Heart of Darkness?

Tens of thousands of acres of forests are gone from the Jemez Mountains. In our warming world, they won’t grow back, and the evidence of that was clear today.
The Heart of Darkness: A walk through the scorched landscapes where our forest used to be and a glimpse of our future fires

Andy thinks this article is unduly pessimistic because the evergreens that Beate, Tim, and he have planted seem to be doing well. He’s going to take a picture of a Ponderosa pine that is several feet tall by now. So far they’ve been watering the planted trees regularly, but Andy plans to stop soon.

On the other hand, even with suitable weather (no guarantees there with climate change) the beautiful forest that burned in the Las Conchas fire won’t be back in our lifetimes, or in Kaitlin and Torben’s either.

June 26, 2011:

September 8, 2011:

No sense getting depressed. As usual, doing the best we can with what we have left.

 

This entry was posted in Life As a Shared Adventure. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Heart of Darkness?

  1. Rummuser says:

    No sense in getting depressed at all. We too had quite a bit of deforesterisation on our neighbourhood hills but with sustained reforesterisation through a public private partnership intervention, they are back to being green and lush. It is possible but needs sustained maintenance.

  2. tammy j says:

    it’s the continuous clear cutting of our rain forests that depresses me.
    trees are the lungs of our planet.
    man’s interference with nature yet again. for money.

    maybe by the time they’ve destroyed everything here there will be shuttles to a new planet so they can evacuate this one and garbage a new one.
    the picture you chose is beautiful. the hope of new vibrant green in the bleakness of dead trees. profound and uplifting.

    • Jean says:

      That green was what we call a “pricker bush.” They do hurt when you get too close. The official name is New Mexican locust, I believe. The description I found says, “It is among the first woody plants to grow after wildfires but is soon shaded out by taller trees.” Soon? Ours are still going strong 6 years later because of the lack of trees. The aspens are coming up in a lot of places, but they’re still small and fighting one another. Andy cuts the pricker bushes down on our land when they’re in the way of walking, but we were thrilled to see any greenery after the fire.

  3. You have a wonderful spirit, Jean, in spite of seeing so much devastation. Everywhere we turn, we see what people have done to the landscape. I am hoping for a change in the direction of the thinking of the critical mass. It looks bleak, but not hopeless.

  4. Cathy in NZ says:

    sadly your forest and others destroyed by fire, which until that disaster stood the test of time (other changes) and yep, I guess the reforestation isn’t on the agenda of many counties/councils – so many other ways to spend the taxpayers monies…

    the only kinds of places that seem to be rebuilt are those connected to community or corp$ations – suddenly for normal citizen there is not funds in the insurance kitty – if there was insurance at all for a whole forest (know/no is the answer…)

    at least your little home up there was replaced, and seem to remember it’s now in a better status…Andy can still drive up and do what he likes (keeps him out of certain types of stores, and off the main streets)…

    • Jean says:

      Yes, it keeps him “off the streets and out of trouble.”

      Actually periodic fires were part of the ecosystem there, but we humans have been suppressing fires for years, which means the forests were overgrown so when a fire did start it was intense and baked the soil and killed all the evergreen seeds. The Forest Service tries to do controlled burns now to reduce the fuel load in areas. The system isn’t perfect. It was a “controlled burn” down that lead to our evacuation in 2000. Oops!

Comments are closed.