Cascades study may rewrite the textbook on forest growth and death

Posted on March 18, 2015 by GarryRogers

“A century-long study in the Oregon Cascades may cause scientists to revise the textbook on how forests grow and die, accumulate biomass and store carbon.

“However, since the stands in Harmon and Pabst’s study have continued to accumulate biomass steadily for 150 years, the optimum harvest cycle may be considerably longer than 50 years. It is likely, they wrote, that some Douglas-fir forests have been harvested many decades before they reached a point when the rate of biomass accumulation slowed.”

GR: It might not surprise anyone to learn that for the past century, the U.S. Forest Service and it’s timber companies have been harvesting forests too often. This research indicates that forests remain healthy and continue to accumulate biomass for more than 100 years. Other research indicates that biodiversity and general environmental health are greater in old-growth forests. So–let’s stop cutting our trees until we get our problems with climate change and wildlife decline under control!

The Fate of Trees: How Climate Change May Alter Forests Worldwide

Posted on March 17, 2015 by GarryRogers

By the end of the century, the woodlands of the Southwest will likely be reduced to weeds and shrubs. And scientists worry that the rest of the planet may see similar effects

Source: www.rollingstone.com

GR: Continued harvest (logging and livestock grazing) will work with wildfires to remove long-lived species. This is already visible in arid regions.

Urban Nature: How to Foster Biodiversity in World’s Cities

Posted on February 12, 2015 by GarryRogers

by Richard Conniff: Yale Environment 360. As the world becomes more urbanized, researchers and city managers from Baltimore to Britain are recognizing the importance of providing urban habitat that can support biodiversity. It just may be the start of an urban wildlife movement. Source: e360.yale.edu

Outrage Over US Secret Approval of Genetically Engineered Trees –

Posted on February 7, 2015 by GarryRogers

“The International Campaign to STOP GE Trees, Dogwood Alliance & Biofuelwatch Groups Condemn US for Bowing to Industry, Ignoring Widespread Public Opposition New York (29 Jan. 2015) – Groups from around the world [1] today joined together to denounce the US government for allowing the first genetically engineered tree, a loblolly pine, to be legalized with no government or public oversight, with no assessment of their risks to the public or the environment, and without regard to overwhelming public opposition to GE trees.

Loblolly Pine Distribution

“A secret letter from the USDA to GE tree company ArborGen [2], dated last August, was recently exposed by scientist Doug Gurian-Sherman of the Center for Food Safety [3]. In this letter, the USDA made the unprecedented decision to allow ArborGen to pursue unregulated commercial cultivation of a loblolly pine genetically engineered for altered wood composition. These trees could be planted anywhere in the US, without public knowledge or access to information about them” (Source: stopgetrees.org).

GR: As pointed out in the article, pollen from these trees will spread, and we do not understand forest ecology well enough to predict the consequences.

The ArborGen website leads with this statement: “What makes a valuable tree? Superior growth, maximum value.” Nothing of forest ecology is mentioned. ArborGen continues “… is a leading global provider of conventional and next generation plantation tree seedling products for the forestry industry. With a long history of research and development, our advanced genetic technologies develop trees that offer forest landowners outstanding silvicultural performance and financial return. With these advanced genetics, ArborGen helps landowners ensure the maximum productivity of their forests – providing outstanding growth and yield to address the world’s growing need for wood, fiber and fuel.”

What can we do to get the USDA and other land management and conservation agencies to stop pandering to industry and ask themselves what they can do to stop the loss of our wildlife?

Conservationists v chainsaws: the RSPB’s battle to save an Indonesian rainforest

Posted on February 3, 2015 by GarryRogers

Colm O’Molloy, Guardian: “In 2007 an RSPB-led group bought up a series of logged-out Indonesian forests to bring them back from the brink.

“Over time, Harapan aims to become the leading centre of knowledge on how to bring damaged forest ecosystems back to health. Tropical rainforests develop over thousands of years. It is not yet known how long it takes to fully restore a damaged rainforest to health, or if it is possible at all.

“There is little doubt that the forests that make up Harapan would have been completely destroyed by now was it not for the efforts of the RSPB and its partners to protect and restore them.

“Despite ongoing losses to encroachment, Harapan still has a relatively large percentage of forest cover within its boundaries. Much of the surrounding forests have been completely decimated and replaced by palm plantations.”

Source: www.theguardian.com

Bet-hedging dry forest resilience to climate-change threats

Posted on January 14, 2015 by GarryRogers

Forestry and Forest Decline

695b2d87-0b19-4ca3-9ee0-69c6e3653d92 New research shows that the most significant current threat to western dry forests is from insect outbreaks and droughts, not wildfires; and historically abundant small trees offer the greatest hope for forest survival and recovery after these events.

The study’s findings suggest current programs that remove most small trees to lower the intensity of wildfires in dry forests and restore large trees lost to logging, may reduce forest resilience to the larger threats from insect outbreaks and droughts. “Using historical forests as a guide, our study suggests we may want to modify our restoration and management programs so they do not put all our eggs in one basket, but instead hedge our bets by keeping both large trees and abundant small ones” said Dr. Baker.
Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2015-01-bet-hedgint-forest-resilience-climate-change-threats.html#jCp

GR: The researchers conducting this study assumed that the U. S. Forest Service’s long-standing practice of paying contractors to remove small trees was intended to reduce forest fire damage. Actually, the principal reason may have been to speed the growth of harvestable trees. Thus, removing the small trees that help the forest recover from drought and disease wasn’t done in a misguided attempt to save the forest–it wasn’t a mistake at all, it was done to help timber companies harvest as much timber in the shortest amount of time as possible.