Understanding Greenhouse Gases (GHG's)

Many people have heard of global warming, now more commonly referred to as climate change (even though technically, they are two different things).  However, not many people understand why global warming happens.  I'm writing this post to give our readers a general overview of the situation.  This post will be moderately scientific, but I'm going to try to stick to the basics.

Greenhouse gases are called such because they trap heat that might otherwise dissipate through various processes.  Just five greenhouse gases account for probably more than 95% of climate change effects.  These five gases, from worst to least problematic, are:

     1.  Water
     2.  Carbon Dioxide
     3.  Methane
     4.  Nitrous Oxide
     5.  Ozone

For the most part, this post will talk about the top three offenders.

Water

Many people will be surprised to see "water" at the top of the list, but I'm not referring to liquid water.  I'm referring to water in its gaseous form (known as water vapour).  Most of the water vapour in our atmosphere is essentially invisible, unless there is a large quantity present.  When water vapour becomes concentrated enough to become visible, you will perceive it as "haze," or see it even more obviously as clouds or steam.  Some people assume that fog and mist are also made of water vapour.  They're not.  Fog and mist are comprised of small liquid water droplets suspended in the atmosphere, rather than water in its gaseous form.

The chemical formula for water, regardless of whether it is in liquid or vapor form, is H₂0.  Ice (water in solid form) also has the same chemical formula.  The only difference between the three states is the amount of energy that is contained in the molecules, which is represented by the temperature.

Climate change scientists disagree about many specific observations, although there is overwhelming consensus that climate change is real.  Depending on the source, you may read that water vapor is responsible for less than half of global warming, or as much as three quarters of global warming.  Regardless of which of those choices is closer to the truth, it's a large amount.

When explaining greenhouse gases (GHG's) to someone who is interested in the science, the first major intellectual frustration usually happens when people suddenly realize that water vapour in the air is responsible for the majority of greenhouse gas effects (and therefore, and therefore, water vapour is the biggest problem when it comes to climate change).  People protest that we can't do anything about the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere.  And you're right!  Mostly right.  There's not much we can do.

The amount of water vapour in the air varies significantly depending on where you are taking a sample.  In deserts, the amount of water vapour is almost negligible.  In rain forests, the atmosphere is heavily laden with water vapour.  For this reason, we must consider global averages when we talk about the contribution of water vapour to global warming.

It is natural to have water vapour in our atmosphere.  Water vapour is essential to life, for many reasons.  For now, let me just say that the Earth's global ecosystem has been in a sort of historical equilibrium for the past several centuries whereby our planet had a "good" amount of water vapour in the atmosphere, but it was in balance.  There was not so much water vapour that it caused problems with global warming.  The real problems with global warming started to happen when we started increasing the amounts of GHG's #2 through #5 on our list.

Let's move on from water for now, although I'll have a few more comments about it at the end.  For now, if you want to memorize one key talking point, focus on this:  Water vapour is controlled by the Earth's temperature, rather than water vapour controlling the Earth's temperature.

Carbon Dioxide

We often refer to carbon dioxide by its chemical formula, CO₂.  Carbon dioxide is the gas that the public most commonly associates with climate change.  That's a good thing.  Carbon dioxide is the GHG that the general public should focus on when trying to mitigate the effects of climate change.

Carbon dioxide is composed of two substances (carbon and oxygen molecules) and the ratio is one molecule of carbon for every two molecules of oxygen.  If this gas were broken apart into carbon versus "conventional" oxygen (in its diatomic homonuclear form, O₂), the oxygen doesn't pose a problem.  We could break carbon dioxide up into carbon and diatomic oxygen, and then hide the carbon away from the atmosphere (or just hide the CO₂ itself from the atmosphere) and we'd have less problems with global warming.

We Interrupt This Bulletin to talk about the Atmosphere

No, the atmosphere wasn't on our list of greenhouse gases.  Understanding the atmosphere is important, because it contains GHG's.  Our atmosphere also contains lots of other gases.  It also contains small amounts of liquids such as rain, and small amounts of solids such as smoke particles and dust.

A lot of us learned in high school that our atmosphere is composed of about 78% nitrogen gas (chemical formula N₂), 21% oxygen (O₂ form, not the single unbonded oxygen atom), a bit of argon, and trace amounts of several other gases including carbon dioxide.  Nitrogen and oxygen in the atmosphere are called non-greenhouse gases.  These non-greenhouse gases have special properties that mean they don't absorb infrared radiation, and therefore don't contribute to the greenhouse effect.  Carbon dioxide DOES absorb infrared radiation, which is a problem.

Water vapour is not considered to be "part" of our atmosphere when scientists list the relative amounts of each constituent gas.  Although this is confusing, we need to acknowledge that water vapour is IN the atmosphere, but it's not a defined part of it.  When scientists talk about the makeup of the atmosphere, they assume that we're talking about dry air.  If we had to give different atmospheric compositions depending on where we stood on Earth, our results would vary widely.  Even a single point on the Earth would vary from day to day, depending on whether it was cloudy and raining, or clear and sunny.

When we talk about about water in the atmosphere, we have to consider both water vapour (gaseous form) and liquid water (rain, snow, mist, fog).  Sometimes one turns into the other.  Some water droplets evaporate.  Gaseous water vapour often condenses to form water droplets.  When trying to understand that water can be in the atmosphere but not part of it, you have to realized that the distinction is subtle.  Think of baking a batch of chocolate chip cookies.  If you think of nitrogen and oxygen and other gases as mixing up homogeneously, they are analogous to batter in the cookies before you add the chocolate chips.  You can no longer identify individual ingredients such as sugar, flour, or eggs in the batter.  The batter (like the atmosphere) is so well mixed that individual ingredients are no longer discernable.  But water in liquid form (tiny droplets or fat raindrops) is akin to chocolate chips that you might add to the cookie batter.  Even after mixing, you can readily identify the chocolate chips as being contained within the batter mix, even though you can't tell individual parts of the batter apart.  There is a strong analogy between the chocolate chips and the water droplets.

Maybe that was too much of a tangent.  Let's get back to our GHG's.


Methane

The chemical formula of methane is CH₄.  Methane is bad.  Well, it's not bad in and of itself.  It's a chemical.  It's used beneficially for humans, for things such as heating and lighting and in the manufacture of useful other chemicals and products.  It's only when methane escapes into the atmosphere that it starts causing a problem.  This is where certain industries need to pay special attention.

How does methane escape?  If escaped methane is the problem, can't we just be more careful with how we handle it?  Well, no.  A lot of the methane on earth occurs naturally.  Methane is the natural by-product of decay in many swamps.  We can't just fill in all the swamps around the world.  Methane is also produced indirectly through human-made activities, in sewers, septic systems, and landfills.  Methane is produced by living creatures.  All those cows around the world release methane into the atmosphere every time they burp.  And methane is also produced in the extraction and transportation of fossil fuels.

The biggest problem with methane is that even though there is much less methane in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide, it is many times more potent than carbon dioxide.  Depending on whom you ask, methane is probably twenty to one hundred times more problematic than CO₂.  Perhaps we should think of methane as the "low hanging fruit" in trying to mitigate climate change, and tackle man-made sources of methane as our highest priority?

Another problem with methane is that it too exhibits a "positive feedback loop" as global temperatures rise.  When the temperature rises, most living organisms tend to increase physiological activities (including the emission of methane).  Swamps aren't the only water sources that naturally emit methane.  Our freshwater lakes and rivers and streams and puddles are also a source, because they usually contain small organisms that emit methane.  As temperatures warm up, methane emissions increase, which then cause further increases in global temperatures.  It's a catch-22 situation.  We need to get ahead of the curve, before it's too late.

The amount of atmospheric methane today (about 1.87 ppm) is approximately 2.5 times the amount that was present in the atmosphere during pre-industrial times. 

Atmospheric Behaviour

Now that we know some of the basic characteristics of water vapour, carbon dioxide, and methane, let's look at how they act (and persist) within the atmosphere.  In this respect, these three GHG's behave very differently.

As I alluded to above, we can't really control water vapour.  Water vapour is controlled by temperature, rather than temperature controlling water vapour.  The globe is essentially in a state of equilibrium when it comes to water vapour.  The only minor exception is that as global temperatures rise, the average overall amount of water vapour in the atmosphere also rises (higher overall saturation of the atmosphere), so there's a small concern due to this positive feedback loop.  But we need to look at the other GHG's to solve the problem.  If we can reduce the effects of the other GHG's, the water vapour equilibrium will take care of itself.

Here's a trivia question for you:  Can you guess how long water vapour remains in the atmosphere?  Scientists believe that it is probably not much more than a week on average.  This means that if a molecule of water "evaporates" from an ocean or lake, chances are that on average, it will return to the surface as rainfall or snowfall in just over a week.  This is why water is so good at maintaining an overall temperature-based equilibrium.  It's in a constant state of flux.

Carbon dioxide, unfortunately, does not return quickly to the Earth's surface.  If it did, we wouldn't have these climate change problems (although we'd probably have a different set of problems).  Carbon dioxide is removed from the atmosphere predominantly by photosynthesis, and also by being mixed into the ocean (carbonated surf?).  But this process takes many years.  Estimates are that even after one hundred years, half of any carbon dioxide that has been emitted into the atmosphere is still present up there, and still contributing to global warming.  Even if we could completely stop emitting CO₂ tomorrow, in 2069 the atmosphere would still have half of the carbon dioxide that's already up there (mind you, that would be a "sustainable" level).  If reducing methane emissions is the "low hanging fruit" of climate change mitigation for certain industries, then reducing CO₂ emissions could be called the "heavy lifting" (on a global scale), and almost everyone can help tackle the carbon dioxide problem.

Methane, our third significant GHG, is a big problem.  Let's look at the positive side first:  A lot of methane disappears from the Earth's atmosphere in about a decade, which is much faster than carbon dioxide.  However, the negative side is that methane is MUCH worse than carbon dioxide when it comes to trapping heat (by worse, I mean that it traps heat more effectively, which is bad for humans who don't want climate change).  If you compare methane and CO₂ side-by-side in the first twenty years after release into the atmosphere, methane is almost ONE HUNDRED times as problematic.  Even on a hundred-year comparison, methane is still the bigger problem.  Now you understand why many people say that we need to reduce the number of cows on the planet.  Or teach them to stop burping and be less flatulent.

Fun fact:  NASA says that cow burps release more methane than cow flatulence, in case you wondered which end was the bigger problem.


Ozone

Again, a tangent.  I said earlier that ozone is one of the top five GHG's, although to be fair it is far less of a problem than the top three.  So if it's a problem, that must mean that "More ozone equals more warming," right?  Yes, that's correct.

But right now, some of you are probably thinking, "Wait, if ozone is a problem, why did we ban CFC aerosol cans?  Can't we just spray a lot of CFC's into the atmosphere and wipe out all the ozone, so the ozone stops contributing to global warming?"  Well, yes, I guess that's an option.  But the reason we banned CFC's was because we need ozone to protect us too.  Even though it contributes to global warming, it protects us from deadly types of radiation.  If we eliminate the ozone, we might be cooler, but we'd also have very high rates of skin cancer, eye cataracts, and damage to our genetic and immune systems.  So please, let's not target ozone.


Summary

I think that I've covered all the basics.  In point form:

- Water vapour is the main greenhouse gas, but since we can't do anything about it, don't think that we need to eliminate it.
- Carbon dioxide is second most common GHG, and since we can change the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere through processes such as carbon capture methods, then it's a great target for climate change reduction.
- Methane is often overlooked because it's less prevalent than the two GHG's listed above, BUT since its effects are so much more significant than carbon dioxide, we should also target methane emissions wherever possible.  This is especially important for certain industries such as oil & gas (ie. flare or capture associated natural gas, which is mostly methane, rather than venting it).


Thanks for reading this far.  In a future post, I think I'll talk about carbon capture technology and ways to target methane emissions.  In the meantime though, remember that trees act as a great filter for our atmosphere, because they help remove carbon dioxide.  And that's why we like to plant trees.  Please visit our website to learn more about our carbon capture and community forest projects.

- Jonathan Clark
www.replant.ca-environmental.ca

Replant.ca Environmental is a Canadian afforestation/reforestation company that plants trees to help mitigate climate change.  Click on the graphic below to learn more about our vision:

Incidentally, our organization is often seeking additional land for our carbon capture projects.  Please visit this link if you might know of a recently-harvested property that we could rebuild into a permanent legacy forest.

New Replant.ca Environmental Toques and Ball Caps

Here are some photos of the latest styles of hats that we have in stock!

We have four colours in stock right now for our ball caps:  Light sand (top left in photo), orange rust, olive green, and beige clay (bottom right in photo, and slightly darker in real life than it appears in the photo).

For the toques, we also have four colours currently in stock:  Black, forest green, grey, and red.  Unfortunately, the navy blue toques have been popular, and we're currently out of stock on those.

Unfortunately, these merchandise items are not for sale.  However, for anyone who donates $50 to Replant.ca Environmental, not only will your contribution directly sponsor the planting of FIFTY trees in one of our community forests or carbon capture projects, you'll also get a complimentary hat or toque.  We'll mail this item anywhere in the world for you.

For more information about our company and our vision, visit the Vision page on our website.


If you're interested in learning how to make a small contribution to sponsor the planting of some trees (and get a free hat), visit:

www.replant-environmental.ca/donate

 

We hope to plant more than 100,000 trees in 2020, and that will be made possible thanks to numerous small donations from readers such as yourself.  Thanks for reading, and thanks in advance for your support!

  - Jonathan Clark
  www.replant-environmental.ca

The Eastern White Pine tree (Pinus strobus)

This post will talk about one of our favorite tree species of the east coast, the Eastern white pine.  The Latin name for this species is Pinus strobus.  Here's a famous photo of a giant Eastern white pine tree in Virginia:

Eastern white pine (which is also referred to by some people in the Unites States as the northern white pine), is a beautiful species.  It grows all over eastern Canada and around the Great Lakes, and also throughout the northeastern seaboard of the United States.  Ironically, even though it is sometimes called the northern white, it doesn't really grow well north of New Brunswick, central Newfoundland, or southern Ontario.  Here's a map showing the typical range, thanks to Wikipedia:

Eastern white pine is a powerful species.  In mature forests, it is typically the largest tree that might be found, and often towers well above other species around it.  This tree can very easily grow to be more than forty meters tall (130 feet), and some historical specimens were reported to exceed sixty meters.  Even forty meters is very tall for the east coast!  There are a number of old eastern whites on our Charles Clark Forest Reserve property in Nova Scotia, and I'm going to try to get an accurate measurement of their height soon.  Thanks to the use of drone technology, it will be very quick and easy to get a measurement that should be accurate to within one meter.  A few of these old giants were blown down several years ago by Hurricane Juan, but a number of them survived and still thrive today.  Thankfully, they recently survived the impact of Hurricane Dorian too.

Although height is everyone's favorite metric when it comes to talking about big trees, let's not forget about DBH, which stands for "diameter at breast height."  A mature eastern white can measure between 1.0 and 1.5 meters across (that's about three to five feet, for our American followers).  Stand beside one, or try to wrap your arms around it, and you'll be humbled. What's even more impressive about this species is its lifespan.  Mature trees often live 200-250 years, and can sometimes live for more than four centuries.  Some native Americans referred to this type of tree as the "Tree of Peace," and Henry David Thoreau remarked, "There is no finer tree."

There's a great historical story about eastern white pines.  In the 1700's, these trees were often used as masts for ships.  Government representatives (early day timber cruisers) would search for the best specimens in the forests and etch a special mark (a broad arrow) into the bark of the tree.  These trees were then designated as property of the crown, and anyone who cut one down (and got caught doing so) was ostensibly given a fine for "stealing" the tree.  This lead to a backlash in the American colonies that was arguably even more significant than the tea tax or the Stamp Act, and eventually led to the Pine Tree Riot of 1772.  This incident was significant in the lead-up to the American Revolution.  You can learn more about the Pine Tree Riot at this wiki link:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pine_Tree_Riot

The eastern white pine is the provincial tree of Ontario.  Despite its majesty, it doesn't always grow symmetrically.  If growing in an area exposed to heavy winds, the tree will often have very short branches on the side exposed most chronically to the wind, and large drooping branches on the leeward side of the trunk.  This happens to other species too, but eastern white is probably more noted for it because these trees tower above other species, so this characteristic is more common in eastern whites.  Many of you probably know of Tom Thomson's famous painting, called "The Jack Pine."  You may not know that his first famous Canadian outdoor painting, entitled, "Byng Inlet, Georgian Bay," features three eastern white pine trees.  I won't post the image here due to potential copyright issues, but you can find it easily with a google search.

When young eastern white pines are growing, they can survive in any kind of soil, although they generally prefer sandy soils.  However, they're versatile, and can still survive in moist receiving zones.  They grow best when exposed to significant amounts of sunlight, but they're also very shade tolerant when young.  This lets seedlings become established as juvenile trees in understory plantations.  For this reason, eastern white pine seedlings do best when planted in open ground or in mature canopies with some open space (two extremes), but generally don't do well when planted in dense young stands with thick juvenile brush.

Different pine species tend to have different numbers of needles in their clusters, consistent to each species.  Some pines are two-needle, some are three-needle, and some are five-needle.  The eastern white, like most other white pines around the world, is a five-needle pine.  These needles grow to be as long as fifteen centimeters on mature trees, and stay on the tree for between one and four years before they fall off and are replaced with new growth.

For those of you who are more intimately familiar with forestry and arboriculture, two of the main diseases that hit eastern whites are Amillaria root rot and white pine blister rust.  The biggest insect pest that causes problems for this species is the white pine weevil.  The white pine weevil attacks eastern white pine in eastern North America, but tends to target spruce trees in western North America.

Here's a photo of one of the large eastern white pines on our Charles Clark Forest Reserve project in Nova Scotia.  It towers above the surrounding canopy!  Thankfully, Hurricane Dorian didn't blow it over.

Now you know a lot about one of our favorite tree species.  We'll leave you with this photo of some of the thousands of eastern white pine seedlings that we planted in 2019!  They're a very important part of our species mix when we're building our community forests and creating forest reserves for carbon capture.  You can learn more by going to our website and looking at our progress report page.

Thanks for reading!

- Jonathan Clark
www.replant-environmental.ca



Replant.ca Environmental is a Canadian company that plants trees for carbon capture and builds community forests.  We also plant trees in national, provincial, and municipal public parks to mitigate damage from wildfires, storms, insects, and forest diseases.  We operate thanks to numerous small contributions from the general public, in addition to larger project sponsorships from businesses and corporations around the world.  If you'd like to learn how to show your support, visit our donations page.  Even if you aren't able to make a contribution, we very much appreciate when people are able to share our posts or our website link on social media, to help spread the word about the work that we're doing!

Teachers are welcome to use content from this post for their classes.  If you know a teacher who might like to use this information, please share it with them!  The more that people learn about trees, the better our world will be.

To learn more about the various species that we plant, visit the conifers page or the deciduous (hardwoods) page on our website.  Thanks so much for your interest!

Incidentally, our organization is often seeking additional land for our carbon capture projects.  Please visit this link if you might know of a recently-harvested property that we could rebuild into a permanent legacy forest.

The Beginnings of Replant.ca Environmental

(Updated in 2023)

My name is Jonathan Clark.

In late 2018, I "started" a new company.  The goal was to plant trees to help fight against climate change.  I had already been planting a small number of volunteer trees each year for the past several years, but I wanted to be able to increase my impact.  I also believed that I could plant trees for environmental reasons on a much larger scale if I formalized the organization.  After all, I had been receiving dozens of inquiries about this type of work every year.  I've been working as a professional tree planter for a couple decades, so I figured that my extensive field experience would be invaluable in building out a large planting organization.

I decided to call the company Replant.ca Environmental.

 

I knew that using this name had the potential to be slightly confusing.  The original Replant.ca website (which focuses on education for commercial reforestation) has been the most well-known tree planting site in Canada since I first put it online in 1998.  It hosts thousands of photos, music, videos, training materials, a message board, and much more.  During its tenure, the website has been visited a few million times, and it has been the reason, directly or indirectly, that tens of thousands of university/college students have found summer jobs as tree planters across the country.  The name has incredibly strong brand recognition, which I felt could be helpful in establishing a new company.

As Replant.ca grew, I kept planting trees.  Throughout my career, I gained a very wide diversity of experience.  I've been a camp supervisor at three companies, a foreman at six companies, and I've planted for more than fifteen companies.  I've planted well over a million trees, although to be honest, that's not really an impressive number for anyone who has worked in the commercial industry for several years.  However, more importantly, I've directly overseen the planting of well over a hundred million trees during my tenure as a camp supervisor (that was up to 2018, but the number is still increasing).  I estimate that approximately two thousand tree planters have worked for me in my camps so far.  I've also been involved in lots of related jobs, including forest nursery work, lifting seedlings, brushing, spacing, girdling, and many varieties of reclamation and environmental restoration work.

The only major drawback to my previous work experience is that my regular job as a professional planter has been an industry job, much like farming.  The tree planting that I normally perform is intended to fill empty cut-blocks after logging companies cut down part of a forest.  To be clear, I don't work for the logging companies directly.  I work (on a seasonal basis) for a few different companies that specialize in tree planting.  These planting companies are hired on a contractual basis by the logging companies or by the government.  I refer to this work as commercial or industrial "post-harvest" reforestation, because we rebuild forests after commercial harvesting.  This is the kind of work that is done seasonally by tens of thousands of Canadians, and this is what the traditional Replant.ca website focuses upon.

It's easy for professional tree planters to be cynical and complain about our work.  We protest that we're just perpetuating the entire cycle of logging, and to some extent, that's true.  In many cases, we're planting trees so that future loggers can harvest them and turn them into toilet paper for our grandchildren.  But there's more to it than that!  Think about the alternatives.  Wood IS a renewable resource, so if we're assisting the logging industry, at least it's better than working in an industry that consumes non-renewables.  If we harvest trees in a sustainable manner, that's some consolation.  And things could be much worse.  Historically I've usually worked in British Columbia and Alberta, where the law says that any harvested areas have to be turned back into forests.  I take solace in the fact that the logging companies that hire me don't just mow down the forests and walk away without replanting the land.

Even though I had tried in the past to be optimistic, and think positively about the sustainable approach that Canada's (west coast) logging industry was usually trying to take, I had always wanted to do more.  I always wanted to plant trees that would be protected from future logging.  I wanted to build forests that would be permanent, where people could walk underneath trees that had been living for hundreds of years.

For years, I didn't act upon those goals.  But in 2018, I knew that I could make a positive change, and that it was time to act.  I had planted a number of small volunteer projects over the past two decades.  However, awareness of the value of reforestation was growing in the cultural zeitgeist.  I'd been contacted many times by people who asked if I could plant large numbers of trees that they would sponsor, so I finally decided in 2018 that it was time to start accepting those requests more frequently.  I knew that I had the background and knowledge to be able to successfully plant environmentally-based trees on a larger scale, and after a few months of research and deciding upon a sustainable business model, I started to accept sponsorships.

In 2019, quite a few individuals and organizations pledged sponsorships for trees.  I brought in extra help.  In the summer of 2019, not only did we plant tens of thousands of sponsored trees, but we also built a proper website, and started spreading the story about our organization and goals through word-of-mouth.  We wanted to be able to capitalize on the very well-known brand name of Replant.ca, but we also wanted to distinguish the new company from the industrial/commercial reputation of the original website.  We decided that Replant.ca Environmental satisfied both needs.

Over the next couple of years, we quickly grew the organization to planting well over half a million trees per year.  Some of these have been our own self-led projects supported by public funders.  On other projects, we've worked as a supply partner to provide the boots-on-the-ground expertise to plant seedlings for other well-respected organizations such as One Tree Planted, Veritree, and Trees For Life.

Replant.ca Environmental plants trees that will not be cut down in the future by logging companies.  Our long-term plan is to acquire land, plant trees, and build community forests that the public is allowed to visit and enjoy!

Thankfully, we've had some help from several of our professional tree planting friends.  They also work for part of each year in traditional post-harvest reforestation, they share the same goal of building some permanent forests that won't be cut down in the future.

You can visit our new website to learn more about our company.  Here's the link:

www.replant-environmental.ca

Here are three things that you may find interesting:

1.  The Replant.ca Environmental organization is not involved with commercial post-harvest work for logging companies.

2.  We do not plant monocultures, and we aim for biodiversity.  We aim to maximize the number of species on each project site, whenever possible.  There are many good reasons to do this.  Carbon capture is maximized when there is a diversity of species.  If a particular species is attacked in the future by some sort of pest or disease, having many other species in the forest is a good form of insurance to make sure the forest survives as a whole.  A diverse forest is also more interesting to walk through, and is much more robust in ecological and biological terms.

3.  We want to make sure that our projects are transparent.  Some of the organizations that do charitable planting don't identify exactly where they do their work.  We want the public and our supporters to know exactly where we've been planting.  You can learn about many of the sites that we've worked on by visiting our projects page.

 

 
If you want to help us out, share this post!  Thanks for reading...
 - Jonathan Clark

A group photo showing part of our 2022 Planting Team.