Emerald Ash Borer Info
Click here
Bill Botti's Tree Series
Click Here
Craig Kasmer's Wildlife Series
Click Here
|
Art and photos on this website may not be reproduced without written
permission of Michigan Forest Association. Other material may be
reprinted with appropriate credit.
|
Privacy
Statement
|
Michigan Forests Magazine
Excerpts From Winter 2009 Issue
Conservation means the wise use of the earth
and its resources for the lasting good of men.-Gifford Pinchot |
AT YOUR SERVICE
Timber Theft
by Rick Lucas
Conservation District Forester
Several reports have surfaced from central Michigan counties
regarding timber theft. A recent TV 9&10 report out of Cadillac
featured landowners in Isabella County entering into an agreement
with a logger to perform timber harvesting services. Upon completion
of the harvest, the logger gathered up his equipment, left the scene
and hasn’t been heard from since. Efforts by the media to reach his
business address and cell phone number resulted in dead ends. This
same logger has been linked to a Mecosta County landowner where the
same scenario played out. Each time, the logger left without making
any payment to the landowner. Timber theft and timber trespass is a
concern for everyone involved in good forestry.
Although timber theft and timber trespass may seem similar, they
are two different things. Timber theft occurs when someone
intentionally steals timber from a woodland owner. Timber trespass
is the result of a logger or landowner accidentally cutting down
adjacent landowner’s trees, thinking the trees were within the
boundary of their property. Timber trespass occurs more often than
timber theft, which happens most often in remote rural setting on
parcels owned by absentee owners.
While the vast majority of loggers are fair and hope to have the
landowner as a client again, clearly, some operate very differently.
Dishonest loggers are well aware of the fact that many landowners do
not know the value of their timber; have no familiarity with hiring
an expert to help with a harvest; and do not know standard
practices. The vast majority of loggers are honest professionals who
take pride in their timber harvests, and appreciate long-term
stewardship and environmental values. Regrettably, as in any
industry, there are exceptions. The best way to deal with timber
theft and trespass is to prevent it from happening in the first
place. Part of any prevention approach includes having an
understanding of some of the ways in which timber theft and trespass
occur in the first place. Some dishonest loggers are very clever.
They may trespass, steal, or apply deceptive practices to their
advantage. Timber theft very frequently occurs via adjoining
property. Your neighbor may not even be aware that his land is the
access and egress route. If caught in the act, the logger may
apologize profusely for mistakenly crossing a line and offer payment
for the act and this is as far as it goes. Timber theft may also be
the result of a logger hiding the evidence by covering stumps with
brush, slash or soil, making it difficult to detect that a crime has
even taken place.
Applying deceptive practices usually refers to situations in
which the logger may actually be authorized to be on the site,
whether under contract or otherwise. One example of this situation,
also called “contractual theft”, occurs when the buyer’s first offer
to purchase timber is at unreasonably low prices. More timber is
stolen “legally” by this method than any other way simply because a
landowner was uninformed of its value from the start. Another
example of a deceptive practice involves purposely damaging unmarked
trees not intended for sale. Even though your timber contract may
address this situation, it may also encourage the opportunity to
“overcut” if the terms of the contract don’t view it with a
substantial penalty. Additionally, when trees are marked for sale,
they should be marked twice: once at chest height and again at
ground level below where the stump would likely be cut for later
verification against overcutting. Timber thieves may paint
additional trees themselves, or damage or cover the stump where it
should have been marked. Lastly, deceptive practices can involve one
of several underpayment schemes.
Examples of underpayment schemes include the estimation of timber
volumes, over-stated expectations and where the product is sold.
Timber volumes are usually expressed in cubic volume measures (e.g.
cubic feet in a saw log) or in terms of estimated “board feet”
(measure of rectangular boards sawn from an ideal tapered
cylindrical log). Conversions from logs to board feet are called
scales, the three typical scales being: “Doyle”, “Scribner” and
‘International 1/4".’ Depending on log diameter and length, each
scale can lead to different board foot volumes. Any contract or
agreement ambiguity on the type of volume measure can be used to
take advantage of the unwary seller. Some loggers may offer to scale
and grade the logs, paying the owner a predetermined amount for each
grade, with the implication that there will be a high percentage of
high-value logs. All too often, however, the owner will later be
told that the timber quality/quantity scaled at the mill was much
less than expected. Lastly, a logger may arrange to pay the owner
based on scale slips from the mill, but the owner may not be shown
all the scale slips, and can never be sure to which mill the logs
are taken.
Private consulting foresters and land surveyors are two
professionals who can help the private landowner avoid timber theft
and trespass and a harvest disaster. For most landowners, hiring a
consulting forester to handle a harvest is a wise investment.
Landowners that don’t understand the timber sale process need to
contact someone who can provide the necessary advice and assistance.
Victims of timber trespass and theft should contact a consulting
forester who can estimate the value of the lost timber.
Maintaining clearly marked property lines is probably the single
best step that forest landowners can take to protect their timber
resource. Additionally, get to know your neighbors and agree to
discuss plans to harvest timber or to contact each other if you see
logging activity nearby. If you live off-site or out of state, make
sure someone visits the property regularly and that neighbors have a
way to contact you. Install a chain or gate across any roads leading
to your woodlot. Such deterrents help keep honest people honest, and
dishonest people out.
Timber theft cases appear to be more difficult to prosecute than
timber trespass cases because most law enforcement agencies don’t
vigorously investigate and prosecute offenders. Furthermore, most
law enforcement officers are not familiar enough with the forest
industry and timber’s value. Timber theft is considered larceny like
other stolen property. Once stolen timber leaves a property and
reaches a sawmill it is impossible for law enforcement agencies to
track the timber.
While prevention is the approach most landowners would like to
take, with a crime of this nature, it is essentially impossible to
make your property theft-proof. Should the worst happen and you
discover a timber theft or trespass has occurred, it is critical to
report it to the proper authorities as soon as possible. Contact
either the state police or county sheriff. The scene must be
examined and the incident recorded if there is to be any hope of
pursuing a criminal prosecution. If the amount of timber stolen is
large, a consulting forester will be needed to provide an estimate
of the monetary value of the missing timber.
Lastly, an additional incentive for you to determine the
estimated value of the stolen timber is for tax purposes. Often,
taxable land values include the value of the timber on the property.
In the case of timber theft, the lost value can be deducted from
your taxes as a casualty loss. While this should not be viewed as a
remedy, it is an important step to take to ensure that even more
money isn’t lost to taxes. Land Management
|
KIRTLAND’S WARBLER POPULATION AT
“RECOVERED” LEVEL
The population of the Kirtland’s
warbler now exceeds the level set for possible de-listing of the
tiny bird as a federal and state endangered species. This past
year’s annual survey recorded 1,791 singing males – the highest
number since monitoring began in 1951. Only 167 singing males were
recorded in 1974 and 1987, when the Kirtland’s warbler faced
possible extinction.
The 2008 tally was up 6% from the 1,697 singing
males recorded in 2007. Federal and Michigan biologists will likely
review survey data over the next several years before deciding
whether to change the official status of the species.
With exception
of nine singing males detected in Wisconsin and one male and a
female in Ontario, breeding Kirtland’s warblers have been found only
in Michigan. The Kirtland’s warbler is a small, blue-gray and yellow
sparrow-sized bird, which usually nests on the ground on
well-drained sand under stands of jack pines. The trees must be
young – between five and 20 feet high, with branches that extend to
the ground. Historically, these stands were maintained by naturally
occurring wildfires that frequently swept through large areas of
Northern Michigan. Fire suppression programs altered this natural
process, reducing the Kirtland’s warbler habitat.
For the past four
decades, federal and state agencies along with private sector
partners have added suitable habitat through combinations of
cuttings, replantings, and/ or prescribed burning. Almost 3,000
acres of jack pines are planted or seeded annually on state and
federal lands for the Kirtland’s warbler. The Michigan
Wildlife Conservancy has provided funds for some of that work
including a 300-plus acre project in 2008 in Oscoda County in
cooperation with the U.S. Forest Service. The Conservancy was also
instrumental in boosting the Kirtland’s warbler on private property
owned by Trout Unlimited in Crawford County. A 300-acre over-mature
pine stand was cut and two-year-old pines were planted 1,100 to the
acre in wavy, parallel bands to form figure eights. This pattern
mimics how jack pines grow after a wildfire.
The project proved to be a great success. Four nesting pairs
occupied the property in 2001, and the numbers climbed steadily with
12 pairs recorded in 2002, 16 in 2004, and 27 in 2005. The property
still gets high use. Other partners in this project were the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Detroit Edison, and the Michigan
Department of Natural Resources. Trout Unlimited is dedicated to the
conservation of coldwater fish and their habitats, but the
organization took advantage of a rare opportunity to help a rare
bird.
Dr. Patrick J. Rusz
Director of Wildlife Programs
Michigan Wildlife Conservancy
|
WHITHER NOW, O BUTTERNUT
By Bill Botti
The Butternut, also called the White Walnut, is quite an unusual
tree, both because of its relative rarity and because of its many
historic uses. It is found in Michigan throughout the south half of
the Lower Peninsula and in Delta and Menominee counties in the U.P.
Nowhere does it dominate the forest. Rather, it exists as isolated
trees or small groups of trees.
Sad to say, the butternut is in trouble in Michigan and throughout
its range. A canker disease appropriately called “butternut canker”
is claiming butternuts across the central hardwood range.
Butternut is not famous as a timber tree, as its larger cousin the
black walnut is, but its wood was once used commonly for furniture,
trim, bowls and many other products. It has a similar grain pattern
to that of walnut, but is much lighter in color.
Historic uses include making a yellow dye or stain by boiling
half-ripe nuts. Certain “backwoods regiments” during the Civil War
were said to have dressed in ‘butternut’ jeans as a part of their
uniforms. Butternut sap can be boiled down to a sweet syrup. The
inner bark of the roots held medicinal qualities. Crushed nuts
reportedly were used to kill fish. Half-ripe nuts could be pickled,
as described below in 1905 by Julia Ellen Rogers in her book, The
Tree Book: a Popular Guide to a Knowledge of the Trees of North
America and to their Uses and Cultivation.
“The frugal housewife in the country looks with interest upon the
butternut when it is half grown – when the pale green, clammy, fuzzy
fruit hangs in clusters, surrounded by its umbrella of leaves. If a
knitting needle goes through husk and nut without hindrance, it is
not too late to make ‘pickled oil nuts,’ which are a delectable
relish with meats in winter. The husk and all are put down in
vinegar, sugar and spices. The unpleasant part of this process is
the rubbing off of the ‘fur,’ after scalding the nuts. This task
usually falls to the children.”
With all of these wonderful qualities it’s perhaps no wonder that
many southern Michigan farmsteads contain one or several butternut
trees. It would have been a very handy resource to have close by.
Butternut has never been a long-lived tree – not usually achieving
an age of over 75 years. Ms. Rogers noted, “It is a cheerful tree,
but unfortunately short lived, and it is rare to see a tree of
considerable size that is not diseased by fungi and blemished by
insects.” So maybe the canker is not new, if that was the fungus
noted in 1905. Today, however, there is concern for the butternut’s
survival because of the canker disease and a lack of good
regeneration opportunities.
One person who is concerned and has taken action is Dr. Keith Woeste,
of the Hardwood Tree Improvement and Regeneration Center at Purdue
University. Dr. Woeste, an employee of the USDA Forest Service, is
heading up a gene conservation project with the support of The
Nature Conservancy and others. He made a trip into southern Michigan
last summer to visit some trees that might have potential for
inclusion in his project. I had the good fortune to spend a day with
him.
Dr. Woeste and I visited a few woodlots that contain butternut. One
of his concerns was that we be sure they are truly wild butternuts
and not hybrids. Certain characteristics of the bud scars on the
twigs are the give-away on that question. Next we looked for
evidence of the canker disease and then for indications there would
be a nut crop this year. In September I visited the trees that were
developing nuts and collected samples from each tree. Locations of
the parent trees were recorded and I sent the nuts to Keith Woeste
at West Lafayette. He will grow them in a nursery setting and screen
them for canker resistance. I think he will also develop an
arboretum that will preserve the genes of these trees from the north
edge of their natural range.
There is a chance here for MFA members to contribute to the project.
If you have, or know of, some butternuts that are bearing seeds and
especially if they appear to be healthy, you could notify us at the
MFA office at 6120 S. Clinton Trail, Eaton Rapids, MI 48827 and we
will pass them on to Dr. Woeste.
Meanwhile, perhaps we can begin another approach to helping this
noble tree. Butternut needs some sort of disturbed environment to
reproduce. Natural regeneration is not occurring in very many
places. Maybe we could plant some. I found butternut seedlings in
the Alpha Nursery’s catalog in Holland, MI. I have a couple in my
yard that I started about 15 years ago. One appears to be close to
nut-bearing size. If you don’t want to buy seedlings, you could
plant nuts. Sites should be at least semi-open to provide enough
sunlight. Weed control during the first few years will be of great
importance. Let us know what you’re doing; maybe we can help to keep
this splendid species among the living.
|
LOGGING SLASH
by Bill Cook
MSU Extension Service Forester
Slash is logging debris left in the forest after a harvest.
Sometimes it is called logging residue. Slash can serve a range of
purposes. The term “waste” would not be a good descriptive choice.
Nutrients in slash become available to plants as they decompose or
to animals that feed on the leaves, buds, and twigs. The physical
structure of slash can protect new seedlings from excessive browsing
from herbivores such as deer. Slash piles serve as effective refuge
from predators for many small animals. Forest owners are often
concerned about how slash impacts the visual quality of a
post-harvest woodland. For loggers, slash is often laid in trails to
better support equipment and minimize soil compaction. Slash might
also become a source of energy as woody biomass.
With increasing interest in using slash as an energy feedstock,
greater concern has been placed on the effects on nutrient cycles
and how to economically gather woody biomass. While the volume of
slash is not the largest pool of potential wood-based energy in the
Lake States, it has attracted a fair amount of attention, probably
because it seems so obvious to many people.
Forest scientists have provided decades of research into nutrient
cycles of forest ecosystems, mostly from the Pacific Northwest and
the South in the United States, as well as much from Canada and
Sweden. Cycles have many variables, pathways, imports, and exports.
Typically, trees absorb only a portion of available nutrients which
move among various ecosystem pools. Forest management and removal of
forest products affect nutrient cycles, but research has seldom
reported losses of productivity.
The most commonly evaluated nutrients are nitrogen, potassium,
phosphorous, calcium, and magnesium. These vital nutrients exist in
various chemical forms in both the soil and in living things.
Different parts of trees contain different amounts of nutrients, and
vary among the seasons.
Research suggests that nutrient impacts of slash removal are
temporary, with full recovery within about five years in most soils.
Recovery is more rapid on sites with more organic material
incorporated into mineral soil. On sites already nutrient poor,
greater caution needs to be exercised.
The amount of slash removed for energy purposes depends upon the
harvest technology used. Whole-tree chipping operations remove the
highest percentage of nutrients held by trees, especially when
harvest occurs with leaves on, but these systems are not common in
our region.
In the Lake States, cut-to-length systems manufacture most of our
forest products. These are large, complex machines that produce logs
and pulpsticks in the forest, which are later carried out of the
forest by another large machine. All the biomass in limbs and
branches is left scattered throughout the forest. Technologies to
collect a portion of the slash present economic challenges.
Moving woody biomass to the gate of an energy facility involves a
string of operations. This supply chain begins in the forest. If
higher value sawlogs and pulpwood have been extracted, then only
slash, nonmerchantable wood, or more desirable trees are left
behind. The physical distribution and composition of the slash has a
great impact on how economically it can be gathered, concentrated,
moved to a landing, and subsequently sold to a mill. From the
landing, a range of transportation issues exist, including the cost
of fuel, season, regulations, road conditions, and equipment.
Operating trucks with a high percentage of empty backhauls is a
particular challenge in forest product deliveries. High
inefficiencies lead to lower profit margins, which can slow the
development of a wood-based energy economy.
As the wood-based energy industry emerges, a number of challenges
need to be addressed before assurance can be provided that logging
slash will be harvested in an environmentally and economically sound
manner. If currently merchantable forest products are diverted to
energy uses, then supply to existing forest product industries may
become tighter and more expensive, which may undermine those
critical elements of our rural economy. Growing a bioeconomy has
great potential, but needs to be done in a strategic way that will
minimize negative effects on both the environment and economy.
|
|
Publications
