Это видео недоступно.
Сожалеем об этом.
Sustainable forestry: Mikael Karlsson at TEDxGöteborg
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 12 янв 2014
- "Forestry means far more than growing timber. A forest encapsulates biodiversity, clean water and fresh air. And humanity." One of the challengers of conventional forestry is Mikael Karlsson, who has taken a new sustainable method to Sweden. Instead of clear cutting he advocates to gently harvest the high quality trees while maintaining the eco system intact. "A forest is at the same time the machine and the product. So be careful not to break the machine -- because only big machines produce big trees."
In the spirit of ideas worth spreading, TEDx is a program of local, self-organized events that bring people together to share a TED-like experience. At a TEDx event, TEDTalks video and live speakers combine to spark deep discussion and connection in a small group. These local, self-organized events are branded TEDx, where x = independently organized TED event. The TED Conference provides general guidance for the TEDx program, but individual TEDx events are self-organized.* (*Subject to certain rules and regulations)
What this guy is saying we have this in Slovenia for the past 70 years.
That is an issue in lots of things, the "right" way to do things exists, but is forgotten/left behind, or not looked into over other methods.
I am a Forest technician from French Canada 🇨🇦. It's an old boy's club. I majored in Sylviculture. They had no interest in the modern techniques. They want the Garden of Eden destroyed. I think they've succeeded. Go Greta Go. She's here in Montreal Sept. 27th!
Lol, come to BC
Thankyou Mikael for sharing your vision. I find it fascinating that you are calling for an integrated forestry approach similar to what we have operating in our native forests here in the state of New South Wales in Australia. Unfortunately, economic studies repeatedly show the system here is not economically viable and requires public subsidies to survive. This is mainly due to oversubscribed commercial interests demanding more than the native forests can provide. This has resulted in the dream of 'selective' harvesting increasingly giving way to industrial scale clear felling techniques which has caused major controversy between environmental groups and native forestry operators.
Sawlog quality in native mixed forests here in NSW is often so poor that it averages less than 10% of timber product extracted. The remaining 90% goes to pulpwood and wood chips. A significant proportion of the 10% is used for low grade applications such as poles, posts and pallets.
A large proportion of the surviving native fauna (marsupials and birds) here in Australia rely on arboreal hollows and a broad diversity of food sources provided by a variety of seasonal nectar producing flowering species. Despite regulations requiring retained vegetation for species sustainability, and active invasive weed management, the one hundred plus years of compromise with insufficient regulation has shown that the 2 demands are not compatible.
The call here in NSW is increasingly to get forestry operations out of native forests and into efficient managed plantations using world's best silvicultural practice. Our native forests have been seriously degraded by this practice. Be careful of what you wish for.
I think cutting volume of trees should be different in each country and depend of biodiversity wich is corelated with climate. Because of effect of global warming the boundary of some species is changing, trying to find its ecological optimum. We as forester can mantain the forests accelerating the adaptations of trees by cutting and plant suitable species. Plus is good quality timber provided to wood industry, preserved any bug attack and new generation of trees adapted to changing climate.
Some sense spoken here. Ecology and production need to be in harmony rather than being seen as being separate. Coppicing has a place alongside clear felling and natural regeneration should never automatically be discounted. I have worked in woodland (and other habitats) for 40 years. For 30 of those I have called myself a woodland manager and emphatically not a forester because I have seen so much damage done in pursuit of short-term gain. Nice to see others thinking along the same lines but I wonder what has changed in the 9 years since this was posted?
I totally agree with you.
Standing in a plantation of trees feels like standing in a field of crops.
If that's how you wanna' see it.
Someday I hope to direct my drone company to Sylviculture and sustainable forestry! :) Any tips?
I’m assuming you don’t have any forestry experience. No silviculture manager would EVER waste money on drone seeding.
Drones are being used more lately for scaling lumber yards and timber sale boundaries. I disagree with Nathan's comment. Drones could definitely be used in the future for seeding.
@@kylepearson2392 it’s applicable for timber harvest but not for conservation of forests
In case you are working on your current resume as a forester looking for gainful employment, the term is spelled "silviculture". There is no "y" in the word silviculture, kids.
The simple truth! For how long are we going to denay it..?
sorry, I am an old forester .. there is NOTHING NEW here ! Relevance to locality and the nature of the species and forest type has always been predominant ... nature does in fact operate some species and forest types by broad area devastation and uniform regeneration ( natural mono-cultures) ... and other species/ forest types by mixed species and age classes and individual senescence ... timber production efficiency for capitalism has ruled some decisions and locations and probably always will ... good forestry is all about recognizing the situation at hand and maximizing ecosystem services appropriately ...
Its weird isn't it. Its like he's taking all the credit for closer to nature forestry.
AdventureTime18 and generations of work and study by many dedicated folks
That's what I was thinking. I watched this thinking I was going to learn something new...
What country were you a forester in? or were you a private-land forester? This is very uncommon in countries like the USA where clear-cutting is the norm and has been since the beginning of the logging industry.
clarify what you meant to say. yes, commercial clearcuts happen a lot. however, forestry in the US is extremely diverse. most of the the western forest is government-owned while most of the east, particularly your woodbaskets of the southeast, lake states, and maine, are private owned. how you decide to regenerate a forest is based on the objectives. both govt and private do clearcuts and more dynamic mgmt. it all depends. saying sustainable forestry is uncommon in the US is just flat out, period, unarguably Wrong.
The world needs to expand existing animal habitats on both land and in the oceans by 100x. Too much development of the land is taking away animal and natural habitats and too much fishing and netting is destroying and depleting the ocean. The human population has doubled since 1980s and it is continuing to grow out of control at a logarithmic rate. See the world population websites if you don't agree. Our planet has not grown to adjust to the human growth, so we as humans must learn how to balance our population and our dedicated land for Farming and living for humans, and habitats for animals. We must do this now before it is too late, and the passage of time and human greed erases all animal and natural habitats. Most people are narrow minded and think we can just live together however man in most all scenarios destroy habitats so there is no living together side by side. Natural and animal habitats must be protected and increased in size or the only animals we will have left are on farms and zoos.
Always trade offs. Intensive crops require less landbase to produce volumes. Here in British Columbia we do almost no sylviculture. What we call plantations are just trees planted then left to grow. Our forest model is based on a "mimic nature" concept....mirror the fire cycle etc... The result has been just a stead encroachment further and further back into the last remaining untouched valleys. This has caused all kinds of problems, namely the destruction of mountain caribou herds. If BC had done a little more monoculture crop forestry fifty years ago, we could have left, far, far, far more natural forests alone forever. Instead, we have done a poor job of everything everywhere and our production figures per hectare are pathetic.
Do you even work in the BC forest industry or have any forestry experience ?
@@nathanglessing9010I think the original statement answers your question pretty well
We have all the answers we need to live sustainably on our planet, yet we continue to allow a few wealthy and powerful narcissists to wipe out the future of humanity in the name of short term profits
1st
We cant return to the jungle because the jungle is almost completely gone already and cant sustain 7 billion people. We have to start planting more trees using mechanized automation methods for future generations. someone needs to design a method of mass airdropping tree saplings that auto plant themselves.
Take beef production out of scenario , and modernise growing methods of vegetables for humans ..then you can begin to return a forest .. not a crop
Trees already plant themselves in places where we should be growing trees. There's no need for mechanization to plant trees more efficiently. They already plant themselves, we only need to thin out undesirable species.
Keep dreaming bud, drone re-seeding has failed miserably.
@@worganyos Thanks, indeed. A piece of bare land will be a forest in just 10-15 years because it will sedeed itself. Also, forest are just a very small part of nature. Healthy soil, scrub etc. is all equally important. (also healthy soil takes A LOT of Co2)