Trees and Climate Change Policy: Ideas about Getting it Right

I am getting ready to head over to CLoquet for this evening’s kick-off of the latest in our series of Family Forest conferences: Forest Values & Carbon Markets: Opportunities for Minnesota. Interest in the topic has been overwhelming – we’re oversubscribed. However, we’re committed to sharing as much of the conference as possible online, including through a follow-up conference wrap-up, and by posting presentations on our website.

One conference highlight will be presentation and discussion of a new report entitled “Minnesota North Woods Carbon Credit Partnership.” Developed by project partners Aitkin and Cass County Land Departments, Dovetail Partners, Inc., and Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences, the goal of the Partnership is to develop a carbon credit accounting system that works for Minnesota’s North Woods, including considerations for carbon storage associated with active forest management, long-lived wood products, and peatland restoration and management. The system was developed to meet the requirements of the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) and the Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS). We will post the full report on our website after its release at the conference.

I had just finished my initial read-through of this still hot-off-the-press report when I received from Great Lakes Forestry Alliance Executive Director Stefan Bergmann a press release outlining central climate change policy themes for the forestry sector. Developed by the Western Forestry Leadership Coalition (WFLC), an informal network of forestry professionals in America’s western states, these themes include 10 principles for developing forest climate change policies at the regional, state and local levels across America’s west. The goal of the framework is to mitigate rising temperatures through forest management strategies that are adapted to climate trends thus helping forests sustain their health while also being able to contribute to reducing carbon in the atmosphere.

The Coalition asserts that trees and forests are most effectively included in climate change policies when these policies:

Are Based on Best Available Science
Promote Forest Resiliency and Sustainability While Providing for Goods and Services
Endorse Full-Carbon Accounting with Forest Offset Projects
Support Market-Based Solutions
Prevent Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions by Increased Use of Forest Products, Woody Biomass, and Renewable Energy from Biomass
Are Developed through Collaboration
Pursue Innovative Activities and Partnerships
Are Cost-Effective and Practical
Are Performance Driven
Promote Learning and Innovation

Here’s the full report .

I will be interested to see how much traction these principles receive at our conference. What do VFVC blog readers think of them?

About these ads

Don Arnosti Says:

February 25, 2009 at 4:31 pm

Those ten principles look very appropriate to me.

Greg Nolan Says:

February 27, 2009 at 9:01 am

New Opportunities in Forest Management

We would like to suggest some new ideas for managing our local forests. From our experience, in central Minnesota, we think the best tool you can use to make a productive, healthy forest is a cutting tool. My favorite is a brush cutter, used as a “weeding” tool in a 2 to 5 year old stand of regeneration. Species diversity can be encouraged at this time with very little effort.
We have actually changed small brush fields with hardwood overstories to high value hardwoods saplings by brush cutting them a few times at the right time of the year (dormant) to encourage the sprouting response in the high value hardwoods seedlings that come from the overstory seed source.
A chainsaw, with firewood production in mind, can change the quality and species diversity of a stand. We think with incentives we could actually get firewood cutters to do forest stand improvement harvesting and sanitation & salvage cutting. Perhaps in exchange for the fuel wood they extract, we could get them to follow simple directions made easy to understand with a paint gun. With this system in place we could follow the ebbs and flows of what happens naturally in our forests (mimic nature).
Finally we think we need to form an army of motivated, highly trained locally based forest stand improvement specialists who are turned loose to develop a cliental of local landowners who trust them. Improvement cuts in the 2 inch to 8 inch class of hardwood forests with no thought of utilization would enable this group to cover some ground (thousands of acres). Why not pay for this with cost share dollars? I would argue that FSI cutting in naturally established forests would pay twice the dividends in half the time of planting trees from scratch, especially in a high value hardwood stand.
We think the “hands-on” learners that the university system left behind in rural Minnesota need a hand up to form this group. We would suggest training sponsored and overseen by the university and carried out by local “hands-on” entrepreneurs.
Micro loans from non-profits could jump start this group with the safety equipment and modern technology (GPS and laptops) they would need to do record keeping. We like the idea of private forest consultants contracted to paint these trees with DNR guidance. We like the ideas of partners in this project because the best ideas come from group thinking. “Turf” wars shouldn’t run our world.
Our local forests in central Minnesota have been high grade harvested and managed by default for decades. It’s time to make them productive again. There is no better way to do carbon sequestration work and economic & social development for the future in central Minnesota then to jump-start our mismanaged youth (human and trees).

Submitted by,

Snowy Pines Reforestation
Greg Nolan & Marcia Rapatz

Michael Krause Says:

March 2, 2009 at 12:31 pm

I’m sorry I was unable to attend the Forest and Carbon conference. Having read the WFLC report, it seems there is a Midwest version, which is the conversion of sensitive acreage from annual crop production to more perrenial production including fast-growing poplar and willow trees. This would have the multiple benefits of increasing the conservation and habitat value of these lands, reducing soil erosion and improving water quality, and generating a steady supply of woody biomass material for energy production. I am aware of a plan in Wright County to convert 6,000 acres to this kind of perennial production, producing 30,000-35,000 tons annually from harvesting 10-20 percent of the trees once the areas reach a certain level of maturity. We are offering to purchase this biomass fuel for our proposed biomass electrical generating facility near Buffalo. By entering into longterm (10-20 years) contracts to purchase the biomass at $20-25 a ton, it is my understanding that we significantly benefit the economics of this arrangement for farmers that choose to implement it. Also, because these fast-growing trees are a very significant carbon sink, these landowners could monetize the carbon credit value of their acreage for further economic benefits. I would be glad to discuss this further if you have an interest in it as a model.

Snow Pines Restoration’s Idea: Aligning young trees and young humans for better economies and healthier landscapes « Vital Forests Vital Communities Says:

March 20, 2009 at 12:12 am

[...] treatments Greg Nolan of Snowy Pines Reforestation near Browerville, MN responded to my pre-Forest Values/Carbon Markets blog post with some innovative ideas of his [...]