| Robinson
State Park |
Thomas
Diggins |
| Nov
29, 2006 14:12 PST |
Gary et al.,
Am I to understand that MA DCR is even contemplating timber
harvest of
maturing 8 - 12'+ L. tulipifera in central Mass, at the fringes
of its
range, within a state park in an urban area???????????
Just checking to make sure this wasn't some kind of demented
flash-back
(and I don't even do psychedelics!). What manner of
"improvement cut"
or "shelterwood cut" or "selective harvest"
(or whatever other
euphemism they use for land rape of public open spaces) do they
propose. I'd love to hear the government rationale.
Tom
|
| RE:
Robinson State Park |
Robert
Leverett |
| Nov
30, 2006 05:47 PST |
Tom,
No, DCR doesn't plan any harvesting of the
tulips. The DCR focus has
been the upland areas of Robinson where they want to regenerate
oak and
white pine. They would eliminate white and black birch and red
maple
from these areas pretty completely.
State Forester James DiMaio DCR is actually
pretty sensitive to
specialized habitats and works with environmental groups quite
readily
and well. We aree lucky here in Massachusetts. By contrast
several of
Jim's management foresters are of the old school - though by no
means
all. The old schoolers are less sensitive to niche habitats,
rarely
recognize endangered species, and reluctantly give ground in the
wetland
areas. They are still of the mind that the timber priority
trumps almost
all other considerations. They still speak of trash species and
use
terms like diseased, decadent, and over-mature to describe trees
they
want to cut.
Bob
|
| Re:
Robinson State Park - Zoar Valley |
Gary
A. Beluzo |
| Nov
30, 2006 07:05 PST |
Tom,
What Bob says is true, although there were some blue marks on
multi-stem
mature tulip poplars. I believe DCR should NOT consider timber
harvest for
the following reasons:
RSP has a significant stand of tulip poplars, perhaps the best
in MA (there
are currently blue marks on trees right up to the very rim of
the "Valley of
the Tulips")
RSP has the New England height champion for Tulip Poplar (140.0
feet) and
probably the biggest girth (12.4 feet) forest-grown tulip poplar
in MA
RSP is an urban state park with a high diversity of trees
(>55) and forest
types, much of the western end is mature
The entire park abuts the Westfield River (part of the National
Wild and
Scenic River system)
RSP is a state PARK (we need to get back to the reason why
public property
was initiated designated either as FOREST (for multiple use
conservation) or
PARK (for preservation). The MA General Laws state that no
"commercial
timber harvest" is to be considered in state parks and
recreational areas.
MA DCR is saying that the Timber Sale in Robsinson State Park
was not
"commerical"- okay, then what was it? Originally, the
cutting was to begin
November 01, 2006.
The Park has been given a "stay of execution" by the
Commissioner of DCR,
and ENTS has been given the opportunity to do a 1 year study of
the natural
resources there.
In this day and age it is difficult to understand why a state
agency in
charge of promoting the conservation AND preservation of our
natural
resources would be so AGAINST setting aside a tiny fraction of
our state
lands for PRESERVATION. Why is there so much resistance to
preservation?
I'm sure you know the answer Tom.
Gary
|
| RE:
Robinson State Park |
Ray
Weber |
|
Nov
30, 2006 11:16 PST |
Finally got my posting issue fixed...
To be fair, the mature Tulip they have marked "could"
be considered diseased, it has a small fungus area on one
of three trunks. However, its far from hopeless and very
alive.
However, in their quest to enter this area, they build a
logging trail 18' wide right through this grove. They have
tulip saplings 2-4" in diameter marked for cut. This road
also goes down the valley, within 3-4 ft of a stream and
wetland. Bad to put a logging road down a valley that has
a tulip population, or any population for that matter.
The citizens have filed a wetlands violation form on that
site and several others.
These aren't just irate citizens, they are citizens that saw
the studies done on this park in the late 1970's and 1980's,
and the resulting recommendations made to preserve it. They
are a little more educated than the average timber irate
protesters.
In the other stand, they are cutting on the slopes that rim
the "valley". This park is right along a river, and is
an
ecologically complex riparian zone. It literally buffers
urban Agawam from the river, and quite effectively. They
have several areas where they are cutting right to and in
some cases over the slopes of ravines that flow into the
river. Ill let Gary go into the specifics of these tulip
groves. They are spectacular, but one of the many features
of this incredible park that has over 50 species of trees in
it.
I could go on, but hopefully DCR will heed the need to
put this area into preservation status.
Ray
|
| RE:
Robinson State Park - Zoar Valley |
Ray
Weber |
| Nov
30, 2006 12:06 PST |
Well, they do have one mature tulip marked for cut.
It was featured with a yellow ribbon around it in the
local paper once. I have an image of it if anyone wants
it, its 2 trunks of 3 on the tulip they are cutting.
In that same stand, they have several regenerating
tulip saplings marked for cut, and they are putting
a logging road over them.
This is a wetland valley that they don't belong in at all.
I detailed the work near the other valley in a separate email.
Ray
|
| RE:
Robinson State Park - Zoar Valley |
Robert
Leverett |
| Nov
30, 2006 12:42 PST |
Ray,
I cannot disagree with your analysis. I do recognize that the
management forester marked some tuliptree saplings as part of
the road
system. This is inconsistent with the publicly stated objectives
of the
timber sale.
We have a ways to go yet to insure that actions DCR would like
to take
in Robinson don't have a hidden timber agenda driven by green
certification. I'm still trying to appeal to DCR's best side and
give
them every benefit of the doubt and acknowledge that they aren't
all one
of mind. We have several schools of thought inside DCR at play,
with the
chief forester being more progressive and the management
forester being
of the old school.
I'm having the Devil of a time figuring out what is DCR's true
motives
are at this time. I would agree that they most likely began as
an
attempt to incorporate the state parks into green certification,
paying
no heed to the law, or perhaps being unaware of the exact
wording of the
law - although I realize how much of a stretch that is. All
parties need
to stay both focused and cool, but that does not require any of
us to
ignore history or hold back in pursuing the truth.
Bob
|
| Re:
Robinson State Park - Zoar Valley |
Gary
A. Beluzo |
| Nov
30, 2006 14:32 PST |
Bob:
Independent of Robinson State Park, how do we get Massachusetts
DCR to start
thinking about PRESERVATION despite the current policy to
increase timber
production? If DCR exists only to rationalize timber harvesting
for state
coffers then perhaps there needs to be a change in policy,
grassroots up
rather than Romney down. We'll see what happens when our new
Governor is in
place, who knows, maybe Devall Patrick will value natural
systems and be
more ecocratic (he just had a $4 million palatial residence
built in
Richmond, MA so he'll be around).
Gary
|
| RE:
Robinson State Park - Zoar Valley |
Ray
Weber |
| Nov
30, 2006 14:52 PST |
Also the current speakings by the Chief Forester, claiming that
these are
not "commercial" timber sales, so they are legal. That
is very dangerous
since that argument could be used to do that kind
of work on a "reserve" as well, as Gary pointed out.
Just so everyone knows, there are also many other issues
at work here, namely all the species found during the 1980's
are not listed, the reports not found, archaeological studies
done lost, and a Massachusetts Historical Commission file on
the sites Robinson contains can't be located. DCR wouldn't
acknowledge
that the records were deficient, and citizens had to go do
legwork and
find, photo, and bring in outside authorities to start to
relocate all
of these. With much success.
Robinson's forest isnt just the trees, nice as that part of it
is.
Ray
|
| Robinson
Forest |
Lee
E. Frelich |
| Dec
11, 2006 06:35 PST |
Bob:
I sent this in answer to your question last Thursday, but it
never showed
up, so I am trying again. Most of my posts these days don't show
up for at
least a day, and sometimes they never show up, even though your
posts
arrive within a few minutes of the time stamp attached to them.
As for Robinson State Park, high conservation value forests (HCVF)
are
supposed to take into account things such as landscape context,
historical
and social uses, and ecological features, and representative
ecosystems are
supposed to do just that--represent all the forest ecosystem
types present
within the certified agency's land holdings. It seems to me that
use of
Robinson as a neighborhood park, place to walk the dog, for kids
to play,
for a scenic backdrop to several neighborhoods, etc., in a long,
narrow
park surrounded by houses, pretty much precludes commercial
timber
operations and makes a reserve the park's best use, with any
harvests done
exclusively for ecological restoration (or as I learned in
Annapolis, there
is no such thing now as restoration, but instead we have
ecological
realignment, since the vegetation cannot go back to the little
ice age, but
must go forward to a warmer climate). If there are not any other
reserves
that represent riverine systems and the transition to upland,
and upland
scarlet oak forests in that part of the state, then that would
automatically put Robinson in the reserve category to represent
those
forest types. The park could serve as a HCVF and a
representative ecosystem
at the same time. If you consult the the FSC guidelines for your
part of
the country for specifics, you could probably come up with a
dozen reasons
why Robinson should be a reserve.
Lee |
| RE:
Robinson Forest |
Edward
Frank |
| Dec
11, 2006 19:45 PST |
| Re:
Robinson Forest |
Gary
A. Beluzo |
| Dec
12, 2006 15:04 PST |
Lee:
Thank you for your support. Massachusetts PARKS were originally
designated
"parks" for many very good reasons. Now, however MA
DCR appears to be using
the Green Certification process to rationalize silviculture on
ALL state
lands in one form or another. There may be very good "silvics"
intended but
DCR is missing the bigger picture; what I call the "ecologics".
Once again
two very different paradigms: the silvicultural perspective and
the
ecological perspective. Logically, it would seem that out of
nearly 1/2
million acres of state land there would be ecological PRESERVES
somewhere.
The Massachusetts Parks would seem an eco-logical place to
begin.
I am optimistic that the incoming Devall Patrick administration
will
recognize the Massachusetts State Parks for the gems they are.
Gary
|
|