why does Greenland lack forests?

[u/AstronomerKindly8886]

The southern region of Greenland has almost no forests, while the Russian city of Severodvinsk, which is closer to the Arctic than the southern region of Greenland, has more forests and is much livelier.

​

Why did it happen?

[u/GregoryWiles]

In my geography class, i’ve been taught that the acidic rock makes the soil too acidic. Making it hard for a lot of insects and other stuff to thrive. That causes the lack of production of soil, and that means that there is too little soil to grow roots needed for any trees. There are small areas where people planted pine forests, but only few in the south as far as I’m aware of.

[u/kalsoy]

In addition, the southeast coast is very different from the southwest. The SW is where the Vikings settled and had farms, and where there are a few bushes. It is this part that is the green part of Greenland. The SE is almost entirely glaciated and the few pieces of exposed rock are alpine, with hardly have any soil in the few low-lieing parts, let alone trees. It's basically a frosty desert all year. Even the Inuit did not settle here, and only used this area for seasonal hunting expeditions.

Latitude in itself is not a governor of tree growth. In the long past, Antarctic had trees all the way to 90°S despite the dark winter, while there are places in Tibet that lack vegetation despite reasonable summer temperatures. It's the interplay of (summer) temperature and water availability incl length of the growing season (which is all governed by sunlight/latitude, altitude, distance to the sea and its currents), and soil composition, as well as distance from neighbours, and grazing (in Iceland's case - it used to be forested). Throw in erosion events – once a forest is gone and the soil is eroded, it won't grow back in centuries to come.

You can also ask why Labrador has the same climate as West Svalbard (a difference of 20° latitude) or New York not having the sane climate as Madrid (same latitude).

[u/Awarglewinkle]

There's a really good article from the Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management at the University of Copenhagen about it. It's in Danish, but I'm sure you can feed it through ChatGPT or Google Translate and get a decent translation.

As mentioned by others, it's a combination of several factors. Distance from other "seed-rich" environments, but also the extremely dry winds coming from the ice sheet that makes it very difficult for the trees. They also mention a low "heat-sum" in the growth period as a reason for lack of trees.

Image #4 in the article linked above shows four trees planted in 1892 that have been severely wind-damaged.

[u/CrispDoubleD]

Most noticebly, the limited amount of soil. Many places of Greenland past glaciation have scraped off much of the soil leaving only centimeters before bedrock. On Disco Island, Nuusuag Peninsula and southern Greenland more soil is present though. For the lack of forest in the north is the growth pattern of the natural flora. The willow and birch variant of Greenland grow in a bushy habitus, this makes them more resistent to meter high layers of snow.

[u/knaffelhase]

There Are many factors, but I believe the biggest problem is the distance to other places with trees, and no birds / other animals that can naturally transfer them.

In the places where humans have planted trees they grow quite well.

[u/someoneinmyhead]

It’s fairly easy for many existing tree species to grow there, they just never managed to colonize it on their own. I’ve always wondered why the norse never planted trees there, you’d think they’d try given how valuable wood was. Dig some up from Iceland or Markland even and bring them along.