|
|
White Pine Society Management Plan
A proposal for managing white pines on Minnesota
state-administrated lands.
Part A
Develop a sustainable harvest plan for each ecological subsection,
taking into account ecological and aesthetic values and long-term timber
values. Within each ecological subsection, make no new sales of white
pines on state-administered land until such a plan is developed. Existing
contracts can run as long as 10 years, so loggers can continue cutting
under old contracts while the DNR develops sustainable harvest plans for
each ecological subsection. Some subsections in north central Minnesota
show reasonable white pine regeneration, so sustainable harvest plans
might be developed most easily for those subsections to enable harvest to
continue on a sustainable basis. It is necessary to manage by ecological
subsection because regeneration problems and past reduction in acreage
differ from subsection to subsection. This will also assure a broad
distribution of white pines and prevent management in which white pines
are depleted in one subsection and regenerated in another, which does
nothing to benefit the depleted subsection. To address ecological and
aesthetic values, the plan for each ecological subsection must include the
following:
|
Within each ecological subsection, exempt from harvest all
white pines older than 120 years old. These total less than 3,000 acres on
state and federal timberland and less than 3,800 acres in reserve areas
such as Itasca State Park and the BWCAW. The subtotal for
state-administered land is somewhat less. These forest stands and
scattered trees will become the true old-growth forests (250-400 years
old) with fully grown trees like our forefathers saw (3-6 feet in
diameter, and sometimes over 150 feet tall). These trees will provide the
long-lasting snags (that often last a half century) and large-diameter
logs (that last up to two centuries) that are lacking in our forests today
and that have many ecological values. |
|
Within each ecological subsection, exempt from harvest
future old growth white pines 60-120 years old in an amount that will
assure an age distribution to replenish old growth white pine forests and
scattered white pines in perpetuity. Very little white pine remains as old
growth. To preserve forest diversity, we must prevent that from declining
more. Both white pine forest acreage and large scattered old white pine
trees are important to wildlife in different ways. |
|
In the ecological subsections where the work group
identified white pines as being most severely depleted, i.e, in the Mille
Lacs Uplands, Anoka Sand Plain, St Croix Moraines and Outwash Plains,
North Shore, Glacial Lake Superior Plain, St Louis Moraines, and
Laurentian Highlands ecological subsections, exempt white pines from
harvest in future timber sales on state-administered land (except limited
experimental harvest-see below) and focus regeneration efforts on these
subsections until the number of white pines over 60 years old has
quadrupled. These subsections currently produce little white pine timber
but were formerly among Minnesota's most productive white pine areas.
These subsections include approximately 30 percent of Minnesota's former
white pine range in east central Minnesota and along the North Shore. |
|
In the ecological subsections where the work group
identified white pine regeneration as being especially difficult to
regenerate due to blister rust, poor seedbed, deer browsing, or
competition from hardwoods and balsam fir, exempt white pines from harvest
in future timber sales on state-administered land, except limited
experimental harvest, until experimental regeneration efforts are shown to
be consistently and predictably successful. These subsections include the
North Shore, Nashwauk Uplands, and Border Lakes ecological subsections.
These subsections currently produce little white pine timber because they
include the depleted North Shore subsection and the reserved BWCA. The
Nashwauk Uplands have some of our most extensive stands of white pines
that remain. However, foresters have had limited regeneration experience
and have had only inconsistent success in regenerating white pines in
these subsections, so harvest on state-administered lands within those
subsections should be limited to experimental harvest of up to three
percent of the white pines to determine regeneration strategies that
provide the highest 20-year survival. Determining the factors that
influence success is necessary to predicting sustainable harvest levels
and developing optimal management strategies for white pine in those
subsections. |
|
Upon satisfaction of the above, restrict future white pine
sales on state-administered land within each ecological subsection to
thinnings, selective harvest, and shelterwood harvests under the DNR's
Extended Rotation Forest Guidelines with followup silviculture and
monitoring to assure that there is adequate regeneration and no net loss
of acreage that is fully stocked with white pines 60-180 years old and
older. Loss of acreage will trigger a halt of future sales of white pines
within that ecological subsection until the acreage is restored. |
Part B
White pines that occur as scattered individuals or in small groups must
not be harvested from public land. Scattered individuals or members of
small groups that are damaged from natural causes will be retained for
their ecological values. The better producing seed trees will be the focus
of regeneration efforts that include creating a suitable seedbed in the
area of seedfall and nurturing seedlings by pruning rust-infected
branches, bud-capping terminal leaders in fall to prevent deer-browse
damage, and releasing them from hardwood competition at the proper time.
Part C
Trees that pose a safety hazard to the public may be harvested.
Part D
Develop procedures for notifying the public of proposed timber sales on
state-administered lands and allowing public comment and appeals as is law
on federally administered land. The recent reduction in Minnesota's white
pine resource and the near elimination of the huge white pines people
enjoy are partly due to the fact that there is little public knowledge of
forestry activities and little opportunity for public involvement prior to
timber sales on state-administered land. The weak limitations on cutting
recommended by this work group show that industry and forestry
professionals cannot effectively manage a public resource over which some
members have a conflict of interest. Public forests belong to all
Minnesotans, and more open procedures are needed to keep the public better
informed and more involved.
|
|