Forest loss in New England: A projection of recent trends

Abstract

New England has lost more than 350,000 ha of forest cover since 1985, marking a reversal of a two-hundred-year trend of forest expansion. We a cellular land-cover change model to project a continuation of recent trends (1990–2010) in forest loss across six New England states from 2010 to 2060. Recent trends were estimated using a continuous change detection algorithm applied to twenty years of Landsat images. We addressed three questions: (1) What would be the consequences of a continuation of the recent trends in terms of changes to New England's forest cover mosaic? (2) What social and biophysical attributes are most strongly associated with recent trends in forest loss, and how do these vary geographically? (3) How sensitive are projections of forest loss to the reference period—i.e. how do projections based on the period spanning 1990-to-2000 differ from 2000-to-2010, or from the full period, 1990-to-2010? Over the full reference period, 8201 ha yr-1 and 468 ha yr-1 of forest were lost to low- and high-density development, respectively. Forest loss was concentrated in suburban areas, particularly near Boston. Of the variables considered, 'distance to developed land' was the strongest predictor of forest loss. The next most important predictor varied geographically: 'distance to roads' ranked second in the more developed regions in the south and 'population density' ranked second in the less developed north. The importance and geographical variation in predictor variables were relatively stable between reference periods. In contrast, there was 55% more forest loss during the 1990-to-2000 reference period compared to the 2000-to-2010 period, highlighting the importance of understanding the variation in reference periods when projecting land cover change. The projection of recent trends is an important baseline scenario with implications for the management of forest ecosystems and the services they provide.

Reported driving factors of land-use/cover changes and its mounting consequences in Ethiopia: A Review

“…The worst case scenario is that some changes in landuse/cover were irreversible or take long period of time to restore back (Afera et al, 2018;Thompson, 2017). For instance, loss of biodiversity and soil and land degradation may take several decades to restore back.…”

Social influence and forest habitat conservation: Experimental evidence from Vermont's maple producers

“…The working landscape is a critical component of bird and biodiversity conservation in the Northern Forest. With 80% of the landscape in private ownership (Thompson, Plisinski, Olofsson, Holden, & Duveneck, 2017), sole reliance on protected areas and reserve lands is not a viable solution. Conservation programs that promote and support forest products industries and successfully engage forest owners are essential to maintaining vibrant ecological and human communities.…”

“…With 80% of the landscape in private ownership (Thompson, Plisinski, Olofsson, Holden, & Duveneck, 2017), sole reliance on protected areas and reserve lands is not a viable solution. With 80% of the landscape in private ownership (Thompson, Plisinski, Olofsson, Holden, & Duveneck, 2017), sole reliance on protected areas and reserve lands is not a viable solution.…”

Wildlife resistance and protection in a changing New England landscape

“…A "Recent Trends" scenario was also included to provide a baseline projection based on recent trends in climate and land use change. This scenario represents a linear continuation of the land use and land cover changes observed between 1990 and 2010 (as defined by Thompson et al [20]).…”