The Michigan Forester On-Line
A Publication of the Michigan
Society of American Foresters
Number 46, Iron River, Michigan, Fall, 1999
IN THIS ISSUE . . .
MSAF Fall Meeting: Ecosystem
Management: A Canadian/Ontario Perspective
Oral History With Putnam Robbins
An Electronic
Crossroads for Ecosystem Management
SAF Centennial-Michigan
Forest Industry History
Forest History:
Roscommon County Won't Tolerate Forest Management!
Upper Midwest Capstone Report
Awards
News From Mississippi Our
Sister Society
Internet Corner:
pending / proposed Michigan legislation affecting DNR
Michigan SAF New Members
Many in our membership had expressed interest in this topic. However, the term "ecosystem management" evokes a variety of responses from foresters. It may be a guiding philosophy leading to healthier and more productive forests. Yet, there are many examples of undesirable forest practices committed in the "name" of ecosystem management. For some, it is just the latest way to further restrict the activities and livelihoods of a class of people.
After a couple months to reflect on what we saw and experienced with the Canadian foresters, one of my core beliefs was strengthened. The forestry profession is dedicated to the long-term welfare of the forests and the society that depends upon those forests. We may argue among ourselves about many aspects of the science and application, but we have more in common than we have differences. No group is in a position to better provide the goods and services of a forest than foresters.
Bill Thornton, Director of the Ontario Ministry
of Natural Resources Forest Management Branch provided an enlightening sketch of the
resource and how Ontario approaches the management of that resource, especially from a
landscape or ecosystem viewpoint. He highlighted some of the similarities (i.e. forest
types) and differences (i.e. forest ownership). For more information of Ontario’s
resource, try the Ministry website (http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/mnr/forests/index.html).
The Ministry works in a different environment than Michigan natural resource agencies. And, I mean environment in a very broad sense. Consider the breadth of the diversity Ontario contends with. The forest resource is huge, about 200 million acres (Michigan has about 19 million acres of forest). Roughly 90 percent of it is government controlled, or "crown lands," as it is termed. The road infrastructure is not as we know it. Much of the forest remains in an unmanipulated condition.
Ontario spans the Great Lakes from the Great Plains to
the St. Lawrence Seaway, and from the latitudes of southern Michigan nearly to
the arctic tundra. The great majority of people live in the very southern portion of the
Province. The remainder of the Province makes the Upper Peninsula look like an urbanized
maze of human development.
One agency, essentially, administers the forest resources of Ontario. District forest management and planning has been contracted to the private sector … to forest industry. Timber volume concessions are linked with forest planning. Checks and balances, of course, are in place. However, the system is relatively new. Time will tell how well it works.
Both the
Canadian Forest Service and the Province of Ontario conduct forest research,
as wellas universities in southern Ontario. Tours of three facilities in Sault Ste. Marie
provided a thumbnail of some of the research going on to better understand forest ecology
and science. Many of the projects have counterparts on our "side of the river."
We touched on familiar topics such as climate change, the role of fire, insect
biotechnology, bioindicators, growth and yield, ecological classification, and landscape
ecology. But, it was interesting to begin to discover how approaches and applications
differ.
The second day offered glimpses into forest operations in the morning, and supporting research in the afternoon.
Norm Iles and Colin Ingram, foresters from Domtar, Inc., demonstrated how that company was handling forest management and operations. A red pine plantation and a northern hardwood stand were not unfamiliar forest types, but it was interesting to learn how forest operations were performed with the kind of industry-government arrangement in Ontario. Management and planning efforts are not uniformly advanced in all districts among the many forest concessions. The Ontario folks are learning how to deal with new relationships and monumental organizational changes.
The afternoon was led by a number of
researchers, such as Wayne Bell, Doug McRae, Neil Foster, Rob Fleming,
and others, looking at a few examples of supporting field projects. Vegetation management
for white pine regeneration, prescribed fire in pine, and biomass removal and soil
compaction have demonstration sites investigating field applications.
The evening banquet was one of the best that I have attended. We were treated to a French-Canadian cuisine with an incredibly wide variety of foods. The banquet was held in the Bushplane Museum, which displays the history of Ontario fire-fighting capability. 1999 was the 75th anniversary of the Service.
The Canadian Institute of Forestry (the Canadian SAF) under the leadership of Paul Ward prepared the program and tour. It is part of the cancelled tour, which was originally scheduled for the SAF National Convention held at Traverse City.
Oral History With Putnam Robbins
By: Bill Hasse
Putnam Robbins is a native of the Iron Mountain, Michigan/Spread Eagle, Wisconsin area. He was born in 1902, started forestry school in 1922 at Michigan State and worked as part of the MSU faculty from 1927 to 1969. He may be the SAF member with the longest continuous membership, having joined SAF in 1929. He comes from a family that was involved in the timber business back east and has turned over to a historical library an ancestor’s diary of a cruise of timber up the Menominee River in the 1850s.
Some of the fascinating tidbits I have recorded in our first couple sessions include:
As part of the SAF Centennial, I have been working on an oral history with Putnam Robbins, former MSU faculty member. This has been been interesting and rewarding. I look forward to several more taping sessions with Mr. Robbins, and perhaps others that are part of the SAF legacy. I would encourage anyone so inclined to get involved with the SAF Centennial celebration. Mike Moore is the Centennial contact person in Michigan. His phone number is 517-323-7685 and his email is mdmoore@umich.edu.
Bill Hasse is a forester with Champion International Corp., based at Norway, MI.
An Electronic
Crossroads for Ecosystem Management
By: Tom Crow and Mark Brush
Forest management is changing rapidly in response to the demands being placed on the resource. Old issues such as forest productivity, multiple use, and sustained yield of wood remain, but many new issues (biological diversity, old growth forests, sustainability, endangered species) have been added to the dialogue. Most of these issues are related and none have simple solutions. It is within this context that ecosystem management has evolved as a guiding concept for managing natural resources. There remains, however, a great deal of confusion about what "ecosystem-based management " is.
The School of Natural Resource & Environment (SNRE) at the University of Michigan has developed a web page devoted to the practice and study of ecosystem-based management. The page provides its viewers with a wide range of topics starting with "What is Ecosystem Management?"
The goal of the web page is to be a resource for students and professionals interested in learning more about a sustainable approach to resource management. Visitors to the web page will be able to see what type of research is taking place at the University; view current course descriptions; see a list of recommended articles; read transcripts from recent symposiums and workshops; and have access to a wealth of links, all related to the field of ecosystem management.
Read about research on the regional ecosystems of Michigan; learn about research taking place regarding the social and political factors that affect ecosystem management; or find out about ongoing collaboration in the field of ecosystem management.
So the next time your surfing, point your browser to www.snre.umich.edu/~ecomgmt and come check out our site. We welcome your comments and questions in an effort to expand upon and improve the site! [Webmaster note: Could not get this link to work and could not find the site on the UM-SNRE website]
Tom Crow and Mark Brush are from the School of Natural Resource & Environment at the University of Michigan.
SAF Centennial
Michigan Forest Industry History - "Yesterday and Today"
Part One
By: David D. Olson
Understanding the history of the forest is necessary in understanding Michigan’s forest industry evolution. Oliver Wendell Holmes said, "A page of history is worth a volume of logic." Who knows for certain what the earliest Michigan forests looked like? Who were the people who first saw the Michigan forests?
It is known that people of the Middle Woodlands Culture (200 BC to 800 AD) camped at Whitefish Bay on Lake Superior. Authorities state that the great Ice Age in the Upper Peninsula ended about 10,000 years ago and that date marked the beginning of Michigan forests. Black spruce trees buried by glacial debris in the Tilden Mine pit near Negaunee had an average age of 9,980 years. There are indications of man being in Michigan following the recession of the last Ice Age.
The Indians lived with the forest and did not abuse it. They developed the art of producing maple syrup and taught that art to early settlers. Lightning, and the fires caused by it, created the biggest changes to the ecosystem. Certainly the canoe Indians of the north, the Ojibwa or Chippewa, were here in the 1400’s. Fur traders in the 1600’s traded with those native Americans.
What did the forests look like in the 1600’s? Certainly plenty of pines were described by the Indians as "shingwauk". The abundance of white and red pine forests, a system of rivers and the Great Lakes made it inevitable that those great pine forests would be cut!
The harvest of pine forests began in the 1830’s and continued as a major industry until after the turn of century. Upper Peninsula cutting began in the 1850’s. Harvesting for hardwoods swept through the Lower Peninsula along the Saginaw, Tittabawassee, AuSable and Manistee Rivers.
The advent of copper and iron mining in the late 1840’s led to a demand for hardwood. The demand accelerated when the smelting of copper and iron began. Many stated that "the best forests of Michigan are underground" as timber supports for mines. By 1903 the smelters were consuming so much charcoal that 30 acres of forests were cut each day to supply the kilns.
The boom peaked from 1860 to 1900. The
dollar value from lumbering in Michigan exceeded the value of California gold by one
billion dollars. The average wholesale price of lumber was $13 per thousand board feet for
the 40-year period. By the 1870’s over 25,000 loggers worked in 8000 camps. Remember
the population of Michigan in 1837 was only 87,000 people.
Many of you have been busy trying to promote overseas markets for Michigan forest products. In 1871 the large pines being cut in the Eastern Upper Peninsula were hand-hewn into squared beams for shipment to Quebec and England. The beams had to be at least 25 feet long and averaged 21 inches on the small ends. The market price was 22.5 cents per cubic foot. A 5-log pine tree could cut out 125 feet of timbers; not the current large 5-log pine with 90 feet of usable length.
The early industry grew rapidly because of strong markets for lumber. Forests were located on easy water transportation. Those streams and rivers allowed dams to be built to float logs to sawmills on the shores of the Great Lakes. From mills, the lumber was loaded directly on ships to market places. In 1889, 5.5 billion board feet of lumber were produced. That was seven times the 1987 output.
The invention of the "big logging wheel" opened up winter logging. At the same time, the development of narrow gauge railroads made the transportation of logs easier. At one point, 100 narrow gauge rail lines operated in Michigan.
The loggers lived in camps in the woods. The camps were
almost entirely populated by men and had their own social classes. The camp superintendent
and foreman were the bosses. The middle classes were the teamsters and cutters and the
lower class were the chore boys. Camp wages averaged $16 to $30 each month, plus
food and a straw bunk. The men worked 6 days each week from dawn to dusk. At meals
in the camps, the men ate piles of food with no talking allowed. Those hard working men
leveled the forests and left behind a landscape of stumps and low quality trees.
After the boom, pine timberlands were selling for 65 cents to $1.25 per acre. The saw log volumes averaged 300,000 board feet for each 40-acre parcel. The oxen, mules, horses and lumberjacks were gone by 1930. Uncontrolled forest fires swept over Michigan. Many pine barrens had already failed as farms. Michigan began to prepare for a new era.
Dave Olson is a retired MSU Extension District Forester .
Read Part 2 in the Winter issue of the Michigan Forester to be published in March 2000.
Roscommon
Herald newspaper clipping copied verbatim below:
WON’T TOLERATE FORESTRY PLAN
To the Editor:
The state forestry commission, with about 30 or more visitors, reached Roscommon on Friday noon. Flags were at half-mast on the flagpoles in the village and the reception they received from the people, although civil and without any hostile demonstration, was speakingly that their presence here was not wanted. They were told in unmistakable terms that their forestry scheme cannot and will not be tolerated in this county. Circulars were handed them to that effect. At the post office the finest exhibition of cereals, fruits, etc, all raised on farms in the county, and which exhibition they unwillingly were obliged to visit, must have convinced them that Roscommon County is not a barren wilderness, unfit for cultivation, but a county destined to become a great agricultural center.
Their stay at the village was therefore of short duration. They left for the north, with a "God speed and never come back" as a greeting from our people.
Some influential citizens plainly made them to understand that they had not a foot of land in the county which they could claim as state property.
It is true the state has a lien for taxes on some of the forestry reserve lands, so have the county and townships and school districts. The chancery decrees, on which the lands were sold and bid in by the state, are void and have been so decided by the supreme court. The original owners by paying up the back taxes are the sole proprietors of the lands. Some of those original owners have offered to pay the taxes due on their lands, but the state has invariably refused to accept the money – as by doing so, it would dwarf their forestry policy.
Some of the original land owners are not contemplated to test the matter in court.
I shall not dwell upon the absurd claim which the state put forth on these lands; this will be left to the court to decide. The people of Roscommon are unanimously against forestry being established in the county and will never allow it. The future will decide. Our motto is: "Down With Forestry!"
No signature indicated, written by an attorney of Roscommon County, dated July, 1902.
Forest history item for the Michigan Forester, submitted by Jack Pilon, Treasurer, MSAF.
The 1998-1999 Upper Midwest Capstone Report Awards
By: Blair Orr
Judges recently selected the winners of the third annual Upper Midwest Capstone Report Award Competition. Student teams from Iowa State University, Michigan State University, Michigan Technological University, and the University of Wisconsin-Madison submitted papers from their capstone courses to a panel of seven judges. The reports were evaluated on the basis of quality of writing, ease of comprehension by the educated layperson, technical rigor, and a sense of land stewardship.
All but one of the capstone projects involved developing a land and resource management plan for a "client." Each team faced a different set of landowner objectives and a different property. In addition, this year one capstone team conducted a market analysis for a wood product, which was a totally different type of project. While each project was different, they all represented "real world" situations.
First place was awarded to the Michigan Tech team of Michael Elenz, Justin Miller, James Pelkola and John Strasser for their report on the Dow Wilderness Tract. This is a 320-acre property in Keweenaw, County, MI with a set of highly complex physical and vegetational characteristics. The tract is owned by the university so the students had to meet teaching, research and outreach objectives while trying to make the property self-supporting.
The difficulty of selecting among reports was reflected in the decision to award a tie to teams from Iowa State and UW-Madison for second place. The properties the two teams worked on shared some similarities, as did their management objectives and recommendations. Both properties contain a mix of forest, wetland, and crop and fallow fields. The teams' recommendations addressed management of forests, prairies and wetlands, provision of recreation and aesthetics, and the cost and income implications.
Iowa State students Joseph Tentinger, Michael Anderson, Jennifer Hare, Eric Holzmueller, Jason Johnson and Brett Mason worked on a 1,200-acre Army Corps of Engineers property that constitutes a downstream corridor of the Des Moines River below Saylorville Lake. The team examined alternatives for mitigating the effects of expanding the Martin Luther King Jr. Parkway.
The UW-Madison team of Benji Brye, Jessica Lengling, Etsuko Nonaka and Josh Scherer developed a management plan for a 457-acre property in Dane County owned by Swamplovers, Inc. The four corporate shareholders have different interests so the team had to struggle with trying to provide a balanced plan and also determine how to improve the degraded woodland that characterizes some of the property.
The first place team received a $500 award and second place teams each received $250. Prizes are split equally among team members.
Capstone courses require students to integrate knowledge from courses throughout the curriculum, and to synthesize their knowledge in order to solve a complex land or resource management problem. The capstone award program was developed as a means of recognizing the hard work of the students and stimulating them to aim high in their expectations.
Financial support for the program was provided by Lake Superior Land, Calumet MI, Menominee Tribal Enterprises (MTE), Neopit, WI, and Tenneco Packaging Company, Tomahawk, WI, and the Department of Forest Ecology and Management, UW-Madison. Judges this year were David Countryman of Iowa State, Monty Maldonado of the US Forest Service, Greg Edge and Jeff Olsen of the Wisconsin DNR, Blair Orr of Michigan Tech, Dan Pubanz of MTE and Don Schwandt of Lake Superior Land. The program was administered by Jeff Stier of the UW-Madison.
News From Mississippi Our Sister Society
Reforestation Tax Credit
Mississippi has become the first state to have a reforestation tax credit. The credit, designed to encourage reforestation practices by non-industrial private timber owners, became law March 29, when signed by Governor Kirk Fordice. The effective date is January 1, 2000.
The bill passed the Mississippi House and Senate with only one dissenting vote. Representative Bob Eaton of Taylorsville was the lead author of the legislation, along with 56 other representatives.
The Mississippi Forestry Association members, along with the 59 county forestry associations, began working with the Legislature in 1997 to explain how increased demand for timber, combined with damage from the ice storm of 1994, had caused timber harvest levels to increase. The House passed the bill in 1998, but the bill died in the Senate Finance Committee.
The bill was introduced again in the 1999 legislative session. County forestry associations were again asked to contact local legislators. Most chapters received favorable response from their legislators. Chapters are now being encouraged to invite legislators to the CFA meetings so they can be thanked in person for their outstanding work for forestry this session.
According to Senator Billy Thames, chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, with this legislation, Mississippi will continue its leadership role in forestry in this country.
A copy of the new law can be found on the MFA website (http://www.msforestry.net).
Details for filing with the tax commission are currently being developed, and will be included in future tax packages.
Featured Site: Michigan
Department of Natural Resources
Address: http://www.dnr.state.mi.us
Highlights: This website has regularly updated information about pending / proposed
Michigan legislation affecting DNR. Click on "Legislative Info" from the list on
the left. Scroll down and click on "1999-2000 Legislation Impacting the
Department." Headings include: Bill No. & Sponsor, Bill Summary, Committee
Assignment, and DNR Position.
Michigan SAF New Members
U.P. - Timothy Allen, Escanaba, MI
Heikki Suomala, Gladstone, MI
MTU - Terry Manty
Kenneth Symes
U of M - David Cohen
MSU - Michael Abbott
Sara Dueling
M.K. Goble
Laura Lazarus
Elizabeth McDonald
Kevin Sayers
Transferred In – Bill Spinner
Please direct questions, comments, and suggestions
to Bill Cook, cookwi@pilot.msu.edu or
906-786-1575.
Editorial issues can be addressed to Eric Thompson.