asterroc ([personal profile] asterroc) wrote2007-10-23 07:39 pm
Entry tags:

Palomar at risk?

Goddamnit, didn't this happen just a couple years ago? They really oughtta remove the forest around it and not let it grow back.

[identity profile] kelsin.livejournal.com 2007-10-24 01:00 am (UTC)(link)
According to my boss (I know nothing about geography) it's all non-native vegetation to begin with. Basically to make rich people like the area they plant the trees that can cause this :-(

[identity profile] zandperl.livejournal.com 2007-10-24 01:07 am (UTC)(link)
It's the threats to astronomical historical landmarks that get my peeve.

Reminds me, I heard an article on NPR the other day all about how the Berkshires' forestry has been drastically changed by historical charcoal-related deforestation. Certain tree species were selectively cut down b/c they made better charcoal, plus the soil became more acidic after the process of turning the wood into charcoal, so that beeches are dominant in the Berkshires where they shouldn't be normally. Very interesting.

[identity profile] kelsin.livejournal.com 2007-10-24 02:23 am (UTC)(link)
Combine that with GE polluting the water and it makes for greats time in Western Mass :)

[identity profile] l0stmyrel1g10n.livejournal.com 2007-10-24 02:14 am (UTC)(link)
like how in Florida they planted Australian pines that all fell down on houses when the hurricanes hit...moral is, non-native vegetation creates natural disasters! er um, something like that.