[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)