[HN Gopher] Replanting logged forests with diverse seedlings acc... ___________________________________________________________________ Replanting logged forests with diverse seedlings accelerates restoration Author : myshpa Score : 221 points Date : 2023-09-18 13:44 UTC (9 hours ago) (HTM) web link (www.technologynetworks.com) (TXT) w3m dump (www.technologynetworks.com) | atourgates wrote: | I did a quick look to see if this only worked in tropical | forests, or if this would be true in, say, Western North American | forests. | | I didn't really find an answer. | | A study[1] in Virgina found that planting multiple varieties of | trees was beneficial because it allowed the variety that was most | suitable for that location to thrive, and survive problems that | might affect other varieties. | | A study[2] in Washington State tested a couple varities of common | conifers planted in pairs, and found more conventional "trees are | affected by competition" result. | | This study[3] performed in the inter-mountain West found that | some conifers _may_ benefit from being mixed with aspens, but | didn't seem nearly as conclusive as the Borneo study. | | If anyone can find a more conclusive study about temperate | Western forests, I'd love to see it. | | [1] https://www.si.edu/newsdesk/releases/tree-species- | diversity-... | | [2] https://cdnsciencepub.com/doi/10.1139/X09-040 | | [3] | https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111... | comboy wrote: | Forest is a complex ecosystem and based on some books [1][2] my | understanding is that fungi plays a huge role in them. They | provide a lot of things that trees need in exchange for what | they need, they also create kind of a market which allows trees | even from different species exchange their resources. Different | trees have different strong sides and can make use of different | conditions. Perhaps this, thanks to the huge forestweb | underneath allows them to thrive. | | Also, trees like to grow slow and solid. Older trees from the | same specie will feed small tree hidden in their shadow and | provide it necessary resources so that when some bigger tree | falls and it can take it place, it can also grow faster. It's | possible that when there's competition between species they | grow faster because there's a fight for sunlight. The year's | growth will be bigger and wood would be less dense (but it is | sold by volume). | | 1. The Hidden Life of Trees, Peter Wohlleben | | 2. Entangled Life, Merlin Sheldrake | hosh wrote: | There's a more thoughtful way of designing this. In the | permaculture world, these would be called "guilds". Species are | selected with an understanding of canopy layers (so that plants | don't compete for sunlight and can still fill in spaces at each | canopy layer), and ecological function (such as, nitrogen | fixer, dynamic accumulators, pollinator attractors, habitats, | etc) | | If you randomly mix up species in temperate forests that are | all competing in the same canopy layer, I can see more | competition. A study done where say, a mix of overstory, | understory, and shrub (such as berries), would be more | insightful. | voisin wrote: | I'd love to see a resource where someone could select their | location and have example guilds like this provided. Every | time I've looked it seemed like the only way to find out was | to take a permaculture design course which is well beyond the | limits of my interest. | hosh wrote: | This is a good video on the specific design principles for | guilds, from Canandian Permaculture Legacy at: | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLPUN2wGbwA | | And yeah, site analysis is where I would start: | | 1. "Where Am I?" | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XNiacRhzuM | | 2. "Sectors" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=233GgYhtoGs&li | st=PLNdMkGYdEq... | | 3. "Zones" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CaUlnvGhnho&list | =PLNdMkGYdEq... | | 4. "Slope" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McopD04XP3s&list | =PLNdMkGYdEq... | | These will inform you of how everything comes together, and | it starts with an understand of your place on earth | (particularly, the lat/lng and how that affects the sun | cycle; then regional forces that is discussed in "Sectors". | Then you designs zones on your site based on how much human | contact you have. | | You can get the rest of the Oregon State University PDC | lectures from Andrew Millison from https://www.youtube.com/ | playlist?list=PLNdMkGYdEqOCvZ7qcgS3e... | | Permaculture is very heavy on design, even if the end | result doesn't look like it. | | And yes, I had thought of creating a mod for an open source | CAD that can pull in knowledge bases and databases as a | permaculture design assistant. For example, there is a | researcher whose lifetime work was to collect nutritional | information for plants from all over the world so that | people can select a nutritionally complete set of native | plants. It's not more widely known because that knowledge | base is locked into a desktop dbms from before web apps. | hinkley wrote: | Suzanne Simard has a bunch of chemical analysis that says yes, | and most of her testing was in the PNW and western Canada (BC | and... Alberta?) | | A lot of the other literature on the complex relationship of | soils and trees (and trees and trees via soil life) were | instigated by her observations. | | She was trying to get NW foresters to stop bathing everything | in herbicides before replanting clearcuts. They always | struggled more than anticipated. | voisin wrote: | Related: https://stopthespraybc.com/ | swader999 wrote: | BC can have three our four species in play on the coast, | interior and east typically has pine and spruce. You could | argue for balsam but that is crap wood and it grows back on its | own typically. I don't know about tropical reforestation, but | in Canada the notion that we are replanting with only mono | species isn't true. They leave seed trees standing and source | cones directly from the logged blocks. It's very well done and | highly regulated. Blocks that don't grow back are replanted | again until they do. | | Canada replants 600 million trees annually, USA about 1 | billion. | | Trees grow so much faster than they did a decade ago. CO2 is to | 'blame'. I help maintain ski runs at my favorite ski hill and | it's ridiculous how much more work it is now. Alpine areas that | never in history had trees are beginning to get overrun. | [deleted] | nerpderp82 wrote: | The sub-alpine line is rising in elevation due to increased | warming. | | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7696691/ | swader999 wrote: | Is it T or CO2? | rcostin2k2 wrote: | They grow faster but weaker, with lower density (cf. | https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2018.07.045) | voisin wrote: | Roughly where are you in BC? I am in Cranbrook and haven't | seen the seed trees left standing in logged blocks but maybe | I've missed them somehow. | | Isn't part of the issue that historically there would've been | more deciduous trees that acted as natural fire breaks and | now loggers only are allowed to replant coniferous? | swader999 wrote: | I've planted all over BC. Seed trees started being a thing | early nineties and they don't do it everywhere. Quite often | its because there aren't species needed as seed trees that | won't already grow back are already slated for nursery | production and replanting. | | Smaller block sizes act this way too, the boundaries are | seeded from the older growth on the perimeter. | | Deciduous trees like poplar, Adler, and birch are like | weeds and will grow very quickly and compete for a time | with replanted trees. Eventually the evergreens tend to | choke them out by taking over the canopy and changing the | soil with their needles. | twunde wrote: | You may also hear this practice called selective | cutting/lumbering. Essentially they leave trees in ones | or twos scattered through to reseed the area around it. | swader999 wrote: | Yeah maybe, selective cutting looks different though, | like 1-2 hectare pieces and roads everywhere. This seed | trees thing has blocks up to about 90 hectares that are | rectangles with ten or twenty trees still standing in it. | myshpa wrote: | > If anyone can find a more conclusive study about temperate | Western forests, I'd love to see it. | | I didn't. But there's no reason why it shouldn't work there. | | https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/2167048/fore... | | Forest study in China finds mix of trees can absorb twice as | much carbon as areas with one species | | _More than 60 scientists from China, Switzerland and Germany | were involved in the research, testing a hypothesis based on | observations in the field._ | | _"The study shows that forests are not all the same when it | comes to climate protection - monocultures achieve not even | half of the desired ecosystem service," Schmid said. "The full | level of mitigation of global warming can only be achieved with | a mix of species. In addition, species-rich forests also | contribute towards protecting the world's threatened | biodiversity."_ | | _Such forests were also less vulnerable to disease and extreme | weather events, which are becoming increasingly frequent as a | result of climate change, Schmid said._ | rolph wrote: | there was a time when logging an area, and subsequent | monospecific replanting had a name. | | it was called a tree farm | | there was a commercialized ignorance of what forest actually | was. | hinkley wrote: | There was a scary forest ghost story a few years ago and | all of the trailers and the PR shots showed neat, tightly | spaced rows of firs. | | That's not a forest it's a fucking tree farm. | | Now is there a Princess Mononoke style paranormal revenge | story out there for destroying the forest? Absolutely. But | this ain't it. | RetroTechie wrote: | _" Such forests were also less vulnerable to disease and | extreme weather events, which are becoming increasingly | frequent as a result of climate change, Schmid said."_ | | That might well be an underestimated aspect. We _don 't know_ | how climate will change locally, what pests will spread | where, what species will turn out best adapted to future | conditions, or what species turn out to be keystones in | specific ecosystems. So we should strive for having as | diverse a set of flora anywhere. Success factors are varied, | complex & interconnected. | | Climate changes so fast that past 'performance' of species in | an area is of little value. Those trees are going to stand | there 20, 50 or 100y from now. What will local climate be | then? Take your guess / throw the dice. | hinkley wrote: | Simard proved that deep rooted trees pull up water that | ends up in shallow rooted plants, and that evergreens share | sugars with deciduous trees in early spring, and then the | direction reverses during the height of photosynthesis. | Specifically in the case of water, the trees cannot | transport enough water to keep up with peak transpiration, | so they slowly dry out. But all night long they're still | pulling up more water, more than they can use, more than | they can store, and some of the excess ends up in their | neighbors, through capillary action or the rhizosphere. | | There's an implication of intent here, regarding plant-to- | plant transport and fairness, that I think is more likely | explained by osmotic pressure. Entropy itself is 'fair' in | this regard. Fungal hyphae aren't designed to manage huge | nutrient or water gradients. In fact they seem to be | designed to communicate information at an alarming speed. | Which we still do not entirely understand. | karaterobot wrote: | I'm not an expert, but I had thought that observing that | monocultures created a weak forest ecosystem was one of the | foundational concepts behind modern forestry--a centuries old | discipline. This seems like an obvious corollary to that. I would | have assumed it yesterday, before reading this article, and I | assume most people would have thought the same. Again, I'm not an | expert, so I'm likely missing something. And sometimes you just | need a study to provide evidence for common sense. | anon84873628 wrote: | Just one of those situations where science needs to get the | ducks in a row and ensure incontrovertible proof. | kderbyma wrote: | it's a blinding glimpse of the obvious | ccooffee wrote: | Someone logged a 500 hectare plot in Borneo. They split this into | 125 sections and planted 0, 1, 4, or 16 "tree species that are | frequently targeted for logging". After 20 years, satellite | imagery shows that the more tree species you planted, the more | recovered the land appears to be. | | I'm left wondering: | | 1. Why did they plant only tree species that are frequently | targeted for logging? This makes the whole experiment very | suspect. The linked article talks a lot about restoring forests, | but why restrict the tree species to those that are profitable to | log? | | 2. Is the satellite imagery actually representative of on-the- | ground truth? A lot of logging land in western America gets | replanted with logging-friendly trees in very regular grid | patterns. These areas may look like forests from satellites (or | to uninformed ground-level visitors), but the regrown tree farms | do not behave like forests. The dense growth crowds out the | ground-level plants, which in turn makes the entire tree farm a | poor habitat for local fauna. If your goal is to grow more trees | for lumber, tree farms are great. But I'm not sure the claims | about "forest restoration" are honest/true here. | liotier wrote: | Between clear-cut horror and ideal pristine old growth, there | is a world of managed forests that fix carbon with an | economically sustainable model. Not the best biodiversity but | mixing sixteen species makes the initiative top tear already. | unglaublich wrote: | And generally, these forests are subdivided in plots of | different 'age'. Every year, they will log 1/20th of the | forest or so. The wildlife might be able to move from an | affected area to one of the bordering areas. | | In fact, this model comes quite close to natural destruction | of forests, where old trees would fall over, and wildfires | would rage. | | The only difference is that the process is not random, but | nicely planned and managed to allow _humans_ instead of | _wildfires and storms_ to reap the full-grown timber. | soperj wrote: | > 1. Why did they plant only tree species that are frequently | targeted for logging? This makes the whole experiment very | suspect. The linked article talks a lot about restoring | forests, but why restrict the tree species to those that are | profitable to log? | | Because the whole point of tree planting is forest management. | That's why whenever there's a forest fire they spray it with | glyphosate so that other trees don't grow, then they plant GMO | trees that can live in glyphosate doused soil. | drone wrote: | Glyphosate is not soil active, so there are no "trees that | can grow in glyphosate-doused soil." | | The primary reason for broad herbicide treatment as part of | site prep is to avoid low-value, or ecologically opportunist | species that thrive in disturbed soil/land, and prevent | either the target species from growing, or create an | environment which lacks the diversity necessary for the | region. For example, sweetgum, huisache, black locust, | chinese tallow (as examples from specific regions in the US), | will all take over and completely dominate a deforested | section and prevent oaks, pines, etc. and appropriate forb | for wildlife without consistent, ongoing burns. | | FWIW, there are no "trees which are GMOd to live with | glyphosate application" - you're thinking non-tree crops. | Nearly every softwood and hardwood tree is susceptible to | damage from Glyphosate. | dudeofea wrote: | why not plant other species to out-compete the invasive | ones? | | why do we need to perform chemotherapy on our forests? | drone wrote: | Only one of the trees I listed was invasive, the others | are opportunistic natives to their regions that will | outgrow everything else. | | The nice "diverse" forest you're thinking of in your mind | took a long time to become that way, the normal state of | nature is to not create a perfect balance out of the | gate, but for constant competition and regularly have to | cycle through multiple iterations of configuration which | are, by all means, not as productive or valuable for | wildlife/nature as their final states. None of that means | that using a herbicide is sufficient, but without, you're | looking at potentially hundreds of years to get back a | usable environment for wildlife that is well-balanced vs | 10's of years. | | Outside of a few soil-active herbicides, most of what | they use is one-and-done and can be applied selectively | to only problem plants with minimal unintended | consequences. | anon84873628 wrote: | To elaborate on this great answer, the technical term is | "ecological succession", defined on Wikipedia as "the | process of change in the species that make up an | ecological community over time." | | Plants do not just fill their niche, they alter the | environment over time, which in aggregate alters the | ecosystem as a whole. Animals and microbes also play a | role in this process. E.g. the way rodents and birds | disperse seeds, or how pests can destroy a species, or | even how elephants can uproot whole trees. | joshvm wrote: | Re satellite. At Sentinel resolution (10-20m) not much, maybe | enough to distinguish plantation from natural forest | spectrally. At Planet (3m) and below you can start to see large | individual trees. | | It's very difficult to accurately measure biodiversity from | space. Drone imagery might get you species visually but until | we have widespread hyperspectral (see ESA CHIME) 12-13 bands is | what most people work with. | mschuster91 wrote: | > Why did they plant only tree species that are frequently | targeted for logging? This makes the whole experiment very | suspect. The linked article talks a lot about restoring | forests, but why restrict the tree species to those that are | profitable to log? | | Because that is what private land owners will do, they'll want | to plant primarily what they can sell. This research likely | intended to reduce the immediate damage from logging. | kmeisthax wrote: | Interestingly enough, this is also part of the reason for | Canada's horrible wildfires a few months back: | https://pluralistic.net/2023/09/16/murder-offsets/#pulped- | an... | llbeansandrice wrote: | > Why did they plant only tree species that are frequently | targeted for logging? | | Because the main purpose of replanting trees to is be able to | harvest them again in the next few decades. Private land owners | generally aren't interested in creating old-growth forests, | they're trying to make money. | | It's not exactly ideal, but ending up with more biodiversity is | likely a good thing even if it will be logged again later. | | If you want more old-growth forests there's going to have to be | a _lot_ more subsidies to private owners to literally pay them | to not log their land. | voisin wrote: | > Private land owners generally aren't interested in creating | old-growth forests, they're trying to make money. | | In Canada the vast majority of logging is on crown land. | [deleted] | rootusrootus wrote: | > Private land owners generally aren't interested in creating | old-growth forests, they're trying to make money. | | To be clear, in the western US this is by design. Large | swaths of private land are zoned for forest. Aside from a few | niche instances of grandfathering, you cannot build on them. | They're useful for recreation and logging, and that's all | that's allowed. | | The gov't wants them to be logged regularly. If they really | wanted old growth forests they'd make it public land (it's | not especially expensive land, either, right after a patch | gets logged it's not uncommon for the owner to put it on the | market fairly cheap). | harywilke wrote: | This is an aside. This [0] is what an attempt at balancing | logging, locals, and forest conservation ~150 years ago looked | like. The checkerboard effect [1] is pretty striking. This | strategy ended up being a disaster for some animals, famously | the Northern Spotted Owl. | | [0] | https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4146826,-123.52657,129879m/d... | [1] https://osupress.oregonstate.edu/blog/checkerboard-effect | [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_spotted_owl | toast0 wrote: | > Why did they plant only tree species that are frequently | targeted for logging? This makes the whole experiment very | suspect. The linked article talks a lot about restoring | forests, but why restrict the tree species to those that are | profitable to log? | | Logging companies typically log a parcel and replant for | logging again in the future. They might be convinced to do | things differently, especially if the outcome is better for | them, but it would be hard to convince them to plant trees that | won't be commercially viable when they come back to log again. | | If diversity is good for the environment and the loggers, that | seems ideal. If diversity is good for the environment and about | the same for the loggers, they might be convinced. | | Not all the parcels will end up being relogged, but that | decision is unlikely to be made at the time of replanting. | greenie_beans wrote: | > 1. Why did they plant only tree species that are frequently | targeted for logging? This makes the whole experiment very | suspect. The linked article talks a lot about restoring | forests, but why restrict the tree species to those that are | profitable to log? | | Because forest management is for logging. They will log those | trees once they mature to the best value when considering DBH, | the market, and opportunity cost. | AnimalMuppet wrote: | Or, to say it in reverse: Replanting logged forests with a | monoculture _hinders_ restoration. | | Putting it this way emphasizes what "normal" is. | bluerooibos wrote: | Who would have thought that replicating nature would yield the | best results... | | The Miyawaki method is probably relevant to this discussion - | https://www.creatingtomorrowsforests.co.uk/blog/the-miyawaki... | nxobject wrote: | Another text I really love as well that focuses on teaching | "applied ecology" is "Garden Revolution" by Weaner and | Christopher. Since I've never taken biology of any sort, it was | a good primer on things like ecological succession (in | temperate climates), parameters of plants that might | completement each other, etc. The authors have worked on large- | scale restoration and sustainable landscaping projects, and it | shows. | [deleted] | CatWChainsaw wrote: | If you own property with a lawn, do what you can as well with | native plants for native pollinators. | darklycan51 wrote: | I don't understand why loggers clear entire sections of forests | instead of leaving every hectare x amount of old "mother" trees | WalterBright wrote: | This is not surprising in the least. Also, genetic variety within | a particular species should help a lot. | [deleted] | jvm___ wrote: | The Curiosity Daily podcast had a related topic this past week. | There are plans to plant 1 billion (or 1 Trillion) trees at | various levels of government (WEF is the 1Trillion number). So | researchers went out to try to find saplings from local nurseries | that could supply the diversity of trees that would be needed. | They found that less than half the nurseries could supply | saplings - and very few were 'climate change friendly' saplings, | most were decorative or other non-climate-friendly trees. | | "Plans to plant billions of trees threatened by massive | undersupply of seedlings." by Joshua Brown. 2023. | https://www.uvm.edu/news/story/plans-plant-billions-trees-th... | | "A lack of ecological diversity in forest nurseries limits the | achievement of tree-planting objectives in response to global | change." by Peter W. Clark, et al. 2023. | https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/advance-article-abstract... | | "Trees Help Fight Climate Change." Arbor Day Foundation. N.d. | "Benefits of Planting Trees." Tree Advisory Board. N.D. | https://www.bgky.org/tree/benefits | mym1990 wrote: | Can you expand on the difference between climate change | friendly and non climate change friendly trees, for the noobs | like me? | developer93 wrote: | If a plant isn't native, the insects and animals that eat or | use it aren't around, those that are can't use it, and it's | of limited use to the ecosystem. Not to mention it's | interactions with other plants. | jvm___ wrote: | The money is in growing saplings of white-pine, the ones | commercial re-planters will buy - because they grow fast and | can be turned into toilet paper in 25(?) years. Growing | saplings of local 'slow' growing, non-harvestable species | doesn't make you $$$. | | "In essence, forest nurseries tended to maintain a limited | inventory of a select few species, electing to prioritize | those valued for commercial timber production over species | required for conservation, ecological restoration, or climate | adaptation." | | "Yet, in their 20-state survey, the team only found two tree | nurseries that had inventory of red spruce, a species from | which many millions of seedlings are needed to meet | restoration goals. "Remarkably, only 800 red spruce seedlings | were commercially available for purchase in 2022," the team | reports in their new Bioscience study, "--enough to reforest | less than one hectare." | myshpa wrote: | Maybe we should plant seeds, same as nature does. Dozens of | different seeds per m2, nature would choose what'd survive | and flourish. | | An example of a forest farm planted with the same approach: | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ST9NyHf09M | freedude wrote: | The same problem exists at the seed level. Who is | collecting the 2 trillion seeds (50% germination rate)? | myshpa wrote: | It's a similar problem but on a smaller scale (it's | easier/cheaper to collect & spread seeds than grow & | plant the seedlings). | mvdtnz wrote: | If you want to prioritise speedy regeneration then this | is not the best approach. Nature is incredibly effective | in the slow and steady mode of operation but to maximise | efficiency you need to be more deliberate. | myshpa wrote: | This is called "close planting" or "high-density | planting". It's often used in regeneration projects (the | Green Great Wall in China is one such example), it's used | by syntropic agriculture (see the video I've posted) or | in Miyawaki forests. | | Japanese botanist Akira Miyawaki developed this method, | which involves planting a variety of native species in | close proximity. The idea is that the trees compete for | sunlight, growing upwards more than outwards, leading to | a fast-establishing and diverse forest. | | https://www.sugiproject.com/blog/the-miyawaki-method-for- | cre... | | Another example would be Mark Shephard's farm where he's | using his Sheer Utter Total Neglect (STUN) method. | | He describes in his video that the goal is to find a | combination of plants that is so resilient, that you | can't kill those trees even if you try. | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=RePJ3rJa1Wg | | Sure, it's essential to ensure that the selected species | are suitable for the specific soil, climate, and | conditions of the site. Additionally, as the forest | grows, some form of management, like thinning or | selective removal of species, may be required to ensure | the forest remains healthy and achieves the desired | goals. | RetroTechie wrote: | I recall some initiative (in Africa, iirc) where locals | would collect seeds of random herbs, shrubs, trees etc, | mix those up & pack into seed bombs. | | Then others who travel around for their work, would toss | those in random places. From bicycle thrown some distance | from roadside, or a bush pilot dropping some during | flight, etc. | | Basically as many different seeds in as many different | places as possible. Then let nature do its thing. | | Note this was still mostly local. So not introducing | invasive species from other side of the globe. Just | helping native species to spread a bit further & faster. | myshpa wrote: | Yes, that's a very effective method. Such initiatives are | all over the world. | | It's based on ancient method of seedballs, promoted by | Fukuoka. | | https://www.permaculturenews.org/2014/06/18/making- | seedballs... | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqYTz6-zGcg | destron wrote: | ... of course the nurseries don't have seedlings to plant one | trillion trees. Growing seedlings of the appropriate species | would have to be part of that effort. | erikhopf wrote: | There are companies like Terraformation that have been doing this | for a while. Beyond the biodiversity angle, seed banking seems to | be very important to the long term success of regrowth projects. | greenie_beans wrote: | i invested in their republic.co fundraising: | https://republic.com/terraformation | | but then did more research, because i've been interested in | forestry for a while and was geniunely curious and wanted to | understand my investment more. | | i pulled my investment once i learned that these sort of | projects don't actually work. terraformation targets land in | areas that aren't meant to be forests. also decided to pull it | because i don't completely understand the space. (sure, | "planting trees will solve climate change" seems easy enough | and makes me feel good because "i'm planting trees!" but nah, | not really, let's maybe rethink this...this is coming from | somebody who spends a lot of time in the woods and finds trees | to be an important part of my life.) | | this person researches this space: | https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=DbjysqUAAAAJ&hl=en | | this is one of the bigger studies: | https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&h... | salynchnew wrote: | Shouldn't be surprising. | | The Miyawaki method shows success when a few principles are | followed: -Planting naturally-occurring communities of plants, | not monocultures (bonus points for including microfauna and soil | microbes) -Planting locations are semi-randomized, with room for | plants to expand and reseed. -Stands of trees are | protected/watered for first 3-5 years. -Local communities are | engaged and have a vested interest in protecting/maintaining | stands of trees for the first few years. | | https://www.jstor.org/stable/24577389?mag=the-miyawaki-metho... | swader999 wrote: | The other way to do this is to leave seed trees on the block in | addition to replanting with 3-4 other species. They do this in | British Columbia now. | | When a block is logged, cones from that block are taken to regrow | seedlings to plant there. It doesn't work as well if you try to | seed from different elevations or far away areas. | atoav wrote: | My brothers MA thesis was about comparing the multiple model | forests that have been planted throughout the EUs different | climate zones (I didn't even know such a thing existed, bur it | makes sense). | | His focus was looking at resilience against weather, insects etc. | and mixed forests fared significantly better throughout all | climate zones. | | As someone from the alps, a thing that should not be forgotten is | how important a diverse tree structure can be for stabilizing | soil, especially in mountain areas. And those areas can expect | more extreme wheater conditions due to climate change, especially | in the form of rain. Mudslides can become a real economic factor | in such regions. | | Mixed forests are also better at stabilizing the soil because the | root structures are less uniform. | | So the best moment to plant mixed forests is 20 years ago, the | next best is now. | | Edit: For non-wood people, the reason why there aren't more mixed | woods is that harvesting is easier in non-mixed environments | (although that also has changed with newer methods and tech). | rgrieselhuber wrote: | Eventually people will figure out that monoculture was a horrible | and anti-nature idea. | hasmanean wrote: | I've heard monoculture forests are worse for forest fires too. | | Having dead decaying logs on the forest floor probably helps | because fungi are naturally fire resistant. | [deleted] | grlass wrote: | The issues from the Great Green Wall [1] are worth looking at | | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Green_Wall_(China) | hanniabu wrote: | This seems pretty obvious, I'm amazed this is coming as a | surprise | sp332 wrote: | No one said it was a surprise. It's a demonstration. | bradly wrote: | It isn't mentioned in this article but one example of this is | deforestation of the a Eastern White Pine. They quickly | realized the problems deforestation at that scale and attempted | to build pack the forests quickly by use a very similar, but | much faster growing pine. Turns out that was a really bad idea. | iamcasen wrote: | How is this not a complete and obvious no-brainer? As advanced as | our culture is in some ways, it is clearly quite idiotic in many | other ways. | wredue wrote: | It always helps having raw experimentation on your side. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2023-09-18 23:00 UTC)