Introduction

Over the past year and one-half, I have made a conscious effort to gain a better understanding of the complex issues involved in the management of forest lands in Minnesota. Through numerous meetings, forums and field tours, my exposure to forestry practices and issues has helped me better understand the current state of forest management in Minnesota and provided a foundation from which I began to develop a future vision for the state's forests. A recent trip to Finland helped solidify some of my convictions about the direction forest management needs to take in our state to shape a better economic and environmental future for our forests. What follows is an overview of what my vision entails. It is fairly simple and straight-forward. As such, it is not intended to address all of the technical details involved with its application. The concepts are not scientifically new. However, their application at a significant scale in Minnesota will present a basic change from how we have managed forest lands in this state over the past 20-30 years. I ask that you approach this vision with an open mind and consider the possibilities it presents for consensus and long-term solutions.

Greater diversity and balance in forest management

My vision is to focus greater attention on the management of forests for conifers and mixed species/mixed age forests. For some very good reasons, forest management in Minnesota over the past 20 years has been dominated by the management of aspen forests primarily through clear-cut harvesting. Aspens are the predominant species and forest type in Minnesota, comprising over 35 percent of forest type acreage and over 30 percent of total growing stock volume. Aspen species also comprise 65 percent of the total timber volume harvested in the state. Aspen forests will certainly continue as a dominant forest type managed primarily through clear cutting to provide important forest habitat, products and values. However, I believe there are substantial opportunities to diversify our forest management on ecologically appropriate sites to provide a greater diversity of forest types, products and values; create a more diverse and reliable supply of quality wood; and help create a more certain future for a diverse forest industry in Minnesota.

Greater presence of longer-lived conifers

Longer-lived conifers, such as pine and spruce, were more abundant in Minnesota forests prior to end of the 1800's. Turn of the century logging followed by extensive wildfires substantially reduced the presence of these species in the state with a resulting increase in aspen/birch forests. Longer-lived conifer species in pure or mixed forest stands are well suited to multiple-entry, intermediate thinnings, longer rotations, and saw timber management. We can increase the presence of conifer species on ecologically appropriate sites over time primarily through introduction in existing forests (e.g., planting and seeding) and through selective harvesting to encourage conifer species in mixed species/mixed age forests. Greater management attention to longer-lived conifers will help increase the diversity of the state's forests and forest industry.

Greater proportion of harvest volume from thinning and selective harvesting Eighty-six percent of timber harvesting in Minnesota comes from some form of clear-cut harvesting. My vision of the future is to reduce the proportion of timber harvesting that occurs through clear-cutting with a respective increase in harvest volume from thinning and selective harvesting. Increased thinning would occur over time from longer-lived tree species suited to multiple entry thinning and saw-timber management. Thinning would also occur in suitable aspen forests. Increased selective harvesting would occur in quality hardwood stands and other stands to increase the amount of mixed species and mixed aged forests. Increased volume from thinning/selective harvesting and management of longer-lived species will decrease clear-cutting in the long run. Greater proportion of harvest volume from saw timber

Nearly 77 percent of timber harvest volume in Minnesota is in the form of pulpwood. Only 11 percent is saw timber. Thinning, selective harvesting, reduced reliance on aspen, and increased presence of longer-lived species will increase the proportion of Minnesota timber harvesting in the form of saw timber . A greater proportion of saw timber will help improve the diversity of Minnesota's forest industries, provide more large tree/older forest habitat, and capture more economic value from our forests.

Hybrid poplar to help supplement wood supply

People involved in forest management in Minnesota have known for some time now that there would be a temporary (i.e., 10-20 years) shortage of mature aspen available for harvest beginning sometime in this decade. To help fill this pending gap in aspen timber supply and ease the transition towards greater use of thinning and selection harvesting, I believe we need to more aggressively explore additional opportunities to establish hybrid poplars on suitable agricultural lands across the state.

Greater Cooperation and Consensus

One of my greatest concerns is the lack of trust, cooperation and agreement on how Minnesota's forest should be managed to best address future environmental and economic needs. I believe that this inability to reach agreement is one of the greatest impediments to shaping and achieving a desired future for Minnesota's forests for the long-term benefit of all Minnesotans. I encourage all interests to enter into renewed dialogue with an open mind around the concepts I have laid-out above and the possibility for innovative solutions to overcome long-standing barriers to agreement.

Demonstration Forest

As a first, tangible step in changing the direction of forest management in the state, I want to work with other forest landowners to establish a substantial (i.e., tens of thousands of acres) demonstration forest area(s) to implement and showcase management principles I have described above. A basic requirement of the demonstration forest area(s) will be that multiple forest ownership's are involved (i.e., state, federal, counties, forest industry, not-for-profit organizations, tribal lands) and that all agree to work together to implement these alternative management approaches. Ideally, the area will contain established forest types and conditions suitable for immediate implementation of thinning/selective harvesting practices. Monitoring will be an essential component of a demonstration forest to track the effects over time on important forest attributes, such as timber production, wildlife game species, song birds, plant species, water quality and aesthetics.