Planting a trillion trees could be the "most effective solution" to climate change, study says

https://mnn.com/earth-matters/wilderness-resources/stories/more-trees-than-there-were-100-years-ago-its-true


In the United States, which contains 8 percent of the world's forests, there are more trees than there were 100 years ago. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), "Forest growth nationally has exceeded harvest since the 1940s. By 1997, forest growth exceeded harvest by 42 percent and the volume of forest growth was 380 percent greater than it had been in 1920." The greatest gains have been seen on the East Coast (with average volumes of wood per acre almost doubling since the '50s) which was the area most heavily logged by European settlers beginning in the 1600s, soon after their arrival.

This is great news for those who care about the environment because trees store CO2, produce oxygen — which is necessary for all life on Earth — remove toxins from the air, and create habitat for animals, insects and more basic forms of life. Well-managed forest plantations like those overseen by the Forest Stewardship Council also furnish us with wood, a renewable material that can be used for building, furniture, paper products and more, and all of which are biodegradable at the end of their lifecycle.

Gwad said:

I think the current administration is attempting to or has opened the gates on those forests.

Let go of the fear

The science is settled

There are more trees now than ever
The world has more trees than anyone previously thought. A study conducted by 38 scientists and published by the journal Nature found that there are over 3 trillion trees on the planet, several times higher than previous estimates. There are 3 tillion trees on Earth. Pictured are some of them.Dec 16, 2015

https://npr.org/2019/06/12/731713229/trump-administration-seeking-to-overhaul-forest-management-rules


Federal land managers on Wednesday proposed sweeping rule changes to a landmark environmental law that would allow them to fast-track certain forest management projects, including logging and prescribed burning.

The U.S. Forest Service, under Chief Vicki Christiansen, is proposing revisions to its National Environmental Policy Act regulations that could limit environmental review and public input on projects ranging from forest health and wildfire mitigation to infrastructure upgrades to commercial logging on federal land.

"We do more analysis than we need, we take more time than we need and we slow down important work to protect communities," Christiansen told NPR.

The proposed rule changes include an expansion of "categorical exclusions." These are often billed as tools that give land managers the discretion to bypass full-blown environmental studies in places where they can demonstrate there would be no severe impacts or degradation to the land.

The Forest Service insists this is not about ramping up commercial logging in public forests. On average, according to Christiansen, it can take big restoration projects that generally have broad support as long as two years to approve. She predicts that time could be cut by more than half if the rule changes move forward.

"Let me be clear that the Forest Service will continue to deliver high-quality, science-based analysis," she said. "We're proposing more efficiency, not shortcutting. In fact, [we're] enhancing, where we can, public involvement."

Federal agencies have long complained of "analysis paralysis" when it comes to getting large landscape-scale projects approved. Policymakers frequently decry what they call frivolous lawsuits by litigious-minded environmental groups who use the courts to try to stop logging on public land.

But according to the government's own analysis — the last done in 2010 during the Obama administration — fewer than one-fifth of all timber and forest projects are appealed by citizens or environmental groups. A bigger holdup is budget cuts, particularly in the Forest Service, where money has been diverted away from wildlife, habitat and forestry programs to pay for the skyrocketing costs of wildfire suppression.

The proposed rule changes are subject to a 60-day public comment period. Barring litigation or other holdups, the Forest Service hopes to finalize them by summer of next year.

Gwad said:

RaceBannon said:

Gwad said:

I'm sorry that contemplating what could go wrong is painful for you Race.

Link?

https://hardcorehusky.com/discussion/62831/planting-a-trillion-trees-could-be-the-most-effective-solution-to-climate-change-study-says#latest

Did you not want a discussion on trees when you started this thread?

I'm contributing

You've added nothing


Was this another troll job?

In the USA we plant over 45% more trees than we harvest