I posted this at the tail end of another thread just now, but thought it was neat enough to bring up on it's own. It's a forest growth/loss map for the world and is actually really accurate. Had a 1/2 acre blowdown in my own woods a few years ago and it even mapped it...
http://www.globalforestwatch.org/map
On a local level here in Texas, not very accurate.
Interesting. Fairly accurate in my area of Vermont
most of the tree cover loss locally is regeneration cuts. i guess it is in the eyes of the beholder.
Quote from: Texas Ranger on October 18, 2017, 09:38:13 PM
most of the tree cover loss locally is regeneration cuts. i guess it is in the eyes of the beholder.
Well, that is tree cover loss, it's just not permanent loss.
Quote from: John Mc on October 18, 2017, 09:42:56 PM
Quote from: Texas Ranger on October 18, 2017, 09:38:13 PM
most of the tree cover loss locally is regeneration cuts. i guess it is in the eyes of the beholder.
Well, that is tree cover loss, it's just not permanent loss.
Very well put! Exactly the message that everyone needs to know
I do a lot of work in northern Quebec and when you see the scale of the cut blocks, it's so very different than Sweden where they're doing much smaller ones.
OK, I give up. How do you "see" anything? All I can look at is roads and lakes...
EDIT: Found it, have to look under Commodities.
I hate to belabor a point, but, I manage a 1000 acre tract in east Texas, and the map shows the 1000 acres to be a "tree cover loss" while in reality there is a single 200 acre block we cut 4 years ago and replanted. The rest is full cover pine, or pine hardwood mix. Some plantations are in their 30th year. I think that gross coverage by this method is suspect.
The map shows a very accurate land line between my owners and the neighbor, the tract is well defined and totally inaccurate.
Out here, the tree loss is quite dramatic where there were major fires.