Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Are rainforests doomed? Not necessarily.

News Feed
Thursday, April 4, 2024

Serranía de Chiribiquete, a mountainous region in the Colombian Amazon. New data from the World Resources Institute and the University of Maryland reveals forest loss declined last year in Colombia, among other countries. | Guillermo Legaria/AFP via Getty Images In a grim new analysis of tropical forests, there are a few important glimmers of hope. Last year, the planet lost 9.2 million acres of its tropical forest, an area a bit larger than the entire state of Maryland, according to new data from environmental group World Resources Institute (WRI) and the University of Maryland. That’s like losing about 10 soccer fields of forest per minute — for an entire year. Obviously, that sounds bad. It is bad. For decades on end, the world has watched its rainforests disappear and give way to giant farms and cattle ranches that feed the public’s desire for meat and other food products. Roughly one-third of the world’s tropical forests are now gone. And that loss has fueled both the extinction crisis and climate change; the carbon stored in trees often gets released back into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide after they’re cut down, helping warm the planet. Yet against this backdrop of destruction, there are a few different, more hopeful stories. The WRI analysis shows that, in a few regions, including Columbia and Brazil, deforestation declined dramatically last year or remained lower than it once was. In other words, more trees were left standing, compared to previous years. This is not only good news but it reveals something critical: With the right laws and good governance, countries can keep their tropical forests intact. Losing the planet’s rainforests is not inevitable. Where forests were destroyed last year The new analysis, based on an enormous amount of satellite imagery, found that the tropics lost slightly less forest in 2023, compared to 2022. You can see the recent dip in the chart below. It shows forest loss over the last two decades, nearly all of which is human-caused. But the amount of destruction is still substantial, Mikaela Weisse, director of WRI’s Global Forest Watch project, said in a call with reporters last week. “The overall tropical rates of primary forest loss remained stubbornly consistent with past years,” Weisse said. “All of that forest loss resulted in 2.4 gigatons of carbon dioxide emissions,” she added, which is equivalent to almost half of all the greenhouse gas emissions in the US. The WRI analysis focuses on the tropics, because that is where the vast majority of global deforestation — the deliberate clearing of trees — takes place. Yet it also includes some broader statistics of global change, which show that there was a massive spike in forest loss worldwide last year compared to 2022 due to the record-breaking wildfires in Canada. Just three countries account for the bulk of the recent destruction in the tropics: Brazil, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), and Bolivia. That’s partly because they’ve got a lot to lose. Brazil, for example, is home to nearly a third of the world’s tropical forests, whereas the lion’s share of the Congo Basin rainforest — the second largest in the world — is in DRC. In most cases, topping the charts for destroying forests is as bad as it seems. In the DRC, for example, consistently high rates of forest loss are eroding the planet’s “last major carbon sink,” Elizabeth Goldman, a researcher at Global Forest Watch, said on the press call, “meaning that forest absorbs more carbon than it emits.” The problems here are especially challenging to solve. Many people clear patches of the forest with fire to grow food for their families, not to profit. A troubling situation is also occurring in Bolivia, where deforestation continues to surge. 2023 was the country’s third year in a row of record-breaking destruction, the analysis found — part of a decade-long trend of increasing loss, fueled by agriculture. (Colonies of Mennonites, a religious group, are behind much of this recent deforestation.) In Brazil and a handful of other countries, meanwhile, the high rate of forest loss masks what is actually a somewhat hopeful story. Bucking the trend: Brazil, Columbia, Indonesia Although Brazil lost nearly 3 million acres of tropical forest last year — much of which vanished from the Amazon — 2023 was actually a relatively good year. The country lost about a third less primary forest compared to 2022, a drop you can clearly see in the chart below, reaching the lowest level of loss since 2015. It’s a tale of two presidents: Jair Bolsonaro and Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, better known as Lula. An icon of the left and a leader of Brazil’s Workers Party, Lula first governed between 2003 and 2011, a period that saw a massive drop in deforestation, at least partly due to his pro-environmental agenda. Then Bolsonaro came into power. The right-wing leader stripped enforcement measures, cut spending for science and environmental agencies, and fired environmental experts, among other activities largely in support of the agribusiness industry. Forests were flattened. Now, Lula is back, after again winning office for a term that started early last year. He’s promised to curtail deforestation, including by stepping up enforcement and tracking criminal activity. And so far, it seems he’s having some success, according to WRI and the Brazilian government. “We have the opportunity again of being a champion on climate, and Lula has promised to do that,” Ana Paula Vargas, Brazil program director at Amazon Watch, an environmental advocacy group, told me last summer. There’s more good news from Colombia, where destruction has similarly softened. Last year, the country’s rate of forest loss dropped in half, according to WRI, after several years of extreme deforestation — largely due to the region’s changing, complicated politics. Finally, there’s Indonesia, where there’s also a reason to be hopeful. Home to one of the world’s most diverse and carbon-rich tropical forests, complete with orangutans and tigers and the world’s largest flower, forest loss in Indonesia remains well below its peak of forest loss in the early 2010s (although the country did see a spike in deforestation last year, per the WRI analysis). Diego Giudice/Bloomberg via Getty Images A tractor applies pesticides to a soybean field in eastern Bolivia. For much of the last few decades, Indonesia has cleared forests to plant near rows of oil palm trees — the crops that produce palm oil, now among the most common oils worldwide. It’s used in everything from baby shampoo to ice cream. The industry has been incredibly destructive, to wildlife, local communities, and, really, the entire planet (the stability of which depends on keeping carbon in the ground). But about 10 years ago, the story began to change. Environmental activists launched campaigns against the most harmful palm oil companies. Indonesia’s government put stricter policies in place. Groups like WRI and TheTreeMap, a data organization, started monitoring deforestation more closely from space, making destruction harder to hide. And as a result, the industry — though still far from perfect — started cleaning itself up. “I don’t want to sit here and say that the palm oil industry has suddenly become shiny green and sustainable, but it’s mostly stopped deforestation,” Glenn Hurowitz, the founder and CEO of Mighty Earth, an environmental advocacy group, told me last year. To be clear, countries like Brazil, Colombia, and Indonesia are still clearing their forests by the thousands of acres. It remains a problem that world leaders should not ignore. But the stories here also suggest that a different future for these ecosystems, among the most important in the world, is possible. Forests can be protected. Laws — and the enforcement of them — can root out harmful activities. Activism can actually transform an entire industry. Yes, what’s happening in places like Brazil and Colombia is just a speck of hope in a world of destruction, but it’s an important reminder that the fate of the world’s tropical forests is in our control.

Serranía de Chiribiquete, a mountainous region in the Colombian Amazon. New data from the World Resources Institute and the University of Maryland reveals forest loss declined last year in Colombia, among other countries. | Guillermo Legaria/AFP via Getty Images

In a grim new analysis of tropical forests, there are a few important glimmers of hope.

Last year, the planet lost 9.2 million acres of its tropical forest, an area a bit larger than the entire state of Maryland, according to new data from environmental group World Resources Institute (WRI) and the University of Maryland. That’s like losing about 10 soccer fields of forest per minute — for an entire year.

Obviously, that sounds bad. It is bad.

For decades on end, the world has watched its rainforests disappear and give way to giant farms and cattle ranches that feed the public’s desire for meat and other food products. Roughly one-third of the world’s tropical forests are now gone. And that loss has fueled both the extinction crisis and climate change; the carbon stored in trees often gets released back into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide after they’re cut down, helping warm the planet.

Yet against this backdrop of destruction, there are a few different, more hopeful stories. The WRI analysis shows that, in a few regions, including Columbia and Brazil, deforestation declined dramatically last year or remained lower than it once was. In other words, more trees were left standing, compared to previous years. This is not only good news but it reveals something critical: With the right laws and good governance, countries can keep their tropical forests intact. Losing the planet’s rainforests is not inevitable.

Where forests were destroyed last year

The new analysis, based on an enormous amount of satellite imagery, found that the tropics lost slightly less forest in 2023, compared to 2022. You can see the recent dip in the chart below. It shows forest loss over the last two decades, nearly all of which is human-caused.

But the amount of destruction is still substantial, Mikaela Weisse, director of WRI’s Global Forest Watch project, said in a call with reporters last week. “The overall tropical rates of primary forest loss remained stubbornly consistent with past years,” Weisse said. “All of that forest loss resulted in 2.4 gigatons of carbon dioxide emissions,” she added, which is equivalent to almost half of all the greenhouse gas emissions in the US.

The WRI analysis focuses on the tropics, because that is where the vast majority of global deforestation — the deliberate clearing of trees — takes place. Yet it also includes some broader statistics of global change, which show that there was a massive spike in forest loss worldwide last year compared to 2022 due to the record-breaking wildfires in Canada.

Just three countries account for the bulk of the recent destruction in the tropics: Brazil, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), and Bolivia. That’s partly because they’ve got a lot to lose. Brazil, for example, is home to nearly a third of the world’s tropical forests, whereas the lion’s share of the Congo Basin rainforest — the second largest in the world — is in DRC.

In most cases, topping the charts for destroying forests is as bad as it seems. In the DRC, for example, consistently high rates of forest loss are eroding the planet’s “last major carbon sink,” Elizabeth Goldman, a researcher at Global Forest Watch, said on the press call, “meaning that forest absorbs more carbon than it emits.” The problems here are especially challenging to solve. Many people clear patches of the forest with fire to grow food for their families, not to profit.

A troubling situation is also occurring in Bolivia, where deforestation continues to surge. 2023 was the country’s third year in a row of record-breaking destruction, the analysis found — part of a decade-long trend of increasing loss, fueled by agriculture. (Colonies of Mennonites, a religious group, are behind much of this recent deforestation.)

In Brazil and a handful of other countries, meanwhile, the high rate of forest loss masks what is actually a somewhat hopeful story.

Bucking the trend: Brazil, Columbia, Indonesia

Although Brazil lost nearly 3 million acres of tropical forest last year — much of which vanished from the Amazon — 2023 was actually a relatively good year. The country lost about a third less primary forest compared to 2022, a drop you can clearly see in the chart below, reaching the lowest level of loss since 2015.

It’s a tale of two presidents: Jair Bolsonaro and Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, better known as Lula.

An icon of the left and a leader of Brazil’s Workers Party, Lula first governed between 2003 and 2011, a period that saw a massive drop in deforestation, at least partly due to his pro-environmental agenda. Then Bolsonaro came into power. The right-wing leader stripped enforcement measures, cut spending for science and environmental agencies, and fired environmental experts, among other activities largely in support of the agribusiness industry. Forests were flattened.

Now, Lula is back, after again winning office for a term that started early last year. He’s promised to curtail deforestation, including by stepping up enforcement and tracking criminal activity. And so far, it seems he’s having some success, according to WRI and the Brazilian government. “We have the opportunity again of being a champion on climate, and Lula has promised to do that,” Ana Paula Vargas, Brazil program director at Amazon Watch, an environmental advocacy group, told me last summer.

There’s more good news from Colombia, where destruction has similarly softened. Last year, the country’s rate of forest loss dropped in half, according to WRI, after several years of extreme deforestation — largely due to the region’s changing, complicated politics.

Finally, there’s Indonesia, where there’s also a reason to be hopeful. Home to one of the world’s most diverse and carbon-rich tropical forests, complete with orangutans and tigers and the world’s largest flower, forest loss in Indonesia remains well below its peak of forest loss in the early 2010s (although the country did see a spike in deforestation last year, per the WRI analysis).

 Diego Giudice/Bloomberg via Getty Images
A tractor applies pesticides to a soybean field in eastern Bolivia.

For much of the last few decades, Indonesia has cleared forests to plant near rows of oil palm trees — the crops that produce palm oil, now among the most common oils worldwide. It’s used in everything from baby shampoo to ice cream. The industry has been incredibly destructive, to wildlife, local communities, and, really, the entire planet (the stability of which depends on keeping carbon in the ground).

But about 10 years ago, the story began to change. Environmental activists launched campaigns against the most harmful palm oil companies. Indonesia’s government put stricter policies in place. Groups like WRI and TheTreeMap, a data organization, started monitoring deforestation more closely from space, making destruction harder to hide. And as a result, the industry — though still far from perfect — started cleaning itself up.

“I don’t want to sit here and say that the palm oil industry has suddenly become shiny green and sustainable, but it’s mostly stopped deforestation,” Glenn Hurowitz, the founder and CEO of Mighty Earth, an environmental advocacy group, told me last year.

To be clear, countries like Brazil, Colombia, and Indonesia are still clearing their forests by the thousands of acres. It remains a problem that world leaders should not ignore. But the stories here also suggest that a different future for these ecosystems, among the most important in the world, is possible. Forests can be protected. Laws — and the enforcement of them — can root out harmful activities. Activism can actually transform an entire industry.

Yes, what’s happening in places like Brazil and Colombia is just a speck of hope in a world of destruction, but it’s an important reminder that the fate of the world’s tropical forests is in our control.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Robbi Mecus, Who Helped Foster L.G.B.T.Q. Climbing Community, Dies at 52

Ms. Mecus, a New York State forest ranger who worked in the Adirondacks, died after falling about 1,000 feet from a peak at Denali National Park and Preserve in Alaska.

Robbi Mecus, a New York State forest ranger who led search-and-rescue missions and became a prominent voice within the L.G.B.T.Q. climbing community, died after falling about 1,000 feet from a peak at Denali National Park and Preserve in Alaska on Thursday. She was 52.Her death was confirmed by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, where she worked for 25 years.Ms. Mecus, who worked mostly in the Adirondacks, searched for and rescued lost and injured climbers facing hypothermia and other threats in the wilderness. This month, she helped rescue a frostbitten hiker who was lost in the Adirondack Mountains overnight.At age 44, she came out as transgender, she said in a 2019 interview with the New York City Trans Oral History project. She then worked to foster a supportive community for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and questioning climbers in the North Country of New York.“I want people to see that trans people can do amazing things,” she said in an interview for a climbing website, goEast, in 2022. “I think it helps when young trans people see other trans people accomplishing things. I think it lets them know that their life doesn’t have to be full of negativity and it can actually be really rad.”Basil Seggos, former commissioner of New York’s Department of Environmental Conservation, called Ms. Mecus a “pillar of strength” and a tremendous leader for L.G.B.T.Q.+ rights, noting she was “always there” for the most difficult rescues and crises.Subscribe to The Times to read as many articles as you like.

New Multnomah Falls parking fees spark debate, federal review

A private shuttle company is charging up to $20 to park in spots that used to be free.

Multnomah Falls visitors have already had to contend with traffic jams, new timed entry permits and occasional closures. Now some are staring at new parking fees.A small private parking lot across the street from the waterfall on the Historic Columbia River Highway has become a flashpoint for debate after new parking meters went up last weekend charging visitors up to $20 for what had previously been free spots.Sasquatch Shuttle — the company that operates the lot, runs a seasonal shuttle service to the falls and offers guided tours of the historic highway – implemented the new parking fees Thursday to alleviate congestion in the Columbia Gorge, the Salem Statesman Journal first reported Friday.The fees do not affect the main Multnomah Falls parking lot off Interstate 84, which remains free. Sasquatch Shuttle said it has leased the small lot on the historic highway from Union Pacific Railroad and will charge between $5 and $20 based on the day and season.The fees are reportedly rankling some visitors and have raised concerns within the U.S. Forest Service, which manages Multnomah Falls and is reviewing the situation.“While the Forest Service is interested in new approaches to reduce congestion and increase traffic safety around Multnomah Falls, we need to ensure it’s done in way that balances public access needs through an equity lens with our responsibilities to protect and preserve this landscape,” the federal agency said in an emailed statement.“We typically do that by requiring projects or changes like this to undergo a detailed approval process, including coordination with our partners, to ensure compliance with the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area Act,” the statement said.Nic Granum, deputy forest supervisor for the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area, said although new parking fees have been under discussion for years, it isn’t clear whether Sasquatch Shuttle is permitted to implement them. The ownership of that parking lot is also currently in question, despite the arrangement struck between the railroad company and shuttle service, Granum said.The national scenic area is a confusing patchwork of federal, state, county, city and private lands, where small parcels can lead to major headaches whenever land ownership is called into question.Granum said there’s currently no timeline for sorting out the issue at Multnomah Falls, but emphasized the agency’s sense of urgency.“It’s a high priority for us to get this resolved,” Granum said. “I think the more clarity we have the better.”People visit Multnomah Falls in the Columbia River Gorge on Tuesday, April 23, 2024.Jamie Hale/The OregonianFee signs are set up in the Sasquatch Shuttle pay lot at Multnomah Falls.Jamie Hale/The OregonianMeanwhile, Sasquatch Shuttle owners said they are simply implementing a crowd control measure that has been a long time coming, using their status as a private company to enact change much more quickly than the various government agencies that operate in the Columbia Gorge.“We’re doing what the government was unable to do,” co-owner Kent Krumpschmidt said.Sasquatch Shuttle also owns a 250-space parking lot in nearby Bridal Veil, where people can pay $5 for parking and a shuttle ride to Multnomah Falls. The company said those who don’t want to pay up to $20 to park in the roughly 48-space lot in front of the falls are encouraged to use their shuttle instead.On Tuesday afternoon, the company’s small pay lot near Multnomah Falls was nearly full, even though plenty of parking spaces were open in the free lot off Interstate 84. A parking attendant, who was busy collecting $10 payments, said the company would be charging $20 once its shuttle was up and running in May.The Sasquatch Shuttle parking, located steps away from the Multnomah Falls Lodge, offers premium access for those who want it, the company said. They also happen to be the only parking spots for those visiting the waterfall via the Historic Columbia River Highway, which runs parallel to the interstate.There is no convenient way to get from the historic highway to the main Multnomah Falls parking lot, forcing visitors to either bypass the main attraction of the famed “waterfall corridor” or jockey for spots in the small pay lot. That design has led to the infamous traffic congestion issues, which all parties in the Columbia River Gorge have been working to correct.“It’s a massive safety issue, and it’s also an environmental concern,” said Krumpschmidt, who is a former deputy with the Multnomah County Sheriff’s Office. “There were many instances where emergency response was delayed sometimes drastically.”Krumpschmidt and fellow co-owner Alan Dayley said they are not motivated by profit, but by a desire to alleviate that congestion. Money from the parking spots goes toward supporting their shuttle service, they said, as well as employees who monitor the parking lots.“Nobody likes change,” Dayley said. “No one’s going to like having to pay for something that’s historically been free.”As for the U.S. Forest Service review, the Sasquatch Shuttle owners said their understanding is that the government agency is not challenging the fees themselves but the installation of a fee machine in the parking lot. They also said the question of who owns the lot has been bouncing around for nearly two years, with no resolution and no evidence presented to them either way.Until it all gets resolved, the new parking fees will remain with peak tourism season set to begin in May.Visitors who park in the main lot off Interstate 84 will continue to be able to park there for free, though $2 timed entry permits will once again be required between May 24 and Sept. 2, from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. daily. Those permits will not be required for cars parking in the new Sasquatch Shuttle pay lot.Granum urged the public not to frame the parking issue as a conflict between Sasquatch Shuttle and the U.S. Forest Service. Both entities share the same vision for Multnomah Falls and the Historic Columbia River Highway, he said.“We have different authorities and different objectives just by our nature, but we’re all users of the gorge and stewards of all the responsibilities we have,” including recreational access, environmental considerations and economic development, Granum said. “All of those things are important and sometimes finding the balance in those doesn’t happen overnight.”The owners of Sasquatch Shuttle agreed, citing their continued good relationship with the agency.“We like the forest service, we’re all going the same direction and we all have the same end goal in mind,” Dayley said. “We have no beef with them whatsoever.”--Jamie Hale covers travel and the outdoors and co-hosts the Peak Northwest podcast. Reach him at 503-294-4077, jhale@oregonian.com or @HaleJamesB.Our journalism needs your support. Subscribe today to OregonLive.com.

National Park Service approves new Crater Lake operator, ending Aramark’s tenure

Hospitality company ExplorUS will take over the contract, effective immediately.

A new concessioner is officially in place at Crater Lake National Park.The National Park Service announced Thursday that it has approved the transfer of the current concessions contract to Kansas-based hospitality company ExplorUS, ending the rocky tenure of Crater Lake Hospitality, a subsidiary of Philadelphia-based Aramark.Aramark faces a litany of serious accusations around its management of the park since 2018, including unsafe housing conditions, environmental hazards and public health code violations. An investigation by The Oregonian/OregonLive, which analyzed 224 pages of federal reports and interviewed 15 former employees, showed years of systemic issues.In February, after the allegations came to light, the National Park Service announced its intention to terminate the contract with Aramark at Crater Lake. Less than a month later, Aramark struck a deal with ExplorUS to take over the contract, which is set to end in 2030.The National Park Service said the new operator will immediately take over the primary visitor services at Crater Lake, including Crater Lake Lodge, the Mazama Campground, all public dining areas, gift shops and the boat tours. In a news release, park officials said they are “striving for a seamless transition of services but ask for flexibility and patience from park visitors.”“We look forward to working with ExplorUS as they invest in facilities, staff training, visitor services, and other improvements to make visitors’ and employees’ experiences at Crater Lake even better,” Crater Lake National Park Superintendent Craig Ackerman said in the release.The National Park Service did not specify whether ExplorUS would be taking over the employee dormitories, the source of many complaints during Aramark’s tenure, nor did the agency say whether employees would still be living in the Rim Dormitory, which received a score of zero out of five in its 2023 inspection.Neither park officials nor ExplorUS immediately responded to requests for more information Thursday.In a statement released in March, ExplorUS CEO Frank Pikus said the company is “committed to working with the National Park Service to enhance and protect the visitor experience” at Crater Lake.According to the company, ExplorUS runs hospitality operations at more than 50 locations across the U.S., including Muir Woods in California, Acadia National Park in Maine and Carlsbad Caverns in New Mexico. It also operates in state parks, national forests and other outdoor recreation areas, including campgrounds in Washington’s Gifford Pinchot National Forest.ExplorUS previously said it plans to transition all current Crater Lake Hospitality employees to its company, and intends to offer all visitor services this summer. The company also intends to honor all reservations and deposits for future stays.Information about available park services will be posted online at nps.gov/crla.--Jamie Hale covers travel and the outdoors and co-hosts the Peak Northwest podcast. Reach him at 503-294-4077, jhale@oregonian.com or @HaleJamesB.Our journalism needs your support. Subscribe today to OregonLive.com.

Reforestation in US East helped keep it cool

According to new research, reforestation in the eastern U.S. helped counter rising temperatures in the 20th century. Learn more here. The post Reforestation in US East helped keep it cool first appeared on EarthSky.

Much of the U.S. warmed during the 20th century. But the eastern part of the country remained mysteriously cool. Now a new study suggests that a century of forest growth, due to widespread reforestation, likely helped keep the eastern U.S. cool as the rest of the country warmed. Image via Pexels/ Lauri Poldre. AGU posted this story originally, earlier this year. Edits by EarthSky. Widespread 20th-century reforestation in the eastern United States helped counter rising temperatures due to climate change, according to new research. The authors highlight the potential of forests as regional climate adaptation tools, which are needed along with a decrease in carbon emissions. Mallory Barnes is the lead author of the study and an environmental scientist at Indiana University. She said: It’s all about figuring out how much forests can cool down our environment and the extent of the effect. This knowledge is key not only for large-scale reforestation projections aimed at climate mitigation, but also for initiatives like urban tree planting. The peer-reviewed AGU journal Earth’s Future published on February 13, 2024. Join our community of passionate astronomy enthusiasts and help us continue to bring you the latest astronomy news and insights. Your donation makes it all possible. Thank you! Deforestation to reforestation Before European colonization, the eastern United States was almost entirely covered in temperate forests. From the late 18th to early 20th centuries, timber harvests and clearing for agriculture led to forest losses. Those losses exceeded 90% in some areas. In the 1930s, there were efforts to revive the forests, coupled with the abandonment and subsequent reforestation of subpar agricultural fields. Those kicked off an almost century-long comeback for eastern forests. About 15 million hectares of forest have since grown in these areas. Kim Novick is an environmental scientist at Indiana University and co-author of the new study. Novick said: The extent of the deforestation that happened in the eastern United States is remarkable, and the consequences were grave. It was a dramatic land cover change, and not that long ago. A warming hole During the period of regrowth, global warming was well underway. Temperatures across North America rose 0.7 degrees Celsius (1.23 degrees Fahrenheit) on average. In contrast, from 1900 to 2000, the East Coast and Southeast cooled by about 0.3 degrees Celsius (0.5 degrees Fahrenheit), with the strongest cooling in the southeast. Previous studies suggested the cooling could be caused by aerosols, agricultural activity or increased precipitation. But many of these factors only explained highly localized cooling. Despite known relationships between forests and cooling, studies had not considered forests as a possible explanation for the anomalous, widespread cooling. Barnes said: This widespread history of reforestation, a huge shift in land cover, hasn’t been widely studied for how it could’ve contributed to the anomalous lack of warming in the eastern U.S., which climate scientists call a ‘warming hole.’ That’s why we initially set out to do this work. Trees are cool Barnes, Novick and their team used a combination of data from satellites and 58 meteorological towers to compare forests to nearby grasslands and croplands. This allowed an examination of how changes in forest cover can influence ground surface temperatures and in the few meters of air right above the surface. The researchers found that forests in the eastern U.S. today cool the land’s surface by one to two degrees Celsius (1.8 to 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) annually. The strongest cooling effect occurs at midday in the summer, when trees lower temperatures by two to five degrees Celsius (3.6 to 9 degrees Fahrenheit). Trees provide relief when it’s needed most. Using data from a network of gas-measuring towers, the team showed this cooling effect also extends to the air. They found forests lower the near-surface air temperature by up to one degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit) during midday. (Previous work on trees’ cooling effect has focused on land, not air, temperatures.) Reforestation cooling extends into unforested areas The team then used historic land cover and daily weather data from 398 weather stations to track the relationship between forest cover and land and near-surface air temperatures from 1900 to 2010. They found that by the end of the 20th century, weather stations surrounded by forests were up to one degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit) cooler than locations that did not undergo reforestation. Spots up to 300 meters (984 feet) away also cooled. That suggests the cooling effect of reforestation could have extended even to unforested parts of the landscape. Other factors, such as changes in agricultural irrigation, may have also had a cooling effect on the study region. The reforestation of the eastern United States in the 20th century likely contributed to, but cannot fully explain, the cooling anomaly, the authors said. Barnes said: It’s exciting to be able to contribute additional information to the long-standing and perplexing question of, ‘Why hasn’t the eastern United States warmed at a rate commensurate with the rest of the world?’ We can’t explain all of the cooling, but we propose that reforestation is an important part of the story. A strategy for climate change? Reforestation in the eastern United States is generally regarded as a viable strategy for climate mitigation due to the capacity of these forests to sequester and store carbon. The authors note that their work suggests that eastern United States reforestation also represents an important tool for climate adaptation. However, in different environments, such as snow-covered boreal regions, adding trees could have a warming effect. In some locations, reforestation can also affect precipitation, cloud cover and other regional scale processes in ways that may or may not be beneficial. Land managers must therefore consider other environmental factors when evaluating the utility of forests as a climate adaptation tool. Bottom line: According to new research, reforestation in the eastern United States helped counter rising temperatures in the 20th century. Source: A Century of Reforestation Reduced Anthropogenic Warming in the Eastern United States Via AGU Read more: Sea level rise creating ghost forests in U.S. East Read more: Wildfires turn world’s largest forests into carbon emittersThe post Reforestation in US East helped keep it cool first appeared on EarthSky.

The big dry: forests and shrublands are dying in parched Western Australia

Intense heat and no rain in southwest Western Australia are causing widespread tree and shrub die-offs.

Author provided, CC BY-NC-NDPerth has just had its driest six months on record, while Western Australia sweltered through its hottest summer on record. Those records are remarkable in their own right. But these records are having real consequences. Unlike us, trees and shrubs can’t escape the heat and aridity. While we turn up the air conditioning, they bear the full brunt of the changing climate. Our previous research has shown plants are more vulnerable to heatwaves than we had thought. Beginning in February 2024, large areas of vegetation started to turn brown and die off. With no real relief in sight, we unfortunately expect this mass plant death event to intensify and expand. Just like a coral bleaching event, WA’s plants are responding to the cumulative stress of the unusually long, hot and dry summer. And just like bleaching, global heating is likely to cause more regular mass plant deaths. The last time this happened in 2010-11, almost 20% of trees and shrubs in affected areas died. This is in line with climate change models, which pinpoint south-western Australia as a warming and drying hotspot. Patches of forest have begun to die. Joe Fontaine, CC BY-NC-ND Which trees and shrubs are dying and where? We have received reports from community members, colleagues, and authorities of dead and dying shrubs and trees spanning approximately 1,000 km from the Zuytdorp Cliffs near Shark Bay down to Albany on the southern coast. This year’s die-off is wide ranging, from Shark Bay to Albany (a) and across many types of plant, from jarrah forest (b,d), southern wet forests near granites (c), and shrublands and woodlands north of Perth (e) Joe Fontaine, CC BY-NC-ND In areas along the west coast where it was hottest, dead or dying patches are larger while further south in the forests, the damage is so far limited to pockets of dead trees and shrinking tree canopies. Read more: Drying land and heating seas: why nature in Australia's southwest is on the climate frontline At present, the die-off seems to have affected plants on and around shallow soils, including trees near granite outcrops and coastal heath. While February heatwaves directly killed some plants, it is likely the long, dry period finished the job. Despite some patchy rain last week, no substantial rain is forecast until May. It’s likely more areas will be hit, including our iconic wet forests in the south. Coastal heath shrublands are dying. Joe Fontaine, CC BY-NC-ND How hot has it been? Perth once again smashed temperature records this summer with a record thirteen days over 40°C in 2024 to date. Even in April, we had a 37°C day. This comes off the back of last year’s spring heatwaves, which broke monthly maximum and minimum temperature records in both September and November. While much of Australia’s east coast had more than enough rain, the west largely missed out. Rainfall has been below or very much below average over the past year, with the biggest rainfall deficits seen from Shark Bay’s Gascoyne region right down to the southwest corner at Cape Leeuwin. Hot and dry: these decile maps show a. 12-month rainfall, b. maximum temperature, and c. minimum temperatures in Western Australia from April 2023 to March 2024. Australian Bureau of Meteorology, CC BY-NC-ND The summer’s heatwaves came from baking desert air, as high pressure systems directed hot dry easterly winds from Australia’s arid interior over the region, just as we saw during the hot summer of 2021-2022, Long hot and dry periods are expected to become more common as a result of our warming climate. Declining rainfall will hit the historically wetter southwest hardest. This pocket of Australia is unique, cut off from the rest of the continent by desert. Here and only here live honey possums and numbats, towering karri and jarrah trees and red flowering gums. But it’s the southwest which has lost most rainfall so far, with annual levels already 20% lower than 50 years ago. Read more: Decades of less rainfall have cut replenishing of groundwater to 800-year low in WA It’s happened before – but this time is worse Over the summer of 2010-2011, we saw a similar event sweep south-western Australia. It came about when a winter drought gave way to widespread heatwaves over summer. The result: die-off of forests and vegetation throughout the southwest. On land, the effects extended over a smaller area than we are seeing now. How bad was it? Pretty bad. Averaging across the region’s affected areas, 19% of trees and shrubs died, while the forests of the south-west lost approximately 16,000 hectares of canopy, about 1.5% of the forest. When forests die, the effects ripple through the ecosystem. The endangered Carnaby’s black cockatoo population crashed, declining by 60%, while the jarrah forest east of Perth was so hard hit it was categorised at “risk of collapse” by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. This time, the summer has been longer and hotter, with impacts on plants more widespread. Climate change is steadily warming the world. Last year was the hottest on record, with temperatures shooting past predictions. What can we do? Our trees and shrubs will keep browning off and dying until we get substantial rain. That means there’s no way to tell when our extraordinary range of forest and shrubland species will have the opportunity to recover. The longer term trend is not good. As with coral bleaching, the situation will worsen until we reverse climate change. Large-scale plant die-offs like this will become more likely. What we do need are eyes on the ground to track what’s happening across this enormous state. Our ability to understand, model and respond is hampered by a lack of field data. If you want to help, take photos of dead or dying trees and upload them to the Dead Tree Detectives citizen science project hosted on the Atlas of Living Australia. Read more: Decades of less rainfall have cut replenishing of groundwater to 800-year low in WA Joe Fontaine receives funding from the Australian Research Council and WA Department of Biodiversity, Conservation, and Attractions.Jatin Kala receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation (WA), and the Department of Primary Industries and Rural Development (WA)Nate Anderson receives funding from the Australian Flora Foundation, and a PhD stipend from the Department of Education. George Matusick and Kerryn Hawke do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.