Loading…

Carbon Credit Eligibility under Area Regulation of Harvest Levels in Northern Minnesota

We evaluated the implications of area regulation of harvest on eligible carbon under both the Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS) and the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) for public forest lands in north central Minnesota (89,840 ha total). We used data from the carbon submodel of the US Forest Service Fo...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Forest science 2011-12, Vol.57 (6), p.470-478
Main Authors: Gunn, John S, Saah, David S, Fernholz, Kathryn, Ganz, David J
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c387t-b83e4b727cc8f89855cc76e28c780d5dd12c25b945775ee1cb7f6f65646dcf843
cites
container_end_page 478
container_issue 6
container_start_page 470
container_title Forest science
container_volume 57
creator Gunn, John S
Saah, David S
Fernholz, Kathryn
Ganz, David J
description We evaluated the implications of area regulation of harvest on eligible carbon under both the Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS) and the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) for public forest lands in north central Minnesota (89,840 ha total). We used data from the carbon submodel of the US Forest Service Forest Vegetation Simulator (Lake States variant) to evaluate changes in forest carbon stocks under different management scenarios. Baseline harvest intensity was defined by considering the manager's short-range tactical plans and the distribution of harvests by cover type and intensity class then became the “business as usual“ (BAU) for use in the calculation of eligible carbon under the VCS and CCX. Under VCS, the most effective way to increase carbon stocks while meeting other management objectives was to shift harvest practices to lower intensity entries and retain higher residual basal areas. The carbon stock change rates for each manager varied significantly under the BAU scenario and resulted in a mean annual net decrease. Because CCX carbon credit eligibility requires a net increase of carbon stocking from the base year, area regulation may create periods of time where there is no eligible carbon volume. An alternate management strategy that uses the area regulation method, reduces harvest intensity, and decreases overall acreage harvested was able to provide higher postharvest carbon stocks versus the BAU scenario under VCS.
doi_str_mv 10.1093/forestscience/57.6.470
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1017959708</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1017959708</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c387t-b83e4b727cc8f89855cc76e28c780d5dd12c25b945775ee1cb7f6f65646dcf843</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkMtOHDEQRS1EJIYJvxAsVtn0YLfbryUa8ZIGIiVBZGe53eXBqLHB7kbi7zEaNmFVm1O3bh2EflCyokSzU58ylKm4ANHBKZcrseok2UMLqplqmGRqHy0IobyRnf53gA5LeSSEKEbaBbpf29yniNcZhjDh8zFsQx_GML3hOQ6Q8VkGi3_Ddh7tFCqYPL6y-bVexBt4hbHgEPFtytMD5IhvQoxQ0mS_o2_ejgWOPucS3V2c_11fNZtfl9frs03jmJJT0ysGXS9b6ZzySivOnZMCWuWkIgMfBtq6lve641JyAOp66YUXXHRicF51bIl-7nKfc3qZayvzFIqDcbQR0lwMJVRqrmV9d4lOvqCPac6xtjOackpaQdoKiR3kciolgzfPOTzZ_FaTzIdu859uw6URpuqui8e7RW-Tsdscirn70xIqqmqthObsHWiWgRg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>915102602</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Carbon Credit Eligibility under Area Regulation of Harvest Levels in Northern Minnesota</title><source>Oxford Journals Online</source><creator>Gunn, John S ; Saah, David S ; Fernholz, Kathryn ; Ganz, David J</creator><creatorcontrib>Gunn, John S ; Saah, David S ; Fernholz, Kathryn ; Ganz, David J</creatorcontrib><description>We evaluated the implications of area regulation of harvest on eligible carbon under both the Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS) and the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) for public forest lands in north central Minnesota (89,840 ha total). We used data from the carbon submodel of the US Forest Service Forest Vegetation Simulator (Lake States variant) to evaluate changes in forest carbon stocks under different management scenarios. Baseline harvest intensity was defined by considering the manager's short-range tactical plans and the distribution of harvests by cover type and intensity class then became the “business as usual“ (BAU) for use in the calculation of eligible carbon under the VCS and CCX. Under VCS, the most effective way to increase carbon stocks while meeting other management objectives was to shift harvest practices to lower intensity entries and retain higher residual basal areas. The carbon stock change rates for each manager varied significantly under the BAU scenario and resulted in a mean annual net decrease. Because CCX carbon credit eligibility requires a net increase of carbon stocking from the base year, area regulation may create periods of time where there is no eligible carbon volume. An alternate management strategy that uses the area regulation method, reduces harvest intensity, and decreases overall acreage harvested was able to provide higher postharvest carbon stocks versus the BAU scenario under VCS.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0015-749X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1938-3738</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/forestscience/57.6.470</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Bethesda: Society of American Foresters</publisher><subject>Biodiversity ; Carbon ; carbon markets ; carbon sinks ; climate ; Environmental protection ; Forest management ; forests ; lakes ; Objectives ; Protocol ; Regulation ; USDA Forest Service</subject><ispartof>Forest science, 2011-12, Vol.57 (6), p.470-478</ispartof><rights>Copyright Society of American Foresters Dec 2011</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c387t-b83e4b727cc8f89855cc76e28c780d5dd12c25b945775ee1cb7f6f65646dcf843</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gunn, John S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saah, David S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fernholz, Kathryn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ganz, David J</creatorcontrib><title>Carbon Credit Eligibility under Area Regulation of Harvest Levels in Northern Minnesota</title><title>Forest science</title><description>We evaluated the implications of area regulation of harvest on eligible carbon under both the Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS) and the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) for public forest lands in north central Minnesota (89,840 ha total). We used data from the carbon submodel of the US Forest Service Forest Vegetation Simulator (Lake States variant) to evaluate changes in forest carbon stocks under different management scenarios. Baseline harvest intensity was defined by considering the manager's short-range tactical plans and the distribution of harvests by cover type and intensity class then became the “business as usual“ (BAU) for use in the calculation of eligible carbon under the VCS and CCX. Under VCS, the most effective way to increase carbon stocks while meeting other management objectives was to shift harvest practices to lower intensity entries and retain higher residual basal areas. The carbon stock change rates for each manager varied significantly under the BAU scenario and resulted in a mean annual net decrease. Because CCX carbon credit eligibility requires a net increase of carbon stocking from the base year, area regulation may create periods of time where there is no eligible carbon volume. An alternate management strategy that uses the area regulation method, reduces harvest intensity, and decreases overall acreage harvested was able to provide higher postharvest carbon stocks versus the BAU scenario under VCS.</description><subject>Biodiversity</subject><subject>Carbon</subject><subject>carbon markets</subject><subject>carbon sinks</subject><subject>climate</subject><subject>Environmental protection</subject><subject>Forest management</subject><subject>forests</subject><subject>lakes</subject><subject>Objectives</subject><subject>Protocol</subject><subject>Regulation</subject><subject>USDA Forest Service</subject><issn>0015-749X</issn><issn>1938-3738</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpdkMtOHDEQRS1EJIYJvxAsVtn0YLfbryUa8ZIGIiVBZGe53eXBqLHB7kbi7zEaNmFVm1O3bh2EflCyokSzU58ylKm4ANHBKZcrseok2UMLqplqmGRqHy0IobyRnf53gA5LeSSEKEbaBbpf29yniNcZhjDh8zFsQx_GML3hOQ6Q8VkGi3_Ddh7tFCqYPL6y-bVexBt4hbHgEPFtytMD5IhvQoxQ0mS_o2_ejgWOPucS3V2c_11fNZtfl9frs03jmJJT0ysGXS9b6ZzySivOnZMCWuWkIgMfBtq6lve641JyAOp66YUXXHRicF51bIl-7nKfc3qZayvzFIqDcbQR0lwMJVRqrmV9d4lOvqCPac6xtjOackpaQdoKiR3kciolgzfPOTzZ_FaTzIdu859uw6URpuqui8e7RW-Tsdscirn70xIqqmqthObsHWiWgRg</recordid><startdate>20111201</startdate><enddate>20111201</enddate><creator>Gunn, John S</creator><creator>Saah, David S</creator><creator>Fernholz, Kathryn</creator><creator>Ganz, David J</creator><general>Society of American Foresters</general><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7U6</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20111201</creationdate><title>Carbon Credit Eligibility under Area Regulation of Harvest Levels in Northern Minnesota</title><author>Gunn, John S ; Saah, David S ; Fernholz, Kathryn ; Ganz, David J</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c387t-b83e4b727cc8f89855cc76e28c780d5dd12c25b945775ee1cb7f6f65646dcf843</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Biodiversity</topic><topic>Carbon</topic><topic>carbon markets</topic><topic>carbon sinks</topic><topic>climate</topic><topic>Environmental protection</topic><topic>Forest management</topic><topic>forests</topic><topic>lakes</topic><topic>Objectives</topic><topic>Protocol</topic><topic>Regulation</topic><topic>USDA Forest Service</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gunn, John S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saah, David S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fernholz, Kathryn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ganz, David J</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>eLibrary</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Agriculture Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest research library</collection><collection>ProQuest Science Journals</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Forest science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gunn, John S</au><au>Saah, David S</au><au>Fernholz, Kathryn</au><au>Ganz, David J</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Carbon Credit Eligibility under Area Regulation of Harvest Levels in Northern Minnesota</atitle><jtitle>Forest science</jtitle><date>2011-12-01</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>57</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>470</spage><epage>478</epage><pages>470-478</pages><issn>0015-749X</issn><eissn>1938-3738</eissn><abstract>We evaluated the implications of area regulation of harvest on eligible carbon under both the Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS) and the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) for public forest lands in north central Minnesota (89,840 ha total). We used data from the carbon submodel of the US Forest Service Forest Vegetation Simulator (Lake States variant) to evaluate changes in forest carbon stocks under different management scenarios. Baseline harvest intensity was defined by considering the manager's short-range tactical plans and the distribution of harvests by cover type and intensity class then became the “business as usual“ (BAU) for use in the calculation of eligible carbon under the VCS and CCX. Under VCS, the most effective way to increase carbon stocks while meeting other management objectives was to shift harvest practices to lower intensity entries and retain higher residual basal areas. The carbon stock change rates for each manager varied significantly under the BAU scenario and resulted in a mean annual net decrease. Because CCX carbon credit eligibility requires a net increase of carbon stocking from the base year, area regulation may create periods of time where there is no eligible carbon volume. An alternate management strategy that uses the area regulation method, reduces harvest intensity, and decreases overall acreage harvested was able to provide higher postharvest carbon stocks versus the BAU scenario under VCS.</abstract><cop>Bethesda</cop><pub>Society of American Foresters</pub><doi>10.1093/forestscience/57.6.470</doi><tpages>9</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0015-749X
ispartof Forest science, 2011-12, Vol.57 (6), p.470-478
issn 0015-749X
1938-3738
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1017959708
source Oxford Journals Online
subjects Biodiversity
Carbon
carbon markets
carbon sinks
climate
Environmental protection
Forest management
forests
lakes
Objectives
Protocol
Regulation
USDA Forest Service
title Carbon Credit Eligibility under Area Regulation of Harvest Levels in Northern Minnesota
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T00%3A25%3A55IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Carbon%20Credit%20Eligibility%20under%20Area%20Regulation%20of%20Harvest%20Levels%20in%20Northern%20Minnesota&rft.jtitle=Forest%20science&rft.au=Gunn,%20John%20S&rft.date=2011-12-01&rft.volume=57&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=470&rft.epage=478&rft.pages=470-478&rft.issn=0015-749X&rft.eissn=1938-3738&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/forestscience/57.6.470&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1017959708%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c387t-b83e4b727cc8f89855cc76e28c780d5dd12c25b945775ee1cb7f6f65646dcf843%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=915102602&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true