Tangential to this topic, Treehugger covers how California’s drought may be killing off those creatures that could save us from climate change folly – trees:
Researchers at the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) have completed an aerial survey of the Sierra Nevada and certain parts of Southern California, covering 8.2 million acres of forest, and the view from the air is alarming. Thanks to the worst drought in over a 1,000 years, trees in California are dying by the millions. The USFS estimates that about 12.5 million have already died in the state’s national forests, and the massive die-off is not over, as millions more are expected to die over the summer.
All these dead trees and dry conditions are making California’s forests dangerously flammable. This means that any small fire can turn into a huge blaze, potentially destroying many more trees as well as killing wildlife and damaging other property.
If they’re dead then they can’t do this:
[A] new report from the International Union of Forest Research Organizations shows that forests can play an important role in eliminating hunger and creating more food security. This is important, because protecting forests has been identified as a key and cost-effective means of fighting climate change. So, a better understanding of how forests help feed people may be another tool in the arsenal of their defense. …
The report examines the nutritional benefits of both natural forests and agro-forests, where food trees are cultivated among other species of trees and are still part of a functioning ecosystem. They find that tree foods can help create more nutritionally balanced diets, particularly for developing areas in the tropics. Seeds, nuts and fruit can be important sources of vitamins and minerals, particularly for communities that are otherwise dependent on starchier staples. Non-tree foods can also add to a wider food portfolio, such as insects, edible greens, fungi and bushmeat.
Jerry Brown’s order to lower water consumption by 25% will almost certainly have no effect on the California forests; they had best hope that the drought breaks soon, or consider irrigating the forests, rather than the farms.
Another danger to forests, interestingly enough, is, according to the US Forest Service (via LiveScience), pot:
“The attributes that make the lands of the National Forest System excellent producers of wildlife habitat and clean water are also prized by illegal marijuana growers,” [David] Ferrell said in his testimony [to the Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control]. “The lands are remote with few people, the forest vegetation is dense, there is an extensive system of roads and trails (both open and closed), soils are fertile, and water for irrigation is available for the diverting.” …
The growers clear plots to plant, destroying natural vegetation in the area and disrupting wildlife. They transport water from lakes and streams (an average plot of 1,000 plants requires 5,000 gallons, or about 19,000 liters, of water daily). Some growers also liberally apply toxic chemicals to keep their plots clear of weeds, bugs and rodents, according to [Warren ] Eth. …
“The most disgusting aspect of it is the pollution,” Eth said. “They just pour chemicals like nobody’s business… and they get washed into streams that flow through national parks.”
Specifically, increasing concentrations of the rat poison warfarin have been detected in a sensitive, and nearing endangered status, mammal called the fisher (Martes Pennanti) in California, Ferrell said. This poison could be contributing to the fisher’s declining population.
While legalization of pot will not positively impact the consumption of water, and may negatively impact it, legalization should lessen the motivation to find remote areas to grow it. I had not considered this aspect before.
However, High Country News‘ Christi Turner is all over that topic.
