Proposed clearcutting rules not strong enough, critics say

loading...

The state’s proposed rules on clearcutting and regeneration disappoint those who wanted the Department of Conservation to formulate a paint-by-number system for good forestry.

The rules simply set minimum standards which aim to create a spectrum of age in the forest, preserve some wooded acreage for wildlife and ensure that some regrowth takes place.

“They allow the very worst of what is going on already,” charged Mitch Lansky of Wytopitlock, a long-time critic of forest practices in Maine.

Others see shortcomings in the rules, but call them a step in the right direction.

“They’ve got all the concepts that Maine Audubon has been pushing for,” said Michael Cline, whose work at Audubon has focused on forestry issues.

A range of opinions about the rules will likely be expressed at hearings set for Aug. 13 at Presque Isle, Aug. 14 at Orono and Aug. 15 at Gorham. Most of the criticism won’t be new, however, since the Maine Forest Service held 15 meetings over eight months throughout the state before writing its recommendations on clearcutting and regeneration.

The rules, required by the 1989 Forest Practices Act, will take effect in January 1991 if they are adopted.

As proposed, the rules would limit the size of all future clearcuts to 250 acres. There has been no restriction on the size of clearcuts.

If a clearcut were carried out on acreage totaling 50 to 250 acres, the landowner would have to:

Have a harvesting plan developed and signed by a professional forester.

Submit information to the state about the cut, including a map showing its location.

Leave a wooded strip, 250 feet wide, around each cut. (Two large clearcuts must be separated by 500 feet of wooded land.)

Limit harvesting on an adjacent and defined parcel of land which is 1 1/2 times the size of the clearcut land.

For smaller clearcuts, ranging from 5 to 50 acres, there would be fewer requirements. Two small clearcuts could be separated by only 250 feet of wooded land. No management plan would be required. No map would have to be submitted.

The rules also would require that five years after an area was clearcut, there would have to be 350 small trees per acre growing there or the owner would have to take some remedial action. Raspberries, alders and grey birch wouldn’t count when it came to meeting this regeneration standard, but almost any other tree species common in Maine would.

An area that was clearcut would no longer be considered a clearcut by the state if, at the end of 10 years, the hardwoods on the site, like maples or oaks, were at least 10 feet tall and the softwoods, like spruce and fir, were at least 5 feet tall.

Reaction

Ted Johnson, spokesman for many owners of timberland as the executive director of the Maine Forest Products Council, stresses that the rules on clearcutting and regeneration are intended only to “limit undesirable behavior.”

“These are not a list of incentives to promote good forestry,” Johnson said. Nevertheless, he argues that the rules will result in small-sized clearcuts, because many landowners will want to avoid the paperwork required for clearcuts larger than 50 acres.

He also suggested that although the rules call for small buffer areas, “economics will dictate that you will want to leave a fairly good stretch of land (uncut) so you can go back later.”

Lansky, who sees the rules as “blatantly pro-industry,” said that they “legitimize large clearcuts.” Lansky opposes the clearcutting of forest land.

He also said the proposed rules invite landowners to “high grade” the buffer zones, meaning they would “cut all the best (trees) and leave the junk.” The rules allow landowners to cut as many as 40 percent of the trees in the buffer zones between clearcuts.

Lansky also is critical of the size of the buffer zones, which he called “island habitats” that won’t be attractive to wildlife. The forested areas between clearcuts are intended to offer habitat for wildlife.

Other environmentalists share some of Lansky’s concerns.

For example, Cline of the Audubon Society said that a buffer of just 250 feet between two small clearcuts was too small, especially when some harvesting could also take place within the buffer. He would prefer to see a minumum of 330 feet separating two small clearcuts and no thinning allowed in that zone, he said.

The clear-cutting rules “aren’t an optimum habitat plan, but they weren’t intended to be,” said Gary Donovan of the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife. The department made recommendations concerning wildlife habitat, and Donovan called the resulting rules a “compromise of all of the positions and opinions.”

Tom Doak of the Department of Conservation said that the size of the buffer zones was identical to the width of the wooded areas that must be left around lakes and ponds and along rivers under shoreland zoning.

“We’re not trying to set a whole new set of standards,” Doak said.

The size of the allowable clearcuts remains a concern. Cline said he had hoped the rules would “consider regional differences” and set limits of 10 or 20 acres for clearcuts in southern Maine. He admitted, however, that large clearcuts are rare in the southern part of the state because there aren’t a lot of people who own huge tracts of forest land.

The regeneration requirements also fall short, according to Cline and Robert Frank, a research forester with the U.S. Forest Service based at the University of Maine.

Both men expressed concern about the omission of any height requirement for softwoods after five years.

“I find that quite dangerous,” Frank said. He said the rules should call for softwoods to be 6 inches high or have some secondary branches in order to ensure that the seedlings were established.

Cline agrees. He’d also like to see a stiffer requirement concerning the number of small trees present on clearcut sites after five years. The rules say there must be 350 trees per acre, determined by sampling 10 circular plots that are about 7.5 feet across.

“I could live with that if we knew it was well distributed,” Cline said. The sampling system, however, doesn’t guarantee good distribution of the seedlings, he said.

Doak of the Department of Conservation said that the sampling system is “based in science.”

He also pointed out that in much of the forest in Maine, “regeneration is usually abundant,” far exceeding 350 trees per acre.

The public is invited to offer opinions on the rules between 2 and 4 p.m. or 6-9 p.m. this week at any of three locations:

Monday, Aug. 13, at Wieden Hall Auditorium at the University of Maine at Presque Isle.

Tuesday, Aug. 14, in Room 137 in Bennett Hall at the University of Maine in Orono.

Wednesday, Aug. 15, in Luther Bonney Auditorium at the University of Southern Maine in Gorham.