Why Tree Planting Campaigns Don’t Work

Take the PBS Audience Survey: to.pbs.org/pbssurvey2023l
In 2019, a Turkey tree planting campaign set a world record. Three months later, 90% of those saplings were dead. Planting trees to replace old-growth forests is a common solution, but it typically does not solve the problem. With deforestation causing climate-related disasters, it’s time to take a hard look at reforestation and what we can do to save our forests.
*****
PBS Member Stations rely on viewers like you. To support your local station, go to: to.pbs.org/DonateORIG
*****
Curious about the future? With the help of a diverse cast of innovators, researchers, and dreamers, FAR OUT explores the future of humanity on this big, messy planet called Earth -- and maybe beyond!
Hosted by futurist Sinéad Bovell, Far Out invites viewers to get informed about what’s to come. The series is produced for PBS by PBS North Carolina, the team behind the award-winning PBS series Overview.
#animal #communication #FarOutPBS
Subscribe to PBS Terra so you never miss an episode! bit.ly/3mOfd77
And keep up with Far Out and PBS Terra on:
Facebook: / pbsdigitalstudios
Twitter: / pbsds
Instagram: / pbsds

[@Bloodmuffin6]

Mossy Earth is a fantastic organization that does responsible tree planting

[@MossyEarth]

Thanks for the shout out!

[@sandal_thong8631]

I've watched several of their videos, including flooded/flooding forests. They seem to know what they're doing.

[@nicholasbaker8158]

Not only multispecies is needed but also multi-age planting. This ensures not only greater species diversity (vegetation), but also successional growth. This expedites the forest succession, creates understory habitat for wildlife, and also promotes resilience (e.g., pests).

[@ConstantChaos1]

I also like when invasive can be composted to recreate the humus earlier

[@jayski9410]

I think you've hit the nail-on-the-head. We've got to stop thinking of a forest as a "crop" of trees that you can plant as any farmer would. It's a succession of many plants over decades or centuries with each preparing the environment for the next. Eventually leading to a climax that we would term "old growth". I'm sure there are foresters, silviculturist, and permaculture people who know this but its the environmentalists who like ringing alarm bells and say stop everything which get the most press.

[@k.h.6991]

When the forest is gone, multi age planting is mostly impractical.

[@jeffnelson4489]

Millions yrs ago when a total burn happened it all grew back at same time and that was okay?You shoulda been there to manage it properly😂

[@skylarschell7858]

@@jeffnelson4489 It didn't grow back all at once. Early succession plants, such as annual grasses and wildflowers, would grow back first. As the location recovered, later succession plants would begin to regrow and displace those early succession plants. If the area went long enough without a major disturbance, it would become a climax community. Some species can grow in multiple stages of succession, but many only survive in one specific stage of it. For example, eastern hemlock can only grow in shaded, later succession communities. Planting projects like these can't be a one and done kind of thing, because that simply won't work for many species. You can't simply take an old, depleted field and try to turn it straight into a climax community, you have to mimic the natural stages of succession.

[@user-eg1sw2dz7g]

Check out what Pennsylvania has done with their forests. By 1900 99% of trees in PA had been clear-cut. The hills looked dead and bare with barely any wildlife. After over 100 years of intense forest management with many wide ranging implementations the forests of Pennsylvania have returned, at least in areas where population density remains small. It will take decades if not centuries to fix the mistakes of the past. Keep your head up

[@ronaldlindeman6136]

Then the question is, how did the trees come back? It was from laws passed by Government. 1920 was about the year that we had the fewest trees in the United States and they passed laws saying that those that cut down trees have to plant trees.

[@user-eg1sw2dz7g]

Initially it was actually the effort of hunters, hunters were the first to realize what was being lost. They started slowly then the government caught onto what they were trying to accomplish and realized it was a good idea.

[@ronaldlindeman6136]

@@user-eg1sw2dz7g Sure. I can believe that. It probably was some calculation between hunters, loggers, farmers, etc.. I had read an article about how many birds were here before the forests got cut down and it was a lot.

[@thiemokellner1893]

Sure, but we do not have 100 years to prevent the worst. That's why re-forestation will not even partially solve the imminent problem. E.g. a beech tree takes 100 years to retain 3.5 tons of CO2. Even several decades to store significant amounts of it. Is the climate suitable for the planted tree throughout its life? Is it worth to blow additional CO2 into the air by planting and hedging trees? Or is it the safer bet to just reduce our CO2 output?

[@d3nza482]

@@thiemokellner1893 Not to mention all that tea in China. It takes "too long" to sequester X carbon? (Not CO2 BTW) PLANT 10 TIMES AS MANY TREES! And keep planting. The whole point of the video is that reforestation has to be sustainable AND sustained. Not just plopping an acorn in the ground and calling it a forest.

[@antjelauer3840]

The Kings Canyon National Park Service in California has started a 3-year massive replanting project of Giant Sequoias in groves that burned heavily 2 years ago, including in wilderness areas. The sites that were burned most intensively have regrown thousands of new Giant Sequoia seedlings naturally, but still, the NP Service moves forward with its plan. They will also plant 30% non Sequoias that are attractive for the logging industry. Independent Biologists have visited the groves and protested against these projects, to no avail so far. You can bring a story on that!

[@generalnawaki]

That's great, doing it fire prone Cali though. Well I hope for the best.

[@johndoh5182]

Maybe you didn't get the part about human usage and political will. You CAN'T simply tell a good chunk, like about 50% of the people in a country that a large chunk of land will have no economic benefit other than tourism. And frankly I disagree with the biologists in this case. Now if a hydrologist, who is very different than a biologist suggested doing certain things I'd be much more likely to listen to what they have to say since they understand the details of water in natural systems, and biologists don't. You don't get ANYTHING if the hydrology isn't right. You know why CA is burning more heavily now? You think it's climate change I'd imagine. It's a little bit of climate change but a LOT of improper water usage. You have land that's semi-arid and it's being treated like you get 50 inches of rain a year the way that farmers have come in and tapped so much ground water. CA is dying because of farming uses too much water. You've dropped the level of aquifers too much, and that drops the water table, and when you drop the water table the indigenous plants/trees that have developed there over many thousands of years no longer get their roots into wet soil. You get massive die off. But biologists talk about beetles and climate change. Yeah, I don't have a lot of respect for biologists who have continually ignored what farming has done to that state. It's thousands of sq. miles that have been affected, not just right around where the farming happens. It's entire aquifer systems and wherever those aquifers affect.

[@generalnawaki]

@@johndoh5182 do you have a biology degree? because otherwise you are someone who has no place talking like you do. Unless you are certified your opinion on a subject is moot if it contradicts someone who is certified. I swear only american argue with scientist.

[@kathleentucker1238]

​@@johndoh5182I agree. As a CA born niece of a botany professor at UC Davis, I listened to Uncle, and his ideas agreed with yours. I have also witnessed the aquifers going dry.😢 Also as one who loves and respects the natural history of the land there and cherishes its resources, my joy in reading your response is mixed with a sigh of hope. Hope that more people are like you!

[@williampatrickfurey]

When I recently realized the amount which was initially logged like a hundred and something years ago, I was astounded, appalled, and deeply saddened at the same time; people "just doing what they're told"...

[@some-say-gregms]

Whenever I saw a flashy "planting trees" widget on some random website, I was always skeptical about it... honestly this is even worse than I expected. Thank you for the informative video.

[@sandal_thong8631]

I agree. I saw videos where they planted saplings on a barren hillside 3 feet apart and then said most of them didn't survive the year. I had to comment that they seemed amateurish at best and incompetent at worst. I would have said fraudulent, but they said they planted saplings elsewhere to ensure their donors' intent wasn't completely wasted. Another tree-planting video on that channel was similar, so I again commented on their incompetence, before blocking that channel from my feed.

[@onewomanarmy6451]

I had known tree plantings often were a waste of time, effort and money and that they often were harmful but didn't know the extent of it all until I watched a Mossy Earth video about the subject around a year or two ago. Mossy Earth has some projects that involve tree planting and it gives me hope to see that they follow what the experts they work with say, they work with local groups and people and they are always guided by whatever science says about what they are attempting. I love the way they work as they are passionate but won't let the passion and eagerness to help stand in the way of current scientific knowledge and best practices. They document everything and are transparent every step of the way no matter if something goes wrong or there is a setback. Being open with your projects, plans and where the money goes ought to be the norm, but sadly not.

[@eklectiktoni]

Ecosia does a good job too.

[@saram8102]

Yes! Mossy Earth is a great example of an organization that takes the time to do things right. And they are truly committed to transparency. I became a member earlier this year ☺️

[@MossyEarth]

Thanks for the shout out!

[@svenkollskegg3812]

Ironically the logging industry in the US is actually rather successful at re-planting following a harvest, but the problem is that they're generally only interested in a handful of species (usually just one truthfully) and their goal is the best growth rate to size by next harvest cycle, so the main benefit isn't the replanting itself rather the forests that are able to be spared from harvesting by having the artificial forests.

[@drillerdev4624]

@@svenkollskegg3812 A tree monoplantation is not a forest, though. It doesn't create a resilient ecosystem, and are an easy prey for plagues. They do capture CO2 if the timber they produce is used for long lasting structures, though.

[@Davett53]

When I bought my house in an urban area in 1993, it had a large front & rear yard. The backyard is 40 ft. by 100 ft,..very large for an urban neighborhood. I replaced all the grass/lawn in the rear with trees (grown from saplings) ever greens, bamboo, & pampas grasses. My backyard looks today, like a sliver of "the garden of Eden". Except now my neighbors, complain all the time that my leaves fall into their tree-less yards. I have caught them damaging my trees, coming into my property to cut down the limbs that hang into their property. None of neighbors even live in these homes, they are all rental properties. Their renters don't care one way or the other. My yard attracts wild birds, small critters, & is a safe haven for roaming lost cats. Because of rampant over-building in my city, deer are now invading both the urban areas and the suburban ones. In August, a 3 point Buck, was lounging in my flower beds. A first for me. I was elated to see him,.....he was startled, and left upon my gentle coaxing.

[@carriebartkowiak]

How much did the specially-lined troughs for the bamboo cost to have installed?

[@Davett53]

@@carriebartkowiakI went with instructions I found on-line. One can buy pre-cast cement troughs,....more like heavy duty planters, combined with all steel re-enforced, livestock feeding troughs. Buried in the ground. Problem is, the bamboo sends out rhizomes, that are not deep in the soil, but tend to flourish, closer to the ground surface. Which means after 15 years, they begin expanding, their growing locations, in the surrounding soil. Bamboo is tenacious and hard to kill, at the root level.

[@miguel5785]

My neighbour below also complained from falling leaves. I was surprised and didn't know what to reply. I mean... they are plants. I would love to get leaves from my neighbours above instead of cigarrette ends and plastic clothspins. I could use them as mulch or compost. Many people were educated the wrong way, expecting everything to be clean and tidy and seeing nature as something to keep away or under extremely domesticated forms. They also were lied to and think their way of life is normal and sustainable. But the tide is changing and future culture will be more mindful of nature. Increasingly more neighbours will appreciate having so much green around them.

[@Davett53]

@@miguel5785I hope so.

[@chrisnagy377]

Bamboo is invasive in the us

[@j.m.b.greengardens968]

The Miyawaki method - according to my understanding, and vastly simplified, involves planting a forest as an ecosystem - that is, planting trees and other species as a plant community. It is apparently quite successful in the small "mini-forest" applications for which it was developed - perhaps ti would be workable also on a large scale. And there are a great many permaculture projects using many of the same principles.

[@krobbins8395]

I remember as a child fruit trees all over my neighborhood and to me they were friends that had food, insects and housed birds.There are few neighbors like this anymore in the U.S perhaps not clear cutting land and throwing up the suburbs with lots of concrete can help. We don't live with trees like we used to. Trees are great they provide shade and a place to hang a swing. Commercial farming treats trees like a industry. We have other options for building materials yet constant plant only to cut them which says a lot about our relationship with the planet.

[@sandal_thong8631]

Another thing that happened was that we've planted more "male" trees that produce pollen, getting rid of "female" trees that drop "junk" on the street, sidewalk and people's cars.

[@kushking949]

plenty of trees in Wa state lmao

[@DanAndHoe]

I’m glad my neighbourhood has many trees. It’s about 180 acres with about 7000 people, 3600 households. There are multiple apartment buildings, but most of it is single family homes. compared to American suburbs it’s pretty densely built, but the streets are lined with trees. Many front and backyards have trees, shrubberies, flowers etc. There’s a small park with some trees and a pond. All in all it makes the entire neighbourhood a network of trees that can be used by birds to get safely from one side to the other. Apart from a larger road, which is also lined with tall trees, the network extends to outside the city into the agricultural areas. In my neighbourhood there’s swallows living in some of the roofs, and they feed on all kinds of flying insects during summer. There are hedgehogs, I’ve seen a squirrel a few years ago, and at least 15 kinds of birds live permanently in the neighbourhood, accompanied by different migratory birds over the year. The plants provide food for all kinds of insects, which then are food for the birds and small mammals. Some people grow food in their gardens and there are many private and public fruit trees. Every spring and summer there’s different types of bees, and people actively try to make their yards attractive to all kinds of insects. In an urban area you can have a successful ecosystem, but it does mean you can’t cut down all trees and just put grass everywhere.

[@mobeydick37]

"Commercial farming treats trees like a industry. We have other options for building materials yet constant plant only to cut them which says a lot about our relationship with the planet." ~~ I've worked in the Contruction industry for 47 years (last 27 as a General Contractor) please enlighten me on the options for building materials to replace industrialized wood farming?! BTW: I would use steel (it doesn't burn) if it didn't double the framing package cost! It takes fossil fuel to produce steel framing material and our current ignorant energy policies have made steel cost prohibitive for 99% of the public.

[@krobbins8395]

@@mobeydick37 I've seen options with hemp that's green and it has a quick crop rotation. They have made hemp Lego bricks that look interesting. I seen today on Pbs Terra about flooding in Vermont and the damage. Wood doesn't stand up well to flood so we need to come up with something better. Hempcrete is fire proof.

[@GreatBigBore]

Wait, the people orchestrating tree-planting initiatives never think to get tree experts involved? Experts who could have told them things like, plant native trees! Or they just ignored the experts, took everyone's money and squandered it? Seems to me these failed initiatives aren't failed, they functioned exactly as their creators intended

[@RojaJaneman]

Capitalism is all about show and marketing. It’s shallow and taxing on every stakeholder. But once in a while it succeeds.

[@lordgarion514]

If you want your tree trimmed, you call a tree expert. Modifying entire ecosystems, is a little above a tree experts head.

[@solar0wind]

That's why I started watching Mossy Earth. They always take scientists on board, plus they know that planting trees isn't always the right thing to do, as seen in their newest video about Scottish rainforests where they only cut down the non-native trees, but likely won't plant anything.

[@j.obrien4990]

Remember a lot of these tree-planting initiatives are political stunts and politicians hate actual experts. Much of China's green wall has died since it was planted with the wrong species or they should have planted grasslands but the CCP knows best. An actual expert outside of Kenya's political system started Kenya's reforestation projects using local help, and native species and it is doing great.

[@MatthewHarrold]

My wife and I purchased 1381m2 of steeply sloped land in a subdivision adjacent to a private reserve, cut down 41 established trees to clear our house build, then spent 8 years trying to revitalize this land and give us a native garden. Most of our furniture and garden mulch came from those trees, we now have lizards, bugs, beetles, birds, and plenty of native wildlife on our small (but not suburban) plot of land. Despite planting dozens of trees, only a few Blackwoods, 3 Huon Pines, and a dozen cheap and cheerful species have thrived (Coppertips, Limelights, Wattles). It is really hard to put back what you cheaply take. $0.02 from Tasmania.

[@jmkelly7710]

I just planted almost 300 native trees, I believe 15 different species of trees and high bush plants. Also collected and hands spread wildflower seeds and , maybe 2,000 or 3,000 altogether. Every tree got a shelter and stake. We also cleared any invasive plants and carefully took out dead trees while leaving enough dead wood on the ground. Took my husband and I probably 5 months to do like one or two acres out of our 24. It was so much work and it will continue to be so much work for years. We will probably do another acre in a couple years and hope the seedlings become seed trees and help keep our once logged forest, healthy for years to come. Fingers crossed. Just sharing my experience because it's not easy when you live in pennsylvania and there's almost zero old growth forest.

[@HolyTeacup-bc9uc]

Amazing! I hope this goes well. Wishing you the best

[@magpietexas9475]

Good to see this. Social psychology has a lot to do with it. In the aftermath of a major pine related wildfire in my community, so many people wanted to 'help' by planting pine seedlings. There was so much other work that needed to be done - especially with erosion control. But - I saw that so many volunteer groups only wanted to do the planting of seedlings. Why? They wanted the "feel good" experience. In the following years, the seedlings had less than a 2% survival rate. And we had major damage to roads and a dam due to erosion. People also made major efforts to remove the burnt dead trees because they didn't want to see them. Seeing them made people feel bad. In contrast, the areas that were left alone re-grew much more rapidly and with more diversity.

[@kaisummerall2044]

We can’t forget about our prairie/grassland ecosystems!

[@linomaldonado2394]

This is important

[@abbyhillman769]

I love the PBS Terra content. The segments are a good length to introduce an important idea, engagingly presented, and with enough information to do further research if the topic interests me. I also love that people from different backgrounds, genders, and ethnic origins are the well-spoken and well-informed presenters. No offense to older white guys, but we've heard a lot from you over the past century. Nice to realize that all people can be and are studying the earth and trying to save it from destruction.

[@brutalusgaming8809]

As a 50 year old white guy I agree. :)

[@magesalmanac6424]

PBS and PBS Terra are my favorite. ❤️

[@hollisspear6278]

No offense taken. I'm tired of us too.

[@johnmcho]

It sounds like "leave it alone" is pretty effective. I like the idea of us taking on a gardening mentality as a species though.

[@k.h.6991]

That's what I thought too, but some research shows that replanting a diverse array of plants is more effective at restarting an ecosystem.

[@johnmcho]

@@k.h.6991 Yeah, that's why I added the comment about gardening. I think we're pretty good at it when we want to be.

[@SaveMoneySavethePlanet]

When talking about the issue is Brazil specifically I’ve started to believe more in a “demand solution.” Since the majority of the deforestation there specifically is for creating farmland for cattle or farmland for feed for cattle, reducing the amount of red meat we eat can have a large impact on their deforestation rates. Aside from that, when it comes to planting trees, I tend to favor solutions in my own backyard. Getting my local city to plant more shade trees along bike paths or offer free shade trees for homes can have huge impacts. Firstly, these trees are much more likely to survive because they’re planted in a place that people want them. Secondly, they can have additional benefits such as making bike commuting more pleasant or providing shade during summer so that we use less electricity to run our AC units.

[@conorgraves]

you get it! obviously it isnt that simple, but we lose so much more than forests in the US due to fucking parking lots and apartment complexes, but EXACTLY this kind of critical thinking is the way. God bless.

[@benhauber1979]

Prime example of "Be the change you want to see." Faith in humanity is dwindling, but we can't fix the whole world ourselves. We CAN improve the world within our reach, though. Kudos to you for doing good with what's within your reach.

[@someguy2135]

Beef has the biggest impact, but almost 80% of the soy grown is used for farm animal feed! Only seven percent is consumed directly by humans. Each of us who know the facts should boycott not only beef, but all animal products! Doing that would have a bigger impact than any other single change we could make.

[@huldu]

Demand a solution? We're talking about poor people here. Do you really think they care what YOU or I think? They're just trying to not starve, make a living. Of course if something happens and a "demand" is made you can be certain it's those poor farmers that will suffer nobody else. It's a very cruel world we live in. The government isn't going to help them, they'd just "relocate" them which probably means they'll be homeless or live in some kind of a camp in misery for the rest of their life if they chose to live that long.

[@benhauber1979]

@@someguy2135 I honestly don't understand the motivation to eat so much meat. I'm not a vegetarian, but there are many times I have meals with no meat, and where I live, a lot of people would say a meal is incomplete if meat is not included. Maybe people just aren't very good at cooking, and poorly prepared meat just had a more desirable flavor than poorly prepared vegetables.

[@johndemeritt3460]

THIS is BY FAR the BEST episode of "Far Out" I've yet seen! What made it so good is that it talked about our futures from both a technological AND a social perspective. Furthermore, it covered futures that covered the entire world, and not just part of it. If you could expand on the range of futures and differentiate between different futures for different peoples, that would go a long way to broaden more people's minds about the futures we face -- and maybe get them to think about how the choices they make in our presents might affect other peoples' futures distanced from us in space AND time. Well done! I hope to see more episodes like this in our futures!

[@quietkidloudmind2347]

And she’s beautiful 😍

[@johndemeritt3460]

@@quietkidloudmind2347, that's a non sequitur, I'm sorry to say. But it is noted: people often accept things an attractive person says more readily than what a less attractive person says -- even if the message is the same, down to the wording and delivery.

[@doxielain2231]

I've been wondering how that Team Trees thing played out. I'm pretty skeptical that it was anything more than a greenwashing campaign ultimately for logging interests and/or just incompetently implemented.

[@eklectiktoni]

Actually it was legit. They worked with the Arbor Day Foundation who is good about doing tree planting right. The TeamTrees website says: *"Who will plant the trees? The Arbor Day Foundation works closely with professional forestry partners such as the U.S. Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, and other government and nongovernmental agencies, to ensure that tree-planting best practices are followed. What species are going to be planted? The Arbor Day Foundation always emphasizes planting native species where local conditions and forest plans allow. Their motto is to plant the right trees, in the right place, at the right time, for the right reasons."*

[@lagmonster7789]

Too bad there wasn't a follow up on #TeamTrees in the video, i bet most of us remember and/or even contributed to that. Would have been good to know what kind of (relative) success it achieved. 🤔

[@almostatic]

#TeamTrees

[@Silverizael]

It did basically nothing. But it was arguably more useful than the later Seas event, which was worse than useless. It actively made people think that having the trash ocean trawlers actually accomplished anything, when they daily collected less than the daily output of trash into the ocean in the region. Targeting the actual sources of the trash going into the ocean in the first place and what was causing that, which is also tied into political corruption and other issues, would have been much more productive. But Mr. Beast actively does not bring up any specific political stances outside of the claimed environmentalism. He doesn't actually criticize and call out the specific politicians responsible. He could do quite a lot with his money and following, but anything that would make a difference is a step too far for him. Instead he'll do a tone-deaf Squid Games parody game.

[@darrelstickler]

This was excellent. Factual. Honest. Described as important but not an “existential crisis.” Not judgmental. No moralizing. No easy answers.

[@Monaleenian]

7:20 “We need to centre the voices of local communities” The local communities in Brazil want to cut down the rainforest though!

[@JxH]

I've been throwing acorns into our forested property for years (decades even), and now we have about two dozen oak trees that are getting big. Sure....I threw hundreds (maybe even thousands?) of acorns, but I was aiming for "some" oak trees. 100% wasn't my goal. Next up are Chestnuts; we have a whole shopping bag full. 🙂

[@sandal_thong8631]

Seeds/nuts are a little different from saplings. These channels I saw were about tree-planting. They didn't say they were going to damaged ecological areas and planting seeds. If they had done that and only 10% sprung up and survived the year, that wouldn't seem as bad as 90% of planted saplings dying.

[@jx-653]

the Miyawaki method seems like an appropriate approach. it focuses on creating micro forests with native plants. there’s a few examples of these forests and how they only need to be taken care of for a few years before they naturally become self sustaining.

[@FundacjaPrzyszlosc]

One year ago we planted 150 beeches in our residential. We did it as an experiment with local authorities. Only 3-5% survived a year. In this month we are going to do replacement plantings, build a water storage and try our best to provide better results. Maybe with your ranges on KZbin you could make a video called "what to do to make tree planting campaigns works". From my perspective: I know we made a lot of mistakes, we did it first time and it takes a lot of effort to do it by your own, in your local community. I personally can't stop Amazon forest from deforestation, but I can plant trees and gather rained water on my community. One step at the time. Thanks for interesting video.

[@user-wh2qc1df3g]

Very interesting and informative. I learned a lot. Thank you.

[@illusion-xiii]

It's depressingly unsurprising that the most popular trees for reforestation are, "good for producing timber and fiber." That basically means that they're replacing rain forests with timber fields, and if you think those won't be harvested as soon as they grow to maturity, well.. did you hear how well the saplings were looked after?

[@jeffreykalb9752]

It's so terrible that the needs of humans are placed above those of worms.

[@illusion-xiii]

@@jeffreykalb9752 You seem to have a very limited view of the needs of humans.

[@llaffallott]

In Oregon, of all places, replanting after the wild fires we've had in recent years is failing. The reason reported is that the forests were so dry and the ambient heat so high, that the fires sterilized the humus in the soil. So the soil was not only dessicated, but had no living nutrients for the saplings to grow. Worrisome.

[@bettyswallocks6411]

Greetings from Vienna, Austria, where, this year, one of the political parties running the city (it’s a bit of a coalition) promised to plant 100,000 trees per year in the city and environs. One local journalist had a good memory and dug out an article from 1991, when the same party promised to plant 1 million trees. In the intervening 32 years, they have managed just 10% of the 1 million target, so the target of 100,000 trees every year has been met with considerable scepticism. Having said that, I originated from Oxford, England, where I still have ties and still visit and I can categorically state that Oxford & Oxfordshire’s tree=planting efforts are far outstripped by Vienna’s tree-planting programs. But then, the UK has destroyed more of its forest cover and wildlife than almost any other country in Europe.

[@Spritsailor]

When I worked for the US Forest Service in Montana in the 1970's we used managed logging with tree planting to follow each operation. They no longer plant trees! WTF They also no longer use managed options such as thinning of "slash" timber that fuels most forest fires. As a result there are forests with too much slash lying around that causes what happened in Canada last summer, i.e., run away forest fires. We used to cut and stack the dead wood, then light those small piles on fire after the dry season. Those practices successfully kept the burn acreage down. With tree planting afterwards the forests were healthy.

[@glennlewman4186]

so true

[@ctfddftba]

Surprised the tree planting in northern China to prevent desertification wasn’t mentioned, they only planted one species of fast growing tree, has large plant die off and local native animal and insect species were reduced like crazy. Supposedly trying to correct for that now by using tree’s native to the area to continue the project

[@eljanrimsa5843]

It would he been nice to provide an overview about the big projects. There's also the Great Green Wall project in Africa, and the reforestation of Atlantic Forest in Brazil. Giant projects which face tons of problems. Even with local buy-in and good scientific support it is tricky to get it right. A human-planted forest will perhaps never be as resilient and in balance with local soil and weather conditions as the original natural forest had been. But where conservation has failed, we have to do it, and learn as we are doing it.

[@MauiBoyTrav]

Thank you for sharing this information.

[@comfortablynumb9342]

Planting trees in soil that lacks nutrients and minerals and biological activity isn't going to work. When I plant a tree I dig an extra big hole and add soil amendments that give the tree the stuff it needs to get established. The right soil conditions for the species of tree or plant is important, some want wetter soil and some want to be pretty dry. So the soil composition is important. It's a lot more complicated than just digging a little hole and putting a tree in it. They need water if nature doesn't provide it. They need other plants growing up and dying and rotting around the roots. They need mycelium (fungus) networks that make relationships with the tree roots and they help each other. And they need worms and other critters in the soil to break down nutrients.

[@shealstewart5381]

How about, regreening some parts of the urban areas, in the countries, that cause the problem in the first place.

[@CalvinHikes]

I'm totally willing to watch a video on why reforestation doesn't work but this was a speech about why logging is bad.

[@hamfranky]

I have a small garden with no lawn and I do minimal upkeep. After the first year I already noticed multiple tree saplings (oak, maple, holly) coming up despite living in a city. I take them out because there's no space for another tree unfortunately but it did make me think about these tree-planting organizations. I'm sure local ecology matters a lot but it seems to me trees are doing fine planting themselves if they get the chance.

[@brettany_renee_blatchley]

It was nice to see a satellite picture of a park where my scout troop and I planted a buch of seedlings over 50 years ago - it was a pretty open field at the time and now it's a small forest: Austin Park, Skaneatles NY, circa 1970. 🌲🌲🌲🌲🌲🌲🌲🌲🌲🌲

[@PrototypeCreation]

finally a report about long-term tree growing that gets everything right. Looking forward to share it...

[@benhauber1979]

It's important we face reality instead of just doing things that make us feel better about a world we're actively destroying. If something isn't helping, we need to address it and move our time and energy into something that will. Feeling good about ourselves is not the goal, so we should leave our feelings at the door and own the fact that some initiatives don't work and can even be more harmful than good.

[@axelwalter4046]

A very clear, understandable and logical message. Well done !

[@SealFredy5]

There is a counter to this, along the lines of "doing nothing". One thing the United States does exceptionally well are the National & State Forests/Parks/Wildlife Areas. Many of these show a blueprint on how to cultivate natural environments that can serve populations beyond the resources a land can provide. On top of that, many people would be shocked to learn that these individual sites are actually growing. Not in plant coverage or animals (although that is also happening through curated efforts), but rather the amount of acreage many of the parks encompass is actually growing. These individual areas often buy land around their existing boundaries when they become available. Forests/Wildlife areas in Ohio are a great example. Shawnee/Woodbury/Zaleski/Wayne, just to name a few, all started smaller and have steadily purchased private property that has become available over the years.

[@richardzakh7209]

biodeversity is the key for making sure that the flora of those reforestations will survive

[@sjoervanderploeg4340]

We are looking at Brazil now, but "we" started this and never looked back!

[@Pottery4Life]

Thank you for the information.

[@StillOnTrack]

I volunteer with a pretty good local org. They address these issues by planting a wide variety of native trees bit by bit throughout the spring and fall from local native seeds they either source or collect and grow themselves, and they follow up with water and care.

[@JustMeJH]

The survey link isn’t in the description. Can you please add it? Thanks.

[@pbsterra]

Apologies for that. It's been added, and here is the URL: to.pbs.org/pbssurvey2023l

[@BatCaveOz]

You should list sources in the video notes.

[@melondoo6129]

This is great and it is reassuring to see that we are starting to question how effective environmentalism efforts have actually been; environmentalism is not always clear-cut: plant trees, go green, buy organic. There needs to be a continued intent as the process of cultivating, sustaining, and improving, our environment progresses, just as the ancestors of the land have always done. This reminds me of a great book that brings different questions and accounts related to environmentalism, the people involved, and the mindset behind it: Believers: Making a Life at the End of the World by Lisa Wells.

[@chrishartley4553]

A lot of what is in this video echoes my experiences and ticks a lot of boxes. TL:DR *Tree guards suck (in lowland areas). *Wrong tress are planted. We need to plant small blocks or pioneer trees and shrubs away from existing tres and let the forests expand naturally and fill those gaps. *But tree planting is a great PR for the pulblic and it helps them care about the woodlands and forests in their local area. It should not be ruled out. *The public cares about something if it has some use to them and they have access to it. I used to volunteer for a newly planted wood in England. Circumstances mean I can't do that any more. This was part of the Jubileee wood project for Elizabeth II's Diamond Jubilee. A Woodland Trust Forestty England project that had certain conditions attached when planting. I got involved a few years after planting and in some areas over half the saplings had died. So a lot of money had to be spent to replant the dead areas and plant some new blocks (because the contractors that had done the original planting hadn't actually finished. So my feelings are. Confined to lowland southern England are: we plant trees horribly. (I think I can expand that world wide generally) 1. Lots of oak are planted with some hazel as an understory. Forests in England were -and the remaining more natural remanents still are- a lot diverse than that. Little is done in many planting schemes to account for local soil conditions and microclimates and what would naturally be found there if it hadn't been chopped down. When we plant -and I think theres is still a case for planting- we need to think of it more of jump-starting succession with pioneer species such as willow, birch, alder etc. You will never grow a mature woodland out of the box and in many cases that isn't the right thing to do. I think the best thing to do is plant some blocks away from extant trees and shrubs and then let nature run its course. 2. This is specific for lowland areas but: Tree guards are a useless expense. a. They cost more than the saplings b. They need to be transported to planting sites. Often on a palettes onto a field away from any road or track. c. They make planting harder. Hammering in those stakes is tough and you feel it after a few hundred. And those stakes need to go in deep or they'll just flop over later, taking the guard with them and often uprooting the sapling. Now try and get a lot of volunteers to hammer in those stakes deep enough for a few hours. (In the end we hammered the stakes in the day before and the vols planted next to them and slipped on the guard.) d. Damage by deer and rabbits -often sited as the need for guards- is overstated. Yes you'll get some damage and some saplings will die. But a 100% survival rate jsn't expected. But there are going to be a lot of other established shrubs as a source of food in the local area as well. And deer tend to pick on certain specific trees. (This is lowland specific. In upland areas where overgrazing by sheep and deer is a real problem saplings need to be protected) e. Guards don't protect sapling from damage. I have seen saplings that have been ringed by voles that have snuck into the guards and nibbled away in safety. f. Grasses grow up those tubes far faster than saplings and block out the light and choke them. G. The guards promote the sapling to grow up fast, but they remain sheltered from the wind so they do not develop the strength needed for when they do grow out of the guards and catch their first strong gusts. Where they then get blown over. H. Tree guards take a long time to collect when no longer needed and even a small wood you can fill up several skips with discarded plastic waste. And most tree uagaurds aren't collected and just end up as litter. I. There are coils. Little strip of clear plastic that you wrap around samller shrubs. They get brittle in sunlight and after a few years crack and fall apart, adding to more litter. All this makes tree planting a lot more expensive and time consuming that it needs to be a piles on a lot of after care to ensure success. 3. A lot of herbicide spraying is used after initial planting. This to try and suppress grass growh. But IMHO it is uneeded. And it is expensive as well as polluting. And then there is mowing between the saplings. Another expense and not needed (all this was mandated in the contract for the Jubilee woodlands). Saplings do grow in grassy areas just fine. There were some mature oaks on the woodland and there were saplings growing by them. often right next to some planted saplings. The naturaly germinated saplings were healthier, bushier and bigger than the planted ones. I have found grass smothering saplings is a problem only when guards are used. Mowing to help provide public access is important though. 4. Along with pioneer trees species, a lot more shrubs and herbs need to be planted. You want to provide shelter and food for as many species as fast as you can and to shade out the grasses so more, smaller woodland plants can get established. And please use locally sourced seeds and saplings when you can. Having said all that I believe planting has its value. Planting is actually great as a gateway into conservation. People like doing it and it gives them a sense of ownership of the wood that is planted. And when that happens they take more care of it. The woodland I helped look after had some planting done by the local community initially then they were forgotten about. We got some volunteers later who looked after it. Strangely once that happened and the wood started to look cared for the flytipping -not a big issue but it did happen- stopped. We also got more people using the wood as many had thought it was out of bounds before. Also planting is important where they are no trees nearby and any natural expansion just won't happen. Tree planting isn't just about wildlife. It is useful in certain forms of agriculture, providing shade, a damoere microclmate, as well as crops. Trees reduce erosion, helping keep soils stable and prevent the silting up of water courses. Trees can also reduce flooding downstram. People need to be able to engage in nature. Even exploit it (but not over exploit). As much I like the idea of 50% land are set aside for nature in its most simplistic terms, pushing people out to make way for trees is just horrible. If you work against nature and the local population then your planted forest will fail. Even the Amazon, vital is it is, isn't wholly untouched. People have lived, hunted and farmed in it for millennia.

[@waykeeperfarmandnerdery]

I really agree with your points. We worked with a local reforestation organization in Canada and have experienced similar things. And humans have always lived as part of nature and trees, so trying to remove ourselves completely from the land is not the solution we think it is.

[@jamessang5027]

You don't have to plant trees to rejuvenate an area. All you have to do is to build ditches and swales to catch the rainfall and hydrate the soil . The trees and vegetation will naturally come when the soil is hydrated .

[@seanmccrackine4604]

I wish. Depends on the ecosystem you're trying to restore. In the fields near the Everglades, if that's all you did, you'd get a rain ditch full of invasive weeds, non-native trees and a million mosquitoes. There's a science to ecosystem restoration.

[@ac4941]

Anyone saying there's a simple and easy solution to ecosystem management and restoration doesn't know anything about the topic. Many ecosystems co-evolved with human activity, and degrades without it--or more specifically without traditional, indigenous management practices that we have worked hard to eradicate. There is no ecosystem restoration effort that will work without active, constant, human management and this really rankles people who think you simply have to leave nature alone to improve it.

[@jamessang5027]

@@seanmccrackine4604 I'm talking about dry lands . In a wet area , you may want to do something different . My idea should work for all drought prone areas .

[@jamessang5027]

@@ac4941 Can you be more specific ? Any land changes requires human effort and thought .

[@fayebird1808]

Research permaculture ,a way of slowing the water in degraded dry lands to raise the groundwater levels and encourage natural growth.@@jamessang5027

[@robinchazdon5313]

This is really well done! Thank you for an entertaining and enlightening episode!

[@patrickedwards1087]

Strongly recommend looking into the work of Neal Spackman and Geoff Lawton regarding the regreening of desertified lands. Also the work done on the Loess Plateau. As well as David Theodoropolous regarding Invasion Biology.

[@Dawn-zo2ny]

Also, many "Wildfies," many of which are set by humans, are a huge deal, and there have been tons of those this year...

[@deepashtray5605]

If 1/3rd of forests have already been removed then setting 1/2 aside as nature preserves means allowing for another 1/3rd to be removed. Given the impact the removal of that first 1/3rd has had on the loss of biodiversity, setting aside 1/2 of the remainder clearly falls well short of any meaningful preservation. We are insidiously consuming the biosphere piecemeal.

[@user-yp7mf2sj7x]

Thanks. Please provide analysis of tree planting in temperate areas as well as the tropics.

[@betula-pendula]

And to make it best, you need the mycorhiza fungi and soil microbiom, which symbioses with the different plants. And the first time you have to water it. Especially in hot and dry summers. When their roots are deep enough and their leves sweat water a local climate stabilizes the joung forest.

[@jimScienceNerd]

We have been trying to grow trees in our yard for years. With no predators in the neighborhood, deer are multiplying rapidly and keep eating the foliage. As a result, the trees just never get anywhere...😢

[@iz6566]

I so loved the radical systemic approach to the problem that you take in this video 🤩

[@tonywilson4713]

This is a great factual report, BUT it needs a follow up on "How to make Tree Planting Work" because we have to make it work. I'm an aerospace engineer and as an under graduate we once had a guest lecturer from NASA talk to us about Terraforming Mars. He broke our hearts with "Sorry but its impossible!" and then explained why. He introduced us to 2 subjects that I now call "Planetary Mechanics" and "Planetary Dynamics". Planetary Mechanics is when you just calculate the basics of what's needed. Planetary Dynamics is how you make it all work and includes things like water, oxygen and nitrogen cycles. When you look at Mars and ask something like how much air would we need to cover mars in a 1km thick layer of Earth Standard Air. *It turns out to be 178 Trillion tons.* So even before you start asking lots of other questions you have to ask where are you going to get 178 Trillion tons of air? Now applying that to the Earth and our problem of having too much Carbon Dioxide. If you do a simple estimate the 1st kilometer above the Earths surface is approximately 500 Million Cubic Kilometers of air and we need to reduce the CO2 level by about 30% (415ppm down to under 300ppm). The basic questions form that are: 1) How do you process 1/2 a billion cubic kilometers of air to extract slightly more than 1/4 of less than 1% of that air? 2) How much energy is it going to take to build all the hardware needed and then power that hardware? Let me introduce you to the cheapest carbon extraction and sequestration pump there is - *A TREE.* Trees are low maintenance solar powered carbon extraction and sequestration pumps. The problem is the size of the task because we need every human on the planet to plant or have planted in their name 1,000 trees. Yes 8 Billion people need to plant about 8 Trillion trees and then look after them and let them clean up the mess we have made. To make it work as this video says we need to THINK and plant the right trees in the right places for the right reasons. So that a reasonable percentage of them grow to maturity and suck out the excess carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. It can't just be endless groves of the same stuff. It has to have bio diversity.

[@darinbauer8122]

Ecosynthesis is key. Without biodiversity we are likely doomed. I watched Picard, drones spraying hydration of some kind on the vines. As much as I cannot possibly understand why rakes or quiet robots should not replace leaf blowers, it seems now that drones could be used to track, monitor, and reseed degrading wilderness. Peace.

[@DeathsGarden-oz9gg]

Lining the big open dirt or rock paches on the sides of off ramps should be filled with native plants flowers bushes trees all from seed so they adapt better. Also the open middle bits in freeways and hyways but mainly on hyways should be filled as well but this one will reduce lights from drivers on other side reducing crashes. Also plant the seeds in the ground where your going to plant every living plant on earth doesn't like being transplanted. Also if you put a tree in a place that gets lots of water whenever it likes but is in a small pot then gets moved to real earth and gets minimal care yes there going to die. Just plant at sight from seed when its ok to and mybe if required water 1 time a month if there native they shouldn't require more water or care then the native wild ones. Pro tip never ever cut a tree or top it or you doomed it to self destructing for the rest of its life.

[@Lisargarza]

I live in Harris County, TX (Houston area) and off ramps are sometimes planted with a mix of native species: loblolly pine, red oak, burr oak, and cypress to name a few. They are saplings when planted. They might be staked, but these are generally removed after a year or so. I don’t see anyone tending them, and because they are packed rather tightly, there’s some natural competition and an attrition rate. But these are biologically dead areas that now host small groves of trees. Now if they would just stop mowing the esplanades…

[@daviancyandreina]

Mossy Earth they are amazing, we need more association like them

[@kokopelli314]

I live in the municipality of Chatham Kent, Southwestern, Ontario, Canada. I’ve seen tree plantations that were claimed to offset our rampant deforestation die within 2 to 3 years. The local conservation Authority bought into the same flawed logic promoted by the grain and oil seed lobby that bulldozes and burns down forests for animal feed, and ethanol. We’ve had counsellors claim that orchards are forests and a conservation authority manager claim that cities are forests because there’s a few trees there. A sad example of people who literally can’t see the forest for the trees.

[@catsupchutney]

I tried to donate to a tree planting charity affiliated with the Forest Service, and my check was never cashed.

[@onlywei]

You can’t just tell the Brazilians to stop chopping down the rainforest. You need to be willing to support alternative Brazilian economic activity. If the Brazilians can’t get a job doing anything other than work that requires flat land, they’re going to keep chopping down trees!

[@GeekonaBike]

It's also a problem in the USA. I've witnessed 99% mortality of native ponderosa seedlings after a massive wildfire. Hopefully, the US Forest Service has improved at reseeding in the last 22 yrs as wildfires on the scale of the Redeo-Chediski are now a common occurrence in US forests.

[@timothyhammer6154]

I want to see more on foraging, native history, and more coverage of native people like the Cherokee working with their agroforestery. Also you should plant sun tolerant trees first then go in and plant your more shade loving trees. But remove all the invasive species first to get better results. Invasive species support other invasive species.

[@markplimsoll]

Traditions, like children, should be sen and NOT... token seriously. 😮 Good, enough simplistic ideas 😢 We all avoid the most "painful" statistic; The country historically the most responsible for the majority of atmospheric pollution, the USA, with only 5% of global population, drives ONE FIFTH of Earth's cars (about one car per person in USA!) a whopping THREE TRILLION miles PER YEAR, with each mile emitting One Pound (half kilogram) of Greenhouse gases. (7 lbs gallon of gas contains 6 lbs of Carbon). 😮 Each mature 2,000 pound tree contains 50% Carbon, so EACH YEAR the USA would need to plant about ONE BILLION TREES which take 40 years to mature and may burn down. 😮 USA is 70% overweight, 40% obese and can't leave the house without using a TON of metal and glass, and even expect meals delivered by car. The answer is bicycle for trips under 5 miles, about the same amount of time, a half hour, as urban traffic, and Public Transportation.

[@DrugzMunny]

I've always been concerned that paying for a tree-planting campaign would lead to a paper company deciding that those trees were theirs to cut down.

[@michaelh.sanders2388]

Most of the eastern part of American was forest in 1600. It's all gone now. The Great Plains was a sea of big blue stem grass in 1850. It's all gone now.

[@Kingofredeyes]

It's amazing to me the number of people saying "get experts involved." I grew up in the middle of a forest, and we had to cut down and burn trees in order to survive, especially when it was cold. We would pile wood up to the halfway point of our house, ~8ft high, at times because we needed so much. Our forests didn't die. We didn't need an expert to tell us to cut down standing dead wood or cut up fallen dead wood instead of healthy trees. We also didn’t need to replant anything because nature does that itself. All we needed was to not be stupid, and we had plenty of wood to burn to keep our family alive for decades, and guess what that forest is alive and well today. The difference between my family and these charities is that we legitimately depended on our forest to survive and live. We couldn't just walk away patting ourselves on the back thinking we did a good thing. We had to take care of it so it would take care of us. This is the key to actually fixing environmental issues. Not some city slicker who thinks food grows in their market, but people who actually live off the land and know how to manage it. If someone from a city tells you how to fix the environment, ignore them they are useless. Entrust it to people like myself and my family who actually need the environment, and we will do significantly better.

So scary to hear that 😮. People Please stop defrosting ! Save forests 🌳 ❤❤

[@comeraczy2483]

As presented, the half earth project is nothing more than a pipe dream. It isn't so much that people live and work on that land, it is that people who don't live on that land still need what the land produces. I believe that a back of the envelope calculation shows that on average, US citizens utilize between 3 and 4 acres each. Of course, there are the areas that they use directly (houses, lawns, driveways, all infrastructure, etc.) but also, and more significantly, the areas that they use indirectly, particularly agricultural land (for food, gasoline, etc.) and timber land (for traditional American temporary 2x4 habitat). For the half earth project to become realistic, some radical decisions need to be made to eradicate the bulk of land usage need. This means either eradicating more than half of the population - not a popular idea - or looking into things we do that use a lot of land. Agriculture is a big one: more than half of arable land is currently used for agriculture. The other big one is timber, but let's focus on agriculture. It is 2023, and we are heavily subsidizing farmers (more than half a Trillion dollars every year, globally) to produce food, using the same general idea as people have been doing for thousands of years. If just 1% of these subsidies were invested in R&D for lab grown food, this would dwarf the current level of investments and speed up the progress in this much needed area. With the right technology, we could position ourselves into a position where we could ban naturally grown meat and produces. At that point, we would be able to divest the farming subsidies to farmers willing to reconvert into native forestry, alleviating substantially the issue of people living and working on the land.

[@sfperalta]

Good intentions are not the same as a solid plan of action. I hope we get better at our planetary stewardship soon.

[@route2070]

There was a wildfire that grazed my college campus prior to me going there. After the fire they did try a tree planting campaign to replace whay was loss. The main tree they tried tl plant (which was natural to the area, apparently had a required symbiotic relationship to mold. No mold, then the tree didn't have a way to properly absorb nutrients so no tree. Again the initiative happened prior to my attendance so i heard the story, and i can't remember if they tried and failed to reestablish the fungus or if they weren't entirely aware kf the symbiotic relationship, or if they hoped establishing the trees would establish the mold, whatever they tried sadly didn't work.

[@marc-olivierlabrecque4594]

Tropical forests are good carbon sink but northern wetlands should not be forgotten. Wetland soils store more carbon per gram than grassland or forest soils.

[@FrancoisTron-hv5pt]

Preventing fire is critical another action to do to preserve healthy existing ecosystems & to succeed in restoration. Just like understanding why some cut down trees & how we can support those who want to shift to protection and restoration, we also need to understand why some use fire & how we can help them shift to protection and restoration. Establishing living fire-breaks using fire-retardant trees is one fairly simple thing to do & spread around! Traditionnal ecological knowledge can help identify the many "useful" trees that have this functionnal trait.

[@berniesbend]

As a boy scout our troop planted a lot of evergreen and larch trees. Years later I found one of the land owners we had planted on had gone behind us and ripped them all out.

[@suchnothing]

Some areas of British Columbia, Canada have been experiencing catastrophic flooding and landslides the past few years, that have closed down major highways for weeks at a time and pose serious safety risks to people who live in or travel through those areas, since highways can flood without much warning. The lumber industry has been a significant portion of BC's GDP for a long time, but because so much of BC's interior is difficult to access, the same tracts of land are being deforested, then reforested and closely cared for until the new trees are ready to cut down again. You'd think having dense, healthy trees under close care would be a good thing, but unfortunately it's not good enough. You lose SO MUCH more than a tree when you cut down large, old growth trees, that can't be replaced by planting new ones. Large, old growth trees have deep roots that absorb huge amounts of rain and glacier/snow melt, and that literally hold the earth together. When those trees are cut down and their deepest roots start to die and decompose, there's nothing to hold that earth together anymore, because the young replanted trees haven't had a chance to grow roots that far down yet. So even though you seem to have a heavily forested mountain or hillside, the soil deeper down becomes unstable and when it gets hit with enough water, the entire hillside comes sliding down. And without those big trees drawing up large amounts of water from deep underground, a lot more rain and melt water comes down the mountainsides than what the infrastructure was built for, resulting in massive flood events that haven't really been seen before. Some forestry researchers, including indigenous people and activists, are pioneering and championing logging techniques that prioritize leaving a critical number of older trees standing. With enough older trees remaining in the area, the soil stays more stable and water flow is managed better. The older trees also "care for" the younger ones by supporting the continuation of the local ecosystem, especially beneficial bacteria and fungi that break down dead material into useful nutrients. The older trees also share their resources with young saplings through fungal networks and protect the young saplings from the elements by breaking up strong winds and . The answer isn't to replant the forests, the answer is to not cut them down in the first place. Or, since we need wood, harvest that wood more responsibly like the forestry researchers in BC.

[@ryuuguu01]

It is not just "Past" ecological damage. The U.S. and Canada are still cutting old-growth forests now.

[@frankhoffman3566]

There are significant tree and forest planting efforts underway in Iceland, Scotland, China, Australia, Israel and sub-saharan Africa. While the Brazilian forest cutting is alarming, the news is not all bad. If, for example, water could be brought to the Sahara Desert, whether by desalination or by some other method, that alone could change the entire carbon picture on the planet. Some good efforts are underway. They may not yet be enough, but they are a start.

[@tross]

Clear, concise explication of huge conceptual frameworks, which help me put nature stabilization efforts and their conflicts, into perspective. Please expand on this.

[@pe66o]

Everyone who goes to school, university or work should get a free week or two to help with reforestation. We need not only quality but much more quantity.

[@sandal_thong8631]

But if 90% die because the organizers don't know what they're doing then you'll be feeling good about a pointless activity; like recycling when your community pays for separate recycling pickup but still sends it to the landfill.

[@jaridkeen123]

We need to end Grass Lawns. Homeowners should have a Wild yard, Food Forest, Garden, or Wildflower Meadow

[@smrk2452]

Very well said. We can’t just plant and walk away! I like the idea of just doing nothing and letting the land heal itself. Nature knows what to do and it can fix this planet quickly if we just let it.

[@ac4941]

I am in stream restoration and management. Planting trees and walking is not responsible. Leaving nature alone is not responsible either, because if you live on planet Earth, much of our ecosystens have co-evolved with human activity, especially if you live in America. Allowing nature to be untouched is abandonment, a removal of keystone species no different from the removal of wolves, and it does not exist on much of this globe. The idea of healthy wilderness being untouched by humans is a colonial myth that is not true.

[@elmerkilred159]

Also not mentioned; A seedling isn't sold in a nursery until it is about 6 years old. The carbon mitigation that a 6 year old tree is about 1lb of carbon in the 7th year of growing vs a 100 year old tree that mitigates 150lbs of carbon by the 101st year of growing. One of the ways to get lower income areas to invest in tree planting is to get them to plant exotic hardwoods, like ipe, or sandalwood, or cocobolo, or Brazillian rosewood (worth $70USD per board foot) ebony, African blackwood... Unfortunately, it takes 20 to 40 years to get that investment to pay off. Most of these idiots in South America are engaging in slash and burn, and are probably burning 200+ year old trees with millions just in their lumber value alone.

[@clarissagafoor5222]

Actually I can confidently write here that if properly managed tree planting or re-planting does work. Just look at Hong Kong. When the British arrived, especially when the NT was leased to them, most of the hillsides were barren. However the British army undertook tree planting projects that covered hills and rocky areas with enough forestry to make the country park areas internationally noteworthy! However these areas are well maintained. Maybe some research?

[@mattcanyon5806]

Deforestation is happening where I live in Texas.

[@philippinenativehardwoodtr7327]

with all the respect may i suggest that your video should be re entitled Strategies to make tree planting successful the title of your video discourages planting of trees which i believe should not be the case by all means let us plant more trees, you explained well in your video the benefits of having trees not only in the forests but also in our our communities

[@shawneeluciani1385]

Arborist here. Unfortunately there's an additional layer to this story. Even under the best survival conditions, a newly-planted, sapling tree will take about 10 years to become a net carbon sink. Studies have found that in those first ten years a tree is actually producing more carbon dioxide (through respiration) than they can take up (through photosynthesis) and store.

[@miguel5785]

The Half-Earth Project makes a lot of sense to me if, as it seems, we must anyway reduce our footprint, degrow and withdraw from much of the land and seas. We'll have to do with a lot less meat and stuff, but it is possible. Very interesting, thank you.

[@asmodiusjones9563]

Where I live, the Pacific Northwest, any open space has trees in it. Medians on the side of the highway have cedar and firs growing on them, which just grew up on their own. Why would we need to *plant* new trees? They grow on their own.

[@lindasidor7165]

They will never stop...now they are putting mercy in the water to get 😢gold

[@z.i.z]

If funding and labor is an issue for maintaining trees, is it a good idea to wrap planting campaigns within private / semi private developments? For example, from yoga retreats to community hubs, or even city parks, where resources are specifically allocated, and people have an immediate incentive for the plants' upkeep (people won't pay for a retreat where the trees are all dead). The Forestias project in Thailand built apartments surrounding a mini forest they cultivated as a selling point. The scale might not be huge, but I wonder if it could still make change. I am not an expert so please share your knowledge!

[@glos7569]

Most of the replanting we hear about is done with non native plantation trees and unsurprisingly fails to replace the forest that was there before. However, there are plenty of examples of successful replanting out there.

[@realstatistician]

It seems like it would be easy to get rural farmers to keep trees if they were fruit or nut bearing trees. It’s the Rare Fruit Growers and foragers that local activists should be consulting with when starting these initiatives. (As a local forager I could easily collect thousands of seeds if I knew someone wanted to buy them). And the farming/coppicing techniques that increase crop yield (from light shade) and provide lumber for fire and fruit/nuts for the farmers. Let’s give nature some credit: many of these forests will regrow themselves without any help if the destructive element is removed (often cattle). If needed a few starter trees can be placed in good locations (like on the top of a hill) and then these trees will spread their seeds via gravity/animals/humans. The best thing may be just to get affordable fencing to the areas you want to rejuvenate.

[@scottbjorkander4141]

also make it easy for hemp to be grown for paper pulp and other uses

[@marr123n]

to plant forests, it is interesting to study how forests come to be in a natural, fully functioning ecosystem. Replicating this process as close as possible does yield higher results since these species have adapted to this process for millions of years.

[@system2thinker659]

My county received a grant for $1 million to plant trees. You know how many they planted? 2,450. This is the problem with tree planting programs, we over think everything. We buy a 5-7 year old nursery trees, get three people to transport it, dig a hole, stake it, set up irrigation, then constantly maintain it because this gives us a warm fuzzy feeling with instant gratification. In a sane world that wasn't run by our ego, we would simple put a SEED in the ground and let nature do all the work. As a test I put 100 native acorn seeds in the ground around my uncles property, it took about 30 mins and cost nothing.

[@lynn6799]

Trees bring rain. No trees equal no rain.

[@jontalbot1]

I live in the UK, a lightly wooded country by international standards and have spent at least half my 68 years seeing successful tree planting both large and small scale. If you just leave land alone most of it will eventually reforest anyway. Biggest issue for us is loss of saplings to deer