Researchers Link Largest NM Tree Dieoff On Record To Climate Warmup - WP

[hatrack]

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. -- Researchers believe the massive die-offs of New Mexico's state tree during 2002 and 2003 could be a harbinger of life in a warming world. High elevation pinon forests that had survived previous droughts endured as much as 90 percent mortality, according to a team of researchers led by University of Arizona ecologist Dave Breshears.

"Across a whole landscape, this system got whacked," said Breshears, whose findings were reported this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. His team has been doing long-term studies of the Jemez Mountain ecosystem. Drought weakened the trees enough for bark beetles to kill them, but warmer temperatures _ only 1 to 2 degrees Fahrenheit higher than the long-term average _ appear to have contributed, the scientists found. Tree deaths occurred in areas that were relatively unaffected by a drier drought during the 1950s.

"This is a different kind of response than we saw following the 1950s drought," said Breshears, who has been studying pinon woodlands since the 1980s. "This drought was hotter." Breshears didn't blame the 2002 die-off on human-caused global warming, saying no single event can be unequivocally linked to the planet's long-term rising temperature trend. But he said dramatic drought-induced changes in the Southwest landscape since the turn of the 21st century are consistent with global climate change projections. "We're more likely to get more frequent, more intense droughts," Breshears said.

U.S. Geological Survey ecologist Julio Betancourt disagreed with conclusions reached by Breshears' team. Betancourt questioned whether scientists know enough about what happened 50 years ago to be sure the recent drought was worse. However, he praised the scientists for trying to quantify effects of warming temperatures. "All of us are seeing these temperatures going up, and we know it's going to have an effect," Betancourt said.

EDIT

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/11/AR2005101101580.html

[opihimoimoi]

1. Rush should be made aware of this....but then, he would just slough

it off.

[NNadir]

2. These things make questionable the strategy of mitigation through trees.

The other factor of course is the change in the range of certain pests, along with the on going introduction of parasites of various types.

I love trees, and plant as many as I can, but man I'm not sure that forests will have much success in sequestering CO2. I doubt it very much, in fact.

[phantom power]

3. Even if it "works," you can only sequester so much before...

you hit the limit. There's a certain number of trees you can have on a planet of finite size (like ours), and then what?

Add to that, the often-overlooked problem that we are still reducing the number of forested acres on this planet every year, not increasing them. And now add the fact that climate change is making it harder to grow trees, period.

Sequestration is just another manifestation of denial. People telling each other stories to help them keep believing that we don't have to stop burning fossil fuels.

[hatrack]

4. On top of that, there was a big study a few years back - Duke/UMich?

Anyway, they raised stands of loblolly pine on a plot where a network of pipes released CO2 at to produce an artificial atmosphere with levels at about (IIRC) 450 ppm.

The results were interesting. There was an initial growth spurt, as predicted by scientists. However, after about 3-4 years, growth rates fell back to levels below those shown in control plots.

The trees goosed with extra CO2 had grown faster initially, but all that it meant was that they used up the available soil nutrients more quickly. Growth then slowed down drastically in soil suddenly rendered comparatively nutrient-poor.

Sorry, "Greening Earth Society" - no Get Out Of Jail Free Card for you

[Boomer]

6. Drought is also a factor

A slight rise in CO2 levels spurs growth and, but as the temperatures rise and drought increases, the vegetation and trees begin to release rather than bind CO2.

There's an article on that observation somewhere in this forum, but I'm too tired to search for it.

[NNadir]

5. As I recall though, this strategy was included in Kyoto.

I'm not totally convinced that sequestration through forest and forest products is useless, but on the other hand, I suspect that the case has been wildly overstated and has been wildy optimistic.

However the bottom line is always fossil fuels. That is the core.