State of the Forest A changing resourcea paradigm shift in resource management

1
State of the Forest A changing resourcea
paradigm shift in resource management!

• Alan R. EkProfessor and HeadDepartment of
  Forest ResourcesUniversity of Minnesota.612-624-
  3400 email aek_at_umn.edu

2
Abstract

• Changes in society and the condition of our
  forest resources suggest needs and opportunities
  for increasing the level of management.
• The focus of management will change from
  treatment of acres to outputs. This focus has
  evolved from issues of fiscal accountability,
  responsibility for providing a healthy and
  productive forest, and ecological and economic
  needs and opportunities.
• New approaches and tools in silviculture, forest
  planning, and communications can facilitate rapid
  innovation as the new paradigm focused on outputs
  is implemented.
• The new paradigm will change planning,
  communications and on-the-ground priorities.

3
Following the signs

• The changing forest
• Evolution of tools and practices
• Need and opportunities
• Paradigm shift and strategies
• Summary

4
The changing forest
5
The changing forest

• 1865-1930 Exploitation of the pinery
• 1930-1990 The wall of new wood
• 1990-2000 Industry expansion environmental
  issues
• New capacity and the GEIS
• Harvest peaks at 4.1 million cords in 1994
• 2000 Regrouping in a globalizing economy
• Harvest levels stuck at 3.6 million cords
• Investment, productivity and forest health
  slowing
• Reassessment / Governors Task Force Reports
• New investment and harvest target 5.5 million
  cords!

6
The chicken or the egg?

• Which comes first?
• Investments in manufacturing and expanding
  markets
• Increasing the supply
• Solution (given a complex ownership)
• Investments to increase the supply
• Articulate timber availability for achieving the
  target.

7
Area, action and Interests?

• MN Timberland 15 million acres
• Harvest Regen 1.2 of timberland per yr
• ---------------------------
• Private - 46
• Family forests - 41 (150,000 ownerships)
• Private Industry - 5
• State - 25
• County - 15
• Federal - 14

8
The Changing Forest
Changing age class structurewhat does it mean?
9
The Changing Forest

• Changing age class structurewhat does it mean?
• The forest is aging
• Health issues are increasing
• For a 5.5 Million cord target
• Increase acres in younger or replacement age
  classes
• Harvest older age classes faster
• Intensify management of younger stands to
  increase their yield (e.g., weed control,
  thinning, shorter rotation ages)

10
The Changing Forest
Changing age class structurewhat about aspen?
11
The Changing Forest

• Changing age class structurewhat does it mean
  for aspen?
• The forest is aging
• Health issues are increasing
• Older stands falling down or converting
• Partial harvests lead to less aspen acreage
• For a 5.5 Million cord target
• Increase acres in younger or replacement age
  classes
• Harvest older age classes faster
• Shorten rotation ages

12
The Changing Forest

• What about softwood type age class distributions?
• Red pine Increase acreage in younger or
  replacement age classes intensify management.
• Balsam fir Rapid decline in acreage due to
  Spruce budworm, partial harvest revisit
  practices.
• White pine Increase acreage in younger age
  classes intensify followup.
• Black spruce Aging, speed harvesting to increase
  acreage of young or replacement age classes

13
The Changing Forest

• What about hardwood type age class distributions?
• Northern hardwoods A complex type, expanding
  acreage intensify management,foster conversion
  to other types.
• Paper birch Increase acreage in younger or
  replacement age classes, increase harvest rate.
• Oak Increase acreage in younger or replacement
  age classes, increase harvest rate.

14
Changing Practices

• Practices reported from 1996 survey
• Species/site matching
• Genetic improvement / improved seed
• Containerized seedlings
• Site preparation
• Weed control release
• Commercial thinning
• Pruning
• Harvest methodsclearcut, shelterwood, selection,
  group selection, seed tree, combinations
• Salvage and slash disposal

15
Changing Practices

• Treatment Opportunity class from 2005 FIA survey

16
Changes in productivity

• Growing stock
• Volume per acre
• Growth per acre
• annual mortality
• annual harvest
• approximate, from USDA Forest Service FIA
  reports.

17
Additional silvicultural tools for a focus on
outputs

• Improved species/site matching (ECS)
• Site preparation weed control options
• Thinning early, light and often
• Fertilization
• Increased utilization
• Combinations of treatments
• the greatest gains!

18
Can we achieve the target? What will it take?

• Shorter rotations.
• Increased utilization
• Managed stand yield tables.
• Intensification of silviculture / combinations of
  practices
• Forest scheduling models (FSMs) for determining
  optimal harvest schedules and plans If 1-4 and
  increased harvest dont show up in the plans,
  there has been no real progress!
• Communication of the opportunities to landowners,
  forest managers, and decision makers / investors.

19
Can we achieve the target?

• Recent and potential allowable harvest
  calculations

20
Practices 1996 survey details

• Regen - 37,760 ac
• Planting, seeding
• Site prep - 27,900 ac
• Chemical, Px burning, mechanical
• TSI - 30,214 ac
• Chemical release
• Mechanical release
• Precommercial thinning
• Residual felling
• Pruning
• Underburning

21
Practicesfrom 1996 survey

• Application area
• 150,000-200,000 acres annually (area subject to
  harvesting and/or other treatment)
• Clear-cutting 85 with and without residuals
• Thinning 11
• Patch, strip, seed tree, shelterwood, other 4
• 20-30 acres per sale or block
• 20 cords per acre harvested
• 83 natural regen
• 17 artificial regen

Photo by
Brian Lockhart, USDA FS, Bugwood.org.
22
Can we achieve the target? What are the givens?
(social license)

• Monitoring silvicultural harvesting practices.
• Monitoring mgmt guidelines implementation.
• Assessment of guidelines effectiveness.
• Continued / enhanced forest inventory (CSA
  FIA).
• Monitoring and synthesis of related outputs.

23
The need and opportunities

• Global competition in forest products industry
• The evolving bioenergy industry
• Forest health management
• Local to global environmental change
• (ID, exotic species, windstorms, fire)
• Diversifying forest ownership interests
• Multiple roles/uses of forests

24
Roles of forestsintensifying!

• Multiple roles/uses of forests is a reality and a
  necessity!
• Timber, water, wildlife, recreation, aesthetics,
  biofuels, carbon sequestration
• Multiple ownerships and diverse authorities
  across landscapes
• Can we get everyone on the same page?

25
Paradigm shift and strategies

• One-the-ground management
• Focus on outputs rather than acres treated.
• Focus first on the low hanging fruit, e.g.,
• Stands that are low risk, high returns.
• Treatments and combinations of treatments that
  have low risk, potentially high returns.
• Focus on tracking and follow up to ensure
  effective treatments and desired results.
• Create demonstration sites for research,
  communications and training.

26
Paradigm shift and strategies

• Planning
• Implement Forest Scheduling Models (FSMs) for
  large and complex forest ownerships.
• Leave preconceptions at the door (Group Grope not
  allowed).
• Bring general ideas for constraints to the
  planning process allow the FSM to help decide on
  the specific constraints.
• Consider 20-50 year planning horizons.
• Track and compare plans and results.
• Use planning results to make the case for
  investment.

27
Paradigm shift research strategies

• Research
• Utilize Monitoring and Forest Scheduling Models
  (FSMs) to assist / guide research direction.
• Utilize expert synthesis and 90 solutions (e.g.,
  managed stand yield tables).
• Use demonstration sites to further improve
  research results.
• Use shortcomings from 1-3 to make the case for
  larger research investments.

28
Summary

• The forest is changing.
• Continuation of current outputs will require
  increased management!
• Increasing the supply will require an even
  greater increase in level of management!!
• Given the needs and opportunities, the paradigm
  for management will need to shift from a focus on
  acres treated to a focus on outputs!!!

29
A big stepany questions?
30
References

• Governors Task Force on the Competitive of
  Minnesotas Primary Forest Products Industry.
  2007. Final Report to the Governor. St. Paul,
  MN.
• Interagency Information Cooperative.
• http//iic.gis.umn.edu
• Jaakko Pöyry Consulting, Inc. 1992. Maintaining
  productivity and the forest resource base. A
  technical paper for a generic environmental
  impact statement on timber harvesting and forest
  management in Minnesota. Prepared for the
  Minnesota Environmental Quality Board
• Miles, P. D., G. R. Brand, and M. E. Mielke.
  2006. Minnesotas Forest Resources 2004. USDA
  Forest Service North Central Research Station,
  Resource Bulletin NC-262. St. Paul, MN.
• Puettmann, K. J. and A. R. Ek. 1999. Status and
  trends of silvicultural practices in Minnesota.
  Northern Journal of Applied Forestry 16(4)
  203-210.
• USDA Forest Service. FIA Mapmaker.
  http//www.ncrs2.fs.fed.us/4801/FIADB/index.htm