Semantics but you can't restore an ancient wood, surely?
this post was submitted on 02 Feb 2024
123 points (97.7% liked)
Uplifting News
11490 readers
172 users here now
Welcome to /c/UpliftingNews, a dedicated space where optimism and positivity converge to bring you the most heartening and inspiring stories from around the world. We strive to curate and share content that lights up your day, invigorates your spirit, and inspires you to spread positivity in your own way. This is a sanctuary for those seeking a break from the incessant negativity often found in today's news cycle. From acts of everyday kindness to large-scale philanthropic efforts, from individual achievements to community triumphs, we bring you news that gives hope, fosters empathy, and strengthens the belief in humanity's capacity for good.
Here in /c/UpliftingNews, we uphold the values of respect, empathy, and inclusivity, fostering a supportive and vibrant community. We encourage you to share your positive news, comment, engage in uplifting conversations, and find solace in the goodness that exists around us. We are more than a news-sharing platform; we are a community built on the power of positivity and the collective desire for a more hopeful world. Remember, your small acts of kindness can be someone else's big ray of hope. Be part of the positivity revolution; share, uplift, inspire!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Semantically, if you are planting a wood on the known site of an ancient wood, you are restoring an ancient wood. Though of course, it won’t be ancient woodland.
Sounds like a recreation more than a restoration.
From Merriam Webster:
- Give back, return
- to put or bring back into existence or use
- to bring back to or put back into a former or original state
- to put again in possession of something
Sounds like meanings 2 or 3 pretty much hit the nail on the head
But it won't be ancient any more; it won't be in its former/original state. Maybe it will in a few hundred years though, we just need to give it some time.
It's great they're doing this, but it's also important people understand that a 100 year old forest is not at all the same as a 1000 year old forest. The harm done by deforestation cannot be easily patched. That doesn't mean it's not worth doing of course - a new forest is still better than no forest, and especially if it is allowed to develop naturally.
Yeh, you are still deep in semantics. To make it clear - when England "restored" the monarchy it didn't exhume Charles II and put him on the throne.
What is being restored here as far as possible restores the mixture of planting found in ancient wood land, on the site of ancient woodland. No-one is saying that the trees will be equivalent to 1,000 old trees, but yes the mixture and diversity of plantsbeing introduced will indeed attempt to mimic the diversity found in very old woods.
A useful resourcem if you are interested https://www.woodlandtrust.org.uk/protecting-trees-and-woods/ancient-woodland-restoration/
Thanks for the link! It's a very interesting project indeed.
I got a bit lost in translation - in my native language, "ancient forest" would be pretty much a direct translation of an old-growth forest, which clearly cannot be restored as it is defined by the lack of human interference.
Having visited Longash wood, it is a pretty special place. Will be good to see this kind of habitat restored