Forrest Fleischman
@forrestf.bsky.social
2.9K followers 5.6K following 890 posts
Associate professor of environmental policy at the University of Minnesota. Forest governance, Restoration Social Science, South Asia, Central America, Environmental justice, urban ecosystems, NEPA, homegardens, etc.
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
Reposted by Forrest Fleischman
bassisjeremy.bsky.social
The University: We need to become leaders in climate and sustainability and there is an urgent need to develop climate science courses.

Me: Our department has climate in the name and we already offer courses on climate science at every level.

The University: Who invited you to this meeting?
forrestf.bsky.social
And yet big NGOs (and plenty of big name ecology & forest scientists) are still promoting them, and arguing that little tweaks will fix them. At this point, If you think your little tweak is going to fix things, you need to show me really strong evidence.
forrestf.bsky.social
Well, since you are missing the Alhambra, I'll just say that Granada has a surprisingly excellent Science Museum.
forrestf.bsky.social
The employment would be through Wassan, and would also involve collaborators in Sweden and Delhi University, and would be fully remote-work based. Would be a great opportunity for a graduate student looking for a part time job, or a recent graduate with experience in textual analysis.
forrestf.bsky.social
A team I am a part of is hiring an India-based part time research assistant to help us with textual analysis of government forestry documents related to forest restoration and pastoral livelihoods in Himachal Pradesh. Information and application instructions here: forms.gle/4D6aVqtDU7FY...
forms.gle
forrestf.bsky.social
oh yes! I definitely heard about this as a major issue when I was there.
forrestf.bsky.social
And in this atmosphere, it won't be the student who gets punished, and we'll all have to start pretending like there are male and female corn plants or something.
forrestf.bsky.social
Sorry - that was a little glib, what I meant to say is that its fine for a botanist to make distinctions between sex and gender, but just as with that story at Texas A&M, I can see a student creating a ruckus at Texas Tech or wherever based on misunderstanding the distinction you made.
forrestf.bsky.social
Thanks this is a good answer. Although I'm not sure it will protect against the thought police.
forrestf.bsky.social
I guess it ends up meaning that you will leave behind the species that are most effective at growing rapidly/capturing nutrients/allelopathy, which is to say, you won't end up in 20 or 50 years with the species that will be strongest then, just the ones that were strongest in the first few years
forrestf.bsky.social
synchronized aging seems less concerning to me if you are planting alot of different species, they'll have different life spans. But what does "leaving the strongest" actually mean in the context of planting diverse species together?
forrestf.bsky.social
But then again, after a few years most of the trees will die and it won't be dense anymore?
forrestf.bsky.social
ok, but I don't want a dense planting in my neighborhood, I want visibility. Also where I live the "natural" vegetation is an oak savanna, which is to say, pretty sparse vegetation. I guess I could imagine some really specific uses of this (e.g. a screen between a park and a highway).
forrestf.bsky.social
I don't really understand why this idea has gotten so trendy.
forrestf.bsky.social
This trend is really weird. Natural forests usually aren't overgrown thickets of plants that don't necessarily grow well together, and most of the trees are likely to die after a few years due to density-dependent mortality. It seems like an overly expensive way to get an impenetrable thicket.
forrestf.bsky.social
I have a serious question: How do you teach botany or agriculture if you are required to say that only 2 genders exist and that individuals can't be both? I'm not trying to troll, I'm genuinely curious about this.
forrestf.bsky.social
As someone who cares about convincing people to agree with me, that's good enough reason for me to avoid the term and focus on the specific institutional conditions that lead to bad outcomes rather than the broad and very popular concept.
forrestf.bsky.social
As a final note, I'll add that as I have lived my whole life in societies in which capitalism is considered extremely valuable and popular, my experience is that political critiques that blame "capitalism" are rarely successful at swaying the opinions of important people.
forrestf.bsky.social
I'm aware that some fields use very specific definitions, and since I don't know Ben or his background, I'm going to assume he was using it with some very specific meaning, but I don't know what that meaning is.
forrestf.bsky.social
My training as a political economist was to avoid the term pretty much at all costs because people understand different things by it (and the most common understanding of it - i.e. as the broad economic system used in most of the world today) is vague enough to be useless as a specific analysis
forrestf.bsky.social
I think Ben doesn't want to continue to engage with this, which is fine, but while Ben may have a specific meaning in mind when he uses the term "capitalism", its definitely one of those words that is used in numerous ways to mean different things to different people.
forrestf.bsky.social
"At the earliest time slice of our model, 1000 BC, the Near Eastern regions (Iraq, Syria-Lebanon, and Palestine-Jordan) clearly display widespread deforestation. Several small parts of central Europe (within Belgium, Switzerland, and Austria) display 70% clearance by 1000 BC" doi.org/10.1016/j.qu...
Redirecting
doi.org
forrestf.bsky.social
I would also dispute that capitalism "caused" forest loss and degradation except in the most vague sense. Lots of forest loss and degradation in Cuba, for example, in spite of an absence of capitalism. Forest loss in the UK preceded capitalism by thousands of years.
forrestf.bsky.social
One of the largest forces for forest conservation in the world is investment by forest products companies in future forest production (otherwise much land would be converted to pastures). I would argue that this is capitalism leading to forest conservation by any measure.