A New Year's Resolution -- to Support Activities That Can Help Slow Global Warming

Ruth Sandra Sperling
RSS Designs In Fiber - Internet Shop of Handmade Items In Fibers



Global Warming -- one of the Hottest subjects around these days!!

To start off and establish my stand on this issue, I would like to quote Louis Blumberg of The Nature Conservancy California Office, who works in Forestry and Climate Change for them, from the article, "The Carbon Equation, Can Forests Save Us From Climate Change?" by Jane Braxton Little in the Winter 2009 edition of Nature Conservancy Magazine:

"Nature is our greatest ally in the fight against climate change."

Why quote him? Because that is totally how I feel and I feel that is the only realistic solution to what I call "un-natural Global Warming".

I am not always sure that people understand it overall. Some do and some don't. Climate Change to some degree happens naturally and geologically all the time on our planet. Geologically there are warming periods and cooling periods. If you read scientific journals and about Geology and about Paleontology, you will see discussions about it and varying opinions. Historically on Earth, there is documented information about warming periods and cooling periods in past centuries and eras -- and what happened as a result of these warming and cooling periods.

To some extent, some scientists are trying to make predictions based on historical occurrences on the planet -- and based on scientific documentation of evidence of Global Warming now -- such as glaciers and ice sheets melting.

The huge question seems to be -- how much of this Global Warming is natural, since the planet is in a geological warming period anyway? And how much of it can we do anything about to slow Global Warming and protect our own human habitat?

As an environmentalist, forests are some of my favorite places to go and get protected and therefore study, so I will focus on this.

Being in a warming period is significant to forestry scientists as it affects the species in the forests -- and the health of certain species in the forests and their growth -- and possibly significant changes in the makeup of a forest ecosystem - whether it is natural warming and/or the result of human-caused warming.

Various human actions on the planet affect Global Warming by increasing carbon emissions into the atmosphere -- various activites directly related to the industrial age for sure increase carbon emissions into the atmosphere.

But one of the human activites that has resulted in a high percentage of carbon emissions is that of Deforestation and Forest Degradation -- and that we can do something about. And this is the main point of this blog article.

Just looking at the fact of how much forest has been cut down over this planet in the last few centuries boggles the mind - at least mine. Looking at facts like part(s) of the Sahara Desert use to be forest that was cut down centuries ago (I don't know exactly what parts geographically) - this deforestation has been going on a long time -- and all the forests that have been and still are being cut down for building cities, towns, agricultural sites -- it looks to me like only a fraction of the original forest on our planet is left. And much did not come down naturally. As trees provide the natural benefits of holding water in the soils/lands, shading and keeping the lands cooler -- as well as storing carbon, it is obvious to me that cutting down huge areas of forest over the planet has contributed to Global Warming and that is human-caused!!

Therefore, we need to look at what we can do about it.

One of the Forestry scientists that I admire and respect for his perspective on forest, forest health and ecological integrity and forest restoration is Dr. Jerry F. Franklin, a Professor in Forest Resources at the University of Washington in the State of Washington.

I first became acquainted with his work in forestry when I became involved with the Sierra Nevada Forest Protection Campaign and their Conservation Strategy for the Management of the Sierra Nevada National Forests; this Conservation Strategy is based on the Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project (SNEP - http://ceres.ca.gov/snep/), which was commissioned by the United States Congress -- and Dr. Jerry F. Franklin is one of the SNEP authors. He also was one of the speakers at the Sierra Nevada Old Forests Public Science Workshop put on by the Sierra Nevada Framework for Conservation and Collaboration, Pacific Southwest Region and Research of the USDA Forest Service on August 24-25, 1999 at UC Davis -- which I attended.

Earlier this year, I emailed Dr. Jerry F. Franklin particularly about his opinion regarding the role of forests in dealing with Global Warming -- and I got his permission to quote him:

"Ruth: Actually we have a much greater percentage of the forest remaining on the
planet than 4% although I cannot tell you the exact percentage. Certainly the
forests do help cool things but, preversely, they may also help warm the planet
as well, due to the fact that they have such a low albedo -- i.e., they retain
most of the energy that they absorb from the sun. It really is very complicated
and I don't think that we have it all figured out yet. Certainly, we should not
be cutting down any of our remaining old-growth forests in the moist temperate
regions and in dry forest regions, like much of the Sierras, we should be
retaining all of the old trees and trying to grow more big old trees, as well,
since they are likely to be more resistent to both wildfire and climate change.

Planting trees is certainly a good thing to be doing and they certainly
can modify the environments in places that we live as well as help modify carbon
balances and climate throughout the globe. Fundamentally a good thing to do. On
the other hand, it is very important to do some active forest restoration in the
Sierra Nevada because many of the forests in your area are simply too dense for
their own good. Any restoration should retain the old trees and, even more,
enhance their potentiall for survival by removing fuels and competing vegetation
around the existing old trees. There is a very good recent PSW Research Station
General Technical Report by Malcolm North and others that has some very good
recommendations for restoring the mixed-conifer forests in the Sierra Nevada.
Jerry"

I noted here in his statement that not only planting trees is important, but proper management of the forests -- to not be too dense and to "enhance their potential for survival by removing fuels and competing vegetation around the existing old trees" -- this is something I learned about when listening to forestry scientists talk about "protecting Old Growth", which also means encouraging "Old Growth characterisitics", which in many cases will require the removal of smaller, undergrowth trees and the competing vegetation (as Dr. Jerry F. Franklin states) to allow the larger trees to grow even larger -- as well as not removing the Old Growth, which is the popular environmental stand! It is faster-growing trees with large canopies that will naturally store carbon through the natural process of Photosynthesis.

There are various projects and studies going on -- and with the advent of the California Climate Action Registry (CCAR) and California Assembly Bill 32, it looks like carbon offset programs by protecting and managing private forests for "forest carbon offset credits" may result in more.

One such forest project being managed is in fact a forest restoration project which The Nature Conservancy got involved with as a partner by paying for a Conservation Easement on a working forest prohibiting future development and managing this forest for restoration and carbon-sequestering potential. It is presently a relaitvely young Northern California Coastal Redwood forest that has been commercially logged again and again in the past by timber companies - but the fast-growing young trees in this Coastal Redwood forest have a huge potential for storing carbon as they grow per scientific analysis -- and this is proving to be a successful source of forest carbon credits. It is the "Garcia River Forest Project" -- my information is from The Nature Conservancy article quoted at the beginning of this blog post, which is online at http://www.nature.org/magazine/winter2009/features/index.html -- and from The Nature Conservancy website: http://www.nature.org/initiatives/climatechange/work/art23798.html .

One solution -- support Forestry Projects such as this to slow Global Warming!!

Another Solution from The Nature Conservancy -- Plant A Billion Trees in the Atlantic Forest of Brazil: http://www.plantabillion.org/ (the widget for this is on the left here on my blog!!)

Another solution, this one from Conservation International -- support the Actions being taken by Conservation International to Stabilize Climate through their programs for "Protecting forests and other ecosystems as a solution to climate change" as given at http://www.conservation.org/learn/climate/Pages/overview.aspx :

1. Saving Forests http://www.conservation.org/forests
2. High Forest Cover, Low Deforestation (HFLD) http://www.conservation.org/learn/climate/pages/climate_change_hfld.aspx
3. Reducing Emissions From Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) http://www.conservation.org/learn/climate/pages/climate_redd.aspx

TAKE ACTION BY PROTECTING AN ACRE OF FOREST THROUGH CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOR $15 http://www.conservation.org/protectanacre

Also, one of my favorite solutions to suggest to people to help with reducing some carbon emissions in their everyday lives -- is to buy and do Handmade!! There are so many ways to do this!!

Handmade causes much lower, if any, carbon emissions.

My Handmade crocheted and knitted items (for sale at http://rssdesignsinfiber.etsy.com/ ), made by either natural light or various forms of energy-saving flourescent lighting, certainly results in less carbon emissions than the similar items that are mass-produced on machines which generate lots of carbon emissions. There are many places where you can buy Handmade online - I am on http://www.etsy.com/, which is a website for Sellers and Buyers of Handmade, Vintage and Supplies for Handmade.

Also -- I encourage Local Harvest and getting foods locally as much as possible as that is part of a "low carbon" life, also!!

Resolutions can be a good thing -- they are postulates for what you choose to do in your life -- New Year has been a popular time of the year to make them, though I personally believe you should not limit yourself to just then to make Resolutions for living a better life!!

And I can't think of a better New Year's Resolution than to find ways to live your life and support activities that can help SLOW Global Warming!!

From The Nature Conservancy -- What Eco-Issue Keeps You Up At Night!

Ruth Sandra Sperling
RSS Designs In Fiber - Internet Shop of Handmade Items In Fibers


The Nature Conservancy, one of my favorite organizations on the planet, has come through again - this time on their blog.

I don't know how it is for most people -- I admit -- I was brought up from the early 1950's by a father who was an active environmentalist (including anti-nuke) before it became the popular thing to do.

I heard about it all the days I was growing up. Books on environmental subjects were all over our home. I was taken to wild places like forests from early childhood. Recycling and Reusing we just a normal part of our everyday life.

I remember being on one of my first hikes in a Forest Preserve in Chicago, IL and being shown what poison ivy was by a camp counselor -- I have never forgotten, always recognize poison ivy and therefore have never ended up with having a problem with it! Existing with and respecting Nature!

Some of my favorite places I have ever been have been in the "green worlds" of canopied forests.

So, when I saw the post by The Nature Conservancy in Facebook, I jumped on it and went to their blog to the post: "Open Thread: Which Eco-Issue Keeps You Up At Night?" - left a comment there and in Facebook -- and I will reiterate it here:

"What keeps me up at night is actually 2 things, but connected. When are enough
of the people and governments on the planet going to realize and act on the fact
that we have to live our lives in such a way as to preserve the web of life the
best that we can — or are we going to keep negatively impacting our own habitat
to the point where it is not habitable by humans? Part of this — and a big part
of this for me — is I worry about how much of the forest that originally covered
the planet has been cut down and is still being cut down; we need to preserve
existing forests and plant trees that grow qucikly and strongly enough to grow
canopies/root structures in 15 to 25 years that keep the land cooler and
moister."

I have a whole section on my blog devoted to "forests" -- because they are so important to me.

What is important to you?

What, if anything, keeps you up at night?

TO LIFE!!!

THE RIGHT WAY TO DO CARBON OFFSETS - PROTECT EXISTING OLD GROWTH FORESTS AND REPLANT HETEROGENEOUSLY MULTI-AGED

Ruth Sandra Sperling
RSS Designs In Fiber - Internet Shop of Handmade Items
RSS Designs Wearable - Internet Shop of Wearable Items
RSS Crochet Thread Plus - Internet Shop of Crochet Thread


I just read an article on the Internet that was very upsetting to me.

http://www.climateark.org/blog/2008/12/light-redd-the-looming-tragedy.asp

It covers the problem with carbon offset funds somehow going to logging of primary old growth forests.

Folks - NO, NO, NO - that is not the right way to do carbon offsets.

The primary Old Growth forests on the planet are not supposed to be logged any longer - if absolutely necessary, based on current environmental analysis for fire hazard, small understory trees may need to be removed to protect the Old Growth and keep fire out of Old Growth and their tree canopies. Other than that, no tree removal in primary Old Growth forests should be done.

Carbon offsets are good for protecting Old Growth from removal.

And carbon offsets are good for restoring highly significant areas of forests that have been previously destroyed, such as the Atlantic Forest in Brazil.

Restoring means restoring - not planting so-called "tree-farms" for future logging or homogeneous even-aged tree plantings, either. Restoring means planting hetereogeneously (definition: in a way that is heterogeneous, which is defined as "consisting of or involving dissimilar elements or parts; not homogeneous"), which in terms of trees means planting different species and they should be native species to that forest eco-system. They should also do planting in small groups at different times, so it is not even-aged, but you end with trees of different ages. After a canopy is grown in the area, they should allow natural regeneration. Along with planting trees, the soil and its total underground biotic province needs to be restored.

I have seen a restored forest - restored from cleared land in an farming area in central Illinois - the woodlands of Robert Allerton Park are so beautiful, you can hardly believe that only a fraction of these woodlands are virgin forest. I went to the University of Illinois, which runs Robert Allerton Park, 1969 to 1972 and the canopied woodlands of Robert Allerton Park provided a wonderful place to hike. It was from the head Biologist at Robert Allerton Park, who was a professor at the University of Illinois, that I learned several years ago about the woodlands being to a large part a restored forest with a fraction of it being virgin forest. 1,000 acres of it are now a National Natural Landmark. I have also been told that this is a Regional Biodiversity Hotspot for that eco-region. During my hiking experiences there in the 1970 through 1980, which were truly wonderful for me, I had no idea that it was not a virgin forest. Read about it here: http://www.continuinged.uiuc.edu/oce-sites/allerton/history.cfm.

So, you see, from personal experience and knowledge, I know cleared forest land can be properly restored to be real forest and not a tree farm.

If you donate for carbon offsets, you need to make sure that the program you are donating to is really about restoring trees or protecting trees/land to the level where they actually do sufficient carbon sequestration as to count in offsetting carbon emissions and reducing globally the amount of carbon in this atmosphere - this issue is discussed in an article on Wikipedia, which is very interesting - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_Sequestration.

I mentioned the Atlantic Forest of Brazil here and in earlier posts - the Atlantic Forest of Brazil is listed as a globally significant Biodiversity Hotspot by the International Conservation Scientists of the organization, Conservation Internaltional, www.conservation.org.

Planting the area of the Atlantic Forest of Brazil is one of the programs being done by The Nature Conservancy - "Planting a Billion Trees" at www.nature.org.

Also, on The Nature Conservancy website is an "Ask the Conservationist" article from June 2008 on the subject of "Do Carbon Offsets Really Work?" -- http://support.nature.org/site/PageServer?pagename=asktheconservationist_200806&JServSessionIdr012=3q075ukq61.app43a. Read this article and you will get a realistic answer.

I have discussed this matter several times in my blog posts and I go into information from a number of different scientifically based organizations in my posts - check here to read my earlier posts and get links to various organizations.

I love real forests - but it is more than my love of forests that is my motivation for writing my blog posts -we need live, carbon sequestering forests on this planet, in addition to reducing carbon emissions, for this planet and this web of life to be healthy for us humans to live in.

We all need to take responsibility for this condition.

TO LIFE!!

Ruth

UNITED NATIONS MAP SUPPORTS PROTECTION OF HIGH-PRIORITY LANDS GLOBALLY FOR CARBON STORAGE AND BIODIVERSITY

Ruth Sandra Sperling
RSS Designs In Fiber - Internet Shop of Handmade Items
RSS Designs Wearable - Internet Shop of Wearable Items
RSS Crochet Thread Plus - Internet Shop of Crochet Thread


I found out about a pdf document on the internet from the
UNEP (United Nations Environmental Programme) World Conservation Monitoring Centre, which they have named "Carbon and biodiversity, A demonstration atlas".

Here is the link: http://www.unep.org/pdf/carbon_biodiversity.pdf

Some of the environmental groups I strongly support for their work on protecting and restoring biodiversity, The Nature Conservancy and Conservation International, were contributors to this report.

I am glad to see that the United Nations has shown this support for Global Biodiversity.

A large part of it is protecting lands of primary Old Growth - some of the healthiest and most ecologically significant lands left on this planet.

Not logging the primary Old Growth left on this planet may be the most valuable thing that we can do on this planet at this time - for the web of life.

Anyone who has seen a clearcut in a forest first-hand and in-person knows from personal experience what a clearcut looks like and how it must affect the forest -- and I have seen a clearcut that must not have been too old at the time I saw it. It was in the Sequoia National Forest in the late 1980's when logging and clearcuts were still going on there. It wasn't too far off the Western Divide Highway in the southern portion of the Sequoia National Forest in what is now the Giant Sequoia National Monument. I was driving down a back road looking for a good place to take some people hiking - I drove around a corner and was shocked at the devastation of this clearcut. Obviously, I was not going to bring these people hiking here as they liked to photograph live trees, etc. It totally upset me and was part of my motivation for getting involved in public issues regarding managing the National Forests.

And, YES, this was in an area not too terribly far from Giant Sequoia groves, though I don't know exactly how close - it was on the western side of the Western Divide Highway somewhere south of the Wheel Meadow Grove and east of Red Hill Grove and Peyrone Grove. I have a map of the Sequoia National Forest and I know where these are.

It was reading Aldo Leopold - both in his book, A Sand County Almanac, and his paper, The Last Stand - that I found out about the devastating effects of clearcutting on the land in addition to just the removal of the trees.

I would like to quote from these.

From "The Last Stand" by Aldo Leopold as published in The Leopold Outlook Winter 2004, A newsletter published quarterly by The Aldo Leopold Foundation.

"Few laymen realize that the penalties of violence to a forest may far outlast its visible evidence. I know a hardwood forest called the Spessart, covering a mountain on the north flank of the Alps. Half of it has sustained cuttings since 1605, but was never slashed. The other half was slashed during the 1600's, but has been under intensive forestry during the last 150 years. Despite this rigid protection, the old slashing now produces only mediocre pine, while the unslashed portion grows the finest cabinet oak in the world; one of those oaks fetches a higher price than a whole acre of the old slashings. On the old slashings the litter accumulates without rotting, stumps and limbs disappear slowly, natural reproduction is slow. On the unslashed portion litter disappears as it falls, stumps and limbs rot at once, natural reproduction is automatic. Foresters attribute the inferior performance of the old slashing to its depleted microflora, meaning that the underground community of bacteria, molds, fungi, and burrowing mammals which constitute half the environment of a tree.
"The existence of the term microflora implies, to the layman, that science knows all the citizens of the underground community, and is able to push them around at will. As a matter of fact, science knows little more than the community exists, and that it is important."

In the book, A Sand County Almanac, in the section, The Upshot, in the sub-section, "Wilderness for Science", I quote Aldo Leopold again:

"Many forest plantations are producing one-log or two-log trees on soil which originally grew three-log and four-log trees. Why? Thinking foresters know that the cause lies not in the tree, but in the micro-flora of the soil, and that it may take more years to restore the soil flora than it took to destroy it."

So, clearcutting - or "slashing" as Aldo Leopold called it in "The Last Stand", has a destructive impact on the land that affects future growth on that land.

WITH WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO PROTECT THE HEALTH OF THE PLANET AND THE LAND, I THEREFORE CONCLUDE THAT WE CANNOT AFFORD TO DO ANY MORE CLEARCUTTING ON THIS PLANET - ESPECIALLY ON PRIMARY OLD GROWTH LANDS.

Also, in the same issue of The Leopold Outlook of Winter 2004 is an essay written by 2 former Chiefs of the United States Forest Service published originally August 24, 2003, Mike Dombeck and Jack Ward Thomas - "Declare Harvest of Old-Growth Forests Off-Limits and Move On"

I would like to quote one paragraph that I feel contains key, relevant information.

"Second, scientists increasingly appreciate old-growth forests as reservoirs of biodiversity with associated 'banks' of genetic material. Most stands are prtected as habitat for threatened or endangered (and associated) species - to meet the purpose of the Endangered Species Act '...to provide a means whereby the ecosystems upon which endangered species and threatened species depend may be conserved...' It's time to stop fighting over what little old growth remains unprotected."

And part of another paragraph discussing forest management from this same article.

"Forest management should focus on restoring forest health and reducing fire risk, intially in areas where risk to human life and property are greatest - the so-called wildand/urban interface. Then, appropriate management practices should be strategically targeted in the right places and at the right scales across the landscape."

YES, FOLKS, PEOPLE WHO RAN (PAST TENSE MEANING IN THE PAST) THE US FOREST SERVICE FEEL THAT OLD GROWTH SHOULD NOT BE LOGGED.

It is now becoming a global issue - with The Nature Conservancy (see Plant A Billion Trees gadget on this blog!) and Conservation International and Care2 running campaigns for protecting rainforest and planting trees - and the United Nations publishing papers on it.

You, too can join the bandwagon - through these organizations you can contribute to protecting the Old Growth forests left on this planet - incluidng for free by clicking on Care2's Race for the Rainforest!!


Ruth

CARBON OFFSETS - AN ARTICLE ON THE NATURE CONSERVANCY WEBSITE

Ruth Sandra Sperling
RSS Designs In Fiber - Internet Shop of Handmade Items
RSS Designs Wearable - Internet Shop of Wearable Items
RSS Crochet Thread Plus - Internet Shop of Crochet Thread


In an earlier post, I mentioned "Biodiversity Offsets".

Well, there are also "Carbon Offsets" --this is where to offset something you do in your life that puts a lot of carbon in the atmosphere (like take a long airline flight which puts a lot of carbon in the atmosphere and adds to greenhouse gases), you make a donation to something to offset that that is supposed to remove the carbon from the atmosphere.

The question is -- is this working and how can you make sure your carbon offset donation will actually do that - offset the carbon?

Well, The Nature Conservancy has some help on this!!

An article on their website answers some key questions on this issue and gives some good advice on how to make sure you are donating to something that will really be a carbon offset.

They have a huge website, so here is the direct link to the article:

http://support.nature.org/site/PageServer?pagename=asktheconservationist_200806&JServSessionIdr012=3q075ukq61.app43a

Good reading - I was glad I found it!! Bill Stanley has some very useful information!

I think carbon offsets are really good things and can be really important.

Speaking of which -- Plant A Billion Trees in the Atlantic Forest of Brazil could use some more donations. Once those trees are planted and as long as they take hold -- I believe they are there to stay!!

Here's to the trees!!

Ruth

I AM JOINING THE TREE PLANTING CAMPAIGN, PLANT A BILLION TREES, A NATURE CONSERVANCY CAMPAIGN

Ruth Sandra Sperling
RSS Designs In Fiber - Internet Shop of Handmade Items
RSS Crochet Thread Plus - Internet Shop of Crochet Thread

It was in 2001 when I first read in the magazine of The Nature Conservancy about the project to replant trees in Brazil's Atlantic Forest to restore it.

With only 7% of the original tropical forest left, it is one of the hottest biodiveristy hotspots on the planet. (Read the website of Conservation International to find out about biodiversity hotspots.)

So, today, I found out about the campaign of The Nature Conservancy to Plant A Billion Trees in The Atlantic Forest of Brazil.

I have made my first contribution today - it is one dollar for one tree - simple - do you want to make your own contribution?

I am putting the "widget" for the campaign here on my blog.

My goal is 1000 for right now - I want a lot of trees planted!!

This planet has had too many trees cut down!!

What can you do???? What do you want to do????

Ruth