[00:00:00] Crystal: I’m Crystal DiMiceli, and welcome to the Forces for Nature show.

Do you find yourself overwhelmed with all the doom and gloom you hear of these days? Do you feel like you, as just one person, can’t really make a difference? Forces for Nature cuts through that negativity. In each episode, I interview somebody who is doing great things for animals and the environment. We talk [00:00:25] about the challenge they’re addressing, the solution they have found, what keeps them going, and And we’ll leave you with practical action tips so that you too can become a force for nature.

Today’s guest is Lori Weyburn, the co founder and president of the Pacific Forest Trust. Through this organization, she has been able to find a middle ground that combines forest conservation with economic [00:00:50] development. That almost sounds like an oxymoron because of the definition that we Westerners have given to conservation the idea that to protect forests, we need to rope them off, set them aside and keep people out.

Now the strategy has worked to a certain extent, but with nearly 60 percent of us forests privately owned, how do we [00:01:15] protect those trees? Lori has an answer.

Hi, Lori. Thank you so much for joining me on forces for nature. It’s so great to have you.

[00:01:28] Laurie: Oh, well, thank you so much. It’s my pleasure to be here.

[00:01:32] Crystal: To start, what are conservation easements?

[00:01:36] Laurie: A conservation easement is a property [00:01:40] deed, just like the deed to land that you buy or a house that you have. It’s an ownership interest and it is a partial interest in property.

Like when you buy property, you get the deed to that property. A conservation easement Is a deed of conservation easement attached to the overall property. And so it is, uh, [00:02:05] if, if, if you think about property and the classic bundle of sticks idea, when you buy property, you’ve bought a bundle of sticks that are described in a property deed, a conservation easement is going to affect.

Some of those sticks that are in the bundle. So if you have a stick that is the right to, they call it a bundle of sticks or a bundle of rights, the right to develop, you are going to [00:02:30] separate either all or a portion of that right to develop. So if you had say a hundred acres and you could develop 10 parcels of 10 acres, you’d have 10 rights there.

You’d say, I’m going to restrict eight of these rights and my a hundred acres can be broken into two, but not more than that. I have the right to build. I don’t want the right to build. I’m going to give that up, or a portion of it up. Instead [00:02:55] of building two houses, I’ll build one. I have the right to log timber to the extent allowable by law.

I’m going to give up some of that right and change it. So that, instead of taking 100 percent of what I can afford, legally log every time, I’m going to take 80 or 75 percent, or 50 percent, whatever that number might be, and so on, as you go through the [00:03:20] number of rights that you have in that bundle. And those rights are then in a deed of conservation easement, but they are held in order that they not be used.

So that those rights, which are held by, uh, a land trust or a governmental entity that is empowered to do that, and we would always encourage people to work [00:03:45] with accredited land trusts. Those are the ones that adhere to the highest standards and are overseen by an accreditation body. Those rights are held by that land trust in order that they not be used.

In other words, the land trust can’t sell the right to develop or can’t sell the right to those trees. They. Are charged with holding them. And so they effectively are in a [00:04:10] perpetual obligation to steward those lands. Steward those rights. They are not an available asset for the land trust. And as, As we’ll talk about elsewhere in the program, they’re a unique tool, conservation are a unique tool in that they have benefits, both of being valued at 100%, but you can be paid for [00:04:35] them through a variety of means, whether directly.

with dollars or through a donation in part or in whole, which provides for tax donations, which are deductions, which are very valuable to many people. And in some places, tax credits, which are also very valuable to people.

[00:04:56] Crystal: And do you, through Pacific Forest Trust, help [00:05:00] the owners to determine what those rights are, like what they take away?

Yes,

[00:05:07] Laurie: one way of thinking about them is taking away. The other way of thinking about them is guarding them forever. And yes, it’s, it’s a very collaborative process in sitting down with the landowner. When we’re looking to do a conservation easement, we will have looked at an area overall for what its values are, its conservation [00:05:25] values are, what kind of forest is there, what kind of habitat does it have, what kind of species are there, what kind of water resources are there.

And the landowner will know those resources as well. So when we sit down, there’s a conversation about. What is it you’re interested in as the landowner for your long term goals? And how can we support those through this conservation easement? Because they’re [00:05:50] voluntary. Landowners do them because they want to.

And so that conversation about goals is very, very important. And then there’s a third party very often that’s involved in this, and that is the funding entity, because there are public funding programs that support the purchase of conservation easements, and they have guidelines and rules and targets themselves.

So there’s a conversation between the landowner [00:06:15] and ourselves and the funding agencies about, you know, How to marry these interests.

[00:06:21] Crystal: So how has your personal connection to nature and forests influenced your approach to conservation and your work with the Pacific Forest Trust?

[00:06:31] Laurie: Oh, a great origin story question.

So I grew up in a family that was, uh, A very dedicated conservation [00:06:40] family. Our Sunday church was going for a walk in the Redwoods and our family vacations were all adventures across the Western United States. My mother would pile us into a station wagon and we would fight our way all the way to a national park and then have a great time when my dad joined us and we would all go hiking.

Uh, so I grew up with a very. Embedded love of [00:07:05] nature. And at the same time, it was actually a very sickly child. So my happy place was when I could be outside. And at that point, I think the influence was inescapable and I was going to be spending my life in some way, focused on people’s connections to nature.

And my first real job was working [00:07:30] with the United Nations environment program based out of Nairobi, Kenya. And that was a very eye opening experience about the difference between how conservation was approached in the United States and much of Europe, which was a set aside approach that had a boundary around a certain special area that said people aren’t going to live inside that special area, but you can do [00:07:55] whatever you want outside that special area.

If it’s harmful, we’ll try to pass a law to stop what is harmful. Living and working overseas in more evolving economies, that perspective was really shifted to how do people work with nature to derive what they need from nature Wild if you will, not killing the golden goose. So it was less [00:08:20] about setting up boundaries and places that you didn’t go or didn’t do things, and more about where you lived and what you did to make where you lived thrive.

So working with nature more than saying nature doesn’t include people, we’ll keep people out except to walk through. So those two forces came together and [00:08:45] joined with an inherent love of science that I have. to really form the approach that in order to understand how nature works, you need long term ecological studies to really, for people at this point, to understand, because we no longer live close to nature the way we might have intrinsically understood how nature works 500 years ago, 400 years ago, and we don’t have that traditional knowledge.[00:09:10]

So we needed science to, or I needed science to better understand things. And then blending that with an approach that said, And hey, people are natural. Let’s work with us to work within nature once we have a better understanding of that. And then guide our management to be more synergistic. So I’d say those were the drivers for me.

What has led to the work that I [00:09:35] do in forests?

[00:09:36] Crystal: This is really resonating with me. It’s. It’s getting me excited because I, lately I’ve been thinking a lot about people’s connection or lack of connection to nature. And I feel like it’s this lack of connection. That’s a really big culprit into why we are doing it in, in the crises in this varying crises that we’re, that we’re in.[00:10:00]

And, What you’re talking about sounds, it just makes sense. It’s putting us back into nature with nature and living in harmony with it, but yet still being able to get all the things that we need from it. So I’m super excited to dive in further. So let’s keep going. You’ve been a pioneer in using conservation easements as a tool for balancing forest conservation with [00:10:25] economic development.

Can you explain how this mechanism works? And. perhaps share a success story that highlights its impact?

[00:10:33] Laurie: Yeah, great question. Actually, I’m going to change the direction of that question a little bit in that I don’t see conservation at all at odds with economic development. or financial return. But the, [00:10:50] in the, in the western mind, conservation has really been, a little bit like the term conserve, you know, put things in a jar and keep them for a long time.

And economic development was seen as something very active. You did that in order to make money or derive products that you needed. And, Yet they should inherently be grounded in each other. So for me, the [00:11:15] kind of pioneering breakthrough was that conservation should be the basis of sustainable economic development, because if you don’t have that land forest conserved, a dedicated to remaining as forest.

And if you don’t manage it for its systematic function, there’s a reason we call them forest ecosystems, because they’re not just a suite of [00:11:40] products, they’re an interrelated suite of functions and services. It’s a real system. And economic development has tended to focus just on one commodity. In forests, it has two commodities.

One is timber and timber products. The other is development. And in both cases, you end up with either a very degraded system or no system. So, you know, you’re killing [00:12:05] the golden goose from which you’re deriving those eggs. So what we wanted to do was figure out a way to pay landowners For the opportunity cost of switching from a solely commodity focused economy in their forests to a broader systematic economy and the conservation easements which pays you for that was a perfect tool to do that.

Conservation [00:12:30] easements in the U. S. are fundamentally the U. A cost share with landowners covering the opportunity cost of turning your forests into something else, and the opportunity cost of shifting management to focus on a more natural system and not just plantations, because plantations are not a natural forest system.

They don’t support the variety of services that [00:12:55] whether it’s biodiversity. Water, and by water I mean water regulation, water retention, air quality, pest and disease resilience. Those are things that plantations really struggle to provide. But forests just do them. So, conservation easements are a way of valuing that dollar for dollar for a landowner.

And saying clean air, a stable [00:13:20] climate, plentiful water, amazing biodiversity, these are public goods. We, the public, should share in that cost with you, the private landowner. Because you, the private landowner, are owning this forest in significant part as a financial asset. And therefore, your private interests also have to be supported.

So that is why I believe that conservation is actually the foundation of a [00:13:45] sustained, not just sustainable, but a sustained forest based economy.

[00:13:50] Crystal: So you’re saying that, would it be the taxpayers who fund the conservation easements, like in helping to pay the private landowners?

[00:14:00] Laurie: Yes, there is some private philanthropic money that helps pay for conservation, and conservation easements, I believe, is the [00:14:10] only tax deductible partial interest gift in property.

So it’s the only one that is tax deductible. In other words, you can donate all or easement, which is an interest in real estate. You don’t have to give away all your property, you just give away some interest in it, and it’s tax deductible. That’s public dollars, and then the other public dollars are direct [00:14:35] grants, whether they’re from a state or federal government.

So, public dollars are the vast majority, whether they are direct, as in grants, or indirect, as in tax benefits. And then there’s a portion is philanthropic as well.

[00:14:50] Crystal: When the owner receives these funds to have this easement, what can they do with the easement? Can you paint that for me? Like, because you’re saying it’s not just leaving the [00:15:00] trees standing, there’s other things that can be done, right?

[00:15:04] Laurie: So conservation easements guide forest management. Historically, conservation easements had two forms. One was something called the forever wild conservation easement, which just said, this is land which I’m going to continue to own, but I’m not going to do anything on it. I won’t build, I won’t subdivide, I won’t farm, I won’t lumber, I won’t [00:15:25] graze.

It’s going to be quote unquote wild. And at the other end of the spectrum were conservation easements that were what we called development only. The only thing that they prevented was development, but you could do any kind of agriculture, any kind of forestry, any kind of grazing that you wanted to do.

So the two ends of the spectrum, black and white, totally leave it alone or just leave it as open [00:15:50] space, but you can do anything else you want.

[00:15:52] Crystal: But still take down all the trees. Kind

[00:15:53] Laurie: of. Oh, you could take all the trees. You could farm and you know, you could convert your forest into a vineyard. You could turn your forest into grazing lands.

You could do anything you want. Just. Don’t develop it. Don’t subdivide it. Don’t develop it. Leave it as open. So two really, you know, ends of the spectrum. [00:16:15] And what we felt was that there was a whole rainbow in between those ends of the spectrum that guided how you use that land. So in forests, which are somewhat uniquely suited to this because of their relatively high value, we, you know, develop an approach that said, you’ll keep this land as forest and you will manage it over time for certain values that [00:16:40] support that relatively natural forest.

There is a section in the IRS code 170H which deals with conservation easements and the purposes for which they can be established. And if you’re going to protect a forest, it’s a relatively natural habitat. So, that’s one of the key foci. of conservation easements in general, relatively natural habitat.

The other is open space, the other is historic preservation, and the third is [00:17:05] recreation and scientific educational purposes. But that relatively natural habitat, well, forests are relatively natural habitat. And so we felt that you could use them to guide management to ensure they stayed that way. And that meant that you were setting up long term management goals, which we call performance goals.

of what management is to achieve. [00:17:30] So inherently in that, you’re embracing timber harvest as a tool, but your outcome that is desired is the whole forest system, not just individual trees.

And that enables you to identify dynamic and flexible limits on how harvest is done, how large will the opening sizes be, [00:17:55] what percentage of growth might you take in a 10 year period, what areas are really special natural habitats like forest wetlands that you really only want to manage for that wetland function.

Or riparian areas or rare vegetative communities or special endangered species habitats that you really only want to manage for those outcomes. And there may be very limited commercial [00:18:20] return on that, but in a lot of the rest of that property, there’s going to be significant commercial return from forest management.

And in fact, most forests in the U. S. that are privately owned, and a lot of the public lands too, but they’re very young, much younger than their natural ages. So, for example, people talk about the concept of rotation ages in [00:18:45] plantations. That’s an even aged or plantation term. And if you take Douglas Fir, we’re trying to harvest that at 40 years of age.

It’s a tree that lives to 200, 300, 400, 500 years. Redwoods we’re trying to harvest them at 40 or 35 years as well. They live to 600, 1000 up to 2000 years. And as they [00:19:10] get older. They have more volume. When you’re managing for timber, you want more volume. So one of the wonderful synergies between conservation easements that guide forest management and a sustainable timber based economy is that the landowners are being paid for the opportunity cost of extending, on average, the age of the forest until it is older and more natural.

That [00:19:35] builds up the volume there, and in turn, you can sustain that with a higher regular yield. Because you have a bigger base of the asset of the forest. There is more volume there. So it’s the difference between a quote unquote, sustained yield. That is like, if you have a bank account of a hundred dollars, that’s earning 6 percent and you spend that 6 every year, you just have a hundred bucks.

That’s all you [00:20:00] have. If you have that a hundred bucks and you take it 5% and 1% goes back into the base, you build up the base of that a hundred dollars. It becomes 110, 130, and so on. And if you then start taking all of your yield, all of your interest in any year, instead of getting 6, you have 1, 000, you’re [00:20:25] getting 100 or 10.

You’re actually a win win for everybody in that case. You’re a win for the forest, you’re a win for the landowner, and you’re a win for the people who work in the forest because they have a really ongoing job.

[00:20:41] Crystal: And so are they going in, for example, are they going in and just picking and choosing trees within the forest to, to harvest or are they [00:20:50] harvesting swaths of forest?

I guess I still am not completely clear on, on how it looks in practice.

[00:20:57] Laurie: Sure, if you want to visualize, for example, a young plantation, all 20 year old Douglas fir or longleaf pine, just pick your species. They’re uniform, they’re young. And it’s in a forest type that is more naturally heterogeneous. It has multiple species [00:21:15] in it, it’s not just a single species.

And it has multiple ages, of which some are very young, but the larger majority are older. Instead of doing what’s called clear cut silviculture, where you go in and you take a big block of trees, you take them all, and then you replant them, and you take them all, and you replant them, which has actually a declining yield over time.

You do what’s called variable retention thinning, small group, uh, harvest, [00:21:40] a variety of different thinning approaches that might take 30 percent as opposed to 100%. You can take it in variable patterns that are more natural rather than rows and blocks. And when you replant, you’ll replant in with multiple species.

You’ll be back in another 15 years and do it again. And you might take out more like, you know, 25 percent that time. You’re, in other words, you’re, [00:22:05] instead of having a single age monocrop, you’re developing a multiple age, multiple crop approach with different structure in the forest. Because forests are not all just young trees of a single species.

They’re Not only multiple species, but some can be very old, hundreds of years old, they’re very large, they have big thick [00:22:30] bark, they have really amazing amounts of habitat available for species from insects through to mammals and birds and amphibians in the canopy, and there are dead trees on the ground and standing.

Those also are extremely important habitat and food sources. And also helpful, actually, in terms of water retention. Big downed logs are great as sponges in a forest. It helps [00:22:55] reduce fire intensity. And you have shrubs that are, have a lot more food value and pollination value. So it’s a much more varied landscape into which you walk.

Relatively few people are going to decide to have a picnic in the middle of a young plantation. But lots of people love to go out and walk and sit [00:23:20] and absorb in a forest.

[00:23:23] Crystal: Yeah, that’s certainly true. And it also provides more resilience. And, you know, if there was some sort of invasive bug that came through a plantation, it could wipe out your entire investment.

But meanwhile, if you have that varied planting, it might not be as bad. Not sure if the [00:23:45] bug is the right example, but you know what I mean.

[00:23:48] Laurie: Oh, you are absolutely right. And there’s quite a lot of research on this at this point. It’s kind of the difference between if you have a young kid or had a young kid and they’re in kindergarten.

Well, everybody in the class is the same age and one kid gets a bug and it goes through the entire class. Yes. Everybody’s sick. The same is true in a young plantation and we’ve seen this [00:24:10] time and again. That there are multiple challenges, particularly with climate change, that these young plantations are far more vulnerable to than your managed natural forest.

Water stress. A crowded young plantation, which is by their nature, it’s a whole lot of straws on the ground. They need a lot of water, their respiration rate is higher. [00:24:35] And they can’t take drought well. Heat stress. If you have a uniform young plantation, there’s no shade, no variability. You saw this in very significant measure in the Pacific Northwest during the heat scalds that we had two years ago and three years ago, where young plantations literally had to be ripped out and replanted.

Whereas where we manage, We had big trees, small trees, medium trees. We did [00:25:00] not have the die off that you saw in the plantations because our bigger, older trees have a much more extensive root. system, they create more shade, the younger trees survive in that. When you have pests and diseases, if you have a mixed suite of species, they don’t transmit one to the other the same way.

And so whether it’s because you have oaks [00:25:25] mixed in with your conifers, or whether you have multiple species of conifers, plus if you have more natural diverse spacing, the diseases don’t travel the same way. And they don’t take out the whole stand. So, this is, you know, it’s very comparable in agriculture, where you have hedgerows with diverse species that break up the insect and disease migration [00:25:50] between different fields.

That heterogeneity, is extremely important in having a more resilient system.

[00:25:58] Crystal: You can

[00:26:00] Laurie: tell I get enthusiastic about this.

[00:26:01] Crystal: No, I completely understand. Biodiversity is, is a benefit and it’s sometimes hard for people to understand how or why. And [00:26:15] I think you helped to explain that really well. What are some of the most unexpected challenges you faced in promoting sustainable forest management, especially in engaging with private landowners.

[00:26:28] Laurie: People involved in private voluntary conservation do something that’s really rare. We make a commitment to protect something forever. And [00:26:40] as they say, forever is a long time, particularly because we don’t know what it is. But we have a concept of forever, and a conservation easement is an obligation that a land trust takes on forever.

So that’s well beyond my time, it’s well beyond anybody’s time in my organization. So you’re trying to craft something that’s really durable, that’s both clear in its purpose, because everything changes, right? And [00:27:05] flexible. Because everything changes. So when you establish that conservation easement with a landowner, you have a really clear purpose in mind.

We want to conserve this forest system and it has these attributes. Well, of course things change, and a recent story where we went through this, where we were working on a very large conservation easement in the highly diverse Klamath Mix connoisseur forests [00:27:30] alongside Mount Shasta, which is a large and extraordinarily beautiful volcano in Northern California.

And we had a major fire come through, and amongst other hundreds of thousands of acres that were burned, about two thirds of this conservation easement area was burned shortly before we were about to finish. Close the funding for the easement. So a challenge was [00:27:55] that we had to kind of step back reassess, you know, maintain our funding sources.

And thankfully, they were very dedicated and they, you know, remained engaged despite the fire, because they realize the importance of fire as. Part of this ecosystem, and then we had to readjust the terms of the easement to do that, but it took us another couple of years, but we carried through. So it was, you know, the challenge of thinking about [00:28:20] forever and yet recognizing the dynamics of our daily lives and our interannual dynamics, and then you add nature on top of that.

So, frankly, I think it’s pretty amazing. We’ve had conservation easements with industrial timber landowners, those who do intensive timber management for, you know, their goal is clearly financial return. We’ve had successful [00:28:45] sales and purchases of some properties two and three times. So that really shows how well they can work with commercial forest management.

Because they do provide very important and deserved financial return to those landowners for changing what they’re doing and then maintaining it. Throughout all the future owners as well.

[00:29:05] Crystal: So this is something that when you apply it to your [00:29:10] land, it’s what you are going to pass on your, your children and their, the inheritors.

Is that the right word? Yeah. They can’t change it.

[00:29:20] Laurie: Children and grandchildren. If you were passing it through a family, it’s a terrific tool for what you might call legacy planning for families. Thank you. and ensuring that future generations will have that land to enjoy and admire and [00:29:35] profit from the same way that you do.

And it’s also an asset for financial investors. You know, I think one of the, in the early days of the Pacific Forest Trust, when we were starting and doing our first conservation easements with landowners, they were largely families. And, One of the most rewarding things, I mean, frankly, irreplaceable, is the look in a landowner’s eyes when [00:30:00] they know it’s going to happen.

And there’s just a deep and profound happiness that they communicate. It’s very rewarding. It’s nothing else that I’ve ever experienced. It’s just that sense. On those landowners part of, well, frankly, there’s a joy to it. There’s also a great relief. You know, these are places that they and, and their [00:30:25] families have lived often for a hundred, hundred and fifty years.

Maybe it’s only twenty five, but they love those places. And for them to know that it’s going to be protected, you know, lived in, managed, but protected, is a relief as well as a joy.

[00:30:42] Crystal: What do you see as the biggest policy gap or opportunity in current forest policy?

[00:30:49] Laurie: [00:30:50] Climate change is, if not the, it is one of the greatest threats to how we envision life on earth.

And it is forcing a change in attitude. It needs to be forcing a change in attitude at a pace and scale that we’ve never really done before. The biggest policy [00:31:15] opportunity that I see with forests is recognizing their absolutely essential, irreplaceable role in helping mitigate and adapt to climate change.

Historically, forests have been managed for their financial output, their economic output of commodities. Or to be turned into farmland or to be turned into development. What the crisis [00:31:40] of climate change puts in front of us is those values of forests for commodities for development, pale in comparison to the value of helping heal our climate of reducing the horrendous impact of climate change that we’re seeing.

So I think the biggest policy opportunity. Is to shift our [00:32:05] understanding and appreciation and valuation of forests from solely relying upon commodities to support them and focus on their climate services, which is what forests do naturally. So, whereas on the one hand, focusing on commodity production inherently either degrades or causes the loss of [00:32:30] forests, focusing on forests for climate provides for the ongoing production of commodities.

So there is no incompatibility in managing forests for their large climate role. And that is, you know, when, when I’m saying large, I mean, globally, 40 percent or more of the target that we need to reach. That’s big. Do you see [00:32:55] the investment going into forests the way we see going into battery technology?

No. Do you see the energy going into forest conservation and stewardship the way we are seeing go into transportation and energy production? No. That opportunity is extraordinary because it’s more immediate. The opportunity to invest in forests for climate will yield [00:33:20] more reductions in emissions. In five and 10 years than any other investment we’re doing now, that doesn’t mean we don’t make those other investments.

We need to do both. We absolutely need to do both, but the cost of shifting management and forests and dedicating them to remaining as forest is a fraction of what it is for the other infrastructure investments that [00:33:45] we are making. So the policy opportunity is to recognize that role of forests. And to invest the same kinds of public investments in public private partnerships with landowners.

The way we are doing public private partnerships with battery and chip developers, with mass transit development, with new [00:34:10] energy sources development. We plonk billions of dollars into those public private partnerships on infrastructure. Hospitals, bridges, roads, name it, we do that. This natural infrastructure needs that kind of approach.

It’s a fraction of the cost, it’s a much quicker return on the investment. It does [00:34:35] require the same fundamental shift. We recognize that the combustion engine is, from fossil fuel combustion, is a root cause of CO2 emissions. Scientifically, we know that forest degradation and loss is a root cause of emissions.

We need to invest in remediating that root cause. The double benefit that [00:35:00] happens is, you know, these are the gifts that keep on giving. So not only does it reduce immediately in CO2 emissions. It stores more for the future. It helps stabilize our water supply. So it’s really important for water security.

It is essential for preventing biodiversity collapse. And you know, you get these other benefits of reduced air pollution. You can walk [00:35:25] through the benefits. It’s really quite a stunning array. But if you just look at a dollar for dollar investment, And you tie that, for example, to employment. We know a dollar in the forest space creates far more jobs than any other space, a really fun study from the university of Maryland on that.

Um, and so, you know, there are, there is no [00:35:50] incompatibility economically here. It fits within our economic and financial paradigms, but it is also a shift. And I think that’s an extraordinary policy opportunity.

[00:36:05] Crystal: That’s really, really interesting. And I, I feel like I’m hearing more of a groundswell behind nature based solutions, which this [00:36:15] is what this is.

Do you feel that way? Do you feel like there is some momentum building or are we just really far behind?

[00:36:26] Laurie: Both. Yes, I think there is momentum building, but if you look, for example, on the campaigns about fossil fuels, they are 35, 40 years old. Nature based solutions are beginning [00:36:40] to get more attention now, even if some of us have been focused on them for 30 or 35 years, but they’re only now beginning to get that kind of visibility that you saw, for example, in the campaign to end coal usage or whatever.

There is a really big difference though. In the nature based solutions, 99 times out of 100, the thought is offsets will do this.

[00:37:02] Crystal: I was just going to ask you about offsets. This will be a

[00:37:04] Laurie: [00:37:05] business to business offset. And it’s seen as a voluntary kind of put the, put the mint in the julep. You know, it’s the, it’s the sprinkle on the top.

It’s not fundamental. And my organization has had a very pivotal role in getting offsets off the ground by getting them included in California’s early policies and then their compliance [00:37:30] policies as a regulatory and compliance tool where I think offsets can have a role. But you would no more think of effectively changing energy usage in buildings by offering an offset for light bulbs.

It’s a nice thing to do. We did do that 25, 30 years ago. We, you know, made some subsidies available for that. But it was not [00:37:55] transformative for energy usage per se overall. And so offsets, you wouldn’t think of that at this point in time at all as a solution for energy uses now. You’d be much more integrated, much more fundamental, and be driving a lot of public investment into that.

And you’d have a construct around it about what are you trying to achieve. You wouldn’t be relying on your or my [00:38:20] individual desire to do something good from time to time. I love individual desires to do something good from time to time, and the more often the better. But it needs to become a way of life, and that is what is quite a ways behind in nature based solutions.

You have governments saying, oh, we don’t have enough money. We don’t have the tools. Let the [00:38:45] private sector do this. Private sector has a role for sure. But in the absence of the public sector engagement, and in the absence of really clear Desired goals, standardized methods, standardized reporting, offsets are just a very small piece of that solution in my view.

[00:39:04] Crystal: Looking towards the future, what emerging trends or technologies are you excited about that [00:39:10] could enhance forest conservation?

[00:39:13] Laurie: Well, oddly enough, disaster seems to motivate us greatly. And you know, the increased occurrence of large scale fires has really woken people up to the fact that. In many cases, we live in fire adapted systems, and fire plays actually a very positive role when it is in a more natural fire regime.[00:39:35]

So, low level regular fires are extremely important for controlling pests and diseases. They’re really important for maintaining soil fertility. They’re really important for adding charcoal to the soil, which helps retain water. You know, they can be very, very positive on a number of levels in addition to kind of maintaining our overall fuel levels.

[00:40:00] At that low level. So when you burn regularly, your fuel levels are low and fire is not damaging. So the fact that we’ve had so many great big fires has created an opportunity for a new approach in managing with fire as opposed to against fire. And that’s very positive. You know, there have been some things in harvesting [00:40:25] equipment and technologies that allow for much lower impact within a forest.

Those are very positive evolutions. In some areas and in some terrains, some of the remote sensing technology can be very helpful in terms of being able to do change detection more quickly. It’s not a panacea at this point, because we still have a lot of [00:40:50] highly difficult terrain to work with. So drones are going to be useful to some degree, and they are labor saving for sure, and they gather a lot of data quickly.

I don’t think we’re going to ever want to or be able to replace people in forests, because forests are systems. They have personalities, if you will. They are not just [00:41:15] digits on a spreadsheet and you get to know them. There’s both an art and a science to forest management and the art cannot be forgotten.

[00:41:26] Crystal: I’d like to dive into the topic of wildfires a little bit more deeply because they do seem to be. Becoming more numerous and more fierce than ever before. [00:41:40] And much is to blame due to climate changes, increasingly hot and dry summers, turning the areas into tinderboxes. However, there are ways that we can reduce these threats.

What are some ways that you promote?

[00:41:53] Laurie: Climate change is one factor influencing fires. The reason they’re more intense and numerous is that we were way too successful in fire suppression. [00:42:05] And that meant that in addition to over planting in many, many, if not virtually all cases, we have a lot of natural regrowth of shade tolerant species that under a natural fire regime.

would not be there. So you had both natural and unnatural overstocking on an acre, any given acre. So [00:42:30] when the fires do happen, because they, it’s not a question of if, it is a question of when. Might take 75 or 80 years through fire suppression, but it’s going to happen because that’s what these systems are, fire adapted.

And they were regularly burned by Native Americans. So you had both a natural and a human driven fire regime. The ways in which we are focused on restoring a more [00:42:55] beneficial or good fire regime, you do need to reduce the excess fuel load or number of trees per acre and shrubs per acre. And so there’s thinning to be done.

A lot of that is so called mechanical, where you can use machines and harvest for small materials. Or smaller trees, quite a few of them are going to be merchantable, but not all of them. So that is where there’s another opportunity for cost shares [00:43:20] with private landowners, as well as providing funding on the public lands.

So you have thinning that is done both mechanically. And by hand, and the goal of that is to open up the spaces between the trees and to lower the likelihood that the fire will go from the ground level up into the branches and then to the canopy, and then sparks get picked up and blown into the next [00:43:45] forest stand and so on, which is how fires really can spread, but instead to keep the fire low and on the ground.

So, thinning, burning of the largest excess materials in piles, and then doing broadcast burns. And then, you know, as they say, step and repeat, do that again in 15 to 20 years. At that 15 and 20 year period, you won’t need to do the thinning and pile burning as much. You can just run the [00:44:10] fire through it. But, When you have a low intensity fire, it’s not going to really damage your residual stand, and it’s going to enhance growth.

So, that is really key to do. I do want to flag, though, that even in the era when we’re thinking about these as always massively damaging fires, for example, in the state of California, almost 50 percent of those fires are actually what we [00:44:35] call low to moderate intensity. So they are overall more beneficial than harmful.

And in many of the cases, really where the big harm is done is in communities, and in what’s called the wildland urban interface, where houses are kind of spread out, um, houses, homes, structures are spread out, in a kind of suburban ring, and then on into more natural lands. And [00:45:00] there are a great deal more needs to be done to make those communities more fire safe.

And that’s going to range from what’s called home hardening and having additional escape routes and training people more effectively and having early fire detection opportunities available and more, more new and different forms of fire suppressants that are right around homes, things of that nature.

Thank you. [00:45:25] So a tremendous amount of work, frankly, needs to be done in communities, so that as and when fire happens, It’s really controllable around there. So you keep fire where you want it and you keep it away from where you don’t want it.

[00:45:39] Crystal: If we implement these mitigative measures, even though climate change is happening, you think it’ll have less of an effect, [00:45:50] less of, um, okay, that’s good news.

All

[00:45:53] Laurie: of these systems. Yeah, all of these systems, number one, are fire adapted, and number two, they, they exist within a range of temperature and precipitation, and there’s a lot of flexibility to that range. While in some cases, we are shifting our habitat types towards things we haven’t necessarily seen in a given area before, [00:46:15] in the larger majority of areas, we’re shifting within an already heterogeneous system.

And, We may end up with more what I would call patchy or island differentiation within these larger habitat types. So, for example, if you have a conifer forest that is on both the north side of a mountain and the south side of the mountain, the south side [00:46:40] with more intense heat and less moisture may become more oak dominated in the west, but the north side would stay more conifer.

And you have that to some degree already in a number of places, it will become more accentuated. But you’re also seeing the shift of species upslope, so that birds that were more valley floor or the first few hundred feet up into foothills are now [00:47:05] moving higher in the foothills and up above that in order to maintain the same coolness.

In climate change, it’s not fully predictable and There are many projections that can see step changes happening as opposed to just gradual changes, and a lot of evolution is punctuated by those step changes. So I don’t think any of us can predict with certainty where things are going, but I think what [00:47:30] we can say is it’s.

It’s rather like human health. The more diseases you have and the more stresses you have, the harder it is for you to respond well in any given new stress. So, you know, if you have heart disease, if you’re overweight, if you’ve got diabetes, and then you get a stressful situation at work, You’re more likely to get more sick.

If you think [00:47:55] about our forests and our Earth’s natural systems, many of them have the equivalent of heart disease, and diabetes, and climate change, and other stress on top of that. So, our job, really, is to restore them to their more healthy, functional state, so they can be more resilient. For us! Because that’s where we get our water.

It’s what cleans our air. It, you know, [00:48:20] it feeds us, it shelters us. You know, that is our responsibility. But it is a self interested responsibility. And that’s a tremendous collective opportunity. Uh, challenge.

[00:48:35] Crystal: Can you tell me about a time when you said to yourself, this, this is why I do it. So a success story or a proud moment.[00:48:45]

[00:48:45] Laurie: Oh gosh. I think I did share one earlier just with landowners. When you see, you know, in particular families and individuals, um, that emotion is just much more transparent and, and is transmissible to other people. That pride. That’s a, that’s a great thing with that. And I do think that joy is unique. The other thing that of course is very pleasing when you look out at a large [00:49:10] landscape and you, and you know, it has the opportunity to continue forever and that people have the opportunity to care for it forever, that’s a great pleasure.

Other things that happen are when, when you’re working with policymakers who in the end are enormously. Uh, powerful, or very large landowners, and you’re talking them through why this makes sense to do. And a [00:49:35] lightbulb goes off. That doesn’t mean necessarily that they’re going to do what you’re hoping they’re going to do, you know, what you want them to do.

But it means that they understand, and that can drive more changes in the future.

[00:49:49] Crystal: One can hope, right? You, if you plant the seed, then it’ll grow. Well, it’s also

[00:49:54] Laurie: great. It’s a great pleasure to see young people who’ve come into our organization, [00:50:00] learned about this and gone on and really made enormous progress in other organizations and contexts.

That’s a tremendous thing to, to feel good about because no single organization can do all of this. It takes a lot of people and approaching the challenge from multiple angles because there are multiple benefits of this kind of positive change. So [00:50:25] that’s a, that’s very gratifying to see.

[00:50:28] Crystal: Now, I like to leave the listener with action tips on how they can help what we’re talking about.

How can individuals and communities become more involved in supporting forest conservation and combating climate change?

[00:50:43] Laurie: There are so many things. How much time do we have? Well, you can start [00:50:50] from the small and move to the large. You know, if you live in a place where you can encourage the planting of native trees within your community, as part of your parks and recreations and natural areas, or as borders around play fields, that is a very powerful thing that you can do in your home and in your communities, is to really support.

the natural forest [00:51:15] that is there, that’s going to be much more effective in terms of maintaining those because in general, those native species are really adapted. to whatever the climate is of that place. So you can do those individual things of supporting your native forest types within those homes and communities.

You can vote for policies that drive more [00:51:40] conservation and urge your, whether it’s your city council, your county commissioners and supervisors, your state legislature, your federal representatives, to support Forest conservation as a critical climate change policy, and that means putting some real money behind it and really guiding how that forest conservation is done for the future.

You can [00:52:05] support organizations like mine that are in your areas through providing them with financial support to do the work that you want to have done. So there’s a whole raft of things that you can do.

[00:52:18] Crystal: This has been really interesting and a fascinating look at how one can create their own legacy through protecting their lands and yet not feeling like they’re losing [00:52:30] something at the same time.

So this was really wonderful to learn about. Laurie, thank you for all that you do. You’re making a difference.

[00:52:40] Laurie: Oh, thank you so much. I really appreciate you having taken the time to, to explore it a little bit with me. And I have to say that I think your podcast is making a terrific difference too, because that’s how change radiates out.

So thank you, Crystal, for [00:52:55] doing that.

[00:53:03] Crystal: Now, in my perfect world, we would never have to cut any trees down. But we have to be realistic. There are a lot of people in the world today, and we need resources and space and livelihoods. [00:53:20] And so the harvest of forest products is inevitable. But the idea that we can do so while keeping the ecosystem Relatively intact so that it could still provide the myriad of its other ecosystem services and benefits gets me really excited.

And if we could do all of that while managing the forests so that wildfires aren’t as severe as they [00:53:45] have been recently. There’s a lot of hope in that.

Don’t forget to go to forcesfornature. com and sign up to receive emailed show notes, action tips, and a free checklist to help you start taking practical actions today. Do you know someone else who would enjoy this episode? I would be so grateful if you would share it with them. Hit me up on Instagram and Facebook at becoming forces for [00:54:10] nature and let me know what actions you have been taking.

Adopting just one habit can be a game changer because imagine if a million people also adopted that. What difference for the world are you going to make [00:54:35] today?