Talk:Long Meadow Grove

California Low‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Forestry (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Forestry, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.ForestryWikipedia:WikiProject ForestryTemplate:WikiProject ForestryForestry articles

Plants Low‑importance

	Plants portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PlantsWikipedia:WikiProject PlantsTemplate:WikiProject Plantsplant articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Alternate name Redwood Meadow

"also known by some as Redwood Meadow Grove"

Hello, ok there's Redwood Meadow Campground, but still, the name Redwood Meadow is very confusing since there is already a well known Redwood Meadow Grove near Giant Forest, and even worse, the well known Log Meadow (yes, Log) of Giant Forest is not far from it. So you easily could get confused. I propose not to hand down the confusing naming, even if there is a reputable reference, because under this circumstances it makes no sense. It is the Long Meadow Grove, and rather the Campground should be renamed :) What do you think ? Rosetta (talk) 22:45, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clearcut picture

The picture certainly is showing an ugly destruction of trees and soil and about anything that was there before. But i have to question the title keyword 'clearcut' - not because it is wrong; but rather, because it creates a wrong image of cutting down Big Trees.While the displayed stumps probably are Big Trees, these trees clearly have been fallen before they got cut off. (There is just no alternate possibility to explain the turned stumps.)

And indeed, Willard (2000) has: "The entire west unit was clearcut for whitewood in the 1980s, when also 15 large already fallen Sequoia were harvested." He also states that no Big Trees ever were logged in this grove.

I propose to change the image title to something more detailed like 'Stumps of Big Trees harvested after toppling, and Whitewood clearcut in the background' and add the explanation in a separate chapter about logging. Such a chapter could be part of every grove description, anyway, as a default - so i won't mind if it's only one sentence there.

Ref: Willard, Dwight. (2000). A Guide To The Giant Sequoia Groves Of California. Yosemite Association.

Rosetta (talk) 23:07, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]