UVM Theses and Dissertations
Format:
Print
Author:
Russell-Roy, Emily T.
Dept./Program:
Natural Resources
Year:
2012
Degree:
MS
Abstract:
Many former industrial timberlands in the northeastern United States experienced decades of heavy cutting, including the unsustainable removal of valuable trees with little thought to regeneration (called "high-grading"). This practice often results in lower rates of sawtimber growth and greater proportions of unmerchantable trees with low vigor, poor form, and irregular spatial distribution. Today, thousands of hectares remain less than fully stocked across the region. These forests offer significant opportunities for rehabilitation and enhanced carbon sequestration. However, few studies have examined the feasibility of using carbon markets to help restore overharvested forests.
To address this gap, we studied 391 hectares of overharvested, former industrial timberland in northern Vermont to assess both the impacts ofpast management and the effectiveness of future rehabilitation efforts. First, we analyzed historical forest condition at the study site and two nearby properties using a remote sensing dataset developed to examine forest health trends across the Northeast between 1984-2009. Next, we conducted future projections of 13 rehabilitation scenarios at the study site over 100 years using the Forest Vegetation Simulator growth and yield model. For each scenario, we quantified stand structural metrics, carbon storage, and carbon offset credits that could be generated under the Climate Action Reserve (CAR) and American Carbon Registry (ACR) protocols. We also assessed the economic feasibility of generating offsets under three sets of price assumptions.
Our results indicate that carbon offsets can provide incentives for rehabilitation actions that involve a long-term strategy of either no harvesting or low intensity harvesting. These scenarios store an average of 78-94 Mg ha⁻¹ of carbon over 100 years in live and dead trees and harvested wood products, and restore stand structural characteristics beneficial to wildlife. They also include a range ofinitial rehabilitation actions, such as silvicultural clearcuts and targeted thinning, which provides management flexibility for landowners. Like other studies, our results found that choice of accounting method influences the financial viability of carbon market participation. Plot-level estimates used for statistical analyses diffyred from property-level estimates recommended by the protocols.
In addition, ACR consistently generated more carbon credits than CAR for the same management scenarios (p<0.05). Yet, when offset prices were high enough (e.g., high voluntary market prices for ACR and regulatory market prices for CAR), the two protocols yielded similar net present values of $121-256 ha⁻¹. These values are comparable to those produced from timber harvesting alone under more intensive management scenarios. Thus, while timber may continue to be a primary source of revenue for many landowners, carbon offsets could appeal to certain landowners as a new tool for restoring overharvested timberland.
To address this gap, we studied 391 hectares of overharvested, former industrial timberland in northern Vermont to assess both the impacts ofpast management and the effectiveness of future rehabilitation efforts. First, we analyzed historical forest condition at the study site and two nearby properties using a remote sensing dataset developed to examine forest health trends across the Northeast between 1984-2009. Next, we conducted future projections of 13 rehabilitation scenarios at the study site over 100 years using the Forest Vegetation Simulator growth and yield model. For each scenario, we quantified stand structural metrics, carbon storage, and carbon offset credits that could be generated under the Climate Action Reserve (CAR) and American Carbon Registry (ACR) protocols. We also assessed the economic feasibility of generating offsets under three sets of price assumptions.
Our results indicate that carbon offsets can provide incentives for rehabilitation actions that involve a long-term strategy of either no harvesting or low intensity harvesting. These scenarios store an average of 78-94 Mg ha⁻¹ of carbon over 100 years in live and dead trees and harvested wood products, and restore stand structural characteristics beneficial to wildlife. They also include a range ofinitial rehabilitation actions, such as silvicultural clearcuts and targeted thinning, which provides management flexibility for landowners. Like other studies, our results found that choice of accounting method influences the financial viability of carbon market participation. Plot-level estimates used for statistical analyses diffyred from property-level estimates recommended by the protocols.
In addition, ACR consistently generated more carbon credits than CAR for the same management scenarios (p<0.05). Yet, when offset prices were high enough (e.g., high voluntary market prices for ACR and regulatory market prices for CAR), the two protocols yielded similar net present values of $121-256 ha⁻¹. These values are comparable to those produced from timber harvesting alone under more intensive management scenarios. Thus, while timber may continue to be a primary source of revenue for many landowners, carbon offsets could appeal to certain landowners as a new tool for restoring overharvested timberland.