Liquidation harvesting

Thank you for calling your readers’ attention to the important issue of liquidation harvesting (BDN editorial, May 16, “Cut-and-Run Legislation”). On behalf of the Department of Conservation’s Maine Forest Service,

I offer my perspective on this very important forest policy concern.

The Maine Legislature defines liquidation harvesting as a business practice to maximize the short-term financial return from forestland ownership without regard for its future productivity as a forest. It begins with the purchase of timberland; this is closely followed by a timber harvest that removes most or all trees of commercial value. Finally, the stripped forestland is put up for sale, typically within five years of the original purchase. Liquidation harvesting is not compatible with responsible forest stewardship that benefits Maine’s workers, forest products industry, or fish and wildlife habitat. Instead, it favors short-term profit over the long-term productivity of a well-managed forest, and it penalizes responsible forest managers by putting them at a disadvantage when selling their wood or purchasing land for long term management.

We believe there is sufficient information to support action now on this important issue. In 1999, the Maine Forest Service issued a report on what was known then about this issue. It concluded that 12,000 to 45,000 acres of land in Maine were subjected to liquidation harvesting during the years investigated. This study incorporated landowner reports filed with MFS, the results of a 1995 evaluation of the effects of the

Forest Practices Act (which included field measurements of more than 100 sites), research on land sales from the registries of deeds, and the field knowledge of MFS personnel to determine which areas had been liquidated.

The wide range in the estimate reflects the fact that a portion of the study involved sites where the harvests were recent and resale had not yet taken place, hence the low end of the estimated range. Subsequent evaluation of other data has led MFS staff to conclude that liquidation harvests likely occur on 6 to 8 percent of the acres harvested in Maine each year or 30,000 to 45,000 acres a year. Additional studies are ongoing; all indications are that the results will refine but not contradict our current understanding of this issue.

Your editorial maintains “that liquidation harvesting is more of a development and sprawl issue than a forestry issue.” In our view it is both. Characterizing liquidation harvesting as “the clearing of trees to make way for house lots or commercial development” is not included under the definition of liquidation harvesting, and the acreage of legally approved subdivisions and developments is not included in the acreage counted as liquidation. Rather than being cleared for development a majority of the forest land degraded by liquidation harvesting is sold as smaller forested parcels, with the likelihood of another timber harvest pushed out another 60 to 80 years and with little attention to improving these stands in the interim. Improved zoning policies and financial incentives will not by themselves stop this exploitive practice.

Liquidation harvesting is a long-standing, difficult problem that in the administration’s view merits state policy intervention. Substantially eliminating the practice will require a multifaceted approach and a long-term perspective. In the administration’s view it is entirely appropriate to begin developing solutions in a thoughtful and deliberate manner.

Gov. Baldacci recently launched his Forest Stewardship Initiative to encourage healthy Maine forests and to strengthen Maine’s forest products industries. The governor’s initiative has two major objectives. The first is to substantially eliminate the practice of liquidation harvesting. The second is to position Maine as a world leader in the production of paper and wood products originating from green-certified forestlands.

Gov. Baldacci’s Forest Stewardship Initiative is a comprehensive, six-point plan that addresses the complexity of liquidation harvesting and strives to improve forest practices in Maine. Achieving these objectives will require both public- and private-sector actions including:

. supporting improved procurement practices at mills;

. establishing rules to substantially eliminate liquidation harvesting as a forest management practice;

. identifying complementary solutions to address liquidation harvesting;

. supporting voluntary “Green Certification,” especially for small landowners;

. state leadership by example; and,

. continued monitoring and reporting on liquidation harvesting by the Maine Forest Service.

The Maine Forest Service is responsible for promoting long-term stewardship of Maine’s forest resources. This responsibility includes calling public attention to this practice that degrades Maine forests and tarnishes the image of forest managers who practice sustainable forestry on a growing proportion of Maine forests. We will work with all interested parties to craft reasonable solutions to the issue. We want to ensure Maine’s economic and environmental future by positioning the state as a place that welcomes and values the practice of sustainable forestry and the manufacture of products obtained from well-managed forests.

R. Alec Giffen is director of the Maine Forest Service.