Climatic Change

, Volume 144, Issue 2, pp 207–220 | Cite as

Forest sector carbon analyses support land management planning and projects: assessing the influence of anthropogenic and natural factors

  • Alexa J. Dugan
  • Richard Birdsey
  • Sean P. Healey
  • Yude Pan
  • Fangmin Zhang
  • Gang Mo
  • Jing Chen
  • Christopher W. Woodall
  • Alexander J. Hernandez
  • Kevin McCullough
  • James B. McCarter
  • Crystal L. Raymond
  • Karen Dante-Wood
Article

Abstract

Management of forest carbon stocks on public lands is critical to maintaining or enhancing carbon dioxide removal from the atmosphere. Acknowledging this, an array of federal regulations and policies have emerged that requires US National Forests to report baseline carbon stocks and changes due to disturbance and management and assess how management activities and forest plans affect carbon stocks. To address these requirements with the best-available science, we compiled empirical and remotely sensed data covering the National Forests (one fifth of the area of US forest land) and analyzed this information using a carbon modeling framework. We demonstrate how integration of various data and models provides a comprehensive evaluation of key drivers of observed carbon trends, for individual National Forests. The models in this framework complement each other with different strengths: the Carbon Calculation Tool uses inventory data to report baseline carbon stocks; the Forest Carbon Management Framework integrates inventory data, disturbance histories, and growth and yield trajectories to report relative effects of disturbances on carbon stocks; and the Integrated Terrestrial Ecosystem Carbon Model incorporates disturbance, climate, and atmospheric data to determine their relative impacts on forest carbon accumulation and loss. We report results for several National Forests across the USA and compare their carbon dynamics. Results show that recent disturbances are causing some forests to transition from carbon sinks to sources, particularly in the West. Meanwhile, elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide and nitrogen deposition are consistently increasing carbon stocks, partially offsetting declines due to disturbances and aging. Climate variability introduces concomitant interannual variability in net carbon uptake or release. Targeting forest disturbance and post-disturbance regrowth is critical to management objectives that involve maintaining or enhancing future carbon sequestration.

Keywords

Forest carbon Forest inventory Ecosystem model Climate change National Forests 

Supplementary material

10584_2017_2038_MOESM1_ESM.docx (2.3 mb)
ESM 1(DOCX 2.30 mb)

References

  1. Aber J, McDowell W, Nadelhoffer K, Magill A, Berntson G, Kamakea M, McNulty S, Currie W, Rustad L, Fernandez I (1998) Nitrogen saturation in temperate forest ecosystems. Bioscience 48:921–934CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen CD, Macalady AK, Chenchouni H, Bachelet D, McDowell N, Vennetier M et al (2010) A global overview of drought and heat-induced tree mortality reveals emerging climate change risks for forests. For Ecol Manag 259:660–684CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bechtold WA, Patterson PL (2005) The enhanced forest inventory and analysis program—national sampling design and estimation procedures. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-80. US Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Asheville, NC 85 pGoogle Scholar
  4. Bellasson V, Viovy N, Luyssaert S, Le Maire G, Schelhaas M-J, Ciais P (2011) Reconstruction and attribution of the carbon sink of European forests between 1950 and 2000. Glob Chang Biol 17:3274–3292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Birdsey R, Pregitzer K, Lucier A (2006) Forest carbon management in the United States: 1600–2100. J Environ Qual 35:1461–1469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Birdsey R, Angeles-Perez G, Kurz WA, Lister A, Olguin M, Pan Y, Wayson C, Wilson B, Johnson K (2013) Approaches to monitoring changes in carbon stocks for REDD+. Carbon Management 4:519–537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brzostek ER, Dragoni D, Schmid HP, Rahman AF, Sims D, Wayson CA, Johnson DJ, Phillips RP (2014) Chronic water stress reduces tree growth and the carbon sink of deciduous hardwood forests. Glob Chang Biol 20:2531–2539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Crookston NL, Dixon GE (2005) The forest vegetation simulator: a review of its structure, content, and applications. Comput Electron Agric 49:60–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Davidson EA, Janssens IA (2006) Temperature sensitivity of soil carbon decomposition and feedbacks to climate change. Nature 440:165–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dilling L, Birdsey R, Pan Y (2013) Opportunities and challenges for carbon management on U.S. public lands. Chapter 18. In: Brown, DG, Robinson, DT French, NHF, Reed, BC, eds. Land use and the carbon cycle: advances in integrated science, management and policy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Press. 455–476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Eidenshink J, Schwind B, Brewer K, Zhu Z, Quayle B, Howard S (2007) A project for monitoring trends in burn severity. Fire Ecology 3:3–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fang J, Kato T, Guo Z, Yang Y, Hu H, Shen H, Zhao X, Kishimoto-Mo AW, Tang Y, Houghton RA (2014) Evidence for environmentally enhanced forest growth. Proc Natl Acad Sci 111:9527–9532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Forkel M, Carvalhais N, Rödenbeck C, Keeling R, Heimann M, Thonicke K, Zaehle S, Reichstein M (2016) Enhanced seasonal CO2 exchange caused by amplified plant productivity in northern ecosystems. Science 351:696–699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Goeking SA (2015) Disentangling forest change from forest inventory change: a case study from the US interior west. J For 113:475–483Google Scholar
  15. He L, Chen JM, Pan Y, Birdsey RA (2012) Relationships between net primary productivity and Forest stand age derived from forest inventory and analysis data and remote sensing imagery. Glob Biogeochem Cycles 26:GB3009. doi:10.1029/2010GB003942 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Heath LS, Smith JE, Woodall CW, Azuma DL, Waddell KL (2011b) Carbon stocks on forestland of the United States, with emphasis on USDA Forest Service ownership. Ecosphere 2(1) article 6Google Scholar
  17. Heath LS, Smith JE, Skog KE, Nowak DJ, Woodall CW (2011a) Managed forest carbon estimates for the US greenhouse gas inventory, 1990-2008. J For 109:167–173Google Scholar
  18. Healey SP, Urbanski SP, Patterson PL, Garrard C (2014) A framework for simulating map error in ecosystem models. Remote Sens Environ 150:207–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Healey SP, Raymond CL, Lockman IB, Hernandez AJ, Garrard C, Huang C (2016). Root disease can rival fire and harvest in reducing forest carbon storage. EcosphereGoogle Scholar
  20. Hicke JA, Meddens AJH, Kolden CA (2016) Recent tree mortality in the Western United States from bark beetles and forest fires. For Sci 62:141–153Google Scholar
  21. Huang C, Goward SN, Masek JG, Thomas N, Zhu Z, Vogelmann JE (2010) An automated approach for reconstructing recent forest disturbance history using dense Landsat time series stacks. Remote Sens Environ 114:183–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Johnson EW, Wittwer D (2008) Aerial detection surveys in the United States. Aust For 71:212–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. King AW, Andres RJ, Davis KJ, Hafer M, Hayes DJ, Huntzinger DN, de Jong B, Kurz WA, McGuire AD, Vargas R, Wei Y, West TO, Woodall CW (2015) North America’s net terrestrial CO2 exchange with the atmosphere 1990-2009. Biogeosciences 12:399–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Law BE, Turner D, Campbell J, Van Tuyl S, Ritts WD, Cohen WB (2004) Disturbance and climate effects on carbon stocks and fluxes across Western Oregon USA. Glob Chang Biol 10:1429–1444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Magill AH, Aber JD, Currie WS, Nadelhoffer KJ, Martin ME, McDowell WH, Melillo JM, Steudler P (2004) Ecosystem response to 15 years of chronic nitrogen additions at the Harvard Forest LTER, Massachusetts, USA. For Ecol Manag 196:7–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mascorro VS, Coops NC, Kurz WA, Olguín M (2015) Choice of satellite imagery and attribution of changes to disturbance type strongly affects forest carbon balance estimates. Carbon Balance Management 10:30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Masek JG, Hayes DJ, Hughes MJ, Healey SP, Turner DP (2015) The role of remote sensing in process-scaling studies of managed forest ecosystems. For Ecol Manag 355:109–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Masek JG, Goward SN, Kennedy RE, Cohen WB, Moisen GG, Schleeweis K, Huang C (2013) United States forest disturbance trends observed using Landsat time series. Ecosystems 16:1087–1104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. McKinley DC, Ryan MG, Birdsey RA, Giardina CP, Harmon ME, Heath LS, Houghton RA, Jackson RB, Morrison JF, Murray BC, Pataki DE, Skog KE (2011) A synthesis of current knowledge on forests and carbon storage in the United States. Ecol Appl 21:1902–1924CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nabuurs GJ, Masera O, Andrasko K, Benitez-Ponce P, Boer R, Dutschke M, Elsiddig E, Ford-Robertson J, Frumhoff P, Karjalainen T, Krankina O, Kurz WA, Matsumoto M, Oyhantcabal W, Ravindranath NH, Sanz Sanchez MJ and Zhang X (2007) Forestry. In: Metz B, Davidson OR, Bosch PR, Dave R, Meyer LA (eds) Climate change 2007: mitigation. Contribution of working group III to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. Pan Y, Birdsey R, Hom J, McCullough K (2009) Separating effects of changes in atmospheric composition, climate and land-use on carbon sequestration of U.S. mid-Atlantic temperate forests. For Ecol Manag 259:151–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pan Y, Birdsey RA, Fang J, Houghton R, Kauppi PE, Kurz WA, Phillips OL, Shvidenko A, Lewis SL, Canadell JG, Ciais P, Jackson RB, Pacala SW, McGuire AD, Piao S, Rautiainen A, Sitch S, Hayes D (2011) A large and persistent carbon sink in the World’s forests. Science 333:988–993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Perez-Garcia J, Lippke B, Comnick J, Manriquez C (2005) An assessment of carbon pools, storage, and wood products market substitution using life-cycle analysis results. Wood Fiber Sci 37:140–148Google Scholar
  34. Raymond CL, Healey S, Peduzzi A, Patterson P (2015) Representative regional models of post-disturbance forest carbon accumulation: integrating inventory data and a growth and yield model. For Ecol Manag 336:21–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ruefenacht B, Finco MV, Nelson MD, Czaplewski R, Helmer EH, Blackard JA, Holden GR, Lister AJ, Salajanu D, Weyermann D, Winterberger K (2008) Conterminous US and Alaska forest type mapping using forest inventory and analysis data. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 74:1379–1388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sample VA, O’Malley R, Kittler B (2010) Forest sustainability in the development of wood bioenergy. Pinchot Institute, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  37. Savage M, Mast JN (2005) How resilient are southwestern ponderosa pine forests after crown fire? Can J For Res 35:967–977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Schaefer K et al (2012) A model-data comparison of gross primary productivity: results from the North American carbon program site synthesis. J Geophys Res 117:G03010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Scharlemann JPW, Tanner EVJ, Hiederer R, Kapos V (2014) Global soil carbon: understanding and managing the largest terrestrial carbon pool. Carbon Management 5:81–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Smith JE, Heath LS, Nichols MC (2010) US Forest carbon calculation tool: forest-land carbon stocks and net annual stock change. Revised. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-13. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Newtown Square, PA 34 pGoogle Scholar
  41. Stinson G, Kurz WA, Smyth CE, Neilson ET, Dymond CC, Metsaranta JM et al (2011) An inventory-based analysis of Canada’s managed forest carbon dynamics, 1990 to 2008. Glob Chang Biol 17:2227–2244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Stockmann KD, Anderson NM, Skog KE, Healey SP, Loeffler DR, Jones G, Morrison JF (2012) Estimates of carbon stored in harvested wood products from the United States Forest Service northern region, 1906-2010. Carbon Balance and Management 7:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ter-Mikaelian MT, Colombo SJ, Chen J (2015) The burning question: does forest bioenergy reduce carbon emissions? A review of common misconceptions about Forest carbon accounting. J For 113:57–68Google Scholar
  44. UNFCCC (2015) Adoption of the Paris Agreement FCCC/CP/2015/L.9/Rev.1. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, 21st Conference of the Parties, Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations OfficeGoogle Scholar
  45. USDA Forest Service (1939) Florida National Forests. Washington, D.C, United States Government Printing OfficeGoogle Scholar
  46. USDA Forest Service (2010) A performance scorecard for implementing the Forest Service Climate Change StrategyGoogle Scholar
  47. US Department of State (2015) U.S. government and companies reiterate commitment to Forest and climate programs. US Department of State, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  48. USEPA (2015) Inventory of US greenhouse gas emissions and sinks: 1990–2013. US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  49. van Mantgem PJ, Stephenson NL, Byrne JC, Daniels LD, Franklin JF, Fulé PZ et al (2009) Widespread increase of tree mortality rates in the western United States. Science 323:521–524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wear D, Coulston J (2015) From sink to source: regional variation in U.S. forest carbon futures. Nature. Scientific Reports 5, Article number: 16518Google Scholar
  51. Westerling AL, Hidalgo HG, Cayan DR, Swetnam TW (2006) Warming and earlier spring increase western U.S. Forest wildfire activity. Science 313:940–943CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wolf S, Keenan TF, Fisher JB, Baldocchi DD, Desai AR, Richardson AD, Scott RL, Law BE, Litvak ME, Brunsell NA, Peters W, van der Laan-Luijkx IT (2016) Warm spring reduced carbon cycle impact of the 2012 US summer drought. PNAS 113:5880–5885CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Woodall CW, D’Amato AW, Bradford JB, Finley AO (2011a) Effects of stand and inter-specific stocking on maximizing standing tree carbon stocks in the eastern USA. For Sci 57:365–378Google Scholar
  54. Woodall CW, Heath LS, Domke GM, Nichols MC (2011b) Methods and equations for estimating aboveground volume, biomass, and carbon for trees in the U.S. forest inventory, 2010. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-88. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station. 30 pGoogle Scholar
  55. Woodall CW, Walters BF, Coulston JW, D’Amato AW, Domke GM, Russell MB, Sowers PA (2016) A tale of two forest carbon assessments in the eastern United States: forest use versus cover as a metric of change. Ecosystems 19:1401–1417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Zaehle S, Sitch S, Smith B, Hatterman F (2005) Effects of parameter uncertainties on the modeling of terrestrial biosphere dynamics. Glob Biogeochem Cycles 19:GB3020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Zhang F, Chen JM, Pan Y, Birdsey R, Shen S, Ju W, Dugan AJ (2015) Impacts of inadequate historical disturbance data in the 20th century on modeling recent carbon dynamics (1951-2010) in conterminous US forests. Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences 120:549–569Google Scholar
  58. Zhang FM, Chen JM, Pan Y, Birdsey RA, Shen S, Ju W, He L (2012) Attributing carbon changes in conterminous U.S. forests to disturbance and non-disturbance factors from 1901-2010. J Geophys Res 117:G02021Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht (outside the USA) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexa J. Dugan
    • 1
  • Richard Birdsey
    • 1
  • Sean P. Healey
    • 2
  • Yude Pan
    • 1
  • Fangmin Zhang
    • 3
    • 4
  • Gang Mo
    • 4
  • Jing Chen
    • 4
  • Christopher W. Woodall
    • 1
  • Alexander J. Hernandez
    • 5
  • Kevin McCullough
    • 1
  • James B. McCarter
    • 6
  • Crystal L. Raymond
    • 7
  • Karen Dante-Wood
    • 8
  1. 1.USDA Forest Service, Northern Research StationNewtown SquareUSA
  2. 2.USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research StationOgdenUSA
  3. 3.Nanjing University of Information Science and TechnologyNanjingChina
  4. 4.Department of GeographyUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada
  5. 5.Utah State UniversityLoganUSA
  6. 6.Department of Forestry and Environmental ResourcesNorth Carolina State UniversityRaleighUSA
  7. 7.Seattle City Light: City of SeattleSeattleUSA
  8. 8.USDA Forest Service, Washington OfficeWashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations