Private Land the Key to Forest Health

By Jim Low, Missouri Dept. of Conservation

First posted on 02-02-2010

Missouri forests grew three times faster than the rate of harvest over the past 30 years. However, that great news disguises a less encouraging fact. Much of the Show-Me State’s forest is in the same condition a garden would be if you simply threw seeds on the ground in the spring and came back in the fall hoping to harvest crops.

Recent surveys show that Missouri’s privately owned forests are growing at an annual rate of approximately 127.1 board-feet per acre, while it is being harvested at a rate of about 32.5 board feet per acre. Statewide, Missouri’s forest area has increased by nearly 2 million acres in the past 30 years. While that is good news, State Forester Lisa Allen says the state’s private forests still are underachieving. She would like to see private forest land turn into an economic and ecological dynamo. The key to that transformation, says Allen, is changing private forest owners’ approach from benign neglect to active management.

“Our private forests have tremendous unfulfilled potential for productivity,” said Allen. “I am not talking just about economic productivity – board feet of lumber and jobs. Our forests also have an enormous amount of unfulfilled biological potential. They could do much, much better.”

Underproductive forests represent more than a loss for landowners, says Allen. She notes that Missouri’s total forest acreage is approximately 15.4 million acres. Of that amount, the Conservation Department owns or manages approximately 600,000 acres, or 4.1 percent. The USDA Forest Service’s Mark Twain National Forest covers another 1.5 million, or 10.2 percent. Private forests account for 83 percent, with the remaining 3.5 percent held by the Department of Natural Resources and other public agencies.

“The Conservation Department is responsible for fostering the wise use of all the state’s forest, fish and wildlife resources,” says Allen. “We can’t realistically hope to accomplish that on the tiny fraction of the state’s forest land in public ownership. Success or failure in managing Missouri’s forests depends on private landowners.”

According to Allen, the current trend is discouraging. Fortunately, she says, this failure is not a result of deliberate mismanagement or lack of concern. Most Missouri forest landowners simply do not know the history of their forests and what is needed to keep them healthy.

The forests that existed in Missouri prior to European settlement vanished long ago. Tree removal began hundreds of years before the advent of professional forestry, as settlers cut trees to build and heat homes. Land for miles around towns and cities was logged at intervals of several decades as forests were cut and regrew. With each harvest, the forests looked less and less like the originals.

The era of industrial logging in the late 19th and early 20th centuries also predated modern forestry. In fact, the ecological devastation that resulted from deforestation of entire regions, such as the Ozarks, provided much of the impetus for learning how to manage forests as sustainable resources, rather than mining them without regard for benefits as diverse as sustainable lumber supplies, soil and water conservation and recreation.

“In a way, present-day attitudes toward forest management are holdovers from the era before forest management,” said Allen. “Many landowners think that leaving forests alone is the best thing they can do for their land. That might have been true before human activities changed the face of the land. But the forests we inherited require careful, active stewardship to restore and maintain their long-term health.”

Active stewardship is what is missing from Missouri’s private forests, says Allen. Despite decades of efforts to raise popular awareness of good forest management practices, only a fraction of the state’s private forestland is managed under plans prepared by professional foresters.

“As close as we can tell, less than 20 percent of private forest land is managed with professional advice,” says Allen. “The other 80 percent is either improperly managed – with destructive harvest practices, grazing, indiscriminate burning and conversion to other uses – or not managed at all. Lack of professional management is the main obstacle to achieving healthy, sustainable forests in Missouri.”

Part of the problem is a chicken-and-egg quandary. Forest land that has been abused and supports only stunted, overcrowded trees, short on species desirable for wildlife or wood products, could benefit from selective thinning. However, this labor-intensive work costs money, and because trees grow slowly, the investment would take decades to pay off.

In spite of the fact that Missouri’s private forestlands are less healthy than they could be, Allen sees several reasons for optimism. One is the rising cost of energy and resulting focus on renewable biofuels. Higher demand and prices for small-diameter and low-grade trees and for logging residue could provide income that helps landowners pay for better forest management.

Another positive trend that Allen sees is the emerging market for carbon credits. This idea, which took practical hold in 2003 with the establishment of the Chicago Climate Exchange, is aimed at providing incentives to decrease net emissions of carbon dioxide.

One way to reduce net emissions is to buy carbon credits from people and companies who are keeping carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. Trees tie up large amounts of carbon as they grow, so one way to obtain carbon credits is to pay landowners to grow trees. Because healthy forests are more efficient at tying up carbon, landowners who manage their forest well can expect the greatest carbon-credit payments.

Allen says a third good sign for healthy forests is increasing demand for green-certified wood products from well-managed land. Environment-conscious consumers want the products they buy to have as little negative effect as possible on the planet. Just as many people are willing to pay more for organic produce, there is growing market for eco-friendly building products.

Evidence of this can be found in the green-architecture movement. This growing field incorporates energy-efficient technologies and wildlife-friendly materials into buildings. Environment-conscious homebuyers are willing to pay more for building materials that come from sustainably managed forests. Again, this promises economic benefits to landowners who manage their forests wisely.

“We have plenty of opportunities to make our forests all they can be,” says Allen. “However, between the Forest Service and the Conservation Department, Missouri has less than 15 percent of its forest acreage in public ownership and management. Whatever we accomplish on those lands will be small potatoes compared to what happens on the private, non-industrial forests that make up 85 percent of Missouri forests. Our challenge is to change people’s attitudes toward forest management and give them the tools and incentives necessary to treat their forests like the valuable assets they are.”

The first step toward good forest management is a visit with a professional forester. After learning the landowner’s main goals for his or her land – for example, wildlife habitat, income from forest products or scenic values – a forester can develop recommendations to achieve those goals. In some cases, assistance is available to implement those recommendations.

To find out more about caring for your forest acreage and how to get forest management help, visit mdc.mo.gov/forest/helpcare.htm, or call the nearest Conservation Department office.

Share | |