Tree Planting Can Make Climate Change Worse
Vložit
- čas přidán 10. 06. 2024
- When tree planting is done incorrectly it can have a significant negative impact on the fight against climate change and the loss of biodiversity.
In this video, we explore how tree planting can go wrong and have a detrimental impact on the planet and then give you some advice on how to figure out if a project is good or bad.
💡 You can read our article to learn more about this topic here:
mossy.earth/rewilding-knowled...
🙌 Subscribe to Mossy Earth czcams.com/users/MossyEarth?...
START REWILDING OUR PLANET TODAY
===============================
With us, you will restore nature and fight climate change every month
🌲 Plant native trees to capture carbon
🐺 Rewild habitats to support biodiversity
🐉 Support underfunded species and ecosystems
Become a Mossy Earth Member yourself and start rewilding our planet at mossy.earth !
⏱️TIMESTAMPS⏱️
00:00 Intro
01:17 Carbon
01:41 Ecological Succession
02:45 Invasives
03:08 Location
03:28 Reforestation Alternatives
04:48 Key Project Criteria
06:16 Save The Earth :) - Zábava
I live in sweden, we have hardly any forest left, but vast expands of tree-plantations, that most people believe are forests. This is largely because the same word is used for both. I want their to be a different word used for these areas. It should not be possible to say that you "replant the forest", when you cover an area with spruce that will be felled in 60 years. During which time you kill all the little bugs that are part of the natural process of breaking the spruce monoculture. That is not a forest, it´s timber production.
I call it brukskog, as opposed to urskog.
But we need more farms to feed people and the wood is used to create expensive furniture? I think the forests should adapt to us humans, not the other way around. The same goes with the animals. We're on top of the food chain and animals should know this. Stay out of our way or go extinct. In case you haven't noticed I am being *extremely* sarcastic but sadly this is exactly how most people look at the situation today. The ignorance is insulting or perhaps it's not ignorance people just don't care. Unless there is a profit in it why bother? Let the future generations deal with it. Our society is doomed to fail and it's slowly falling apart. I truly hope projects like this will be a future and not just a gimmick, the second politicians are involved it's over.
@@huldu Well "most people" aren't doing this. Very few people decide and a lot of people don't know about the significance of what is happening.
Yes you are onto something here. What is a REAL forest? Should be a more common question we ask ourselves next time we are on a nature walk
I call it trädåker, as opposed to skog (urskog/naturskog).
I'm in New Zealand. My local council not only publishes guidance about which locally native tree species to plant where and which to plant first; it also operates a nursery which raises them from seed for supply to municipal and community planting projects. The landscapes around my city already look very different to when I was young and everything was grass and gorse. Can't wait to see it in another thirty years :)
Ah, another example of New Zealand having their shit together. Love it!
Damn this channel is good. Exposing greenwashing while not being a complete doomer is doing god's work
As an ecologist and researcher it pains me every time when I see a big company is launching a new reforestation project. Because I know how often the end result is a sad looking monoculture deprived by wildlife. Thank you so much for posting this video! ❤ Healing our ecosystems isn’t easy… but it can be so much easier when done right!
My parents are environmental chemists who work on the ancient peat bogs of Scotland. As you said, in the last 50 years, a lot of the peat was artificially drained to make room for commercial forest cultivation. Peat bogs are not only important as a huge carbon storage, but they also release iron from the soil in a very bioavailable form that stays soluble in saltwater for a long time, meaning that areas with intact peat bogs also have very productive oceans around them, as soluble iron is an important fertilizer in seawater. You can recognize water like that from its dark, tea-like color.
Most of the European peat bogs were destroyed during the industrialisation of Europe. The Netherlands for example used to be on average a few meters higher above sea level, as there were a lot of peat bogs with a height of up to ten meters that were drained and as a consequence completely biologically degraded and turned into CO2, something that not many people know. Those peat bogs have been growing since the last ice age, sadly once they're gone, you can't restore them overnight.
Yeah, industrialization and wrong agriculture. It is time to restore what we destroyed and learn how to live in a harmony with nature.
this is very interesting, and no doubt true of the ancient peat bogs you specified. But I think it's important to also remember the contrasting shallow peats; which have largely been created through anthropogenic deforestation, extensive grazing of sheep and deer, and heather burns to keep moors suitable for grouse nesting for rich guys to shoot. Although still carbon stores, unlike deep peats, shallow peats would benefit from being reforested to encourage biological diversity, quickly recovering the carbon lost through soil desiccation, bringing mixed land use, habitat for endangered species, improving water quality for humans as peaty water releases carcinogenic trihalomethanes when dissolved organic carbon is processed, reducing flooding downstream by increasing upper catchment surface roughness, increasing plants' evapotranspiration, providing habitat for beavers etc, as well as just access to more varied habitats for people.
Most of scotland was a forest before human deforestation a few thousand years ago. least that is what i have been repeatedly been told. The bogs and empty grassland was created by humans. The whole of the british isles is supposed to be a giant forest if there were no humans.
@@killgazmotron nah, some ancient deep peats, particularly in Scotland are above the natural tree line and are in areas too inundated and saturated for forests to grow, so moorland habitats are 'natural'. Yes, the vast majority of UK peatland is an artificial creation, but there are notable exceptions in Scotland. In parts of England there would have been vast wet woodlands as opposed to the modern morrland.
Even trying to imagine the world 100 years from now is depressing. It does not look pretty. There are tiny changes taking place but it won't be nearly enough. At the end of the day it will always boil down to money. It's really that simple. If something isn't profitable then nobody will invest in it. Let's say you have a lot of countries doing good work all their work could easily be for nothing because one country is doing nothing but making things worse. The more people you have the more problems arise. Food, homes, jobs all these things are not for granted. in our society. As we become more and more the problems will get worse and worse. It's like we're on the brink of a collapse of society. Probably not anytime soon but 50-100 years from now? It's bound to happen.
The forests of my native area of the east of the Netherlands today look very different from my youth: they used to be too dense, a fallen tree would immediately be taken out, the fallen leaves would be cleaned out in fall, and the ditches would be deep to evacuate water rapidly (of course there was more rainfall then). Today, the forests are not dense anymore, so you see a lot of plant variety and therefore small wildlife and birds, the fallen trees are left to rot, the fallen leaves stay in autumn and the ditches are not deep anymore so that water can spread.
It all looks much richer and better.
I only recently saw that you have to dig square holes instead of round. Because otherwise the roots dont want to penetrate the edges of the hole. The corners force them to enter the denser soil. I never even thought about that..
Reminds me of the Bohol, Philippines Bilar Manmade Forest that was made over 50 years ago. They planted imported Mahogany Trees instead of the local Philippine mahogany, Molave, or Narra. Thus the forest is a dead biodiversity zone as the imported Mahogany restricts the growth of local trees and wildlife can't nestle on those trees.
Here in Spain we have ARBA (Asociación para la Repoblación del Bosque Autóctono), which is divided in small local groups focused in their areas. I started collaborating with them recently, and I'm happily surprised with what I've seen so far.
Please consider contacting them if you plan on future actions here.
'there have been cases where bogs have drained' - 80% of the 1.7 million hectares of peatland in Scotland have been cut for fuel or otherwise degraded, and roughly 500,000 hectares have been drained and forested with non-native conifers
Safe to say there have been some cases...
Thank you for your amazing content and the ACTUAL difference you're making via Mossy Earth 🌳💚
Excellent and such a needed message. On youtube you can see many commercial monoculture forestation projects promoted as "green". Unfortunately the general public are largely ignorant of ecology and think that covering a landscape in non-native trees = saving the world.
The production quality and information in these videos is extremely good! This channel certainly deserves more attention than it's getting currently, keep it up!
Thank you Robin! Your comment is much appreciated :) I feel that way to but glad other people recognise it :) Hopefully the youtube gods will bless us more in the future :) - Cheers, Duarte
@@MossyEarth i actually found one of ur videos in my reccomendations today and as a greenie im happy that the algorithm is providing such quality channels like yours! best wishes for the future!
@@juliaxiao5320 same!
@@MossyEarth already stumbled twice across your videos! You are getting some leverage! Awesome projects!
Great video, as an tree planter and a science student, you really nailed the topic, very well. Often at least in Canada, the trees we plant are often with the intention of reforesting areas that had been logged down, and for the logging industry. We would often plant either a mono or di-culture, and the trees are often planted in area thats might not be best for them such as sometimes white spruce in swamps (instead of black spruce). Although at least in Canada we do plant mostly native trees (such as Jack Pine or Red pine or White pine), but at least in Ontario, the way the trees are planted are often in unnatural ways such as in grid like patterns often leading to a greater loss of biodiversity. Although, I would argue that tree planting is an important industry as it often helps restore forests to areas forming the basis of sustainable industry.; a bad forest is still better than no forest. There is no helping that timber is an important in our world and the need for it would only rise in demand with the rise in global populations. Therefore, a sustainable industry is probably the right way to go.
A bad forest can be way worse than no forest, especially in areas where there never was forest. If you plant trees in the savannah, you will endanger the species that live there.
I agree, although I do worry that these types of massive monoculture, grid-planted timber forests' sustainability is debatable. When you see the state of the entire ecosystem after they clear-cut the forest (as they normally do for efficiency), leaving the roots to rot and release their sequestered carbon as methane, the soil degraded, exposed and disturbed, causing much of the organic matter to desiccate and rot, releasing tonnes of methane. Then the degraded soil, left un-anchored by rotting roots, is often eroded, causing degradation to a resource which takes thousands of years to develop, for the sake of timber which takes decades. At the risk of sounding like a anarcho-primitivist, I do often wonder if any industrial practices, or even many agricultural practices can be sustainable over the long term.
I spent a year hitching through Canada and living in a tent, and I've walked through old growth in both Ontario up around Algonquin and in BC in the coastal rain forests. It's a stunning difference, especially in terms of biodiversity, from the reforested areas of sterile earth where nothing grows except row after row of perfectly-spaced, identical trees, with dead silence all around: no bird songs, no chittering squirrels, not even wind blowing through undergrowth or canopy.
@@NoJusticeNoPeace Algonquin is actually logged all the time! The area people see is a small portion of the park.
@@sharongraham992 Up _around_ Algonquin. It's expensive to enter, so I usually go farther north, past Matawa. The forest doesn't know there's an official park border, so it makes no difference except I don't have to pay for it.
I would like to clarify that the Lake District isn't in Scotland it's actually England. Scottish Forestry in general makes better tree planting scheme decisions compared to Forestry England.
Apologies if that caused some confusion! We never meant to say the lake district was in Scotland. We know where it is of course :) I believe there are cases of this happening in Scotland as well but the example in our video is indeed from the lake district as it was an article we could show.
Although this is true. The company which made the error in this case operates mainly in Scotland and is a Scottish company
@@scott-chegg1194 theres many monoculture replantings in/around the lake district, such as the fir (maybe not the exact term i am just a local without much tree knowledge) near Muncaster and Ravenglass. Hopefully national trust efforts along with help from groups like this will look at more long term solutions. Would love to see more deer and othersuch wildlife around the place I grew up, going further inland I know for sheep farmers towards the fells need their space to graze though so I hope a balance can be struck.
@@chillingnkilling unfortunately this is required as a source of timber, the tree you'll be thinking of is Citka Srpuce which is often the tree used in such plantations. Deer also pose quite a problem. Over grazing in the lake district is the biggest threat it faces. The culture surrounding sheep farming is also heavily supported by the likes of the LDNP and NT. Therefore the solution to "re-Wilding" the lakes is to cull and reduce deer populations, which will in turn allow more trees to grow. If you want to get involved in a local project which is trying to rewild then I suggest contacting Hard Knott forest PM. You'll learn a tonne and see the benefits of removing or reducing the number grazing animals from a habitat
@@scott-chegg1194All large-scale tree planting schemes require approval from Forestry England, the fault mostly lies with them because you aren't allowed to plant on deep peat. Why did they grant approval in the first place?
Who was the contractor by the way?
What really bugs me is the obsession with nursery grown trees being planted in the UK when it is so easy and much better to grow them directly from seed where you want them. That and the plastic sleeves used to protect them even where they don't really need it.
Yes, tree planting is usualy for wood industry. Wood is a renewable source but it must be managed according ecological principles, not for profit. It is also fair to say that it is important to have different areas, areas for logging and areas without human impact - natural forest which can be used only for study or soft controled tourism.
It needs to be a profit if it is a source. What is needed is proper regulation to to demand tree diversity in those plantations as compromise.
@@killgazmotron Well, to be fair, everything what is for profit sucks! Current economic model is not sustainable. Why? Because the emphasis is on profit. That is wrong. And I agree with tree diversity.
@@igorbukovy4313 It is sustaining because its about profit, it is the driving force behind the action to have such things done in the first place, it is the search for ones own capital that you get a job in the first place.
Living in magical lala land of happy fairies and unicorns and everyone living in happy little dreadlocked communes of magically no resource scarcity while no one has to work is never,
ever,
going to happen. If you want to take care of environmental concerns, you are going to have to come to reality and make the discerning compromises and work around what ACTUALLY WORKS.
If you want anything to get done at all.
That means some regulation with economic concerns in mind, incentives, innovation etc.
Capitalism is going nowhere and if you dont work with it you are choosing to lose.
And lose the earth. Case closed.
@@killgazmotron Okay, we have different opinions. You do not agree with me, I do not agree with You. There is no point to continue.
This is great as informative video. I've been struggling to explain people here in Slovakia, why leaving forest to regenerate itself should be first to consider and most of time best choice.
Also thank you for supporting 4 projects in my country.
Love you all.
A very useful video. Our school forest (in South Korea) has been planted by an amateurish administration (in terms of forestry); we have a diversity of tree species, with inconsistent tree density. The problems: severe landscaping, mainly in the time before afforerstation, a high percentage of fast-growing introduced tree species and of most slow-growing native tree species having been sorted out when tree species were selected for afforestation. Therefore I have concluded that the ecosystem has to be improved by introducing those native tree species, which - not just in our school, but countrywide during reforestation, have been sorted out. You do not introduce the method of improving forests deprived by factors such as low tree species variety or a locally unfit combination of tree species by correcting the mistakes of previous administrations.
What a great channel. It feels rare to find someone who cares about the environment and cares about doing things the right way
Thank you my friend! You have no idea how much it means to us to ready your comment :) - Cheers, Duarte
Its interesting to see how polarized people get on this. I was working with a land owning friend of mine in palo duro canyon in the texas panhandle, in the great plains, and i got in a heated argument with 3 locals. They were saying “trees aren’t supposed to grow here. Theyve arrived after settlement due to man made factors” and in general i agree with them. The natural state of the landscape is prairie, which is more productive than forest anyway. But thats not the full picture. Trees like mesquite, pinyon, and cedar have always been there, but in very small numbers, very scattered throughout the landscape. Lack of fires and roaming grazers allowed them to take over, but in their intended numbers, they play an important role. They also got pissed that we wanted to replant the riparian forests on the land, when naturally, the creek would have been lined with plums, cottonwoods, elms, willows, and a few other trees, which also contribute greatly to the greater ecosystem. So yeah, not everywhere should be forest, but its not black and white.
thank you for speaking the truth about the horrors of tree planting gone wrong!
You said it best, when you mentioned natural succession. It also means, that there won't be forest everywhere. Forests grow only in certain areas, other areas will be sparsely treed and will mostly be grassland.
I just found your channel and must admit that it is a refreshing sight. Your sensible but no bullshit approach is a cool breeze in a hot evening.
Thanks for giving this issue some attention it's been bothering me for years
As content marketing, you guys seem to really be doing great ! Good luck, you seem to be a positive impact project : I wish you a lot of success.
Thank you! - Cheers, Duarte
Here in Sweden there are spruce mono culture everywhere. Forstes that are more or less dead, there are no undergrowth other than moss and fungus. Yes, it is a native tree, but it's the worst of all trees. There are so many non-native trees that would be better for the environment to plant. Trees that would let sunlight through and allow biodiversity.
I'm not very familiar with Swedish forestry practices (and I'm not Swedish despite my alias), but I would like to point out that there is a reason why certain trees are native in a place, and naturally the further north you go the fewer the (economically interesting) species that will be able to sustain a population there by themselves long-term or could compete with spruce and pine. Of course, both modern forestry practices and climate change "offer" an opportunity to experiment with new species and combinations, but especially fixed factors like soil quality and water levels absolutely pre-determine the success of such endeavours. Anyway, if you're talking about southern Sweden I hope people have become aware of how un-sustainable spruce monocultures can be in the wrong environments (southern Sweden being a sub-optimal environment for spruce for sure), speaking as someone living in a part of Germany where the previously dominant spruce has been as good as eradicated during the last three years.
Here in Finland spruce is also used like there isn't anything else to plant. It's a gamble cos of the climate change.
Isn't the soil in Sweden like very shallow and then you hit rock? That's why only spruce grows there in the first place, due to geology.
@@gilleslesire4983 not true.
@@ukoowkolli4905 The Scandinavian Peninsula is a mountain range that has been eroded by glacier movements during glacial periods over millions of years. On top of which some of this eroded soil settled (till), which is poor quality for forestry and causes the soil to not be as deep as elsewhere in Europe. Deciduous trees can't survive in that soil.
At least that's what I have been thaught.
So simplify the 3 problem
"I wanna help grow trees but the path to grow is too rough, what if we burn the whole area? Oh and plant these non-native species, they do good for us"
Planting invasive species is a really bad idea. In Belgium the american bird cherry is growing all over unmaintained land, feeding the birds but decreasing biodiversity over all.
Planting local and diverse seedlings is important, but how do you ensure they will survive? Many seedlings may be eaten by herbivores, unless there are effective barriers (as this video pointed out). What's more, I have seen many tree planting efforts in Texas, where I live, fail because the saplings are overly stressed in hot, dry summer conditions when the tree planters leave them to fend for themselves, rather than caring for them until they are properly settled in and viable.
A friend of mine - their HOA management planted dwarf bamboo - in the dry season. It all died apparently (and unsurprisingly). So management had to announce that they were going to try again but that they would make sure this time to wait until it was the wet season. 😂 I suppose the plant suppliers are in their glee.
You'll never get a 100% success rate, and you don't need to.
The absolute easiest way to plant is to use the winter as a stratification period:
Gather seeds through the summer and fall, and as lower temperatures arrives, bring those seeds and a pocket spade with you on your walks and plant the seeds along the route. This can be done until the ground freezes. In the spring you'll hopefully have a fair amount sprout, and you'll be able to follow their growth over the years.
If you really want to, saplings up to 2-3 years, or perennials any age can be moved and left on its own if done during fall/wet season.
Possibly early spring as well, but you'd be better off planting seeds and using the time saved doing something else.
It really is that simple.
That planting on deep peat you mentioned in Cumbria was small, actually at Berrier End Farm. The area of deep peat was visible from aerial imagery, but was not large enough to show on soil maps. The bog cotton was a give away that was missed, perhaps the location was not visited at the right time of year? It was easily rectified, but sadly missed by the FC and the applicant's main contractor.
Additionally, there are international standards on species diversity, such as under the UK Forestry Standard, so in general, we tend to avoid large scale monocultures.
I watched an interesting BBC news piece about the almost complete failure of the Mangrove replanting project in the Philippines. Why, because they chose the convenient species instead of the scientifically correct one.
stop watching mainstream news specially BBC
Very Enlightening! Thank you!! I wonder what do you know about Africa's supposed "Great Green Wall"? Are they going about it the right way? What are their chances of success? I love what you good folks are doing and plan to support you soon. Maybe as a gift to a family member for the holidays. I'll be visiting your website soon. Keep up the great work!!!
Hi, the video is amazing. I would like to sugest ecosia as one of very solutions since it's a search engine that plants trees with their money
Nicely done. Thank you, folks.
Hope the algorithm picks up on these!
Well if they keep exposing things like "forests being planted" for corporations to chop down for lumber they might end up getting banned. XD
Thanks mate! We hope so too :) - Cheers, Duarte
short, simple. great video people!
Glad you liked it!
Dude, what an amazing channel you have! How can you not have more subscribers?
Thank you Joaquim! I as myself this every day... We put in the effort, hopefully someday we will see the results. Until then we do our best :)
- Cheers, Duarte
Thank you
I've recently discovered this channel and found a lot of very high quality content... However- with this video I'd like to make use of some of your sources, do you have them listed anywhere? Thanks!
Tack!
would love to have you come to ireland and speak with the forestry board and give them an education
Wow, amazing work!
Thank you :) - Cheers, Duarte
Great information !
Glad it was helpful!
Great video, love what you do guys! we should all look after our nature.
where do you get those little tree planting tools from ?
You make a very good point about draining peatland and wetland in order to planet forests. even though wetlands are a bigger carbon sink. Maybe we should be creating more swamps rather than more forests.
Good lesson
Nice video that asks some questions that really do need asking, but did you miss one?
If you are thinking of supporting tree planting or re-forestation utilising native species, I think you need to know where your trees . Looked at from the point of view of the British Isles (an archipelago surrounded by sea and with a relatively low diversity of native species) the questions that arise are:
Where are the seeds sourced? Local to the planting site? In the UK, planting native oaks Quercus robur or Q petraea sourced from (say) France introduces Continental genotypes and phenotypes. The Jury is out about whether this will be good to accommodate climate change and the work on whether novel diseases will be imported in the seed usually isn't even thought of.
Collected from a few trees or many? 'Many' increases the genetic diversity of your 'new forest'. Sometimes many seed source trees do not exist locally.
Raised locally? Using native spp. from British Isles seed sources raised in nurseries in Poland or Holland (or wherever) has been implicated in the import of pests and diseases.
This can happen in the tissues of the saplings themselves as well as in the inevitable innoculum of nursery soil or even in timber pallets. Nothing against hard working, low-paid people earning a living, but.....
The same questions apply to other biomes/sociopolitical regimes.
Well done for raising the issue of afforesting peat-rich soils. Forests capture carbon but do not sequester it like peat-accumulating soils. In fact they are damn good at cycling carbon.
Well done for mentioning coppice. Why not click the name 'Anemone' and have a shufti at some of the short vids on coppiced ancient woodlands you will find there. You'll have to root about a bit as it's a lo-fi, unresourced non-profit-making channel, that exists as a clearing-house of information and uncomfortable questions.
Cool beans. So now my question is… was I wrong to support team trees?
Will try to answer this in our Q&A. I don't have enough information about the project details. - Cheers, Duarte
Tbh I think its impossible to say
England/Britain, that's quite easy work 😆
America, maybe is 1 of most devastated countries concerning nature. You guys should go down to Yuma, Arizona. I seen a video that says that 90% of bobcat area is gone. Also, barely anything lives there.
what if you want to fight the desertification or turning a desert to green to fight drought?
Probably the best is to plant native trees in areas that are suffering from desertification (desert expansion) but leave the deserts themselves alone. - Cheers, Duarte
There is a neat project by Geoff Lawton called "greening the desert" in Jordan. There are lots of videos of it on his channel, it could be a good resource for you to start 👍.
The best way is (some abbreviation I can't remember) that helps it recover naturally.
the two biggest parts of this is:
1: DO NOT REMOVE ANIMALS.... this is what so many people get wrong about desertification most of all when it comes to herd animals
2: Good tree pruning. Since the grounds soil is usually poor quality it is having trouble holding water, so pruning some of the tree branches as they grow can help them need less water so they don't die or have stunted growth.
The harder part is making sure what grows where is in the right area (as mentioned in this video, just because it is a native plant doesn't mean it grows well with another native plant so naturally there are patches of things growing together/apart) that might effect erosion or cause flooding and so on.
Also, know the difference between soils and dirts.
Dirt is specifically the tiny rocks (clay, silt, sand, pebbles, cobbles) and on its own isn't good for growing, but it affects water retention and other factors. (Sand lets water run right through it, clay is nearly impermeable, and the particle sizes can be mixed creating loam and a bunch of other named mixtures that affect what plants can grow in it)
Soil, has a critical organic component and is its own ecosystem full of dead organics, worms, bacteria, fungi, and insects/arthropods. Top soil is specifically the ultra rich layer at the top of the soil column and the bottom layer is the bedrock, between them is a much less active and productive layer of mostly dirt with some roots. All the organics in soil is why its a carbon sink, and and potential source if you mess with it in the wrong way.
A big issue with deserts is they have no soil only sands and dirts, which makes it much harder for plants to grow until the soil is properly formed from dead plant matter and soil colonizers.
@@jasonreed7522
Deserts have a top layer also.
They don't normally have earth worms... but do have small insects and fungi.
Forest planning is extremely complicated if it’s a self sufficient ecosystem
Hello from Chicagoland Treestorian Witnessing so much BS MOST EVERY time a new tree is planted.
*Perfect examples of Most common mistake made today* _... __0:36__ These first two plantings were a waste of time and effort. why? Notice roots from first root plug all extend in a straight downward direction. And second tree which had been grown in a pot and hole is dug for, failed to remove one large circling pot bound root._ All lateral roots growing off of horizontal downward tap root need to be oriented in a radially outbound direction from trunk. Which is why planting bare root is the only proper method which assures no suspect kinked or circling roots are hidden.
Trees are also planted because they are beautiful and all the other potential aspects are a secondary benefit . so ,, Love them and be smart
Cool. Still going to plant my own forest 👍
And ima burn that down
@@slightez4591 I'll feed your ass to the trees lol, try it
Unfortunately here in the US the main federal government department (the USFS) is woefully behind the times culturally and academically. While there are many USFS staff that are well intentioned, the primary mission of the USFS has been to support the logging industry which is an ethos based on a conservation rather than a preservation model for over a century. Further, when they do attempt to help speed up the process of environmental restoration in the aftermath of destructive wildfires, their tree plantings often fail due to a lack of understanding of the successive generations of biomes that have to occur for the old forest ecosystem to come back.
The worst thing when a monoculture of some invasive species is planted in a wrong place. Unfortunately, this takes place in my country (Ukraine) when the most endangered ecosystem, steppe (grassland), is destroyed by planting Robinia pseudoacacia and other North American species. P.S. Thank you very much for your video.
do you grow your own saplings?
Is it possible for a partially commercial forest to combat global warming? If there is some mix of species and the trees that will be harvested are compatible and also assuming the harvesting and planting is done in a sustainable way, I would think the forest will continue to sequester carbon in the soil ( roots aren’t harvested) and the presence of many large trees themselves hold carbon. This may be a path to gain more local support.
Reforestation with the same species is important
Very interesting - love the guide
Thank you Dharmesh!
Do you guys work with government/local cities as well? You do great work, but give a man a fish he has a meal. Teach him how to fish and...
Awesome work you do btw!!
You could also mention, that greening desserts, like Sahara, can be bad for the earth's overall climate, as the dessert reflects much of the sunlight and can't safe its warmth very well. If a dessert becomes a forrest, it won't help the planet very much, ergo (don't get me wrong, I'm very much for stopping desertification of areas with an existing vegetation. But those projects shouldn't shouldn't cast more harm)
Sands from the Sahara also gives nourishment for the Amazon rainforest. Winds carry the sand into South America.
@@KyoushaPumpItUp yes, also to Europe. But we shouldn’t forget that the spread of Sahara harms the vegetation and the people in Africa
Good vid
Thanks, we're glad you enjoyed it! - Diogo
Very informative and much needed wisdom about the proper way to plant trees.
Thank you Michael! - Cheers, Duarte
A strong british accent, but your calm and slow manner to speak did its deed. I could understand every word as a non native speaker. Nice!
Wouldn't it be a good choice to search for a plant which is by far better suited to implant into the Gobi desert? By better suited I mean for example a tree which will survive quit well but will search for water deep in the earth by letting the roots grow intense.
Im no expert, but those trees or even bushes would do a better job over time and could even support integrations of over plants.
But only if they have high survival abilities - intense root growing deep into the earth and not dying due to the fauna there.
If you know better, please correct me!
^^ great video
He doesn't have a strong British accent. He doesn't sound like a native speaker either even though he speaks good English
@@adam2956 that doesn't change the fact that I have understand him with my bad english.
It doesn't even matter if he is or not.
I evaluated his english highly and if he isn't a native speaker its even higher - meaning that I can also reach higher than I am now
@@kakyoin3856 your English is actually good
@@adam2956 thank you very much!
Id like to see finally some fruits growing - lemons aren't included, i get enough in the subject English xD
😅 Hello guys, I am half dutch half portuguese. Over the years I've lived in New Zealand, US and UK so my english speaking accent is all over the place... - Cheers, Duarte
Forests are important, including biodiversity. But the way things are now being handled worldwide is wrong. Forests are cut down for heathland, agriculture becomes monocultural forest, forests and meadows are occupied by windmills and solar panels. And all this for..... the luxury for the human?? It is expected that if the CO2 share decreases, the temperature will stabilize or decrease. However, the truth is not that simple. The CO2 is not a thermostat that regulates the climate. That only works in the climate models, but not in reality. Almost all 'green' well-intentioned climate measures have only one goal: to make a financial profit.
i planted little forest in my property to make it nicer
Sometimes if we plant trees in wrong places like in deserts this can result in draught or wild fire in other places.I don't know if it's true it's my mind feeling,came after alternative flood and forest fire events happens in Africa and Australia. Is there any chance for negative climatic effect due to aggressive forestation happening in China.
Curious about Project teamtrees by mr beast and how they are planting trees with all that money, and are they doing it the right way?
Quite a few people have been asking about this. I will try to include it in the upcoming Q&A. I know very little of the concrete details of the project though.. - Cheers, Duarte
I saw a guy wearing a YMCMB sweatshirt
Thank you for this video. I shared it on LinkedIn
Thank you for sharing! :)
So what you're saying is, instead of planting trees, we should focus on planting grasses and shrubs first, then after a few years plant trees in that area in gaps between the shrubbery so they don't smother the established plants.
Is it good if we just focus on planting trees to the wild life and save the endangered species of animals from extinction
❤
👍
I know I'm late but I have a question
You said about planting native trees instead of foreign ones to support native wildlife
But what about desert
I mean the desert where no wild life is there
Like Sahara desert of Arabian desert
If we can We provide the necessary water and soil for planting
Is planting un-native trees that don't need a lot of water better ??
With more of plants like that don't need a lot of water can we make a forest that is good enough to support re-introduce wild life ??
If you plant a tree that is native to the area then it should just have the correct adaptions to survive there anyway since that's what it evolved to live with.
@@pipwalker-nix5451 I'm talking about the desert where no native trees is there , no thing at all
Deserts are ecossystems on their own, and are very important a regulating our climate. Furthermore, some deserts receive so much sunlight that if trees are planted they will heat the plannet more than they cooled
As for water, you would need a shit ton of water to plant a sucessfull forest in the desert. So I don't think that is a good idea
@@abood8399 It doesn't had to be trees, bushes can do well too.
@@nidohime6233 its the same argument
In desserts with no wild or plant life
If we somehow got a good and stable fresh water supply
What should we plant
What kind of trees , bushes grass we should plant
Lake district is in England, not Scotland.
I have no problem with the amount of carbon in our atmosphere. We could probably do with more, as 400ppm is not much of a buffer, considering 180ppm is a bare minimum for food plants. Pollution, and habitat is a problem, as is soil microbes, but carbon is as necessary to life as water.
Just commenting to appease the CZcams Gods. This need way more traction.
Will be going on checking more of these videos.
Thank you Marijn! The gods have been kind to use recently and the channel is growing :) Glad you enjoy our content!
@@MossyEarth That is good to hear! Let's hope it snowballs :D
We are a forest inside a forest.
The voice-over still has the habit of using up his breath before the end of a senten', which makes it tiring to listen t'.
Also, he speaks monotonously, every sentence is spoken in the same choppy w'.
But, good content and good work. Thanks, Duarte and team!
#tryingtohelp #cheers
The Lake District is not in Scotland... just saying
So what you are telling me is that Mr.Beasts Plant Trees charity can do more bad then good? Might be helpfull to send a message to him if you, if they didn't look into it themselves. Which does not look like it from tje Mr.Beast and Mark Rober videos.
Tip: Grow fruit trees near human corridors, else humans shall cut them if they don't provide profits
This kinda seems like rich people telling me to not plant trees. Thats why you dont just plant trees, you actually analyze the environment and see how you can terraform an area to maximize its life and positive impact
Food forests, ffs. Layers of food plants and fruit trees
yes but even bad forest will turn into good one in time... not a life time of a human but still if left alone it will become native forest.
Sooooo… don’t plant trees ? I don’t get it
I think he meant do not plant trees too close to each other and do not plant that is not native so according to the ecosystem and its biome
The best way to increase the amount of forested areas
is to have good markets for the timber.
not all exotic species are invasive, planting a mixture of both native and exotic trees will be the most effective in reforestation.
Yes I think you are right that sometimes it can be good to plant some non-native species to diversify the forest and make it more resilient to future changes in the climate. However, we don’t think this is the case for most places. Generally, local trees from local DNA is the way to go for us :) - Cheers, Duarte
Invasive simply means that it outcompetes native species... but that still doesn't mean that exotic species will support wildlife as the animals are not adapted to that tree.
The hell you talking about?
@@rameneater1437 some foreign species can be beneficial to an ecosystem and don’t outcompete the native species.
One example in introducing green crabs which are invasive in most places they are introduced because they eat everything and reproduce fairly quickly. However, in certain areas you can introduce them in order to curb a more dangerous invasive species. Has to be done very carefully with lots of oversight though.
@@MossyEarth With changing climatic conditions, planting local genetic stock are increasingly failing at unprecedented rates. Many industry professionals, as well as this channel, appear to be providing insights according to RCP 2.6 / 3.4 without taking into consideration the devastating impacts of a more harsh (and realistic) pathway like RCP 4.5, RCP 6.0, or RCP 7.0; Quite frankly, it's irresponsible and unscientific to be saying that one source of DNA is the way to go over another in "most places". Local conditions such as elevation, solar intensity, etc., all play a role, but across the board forest geneticists have long been urging industry professionals to start thinking and employing assisted migration.
Thankfully forestry professionals are starting to employ assisted migration where and when appropriate here in BC. For example, to counteract the shifting BEC zones of BC, Canada.
In most places, this is also very important. For another example, the seed zones of Antioquia, Columbia used to restore the Amazon. Studies are showing that the seed stock originating from local zones are failing at increasing rates in comparison to those from further away.
-- Note: reviewing this, it reads a bit like a rant. Wanted to let you know that I didn't intend for that. Forest genetics is just one of those fields that are so commonly misunderstood, even by those who are relatively well versed in other parts of the forest / conservation research and industry.
Not long ago eating eggs (cholesterol) were a death sentence, .....not long ago margarine (transfat) was better than butter for you, now it's the worse thing .... not long ago it was bed rest for post operation for knee replacement surgery, now it's up and walking while you have just woke up from the operation. ....maybe I should take up smoking again and get a jump on being healthy.
Are you telling me teamtrees was a bad thing?
Climate change sick of hearing it, we get hot summers, cold summers, wet summers, dry summers, we get wind, hail, snow, ice etc.The Ice caps are still there, the sea has not risen, it still snows. All predictions have been proved wrong as we have passed all the dates that were suppose to be the end of the world.
Ditto. There are far more serious problems facing the biosphere, such as too many people, deforestation, urbanisation, over farming, pollution etc. Hadley Centre's HadCRUT 5 etc shows the World is warming by about 0.18 deg C per decade (it may not go on for ever as other forcing influences kick in) and the various climate models and the CO2 predictions they depend upon are almost running too hot. I gave a forestry presentation on the subject back in November, so had to research and know my subject for the UK.
@@kernowforester811 warming 0.18 deg C a decade if you can trust them.
@@tonysheerness2427 It is also in line with other sources such as NASA and NOAA, so I do believe it. The caveat is how that data has been collected, and there are criticisms of e.g. the lack of actual Arctic and Antarctic data. To me it is interesting that the north Atlantic region is not warming! The so called north Atlantic cold blob, plenty of info on the web about it. So for instance the west of Britain, especially in the Spring and Summer is NOT warming, even based upon Met office weather station data! The cold blob also features in various temperature prediction models as well! You will not hear about that in the MSM, does not fit the narrative.
@@kernowforester811 It also depends where you put the weather stations in the centre of airports, concrete heat spots, or in the country side. Plus two thirds of the world is water with minimum weather centres.
Wow. Convincing consumers to pay to plant a tree, and then using that money to produce trees you'll log and sell. That's some Grade A capitalism.
thanks mr beast
One thing you don't mention is that forests are ultimately doomed. Trees and grasses have been at war for millions of years, and computer modelling shows that in the end, grasses will win. Hundreds of millions of years down the road, there will be no trees left, only grasses. This has happened before, of course, with cycads and ferns being the first to lose their battle, and no doubt grasses will some day be supplanted by something else too, but it's sad to think that one day, when humanity is dust and our machine children have gone to space, the very last tree will fall somewhere on Earth.
Um, ferns and cycads still exist, ferns in massive numbers.
Earth's atmosphere is composed of approximately 78 percent nitrogen, 21 percent oxygen, 0.93 percent Argon, 0.04 percent carbon dioxide as well as trace amounts of neon, helium, methane, krypton, ozone and hydrogen, as well as water vapor.
yes and?
Amazing but all tree planting schemes are not fully successful. The problem are herbivorous that will always preferred eat some young tree species before other. Usually those species are slowly growing and more important for habitat recovery. Herbivorous are killing young trees. Compare number of seeds that are produce by any tree with number of young trees growing around it. The solution is simple but not popular among ecologist. Big carnivore. More wolves, bears, big cats in the wilderness. But ecologist don't like it. More carnivorous and more risk of attack. Especially big risk for elderly and children. Big carnivorous in wilderness and no more happy strolling in mountains or in forests. No more save holidays trips outside cities. And that is a problem.
Noice.