That is the question we asked concert goers in downtown Portland last week. The nonprofit organization Ecotrust hosted the music and invited groups to attend with educational booths related to the theme “Treasuring Forests.” At the OSU Extension table, we talked to members of the crowd about the Hopkins Demonstration Forest, the Women Owning Woodlands Network, and the important role that the 70,000 Oregon family forest owners play in our state.
As a conversation starter, we put up a flipchart and invited people to give us their definition of sustainable forestry. A few brave souls took on the challenge.
(Click on the photo to enlarge)
This led to some interesting interactions.
My own view is that sustainable forestry is a much larger and more nuanced concept than anything captured on the flipchart. But I think it’s always instructive to hear what non-forest owners perceive and understand about forestry.
So, what does sustainable forestry mean to you? And, more importantly, two follow up questions: Are you able to implement your vision of sustainable forestry on your land? If not, what is standing in the way?
I invite you to write your thoughts on the virtual flipchart, a.k.a. the comments section of this post.
(If you missed them, here’s Part 1 and Part 2. Now for the final installment…)
Coweeta and other LTERs have all kinds of equipment which continuously monitor and record temperature, precipitation, stream flow, water chemistry, and so forth, and thus have compiled valuable long-term records.
This is one of the meteorological stations at H.J. Andrews forest, but the one at Coweeta looks pretty much the same. Photo by Al Levno
At Coweeta, these records date back to 1934, and two climate trends are evident from the data that’s been collected since then. First, there’s been an upward trend in temperature since around 1980 (before that, there was no discernible trend). Second, with respect to rainfall, the wettest years have been getting wetter, and the driest years have been getting drier. They collect data on rainfall chemistry too; and interestingly, they started seeing a sharp drop in sulfate concentrations around 1990 – coincident with the passage of the Clean Air Act which was enacted in response to sulfur dioxide deposition (a.k.a. acid rain).
The biggest takeaway I left Coweeta with was an appreciation for the value and power of long-term observation. Forests grow slowly, and so we need to be really patient if we want to understand how they work. This is one of the reasons why the network of LTER sites across the country is so valuable.
This leads to some further musings. One, as a family forest landowner, you probably don’t have access to fancy monitoring equipment, or a Ph.D. scientist (or two or three) for hire. However, you do have a place that you observe on a fairly regular basis and you and your family may have a long-term connection to that place. Your observations, and more importantly your recording of your observations, have power. You can monitor changes on your property for your own purposes – wildlife sightings, stream changes – whatever fits your interests. For example, if you attend the upcoming June 23rd tour at Hyla Woods, you’ll learn how the host family has been monitoring birds in different forest types on their property for years.
The final thought – partly because nature is full of long-term processes, our scientific understanding evolves over time, and sometimes what seems like a pattern or a clear result in the short term turns out to be different in the long term. I suppose that’s why forest management practices are based on the “best available science” of the time, but as time passes we might revisit and revise what is considered a best management practice. If those scientists who planted the pine watershed at Coweeta had stopped their experiment after ten years, they would have come to false conclusions about different tree species’ water use. And if climate scientists looked at trends over just a decade or two, they would certainly also miss the big picture.
In Part 1, I reflected on whole-watershed-sized forest science experiments that have informed present-day management practices and understanding of water cycling through forests. But what happens when a factor beyond our control changes the forest ecosystem, creating a quasi-experiment of its own? That’s what is happening right now in the southeast U.S. due to an aggressive non-native insect.
Traveling through the hills of North Carolina, it was hard not to see the impact of the hemlock woolly adelgid. This miniscule leafsucking insect came from Asia and was first detected at the Coweeta Hydrologic Laboratory about 10 years ago. Because the hemlock woolly adelgid has no natural predators here in the U.S. and because eastern hemlocks have low natural resistance to it, it is pretty much sucking its way through the eastern hemlock range. Nearly all the eastern hemlocks I saw on my trip were either dead or dying.
hemlock woolly adelgid: Photo from invasive.org
For the record, we have hemlock woolly adelgids here in Oregon also, but they don’t cause much harm to Oregon’s two native hemlock species, western hemlock and mountain hemlock. The scientist who led our tour at Coweeta described why, tossing around fancy terms I haven’t uttered much since graduate school such as stylet, petiole and parenchyma. Basically what it boils down to is that the insects cannot penetrate the leaf structure of our west coast hemlock species very easily.
But back east, the hemlock woolly adelgid is leading to the loss of an entire component of the forest ecosystem throughout the Appalachian region. What is the impact when a tree species is lost from the landscape? Many scientists are trying to answer that question, looking at everything from soil chemistry to aquatic habitat to understory species composition.
Dead hemlocks in North Carolina. Photo from invasive.org
Unfortunately the hemlock woolly adelgid is not the only non-native insect to create such widespread impact. While on a family trip to Wisconsin last summer, I heard a lot about the emerald ash borer, another invader from Asia which is killing ash trees throughout the midwest. Unlike the hemlock woolly adelgid, the emerald ash borer hasn’t shown up on the west coast yet (that we know of). If it arrived, would it wipe out our Oregon ash trees? I hope we don’t have to find out.
Last week, I traveled to western North Carolina for a natural resources Extension conference. While there, I took a field trip to the Coweeta Hydrological Laboratory – a 5,400 acre experimental forest and the oldest continually running LTER (Long Term Ecological Research) site in the country. Coweeta is famous as the site of groundbreaking studies of how forest management and land use changes affects things like water supply and quality. It was a fascinating tour and if you have an interest in forest science, read on over the next few days as I share some of what I learned and reflect on how it relates back home in Oregon.
Many of the studies at Coweeta are set up as paired watershed studies. Two watersheds of similar size and topography are selected. One is left as a control, and the “treatment” is applied to the other.
What is striking about paired watershed studies is the sheer size of the experiments. Here is a photo from a watershed at Coweeta that has been studied since the 1940’s. Back then, scientists wanted to know whether converting a mixed hardwood forest to a pine plantation would impact the water supply. So, they clearcut the treatment watershed, controlled the regrowing vegetation for a decade, and then planted it back to eastern white pine.
For the first ten years, there was more water in the stream exiting the cut watershed than in the control watershed. But, as soon as the pine was planted, water levels in the stream began to return to normal, and by the time the pines were ten years old, they were using as much water as the control forest. Ever since then, there has been significantly less water in the stream exiting the pine watershed than the hardwood watershed. Why? At the risk of oversimplification, it boils down to a few reasons: 1) pines grow (and thus use water) all through the mild Appalachian winter while the hardwoods lose their leaves and shut down; 2) pines have more foliage surface area than hardwoods, so there’s more capacity for photosynthesis (and, when trees photosynthesize they use water); and 3) pines are less efficient water users than the native hardwood species – sort of like a regular shower head compared to a low-flow one – they both get the job done, but one uses a lot more water. These were an important finding because most of the region’s drinking water originates from these mountain streams.
We have well-known paired watershed studies in Oregon, too. Some are conducted at our “local” LTER, the H.J. Andrews Experimental Forest. Other paired watershed studies in the Coast Range at Alsea, and Hinkle Creek, and Trask have informed the development of today’s Forest Practices Act and other best forest management practices.
To learn more about the research in paired watersheds in Oregon, you can watch a videostream of a recent lecture at OSU. Also this week, as part of the Starker Lecture Series in the OSU College of Forestry, there was a field tour of the Alsea watershed studies. Unfortunately, I couldn’t make the tour. Did you go? If so, what did you learn?
As some readers are aware, the OSU Forestry Extension program has seen some significant personnel changes in recent months, including the retirement of longtime Linn/Benton County agent Rick Fletcher and the transition of Clackamas County agent Mike Bondi to an administrative leadership role. That, coupled with a declining overall program budget has led Extension administration to reorganize and reallocate existing staff in order to continue serving all Oregonians. Because our budget situation does not allow us to refill vacancies with new hires, many county agents will now be serving larger areas or new territories.
As a result, my new assignment is expanding to include Yamhill County, in addition to my existing area of Columbia and Washington Counties. Though 1/3 of my effort is to be allocated to each county, I will be maintaining my “home base” in the Columbia County office in St. Helens, and that remains the best place to track me down.
This is a significant change for me, and one that I do not take lightly. Those of you that I work with in Columbia and Washington Counties will no doubt experience some change as well. With a larger area and clientele to serve, I will have to be especially mindful of prioritizing my time. Partnerships and volunteers will be more important than ever.
For those of you interested in the bigger picture, here is a rundown of the changes being implemented in northwest Oregon:
Brad Withrow-Robinson is transitioning from Yamhill, Polk and Marion Counties to a new service area of Linn, Benton, and Polk Counties
Glenn Ahrens is transferring from Clatsop and Tillamook Counties to Clackamas County, and will also pick up coverage for Marion and Hood River Counties
Amy Grotta is increasing her service area to include Columbia, Washington, and Yamhill Counties
Jim Reeb is transitioning from a 100% appointment in Lincoln County to a three-county service area including Lincoln, Tillamook, and Clatsop Counties
This entire reorganization process will take place over the next several months, to be concluded by July. There is still a lot of coordination and planning to do to make this happen smoothly as we each settle into our new roles. I’ll certainly be working with Brad to get to know the people and the forests of Yamhill County.
The Natural Resources Conservation Service is accepting applications for the Conservation Stewardship Program now through January 13th. The CSP provides a per-acre payment to small woodland owners that can demonstrate that they are implementing conservation and stewardship practices such as stream restoration, wildlife habitat enhancement, or other measures. Interested landowners should contact their local NRCS office to learn about eligibility and to determine whether CSP is a good fit for them.
The NRCS news release states that payments are typically around $9 to $12 per acre – which makes me wonder whether it is worth the time and paperwork for a small landowner. However, I do know that several woodland owners in our area participated in the CSP program last year. Are you one of them? I invite you to share your experience by commenting on this post.
Congratulations to Washington County’s own Dallas and Sharon Boge, Master Woodland Managers from Gales Creek. They grew this year’s State Tree, now on display in the Capitol rotunda in Salem. Thanks to daughter Sue Curtis for supplying the photos. Happy holidays everyone!
The NRCS in both Columbia and Washington Counties are now accepting Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) applications from forest landowners who want forest management plans. The application deadline is October 31, 2011. Approved applicants will receive cost-share funding to have a management plan written by a qualified professional.
Nathan Adelman, NRCS Soil Conservationist in Hillsboro says, “In Washington County, priority will be given to applicants who have 10 or more acres of forest and who agree to complete, with NRCS cost share, afforestation on 3 or more acres of land that is not now and has not recently been in forest. Basically, our office would like to help non-industrial forest landowners plant trees on land that is not currently wooded.”
Columbia County landowners should be receiving more information about the program in the mail, and a series of informational meetings will be held throughout the county during the second week of October.
For more information, contact:
Washington County NRCS: Nathan Adelman, 503-648-3174 ext. 101
Columbia County NRCS: Don Mehlhoff, 503-397-4555 ext. 105
I’d like to give a shout out to my friend, Extension co-worker, and hard-core cyclist Nicole Strong, who is combining her work and workout on the Cycle Oregon route this week. Every day along the route through the rural hills of southern Oregon, Nicole and a cadre of volunteers are hosting an information tent and engaging riders in conversations about the forests they are passing through. Nicole is writing about the ride on her blog and you can follow along, here.
Longtime woodland owners always seem to have interesting stories to tell, and it seems like local writers are picking up on that. I just came across a story on Country Traveler Online about the VanNatta family and their tree farm outside of Rainier. This website says that it is meant to “entice people to travel more in Oregon”. I wonder how many of these people will try to make it down the VanNatta’s driveway…
A couple of months ago, the Keasey family of Vernonia was featured in a long article in The Vernonia Voice. This family is now in the seventh generation of owning their land. Wow!
It’s great to see stories like these pop up in places where the public can learn what family woodland ownership is all about.
