Law and Moomaw: Protect mature US forests to slow climate change

From The Conversation: “The Biden administration has called for protecting mature US forests to slow climate change, but it’s still allowing them to be logged.” By by Beverly Law and William Moomaw. Much to critique here. Many links. For example:

“Some studies indicate that thinning forests by harvesting some trees and reintroducing low-intensity fires can reduce the intensity of future wildfires, leaving more carbon stored in trees. But these studies don’t account for the large amount of carbon that is released to the atmosphere after trees are cut.”

Law’s work has been discussed numerous times on Smokey Wire, such as here, in looking at a paper by Law et al, “Carbon sequestration and biodiversity co-benefits of preserving forests in the western USA.”

Moomaw is a proponent of “proforestation.”



5 thoughts on “Law and Moomaw: Protect mature US forests to slow climate change”

  1. These kinds of studies always seem to exclude facts that don’t support their agendas. They want to isolate data, leading to their slanted conclusions. Solely focusing on carbon storage, and ignoring silviculture is planned ignorance, designed to increase donations to preservationist groups.

    • I wonder what Law and Moomaw think about the paper we discussed here: “Another paper: Forests are increasingly struggling to recover from wildfires.”

      50+ scientists: “Wildfires and severe drought are killing trees at an alarming rate across the West, and forests are struggling to recover as the planet warms. However, new research shows there are ways to improve forests’ chances of recovery – by altering how wildfires burn.”

      • Within the Caldor Fire footprint, there are probably every kind of managed or unmanaged forests where the fire burned through. We’ve also seen other fires burn right through young plantations. The only thing left of some of those plantation trees is a hole in the ground, where the trunk used to be. Untouched old growth also burned at high intensities, due to the build-up of large fuels.

        Speaking of big economic costs, the Sierra-At-Tahoe ski resort had major impacts to their bottom line, too. One lift was completely destroyed and 3 others had major damages. Salvage logging had to occur over most of its terrain. They also lost one complete year of operations, too.

    • I think solely focusing on the issue that interests you doesn’t suggest or promote “ignorance” of other issues, but is a pretty universal approach to advocacy. It’s up to the decision maker to give appropriate weights to carbon storage and silviculture. In this case, the president has weighed in.


Leave a Comment