• benvoyon@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      What about a Triple Negative? You don’t see triple negatives often, but here’s a witty one: I cannot say that I do not disagree with you. (Comedian Groucho Marx) (If you follow it through logically, you’ll find it means “I disagree with you”.) There are forests and they deserve to be preserved for generations.

      • HikingVet@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Cutting down the forest because of forest fires is one of the most backwards ways of preserveing forests. Especially when they are going after the trees planted to replace the ones lost due to… (wait for it)… the largest forest fires the region has seen in how long?

        • benvoyon@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          You’ve never heard of fire lines to help fight forest fires in conjunction with planting trees for clear-cut forest? Forests regenerate themselves after disastrous fires. Planting trees is needed after clear- cutting a forest. But the worst is yet to come with climate changes.

          • HikingVet@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Yes, fire breaks are a good tool to fight an active forest fire.

            Forests can use a little help after the largest fires in recorded history happened. Forests can’t regenerate properly when that happens.

            It sounds like they are taking a page out of the Irvings book.

            The trees haven’t even been given a chance to grow and people (the article doesn’t mention experts only industry and municipalities) want to cut them down. No where is there a mention of best practices.

        • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          You’re mixing things up because the article intentionally mixed things up in order to generate hate towards Quebec.