Re:2,000-year-old redwoods survive wildfire at California's ...
by hinkley on Tuesday August 25, 2020 @12:40PM
(#24273194)
Both can be true, and if anything I think I would agree that this means we need to be even more careful over the next 30-50 years than we ever have been (or, hopefully, will have to be again), because we have two fuckups paying dividends at the same time, and one of them is on that time scale.
We already know that timber land in the Americas requires more active stewardship than colonial thinking suggests. These are not European forests. Microbial decay doesn't reduce the calories per acre the same way. Global warming makes the balance even more precarious. But there are ways we can address both of these problems which also serves as a carbon sink. As long as we do it before the dominant forest soil biome in North America flips to bacteria-dominant due to rising ambient temperatures.
We already know that timber land in the Americas requires more active stewardship than colonial thinking suggests. These are not European forests. Microbial decay doesn't reduce the calories per acre the same way. Global warming makes the balance even more precarious. But there are ways we can address both of these problems which also serves as a carbon sink. As long as we do it before the dominant forest soil biome in North America flips to bacteria-dominant due to rising ambient temperatures.