palo alto tree scandal
10-13-2009, 11:08 AM
#23
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stuart, FL
Posts: 24,416
No, I completely understand, you don't know what a real oak tree looks like and therefor the uses of a real oak tree escape you. I can live with that, if it makes you feel any better southern folk don't know what a real pine tree looks like either. These southern pines are the ugliest thing I've ever seen, they all look sick or dead and their trunks are so small it would take 200 of them to make a sheet of paper!!!
10-13-2009, 11:19 AM
#24
Super Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 5,425
I'm totally with you on the pine trees. I hate our pine trees, they shed huge dead branches all the time, and I'm always scare they'll fall over in a stiff breeze.
As for paper production though, the Apalachicola national forest was historically a huge site of tree farms for paper production (on google maps you can still see the rows of trees in many spots). I think the pines change drastically the more south you go in the state.
As for paper production though, the Apalachicola national forest was historically a huge site of tree farms for paper production (on google maps you can still see the rows of trees in many spots). I think the pines change drastically the more south you go in the state.
10-13-2009, 11:25 AM
#25
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stuart, FL
Posts: 24,416
I'm totally with you on the pine trees. I hate our pine trees, they shed huge dead branches all the time, and I'm always scare they'll fall over in a stiff breeze.
As for paper production though, the Apalachicola national forest was historically a huge site of tree farms for paper production (on google maps you can still see the rows of trees in many spots). I think the pines change drastically the more south you go in the state.
As for paper production though, the Apalachicola national forest was historically a huge site of tree farms for paper production (on google maps you can still see the rows of trees in many spots). I think the pines change drastically the more south you go in the state.
Do they still use that area for paper trees?
10-13-2009, 08:01 PM
#28
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Calgary
Posts: 564
10-13-2009, 08:57 PM
#29
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stuart, FL
Posts: 24,416
I can honestly say that is the first time I've heard a Canadian say "Mile and BC" in the same sentence. In fact I rarely hear anyone from canada refer to distance as a mile. You better watch it man they are going to deport you.
10-13-2009, 09:46 PM
#30
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Calgary
Posts: 564
Yeah I know, I am kinda old school when it comes to measurement systems. It stems that my trade is pretty much stuck using imperial measurements. Till about grade 3 we were taught imperial in school, then one day the teacher through a book down and declared our whole world metric. This continued through high school. In trade school, the texts/tools/materials were in imperial, the tests in metric. In the real world, everything is still imperial, so when I started my apprenticeship, I had to relearn imperial and try to forget metric.
The problem with metric in my profession, is Celsius is to coarse of a unit for temperature for whole number measurements, and there really is not a good short distance measurement with the natural fit on an inch or a foot in the metric system. CM always ends up as some ungodly huge number and M ends up with to many decimals in it for good estimation and visualization purposes.. So easy to say cut a piece 6'6 and 3/8. instead of something like 228.33 cm or 2.2833m ( not exact conversion, just for comparison).
Anyway back to you guys arguing whos got the biggest wood.
The problem with metric in my profession, is Celsius is to coarse of a unit for temperature for whole number measurements, and there really is not a good short distance measurement with the natural fit on an inch or a foot in the metric system. CM always ends up as some ungodly huge number and M ends up with to many decimals in it for good estimation and visualization purposes.. So easy to say cut a piece 6'6 and 3/8. instead of something like 228.33 cm or 2.2833m ( not exact conversion, just for comparison).
Anyway back to you guys arguing whos got the biggest wood.