I dont see your point. If Birches out grow aspens, its what nature intends.

I have some experience planting trees as well.
White and Red Pine, Douglas Fir, Blue Spruce, Black Cherry, Black Walnut, Larch and a new and improved American Chestnut. Also tried limited numbers of White Oak, Sweet Cherry and Redwood that were all pretty much failures.

Typically buy them in lots of 100 or 500 from the State for pennies each and use a planting bar to throw them in an abandoned farm field. Also have 100 acres of managed Maple and Cherry forest.

While forest can sequester CO2, the reality is that trees are harvested thereby limiting the sequestion.

Probably best tree is Red Pine due to its rapid growth and resistance to drought, disease and Forest Caterpillars, also known as the scourge.

In the Rocky Mountains, Aspen trees come in after fires. Fire suppression during the last century caused reductions in the Aspen population as they got pushed out by conifers, but large fires in the past couple of decades have re-stimulated Aspen growth.

The extensive Aspen groves north of Santa Fe, NM (which include the tallest in the world) were the result of large fires in the late 19th century.

Sorry, Brett, it is never easy anymore. Arborists and other environmentists I guess suggest don't plant Norway Maples. A quote "Why You Should Not Plant Norway Maple!:
The shallow, fibrous root system and dense shade of Norway maple make it virtually impossible for grass to grow under the tree. The aggressive roots frequently girdle their parent tree, ultimately choking itself to death. Norway maple is also a non-native exotic. It has escaped the urban environment and is a threat to native maples."

My almost 2 acree treed lot has lots of Norway Maples, other Maples, Poplars, Oaks, Beeches, Black Cherry (horrible buggy trees) and other miscellaneous evergreen pines. Of course, still living in the basement, house still not finished, from the giant Oak that fell on the roof during the Nor'easter April 16.

So many "things" are happening as a result of CO2 increase, aka "Global Warming", I wonder about the interrelationships of all these occurrences, how one impacts the other. Not sure if I am being clear, but when you get sooooooooo many variables relating to effects of GW,(that you post and I read elsewhere) there must be some interrelationships between them. And that's not counting what in our infinite wisdom, man plans on doing to counter all these symptoms and the expected and unexpected side effects. Who is running the computer models on these relationships?

We do a lot of tree planting at work for environmental restoration and avoid Norway Maple like the plague because it is so invasive. A lot of native trees resist pests and don't spread themselves so insidiously. Trees are also a great offset for CO2 emissions. http://local-warming.blogspot.com/2007/08/trees-and-global-warming-in-defense-of.html

Reply: for the record, I do not have have any norway maples on my property, but I grew up with about a dozen in my yard and they provided a ton of shade, but it is true that the grass struggled to grow underneath the canopy. I prefer the sugar maple, but it is a challenge to grow, especially where I live. I see a lot of sugar maple trees under stress in central PA, and they are not even that old yet. Brett

Brett,

Was your birch tree a river birch or a white birch? The river birch is supposed to attract a lot less pests than the white birch. River birches are slightly pink in color versus pure white & the bark tends to peel more.

If you planted a white birch, try a river birch next time!

Steve

Reply: It is a yellow birch. Brett

I guess the bugs don't have a sweet tooth Brett. On the other hand, you could always look at the the birch as bug bait that keeps their attention away from your maple.

The mythical world of AGW is certainly an entertaining and fun place to hang out, but every once in a while something serious comes up in the real world. I suggest everyone read this link.

http://www.homelandsecurityus.com/Options082907

If judging by my yard..black walnut trees are not having any difficulty growing at all around here..they have become almost a pest to me with how fast they grow.

My parents have several white birches in their yard that were planted back in the 70's early 80's.. they have been healthy since.

Reply: I had a black walnut tree at my first house. I know the trees are valued, but boy, what a mess they can make and they are certainly not all that attractive. Horrible fall color. Brett

This is off-topic a bit, but I just had to interject it somewhere. It shows what a scam, this whole global-warming/climate change debacle is.

Brendan O'Neill of the online magazine Spiked calls our attention to an astonishing report that appeared last week in London's Times. You thought this "carbon offset" business was a scam? It turns out it's even worse, as O'Neill explains:

"In [the Times article] it was revealed that the leader of the UK Conservative Party, David Cameron, offsets his carbon emissions by effectively keeping brown people in a state of bondage. Whenever he takes a flight to some foreign destination, Cameron donates to a carbon-offsetting company that encourages people in the developing world to ditch modern methods of farming in favour of using their more eco-friendly manpower to plough the land. So Cameron can fly around the world with a guilt-free conscience on the basis that, thousands of miles away, Indian villagers, bent over double, are working by hand rather than using machines that emit carbon."

"Welcome to the era of eco-enslavement."

"The details of this carbon-offsetting scheme are disturbing. Cameron offsets his flights by donating to Climate Care. The latest wheeze of this carbon-offsetting company is to provide "treadle pumps" to poor rural families in India so that they can get water on to their land without having to use polluting diesel power. Made from bamboo, plastic and steel, the treadle pumps work like "step machines in a gym," according to some reports, where poor family members step on the pedals for hours in order to draw up groundwater which is used to irrigate farmland. These pumps were abolished in British prisons a century ago. It seems that what was considered an unacceptable form of punishment for British criminals in the past is looked upon as a positive eco-alternative to machinery for Indian peasants today."

"What might once have been referred to as "back-breaking labour" is now spun as "human energy.""

"What's more, this is all done so that Cameron can avoid making changes in his own lifestyle, which we are supposed to believe is destroying the planet. Global-warmism is not just some harmless enthusiasm; it can be despicable and inhuman."

Brett, feel free to post this as a new topic if you wish.

I have to echo the remarks about the invasive species. We are starting to see Norway maples make it into the log yard, which means they have displaced some native species.

If the grass doesn't grow under the tree, then you need a new type of shade tolerant grass. We used to use Kentucky fescue #31 to retire woods roads after logging. Its a shade tolerant grass that will grow well underneath Norways. My father in law planted it under his, and its still growing well.

Paul, it goes further than that, The brits are even talking about taking the organic label off 3rd world food imports. Not because they may be using chemical but because of the air miles a Congolese carrot might clock up in the frequent flyer import industry.

I think it�s a scam, but only to make westerners more money.

On topic.

More CO2 and the associated warming will promote insect life and weeds that will increase the die off that already occurs due to beetle attack in nthern forests. The weeds will smother the forest floor with nutrient harvesting groundcover that will severely affect the success of new growth.
Perhaps introduced species will suit the new climate better than the indigenous varieties that have had no time to evolve into their new surroundings.
Are the emissions of a carbon credit tree program offset by another program?

Simon

The beetle attacks you are talking about occur mainly in the conifer forests. Many of these forests have been managed on a single age and monoculture type of system.

That is not as typical in the hardwood forests. Several age classes are usually present, as well as many different types of species. We do have some forest pest problems, but most of them have been imported, such as the emerald ash borer and gypsy moth.

As far as weeds overtaking forests, that has not been the case. The problems we have in western forests is too many trees which cause stand stagnation and increased fireload. In most eastern forests, sufficient canopy is enough to contain weeds.

To contain weeds from displacing seedling growth, then different management schemes can be used to limit weeds, with or without spraying. A shelterwood harvest would allow for new growth before final harvest and give advanced regeneration and would limit weed growth. Besides, wouldn't the nutrient cycle be that the weeds would die and then the nutrients returned to the soil?

As for a tree needing to "evolve to their new surroundings", most forests have no problem with that. Ranges do change over time as does stand composition. Relic communities are still around that indicate the ranges were different in the past. It shows both a warmer and a colder climate. Importing new species would not be very productive.

Admittedly encroaching groundcover and smothered forests now occurs in tropical regions with devastating effects but I�m sure annual plant growth globally is benefiting far more than trees from longer and warmer seasons in the NH and higher co2 levels overall.
Groundcover is one part of a healthy ecosystem but when it dominates the whole of the system suffers. Groundcover will absorb the nutrient it creates and what ever else is available. Weeds do not increase what is available as they use more nutrients each year and mat the ground with their own decay seeding top soil as their numbers increase which will inhibit tree growth to some extent.
I�m glad to hear that you have forest management techniques that insure the weeds can be controlled by using non chemical methods.
As for a tree needing to "evolve to their new surroundings�,. The study highlights the speed at which the changes are occurring which have already overtaken the rate at which the trees can evolve. The surviving remnants of ancient stands shows that the process is ongoing and takes millions of years for the trees to adapt compared to the rate of change that has occurred in one human lifetime. This is the concern, colder climate trees will march up past what was the snowline as weeds take over and choke the streams and the valley floor
Evolution is a slow process but forests are not getting any bigger even if some are overcrowded by trees.

Birch trees in our yard and my parents seem to be very prone to disease and bugs. Two out of four are now dying off and we have replaced them with Maple and (manitoba Maple) and another tree which has aq leaf much like an Aspen or Poplar.