Not my specialty, but since there seems to be some interest in climate change here, I wanted to make sure we didn’t let this week pass us by.
Here are the statements of the Forest Service and Interior Department. The Forest Service says:
“It is abundantly clear that our nation’s forests and grasslands have a big role to play in helping build a more climate-resilient nation but are also threatened by climate impacts. Our forests and grasslands need adaptive management solutions to foster resilience and sustain lasting ecological, economic and social benefits in a rapidly changing climate.
Climate change is threatening the Forest Service’s ability to fulfill its mission. Warming temperatures and changing precipitation patterns in the Western U.S. are already contributing to changes in wildland fire frequency, severity and size. In the East, changing climate conditions are contributing to more frequent and severe floods and droughts, changes in pests and diseases, and shifting habitat suitability for economically and culturally important tree species. These changes are expected to become more profound in the coming years.”
It goes on to talk about the various agency programs that address climate change. USDI talks about specific projects funded by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law “to improve the nation’s natural infrastructure.”
“Projects selected will advance the three pillars of the Restoration and Resilience Framework: building climate resilience and addressing climate change impacts; restoring healthy lands and waters; and enhancing communities’ quality of life.”
Both notably focus on adaptation rather than mitigation through emphasis on renewable energy.
I wonder what a revision to NFMA based on “Our forests and grasslands need adaptive management solutions to foster resilience and sustain lasting ecological, economic and social benefits in a rapidly changing climate.” would look like?
Maybe the old “plans as a loose-leaf notebook?”
I think the FS believes “adaptive management” = “flexibility.” And I think they’d love a “loose-leaf notebook” approach to planning, but that movement wilted in the face of having to talk to the public (and maybe the ESA agencies) about the effects of replacing the pages.