portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reporting global



From Page C7 of The Oregonian, Tues Oct 20,2009. Global Warming will increase forest 'productivity' This is NOT from THE ONION. It is an actual story in today's OREGONIAN.
People: This is verbatim; tragically/comically The Oregonian ACTUALLY published this as such.

I don't know Mr. Learn, and as a writer myself I could understand when editors sometimes mutate the intended piece beyond recognition. Apologies to you if this is the case. Nevertheless, the end product is BIZARE, speaks to itself: Here goes, verbatim:

Global warming could boost Northwest's forest growth -- except in most-logged areas
By Scott Learn, The Oregonian
October 19, 2009, 3:28PM
Global warming could increase overall productivity in the Pacific Northwest's forests during the next century, a study concludes, but growth could decrease in the lower elevation forests that have accounted for more than four-fifths of the region's timber harvest in recent years.

In Washington, high-elevation forests could see productivity rise from 35 percent a year to as much as 500 percent, depending on what climate scenario the researchers used. In Oregon, similar elevations would see more modest growth of 9 to 75 percent, the researchers estimated based on climate change computer models.

Overall, forest productivity could increase about 7 percent annually in forests west of the Cascade Range and 20 percent in forests east of them, the researchers said. That conclusion is based on a climate scenario that largely reflects current trends of energy use, globalization and economic growth.

The findings were recently published in Forest Ecology and Management, a professional journal, by researchers from the College of Forestry at Oregon State University and the U.S. Forest Service's Pacific Northwest Research Station.

The study did not analyze forest management practices, genetic limitations, and changes in natural disturbances such as disease, insects and fire that can also affect productivity.

If global warming projections pan out, forests at all elevations would get warmer. At lower-elevations, the tree growth likely wouldn't increase enough to offset the warming, said Greg Latta, an OSU faculty research assistant and the study's principal investigator.

Private timberlands that have accounted for 83 percent of the timber harvest in the region in the past decade are concentrated at lower elevations.

-- Scott Learn

what's so weird about that? 21.Oct.2009 16:47


review a little bit of climate history:

the earth is wetter when warmer. there really weren't grasslands or deserts on the planet during the warm eocene. all the extra heat means more water and more rainfall.

plus, with higher CO2 levels, plants grower larger and faster.

none of this is that confusing.

of course, with increased rainfall, grain agriculture becomes more difficult.

? 21.Oct.2009 20:13


review a little bit of climate history:

the earth is wetter when warmer. there really weren't grasslands or deserts on the planet during the warm eocene. all the extra heat means more water and more rainfall.

Um, okay, then why have lakes been drying up in Georgia and why have the level of Great Lakes dropped 4 feet in the past decade?
There is the slight problem with looking at the planet's history to tell the future. The problem is that there are so many contributing factors to global climate conditions. Desertification, for instance, has happened in Africa from the removal of trees and over grazing. Wiki on desertification:

"The primary reasons for desertification are overgrazing, over-cultivation, increased fire frequency, water impoundment, deforestation, overdrafting of groundwater, increased soil salinity, and global climate change."

Again, every thing is in such delicate balance on earth we are pissing in the wind to say that we will KNOW what will happen with climate change. Scientists originally advised stopping it for this simple reason: we have no idea what we are doing!

I know; you don't care. Living the way we do is too comfortable and we are too cowardly to give that up, even to not hurt ourselves. So have fun; thanks to people like you we'll get to see what actually happens a hell of a lot sooner.

hey ... 23.Oct.2009 19:47


i never said that global warming was good. I just said that the article's narrow point wasn't that crazy.

they didn't look at species movement- that's what's really going to fuck us over wtih global warming.
we will face a situation where few species will be able to live within their current ranges and will die out if not actively moved.

Here's what i think is Bullshit:
We know about global warming because of scientific research.
The assholes who deny global warming are picking and choosing their data and not actually trying to understand what's happening.

I would put you and your fucking wikipedia perspective on global warming on the side of the global-warming deniers. You are picking the choosing the data based on what you think rather than looking to see what's happening. Get your head out of your beleif and start actually learning about what happens when the planet heats up. It's not hard to put together a simple chart for yourself of what the CO2 levels were like throughout the Cenozoic. And you will see an increase in moisture and forested landscapes during warmer periods and general desertification during cold periods.

Desertification has been going on since the end of the eocene, dude. that it is make worse by bad grazing management has NOTHING to do with the larger forces at work.

you are saying that i don't care? Hell, i'm actually doing things about global warming by reseting the ecosystem processes that store carbon and rebuild soils and you're, what? spreading your wikipedia psudo-science interpretations of what's happening?

sorry for swearing but you are presuming way too much.