Jason White, Director, CT Agricultural Experiment Station (CAES). Working Group Member

Hannah Reichle - MetroCOG Regional Planner

Lori Brown, Executive Director, CT League of Conservation Voters

Chelsea Gazillo, Working Lands Alliance/American Farmland Trust - Working Group Member

Hi Everyone, Eric Hammerling, Executive Director, Connecticut Forest & Park Association, WG Member

Juliet Cain, Chair Darien Pollinator Pathway

Joan Nichols, Executive Director, CT Farm Bureau Association, Member

Lilian Ruiz, Council on Soil and Water Conservation, group member.

Anna Shugrue - NECCOG Regional Planner, working group member

Kip Kolesinskas, Co-Chair Working lands Alliance, Conservation consultant

Amanda Fargo-Johnson, CT Resource Conservation & Development - working group member

Jamie Pottern, American Farmland Trust

Kayleigh Royston, Ph.D. -Connecticut Department of Agriculture

Andrea Urbano, CT DEEP Division of Forestry Private and Municipal Lands Unit, WG member

Rebecca French, Director Office of Climate Planning, CT Dept. of Energy & Environmental Protection - assisting with working group coordination for the GC3.

Robert Fahey, Associate Professor, University of Connecticut, Department of Natural Resources and the Environment

Sarah Watson, Senior Analyst in Office of Climate Planning, CT DEEP. DEEP Liaison for the Working Group.

For working group members of Climate Smart Agriculture & Forestry - please introduce yourself in the chat

Lisa Hayden, Outreach Manager, New England Forestry Foundation

Agenda for today's meeting: https://portal.ct.gov/-/media/DEEP/climatechange/GC3/GC3-2022-agendas-and-minutes/GC3_Climate-Smart-Agriculture_Forestry-Agenda-090122.pdf

Frank Cervo (he/his), Service Forester, DEEP Forestry, Private & Municipal Lands

Michael Wrobel

There seems to be growing resistance to using wood products in place of high carbon-emitting substances such as concrete, steel, and plastic. How should the state respond?

Michael Wrobel President of the Connecticut Greenhouse Growers Association

For those joining late, if you are a working group member, please introduce yourself in the chat. There will be a public comment period toward the end of this meeting and you can sign up to speak by sending me a direct message.

Mark Ashton - Yale

David Irvin, I have been a forester for 32 years, 26 of those years with the DEEP Forestry Division, responsible for management of a few state forests in Western Connecticut.

For everyone's awareness, Jim Hyde is USDA NRCS's representative to this Working Group. He had a prior commitment, but as you can see, it is critically important that NRCS plays a role in any state effort.

can you speak to why the definition of climate smart agriculture includes sequestering carbon and not storing carbon? Is there a distinction is climate smart agricultural practices that enhance sequestration versus increase carbon storage?

Latha Swamy, Director of Food & Agriculture Policy for the City of New Haven (which is a unique municipal position - only ~20 similar positions exist in the country).

All slides and a recording of the meeting will be available here: https://portal.ct.gov/DEEP/Climate-Change/GC3/Working-Group-Meetings-2022

https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/PA_NRCSConsumption/download?cid=nrcseprd1905826&ext=pdf

Great presentation Chelsea, great summary of such a complex scenario. Looking forward to the work ahead.

what is the difference between the two?

https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/PA_NRCSConsumption/download?cid=nrcseprd1905826&ext=pdf

Storing can be just "retaining"

Will there be information presented for the record on threats to forestland?

I am advocating for Ecosystem Service Payments for Landowners for services provided by their living land: carbon storage; water retention and purification; clean air creation and purification, also biodiversity preservation, and more. Our living forests are a wealth that needs to have a monetary value placed on their living services. Tools measuring carbon storage must be made available.DEEP should increase reserves of forest preserved to become Old Growth (Old Forest Management) to maximize carbon storage and sequestration, ecosystem services, and biodiversity preservation.Agriculture: promote Silvopasturalism and incorporating trees throughout agriculture practicesAbout construction: less tear-downs; more renovations, more repurposing, more recycling of wood materials. Utilize low-carbon concrete that is available now, promote zero-emissions concrete creation. Thank you

Carbon sequestration is the process by which carbon is removed from the atmosphere, whereas carbon storage is the process by which carbon is held somewhere other than in the atmosphere

good question, Kat! Carbon sequestration is the process of taking C out of the atmosphere. in a vegetative system, this occurs through/by photosynthesis. Carbon storage refers to the amount of carbon retained in a specific carbon pool

thank you!

Here is also WLA's press release on the passage of the budget: https://workinglandsalliance.org/working-lands-alliance-a-project-of-the-american-farmland-trust-statement-on-the-passage-of-connecticuts-adjustments-for-the-2023-biennium-budget/

I will add that we used the USDA-NRCS definition of climate-smart ag and forestry in our legislation this year but it does not mean we could not go back and create a state definition of climate-smart ag and forestry

is this working group working on policy and non-policy ways to address barriers for small urban farms

this working group could discuss those barriers and come up with recommendations.

We would be in favor of a state definition on climate smart agriculture so that energy resiliency issues are not excluded.

The majority of our state forests are designated areas that will not be a part of active management, as part of the forest inventory and management plan development process. Having professional foresters on the ground to make these decisions helps DEEP to choose the right areas to set aside and forest stands that are healthy and beneficial for long-term storage, rather than decision-making that could be more arbitrary. But management of forests is an important part of carbon sequestering and storage, and DEEP has to responsibly manage for declining ecosystems and more rare wildlife habitat, as well as provide a supply of sustainable wood for forest products. Young forests continue to be greatly lacking in our state and these other objectives cannot be ignored.

all good questions, Eric!

I appreciated Chelsea’s acknowledgment that many of the named practices to support healthy soil are agroecological practices that have been used by Indigenous peoples on these lands for millennia. Given the overlap of Indigenous justice and food sovereignty and climate resilient agriculture, I’d be interested to hear from Commissioner Hurlburt’s presentation about what efforts if any have been taken to make room for Indigenous leadership in the push for climate smart ag in our state and/or what resources might be dedicated to helping our state’s Indigenous populations re-establish traditional growing practices.

Ecosystem Service Payments would help landowners get an income by keeping their land and forests in natural condition instead of selling for development.DEEP should have a separate division of Forest Ecology that prioritizes forests for their Natural Processes and Ecosystem Services, keeps forests living to become Old Growth.

when might the next meeting be?

Related to PA 490...the Open Space classification has significant value but is underutilized because it is a municipal option of which only about 45 towns have adopted. Welcome furthering the discussion on 490.

can timing consider the work hours of farmers

Andrea Urbano has great observations. PA 490 should be enhanced to give state-funded credits or payments to landowners, not just reduce the amount of taxes they pay.

@kat and everyone. Office of Climate Planning will send out meeting invites to working group members and all meetings will be noticed to the public in the Climate Solutions newsletter and on the Secretary of State website per state requirements.

Sign up (https://confirmsubscription.com/h/j/19E73F2E0479003B) for the Climate Solutions Newsletter. Check the Climate Solutions box to receive climate change and GC3 news, information, and updates.

Foresters in DEEP are as close to forest ecologists that I am aware of. Designation and managing old forestland management areas are a part of the program of management of these units of state forest. This may include inaccessible and inoperable areas, those with special unique character, and any areas that show specific old growth character or are likely to develop such. We are all getting trained both in "old growth" and carbon storage and sequestration on a regular basis today.

Thanks, Eric! For those who are interested reports from the sub-groups of the GC3 Working and Natural Lands Working Group are available here: https://portal.ct.gov/DEEP/Climate-Change/GC3/GC3-Working-group-reports

PRFCT Future Report: https://www.ctwoodlands.org/sites/default/files//FINAL%20PRFCT%20Future%20Working%20Group%20Recommendations%2012.14.21.pdf

There is an important misunderstanding about carbon sequestration often stated. However, most scientists agree that carbon sequestration is generally understandable as a function of the amount of leaves in the forest. Thus old forests have far higher sequestration and storage than new forests or scrub shrub.

Link to Executive Order 21-3 site: https://portal.ct.gov/ConnecticutClimateAction/Executive-Order/Executive-Order-No-21-3

Here is the Governor's Council on Climate Change recommendations from the 2020 working group process: https://portal.ct.gov/-/media/DEEP/climatechange/GC3/GC3_Phase1_Report_Jan2021.pdf

Thank you Ann. I like your idea of ecosystem service payments. It's important to find ways to make climate smart practices more feasible for landowners with the goal of keeping our farms and forests in tact. As David mentioned, DEEP Forestry does employ passive management (makes informed decisions based on forestry data and other considerations to designate forested acreage to function as reserves/controls/no harvested timber)- quite a bit to my understanding . But active forest management is also critical in this era of change to promote forest resilience, climate change mitigation benefits, and has been proven effective in expediting old-growth forest conditions. To a point made earlier, active forestry can also play a critical role in the States' investment in renewable resources. Locally sourced wood is renewable and sustainable :)

There is certainly no one size fits all prescription for forest land that is best for carbon. It is an oversimplification. A diverse forest that includes different age classes and does not exclude species and ecosystems that are disturbance-dependent is best for a healthy forest environment and climate change mitigation. This is something that forest professional have to balance and keep in mind at all times.

Ann, since photosynthesis (the process through which carbon is sequestered) occurs through foliage, it is important to have healthy tree crowns and good live crown ratios. However carbon sequestration rates are actually greatest in younger forests, as this is when trees and vegetation grow most rapidly Carbon storage rates tend be greatest in older forests. This is because roughly 50% of a tree's wood/biomass is carbon.

I need to drop off early to attend an event (and here's public congrats to DEEP and partners on the Whip-Poor-Will Woods Forest Legacy Program project!) Thanks for this opportunity. I look forward to the next meeting.

Andrea, the rate of growth of a small tree is of course fast, but the amount of growth of large trees is so much larger. So this equates to greater sequestration in the larger growing tree. But I very much appreciate your great point about supporting landowners by giving them an incentive to keep their land providing ecosystem services.

Is there a point at which tree growth stops and senescence begins? Presumably it would depend on species and local habitat conditions.

is there a request minimum

maximum

who is the intended prime candidate for successful application

Ann, be sure to keep in mind that a larger tree is going to certainly sequester more than a tiny sapling, but what you would really be comparing is space, not individual trees. There are FAR more small trees per acre than large older growth trees. So it's not a one to one comparison. You may have a space with a few old trees, but three times as many pole-size trees, and hundreds of saplings. It is important to maintain a healthy and diverse forest across the landscape with older forests for long-term storage (as long as they are healthy and naturally long-lived tree species), and younger forests for sequestration.

There are many, many factors which influence forest carbon sequestration and storage rates. We, as a working group, will consider all of these things in our recommendations and actions going forward. Thank you, Ann, for your comments.

will they have to be legally declared a non-profit

or would a fiscal sponsor suffice

In a living forest, as an old tree declines, new growth is supported and promoted. And new habitat is provided. Old Growth forest in Connecticut is almost non-existent; we should provide for much more forest to be reserved to become Old Growth.

Are only active agricultural landowners eligible for these programs? Many woodland owners do not have farmland on their property or are actively managing their land for timber - Is there some part of the program they would be eligible for?

Sorry - Many owners are not actively managing their forest for timber... so would they be included?

Forest landowners can and do participate in NRCS conservation programs. There may be some practices that they currently don't cover

Would "establish equipment sharing programs" funding include actual purchases of equipment? And could it include equipment that might help improve forestry practices as Lisa H mentioned?

I agree, Ann! But I believe I may have failed to communicate that DEEP is doing that. It must be done with proper on the ground analysis of resources. Most of our forests in Connecticut average 100-120 years of age at this time and are well on their way to that potential. Feel free to reach out directly to our Division, including myself personally, if you wish, david.irvin@ct.gov, as a starting point. It may be interesting to even plan a field visit together to discuss the many thoughts and views we certainly share in common.

microgrants are always useful if there could be a third, smaller category

I want to reiterate my question from earlier about whether there’s been any effort to hold space for leadership and allocate resources for the Indigenous populations of our state

+++

We encourage working group members to continue posting comments and questions in the chat in the interest of time and we can follow up after the meeting.

UConn was mentioned specifically under one of the programs. I am wondering what types of projects you envision coming out of UConn (extension vs research) and if the language specifically states UConn or includes other research and outreach institutions?

I have to hop off for another meeting

Due to timing today where should we send our comments and suggestions on this topic?

Market regulations to increase accessibility of non-hybridized seed and resources to help farmers practice seed saving so that seeds can actually adapt over time to the changing climate of our region is also critical to climate-smart ag, would reduce costs to farmers in the long run (as would other agroecological practices to reduce farmers’ dependencies on ag corporations for new farm inputs), and would help promote biodiversity of the region, one of the planetary boundaries we’re accelerating past largely as a result of the agricultural practices of our food system. Prioritizing leadership of Indigenous seed keepers in our state and region in doing this is vital too since Indigenous populations protect 80% of the world’s biodiversity and in CT in particular many towns pushed their communities off their lands under settlers’ rationale that they weren’t using land as “efficiently” as the industrial-style practices that have proliferated and decimated ecologies since.

I would certainly include the ag experiment station in all aspects of this initiative, proposals, implementation.

Send comments to DEEP.ClimateChange@ct.gov

Thanks, I need to jump off. I'll follow up

Luke Anderson has an important message; we can and should include indigenous people and learn from indigenous peoples' practices.

I also want to call attention to the fact that transitions to fossil gas, biofuels, and other carbon and other GHG-emitting energy sources are not the “climate smart” measures they were presented to be. Clean fossil fuels are a myth.

Can there be a component similar to the NE SARE grants whereby the outcome and benefit of the projects must be shared with other producers?

I do not mean to concentrate the funds- but to concentrate the ACTIONS- get a good topic/action/effort and apply widely on all landscapes.

soil and water conservation districts

noting Luke's comment on Indigenous leadership rather than public comment participation.

^

It would behoove us to integrate forestry practices, or ensure at least that we target forest landowners in our marketing, etc. efforts to make applicants clearly aware that this applies to and benefits forest landowners.

Do we have a next meeting date?

Send comments to DEEP.ClimateChange@ct.gov

hope the presentations will be posted soon

We will send presentations to all attendees/registrants ASAP

Need to run. Thanks for the information.

Appreciate it. Thanks!

who should we send agenda suggestions to?

DEEP.ClimateChange@ct.gov

Thank you! Good meeting and great presentations.

Wonderful meeting. Thank you.

Thanks everyone. Great meeting

Thanks!

thank you excellent meeting!

Thank you all!

thanks everyone!