State of Vermont Agency of Natural Resources Department of Forests, Parks and Recreation Department of Fish & Wildlife Department of Environmental Conservation
Aitken State Forest Long Range Management Plan
Mendon, Vermont 918 acres
Prepared by: Rutland Stewardship Team
Approved by: ______Michael Snyder, Commissioner Date Department of Forests, Parks & Recreation
Reviewed by: ______Louis Porter, Commissioner, Date Fish & Wildlife Department
Approved by: ______Julie Moore, Secretary Date Agency of Natural Resources
(Date of LRMP Template: 8/26/2015 TM/LT/MMC )
Rutland Stewardship Team
Angie Allen, Watershed Planner
Reuben Allen, Parks Regional Manager
Gabrielle Bickford, Administrative Assistant
Joel Flewelling, District Wildlife Specialist
John Lones, State Lands Forester
Nick Fortin, Wildlife Biologist
Shawn Good, Fisheries Biologist
Nate McKeen, Forestry District Manager
Hannah Phillips, State Lands Administration Program Manager
Jessica Savage, Recreation Program Manager
Lisa Thornton, State Lands Stewardship Forester
Robert Zaino, State Lands Ecologist
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan ii | P a g e
Mission Statements
Vermont Agency of Natural Resources
The mission of the Agency of Natural Resources is “to protect, sustain, and enhance Vermont’s natural resources, for the benefit of this and future generations.” (Agency Strategic Plan)
Four agency goals address the following:
• To promote the sustainable use of Vermont’s natural resources; • To protect and improve the health of Vermont’s people and ecosystems; • To promote sustainable outdoor recreation; and • To operate efficiently and effectively to fulfill our mission.
Departments
Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation Mission Statement
To preserve, enhance, restore, and conserve Vermont’s natural resources, and protect human health, for the benefit of this and future generations.
********
Vermont Fish & Wildlife Department Mission Statement
The mission of the Vermont Fish & Wildlife Department is the conservation of all species of fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats for the people of Vermont. To accomplish this mission, the integrity, diversity, and vitality of their natural systems must be protected.
********
Vermont Department of Forests, Parks and Recreation Mission Statement
The mission of the Department of Forests, Parks and Recreation is to practice and encourage high quality stewardship of Vermont’s environment by monitoring and maintaining the health, integrity, and diversity of important species, natural communities, and ecological processes; managing forests for sustainable use; providing and promoting opportunities for compatible outdoor recreation; and furnishing related information, education, and services.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan iii | P a g e
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The 918-acre Aitken State Forest (ASF) is located in the southwest corner of the Town of Mendon in Rutland County on the boundary between the Vermont Valley and the Southern Green Mountain biophysical regions. This forested property is located near population centers around Rutland, the state’s second largest city, providing opportunities for a variety of dispersed recreational uses, sustainable forest management, and conservation of natural resources. Bald Mountain is a prominent feature visible from the east side of the city of Rutland. With Jim Jeffords and Coolidge State Forests nearby to the east, ASF contributes to regional landscape connectivity. These local and regional connections between large forest blocks serve an important role in maintaining long-term health and viability of plant and animal populations.
Legal Considerations There are three rights-of-way that serve as management access to Aitken State Forest. Acquired in 1915, 1960, and 2014, these rights facilitate access from the north, northwest and south sides of ASF and provide access to parts of ASF not easily reached by the primary management access from the Notch Road. Additional details can be found in the Legal Assessment on page 11.
Natural Communities Twenty-one occurrences of 14 different natural communities have been identified and mapped on Aitken State Forest. Some broad patterns emerged from this mapping effort. The slope aspects of Bald Mountain broadly separate the forested communities. Northern and eastern facing slopes tend to have communities of the northern hardwoods group (Northern Hardwood Forest, Mesic Red Oak-Northern Hardwood Forest, Hemlock Forest) while southern and western facing slopes tend to have communities of the transition hardwoods group (Dry Red Oak-White Pine Forest, Dry Oak-Hickory-Hophornbeam Forest). The frequently sharp transition between these two groups parallels the larger landscape pattern of southern Vermont. Of the 14 natural communities identified, 10 are state significant covering nearly 77% of the state forest. 28% of the state forest supports communities that are rare or uncommon in the state. The Ecological Assessment beginning on page 13 and the Natural Community Assessment in the appendix provide detailed landscape context and natural community descriptions.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan iv | P a g e
Natural Communities of Aitken State Forest Natural Acres Vermont State Community Distribution Significant Example? Uplands Boreal Talus Woodland 10 Uncommon Dry Oak-Hickory-Hophornbeam Forest 31 Uncommon Yes Dry Red Oak-White Pine Forest 188 Uncommon Yes Hemlock Forest 38 Common Yes Mesic Red Oak-Northern Hardwood Forest 373 Common Yes Northern Hardwood Forest 183 Very common Red Pine Forest/Woodland 11 Rare Yes Red Spruce-Heath Rocky Ridge Forest 12 Uncommon Yes Rich Northern Hardwood Forest 35 Common Yes Temperate Acidic Outcrop 8.5 Common Yes Temperate Calcareous Cliff <1 Uncommon Yes Wetlands Hemlock-Balsam Fir-Black Ash Seepage 7 Common Swamp Red Spruce-Cinnamon Fern Swamp 2 Uncommon Yes Seep 2.5 Common Yes
Wildlife and Habitat Red oak is a component of many stands within Aitken State Forest. These oak stands provide a regionally important fall food source for a variety of wildlife including black bear, white-tailed deer, and wild turkey. There is a small portion of a much larger deer wintering area in the northwest section of the parcel. Deer wintering habitat is critical to the survival of deer during harsh weather conditions when the snow is deep and temperatures are below zero. Timber harvesting will create browse for deer and provide young forest habitat for a variety of species including songbirds and other non-game wildlife. South-facing hardwood stands in the south and west portions of the state forest also offer winter habitat. The southern aspect, stronger solar gain, and availability of mast provide this additional winter habitat value. Largely forested and undeveloped, ASF provides an important connection from the Vermont Valley and Taconic Mountain Range to the Green Mountains for wide ranging species like black bear and moose. Management of ASF will continue to provide high-quality wildlife habitat for a diversity of species and ensure that other uses and activities are compatible with that goal.
One state-listed endangered plant species is found in ASF. There are several locations within the state forest where its likely habitat exists for additional rare species. Dedicated surveys will be conducted in these locations. There are no known rare, threatened, or endangered animals, however, appropriate habitat is present for the state-endangered little brown and northern long- eared bats. Acoustic surveys for these species will be conducted in these habitat areas prior to management activities. Further detail related to wildlife, habitat, and rare, threatened and endangered species can be found in the Ecological Assessment beginning on page 13.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan v | P a g e
Timber Resource Forest management on Aitken State Forest began in 1912 when the state forest was acquired by the State of Vermont. Heavily cut at the time of acquisition, management focused on planting, firewood cutting, and timber stand improvement. Over time and as the forest matured, sustainable harvesting was conducted. The first timber harvests began in the 1950s and have continued to present time. ASF is now primarily forested and those forests are dominated by mixed hardwoods of red oak, red maple, beech and white ash; northern hardwoods, and mixed softwood stands with hemlock, spruce and red and white pine. The quality of the timber resource is good to excellent. The structure is predominantly even-aged sawtimber sized stands. Management infrastructure (i.e. roads, landings) is in good condition.
Timber harvesting is an important tool that helps to support a variety of management goals. Forest and vegetation management contribute to the sustainable production of forest products, improvement of forest health conditions, quality wildlife habitat and invasive species control, the creation of scenic vistas, contribution to forest resiliency and climate adaptation, demonstration sound forest management practices and is a small, but vital part of the Vermont economy. The goal of forest management on ASF is to produce a diverse array of wood products through sustainable management and harvest practices while integrating wildlife habitat and recreation management goals utilizing a range of established silvicultural techniques and prescriptions. Silvicultural prescriptions will consider climate change scenarios and focus on resiliency and diversity. Further details can be found in the Timber Resource Assessment and Land Management Classification on pages 34 and 65.
Fisheries and Water Aitken State Forest is contained within the Cold River (37-mile2) and Moon Brook-Otter Creek (8.7-mile2) watersheds. Few large streams or rivers are found within the state forest, though many small, possibly seasonal, streams drain from near the summit of Bald Mountain. Fisheries resources exist primarily within a short section of the North Branch of the Cold River that originates approximately 2 stream miles north of ASF and is formed from a gathering of several small headwater streams as well as Eddy Brook. Eddy Brook flows eastward from Coolidge State Forest before joining the North Branch, which enters ASF at the northeast corner and forms the eastern border for approximately 0.75 miles before entering Jim Jeffords State Forest. The North Branch of the Cold River supports an abundant, healthy coldwater fish community primarily comprised of brook trout and brown trout as well as slimy sculpin and blacknose dace. It is a goal of this LRMP to maintain high quality surface waters within ASF.
Wetlands: Several small wetlands occur on the property; these are described in the Natural Community Assessment and the Water Resource and Flood Resiliency Assessment on pages 22 and 41.
Riparian Zones: The North Branch riparian management zone is located along the east boundary of the state forest and contributes to river corridor protection. These floodplain forests are important for flood attenuation, wildlife habitat, temperature moderation, large wood recruitment and retention, and sediment and nutrient retention. This zone offers long-term stream corridor protection to avoid conflict with river migration and development, and for avoidance of
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan vi | P a g e
encroachment on and development within the Notch Road mass soil slope failure zone (2011 Tropical Storm Irene).
Forest Health – Invasive Exotic Species While present, invasive plant species are generally restricted in distribution to the disturbed areas at trailheads, parking areas, and along roads within Aitken State Forest. Invasive species are increasingly challenging to manage and represent a growing forest health concern in many areas of the state. At ASF there is opportunity to manage invasive species before they spread into the interior forest. Progress is being made through the efforts of the Department of Forests, Parks & Recreation (VFPR) Habitat Restoration Crew and work with volunteers. Despite these successes continued monitoring and adaptive management are needed to keep ASF’s forests healthy. Further information on the location and management of invasive species on ASF, including invasive insects, can be found in the Forest Health and Resiliency Assessment on page 27.
Historic Resources Areas in proximity to the North Branch of the Cold River, particularly along the glacial (kame) terrace, have elevated pre-contact archeological sensitivity. Sensitivity is increased due to the value of the river as a historic travel corridor. Several structures are indicated on maps dating from the late 1800s. These are likely temporary camps (Hartgen Archeological Associates, 2018) related to the sawmill located near the North Branch. During the 1930s the Civilian Conservation Corps established a camp with several buildings and campsites on the state forest. CCC field work included wildlife and softwood plantings as well as pre-commercial forest treatments. During the 1950s those same lands were leased to the Rutland Council of the Girl Scouts who operated a camp for 30 years. Their use continued through the early 1980s when increasing maintenance costs and decreasing interest led to their discontinuation of the license with VFPR. Grace Congregational Church in Rutland used the camp for a few years in the 1980s. Efforts were made to find other groups interested in using the camp but were unsuccessful. The buildings became increasingly unsafe and beyond feasible repair due to vandalism and were razed in 1989.
The rich history of the area, particularly the land north of Notch Road is ideal for historic interpretation. Development of a complete historic assessment of the CCC / Girl Scout Camp area will guide the documentation and protection of historic resources and inform interpretation efforts. Historic information could be shared via kiosk postings or development of signage along a history hike, depending upon report recommendations. Partnership with the Mendon Historical Society would help facilitate documentation and potential interpretation. More information on historic resources can be found in the Historic Resources Assessment on page 47.
Recreation Aitken State Forest provides a location for a variety of recreation activities including hiking and walking; winter recreation including snowshoeing, cross-country skiing and trail connectivity to the VAST north/south corridor; and opportunities for hunting, fishing, and trapping. The Tamarack Notch Trail offers an accessible trail along the old CCC camp road. The Bald Mountain Trail is a popular day hike that offers great views of the surrounding landscape. More information on recreation offerings at ASF can be found beginning on page 50. ASF’s position on the landscape as an integral part of a conserved wildlife movement corridor not only
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan vii | P a g e
conserves habitat but makes a great location to observe birds and wildlife. Despite its proximity to Rutland, the rugged, mountainous terrain offers a unique opportunity for a sense of remoteness often only found in less accessible locations. By providing opportunities for this type of nature- based recreation, Aitken State Forest enhances total regional opportunities. Recreation management on ASF will be directed at providing a sustainable level of well-maintained opportunities while protecting the natural resources and the recreation experience with a focus on dispersed, low-density recreation.
New uses will be carefully considered where appropriate and compatible with other management goals and objectives and with strategies outlined in the Land Management Classification. VFPR’s recreation proposal process, including Pre- and Full-Proposal development, is designed for partner groups to request evaluation of a new recreational use or activity. See page 54 for more information on this process. Trail requests that require connections to other properties must be considered in partnership with those landowners and land managers and cannot be fully developed within this LRMP.
Work on existing trails will focus on maintaining trails that are safe, enjoyable, and sustainable. Universal accessibility will be enhanced on the Tamarack Notch Trail. VFPR will continue to work with partner organizations to provide and promote recreation that is complementary to the natural resources and goals of the management plan. Further information on recreational opportunities at ASF can be found in the Recreational Resource Assessment on page 50.
Infrastructure and Access Public access to Aitken State Forest is via the Notch Road in Mendon, just east of its intersection with Wheelerville Road. VFPR will continue to partner with the Town of Mendon to provide safe and functional access to the state forest. Trailhead parking serves the Tamarack Notch, Bald Mountain, and VAST trails as well as access for hunting, fishing and trapping. Public and management access within the state forest is via internal state forest management roads and dedicated rights-of-way. Main access for the lands east of Bald Mountain is via the East Road, a gated state forest highway that begins south of the Notch Road and ends at a log landing. Main access to the lands north of the Notch Road is via the Girl Scout Loop Road, also a gated state forest highway. There are three deeded rights-of-way that provide management access. Further information on infrastructure and access can be found in the Infrastructure and Public Access Assessment on page 59.
Regular road maintenance is conducted to provide safe and functional access that also protects water quality and the surrounding natural resources. Maintenance will include installation and maintenance of waterbars and clearing ditches and culverts of debris. Culverts are evaluated for size, condition, capacity and suitability for aquatic organism passage. Under-sized or otherwise inadequate structures will be replaced.
Scenic Resources Bald Mountain is a prominent feature in Aitken State Forest and is visible from points in the greater Rutland area. The forested mountain rises to the east of Rutland with the Green Mountain range in the background. The “bald” rock outcrops at summit of the mountain, accessed via the
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan viii | P a g e
hiking trail, serve as popular vantage points for a variety of views of the surrounding landscape. More information on scenic resources is available in the Scenic Resource Assessment on page 63.
Management Classification After completion of inventories and assessments the lands, resources, and facilities held by the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources (ANR) are evaluated and assigned to appropriate Agency Land Management Classification categories based upon knowledge and understanding of resources and appropriate levels of management. The four categories as applied to Aitken State Forest are Highly Sensitive (6%), Special Management (48%), General Management (45%), and Intensive Management (<1%). This classification system enables land managers to allocate use and management by area minimizing conflicts between competing objectives and facilitating a common understanding of the overall use or type of management to occur in particular areas of the Aitken State Forest.
Management goals for the Aitken State Forest include strategies to: • Maintain and enhance the parcel’s ability to provide ecosystem services such as providing wood products, protecting soil and water resources, and providing recreational opportunities. • Conserve biological diversity on the parcel and contribute to the diversity of the larger landscape. • Protect and improve the condition and resiliency of important biological and natural resources. • Maintain or enhance quality rank of significant natural communities and protect habitat of rare, threatened, and endangered species. • Enhance wildlife habitat through creation of balanced vegetative stages (age classes), protection and enhancement of critical wildlife habitat such as deer wintering areas, and protection of unique habitat. • • Promote an ethic of respect for the land, sustainable use, and exemplary management. • Produce a diversity of wood products through sustainable management and harvest practices. • Maintain or enhance water quality and fisheries habitat. • Manage invasive plant populations. • Document, interpret, and protect historic resources.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan ix | P a g e
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. PARCEL DESCRIPTION ...... 1 A. Parcel Description ...... 1 B. Purpose of Ownership ...... 1 C. Location Information ...... 2 D. History of Acquisition...... 2 E. Land Use History ...... 2 F. Resource Highlights ...... 3 G. Relationship to Town, Regional, and Other Pertinent Planning Efforts ...... 4 Figure 1: Locator and Biophysical Region Map ...... 7 Figure 2: Parcel Base Map ...... 8 II. PUBLIC INPUT...... 9 III. RESOURCE ANALYSIS ...... 11 A. Legal Constraints Assessment ...... 11 Figure 3: Legal Constraints Map ...... 12 B. Ecological Assessment of Natural Communities, Plants, and Wildife ...... 13 Table 1: Natural Communities of Aitken State Forest ...... 18 Figure 4: Natural Communities Map ...... 19 Table 2: Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Plants of Aitken State Forest ...... 24 Table 3: Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Animals of Aitken State Forest ...... 24 Figure 5: Wildlife Habitat Map ...... 25 Figure 6: Habitat Connectivity Map ...... 26 C. Forest Health and Resiliency Assessment ...... 27 Table 4: Invasive Exotic Plants of Aitken State Forest ...... 29 Table 5. Invasive Insects ...... 30 Table 6: Expected Climate Change Effects and Timeframes ...... 32 Table 7: Forest Management Adaptation Strategies ...... 34 D. Timber Resource Assessment ...... 35 Table 8: Site Class Management Potential ...... 38 Table 9: Dominant Forest Types ...... 39 Figure 7: Soils and Site Class Map ...... 40 Figure 8: Forest Stand Map ...... 41 E. Water Resource and Flood Resiliency Assessment ...... 42 Table 10: Results of Water Quality Sampling...... 42
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan x | P a g e
Figure 9: Water Resource and Fisheries Map ...... 44 F. Fisheries Resource Assessment ...... 45 Figure 10. Locations of historic fisheries sampling sites...... 45 Table 11. Locations and years of fisheries assessments on the North Branch...... 45 Table 12. North Branch of the Cold River Fisheries Assessment Data ...... 46 Table 13. Cold River fisheries assessment data at three sampling sites ...... 47 G. Historic Resource Assessment ...... 48 Figure 11: Historic Resource Map ...... 50 H. Recreation Resource Assessment ...... 51 Table 14: Trails on Aitken State Forest...... 57 Figure 12: Recreation Resource Map ...... 59 Figure 13: Recreation Opportunity Spectrum ...... 60 I. Infrastructure and Public Access Assessment ...... 61 Figure 14: Infrastructure and Public Access Map ...... 64 J. Scenic Resource Assessment ...... 65 Table 15: Scenic Resources of Aitken State Forest ...... 65 IV. MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES AND ACTIONS ...... 66 Land Management Classification ...... 66 Figure 15. Land Management Classification ...... 73 1.0 HIGHLY SENSITIVE MANAGEMENT ― 56 acres ...... 74 2.0 SPECIAL MANAGEMENT ― 444 acres ...... 77 3.0 GENERAL MANAGEMENT ― 415 acres ...... 82 4.0 INTENSIVE MANAGEMENT ― 0.2 acres...... 84 Table 16: Implementation Schedule 2019-2039 ...... 86 Figure 16: Implementation Map ...... 89 V. MONITORING AND EVALUATION ...... 90 VI. NEW USES AND PLAN AMENDMENT PROCESS ...... 93 VII. FUTURE ACQUISITION/DISPOSITION ...... 94 VIII. APPENDICES ...... 95 APPENDIX 1: Natural Community Assessment ...... 96 APPENDIX 2: Forest Inventory Data and Stand Map ...... 110 APPENDIX 3: Breeding Bird Data ...... 113 APPENDIX 4: Reptile and Amphibian Data ...... 114 APPENDIX 5: Public Comment Summary ...... 115 APPENDIX 6: Works Cited ...... 121
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan xi | P a g e
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ADA American’s with Disabilities ANR Agency of Natural Resources AOT Agency of Transportation ASF Aitken State Forest ATV All-Terrain Vehicles CCC Civilian Conservation Corps DWA Deer Wintering Area GIS Geographic Information System GMP Green Mountain Power GPS Global Positioning System LARC Land Acquisition Review Committee LRMP Long Range Management Plan LUC Land Use Classification LWCF Land and Water Conservation Fund MSD Mean Stand Diameter ROS Recreation Opportunity Spectrum ROW Right-of-way RTE Rare, Threatened and Endangered SGCN Species of Greatest Conservation Need SF State Forest USDA United States Department of Agriculture UVM CAP University of Vermont Consulting Archaeology Program VAST Vermont Association of Snow Travelers VFBMP Vermont Forest Bird Monitoring Program VFPR Vermont Department of Forests, Parks & Recreation VFWD Vermont Fish & Wildlife Department VHCB Vermont Housing and Conservation Board
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan xii | P a g e
I. PARCEL DESCRIPTION
A. Parcel Description The 918-acre Aitken State Forest (ASF) is located on the boundary between the Vermont Valley and the Southern Green Mountains biophysical regions. Bald Mountain, the primary feature of this parcel, is the first mountain foothill rising out of the valley. The narrow Vermont Valley sits in the long north-south gap between the Taconic Mountains to the west and the Green Mountains to the east. ASF is part of a larger block of conserved land. With the 1,346-acre Jim Jeffords State Forest along its eastern boundary, and the nearly 20,000-acre Coolidge West Management Unit to the east of Jim Jeffords SF, these state forests provide important linkage to the Green Mountain National Forest along the spine of the Green Mountain range. ASF has a long history of forest and habitat management.
The state forest’s location just minutes east of Rutland, Vermont’s second largest city and near the surrounding communities of Mendon and Killington, makes it an attractive location for a variety of recreational uses. Hiking, walking, bird and wildlife watching, hunting, and fishing are popular as are winter activities including cross-country skiing, snowshoeing and snowmobiling.
B. Purpose of Ownership State Forests are managed by the Vermont Department of Forests, Parks and Recreation to meet a variety of conservation and management goals.
Use and Management of Aitken State Forest is designed to:
➢ Conserve biological diversity on the parcel and contribute to the diversity of the larger landscape. ➢ Maintain and enhance forest ecosystem health. ➢ Maintain and enhance the parcel’s ability to provide ecosystem services such as providing wood products, protecting soil and water resources, and providing recreational opportunities. ➢ Promote an ethic of respect for the land, sustainable use, and exemplary management. ➢ Protect and improve the condition and resiliency of important biological and natural resources. ➢ Conform to any and all deed restrictions, conservation easements, and legal agreements. ➢ Maintain or enhance quality rank of significant natural communities and protect habitat of rare, threatened, and endangered species. ➢ Enhance wildlife habitat through creation of balanced vegetative stages (age classes), protection and enhancement of critical wildlife habitat such as deer wintering areas, and protection of unique habitat. ➢ Produce a diversity of wood products through sustainable management and harvest practices.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 1 | P a g e
➢ Maintain or enhance water quality and fisheries habitat. ➢ Control or limit invasive plant populations to the extent feasible. ➢ Document, interpret, and protect historic resources. ➢ Provide dispersed recreational opportunities and trail systems where appropriate and compatible with other goals. ➢ Evaluate new recreational use requests in the context of total recreational use of parcel (degree of use, numbers of trails), the Recreational Opportunity Spectrum, and other management goals for the parcel. ➢ Provide safe and enjoyable access for public uses while protecting the resource and forest access infrastructure.
C. Location Information Aitken State Forest is located in the Town of Mendon near the intersection of Notch (TH #2) and Wheelerville (TH #7) roads, just minutes east of the city of Rutland. Until 2011 the Notch Road provided access from Wheelerville Road east through the state forest to Notch Road Extension. The flooding associated with Tropical Storm Irene in 2011 washed away a large section of the town road. Access to the state forest via the Notch Road now ends at the parking lot just past the Tamarack Notch trailhead. Located in the southwest corner of the town of Mendon, its southern boundary is on the Shrewsbury/Mendon Town line and its west boundary is on the Rutland/Mendon town line. ASF is bounded on the north by lands of Rutland City Forest.
D. History of Acquisition Aitken State Forest is the second oldest state forest in southwestern Vermont, purchased in 1912 from Edmund Morse. The 832 +/- acre acquisition was combined with an additional 80 +/- acres from the City of Rutland in 1917. The new state forest was named for George Aitken, a member of the State Agriculture and Forestry Board and Supervisor of the Billings Farm in Woodstock. The forest had been heavily harvested and at least four large forest fires had taken place prior to state ownership. Years of management under state ownership and the passage of time have allowed for recovery of the forest resulting in a productive working forest, diverse wildlife habitat and the setting for nature-based recreation.
There are three rights-of-way that provide access to two locations in the northwest and one in the southwest quadrant of the state forest. Acquired in 1915, 1960, and 2014, these rights-of-way provide management access to parts of ASF not easily reached by the primary management access along the state forest highway known as the East Road. They do not provide general public access.
E. Land Use History At the time of acquisition, much of Aitken State Forest had been heavily cut to meet firewood, timber and charcoal needs of nearby Rutland. By 1913 at least four separate wildfires had burned several hundred acres of the state forest. To this day, evidence of fire is apparent from scarring on individual trees and in the composition of the forest itself, with stands of aspen and white
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 2 | P a g e
birch in historically burned over areas. The first forest management plan was developed in 1922 by forester Gaston Gutts of the Vermont Forest Service (now Vermont Department of Forests, Parks & Recreation). Gutts described the forest as “the whole area having been cut down in the past about 20 years”. As a result, early management activities focused on planting heavily cut areas to softwood. By 1924, 192 acres had been planted to red and white pine and Norway spruce. With the assistance of the 392nd Company of the Civilian Conservation Corps in the 1930s many more acres of ASF were planted to softwood species including Norway spruce, larch, and red and white pine. Few acres of these plantation remain, the softwood having been outcompeted by hardwood species.
Historic maps from 1854 indicate the presence of structures that were gone by the time the 1869 map was drawn indicating that they may be been short-term camps possibly associated with the sawmill that was located on the North Branch during that time (Hartgen Archeological Associates, 2018). The Tamarack Notch Camp, ca. 1935 was constructed by the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) and was used later as a Girl Scout camp and then a church camp. No buildings remain but several mortared fireplaces are scattered through the area. There may also be pre-contact sensitivity associated with the area related to its location within the North Branch travel corridor.
F. Resource Highlights Twenty-one occurrences of 14 different natural community types have been identified and mapped on Aitken State Forest. The aspect of Bald Mountain’s slopes broadly separates the forested communities. Northern and eastern facing slopes tend to have communities of the northern forest group (northern hardwood forest, red oak-northern hardwood forest, hemlock- northern hardwood forest). Southern and western facing slopes tend to have communities of the transition hardwoods group (dry oak forest, dry oak-hickory-hophornbeam forest). The often- sharp transition between these two groups parallels the larger landscape patterns of southern Vermont, where there is large-scale mixing of these two forest types.
Nearly all ASF’s 918 acres are forested. The predominant forest type is northern hardwood (American beech, sugar maple, yellow birch) with black birch, white ash, basswood, and red oak in association. Forest management has occurred since state ownership began with reforestation efforts to restore cut over lands with softwood species followed by pre-commercial work (timber stand improvement). As the forest matured, timber harvests were conducted, and sustainable timber harvesting continues as an important management activity today.
ASF provides important habitat for white-tailed deer, turkey, ruffed grouse, small mammals and songbirds. Due to its excellent access and proximity to Rutland considerable hunting occurs. Hard mast (red oak, beech) are found throughout the state forest. Hickory and hophornbeam provide an important, but more limited, food supply. The larger block of forest land that ASF is a component of provides excellent wildlife habitat and facilitates wildlife movement through the landscape.
ASF is a popular and growing recreation destination close to population centers around the Rutland area. The 3.5-mile Bald Mountain Trail offers a moderate day-hike with some steep slopes and great views of Rutland, the Route 7 valley and the Green Mountains. The Tamarack
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 3 | P a g e
Notch Trail is shorter and on flat terrain offering an easy short hike and alternative to the Bald Mountain Trail. Dog walking is also popular on both trails and along the forest management access road that heads south from the trailhead kiosk. A parking lot and snowmobile connector trail crosses a portion of the parcel north of the Notch Road to connect to the VAST (Vermont Association of Snow Travelers) north/south Corridor Trail offering an access point to miles of VAST trail. Hunting is popular in the diverse forests of ASF as is fishing in the North Branch of the Cold River along the eastern boundary of Aitken State Forest.
G. Relationship to Town, Regional, and Other Pertinent Planning Efforts The long-range management plan for Aitken State Forest is consistent with the objectives and recommendations found in the Mendon Town Plan adopted December 14, 2015.
Mendon Town Plan – General town goals as stated in the 2015 town plan include preserving the present environment and character of the Town, its rural appearance and atmosphere, and preserving the existing, natural, scenic, and historic areas.
The town plan recognizes the importance of its natural resources and includes recommendations for their conservation. It also highlights the importance of a solid flood resiliency plan understanding that the towns steep terrain and frequent storms challenges stream bank stability.
The town plan underscores the economic and social significance of rural recreation to the town especially as it provides for dispersed recreational activities including camping, hiking, picnicking, nature walks, cross-country skiing and snowmobiling.
Aitken State Forest is located wholly within the town of Mendon and the town plan recognizes the importance of that public land base and others in the town. Recognizing: • The importance of keeping large forest blocks undeveloped and unfragmented. • That deer wintering areas are critical to animals in severe conditions in the mountains. Shelter requirements and availability of browse are critical for species survival.
The Mendon Town Plan: • Places significance on forested mountain peaks. • Recommends following VTANR guidance in areas mapped as seasonal bear habitat. • Emphasizes sustained agriculture and forestry use and the importance of following best management practices for both agricultural and silvicultural operations. • Recognizes the importance of public forest land for recreation. • Underscores the need to protect wetlands. • Encourages the availability of ‘undeveloped’ land for dispersed recreation including hunting, fishing, hiking, skiing, or bird watching.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 4 | P a g e
Aitken State Forest is located within the Town’s Conservation District I whose purpose is to “protect those high elevations which have steep slopes, shallow soils and fragile or limited vegetation and which provide significant recharge of the ground and surface water supplies of the Town and region.” The plan also recognizes the role these areas play in the protection of natural resources specifically for wildlife habitat and commercial forestry.
The plan states that these areas “encourage wildlife habitat, forestry, agriculture, limited commercial recreation, and noncommercial recreation…” The plan recommends that all public forest lands be open for recreational use.
Regional Plan The Rutland Regional Plan was re-adopted June 19, 2018. The plan shares many goals with the long-range management plan for Aitken State Forest. The plans complement each other, together providing regional benefits.
The regional plan: • Recognizes the importance and value of outdoor recreation to residents and the local economy. • Strives to conserve outdoor space and natural areas for outdoor recreation especially in proximity to population centers. • Supports regional trail connectivity. • Sets a goal of working with municipalities and VFPR to increase awareness and facilitate public use of recreational assets. • Recognizes the importance of controlling non-native insects and plants that have the potential to undermine forest economies. • Recognizes the importance of retention and viability of forests to the economy. • Supports partnerships with VTANR to meet goals of sustainably managed forests. • Recognizes the important ground water recharge capacity of forests and meadows. • Articulates the importance of forests for the diversity of wildlife habitat and nature-based recreational opportunities they provide. • Recognizes the importance of un-fragmented forest land and the habitat value associated with maintaining large tracts of forest. • States the importance of protecting significant deer wintering areas (as identified by VFWD) from uses that threaten the ability of the habitat to support wintering deer. • Encourages efforts to inventory and protect resources for educational, recreational and other purposes further stating that protection of rare, threatened and endangered species are matters of public interest. • Encourages participation in river corridor planning and protection promoted by the VDEC River Management program.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 5 | P a g e
• Recognizes the importance of protecting riparian areas and wetlands including those that do not appear on the Vermont Significant Wetlands Inventory.
The plan recognizes the importance of recreation to residents of the Rutland Region as well as its contribution to the local economy. It calls for enhancement of recreational opportunities in the area and recognizes an unmet need related to adequate recreation facilities for people with disabilities and increasing demand for trail-based recreation. The plan also draws attention to the predicted impacts of climate change especially on vulnerable winter recreation such as snowmobiling, cross-country skiing, snowshoeing, and sledding. All are activities that rely on natural snow cover.
Coolidge State Forest and Jim Jeffords State Forest With the 2016 acquisition of Jim Jeffords State Forest in Mendon and Shrewsbury connectivity was enhanced between the large forest block of Coolidge (west) State Forest and Aitken State Forest. This nearly 22,000-acre block of combined state forest land contributes to regional connectivity. Connections between wild lands can serve an important role in maintaining long- term health and viability for wildlife populations. It can also enhance appropriate recreational opportunities. Coolidge State Forest is managed following guidance of the long-range management plan for the Coolidge West Management Unit (adopted 2008) which also includes Plymsbury and Tiny Pond Wildlife Management Areas. Jim Jeffords State Forest is managed under the guidance of an Interim Stewardship Plan adopted in January 2016. Resource assessments have begun as part of the LRMP development for the state forest. Future revisions of these individual LRMP’s will likely be inclusive and will consider the management of this large block of state land as one management unit. This large block of state forest land sits between the northern and southern halves of the Green Mountain National Forest.
Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department Easement Lands The Fish & Wildlife Department holds an easement on 90 acres along the Cold River south of Aitken State Forest. The primary purpose of the easement is to “conserve and protect important wildlife habitat, biological diversity and natural communities; to conserve the undeveloped character and scenic and open space resources for present and future generations; and to foster the conservation of the state’s wildlife habitats, forestry and other natural resources…”. The easement restricts the operation of motorized or mechanized vehicles (i.e. mountain bikes, ATVs, snowmobiles, and four-wheel drive vehicles, etc.). Additionally, between December 15 and April 15, cross-country skiing, snowshoeing, and dogs are prohibited on the easement lands. Easement conditions allow non-motorized, non-mechanized, non-commercial, dispersed recreational use. Act 250 permit conditions placed on the gravel operation south of the state forest and adjacent to the easement lands restrict activity during the months of December through March to protect the integrity of the wintering area. (Grant of Conservation Easement and Development Restrictions, 2014).
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 6 | P a g e
Figure 1: Locator and Biophysical Region Map
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 7 | P a g e
Figure 2: Parcel Base Map
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 8 | P a g e
II. PUBLIC INPUT
The citizen participation process for Aitken State Forest Long Range Management Plan was conducted in accordance with Agency of Natural Resources policies, procedures, and guidelines. Public involvement or citizen participation is a broad term for a variety of methods through which the general public has input into public land management decisions. The Agency of Natural Resources, including the Departments of Forests, Parks and Recreation and Fish & Wildlife, is committed to a planning process which offers the opportunity for all citizens and stakeholders to participate. These include letters, surveys, personal comments, telephone calls, e- mails, and more formal methods such as public meetings and workshops. All public input received concerning the future stewardship of Aitken State Forest has been considered in the preparation of this plan.
An open-house style informational public meeting was held on December 13, 2016 at the Department of Forests, Parks & Recreation district office in Rutland, Vermont to present inventory and assessment information and to receive comments. The public was invited to view maps, inventory information and ask questions and engage in conversation with member of the district stewardship team. Comments were collected at the meeting and during a 30-day public comment period that followed, ending January 20, 2017.
Announcements for public input meetings and opportunities for comment were posted on the Department website, mailed to statewide and local stakeholders, distributed in ANR press releases, and shared with local and statewide media.
In addition, VFPR staff has met on numerous occasions with Vermont Association of Snow Travelers (VAST), both local and statewide members, to discuss management of the snowmobile connector trail. Staff has also met with representatives from the Mendon Historical Society to discuss recreation opportunities and historic interpretation on the Girl Scout parcel, and with representatives from the Town of Mendon to discuss parking, dumping, law enforcement and road classification.
In 2018 VFPR hired a Vermont Youth Conservation Corps (VYCC) crew to conduct a trailhead survey to gather information from visitors to the trail system. The survey was small in scope but provided an opportunity to interact with recreational users at ASF. Results of the survey are in the Appendix.
The public input process is purposefully varied including open house style meeting, trailhead surveys, small meetings and meetings and conversations with partner organizations to encourage conversations and meaningful discussion of value and context. Emails and comments received during this planning period were reviewed and analyzed by the District Stewardship Team and considered as a draft long-range management plan was written.
Comments from the public are taken as advice by the ANR. The purpose of public involvement is not to institute majority-rule management of public land. However, effort is made to include
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 9 | P a g e
suggestions which are compatible with ANR land management principles and goals; and which are fiscally realistic. Results of the input received can be found woven into the management recommendations throughout the plan.
Following review by the Agency of Natural Resources Lands Team, the draft long-range management plan will be shared with the public via a digital platform. A Story Map was developed to highlight the state forest and the management proposed in the draft plan. Comment will be received via an embedded survey, through the mail or via email during the winter of 2021. State guidance related to COVID-19 precludes large public gatherings that have customarily been associated with the release of draft long-range management plans.
A summary of the comments received during the public involvement process, a summary of the Department’s response to comments, and additional information about the public involvement process are in the appendix.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 10 | P a g e
III. RESOURCE ANALYSIS
A. Legal Constraints Assessment The legal constraints related to the stewardship of Aitken State Forest include:
1. Summary of Major Legal Constraints:
a) Deed Restrictions or Obligations: Henry Brislin, Mayor of the City of Rutland conveyed 80 acres +/- to the State of Vermont on March 5, 1917 “excepting herefrom any and all water rights on Cold River and also reserving the right to divert and take away as much of the water as desired”. This quit claim conveyance was done to clear the title.
b) Rights-of-way: • The 1500-foot Bradder right-of-way connects most of the northwest portion of the State Forest with Town Road #2 (Notch Road). William and Ferne Bradder to State of Vermont “… an non-exclusive easement in right-of-way, not exceeding two rods in width…” “the use of said right-of-way shall include the relocation, construction, maintenance and repair of a road for timber management purposes as determined necessary by the Department of Forests and Parks, a lawful part of the State of Vermont government, in connection with the management and administration of lands owned by the State of Vermont and administered by the Department of Forests and Parks” “ This easement does not grant the right of access and egress to the Grantee for purposes other than those connected with timber management.” November 21, 1960. Mendon Land Records Book 20, page 35. • Granted in 1915, the Nagy right-of-way facilitates access to the lower section of Compartment 1 from Town Road #6. This right-of-way, although unrestricted, accesses only a small portion of the state forest and only has been used for management purposes. John Nagy to state of Vermont “a certain right of way situated in Mendon” further described as follows “a right of way to pass and repass at any time and all times from the town road through my lane and door-yard and across my field to an old wood road now being used by one Frank Horvath for the purpose of drawing wood, with the right to enter upon said premises and the land adjoining thereto for the purpose of maintaining and constructing said roadway” June 23, 1915. Book 12, page 220 Mendon Land Records
• Granted in 2014, the Elnicki right-of-way provides access from Cold River Road to the southwestern section of Aitken State Forest.
Elnicki to State of Vermont a fifty-foot right-of-way across lands of Elnicki Aggregate, Inc. to Aitken State Forest for “forest management purposes only”. May 22, 2014. Book 65, page 114 Shrewsbury Land Records.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 11 | P a g e
Figure 3: Legal Constraints Map
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 12 | P a g e
B. Ecological Assessment of Natural Communities, Plants, and Wildife
The Agency of Natural Resources uses a “coarse filter/ fine filter” approach to the ecological inventory and assessment of state lands (Jenkins 1985; Noss 1987; Hunter et al. 1988; Hunter 1991; Noss and Cooperrider 1994; Haufler et al. 1996; Jenkins 1996; Poiani et al. 2000). Widely employed as a management tool on state, federal, and private lands (see for example: Leslie et al. 1996; Committee of Scientists 1999; Stein et al. 2000; USFS 2000, 2004), it is an aid to land managers who seek to protect most or all of the species that naturally occur on their lands, but who lack the resources to make exhaustive inventories of all taxonomic groups. Because many groups of organisms are cryptic or poorly understood (for example, fungi and soil invertebrates), it is not practical to make lists of all of them (Anderson et al. 1999; Willis and Whittaker 2002). Even if we could assemble such lists of species, it would be impossible to manage the land with all of them in mind. Instead, natural communities are treated as a proxy for the biological organisms of which they are composed. It is thought that if examples of all of Vermont’s natural communities are conserved at the scale at which they naturally occur, most of the species they contain, from the largest trees and mammals to the smallest insects, will also be conserved (NCASI 2004). Natural communities are thus a coarse filter for “catching” the majority of an area’s native organisms. Because conservation of habitats (in the form of natural communities) will not protect all species, we also employ a “fine filter” to catch the remaining species that are known to require very specific conditions for their growth, reproduction, wintering, etc. Examples of organisms benefiting from the fine filter inventories described below include breeding birds, deer on their wintering areas, and rare plants.
Natural Community Summary Much of Aitken State Forest (ASF) is characterized by forests comprising northern hardwood species including sugar maple, American beech and yellow birch. On steeper slopes and more southern aspects a substantial component of red oak is found. Warmer and drier areas, particularly the southwestern slopes of Bald Mountain are characterized by shallower and droughty soils that support more open forests and stunted trees. The steep and rocky terrain of ASF supports cliff and outcrop communities that provide important habitats for rare and uncommon plant species, as well as more common species of birds, mammals, and reptiles. Wetlands cover just 1% of the parcel but provide habitat for wildlife including amphibians and reptiles. Nearly 78% of the natural communities within the state forest are considered state significant and 28% are rare or uncommon.
Wildlife Summary Wildlife species known from ASF reflect the habitats and natural communities summarized above and discussed in further detail below. The most common wildlife species on ASF are those that generally rely on northern hardwood forests for some or all of their needs (e.g. a variety of songbirds including hermit thrush, ovenbird, scarlet tanager, and some game species such as deer, turkey, bear, and gray squirrels, along with bats, and relatively common amphibian and reptile species such as the eastern red-backed salamander,wood frog, common gartersnake, and eastern milksnake. There are no known rare, threatened, or endangered wildlife species in the forest, although extensive surveys have not been conducted. More detailed wildlife/habitat associations are described in the individual natural community descriptions in the appendix.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 13 | P a g e
Coarse-filter/Broad-scale Habitat The coarse filter assessment begins by describing landscape and climatic factors that categorize ASF, such as bedrock geology and water resources. It then details the 21 distinct natural community types documented and mapped during inventories of the state forest. This is followed by a fine filter assessment describing any rare species and wildlife habitats found here.
Biophysical Region and Climate Aitken State Forest is located on the boundary between the Vermont Valley and the Southern Green Mountain biophysical regions. Bald Mountain, the primary feature of this parcel, is the first mountain foothill rising out of the valley. The narrow Vermont Valley sits in the long north- south gap between the Taconic Mountains to the west and the Green Mountains to the east. The parallel mountain and valley topography reflect the history of continental collisions and bedrock folding that has shaped Vermont. The climate varies in the Vermont Valley, because of the dramatic topography, but in general is warmer and drier than the Southern Green Mountains region. The mountains, with relatively high elevations and rugged topography, have cool weather, heavy precipitation, and frequent fog. Sitting on the boundary between these two regions, ASF is not subject to extremes found in either region.
Bedrock Geology, Surficial Geology, and Soils The geologic history of an area can have a strong influence on the distribution of natural communities. The Vermont Valley and the high mountains to the east and west were formed by continental collisions that folded the landscape and shaped the underlying bedrock. The bedrock geology of the region can be complex but can be broadly divided into the metamorphosed calcareous (calcium-rich) rocks of the Vermont Valley, such as limestone, dolomite and marble, and the metamorphosed non-calcareous rocks of the Green Mountains, such as schist, phyllite and gneiss. Aitken State Forest is located where these calcareous and non-calcareous rocks meet, and as a result has an intricate mix of many different bedrock types. The various bedrock types have been mapped in detail by Ratcliffe (1998) and Ratcliffe et al. (2011), but in general the bedrock is gneissic with smaller, interbedded calcium-rich layers.
The degree to which this bedrock affects growing conditions at ASF is mediated by the depth of the surficial materials deposited at the end of the last glaciation, some 15,000-12,000 years ago. As the glacier melted rock fragments of all sizes, from boulders to clay, fell in an unsorted jumble known as glacial till, and most areas of ASF feature a layer of this over bedrock. Glacial till depths can be as deep as 60” but are often substantially shallower. Till retains the qualities of the rock that was ground by the glacier, and often transports it over other rock types. Thus, because many rock types are in close proximity in ASF, calcium-rich glacial till might have been deposited over acidic gneiss bedrock, or vice-versa.
While till is almost ubiquitous in ASF, small areas have other types of surficial deposits. Small portions in the far northeast corner, and on the flat below the large bowl in the northwest corner, have glaciofluvial kame moraine deposits. These gravelly deposits were laid down along the edge of the receding glacier. The lower western slopes of Bald Mountain, most outside of ASF, have glacial moraine deposits, and a portion of these can be found in the extreme northwestern corner of ASF. Near the summit of Bald Mountain, there are many rock outcrops that have either
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 14 | P a g e
never held till or are where the till has eroded away since being deposited. Post-glacial accumulations of muck and peat can be found in most of the wetlands. These are organic materials deposited in anaerobic environments that consequently decay more slowly than they are produced.
The soils of ASF are primarily products of these surficial deposits. Till-derived soils are the most widely distributed, followed by peat and muck, and glacio-fluvial soils. The till soils are often rocky and located on steep terrain. The USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) has mapped most of these soils as part of either the Killington-Rawsonville and Rawsonville- Houghtonville complexes, or the Berkshire and Sunapee series. The former two types are generally steep and fairly shallow soils, while the latter two types are often deeper (>60”) but still rocky. The glaciofluvial soil deposits are generally mapped as the Colton-Duxbury complex, though parts also have been mapped as Berkshire gravelly loam or Sunapee fine sandy loam. Wetland soils are mapped as either Linwood or Peacham muck. Field sampling found that even in areas mapped as one soil type, depth and composition can be quite variable. Detailed soil descriptions can be found in the associated natural community summaries in the Appendix.
Hydrology Aitken State Forest receives around 42” of precipitation annually, a relatively average amount compared to other areas in the state. ASF is in the headwaters of Otter Creek, which drains to Lake Champlain and ultimately the Saint Lawrence River. Few substantial streams or water bodies are found in ASF, though many small, possibly seasonal, streams drain from near the summit of Bald Mountain. Larger streams can be found at lower elevations, particularly in the northwest corner of the forest, draining the wetland near the southeast corner of the forest, and along eastern boundary.
Natural and Human Disturbance Natural disturbance processes, such as wind, fire, and flooding, continually shape landscapes and define their natural communities. The most frequent upland natural disturbances at ASF are small-scale, ongoing events, resulting in individual tree death and canopy gap dynamics. Moderate scale disturbances such as blowdowns, ice storms, and insect defoliation events are expected less frequently, but have the potential for larger impacts. Very large-scale disturbances (events affecting many hundreds of acres or more) are expected to occur rarely, but if an event does occur it would have the potential to create dramatic changes in natural communities. Land use history also influences the present-day distribution of natural communities at ASF. Like much of the Vermont landscape the parcel has a history of agriculture (e.g. grazing), tree planting, and timber harvesting. Evidence of these activities can still be found. The legacy of human land use will continue to affect the natural communities for a long time.
Landscape-scale Land Use and Connectivity Forest Blocks and Interior Forest
Aitken State Forest is located on the western edge of a substantial area of unbroken forest that extends into the Green Mountains toward Killington and includes Coolidge and Jim Jeffords State Forests. This large forest block is nearly 46,000 acres and is adjacent to several other forest blocks that are similarly sized. The forest block is identified in Vermont Conservation Design as
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 15 | P a g e
highest priority as an interior forest block and a connectivity block. Most of the habitat in this block is higher elevation northern hardwood and spruce-fir forest. Forest composition in ASF, especially oak and hickory dominated areas, contribute to the overall habitat diversity of this forest block.
Species Movement Corridors Local and regional connections between large forest blocks can serve an important role in maintaining long-term health and viability of plant and animal populations and allow species to shift their distributions over time in response to a changing climate and other pressures. For wildlife, corridors not only allow individual animals (such as young individuals in search of new habitat, or wide-ranging mammals like bear, moose, and bobcats) to move throughout the landscape, but also allow for the valuable gene-flow of species across a region. Even the occasional travel and mating of a few individuals between otherwise isolated populations can substantially increase their long-term viability, because the genetic diversity within each group is effectively increased. While individual plants don’t move, the exchange of pollen and seeds across forest blocks has the same effect on genetic diversity.
Located near the edge of the large forest block, Aitken State Forest is part of an important connection to the south, via series of forest blocks that ultimately lead to White Rocks in Wallingford and to large forest blocks in the Green Mountain National Forest. To the west, narrow riparian areas provide connectivity opportunities across the Vermont Valley to the Taconic Mountains. The combination of Coolidge State Forest, Jim Jeffords State Forest, and Aitken State Forest also provides important core habitat that is critical to the primary north-south connection along the spine of the Green Mountains – connecting to Tiny Pond Wildlife Management Area and Okemo State Forest. East of Route 100, Coolidge (east) State Forest and other conserved lands and intact forests provide connections all the way to New Hampshire. On a smaller scale, because the parcels that make up ASF are on either side of the Notch Road, it might provide an undeveloped crossing location for many species.
Natural Communities A natural community is an assemblage of biological organisms, their physical environment (e.g. geology, hydrology, climate, natural disturbance regime, etc.), and the interactions between them (Thompson and Sorenson, 2000). More than a simple collection of species, a natural community is characterized by complex webs of mutualism, predation, and other forms of interaction. The 89 natural community types described in Vermont repeat across the landscape in patches (or “polygons”) of various sizes. These patches (or groups of patches in close proximity to each other) are referred to as natural community occurrences and are to be distinguished from broad descriptions of community types. Natural community occurrences vary greatly in their size. Matrix communities, such as Northern Hardwood Forests, occur in broad expanses across the landscape, and form the context in which other, smaller communities are found. Large patch communities, such as Spruce-Fir-Tamarack Swamp, typically occur at scales of 50-1000 acres. Small patch communities such as Seeps or Boreal Outcrops are usually less than 50 acres in size; many are smaller and owe their existence to highly localized site and disturbance characteristics. Natural communities at Aitken State Forest were identified through aerial photograph interpretation and field surveys. A Geographic Information System (G.I.S.) map of natural communities was produced using ArcView software from ESRI, Inc. Because some natural
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 16 | P a g e
communities occur at very small scales (e.g. less than ¼ acre), this mapping effort is probably incomplete. Natural community mapping is an iterative process, and our knowledge improves with each mapping effort. Thus, the map presented here should not be viewed as a final statement on community distribution at ASF; instead, it should be treated as a first attempt at describing natural communities in this area. Land managers and members of the public should be aware that additional examples of small patch natural communities may occur on the management unit. As subsequent inventories and site visits are conducted, this map will be improved.
Natural community occurrences are assigned a quality rank, a statement of their overall ecological value which helps guide management. An “A”-ranked occurrence is of high quality relative to others of its type in the state, while a D-ranked example is of comparatively low quality. Quality ranks are objectively assigned on the basis of three factors: occurrence size, current condition, and landscape context. The three factors vary in the degree to which they influence overall quality in different communities. For example, size and landscape quality are more important factors than current condition in the quality ranking of Northern Hardwood Forests, while current condition and landscape context receive greater attention in the tanking of Rich Northern Hardwood Forests. It is important to recognize that assignment of low-quality ranks many be due to small size rather than poor current condition. When community occurrences are either rare or of high quality (or a combination of these factors), they may be designated as being of “statewide significance”. This designation is applied according to objective guidelines established by the Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department and which are available upon request. It is recommended that state-significant natural communities be afforded a higher level of protection than other areas of the management unit.
A total of 40 natural community polygons were mapped within the 14 natural community types and variants identified and mapped in ASF (see table below). Some broad patterns emerged from this mapping effort. The aspect of Bald Mountain’s slopes broadly separated the forested communities. Northern and eastern facing slopes tend to have communities of the northern hardwoods group (Northern Hardwood Forest, Mesic Red Oak-Northern Hardwood Forest, Hemlock Forest). Southern and western facing slopes tend to have communities of the transition hardwoods group (Dry Red Oak-White Pine Forest, Dry Oak-Hickory-Hophornbeam Forest). The frequently sharp transition between these two groups parallels the larger landscape pattern of southern Vermont, where there is a large-scale mixing of these two forest types.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 17 | P a g e
Table 1: Natural Communities of Aitken State Forest
Natural Communities of Aitken State Forest Example of Natural Community Vermont Statewide Acres Distribution Significance?
Wetlands Hemlock-Balsam Fir-Black Ash Seepage 7 Common Swamp Red Spruce-Cinnamon Fern Swamp 2 Uncommon Yes Seep 2.5 Common Yes
Uplands Boreal Talus Woodland 10 Uncommon Dry Red Oak – White Pine Forest 188 Uncommon Yes Dry Oak-Hickory-Hophornbeam Forest 31 Uncommon Yes Hemlock Forest 38 Common Yes Mesic Red Oak-Northern Hardwood Forest 373 Common Yes Northern Hardwood Forest 183 Very common Red Pine Forest/Woodland 11 Rare Yes Red Spruce-Heath Rocky Ridge Forest 12 Uncommon Yes Rich Northern Hardwood Forest 35 Common Yes Temperate Acidic Outcrop 8.5 Common Yes Temperate Calcareous Cliff <1 Uncommon Yes For more information on these and other natural communities, see Wetland, Woodland, Wildland: A Guide to the Natural Communities of Vermont, by Elizabeth Thompson and Eric Sorenson. Information may also be found online at: http://www.vtfishandwildlife.com/books.cfm?libbase_=Wetland,Woodland,Wildland Descriptions of individual natural community types and related wildlife occurrences are described in Appendix A: Natural Community Descriptions.
Rich Northern Hardwood Forest 1 RedRed Pine Pine Forest Forest Rich Northern Hardwood Forest
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 18 | P a g e
Figure 4: Natural Communities Map
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 19 | P a g e
Meso-filter / Special Habitats
Structural Diversity Aitken State Forest is dominated by a mix of three forest types in generally even-aged stands with relatively little age/size class diversity. Forests cover nearly all of ASF. Northern hardwoods forests are most common, covering about 70% of the forest and oak-dominated stands cover an additional 15%. Mixed wood stands cover about 8%, and softwood is found in just 1% of the forest.
The diversity of forest wildlife is partially related to the variety of structure provided within the forest communities – from leaf litter and ground cover, through the low herbaceous layer, the smaller shrub layer, and the taller mid-story, each level of vegetation provides nesting, foraging, and cover for a range of forest wildlife. Generally, the variety of species and conditions observed across ASF will provide adequate habitat for many species. This structure is naturally patchy and uneven in distribution, so areas will favor different species based on habitat structure. Moose, coyote, deer, bear and bobcat are just some of the wildlife that utilize these forest conditions as part of their habitat needs.
Early Successional / Young Forest Habitat Early successional or young forest habitat are important for species including the ruffed grouse, chestnut-sided warbler, American woodcock, and white-tailed deer. These habitats are created following forest disturbances by natural forces (wind, ice, beaver, etc.) and through forest management. Dense seedlings and saplings quickly grow into disturbed sites, providing cover, browse, soft mast, and other resources uncommon in closed forests. Within 15 years, however, trees typically have grown enough to create a closed canopy, shading the understory, and reducing their value for young forest-dependent wildlife.
No sizable occurrences of young forest habitat are currently found on Aitken State Forest. Forest management can create young forest habitat. In areas where the forest is not actively managed, natural disturbance will eventually create small patches of young forest.
Late Successional / Old Forest Habitat A patch of old Rich Northern Hardwood Forest occurs in the northwest part of Aitken State Forest. Located in a steep bowl, the terrain likely limited opportunities for past management. Large trees and large dead and downed wood in this patch are the primary indicators of this old forest. This example of Rich Northern Hardwood Forest includes a substantial component of white ash and is threatened by the spread of Emerald Ash Borer in Vermont.
Managed Openings Herbaceous and shrub communities are important wildlife habitats for many species, including deer, grouse, rabbits and dozens of birds. Many species that rely on this habitat are declining regionally, largely due to loss of habitat. Additionally, these communities are ephemeral in nature, as they develop into forest without repeated disturbance. This habitat is quite limited in distribution on ASF occurring on 2 acres in two locations. These include two landings off the forest management access road. The presence of wild chervil (Anthriscus sylvestris) in the larger opening degrades the habitat and challenges ongoing management. The expanding population of
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 20 | P a g e
goldenrod (Solidago spp.) is naturally controlling it to some extent by forming thick clumps that crowd the chervil.
Birds Bird monitoring surveys (Rutland County Audubon Society, 2009) on ASF have documented the occurrence of 75 species of birdlife on the forest including a wide variety of songbirds, raptors, woodpeckers, grouse, woodcock, and turkeys (complete list in the appendix). Breeding was confirmed for 24 of those species although more may breed at ASF than observed during the survey. Notably, brown-headed cowbirds were observed in the survey. Management strategies should take this parasitic bird into consideration during planning. In addition, 29 species of butterflies were observed including monarchs, swallowtails, skippers, and dustwings. A complete list is in the appendix.
Deer Wintering Areas Deer wintering areas provide critical habitat to enable deer to survive harsh winter conditions. They tend to be at lower elevations and have dense softwood canopies or are hardwood stands with southern exposure. These conditions help to reduce ground-level snow depths for deer and minimize wind-chill effects. An ample supply of food, typically in the form of hardwood shoot growth, in proximity to the cover must also be available.
ASF contains approximately 90 acres of mapped deer wintering habitat in the northwest corner of the parcel. This regionally significant wintering habitat of over 1,200 acres extends north into developed portions of Rutland and south to the Cold River and includes a 90-acre Conservation Easement held by the Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department that protects deer wintering habitat. This valuable habitat is relatively unique such that significant consideration should be made to apply appropriate, long-term vegetative management of this area as well as its protection from winter human-related disturbance to maintain this critical function for wintering deer. No new trails or developed uses that would lead to an increase in winter use should occur within the deer wintering habitat or 500-foot buffer surrounding it. South-facing hardwood forests in the southwest corner of the property are also used by wintering deer.
Key Mast Areas There are approximately 220 acres in areas of mast production within ASF consisting primarily of red oak. The Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department considers portions of ASF significant mast area supplying a critical fall food source of a variety of wildlife species. Due to its significance to wildlife, especially bear, this area has been designated as a trend mast survey area with specific annual mast surveys conducted since 1999 to index mast production. Results of these surveys show acorn production in the excellent rating category (more than 15 nuts per three-foot sample circle) occurring every 3-5 years.
Dead and Dying Wood Features / Forest Structural Diversity Standing dead and dying trees along with downed trees, are vital components of the forest. These components provide habitat for wildlife ranging from mammals to invertebrates, and play an important role in nutrient cycling, soil protection, and water availability, all elements of a healthy, resilient forest. Overall, about one-third of New England’s forest-dwelling wildlife makes use of dead and dying wood features, including cavity trees, snags, downed wood and
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 21 | P a g e
large trees. This includes cavity-nesting birds, small mammals such as mice, chipmunks and squirrels, salamanders, raptors, bats, reptiles, and beetles. Often these are critical habitat elements, affecting the distribution, behavior, and survival of wildlife. Variation in species, size and condition best accommodate the full range of wildlife needs. Occasional canopy gaps, large legacy trees, snags, and dead and downed large wood is prevalent in the ASF, which adds important structural and habitat diversity for species that rely on this type of habitat. These habitat components should improve further as the forest naturally matures.
Seeps and Wetlands Although seeps occupy only two acres and wetlands are limited to just nine acres on ASF, surveys (Reptile and Amphibian Survey of Aitken State Forest, 2008) indicate that they support 13 species of amphibians, including six species of salamanders, six species of frogs, and the common gartersnake. These small wetlands and seeps also provide important spring foraging habitat for black bear, because the ground water movement moderates ground temperatures making seepage areas quicker to ‘green up’. This early spring food source is sought by bears following a long winter hibernation. Many songbirds including the hermit thrush and cedar waxwing may also forage in the hemlock-dominated swamps, and the brown creeper and winter wren may nest in these areas. A relatively new beaver flowage has developed in the northeast section of ASF adding valuable wetland habitat to the parcel. Allowing and encouraging the presence of beavers in the forest may provide additional wetland habitat that could benefit amphibians and reptiles.
Streams and Riparian Habitat Riparian areas provide important contribution to ecological and physical processes which significantly influence water quality, stream channel equilibrium, aquatic and terrestrial habitats, and the diversity of populations and natural communities they support (ANR Riparian Area Management, 2015). Many species of wildlife rely on riparian areas for a variety of life-stage requirements. Wide-ranging mammals use riparian areas to travel between habitats within their home range. Moving from one feeding or breeding area to another is critical to maintaining populations and their genetic diversity. Areas of habitat connectivity align in some cases with riparian habitat. Some species of amphibians and reptiles’ nest and forage in and along streams. Of particular significance is the spring salamander documented in the North Branch of the Cold River. Spring salamanders do not travel far from their home stream, foraging within 100 feet of the streambed.
The Riparian Management Guidelines for Agency of Natural Resources Lands and Acceptable Management Practices (AMPs) will be followed when management occurs near riparian habitat. The width of riparian management zones (RMZ) will be determined based on criteria within the guidelines. While timber harvesting within the RMZ can be managed based on time of operations, proximity to the stream, and other factors, it is important to avoid developing roads, trails or other permanent infrastructure across or in close proximity to these sensitive habitats.
Vernal Pools A single vernal pool has been documented on Aitken State Forest. It is located near the top of the mountain and evidence of wood frog breeding has been observed. Additional vernal pools may
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 22 | P a g e
occur on the state forest. The ANR Riparian Management Guidelines inform management around vernal pools and amphibian “life zones” which are critical for sustained populations.
Bat Habitat Mature forest found in ASF provides suitable roosting trees for forest dwelling bat species. Also, forest roads, streams and forested wetlands provide important foraging areas for bats. Acoustic surveys conducted in 2019 revealed limited bat activity but detected calls from little brown bats (Myotis lucifugus) and eastern small-footed bat (Myotis lebeii). Survey results did not reveal evidence of the state endangered northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) although it was detected on nearby Coolidge State Forest. These types of surveys are conducted prior to forest management operations during the summer months when the females are raising their young. The status of the state-threatened small-footed bat is also unknown, however the type of exposed bedrock on ASF is not considered to be suitable habitat for this species and it is therefore not likely present. State and Federally endangered Indiana bats are found lower in the Champlain Valley and are unlikely to be found in ASF.
Fine-filter / Special Species
Fine Filter Plants Rare, Threatened, Endangered Species One state-listed endangered plant species and one uncommon plant species are found in Aitken State Forest. These species and their management needs are summarized below.
Plants: The very rare (S1) bronze sedge (Carex foenea) is found at one site in ASF. This species is listed as “endangered” by Vermont state endangered species statute (10 V.S.A. 123). Its occurrence at ASF is thus very important on a statewide basis. This plant typically grows in dry, rocky sites. At ASF, this plant was found at the base of a temperate acidic outcrop.
Aitken State Forest also has an uncommon plant species, found in shady and enriched hardwood forests. This plant species can be adversely impacted by timber harvesting if the canopy is thinned to allow more sunlight on the plants. Land managers are familiar with the plant and look for it in appropriate habitat on the state forest.
While no other rare or uncommon plants are currently known to exist in this state forest, several natural communities are likely locations to find additional rare plant species. In particular, three community types – Dry Oak Woodland, Dry Oak Forest, and Dry Oak-Hickory Hophornbeam Forest – are all uncommon habitats in Vermont that may host warm-climate species that are uncommon or rare in the state because they are at the northern edge of their range.
Animals: There are no known rare, threatened, or endangered wildlife species on ASF. However, appropriate habitat is present for the state-endangered little brown and northern long-eared bats Acoustic surveys for these species should be conducted.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 23 | P a g e
Table 2: Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Plants of Aitken State Forest
Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Plants of Aitken State Forest Species Name Common Name Sites Where State Rarity Rarity2 Legal Status Found Rank2 Carex foenea Bronze sedge Dry, rocky S1 Very rare Endangered
1 for historical species, includes year of last observation 2 For a full explanation of these rarity ranks, visit the Vermont Natural Heritage Inventory website: http://www.vtfishandwildlife.com/wildlife_nongame.cfm
Table 3: Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Animals of Aitken State Forest
Potential Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Animals of Aitken State Forest Species Name Common Name Sites Where State Rarity Rarity2 Legal Status Found Rank2 Myotis lucifugus Little Brown bat Hardwood S1 Rare Endangered forests Myotis Northern long- Hardwood S1 Rare Endangered septentrionalis eared bat forests
1 for historical species, includes year of last observation 2 For a full explanation of these rarity ranks, visit the Vermont Natural Heritage Inventory website: http://www.vtfishandwildlife.com/wildlife_nongame.cfm
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 24 | P a g e
Figure 5: Wildlife Habitat Map
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 25 | P a g e
Figure 6: Habitat Connectivity Map
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 26 | P a g e
C. Forest Health and Resiliency Assessment
General Forest Health: Overall forest health is good at Aitken State Forest. The most frequent natural disturbance events in the forests of ASF are small-scale, ongoing disturbances that result in individual tree death and canopy gaps. Snow, ice, frost, and drought are all-natural disturbances at play in Vermont’s forets. Generally, these events occur at a small scale. Somewhat larger events include blowdowns, ice storms, and insect defoliations. Fire disturbance played a role at the turn of the 20th century. Together these events have helped to shape the forest composition of ASF.
Invasive species are present in the more disturbed locations at trailheads, along roads and at parking areas. There are scattered invasive plant species moving into the forest from these locations but their impact on forest health is still negligible. It is important to remain vigilant and continue ongoing monitoring and management efforts to keep these species from becoming established. Invasive species management is most successful and cost-effective when done at this stage of early infestation.
Tree diseases that are customarily present in Vermont forests, including beech bark disease, butternut canker and eutypella canker are present at ASF. White ash does quite well in some areas of the forest and shows considerable decline in others. Mortality in white ash is higher on sites with high variation in moisture supply than on sites that are dry with less variability. Deeper soils show less variation in soil moisture during drought events. The condition of ash is better in upslope areas where soil is deeper. The trees in decline are on the poorest microsites. Ash yellows does not appear to be a problem at ASF.
Forest health specialists from VFPR conduct aerial surveys to assess forest health conditions across the state. While forest tent caterpillar populations and associated defoliation have been increasing in areas of the state, no defoliation has been mapped at ASF for the past several years. Aerial surveys have mapped nearly 100 acres of defoliation from pear thrips and frost damage in 2010 and 2012 and almost 50 acres of foliage discoloration associated with drought in 2010. These areas mapped were at the summit and on the western side. The forest has since recovered from these events.
1. Site and Elevation, etc.: Elevations within ASF range from 980 feet in the northwest corner of the forest to 1280 feet at the Bald Mountain summit. Site conditions vary from seepy, enriched sites to areas of shallow soils and outcrops where drought can play a significant role in forest health and development and can lead to reduced growth and increased tree mortality. Drought stressed trees are often attacked by secondary pathogens. Areas with more available moisture support greater species diversity and better growing conditions.
2. Browse Sensitivity Assessment: Deer populations in the area are not a major concern to forest regeneration although localized heavy browsing is occurring in areas adjacent to deer wintering habitat. Recent harvests have yielded good hardwood regeneration.
3. Invasive Exotic Species Assessment: There are several non-native invasive plants beginning to expand into the state forest. Invasive species are those that have great potential to harm the
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 27 | P a g e
ecosystem by out competing and replacing native species, interrupting natural succession, decreasing successful native forest regeneration, disrupting the food chain, degrading habitat, hastening erosion and changing soil chemistry (Wilmot, et al 2013). These species tend to follow disturbance, thus activities that create soil disturbance or canopy gaps in the forest could result in the spread of invasive species.
While several species are present in the forest and some can be found scattered throughout, the most troublesome are found along parking areas, at the gates and the interior landing (opening) south of the kiosk. These are the more disturbed areas within the forest, have the most human visitation and have become a common place for dumping of yard waste. While it seems logical and even benign to compost yard waste, it has become a common mode of invasion for these species into otherwise intact forests. As populations become established and begin to spread, they are moving into the interior of the forest along the roads and trails. Current populations are low density and localized, however without careful management and monitoring these populations have the potential to spread throughout the state forest.
Honeysuckle (Lonicera spp.) is found at the gate on the north parcel and in the more disturbed area of the former Girl Scout camp. Garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata), goutweed (Aegopdium podagraria), Norway maple (Acer plantanoides) and oriental bittersweet (Celastrus orbiculatus) are found along the town road at parking pull-offs and at the gates. Invasive species take advantage of these disturbed sites. The Tamarack Notch trailhead and parking area have become popular locations for dumping yard waste. Yard waste often contains seeds or reproductive plant parts of invasive species. Japanese knotweed (Fallopia japonica), wild chervil (Anthriscus sylvestris) and goutweed are along the forest management access road on the southern parcel. Chervil is also expanding in the opening/landing on the East Road. This spread may be due to the disturbance associated with road maintenance and ongoing ATV traffic. Burning bush (Euonymus alatus), Japanese barberry (Berberis thunbergii), and autumn olive (Elaeagnus umbellata) are also present near the southern boundary of the state forest.
Management of invasive species can be challenging, costly and time consuming. Prioritizing management of invasive species in these areas can slow the spread into the invasive-free interior of the state forest. Since 2013, VFPR’s Habitat Restoration Crew, with the help of volunteers and students from the Stafford Technical Center’s forestry class have been working to control the spread of these species. Prioritizing management to focus on eliminating small, isolated populations is probably the best way to protect native plants, animals and habitats within the state forest. In general, when invasions are at low densities, less effort (time and money) is needed to obtain higher levels of success. Conversely, when areas are highly infested, efforts increase and success decreases. Attempting control at the core of the infestation is expensive, labor intensive, and will require a long-term effort. Management of invasive species at ASF have included both mechanical (i.e. hand pulling) and chemical (foliar and cut & paint applications of herbicide). The district Habitat Restoration Crew has targeted goutweed, garlic mustard, chervil, Japanese knotweed and oriental bittersweet along roads and trails. Repeated management will be needed to achieve some level of success. Without intervention these species will continue to have an increasing negative impact to natural communities, native plants and wildlife habitats as well as to
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 28 | P a g e
recreational use (i.e. wildlife viewing, access, increase tick populations) of Aitken State Forest.
District management of invasive species is only part of the solution. Considerations must be made to enhance native species present in the forest. Strategies include direct planting of native trees and shrubs, especially in disturbed areas or where invasive species have been removed; direct release of native vegetation through removal of competing invasive plants; mowing regimes that discourage invasive plants in favor of native herbaceous and shrub species; and encouraging and educating landowners on proper on-site composting of yard waste.
Climate change will likely worsen the proliferation of invasive species by allowing them a competitive advantage. Warming temperatures will facilitate northward expansion providing the opportunity for them to take advantage of weakened ecosystems and outcompete native species. The increased forest disturbance associated with climate change provides an optimal setting for these disturbance-loving species to spread.
Table 4: Invasive Exotic Plants of Aitken State Forest
Present Threat to Native Plant Species Name Common Name Distribution Sites Where Found Communities Lonicera spp. Non-native Scattered At old Girl Scout camp & Low honeysuckles at Tamarack Notch trailhead Berberis thunbergii Japanese barberry Localized Scattered individuals at Low Tamarack Notch Trailhead, Southern boundary Celastrus orbiculatus Oriental bittersweet Localized At access gate & parking Low Acer platanoides Norway maple Localized At access gate & parking Low Aegopodium Goutweed Widely Along access and town Low podagraria distributed road along road Alliara petiolata Garlic mustard Localized At access gate and parking Low Anthriscus sylvestris Wild chervil Localized Along access and town Moderate road, landing Fallopia japonica Japanese knotweed Localized Along access at stream Low Euonymus alatus Burning Bush Localized Southern boundary Low Elaeagnus umbellate Autumn olive Localized Southern boundary Low
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 29 | P a g e
Invasive Exotic Insects – Exotic insects are not known to have a significant impact on these lands currently, but they are continually being monitored across the state. This includes some insect pests that are not yet known to have reached Vermont but whose introduction would have devastating effects on our forests.
Table 5. Invasive Insects
Invasive Insects Species Name Common Name Distribution Sites where found in or closest to Vermont Agrilus planipennis Emerald Ash Borer 34 states and 4 Several Vermont Metallic green, ½” long d- Canadian provinces counties – see shaped exit holes www.vtinvasives.org Species impacted: Impacts all native ash species. Ash is one of the top 10 most common trees in Vermont. Adelges tsugae Hemlock woolly adelgid Georgia to Maine Found in Windsor, White woolly mass Windham, & underneath hemlock needles Bennington counties Species impacted: Impacts Eastern hemlock, Vermont’s 7th most common tree species. This insect could have devastating effect on deer wintering habitat. Anoplophora Asian Longhorned New York, Worcester, MA glabripennis Beetle Massachusetts, White & black, 1-1 ½” long Ohio, Toronto Species impacted: Impacts many of Vermont’s native hardwoods. This insect has the potential to impact 1/3 of Vermont’s native species including maple, birch, elm, poplar, ash, willow.
Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) (Agrilus planipennis) is an exotic beetle whose larvae eats and kills ash trees. It was first transported to this country from Asia, probably in wood-packing material on cargo ships. It was first identified in 2002 in southeastern Michigan. EAB is found in all of our neighboring states and was discovered in Vermont in 2018. By fall 2018 it had been found in Orange, Washington, Grand Isle and Bennington counties and in 2019 it had been identified in Addison, Franklin, Chittenden, Orleans and Windham counties. In 2020 it was discovered in additional towns. The insect is a poor flyer and moves only 1-2 miles per year, however, movement of infested wood, especially firewood, contributes significantly to the spread of EAB. VFPR is monitoring the spread of the insect and updated information including real-time maps can be found at www.vtinvasives.org.
Red pine scale (Matsucoccus matsumurae), also known as Japanese pine blast scale, is a non- native insect that has been confirmed in Vermont and is present in declining red pine stands in Rutland County, including ASF. It exclusively attacks red pine. Cold temperatures had prevented its spread to northern New England until recently. Like many scales and adelgids, the insect spreads in the crawler stage by wind as a hitchhiker, so spread is generally slow.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 30 | P a g e
Hemlock woolly adelgid (Adelges tsugae) was introduced from east Asia to the United States in the 1920s and attacks both forest and ornamental hemlocks. The insect has since spread throughout the eastern United States via wind, birds, mammals, human activities, and on infected nursery stock. It is found in the southern Vermont counties of Windsor, Windham and Bennington.
Introduced to North America in 1890, Beech Bark Disease (BBD) has resulted in widespread mortality and defect in American beech. BBD is caused by a scale insect and fungus complex. Beech scale (Cryptococcus fagisuga) is a non-native scale insect that feeds on bark allowing the secondary infection caused by Nectria fungus. Some beech is resistant to BBD but widespread mortality and defect occurs in beech stands throughout Vermont.
Climate Change Assessment: If the most conservative models of climate change are accurate, Aitken State Forest, like the rest of the region, will experience strong impacts from climate change over the next 50-100 years. These changes may have important consequences for forest nutrient cycling and health, timber productivity, forest pest ecology, wildlife habitat, and winter recreation opportunities in the forest. Assessing changes in our climate and the potential effects on Aitken State Forest will influence how we manage the forest to improve resiliency and adaptability.
Historical data have shown changes across Vermont over the past 50 years, including: • Summer temperatures increased 0.4oF per decade • Winter temperatures increased 0.9oF per decade • Spring thaw arrives 2.3days earlier per decade • Precipitation increased 15-20%, with 67% from “heavy precipitation” events
Anticipated climate change effects include: • Increased temperatures, especially in winter • Increased precipitation, especially rain in winter • Increased extreme weather events, including floods, windstorms, and fires • Longer growing seasons, shorter winters • Change in biological interactions
These potential changes are expected to have a range of effects on the forested ecosystems of ASF as with forests across the state. Table 8 lists examples of anticipated effects and timeframes of many key climate factors on upland forests of Vermont.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 31 | P a g e
Table 6: Expected Climate Change Effects and Timeframes 1
Key Climate Change Factors Expected Effects Timeframe Warming Compositional changes associated with changes in Long-term, but temperatures thermally suitable habitat (loss of cold-adapted localized effects species and increase in warm-adapted species) could occur on a shorter timescale Increase in overwinter survival of pests, such as Immediate balsam and hemlock wooly adelgid Increased physiological stress, resulting in Immediate increased susceptibility to pests and disease, decreased productivity and increased tree mortality Increased evapotranspiration, resulting in a Immediate decrease in soil moisture; moisture limitation/stress negatively impacts productivity and survival in many species Increased decomposition rate of organic material Long-term, but may enrich soils and make them more suitable for localized effects competitors could occur on a shorter timescale Decrease in winter snowpack, leading to change in Immediate deer browsing patterns, which affects regeneration Lengthening of growing season resulting in changes Immediate in species competitiveness, especially favoring non- native invasive plants Increase in Increased physical damage and disturbance, leading Immediate extreme storm to gap formation, which could facilitate the spread events of invasive plants Phenology Longer growing season Immediate (timing) Early spring thaws/late frosts can damage buds, Immediate blossoms and roots, which affects regeneration Change in freeze/thaw cycles could disrupt regular Immediate periodicity of cone cycles Asynchronous changes in phenology map Immediate negatively impact some migratory species and pollinators Increase in fire Loss of fire intolerant species and increase in fire Long-term, but risk tolerant species, such as red and pitch pines localized effects could occur on a shorter timescale
1 Source: TetraTech. 2013. Climate change adaptation framework. Prepared for Vermont Agency of Natural Resources.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 32 | P a g e
Key Climate Change Factors Expected Effects Timeframe Earlier and warmer springs, smaller snowpacks, and Immediate hotter drier summers conducive to increased fire risk Increase in Declines in forest productivity and tree survival Long-term quantity of short- associated with water limitation term droughts
Resiliency, adapting forests to climate change – Implementing climate adaptation strategies can help to set the stage for forests that are more resilient and better able to adapt to changing climate conditions. Many of these strategies are already an integral part of sustainable forest management in Vermont. Six general adaptation strategies have been identified (Horton et al. 2015) to create resilient forests. • Sustain fundamental ecological functions – protect soil quality, nutrient cycling, and hydrology: retain species with high nutrient cycling capability; retain or enhance coarse and fine woody material for nutrient cycling and soil protection; and conduct forest management on frozen or snow-covered ground. • Reduce impact of biological stressors – pests and pathogens, invasive species and herbivory: Maintain or enhance native species diversity; manage invasive species as an important part of northern hardwood silviculture; implement strategies that protect regeneration from browsing (i.e. fencing, leaving large tops). • Moderate impacts of severe disturbance: Promote age class diversity and vigorous crown development. • Maintain or create refugia – increase ecosystem redundancy: maintain site quality and existing species composition where they may be better buffered against climate change and short-term disturbance. • Maintain or enhance species and structural diversity: Promote age class and species diversity, maintain species that naturally occur in a natural community and consider including species that may be better adapted to future conditions (i.e. oaks, hickories, white pine); retain biological legacies. • Promote landscape connectivity: Maintain or create forested corridors to help to promote movement of species – trees and wildlife.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 33 | P a g e
Forest management approaches to use at Aitken State Forest to prepare for current and future climate changes:
Table 7: Forest Management Adaptation Strategies Adaptation Focus Area Strategy Forest Management Approach Soil Protect soil quality 1. Rebuild soils at upper elevations by leaving conservation substantial amounts of big trees, in addition to small trees and branches, on the ground to decompose and build soil organic matter. 2. Utilize measures to direct hikers to trails and avoid steep erodible soils. 3. Allow for revegetation or soil stabilization to restore compacted soils. 4. Minimize trail widening and unauthorized trails. 5. Close trails during mud season and extended periods of rain. 6. Close gates on winter use trails at end of winter season and during periods of low or no snow. Sustain nutrient 1. Keep species with high nutrient cycling cycling capacity such as basswood. 2. Keep an abundance of dead trees and branches on the forest floor to maintain moisture, soil organisms and nutrient cycling functions. Stormwater Reduce erosion 1. Maintain adequate tree canopy and ground and soil loss cover to increase water infiltration during rain storms. 2. Upgrade culvert sizes to accommodate greater precipitation in the future. Pests Reduce the 1. Create a diverse mix of tree species and tree impacts of insect ages to reduce forest impacts. pests and 2. Avoid introductions of new pests that can be pathogens transported via firewood or other carriers. Invasive plants Protect native 1. Prevent the introduction and establishment of plant populations new invasive plants. 2. Prioritize and remove existing plants where appropriate. Severe storms Reduce forest 1. Retain edge trees to help protect interior forest risks of long-term trees.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 34 | P a g e
Adaptation Focus Area Strategy Forest Management Approach impacts from 2. Harvest over a few entries to gradually storms increase resistance of residual trees to wind. 3. Minimize damage to residual trees that increase their vulnerability to breakage. 4. Reduce windthrow risk by creating canopy gaps that have an orientation and shape informed by prevailing winds. Rare plants Maintain rare and 1. Manage vegetation to create favorable sensitive species growing conditions. 2. Retain multiple populations representing different environmental conditions to reduce risk of maladaptation. 3. Reroute roads or trails. 4. Minimize disturbances in the vicinity of sensitive species. 5. Monitor regeneration to detect reproductive success or species migration.
D. Timber Resource Assessment Timber and vegetation management on Aitken State Forest contribute to the sustainable production of forest products, improvement of forest health conditions, management of quality wildlife habitat, control of invasive species, contribution to scenic vistas, contributions to forest resiliency and climate adaptation, demonstration of sound forest management practices and is a small, but vital part of the Vermont economy. Forest sustainability considerations are both scale and goal dependent. While income generation is never the primary reason for conducting forest harvesting on state land, it is an important consideration that helps to support wildlife habitat management, recreational access, and other management goals. Forest management goals for ASF include the production of a diverse array of wood products through sustainable management and harvest practices while integrating wildlife habitat and recreation management considerations, among others. Careful attention to securing adequate, healthy, native regeneration while protecting biodiversity, soils, water quality and forest health are important management considerations. Forest management activities use science-driven silvicultural practices to create uneven-aged forest conditions on ASF.
History of Forest Management on Parcel: There is a rich history of vegetation management on Aitken State Forest under state ownership. The 918 acres that comprise the state forest were purchased in 1912. Like many other parcels coming into state ownership at that time the property had been cut heavily. There were several fires that passed over this area, and while they temporarily degraded the parcel further these fires were likely instrumental in helping to facilitate development of the oak stands that dominate much of the forest today. At the turn of the century and by 1913 at least 4 large forest fires had occurred. In 1927, another fire burned 10 acres.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 35 | P a g e
The first recorded harvest activity occurred in 1913 and consisted of the removal of “cordwood” to “transform the forest into a softwood stand”. During this operation, 300 cords were sold at 85 cents per cord. An inventory conducted shortly after acquisition provided a low stocking estimate of 325 thousand board feet and 4,855cords on 825 acres. As a result, some initial management activities included planting. Between 1912 and 1913, 19,000 white pine, 6,000 scotch pine, 4,000 red pine, 10,000 Norway spruce, 1,300 red oak, 800 white ash and 500 spruce were planted. The first “working” forest management plan was written in 1922 by forester Gaston Gutts. Planting continued in subsequent years and by 1924, 192 acres had been planted, primarily in cutover areas, with an emphasis on replacing hardwood species with softwood. More planting was done by the CCC in the 1930s. Since site conditions on ASF predominantly support hardwood species, most of the early plantations failed although a few small plantations remain to this day. Early management activities also included the removal of gooseberry from white pine plantations in 1926. Gooseberry is an alternative host for white pine blister rust.
The first harvest as part of timber management program started in the 1950’s and have continued to present day. There have been 29 timber harvest operations that have harvested 1.916 million board feet and 2,397 cords and generated $314,771 in stumpage payments. Harvests on state land serve multiple goals. In addition to producing forest products and contributing to the local economy, these harvest operations also manage wildlife habitat, protected water quality, and supported recreation. They also provided infrastructure improvements such as the East Road and numerous skid trails that provide access for recreation activities including as hiking, hunting, and snowshoeing.
Management on ASF will continue to focus on moving toward uneven-aged stand structure using accepted silvicultural guidance. Strategies will be implemented to initiate additional age classes and enhancement of species and structural diversity. Management of excessive and poor-quality beech is an important consideration in efforts to promote successful regeneration of red oak and northern hardwood species. White ash is threatened by ash decline in many areas of the state forest and by the continued spread of Emerald Ash Borer throughout Vermont.
Soils and Site Productivity: The soils information used in this assessment are based on the Rutland County Soils Survey conducted by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). Soil characteristics such as structure, texture, porosity, depth, as well as chemical and biological properties are a major factor in determining the potential productivity of any site. This potential site quality is often expressed in terms of site class. The various soils found on this parcel have been grouped into four different site classes and are depicted on the map on page 39. Site class I represents the most productive and site class IV is the least productive. The following table on page 37 shows the productivity of each site class expressed in terms of capacity to produce wood and the site index for different species. Site index is defined as the height of dominant trees in even-aged stands at a certain age, in this case 50 years. In addition to estimating potential productivity, site classes have also been used to project appropriate management entry intervals. Because site class I lands grow trees more rapidly, the interval between management entry is reduced as compared with that on site class IV lands. For example, the recommended management entry interval for northern hardwoods on Site Class I soils is 15 years and on site class III soils it is 25-35 years. Soil survey mapping units are useful for
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 36 | P a g e
generalized thinking about productivity, but more detailed site-specific investigations are important to determine what management activities are ultimately appropriate. There are approximately 48 different soil types found on Aitken State Forest. The soil series and complexes found on most of the area are described further below.
Rawsonville-Houghton Complex – The Rawsonville series consists of moderately deep, well drained soils, whereas the Houghton series consists of very deep, well drained soils. These soils formed in loamy glacial till on knolls, hills, and mountains. Permeability is moderate to moderately rapid. Slopes range from 3 to 70 percent. The complex is classified as Site I in forest productivity and has a site index of 60 for sugar maple.
Tunbridge-Berkshire Complex – The Tunbridge series consists of moderately deep, well drained soils, whereas the Berkshire series consists of very deep, well drained soils. Those soils formed in loamy glacial till on knolls, hills, and mountains. Permeability is moderate to moderately rapid. Slopes range from 3 to 75 percent. The complex is classified as Site II in forest productivity and has a site index of 52 to 60 for sugar maple.
Killington-Rawsonville Complex – The Killington series consists of shallow well-drained soils, whereas the Rawsonville series consists of moderately deep, well drained soils. These soils formed in loamy glacial till on knolls, hills, and mountains. Permeability is moderate to moderately rapid. Slopes range from 5 to 70 percent. The complex is classified as Site III in forest productivity and has a site index of 45-60 for sugar maple.
Existing Conditions and Dominant Forest Types: The current condition of the forest varies with site conditions such as soil productivity, aspect, elevation and with past management practices. Generally, the forest stands within ASF are fully stocked to overstocked, with no significant forest health issues for most species. There are some exotic invasive plant species present, mostly as a result of yard waste dumped on the side of the road, but these are not currently a significant problem in the interior of the parcel. Other invasive pests are present including Beech Bark Disease and Red Pine Scale. Emerald Ash Borer and Hemlock Wooly Adelgid are present in Vermont but have not been identified at ASF. a. Regeneration/Age Class Distribution – Regeneration of commercial forest species is generally poor and, in some instances, non-existent. Beech is the dominant species regenerating in mixed hardwood and northern hardwood stands. There is little regeneration in softwood plantations. Creating new age classes through harvesting will be done to address the lack of forest regeneration and move the forest from an even- to uneven-age structure. Addressing the dominance of beech in some stands will be an important consideration. b. Dominant Forest Types – Dominant forest types include mixed hardwood with a significant component of oak, northern hardwood, and mixed softwood. Table 6 describes these forest types in more detail. c. Health/Vigor of Timber Resource - The quality of the timber found across these forest types varies widely but is in general good to excellent. This condition has a lot to do with the fine long-term management practices that have taken place on this parcel since state ownership
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 37 | P a g e
began in 1912. This is particularly true of the hardwood stands, some of which have been treated as many as three times. The age structure of these forests are mostly even-aged, as is common in Vermont. The size class of these forested stands is heavily weighted towards sawtimber sized trees with limited pole timber and virtually no seedling/sapling sized material. This lack of young forest is a result of the even-aged management techniques used in the past. The current age structure can be converted to a more balanced all-aged condition over time with the proper application of uneven-aged management techniques. d. Access/Operability – Another factor influencing vegetation management is the condition of the road infrastructure into and throughout the parcel and whether it is sufficient to allow management to be undertaken in an economically feasible way. The long history of management on site conditions that support harvest operations has resulted in the establishment of a system of roads and landings that are in excellent condition. The one item of infrastructure that is somewhat unique to this property is the fact that a significant percent of the parcel must be accessed through abutting parcels. There are three permanent, deeded rights-of-way that allow this management to take place. The other main entry point for management is along the East Road. This access was built and improved during past management operations and is currently in excellent condition.
Table 8: Site Class Management Potential Potential Productivity Site Index Site Class (cubic feet of wood/acre/year) (height at age 50) Acres Site Class I >85 cubic feet White Pine 70’ 327 Northern Hardwoods 60’ Site Class II 50 to 84 cubic feet White Pine 60-69’ 220 Northern Hardwoods 53-59’ Site Class III 20 to 49 cubic feet White Pine 50-59’ 360 Northern Hardwoods 45-52’ Site Class IV <20 cubic feet White Pine 50’ 11 Northern Hardwoods 45’
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 38 | P a g e
Table 9: Dominant Forest Types Type Major Species Condition Quality Regeneration Mixed Red oak, red Pole to sawtimber sized Overall stem quality Regeneration is hardwood maple, beech, stems, fully to of the oak is good, generally poor to white ash overstocked, vigor is fair while much of the nonexistent, beech is to good except for the red maple has poor the dominant species white ash which has been form. Most of the with little to no oak in decline for the last 15 beech has been years and has suffered impacted by BBD significant mortality Northern Sugar maple, Mostly sawtimber sized Overall stem quality Very little hardwood white ash, stems with some poles, is good to excellent regeneration because beech, red oak fully to overstocked, of high stocking. general vigor is fair to Where there is an good except for ash and understory, it is beech which are declining dominated by beech and striped maple Mixed Hemlock, Mostly sawtimber sized Overall stem quality Very little softwood spruce, white stems, fully stocked, vigor is fair to good regeneration, some and red pine is good in hemlock stands hardwood has come but poor in the red pine up through declining plantations plantations
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 39 | P a g e
Figure 7: Soils and Site Class Map
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 40 | P a g e
Figure 8: Forest Stand Map
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 41 | P a g e
E. Water Resource and Flood Resiliency Assessment
1. Watershed Description: Aitken State Forest is contained within the Cold River watershed and the Moon Brook-Otter Creek watershed. The Cold River watershed is located in Rutland County, Vermont and has an area of approximately 37 mi2. The Cold River flows westerly until it joins the Otter Creek which then drains northerly into Lake Champlain. It is one of the major watersheds comprising the Upper Otter Creek watershed. The watershed drains from forested headwaters in the Green Mountains covering portions of five towns: Clarendon, Mendon, Shrewsbury, Killington, and Rutland Town.
Moon Brook drains a watershed of approximately 8.7 mi2 located in the City of Rutland and the Towns of Rutland and Mendon in Rutland County, Vermont. The headwaters drain the undeveloped forested area of Bald Mountain and the streams flow through an increasingly residential area below Town Line Road.
2. Significant Feature(s): Few large streams or rivers are found in Aitken State Forest, though many small, possibly seasonal, streams drain from near the summit of Bald Mountain. One exception is the North Branch of the Cold River, which can be found in the northeastern corner of the ASF where it parallels the remaining portions of the Notch Road. This North Branch of the Cold River is a third order, headwater stream and is identified as a FEMA Flood Hazard Area. Other streams are found in the northwest corner of ASF and drain the wetland near the southeast corner of the state forest.
No additional water quality or biomonitoring data are available for streams in ASF.
3. Wetland Description and Function: There are four Class 2 wetlands within Aitken State Forest and one vernal pool. The pool located adjacent to the Notch Road in the northeast corner of the forest is the most significant amphibian breeding pond on the forest. The largest Class 2 wetland crosses over the northern boundary of the forest. Approximately half of its 6.8 acres is within ASF. There is one Vermont Department of Environmental/Watershed Management Division (DEC/WSMD) wetland sampling site located in the southeastern corner of ASF. It is a Palustrine-Forested wetland and was sampled on 7/27/2011 for a suite of chemical parameters (Table 10).
Table 10: Results of Water Quality Sampling Conductivit Dissolve Tota Tota Tota Turbidit y d P1 l CI2 l N3 l y P Visit Locatio Project Dept umho/cm uq/l mg/l mg/l uq/l NTU4 Date n ID h (m) 7/27/201 ASF Wetland 0.2 123.9 12.1 0.31 0.21 51.5 1.29 1 s 6 7/27/201 ASF Wetland 0.2 126.1 14.6 0.35 0.39 51.5 1.86 1 s 4 1. Phosphorus 2. Chemical Ionization 3. Nitrogen, 4. Nephelometric Turbidity Units
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 42 | P a g e
4. Flood Resiliency: Recommendations for the North Branch of the Cold River are for long- term river corridor protection to allow river migration and development; and to avoid encroachment on and development within the Notch Road mass soil slope failure zone, which is the area most susceptible to erosion and flooding.
5. Relationship to Basin Plan and Basin Plan Recommendations: All waters within the ASF are classified as Class B which are managed to achieve and maintain a level of quality that fully supports aquatic biota and habitat, swimming, fishing, boating, irrigation of crops, and public water supply with treatment. B1 waters are managed to maintain an almost natural condition showing minimal changes from reference conditions for aquatic macroinvertebrates and fish assemblages.
6. Considerations for Management Related to Water Resources: • Maintain and enhance, where possible, wetland habitats including vernal pools. In particular, the pool located adjacent to the Notch Road in the northeast corner of the forest is the most significant amphibian breeding pool on the forest. Appropriate buffers around these pools (‘life zones’) should be incorporated in management considerations to protect these critical amphibian breeding sites. • Maintain buffers along all waters following ANR Riparian Management Guidance. • On the land directly adjacent to the North Branch of the Cold River: o Allow the river to meander and re-establish its natural channel. o Maintain a densely vegetated buffer and large woody debris, if present. This is the area where there is the greatest likelihood of erosion in high flow events. o Do not encroach on the limited floodplain available in this area as it is critical for flood attenuation. o Design roads, trails, and other infrastructure to allow for aquatic organism passage and riparian connectivity.
7. Assessment of Need: • Additional wetlands assessments as needed.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 43 | P a g e
Figure 9: Water Resource and Fisheries Map
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 44 | P a g e
F. Fisheries Resource Assessment
1. Description: Fisheries resources within Aitken State Forest exist primarily within a short section of the North Branch of the Cold River that flows through the property. The North Branch originates approximately 2 stream miles north of the State Forest and is formed from a gathering of several small headwater streams, as well as Eddy Brook which flows eastward from Coolidge State Forest before entering the North Branch. The North Branch of the Cold River drains a watershed of approximately 12.6 square miles.
The North Branch enters Aitken State Forest at the northeast corner of the property and forms the eastern border for approximately 0.75 miles before entering Jim Jeffords State Forest. From this point it flows south/southeast through Jim Jeffords State Forest for approximately 1.75 stream miles before entering the main stem of the Cold River in Shrewsbury.
Figure 10. Locations of historic fisheries sampling sites on the Cold River and the North Branch of the Cold River, 1970 through 2013.
2. Existing Conditions: The Vermont Fish & Wildlife Department has conducted past fisheries assessments at two sites on the North Branch of the Cold River, one of which is located just inside Aitken State Forest at elevation 1282’, while the other is further upstream at elevation 1600’ (Table 11).
Table 11. Locations and years of fisheries assessments on the North Branch of the Cold River. Stream Station Elevation Years Surveyed Latitude Longitude N.B. COLD RIVER 1282’ 1996, 2013 43.59435 -72.90552 N.B. COLD RIVER 1600’ 1996, 2013 43.60959 -72.89228
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 45 | P a g e
The North Branch of the Cold River supports an abundant, healthy coldwater fish community primarily comprised of brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) and brown trout (Salmo trutta), as well as slimy sculpin (Cottus cognatus) and blacknose dace (Rhinichthys atratulus).
In fisheries assessments conducted in 1996 and 2013, brook trout and brown trout were found in very good densities, and populations of both species included an abundance of young-of-the-year (YOY) trout as well as juvenile and adult sizes. This is a clear indication that the North Branch provides excellent spawning habitat as well as quality adult habitat necessary for multiple year survival.
For site 1282’ within Aitken State Forest, total trout numbers were between 2,000 and 3,000 trout per stream mile in both survey years, qualifying this stream for W2 (Very Good Wild Trout) classification, based on criteria set out in the Vermont Management Plan for Brook, Brown and Rainbow Trout (VFWD, 2018).
Table 12 shows fisheries assessment data surveyed from the North Branch of the Cold River at two sampling sites in 1996 and 2013. Site 1282’ is located within Aitken State Forest, while site 1600’ is approximately 1.5 miles upstream.
Table 12. North Branch of the Cold River Fisheries Assessment Data
Site Elevation Brook Trout / Mile Brown Trout / Mile Total Trout and Year Sampled YOY <6” 6”+ Total YOY <6” 6”+ Total #/Mile Lbs/Acre Elev 1282’ 1996 715 782 134 1,631 402 246 45 693 2,324 25.1 2013 333 203 92 628 1,849 277 148 2,274 2,902 25.1 Elev 1600’ 1996 457 795 40 1,292 0 0 0 0 1,292 17.0 2013 111 481 185 777 0 0 0 0 777 21.8
The reach of the North Branch located within Aitken State Forest at elevation 1282’ supports brook trout and brown trout in high numbers, likely because of the lower gradient, deeper pools and more complex habitat, while brown trout are absent from site 1600’ farther upstream closer to the headwaters. This is common in mountain streams across the state, as brook trout are well-adapted to the more difficult, harsh and smaller stream environments at higher elevations in headwater reaches, while brown trout are not.
While standard fisheries assessments do not estimate abundances of non-trout species such as blacknose dace and slimy sculpin, it’s worth noting that the presence of these species, particularly slimy sculpin, is an effective indicator of water and habitat quality. Slimy sculpin inhabit coldwater streams and are found in riffle habitats with mixed gravel-rubble substrates. They are intolerant of warm water and siltation, and populations tend to decline or
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 46 | P a g e
disappear when stream habitats are degraded, and water temperatures increase or there is excessive siltation of the stream bottom.
The North Branch of the Cold River is also an important tributary to the Cold River, and provides coldwater input to the Cold, as well as offers areas of thermal refuge and spawning habitats for larger fish migrating upstream. Protections offered to the North Branch within ASF also benefit fish communities in the Cold River and the larger Cold River watershed.
Table 13. Cold River fisheries assessment data at three sampling sites surveyed in 1970, 1973, 1985 and 1996, for brook trout and brown trout.
Site Elevation Brook Trout / Mile Brown Trout / Mile Total Trout and Year Sampled YOY <6” 6”+ Total YOY <6” 6”+ Total #/Mile Lbs/Acre Elev 1001’ 1970 127 85 42 254 63 21 0 84 338 n/a 1985 190 0 0 190 758 179 32 969 1,159 n/a 1996 66 16 0 82 166 50 82 298 380 3.9 Elev 1300’ 1970 21 11 11 43 0 0 42 42 85 n/a 1973 0 74 42 74 0 0 42 42 158 n/a 1996 119 130 0 249 417 84 48 549 798 15.0 Elev 1368’ 1970 489 700 209 1,398 0 0 0 0 1,398 n/a 1973 525 69 0 594 0 0 0 0 594 n/a 1996 42 254 21 317 296 106 63 465 782 20.3
Rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) are also present in the Cold River at elevations 1001’, 1300’ and 1368’ (Figure 1), but have never been documented at sampling sites on the North Branch of the Cold River. Young-of-year rainbow trout as well as older, larger size classes of fish have been sampled.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 47 | P a g e
G. Historic Resource Assessment
1. Description: The State of Vermont purchased 832 +/- acres from Edmund Morse in 1912. In 1917, the State acquired an additional 80 +/- acres from the City of Rutland as part of an effort to clear the title to the land. Together these acquisitions make up what is known as Aitken State Forest. The state forest was named for George Aitken who was the superintendent of the Billings Farm in Woodstock and a member of the State Board of Agriculture and Forestry.
The first record of forest management activity under state ownership was in 1913 when 300 cords were harvested to help transform the forest into a softwood stand. At the time of state acquisition “all of the timber had been cut”. By 1913, at least four large forest fires had occurred and in 1927 there was a 10-acre fire. During that same timeframe nearly 42,000 softwood seedlings were planted. The first forest management plan was developed by Gaston Gutts in 1922. By 1924 nearly 192 acres had been planted. The 392nd company of the Vermont Civilian Conservation Corps established a camp in ASF located on the parcel north of the Notch Road in the 1930s and conducted early forest management activities on ASF. S-57 Company of Veterans arrived June 28, 1933 and moved out May 11, 1934. Company 1107 arrived December 7, 1934 and disbanded February 7, 1935. Company 1164 arrived August 5, 1935 and disbanded October 29, 1935 (History of Forestry in Vermont, Perry Merrill, 1959).
Native American and Pre-historic Sensitivity Analysis Understanding pre-contact site sensitivity begins with an understanding of landforms and proximity to water features. This type of environmental modeling does not incorporate human behavior and inevitably potential sites may be missed, and others misidentified. Areas in proximity to the North Branch of the Cold River, especially along the kame terrace, have elevated precontact archeological sensitivity. Sensitivity is increased due to the value of the river as a travel corridor (Hartgen Archeological Associates, 2018).
Early Settlement and Industrial History Several structures are indicated on historic maps. An 1854 map shows three structures that are no longer shown on the later 1869 map. According to Hartgen Associates (2018) this suggests that these structures were temporary camps with possible relation to the sawmill shown along the North Branch of the Cold River on the maps. A schoolhouse was located nearby as well.
During the 1930s, Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) established a camp on the state forest that included a sizeable lodge, tool house, garage, water system, and a camping area with tent
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 48 | P a g e
platforms and fireplaces. The buildings were razed by the CCC when the program was terminated. CCC field work on the forest included wildlife plantings of viburnum, barberry, dogwood and Norway spruce.
In 1952, those same lands were leased to the Rutland Council of the Girl Scouts of America as the Tamarack Notch Camp and used for Girl Scout environmental education and recreational activities. The Council developed 33 acres of the former CCC camp to be used as a Girl Scout summer camp complete with a pool, main lodge, staff house, arts and crafts building, and fire circle. A camp loop with 8-10 former CCC campsites was used as a camping area for the scouts. The Girl Scouts continued to use the camp through the early 1980s when increasing maintenance costs and decreasing interest led to their discontinuation of their license agreement with VFPR. Beginning in 1983, Grace Congregational Church in Rutland used the camp for a few years. Faced with increasing costs and decreasing interest in the camp, Grace Church withdrew from its agreement with VFPR. The main lodge, staff house, pool, nine open-sided shelters and five additional buildings remained. VFPR made attempts to find other groups interested in using the facilities but efforts were ultimately unsuccessful, and the buildings became unsafe and beyond feasible repair due to vandalism. The buildings were razed in October 1989.
2. Existing Conditions: The main camp road is in good condition and serves as the Tamarack Notch Trail and a portion of it as a VAST snowmobile trail. Limited remains of historic features still exist. The forest has grown around old campsites and building foundations. There is ongoing need for the protection of historic resources during the implementation of management activities and from the impact associated with recreational use. In order to better protect these features, it is important to better understand and interpret historic resources and their context within the forest.
3. Assessment of Need: Developing a complete historic assessment of the area of the CCC and Girl Scout camp will facilitate appropriate protections and accurate interpretation for visitors. Using this information to develop a “history hike” with interpretive signage will help future generations to understand the rich history of the area.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 49 | P a g e
Figure 11: Historic Resource Map
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 50 | P a g e
H. Recreation Resource Assessment Aitken State Forest is a popular location for day hikes, dog walking, bird watching and wildlife viewing and wintertime activities such as snowshoeing, cross-country skiing, winter hiking and as a connection to the VAST trail network. It’s growing popularity for recreational use is due in part to its proximity to Rutland and Mendon. Despite its location just minutes from a sizeable Vermont community, ASF continues to be a working forest supporting sustainable forest management. It supports diverse wildlife habitat that is substantially valuable because of connectivity to other large blocks of forest land including Coolidge West Management Unit, Jim Jeffords State Forest, Rutland City Forest and Green Mountain National Forest. ASF offers opportunities for both mountain hiking and accessible trails, snowmobiling and pedestrian winter recreation, trail-based and dispersed winter recreation, and remote areas for wildlife and nature observation as well as supporting the long tradition of hunting, fishing and trapping on the property.
Trails are monitored and assessed annually for maintenance and improvement needs. This aids in preparation of trail work planning with a focus on public safety, erosion control, quality recreation experiences, and protection of natural resources. Trail maintenance is ongoing and is completed with work from various trail crews (i.e. VYCC, state trail crew), volunteers, and staff. Maintenance activities focus on proper erosion control, installation and maintenance of drainage structures, clearing brush and blowdowns, maintaining vistas, repairing and maintenance of trail tread, relocating poorly aligned trail segments, and maintenance of trailhead kiosks and register boxes.
The connectivity benefits afforded by ASF’s location in relation to conserved lands including Coolidge and Jim Jeffords state forests reach beyond forest sustainability and wildlife habitat. They also have implications for recreational connectivity. Additionally, the proximity of regional recreational offerings complements that which can responsibly be offered at ASF. Together the activities offered at ASF or Pine Hill Park or Killington Ski area or private businesses and organizations or any number of other locations in the Rutland valley provide a diversity of activities.
Aitken State Forest provides opportunity for sustainable outdoor recreation compatible with high quality stewardship of Vermont’s environment. ASF is uniquely situated to provide appropriate dispersed and trail-based, low-density summer and winter recreation as a component of the greater regional recreational opportunities.
Carefully managing recreational use and implementing strategies and procedures to enhance recreational experiences while minimizing conflict with other uses, goals and objectives and practicing high quality stewardship of Vermont’s environment are important goals of this plan.
1. Existing Conditions: Not all recreational use of ASF is trail-based. While hiking and snowmobiling are popular on designated trails, some activities such as hunting, fishing & trapping, wildlife observation, and snowshoeing occur off-trail as well. The more remote areas within the state forest offer opportunities to explore and experience these more dispersed uses.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 51 | P a g e
a. Hunting, fishing, and trapping are permitted on all state land unless otherwise designated. The actual pursuit of fish and wildlife is governed by rules and regulations established by the Vermont Fish and Wildlife Board. Fish and wildlife commercial uses are limited to those specified in the existing Fish and Wildlife Department regulations. The state forest is within Wildlife Management Unit (WMU) L. WMUs are administrative entities based on physiographic characteristics that help to shape species management in the state. The North Branch of the Cold River along the eastern boundary of ASF supports a healthy fish population.
b. Birding, wildlife observation, and nature appreciation are popular at ASF. Visitors can experience forested landscapes, some open areas with field-like conditions, streams, small wetlands, historic settings, and remote areas. Wildlife on the state forest includes songbirds, invertebrate species, raptors, small mammals, deer, turkey and bears.
c. Hiking and walking are extremely popular at ASF due in part to its proximity to population centers in Rutland and Mendon and represent the dominant recreational use at ASF.
The main loop of the 3.5-mile Bald Mountain Trail begins at the kiosk at the intersection of the Notch Road (town road) and East Road (state forest highway). The trail follows south along the East Road for ¼ mile before turning to the west away from the road and beginning its climb into the forest. The trail traverses the summit of Bald Mountain with several great views of the surrounding valleys and mountains. The lower loop of the Bald Mountain Trail begins at the summit and continues to the north, providing additional views to the west. Portions of the trail are on skid roads that are used periodically for forest management activities. The Bald Mountain Trail is a popular year-round destination day hike.
Trail maintenance has focused on sustainability. Trails at ASF are maintained to enhance visitor experience while promoting safety and minimizing impacts to natural resources. Maintenance has focused on improving grade, reducing erosion, improving signage and trail blazing, relocating segments or hardening trail surface in poorly drained areas, correcting poorly aligned segments, and maintaining vistas.
The 0.7-mile Tamarack Notch Trail begins at the gated entrance north of the Notch Road just east of the Bald Mountain Trail trailhead kiosk. This trail follows an old loop road that was part of the Civilian Conservation Corps camp and later the Tamarack Notch Girl Scout Camp. The trail is a nearly flat and provides an easy short hike through the forest. The VAST trail uses part of this trail to access the corridor trail off the state forest. Ongoing trail maintenance includes surfacing, corridor brushing, and signing.
Enhancing access to universally accessible trails in the region has been identified through local and regional planning efforts as a recognized need. Continuing to maintain and enhance accessibility of this trail with the potential to construct additional accessible trail segments as an interpretive ‘history hike’ trail would help to address that need and enhance the recreational offerings at ASF. This area is rich in history and interpretation
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 52 | P a g e
of the area’s history would add considerable value to this recreation asset. The Town of Mendon Historical Society will be an important partner in the development of this project.
The 1.4-mile East Road serves as both a forest management access road and a popular hiking/walking trail. The surface is sandy and gravelly, and the road is gated, water barred, ditched and has culverts to control erosion and protect water quality. Some sections are rough and have larger cobble where the fine soils have washed away from erosion related to unauthorized vehicle traffic.
The primary role of the East Road is as a forest management access road for timber harvest, vegetation management, and other management activities. The road is quite popular as a hiking destination, providing one-way access to the landing. From there some return the same way and, others hike along skid roads. There may be opportunities to create a loop trail connection near the landing to enhance pedestrian recreation. Maintenance focuses on roadside brushing, erosion prevention (i.e. ditches, waterbars) and enforcing ATV and ORV violations to eensure continued availability for both management access and recreation. Unofficial trails that connect to lands south of ASF are not part of a designated trail or road network associated with ASF. There are no agreements with adjoining landowners for this use.
d. Hiking with dogs or bringing them to ASF for exercise is a popular and growing use. It is an important part of the recreational experience for many. There is an increased amount of dog waste along trails and roads and increasing dog-related interactionsThe Town of Mendon Animal Control Ordinance pertains to lands within ASF. The ordinance states that “when not on property of its owner, dogs must be kept on leash or under verbal control and not be allowed to “run at large”. Further, an owner shall not permit a dog to harass pedestrians or cause fear of or sustain bodily injury. The Mendon Animal Control Officer is the primary enforcement official under the provisions of the ordinance.
e. Winter recreation pursuits are also quite popular at ASF. Snowshoeing and cross- country skiing are popular on hiking trails and woods roads within the forest. These are ungroomed trails that offer the possibility of fresh snow and dispersed recreation opportunities. These uses also occur on the groomed snowmobile trail.
Snowmobiling occurs on a groomed trail that connects the parking area on the Notch Road with the Vermont Association of Snow Travelers (VAST) north/south corridor trail located off the forest. The 0.6-mile trail is groomed by the local VAST club between December 16 and April 15 when conditions permit. Snowmobiles are permitted on designated trails only and must meet VAST registration requirements.
A section of the VAST trail was relocated in 2018. The relocated section was on very steep terrain between the Girl Scout Loop Road (Tamarack Notch Trail) and the Notch Road. That segment of trail was eroding badly and was difficult to maintain and use. Without substantial waterbars to hold soil in place and shed water the trail suffered considerable erosion during storm events. The steep grade also made grooming extremely
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 53 | P a g e
challenging. Managing trails to reduce the risk of damage from erosion as well as to protect the adjacent streams and the surrounding watershed is critical to ensure natural resource protection and to enhance the recreational experiences. Through partnerships with VAST and Rutland City, the steep section was relocated to a gentler and more sustainable grade. The transition from the terrace that supports the Tamarack Notch Trail to the Notch Road is on Rutland City Forest resulting in a connector trail that crosses portions of both Aitken State Forest and Rutland City Forest. The trail and natural resources were further protected by installing gates to restrict illegal ATV traffic and by strategically placing waterbars, ditches and culverts to better prepare it to withstand heavy rains and flooding events. This work helps to ensure the continued recreational availability of the trail as a connection to the VAST Corridor trail. The steep trail segment was decommissioned, water barred, stabilized and seeded to prevent soil loss. Interpretive signs describing the project were posted on the trailhead kiosk and restoration signs were posted at the site.
Winter recreation activities have the potential to impact wildlife, especially in critical habitats such as deer wintering areas. Expansion of winter recreation into these areas often conflicts with the goals of conserving these habitats and must be carefully evaluated. Deer wintering habitat is located within ASF and on VFWD easement property to the south of the state forest. The easement has specific conditions that negatively impact this critical habitat. No new trails or developed uses that would lead to increased winter use should occur within the deer wintering habitat. Details can be found on page 6.
f. Rock climbing, bouldering, scrambling are not widely practiced at ASF however the cliff and outcrop communities within the forest have been used occasionally for these activities. The cliffs are short, fractured and difficult to access. It will be important to monitor these areas regularly for damage to vegetation and rare plants and soil erosion. Mitigation or closure will need to be considered if it is determined that recreational activity is leading to site damage.
g. Two, informal parking areas that have served the trail system at ASF for many years. A pull-in, 6-car parking area directly across from the East Road kiosk has served as the primary parking for the Bald Mountain and Tamarack Notch Trails. Additional roadside parking for 2 cars is directly across from the Tamarack Notch trailhead. In 2019, trailhead parking was enhanced. An additional parking area was established at the Bald Mountain trailhead that adds capacity to the existing area. As part of this project, signage will be upgraded, and stream protections will be put in place. The parking area across from the Tamarack Notch Trail was expanded and will have designated and signed ADA spots. A larger parking lot exists east of the Girl Scout Loop Road and south of the Notch Road. This lot can hold a dozen cars and in winter serves as parking for trucks and trailers associated with the VAST trail. The larger parking lot is often the site of dumping, fires, and shooting. People rarely park there during the non-winter months. Enhancements were made to increase visibility and lines of sight from the road and trailheads to this parking area.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 54 | P a g e
Improved parking has been a recognized need for this area. Capacity and enforcement issues related to the increasing popularity of the trails and ongoing vandalism of the larger parking area continue to be addressed. Construction of a well-maintained trailhead parking including upgrades to include handicapped accessible parking, improved signage, improved aesthetics, and enforcement of vandalism were recently completed and will continue to be monitored.
h. Education and outreach provide state forest visitors with information with which to better understand the diversity of natural resources and the many recreational opportunities on the state forest. This also provides the opportunity to advance knowledge and understanding about forest management activities, recreational opportunities and impacts, appropriate uses, and department missions and responsibilities. There are a variety of ways to achieve this. Information is posted on kiosks, websites, and in brochures. This information is also effectively conveyed with educational interactions between department staff and forest visitors through one-on-one conversations and by demonstrating and signing management activities such as road maintenance, high-quality trail management practices, invasive species treatments, and forest management operations. This is occuring on both a formal and informal basis.
i. The successful management of trails at ASF has involved important partnerships with a number of organizations that expand VFPR capacity and involve groups and individuals interested in sustainable management of the state forest. VFPR continues to work with VAST on the management of the VAST connector trail; with the Town of Mendon road crew on items related to the Notch Road and trailhead dumping; and with the Mendon Historical Society and alum from the Girl Scout Camp in developing opportunities to enhance accessibility and interpretation of the historical aspects of the state forest. Rutland County Audubon helps to develop a deeper understanding of bird species that use habitat within ASF. Partnerships with VFWD game wardens help to enforce ATV and dumping regulations. Expanding capacity through partnerships of shared vision enhances management of ASF.
j. A remote setting for quiet recreation or for hunting is valued by many and increasingly rare, especially so close to developed areas. The connectivity afforded by ASF’s proximity to large forest blocks not only provides critical wildlife habitat but also supports those recreational pursuits that rely on and benefit from remote areas (i.e. hunting, wildlife observation, primitive camping, etc.). Having those qualities in such an accessible location close to Rutland is increasingly unique.
k. Primitive camping is permitted in portions of the state forest that meet the VFPR Primitive Camping Guidelines and Leave No Trace principles. Steep slopes, shallow soils and lack of water during much of the summer limits the attractiveness of this use at ASF.
l. There are currently no mountain bike trails at ASF, however, several opportunities exist regionally. Trails at Pine Hill Park in Rutland, at Killington Ski Area and Sherburne Trails in the town of Killington, and a network of trails managed by Slate Valley Trails in the Poultney area provide a diversity of opportunities for a variety of skill levels. There
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 55 | P a g e
may be opportunities for some mountain bike trails to be located on ASF, particularly those that facilitate connections to existing trails in the region. Any proposed trails would need to be in a location that did not impact natural resources, sensitive features or negatively impact other management goals. Terrain limitations and management objectives related to natural communities, wildlife habitat, water resources, and rare, threatened and endangered species hamper construction of trails in some locations within ASF and present conditions that do not easily support a loop trail wholly within the state forest.
m. VFPR works in partnership with VFWD game wardens and local and state law enforcement to enforce existing laws (i.e. ATV use on state land, dumping) in effort to keep ASF safe and enjoyable for all visitors.
n. New trails and recreation use proposals are considered in the context of management goals and objectives for ASF and existing uses. New use proposals are evaluated for impacts including those related to: • Natural & cultural resource constraints (i.e. wildlife impacts, rare, threatened and endangered species, erodible soils, riparian zones, archeological/cultural concerns) • Use or management conflicts • Impacts to adjacent parcels • Project/trail design standards • Long- and short-term maintenance capacity • Funding capacity • Public demand • Demonstrated lack of regional supply for this activity/use • Formal agreement with a partner organization • Whether this activity is established and growing
The submission process starts with a Pre-proposal that outlines basic project elements as a first cut at project feasibility. If the project is determined to be potentially appropriate the next step is the submission of a Full-proposal that dives deeper into project details and design. Links to the documents can be found at https://fpr.vermont.gov/recreation/using-state-lands-recreation
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 56 | P a g e
Table 14: Trails on Aitken State Forest Trail Name Trail Type Length Location (miles) Bald Mountain – Loop trail – Hiking, snowshoe 3.5 South of Notch Road, to Upper Loop & summit Lower Loop trails Tamarack Notch Loop trail - hiking, snowshoe, 0.7 North of Notch Road cross-country ski, a portion serves as snowmobile trail VAST Connector trail – snowmobile; 0.6 North of Notch Road, uses part of the Tamarack crosses Rutland City Forest Notch trail East Road Forest management access 0.6 to South of Notch Road; an Walking, snowshoe, cross- landing additional 0.8 to second country ski landing
2. Recreation Opportunity Spectrum Results: Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) is an inventory and assessment process designed to focus on the character of experiences a recreational user can expect to find on a parcel of land. Developed by the U.S. Forest Service for application in the western United States, this system has been adapted for use in the eastern United States. Use of the system will result in the public being given consistent messaging on the types of recreation experiences to expect in various areas, regardless of being on State or Federal lands.
There are six ROS categories developed for New England. These categories range from the highly developed (urban) to the undeveloped (primitive). The characteristics used to map these ROS categories are based on:
1. Physical setting – remoteness, size of the area and evidence of humans. 2. Social setting – the amount and type of contact between individuals and groups. 3. Managerial setting – the amounts and kinds or restrictions on people’s actions.
Two of the six ROS categories exist on the state forest. In its purest sense the ROS is difficult to apply to ASF; the property is too small. But even with this relatively small parcel size, it is helpful to use this model to describe recreational experiences on the state forest.
Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized areas are at least 0.5 miles from improved, maintained roads and can include unimproved roads if there is no motorized use. These areas are characterized by predominantly natural or natural-appearing environment of relatively medium to large size. Interactions between users is low but there is evidence of other users. Non-mechanized uses are most common but mechanized uses occur. Motorized use does not occur. Isolation from human development, use and impact is likely. Human controls over the area are subtle. There may be unimproved roads and skid trails within the area. Timber harvesting and vegetation management may occur. Road and trail density is low. This includes approximately 500 acres in the south and southwest portions of ASF.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 57 | P a g e
Semi-developed Natural areas are within 0.5 miles of improved, maintained roads. These areas are characterized by a natural appearing setting but with obvious, but scattered, modifications that are perceived to be background by most visitors to the area. Contact with other users is moderate on roads and moderate to low on trails and away from roads. Evidence of other users is prevalent. Timber harvesting and vegetation management practices are compatible. This includes approximately 430 acres in the east and northeastern portions of ASF including the Girl Scout parcel.
3. Assessment of Need: • There is a recognized need to enhance trailhead parking along the Notch Road. Construction of adequate and aesthetic trailhead parking. Parking upgrades including accessible parking, improved signage, improved aesthetics, and enforcement of vandalism and dumping are needed. • Enhance universally accessible trails on the Girl Scout Loop. Partner with the Town of Mendon Historical Society to interpret area’s rich history. • Continue partnerships with law enforcement agencies to build on successes of past few years. • Regular monitoring of cliff and outcrop natural communities for damage to vegetation and rare plants and soil erosion. Consider mitigation or closure if it is determined that recreational activity is leading to site damage. • Careful evaluation of the potential impact of expansion of winter recreation into sensitive and critical habitat.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 58 | P a g e
Figure 12: Recreation Resource Map
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 59 | P a g e
Figure 13: Recreation Opportunity Spectrum
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 60 | P a g e
I. Infrastructure and Public Access Assessment
1. Description: Aitken State Forest is located just east of Rutland in the Town of Mendon at the intersection of Wheelerville (TH #7) and Notch (TH #2) roads. Flow of traffic to and past the state forest was altered following Tropical Storm Irene in 2011. During that storm event a section of the Notch Road east of the entrance to the state forest was damaged beyond repair and remains completely impassable. The result is that the section of Notch Road that accesses the state forest functionally ends at the parking area just east of the Bald Mountain trailhead. Tropical storm Irene was not the first storm to affect the Notch Road. In 1999, Hurricane Floyd also damaged this section of road. That damage was not as substantial, and the road was repaired by installing riprap on the bank. Contractors and engineers engaged by the Town of Mendon to repair the road in 1999 were in agreement that the slope is unstable and will fail again in time. The extremely steep bank, seeps, and poorly drained soils contribute to the instability. The town of Mendon has barricaded the Notch Road and has invested in the upgrade of the Falls Road (LT 6) to provide access to camps and homes east of ASF. The closure of the Notch Road east of the state forest does not adversely impact management or public access to the forest.
2. Existing Conditions: In addition to the far-reaching effects on ecological systems, climate change may also affect the infrastructure and public uses on ASF. Potential effects could include: • Floods damaging roads, trails and facilities. • Fires endangering visitors, forest resources, and neighboring properties. • Increased precipitation leading to more temporary/seasonal road closures and increased road maintenance. • Shorter winters reducing winter use seasons (i.e. logging, winter recreation). • Windstorms increasing maintenance needs to keep roads clear of trees.
Such effects will be addressed on a case-by-case basis. It is anticipated that the systems in place to manage many of these uses will readily handle these issues. Others will require more comprehensive considerations, for example, for increased precipitation and flooding – maintaining ASF as extensively forested is a key strategy to reduce and mitigate flooding downstream. In addition, ANR has and will continue to replace undersized culverts (which can fail in flood events) with larger and better positioned structures.
Roads: Public and management access within the state forest is via internal state forest highways and dedicated rights-of-ways. Main access through the largest block of the state forest is via the East Road, a gated state forest highway that begins at the Notch Road and ends at a log landing. Main access through the block to the north of the Notch Road is via the Girl Scout Loop road, also a gated state forest highway. Controlling unauthorized vehicle use (i.e. ATV, ORV) is critical to maintaining a safe and functional road system for management and recreation access. Partnerships with local law enforcement (i.e. VFWD game wardens, Town of Mendon) will continue.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 61 | P a g e
There are also three restricted rights-of-way that access the state forest, one on the north, one on the northwest and one on the southern boundaries of the property. These roads are deeded rights that support forest management access (see legal assessment).
Infrastructure Summary
Access, Management & Public State Forest Highways and Roads Road Class Condition Length Uses Needs East Road C Fair to 1.35 mi Forest management, Increased need for good hiking, walking, ongoing maintenance due pedestrian winter to unauthorized ATV use, recreation (i.e. xc ski, manipulation of road snowshoe) drainage & erosion control by unauthorized individuals that jeopardize long-term stability of road Girl Scout Loop Road C Good 0.7 mi. Forest management, Increased maintenance walking, portion is used and enforcement need due as VAST trail to increasing ATV use Bradder ROW (1960) Good 0.29 mi ROW restricted to timber Gated road. Culverts management upgraded and stone added when last used Elnicki ROW (2014) Fair to 1.0 mi ROW restricted to forest None currently Good management Naigy ROW (1915) Good 0.15 mi. Access to northwest None currently corner
*Class B Road: A paved or unpaved state forest highway that is generally open for public vehicle use but may be closed at certain times of the year to restrict such access.
**Class C Road: An unpaved state forest highway not generally open for public vehicle use.
Gates Location Condition Status Needs East Road at Good Gate remains closed to protect road. Periodic painting. Gate lock intersection with Notch occasionally cut by unknown Road persons. Enforcement need directed at ATV’s bypassing gate. Girl Scout Loop Road Good Gate open during snowmobile season – Periodic painting. Enforcement at intersection with December 15 – April 16. Closed during need directed at ATV’s bypassing Notch Road other times of the year to protect road. gate. There is a 32” opening to allow pedestrian and wheelchair access around gate. VAST trail at Notch Good Gate open during snowmobile season – Periodic painting. Enforcement Road by bridge December 15 – April 16. Closed during need directed at ATV’s bypassing other times of the year to protect road. gate and gate vandalism. Reconstructed 2018. Girl Scout Loop Road Good Gate open during snowmobile season – Periodic painting. Enforcement at VAST trail to December 15 – April 16. Closed during directed at ATV’s bypassing gate. Rutland City Forest other times of the year to protect road.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 62 | P a g e
Kiosks Location Condition Status Needs At East Road gate Good Serves as trailhead kiosk for Bald Mountain Add additional Trail. Provides general recreation information information on forest to forest visitors. management, birds, etc. to enhance information available At Girl Scout Loop Road Good Built and installed by Stafford Technical Add additional gate Center in 2017. Serves as trailhead for information on forest & Tamarack Notch Trail. Provides general recreation management, recreation information to forest visitors. birds, history, etc. to enhance information
Signs Location Condition Status Needs Parcel ID signs There are currently none Install parcel ID signs Trail directional signs Good Along the Bald Mountain Maintain sign inventory. Periodic hiking trail replacement needed.
Culverts and Bridges: State forest highways have culverts that serve as stream crossing or ditch relief. There are currently no permanent bridges. Regular maintenance includes cleaning ditches and culverts of debris, evaluation of culvert size, condition and capacity, evaluation of aquatic organism passage, and replacing undersized structures.
Parking Areas: There are two pull-in parking areas located off the Notch Road for recreational access to the state forest. A 6-car, pull-in parking area located just across from the Bald Mountain trailhead kiosk and another to the west of the gate serve as the primary parking for hikers. Additional pull-in parking is across from the Tamarack Notch Trail/Girl Scout Loop and is also used for trailhead parking. It includes accessible parking. A larger 12- car parking area is located east of the main trailhead parking and generally serves as VAST parking in winter months.
Vandalism, dumping and shooting have occurred frequently at the larger parking area. Enforcement efforts by the Town of Mendon and Vermont Fish & Wildlife Department Game Wardens have helped to curtail this abuse but their presence is not constant, the abuse continues, and the parking area remains largely unattractive to many visitors. Efforts to enhance parking, improve visibility, continue enforcement and improve partnerships will be a major goal of this plan.
3. Assessment of Need: • Maintain parking availability, access, aesthetics and safety. • Continue program of regular road maintenance to address erosion, water quality and illegal use. • Maintain signage.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 63 | P a g e
Figure 14: Infrastructure and Public Access Map
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 64 | P a g e
J. Scenic Resource Assessment
1. Description: Bald Mountain is the first mountain east of Rutland and is visible from many points in the Rutland area. The summit of Bald Mountain also serves as an important vantage point for views of the surrounding landscape. There are views of the Route 7 and Cold River valleys, Rutland, and Pico from various vistas along the Bald Mountain Trail. The views are an important part of the recreational experience. For many visitors to ASF, high quality scenery, especially scenery with natural-appearing landscapes enhances people’s lives and benefits society.2 Scenery can be assessed at different scales (regional, local, parcel).
Table 15: Scenic Resources of Aitken State Forest Visual Feature Location Vantage Point Description Significance* Bald Aitken State Surrounding High point in local Local Mountain Forest landscape – east part landscape. Forested of Rutland City Route 7 & Surrounding Bald Mountain – View of surrounding Significant for Cold River landscape vistas along trail valleys, Rutland City visitors to ASF valleys and Green Mountains Hillsides All slopes Parts of Rutland City, Hardwood and mixed Local from Cold River forests Road Wetlands Girl Scout Hiking trails Forested wetlands Parcel parcel, Bald Mountain summit North East boundary Notch Road, VAST Forested stream parcel Branch ASF trail *Regional A significant scenic resource known and appreciated at a broad geographic sale (often geologic land form), typically unique, prominent and visible by a large number of people. Local A scenic resource visible from off site that may be geologic but can also be subjectively attractive rural and/or forest vistas. Parcel A scenic resource visible from only within or just adjacent to the parcel such as maintained meadows, historic sites, and unique geological features.
2 USFS Handbook #701, Landscape Aesthetics – A Handbook for Scenery Management
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 65 | P a g e
IV. MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES AND ACTIONS
Land Management Classification Vermont ANR lands are managed using four categories of use or types of management to be emphasized on the land. In this section of the plan, the recommended levels of use or types of management will be shown for all the land area in this parcel. This section also describes generally how the land will be managed so that the activities occurring on the land are compatible with the category assigned. The four categories are: (1) Highly Sensitive Management; (2) Special Management; (3) General Management; and (4) Intensive Management.
As part of the planning process, the lands, resources, and facilities held by the ANR are evaluated and assigned to the appropriate land management category. Assignment of management categories for Aitken State Forest is based on a thorough understanding of the resources identified and the application of over-arching lands management standards. The resources include natural communities, plants, and wildlife as well as recreation, historic, timber, and water resources. The four management classification categories are broadly described as follows:
1.0) Highly Sensitive Management – Areas designated as Highly Sensitive Management are described as “areas with uncommon or outstanding biological, ecological, geological, scenic, cultural, or historical significance…” Acres managed under this category will have no timber management, salvage harvest, or active wildlife habitat management. However, trees and other vegetation may be cut to restore natural community species composition and structure in limited locations; manage specific habitat conditions for rare, threatened, and endangered species; and to maintain safe and enjoyable recreational conditions.
2.0) Special Management – Areas designated as Special Management include areas “…where protection and/or enhancement of those resources is an important consideration for management.” Timber harvesting and wildlife habitat management as well as recreation are considered to be complementary uses within this classification to the extent that they do not impact special features.
3.0) General Management – The General Management category includes areas where “dominant uses include vegetation management for timber and wildlife habitat, concentrated trail networks, and dispersed recreation…” A primary consideration for management is minimizing conflict between activities. Sensitive resources that occur within these areas may require special attention.
4.0) Intensive Management – The Intensive Management category is characterized by a “high level of human activity and high intensity development on/or adjacent to State land.” Aesthetics and safety are the primary management considerations in these areas. However, more sensitive resources that occur within these areas may require special attention.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 66 | P a g e
A. Overarching Management Goals and Strategies for Aitken State Forest
Conserve Uncommon and Rare Species and Natural Communities: Maintain or enhance quality rank of significant natural communities and protect habitat of rare, threatened, and endangered species.
Half of the 14 natural communities mapped on Aitken State Forest are rare or uncommon and state significant natural communities are mapped on 76% of the forest. There is one state-listed endangered plant known from ASF, however several areas have not been assessed and have suitable habitat for rare and uncommon plant species.
• Prioritize management of invasive species that pose a threat to native rare, threatened, or endangered species. • Maintain or enhance habitat for uncommon and rare species. • Manage and monitor impacts from other uses, including recreation and forest management activities. • Conduct or support survey efforts designed to gain better understanding of species present and their distribution on the state forest. • When appropriate, allow natural processes and disturbance regimes to prevail.
Natural Resource Protection: Maintain healthy, diverse, and resilient forests.
Natural resource protection is at the foundation of management on state land and at the core of our mission. It serves as the backdrop for Vermont’s high-quality recreation and provides the setting for sustainable forest management. Maintaining resilient forests better able to adapt to climate change and invasive pests, protect water quality, provide species diversity, and garner an ethic of respect for the land will help to ensure that Vermont’s forests are available for a variety of appropriate uses and benefits into the future.
• Conserve biological diversity on ASF and contribute to the diversity of the larger landscape. • Promote an ethic of respect for the land, sustainable use, and exemplary management. • Promote native species composition in forests. Prioritize invasive species management by impact to rare, threatened and endangered species, density of infestation, risk of spread, impact to forest health and quality of surrounding forest. • Maintain or enhance forest resiliency by promoting climate adaptation strategies. o Protect forest soils by minimizing disturbance and controlling erosion. o Improve carbon storage and flood resilience through retention of older, larger cull trees in all harvest types, protection of soil structure, organic matter and moisture,
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 67 | P a g e
enhancement of groundwater recharge and retention of biological legacies in managed and reserved areas. o Maintain or enhance coarse woody material to replenish organic material, moderate soil temperatures, and cycle nutrients. o Promote age class and species diversity and vigorous crown development. o Retain or promote natural communities comprised of more adaptable tree species such as oak, hemlock and pine. o Maintain landscape connectivity. o Manage stressors to the extent possible, including invasive species. • Maintain or enhance forest ecosystem health o Continue ongoing forest health surveys. o Consider current insect and disease conditions when determining the timing of management activities. o Conduct ongoing monitoring for the presence of Emerald Ash Borer, Hemlock Wooly Adelgid, Red Pine Scale, and other invasive or damaging insects.
Wildlife habitat: Provide high quality wildlife habitat for a diversity of species.
Aitken State Forest is located on the western edge of a substantial area of unbroken forest that extends into the Green Mountains toward Killington and includes Coolidge and Jim Jeffords State Forests. This large forest block includes 46,000 acres and is adjacent to several other similarly sized forest blocks providing conserved corridors that will facilitate long-term species movements. Forest composition in ASF, especially oak and hickory-dominated areas contribute to the overall habitat diversity of the area.
• Maintain a diversity of habitats of all vegetative stages. Protect and enhance critical wildlife habitat, such as deer wintering areas, and protection of unique habitat. o Use timber harvesting to maintain or increase the proportion of young forest found on ASF. o Use combination of passive and active forest management to promote the development of old forest and structurally complex forest habitats. • Maintain or enhance occurrence of trees used by cavity nesting species, as roost trees for bats, and as a future source of dead and down wood on the forest floor. Ideal targets would be 4-6 each of live and dead snags >12” diameter per acre 50-80 pieces of downed wood per acre. • Adhere to management guidelines for bats in Vermont prepared by Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department. Review all timber harvests for their effects on these species, adjusting prescription and timing accordingly.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 68 | P a g e
• Maintain or enhance mast producing species such as oak, beech, hickory, cherry and serviceberry. • Develop connecting habitat on ASF and within the region to aid in the movement of plant and animal populations adapting to changing climate and regional environmental conditions. • Discourage new recreational trails or uses that would impact critical wildlife habitat (i.e. deer wintering areas). • Maintain high quality surface waters within ASF o Follow Riparian Management Guidelines for Agency of Natural Resources to protect riparian function around all wetlands, seeps, streams, and vernal pools. o Design roads, trails and other infrastructure to allow for aquatic organism passage and riparian connectivity.
Recreation management: Provide opportunities for dispersed, low density sustainable recreation and trail systems where appropriate and compatible with high quality stewardship of Vermont’s environment and management goals at ASF.
Aitken State Forest provides a location for a variety of recreation including hiking and walking; winter recreation including snowshoeing, cross-country skiing and trail connectivity to the VAST north/south corridor; and opportunities for hunting, fishing and trapping. It’s position on the landscape as an integral part of a wildlife movement corridor not only conserves habitat but makes it a great location for bird and wildlife observation. Despite its proximity to Rutland, the rugged, mountainous terrain offers a unique opportunity for a sense of remoteness so close to a city.
Proximity and connection to the Rutland Region affords opportunities for partnerships and recreational connectivity. Connectivity to Jim Jeffords and Coolidge State Forests and the Green Mountain National Forest and Rutland City Forest highlight the recreational importance and opportunities at ASF. Both the Town of Mendon and City of Rutland, in association with the Killington Valley initiative, are promoting/highlighting recreation in their communities. Aitken State Forest plays a role in each.
Aitken State Forest is part of a much larger recreational picture in the region. Rather than providing a location for all recreational uses on this relatively small property, ASF enhances regional opportunities. ASF plays a significant role in offering a location for specific uses while managing the state forest for a variety of other goals.
• Provide sustainable level of well-maintained recreational opportunities. • Ensure that recreational activities are compatible with high quality stewardship of ASF and limit impacts to wildlife. • Maintain existing trail system:
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 69 | P a g e
o Maintain and construct trails to the highest industry standard. o Maintain vistas along Bald Mountain Trail o Continue program of ongoing trail maintenance utilizing staff, contracted trail crews and volunteers. o Continue to monitor visitor use through use of trailhead registers, electronic counters, and intercept surveys. o Continue to monitor the trail system and associated infrastructure. Document status through the appropriate GIS tool (i.e. Collector App). Adjust management accordingly. o Continue to work with partner organizations, such as VAST, to provide safe, enjoyable, and environmentally sustainable trail systems. o Consider requests for mountain bike trail connectivity between Aitken SF and adjoining properties utilizing pre- and full-proposal process for evaluating conceptual trail proposals. As ASF is just one piece of component of trail connections, encourage recreation groups to collaborate with adjoining landowners/land managers as part of proposal development.
• Continue to allow primitive camping according to the Vermont Department of Forests, Parks and Recreation Primitive Camping Guidelines. • Consider careful expansion of recreational opportunities where appropriate and compatible with other goals. o Evaluate new recreational use requests in the context of total recreational use of the forest, the Recreational Opportunity Spectrum, and other management goals of the state forest. o Ensure proper planning for and implementation of new trails where appropriate. o Expand recreational access by exploring potential for universally accessible trails. • Improve public access: o Enhance parking opportunities at trailheads to support growing recreational use of area. o Continue to partner with Vermont Fish & Wildlife Department Game Wardens and Town of Mendon law enforcement to curtail vandalism, dumping, etc.
Forest management: Produce a diverse array of wood products through sustainable management and harvest practices while integrating wildlife habitat and recreation management considerations.
Timber and vegetation management on ASF contributes to the sustainable production of forest products, improvement of forest health conditions, management of quality wildlife habitat, control of invasive species, maintenance of scenic vistas, contributions to forest resiliency and climate adaptation, demonstration of sound forest management practices and is a small, but vital
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 70 | P a g e
part of the Vermont economy. While income generation is never the primary reason to conduct forest harvesting on state land it is an important consideration and helps to support wildlife habitat management, recreational access and other management goals.
• Develop and maintain a resilient forest that fosters natural communities with a range of tree densities, gap sizes, plant species and tree ages distributed over a variety of sites and conditions. • Manage for sustainable production of forest products that consider the prevalence of riparian zones, connector habitat, and inoperable area/terrain embedded within management zones. • Utilize a range of established silvicultural techniques. o Consider a broad range of peer-reviewed silvicultural guides. o Utilize diverse types of forest management to create age and structural diversity. o Determine the most appropriate cutting regime on site-specific basis. Such cutting regimes include but are limited to single tree and group selection, irregular shelterwood, regular shelterwood, seed tree, clearcut and thinning. o Consider timing of silvicultural treatments (summer v winter) in regard to soil and water protection, and desired regeneration. o When necessary, limit the type of equipment that is permitted to operate on a given timber harvest. • Design silvicultural prescriptions that consider likely climate change scenarios and focus on resiliency and diversity. o Follow recommendations in Creating and Maintaining Resilient Forests in Vermont: Adapting Forests to Climate Change (VFPR, May 2015). o Follow Agency guidelines as they relate to Assisted Migration. o Ensure that advance regeneration is abundant prior to overstory removal when conducting even-age management. o Monitor harvests and temporarily halt operations as needed to protect soil, water, and access infrastructure. o Match equipment to terrain and harvest objective to reduce soil and stand impacts. o Monitor for early detection and removal of invasive plant species. Where invasive plant populations are already established, include aggressive management as a component of any silvicultural technique. o Monitor for early detection of EAB. Follow VFPR guidance and Slow the Spread recommendations (www.vtinvasives.org) • Maintain an adequate road access system. o Maintain roads recognizing that likely climate change scenarios suggest more frequent and intense storm events in the future.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 71 | P a g e
o Replace and enlarge inadequate culverts and stream crossing structures thereby enhancing flood resilience. o Minimize number of skid roads and trails. • Incorporate FPR published Acceptable Management Practices and ANR Riparian Management Guidelines for Agency of Natural Resource Lands into all harvesting projects to ensure a continuing high level of protection of water quality and soils • Undertake periodic forest inventories to assist with guiding future plans and developing appropriate silvicultural prescriptions Five commercial timber sales are planned with an average size of 130 acres for a total of 663 acres. These treatments range in size from 56 to 197 acres. Some treatment area sizes will actually be smaller when considerations for stream and wetland buffers are calculated. The primary goal will be uneven-aged management to increase age class and structural diversity.
Most of the timber sales on Aitken State Forest are conducted in winter months to reduce impacts to sensitive natural resources and reduce ground disturbance, however summer logging is suitable in some instances where ground conditions allow and soil scarification benefits tree regeneration. Proposed timber harvests go through an internal review process that includes site evaluation related to forest health, species composition, soil characteristics, wildlife habitat considerations, wood product quality and value, value in meeting management goals, recreation considerations, and a review by the state lands ecologist related to rare, threatened and endangered species and significant natural communities. This data is used to develop formal silvicultural prescriptions that are reviewed by the district stewardship team. Current silvicultural guides are referenced to formulate appropriate strategies for treatment. Timber harvests are also often an opportunity to improve forest access roads. The timber harvest schedule may need to be flexible due to unforeseen circumstances related to access conditions, insect and disease infestations, poor conditions for logging such as extended wet periods or lack of cold weather and/or inadequate snow cover.
Manage Cultural Resources: Identify, document, and protect cultural resources.
Historic resources within ASF are primarily on the parcel north of the Notch Road and consist of Civilian Conservation Corps activity in the 1930s and Tamarack Notch Girl Scout Camp in the 1950s -1980s. Identification, documentation, protection, and then interpretation of these resources as a history hike will enhance recreational use to the forest. The nearly level terrain, existing Tamarack Notch Trail and community interest may help to shape the use of this part of ASF.
• Identify and document historic resources found within the state forest. • Interpret resources as they relate to the Civilian Conservation Corps activity and Tamarack Notch Girl Scout Camp activities within the forest. • Explore potential to create an interpretive history hike trail. • Conduct appropriate historic review prior to any ground disturbing activity.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 72 | P a g e
Figure 15. Land Management Classification
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 73 | P a g e
B. Land Management Classification on Aitken State Forest (Additional site-specific management actions)
1.0 HIGHLY SENSITIVE MANAGEMENT ― 56 acres
Highly Sensitive Management (HSM) areas represent approximately 56 acres or 6% of the Aitken State Forest.
Highly Sensitive Areas are those with uncommon or outstanding significance (biological, ecological, geological, scenic, cultural or historic) where protection of those resources is the primary consideration for management. Human activities and uses should not compromise the exceptional feature(s) identified.
Management Goals and Objectives: • Primary management function is to protect sensitive resources. • Management activities should not compromise exceptional features. • Focus on restoration of natural community species composition and structure. • Manage specific habitat conditions for the conservation of rare, threatened and endangered species.
1.1 – Rare or Exemplary Natural Community
HSM 1.1a – Red Pine Forest (10 Acres; Figure 1.1a) The Red Pine Forest on ASF is a state-significant example of a rare natural community. It is found on the upper slopes of Bald Mountain and on steeper rocky areas on lower slopes and is associated with shallow soils, droughty conditions, and perhaps most importantly, recurring fire. Red pine is well adapted to fire, with thick protective bark and seeds that germinate in bare mineral soil. The long-term persistence of this community is probably maintained by fire.
Red pine scale, a non-native insect, is the apparent cause of red pine decline in parts of Vermont. This insect may not be the sole cause of mortality, but it has been identified in the red pine on ASF. The Bald Mountain Trail passes through one example of this community just below the summit.
Management Strategies and Actions: • Maintain quality, composition and structure of Red Pine Forest and manage activities and uses to minimize impacts. • Allow natural processes except for instances of public safety and to meet trail maintenance standards. • Monitor for red pine health and presence of red pine scale. • Maintain designated hiking trail in its current size and location.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 74 | P a g e
• Do not expand recreational use into other two examples of this community on ASF. HSM 1.1b – Rich Northern Hardwood Forest (30 Acres; Figure 1.1b) Rich Northern Hardwood Forest is typically found in places where colluvial soil movement creates rich site growing conditions. Within ASF this enriched forest is found in two locations. This larger example is in a steep, north-facing, bowl-shaped slope and is one of the most intriguing sites on the forest because forest conditions indicate likely old forest conditions. This example contains rare plants and is considered state-significant.
Management Strategies and Actions: • Promote late successional forest characteristics that include high residual basal area, diversity of tree sizes and ages (including very large and old trees), abundant dead and downed wood in all size and decay classes, and the accumulation of biomass. • Manage activities and uses to minimize the impacts to the quality, composition or structure of the natural community. • Maintain quality of natural community by allowing or mimicking natural processes. • Maintain colluvial soil movement – do not interrupt that process with roads or trails. • Monitor for Emerald Ash Borer, ash mortality, and related increase in invasive plant species as impact to community quality.
1.5 – Exceptional Geological Features HSM 1.5a – Rock Outcrops and Cliffs (9 Acres; Figure 1.5a) The steep and rocky terrain of ASF means that rock outcrops are quite common. Five patches of Temperate Acidic Outcrop have been mapped but scattered throughout the slopes of Bald Mountain are numerous additional smaller examples of this community type. These are generally open with little soil and limited cover of low trees, shrubs and herbs. Together these mapped examples are considered state significant. A portion of the lower loop of the Bald Mountain Trail passes through one of the examples of this community, facilitating views to the south and southeast.
The southeast ridge of Bald Mountain is steep and rocky and has a discontinuous cliff band that is mapped as Temperate Calcareous Cliff. It appears that the cliff is a mix of calcareous and non-calcareous rock types. The cliffs are 20-40 feet in height, composed of fractured rock and are remote. Because this community is uncommon, it can often include the presence of rare or uncommon species. To better understand the presence and distribution of these species, the cliff should be targeted for additional inventories. This is a high quality, state-significant example of an uncommon natural community. While inventories noted no evidence of recreational use, rock climbing would pose a threat to this community.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 75 | P a g e
Management Strategies and Actions: • Maintain quality of rock outcrops and cliff communities. • Manage activities and uses to minimize the impacts to the quality, composition or structure of the natural community. • Maintain hiking trail at its current size and location. • Natural openings at the top of outcrops provide views from the trail. Only modest trimming should be done to maintain the view. • Do not expand trail development on those outcrops of clifftops currently without trails. • Monitor cliff community for impacts from rock climbing and conduct inventories for rare and uncommon species as part of this monitoring. • Consider appropriate mitigation or designate area as an ANR-designated Cliff Reserve should monitoring deem it necessary. Such a designation would entail a prohibition on rock climbing.
1.7 – Exceptional Water (lake, pond, or streamside buffer) HSM 1.7a – North Branch Riparian Zone (7 Acres; Figure 1.7a) The North Branch lies at the bottom of a steep-sided, often rocky ravine that drains into the Cold River. ASF’s east boundary follows the North Branch of the Cold River and contributes to river corridor protection. South of the Notch Road the North Branch continues along the western boundary of Jim Jeffords State Forest adding to its protection. These floodplain forests are important for flood attenuation, wildlife habitat, temperature moderation, large woody recruitment and retention, and sediment and nutrient retention. The Cold River has been described as having an exemplary assemblage of aquatic species including a healthy population of brook trout. In 2011 heavy rains associated with Tropical Storm Irene resulted in a significant mass soil slope failure. A portion of the town road was lost although functional management and public access to the state forest was not adversely impacted. The Town of Mendon has invested in the upgrade of the Falls Road to provide access to private lands east of ASF.
North Branch Riparian Zone provides long-term stream corridor protection to avoid conflict with river migration and development and for avoidance of encroachment on and development within the river corridor.
Management Strategies and Actions: • Manage in accordance with guidance objectives and desired conditions provided in the Riparian Management Guidelines for ANR Lands. • Maintain ability for natural river movement within the river corridor. Maintain the limited existing floodplain free of encroachments to allow natural flood attenuation. Allow river to re-establish its natural corridor. • Maintain densely vegetated buffer and large woody debris. • Maintain habitat for wood turtles and other species along North Branch.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 76 | P a g e
• Monitor for the presence and proliferation of invasive plant species as these areas are likely to be entry points for various invasive plants including Japanese knotweed. 2.0 SPECIAL MANAGEMENT ― 444 acres
Special Management areas represent approximately 444 acres or 48% of the Aitken State Forest.
Special Management Areas (SMA) include areas with unique or special resources where protection and/or enhancement of those resources is an important consideration for management. Some areas may be intensively managed for specific purposes related to identified resources.
Management Goals and Objectives: • Protect and enhance identified resources. • Prioritize management toward purposes specifically related to identified resources. • Consider complementary management goals including timber harvesting, wildlife habitat management, and recreation.
2.1 Biological, cultural, and geologic importance
SMA 2.1a – Boreal Talus Woodland (10 Acres; Figure 2.1a) A small example of the uncommon Boreal Talus Woodland is located on the west slope of Bald Mountain. There is a small cliff and exposed ledge that appears to be the origin of this talus. The canopy is composed almost entirely of red spruce. Additional inventory is needed in this community. Its state significance was not assessed due to lack of data.
Management Strategies and Actions: • Conduct species inventory and gather data to determine natural community quality and state significance. • Maintain community composition, characteristics and site conditions. • Manage activities and uses to minimize the impacts to the quality, composition or structure of the natural community.
SMA 2.1b – Forested Wetlands (9 Acres; Figure 2.1b) Three forested swamps around the edges of ASF have been mapped as Hemlock-Balsam Fir-Black Ash Seepage Swamp. In ASF, these are moderately enriched headwater wetlands which host a diverse vegetation assemblage. All three of the swamps appear to have a history of disturbance and seem to be in successional stages. These can be important spring foraging areas for black bears.
Two examples of Red Spruce-Cinnamon Fern Swamp were also identified on the state forest. This acidic softwood swamp is located near the summit of Bald Mountain and mid-slope on the western flank. Though small, these wetlands can provide valuable wildlife habitat. Neither of these examples is considered state significant. However, they
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 77 | P a g e
provide important habitat for songbirds and protective winter cover for deer and other species of wildlife.
Management Strategies and Actions: • Manage riparian zone and wetlands in accordance with guidance for objectives and desired conditions provided in Riparian Management Guidelines for ANR Lands. • Manage activities and uses to minimize the impacts to the quality, composition or structure of the natural community. • Maintain or enhance natural community species composition and structure. • Allow beavers to persist where impact to infrastructure can be mitigated. • Manage trail drainage so it does not impact wetland community or water quality.
SMA 2.1c – Red Spruce-Heath Rocky Ridge Forest (12 Acres; Figure 2.1c) This community type generally occurs in areas of shallow bedrock where red spruce dominates the canopy. At ASF it is found in association with rock outcrops and cliffs near the summit of Bald Mountain. Closely related to the Red Pine Forest community, it is also associated with shallow, rocky soils and bedrock exposures. This represents a state-significant example of this uncommon natural community type. The Bald Mountain Trail passes through a portion of the community.
Management Strategies and Actions: • Manage activities and uses to minimize the impacts to the quality, composition or structure of the natural community. • Maintain current designated trail at existing size and location. • Allow natural processes to occur except in instances of safety or where trail maintenance is required.
SMA 2.1d – Dry Red Oak-White Pine Forest (166 Acres; Figure 2.1d) Two examples of this uncommon community are mapped at ASF. Found on steep slopes with numerous outcrops and small cliffs it is on very shallow and dry soils and grades into Dry Oak-Hickory-Hophornbeam Forest at lower elevations where soils are slightly more mesic and enriched and into Red Pine Forest at higher elevations where fire may play an important role. This is a somewhat atypical example of this community type as white pine is largely absent. The role of fire in this community is not well understood but it may be a normal natural disturbance. This is a state-significant example of an uncommon natural community. Segments of the Bald Mountain Trail are located within this community, although some examples contribute to the remote character of the east side of ASF. The East Road, a forest management access road, is on the southeastern boundary of the community. Deer utilize the south-facing hardwood slopes in the southwest corner of the state forest. The mast provided by the oaks and hickories and lower snow depths on these sunnier slopes offer important habitat for wildlife in winter.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 78 | P a g e
Management Strategies and Actions: • Maintain natural community composition. • Manage activities and uses to minimize the impacts to the quality, composition or structure of the natural community. • Maintain Bald Mountain Trail using recreation management strategies outlined in section IV. A. • Discourage new recreation proposals in this area that have the potential to impact this community. • Conduct forest management using timber management strategies outlined in section IV. A. There may be operational limits based on terrain. • Manage wildlife habitat using strategies outlined in section IV. A.
SMA 2.1e – Historic District (43 Acres; Figure 2.1e) This area is mapped as Mesic Red Oak-Northern Hardwood Forest. The vegetation here appears heavily altered by former land use and this provisional community designation is based largely on soil data. Located north of the Notch Road and south of Rutland City Forest, this area includes concentrated areas of historic importance within ASF including that of the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC). Remnants of the Tamarack Notch Girl Scout Camp and CCC presence on the state forest are found throughout this area. Recreational uses include the Tamarack Notch Trail and a VAST connector trail. Portions of the VAST trail are co-located with the Tamarack Notch Trail.
A segment of the VAST trail was relocated in 2018 to reduce the erosion, protect water quality, to improve recreational experience, and to make trail grooming easier. To accomplish these goals, VAST sought permission to move portions of the trail onto lands of Rutland City Forest north of ASF. The former location on the steep slope was stabilized. Gates were installed to prevent damaging and unauthorized ATV and ORV traffic on the trails.
There is potential to enhance recreational opportunities within this area. The flat terrain is suitable for accessible trails and the area’s rich history would provide a great setting for an interpreted history hike. In addition to existing VAST trail connectivity, there may also be opportunities for other uses that are not in conflict with development of accessible trails.
Management Strategies and Actions: • Conserve integrity of historic resources. • Consider opportunity and options for development of an accessible history hike trail. Work with the Town of Mendon Historical Society to develop associated historical content. • Maintain/enhance Tamarack Notch Trail as an accessible trail.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 79 | P a g e
• Develop accessible parking and trailhead. • Maintain historic apple trees by pruning and releasing from competition. • Maintain aesthetic trailhead entrance (e.g. kiosk, parcel ID sign). Manage and discourage dumping at trailhead. Install educational signs. Work with VFWD game wardens to enforce dumping regulations. • Work with VAST to support their efforts to maintain a safe, sustainable trail while not impacting accessibility of Tamarack Notch Trail. Continue work to minimize impact particularly from unauthorized motorized and mechanized uses. • Monitor and manage ATV and other unauthorized use. Work with VFWD game wardens and Town of Mendon to enforce. Barricade ATV access around gates while facilitating pedestrian and wheelchair access. • Monitor steep slope for effectiveness of stabilization efforts and adjust management as needed.
2.2 Critical Plant and Wildlife Habitat
SMA 2.2a – Hemlock Forest (38 Acres; Figure 2.2a) Three patches of this community type have been mapped on ASF covering about 38 acres. The two larger examples are in the northwest corner of the forest are considered state significant. A small patch in the southeast corner of the forest is of poorer quality. This community is part of a larger 1,200-acre deer wintering area that stretches from developed portions of Rutland to the Cold River that includes an easement held by the Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department south of the state forest.
Management Strategies and Actions: • Manage activities and uses to minimize the impacts to the quality, composition or structure of the natural community. • Maintain deer wintering habitat/softwood component. • For wintering areas that are scheduled for treatment comply with Management Guide for Deer Wintering Areas in Vermont. • Discourage uses or activities that would negatively impact habitat particularly those that disturb wintering deer.
SMA 2.2b – Seep (3 Acres; Figure 2.2b) Three seeps have been mapped at ASF. Although these are located in different landscape contexts around Bald Mountain, these patches all have groundwater seepage and are at the head of small drainages. Species composition varies. The small seep at the base of the rich northern hardwood forest shows signs of enrichment from upslope nutrient input. Seeps provide important habitat for a variety of wildlife, most notably for amphibians and black bears. Each of these seeps is considered a separate occurrence. The example near the summit is considered state significant.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 80 | P a g e
Management Strategies and Actions: • Manage in accordance with guidance provided in the Riparian Management Guidelines for ANR Lands to maintain quality and function of seeps. • Avoid activities that have the potential to alter the quality or quantity of groundwater associated with the seep.
SMA 2.2c – Mesic Red Oak-Northern Hardwood Forest (110 Acres; Figure 2.2c) This community is closely related to the northern hardwood forest but has a substantial component of red oak in the canopy. It is difficult to know whether the oaks will persist over time. The adjacent forest types which do appear to have persistent red oak will likely provide a constant seed source, but it is still possible that red oak will become less prominent over time in areas mapped as this community type in ASF. On the western side of ASF, this community hosts uncommon plants and transitions to spruce-boreal forest in a relatively small area.
The acorn mast produced in oak forests provides an important food source for black bear, white-tailed deer, turkey, and many other species. Birds (hermit thrush, ovenbird, black- throated blue warbler), small mammals (red squirrel, southern flying squirrel) and amphibians (redbacked salamander, wood frog) are also likely to utilize this habitat.
The Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) assessment characterizes this area as semi- primitive non-motorized. The area supports the Bald Mountain Hiking trail as well as more dispersed recreation (i.e. hunting, nature observation). ASF’s position on the landscape as an integral part of a conserved wildlife movement corridor not only conserves habitat but makes a great location to observe birds and wildlife, and a place for quiet recreation.
Management Strategies and Actions: • Retain remote character valued for wildlife habitat connectivity and quiet, dispersed recreation. • Utilize diverse types of forest management to create age and structural diversity. • Conduct forest management using timber management strategies outlined in section IV. A. • Maintain/enhance oak component as source of mast. • Manage wildlife habitat utilizing strategies in section IV. A. • Maintain hiking trail using recreation management strategies outlined in section IV. A.
SMA 2.2d – Dry Oak-Hickory-Hophornbeam Forest (31 Acres; Figure 2.2d) This community type is found on the warm and dry southwestern slopes of Bald Mountain. These forests develop on soils that, although rich in nutrients, are shallow and
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 81 | P a g e
droughty. As a result, they are more open and often have stunted trees. The vegetation assemblage is similar to the closely related dry oak forest community type. It seems that the driest microsites have more red oak and blueberry and more mesic and nutrient-rich sites have more hophornbeam, shagbark hickory, and white ash. This represents a state- significant example of an uncommon natural community.
Much of this area is at the summit and slopes of Bald Mountain and is inoperable.
Management Strategies and Actions: • Manage activities and uses to minimize the impacts to the quality, composition or structure of the natural community. • Maintain/enhance oak component as a source of mast. • Conduct forest management using timber management strategies outlined in section IV. A.
3.0 GENERAL MANAGEMENT ― 415 acres
General Management areas (GMA) represent approximately 415 acres or 45% of the Aitken State Forest.
General Management Areas include all areas that do not meet the other classification categories.
Management Goals and Objectives: • Manage to enhance forest management, wildlife habitat and recreation management while minimizing impact to natural resources, other uses, and management goals. • Provide special protection to sensitive resources.
GMA 3.0a – Northern Hardwood Forest (183 Acres; Figure 3.0a) This designation includes Northern Hardwood Forest, probably the most abundant natural community type in Vermont. At ASF one large patch of this community covers much of the north face of Bald Mountain. As the slope aspect changes, increased sunlight and warmth seem to favor species like oak, pine and hickory limiting the extent of the northern hardwood forest. Coarse woody material in not especially abundant here. This example is not state- significant. This designation includes a small remnant plantation of Norway spruce. Much of the west side of the Bald Mountain Trail passes through the area. Areas west of the Bald Mountain Trail offer opportunities to manage its remote character. ASF’s position on the landscape serves as an integral part of a conserved wildlife movement corridor and offers remote areas for dispersed recreation, bird and wildlife observation, and areas of quiet, uncommon so close to a city.
Management Strategies and Actions: • Utilize diverse types of forest management to create age and structural diversity.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 82 | P a g e
• Retain remote character of areas (i.e. area west of Bald Mountain Trail) for its value to wildlife habitat connectivity and quiet recreation. • Manage recreation and Bald Mountain Trail using strategies outlined in section IV. A. • Manage wildlife habitat using strategies outlined in section IV. A. Manage vegetation to optimize wildlife habitat for a variety of common and target species. • Manage timber using strategies outlined in section IV. A. • Manage Norway spruce plantation through periodic entries to maintain tree vigor, crown density. Buffer trail from harvesting operations to protect trailside aesthetics. • Manage vegetation to create structural and age diversity.
GMA 3.0b –Oak-Hardwood Forest (232 Acres; Figure 3.0b) This designation includes Mesic Red Oak-Northern Hardwood Forest. Found across the lower eastern slopes of Bald mountain, the Mesic Red Oak-Northern Hardwood Forest is closely related to the northern hardwood forest, but with a substantial component of red oak in the canopy. Depending on the landscape this forest can be slightly enriched from upslope nutrient input, or fairly well-drained and nutrient poor, as on a low knoll. Near the eastern boundary of ASF, this community is more enriched and begins to shift towards Mesic Maple-Ash-Hickory- Oak Forest, with signs of enrichment, and the occasional presence of hickory species.
Nearly all of the East Road, the main forest management access/truck road passes through this area. In addition to providing management access, the East Road is also popular for walking offering an out and back route on gentle terrain. Unauthorized, illegal ATV traffic is damaging to the road surface, has negative impact to water quality and impacts recreational experience of hikers, dog walkers, etc.
Maintained openings provide landscape diversity and valuable habitat for certain wildlife species. This habitat is quite small on ASF, found in just two log landings along the East Road, but provide important habitat diversity. The larger landing near the mid-way point of the East Road has a population of wild chervil, an aggressive invasive plant with characteristics similar to poison parsnip. Ongoing monitoring of this population has shown some promise at control. It appears that colonies of goldenrod are helping to keep it at bay by out-competing the chervil. Careful monitoring and adaptive management will be needed to keep it from spreading deeper into the state forest. Part of the mechanism for expansion is the disturbance associated with illegal ATV use of the East Road.
Management Strategies and Actions: • Utilize diverse types of forest management to create age and structural diversity. • Manage timber using strategies outlined in section IV. A • Manage wildlife habitat using strategies outlined in section IV. A. Manage vegetation to optimize a variety of common and target wildlife species
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 83 | P a g e
• Protect water quality and prevent soil loss through ongoing road maintenance. Stabilize temporary skid roads and barricade from vehicle access. Restrict unauthorized motorized traffic. • Conduct periodic road maintenance of East Road according to AMPs, including water bars, ditches and culverts, culvert upgrade (see infrastructure assessment). • Keep road barricaded to protect natural resources, water quality, maintenance investment, and recreational experience and safety. • Maintain openings that support native herbs and forbs through periodic mowing (3-5 year cycle). • Delay mowing until after August 15 to provide habitat for nesting birds and wildflowers that support bees and other pollinators. • Don’t mow using that schedule if it will spread chervil. Use adaptive management that utilizes ongoing research on successful control plans for wild chervil with the goal of continual reduction of the population. • Use of the landings for forest management activities must be accompanied by a plan to address the chervil population. • Manage Recreation and Bald Mountain Trail using strategies outline in section IV. A. • Control illegal ATV use of the East Road and associated skid trails. Continue to work with VTFWD game wardens on ATV enforcement. • Explore potential to create a loop trail connection near the landing to facilitate pedestrian recreation. • Discourage unauthorized access to and from neighboring properties.
4.0 INTENSIVE MANAGEMENT ― 0.2 acres
Intensive Management areas represent approximately 0.2 acres, just a fraction of the forest but serves as important public access to Aitken State Forest.
Intensive Management Areas (IMA) are those that are characterized by a high level of human activity and high intensity development.
Management Goals and Objectives: • Protect sensitive resources within areas designated under this category • Maintain safe access to developed trails and parking • Provide attractive access with appropriate signs, kiosk, etc
HSM 4.4a – Trailhead Parking (0.2 Acres; Figure 4.4a) The most utilized summer trailhead parking is directly across from the kiosk at the Bald Mountain Trailhead. This area adjacent to the town road has a 6-8 car capacity. In 2019 additional parking was developed adjacent to the trailhead to expand capacity. Parking was also improved across from the Tamarack Notch trailhead and now includes
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 84 | P a g e
additional capacity and handicapped accessible parking. There is a larger parking area that supports vehicles and trailers and is more widely used in winter as parking for the VAST connector trail. In summer, this parking area is often used for parties, bonfires, dumping and target shooting. Barricades have been used successfully to deter this abuse in the past. Successfully managing this abuse would effectively expand parking in the area for legitimate trailhead parking. Increasing visibility to all parking and trailheads will also aid enforcement and create a safer more aesthetic entrance. Management Strategies and Actions: • Monitor and maintain parking along East Road for trailhead access and parking capacity. Include accessible parking with access to Tamarack Notch Trail. • Install parcel ID signs and upgrade trailhead kiosks • Continue to partner with town and VFWD law enforcement (i.e. dumping, fires, ATV, vandalism). • Conduct periodic maintenance on large parking area (gravel, clean up debris, signage).
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 85 | P a g e
Management Implementation Implementation of management actions as outlined in sections A. and B. above is often carried out as opportunities arise or when financial or resources are available. Scheduling of management activities (below) may vary based on a variety of conditions (i.e. site, weather).
Table 16: Implementation Schedule 2019-2039
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 86 | P a g e
Activity Location Acreage Goal Year Outcome Road and parking East Road, Well-maintained Annual High quality maintenance trailhead parking surface, drainage and roads & parking appearance. & water quality protection. Mowing of East Road, Maintain wildlife As Grasses retained landings & landing, Girl habitat and condition needed in open areas. roadsides Scout parcel of roads Invasive plant Throughout with <75 Limit spread of Annual Improved native monitoring and focus on likely invasive plants using species management areas of combination of composition. introduction - techniques Improved public roads, trails & health. parking Trail maintenance All trails Maintain trails in safe Annual High quality trail and sustainable network condition. minimizing environmental impact. Vegetation Comp. 1, 165 Uneven-age 2021 Species and age management (#1) Stands 8, 9, 11 management in class diversity. northern hardwood, Improved forest overstory removal in regeneration. Norway spruce plantation. Includes road improvement. Rare, Threatened Throughout but 9 Monitor natural 2022 Determine and Endangered focused on community and mitigation if Species survey outcrop inventory RTE needed communities species Historic assessment Girl Scout parcel Document cultural 2021 Update historic resources related to documentation. CCC and Girl Scouts Vegetation Comp. 1 197 Uneven-age 2023 Species and age management (#2) Stands 1,2,5,7 management in class diversity. northern hardwoods Improved forest regeneration. Trail construction Girl Scout parcel Construct ADA 2021 Enhanced trail accessible accessibility. interpretive (history) Interpretation of trail area’s history. Vegetation Comp. 1 92 uneven-age 2025 Species and age management (#3) Stand 10 management in class diversity. northern red oak Improved forest regeneration.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 87 | P a g e
Vegetation Comp. 1 153 Uneven-age 2027 Species and age management (#4) Stands 3,4 management in class diversity. northern Enhanced red oak hardwood/red oak component. Boundary line All Re-mark boundary 2030 All lines located maintenance lines and document and marked. monumentation Vegetation Comp. 2 56 Uneven-age 2035 Enhanced age management (#5) Stands 1,2 management mixed and species hardwood stands diversity. Improved forest regeneration.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 88 | P a g e
Figure 16: Implementation Map
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 89 | P a g e
V. MONITORING AND EVALUATION
During the life of the LRMP for Aitken State Forest, periodic monitoring and evaluation will be conducted to ensure that the resources are protected from fire, insect and disease, encroachments, unauthorized or overuse, or unforeseen problems that may occur within the Aitken State Forest. Management activities will be evaluated to determine how closely the results matched those projected within the plan. Minor adjustments in management may be made to reflect changed conditions or unanticipated results.
As long-term management for Aitken State Forest continues, inventory, monitoring, assessment, and research are necessary to: evaluate the status of the resource; assess progress toward achieving stated goals; and determine the effectiveness of management actions and activities.
• Were proposed strategies and actions carried out? • Did the strategies and actions have the intended effect? • Were the results consistent with expectations and predictive models? • Do we have the necessary information to understand and evaluate actions taken on Aitken State Forest?
Obtaining quality information is critical to making informed decisions and conducting sound, thoughtful management actions. Research projects on Aitken State Forest are directed by the District Stewardship Team to ensure that they do not conflict with the goals and objectives for Aitken State Forest as set forth in the LRMP and that they follow policies and procedures of the ANR. It is important that individual research projects be assessed for their effects on the resource, potential conflicts with other uses or users, and consist of quality proposals from credible institutions and individuals. All data from private research will be shared with the Agency of Natural Resources.
Ecological/Wildlife Maintaining the biological diversity of Aitken State Forest requires long-term research and monitoring projects in a number of areas. Some of the efforts at meeting these goals include:
Strategies and Actions: • Continue ongoing inventory and assessment projects promoting the collection and documentation of quality long-term information critical to the assessment and evaluation of management on Aitken State Forest (including forest inventory, aerial insect and disease surveys, amphibian and reptile surveys). • Monitor rare, threatened, and endangered species and natural communities. • Consider and support appropriate, credible research project proposals which further understanding of ecological elements and wildlife habitat on Aitken State Forest and the impacts of management activities.
Timber and Wildlife Habitat Timber management and harvest is an important tool used to achieve wildlife habitat and forest management objectives. An effective monitoring and assessment program is essential for
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 90 | P a g e
ensuring the long-term sustainability of a quality timber management program. Careful analysis of the forest, its resource capabilities, potential impacts on other important management goals, protection of rare and/or threatened endangered species, water quality, management or protection of rare and/or state significant natural communities, and the documentation of the occurrence of natural processes (i.e., insect and disease outbreaks, blowdown events) is important in the execution and understanding of the effects of timber management actions.
Timber harvests and wildlife management activities completed within the Aitken State Forest will be periodically reviewed by the stewardship forester and the District Stewardship Team to determine how well management objectives are being met. If monitoring results indicate that there is a significant difference between the outcomes predicted by the plan and actual conditions, changes to the plan may be recommended.
Strategies and Actions: • Continue to support ongoing assessment and mapping efforts (e.g., forest inventory, aerial insect and disease surveys). • Conduct periodic, standardized post-practice assessments to assess effectiveness of management activities. • Support proposals for appropriate research addressing long-term evaluation of forest management activities. Gather baseline data as necessary and practical to support assessment of management effectiveness and impacts.
Recreation Public recreation is continually monitored across the property by the District Stewardship Team to identify where recreational uses are in conflict with other management objectives or uses or may be damaging to natural resources. State game wardens will be utilized to assist with maintaining compliance with state laws where specific and/or ongoing problems are occurring.
Strategies and Actions: • Monitor for effectiveness of trail maintenance program (i.e. trail condition, grade, trail braiding, erosion, corridor width). • Monitor trail and recreation use through use of trailhead registers, electronic counters, and trailhead surveys. • Monitor impacts to trail system, natural resources and water quality (i.e. number of social trails, change in trail width, amount of exposed soil, soil compaction, impact to vegetation). • Document illegal use and subsequent damage to resources (i.e. damage to vegetation, erosion, water quality issues, conflicts with other uses). • Support appropriate research projects including the collection of baseline data to expand knowledge of recreational carrying capacity, resource impacts, and user conflicts.
Historic There are both historic and suspected pre-contact resources within the Aitken State Forest. Current understanding and documentation of these resources varies by site. Detailed
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 91 | P a g e
documentation and study of field evidence is an important component to the understanding, protection, and interpretation of the individual sites and the greater historic context of Aitken State Forest and surrounding areas.
Strategies and Actions: • Continue to inventory, map, and document historic features. • Monitor and document condition of known historic features using standardized forms and photo documentation. • Support proposals for appropriate research addressing historic resources and proposals to appropriately interpret the history of Aitken State Forest.
Invasive Exotic Species Invasive exotic species are known to be a problem in many areas of the state negatively impacting wildlife habitat, timber management, natural community composition, recreation, and economics. The District Stewardship Team will monitor the Aitken State Forest for the presence of invasive exotic species both plants and animals. The District Stewardship Team will work to identify populations of invasive exotic species and implement management measures where feasible.
Strategies and Actions: • Identify invasive species when populations are small. Develop management goals and implement. • Assess and document levels of introduction of invasive exotic plants by species and location. • Monitor timber harvest areas before and after timber sale activities. Management invasive species as necessary and practical. • Evaluate invasive species management projects for effectiveness.
Climate Change If the most conservative current models of climate change are accurate (Iverson, Prasad, Hale, & Sutherland), Aitken State Forest, like the rest of the region, will experience strong impacts over the next 50-100 years. These changes may have important consequences for forest nutrient cycling, timber productivity, forest pest ecology, wildlife habitat, and our enjoyment of the forest.
Strategies and Actions: • Monitor ground conditions, results of management, research, and adaptations of silvicultural guides to inform management decisions and adapt treatment prescriptions as appropriate. • Support appropriate research project proposals which further understanding of climate change on ASF.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 92 | P a g e
VI. NEW USES AND PLAN AMENDMENT PROCESS
The long-range management plan provides guidance for the long-term management and development of a parcel of state land. However, the future cannot be fully determined at the time of plan development. The departments of Fish & Wildlife and Forests, Parks and Recreation undertake an amendment or plan update process when significant changes to the current long- range management plan are proposed. These may include:
1) Substantial changes to any goals, management objectives, and implementation actions contained in the current plan;
2) Major change in land use, land classification, or species management direction;
3) Designation of non-developed camping sites (via statute regarding camping on state lands);
4) Permanent closure of existing trails and/or permanent creation of new recreation corridors not identified in the current plan;
5) Major rerouting, reclassification, permanent closing or creation of new roads (not including forest management access roads not meant for normal vehicle traffic) within state land boundaries not identified in current plan;
6) Major land acquisitions added to the existing parcel;
7) Major capital expenditures for new projects;
8) Facility closures;
9) Transfers in fee ownership;
10) Leasing of new acreage (e.g., ski resort); and
11) Renaming of natural features (prior to recommendation to Department of Libraries) or lands.
When the amendment process is triggered, a public involvement process begins. The type of process is determined at the time and is dependent upon the extent and type of amendment. If applicable, the easement holders are notified to discuss the proposed amendment.
There may be times when the public input and comments are sought regarding plan changes that are less significant than those triggering the plan amendment process. This is left to the discretion of the District Stewardship Team.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 93 | P a g e
VII. FUTURE ACQUISITION/DISPOSITION
Through its October 1999 Vermont Agency of Natural Resources Lands Conservation Plan, the Agency outlined priorities for acquiring new lands as well as for acquiring additions to existing ANR lands. It is the State’s policy to acquire additions to ANR state lands parcels that are:
1) necessary for maintaining or enhancing the integrity of existing state holdings;
2) lands, such as inholdings and other parcels that serve to consolidate or connect existing state holdings and contain important public values and/or facilitate more efficient ANR land management;
3) parcels that enhance or facilitate public access to ANR lands; and
4) parcels that serve an identified facility, infrastructure, or program need.
All new acquisitions of land to Aitken State Forest will be guided by this plan and must have a willing seller, as the Agency does not have the authority to exercise eminent domain. They will also be done in consultation with the regional planning commissions and the town(s) in which the parcel is located.
All future acquisitions to Aitken State Forest will require an amendment to this comprehensive long-range management plan prior to active management of the newly acquired parcel.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 94 | P a g e
VIII. APPENDICES
• APPENDIX 1: Natural Community Assessment
• APPENDIX 2: Forest Inventory Data and Stand Map
• APPENDIX 3: Breeding Bird Data
• APPENDIX 4: Reptile and Amphibian Data
• APPENDIX 5: Public Comment Summary
• APPENDIX 6: Works Cited
• APPENDIX 7: Glossary
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 95 | P a g e
APPENDIX 1: Natural Community Assessment
Ecological Assessment of Aitken State Forest Revised: November 4, 2016
This ecological assessment of Aitken SF applies a “coarse filter/ fine filter” approach to inventory and assessment. A detailed description of this approach and of inventory and assessment methods is available upon request from the Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Coarse Filter Assessment
Biophysical Region and Climate Aitken State Forest is located on the boundary between the Vermont Valley and the Southern Green Mountains biophysical regions. Bald Mountain, the primary feature of this parcel, is the first mountain foothill rising out of the valley. The narrow Vermont Valley sits in the long north- south gap between the Taconic Mountains to the west and the Green Mountains to the east. The parallel mountain and valley topography reflects the history of continental collisions and bedrock folding that has shaped Vermont. The climate varies in the Vermont Valley, because of the dramatic topography, but in general is warmer and drier than the Southern Green Mountains region. The mountains, with relatively high elevations and rugged topography, have cool weather, heavy precipitation, and frequent fog. Sitting on the boundary between these two regions, Aitken State Forest is not subject to extremes found in either region.
Bedrock and Surficial Geology and Soils The geologic history of an area can have a strong influence on the distribution of natural communities. The Vermont Valley and the high mountains to the east and west were formed by continental collisions that folded the landscape and shaped the underlying bedrock. The bedrock geology of the region can be complex, but can be broadly divided into the metamorphosed calcareous (calcium-rich) rocks of the Vermont Valley, such as limestone, dolomite and marble, and the metamorphosed non-calcareous rocks of the Green Mountains, such as schist, phyllite and gneiss. Aitken State Forest is located where these calcareous and non-calcareous rocks meet, and as a result has an intricate mix of many different bedrock types. The various bedrock types have been mapped in detail by Ratcliffe (1998) and Ratcliffe et al. (2011), but in general the bedrock is gneissic with smaller, interbedded calcium-rich layers.
The degree to which this bedrock affects growing conditions at ASF is mediated by the depth of the surficial materials deposited at the end of the last glaciation, some 15,000-12,000 years ago. As the glacier ice melted, rock fragments of all sizes, from boulders to clay, felt in an unsorted jumble known as glacial till, and most areas of ASF feature a layer of this over the bedrock. Glacial till depths can be as deep as 60” but are often substantially shallower. Till retains the qualities of the rock that was ground by the glacier, and often transports it over other rock types. Thus, because many rock types are located in close proximity in ASF, calcium-rich glacial till might have been deposited over acidic gneiss bedrock, or vice-versa.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 96 | P a g e
While till is almost ubiquitous in ASF, small areas have other types of surficial deposits. Small portions in the far northeast corner, and on the flat area below the large bowl in the northwest corner, have glacio-fluvial kame moraine deposits. These gravelly deposits were laid down along the edge of the receding glacier. The lower western slopes of Bald Mountain, mostly outside of ASF, have glacial moraine deposits, and a portion of these can be found in the extreme northwestern corner of ASF. Near the summit of Bald Mountain, there are many rock outcrops that have either never held till, or where the till has eroded away since being deposited. Post- glacial accumulations of muck and peat are found in most of the wetlands. These are organic materials deposited in anaerobic environments that consequently decay more slowly than they are produced.
The soils of ASF are primarily products of these surficial deposits. Till-derived soils are the most widely distributed, followed by peat and muck, and glacio-fluvial soils. The till soils are often rocky, and located on steep terrain. The USDA NRCS has mapped most of these soils as part of either the Killington-Rawsonville and Rawsonville-Houghtonville complexes, or the Berkshire and Sunapee series. The former two types are generally steep and fairly shallow soils, while the latter two types are often deeper (>60”) but still rocky. The glaciofluvial soil deposits are generally mapped as the Colton-Duxbury complex, though parts also have been mapped as Berkshire gravelly loam or Sunapee fine sandy loam. Wetland soils are mapped as either Linwood or Peacham muck. Field sampling found that even in areas mapped as one soil type, depth and composition can be quite variable. Detailed soil descriptions can be found in the associated natural community summaries.
Hydrology/Streams/Rivers/Ponds ASF receives around 42” of precipitation annually, a relatively average amount compared to other areas in the state. ASF is in the headwaters of Otter Creek, which drains to Lake Champlain and ultimately the Saint Lawrence River. Few substantial streams or water bodies are found in Aitken State Forest, though many small, possibly seasonal, streams drain from near the summit of Bald Mountain. Larger streams can be found at lower elevations, particularly in the northwest corner of the park, and draining the wetland near the southeast corner of the park.
Natural Communities A natural community is an assemblage of biological organisms, their physical environment (e.g., geology, hydrology, climate, natural disturbance regime, etc.), and the interactions between them (Thompson and Sorenson 2000). The natural community types described in Vermont repeat across the landscape in patches (or “polygons”) of various sizes. These patches (or groups of patches in close proximity to each other) are referred to as natural community occurrences and are to be distinguished from broad descriptions of community types.
Natural communities at ASF were identified through aerial photograph interpretation and field surveys. Because some natural communities occur at very small scales (e.g., less than ¼ acre), this mapping effort is probably incomplete. Natural community mapping is an iterative process, and our knowledge improves with each mapping effort. Thus, the map presented here should not be viewed as a final statement on community distribution; instead, it should be treated as a first attempt at describing natural communities in this area. Land managers and members of the public should be aware that additional examples of small patch natural communities (e.g., vernal
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 97 | P a g e
pools and seeps) probably occur on the management unit. As subsequent inventories and site visits are conducted, this map will be improved.
21 occurrences of 14 natural community types and variants were identified and mapped in ASF (see table below). A total of 40 natural community polygons were mapped. Some broad patterns emerged from this mapping effort. The aspect of Bald Mountain’s slopes broadly separated the forested communities. Northern and eastern facing slopes tend to have communities of the northern hardwoods group (Northern Hardwood Forest, Mesic Red Oak-Northern Hardwood Forest, Hemlock Forest). Southern and western facing slopes tend to have communities of the transition hardwoods group (Dry Red Oak-White Pine Forest, Dry Oak-Hickory-Hophornbeam Forest). The frequently sharp transition between these two groups parallels the larger landscape pattern of southern Vermont, where there is a large-scale mixing of these two forest types.
The topography, soils, vegetation, and wildlife associations of each natural community in ASF are described below.
Natural Communities of Aitken State Forest State Vermont Significant Natural Community Acres Distribution Example? Uplands Boreal Talus Woodland 10 Uncommon Dry Oak-Hickory-Hophornbeam Forest 31 Uncommon Yes Dry Red Oak-White Pine Forest 188 Uncommon Yes Hemlock Forest 38 Common Yes Mesic Red Oak-Northern Hardwood Forest 373 Common Yes Northern Hardwood Forest 183 Very common Red Pine Forest/Woodland 11 Rare Yes Red Spruce-Heath Rocky Ridge Forest 12 Uncommon Yes Rich Northern Hardwood Forest 35 Common Yes Temperate Acidic Outcrop 8.5 Common Yes Temperate Calcareous Cliff < 1 Uncommon Yes Wetlands Hemlock-Balsam Fir-Black Ash Seepage Swamp 7 Common Red Spruce-Cinnamon Fern Swamp 2 Uncommon Seep 2.5 Common Yes
For more information on these and other natural communities, see Wetland, Woodland, Wildland: A Guide to the Natural Communities of Vermont, by Elizabeth Thompson and Eric Sorenson. Information may also be found online at: http://www.vtfishandwildlife.com/books.cfm?libbase_=Wetland,Woodland,Wildland
Boreal Talus Woodland A small example of Boreal Talus Woodland is found on the west slope of Bald Mountain. There is a small cliff and exposed ledge that appears to be the origin of this talus. The canopy is composed almost entirely of red spruce (Picea rubens). Additional inventory is needed in this community. At ASF there is a single, 10-acre occurrence. It was not assessed for significance due to the lack of data.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 98 | P a g e
Dry Oak-Hickory-Hophornbeam Forest This community type is found on the warm and dry southwestern slopes of Bald Mountain. These forests develop on soils that, although rich in nutrients, are shallow and droughty. As a result, these forests are more open and often have stunted trees. These forests may also have been influenced by natural disturbances (like wildfire) and human disturbances (grazing or other agricultural use), but the importance of disturbance history on the expression of this community type is poorly understood.
At ASF, this type is on glacial till soils mapped by the NRCS as the Killington-Rawsonville and Rawsonville-Houghtonville complexes, and the Berkshire series. Exposed bedrock is common. The overstory canopy reaches 40-50’ in height, and averages around 70% cover. Red oak (Quercus rubra), shagbark hickory (Carya ovata), hophornbeam (Ostrya virginiana) and white ash (Fraxinus americana) are the most common trees. Other species present include butternut (Juglans cinera), red maple (Acer rubrum), American beech (Fagus grandifolia), and (very rarely) red spruce (Picea rubens). A sparse (20% cover) secondary canopy is present in places and includes red maple, beech, hophornbeam and shadbushes (Amelanchier spp.). Tall shrub cover is almost absent, but maple-leaf viburnum (Viburnum acerifolium) is present. The low shrub velvet-leaf blueberry (Vaccinium myrtilloides) is very common (50-80% cover) and additional blueberry species are probably also present. Herbs (80-90% cover) include woodland sedge (Carex pensylvanica), bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum), wintergreen (Gaultheria procumbens), silverrod (Solidago bicolor), marginal wood fern (Dryopteris marginalis), and round-lobed hepatica (Hepatica americana). (This community was not inventoried until after the growing season, so this species list may not be representative.) Dry site mosses and lichens are abundant in some areas.
The vegetation assemblage of this community is in places similar to the closely related dry oak forest community type. It seems that the driest microsites (on small bedrock ridges or ledges) have more red oak and blueberry, and more mesic and nutrient-rich sites have more hophornbeam, shagbark hickory and white ash. These subtle changes are probably too small to map meaningfully, but further inventory efforts might be able to identify distinct patches of dry oak forest within the dry oak-hickory-hophornbeam forest.
Animals in Dry Oak-Hickory-Hophornbeam Forest would be expected to include white-tailed deer, grey squirrel, white-breasted nuthatch, scarlet tanager, and turkey. The timber rattlesnake may have historically used the rockier portions of this community type, but the species is now extirpated in both the Vermont Valley and Southern Green Mountains biophysical regions.
This 31-acre occurrence is B-ranked and is a state-significant example of an uncommon natural community.
Dry Red Oak-White Pine Forest The steep south-facing slopes of Bald Mountain are covered with a 40-acre patch of this uncommon community type. Found on steep (up to 45 degree) slopes with numerous outcrops and small cliffsit is on very shallow and dry soils, and grades into dry oak-hickory-hophornbeam forest at lower elevations (where soil is slightly more mesic and enriched) and into red pine
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 99 | P a g e
forest/woodland at higher elevations (where fire may play an important role). This is a somewhat atypical example of this community type, as white pine (Pinus strobus) is largely absent.
This Dry Red Oak-White Pine Forest occurs on soils of the Killington-Rawsonville complex, and field sampling found 4” of decomposing organic matter over just 1-2” of eluviated loamy sand on top of bedrock. The tree canopy is at most 60’ tall, with 50-60% canopy cover of red oak (Quercus rubra). A secondary canopy, 40-50’ in height and around 60% closed, is dominated by red oak but also contains red maple (Acer rubrum) and American beech (Fagus grandifolia). Tall shrubs (average 40% cover) include witch hazel (Hamamelis virginiana) and beech. Low shrub cover is around 20% and limited to early low blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolium). Herbs are generally sparse (around 30% cover) and include beechdrops (Epifagus virginiana), Indian cucumber root (Medeola virginiana), wintergreen (Gaultheria procumbens), and bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum). Bryophytes are uncommon in this community.
Animals associated with this forest likely include white-tailed deer and turkeys. Hermit thrush, ovenbird and scarlet tanager might make use these woodlands, and the timber rattlesnake is a species that may have historically used the rocky ledges of this region (though it is now extirpated).
The role of fire in this community is not well understood, but it may be a normal natural disturbance. In particular, at ASF different fire histories may favor red pine (Pinus resinosa) over red oak, and vice versa.
This one occurrence is A-ranked and is state-significant example of an uncommon natural community.
Hemlock-Balsam Fir-Black Ash Seepage Swamp Three swamps around the edges of Aitken State Forest have been mapped as hemlock-balsam fir-black ash seepage swamp. In ASF, these are small, moderately enriched headwater wetlands which host a diverse vegetation assemblage. All three of these swamps appear to have a history of disturbance and seem to be in successional stages, so the vegetation summary presented here may change over time. Together these swamps total 7 acres and are considered three individual occurrences. Each is C-ranked, and none is considered state-significant.
Found on Linwood and Peacham mucks, field sampling found these swamps to have 6-18” of muck on top of interbedded layers of mottled sand silt and clay. Gravel was found at around 3’ deep. During sampling (mid-September) the water was at the surface. The pH of the surface ranged 6.0-6.5, and one sample of deeper soil had a pH of 6.5-6.6. Vegetation was variable, probably because these may be successional stages. Tree canopy cover generally ranged around 50-70% but varied in height from around 25’ in one location, to 40-50’ in another. Species include hemlock (Tsuga canadensis), red maple (Acer rubrum), black ash (Fraxinus nigra) and yellow birch (Betula alleghaniensis). In one spot, the tree canopy is a dense growth of saplings of yellow birch, American elm (Ulmus americana), black ash, hop-hornbeam (Ostrya virginiana), and quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides). In the southwest swamp, an emergent canopy 60-70’ tall (but only 10% cover) includes hemlock, red oak (Quercus rubra) and quaking aspen. Tall shrub cover ranges from 0-30% cover, and included red spruce, yellow birch, and
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 100 | P a g e
meadowsweet (Spiraea alba var. latifolia). The low shrub layer (10% cover) is dominated by speckled alder (Alnus incana), with small amounts of striped maple (Acer pensylvanicum), red oak, and American fly honeysuckle (Lonicera canadensis). Herb cover is nearly 100% in all cases, with numerous species present. The most abundant are sensitive (Onoclea sensibilis), cinnamon fern (Osmunda cinnamomea), water avens (Geum rivale), foamflower (Tiarella cordifolia), swamp saxifrage (Saxifraga pensylvanica), and New York fern (Thelypteris noveboracensis). Less abundant, but indicative of enrichment are silvery glade fern (Deparia acrostichoides), jack-in-the-pulpit (Arisamea triphyllum), fringed sedge (Carex crinita), and tall meadow rue (Thalictrum pubescens). Bryophytes are uncommon in these swamps, with sphagnum mosses (Sphagnum spp.) reaching at most around 15% cover. Exposed muck is common.
These seepage swamps can provide important spring foraging habitat for black bear, because the groundwater movement moderates ground temperatures and makes seepage areas quicker to ‘green up’ early in spring. Many songbirds may also forage in these hemlock-dominated swamps, and the brown creeper and winter wren may nest in them.
Hemlock Forest Three patches of this forest community have been mapped in ASF, covering around seven acres. One is small and a poor example of this type. The other two are found in the northwest corner of the parcel. One of these has very shallow soils and many bedrock exposures (mapped by the NRCS as the Killington-Rawsonville complex). Windthrown trees are abundant, creating many canopy gaps. The other patch is found on gravelly and/or sandy loams of the Berkshire and Sunapee series. The forest is characterized by a canopy of eastern hemlock (Tsuga canadensis), along with red oak (Quercus rubra) and American beech (Fagus grandifolia), and lesser amounts of black birch (Betula lenta) and white ash (Fraxinus Americana). A secondary canopy of hemlock, black birch and beech is also sometimes present. The deep shade of hemlocks usually limits undergrowth, and so tall shrubs are absent, and low shrubs are limited to a 20% cover of striped maple. Herbs include Indian cucumber-root (Medeola virginiana), Canada mayflower (Maianthemum canadense), intermediate wood fern (Dryopteris intermedia), sarsaparilla (Aralia nudicaulis), stiff club moss (Lycopodium annotinum), bluebead lily (Clintonia borealis), and goldthread (Coptis trifolia). Soil sampling found 2.5 feet of sandy loam in one location, with a fairly deep (6”) organic layer on top.
These forests can provide protective deer winter habitat, as the dense hemlock boughs can prevent deep snow accumulation. Other mammals and birds that might be found in hemlock- northern hardwood forests include porcupine, deer mouse, red-breasted nuthatch, and black- throated green warbler.
The two patches in the northwest form a single, 33-acre occurrence that is considered state- significant. The third patch is not considered state significant.
Mesic Red Oak-Northern Hardwood Forest Found across the lower eastern slopes of Bald Mountain, this community is closely related to the northern hardwood forest but has a substantial component of red oak in the canopy. In places, red oaks are some of the largest trees in the canopy. Depending on the landscape, this forest can
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 101 | P a g e
either be slightly enriched from upslope nutrient input, or fairly well-drained and nutrient-poor, as on a low knoll. In each case the species composition and abundance reflect the site conditions. On all these sites, however, it is difficult to know whether the oaks, which are moderately shade intolerant, will persist over time. The adjacent forest types which do appear to have persistent red oak will likely provide a constant seed source, but it is still possible that the oak will become less prominent over time in areas mapped as this community type in ASF.
At present, this community is primarily found on soils mapped by the NRCS as the Killington- Rawsonville, Rawsonville-Houghtonville, Tunbridge Lyman, and Tunbridge-Berkshire complexes. Small portions are on the Berkshire series. Field sampling at one location found 20” of fine silty loam over rock on a convex 15-20 degree north-facing slope. The overstory canopy is generally around 70’ tall, with 80% closure, and has red oak (Quercus rubra) in varying abundance (15-40%). Other canopy species include (roughly in order of abundance) sugar maple (Acer saccharum), American beech (Fagus grandifolia), white ash (Fraxinus americana), yellow birch (Betula alleghaniensis), white birch (Betula papyrifera), black birch (Betula lenta), and eastern hemlock (Tsuga canadensis). Basswood (Tilia americana) is present in small enriched pockets, but absent elsewhere. A secondary canopy (50’ tall, 40% cover) contains white ash, sugar maple, red oak, beech and, in places, hemlock and black birch. Tall shrubs are uncommon (average 25% cover) and are primarily beech and sugar maple regeneration. Striped maple is the only low shrub that was observed, averaging 30% cover. Herbs in particular vary depending on site conditions. A few particularly enriched pockets have white baneberry (Actea alba) and maidenhair fern (Adiantum pedatum), but this was uncommon. Mesic slopes had rose twisted stalk (Streptopus roseus), intermediate woodfern (Dryopteris intermedia), Christmas fern (Polystichum acrostichoides), false Solomon’s seal (Smilacina racemosa), New York fern (Parathelypteris noveboracensis), and white snakeroot (Eupatorium rugosm). Drier sites had fewer herbs, including Indian cucumber-root (Medeola virginiana), false lily-of-the-valley (Maianthemum canadense), and ground pine (Lycopodium obscurum). Bryophytes were generally uncommon in this forest type.
Near the eastern boundary of ASF, this community is more enriched and begins to shift towards a Mesic Maple-Ash-Hickory-Oak Forest, with signs of enrichment, and the occasional presence of hickory species (Carya spp.). This transition occurs on only a small area covering no more than an acre or two, so these areas are not mapped separately.
The acorn mast produced in oak forests provides an important food source for black bear, white- tailed deer, turkey, and many other species. Hermit thrush, ovenbird, black-throated blue warbler, red squirrel, southern flying squirrel, redbacked salamander, and wood frog are additional wildlife likely found in these forests.
This community has also been mapped in much of the northeastern portion of the park, on the north side of Notch Road. The vegetation in this area appears heavily altered by former land use, and this provisional designation is based largely on soil data. For those reasons, this area was not assessed for significance.
The 305-acre occurrence on Bald Mountain is considered state-significant.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 102 | P a g e
Northern Hardwood Forest Northern hardwood forest is probably the most abundant natural community type in Vermont. At Aitken State Forest, one large patch of this community covers much of the north face of Bald Mountain. As the slope aspect changes, increased sunlight and warmth seem to favor species like oak, pine, and hickory, limiting the extent of northern hardwood forest. Thus, the large-scale landscape distribution of natural communities between warmer and cooler portions of Vermont is replicated at Bald Mountain, on a much smaller scale.
This northern hardwood forest patch is located on a moderately steep slope (averaging approx. 25 degrees), roughly between elevations of 1000 and 2000 feet above sea level. Soils are primarily mapped by the NRCS as the Killington-Rawsonville and Rawsonville-Houghton complexes. These are generally shallow, rocky soils derived from glacial till. Field sampling in one location found just 1-5” of sandy loam over rock, though the soil is not consistently this shallow. The overstory canopy (80’ tall, 80% closed) is comprised of sugar maple (Acer saccharum), red maple (Acer rubrum), yellow birch (Betula alleghaniensis), American beech (Fagus grandifolia), and white ash (Fraxinus americana). An understory canopy (50-60’ tall, approximately 25% cover) includes sugar maple, yellow birch, and beech. Tall shrub cover (average 25% cover, range 0-50%) includes beech, yellow birch, and striped maple (Acer pensylvanicum). The low shrub layer (10% cover) includes striped maple and hobblebush (Viburnum lantanoides). Herb cover (40%) includes intermediate woodfern (Dryopteris intermedia), wild sarsaparilla (Aralia nudicaulis), bluebead lily (Clintonia borealis), hayscented fern (Dennstaedtia punctilobula), along with asters and Rubus species. Some areas show signs of slight enrichment and include blue cohosh (Caulophyllum thalictroides) and Jack-in-the-pulpit (Arisaema triphyllum); in general, however, this patch is not highly enriched. Bryophytes are not prominent in this community.
Coarse woody debris (a mix of standing dead trees and fallen logs) is not especially abundant in this community (<5% ground cover) but the uncommon abundance of large diameter trees has the potential to create important standing deadwood and fallen log habitat for many wildlife species, such as pileated woodpecker, barred owl, and black bear. Northern hardwood forest also provides habitat for many other wildlife species as well, such as the hermit thrush, ovenbird, black-throated blue warbler, red squirrel, southern flying squirrel, white-tailed deer, red-back salamander, and wood frog.
The one patch of this community covers 183 acres and is a C-ranked occurrence. It is not state- significant.
Red Pine Forest or Woodland Three patches of this rare natural community type are found in Aitken State Forest. One is on the upper slopes of Bald Mountain; the others are associated with steep rocky areas on the lower slopes. Throughout Vermont, this community is associated with shallow soils, droughty conditions and, perhaps most importantly, recurring fire. Red pine is well-adapted to fire, with thick protective bark, and seeds that germinate in bare mineral soil. Repeated fires allow red pine seedlings to take hold and eliminate the other species that might compete on the site. Thus, the long-term persistence of this community is probably maintained by fire. (This natural community should not be confused with human-planted stands of red pine, which are common in Vermont.)
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 103 | P a g e
In ASF, this community occurs on rocky, shallow soils of the Killington-Rawsonville complex. Field sampling found 1-2” of organic matter over a 2” eluvial layer, on top of 6-8” of rocky sandy loam over bedrock. Short and gnarled red pine (Pinus resinosa) comprises nearly 90% of the tree canopy (30-35’ tall, 60-80% closed). red maple (Acer rubrum), grey birch (Betula populifolia) and a shadbush species (Amelanchier sp.) are also present. Red oak (Quercus rubra) mixes into this community where it is adjacent to Dry Oak Forest. A tall shrub layer (up to 20’ tall, 30-50% cover) includes red maple, striped maple (Acer pensylvanicum), and red spruce (Picea rubens). Low shrubs have 10-30% cover and include black huckleberry (Gaylussacia baccata) and low sweet blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolium). Herbs also covered approximately 30-40%, with observed species including bunchberry (Cornus canadensis), bracken (Pteridium aquilinum), bluebead lily (Clintonia borealis), wintergreen (Gaultheria procumbens), Indian cucumber-root (Medeola virginiana), and sedges (Carex spp.). Bryophytes did not appear to be a significant component of this community—most of the ground is covered by a mat of decomposing red pine needles.
This community probably has few birds and mammals that depend heavily on it, because Red Pine Forest or Woodland patches are generally small. Many species of adjacent communities may travel through these patches while foraging. The unique structure of this community may provide important habitat for invertebrate species.
The three patches of this community total 10 acres, and are considered a single A-ranked occurrence, making this a state-significant example of a rare natural community.
Red Spruce-Cinnamon Fern Swamp Two examples of this acidic softwood swamp were identified in Aitken State Forest. One is located near the summit of Bald Mountain, and the other is mid-slope on the western flanks. This community has a 60’ canopy (60-90% closed) that has red spruce (Picea rubens) and red maple (Acer rubrum). Red maple makes up nearly 50% of the canopy in the mid-slope example but is much less common in the patch near the summit. A secondary canopy (30-40’, 25% cover) contains red maple, yellow birch (Betula alleghaniensis), red spruce (Picea rubens), and a small amount of hemlock. Mountain holly (Ilex mucronata) makes up the tall shrub layer (20-30% cover). Cinnamon fern (Osmundastrum cinnamomeum), goldthread (Coptis trifolia), bluebead lily (Clintonia borealis), creeping snowberry (Gaultheria hispidula), bunchberry (Cornus canadensis), and three-seeded sedge (Carex trisperma) are herbs present (60% cover). In the mid-slope example, the low shrubs and herbs also include hobble-bush (Viburnum lantanoides), low sweet blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolium), and intermediate woodfern (Dryopteris intermedia). Sphagnum mosses are abundant in the bryophyte layer, though other mosses are present as well. Soils in the patch near the summit are deep (>4’) poorly decomposed peat, while the mid-slope patch had 2.5 feet of muck and mineral soil over bedrock.
Though small, these swamps can provide valuable wildlife habitat. Mountain holly can be an important source of food for migrant songbirds such as hermit thrush and cedar waxwing. These swamps might also provide protective winter habitat for white-tailed deer.
Both of these swamps are around an acre in size, and they are each considered a separate occurrence. Both are C-ranked and are not state-significant examples of this community type.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 104 | P a g e
Red Spruce-Heath Rocky Ridge Forest This community type generally occurs in areas of shallow bedrock where red spruce dominates the canopy. At Aitken State Forest, this community is found in association with rock outcrops and cliffs. It is also found near the summit of Bald Mountain, in a somewhat unusual example of this type.
Because these small patches are scattered across the steep slopes of Bald Mountain, not all patches were visited in this inventory. Those that were visited have a 40 to 50-foot canopy composed almost entirely of a dense stand of red spruce (Picea rubens), although red maple (Acer rubrum) and red pine (Pinus resinosa) are occasionally present. Shrubs are almost entirely absent, with a few low sweet blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolium) and seedlings of American mountain ash (Sorbus americana) present. Herb cover (10-20%) is not very diverse and includes species such as intermediate woodfern (Dryopteris intermedia), bluebead lily (Clintonia borealis) and goldthread (Coptis trifolia). Bryophyte cover is approximately 40%. Soils, which show distinct pit and mound development from windthrow, are limited to a few inches of organic matter over about an inch of eluviated coarse sand, on top of bedrock.
At Aitken State Forest, this community seems closely related to the Red Pine Forest or Woodland community, which is also associated with shallow, rocky soils and bedrock exposures. Several patches of Red Pine Forest or Woodland have red spruce in them, and the disturbance history of any particular site may be responsible for the current species mix. In particular, red pine is associated with fire tolerance, and can often out-compete other species if fire is a recurring disturbance. In the absence of fire, however, red spruce may be able to out-compete the red pine.
These small areas of Red Spruce-Heath Rocky Ridge Forest probably host similar bird and mammal species as the surrounding forest communities. Some bird species, such as red-breasted nuthatch or American goldfinch may stop at these patches to feed on the spruce seeds. Small patch communities can sometimes host uncommon insect assemblages, but no research is known from this community type.
These six patches total 12 acres, and form one B-ranked occurrence, making this a state- significant example of this uncommon natural community type.
Rich Northern Hardwood Forest Rich Northern Hardwood Forest is typically found in places where colluvial (downhill) soil movement concentrates plant nutrients such as calcium. The result is an especially productive forest that often has many species not found in typical northern hardwood forests. Within Aitken State Forest, this enriched forest is found in two places: a small patch on a seepy, gentle slope in the southwest corner, and a larger patch in a north-facing, bowl-shaped slope. This larger patch is one of the most ecologically intriguing sites in the ASF, because it contains a substantial number of large white ash trees that may be old growth.
The description of this type is based primarily on observations in the large patch. This has a 70- 80-foot, 90% closed canopy dominated by white ash (Fraxinus americana) and sugar maple
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 105 | P a g e
(Acer saccharum). These are very large trees, many with a DBH of 24” or greater. Basswood (Tilia americana), eastern hemlock (Tsuga canadensis), red oak (Quercus rubra), slippery elm (Ulmus rubra) and yellow birch (Betula alleghaniensis) are also present in very low abundance. In places, a secondary canopy of sugar maple, white ash, and American beech (Fagus grandifolia) is present. Tall shrub cover averages 30% and includes sugar maple, mountain maple (Acer spicatum), common elderberry (Sambucus canadensis), and striped maple (Acer pensylvanicum). Low shrubs (average 20% cover) include the tall shrub species along with hobblebush (Viburnum lantanoides) and a Ribes species. Herbs are abundant (60-100% cover) and include wild ginger (Asarum canadensis), miterwort (Mitella diphylla), bulbet fern (Cystopteris bulbifera), fragile fern (Cystopteris fragilis), Jack-in-the-pulpit (Arisaema triphyllum), marginal woodfern (Dryopteris marginalis), northern maidenhair (Adiantum pedatum), blue cohosh (Caulophyllum thalictroides), doll’s-eyes baneberry (Actaea pachypoda), silvery glade fern (Deparia acrostichoides), and oak fern (Gymnocarpium dryopteris). Soils in this patch have been mapped as the Berkshire and Sunapee series and the Killington- Rawsonville, and Rawsonville-Houghton complexes. Field sampling on this steep (45 degree) slope found just a few inches of soil over rock.
Animals found in this forest type are similar to those in the typical northern hardwood forest, such as black bear, deer mouse, white-footed mouse, and redback salamander. The calcium-rich environment of rich northern hardwood forests can make the forest suitable for many invertebrates (such as snails).
The larger patch of this community found in the northern part of ASF is a 30-acre occurrence that is B-ranked and considered state-significant. The second occurrence is C-ranked and is not state-significant.
Seep Three seeps have been mapped at ASF. Although these are located in different landscape contexts around Bald Mountain, these patches all have groundwater seepage and are at the head of small drainages. Species composition varies. The small seep at the base of the rich northern hardwood forest shows signs of enrichment from upslope nutrient input, and hosts herb species such as silvery glade fern (Deparia acrostichoides), wood nettle (Laportea canadensis), stinging nettle (Urtica dioica), purple avens (Geum rivale), pale jewelweed (Impatiens pallida), zig-zag goldenrod (Solidago flexicaulis), sensitive fern (Onoclea sensibilis), and ostrich fern (Matteuccia struthiopteris). This patch has over three feet of sandy loam mineral soil. The seep near the northwest corner of ASF has sugar maple (Acer saccharum), white ash (Fraxinus americana), eastern hemlock (Tsuga canadensis), yellow birch (Betula alleghaniensis), an elm (Ulmus sp.), silvery glade fern, wild ginger (Asarum canadense), doll’s-eyes baneberry (Actaea pachypoda), Christmas fern (Polystichum acrostichoides), and intermediate woodfern (Dryopteris intermedia). Soils were mostly mineral at this site, and wet but not saturated. A third seep, near the summit of Bald Mountain, was identified in late November and so species composition is not fully known. Cinnamon fern (Osmundastrum cinnamomeum) appeared to be a major component of this seep.
Seeps provide important habitat for a variety of wildlife, most notably for amphibians and black bears. Amphibians using seeps that might be found at ASF include northern two-lined
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 106 | P a g e
salamander and dusky salamander. Because of the relatively warm groundwater flow, seeps are often among the first places to find new plant growth in spring, and black bears forage on the fresh green shoots of some seep plants.
Each of these three seeps is considered a separate occurrence. The example near the summit is considered state significant.
Temperate Acidic Outcrop The steep and rocky terrain of Aitken State Forest means that rock outcrops are quite common. Five patches of Temperate Acidic Outcrop have been mapped in this inventory but scattered throughout the slopes of Bald Mountain are numerous smaller examples of this community type. These areas generally open, with little soil and limited cover of low trees, shrubs and herbs. Thorough plant observations were not taken in these areas, but some species observed include black huckleberry (Gaylussacia baccata), black chokeberry (Aronia melanocarpa), early azalea (Rhododendron prinophyllum), and several blueberry species, including late lowbush blueberry (Vaccinium pallidum). Other typical shrubs and herbs often found in temperate acidic outcrop communities include shadbush (Amelanchier spp.), poverty grass (Danthonia spicata), bristly sarsaparilla (Aralia hispidula) and silver rod (Solidago bicolor). Moss species (Polytrichum spp. and Dicranum spp.) are also common, along with reindeer lichens (Cladina spp.).
Historically, the rocky outcrops on Bald Mountain could have provided habitat for the timber rattlesnake, but today the species is presumed extirpated in both the Vermont Valley and Southern Green Mountains biophysical regions. Turkey vultures are reported to frequent these openings in the spring and fall. Small patch communities such as this can sometimes host uncommon insect assemblages, but these have not been studied.
These six patches form one 8-acre occurrence that is A-ranked. It is considered a state-significant example of this natural community type.
Temperate Calcareous Cliff The southeast ridge of Bald Mountain is steep and rocky in places and has a discontinuous cliff band that is mapped as temperate calcareous cliff. It appears that the cliff is a mix of calcareous and non-calcareous rock types, with the calcareous portions weathering faster and providing suitable habitat for calcium-loving plant species. The bedrock has been mapped as a Cambrien quartzite or gneiss, with interbedded dolomite layers (Ratcliffe 1998). These cliffs are 20-40 feet in height, and generally sparsely vegetated. Species noted on the cliff or at the immediate base include round-lobed hepatica (Anemone americana), bluebell bellflower (Campanula rotundifolia), fragile fern (Cystopteris fragilis), marginal woodfern (Dryopteris marginalis), and silver rod (Solidago bicolor). Sedge and grass species are also present. Two rare wildlife species that have historically used cliffs and rocky areas in the warmer parts of the state include timber rattlesnake and peregrine falcon.
Because this community is uncommon, it can often have rare or uncommon species. This cliff received limited inventory and should be targeted for additional rare species searches. In particular, fragrant fern (Dryopteris fragrans) is a rare species known to occur in the vicinity. Suitable habitat is present at Bald Mountain, and searches for this species may be warranted.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 107 | P a g e
While inventories noted no evidence of recreational use, rock climbing would pose a threat to this community.
This occurrence is A-ranked and is a state-significant example of this uncommon natural community type.
Fine Filter Assessment
Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species
PLANTS No endangered or threatened plant species were located during this inventory effort, although ASF does have areas of uncommon habitat that might host as yet undetected rare species. Aitken State Forest is known to have one state uncommon plant species, found in shady and enriched hardwood forests. This plant species can be adversely impacted by timber harvesting if the canopy is thinned to allow more sunlight on the plants. Land managers should be familiar with the plant and look for it in appropriate habitat in ASF.
While no other rare or uncommon plants are currently known from ASF, this inventory effort was conducted in part after the growing season, and so may have missed species that are more apparent at other times of the year. In particular, the rare (S2) fragrant fern (Dryopteris fragrans) is known from nearby cliffs and outcrops outside of ASF, and so it is possible that this species could be found on similar habitat within ASF.
Non-Native Species Many non-native and naturalized species can be found in Aitken State Forest; however, these are not invasive and generally do not pose a threat to native species. There are several species which, while not currently known to be in ASF, might pose future problems in the ASF.
Non-native honeysuckles (Lonicea spp.) or barberries (Berberis spp.) were not observed during this inventory but are often found in disturbed habitat similar to that in the parcel north of Notch Road. The seeds of these species can be bird dispersed, so the absence of a nearby source population does not mean the species cannot become established. Once on a site, these species can rapidly outcompete and displace native vegetation.
Hemlock wooly adelgid is a non-native species that is decimating eastern hemlock in other parts of the northeast, and has recently turned up in Vermont, with one population as close as Brattleboro. The animal has not been found on hemlock trees in ASF, but it should be monitored
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 108 | P a g e
for. A serious infestation of the adelgid could alter many of the natural resource values described above. Habitat Blocks and Interior Forest Aitken State Forest is located on the western edge of a substantial area of unbroken forest that extends up into the Green Mountains towards Killington, including Coolidge State Forest. This large forest block is nearly 46,000 acres and is adjacent to several other forest blocks that are similarly sized or even larger. Most of the habitat in this block is likely higher elevation northern hardwood forest and spruce-fir forest, and so the habitat in ASF, especially the oak and hickory forests, likely contribute much to the diversity of this contiguous block. In contrast to the wild lands to the east, the city of Rutland and the development in the valley to the west create a considerable gap in forest; however, this may not prevent wildlife movement (see below).
Species Movement Corridors There is generally unrestricted movement of species to the east of Aitken SF. State owned lands of Jim Jeffords SF and Coolidge SF provide conserved corridors that will facilitate long-term species movements. To the south of ASF, a series of forest blocks provides opportunities for connectivity extending down to Wallingford White Rocks and a large forest block. Although the development in and around Rutland in the Vermont Valley creates substantial break in forest cover, riparian areas extending to the west may provide some pathways for species to move between the Taconic Mountains and the Southern Green Mountains.
Literature Cited Doll, C.G., W.M. Cady, J.B. Thompson, and M.P. Billings. 1961. Centennial geologic map of Vermont. Miscellaneous Map MISCMAP-01. Vermont Geological Survey. Waterbury, VT. Doll, C.G., D.P. Stewart, and P. MacClintock. 1970. Surficial geologic map of Vermont. . Miscellaneous Map MISCMAP-02. Vermont Geological Survey. Waterbury, VT. Ratcliffe, N.M. 1998. Digital and preliminary bedrock geology of the Rutland quadrangle, Vermont. Vermont Geological Survey. Ratcliffe, NM, Stanley, RS, Gale, MH, Thompson, PJ, and Walsh, GJ, 2011, Bedrock Geologic Map of Vermont: USGS Scientific Investigations Series Map 3184, 3 sheets, scale 1:100,000. Sorenson, E.R., and D. Farrell. 2007. Draft descriptions of softwood swamp natural community types. Vermont Nongame and Natural Heritage Program, December 11, 2007. Unpublished document. Thompson, E.H., and E.R. Sorenson. 2000. Wetland, woodland, wildland. A guide to the natural communities of Vermont. University Press of New England. Hanover, NH.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 109 | P a g e
APPENDIX 2: Forest Inventory Data and Stand Map
Parcel Block Comp Stand Acres QMD BA/A AGS MBF/ Timber Species Recommended Total BA/A Acre Type %BA Treatment
Aitken 1 1 1 63 12.3 119 75 4.4 Northern HM 36 Uneven-aged Management SF # 7 Hardwood WA 19 Single tree and group selection, harvest high risk stems, release established regeneration., in 0-5 years Aitken 1 1 2 35 12.2 109 60 3.4 Northern HM 61 Uneven-aged Management SF # 7 Hardwood WA 12 Single tree and group selection, harvest high risk stems, release established regeneration., in 0-5 years Aitken 1 1 3 108 11.6 119 83 3.9 Hardwood RO 38 Uneven-aged Management SF # 7 BE 27 Single tree and group selection, favor oak, harvest high risk stems, release established regeneration., in 5-10 years Aitken 1 1 4 45 12.5 127 90 7.5 N. Red Oak RO 51 Uneven-aged Management SF # 7 HM 17 Single tree and group selection, favor oak harvest high risk stems, release established regeneration., in 5-10 years Aitken 1 1 5 63 9.4 128 79 4.9 Northern YB 15 Uneven-aged Management SF # 7 Hardwood RM 15 Single tree and group selection, favor hemlock, harvest high risk stems, release established regeneration., in 0-5 years Aitken 1 1 6 30 13.9 138 105 6.6 Hemlock HK 47 No Treatment SF # 7 RM 17 Aitken 1 1 7 36 13.7 104 62 5.2 Northern WA 30 Uneven-aged Management SF # 7 Hardwood HM 21 Single tree and group selection, harvest high risk stems, release established regeneration., in 0-5 years Aitken 1 1 8 44 11.1 120 68 5.2 Northern RM 19 Uneven-aged Management SF # 7 Hardwood HM 18 Single tree and group selection, harvest high risk stems, release established regeneration., in 0-5 years Aitken 1 1 9 90 9.2 139 99 9.7 Northern HM 48 Uneven-aged Management SF # 7 Hardwood WA 15 Single tree and group selection, harvest high risk stems, release established regeneration., in 0-5 years Aitken 1 1 10 92 11.3 127 95 5.0 N. Red Oak RO 72 Uneven-aged Management SF # 7 RM 22 Single tree and group selection, favor oak and spruce, harvest high risk stems, release established regeneration., in 0-5 years Aitken 1 1 11 31 12.7 172 108 9.3 Norway NS 51 Even-aged Management SF # 7 Spruce RM 16 OSR of Norway Spruce Plantation, in 0-5 years. Aitken 1 1 12 180 10.4 129 73 2.9 Hardwood RO 25 No Treatment
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 110 | P a g e
SF # 7 BE 21 Aitken 1 2 1 22 16.8 134 53 3.6 Northern RM 23 Uneven-aged Management SF # 7 Hardwood HK 15 Single tree and group selection, favor hemlock and red spruce harvest high risk stems, release established regeneration., in 10-15 years Parcel Block Comp Stand Acres QMD BA/A AGS MBF/ Timber Species Recommended Total BA/A Acre Type %BA Treatment
Aitken 1 2 2 34 13.4 155 40 3.1 Mixedwood RM 34 Uneven-aged Management SF # 7 HK 19 Single tree and group selection, harvest high risk stems, release established regeneration., favor hemlock, OSR small area of Red Pine plantation in 10-15 years Aitken 1 2 3 37 9.5 153 40 1.2 Mixedwood RS 26 No Treatment, except for hazard trees, and aesthetic SF # 7 RM 26 considerations.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 111 | P a g e
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 112 | P a g e
APPENDIX 3: Breeding Bird Data
Excerpt from Aitken State Forest, A Year of Bird Monitoring prepared by Rutland County Audubon. 4/2008 – 3/2009
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 113 | P a g e
APPENDIX 4: Reptile and Amphibian Data
Excerpt from A Reptile and Amphibian Survey of Aitken State Forest in Mendon, Vermont 2008
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 114 | P a g e
APPENDIX 5: Public Comment Summary AITKEN STATE FOREST
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 115 | P a g e
Public Comments and Responses From Public Scoping Meeting December 13, 2016 Comments are in bold. Like comments are grouped. VFPR responses follow.
PUBLIC ACCESS The location is easy to get to from the greater Rutland area. Hiking and hunting are the greatest uses. It is so close to a small city. Anyone can get there and walk, including non-residents. It’s location is good to get people out into the wild areas – all levels of recreation. It is valuable for its proximity to town/city for recreational use. In the 60s-80s it was an educational area to teach kids camping and use and care of the land. Aitken State Forest’s location is one of its greatest values. Its proximity to populations offers easily accessible locations for a variety of recreational activities for many levels of ability. Maintaining sustainable recreational opportunities and ADA accessible trails enhances recreational and educational opportunities in the context a sustainably managed forest and adds to the diversity of recreation opportunities in the greater Rutland region. Aitken State Forests’ position on the landscape serves not only as an integral part of a conserved wildlife movement corridor by areas, but also provides remote, quiet areas particularly west of Bald Mountain, a characteristic that is rare so close to a city.
PARKING The Mendon selectboard is interested in working with VT Forests, Parks and Recreation on moving the parking lot opposite the Girl Scout camp closer to the Wheelerville Road. We value our partnership with the Town of Mendon and its road crew. In 2019, working together, the town, VFPR, and VYCC improved accessibility on the Tamarack Notch Trail, enhanced and expanded trailhead parking, and installed parcel identification signage. There is now additional parking at the Tamarack Notch/Girl Scout trailhead, including ADA parking and there are now two parking areas at the Bald Mountain Trailhead. The original parking includes increased riparian buffer to protect habitat and water quality in the stream that runs south from the girl scout parcel along the East Road before entering the North Branch of the Cold River. The parking area to the east of the trailhead remains available as both winter and additional summer parking.
ACCESSIBILITY Accessible trail on Girl Scout property with potential expansion on adjoining city land. The loop trail on the Girl Scout/Tamarack Notch parcel (north of Notch Road) is located on nearly level terrain and offers a great opportunity for ADA accessible trails. In 2019, the Tamarack Notch Loop Trail (Girl Scout loop) was surfaced and signed to enhance those opportunities. Other potential exists for expanding accessible trails and including interpretive signage related to Civilian Conservation Corps and Girl Scout Camp use of the property. VFPR is open to discussions with Rutland City about the expansion of opportunities onto adjoining city-owned property.
DIVERSE RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 116 | P a g e
Participate in hiking over the entire trail system and cross-country skiing and snowshoeing. Enjoy hiking the Bald Mountain Trail. Would like to see mountain bike trails developed. Value Aitken for non-motorized outdoor recreation. Would like to see management that is thoughtful multiple use (hike, ski, mountain bike, snowmobile), again with groups or agencies to maintain/sustain/maintain infrastructure. Opportunity for divergent groups to meet and share common interests. Get investments from local groups (GMC, CTA, VAST, Audubon, etc.) Would like to see Aitken kept as open as possible. Continue to minimize signs. Would like management to support safe, responsible recreation. Open up trail system. Work with Rutland City to use trails on their property. Look for linkages for mountain bike trails. Aitken SF offers a variety of settings for diverse opportunities and taken together contribute to a larger, more diverse regional recreation picture. Existing trails provide a variety of opportunities for hiking, snowshoeing, cross-country skiing, and snowmobiling, as well as ADA accessible trails. The more remote areas of the forest, especially west of the Bald Mountain Trail, provide opportunities for more contemplative and nature observation recreational pursuits, including nature observation and bird and wildlife watching. New uses or trail linkages are considered by the District Stewardship Team in the context of the long-range management plan as they are proposed by trail organizations. Proposals for new recreational uses will be considered within or near existing trail corridors and where they do not conflict with other management goals. Development of a mountain bike trail network wholly within the state forest is challenged by terrain limitations and compatibility with other uses and management goals. Potential exists for trail connectivity through ASF in some locations where compatibility thresholds can be met, and relationships can be developed with neighboring landowners. VFPR’s Cooperative Agreement with VMBA provides the management structure for trail stewardship. In that structure, proposals must be supported by VMBA and a conceptual proposal presented to VFPR for evaluation by the district stewardship team. The proposal will be vetted within the context of ANR and VFPR policy and guided by this LRMP. The proposal must also develop partnerships with neighboring landowners to support the trail connections off of ASF.
Recent improvements to trailhead parking and to the Tamarack Notch trail support recreation access. A segment of the VAST trail was relocated from a very steep slope to a new location that includes a section on lands of Rutland City.
WINTER RECREATION Snowmobiles. Recreation for all seasons. The waterbars are not even within reasons. You can’t even hike the girl scout old road. Enjoy snowmobiling and grooming trails for VAST. Aitken is valuable for snowmobile usage and parking – summer and winter parking. Traditional use of snowmobile on East Road. Have been using that trail for over 40 years with no issues. Winter recreation is a popular use on ASF. Cross-country skiing and snowshoeing are enjoyed on existing roads and trails. Snowmobiling occurs on the designated VAST connector trail that
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 117 | P a g e
begins at the Notch Road parking area and connects to the north-south trail corridor east of the state forest. A portion of this trail has recently been relocated to cross lands of Rutland City to the north of the Girl Scout parcel. The East Road is not a designated snowmobile trail and not part of the VAST trail network. The scope of road and trail maintenance may include ditching, culverts, waterbars, surfacing, etc. depending upon road quality, use, terrain, etc. This maintenance protects water quality and road and trail infrastructure ensuring the continued availability of these networks for recreation and management access. The flat terrain of the Girl Scout loop road (Tamarack Notch Trail) is not waterbarred as part of its maintenance.
WILDLIFE HABITAT CONNECTIVITY Single most important value or public benefit is as habitat for birds and wildlife. Would like to see recreation use that does not negate habitat for birds and animals. Would like to see it managed into the future as an area for conservation of our woodlands and wildlife corridors. Preserve for future generations Aitken State Forest’s terrain, diverse natural communities, proximity to other large blocks of conserved forest land and position on the landscape make it an integral part of a conserved wildlife movement corridor. It’s diversity offers opportunities to balance responsible recreational use with its value as wildlife habitat and remote lands. Existing trail corridors are located on the eastern side of the mountain and to the north on the Girl Scout parcel. Areas to the west of the Bald Mountain Trail offer more remote forest for wildlife as well as for wildlife and nature observation-related recreation. Winter recreation is directed away from important critical wildlife winter habitat. Maintaining that balance is an important goal of this long-range management plan.
WILDLIFE OBSERVATION Participate in birding and wildlife observation – how about a bird list accessible from the website? Wildlife observation is a popular pastime and is supported by the diverse habitat and remote areas within the state forest. Posting a bird list on the website is a great idea.
LEGAL RIGHTS Hopefully mineral rights and mining will not become an issue with this state park (forest). Aitken State Forest is owned in fee by the State of Vermont including its mineral rights. Mineral extraction is governed by 10VSA sec 2606(c) and requires commissioner and governor authorization. There are no plans for mining as part of this long-range management plan.
PARTNERSHIPS I am interested in volunteer opportunities. Partner with recreation clubs to stop unauthorized, illegal use.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 118 | P a g e
VFPR regularly works with partner organizations to achieve a variety of recreation and mission- driven projects. At Aitken SF particularly, we’ve partnered with VAST, Stafford Technical Center, Vermont Fish and Wildlife Game Wardens, Town of Mendon and Rutland City in various aspects of the management of ASF. We are always happy to engage volunteers. If you wish to help, please notify the VFPR Rutland district office at 802-786-0060.
TAMARACK NOTCH GIRL SCOUT CAMP My wife attended girl scout camp off the Notch Road. My mother and the girl scouts made the trail on Bald Mountain so we spent a lot of time on the mountain and it has importance in our past and hopefully will be available for future recreation. Loved the girl scout camp. Enjoy going to the old girl scout camp and reminiscing with other former scouts. Enjoy walking at the girl scout camp. Aitken State Forest has a rich history and the Tamarack Notch Girl Scout Camp is a big part of that history for many. We’d like to document and interpret that history as part of an accessible history hike and would like to connect with former campers to help document its rich history. Please contact us if you have information you’d like to share. You can reach us at the VFPR district office in Rutland at 802-786-0060.
HUNTING, FISHING, TRAPPING I would like to trap on that state land. You can’t. People do not believe in Leash Law. Vermont state land is open for hunting, fishing and trapping unless otherwise designated. All are allowed on Aitken State Forest governed by rules and regulations established by the Vermont Fish and Wildlife Board. The Town of Mendon Animal Control Ordinance pertains to lands within ASF. The ordinance states that when not on property of its owner, dogs must be kept on leash or under verbal control and not be allowed to run at large. The ordinance can be found at https://www.mendonvt.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Animal-Control.pdf.
ENFORCEMENT/UNAUTHORIZED USE Would like to see management continue as in the past with no ATV use. Continue to clean up trash on loop trail. Recurring emphasis on illegal use – limiting uses may increase allure to other lower impact recreation. More access to positive use? More signage in other parts of Rutland? Dumping is a major concern and costly and time consuming for road crew. There is reported drug use in this area. ATV’s have been spotted on the north side of the mountain during deer season. Illegal dumping, ATV use, target shooting, and vandalism have been ongoing concerns at ASF. We’ve worked with the Town of Mendon and VFWD Game Wardens on enforcement. Along with the Town road crew, we continue to clean up trash dumped at parking areas, trailheads and along trails. One of the goals of the trail, trailhead, and parking enhancements done recently was to enhance legitimate recreational use of the state forest.
INVASIVE SPECIES Continue working on invasive species.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 119 | P a g e
Assessment, monitoring and management of invasive species is an important part of the forest management. ASF has concentrations of invasive species at disturbed, high use sites at trailheads and along some roads. The Invasive Plant Program’s Habitat Restoration Crew has been engaging volunteers to manage many of these locations. We will continue to manage and monitor these populations and continue ongoing assessment of ASF through forest inventory and observation.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 120 | P a g e
APPENDIX 6: Works Cited
CAP. (2009), Archeological Precontact Site Sensitivity Analysis and GIS Mapping for. University of Vermont, Consulting Archeological Program, Burlington, VT.
Dupigny-Giroux, Lesley Ann (2000). Mapping Ice Storm Damage in Vermont Using SPOT/LANDSAT Imagery.
Faccio, Steve (2000). Assessing Changes in Breeding Bird Populations in Ice Damaged Forests.
Iverson, L., A. Prasad, B. Hale & E. Sutherland. Atlas of Current and Potential Future Distributions of Common Trees of the Eastern United States. General Technical Report NE-265. Northeastern Research Station, USDA, Forest Service, Radnor, PA.
LaBarr, Mark. Et al. Vermont Grassland Bird Management and Recovery Plan. 2014.
Langdon, R.W., Ferguson, M.T., and K.M. Cox, 2006. Fishes of Vermont. Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, Waterbury, VT.
Lorimer, C. & A. White. A Scale and Frequency of Natural Disturbance in Northeastern United States: Implications for Early Successional Forest Habitat and Regional Age Distribution. Forest Ecology Management (185), 41-64.
MacMartin, J. (1962) Statewide Stream Survey by Watersheds. Vermont Fish and Game, Montpelier, VT.
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Trails and Waterways. Framework for Planning Sustainable Trails. p. 1.1-1.16
More, T, S. Bulmer, L. Henzel & A. Mates. (2003) Extending the Recreational Opportunity Spectrum to Nonfederal Lands in the Northeast: An Implementation Guide. USDA Forest Service. Newtown Square, PA.
Thompson, E., & E. Sorenson. (2000) Wetland, Woodland, Wildland. A Guide to the Natural Communities of Vermont. Hanover, New Hampshire: University Press of New England.
Vermont Department Forests, Parks & Recreation.2019-2023. Vermont Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP).
Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2018. The Vermont Management Plan for brook, brown, and rainbow trout. Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department, Montpelier, VT.
Visitor Use Management Council. 2016. An Interagency Approach to Visitor Use Management.
Visitor Use Management Council. 2016. Visitor Capacity on Federally Managed Lands and Waters: A Position Paper to Guide Policy.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 121 | P a g e
APPENDIX 7: Glossary
The following is a series of key words and their definitions used in the development of Long Range Management Plans for Vermont Agency of Natural Resource lands.
Acceptable Management Practices (AMPs). In this plan, a series of erosion control measures for timber harvesting operations, as identified in state statutes. The AMPs are the proper method for the control and dispersal of water collecting on logging roads, skid trails, and log landings to minimize erosion and reduce sediment and temperature changes in streams.
Acceptable Growing Stock (AGS). AGS trees exhibit form and appearance that suggests they will maintain and/or improve their quality and can be expected to contribute significantly to future timber crops in the form of vigorous high-quality stems. They contain or may potentially produce high or medium quality sawlogs.
Age Class. One of the intervals, commonly 10 to 20 years, into which the age range of forest trees are divided for classification or use. Also pertains to the trees included in such an interval. For example, trees ranging in age from 21 to 40 years fall into a 30-year age class; 30 designates the midpoint of the 20-year interval from 21 to 40 years.
All-aged (Uneven-aged) system. Timber management which produces a stand or forest composed of a variety of ages and sizes. Regeneration cutting methods in this system include single tree selection and group selection.
Basal area. A measure of the density of trees on an area. It is determined by estimating the total cross-sectional area of all trees measured at breast height (4.5 feet) expressed in square feet per acre.
Best management practices. A practice or combination of practices determined to be the most effective and practicable means of preventing negative impacts of silvicultural activities.
Biodiversity. The variety of plants and animals, their genetic variability, their interrelationships, and the biological and physical systems, communities, and landscapes in which they exist.
Biophysical region. A region with shared characteristics of climate, geology, soils, and natural vegetation. There are currently eight biophysical regions recognized in Vermont.
Block. A land management planning unit.
Browse. The part of leaf and twig growth of shrubs, vines, and trees available for animal consumption.
Canopy. The more or less continuous cover of branches and foliage formed collectively by the crowns of adjacent trees and other woody growth.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 122 | P a g e
Capability. The potential of an area to produce resources, supply goods and services, and allow resource uses under an assumed set of management practices and at a given level of management intensity. Capability depends on current conditions and site conditions such as climate, slope, landform, soils, and geology as well as the application of management practices such as silvicultural protection from fire, insects, and disease.
Cleaning (Weeding). Regulating the composition of a young stand by eliminating some trees and encouraging others, and also freeing seedlings or saplings from competition with ground vegetation, vines, and shrubs.
Clearcutting. A cut which removes all trees from a designated area at one time, for the purpose of creating a new, even-aged stand.
Commercial forest land. Land declared suitable for producing timber crops and not withdrawn from timber production by statute or administrative regulation.
Conservation. The careful protection, planned management, and use of natural resources to prevent their depletion, destruction, or waste.
Conservation easement. Acquisition of some rights on a parcel of land designed to keep the property undeveloped in perpetuity.
Cover. Vegetation which provides concealment and protection to wild animals.
Cull Tree. Tree that does not meet regional merchantability standards because of excessive unsound cull. May include noncommercial tree species.
Cultural operation. The manipulation of vegetation to control stand composition or structure, such as site improvement, forest tree improvement, increased regeneration, increased growth, or measures to control insects or disease. Examples of methods used are timber stand improvement, cleaning or weeding, release, and site preparation.
Day Use – Visitor activity in a park, or given section of a park, that does not involve staying overnight.
DBH (diameter at breast height). The diameter of the stem of the tree measured at breast height (4.5 feet or 1.37 meters) from the ground.
Deer wintering area. Forest area with at least 70 percent conifer that provides suitable, stable habitat to meet deer needs during the winter.
Den tree. A live tree at least 15 inches DBH (diameter at breast height) containing a natural cavity used by wildlife for nesting, brood rearing, hibernating, daily or seasonal shelter, and escape from predators.
Developed (or intensive) recreation. Activities associated with man-made structures and facilities that result in concentrated use of an area. Examples are campgrounds and ski areas.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 123 | P a g e
Diameter at breast height (DBH). The diameter of the stem of the tree measured at breast height (4.5 feet or 1.37 meters) from the ground.
Dispersed recreation. Outdoor recreation activities requiring few, if any, support facilities.
Down woody material (DWM). DWM is also referred to as coarse woody debris, woody material, and down woody debris. DWM is comprised of woody material left in the woods from harvested trees as well as portions or whole trees that die and fall naturally.
Ecological processes. The relationships between living organisms and their environment. Among these processes are natural disturbances such as periodic fire, flooding, or beaver activity; natural stresses such as disease or insects; catastrophic weather-related events such as severe storms or lightning strikes; or more subtle ongoing processes such as succession, hydrology, and nutrient cycling.
Ecological reserve. An area of land managed primarily for long-term conservation of biodiversity.
Ecosystem. A complex array of organisms, their natural environment, the interactions between them, the home of all living things, including humans, and the ecological processes that sustain the system.
Ecosystem management. The careful and skillful use of ecological, economic, social, and managerial principles in managing ecosystems to produce, restore, or sustain ecosystem integrity, uses, products, and services over the long-term.
Endangered species. A species listed on the current state or Federal endangered species list (VSA Title 10, chapter 123). Endangered species are those which are in danger of becoming extinct within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of their range.
Even-aged system. Timber management that produces a forest or stand composed of trees having relatively small differences in age. Regeneration cutting methods in this system include clearcutting, seed tree (seed cut) method, and shelterwood method.
Forest health. Condition in which forest ecosystems sustain their complexity, diversity, resiliency, and productivity.
Forest type. A natural group or association of different species of trees which commonly occur together over a large area. Forest types are defined and named after the one or more dominant species of trees, such as the spruce-fir and the birch-beech-maple types.
Forestry. The art and science of growing and managing forests and forest lands for the continuing use of their resources.
Fragmentation. Division of a large forested area into smaller patches separated by areas converted to a different land use.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 124 | P a g e
Game species. Animals habitually hunted for food, particular products, sport, or trophies.
Gap. An opening in the forest canopy caused by the death or harvest of one or several overstory trees.
Geographic Information Systems. A computer-based means of mapping lands and resources and communicating values associated with them (GIS).
Green certification. A process, sponsored by several international organizations, that promotes sustainable forest management practices, providing a marketplace identify for forest products certified to have been grown and manufactured in a sustainable manner.
Group Selection. The removal of small groups of trees to meet a predetermined goal of size, distribution, and species.
Habitat. A place that provides seasonal or year-round food, water, shelter, or other environmental conditions for an organism, community, or population of plants or animals.
Hardwood. A broad leaved, flowering tree as distinguished from a conifer. Trees belonging to the botanical group of angiospermae.
Healthy ecosystem. An ecosystem in which structure and functions allow the maintenance of the desired conditions of biological diversity, biotic integrity, and ecological processes over time.
Heritage Sites. Sites identified by the Vermont Nongame and Natural Heritage Program of the Department of Fish and Wildlife, which have rare, threatened, or endangered species of plants or animals. Heritage sites are identified using a common standards-based methodology, which provides a scientific and universally applicable set of procedures for identifying, inventorying, and mapping these species.
Intensive (or developed) recreation. Outdoor recreation activities requiring major structures and facilities.
Interior dependent species. Those wildlife species that depend on large unbroken tracts of forest land for breeding and long-term survival. The term is also often used in conjunction with neotropical migratory bird species requiring large patches of fairly homogeneous habitat for population viability.
Intermediate treatment. Any treatment or tending designed to enhance growth, quality vigor, and composition of the stand after its establishment or regeneration and prior to the final harvest.
Invasive Exotic (Non-native). A species that is 1) non-native (or alien) to the ecoregion or watershed under consideration and 2) whose introduction does or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human health.
Land conservation. The acquisition or protection through easements of land for wildlife habitat, developed state parks, and working forests.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 125 | P a g e
Landscape. A heterogeneous area of land containing groups of natural communities and clusters of interacting ecosystems. These can be of widely varying scales but normally include a range of elevations, bedrock, and soils.
Mast. The fruit (including nuts) of such plants as oaks, beech, hickories, dogwood, blueberry, and grape, used for food by certain wildlife species.
Motorized use. Land uses requiring or largely dependent on motor vehicles and roads.
Multiple-use forestry. Any practice of forestry fulfilling two or more objectives of management, more particularly in forest utilization (e.g. production of both wood products and deer browse).
Multiple-use management. An onsite management strategy that encourages a complementary mix of several uses on a parcel of land or water within a larger geographic area.
Native (species). A plant or animal indigenous to a particular locality.
Natural Area. Limited areas of land, designated by Vermont statute, which have retained their wilderness character, although not necessarily completely natural and undisturbed, or have rare or vanishing species of plant or animal life or similar features of interest which are worthy of preservation for the use of present and future residents of the state. They may include unique ecological, geological, scenic, and contemplative recreational areas on state lands.
Natural community. An assemblage of plants and animals that is found recurring across the landscape under similar environmental conditions, where natural processes, rather than human disturbances, prevail.
Nongame species. Animal species that are not hunted, fished, or trapped in this state. This classification is determined by the state legislature.
Northern hardwood. Primarily sugar maple, yellow birch, and beech. May include red maple, white ash, white birch, black cherry, red spruce, and hemlock.
Old growth forest. A forest stand in which natural processes and succession have occurred over a long period of time relatively undisturbed by human intervention.
Outdoor recreation. Leisure time activities that occur outdoors or utilize an outdoor area or facility.
Overstory. That portion of the trees, in a forest of more than one story, forming the upper or upper-most canopy layer.
Patch Clearcut (Patch-cut). Under an even-aged method, a modification of the clearcutting method where patches (groups) are clearcut in an individual stand boundary in two or more entries. Under a two-aged method, varying numbers of reserve trees are not harvested in the patches (groups), to attain goals other than regeneration.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 126 | P a g e
Pole. A tree of a size between a sapling and a mature tree.
Pole timber. As used in timber survey, a size class definition; trees 5.0 to 8.9 inches (varies by species) at DBH. As used in logging operations, trees from which pole products are produced, such as telephone poles, pilings, etc.
Regeneration. Seedlings or saplings existing in a stand. Regeneration may be artificial (direct seeding or planting) or natural (natural seeding, coppice, or root suckers).
Regeneration treatment (harvest cut). Trees are removed from the stand to create conditions that will allow the forest to renew or reproduce itself. This is accomplished under either an even-aged management system or an uneven-aged management system.
The four basic methods used to regenerate a forest are clearcutting, seed-tree, shelterwood, and selection (group selection or single tree selection).
Regeneration methods. Timber management practices employed to either regenerate a new stand (regeneration cutting) or to improve the composition and increase the growth of the existing forest (intermediate treatment).
Regulated Hunting/Fishing/Trapping. The harvest of wildlife under regulations stipulating setting of seasons, time frame of lawful harvest, open and closed zones, methods of take, bag limits, possession limits, and reporting or tagging of species.
Release (release operation). The freeing of well-established cover trees, usually large seedlings or saplings, from closely surrounding growth.
Removal cut. The final cut of the shelterwood system that removes the remaining mature trees, completely releasing the young stand. An even-aged stand results.
Riparian Area. “The word “riparian” means of or pertaining to the bank of a river or lake. Riparian areas are ecosystems comprised of streams, rivers, lakes, wetlands, and floodplains that form a complex and interrelated hydrologic system. They extend up and down streams and along lakeshores from the bottom of the water table to the top of the vegetation canopy and include all land that is directly affected by surface water. Riparian areas are unique in their high biological diversity. They are “characterized by frequent disturbances related to inundation, transport of sediments, and the abrasive and erosive forces of water and ice movement that, in turn, create habitat complexity and variability…resulting in ecologically diverse communities” (Verry, E.S., J.W. Hornbeck, and C.A. Dolloff (eds). 2000. Riparian management in forests of the continental Eastern United States. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL. 402p.)
Riparian Management Zone (RMZ). The width of land adjacent to streams or lakes between the top of the bank or top of slope or mean water level and the edge of other land uses. Riparian management zones are typically areas of minimal disturbance, consisting of trees, shrubs, groundcover plants, duff layer, and a naturally vegetated uneven ground surface, that protect the water body and the adjacent riparian area from the impact of these land uses.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 127 | P a g e
Salvage Cutting. The removal of dead, dying, and damaged trees after a natural disaster such as fire, insect or disease attack, or wind or ice storm to utilize the wood before it rots.
Sanitation cutting. The removal of dead, damaged, or susceptible trees to improve stand health by stopping or reducing the spread of insects or disease.
Sapling. As used in timber surveys, a size class definition. A usually young tree larger than seedling but smaller than pole, often 1.0 to 4.9 inches at DBH.
Sawlog or Sawtimber. A log or tree that is large enough (usually > than 10 or12 inches DBH) to be sawn into lumber. Minimum log length is typically 8 feet.
Seedling. A very young plant that grew from a seed.
Seed-Tree (Seed Cut) method. The removal of most of the trees in one cut, leaving a few scattered trees of desired species to serve as a seed source to reforest the area.
Shelterwood method. A series of two or three cuttings which open the stand and stimulate natural reproduction. A two cutting series has a seed cut and a removal cut, while a three cutting series has a preparatory cut, a seed cut, and a removal cut.
Silvicultural systems. A management process whereby forests are tended, harvested, and replaced, resulting in a forest of distinctive form. Systems are classified according to the method of carrying out the fellings that remove the mature crop and provide for regeneration and according to the type of forest thereby produced.
Single tree selection method. Individual trees of all size classes are removed more or less uniformly throughout the stand to promote growth of remaining trees and to provide space for regeneration.
Site Preparation. Hand or mechanical manipulation of a site, designed to enhance the success of regeneration.
Site Quality. A broad reference of the potential of forest lands to grow wood. Site class identifies the potential growth more specifically in merchantable cubic feet/acre/year.
Snag. Includes standing dead or partially dead trees that are at least 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH) and 20 feet tall.
Social Trail – unauthorized and undesignated trail created by members of the public.
Softwood. A coniferous tree. Softwood trees belong to the botanical group gymnospermae, including balsam fir, red spruce, and hemlock.
Stand improvement. An intermediate treatment made to improve the composition, structure, condition, health, and growth of even or uneven-aged stands.
Stewardship. Caring for land and associated resources with consideration to future generations.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 128 | P a g e
Stocking. A description of the number of trees, basal area, or volume per acre in the forest stand compared with a desired level for balanced health and growth. Most often used in comparative expressions, such as well-stocked, poorly stocked, or overstocked.
Sustainability. The production and use of resources to meet the needs of present generations without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs.
Sustained yield. The yield that a forest can produce continuously at a given intensity of management.
Thinning. Removing some of the trees in a dense immature stand primarily to improve the growth rate and form of the remaining trees and enhance forest health.
Threatened species. A species listed on the state or Federal threatened species list. Threatened species are those likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of their range.
Timber lands. Properties that are managed primarily for the maximum production of forest products.
Timber Stand Improvement. Activities conducted in young stands of timber to improve growth rate and form of the remaining trees.
Traditional uses. Those uses of the forest that have characterized the general area in the recent past and present, including an integrated mix of timber and forest products harvesting, outdoor recreation, and recreation camps or residences.
Unacceptable Growing Stock (UGS). UGS trees are high risk and are expected to decline before harvest. UGS trees are of poor form and/or low quality and cannot reasonably be expected to improve. They have the potential to produce only low quality logs or pulp-type products.
Uneven-aged (All-aged) system. Timber management which produces a stand or forest composed of a variety of ages and sizes. Regeneration cutting methods in this system include single tree selection and group selection.
Watershed. The geographic area within which water drains into a particular river, stream, or body of water. A watershed includes both the land and the body of water into which the land drains.
Weeding (cleaning). Regulating the composition of a young stand by eliminating some trees and encouraging others, and also freeing seedlings or saplings from competition with ground vegetation, vines, and shrubs.
Wilderness. Areas having pristine and natural characteristics, typically roadless and often with some limits on uses. (This is not the federal definition of wilderness.)
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 129 | P a g e
Wildlife habitat. Lands supplying a critical habitat need for any species of wildlife, especially that which requires specific treatment and is of limited acreage.
Working forest. Land primarily used for forestry purposes but also available for recreation, usually where both managed land and land not presently being managed is present.
Working landscape. A landscape dominated by land used for agricultural and/or forestry purposes.
Aitken State Forest – Long Range Management Plan 130 | P a g e