detailed response in your own words adding to the conversation. NO REFERENCE NEEDED
Question to these responses *What is a clear cut and why is it so criticized in the
Lorie- What is a clear cut and why is it so criticized in the US?
Clear cutting is the practice of uniformly cutting down all or the majority of trees in an area, typically to
create certain types of forest ecosystems and to encourage growth of select species that require vast
amounts of sunlight. There are several methods of clear cutting; the most common is the removal of
every tree or stem so no canopy remains. (What is Clearcutting?).
Some countries support this practice for economic or safety measures, while some use clear cutting as a
means of clearing space for agriculture (crops and cattle farms) in areas of increasing population. Clear
cutting is criticized in the US because of the negative impacts on the environment, animals, and humans
including: increased soil erosion, global warming, destruction of natural habitats, possibility of rapid
runoff of water causing flooding, increased effects of wind on crops, and temperature changes to nearby
water sources which can cause the extinction of some species.
Imagine your family lives in a country where the average annual income per household is only
$300. However, you live in an area where the ground would support crops; all you have to do is cut
down trees (clear cut). What would you do? How would you feel toward the family if they cut down
all the trees to raise food or to provide additional income?
Given the fact that the average annual income is only $300, I think I would agree with clear cutting in
this situation to grow crops since food is probably lacking. As long as the land would be used for crops,
would not potentially kill off other species such as fish and amphibians in nearby water sources, would
not cause drought due to evaporation of water sources, would not be excessive, and would be of benefit
to everyone in the area, I wouldnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t be opposed to clear cutting the land.
*What effects might an increasing population have on this subsistence farming? Using the web, find
a currently used viable alternative to this type clear cut subsistence farming and describe it in your
An increasing population would have devastating effects on forests through subsistence farming
activities. As people move into these areas, after cutting down trees for use as building materials, they
use the slash-and-burn technique to clear the forest for short-term agriculture causing a decline in the
soil nutrients leaving the area infertile making it hard for newly planted trees to grow. (Mongabay).
One alternative is selective cutting where only some of the trees in a smaller area are cut down at a
single time, and new trees are planted. The next time resources are needed, another section of trees of
a different age, size, or species is cleared allowing the previous section time to regenerate. Although
selective cutting takes longer and is more expensive, it preserves the soil, decreases potential erosion,
and ensures protection of the ecosystem. (Alternatives to Clear Cutting).
Other alternatives include: (1) strip cutting where narrow rows of the forest are cut, leaving wooded
corridors of trees that provide seeds; (2) shelter wood cutting where dead and less desirable trees are
cut down first, and then mature trees are cut down later; and (3) seed tree cutting which is the removal
of all but a few seed trees that will promote regeneration of the forest. These methods permit lumber to
still be used for economic purposes, but helps reduce mass amounts of trees being cut down while
preserving the environment. (Alternatives to Clear Cutting).
Alternatives to Clear Cutting. (n.d.). Retrieved March 29, 2021,
Mongabay. (2020, March 22). Subsistence agriculture and deforestation. Retrieved March 29, 2021,
What is Clearcutting? (2019, May 12). Retrieved March 29, 2021,
Rebecc- Clearcutting is the term that describes the practice of cutting down most to all trees in a certain
area. I would think that it would be criticized in the U.S. because it leads to the defragmentation of
forests. I probably would cut the trees down but only plant more somewhere else that is more
sustainable to them. I do not think I would feel different from the family that is trying to survive and
create food. However, I would hope that they would be planting more trees somewhere else, where
they could grow and the crops as well. I do think taking trees down is that bad if there is a replacement
tree being planted for it. The increasing population would make clear-cutting more prevalent on the
land. There would have to have more land in order to feed the growing population. An alternative to
clearcutting is selective cutting. It is still cutting down trees but in more of a selective area. Only certain
areas are cut down so there is fewer trees being cut down at a time. This would result in the forest
never being completely cut down and would always contain varieties of trees. This would help from the
forest being completely taken down at once.
Conservation of Renewable and Nonrenewable Resources, flpda.org/independent/courses/elementary/science/section2/2j9.htm#:~:text=An%20alternative%20to%
Types of diversity- *List and define the three types of diversity. Based on your reading, what is the most
important kind of diversity? Explain and justify your answer.
Genetic Diversity: genetic diversity is the variety of genes that are present in all species. Each species has
there own genetic composition, then when they breed with others, that creates a whole new set of
genetics. Genetic diversity is to help prevent species extinction.
2. Species Diversity: Species diversity is the variety of species that are contained by a geographical area.
This would include all living species that live in a certain area. This keeps a variety of species all over the
3. Ecological Diversity: Ecological diversity is a broader concept than species diversity. It deals with the
species richness and the interaction with the rest of the environment.
I would think that species diversity would be the most important kind of diversity. This helps make sure
that a species would not go extinct. The new species would then be able to adapt to the new conditions
of the whole which in return help the species live one. I personally think that is very important so more
species are able to live longer and also create new species. Even though extinction is a natural process
but hopefully species diversity would be able to help slow the process.
Running Head: ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE PEER RESPONSE
Environmental Science Peer Response
I agree with you that species diversity is the most important kind of diversity. The
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE PEER RESPONSE
world needs various species, and this type of diversity will help prevent the extinction of
Environmental Science Peer Response
some of the species. Species diversity would have made it possible for us to see dinosaurs
still today. However, the changing conditions in the environment cannot allow some species
to continue existing. It will also help develop new species from the combinat ion of the
This is quite an insightful discussion. Clear-cutting in the United States has brought about
existing ones, which again enhances biodiversity .
a lot of controversy because of the cutting’s indiscriminate nature. Despite the controversy, there
are still proponents of this practice that indicate that clear-cutting increases job opportunities,
especially in the agricultural sector. This is because the land gained from clear-cutting can be
used as a farm or for agricultural purposes. The controversy and uproar against clear-cutting
have also been due to the negative impacts that it can cause. Notably, it leads to the loss of
biodiversity as some plants and animals lose their habitat. Species of trees may also become
extinct, given the indiscriminate nature of tree cutting. This clear-cutting’s other negative impact
is increased soil erosion, especially when the land is left bare without any development.
Species Diversity Response
This perspective is quite interesting. Undoubtedly, the increase in population demands an
increase in the food produced, subsequently demanding more farming. This is the reason why
some individuals may argue that clear-cutting is justified. However, It is essential for individuals
who practice clear-cutting to ensure that they can replace the trees they are cutting elsewhere. It
will reduce the negative impacts of cutting trees on the environment, including the massive
climate change being experienced. After all, climate change may impede the growth of the food
they were seeking to have with clear-cutting and farmland increase. Unfortunately, most
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE PEER RESPONSE
individuals practicing clear-cutting in the United States will rarely replace the trees unless there
are strict regulatory interventions.
Purchase answer to see full