State of the Forest…
A changing resource—a paradigm
shift in resource management!
Alan R. Ek
Professor and Head
Department of Forest Resources
University of Minnesota.
612-624-3400; email aek@umn.edu
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.
2
Following the signs





The changing forest
Evolution of tools and practices
Need and opportunities
Paradigm shift and strategies
Summary
3
The changing forest
4
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!
5
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.
6
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%
7
The Changing Forest
Changing age class structure…what does it mean?
All types
Timberland Acres
1977
1990
2005
1-30
3,403,700
3,673,000
3,589,908
31-60
6,665,400
5,175,100
4,934,383
61-90
2,663,900
4,390,900
4,856,807
91-120
120+
785,900
1,105,500
1,177,532
179,800
425,901
430,079
Age class
8
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)
9
The Changing Forest
Changing age class structure…what about aspen?
Timberland Acres
Aspen
1977
1990
2005
1-30 1,672,900
31-60 3,081,500
1,756,400
1,989,020
2,181,700
1,813,141
61-90
527,000
1,196,800
999,596
91-120
120+
19,500
53,100
41,935
1400
5,600
6,037
Age class
10
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
11
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
12
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.
13
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
14
Changing Practices

Treatment Opportunity class from 2005 FIA survey
Regen w site prep 5%
Stand conversion 15%
Thinning seedlings &
saplings 7%
Thinning poletimber 4%
Clearcut harvest 28%
Partial cut harvest 4%
No silvicultural
treatment 37%
15
Changes in productivity…

Growing stock*…
Year
Ft3 ac-1
Volume per acre
Growth per acre
2004
1118
36
1990
1021
31
1977
836
32
1962
612
30
1953
399
27
1936
378
26




annual mortality
annual harvest
* approximate, from USDA
Ft3 ac-1yr-1
Forest Service FIA reports.
16
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!
17
Can we achieve the target? What
will it take?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
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.
18
Can we achieve the target?

Recent and potential allowable harvest calculations…
12
10
8
6
4
2
Harvest 1999
Harvest 2001
Harvest of growing stock
Net growth 1977-89
Net growth 1989
GEIS AAC
Growth + mortality 1989
FIA site potential
0
19
Practices… 1996 survey details

Regen - 37,760 ac


Site prep - 27,900 ac


Planting, seeding
Chemical, Px burning, mechanical
TSI - 30,214 ac






Chemical release
Mechanical release
Precommercial thinning
Residual felling
Pruning
Underburning
20
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.
21
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.
22
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
23
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?
24
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.
25
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.
26
Paradigm shift research strategies
Research

1.
2.
3.
4.
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.
27
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!!!
28
A big step…any questions?
29
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): 203210.
USDA Forest Service. FIA Mapmaker.
http://www.ncrs2.fs.fed.us/4801/FIADB/index.htm
30