They should be forced to replant the same number of trunk diameter-inches. (Or diameter-meters, I guess, being in Finland.) In other words, for every 1’ diameter tree they remove, they should have to plant 12 1" saplings (either back on the same site or elsewhere when they run out of space).
Replant the area and fund maintenance and custodianship until the forest reaches the state it was in before they clear-cut it. As well as conservation efforts to protect the surrounding areas until that point is reached.
They should be forced to replant the whole area, and pay for it.
They should be forced to replant the same number of trunk diameter-inches. (Or diameter-meters, I guess, being in Finland.) In other words, for every 1’ diameter tree they remove, they should have to plant 12 1" saplings (either back on the same site or elsewhere when they run out of space).
Surface area of cross section of (1) 12" trunk: 113.1 square inches
Surface area of cross section of (12) 1" trunks: 9.42 square inches
The percent change from the single 12" trunk to the twelve 1" trunks is a decrease of 91.67%.
I know it isn’t the same cross-sectional area. I was just suggesting the same as how my local government does tree recompense.
He said diameters. He didn’t say areas.
They should have to plant back the same sized trees and replant wherever they sourced the trees from.
Replant the area and fund maintenance and custodianship until the forest reaches the state it was in before they clear-cut it. As well as conservation efforts to protect the surrounding areas until that point is reached.
Should also be at the same site, since there is no garantuee other locations will be as favorable to host a forest.
Just send them to prison.
Good idea! Send them to prison, then add part of the sentence, they must go out and plant 250 thousand trees.
And the same species and in same proportion as they cut down.
And fund its conservation until it reaches an equivalent state to before it was clearcut.
And only then they get the permit to deforest it.