5.b MPRB re. Tornado Cleanup Mr. Ralph Sievert Director of Forestry Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board December 1 7 , 2011 Dear Mr. Seivert, Thank you for your prompt reply to my December 6 email to MPRB Planner Andrea Weber regarding the tornado cleanup work underway in the area of the Theodore Wirth Parkway/Glenwood Ave. intersection. Like y ou, I am a civil servant in natural resources , and know well how difficult it is to satisfy the desires and needs of a diverse citizenr y. I have worked both in the field and in management for the U.S. Forest Service and the National Park Service as well as the Minnesota DNR, and am no stranger to the subtleties of managing parks and forests to achieve the often -conflicting goals of recre ation, safety, and conservation. I am also an avid user of Theodore Wirth Park (TWP), and consider it one of the most valuable assets of our community . I have walk ed or bike d through the park almost daily for the past 13 years. I also buy a ski pass eve ry winter and ski daily during that season . Overall, I have been impressed with the management of TWP by the MPRB. However , I am not satisfied by your 12/7 email, and here I must respond at greater length . I remain very concerned about the “clean -up ” project, the long -term damage it has done , and the management of natural areas in TWP . I hope this letter will encourage MPRB to take a fresh look at natural area management in TWP . NW corner of Intersection P rior to the May tornado, this little -used area supported stands of mature black oak forest and evergreens . The oak forest was diverse in age class and understory species . Standing and down deadwood was present in moderate amounts, but was not an impediment to the ongoing regeneration and understory development , and buckthorn was present, but sparse. A n undesignated bike path runs along the western edge, but there is no other evidence of recreational use. My wildlife observations in this area included a healthy suite of woodpeckers and ot her bark gleaners that rely upon standing live and dead trees for foraging and nesting sites. The tornado damaged or downed trees in small patches scattered throughout this area . T he clean -up has removed and chipped all standing or downed deadwood throug hout this area and has created several very large, unvegetated openings . The skidder used to remove the wood created many wide , bare -soil, and compacted skidpaths through the area . The wood chips produced from the deadwood ha ve been spread over much of the stand. The result is that large portions of this area have been converted from a n oak forest to a sparsely vegetated state . The w ood chips that have been spread over much of the site will smother any seed bank or natural reg eneration that might otherwise occur. In my judg ment, even if the chips are removed, t he area now has little potential for anything other than buckthorn regeneration over the foreseeable future without a large investment in restoration. SE corner of Inte rsection Prior to the May tornado, bottomland in this area supported a shrub wetland with considerable species diversity , but with severe buckthorn infestation. It supports many seeps and springs. Mature black oak forest grew on the hillside between the wetland and the EB Wildflower Garden. A single paved path runs through the site. My wildlife observations in this area included a suite of shrub wetland bird species , many of which are uncommon due to the rarity of this cover type in the metro area . The tornado damaged or downed many large trees in this area. The clean -up has removed and chipped all standing or downed deadwood, and has also stripped the area of much of the remaining vegetation. The skidder disturbed the muck soil throughout the wetl and , and wood chips have been spread throughout its western edge. All deadwood has been removed from the hillside to the south up to the edge of the EB Wildflower Garden . The wetland portion of this area has been subjected to wholesale conversion from sh rub wetland to a sparsely -vegetated state . The mulched area will not support any growth in the foreseeable future , and even if the chips are removed, the remainder of the site will be dominated with buckthorn, but without the structural diversity that exi sted there previously , unless a large investment in restoration is made . The hillside abutting the Wildflower Garden has also been converted from forest to an open state .
Ralph Sievert Page 2 Standing Deadwood: I understand that Forestry’s goal was to remove only the damage caused by the tornado. However, the result of this work has gone far beyond that goal, and has resulted in a conversion of these sites from a tornado -damaged, but natural state to a highly modified condition . In your email, you state that “We are removing fallen trees as well as trees that are structurally damaged yet still standing. There were so many fallen trees that leavi ng them would pose an obstacle to any natural regeneration that may occur.” I know of no scientific evidence that the presence of fallen trees in either an oak forest or shrub wetland (unlike slash in a clearcut) poses an obstacle to natural regeneration. You also state that “The criteria for removing standing trees has to do with its potential to cause damage to surrounding healthy trees if such trees should fall or fail.” However, m odern forest ecology considers tree fall , tree failure , and other patch y catastrophic disturbance like that produced by the May tornado to be an important component of a healthy and dynamic natural forest. Coarse Woody Debris: Dying, dead, and downed trees (aka “c oarse wood debris ” or cwd ) are products of natural forest dynamics and serve a critical role in forest health. They provide habitat for animals, serve as nursery sites for germination and growth of plants, and provide a store of nutrients that are cycled through the forest as the y decompose. Up to 40% of forest birds are cavity nesters that require the presence of standing dead or dying trees. Small mammals, salamanders, snakes, and innumerable invertebrate species rely on the presence of cwd for their existence. By removing al l cwd from these sites, you have eliminated the potential to support much of the biological diversity that is native to the area . I refer you to the extensive scientific literature on this subject for more information. (see two references below ) I belie ve that the unnecessary clean -up project has done far more damage to TWP than did the tornado itself or will any future failure of damaged standing trees. Unfortunately, MPRB’s misguided policy of removing standing and downed deadwood is evident throughou t the southern portion of TWP. Safety: You also state that “There is also a safety concern for individuals that may be walking through the area.” Ho wever, the minimal hum an use of these sites does not justify the extent of the work done by your crews. I understand the need to remove hazard trees from road and trail right s -of -way, but MPRB’s work has gone far beyond this standard . Recreation: I know that recreation is an important goal of TWP, although you do not mention it in your email. Although t he chip -covered skid path s now look like ski trails, I have confirmed with the Nordic Foundation that from their perspective, this is neither a desirable nor intended outcome of the clean -up. The skid paths are also far wider than would be used for either walking or biking. Natural Areas: Finally, you state that “As a forested natural area within the MPRB system, active reforestation and vegetative restoration is dependent on budget availability.” However, the “natural area” character of these sites has been destroyed by the clean -up, and without active restoration, these areas will quickly become buckthorn thickets with little pla nt or animal diversity or other “natural” characteristics . MPRB should not have implemented wholesale co n version of these sites if it was not prepared to invest immediately in their restoration. Oak savannah restoration, if that is the intent of the clean -up , does not consist of removing the deadwood , disturbing the soil, and destroying the understory . I am copying other resource managers, MPRB staff , and elected officials to apprise them of my concerns. In my professional judgment and in light of the tornado clean -up , I recommend that MPRB reevaluate its TWP natural area management policies to insure that f uture natural area management efforts are more conducive to maintaining a sustainable natural resource within TWP. I would appreciate an opportunity to discuss these concerns further at your earliest convenience. Thank you for your attention to my concer ns. Sincerely, Richard J. Baker NOTE: This letter presents my personal knowledge and judg ment , and in no way represents my employer or any other organization with which I may be affiliated. References Hunter, M.L., ed . 1999. Maintaining Biodiversity in Forest Ecosystems. Cambridge University Press. (See especially C hapter 10 : “Dying, dead, and down trees” by W. McComb and D. Lindenmayer ) Kohm, K.A. and J.F. Franklin, eds. 1997. Creating a Forestry for the 21 st Century. Island Press.