Vital Forests Vital Communities

Thanks to Beth Jacqmain, Aitkin County Deputy Land Manager and 2009 Chair of the Minnesota Chapter of the Society of American Foresters, for forwarding me a copy of the Chapter’s new resolution on carbon sequestration.

The resolution was passed by unanimous vote at MN SAF’s General Business meeting on February 27th, on the heels of the Forest Values/Carbon Markets conference at Cloquet Forestry Center.

Katie Fernholz, an SAF/MN past chair, alerted me to the fact that it was Saint John Arboretum’s Tom Kroll who took the time to draft and introduce the carbon resolution, and that DNR’s (former State Forester) Mike Carroll – an influential voice – lent his instant support. As Katie wrote, “it is to the credit of the full membership that [the resolution] passed unanimously, but it took Tom’s initiative to get it rolling down hill. Thank goodness that man chose forestry as his profession!” Indeed.

At the Blandin Foundation we care about promoting “rural voice” — helping ensure that rural perspectives are well represented in public discourse and strengthening the capacity of rural people to be their own voice.

That’s why I pay attention to Minnesota Brown, Aaron Brown’s blog about life on the Iron Range. In his March 5 post, Who are the true owners of these lands, forests and waters?, Aaron makes a compelling case for why forests are so central Minnesota’s identity and future, and why the Upper Mississippi Forest conservation easement project on UPM lands – which Aaron calls a “once in a lifetime” opportunity — is so important to our future.

I urge you to read it and pass it on. And check out the comments too. As one contributor writes: “This is an issue that will have an impact in our lifetime, and will become even greater for our children. If action is not taken now, much stands to be lost.”

Earlier this week I shared some reflections on the Forest Values & Carbon Markets conference held last week in partnership with over 30 organizations who have signed up for the “Next Million Acre” goal of increasing by one million the number of acres of family forest land under sustainable management. Here’s an update on next steps:

• The conference web page has been updated with all of the PowerPoint presentations and reports, including the Manomet report.
• We are planning a series of on-line activities to advance the dialog and discussion begun at the conference. We were energized by the participants’ smart and sparky questions – especially about the implications of carbon markets for forest management. These activities are likely to include a webinar, as well as presenters’ written and video responses to audience questions. Watch this space for details. In the meantime, you might be interested in seeing the aggregated list of QUESTIONS submitted.
• A final summative report of the event, including the real-time audience opinion questions we asked and answered during the day, is being prepared. We’ll make that available just as soon as possible.
• Photos from the conference, including the field tour, are available on our website.
• And speaking of the field tour, here’s a link to Eli’s blog post, Silviculture and Carbon in the Cloquet Woods.
• Yesterday, MPR aired a detailed report by Stephanie Hamphill, who attended the conference, about forest management and carbon trading. Check it out!
 

Last week I got to sit in on part of the Lessard Outdoor Heritage Council’s (LOHC) marathon session to hear forestry proposals. The Council’s meeting began promptly at 8:00, took a mid-day recess while the House and Senate were in session, and then didn’t finish up until 8 p.m. Interest was high; the room was packed.

I made the trip to hear the presentation of the 12 collaborating organizations of a package of proposals for “Forest Protection, Enhancement and Restoration,” totaling just over $64 million. In particular, Blandin Foundation Trustees have signaled their interest in the Upper Mississippi Forest Project, a conservation easement project that would permanently protect 187,277 acres of working forestlands in and around Itasca county (basically, all of UPM’s forestlands in Minnesota).

DNR’s Dick Peterson, Program Coordinator for the Minnesota Forests for the Future Program, made the presentation of the Upper Mississippi Forest Project. His restrained affect notwithstanding, Dick successfully conveyed the historical significance of this opportunity: the working forest in question is about half the size of Hennepin County and would stitch together 4,000 square miles of public lands. He noted that besides the environmental benefits of the project – including significant habitat restoration, enhancement and protection achieved through requirements for ecological management of the property — protecting this working forest landscape will be important for Itasca area’s local economy.

Dick noted that 3,200 families are directly impacted by the property, including jobs in the woods, jobs at 17 mills in Minnesota that receive forest products off this forest, and hundreds of jobs in recreation and tourism. He emphasized that the easement would ensure permanent public access for hunting, fishing, hiking, bird watching, and other activities, along with permanent public access to more than 82 miles of snowmobile trails and more for ATV use with safeguards to protect the environment. Media coverage of the topic was substantial in local, regional and statewide newspapers this past weekend. Many of the major stakeholders in this project participated in the Foundation’s Seeing the Forest AND the Trees Study Tour project , and it was gratifying to see the relationships they strengthening during that experience put to good use in support of this project.

However, LOHC chair Mike Kilgore is quick to point out that even if the proposal receives strong support from the council, legislators will be the real “deciders.” During a visit to the Foundation last week, Mike said that the bigger issue at play here is not just what projects best serve Minnesota’s long term conservation goals, but what governance model for the new dedicated funds best serves the state. In Sunday’s Star Tribune, columnist Dennis Anderson in his story More power to the people outlines these battle lines and weighs in strongly on the side of the council, calling it a “beacon of hope” and “ by far the most inclusive, efficient and knowledgeable conservation committee this state has known. Ever.” Anderson also praises the “energy and intelligence” that Mike is bringing to his role as chair. All true, but I’d also add that he’s a really nice guy.

He’s gracious about it, but in his comment on my most recent blog post, Jim Bowyer gently points out that I’m off-base with my concerns that Manomet’s case study of a possible carbon off-set market in Minnesota presents forest managers with an “apparent forced choice” between managing for either for carbon credits or fiber. That’s because the proposed Manomet system and the CCX both “count” harvested wood products. Because longer-lived products (like OSB and lumber) “count more than shorter-lived products (like paper,) “one way to look at carbon credits in Minnesota is that such payments could assist in the goal of bringing a greater portion of our forests to later successionary and/or old growth conditions.” Read more from Jim…

John Rajala made a similar point when I ran into him at the Foundation yesterday afternoon. He’d spent the afternoon talking with MPR’s Stephanie Hemphill about what carbon off-set trading might mean for Rajala Companies, whose commitment to growing big quality trees is well known. (Stephanie was at the conference as part of her global warming beat. Listen for her report on forests’ role on MPR this Thursday.) John said he thought such a market might be helpful to his business and his forest management goals – not in a big way, perhaps, but enough so that he was paying attention. He also said he tried to sell Ms. Hemphill on the fact that Grand Rapids is the center of the forestry universe on Earth. Clearly, he’s been reading too many Dovetail, Inc. reports.