Abraham and Forum:
I sure don't know of any, and I would like an answer to the same question.
However, I would also like to know how that kind of information can be
extracted and analyzed without dead-ends.
As long as we're guessing, I guess we should try to get as close to specific
cases as possible, including the goals of your research, policy
implications, and the nature of the site(s) involved.
WT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Abraham de Alba A." <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 06, 2009 10:20 AM
Subject: [ECOLOG-L] C Seq Grass vs Wood
That's what I am after. Is there any hard data out there
Well Wayne,
That's what I am after. Is there any hard data out there for the
rate/amount/whatever of C that a woodland can "sequester" (above and below
ground) vs. the same under grassland under appropiate grazing.
I realize that under the same rainfall regime, if it's a grassland it
probably is too dry to get a woodland to grow, the exception probably being
the ecotone between eastern woodlands and tall grass praerie.
Abraham de Alba Avila
Terrestrial Plant Ecology
INIFAP-Ags
Ap. postal 20,
Pabellón Arteaga, 20660
Aguascalientes, MEXICO
SKYPE: adealba55
Tel: (465) 95-801-67, & 801-86 ext. 126, FAX ext 102
alternate: [email protected]
cel: 449-157-7070
________________________________
From: Wayne Tyson <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Friday, September 4, 2009 11:10:31 PM
Subject: [ECOLOG-L] Ecosystem Management Re: [ECOLOG-L] C Seq Grass vs Wood
All:
As in all science, shouldn't there be a specific theoretical foundation for
such conclusions and at least some preliminary calculations to shoot at
first? Sounds like "range management" kaka de toro and a "carbon
sequestration" bandwagon to me. It needs some kind of proof, then some
retesting by truly independent researchers before applying it to policy,
such as chaining the trees and shrubs out and planting grass. Such an
"argument" can't be settled honestly on the basis of opinion.
WT
Suggested reading: "Wildlife of Mexico" by A. Starker Leopold. (Especially
the "before" and "after" pictures of cornfield erosion. I'm not suggesting
that the case illustrated is comparable in every detail, only in principle.
Presumptuous "management" has trashed a lot of "range" in both the USA and
Mexico.)
----- Original Message ----- From: "Abraham de Alba A." <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2009 12:45 PM
Subject: [ECOLOG-L] C Seq Grass vs Wood
I am trying to settle an interesting argument and my
dear ecologgers:
I am trying to settle an interesting argument and my library resources are
quite limited, I hope you can direct me to reputable references.
There is the general belief (even academic) that forests or woodlands in
general can be a Carbon net sink, I am told that is not totally true, since
an early successional woodland, would probably be growing fast, respiring
also (so producing more C than sequestrating).
Now grasslands, if grazed properly (enough time given for recuperation) is
is argued that the root loss due to grazing can increase the net C content
in the soil (which is more stable than the above ground wood), even better
if high density grazing can topple residue and mix it with urine and feaces.
What do you think ?
Abraham de Alba Avila
Terrestrial Plant Ecology
INIFAP-Ags
Ap. postal 20,
Pabellón Arteaga, 20660
Aguascalientes, MEXICO
SKYPE: adealba55
Tel: (465) 95-801-67, & 801-86 ext. 126, FAX ext 102
alternate: [email protected]
cel: 449-157-7070
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.76/2343 - Release Date: 09/03/09
05:50:00
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.80/2349 - Release Date: 09/06/09
05:51:00
