry trees (the ones planted in the cities) are apparently very different from wild cherries, so the variety of cherry trees really was dangerously low if it wasn’t for Ingram and other enthusiasts planting them in other countries.
The significance of cherries and how WWII hijacked the previous symbolism of cherry blossoms would be a great video though
James Merryman very true. The book I read was written by a Japanese author, so much of the translated version had to add a lot of extra explanation for non-Japanese who don’t know much about how much cherries and Japanese culture intertwine. Which is why I think that it would make a great video topic where there’s more research than a comment can provide
In researching the Japanese Cedar, I was surprised that this tree is plentiful in plantations, but is quite rare in natural habitats. It is waterproof, so it makes good decks, fencing, and tubs.
@James Merryman wow you have so much knowledge, i really want to learn from you!! Thankyou for sharing it
Can imagined she might be risking being accused of bringing in an invasive plant species back to her home country?
Well, Im from Spain and depending in which region you live the tree subject changes. In the east coast most of the trees are cut down in order to plant fruit trees or to plant stuff. We have pine forest, but not too many and sometimes, "accidentaly" (coff coff
land requalification) it gets burnt and some nice, rich houses pop in there :) Also the original trees in Comunidad Valenciana are indangered because of this and invasive species
well we in germany now have the problem that the bark bettle kills big parts of our forest - partly because we also bet on monoculture. climachanges makes life easier for the beetle but the lack of water things harder for the tree, so the hotter and drier it gets, the worse it gets.
so you could also say that we (have to) cut down the foerest to save it - but in that case really cut it down instead of thinning it out^^
Blame climate change eh?
@@BillFromTheHill100 that and that we didn't knew it better 50+ years ago. Back then monoculture forest where just the thing...
Well in the Harz-region they seem to mainly eat spruces, which were (to this huge amount) artificially planted. There already existed ideas to plant more beeches instead of spruces. Beeches cool down the forest more and don't make the soil that acidic as spruces. Also they are native to the forests and just were replaced by spruces because those would grow faster.
So, basically, we need to take a wholistic view when managing the environment.
We need to take a wholistic view in managing nearly everything in our lives.
@Pedro Ortega except pandas, pandas are useless
Wholistic? No no no.. The right way is when I am the King of the world and everyone does exactly as I say.
@The Final Rumbling Except in California, they're still doing it all wrong and burning because of it
"What are forest like where you are from"
Me: *Looks around* Sand... sand everywhere
Syria according to Trump
You live on Tatooin? :O
I don't like sand
@@thatoneradicalizedprussian225 its coarse, rough, irritating and it gets everywhere
"My boy, Sir David..." You just get better and better, my friend.
Hi! Last summer I was a university co-op student who got the opportunity to work in Japanese forestry industry (both forest management and forest wood products) as well as forestry-related lab research within the Okayama province. It was so interesting watching your video, I've been following your channel for years, especially before I first visited Japan to start work, and it was so interesting to see everything that I learned in three months summarized. What I can tell you is that there is a huge push by Japanese manufacturers to promote value-added Japanese wood products (such as subsidies for use of CLT [cross-laminated timber], glulam [glue-bonded wood], and other engineered wood). So much that in local malls, some of my employers would host small fairs to make city residents aware of the quality of Japanese wood products (The JAS, or Japanese Agricultural Standard, has extremely in-depth requirements for the strength and presentation of the wood, as it is preferred to be shown and not covered by other material). As for forest management, one of the bigger problems in the industry I'm not sure you touched on is 1) the difficulty of harvest and planting. It is STEEP. Clearcutting isn't really an option in these forests, its hard enough to harvest single trees and get them to market. 2) The age of the forestry workforce. Most of my coworkers at one of the forest management companies I worked at were 40+ years in age, with the oldest employee being 70 years old. Although my company in particular was quite small in their forest department, the lack of new workers (almost all are male too) has been a significant problem, hence why the university that employed me sought to encourage both female and male Japanese students to also intern in their co-op program. All in all, it is hard to stay competitive with Canadian, American, and European markets, especially with how cheap lumber is in Canada, but the look, feel, and tradition behind using hinoki for carpentry is still there. I hope to see improvements with the current government's commitments to promoting the UN's SDGs, (Sustainable Development Goals). Thank you!
In Portugal, there are two types of forest: maritime pine and eucalyptus (invasive) in the north and cork oak and holm oak in the south.
Pine has the same story as the japanese cedar: grows fast and straight, was encouraged by the government but it's no longer profitable and most pine forests are abandoned. Eucalyptus is invasive but grows VERY fast and is profitable. Both species have oily sap so because of the dense forests and our dry mediterranean summer, wildfires are big and common.
Cork oak and holm oak forests aren't dense so weeds grow easily. This allows for cattle and pigs (fed on acorns) to be raised. Cork also brings a very nice profit.
Eucalytpus is horrible. Grows fast, ruins the soil, depletes the water table and kills everything else.
Yes, but those gum (eucalyptus) trees shed leaves AND bark. If the pile of junk at the base catches fire they burn like an effin’ acetylene torch!
Eucalyptus trees are native to Australia. They do in fact grow quite quickly especially in plantations, but here in their native forests they are quite beautiful. The trees are tall and different shades of green mixed in with low shrubs and grass and leaf cover. They also provide homes to some curious Aussie animals including the koala. Unfortunately they can spark large fires in the Summertime, but it is also a natural part of their regenerative process, to naturally clear overgrowth. It can be said however that climate change is enlarging this process. Weirdly, there are also conifer plantations in Australia as well with similar monocultures to Japan. We may be headed the same way as the land of the rising sun as our logging industry declines and the forests are left unmaintained.
One note wrt to your forest. The idea that thinning the forest improves is actually IMO older information. The best approach is clear cut, but in splotches. Other countries are doing it, but something interesting happened in Switzerland. In Switzerland around 2003 there was a "hurricane" that essentially knocked down huge swaths of forest. They removed the wood and let the forest grow back. About a year or so ago they reported on how the forest evolved. Apparently the forest had more biodiversity than thinning alone. Thus now what I see happening in the forests are small lots of clear cut (1 to 5 acres).
"What are forests like where you're from?"
Me: *cries in Brazilian*
F
*Screams* *in* *Australian*
😢😢🇧🇷
Me: *cries in Indonesian*
Traitor
So selective harvesting in some forests is like fire in others: once seen as something horrible, but turns out to be benificial, but only after their absence causes a crisis.
You're leaving out why the Tokugawa Shogunate wanted to restore the forests: previously the local daimyos had been engaged in an orgy of castle building, for both military and political reasons. This consumed so much wood it was denuding hillsides of trees. This in turn led to an epidemic of landslides and flash flooding that wiped out rice farming downstream. And so Tokugawa Ieyasu basically ordered the nobility to live year round in Tokyo instead in modest apartments, and ended this destructive practice.
No, he wanted there because he needed hostages and Damiyos spent a lot of their money on cost of moving the clan from rural to urban. Stops rebellion, never heard of the landslides, the castles were not that big except for the great lord's.
The total road extension distance in Japan is 1,281,793.6 km.
The total railway extension distance in Japan is 30,182km.
Japan has a land area of 378,000km², but a habitable area of 114,622 km². Forests occupy 70% of the land.
Its the same problem in Sweden and Finland aswell im afraid.
There is a lot of treeplantations , mainly sprouse and pine ,but almost no real natural forrests at all. Its a tragedy how we are killing everything on the planet :(
I make a habit to watch every single video you create and I like how sometimes I end up learning about topics that I'd never bother to think about otherwise, but there's always an interesting take on it. I found this particularly fascinating and learned something. I always thought Japan's naturescapes were wonderful, but it's surprising to learn that so much of it is man made in such a way.
Thank you for loraxing this idea with dignity and thoughtfulness; forest ecosystem management is increasingly necessary as globalization introduces invasives, harmful and benign. If silviculture taught me anything it is that the math is complicated and often mixed aged stands are more resilient. I count myself lucky to claim northeast hardwood forest as my home- just planted 5 paw paw trees this weekend! Aspirations of land ownership where I can establish a sugarbush in healthy sugar maple stand!
I've got to say that this one of your best produced videos. I am not usually commenting on youtube but I have got to give credit where it's due. Good job on research and I am looking forward to your new videos. You are one of my favourite youtube creators. Keep up the good work.
Forest thinning sounds like a necessary plan. In the meantime, nuclear power has the lowest deaths to kWh ratio and highest reliability % of any power source and is the most viable option for rapid decarbonization of the world's power production.
Among all the tree videos in the past day, this is definitely the most informative and well researched. I don't think I would have learned all this stuff without your intensive reading. Kudos Greg!
Im very happy to know ur joining the movement!
Interesting video Greg. I used to work in Okutama as a forester. We thinned trees for a government programme to make the forests healthy and help reduce the Tokyo pollen problem. I think the main problem is although the government are investing in forest thinning there just aren’t enough young people wanting to do the work. It’s hard and dangerous, I could tell you a thousand stories! Although the last decade has seen more young people moving back to the countryside, they tend to be opening coffee shops or working online and other lifestyle jobs. They could fill this gap with foreign workers but the strict visa requirements currently make this impossible.
8:16
Woah! Look at the color of that water.
Ikr it's so beautiful
Oh man, not Grave of the Fireflies. I almost teared up just seeing that short clip.. such a sad story. Regardless of it being an anime GotF really hits hard on the effects of war on the innocent and innocence of young children. One of my all time top favorite movies and the only one among the top 5 that I’ve only watched once because it’s so heart wrenchingly sad.
Also, thank you for including some info on the co2 issues! It was very interesting to learn about that and biodiversity. I would be very interesting in more similar videos. Perhaps about biodiversity in nature over time in Japan and how people go about it. For example, Japan has a variety of “mountain vegetables” they also use in meals such as fern, types of leaves etc. fern seems to be used rarely and mostly in Shoujin ryouri cuisine or by organic, vegan restaurants that follow a shoujin ryouri type of menu. Why are such vegetables not used that often? What type of mushrooms can be found in the wild? Why are bamboo shoots considered pricy? Bamboo grows very fast and for some time I took a walk along the same path through a small forrest in Japan. From one day to another I tripped over a bamboo shoot. Because it was in the middle of the way I took it too prepare and cook. Or does it have to be a special type of bamboo that people eat? I would really be interested in this historically and agriculturally if that is the right term...
i somewhere heard that bamboo stays very long dorment in the ground, like for years, but only the above ground growth is very fast... but not sure if true...
Oh wow - we have an organic vegan restaurant in Los Angeles called Shojin.
@@gianniclaud Yea, Shojin Ryouri is traditional, buddhist vegan cuisine :) It is very delicious.
Our experience in regeneration of native tropical rainforest points strongly to not planting trees at all, but just let the forest regenerate by itself. Eventually bringing seeds of absent species.
It worked pretty well right here on the farm from where I'm watching your video now.
This was really interesting! This shows that we need to think about sustainability in all perspectives
I'm Japanese and learning a lot from this video. Well researched and studied.
MrBeast planting 20 million trees is going to be great for everyone
It's not just him planting you have to plant some too. Planting trees all around the world would make more sense. I helped plant 20 saplings a few years ago.
Unless until they burn down in fire from lack of rain !
@@WANDERER0070 trees capture moisture and provide hummus layers that are fire resistant. More trees, the less fire. Or at least less severe fires
Here in Michigan, USA; we have what we call Depression Forests. They were planted during the great depression to give people jobs and revitalize the lumber industry. They represent the same issues here as in Japan, Large swaths of monoculture forests with little else but deer. It's dead silent out there, not even birds bother coming into the forests.
I love Japans nature, so this video is very interesting for me :D Many people- even Japanese often were confused when I told them I liked Japans nature and I liked to go hiking. I stayed in Matsuyama for a year and Shikoku is famous for it’s pilgrimage around the island. It is relatively difficult to go hiking in Japan. Even the pilgrimage is often along normal streets (in cities) or even alongside/on car roads. Often times there are car roads going right to a picturesque sight seeing spot where people get out, take pictures and then get back into the car. However, there are some people who are enthusiastic about nature and there are hiking clubs (to be fair I only met retired people, but those were extremely enthusiastic and happy to show me great spots) so once you’ve figured some things out there are great hiking spots including places you can go climbing. It’s kind of my dream to return to a specific region of Ehime and Kouchi for camping and hiking (and of course also to see other places and cities too)
Hiking is a waste of time, only northern europeans like it.
Daniel Gonzalez waste of time? Really?
@@dangonzalezb Hiking is more than just walking. Although the exercise is a very nice side effect- that doesn't even cost a fitnessstudio membership. The nice thing about hiking is that people can get out and explore nature. There is nothing fascinating about seeing a depressed animal in a small zoo cage taking three steps. But when you come across an animal in the wild it can be very special and you have to be careful not to scare it away. There are very many photographers who also love going to the mountains to take pictures of the changing scenery. It is nice to see the different plants grow in spring and wilting in the fall. Getting some sun is also very important, espeically now a days, where people spend way too much time indoors.
I’m a natural resource management major and currently I have to write a 7-15 page paper on Japan’s timber industry, all of its issues, etc. and I could kiss you on the lips for all the cited work in the description.
Germany got a dying forrest since 2-3 years due to drounghts and hotter and dryer summers, we do now plant trees,
but I do not think it will help a tree needs 30 years to grow but a hot summer we have now every year.
Well, we have a big bug issue, espacially in the south region of Germany (Bavaria). Because of the last hot summer seasions.
Thank you for the video. Very informative and lovely to learn about it on my trip to Japan now.
This video reminded me of a forested area near where I live. The city trimmed and thinned the trees. Afterward, it looked like a bad haircut. People protested that it ruined the forest, the view, nearby property value, etc. The city held townhall meetings to appease everyone. In less than two years, the trimmed and thinned forest has blossomed into a very attractive land with more wildlife (especially birds) and, surprisingly to me, fishes have returned to the streams that run through it. Nearby schools use it as a learning laboratory for their students since it’s bustling with wildlife and new growth.
Amazing video! Never knew much about this topic in Japan. You’ve done some fantastic research, it’s very interesting!
Besides the trees, carbon is also stored in the under-story and in the soil if it's healthy. This is where thinning the trees will pay off.
In Lapland of Finland, Forests tend to have many shorter trees and a floor of moss with other plants like Blueberry shrubs. The light reaches them because the growing season is so short and the trees grow slowly. Trees might grow one inch per year. The floor of the forest is not much affected.
素晴らしい内容！めちゃめちゃわかりやすかったです！
Absolutely fascinating. And good idea letting us in our your process/how you came to the conclusion. Those are the best kind of research videos. And man! Its exactly for these issues that ive been wondering which tree charity is doing it right and to give to for years. Sounds like i finally have an answer. Ill be donating! Really well done!
If you would like to see one of the major negative impacts of not thinning the forests you need look no further than the Paradise Fires that happened in California in 2018. One of the reasons that fire was so bad was because of the massive amounts of fuel in the forest. Underbrush that was never allowed to burn off naturally and the density of trees in the forest. provided excessive amounts that when combined with high winds generated a fire that swept through and burned a town to the ground in a matter of hours. a fire so great that it began to create its own micro climate that only fueled its destructive power. So yeah, forest thinning when done thoughtfully and in line with the natural concentration we find in healthy forests are a good thing.
Saw this after I was figuring out how to help rebuild the Caledonian forest where I am. My mother has already planted 260 trees in her garden and there is certainly more to come. It is so important that we work with our forests to ensure they thrive.
So we can learn from Japan. Keep biodiversity and plant well. We can save our planet if we're smart about it. And Greg is right; thinning isn't a bad thing. Clearcutting, on the other hand, is bad.
Could we "carpet bomb" barren areas with vast mixtures of seeds and just see what grows? Like crop dusting, but to give life rather than take it. Boom, instant diversity.
I have come to be sceptical about ~10 min long videos here on RUclips, but this one was actually worth every second of it!
I thought I read the title wrong at first lmao, this is so different and interesting. Yeah, many forest rangers and scientists/activists say that some organized destruction of forests is necessary for their renewal like natural forest fires (not the humongous blazes that are gong on in recent years but the smaller ones which help remove old rotted trees and foliage allowing young saplings to grow)!
Mirrorwarrior we used to accomplish this by logging. Since the usda has given up on logging for the last twenty five years we’ve had catastrophic fires that get worse every year
@@HubertofLiege it's less a reduction on logging, more an outcry from city dwellers who don't understand a very controlled small fire every so often prevents big catastrophic fires. So anytime a controlled burn is made aware to the public there's outcry over the dangers of fire and that it's so unnecessary and how bad it is for the environment (bull, I know) and so they can't do the burn. They need to, but the city or county or whatever is conducting out backs down due to the opposition.
Australia is currently suffering from a great lack of controlled burn offs. Green mismanagement. Save the diseased and increase the fire load.
about 30% of Poland is grown by forests (coniferous, leafy and a lot of mixed forests). we have numerous complexes and reserves, where wolves, wisents, moose and bears enjoy their life. we have a lot of foxes, wild boars, deers and beavers- so sometimes they need to be shot:( the common animals can be seen also in the city outskirts.
the best thing about our forests is- they are owned by the state, so everyone can walk in and even take adventage of the forest flor- pick up mushrooms, blue berries, cranberries and hazel nuts.
the silviculture is good, in every area is a forester living, who cares about it and is also the ranger (can for example issue a ticket or other procedure towards people who would for example make a bonfire beyond the allowed spot)
And in my country some people burn forest for palm oil tree and people live in that island use mask for avoid breathing that gas.
In our forests, you can see for miles in all directions, because the trees were planted well apart and in straight lines to facilitate hunting on horseback. This practice became so widely accepted that even forests that were not planted with hunting in mind were planted in this checkerboard pattern. There are only a few small patches of old-growth forests and a few patches where the checkerboard structure was damaged e.g. by storms that look like actual forests.
As a long-term resident and avid hiker, I can attest to the assertions in the video. One of the things that I notice that is not brought up in the video is that soil quality in the monoculture forests is terrible. There are is so little microbial life that leaves remain for years rather than just a season, and there's no "forest smell" of decaying organic matter that is common in healthy biomes. There are few birds, and the number of invertebrates is low.
That said, keep in mind that the 67% of Japan that is forested is slopes between 30 and 60 degrees. It's forested for a very simple reason: it's mountainous; you can't do much else with it.
One of the reasons that the timber industry collapsed is because so much of the timber that was harvestable by the proverbial wood cutter in the old days - taking a smaller percentage of the trees here and there - is not economical now and clear-cutting results in devastating landslides. Better to take a tax write-off than manage the forests.
Japan needs its own Works Progress Administration to grow the economy and put people to work building the sustainable environments it needs for the 21st Century.
omg is that why the trees/nature in japan dont really smell? i didn't smell any nature when i traveled around Japan, I was always disappointed by it. It all just felt.... fake kind of
@@Pepechunya I'm not a biologist or anything, but I grew up in the countryside in the US and I have a hard time finding the kind of rich soil that you can tell is teeming with microbes. I don't know that the monoculture forests are the cause of it -could be the DDT they sprayed all over everything during and after the war - but it is surprising given the climate.
@@ichifish Okay, I literally almost always smelled the trees directly in Japan (when no one saw), to see if they smelled of actual nature. But no. Anyway thank you for your reply :)
Some thoughts. Living in Sweden that has huge forests, what comes to mind is a difference in culture and how we view them. Logging has been an industry long before industrialization, using natural streams to transport trees or using horses during winter (moving trees across frozen land and snow). It's a way of living, though today modern equipment and machines are used.
While there are huge national parks that keep some forests intact, the majority of Swedens' forests are therefore kept for commercial purposes, by companies, which has its downsides.
Locals tend to get upset when their view out their kitchen window turns into a wasteland after some company cuts down the trees outside of their home. Happens often enough since it's a commercial forest. Even if the trees are replanted it takes a long time before the forest is back.
There's also the issue of spruce being popular as it's also more susceptible to storm damage and even forest fires. Monoculture is not a good thing.
There are also issues with having all trees being planted simultaneously. That's also bad for a number of ecological reasons (though, obviously, not as bad as not replanting at all).
In the end, even though commercial companies might promote the view that it's great to cut down forests every 40 years or so, it's their commercial view on the matter.
From an ecological perspective, or just the locals living in view of a forest, it's really not that great. If you wanted to help endangered species and biodiversity, you might want to keep diverse forests undisrupted by humans for several hundreds of years instead.
Really interesting as one of the main reasons I love Japan is all the trees, mountains & rivers. I video many of my local woods here in Essex England & some are ancient having first been recorded 10,000 years ago.
That was lovely, we have enjoyed your videos from the start. Great information
I’m going to see that the video title didn’t mean what I initially thought it meant. It doesn’t mean that we should be now cutting down mass trees. It simply means that Japan has got too many of the wrong trees, and needs to try and go back to the right variety in its forests.
I could definitely get behind this way of thinking. All there to do now is locate all the areas where the trees are to densely packed and manually planted by people and start ‘thinning’ them out a bit.
Really interesting documentary! Good research, thanks for sharing :)
Rest of the world: Let's plant 20 million trees!
Japan: Let's cut down 20 million trees!
Japan, pleeeeease don’t cut down your trees.
Daniel Whyatt did you not watch the video?
@@dsvwtrbeytnryune lol
Wow, you did a ton of research! This is way more fascinating than I thought it would be :D
Apparently, the rest of the world is cutting down alarmingly enough trees.
Yeah
No we dont there are countries that plant them back
Twenty million trees planted is a slow year for loggers
It’s actually not how many but where we cut them down and what we replace them with that causes the problems ....
Nice. So good to hear real science that disagrees with the basic idea most people have without a more in-depth understanding of the nature of the balance of things.
well the basic idea wasnt flat out wrong
The cutting down of trees is highly regulated by multiple levels of government. You wouldn't believe how difficult it is to get permission to cut down trees. At least in Kansai.
lol, unless the tree is in the city, in which case it must be routinely pruned back to a nothing-stump.
Here in Florida, and much of the American South-East, the historical plant community was long-leaf pine savanna. This system has been said to be the second most biodiverse ecosystem, right behind tropical rainforest, although that can be disputed. The dominant species in these is the long-leaf pine, which grows very tall and very old, but because of natural wild-fire cycles, these trees grow pretty far apart. It doesn't look like what people think of forests as. It isn't shady and sheltered, but open and bright. Most of the biodiversity comes from the abundance of ground cover plant species and the insects that live with them.
When European settlers came to the continent, they harvested a large amount of these pines for materials. Long-leaf pine wood is very high quality, trees often grow extremely straight, and the oils/saps in the tree were used for treating ship hulls. These trees were highly important in the shipbuilding industry of the time. More important than harvesting, settlers excluded fire from these ecosystems. They felt that their farms and villages were threatened by fires and unlike the indigenous people of the continent, they didn't understand the importance of fire to maintaining the natural community. Without fire, broadleaf, shade tolerant woody species quickly colonized, grew uninhibited, and outcompeted the diverse species of ground cover plants which need full sunlight. Now, 98% of the historical extent of long-leaf pine savanna is gone.
Actually, cutting down trees and making things out of the wood takes carbon out of the system. Then, planting small trees will cause more carbon to be absorbed. Cut down those trees again and make e.g. paper or furniture out of them. They always say that paper is bad for the climate, but actually, by making paper, we are taking carbon out of the atmosphere, as long as the trees are replanted of course.
Just so long as we don't burn the paper and wooden furniture
@@HexaDecimus Exactly.
What is wrong with carbon in the atmosphere?
@@s1lverFoX Have you ever heard about global warming? The two molecules that are cause it the most are methane (CH4) and carbon dioxide (CO2), both of which contain carbon (C). We would like to convert these (especially CO2, but CH4 can be converted to CO2) to the harmless oxygen (O2). For this, we need to get the carbon atoms out of the atmosphere.
@@s1lverFoX it's not that's it's bad in and of itself, the problem comes when there's too much of it in the atmosphere, our current biosphere can't handle it.
I live in England, and right next to one of our most well known forests, the New Forest. It's well known for the New Forest Ponies, a free roaming herd, as well as deer and cattle. Even though I've lived in the UK my whole life, I'm always surprised by how few large forests/woodland we have. A lot of it's farmland, and there's a lot of issues right now between farmers and agricultural scientists, as well as lack of funding (and lack of interest from certain parts of the Government) to protect areas and try to restore lost woodland. Though England definitely isn't "bad" when it comes to taking care of and preserving important natural areas, it's the kinda thing where the government could be doing a lot better.
Greg you continue to impress with these videos!
Really great video on a very complex issue. A very close friend of mine worked for the Oregon Seed Orchard and so a lot of these concepts were familiar to me from his work. Even with all the efforts put into maintaining biodiversity and also preserving original genealogies there was plenty of room for improvement, and still is. Similar to Japans issue, the key is a healthy balance between logging and preservation.
I'd love to see if you tackled a video on the issues of lack of apex predators in Japans forest as well. I know I'd heard something about it and it had me curious. Oregon, for example, has very few wolves but an abundance of cougars that have filled the predator gap created.
Again, excellent work!
if you cut some of these trees and use their wood, the carbon captured is still in the wood and you have more space to plant more trees that will capture more carbon
put the wood a few thousand meter underground and in a few million years you will have petrol
Using wood products is good for the environment, but destructive uses like paper, much of which gets destroyed after a short time is not. What's a pity is that wooden items are not popular these days so ornamental trees that once ended up in countless workshops are more likely to get turned into firewood.
As a forester I’m very happy you made this video
That is still one of the saddest movies I have ever watched. Highly recommend It if you have not seen it.
Grave of the Fireflies, you mean?
I know. I cried at the end.
I raughed
Great video, thank you for taking the time to make it! A lot to think about here...
Grave of the Fireflies! I remember it well. Beautiful, but I was depressed for days on end after seeing it. I wonder: do the Japanese at all talk about the Second World War? Do history teachers talk about Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
Hubert Van Calenbergh Just like Germany talks about the Holocaust, Japan talks about the WWII. To make sure history is passed down and not repeated.
Well, except for the nationalists that try to revise history to erase the bad parts. But I guess every group of humans is going to have assholes like that. It's not exactly a uniquely Japanese thing.
@@UsenameTakenWasTaken you're right on that some events happened in the past didn't make it in our history books because the current authority in that time thought it irrelevant to their agenda.
actually, the germans dont really touch on it too much. You know how American textbooks dont talk about the millions and millions of native Americans genocides, but rather says they just died from disease?
Yeah, it's kinda like that. It tells about the 2nd world war but not really.
Thank you for this. About to make this the subject of a presentation on proper reforestation techniques for the coming century.
Let's go #TeamTrees !
Such an intersting video and well segmented
Thank you
Nobunaga's Ambition II for NES was much better than the first one.
Cool video. I live in Hamburg/ Germany now. As a kid I grew up north where the saying is you can see who will come for dinner on tje horizon because the landscape is so open and flat. I raise some treelings every year and Guerilla plant them somewhere in the city. This year it were 4 beech trees and an oak. And next year it will be 6 willows.
2:17 knock knock it's the United states with huge boats with guns gunboats. Open the country stop having it closed. Matthew c Perry.
I'm so happy that you are supporting #TEAMTREES! Yours was the first video I saw supporting them 💚 I just donated and I hope lots of others will too. Thank you for always entertaining and educating me! 🌱🌲🌳💚
I’m in the uk so we have the “new forest” which has loads of animal life including new forest ponies and grass snakes.
James Merryman probably ture I wasn’t taught that at school wen we learnt about the tudors. I knew Henry VIII have 6 wives tho and got rid of the old abbeys.
This was a well-made, interesting and beautiful video! Thanks for this!
They buy U.S. timber but that's ok , it's a renewable resource
Thanks for the level of detail in this video. Re-foresting is much more complicated than just “plant more trees”. You need a certain suite of species specific to the region.
Those monoculture "forests" aren't really forests, they're tree farms. Restoring the forests to their natural state is definitely the way to go, even if we have to cut down some trees to get there.
This is hands down one of your finest uploads! Thank you!
RUclips : *planting 20M trees*
Japan : *cutting down tree*
*and planting new ones*
Scotland: Cutting down trees and planting more moses to absorb CO2
I'm from Canada and it is covered in trees. In Toronto go to the top of the CN Tower and look down, tons 'o trees including some Japanese cherries. They were presented as goodwill gifts.