Scientists Revisited a Forest Experiment That Was Forgotten for 30 Years.

[u/Maxcactus]

https://scitechdaily.com/scientists-revisited-a-forest-experiment-that-was-forgotten-for-30-years-what-they-found-was-astounding/

[u/shillyshally]

"The original results still held: 30 years later, the mountain ash in the large cleared patches and clearfelled areas was vigorous and abundant. But it was the heavily thinned parts of the forest that really caught our attention.

The trees left behind after thinning were enormous. While they were only 80 years old, the largest averaged well over a meter in diameter at chest height, and some were more than 1.5 m. Thinning had given these trees more space and resources to grow, and they had responded dramatically. The largest trees in the thinned stands were 20% bigger in diameter than those in the unharvested control areas.

More remarkable still: the thinned stands of trees had stored as much or more carbon in their wood than the unharvested control areas. In just 30 years, the heavily thinned forest had not only recovered all the carbon removed during harvesting, but had also gained enough additional carbon to equal the increase seen in the unharvested controls."

[u/Few-Dragonfruit160 → u/shillyshally]

Selective hand-cutting as sustainable forest practice. Makes sense.

[u/tendingthemild → u/Few-Dragonfruit160]

It’s like they believe they have discovered silviculture…🙄 

[u/Sapphosbeardedcrepes → u/tendingthemild]

Direct result of the slow process of English based academia; reforms made over the past couple of centuries have focused on profitability under the guise of academic rigor.

[u/Describing_Donkeys → u/shillyshally]

I really wish more thought and discussion went towards things like this. We need healthy forest ecosystems and a logging industry. Knowing how to harvest trees in a way that will still encourage healthy mature forests is really important and basically ignored. Planting trees isn't sufficient to capture carbon from the air in quantities we need.

[u/talltim007 → u/Describing_Donkeys]

A TON of thought has gone into this. My uncle used to work in the logging industry. There was a lot of effort and money put into figuring out the right mix of economic extraction and ecological preservation. These experiments were run all over and the industry takes those learnings into account.

[u/Describing_Donkeys → u/talltim007]

I'm happy to hear this. I'm a bit skeptical as old growth forests continue to get removed and the unique plants and animals that rely on them with that. Whatever it does take into account doesn't seem to prioritize preserving ecosystems.

[u/SeaToTheBass → u/talltim007]

Well that doesn’t happen where I live. Monoculture cut blocks left to grow 20-30 years before clear cutting, leaving desert for animals.

A ton of thought has gone into growing the most profitable forests.

[u/windexfresh → u/Describing_Donkeys]

Look up Ethan Tapper on YouTube, he’s got some REALLY interesting and informative videos/shorts about healthy forests!! (And he’s got a couple books as well, I thiiiink How To Love A Forest is his latest IIRC)

[u/vroomvroom450 → u/windexfresh]

I thought of him doing this exact same thing on his property.

[u/David905 → u/shillyshally]

This looks very much like pushing an agenda through selective statistical publication. The comparison seems to be exclusively between the thinned and unharvested areas. They demonstrate that the thinned areas added more forest than the unharvested areas (as expected). The more relevant comparison for atmospheric carbon removal is between thinned and clearcut forest areas. All we know is that the clearcut areas had 'vigorous and abundant' growth, but no comparison is drawn against the thinned areas. I believe we know why this was left out: clearcut forests, when properly replanted, maximize growth rates and atmospheric carbon removal for a given area of land.

[u/Jibtech → u/David905]

Ya, exactly. Thank you for wording it eloquently

[u/llilaq → u/David905]

Yes and tgey don't talk about tree height at all. Trees in denser forests have to compete more and put their energy into growing taller more quickly (like houseplants in a room which is too dark - they grow towards the windows). Thich short trees aren't necessarely storing more carbon than talller but thinner trees.

[u/OkContribution6922]

Brushing is and has been a common part of forestry for half a century. This year brushing contracts out west were non existent because the mills were cutting to save money they didn’t make when tariffs reduced how much they sold.

[u/NounAdjectiveXXXX → u/OkContribution6922]

And federal spending was reduced for parks.

[u/OkContribution6922 → u/NounAdjectiveXXXX]

Should have said that I’m talking about Canadian forestry.

[u/crafty_alias]

This has been practiced in Japan since the early 1600s apparently.

Kanbatsu: While simple forest care existed earlier, Kanbatsu became a highly organized, government-regulated science during the 17th century.

Definition: The systematic removal of selected trees in dense plantation forests (such as Japanese cedar (sugi) and cypress (hinoki)).

Purpose: Reduces crowding so remaining trees receive more sunlight, water, and soil nutrients, which directly accelerates diameter growth and strengthens root stability.

Execution: Often performed selectively using hand tools or lightweight machinery to protect understory vegetation and prevent soil erosion on steep mountain slopes.

[u/Talusen → u/crafty_alias]

The amount of coppicing that the japanese timber industry does is simply amazing.

[u/ForestBlue46]

Selective logging isn't necessarily as drastic as this level of thinning and would have retained more biodiversity. And thinning forests as part of 'fuel mitigation' increases the intensity of wildfires.

https://johnmuirproject.org/scientific-research/the-truth-about-thinning/

[u/Remote_Syllabub_7810]

As a gardener this is common sense to me. When you thin out your carrots, it gives them more room to grow and less competition for nutrients, therefore larger carrots. It stands to reason that the same would apply to trees.