<p>Forests are being scrutinized for their capacity to store large amounts of carbon over long periods. However, the interactions between climate change, forest management, and wind disturbances could challenge management strategies based on setting aside forests. The study is located in the northeastern part of the Romanian Carpathian Mountains and compares forests’ contribution to mitigation according to three opposing strategies of forest management differing by their share area set aside (SA) from wood procurement: SA0, business-as-usual management; SA30, 30% of the forest areas are set aside; and SA100, 100% of the forest areas are set aside. A dynamic forest landscape model (LandClim) was used to compare the effects of different management strategies on the potential for forest mitigation. The model outputs were used to quantify the potential for carbon sequestration and substitution under RCP2.6 and RCP8.5 climate scenarios. Under the RCP2.6 climate, the highest carbon storage capacity was achieved by the SA100 management. Wind-induced losses in the SA0 and SA30 remained at similar magnitudes until 2120. Thus, under the RCP2.6 climate, the effects of substitution from SA0 exceeded the increase in storage expected from SA100. Under the RCP8.5 climate, stocks increased for three decades, then collapsed. The management strategy did not influence these losses, which were negligible after 2080 owing to the very small standing stocks. Setting aside forests for carbon storage could be a viable solution in the RCP2.6 climate. However, windthrow events limit their potential.</p>