Search

Great hope is being placed in the ability of forest ecosystems to contribute to greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction targets to limit global warming. Many nations plan to rely on forest-based climate mitigation activities to create additional and long-term carbon sequestration. Here, we take a critical look at the state of the policy and ecology surrounding forest-based natural climate solutions (NCS), with a focus on temperate forests of the United States (US). We first provide a high-level overview of carbon accounting, including key concepts used in the monitoring, reporting and verification of forest-based NCS. Second, we provide a high-level overview of forest carbon dynamics, including pools and fluxes, and drivers of their change. We then identify gaps in the current systems of GHG accounting, and between current ambitions and basic forest ecology. Improved use of data in models provides a path forward to better assessment and anticipation of forest-based climate mitigation. We illustrate this with the creation of a climate-sensitive forestry model, using tree-ring time series data. This climate-sensitive forest simulator will improve planning of site-level climate mitigation activities in the US by providing more realistic expectations of the carbon sequestration potential of forests undergoing climate change. Our review highlights the sobering complexity and uncertainty surrounding forest carbon dynamics, along with the need to improve carbon accounting. If we are to expect forests to play the significant emissions reduction role that is currently planned, we should view immediate emissions reductions as critical to preserve the climate mitigation capacity of forest ecosystems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper provides a review and comparison of strategies to increase forest carbon, and reduce species losses for climate change mitigation and adaptation in the United States. It compares forest management strategies and actions that are taking place or being proposed to reduce wildfire risk and to increase carbon storage with recent research findings. International agreements state that safeguarding biodiversity and ecosystems is fundamental to climate resilience with respect to climate change impacts on them, and their roles in adaptation and mitigation. The recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report on impacts, mitigation, and adaptation found, and member countries agreed, that maintaining the resilience of biodiversity and ecosystem services at a global scale is "fundamental" for climate mitigation and adaptation, and requires "effective and equitable conservation of approximately 30 to 50% of Earth's land, freshwater and ocean areas, including current near-natural ecosystems." Our key message is that many of the current and proposed forest management actions in the United States are not consistent with climate goals, and that preserving 30 to 50% of lands for their carbon, biodiversity and water is feasible, effective, and necessary for achieving them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An analysis of 2014 forest inventory data for the contiguous United States shows nearly 8 million ha of forestland that are currently defined as nonstocked after recent natural and human disturbances. It is estimated that forest regeneration on these lands could result in an additional terrestrial sequestration of 48.9 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent (CO2e) annually. Analysis across a range of seven site productivity classes indicates that approximately 58% of the total area is productive timberland, defined as capable of producing merchantable volume of ⩾1.4 m3/ha/year. It is estimated that regeneration of just the productive timberland portion of the total could produce an additional 44.4 million metric tons of CO2e annually in carbon sequestration. On National Forest System lands, more than 50% of the total potential carbon sequestration benefit from regenerating nonstocked lands could be achieved by reforesting just the top 30% of these lands in the moderate-to-high site productivity classes. On private lands, more than 70% of the total potential carbon benefit can be achieved by regenerating the most productive 30%. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The 2001 Forest Service Roadless Area Conservation Rule (Roadless Rule) prohibits road construction, reconstruction, and timber harvest on approximately one-third of National Forest System lands. In 2011, the Tenth Circuit upheld the Roadless Rule in Wyoming v. USDA after a decade of litigation. Subsequently, in October 2012, the Supreme Court refused to take up challenges to the Tenth Circuit's ruling. Given the Forest Service's new focus on managing for climate change and the importance of Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) protected by the Roadless Rule, this Note examines whether management for climate change adaptation and mitigation is feasible, necessary, and defensible in IRAs. As background, Parts I and II describe the history and terms of the Roadless Ride and the projected effects of climate change on forest ecosystems. This Note explains the benefits of purely passive management of IRAs in light of climate change effects and discusses arguments against active management in IRAs, but because the Rule explicitly allows some level of active management in IRAs, Part III summarizes the relevant scientific literature on climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies that may be extended to IRAs. Part IV examines the Rule's language, the case law, and the Forest Service's statutory framework to analyze the extent to which the Agency may implement active management in IRAs, including strategies that do not adhere to historical conditions. This Note concludes that: 1) if the Agency seeks to actively manage IRAs, it needs a comprehensive set of criteria for prioritizing roadless areas for climate change mitigation and adaptation treatments, and 2) the Agency may benefit from modifying the Rule's language if it deems that management outside of the historical range of variability is necessary. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Problem: Most research on planning to mitigate climate change has focused on reducing CO2 emissions from coal-fıred power plants or the transportation sector. The contribution of forests to lowering net CO2 emissions has largely been overlooked. U.S. forests already offset about one eighth of the nation's annual CO2 emissions and have the potential to offset more, all at a relatively low cost. It will not be easy to integrate forest carbon sequestration into a cap-and-trade program to reduce net CO2 emissions, however. Purpose: I explore what forest land use planning, forestry management practices, and land preservation strategies would be required to integrate forest carbon sequestration into a cap-and- trade program, and explain the role planning and planners can play in promoting forest carbon sequestration. Methods: The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative is a 10-state cap-and-trade program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from coal-fıred power plants in the northeastern United States. It provides a case study of how forest carbon sequestration can be included in a cap-and-trade program. Meanwhile, California has devised certifiable carbon credits from forestland. I analyze both approaches and generalize from them. Results and conclusions: To promote forest carbon sequestration through a cap-and-trade program will require ensuring the permanence of CO2 reductions, minimizing leakage from forestland conversion, and obtaining prices for carbon offsets that are high enough to induce forestland owners to participate in the program and offer them for sale. The capital needed to purchase and monitor permanent forest conservation easements as well as to provide a stream of annual income for timberland owners may require a national system of carbon credits. Ideally, the easements would be set up in advance through investments by government or nonprofits, so that landowners will be ready to sell credits when they are demanded. Takeaway for practice: A cap-and-trade system could be a cost-effective way to lower net CO2 emissions if it included certifiable, tradable credits from forestland preservation and management, and if the price of carbon credits were high enough to induce forest landowners to offer credits. To promote forest carbon sequestration, planners in rural areas should work with the local, state, and federal governments and nonprofit land trusts to zone forestland at low densities, to preserve forest land through acquiring conservation easements, and to fashion forest management plans that ensure long cycles of timber harvesting. Planners in metropolitan areas should promote tree planting and tree retention ordinances to protect, expand, and manage urban forests to absorb greenhouse gases. Research support: None. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]