This is very high on my list. It seems most hydrologists interested in climate change are talking a lot about afforestation for all of those reasons. It isn’t s

This is very high on my list. It seems most hydrologists interested in climate change are talking a lot about afforestation for all of those reasons. It isn’t something I hear about often at all, though. For a while I pointed people to a study showing that geohydrological model of the Amazon rain forest indicates that it is well past a breaking point in which the hydrology there will never be recovered, and the landscape will likely transform dramatically. It’s very poorly received though. Not because it’s a bad study but I guess no one thinks what’s happening in the Amazon happens anywhere else. As though it’s fear-mongering to point to this phenomenon despite that deforestation occurs the entire world over. My understanding is that there’s no known feasible way to improve future hydrology as inexpensively or low-tech, too. Here in British Columbia, Canada we have a fairly aggressive forestry practice which generates a shockingly small portion of our GDP. I seriously wonder if our GDP could be maintained or increased overall by converting forestry efforts to afforestation efforts. Were we to succeed in recreating healthy forests here, the impact on other sectors through improved hydrology (healthier rivers and lakes, better water retention in forests, better forest fire outcomes, eventually strengthened tourism, etc) actually seems like it could be a net positive. This would be an extremely long term project though, and virtually impossible to enact given jobs would be lost on the short term. This is also important for us because so much of our energy is generated from rivers. We need stable, consistent flows to power almost every home in the province. We should be hyper focused on efforts to improve hydrology, and forestry works directly against that. It’s such a big part of our history and so broadly evident and present in our lives here. Most people assume it’s a major part of our economy and that we could never function without it. I sincerely wonder if it’s a net drain on the province though. Not only does it visibly and measurably harm the environment here (even with our “green” forestry practices), but a lot of our forestry products are immediately exported for absurdly low prices. I think I would support a ban on exports and reducing our forestry to supporting domestic needs, based on what I know of the situation. It’s scary stuff, anyway. And it seems like not many people are aware or listening.