• FiveMacs@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    9 months ago

    Meanwhile ford wants to level the greenbelt for profit and overpriced housing…

    • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      9 months ago

      We have a large section of green space running alongside the waterfront trail in Oshawa.

      Home to butterflies, coyotes, deer, and a quite a few different bird species. Now completely levelled and being prepped for new houses. Why in that space? I’d love to know!

      • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        9 months ago

        Why? Because waterfront properties are valuable, and of course the only reason to build a property is for value and investment. Land can serve no other possible purpose except investment and profit.

        • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          9 months ago

          Because waterfront properties are valuable

          More valuable to wildlife and our natural ecosystem.

          But yes, it’s always about money and property value.

          I can’t wait for the new residents to complain about coyotes trying to eat their dogs. God knows, we get enough complaints about wildlife entering urban areas… after their natural habitats were destroyed so we can build a few more houses.

  • HikingVet@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    What the fuck is with Quebec always trying to cut their nose off to spite the face?

    • benvoyon@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      A veterinarian walking the tight rope oblivious to his own fall in the first round. /s A nose bleed is nothing when you play with forest fires. In Québec it’s for forest management because of disproportionate forest fires due to climate change. I read the article, nothing to justify batshit crazy Québec bashing WTF!

          • HikingVet@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Cutting down the forest because of forest fires is one of the most backwards ways of preserveing forests. Especially when they are going after the trees planted to replace the ones lost due to… (wait for it)… the largest forest fires the region has seen in how long?

            • benvoyon@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              9 months ago

              You’ve never heard of fire lines to help fight forest fires in conjunction with planting trees for clear-cut forest? Forests regenerate themselves after disastrous fires. Planting trees is needed after clear- cutting a forest. But the worst is yet to come with climate changes.

              • HikingVet@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                Yes, fire breaks are a good tool to fight an active forest fire.

                Forests can use a little help after the largest fires in recorded history happened. Forests can’t regenerate properly when that happens.

                It sounds like they are taking a page out of the Irvings book.

                The trees haven’t even been given a chance to grow and people (the article doesn’t mention experts only industry and municipalities) want to cut them down. No where is there a mention of best practices.

            • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              9 months ago

              You’re mixing things up because the article intentionally mixed things up in order to generate hate towards Quebec.