Favourite tree and favourite forest type

[rothaer]

Who said the "forest" (350 hectares) was in Sweden? It is in Ostrobothnia (where my parents lives).

You said

These photos actually shows, why Scandinavians will win 6 - 0 all the orientation competitions which will be in our ''forets''.

so I thought that the photos and the forests you spoke of will be in Scandinavia and not elsewhere in Brasil or in Ostrobothnia where Scandinavians may own forest.

Anyway, damn sure there's a lot more trees per hectares than in your "park" picture ''Ossi''.

The older the trees are the less dense will they stand. In my two hectares the trees are standing more dense. Maybe I can make a pic later.

As for Ossi, do you know which individuals are labeled that? That are those that lived in the GDR per 9th of November 1989 or descends from such people. I'm labelled a Wessi here (if Wessi and Ossi is at all still applied). People that went from the west to the east are even the original subject of that Wessi label, not those who stayed in Western Germany that were not labeled at all in the beginning. My wife is an Ossi.

[Salty Ears]

I like swamp forests. A good place for sly outsiders or a robbers that tried to take advantage of the credulity of the forest inhabitants to go to collect marsh cloudberries FOREVER

[Finnish Swede]

You said

I said what should be called as a forest, or what I like/tend to call as a forest by myself. There is a huge difference (egological point of few)are we talking about natural forests or humans ''tree fields''. No matter if the latter once would even have enough trees per hectares. Via diversity of species. I know what kind of mistakes have been done earlier, even in here (like Forest 2000 project etc.). Luckily my parents were wiser, forethoughful and responsible forest owners . I will continue that.
Not to now talking about those European nations who have basically destroyed their own forests....

so I thought that the photos and the forests you spoke of will be in Scandinavia and not elsewhere in Brasil or in Ostrobothnia where Scandinavians may own forest.

Forest will look pretty similar here (Sweden) if you go as north (approximately Sundsval). Swedish forest owners have used FCA certificate, but other than no differencies. I could talk hours those certificates (differences; cons and pros), but it would be waiste of time.

The older the trees are the less dense will they stand. In my two hectares the trees are standing more dense. Maybe I can make a pic later.

Teach the urban (box-grown) people who have lived in the cities. There shouldl be more than enough of those nowadays. My ''relationship'' to forest is something which central Europeans etc. can hardly never reach (anymore).

As for Ossi, do you know which individuals are labeled that?

Untermensch in your case. Cross the line once, and I'll remember that.

[ugochaves]

I said what should be called as a forest, or what I like/tend to call as a forest by myself. There is a huge difference (egological point of few)are we talking about natural forests or humans ''tree fields''. No matter if the latter once would even have enough trees per hectares. Via diversity of species. I know what kind of mistakes have been done earlier, even in here (like Forest 2000 project etc.). Luckily my parents were wiser, forethoughful and responsible forest owners . I will continue that.
Not to now talking about those European nations who have basically destroyed their own forests....



Forest will look pretty similar here (Sweden) if you go as north (approximately Sundsval). Swedish forest owners have used FCA certificate, but other than no differencies. I could talk hours those certificates (differences; cons and pros), but it would be waiste of time.



Teach the urban (box-grown) people who have lived in the cities. There shouldl be more than enough of those nowadays. My ''relationship'' to forest is something which central Europeans etc. can hardly never reach (anymore).


Untermensch in your case. Cross the line once, and I'll remember that.

You look stupid. Swedish intact forests make up 0.3%, the rest are planted forests. you live in a capsule. come to Russia, you will see real mountains, real forests, you will tremble with fear in a tent - the howl of wolves. The next morning, you will find bear tracks near your tent. You will enjoy real beauty - snowy mountains, waterfalls, river rapids - this is not artificial Swedish shit. Waterfalls, volcanoes - you hate it. But welcome to urbanized, dead Sweden. I feel sorry for you, that's why I still love you and invite you to Russia!

[Hektor12]

Tree=Sakura. Ive spent a lot of tie here when i was young, every April this place turned into a Paradise. https://goo.gl/maps/xbUzSH8ssT4MHdNq9

Forest=I dont know what exactly but this forest feels best. There are similar forests in Usa/Canada too. https://goo.gl/maps/NfQXBEsE4j9C6MNQ7

[Demirkazık]

Oak, Pine, Juniper and Lagerstroemia

I like Oak and Pine tree forests, just like in North Ankara.

[Finnish Swede]

You look stupid. Swedish intact forests make up 0.3%, the rest are planted forests. you live in a capsule. come to Russia, you will see real mountains, real forests, you will tremble with fear in a tent - the howl of wolves. The next morning, you will find bear tracks near your tent. You will enjoy real beauty - snowy mountains, waterfalls, river rapids - this is not artificial Swedish shit. Waterfalls, volcanoes - you hate it. But welcome to urbanized, dead Sweden. I feel sorry for you, that's why I still love you and invite you to Russia!

You know nothing about the topic, other one you can read in 10 minutes via internet. Same goes with this German.

Nope ... of course planned forests do not need to be ''bad'' as such ... I mean how you can know this small Betula pendula (Birch) is a natural plant and other one is a planned one? Honestly I keep planned Betula pentula better than natural Betula pubescens ... but that is just my own opinion. The same can be said pines or spurces etc.

The problems with planned forests will rise via how people are doing them.
* how many plants you'll plan,and which type/types. One area fully at the same time or little by little etc,.
* how you'll threat your forest/trees as they are growing
* in which age you will do the first thinning. How many thinnings you are planning to do? Or none?
* how much fertilizers,herbidices etc. chemicals you will use, or perhaps none?
* are these plants (types) really naturally growing in your area or excotic? do you use genetic engineering plants etc.

There are lots of question. .

[ugochaves]

You know nothing about the topic, other one you can read in 10 minutes via internet. Same goes with this German.

Nope ... of course planned forests do not need to be ''bad'' as such ... I mean how you can know this small Betula pendula (Birch) is a natural plant and other one is a planned one? Honestly I keep planned Betula pentula better than natural Betula pubescens ... but that is just my own opinion. The same can be said pines or spurces etc.

The problems with planned forests will rise via how people are doing them.
* how many plants you'll plan,and which type/types. One area fully at the same time or little by little etc,.
* how you'll threat your forest/trees as they are growing
* in which age you will do the first thinning. How many thinnings you are planning to do? Or none?
* how much fertilizers,herbidices etc. chemicals you will use, or perhaps none?
* are these plants (types) really naturally growing in your area or excotic? do you use genetic engineering plants etc.

There are lots of question. .

I didn't understand anything you wrote, my Sami love

[Finnish Swede]

I didn't understand anything you wrote, my Sami love

Like I said; lets not go to forest certifications ). Those would already be like rocket science a'la: e=mc2

I'm interesting the topic as firstly nature/forests has always meant a lot for me (growing up in rural areas/country side) but also as there is some money connected to that property. Threat it well.

[Jacques de Imbelloni]

Favorite tree: Linden

Favorite forest: Temperate deciduous forest