Should we focus on young trees or old as the climate warms?

I keep seeing comments that are really missing the point. This video isn't saying you shouldn't plant trees or that planting trees is just as bad as other human activity. Its just an exercise in considering how we impact the environment. The biggest takeaways are that the environment is complex and there is no bandaid solution to climate change.

As a forestry student, I feel like this does a good job at talking about carbon storage in mature forests. I am also happy that they tackled canopy closure. I would like to see them tackle a more finicky topic like restorative logging. For example, 100 years of fire suppression in the West has shifted the fire regimes. In other words, one of the determinants for fire severity. For areas where a fire should occur every 20 years and clear out the forest floor, 90 years without fire creates higher tree density than is natural for the area. To correct this, the Forest Service (among other agencies) write a prescription for loggers to follow. To be more clear, they are not clear cutting. They are selectively removing trees without creating openings in the canopy. Furthermore, where there are clearcutting (at least for Montana) the Forest Service prescribes it to areas of forest that have become susceptible to disease and thus become more fire prone. There is a lot of complexity to this topic and one that I am eager to be more involved in for the future. I believe that we can have logging benefit our forests while also combating large scale, high severity fires brought on by climate change. I don't see logging as inherently evil or anti nature. I see it as a tool and like all tools, it can be misused and when it is, calamity is the result, such as the clearcutting of healthy mature forests in the Pacific Northwest.

I think there needs to be more information made about natural grasslands as well

It’s not just about carbon. Trees regulate the climate, raise the water tables for more fresh drinking water and lower the sea level in the process. It’s always hotter without trees.

I'm saddened you didn't mention the fact the Loss of Forest EcoSystems cannot simply be revived by planting endless rows of the same type of tree #MonoCulture

This young woman does a great job explaining these complex issues. Her voice is soothing which makes her a joy to listen to. Thanks for this series.

you may also want to look at Menominee forestry practices, lumber can be harvested while making the forest healthier if you don't just clear cut.

As a scientist, this was fascinating and raises many questions. It is worthy of a longer series to explain in further detail.

There should be a difference between the types of forests we're talking about here, and not just in terms of age. Is a young tropical forest different? A mangrove? A bamboo forest? Should we plant rapidly growing big plants instead of temperate forests instead, for short term significant gains? What about grasslands? Is the Pleistocene Park onto something?

I live in Ontario and I cut my forest constantly. Mainly just the dead wood but living trees too sometimes. I totaly agree about keeping the canopy closed and never ever clear cutting. Selective cutting is the way to go. That is the best way to produce the most wood per acre for sure. Thinning in winter also feeds the deer and keeps their populations up, it works for rabbits too. Burning dead wood is essential in my view to reduce the risk of forest fires. My favourite fires are for heating my home and water as well as making that sweet sweet maple syrup!

So basically try to close the canopy sooner. Then they grow vertically and store more carbon. I would like to also have some data from sustainable forests, where they cut only the dead trees and thin out just enough so neighbor trees don't die.

finally a video about how old trees are not necessarily bad, but very beneficial to have around.

I have been saying for years that Arbor Day should be one of our most important holidays. Early settlers come to the East Coast and defoliate to build homes, Then, down the road Oklahoma becomes a dust bowl. By chance? Not likely.

Perhaps a bit more explanation on the source of this carbon imbalance is due: microbial respiration in young, open forests releases carbon already in the soil, presumably from earlier generations of trees. Mature forests store more carbon that they release in their soil, making its organic content greater every year. Forest is not trees only.

There is a "Climax Forest" on the Chehalis River in Washington State ! A true old forest where the brushy undergrowth is shaded out .

While everyone keeps hyper focusing on trees the Great plains which is one of the biggest carbon sinks in the world is being taken over by pavement at a alarming rate matter in fact its only 1/8 of what it used to be size was if you look at old 1800s maps it stretched from Missouri to the rocky mountains and even in the flat land passes in the mountains it was for a good distance on the western side of the rocky mountains.

The crazy thing is, I was taught this in highschool back in the early 90's and they still haven't gotten the message across.

I want to give Kudos to this. I have been saying this since the 1980's. This is the first document I have seen that even mentions the forest let alone give any numbers about it.

Fun fact: plastic is 80% carbon, and is virtually indestructible. Therefore, the great Pacific plastic patch is a huge carbon sink. The only problem is that this carbon came directly from oil, not from the atmosphere :o(

In Germany there existed once a Woodcutting Method called Haubergswirtschaft where the Forest was partitioned into 20 to 32 Areas and every Year one part of the Forest would be cut in Winter when most of the Trees Energy is in its Roots. Also they would be cut in an Angle so that Rain could flow down the Stumps and it wouldn't rot, also the Branches and 'useless' Wood would be burned carefully around the Stumps without hurting the Roots to bring back Carbon and and Nutrients into the Soil. Afterwards the part of the Forest would be protected against wild Animals that would eat the new Shoots and the Forest would be left alone for 20 to 32 Years to regenerate from the Shoots In that Time it would only be allowed to collect Mushrooms in that Area and let small Animals roam like Chicken after a few Years where they can't eat the Shoots anymore. Maybe then the Forest would capture more Carbon faster, because it doesn't has to start from the beginning. Yet when I had been there the Trees there had been pretty chaotic and quirky because they were mostly used for Firewood and to be turned into Coal, but also for Construction: Beeches for Coal and they were growing in all Directions and Oaks for Construction that grew more normally.