[NatureNS] Red Herring & Forestry

Received-SPF: pass (kirk.glinx.com: authenticated connection) receiver=kirk.glinx.com; client-ip=208.103.231.40; helo=D58WQPH1; envelope-from=dwebster@glinx.com; x-software=spfmilter 2.001 http://www.acme.com/software/spfmilter/ with libspf2-1.2.10;
From: "David & Alison Webster" <dwebster@glinx.com>
To: <naturens@chebucto.ns.ca>
References: <BAY403-EAS2250DEB45BBF07C4847A4EFC7F50@phx.gbl> <C9F133C5-1EAE-4D68-BFBD-64B9B234C127@eastlink.ca>
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 20:41:42 -0400
Precedence: bulk
Return-Path: <naturens-mml-owner@chebucto.ns.ca>
Original-Recipient: rfc822;"| (cd /csuite/info/Environment/FNSN/MList; /csuite/lib/arch2html)"

next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects

Index of Subjects
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_2C26_01D1498B.D0A681F0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Mary, Jim & All,                                    Jan 7, 2016
    By biomass I meant cutting trees (but clear cutting only in very =
exceptional circumstances), mowing Miscanthus,.... and ultimately =
burning for power.

    It is a grave mistake to imagine that carbon accumulation in a =
forest continues for all time. David Suzuki preached this for a while =
but retracted about 20 years ago. After few decades or many, depending =
upon initial state, a point is reached whereby release of carbon dioxide =
by forest litter and soil equals the carbon fixed in any one year. This =
steady state neither gains nor loses CO2. Consult a copy of The Soil =
Resource Hans Jenny Ecological Studies 37 1980, 377 pp; fluff free so =
about 400 hrs would be a good start.

    A steady state forest does store carbon until a dry period hits, as =
it has out west for several years, and one has huge forest fires. And =
dry or not there are some forest fires every year. And on the heels of a =
forest fire, unless there is very rapid regeneration, there will be =
large losses of CO2 from soil, as in clear cuts.

    As an aside, I have been selectively cutting trees for firewood, off =
and on, for 72 years and I am confident that most cuts quickly led to =
greater growth rates of the remaining trees and greater rates of carbon =
capture. I don't want to put words in Jamie's mouth or actions in his =
hands but, unless I have wires crossed, he also cuts trees selectively =
for firewood and I suspect that given the same setting we would very =
often make similar choices.=20

    Also as an aside, one learns by making mistakes and I have learned =
much that way. For example in 1971 I bought a woodlot south of Wolfville =
with the view that the best way to protect woodland was to buy and not =
cut it. For 10 years I spent many weekends thinning perhaps 5% of the =
area and keeping the lines clear and in 1981 got a nearby lot and =
neglected the first. At the time of the cutting craze (high prices) I =
received many phone calls from those wanting to buy stumpage and refused =
all. I was called all kinds of names, most having something to do with =
fool and was warned that many would die if I did not have the larger =
trees removed. It turns out they were correct. Many did die or perhaps =
even worse survive and crowd nearby trees. In the wind of Dec 2010 many =
more went over and in much of those woods one would be unwise to walk =
without a chainsaw; land in a tangle of 10' Fir thickets and cross piled =
windfalls is just plain dangerous to walk across without a saw to cut a =
path if need be. With the objective of making matters easier for my =
executors I put it up for sale and the only serious offer was from a =
logger, about my age, who had cut some there when he was young. He has =
two (?) sons and I am sure they will do a better job of managing it than =
I did.

    In the North Alton woodlot about 2003 my neighbor had a harvester on =
his lot and offered to selectively cut about 20 acres of mine which he =
claimed would soon die if not thinned; the offer was (?) $40,000 =
guaranteed and half of any remaining profit. I agreed to this, slept on =
it and backed out. Once again he was correct; probably 80% of these =
trees did die and there are large patches bare of live trees.=20

    The discussion about woodland, from my perspective, is whether and =
how the desirable features of selective cutting for firewood can be =
effected by machinery for biomass and therefore be cost-effective, =
improve the forest and decrease net CO2 emissions. We have strayed into =
several side issues but this is a necessary step so all or most can =
agree on what is known or can be known.

    For nearly a year now I have intended to make some comments about =
possible futures for NS forests and this current discussion may lead =
into that subject eventually. It is a topic which I think needs to be =
carefully reconsidered in all respects.=20

    My time and energy is largely taken up in 24/7 home care so time is =
usually limited to fragments of time between chores. But I do generally =
have ~3 hrs free when Alison has a nap between 12:30 and 3:30. So Jim =
(and Mary if business takes you this way) I would be delighted to show =
you a Pine stand which has been cut much and in need again of thinning =
(the 2010 wind thinned some and my Nephews thankfully extracted the =
logs)  and some of the consequences of not thinning soon enough as =
viewed in North Alton.

    The average age of NS forests, so I understand, is about 40 years. =
Non-commercial thinning costs, and the forestry outlook has been =
depressed, so I suspect many are overstocked. By cutting intelligently =
one could, using mechanical harvesters, clear cut 1/5 of the area for 9' =
wide travel ways and then thin the remaining 80% to overcome suppression =
and come away with biomass for burning.

    And depending upon the state of the forest, there may be great net =
release of CO2 in an unthinned forest if e.g. the trees are overstocked =
such that nearly all die after a long period of poor CO2 fixation of =
ongoing release from the litter & soil.
And so to bed,
     Yt, Dave Webster, Kentville
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Jim Wolford=20
  To: naturens=20
  Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 5:10 PM
  Subject: Fwd: [NatureNS] Red Herring & Forestry


  I fear Mary is reading into =93biomass=94 its harvesting and burning, =
which I=92m sure was not intended by David W.  And yes to Mary=92s =
second sentence.  from Jim in Wolfville.



  Begin forwarded message:


    From: Mary Macaulay <marymacaulay@hotmail.com>

    Subject: Re: [NatureNS] Red Herring & Forestry

    Date: January 7, 2016 at 3:50:03 PM AST

    To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca

    Reply-To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca



    You lost me at:
    "Biomass, from forest or otherwise, is one potential way to reduce =
carbon footprint so I think every effort should be made to foster and =
expand this as quickly as possible."

    I'm hoping you meant storing Carbon in biomass by leaving forests =
intact rather than burning them...?

    But I fear not.

    With kindest regards

    Mary (Macaulay), P.Eng.
    Queen Bee, Insect Recovery Project
    Owner, Remember Adventures
    Pedal Buggy & snowshoe rentals, picnics, great bird friendly coffee, =
breakfast & pasta, pollinator meadow, games & more!!=20
    (Open Wed to Sunday: 8:30 a