To read the full transcript of our commentry, please go to: www.ricksfilmrestoration.com/Harz1.com Please share these shocking images with others to make more people aware what is happening to our unique planet. Thanks for watching! NL: Dit is interessant leesvoer: nos.nl/collectie/13901/artikel/2436073-het-stikstofprobleem-is-echt-nederlands-uitgelegd-in-acht-grafieken en nos.nl/collectie/13901/artikel/2433131-dit-is-wat-je-moet-weten-om-de-stikstofcrisis-te-begrijpen en veeteelt.nl/nieuws/eurofins-klimaat-niet-gebaat-bij-stikstofplannen en www.viridiair.nl/blog/de-positieve-invloed-van-stikstof-op-de-natuur-en-de-leugens-erom-heen/
These dead zones are more likely caused by incessant Chem-trail spraying. The Earth is being intentionally destroyed using aerosols containing myriads of toxins. Yet, few people connect the dots.
you are right. it is unbelievable how many places are dead. just today I was on the Wurmberg and Brocken and you can see the areas of dead trees. it is really sad and scary to see that. A ranger told me that the problem was also done by hand. After World War II so many trees were felled for reconstruction. and then only spruces were planted. they grow quickly but are very susceptible to drought. then the tree no longer has the strength to get rid of the bark beetles. The trees lack water to defend themselves.
@@christianmuller4027 Indeed. The tree's defense consists of producing Resin which literally stops the bark beetles in their tracks. Without enough moisture insuficient resin is produced.
That's best example, that we should not use mono culture in the forests. One insect is enough to destroy the forest. If we look at the Lower Harz, where mixed and "jungle" forest grows, this problem does not exist there. This bark beetle problem already existed in the early 1980s. Only the forestry in the upper Harz mountains has learned nothing from it. That's the problem here.
What diverse footage. Drought is the untamed enemy, and it's devastation is palpable. Your video really is so humbling. Also, thank you for such a detailed description. It really helps.
I travel every year to the Harz and it is shocking to see how things have changed rapidly in the last 25 years alone. At the other side: In the Harz you can also see how nature is healing itself when people are NOT "helping" with special measures, but simply leave it as it is and allow nature do it's thing. In the Harz they have discovered that a new forest is growing up which will be much more divers (and thus stronger) as the one which has disappeared, most of the times due to climate change which we can see all over the planet by now (what about snowstorms in Los Angeles?), but also due to human actions.
Been in the hartz 10 yrs ago, and this is alarming to see, thanks for your effort put in making aware the change of climate, Embrace this Complexity! Simplicity is the enemy!! Change direction looks complex, but it is needed
As someone born in the Harz... The Beetle has been an issue for decades. Climate change only sped up the problem. What will happen now, is that the artificual mono culture that was planted back in the mining days will die and give way to the natural mixed forest of the area. Calling it a few years is nonsense of course, but shrubs and bushes will grow fast, so I guess it being green again in a few years is probably true. And the death of the spruce trees actually wildly improved the view in many places. Hiking through the Harz often used to mean that you were looking at dark, shaded forest floor with thousand of bleak, brown spruce stems, with the green only starting near the top, as all the trees competed for sunlight and left the forest floor in permanent shade. The new forest will be much prettier and diverse. And the diversity is what grants resistance to pests like the bark beetle. So the Harz will actually improve, climate change remains the major global challenge nonetheless. Your opinions about Nitrogen were weird though and smelled of vested interest. Nitrogen pollution is ruining rivers and lakes everywhere by massively stimulating growth of algae. And it depletes soils as well, by making plants grow and using up minerals unnaturately quickly. So it's not exactly a non-issue. On the whole, not as much as climate change though, of course.
That is the same problem we are having in the Pacific Northwest. 20 years ago the beetle was not seen north of California, now it is almost to Alaska. Our winters are no longer cold enough to kill them back and the droughts diminish the trees ablility to fight back with sap production.
As a retired scientist (medical research), one must view all of the factors, not just one. The Harz forest has an complex past. The landscape of the Harz Mountains, which for centuries was characterised by pure spruce forests, is changing. Spruce was originally planted as fast-growing wood to be used in mining. In the post-war period, more wood was needed for reconstruction, for heating and also for part of the reparation payments. As a result of the severe overexploitation of the forests from the 1930s until about 1950, approximately 140,000 ha of bare forest was created in Lower Saxony alone. In order to reforest these areas, great efforts were made to reforest the forests. Only spruce seed was available in sufficient quantities in the Harz Mountains. Thus, spruce became the “Brotbaum” (bread tree) of the region and was also planted in locations where it is not actually native. This is an area where deciduous trees would naturally grow - beech mixed with maple, birch, ash, and other tree species.
True, but to my opinion this "mono culture" of spruce trees, that has been successfully in existence for 80 years, does not explain the rapid deforestation of the past ca. 5 years. I believe its due to climate change: the destructive bark beetles are surviving the current mild winters.
@@Rick88888888 Climate changes. Always has, always will. The historical record is clear. Earths climate is cyclical. And extraordinarily complex. This forest will recover naturally. All is well.
What a devastating sight! Thank you for the explanation which now makes a lot of sense. I've seen other videos from other parts of the world with similar sights, but without explanation. This makes me just as said as some sights of coral banks disappearing or turning into grey dead patches, also caused by the warming by the way. Such an incredible shame
I visited Goslar, Wernigerode, Quedlindburg, and the Teufelsmauer 6 years ago. Very beautiful. The mines in Golsar are very astonishing ; they were digging 1m per day, and there are hundreds of kilometers of galleries under the mounatin. Goslar by night and the mines worth largely the visit.
Thanks for this video! A few months ago I was also in the Harz and indeed saw the dead forests. So awful :-( I'll be heading that way again in three weeks. Mainly to urbex in abandoned hotels etc. and to enjoy the beautiful towns.
I am German from the Berlin-Brandenburg. The mixed woods here do not look like this, i love our beech woods - majestic in summer. After WWII many of these industrial woods where planted all over Germany to compensate for resources and even to pay for reparations. We have them in Brandenburg everywhere too. Climate change is a kind of half-truth, yet often repeated by superficial media or politicians to push a one sided agenda. Climate change only proofs how prone mono cultures are to diseases. Happens with other plants too. I think besides Climate change we should not forget that other man made problems are not gone.
@@daffyduk77 "Half truth" in the case of the Issue of these industrial mono cultures in Germany. The World is a bit more complex than putting a single singularity label on everything. And what you are telling me, in the end you are ok with these mono cultures instead of a healthy mixed nature as long every bodies bows to "climate change"`?
The real half truth is that global warming is man made and that man can stop it. Rubbish. The earth has gone thru countless warming phases and this is just another. The global warming agenda is nothing more than a way for corporations to make lots of money.
This is sad. I am sorry this is happening. We experience plagues of beetles every few years. Some of our mountainsides left barren of greenery after they've had their fill. I live in an area of the USA that has suffered extreme drought for the last couple of decades. Much of our region is beginning to look like this, but because of drought. The lakes are emptying, some totally gone and many down by 100ft or more. The forest undergrowth wilts. While people water pastures, hay fields, lawns, etc. with no regard for water saving measures, growing thousands of acres of thristy corn in the desert to feed the cows, more trees being cut for animal ranching and pastures, and the thirsty cities keep growing... Thank you for all the work you put into this channel. Bless
Bark beetles are nasty things, and in warmer climes are almost impossible to eradicate, once established. The mountain range to the north of where I live used to be covered in trees. About 30 years ago the bark beetles came. Now all there is on the hills is scrub, which burns off in wildfires every few years. I can see about three trees left on the mountains. This is in Southern California.
It is not only climate change that is to blame. It is the untypical planting of forests with monocultures of spruce! When pests come along, it's all too late. This mixed forest will develop in the Harz, it will take time, but this forest will be more resistant to environmental influences: More emphasis should be placed on the self-regulating forces of nature.
`more resistent´, OK, but will they be resistent enough? The monoculture spruce trees lasted for 70 or more years. Now ´suddenly` there are devastating influences. Will decidious trees be immune for influences due to climate change? Don´t be too sure!
@@Rick88888888 Well, there are trees and woods in Italy, Spain or Portugal, aren't they? Maybe we'll have another, more arid climate here in Middle Europe, but nature will fix it (with the help of humans). I'm an optimistic person. What's going on in the Harz is in a double manner "man made". I'm more concerned about the woods in Southern Europe that at some point only cacti will grow there. 🥴
Der Harz sah tatsächlich schon in den 80ern so aus. Schon damals begann das Waldsterben. Mein Vater hat das 1987 im Urlaub im Harz angesprochen und gefilmt.
Looks like much of the dead forest was a monoculture of spruce. That along with spruce not being indigenous to the area, coupled with stress from a changing climate, and you have a prefect formula for the exponential spread of a pest.
Bedankt voor het delen van de video. Complex probleem. Zeker is een veranderend klimaat deel van het probleem. Maar in Nederland hebben eens palmbomen gestaan, dus het klimaat verandert voortdurend. Het planten van een monocultuur is een ander probleem. Dan moet je landbouwkundig gezien gebruik gaan maken van bestrijdingsmiddelen. De invloed van ons op klimaatverandering wordt erg overschat, omdat er toch 8 miljard monden gevoed moeten worden. Voor de mens geldt het zelfde als voor die kever: er zijn er gewoon teveel. Denk dat het beter is ons aan te passen aan de klimaatverandering.
Nee, het is beter dat wij ons aanpassen ter bestrijding van de klimaatverandering i.p.v. het als een voldongen feit te accepteren. Inderdaad, (veel) minder mensen op aarde gaat in de richting van de beste oplossing, maar het is een Utopie dat de mensheid dit beseft, laat staan maatregelen in die richting binnenkort gaat treffen.... totdat het rond het einde van deze eeuw te laat is... Gelukkig zal ik dat niet meer meemaken.
@@johanboer7157 They said the same 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 etc etc years ago and still we are all pretty much alive. We are still not running out of oil, more people live on this planet today in better conditions than ever before. Even if human activity is fully responsible for the current warming trend, then what? Human activity has an effect on everything. I assume you live in a house, that is nature’s land taken by men to build your house on. The current warming trend is not causing any danger to the human species. Solar panels and windturbines and not the solution, they will only take more of nature’s land, making this planet a more ugly place to live on.
I have pictures from 2017 of some of the same spots, even though they were taken during the winter time, you can tell the trees were looking healthy compared to this ... I'm not sure if we're able to post links in the comments, perhaps I'll try to put them in an Imgur album later.
The Harz will return with proper agronomy management. Pine beetles have far reaching effects and have been in the ecosystem far longer than centuries of people who curse the incorrect theory that cold winters will eliminate the pest. We can only wish the same desired cold would eliminate the pest responsible for the largest cause of human death, the mosquito. Maybe we can train these insects to eat the beetles 🙃.
Spruce forests are not healthy. These spruce forests are only forest business and are not a long term situation. A set aside programme would work rather than intensive forestry practices. The beetle problem can be solved but it would seem a lack of interest or money has only made the matter worse. Quick growing woods suffer as they are a soft wood and should be seen as only a short term growing enterprise. If the wood has been damaged by the beetle the wood becomes of very little value. Once the beetle situation is cleared up, I see no reason why most of the existing trees cannot be cut down and left to rot and a set a side programme put in place. This has nothing to do with climate change rather than a over use of the area without investment by the forestry company. Sad to see...
"Spruce forests are not healthy": You probably mean that because of the environment (location, maintenance, diversity etc.) and recent unfavourable climate, the health of these trees has been effected, and not that these trees are unhealthy by nature. Spruce trees have been around since the dawn of time. It's not their DNA that's flawed and over the ages such trees have contributed enormously to mankind!
@@Rick88888888 It is not that spruce trees are always an issue, but in this case the woods are monoculture plantation. I'm not sure what trees used to cover that area, but in the video you comment how the deciduous trees you drive past are not affected, meaning that trees than conifer exist well there and in the past may have been spread throughout the area. Plantations lack biodiversity and are therefore less resilient and more susceptible to disease, not only through lack of habitat for predators, but also an over-abundance of food for those causing disease. In the UK, the Forestry Commission has felled much of the old woodland of mixed deciduous trees and replaced them with monoculture spruce plantations, all of which is a crying shame
We had the same experience in the Hoch Sauerland some weeks ago. All those dead spruce trees gave an apocalyptic picture. The Germans we talked to blamed the mono culture forrest combined with not enough rain
Yes the `monoculture´ argument is raised very often (too often). What troubles me is that such spruce trees were already being planted just after WW-II. For 70 years there were no such problems as we experience today. Also I seriously doubt that the result would have been much different if for example half of these trees had been deciduous trees. The Borkenkàfer and the drought would still find their way to the spruce trees and kill them. Even at 10% the 90% deciduous trees would probably not protect the spruce trees. What do you think?
@@Rick88888888 Rick, I don’t know. But I do know that the current situation is very sad and that the forrests will need a lot of time (human perspective) to recover. Keep up the good work!
@@WimS675 Dutch Elm disease, ash die back, Cavendish banana crop failure, unless you plant mixed genetic forests/ crops you will be open to devastation by insects and viruses. Warming is increasing the risks of course.
I live near Dover on the English Channel. The sea here is warming rapidly. Species of fish never seen before are arriving. Red mullet, Gilt head bream and even Tuna are being found. The usual fishing seasons are changing. The Cod and mackerel appear in lower numbers and are apparently staying north in cooler waters. This has all happened over the last 5-10 years. I was last here 7 years ago and this wasn’t the story then.
Indeed. And still some people believe it has nothing to do with climate change. Fact is that these beetles have survived the recent mild winters whereas in the past they died en-mass during the much colder winters.
The beetle is the main culprit here. It’s a ferocious little creature. In this episode more emphasis has been placed upon climate change being the main factor. I’ve just come back from the Harz and witnessed the devastation but equally seen plenty of new growth. Yes, it will take time to rejuvenate.
It is climate change that is at the source of the problem: The Letterzetter beetle survives the warmer winters and the spruce trees produce less raisin (amber) that normally hinder the beetle in digging tunnels in the bark due to drought. Some people blame the mono culture of spruce trees which is utter nonsense. In more diverse circumstances the spruce trees will still die, only the effects will be less visible.
Indeed, weird that they lie about it... And it will take longer than just five years. But nature will adapt. When there is a forest fire, all is gone too. Nature comes back. No need to be too pessimistic about the forest. What will be devastating though, is the droughts on this earth and the uptake in velocity of storms and floods. That will get worse, before it gets better, even if we'd consume hardly anything anymore, and we will, of course. Earth is in for some terrible weather for quite some time still.
#150👍🤣The world is always changing. Climate included! Get over it because we are not fixing anything. Those dead trees need to be logged before they burn. Bugs are the problem here and if you cut the trees the bugs will starve. Or find a pesticide that is as effective as freezing winter weather. Shit happens just consider the way the dinosaurs died. A new ice age will come guaranteed!!
Sure but the problem is that after a mass extinction event it takes on average 50 million years for a new stable ecosystem to form. By then we will be long gone. If we value any kind of future for our own species this can't be ignored. So this discussion basically boils down whether or not we care about our own future.
Will do! I have an opinion on many things, but don´t want to turn this channel into a (political) debating club. Restoring and colorizing historic footage will remain the core of this channel.
Ik ben bang dat het ook hier nog veel erger gaat worden t.g.v. deze schorskever in combinatie met droogte en zeer hoge temperaturen. Mijn mening is dat we (wereldwijd) een CO2 probleem hebben. Het stikstof-probleem valt daarbij in het niet!
Like others are saying, monoculture of spruce trees is the main problem. In a diverse, mixed species forest you wouldn't even notice a few dead spruce trees.
Use the spruce for lumber or fuel and plant trees that are resistant to the beetle and drought. We certainly do have climate change, and it will be with us far longer than any of us. Clean air and clean water should always be a priority, but Man cannot correct this situation. The Earth is going through a normal warming cycle. In time it will cool off again. Even though the warming causes devastation in some areas it helps promote new and stronger growth in other areas. There’s always a balance.
perhaps the governments are due us a FULL DETAILED explanation of their aircraft & microwave geoengineering programs. They spare no expense. Is it making our climate more unstable? Worse or Better??
This is not climate change. It is problems that all monoculture forest have. We had the same problem in the Great Smokey Mountain National park in the US. In the Higher elevations where only fur forests grew it was thought that Acid Rain was killing all the fur trees. Acid Rain was the latest enviromental disaster that was being promoted back then that of course now you here nothing about. The enviromentalist went crazy. The problem ended up being a bettle that was killing all the trees. This happened back in the late 70's and early 80's. History does not reapeat but it does often Rhyme.
Where was this Bark-beetle imported from? Many invasive pests have made their way around the world with the growth of globalized shipping.Many of the invasive pests have effected areas throughout the United States by way of imports from Asia.
No, spruce trees are not native to the Harz. They were manually planted (by scores of predominantly German ladies) just after WWII, mainly as a source for timber.
De discussie gaat meer over de vraag of de huidige temperatuurstijging volledig is toe te schrijven aan menselijke CO2 uitstoot. Dat is iets totaal anders dan klimaatverandering ontkennen, dat zou overigens ook dom zijn, want als mensen klimaatverandering ontkennen, hoe kunnen ze dan verklaren dat er vroeger ijstijden zijn geweest. Dit soort onzorgvuldige formuleringen brengen alleen maar verwarring. Hetzelfde als met alle milieu problemen op 1 hoop gooien.
Ja hoor, iedereen weet zijn eigen draai aan dit verhaal te geven, de meesten met als doel klimaatverandering te ondermijnen, bagatelliseren of als overheids-conspiracy af te schilderen. Wie geen oog heeft voor dit soort beelden, orkanen, hittegolven, koudegolven, droogte, extreme sneeuwval, overstromingen, smelten poolkappen, meet- en bewijsbare opwarming van de aarde (zie IPCC rapport) etc. etc heeft stront in zijn of haar ogen (sorry voor dit woordgebruik). Je kunt er elk stempel op plakken, van alles al dan niet de schuld geven, maar de feiten en pessimistische vooruitzichten voor onze planeet zijn onmiskenbaar. In de doofpot stoppen is wel het laatste wat we als mensheid moeten doen. Ik ben (nog) geen milieu-activist, maar na het lezen van deze comments-section ben ik diep in de mineur gelet op de stupiditeit die daar ten toon wordt gespreid. Helaas ondermijnt het volkomen uit zijn verband getrokken stikstof-crisisverhaal het vertrouwen in weloverwogen en wetenschappelijk verantwoorde maatregelen met als gevolg dat de ware oorzaak van de klimaatproblemen onvoldoende wordt onderzocht noch effectief aangepakt noch dat er draagvlak voor de noodzakelijke maatregelen ontstaat. Nog even en ik haal deze video offline wegens mijn enorme frustratie. Kijk maar eens naar het "Nature Bats Last" TH-camkanaal! Daar word je echt 'vrolijk' van...
@@Rick88888888 Nee Rick, zeker niet offline halen. Ongetwijfeld gaan er ook nog mensen hun beklag doen over het feit dat je je in een niet bepaald co2 neutrale trein verplaatste. Als maar genoeg mensen dit soort beelden verspreiden komt er een momentum dat mensen ingrijpen gaan eisen. Of dat op tijd zal zijn valt te betwijfelen. Maar de stikstof uitstoot heeft natuurlijk wel degelijk ook een impact op de natuur. Ik zou zeggen: zoek maar eens naar oude en recente beelden van de Veluwe. Dan zul je zien dat grote delen van de zandgronden verdrongen zijn. Er groeit overal gras en mos. Het zorgt voor eenzijdigheid in de natuur waardoor die juist extra kwetsbaar is voor plagen en extreem weer. Die eenzijdige naaldbomen in de Harz laten die kwetsbaarheid goed zien.
@@Rick88888888 Ik deel uw pessimisme niet. Ik heb niet de vrees dat de planeet onleefbaar wordt door CO2 gerelateerde opwarming. Het is precies wat u zelf zegt. Iedereen weet er zijn/haar eigen draai aan te geven. Mijn idee indruk is dat u volledig in de paniek/pessimistische modus schiet en elk verschijnsel wijdt aan menselijke invloed op het klimaat. In het Eoceen had Nederland een subtropisch klimaat en de polen waren ijsvrij. Ik zou mij eerder zorgen maken om plastic vervuiling en ontbossing wat echt schade toebrengt aan de natuur, ipv onzichtbaar CO2.
@@wellness3 Ik kom al vele jaren op de Veluwe. Vooral het zakken van het grondwaterpeil is me opgevallen. Over die verschraling maak ik me veel minder zorgen, (minder zandgronden en het verdwijnen van enkele plantensoorten) wat uiteraard niet betekent dat we er niets aan moeten doen (bijvoorbeeld tonnen schelpen vermalen (kalk) en in de natuurgebieden uitstrooien. Mijn inschatting is dat het broeikaseffect (CO2, Methaan) 100 keer erger is. Ik zie grote overeenkomsten met de zg. "Zure Regen" crisis uit de jaren '80 waar niemand het meer over heeft. Ik zou van die 25 miljard Euro 1 miljard besteden aan de N-crisis en 24 miljard aan het z.s.m. zorgen voor nog meer schone energiebronnen: Zonnepanelen, Windturbines, Getijden-energie, Grondwarmte en (jawel) minstens 4 kerncentrales (te bouwen op zee). Lees dit: nos.nl/collectie/13901/artikel/2436073-het-stikstofprobleem-is-echt-nederlands-uitgelegd-in-acht-grafieken
😂 zo mild was de afgelopen winter zeker niet in de Harz. Komt door de eenzijdige bomen soort en de kever. Maar dit is al veel langer aan de gang. Natuur herstel zich al weer.
@@Rick88888888 bij de infocentrums in en om de Harz liggen folders hoe het 10 jaar terug er uit zag. En hoe nu. Ik woon aan de rand van de Harz maar waar de dode dennen weg zijn word alles weer groen. Omdat er weer lucht en licht bij komt.
@@sebastiaan4898 Nog steeds twijfelachtig optimisme! Als er weer sparren op dezelfde plekken terugkomen gebeurt over ca. 15 tot 20 jaar precies hetzelfde: weer droogte, onvoldoende aanmaak door de sparren van hars en dus weer vrij spel voor de schorskevers. Meer diversiteit met loofbomen zal wellicht alles groener maken, maar die loofbomen zullen de sparren niet beschermen. Sterker nog, de loofbomen zullen de sparren beroven van vocht. De schorskevers kunnen/zullen ook andere boomsoorten aantasten, zeker bij zwakte door droogte.
Your limited scope doesn’t take into account climate trends and anomalies which unfold on a timeline much greater than your own lifespan. To smugly parrot the globalists’ mantra of “climate change” shows your acute lack of discernment in vetting information presented to you. You are ‘feeling’ rather than ‘thinking’ on the subject. Not only do I question “climate change” as presented by the powers that be, but as a rule, I don’t believe a single word of what my (or any other) government says. They have proven themselves time and again to all be psychopathic liars with nefarious agendas. There’s much more hard data on this fact than there is on so-called “climate change”.
You´ll soon find out how wrong you are if you have another 25+ years more to live. Ignore what governments are saying, but make your own independent judgement! People (like you) must be blind if they don´t recognise the effects of climate change over the past ca. 10 years, e.g. drought, floods, heat waves, hurricanes, forest fires, extreme snow fall, mass animal and insect extinction etc. etc. You probably had your head buried in a game on your mobile phone when you ´watched´ this video. But hey, why do I even bother to reply to such comments...
@@Rick88888888 yeah, wait 10 more years and all major cities will be underwater and polar bears will go extinct. Man, this bs mantra has been around since 1970s. It’s all about money and power, climate is perfectly fine. P.S. I think that you should be more concerned about the fact that Germany’s Green Party (honk honk) wants to cut 2000 ha of Reinhardswald untouched forest for wind farms that are detrimental to the nature.
The (politician-created) stupid Dutch `stikstof´ (Nitroges) crises has now gotten totally out of hand. Hardly anybody understands the urgency to waste 25 billion Euros of taxpayers money (plus the consequent financial disaster for our agricultural sector)! I am not stupid and have an open mind and have tried to understand the stikstof crises, but utterly failed at doing so. The real culpret is CO2 greenhouse gas!!! If it was up to me then I would spend 1 billion Euros on reducing Nitrogen and 24 billion on CO2 reduction, in particular by building half a dozen nuclear energy plants (off the coast in the North sea).
@@Rick88888888 You're absolutely correct. It's a terrible sham and hopefully farmers with support of the public will be able to revert this disastrous policy decision. CO2 and green energy sources are urgent matters, not a bureaucratically created nitrogen problem.
@@GQ2593 Thank you for sharing these sentiments. What I find most destressing in this Nitrogen crisis is the sheer rigidness, fear for loss of face, eyeblinker-on mentality and future vision-less inflexibility and stupidity of our government (and governments in general). All the high court said was that something should be done about N-emissions. They did not dictate a spend of 25 billion. Our visionless PM is simply hiding behind this court order and a mindless `regeeraccoord`
Another great video Rick---apart from its alarming portent!!! Climate change is here. The Australian bushfires of two years ago missed my home by 100 metres. Many,many,many others were not so fortunate. That too was a Climate change event.Undeniable --in my opinion. Thanks.
geen boer geen voer, wij steunen de boer! if you want to know why the trees are dying talk to the Förster or the Jäger they will tell you why. Stop this climate drama activism
Mee eens. De boerenstand wordt volkomen onterecht en met stupide, onwetenschappelijke argumentatie om zeep geholpen. De stikstof crisis gaat veel te ver en is zwaar overdreven. Helaas onttrekt het grotendeels de aandacht van de echte veroorzakers van de klimaatverandering, met name CO2.
@@Rick88888888 de echte veroorzakers van klimaatverandering? De cycli van de aarde bedoel je? We zijn pas begonnen met meten vanaf de 19e eeuw oid... begin 19e eeuw, is deze data door gekalibreerde instrumenten gemeten? En waar, en hoe? Hoe was het klimaat voor de tijd dat er gemeten werd? Waarom werden we in de jaren 70 gewaarschuwd voor een 2e ijstijd? Waarom hebben alle klimaat predikanten een villa aan zee terwijl ze prediken dat de zeespiegel gaat stijgen? Waarom vliegen de klimaat predikanten de hele wereld over met hun prive jets om gezamenlijk in Davos te overleggen over 'het klimaat probleem' terwijl dat ook gewoon via een zoom meeting kan (Co2 neutraal)? Waarom voegen ze in kassen extra Co2 toe om de gewassen beter te laten groeien? Wordt de aarde juist niet groener van Co2? enz enz. Klimaat verandering is gewoon een verzonnen religie aan het worden om de gewone burger in angst te laten leven en te betalen voor iets wat er niet is. Ik persoonlijk maak me meer zorgen om vervuiling van de planeet en niet zozeer het klimaat ;) Ps. je gerestaureerde oude filmpjes zijn super!
@@mog5007 Bedankt voor je reactie. Deze video was een uitschieter. Volgende keer weer historische video´s, met name omdat ik nu nog meer dan van de beelden uit de Harz geschrokken ben van de vele (.....) commentaren onder deze video. Wat ik met `....` had willen zeggen hou ik maar liever even voor me.
@@Rick88888888 Voel je vooral niet verplicht om alleen oude filmpjes te plaatsen hoor ;) ik heb ook genoten van dit filmpje. En ja het is treurig om te zien wat er gebeurd is met het bos. Het is juist goed dat je filmpje het debat aanwakkert over dit soort zaken. Ik vind het juist interessant om meerdere reacties te lezen met verschillende invalshoeken. Juist nu het debat mist in de mainstream. Vooral filmpjes blijven posten!
One should not forget that nothing is necessarily as it seems. The Harz is not dead, it is more alive than before. In the general imagination one connects the healthy Harz with endless, green spruce forests. But these spruce forests are not healthy, wild forest. These spruce forests are only forest business. Without good biodiversity. In contrast today's Wildnes, which most refer to as "dead", is full of life. All the deadwood, grasses and flowers attract a lot of insects and animals. Biodiversity is already greater than in a spruce forest. But yes, the spruce forest has bound more CO2 and it will take some time before the new wild forest has this effect. But he grows much faster than assumed in this film. Pioneer trees such as birch, ash, aspen or alder grow up to 1 meter a year. Young, diverse forests develop everywhere in the Harz. The spruce occurs naturally only from about 700 meters above sea level. And there is already a healthy young stock again. As I said, the situation is much better than you would think at first glance. It just doesn't live up to our expectations. - With all this I don't want to say that man-made climate change is not a problem. It is mankind's greatest problem!
You are giving no proof whatsoever, just blind optimism. Blaming the monoculture and bark beetle is far too easy and over-simplified. Fact is that all these trees have died almost at the same moment, give or take a few years. They grew in the Harz (and in many other areas) without big problems since they started to be planted just after WW-II (75 years ago!). Even if the ratio had been 10% spruce trees versus 90% decideous trees (in stead of the reverse) the spruce trees would still most likely have suffered the same fate, only it would not have been so noticeable. Don't believe for a moment that the deciduous trees will somehow shield-off the spruce trees from beetles or drought. Even worse, these trees will probably will deprive the spruce trees from enough water to produce resin in order to defend themselves against the bark beetles. The Harz is at 500 meters level and higher, so your 700m argument fails. Why wouldn't the "healthy young stock" that you mention suffer the same fate once these trees reach maturity (or even before)? The bark beetles won't die during winter and droughts are bound to occur even more frequent then now anno 2022. I have an open mind, but the number of times that people try to convince the world not to worry is staggering and in fact rubs me completely up the opposite way. All these climate-change-deniers need to visit an optician (or other). Anyhow, we'll see in about 10 years time who was right. Pity that all that remains for the deniers will be to say, "oh dear, we got it wrong". I recommend you subscribe to the "Nature Bats Last" TH-cam channel: that will cheer you up (...not!).
@@Rick88888888 If the forest was 90% deciduous and 10% spruce, then if the spruce died off it would not matter much, and the other trees would fill in the space. Let the spruce stay where the climate is cold and the other trees cannot live - this is the way of things. Global Burning is the spark which has set off this particular beetle-fire, but do not think that Global Burning is the only tragedy we have caused. These spruce forests are not natural, they are man-made and kept going only by men killing off the other trees that grow there. Please, do not let those people who deny our impact to the climate let you ignore the other things we have done.
Sorry Rick. The CO2 driven dangerous climate change hypothesis is an unproven hypothesis. It's a good story though. But it doesn't stand up to scrutiny. At the very least, it is certainly NOT certain.
I have no doubt that global warming is real, however, how can global warming be blamed on this situation when you referred to the beetles that destroy these type of trees?
Wow I never expected such politically loaded content from this channel. "Blindly following a high court order" is not really a neutral way to put it. All parties have to follow any court order whether you're a simple citizen or a national body of government. If we all stop listening to courts we might just as well end our democratic civilization. The problem is that many parties over the decades have allowed the agricultural sector to explode. This even went directly against European rules for which only a temporary exemption was awarded by Brussels which is now ending. Sure farmers are one of the biggest victims of this long ago derailed policy but something simply has to change. We can no longer ignore the science. From what I've seen in this video spruce trees were very much a mono culture in the area. Every biologist will tell you that's a bad idea. In The Netherlands there are similar problems directly resulting from mono culture. The oak processionary caterpillar is mostly found in areas where planted oak trees are the only species of tree without much other vegetation around them. In nature oak trees usually grow more isolated from eachother at the fringes of forests. The caterpillars usually don't thrive there because of too many natural hazards and obstacles. The caterpillar issue is therefor a purely manmade issue. Same can be said of course when a forest of mostly one kind of tree dies entirely in a short time. In a naturally more diverse forest certain natural hazards have far less effect. Also it is known that coniferous trees are not at all advantageous. They use up much more water than broad-leaved trees and in times of drought catch fire much more easily too. Biologists vouch for planting a lot more species of broad-leaved trees for this very reason so we don't have to see so many widespread fires of the kind we now see in many parts of the world. Humans have had an enormous effect on plant and animal life in the past thousand or so years in Europe and other parts of the world. Many natural forests have disappeared and replaced with manmade parks. It is only logical to gain knowledge about what a natural and biodiverse ecosystem looks like for a particular area and then try to reinstate the conditions for such an ecosystem to re-emerge. It is OK if this takes more than a generation to happen. It is also OK if this means that certain areas we have come to get used to so much (the much debated Veluwe park comes to mind, an manmade area which was heavily forested long ago) to change dramatically. I'm not sure if this German area will see more natural vegetation emerge from all these dead trees. I'm not a biologist. But it is better to see it as a chance for change for the better than only consider it as a ecological disaster. Because it might very well not be a disaster at all.
Thanks for your comment. Nothing ´politically loaded´ here, just COMMON SENSE! Just to say that I am surprised to read so many viewers downplaying (`bagatelliseren´we say in the Netherlands) the situation and painting a far too rosy picture, probably driven by wishful thinking and having grown up with eye-blinkers on in/for all such cases. What if you are too optimistic? What if nothing is done (again) and we continue to bury our head in the sand? All that can be said in the future to our (grand)children is `sorry, we got it wrong`, and ´sorry again but it is too late now!´. PS, there is indeed a nitrogen problem, but it dwarfs besides the green house gasses crisis. Our high court never told the government to spend (waste) 25 billion Euros on the Nitrogen crises, forget about the economic consequences plus to largely ignore all other, far more dramatic climate change topics. At least that is now my opinion, especially after having seen the disaster in the Harz with my own eyes. I don´t think I will make such a video again because the comments section shows how ..... mankind is.
PS, look at the exponential way natural catastrophies are occurring in the world e.g. drought, forest fires, extreme snowfall, floods, torrential rain, hurricanes, heat waves, food shortages, energy crises, virus outbreaks, animal, insect, plankton and other destinction, virmin hordes etc. etc. Just look at the global temperature prediction graphs. Heat waves will annually increase by maybe 1 degree each year, so by 2030 I wouldn´t be surprised if we have multiple 45 degrees heatwaves in the Netherlands.
@@Rick88888888 Political, heavily opinionated.. Doesn't really matter how we label it. I don't criticize you for it mind you. It's just that I didn't expect it from you is all considering your other usually amazing content. I haven't read all the comments because I know what social media can be like. As soon as you put out an opinion you can expect both support and backlash. It simply is the polarized state we've reached as a society. About all the issues you mention. Climate change is definitely the main challenge. That doesn't mean we can't and shouldn't focus on more than one issue at a time. Mankind has the capability to tackle multiple issues at once. My goal to contribute to these debates is usually to try and have people keep an open mind. Things often come down to common sense as you say but common sense isn't always that obvious. Science and our current knowledge is often a complicated beast and boiling it down to simple explanations is usually not constructive but rather the opposite. I too struggle to keep an overview of the current state of human knowledge in all kinds of fields but I am also very careful not to fall into the trap of boiling things down too much. Perhaps I am too optimistic but frankly it's the one thing we need in these times. We can overcome many of the issues at hand. Sure the world is going to change drastically for all kinds of reasons. What we shouldn't do is break down the cornerstones of modern society just because we have a gut feeling. Because once we do that there is no way back and we can forget about solving the major crises.
@@moladiver6817 I take your points and to a large degree I agree with you. What I don't share is your statement about "optimism", especially not in this case of climate change. Optimism is a state of mind whereby events are viewed through rose-coloured glassed in stead of transparent glasses. If these sentiments drive policies, and if the optimism later on appears to have been a misconception, then the window of opportunity to take corrective measures may have closed long ago. There is far too much evidence that our planet is rapidly and exponentially on its way to disaster. Those who still can't see it, ignore it or simply close their eyes will be very sorry in about a decade of time. If you are interested, take a look on the "Nature Bats Last" website. You may not like sour-puss and extreme pessimist Prof.Guy McPherson, but he makes many valid, extremely knowledgable observations. In his worst case scenario human habitat will be completely lost by 2035. You might simply say: "he is wrong" or "I hope he is wrong", but what if he does have the right end of the stick?? By the way, he proclaims that it is already far too late to reverse the fate of our planet.
@@Rick88888888 Aren't you mistaking optimism with being naive in your explanation? Because the latter is what wearing pink glasses is all about. With optimism I mean nothing other than that we should stick to the idea that we can actually solve many of the issues with modern science and more effective policies. That is also the polar opposite of your last sentence which is the idea that it's all too late anyway so why bother. That's a kind of pessimism that can undermine a society entirely if it gets the chance to thrive. But while I recognize the terrible shortcomings of politics I think the effect of certain political parties and movements to put the actual science in question instead of discuss how to implement it is an even more dangerous phenomenon to our society than having too much pessimism alone. In fact it is science that can still bring us many great advancements. There's so much really exciting research going on out there. It's a shame really the mainstream media misses out on it and chooses to prioritize the worst of the worst stories. This is only bound to make people biased towards pessimistic future outcomes.
@@Rick88888888 The Beetles have been imported from we think Canada originally in untreated logs, but we are not sure exactly, it's a relatively new phenomenon since the 80's. In the UK we have tried to counter it by releasing a predator beetle that feeds on the Spruce Beetle with considerable success, but it's a big problem.
@@GeneralZap Sorry, but that is nonsense. It all depends on how the electricity to charge the car with was generated (solar, wind, hydrogen, nuclear, gas, fossile fuel, coal etc.)
I'm not a climate change denier, I'm not stupid; but this doesn't look like the effects of climate change, more so a bad disease or pest, or a lack of thinning to allow healthy trees to grow.
And what allows you to make that judgement? You provide nothing to back your conclusion. Why do all of the sudden these spruce trees no longer produce resin which in turn gives the bark beatle a free play? For almost a century there was no problem with monocultures. Too many people are sticking their head in the sand when it comes to climate change.
@@xderleonx7227 no - thats happened anytime in german forests when socialists / ideologes took over the forest management (and did not managed it as required). same crap happened in GDR…
![Beautiful South Limburg (NL) in the 1920s in color! [A.I. enhanced & colorized]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/hlJ8rBoThDA/mqdefault.jpg)
![🔴 ฟุตบอลแชมป์กีฬา 7HD แชมเปียน คัพ 2024 [รอบรองชนะเลิศ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zPm8ClLVhoE/mqdefault.jpg)
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 85 | คู่เอก "ยอดเหล็กเพชร vs ผึ้งหลวง"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Qq_19bnnxEo/mqdefault.jpg)
To read the full transcript of our commentry, please go to: www.ricksfilmrestoration.com/Harz1.com
Please share these shocking images with others to make more people aware what is happening to our unique planet. Thanks for watching! NL: Dit is interessant leesvoer: nos.nl/collectie/13901/artikel/2436073-het-stikstofprobleem-is-echt-nederlands-uitgelegd-in-acht-grafieken en nos.nl/collectie/13901/artikel/2433131-dit-is-wat-je-moet-weten-om-de-stikstofcrisis-te-begrijpen en veeteelt.nl/nieuws/eurofins-klimaat-niet-gebaat-bij-stikstofplannen en
www.viridiair.nl/blog/de-positieve-invloed-van-stikstof-op-de-natuur-en-de-leugens-erom-heen/
These dead zones are more likely caused by incessant Chem-trail spraying.
The Earth is being intentionally destroyed using aerosols containing myriads of toxins.
Yet, few people connect the dots.
you are right. it is unbelievable how many places are dead. just today I was on the Wurmberg and Brocken and you can see the areas of dead trees. it is really sad and scary to see that.
A ranger told me that the problem was also done by hand. After World War II so many trees were felled for reconstruction. and then only spruces were planted. they grow quickly but are very susceptible to drought. then the tree no longer has the strength to get rid of the bark beetles. The trees lack water to defend themselves.
@@christianmuller4027 Indeed. The tree's defense consists of producing Resin which literally stops the bark beetles in their tracks. Without enough moisture insuficient resin is produced.
That's best example, that we should not use mono culture in the forests. One insect is enough to destroy the forest. If we look at the Lower Harz, where mixed and "jungle" forest grows, this problem does not exist there. This bark beetle problem already existed in the early 1980s. Only the forestry in the upper Harz mountains has learned nothing from it. That's the problem here.
Exactly
Thank you for sharing either our history but as well as these videos.
I'm really sad seeing such a beautiful park dying.
What diverse footage. Drought is the untamed enemy, and it's devastation is palpable.
Your video really is so humbling.
Also, thank you for such a detailed description. It really helps.
I travel every year to the Harz and it is shocking to see how things have changed rapidly in the last 25 years alone. At the other side: In the Harz you can also see how nature is healing itself when people are NOT "helping" with special measures, but simply leave it as it is and allow nature do it's thing. In the Harz they have discovered that a new forest is growing up which will be much more divers (and thus stronger) as the one which has disappeared, most of the times due to climate change which we can see all over the planet by now (what about snowstorms in Los Angeles?), but also due to human actions.
Partially due to human actions.
Been in the hartz 10 yrs ago, and this is alarming to see, thanks for your effort put in making aware the change of climate, Embrace this Complexity! Simplicity is the enemy!! Change direction looks complex, but it is needed
As someone born in the Harz... The Beetle has been an issue for decades. Climate change only sped up the problem. What will happen now, is that the artificual mono culture that was planted back in the mining days will die and give way to the natural mixed forest of the area. Calling it a few years is nonsense of course, but shrubs and bushes will grow fast, so I guess it being green again in a few years is probably true.
And the death of the spruce trees actually wildly improved the view in many places. Hiking through the Harz often used to mean that you were looking at dark, shaded forest floor with thousand of bleak, brown spruce stems, with the green only starting near the top, as all the trees competed for sunlight and left the forest floor in permanent shade. The new forest will be much prettier and diverse. And the diversity is what grants resistance to pests like the bark beetle. So the Harz will actually improve, climate change remains the major global challenge nonetheless.
Your opinions about Nitrogen were weird though and smelled of vested interest. Nitrogen pollution is ruining rivers and lakes everywhere by massively stimulating growth of algae. And it depletes soils as well, by making plants grow and using up minerals unnaturately quickly. So it's not exactly a non-issue. On the whole, not as much as climate change though, of course.
That is the same problem we are having in the Pacific Northwest. 20 years ago the beetle was not seen north of California, now it is almost to Alaska. Our winters are no longer cold enough to kill them back and the droughts diminish the trees ablility to fight back with sap production.
As a retired scientist (medical research), one must view all of the factors, not just one. The Harz forest has an complex past. The landscape of the Harz Mountains, which for centuries was characterised by pure spruce forests, is changing. Spruce was originally planted as fast-growing wood to be used in mining. In the post-war period, more wood was needed for reconstruction, for heating and also for part of the reparation payments. As a result of the severe overexploitation of the forests from the 1930s until about 1950, approximately 140,000 ha of bare forest was created in Lower Saxony alone. In order to reforest these areas, great efforts were made to reforest the forests.
Only spruce seed was available in sufficient quantities in the Harz Mountains. Thus, spruce became the “Brotbaum” (bread tree) of the region and was also planted in locations where it is not actually native. This is an area where deciduous trees would naturally grow - beech mixed with maple, birch, ash, and other tree species.
True, but to my opinion this "mono culture" of spruce trees, that has been successfully in existence for 80 years, does not explain the rapid deforestation of the past ca. 5 years. I believe its due to climate change: the destructive bark beetles are surviving the current mild winters.
@@Rick88888888 Climate changes. Always has, always will. The historical record is clear. Earths climate is cyclical. And extraordinarily complex. This forest will recover naturally. All is well.
What a devastating sight! Thank you for the explanation which now makes a lot of sense. I've seen other videos from other parts of the world with similar sights, but without explanation. This makes me just as said as some sights of coral banks disappearing or turning into grey dead patches, also caused by the warming by the way. Such an incredible shame
Everything dies, I refuse to live my life in fear. And its naive to think any Government can save you.
I visited Goslar, Wernigerode, Quedlindburg, and the Teufelsmauer 6 years ago. Very beautiful. The mines in Golsar are very astonishing ; they were digging 1m per day, and there are hundreds of kilometers of galleries under the mounatin. Goslar by night and the mines worth largely the visit.
This is so sad to see. ❤️🌲
In 2019, while driving through Sauerland (NRW), I saw black bands of dead coniferous forests. Very sad.
Yes.. ..CO2 is very dangerous for plants.
nice joke ß}
Lol
Thats why you need it for them to grow
Yeah, I moved to Wernigerode in 2012 and it breaks my heart how the forests look now😔
Thanks for this video! A few months ago I was also in the Harz and indeed saw the dead forests. So awful :-(
I'll be heading that way again in three weeks. Mainly to urbex in abandoned hotels etc. and to enjoy the beautiful towns.
War vor vier Wochen in Schierke zum Bike bzw Fahrrad fahren... einfach nur traurig den Wald so zu sehen...
I am German from the Berlin-Brandenburg. The mixed woods here do not look like this, i love our beech woods - majestic in summer. After WWII many of these industrial woods where planted all over Germany to compensate for resources and even to pay for reparations. We have them in Brandenburg everywhere too. Climate change is a kind of half-truth, yet often repeated by superficial media or politicians to push a one sided agenda. Climate change only proofs how prone mono cultures are to diseases. Happens with other plants too. I think besides Climate change we should not forget that other man made problems are not gone.
Half-truth ? Winters have been getting warmer here in the UK. Permafrost areas have been thawing in parts of Siberia.
@@daffyduk77 "Half truth" in the case of the Issue of these industrial mono cultures in Germany. The World is a bit more complex than putting a single singularity label on everything. And what you are telling me, in the end you are ok with these mono cultures instead of a healthy mixed nature as long every bodies bows to "climate change"`?
@@sunrae3971 Is this spruce forest a mono culture? Sure looks like it.
@@brushcreek42 man made woods vs. natural woods.
The real half truth is that global warming is man made and that man can stop it. Rubbish. The earth has gone thru countless warming phases and this is just another. The global warming agenda is nothing more than a way for corporations to make lots of money.
This is sad. I am sorry this is happening. We experience plagues of beetles every few years. Some of our mountainsides left barren of greenery after they've had their fill.
I live in an area of the USA that has suffered extreme drought for the last couple of decades. Much of our region is beginning to look like this, but because of drought. The lakes are emptying, some totally gone and many down by 100ft or more. The forest undergrowth wilts. While people water pastures, hay fields, lawns, etc. with no regard for water saving measures, growing thousands of acres of thristy corn in the desert to feed the cows, more trees being cut for animal ranching and pastures, and the thirsty cities keep growing...
Thank you for all the work you put into this channel. Bless
Thanks! It seems we are on the same page. I can´t see the process that you describe being reversed soon, do you?
Bark beetles are nasty things, and in warmer climes are almost impossible to eradicate, once established. The mountain range to the north of where I live used to be covered in trees. About 30 years ago the bark beetles came. Now all there is on the hills is scrub, which burns off in wildfires every few years. I can see about three trees left on the mountains. This is in Southern California.
It is not only climate change that is to blame. It is the untypical planting of forests with monocultures of spruce! When pests come along, it's all too late. This mixed forest will develop in the Harz, it will take time, but this forest will be more resistant to environmental influences: More emphasis should be placed on the self-regulating forces of nature.
`more resistent´, OK, but will they be resistent enough? The monoculture spruce trees lasted for 70 or more years. Now ´suddenly` there are devastating influences. Will decidious trees be immune for influences due to climate change? Don´t be too sure!
@@Rick88888888 Well, there are trees and woods in Italy, Spain or Portugal, aren't they? Maybe we'll have another, more arid climate here in Middle Europe, but nature will fix it (with the help of humans). I'm an optimistic person. What's going on in the Harz is in a double manner "man made".
I'm more concerned about the woods in Southern Europe that at some point only cacti will grow there. 🥴
Der Harz sah tatsächlich schon in den 80ern so aus. Schon damals begann das Waldsterben. Mein Vater hat das 1987 im Urlaub im Harz angesprochen und gefilmt.
Can you show us that film from 1987?
@@Rick88888888 Ich könnte dir den Film möglicherweise senden. Mein Bruder hat den Film als Videodatei.
Looks like much of the dead forest was a monoculture of spruce. That along with spruce not being indigenous to the area, coupled with stress from a changing climate, and you have a prefect formula for the exponential spread of a pest.
Bedankt voor het delen van de video. Complex probleem. Zeker is een veranderend klimaat deel van het probleem. Maar in Nederland hebben eens palmbomen gestaan, dus het klimaat verandert voortdurend. Het planten van een monocultuur is een ander probleem. Dan moet je landbouwkundig gezien gebruik gaan maken van bestrijdingsmiddelen. De invloed van ons op klimaatverandering wordt erg overschat, omdat er toch 8 miljard monden gevoed moeten worden. Voor de mens geldt het zelfde als voor die kever: er zijn er gewoon teveel. Denk dat het beter is ons aan te passen aan de klimaatverandering.
Nee, het is beter dat wij ons aanpassen ter bestrijding van de klimaatverandering i.p.v. het als een voldongen feit te accepteren. Inderdaad, (veel) minder mensen op aarde gaat in de richting van de beste oplossing, maar het is een Utopie dat de mensheid dit beseft, laat staan maatregelen in die richting binnenkort gaat treffen.... totdat het rond het einde van deze eeuw te laat is... Gelukkig zal ik dat niet meer meemaken.
Great video report and highly interesting commentary. Pity that this video is drawing out so many climate change deniers and cranks
The earth has always been changing. Even before the great flood of Noah.
We are being lied to.
Prove me wrong.
@@jtjjbannie Just wait another 10 years or so and you'll see how wrong you are
@@johanboer7157
LOL!!! Ok bro.
@@johanboer7157 They said the same 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 etc etc years ago and still we are all pretty much alive. We are still not running out of oil, more people live on this planet today in better conditions than ever before. Even if human activity is fully responsible for the current warming trend, then what? Human activity has an effect on everything. I assume you live in a house, that is nature’s land taken by men to build your house on. The current warming trend is not causing any danger to the human species. Solar panels and windturbines and not the solution, they will only take more of nature’s land, making this planet a more ugly place to live on.
Здравствуйте. 10.17 - Очень, очень печальное вид... Спасибо за видео.
I have pictures from 2017 of some of the same spots, even though they were taken during the winter time, you can tell the trees were looking healthy compared to this ... I'm not sure if we're able to post links in the comments, perhaps I'll try to put them in an Imgur album later.
The Harz will return with proper agronomy management. Pine beetles have far reaching effects and have been in the ecosystem far longer than centuries of people who curse the incorrect theory that cold winters will eliminate the pest. We can only wish the same desired cold would eliminate the pest responsible for the largest cause of human death, the mosquito. Maybe we can train these insects to eat the beetles 🙃.
What a coincidence, great oppertunity to build a solar or windturbine farm on those places to fight 'climate change' 🤡
Spruce forests are not healthy. These spruce forests are only forest business and are not a long term situation. A set aside programme would work rather than intensive forestry practices. The beetle problem can be solved but it would seem a lack of interest or money has only made the matter worse.
Quick growing woods suffer as they are a soft wood and should be seen as only a short term growing enterprise. If the wood has been damaged by the beetle the wood becomes of very little value.
Once the beetle situation is cleared up, I see no reason why most of the existing trees cannot be cut down and left to rot and a set a side programme put in place.
This has nothing to do with climate change rather than a over use of the area without investment by the forestry company.
Sad to see...
"Spruce forests are not healthy": You probably mean that because of the environment (location, maintenance, diversity etc.) and recent unfavourable climate, the health of these trees has been effected, and not that these trees are unhealthy by nature. Spruce trees have been around since the dawn of time. It's not their DNA that's flawed and over the ages such trees have contributed enormously to mankind!
@@Rick88888888 It is not that spruce trees are always an issue, but in this case the woods are monoculture plantation. I'm not sure what trees used to cover that area, but in the video you comment how the deciduous trees you drive past are not affected, meaning that trees than conifer exist well there and in the past may have been spread throughout the area. Plantations lack biodiversity and are therefore less resilient and more susceptible to disease, not only through lack of habitat for predators, but also an over-abundance of food for those causing disease. In the UK, the Forestry Commission has felled much of the old woodland of mixed deciduous trees and replaced them with monoculture spruce plantations, all of which is a crying shame
We had the same experience in the Hoch Sauerland some weeks ago. All those dead spruce trees gave an apocalyptic picture. The Germans we talked to blamed the mono culture forrest combined with not enough rain
Yes the `monoculture´ argument is raised very often (too often). What troubles me is that such spruce trees were already being planted just after WW-II. For 70 years there were no such problems as we experience today. Also I seriously doubt that the result would have been much different if for example half of these trees had been deciduous trees. The Borkenkàfer and the drought would still find their way to the spruce trees and kill them. Even at 10% the 90% deciduous trees would probably not protect the spruce trees.
What do you think?
@@Rick88888888 Rick, I don’t know. But I do know that the current situation is very sad and that the forrests will need a lot of time (human perspective) to recover. Keep up the good work!
@@WimS675 Dutch Elm disease, ash die back, Cavendish banana crop failure, unless you plant mixed genetic forests/ crops you will be open to devastation by insects and viruses. Warming is increasing the risks of course.
I live near Dover on the English Channel. The sea here is warming rapidly. Species of fish never seen before are arriving. Red mullet, Gilt head bream and even Tuna are being found. The usual fishing seasons are changing. The Cod and mackerel appear in lower numbers and are apparently staying north in cooler waters. This has all happened over the last 5-10 years. I was last here 7 years ago and this wasn’t the story then.
Thanks for the info!
Ich war gestern da, hab auch überlegt ein Video darüber zu machen
Why not do that and upload it to TH-cam? The more people that realize how the Earth is being destroyed the better!
The spruce trees were killed by an infestation of bark beetles.
Indeed. And still some people believe it has nothing to do with climate change. Fact is that these beetles have survived the recent mild winters whereas in the past they died en-mass during the much colder winters.
@@Rick88888888 Apart from that, during the droughts we had in recent years, the trees can't produce resin which protects them from the beetles.
The beetle is the main culprit here. It’s a ferocious little creature. In this episode more emphasis has been placed upon climate change being the main factor.
I’ve just come back from the Harz and witnessed the devastation but equally seen plenty of new growth. Yes, it will take time to rejuvenate.
It is climate change that is at the source of the problem: The Letterzetter beetle survives the warmer winters and the spruce trees produce less raisin (amber) that normally hinder the beetle in digging tunnels in the bark due to drought. Some people blame the mono culture of spruce trees which is utter nonsense. In more diverse circumstances the spruce trees will still die, only the effects will be less visible.
I am every year in the Harz forest. It is brutal to see the dying Forest.
Das kommt, wenn man keine heimischen Bäume pflanzt.
Diese Bäume sind schon zeit 1948 in der Harz, und plözlich geht dass nicht mehr...?!
Nein, es gibt viel mehr komplizierte Ursachen.
Indeed, weird that they lie about it... And it will take longer than just five years. But nature will adapt. When there is a forest fire, all is gone too. Nature comes back. No need to be too pessimistic about the forest.
What will be devastating though, is the droughts on this earth and the uptake in velocity of storms and floods. That will get worse, before it gets better, even if we'd consume hardly anything anymore, and we will, of course. Earth is in for some terrible weather for quite some time still.
#150👍🤣The world is always changing. Climate included! Get over it because we are not fixing anything. Those dead trees need to be logged before they burn. Bugs are the problem here and if you cut the trees the bugs will starve. Or find a pesticide that is as effective as freezing winter weather. Shit happens just consider the way the dinosaurs died. A new ice age will come guaranteed!!
Sure but the problem is that after a mass extinction event it takes on average 50 million years for a new stable ecosystem to form. By then we will be long gone. If we value any kind of future for our own species this can't be ignored. So this discussion basically boils down whether or not we care about our own future.
More Videos Like this Please🙏
Will do! I have an opinion on many things, but don´t want to turn this channel into a (political) debating club. Restoring and colorizing historic footage will remain the core of this channel.
In Nederland zie je ook veel dode naaldbossen
Ik ben bang dat het ook hier nog veel erger gaat worden t.g.v. deze schorskever in combinatie met droogte en zeer hoge temperaturen. Mijn mening is dat we (wereldwijd) een CO2 probleem hebben. Het stikstof-probleem valt daarbij in het niet!
Like others are saying, monoculture of spruce trees is the main problem. In a diverse, mixed species forest you wouldn't even notice a few dead spruce trees.
Spruce Budworms folks. Nothing to do with weather change or whatever BS thing they want to call it.
Same thing is happening where I live... 😬
And where is that?
@@johanboer7157 Canada, west coast.
@@BubbafromSapperton do you have murder Hornets yet?
@@chevychase3103 not yet, it's gone quiet about them.
Use the spruce for lumber or fuel and plant trees that are resistant to the beetle and drought. We certainly do have climate change, and it will be with us far longer than any of us. Clean air and clean water should always be a priority, but Man cannot correct this situation. The Earth is going through a normal warming cycle. In time it will cool off again. Even though the warming causes devastation in some areas it helps promote new and stronger growth in other areas. There’s always a balance.
perhaps the governments are due us a FULL DETAILED explanation of their aircraft & microwave geoengineering programs. They spare no expense. Is it making our climate more unstable? Worse or Better??
Chemtrails to block the sun for the so called ''climate change''. Better leave nature alone, it will fix itself always.
Same thing has happened in Helena, Montana. U.S.A.
South shore of Nova Scotia as well. Its sickening to see from the water, vast "bands" of spruce. We have beetles to, evasive Japanese long horn.
Its sad and definitely because of climate change
That said problem wouldnt be so big If it was a natural forest as nature doesnt tend to be so uniform
This is not climate change. It is problems that all monoculture forest have. We had the same problem in the Great Smokey Mountain National park in the US. In the Higher elevations where only fur forests grew it was thought that Acid Rain was killing all the fur trees. Acid Rain was the latest enviromental disaster that was being promoted back then that of course now you here nothing about. The enviromentalist went crazy. The problem ended up being a bettle that was killing all the trees. This happened back in the late 70's and early 80's. History does not reapeat but it does often Rhyme.
I totally disagree. This monoculture had no problems since WW-II, until very recent.
Have the Fraser Furs come back? I was there in 1987 and saw large patches of dead furs.
Where was this Bark-beetle imported from?
Many invasive pests have made their way around the world with the growth of globalized shipping.Many of the invasive pests have effected areas throughout the United States by way of imports from Asia.
I just Googled it. These beatles were not imported but always around in these areas.
Are these trees, natural to the area ?
Yes
No, spruce trees are not native to the Harz. They were manually planted (by scores of predominantly German ladies) just after WWII, mainly as a source for timber.
@@ingvar1996 No, unless you only count the post WWII period.
You must burn the forest for a new one to grow
De discussie gaat meer over de vraag of de huidige temperatuurstijging volledig is toe te schrijven aan menselijke CO2 uitstoot. Dat is iets totaal anders dan klimaatverandering ontkennen, dat zou overigens ook dom zijn, want als mensen klimaatverandering ontkennen, hoe kunnen ze dan verklaren dat er vroeger ijstijden zijn geweest. Dit soort onzorgvuldige formuleringen brengen alleen maar verwarring. Hetzelfde als met alle milieu problemen op 1 hoop gooien.
Ja hoor, iedereen weet zijn eigen draai aan dit verhaal te geven, de meesten met als doel klimaatverandering te ondermijnen, bagatelliseren of als overheids-conspiracy af te schilderen. Wie geen oog heeft voor dit soort beelden, orkanen, hittegolven, koudegolven, droogte, extreme sneeuwval, overstromingen, smelten poolkappen, meet- en bewijsbare opwarming van de aarde (zie IPCC rapport) etc. etc heeft stront in zijn of haar ogen (sorry voor dit woordgebruik). Je kunt er elk stempel op plakken, van alles al dan niet de schuld geven, maar de feiten en pessimistische vooruitzichten voor onze planeet zijn onmiskenbaar. In de doofpot stoppen is wel het laatste wat we als mensheid moeten doen. Ik ben (nog) geen milieu-activist, maar na het lezen van deze comments-section ben ik diep in de mineur gelet op de stupiditeit die daar ten toon wordt gespreid.
Helaas ondermijnt het volkomen uit zijn verband getrokken stikstof-crisisverhaal het vertrouwen in weloverwogen en wetenschappelijk verantwoorde maatregelen met als gevolg dat de ware oorzaak van de klimaatproblemen onvoldoende wordt onderzocht noch effectief aangepakt noch dat er draagvlak voor de noodzakelijke maatregelen ontstaat.
Nog even en ik haal deze video offline wegens mijn enorme frustratie.
Kijk maar eens naar het "Nature Bats Last" TH-camkanaal! Daar word je echt 'vrolijk' van...
@@Rick88888888 Nee Rick, zeker niet offline halen. Ongetwijfeld gaan er ook nog mensen hun beklag doen over het feit dat je je in een niet bepaald co2 neutrale trein verplaatste. Als maar genoeg mensen dit soort beelden verspreiden komt er een momentum dat mensen ingrijpen gaan eisen. Of dat op tijd zal zijn valt te betwijfelen. Maar de stikstof uitstoot heeft natuurlijk wel degelijk ook een impact op de natuur. Ik zou zeggen: zoek maar eens naar oude en recente beelden van de Veluwe. Dan zul je zien dat grote delen van de zandgronden verdrongen zijn. Er groeit overal gras en mos. Het zorgt voor eenzijdigheid in de natuur waardoor die juist extra kwetsbaar is voor plagen en extreem weer. Die eenzijdige naaldbomen in de Harz laten die kwetsbaarheid goed zien.
@@Rick88888888 Ik deel uw pessimisme niet. Ik heb niet de vrees dat de planeet onleefbaar wordt door CO2 gerelateerde opwarming. Het is precies wat u zelf zegt. Iedereen weet er zijn/haar eigen draai aan te geven. Mijn idee indruk is dat u volledig in de paniek/pessimistische modus schiet en elk verschijnsel wijdt aan menselijke invloed op het klimaat. In het Eoceen had Nederland een subtropisch klimaat en de polen waren ijsvrij. Ik zou mij eerder zorgen maken om plastic vervuiling en ontbossing wat echt schade toebrengt aan de natuur, ipv onzichtbaar CO2.
@@koen2914 Ik ben totaal niet in paniek maar ben wel deze discussie spuugzat en ga er niet verder op in.
@@wellness3 Ik kom al vele jaren op de Veluwe. Vooral het zakken van het grondwaterpeil is me opgevallen. Over die verschraling maak ik me veel minder zorgen, (minder zandgronden en het verdwijnen van enkele plantensoorten) wat uiteraard niet betekent dat we er niets aan moeten doen (bijvoorbeeld tonnen schelpen vermalen (kalk) en in de natuurgebieden uitstrooien.
Mijn inschatting is dat het broeikaseffect (CO2, Methaan) 100 keer erger is. Ik zie grote overeenkomsten met de zg. "Zure Regen" crisis uit de jaren '80 waar niemand het meer over heeft.
Ik zou van die 25 miljard Euro 1 miljard besteden aan de N-crisis en 24 miljard aan het z.s.m. zorgen voor nog meer schone energiebronnen: Zonnepanelen, Windturbines, Getijden-energie, Grondwarmte en (jawel) minstens 4 kerncentrales (te bouwen op zee).
Lees dit: nos.nl/collectie/13901/artikel/2436073-het-stikstofprobleem-is-echt-nederlands-uitgelegd-in-acht-grafieken
😂 zo mild was de afgelopen winter zeker niet in de Harz. Komt door de eenzijdige bomen soort en de kever. Maar dit is al veel langer aan de gang. Natuur herstel zich al weer.
Weer zo'n optimist... Het probleem is veel complexer en de uitkomst m.i. veel pessimistischer.
@@Rick88888888 bij de infocentrums in en om de Harz liggen folders hoe het 10 jaar terug er uit zag. En hoe nu. Ik woon aan de rand van de Harz maar waar de dode dennen weg zijn word alles weer groen. Omdat er weer lucht en licht bij komt.
@@sebastiaan4898 Nog steeds twijfelachtig optimisme! Als er weer sparren op dezelfde plekken terugkomen gebeurt over ca. 15 tot 20 jaar precies hetzelfde: weer droogte, onvoldoende aanmaak door de sparren van hars en dus weer vrij spel voor de schorskevers. Meer diversiteit met loofbomen zal wellicht alles groener maken, maar die loofbomen zullen de sparren niet beschermen. Sterker nog, de loofbomen zullen de sparren beroven van vocht. De schorskevers kunnen/zullen ook andere boomsoorten aantasten, zeker bij zwakte door droogte.
The Germans will have to start growing other tree species that are not affected by the disease.
Your limited scope doesn’t take into account climate trends and anomalies which unfold on a timeline much greater than your own lifespan. To smugly parrot the globalists’ mantra of “climate change” shows your acute lack of discernment in vetting information presented to you.
You are ‘feeling’ rather than ‘thinking’ on the subject.
Not only do I question “climate change” as presented by the powers that be, but as a rule, I don’t believe a single word of what my (or any other) government says. They have proven themselves time and again to all be psychopathic liars with nefarious agendas.
There’s much more hard data on this fact than there is on so-called “climate change”.
You´ll soon find out how wrong you are if you have another 25+ years more to live. Ignore what governments are saying, but make your own independent judgement! People (like you) must be blind if they don´t recognise the effects of climate change over the past ca. 10 years, e.g. drought, floods, heat waves, hurricanes, forest fires, extreme snow fall, mass animal and insect extinction etc. etc. You probably had your head buried in a game on your mobile phone when you ´watched´ this video. But hey, why do I even bother to reply to such comments...
Earth is flat. If you dont know this you are still asleep. Thats a fact!
@@Rick88888888 yeah, wait 10 more years and all major cities will be underwater and polar bears will go extinct. Man, this bs mantra has been around since 1970s. It’s all about money and power, climate is perfectly fine.
P.S.
I think that you should be more concerned about the fact that Germany’s Green Party (honk honk) wants to cut 2000 ha of Reinhardswald untouched forest for wind farms that are detrimental to the nature.
Call the dutch for stikstof
The (politician-created) stupid Dutch `stikstof´ (Nitroges) crises has now gotten totally out of hand. Hardly anybody understands the urgency to waste 25 billion Euros of taxpayers money (plus the consequent financial disaster for our agricultural sector)!
I am not stupid and have an open mind and have tried to understand the stikstof crises, but utterly failed at doing so.
The real culpret is CO2 greenhouse gas!!! If it was up to me then I would spend 1 billion Euros on reducing Nitrogen and 24 billion on CO2 reduction, in particular by building half a dozen nuclear energy plants (off the coast in the North sea).
@@Rick88888888 You're absolutely correct. It's a terrible sham and hopefully farmers with support of the public will be able to revert this disastrous policy decision. CO2 and green energy sources are urgent matters, not a bureaucratically created nitrogen problem.
@@GQ2593 Thank you for sharing these sentiments. What I find most destressing in this Nitrogen crisis is the sheer rigidness, fear for loss of face, eyeblinker-on mentality and future vision-less inflexibility and stupidity of our government (and governments in general). All the high court said was that something should be done about N-emissions. They did not dictate a spend of 25 billion. Our visionless PM is simply hiding behind this court order and a mindless `regeeraccoord`
HAARP!!!
Looking for a conspiracy explanation, aren't you. Silly, when you know the real one, which is bad enough.
Another great video Rick---apart from its alarming portent!!! Climate change is here. The Australian bushfires of two years ago missed my home by 100 metres. Many,many,many others were not so fortunate. That too was a Climate change event.Undeniable --in my opinion. Thanks.
Looks like a forest fire went through years ago.
No. You don't see any fire scorching. The trees simply died because of drought and the bark beetle.
@@Rick88888888 it’s the pine beetle for us in western Canada.
geen boer geen voer, wij steunen de boer! if you want to know why the trees are dying talk to the Förster or the Jäger they will tell you why. Stop this climate drama activism
Mee eens. De boerenstand wordt volkomen onterecht en met stupide, onwetenschappelijke argumentatie om zeep geholpen. De stikstof crisis gaat veel te ver en is zwaar overdreven. Helaas onttrekt het grotendeels de aandacht van de echte veroorzakers van de klimaatverandering, met name CO2.
@@Rick88888888 de echte veroorzakers van klimaatverandering? De cycli van de aarde bedoel je? We zijn pas begonnen met meten vanaf de 19e eeuw oid... begin 19e eeuw, is deze data door gekalibreerde instrumenten gemeten? En waar, en hoe? Hoe was het klimaat voor de tijd dat er gemeten werd? Waarom werden we in de jaren 70 gewaarschuwd voor een 2e ijstijd? Waarom hebben alle klimaat predikanten een villa aan zee terwijl ze prediken dat de zeespiegel gaat stijgen? Waarom vliegen de klimaat predikanten de hele wereld over met hun prive jets om gezamenlijk in Davos te overleggen over 'het klimaat probleem' terwijl dat ook gewoon via een zoom meeting kan (Co2 neutraal)? Waarom voegen ze in kassen extra Co2 toe om de gewassen beter te laten groeien? Wordt de aarde juist niet groener van Co2? enz enz. Klimaat verandering is gewoon een verzonnen religie aan het worden om de gewone burger in angst te laten leven en te betalen voor iets wat er niet is. Ik persoonlijk maak me meer zorgen om vervuiling van de planeet en niet zozeer het klimaat ;) Ps. je gerestaureerde oude filmpjes zijn super!
@@mog5007 Bedankt voor je reactie. Deze video was een uitschieter. Volgende keer weer historische video´s, met name omdat ik nu nog meer dan van de beelden uit de Harz geschrokken ben van de vele (.....) commentaren onder deze video. Wat ik met `....` had willen zeggen hou ik maar liever even voor me.
@@Rick88888888 Voel je vooral niet verplicht om alleen oude filmpjes te plaatsen hoor ;) ik heb ook genoten van dit filmpje. En ja het is treurig om te zien wat er gebeurd is met het bos. Het is juist goed dat je filmpje het debat aanwakkert over dit soort zaken. Ik vind het juist interessant om meerdere reacties te lezen met verschillende invalshoeken. Juist nu het debat mist in de mainstream. Vooral filmpjes blijven posten!
One should not forget that nothing is necessarily as it seems. The Harz is not dead, it is more alive than before. In the general imagination one connects the healthy Harz with endless, green spruce forests. But these spruce forests are not healthy, wild forest. These spruce forests are only forest business. Without good biodiversity. In contrast today's Wildnes, which most refer to as "dead", is full of life. All the deadwood, grasses and flowers attract a lot of insects and animals. Biodiversity is already greater than in a spruce forest. But yes, the spruce forest has bound more CO2 and it will take some time before the new wild forest has this effect. But he grows much faster than assumed in this film. Pioneer trees such as birch, ash, aspen or alder grow up to 1 meter a year. Young, diverse forests develop everywhere in the Harz. The spruce occurs naturally only from about 700 meters above sea level. And there is already a healthy young stock again. As I said, the situation is much better than you would think at first glance. It just doesn't live up to our expectations. - With all this I don't want to say that man-made climate change is not a problem. It is mankind's greatest problem!
You are giving no proof whatsoever, just blind optimism. Blaming the monoculture and bark beetle is far too easy and over-simplified. Fact is that all these trees have died almost at the same moment, give or take a few years. They grew in the Harz (and in many other areas) without big problems since they started to be planted just after WW-II (75 years ago!). Even if the ratio had been 10% spruce trees versus 90% decideous trees (in stead of the reverse) the spruce trees would still most likely have suffered the same fate, only it would not have been so noticeable. Don't believe for a moment that the deciduous trees will somehow shield-off the spruce trees from beetles or drought. Even worse, these trees will probably will deprive the spruce trees from enough water to produce resin in order to defend themselves against the bark beetles.
The Harz is at 500 meters level and higher, so your 700m argument fails. Why wouldn't the "healthy young stock" that you mention suffer the same fate once these trees reach maturity (or even before)? The bark beetles won't die during winter and droughts are bound to occur even more frequent then now anno 2022.
I have an open mind, but the number of times that people try to convince the world not to worry is staggering and in fact rubs me completely up the opposite way. All these climate-change-deniers need to visit an optician (or other). Anyhow, we'll see in about 10 years time who was right. Pity that all that remains for the deniers will be to say, "oh dear, we got it wrong". I recommend you subscribe to the "Nature Bats Last" TH-cam channel: that will cheer you up (...not!).
@@Rick88888888 If the forest was 90% deciduous and 10% spruce, then if the spruce died off it would not matter much, and the other trees would fill in the space. Let the spruce stay where the climate is cold and the other trees cannot live - this is the way of things.
Global Burning is the spark which has set off this particular beetle-fire, but do not think that Global Burning is the only tragedy we have caused. These spruce forests are not natural, they are man-made and kept going only by men killing off the other trees that grow there. Please, do not let those people who deny our impact to the climate let you ignore the other things we have done.
Yes I'm optimistic, it took nature only milions of years to be abundant again after that dinosaur thing.
Sorry Rick. The CO2 driven dangerous climate change hypothesis is an unproven hypothesis. It's a good story though. But it doesn't stand up to scrutiny. At the very least, it is certainly NOT certain.
I have no doubt that global warming is real, however, how can global warming be blamed on this situation when you referred to the beetles that destroy these type of trees?
You should watch the whole video or listen more carefully to the commentary...
Wow I never expected such politically loaded content from this channel. "Blindly following a high court order" is not really a neutral way to put it. All parties have to follow any court order whether you're a simple citizen or a national body of government. If we all stop listening to courts we might just as well end our democratic civilization. The problem is that many parties over the decades have allowed the agricultural sector to explode. This even went directly against European rules for which only a temporary exemption was awarded by Brussels which is now ending. Sure farmers are one of the biggest victims of this long ago derailed policy but something simply has to change. We can no longer ignore the science.
From what I've seen in this video spruce trees were very much a mono culture in the area. Every biologist will tell you that's a bad idea. In The Netherlands there are similar problems directly resulting from mono culture. The oak processionary caterpillar is mostly found in areas where planted oak trees are the only species of tree without much other vegetation around them. In nature oak trees usually grow more isolated from eachother at the fringes of forests. The caterpillars usually don't thrive there because of too many natural hazards and obstacles. The caterpillar issue is therefor a purely manmade issue. Same can be said of course when a forest of mostly one kind of tree dies entirely in a short time. In a naturally more diverse forest certain natural hazards have far less effect.
Also it is known that coniferous trees are not at all advantageous. They use up much more water than broad-leaved trees and in times of drought catch fire much more easily too. Biologists vouch for planting a lot more species of broad-leaved trees for this very reason so we don't have to see so many widespread fires of the kind we now see in many parts of the world.
Humans have had an enormous effect on plant and animal life in the past thousand or so years in Europe and other parts of the world. Many natural forests have disappeared and replaced with manmade parks. It is only logical to gain knowledge about what a natural and biodiverse ecosystem looks like for a particular area and then try to reinstate the conditions for such an ecosystem to re-emerge. It is OK if this takes more than a generation to happen. It is also OK if this means that certain areas we have come to get used to so much (the much debated Veluwe park comes to mind, an manmade area which was heavily forested long ago) to change dramatically.
I'm not sure if this German area will see more natural vegetation emerge from all these dead trees. I'm not a biologist. But it is better to see it as a chance for change for the better than only consider it as a ecological disaster. Because it might very well not be a disaster at all.
Thanks for your comment. Nothing ´politically loaded´ here, just COMMON SENSE! Just to say that I am surprised to read so many viewers downplaying (`bagatelliseren´we say in the Netherlands) the situation and painting a far too rosy picture, probably driven by wishful thinking and having grown up with eye-blinkers on in/for all such cases. What if you are too optimistic? What if nothing is done (again) and we continue to bury our head in the sand? All that can be said in the future to our (grand)children is `sorry, we got it wrong`, and ´sorry again but it is too late now!´.
PS, there is indeed a nitrogen problem, but it dwarfs besides the green house gasses crisis.
Our high court never told the government to spend (waste) 25 billion Euros on the Nitrogen crises, forget about the economic consequences plus to largely ignore all other, far more dramatic climate change topics.
At least that is now my opinion, especially after having seen the disaster in the Harz with my own eyes. I don´t think I will make such a video again because the comments section shows how ..... mankind is.
PS, look at the exponential way natural catastrophies are occurring in the world e.g. drought, forest fires, extreme snowfall, floods, torrential rain, hurricanes, heat waves, food shortages, energy crises, virus outbreaks, animal, insect, plankton and other destinction, virmin hordes etc. etc. Just look at the global temperature prediction graphs. Heat waves will annually increase by maybe 1 degree each year, so by 2030 I wouldn´t be surprised if we have multiple 45 degrees heatwaves in the Netherlands.
@@Rick88888888 Political, heavily opinionated.. Doesn't really matter how we label it. I don't criticize you for it mind you. It's just that I didn't expect it from you is all considering your other usually amazing content.
I haven't read all the comments because I know what social media can be like. As soon as you put out an opinion you can expect both support and backlash. It simply is the polarized state we've reached as a society.
About all the issues you mention. Climate change is definitely the main challenge. That doesn't mean we can't and shouldn't focus on more than one issue at a time. Mankind has the capability to tackle multiple issues at once.
My goal to contribute to these debates is usually to try and have people keep an open mind. Things often come down to common sense as you say but common sense isn't always that obvious. Science and our current knowledge is often a complicated beast and boiling it down to simple explanations is usually not constructive but rather the opposite. I too struggle to keep an overview of the current state of human knowledge in all kinds of fields but I am also very careful not to fall into the trap of boiling things down too much.
Perhaps I am too optimistic but frankly it's the one thing we need in these times. We can overcome many of the issues at hand. Sure the world is going to change drastically for all kinds of reasons. What we shouldn't do is break down the cornerstones of modern society just because we have a gut feeling. Because once we do that there is no way back and we can forget about solving the major crises.
@@moladiver6817 I take your points and to a large degree I agree with you. What I don't share is your statement about "optimism", especially not in this case of climate change. Optimism is a state of mind whereby events are viewed through rose-coloured glassed in stead of transparent glasses. If these sentiments drive policies, and if the optimism later on appears to have been a misconception, then the window of opportunity to take corrective measures may have closed long ago. There is far too much evidence that our planet is rapidly and exponentially on its way to disaster. Those who still can't see it, ignore it or simply close their eyes will be very sorry in about a decade of time. If you are interested, take a look on the "Nature Bats Last" website. You may not like sour-puss and extreme pessimist Prof.Guy McPherson, but he makes many valid, extremely knowledgable observations. In his worst case scenario human habitat will be completely lost by 2035.
You might simply say: "he is wrong" or "I hope he is wrong", but what if he does have the right end of the stick?? By the way, he proclaims that it is already far too late to reverse the fate of our planet.
@@Rick88888888 Aren't you mistaking optimism with being naive in your explanation? Because the latter is what wearing pink glasses is all about. With optimism I mean nothing other than that we should stick to the idea that we can actually solve many of the issues with modern science and more effective policies. That is also the polar opposite of your last sentence which is the idea that it's all too late anyway so why bother. That's a kind of pessimism that can undermine a society entirely if it gets the chance to thrive.
But while I recognize the terrible shortcomings of politics I think the effect of certain political parties and movements to put the actual science in question instead of discuss how to implement it is an even more dangerous phenomenon to our society than having too much pessimism alone. In fact it is science that can still bring us many great advancements. There's so much really exciting research going on out there. It's a shame really the mainstream media misses out on it and chooses to prioritize the worst of the worst stories. This is only bound to make people biased towards pessimistic future outcomes.
Good comment from Hsaid Arb (below) it's got nothing to do with global warming.
If you are so certain then explain why.
@@Rick88888888 The Beetles have been imported from we think Canada originally in untreated logs, but we are not sure exactly, it's a relatively new phenomenon since the 80's. In the UK we have tried to counter it by releasing a predator beetle that feeds on the Spruce Beetle with considerable success, but it's a big problem.
How did you visit the Harz? Do you have an Electric car or do you drive on petrol🤔
Your attempt to shame me or make me feel guilty won't work! :-))
Electric car is more bad for the Earth then Petrol of Diesel car.
@@GeneralZap Sorry, but that is nonsense. It all depends on how the electricity to charge the car with was generated (solar, wind, hydrogen, nuclear, gas, fossile fuel, coal etc.)
@@GeneralZap "Nuclear powered vehicle"?? Are you nuts?!
Its the book worm that causing the trees to die , and the winters being less colder and shorter time being cold. Not the EV or Cow poo
😭
Facepalm @ the steam trains.
Normie!
I'm not a climate change denier, I'm not stupid; but this doesn't look like the effects of climate change, more so a bad disease or pest, or a lack of thinning to allow healthy trees to grow.
And what allows you to make that judgement? You provide nothing to back your conclusion. Why do all of the sudden these spruce trees no longer produce resin which in turn gives the bark beatle a free play? For almost a century there was no problem with monocultures. Too many people are sticking their head in the sand when it comes to climate change.
Drier climate which we experienced in recent years combined with warm temperatures made this devastation possible.
@@xderleonx7227 no - thats happened anytime in german forests when socialists / ideologes took over the forest management (and did not managed it as required).
same crap happened in GDR…
@@DettenbachDe du willst mir doch nicht erzählen dass es im Westen anders aussieht?