Is anybody finding that tree growth can keep up with the logging camps? Even if I turn on selective harvesting and add the option so that trees grow back twice as fast, it still seems like the logging camps all eventually wipe out areas that were green to them when the building was first placed.

Now I could be wrong, but it seems to me that if selective harvesting is activated then the logging camp is going to cut down less trees at the sake of production and inventory of logs, and if the Horticulture station is built then the trees really should have a pretty good chance of at least keeping up with the removal of the trees by the logging camp, especially if those logging camps don't even have full staffing.

Opinions?

I remember T1 had it like this for fully staffed camp:
1) with clear cut will eventually remove the trees from the area
2) with clear cut and horticulture station trees manage to grow back, but still get somewhat cut out.
3) tools shed decreased time the trees are cut out from the area significantly
4) Selective harvest with horiculture station had regrowth somewhat keep up with cutting.

I don't think T1 had "infinite" tree resource, but you could harvest a single area for long periods if you use option 4 without 3 even with full staffing. Staffing could be decreased at some point to let trees regrow. Or use option 3 and 4 with less staff from the beginning.

Didn't pay attention to T3 in this matter though, got to play some more.

Think of it the other way around.
If trees grew back faster than they were chopped down, that would mean several things:

Infinte furniture factory profits -> ultimate exploit
bye bye, realism
no real beauty penalty from the deforestation industry
really annoyed lumberjacks

Correct, that would break the realism. So if you want to keep furniture industry permanent, you must make financial sacrifice in horticultural station and decreased production with selective harvest. I believe that you are actually forced to do this in order to keep this production chain on your island.

Experiment, T3 probably has similar variables involved as in T1. If the behaviour is like T1, then balance is ok.

Doesn't it really just mean that while the forests have had all the harvestable wood removed by the lumberjacks, and there is no more to be gotten, that you simply fire all the workers in the lumberjack, lumbermill and furniture factory until x amount of years when it all grows back anyway, and then you rehire, thus only paying a mild penalty for the buildings standing there (or demolish them and pay nothing, other than restart up fees later), and then continue on with your deforestation ways anyway equal the ultimate exploit anyway?

I guess it depends though...

How long does a tree actually take to regrow, and if the lumberjacks building isn't staffed, but it has a horticulture station will the trees still grow back at 60% faster than then normally would. If the trees take 60 game years then yeah, it ends it right there, however if they are deforested in 20 years and only take 20 years or less to grow back then they just start up the industry again.

But really it doesn't matter about the foresting industry since so much money can be made in the game anyway. I've read reports that people have said that once they get an industry they usually have more money than they can spend anyway coming in because their island is already established so if one needed to shut down the forestry industry it would be no great hardship.

But this does answer another question that I had, which was why isn't there any trees that we can plant that plant into the ground. I guess THAT would be the ultimate exploit if the gamer could simply pay some $$ and replant whole forests.

Booze Baron + Rum Distillery = game exploit... Furniture isn't that high priced...

Anyways, I've never had trouble with lumber camps... 1 lumber camp can feed two saw mills... 50 years strong...