State of the Forest… A changing resource—a paradigm shift in resource management!

1. State of the Forest…A changing resource—a paradigm shift in resource management! Alan R. EkProfessor and HeadDepartment of Forest ResourcesUniversity of Minnesota.612-624-3400; email aek@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 / Governor’s 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 structure…what does it mean?

9. The Changing Forest • Changing age class structure…what 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 structure…what about aspen?

11. The Changing Forest • Changing age class structure…what 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 methods…clearcut, 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 don’t 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. Practices…from 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 (I&D, exotic species, windstorms, fire…) • Diversifying forest ownership interests • Multiple roles/uses of forests

24. Roles of forests…intensifying! • 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 step…any questions?

30. References • Governor’s Task Force on the Competitive of Minnesota’s 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. Minnesota’s 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