Tree-planting drones to speed up reforestation efforts

Planting trees in remote forest locations is a slow, laborious process that still relies on humans with shovels to do all the work. DroneSeed, a company based in the Pacific Northwest, wants to drastically modernize that process by employing squadrons of drones to plant seeds, spray for invasive species, and monitor the tree growth process.

more…

CrazyNeutrino said:

Tree-planting drones to speed up reforestation efforts

Planting trees in remote forest locations is a slow, laborious process that still relies on humans with shovels to do all the work. DroneSeed, a company based in the Pacific Northwest, wants to drastically modernize that process by employing squadrons of drones to plant seeds, spray for invasive species, and monitor the tree growth process.

more…

Wookie, Crazy wants his handle back.

sibeen said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

Tree-planting drones to speed up reforestation efforts

Planting trees in remote forest locations is a slow, laborious process that still relies on humans with shovels to do all the work. DroneSeed, a company based in the Pacific Northwest, wants to drastically modernize that process by employing squadrons of drones to plant seeds, spray for invasive species, and monitor the tree growth process.

more…

Wookie, Crazy wants his handle back.

wookies drones are for putting out the forest fires that will happen in all these plantations.

The idea sounds feasible enough.

ChrispenEvan said:

sibeen said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

Tree-planting drones to speed up reforestation efforts

Planting trees in remote forest locations is a slow, laborious process that still relies on humans with shovels to do all the work. DroneSeed, a company based in the Pacific Northwest, wants to drastically modernize that process by employing squadrons of drones to plant seeds, spray for invasive species, and monitor the tree growth process.

more…

Wookie, Crazy wants his handle back.

wookies drones are for putting out the forest fires that will happen in all these plantations.

nah… destroying road and rail infrastructure… that’s how you stop an enemy

What we really need is a drone army to water the indoor pot plants in the APS.

need moah drones.

ChrispenEvan said:

need moah drones.

or moar.

:-)

poikilotherm said:

What we really need is a drone army to water the indoor pot plants in the APS.

loooooxury

ChrispenEvan said:

ChrispenEvan said:

need moah drones.

or moar.

:-)

Mohr?

The Rev Dodgson said:

ChrispenEvan said:

ChrispenEvan said:

need moah drones.

or moar.

:-)

Mohr?

If we try harder it could be Mohs.

sibeen said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

ChrispenEvan said:

or moar.

:-)

Mohr?

If we try harder it could be Mohs.

and if we wanted to be funny it could be Mo’s

Bubblecar said:

The idea sounds feasible enough.

They probably can do it, but there are downsides as well. Normally, especially in Australia, a burnt forest will regenerate itself and does not need seeding by drones or anything else. Nevertheless seedlings and seed are often planted in logged areas (clear-felled) that will subtly change the natural distribution of local species, by planting more of a desired tree for future logging and by this action influence the biota of the area. This is a planned Forestry Commission procedure and like much of their activities, is not necessarily a good one, .

I had an idea about aerial planting.

A paper cone like what you would get with say a Cornetto or Trumpet style ice cream. Fill the bottom part of the cone with sand to weight it so it sits upright when falling. Fill the rest of the cone with gel and any fertilisers or cutting hormones etc you wish add. Pop in the seed or small cutting. Drop from aircraft. Hopefully it falls upright and buries itself deep enough in to soil to correct level without destroying the seed or cutting. As the plant grows the paper ice-cream cone with biodegrade.

Never got to experiment with it.

Have they taken into account the greenhouse gases produced in generating the power and the batteries for the drones?

PermeateFree said:

Bubblecar said:

The idea sounds feasible enough.

They probably can do it, but there are downsides as well. Normally, especially in Australia, a burnt forest will regenerate itself and does not need seeding by drones or anything else. Nevertheless seedlings and seed are often planted in logged areas (clear-felled) that will subtly change the natural distribution of local species, by planting more of a desired tree for future logging and by this action influence the biota of the area. This is a planned Forestry Commission procedure and like much of their activities, is not necessarily a good one, .

+1
Once Trees have Price Tags attached to them.. valued By The Board-Foot
Rather than their Serene Beauty and Ability to Sustain LIFE
This Planet will be a Poorer Place.
Beyond Redemption.

At BEST, it Favours PRO BOTTOM-LINERS who have no interest nor appreciation, for Healthy Bio-Diversity.

At WORST, It can be used to Skew the Info against Folks who DO value & understand Healthy Bio-Diversity.

Although it “SOUNDS-GOOD-On PAPER” ( after all, who’s Not In Favour of RE-Forestation?) by being able
to front-up the NUMBERS of “Replaced” Trees vs Clear-Cut Acreage.

At first glance it SEEMS To Balance-Out
until you realize that what’s Being SOLD To the People is (#1) NOT A FOREST, But A STERILE TREE FARM
which (#2) will take 10-15 YEARS to be COMMERCIALLY LOG-ABLE… During Which TIME…
(#3) The Bottom-Liners will CONTINUE Full-Bore SANCTIONED CLEAR-CUTTING. Using Skewed View as “PROOF”
IOW
THIS:

v.s.
THAT

Ogmog said:

PermeateFree said:

Bubblecar said:

The idea sounds feasible enough.

They probably can do it, but there are downsides as well. Normally, especially in Australia, a burnt forest will regenerate itself and does not need seeding by drones or anything else. Nevertheless seedlings and seed are often planted in logged areas (clear-felled) that will subtly change the natural distribution of local species, by planting more of a desired tree for future logging and by this action influence the biota of the area. This is a planned Forestry Commission procedure and like much of their activities, is not necessarily a good one, .

+1
Once Trees have Price Tags attached to them.. valued By The Board-Foot
Rather than their Serene Beauty and Ability to Sustain LIFE
This Planet will be a Poorer Place.
Beyond Redemption.

At BEST, it Favours PRO BOTTOM-LINERS who have no interest nor appreciation, for Healthy Bio-Diversity.

At WORST, It can be used to Skew the Info against Folks who DO value & understand Healthy Bio-Diversity.

Although it “SOUNDS-GOOD-On PAPER” ( after all, who’s Not In Favour of RE-Forestation?) by being able
to front-up the NUMBERS of “Replaced” Trees vs Clear-Cut Acreage.

At first glance it SEEMS To Balance-Out
until you realize that what’s Being SOLD To the People is (#1) NOT A FOREST, But A STERILE TREE FARM
which (#2) will take 10-15 YEARS to be COMMERCIALLY LOG-ABLE… During Which TIME…
(#3) The Bottom-Liners will CONTINUE Full-Bore SANCTIONED CLEAR-CUTTING. Using Skewed View as “PROOF”
IOW
THIS:
!http://www.motherearthnews.com/~/media/Images/MEN/Editorial/Articles/Magazine%20Articles/1975/01-01/One%20Mans%20Forest%20Starting%20a%20Tree%20Plantation/tree-farm.jpg
v.s.
THAT
!http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v63/Photografix/FLORA/forest.jpg

yes you have a point

perhaps one solution is to look at what grows in a natural forest area

then look at ways in which other plants could reside in a plantation

to create a more natural environment for birds and insects etc

instead of whole areas being cut down say two or three rows of plantation could be cut down while at the same time replanting

maybe look at computer modeling to design a plantation for best efficiency and leaves the forest floor alone

with more expert input a more sustainable design could be put in place

Im not a forest expert

just an ideas person

CrazyNeutrino said:

Ogmog said:

PermeateFree said:

yes you have a point

perhaps one solution is to look at what grows in a natural forest area

then look at ways in which other plants could reside in a plantation

to create a more natural environment for birds and insects etc

instead of whole areas being cut down say two or three rows of plantation could be cut down while at the same time replanting

maybe look at computer modeling to design a plantation for best efficiency and leaves the forest floor alone

with more expert input a more sustainable design could be put in place

Im not a forest expert

just an ideas person

they lost my vote
the instant they mentioned
spraying herbicide on all but
their Target Trees, perfect from
a PLANTATION Point of View, but
a Decree of DEATH for every other
living thing that interfered w/PROFIT.

Ogmog said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

Ogmog said:

PermeateFree said:

yes you have a point

perhaps one solution is to look at what grows in a natural forest area

then look at ways in which other plants could reside in a plantation

to create a more natural environment for birds and insects etc

instead of whole areas being cut down say two or three rows of plantation could be cut down while at the same time replanting

maybe look at computer modeling to design a plantation for best efficiency and leaves the forest floor alone

with more expert input a more sustainable design could be put in place

Im not a forest expert

just an ideas person

they lost my vote
the instant they mentioned
spraying herbicide on all but
their Target Trees, perfect from
a PLANTATION Point of View, but
a Decree of DEATH for every other
living thing that interfered w/PROFIT.

Say No to spray

I found this article on the value of a tree, it’s pretty old and I do remember reading something much more recent but cannot remember where.

http://www.uow.edu.au/~sharonb/STS300/valuing/price/pricingarticles.html

Cymek said:

I found this article on the value of a tree, it’s pretty old and I do remember reading something much more recent but cannot remember where.

http://www.uow.edu.au/~sharonb/STS300/valuing/price/pricingarticles.html

That’s a really good article

Trees: finding their true value, gives a reason that the CSIRO should employ more scientists to really work out this issue

not just the money side, but the nature side as well

diddly-squat said:

ChrispenEvan said:

sibeen said:

Wookie, Crazy wants his handle back.

wookies drones are for putting out the forest fires that will happen in all these plantations.

nah… destroying road and rail infrastructure… that’s how you stop an enemy

as opposed to allowing tanks, troops, ammunition and other suppli to travel unhindered to the battle field – no wonder australia hasn’t won a war since malaya, america hasn’t won a war since WW2

wookiemeister said:

diddly-squat said:

ChrispenEvan said:

wookies drones are for putting out the forest fires that will happen in all these plantations.

nah… destroying road and rail infrastructure… that’s how you stop an enemy

as opposed to allowing tanks, troops, ammunition and other suppli to travel unhindered to the battle field – no wonder australia hasn’t won a war since malaya, america hasn’t won a war since WW2

Humanity Looses.

Simple.

CrazyNeutrino said:

Cymek said:

I found this article on the value of a tree, it’s pretty old and I do remember reading something much more recent but cannot remember where.

http://www.uow.edu.au/~sharonb/STS300/valuing/price/pricingarticles.html

That’s a really good article

Trees: finding their true value, gives a reason that the CSIRO should employ more scientists to really work out this issue

not just the money side, but the nature side as well

It IS A Good Article
However..
The Danger of assigning a “Dollar Value” to these (all too often taken for granted) voiceless entities
comes from they that I called “THE Bottom-Liners” when they glibbly weigh the “VALUE/WORTH”
of X-Y-Z is when weighing the Potential “WORTH” of a SHOPPING MALL v.s. “A Bunch of Trees” :-p

Ogmog said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

Cymek said:

I found this article on the value of a tree, it’s pretty old and I do remember reading something much more recent but cannot remember where.

http://www.uow.edu.au/~sharonb/STS300/valuing/price/pricingarticles.html

That’s a really good article

Trees: finding their true value, gives a reason that the CSIRO should employ more scientists to really work out this issue

not just the money side, but the nature side as well

It IS A Good Article
However..
The Danger of assigning a “Dollar Value” to these (all too often taken for granted) voiceless entities
comes from they that I called “THE Bottom-Liners” when they glibbly weigh the “VALUE/WORTH”
of X-Y-Z is when weighing the Potential “WORTH” of a SHOPPING MALL v.s. “A Bunch of Trees” :-p

I doubt that anyone is incapable of putting the known data in the one box, This will easily give the value of a tree. Walk up to any lone tree n a vast emptiness and it can easily be seen that this will be where the city of life in an otherwise treeless plain will be.