(audience applauds)
So as you can see, we have a wonderfully diverse array
of expertise up here.
And I wanna make sure we have some time for questions.
I'm gonna throw out a couple questions.
If you are, you know, chomping at the bit to ask
one of our panelists a question, just raise your hand
and I'll see you and we'll shift to audience questions.
But why don't we start with you, Allie, I've got a question
for you and I'm gonna have to wear my glasses.
So we have been talking about,
I called it connectivity climate community,
we call it climate change, biodiversity wellbeing.
I love the fact that we are all speaking
the similar language when we talk about our body of work.
And so in your work of managing forest for carbon storage
and climate resilience, how do you manage this tension
that I mentioned earlier, we demand a lot,
there's a lot of trade-offs that we demand
of our forests and our ecosystems.
And maybe just as an example,
you can share some insights into finding the balance
that maximizes carbon sequestration while also
considering the crucial aspects of biodiversity
and water quality and economic development.
So just, yeah, all of it.
Great simple question there, Heather. Easy one to solve.
Well, you know, first off, I really encourage folks
to be careful about this idea of maximizing right,
one goal over others.
We do know from history that when we seek to maximize
one goal in the forest or anything
can have really unintended consequences, right?
Maximizing timber, right?
We know that that did not lead
to the best ecological outcomes.
I also think that's happening in some carbon offset programs
right now that really focus just on the carbon
and aren't thinking about resiliency
or community needs and dynamics.
So really, you know, thinking about every parcel,
this is something that foresters really are great
at doing, is sort of looking at what are the needs
of the land?
What are the goals and objectives of the landowner?
Thinking about how you can optimize or balance
those goals, right?
There are gonna be trade-offs.
You can't do everything on every parcel,
but that's really critical.
The other thing as far as carbon and resilience,
they are really complimentary.
And I think, you know, I use the term resilient carbon
because I think we really need to consider
not just carbon now, those benefits,
but we wanna sustain those benefits so that forest
needs to be healthy, productive, you know,
have as minimal stressors as possible.
There's a lot of degraded conditions from past land use
or poor management decisions or invasive species,
you know, you name it.
And thinking about ways we can improve
the ecological functioning of those forests
that does give us those carbon benefits
into the future, right?
So that can really compliment those things.
And the other third part about this is really,
it's a challenge when we think about carbon, right?
We're managing and thinking about
what we do on a parcel level,
but we do our carbon accounting on a state level.
But we all know that greenhouse gases
are a global issue, right?
So we have this scale issue.
And so I really encourage folks to think broadly
about what our choices mean.
I think there's a real danger when we think about
let's really try to maximize carbon in our forest,
and we don't think about what the implications
of that are to carbon elsewhere, right?
So if we are buying wood that's coming from other forests,
we're having those carbon implications elsewhere,
perhaps even larger, because then we're importing that wood
that takes greenhouse gases and we lose
that local community aspect.
We lose some local sovereignty from producing
our own materials.
So it's really a complex issue that doesn't end
at the forest boundaries.
And so thinking about how we can, you know,
use forest to be really the, you know,
benefit all of us have these benefits
and have a community, local community responsibility
to steward our forest and provide all of these things,
you know, wildlife habitat, our needs,
our recreational needs, right?
It's a lot that is at risk.
And I really appreciate that Heather called out, you know,
forests themselves are at risk from climate change.
And so this idea that we can, you know, count on them
to do the work that they're doing might require us
to do some stewarding in the future, right?
It's a give and take.
We really rely on forests for a lot,
and so we really need to consider that
in our management decisions as we move forward.
Awesome. I love that.
Yeah, I love the idea of checking yourself
around maximizing, so that's great.
Tim, this one is for you.
What strategies or approaches to forest management
do you think we should take to balance the needs
of biodiversity conservation and the recreational demands
that we have on our forest,
which I know here in Vermont have been growing
and growing over the last decade.
So maybe you can share some thoughts around that.
Yeah, for sure.
Well, I think, you know,
Allie kind of just queued us up a bit for this as well,
given that, you know,
you presented how we should be thinking holistically
across the state about how we can't necessarily maximize
one objective in any one location.
Instead we need to try a variety of different strategies
to use my own word for that.
But, you know, thinking at a state level
and from there kind of across, you know,
the kind of the matrix of different habitats that we have,
the forest that we have at various scales across the state.
So in this way I think we really need to continue
to think about our forest ecosystems at multiple scales.
So I think a lot about like Vermont conservation design,
I lean heavily on that and have a lot of faith in that,
in that it's a statewide accounting
of our interior forest blocks,
the connectivity between those blocks,
even the risk of development within those blocks
and the change in land use in those areas.
I lean heavily on the bio finder tool,
Natural Resource Atlas,
which shows our significant natural communities,
deer wintering yards, riparian areas, vernal pools,
wildlife crossing corridors, and all these ways, you know,
really thinking about how, you know,
I think a lot about forest,
but how it's all part of an interconnected system.
And then from there, I am really encouraged
by the rapid development and focus on ecological forestry,
which is really kind of this movement away
from production forestry or I would say,
and more into thinking about forests, not just for the trees
or tree products in those forests,
but how forests are ecosystems.
And in this way, thinking about, you know, like in the case
of Audubon Silviculture With Birds in Mind,
how we can through the tool of forest management
through logging, harvesting, and other forms of stewardship,
you know, restore habitat conditions to our forest
across the Vermont landscape.
You know, thinking about components
like large diameter snags, legacy trees,
structural diversity within our forest, the role value,
of course, woody material, find woody material
and how through forest planning, harvest design
and logging practices, we can complement, improve,
maintain these features in our forests.
To balance the, you know, values of how we use our forests
is challenging, thinking about how we can maintain
recreational opportunities and economic opportunities
across the state.
We have to take a variety of different strategies.
I think a lot about how we can through industry
kind of promote, you know, sustainable practices
through like product recognition,
how our forest products are produced from sustainable
forestry practices, programs like Audubon Vermont's,
Bird Friendly Maple Program that recognizes producers
for producing maple syrup from sugar bushes
that are sustainably managed using ecological
silviculture cultural practices,
but also thinking about ways that we can reward
and incentivize landowners to undertake these practices
as well.
Again I think that Vermont is unique in that, for example,
like our use value appraisal program,
it connects our consulting forester community
with over 2 million acres of privately owned forest
in Vermont, roughly 80% of Vermont's privately owned
as we know.
And so being able to kind of bring those principles
of ecological silviculture to those landowners,
especially through our consulting forestry community,
is a really powerful mechanism to be able to help landowners
think about how to balance these values, these needs
across the forest in Vermont.
Terrific. Thank you, Tim.
(audience applauds)
So, you know, I love the tone of this conversation
and being able to really unpack all the different demands
that we have of our forest.
And the one that is a favorite for me is the cultural
and spiritual dimensions of what forests provide for us.
And I, you know, it's not a too much of a leap of faith
to then get into health and, you know,
the idea of having a prescription, a forest prescription
is fascinating and exciting.
And I wonder if, Michelle, you want to just talk
a little bit more about what a nature prescription is?
And you did share a little bit about some of the outcomes.
I wonder if there's maybe a story or other outcomes
you wanna share about nature prescriptions?
Sure, yeah well so it's a very broad and general term
and has been used in all sorts of different ways.
The way it works with the prescribed outside program is,
so this is a pediatric group, right?
So a doctor will, so often, you know,
we have a screener, we're looking for nature deficit.
How often have you been outside in the past two weeks?
Or, you know, whatever the time period is, it's pretty,
how much time do you spend on a screen?
It pretty easy to detect, you know,
find those kids that are indoors all the time.
And boy, there are very, very many of them.
And so it's a, you know, screening
and then the pediatrician, you know, is alerted to that.
And then the pediatrician will give the nature prescription.
So will recommend to the caregiver, the family,
whoever's there and with the child
that the child should be getting outside
for certain number of hours, at least per week
to set as a goal.
And we don't necessarily in our program
the target isn't, you know, traditionally it's thought,
okay, well we need to, it's physical activity
that kids are needing.
And yes, they do need that.
And you know, we have an over overweight,
you know, obesity epidemic in the country
and outdoor time is the way to solve that problem.
We actually view and are targeting more mental health,
anxiety, depression, and just overall, you know,
all of the negative things that come along with, you know,
being sucked into a screen, right?
That addictive, you know, all the things
that they're being faced with as well as social isolation
and things like this.
Even though we are more connected than ever,
in some ways we're also more disconnected than ever.
And so right, so we're targeting, you know, anxiety,
depression, you know, behavioral issues
that a focus, ability to pay attention.
And just the belief that it's good for kids
to be outside in nature.
So the doctor will refer, tell the patient, you know,
that they should be spending time outdoors
and refer them to a set of activities.
So we have an activity provider that posts activities
every week.
And eventually we want to work with specific patient groups
that have specific diagnoses for example, kids in the,
you know, under psychiatric care to actually bring them out,
you know, hold their hands and bring them outside.
We're finding that we need a social work component.
So what does it take to actually get people, you know,
tell them to go outside?
You can do that, but it might not actually, you know,
work to get them outdoors.
So we're finding we need resources and that sort of knowhow
to work with caregivers to say, okay, let's talk through
your schedule, how can we make this work?
And what do you need?
Do you need a bus pass?
Do you need an Uber to come get you?
If we bring a bus by Saturday morning, you know,
hop on and right, so we're looking at,
do we need transportation partnerships
and lots of resources to figure out what will motivate
and allow people to actually take advantage
of these recreation programs.
Yeah, and then it's measuring what difference does it make?
So we might go out and measure and survey people
or take measurements before and then after
during and after maybe a 10 week program.
So this is the kind of research
that we're doing along parallel.
There's lots of room for evidence there.
The UK has institutionalized this practice.
So it's called social prescribing
and their national healthcare system
now it promotes it and it's covered, right?
It's pretty amazing. They've really bought into it.
So they're calling it nature-based social prescriptions.
So we're trying to learn a lot from them
they've taken a leap of faith and yeah.
Terrific. That's fascinating. Fascinating. Okay.
So big room of people, there's gotta be questions out there.
What questions might you have for our panelists?
Okay, thanks.
Can I add something while folks
are getting to the questions?
I just wanted to bounce off what Tim was talking about
Biodiversity Plug.
An upcoming should be starting project
between UVM extension Forestry and Audubon Vermont,
and some other Vermont organizations.
We received grant through the Forest Service to promote
and better understand biodiversity management in forests.
So we'll be doing a lot of outreach to landowners
or foresters about what folks can do to promote biodiversity
and doing some demonstration sites.
So if you are interested, if you work in biodiversity,
like please reach out to one of us,
we're gonna be forming a steering committee,
we want to hear what folks are doing.
So if that's of interest, just gonna plug that,
we'd love to hear from folks about that.
Terrific. Thank you for that.
We got a question over here, Allison. Oh, thank you.
Allison has a mic. We're gonna use it.
Or you can shout,
I can always repeat the question if we can't all hear.
[Audience Member] It's not on.
All right.
So Michelle, I'm really fascinated by the work
that you're doing and I think maybe similar to a lot
of people here, because I don't have any expertise
in sort of the social dimensions or wellbeing side
of forestry.
And when you were talking about all the work
that's been going on in these sort of urban areas
and within sort of the realm of pediatrics,
I can't help but think that we've gotta have similar issues.
It's nature deficit even within rural areas.
I mean, how many people, not even children,
people don't get out into the forest anymore.
And so I'm wondering if anybody is doing any work
looking at that or if you have any ideas
or if anyone's talking about how we can encourage
people to get into our forest here.
Sure, yeah.
So, oh the question is, what about in rural areas?
What about nature deficit among rural populations
and how, you know, and that sort of medical
or you know, public health, you know,
element to getting people enticing
and incentivizing people to get outside.
Yes, there is work going on in rural areas
in the realm of nature prescriptions
and yeah, so our program received a grant
from the Department of Conservation Natural Resources
in Pennsylvania, and we are, you know, one of,
I don't know a handful that they are supporting
and I think we might be the only urban program,
the others are rural.
So when I go to our meetings and we are sharing our issues,
we share issues, right, there's so many barriers, right,
to getting outside when that's not what you do right?
Culturally and or it's not within the realm
of the resources that you have access to.
So I would say yes, that work is being done.
I can't necessarily point you to anything local here,
but I don't know, does that help?
[Audience Member] Yes, I think I'd to follow up.
Sure, yeah.
Terrific, other questions over here?
-Got the mic? -Yeah.
Is it working?
[Audience Member] Can you hear me?
-Yeah. -We can hear you.
I'm just gonna stand up so I can see,
my questions to everyone, but probably particularly
to Michelle and it's also a comment.
I teach in a liberal arts college in northern New York
and I run a nature education program.
And so I'm curious if you've had the opportunity yet
to see not only the public health benefit
of getting people outdoors,
but is there a connection then to those people
having more investment in protecting nature and investing
in the forest because of that outdoor time?
That's my question.
My comment is, I've been watching for years
grant opportunities in my state to fund the work that I do.
And what I find is if I wanna buy things, game cameras,
for example, I can always find funding for that.
But what I can never find funding for is staff
to take people outdoors.
And so really I just am saying this for all of us
because we have input for, you know,
folks who are doing state management for,
we need to connect people to these forests if we want them
to be invested in caring for these forests in this future.
And one way to do that is get them into the forest.
And if we don't pay for staff who are educated
to take you in to respect the forest,
I don't know how we're gonna do that, so.
Oh yeah.
(Panelists laugh)
A lot of support for that one.
Oh, I totally agree.
Right, and this is where we found that missing link
between, you know, when telling someone
they should go outside and get into the forest
and then what, right?
We are finding that we almost need like a social work
or a community health.
We call it a nature navigator, so we have in the past
had what we call this nature navigator person
with a community health worker sort of background
as well as environmental education, right?
And I think typically right,
so often there, right?
You need a living wage, right?
To provide this, a fundamental and essential service.
And you're right, that it often doesn't make it into budgets
and or it's seasonal or it's temporary, it's part-time.
I agree that this is a missing link and it's a major part
of in the system in the UK that it is a recognized role
that is funded this sort of link worker,
they call it a link worker.
Yes, so we're looking more to build models for that
and hopefully funding will come with it.
Very exciting.
Allie, Tim, anything to add?
Well, you know, in Vermont I can think of a couple
different mechanisms by which we do get young folks outside.
You know, I mentioned in my own experience
the Green Mountain conservation camps run through the state,
which are very affordable, talking about a six night
week long experience that,
I believe it's only still about like $200.
Yep, exactly that.
Like, that's nothing for an entire week away, you know,
60 kids at a time each week, these camps, you know,
train, not well train, they educate, you know,
hundreds of kids a summer on concepts
of wildlife management, ecology, hunting, fishing, sporting,
outdoor sports.
You know, Audubon Vermont has a series of day camps
as well and entertains and hosts, you know,
hundreds of kids a year throughout the summer
as well as through school groups.
You know, Vermont has alternate Fridays
in a lot of schools like GISP, where students can get out
and you know go skiing or go visit a place
like Merck Forest & Farmland Center.
We have a lot of non-profit spaces in the state
where we have really strong environmental
education programs for students.
And the key is to continue to support the funding
for these programs so that we can continue to, you know,
reduce economic barriers to getting young folks
outside from our urban and rural communities
across the state.
So I'm very proud of my state in the way
in which we go about getting young folks out
reducing these barriers.
Certainly there's a lot more we can always do,
but I'll just promote those.
Awesome, yeah get them while they're young for sure.
All right, we have a question over here
and then someone have a hand back there.
Okay, thanks.
[Audience Member] All right.
Oh, she's got a mic already back there.
-[Audience Member] Yeah. -So let's go with her.
And you can hear me? Okay.
Hold it a little closer.
-[Audience Member] All right. -There you go.
Well, all right.
So I was really impressed Heather,
with a 18 million acre target and I represent
the Forest Service, the Forest Legacy program,
and this year in Maine, you know, we had an event
where we celebrated 3 million acres
with the Forest Legacy program.
And so I'm just curious, as I go back
and I talk to my colleagues, is this 18 million acre
within, you know, and ours was a national number, you know,
and this is within the Southern Appalachian,
so I'm just like, TNC always has these ambitious goals.
Is our, you know,
is this TNCs goal or are you looking at every organization
that works in land easement and land acquisition
to achieve that 18 million acres?
I was wondering who was gonna ask this question.
(audience member laughs)
I look at that 18 million acres
and I'm like, okay, I am gonna know this.
(audience member laughs)
Yeah, so excellent question. It is a huge number.
There's no doubt.
And I think the mantra for the Nature Conservancy
in recent years has been there's no way
we can do this alone, which is one of the reasons
why we've started a grant program
to really start to incentivize and cover costs
for protection in the places that we think
are really important and priority places
up and down the Appalachians, but also just to,
you know, yeah, just really (laughs) really
build capacity across the swath of organizations
that are doing this work.
So it's huge, 5 million of that number is protection work
definitely includes partners any way
that the Nature Conservancy is helping to support,
even if it's not monetarily, but just, you know,
with our science and through other ways that we partner
with our partner organizations.
And then 13 million acres is restoration work,
and we are doing the vast majority of that
with our federal partners where we have the opportunity
to do really big improvements on federal forest land.
So burning a 100,000 acres at a time or more,
that number is through 2030.
So it's not next year's number.
But yeah, I think it's always good to hold out,
in my opinion, it's always good to hold out a number.
It's what we need, it's what we need to do to really
ensure the viability of this network.
And so if we don't set our sights on that,
we're bound to fall short and if we do set our sights on it,
we can continue to put that vision out there
and incentivize others to work with with us.
So thank you for that question.
Hi, Georgia Murray, Appalachian Mountain Club.
And we've been doing close to home recreation work
recently with like the base circuit trail
that goes around Boston.
We have the New England Scenic Trail,
and some of my coworkers that work
in those more urban communities have recognized
that if we're gonna engage in, you know,
bringing in diverse groups, black and brown communities,
that the challenge is not only, that the resource challenge
goes to, they don't even have the time or the capacity
to like, say write a grant or knowledge.
And so one of the things one of my colleagues
was focusing in on was how do we as a bigger organization
help those groups, you know, with those, you know,
we know where the grants are, we know how to write grants.
Is that the mechanism that we can really help
bring those folks into the fold?
And I'm just wondering if you've thought about
that across the panel as well, because the resource question
is really huge in bringing in diverse partners, I believe.
[Heather] Yeah, go ahead.
Well, the IRA funds that are going out now to states
and to various partners that to, you know, for,
it's one and a half billion to be spent
in urban disadvantaged neighborhoods, Justice40, right?
C-Just communities.
And so there are, you know, it's right now
being distributed through agreements
and we have pass through partners.
So yeah, this system is set up to support
smaller organizations and groups that don't necessarily
have the capacity to manage a federal agreement.
And yeah, those requests for proposals are going out soon.
So we are hoping is gonna be a big
sort of capacity building.
It's an experiment, this is kind of a first time investment
of the size with this focus.
And so we'll see what happens.
I'm setting up some surveys to go out to grantees
before and during this funding so that we can track,
you know, what difference does it make?
How are people using,
who's using the funds,
what are they doing with it?
And what are the barriers, challenges,
and what kinds of capacities are we building?
So that's one way
I'll add to that too.
You know, among the philanthropic community,
a lot of organizations are looking at how do we just give
unrestricted support really to community organizations
that need that capacity building.
They've got the leadership.
And we as a conservation community need to get better
at doing that.
The philanthropic community is having this conversation
and so are a lot of organizations.
It's hard and it's tricky, but the more we can build,
you know, real power and leadership at the local level,
and I don't mean we, meaning we build and support
power and local leadership and invest in that.
A lot of organizations in the social justice space
and environmental justice space are saying
this is what we need in order to be an equal partner
at the table.
And so we need to think really hard about
how we can do that.
And that also means, you know, being open
to what the outcomes of our conservation work
is going to look like.
It may not look like we think it needs to look.
And that's where we get into real relationship
and dialogue with communities about
those long-term conservation outcomes, yeah.
And on the forest landowner side of things,
I've been really impressed with new funding
that's coming out through like the IRA
Forest Legacy program has some increased funding too,
that really does focus on trying to serve
underserved communities better, or individuals, families,
than maybe we have in the past.
That's tricky because it depends how you define that,
but I really, you know, that's a start.
And the Forest Legacy program this year
has a first time funding to do tribal state partnerships,
which is really interesting.
You know, that's again, something that's uncharted in,
you know, especially in Vermont but in our region,
but great that we're trying to move that needle forward.
So I think there's a lot of room to go,
but we do have a lot of funding coming in for forests,
urban forests and rural forests right now.
So there's a lot of potential to serve more people
than we have maybe in the past.
That's great. Is there a question back here?
Hi, thanks so much.
Love to learn more about what you were just talking about.
My question is for you, Tim,
and maybe everyone could speak to the kind of fine line
between conservation and restoration,
and so particularly we mentioned
the Vermont Conservation design,
I know it's still being developed, curious,
so like wetland, woodland, wildland,
those natural communities.
How is the people you're working with
guiding restoration practitioners, kind of the edges
of those ecosystems starting to get smaller
and us trying to rehabilitate degraded areas
and then re-expand those natural communities
with climate change in mind?
There aren't plant pallets made for that yet,
and we could use the plant pallets in wetland, woodland,
wildland, but as you know, it's not necessarily keeping up
with what's happening.
So just curious if you could speak to that. Thank you.
Yeah, it's an excellent question.
Well, first and foremost, in working with landowners,
you know, our chief goal is to impress upon them the value
of their lands, what they have on their land
in terms of the various natural communities
on their property, the condition of the forest
on their property, the land use history of their lands
and how that's impacted the natural communities
and the forest and their property.
And from there, designing strategies to maintain
first and foremost those natural communities that exist,
but also where possible restore forest conditions
towards largely older forest conditions that existed before
diverse forests essentially.
But beyond that, also getting landowners to think about
what exists around them in the landscape.
And so we, for every lender we work with,
I do a landscape level analysis where I'm looking at,
what exists within 2,500 acres of them.
And I, again, I go to bio finder or Natural Resource Atlas
and I'm, you know, pulling up the natural communities
and various ecological assets that exist around them.
And in that way, really work to contextualize
what their forest means for the both their property,
but around them, their landscape.
So, you know, everything we do, we try to first understand
what we have and then how we can maintain it,
and where possible restore it.
And by restoring, I largely think about how,
again I already mentioned this,
but I really want to emphasize restoring forest to,
you know, older forest conditions
like various age structures, uneven age structure
with canopy gaps and areas of regeneration,
large diameter trees, legacy trees, as well as, you know,
complex structure on the forest floor.
We are trying to provide strategies in which landowners
can complement and improve the forest ecosystem
that exists on their property.
Great. Thanks Tim.
All right, we'll take one more question
and then we're gonna move toward wrap up.
So right over here,
Question on forest carbon.
I'm gonna switch gears for a minute.
Carbon sequestration, carbon storage.
We're seeing in Northern New England,
many programs which are attempting to store
and sequester carbon on large scale landscapes
with private timber companies and other larger landowners.
How do we balance those carbon sequestration
and storage programs, which may alter traditional
timber markets with the demand for wood products
that we always know we're gonna have?
So if a landowner might alter that scenario
and lock up carbon for an extended period of time,
which is then no longer available for production,
How do we balance that?
That's for you.
Yeah, so I'm familiar with
sort of what you're referencing, Carl.
But yes, I mean, I think that's an example
I was sort of alluding to before about
maybe there isn't the balancing the community needs
with those projects, right?
So especially those large, large projects
that's really critical to understanding the community,
how the community has used that land historically, you know,
and really engaging the community in that land.
And we've seen that in other countries that carbon projects
have not done that, and it's been really detrimental.
And I think that's an example,
we're seeing it kind of in our own backyard.
So I am a little worried about that sort of thing happening.
As far as balancing it, you know, it is really a struggle
because we, you know, we do use wood products
and wood products from a carbon standpoint
are really sort of the best products we have right now.
They store carbon for as long as we use them,
and if we can use them to replace things like steel
and concrete right now, we do get carbon benefits,
greenhouse gas savings above that.
And then, not to mention it's something we can harvest
from our own back backyard, so to speak,
and see the impacts it has rather than having something
harvested from elsewhere.
And we don't really know how that wood was procured
or how the people who live there were retreated
or, you know, the human rights, you know,
you can go on and on.
And so that's really concerning.
So, you know, I think that project in particular
in Northern New Hampshire, it's a good example
about how we didn't know this was coming down the pike
when lands were set up and agreements were made,
that carbon is gonna be a commodified benefit that we have.
And so I think we should be thinking proactively
about other parcels and having these conversations
about how do we wanna see these large tracks of land managed
what is the best for the whole community in balancing
all those needs, right?
Not focusing on one single benefit
over the detriment of others.
So you know, I don't really have a great answer to that.
It's a real challenge and I think the more we all
as a community can be part of those conversations,
I think is really important.
And it's sort of uncharted territory
that we're working through, but again, like not,
you know, thinking about how to balance
all of those objectives together.
You know, as I get further and further
into the carbon world, carbon science,
I really do think we should be producing more
of our products here.
We have the ability, our forests grow much more wood
than we harvest.
We can do it sustainably and well.
And I think there's moral and ethical obligation
that we have to do so, and so how can we do that?
Let's have a conversation about doing it better
and doing it more, you know, without as much waste
or reusing materials, all of that I think would be,
I'd love to see more of that conversation happening.
Great. Thank you, Allie.
All right, well I have one more question for you all
to wrap up.
You know, we've talked about a lot of different things
today, we've talked about a lot of different demands
on our forest.
And so looking ahead into the future a little bit,
what do you think are the most important skills
for foresters and conservationists
and other practitioners to develop in the coming years?
-Yeah, you go. -All right,
and if we're going down the line, all right.
I think not, so I think it's really important
to not think there's one tool or one strategy, right?
It's a suite of strategies,
and I think Tim alluded to this, right?
We want a diversity within our forest.
We also want a diversity across our landscape.
We know that that promotes resilience.
We know that can promote the most like balanced
ecosystem services.
So I encourage folks to not think,
oh, I've done it this way,
I'm gonna continue to do it this way, right?
We're in a changing climate.
We have a lot of different things going on.
Climate crisis, biodiversity crisis,
not to mention housing crisis and, you know,
homelessness crisis.
We have a lot of things that are happening in our world.
So trying different strategies,
reevaluating how the impacts did that work,
did that lead to the outcomes I expected?
Maybe try something else.
So I think that's gonna be really important,
creativity and innovation moving forward.
Awesome.
I would say that just to build connections
and perhaps partnerships with a different set of people,
individuals, you know, that you might typically,
so reaching out across, you know,
find a doctor who's passionate about wanting to help
their patients and who wants to influence their, you know,
workplace and or, you know, right.
So it's working across disciplines of, you know,
backgrounds and you know,
I would say that we need to branch out (laughs).
Perfect. Tim, any final thoughts?
Final thoughts on me, huh? Okay. Yeah.
Skills, again, like, as y'all just said, very well,
just diversity, thinking about, again,
the work that they do in the woods really does
directly affect the ecosystem.
So continuing to support our foresters and building
the skills to be able to think as ecologists really,
you know, like how the work they do in the woods
really influences the ecology of the woods.
And from there, thinking about climate change effects
and how we really need to be thinking about
how to manage our now so as to be resilient,
adaptable in a changing climate, trying to distill
that science down into actionable tools for them
is extremely important.
Also really, our foresters are ambassadors.
You know, they are out there meeting with landowners
every single day across the state of Vermont,
and they are talking about the fate of these forests
with those landowners.
And so being able to really work with our foresters
to empower them to have really crucial conversations,
to be educators, to be able to, you know, provide the tools
or resources to meet those landowners values
and objectives is huge.
So, you know, from there, oh, that's really it.
Terrific.
Well, I heard we started off this conversation
with connectivity, climate and community,
and I heard curiosity, creativity, and connection going out.
So Allie, Michelle, Tim, thank you so much.
Let's give our panelists a hand.
and thank you all so much being part of the conversation.
(audience applauds)
All right, thank you everyone
for such a lively conversation.
I wanted to say I really appreciated one person's,
one of the people asked a question made a point about
this like, potential cycle that getting people outside will,
you know, inspire them to do a bunch of other things
related to protecting our forests.
And I really love that point.
'Cause I think that's absolutely true that.
And is a point that ties all the people
who are up on the stage today together,
that if we're able to really focus on getting people outside
as one of the really key pieces
and having them have good experiences in the forest
and developing those relationships as early as possible,
that they're gonna invest in protecting those forests
for biodiversity, making sure that those forests
are resilient to climate and all of the things
that everybody in this room cares about.
So thank you again to our panelists
and to Heather for that conversation.
I encourage all of you to explore all of these topics
further through our contributed talks today,
which we'll go into lots of little detail,
more focused detail that touches on many of these things.
And we'll be jumping into the first round
of those contributed talks in just a moment.
We have a coffee break now.
And then we'll have lunch back here in the ballroom
after the contributed talks, excuse me.
followed by another round of contributed talks,
another coffee break, and then working sessions
this afternoon.
And then we're gonna wrap up the day with a poster session
with snacks and a cash bar in the fireplace lounge.
And I'll reiterate that during the first up to,
during the first 45 minutes of that poster session.
And also throughout the day,
you can vote for your favorite poster.
All the posters that have orange sticky notes on them
are in the competition for best poster.
And we'll be giving out an appreciative FEMC mug
to the winner at the end of the poster session.
Alright, so that's it.
If you have any questions, come find me or any of the other
FEMC staff or ECO AmeriCorps members
and can those folks raise their hands
just so people know who you are.
Okay, you might not really be able to see them well enough
to find them, so you also could just stand and shout help
and we'll come find you.
And with that, enjoy the day.
(audience applauds)