Are trees not getting the memo...?

The next skeptic meme will be that we haven't warmed enough, and CO2 isn't high enough, to help trees. It will be like an inverted Laffer curve, where you plot productivity versus temperature (or CO2 concentration), and we are sitting just to the left of the minimum. All we have to do is let T and [CO2] rise past the minimum and trees will be fine.

That proposition is delusional nonsense, but so is everything else spewing from the mouths of skeptics so it will fit right in. (Except the black helicopter conspiracy crap, that stuff is dead-bang on target.)

"There is not enough evidence at present to suggest high confidence in observed trends in dryness due to lack of direct observations, some geographical inconsistencies in the trends, and some dependencies of inferred trends on the index choice. There is medium confidence that since the 1950s some regions of the world have experienced more intense and longer droughts (e.g., southern Europe, west Africa) but also opposite trends exist in other regions (e.g., central North America, northwestern Australia)."

http://www.ipcc-wg2.gov/SREX/images/uploads/SREX-A...

"The most widespread and severe drought conditions occurred in the 1930s and 1950s (Andreadis et al., 2005). The early 2000s were also characterized by severe droughts in some areas, notably in the western United States. When averaged across the entire United States (Figure 2.6), there is no clear tendency for a trend based on the PDSI. Similarly, long-term trends (1925-2003) of hydrologic droughts based on model derived soil moisture and runoff show that droughts have, for the most part, become shorter, less frequent, and cover a smaller portion of the U. S. over the last century (Andreadis and Lettenmaier, 2006). The main exception is the Southwest and parts of the interior of the West, where increased temperature has led to rising drought trends (Groisman et al., 2004; Andreadis and Lettenmaier, 2006). The trends averaged over all of North America since 1950 (Figure 2.6) are similar to U.S. trends for the same period, indicating no overall trend."

http://downloads.climatescience.gov/sap/sap3-3/sap...

I'll highlight the good part: "...droughts have, for the most part, become shorter, less frequent, and cover a smaller portion of the U. S. over the last century..."

I think it would be fair to say that those two reports you linked are a clear example of cherry picking. Droughts and floods are going to happen just like they have for thousands of years. Some trees are going to die, some are going to grow. Pests will come and go. There will be good good growing years and bad growing years. Just look at some tree rings.

There's nothing magical in any of this. It's nature. On top of that, I'm not even sure what your point is. If you are suggesting that reducing CO2 emissions will prevent forests from dying off due to drought, well you're going to have to stop cherry picking and do some real science starting with showing that droughts are actually increasing AND the cause is due to increased CO2 emissions.

If that's not your point and you're just being like me, well then mission accomplished.

Trees need lots of water. Climate change, short- or long-term, can stress a forest. Forests will migrate to favorable conditions. Death is quick. Restoration or migration of a forest takes a little more time. Within the relative stability of the good Earth's climate, humans can be afforded a place just as there is a place for new forests. Burt doesn't quit because a tree dies. He makes a fire, builds something useful, and plants a tree where it will grow.

According to one of your own favorite sources,some trees got the memo & are taking full advantage of the situation.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/09120...

Of course periods of severe drought will kill any plant but increased atmospheric co2 also REDUCES most species of trees need for water.

http://www.fsl.orst.edu/~bond/fs561/references/kna...

Trees such as locust that fix nitrogen from the atmosphere get the most benefit from increased co2 but 97% of scientists agree all trees get some benefit.

There are more trees in the US now than when Columbus discovered America.

The denialist misrepresentations AKA lies are being revealed and are collapsing

Your question is silly, of course you have to have adequate water.

------------------------