DNR ERF Overview By: ERF Policy Review Team To: Stakeholders April 18, 2012

 Work with citizens to conserve/manage state’s natural resources  Provide outdoor recreation opportunities  Provide for commercial uses of natural resources to create sustainable quality of life DNR Mission

Forest Sustainability: Managing for Diversity A Diversity of Sustainable Benefits A Diversity of Sustainable Benefits (“timber; water; fish and wildlife habitat; biodiversity; recreation; soil; climate; rare and distinctive flora and fauna…” defined in MS 89A ) (“timber; water; fish and wildlife habitat; biodiversity; recreation; soil; climate; rare and distinctive flora and fauna…” defined in MS 89A ) A Diversity of Forest Types and Ages A Diversity of Forest Types and Ages (e.g., pine, aspen, oak and others; young, mature, and old…..) (e.g., pine, aspen, oak and others; young, mature, and old…..) A Diversity of Silviculture Practices A Diversity of Silviculture Practices (e.g., even-aged management with short and long rotations; all-aged management with selective harvest; natural and artificial regeneration……..etc.) (e.g., even-aged management with short and long rotations; all-aged management with selective harvest; natural and artificial regeneration……..etc.)

Integrated Resource Management Fulfilling a Mutual Responsibility While each division has different mandates and functions, they have mutual responsibility for sustainable forest management SFRA Policy (M.S. 89A.02) It is the policy of the state to pursue the sustainable management, use, and protection of the state's forest resources to achieve the state's economic, environmental, and social goals;

What is ERF? AKA Older Forest AKA Older Forest The amount of certain forest types that are beyond their “normal rotation age” at a specific point in time The amount of certain forest types that are beyond their “normal rotation age” at a specific point in time  Forest types with ERF goals include Aspen, Birch, Jack Pine, Red Pine, Balsam Fir, Lowland Black Spruce, Tamarack.  These “even-aged” types require substantial disturbance (i.e., opening up the canopy) to regenerate.  Normal rotation age is generally the age where growth peaks and is generally the point when harvest would occur IF maximizing timber volumes were your primary objective.

ERF ≠ Old Growth DNR Old Growth is not harvested DNR Old Growth is not harvested DNR Old Growth is more than just old trees DNR Old Growth is more than just old trees ERF is harvested, but the final regeneration harvest is delayed until an older age. ERF is harvested, but the final regeneration harvest is delayed until an older age. ERF is applied to forest types that generally aren’t regarded as “old growth.” ERF is applied to forest types that generally aren’t regarded as “old growth.”

Brief History of ERF 1988 – DNR begins develop of Old-Growth Forests Guidelines – DNR begins develop of Old-Growth Forests Guidelines.  Staff identifies the need to maintain older forest conditions on forest types not identified as old-growth types 1990 – OG & ERF Guidelines required by out-of-court settlement 1990 – OG & ERF Guidelines required by out-of-court settlement 1992 – DNR Draft ERF Guidelines reviewed by stakeholders at the first of a series of Stakeholder Roundtables – DNR Draft ERF Guidelines reviewed by stakeholders at the first of a series of Stakeholder Roundtables — DNR Commissioner approves ERF Guideline 1994 — DNR Commissioner approves ERF Guideline 1994 — GEIS modeling assumes a certain level of application of ERF on state and federal lands — GEIS modeling assumes a certain level of application of ERF on state and federal lands – Additional stakeholder roundtables on NE application of ERF – Additional stakeholder roundtables on NE application of ERF. 1999— DNR clarifies direction for ERF implementation. 1999— DNR clarifies direction for ERF implementation – DNR begins SFRMP and SFRMP becomes the vehicle for ERF implementation – DNR begins SFRMP and SFRMP becomes the vehicle for ERF implementation.

Why the concern for Older Forest? When the ERF Guideline was developed: When the ERF Guideline was developed: Industry was expanding Industry was expanding Timber harvests were rising & projected to continue increasing. Timber harvests were rising & projected to continue increasing. Concern that older forests would disappear from DNR and other lands. Concern that older forests would disappear from DNR and other lands. Mechanism needed to help assure some amount of older forest would be sustained on DNR lands. Mechanism needed to help assure some amount of older forest would be sustained on DNR lands.

What has changed? Statewide harvest levels from all ownerships have declined substantially. Statewide harvest levels from all ownerships have declined substantially. Harvest levels on DNR lands have remained stable/slightly increased. Harvest levels on DNR lands have remained stable/slightly increased. Across all ownerships, MN forest lands in general have continued to grow older. Across all ownerships, MN forest lands in general have continued to grow older. On DNR lands, the amount of older forest in some forest types has been reduced towards long-term goals. On DNR lands, the amount of older forest in some forest types has been reduced towards long-term goals. Greater need to consider revenue implications in managing for older forests (e.g., Trust Fund). Greater need to consider revenue implications in managing for older forests (e.g., Trust Fund).

Hunting Economics on State Forestry and Wildlife Lands White-tailed Deer ~56,000 hunters annually ~56,000 hunters annually $3.1 million in license revenue and from P-R grant reimbursement $3.1 million in license revenue and from P-R grant reimbursement Nearly $27 million in direct expenditures by deer hunters Nearly $27 million in direct expenditures by deer hunters Ruffed Grouse & Squirrels ~33,000 & 13,000 hunters annually ~33,000 & 13,000 hunters annually >$2 million in license revenue and P-R >$2 million in license revenue and P-R $17.5 million in direct expenditures by these small game hunters $17.5 million in direct expenditures by these small game hunters

Older Forest Habitat Elements Compositional Diversity Additional tree species Additional tree species Hard and soft mast production Hard and soft mast production Multiple layers Multiple layers Advanced regeneration Advanced regeneration Well-developed shrub layer Well-developed shrub layer Structural Complexity Large old trees Large old trees Hard and soft snags Hard and soft snags Tree cavities Tree cavities Less canopy closure, canopy gaps Less canopy closure, canopy gaps Coarse woody debris Coarse woody debris Large down logs, tip-ups Large down logs, tip-ups Winter and security cover Winter and security cover

Effects of Stand Age on Forest Bird Communities in Aspen-dominated Forests (Central Saskatchewan) Young years Mature years Old – years Number of breeding bird species increases with forest age: Number of breeding bird species increases with forest point count level: O & M > point count level: O & M > site level: O & M > Y * site level: O & M > Y * landscape level: O > M & landscape level: O > M & Y Increase in conifers in older stands: presence of conifer associated species: Increase in conifers in older stands: presence of conifer associated species: Bay-breasted Warbler Magnolia Warbler Ruby-crowned Kinglet

Conversion to Longer Lived Species

Fisher - Case Study Natal and maternal dens in tree cavities of mostly aspen & some oak >21” dbh. Natal and maternal dens in tree cavities of mostly aspen & some oak >21” dbh. Mature, dense, and structurally diverse forests that include large downed woody debris support an adequate prey base and provide good winter cover for fisher. (overstory tree avg dbh 15+” optimal) Mature, dense, and structurally diverse forests that include large downed woody debris support an adequate prey base and provide good winter cover for fisher. (overstory tree avg dbh 15+” optimal) Given the continuing pressure to maximize fiber production from forests (i.e., short forest rotation, biomass harvesting), the forest structural attributes critical to fisher and marten could become limiting in the future, if not already. (Erb et al. 2010)

Locating ERF to Meet Specific Needs

Cavity-nesting Waterfowl Cavity use distance from wetland/water edge: Wood duck ≤ 1.25 mile, Common goldeneye ≤ 1.0 mile, Hooded merganser ≤ 0.3 mile. Cavity use distance from wetland/water edge: Wood duck ≤ 1.25 mile, Common goldeneye ≤ 1.0 mile, Hooded merganser ≤ 0.3 mile. MN aspen needs to be >50 years old to develop suitable cavities. MN aspen needs to be >50 years old to develop suitable cavities. Minimum tree size for nesting cavity (11” dbh). Minimum tree size for nesting cavity (11” dbh). Aspen >20” dbh produce cavities at 5 times the rate as aspen 11-20” dbh. Aspen >20” dbh produce cavities at 5 times the rate as aspen 11-20” dbh.

Scale Spatial and Temporal  Spatial Landscape (ECS Subsections) (age classes) Site (selected for each SFRMP) (successional stages)  Stand  Groups of Stands ERF – Natural Resource Sustainability  Temporal  Long Term  Short Term

Ecosystem Functions ERF – Natural Resource Sustainability The interactions between biotic and abiotic components in an ecosystem results in complex exchanges of energy, nutrients and waste. Ecosystem Services The wide array of resources and processes that are supplied by natural ecosystems.

Ecosystem Functions Gas exchange (photosynthesis) Nutrient cycling Species interactions Ecosystem structure and composition Ecosystem services Atmospheric oxygen, carbon sequestration and storage Contaminant sequestration, nitrogen fixation PollinationHydrologic modification, soil retentionWater quality and quantity ERF – Natural Resource Sustainability The more complex a system is the more functions it will support. The more functions the more ecosystem services provided.

Ecosystem Services Provided by Older Forests ERF – Natural Resource Sustainability  Habitat--Niche  Carbon Storage  Hydrologic processes

ERF – Natural Resource Sustainability Resiliency Disease Insects Climate Change Invasive Species HarvestingWind Fire Refers to the ability of an ecosystem to adjust to disturbance or change without greatly altering its functioning.

ERF – Natural Resource Sustainability Resiliency Ecosystems are not static but cycle through multiple stages depending on the form and magnitude of disturbance. The biological diversity of the ecosystem provides a level of resilience to the system.

General Observations: Overall, Minnesota forestlands are older than they were in Overall, Minnesota forestlands are older than they were in Our ERF policy has been very successful! Our ERF policy has been very successful! Harvesting is significantly reduced on all ownerships. Harvesting is significantly reduced on all ownerships. Harvesting on DNR managed lands has been stable, or increased. Harvesting on DNR managed lands has been stable, or increased.

General Observations: We need young forest. We need older forest too. We need young forest. We need older forest too. Ecosystem functions and certain habitats benefit from older forests. Ecosystem functions and certain habitats benefit from older forests. Trust lands are different! They need to be considered in a different context from other DNR managed lands. Trust lands are different! They need to be considered in a different context from other DNR managed lands.

Identified DNR ERF Policy Questions How should we account for all older forest on state land? How should we account for all older forest on state land? How do we better locate ERF on the landscape? How do we better locate ERF on the landscape? Should Site Index be considered? Should Site Index be considered? How will School Trust lands be treated differently? How will School Trust lands be treated differently? Should we focus on plant community growth stage? Should we focus on plant community growth stage? Should uneven aged covertypes count towards ERF goals? Should uneven aged covertypes count towards ERF goals?

Identified DNR ERF Policy Questions (continued) Should planted stands be treated differently? Should planted stands be treated differently? Is consistency among SFRMP’s important? Is consistency among SFRMP’s important? Are there Forest Certification implications? Are there Forest Certification implications? What should ERF harvest prescriptions look like? What should ERF harvest prescriptions look like? Should ERF stand “tags” be permanent? Should ERF stand “tags” be permanent?

Team members contact information: x225 For data and modeling information: