Forest Resources Management Plan

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

- January 2021 - Prepared by:

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Adopted: November 2003 Revised: May 2010 Updated: January 2021

Cass County Board Neal Gaalswyk, District 1 Robert Kangas, District 2 Jeff Peterson, District 3 Scott Bruns, District 4 Dick Downham, District 5

Natural Resources Advisory Committee Cass County Soil & Water Conservation District Board Thomas Kuschel, District 1 Kenneth LaPorte, District 2 James Ballenthin, District 3 David Peterson, District 4 Willard Pehling, District 5

Land & Forestry Department Staff Kirk Titus, Land Commissioner Patrick Bundy, Forest Resource Manager Kevin Dahlman, Forest Resource Manager Kim Frame, Forest Resource Manager Erik Lindquist, Forest Resource Manager Amy Rand, Forest Resource Manager

Prepared by Consultant Team Dovetail Partners, Inc.

Photo Credits Cass County Land Department unless otherwise noted

Table of Contents Executive Summary ...... i Chapter 1.0 Mission ...... 1 1.1 Mission ...... 2 1.2 Management Approach...... 2 1.3 Certification ...... 2 Chapter 2.0 Strategic Initiatives ...... 3 2.1. Progress in Meeting Management Plan Goals ...... 3 2.2. Strategic Assumptions ...... 3 Chapter 3.0 Socio-Economic Context ...... 5 3.1. Socio-Economic Context ...... 5 Chapter 4.0 Resource Description ...... 9 4.1. Land Ownership ...... 9 4.2 Ecological Context ...... 12 4.3 Cover Types and Water Resources ...... 25 4.4 Ecological Classification ...... 30 4.5 Resource Assessment...... 35 Chapter 5.0 Department Administration ...... 41 5.1. Assessment ...... 41 5.2 Procedures ...... 44 Chapter 6.0 Revenue Generation ...... 45 Chapter 7.0 Land Base, Leases, Easements & Use Permits ...... 48 7.1. Assessment...... 48 7.2 Procedures ...... 55 Chapter 8.0 Recreation Facilities and Trails ...... 56 8.1. Assessment ...... 56 8.2 Procedures ...... 65 Chapter 9.0 Forest Roads ...... 66 9.1. Assessment ...... 66 9.2 Procedures ...... 67 Chapter 10.0 Habitat ...... 68 10.1. Assessment ...... 68 10.2 Procedures ...... 71 Chapter 11.0 Timber Management ...... 72 11.1. Assessment ...... 72 11.2 General Silvicultural Practices ...... 76 11.3 NPC Management ...... 80 11.4 Cover Type Management ...... 80 11.5 Procedures ...... 80 11.6 Forest Management Summary ...... 81 11.7 Overview of Change ...... 81 Appendicies ...... 82 Index of Policies Executive Summary ...... i Chapter 1.0 Mission ...... 1 Certification Policy ...... 2 Chapter 2.0 Strategic Initiatives ...... 3 Chapter 3.0 Socio-Economic Context ...... 5 Chapter 4.0 Resource Description ...... 9 Chapter 5.0 Department Administration ...... 41 Advisory Committee Policy ...... 41 Planning and Coordination Policy ...... 42 Deep Portage Policy ...... 43 Ordinance and Regulation Policy ...... 43 Resource Data Policy ...... 43 Procedure Development Policy ...... 44 Chapter 6.0 Revenue Generation ...... 45 Revenue Distribution Policy ...... 46 Conservation Trust – Fund 73 Policy ...... 46 Undivided Interest Ownership Management & Revenue Distribution Policy ...... 47 Chapter 7.0 Land Base, Leases, Easements & Use Permits ...... 48 General Land Base Policy ...... 48 Land Classification Policy ...... 51 Lease Policy ...... 52 Gravel Sale Policy ...... 52 Balsam Boughs ...... 53 Easement Policy ...... 54 Special Use Deed Policy ...... 55 Chapter 8.0 Recreation Facilities and Trails ...... 56 Recreational Trail Policy ...... 57 Boat Access Policy ...... 63 Primitive Camping Policy ...... 63 Permanent Hunting Stand and Structures Policy ...... 64 Shooting Lane Policy ...... 64 Chapter 9.0 Forest Roads ...... 66 Forest Roads and Trails Policy ...... 67 Chapter 10.0 Habitat ...... 68 Habitat and Wildlife Policy ...... 71 Chapter 11.0 Timber Management ...... 72 General Timber Management Policy ...... 72 Timber Sale Policy ...... 73 Visual Quality Management Policy ...... 74 Site Level Management Policy ...... 76

Map 1: Cass County Location within Minnesota

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

► i Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Executive Summary

The Resource Cass County administers about 257,719 acres of tax-forfeited land or 20% of the county’s total area. Just over three-quarters of this land is forested with the rest being brushlands, water, or developed (e.g., forest roads, gravel pits, etc.).

The single largest forest cover type is aspen, which covers 67% of the commercial forest. Pine cover types are slightly more than 7% and total conifer cover types are about 14% of the commercial forest. Oak covers nearly 6%, northern hardwoods 4%, and total deciduous cover types are 86% of the commercial forest.

In reviewing this plan, it is important to understand how Minnesota’s forests have been shaped over the past 120 years. Over 100 years ago much of the forest was logged. Then came extensive fires and conversion of former forestland to agriculture; during the Great Depression many farms were abandoned. Slowly, the forest reclaimed these lands during a period of time when public lands were not intensively managed for long-term goals.

Around 1970, aspen, an early successional species then nearing maturity became the primary ingredient for paper and fiber-based wood products. This led to extensive harvesting of the aspen resource and the resetting of stands back to the regeneration phase.

Since the 1990s, landscape planning efforts and the development of site-level guidelines have contributed to an expansion of forest management practices that balance environmental, social and economic goals and contribute to the sustainability of the state’s forest resources for future generations.

The Mission

It is the mission of the Cass County Land Department to: “professionally manage the County’s forest land base within the confines of Minnesota Statute 282 and to improve the quality and value of the County’s forest land resources.”

In 2001 Cass County’s forest management achieved Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certification. The County sought this certification to assure the public and consumers of products from the forest that the lands are being managed in an environmentally, economically, and socially sound manner. Cass County has been continuously FSC® certified since 2001 and is audited annually to assess conformance with the FSC® standards.

Cass County adopts the approach that its responsibility is to manage the resource and focus on long-term goals and objectives. The County understands that the landscape it inherited resulted from a century of activity little of which, at least not until the past forty years, was intentionally directed at sustaining the resource. Within the limits of this context, the County intends to create a future forest that is natural in character and

► ii Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

context. Finally, the County recognizes the complexity of the forested landscape and the limits of human knowledge about it. This is a plan which will be implemented stand by stand, one year at a time, with the lessons learned used to revise and improve subsequent versions of the plan.

Strategic Management Cass County’s management is rooted in a series of core values stated as strategic principles: • Long-term forest integrity is the foundation of all management: Retaining forest stability, defined as maintenance of forest integrity, is essential to the ongoing health, diversity, and productivity of the forest. Strategic management is based upon those forest elements which are the most constant and enduring over time. The general objective is to manage the resource, not to manage for specific outputs. • Humans are embedded in nature: Humans influence ecological processes and cannot be considered external factors. Human values and ethics play a dominant role in directing management initiatives and setting goals. At the same time, human values are to be carefully weighed alongside those of other life especially within the context of ecological functions in a healthy, resilient environment. In general, human uses of the forest and resource base will be accommodated to the constraints placed upon them by the ecological considerations articulated in the other principles. • Patch size distribution will tend to favor larger, aggregated patches: Except where management objectives, such as wildlife considerations, support smaller forest patches, the general trend of patch size distribution will be toward creation of larger patches. • Manage consistent with native plant community: Stands will be managed so that their forest type, cover type, and related attributes are in accord with the underlying native plant community. • Resource distributed in accord with vegetational growth stage: Management will seek to secure a representative distribution of vegetational growth (successional) stages across the aggregated stands for each native plant community. • Manage by species age: Establish a balance of age class groups as appropriate for each cover type.

Strategic Assumptions The Cass County Land Department has identified a number of strategic assumptions related to implementing forest management.

• Land Asset Management Program The amount of tax-forfeited land administered by the County will remain relatively constant throughout the management period. The continued implementation of the land asset management program will aim to retain and consolidate the tax forfeited land base to improve efficiency and effectiveness in achieving management objectives, and, reduce future public costs to service remote and isolated private land. This is to be accomplished in a manner that does not reduce the private property tax base or reduce the amount of acres of County-administered land within the county.

► iii Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

• Sound Forest Management and Planning Forest management planning is accomplished using the most current and accurate information available. Within the context of managing for multiple uses and values, overall management will generate sustained net income for the County and benefit local units of government. When projecting management forward over 100 years it is necessary to assume there will be markets for diverse timber resource offered by the County. The use of native plant communities to inform management will contribute to a resilient, diverse, and healthy forest that is best suited to adapt to changes in environmental dynamics. Forest management planning is a dynamic process and continual monitoring informs the responses to changes in key factors, including markets, forest health, and natural disturbances.

• Landscape Coordination and Logger Interaction Recognizing that achieving county management objectives requires coordination with other land managers and the full cooperation of professional loggers, the County will continue to engage with other land managers in planning efforts and assist loggers to gain skill in managing even and uneven aged forests, an increasingly important component of overall forest management. The County will actively seek input from other land managers and professional loggers on methods to achieve management objectives.

• Leases The county no longer grants leases for uses including recreational cabin leases on tax forfeited lands. This continues an existing policy and expands it to include all uses.

Anticipated Change If the management directives contained within this plan are followed over the next century, then the following changes are anticipated: .

Timber Flow: A predictable flow of diverse forest resources is provided by the plan. Aspen will be consistently supplied, and northern hardwoods and pine supplies will increase. Recreation: Diverse recreation opportunities will continue to be supported, including motorized and non-motorized trail- based recreation. The forest management activities will help ensure quality outdoor experiences for residents and visitors through the protection of local water resources that support water-based activities and experiences. Conifer The amount of pine and conifer on the landscape is Enhancement: expected to increase during the plan period through management of existing stands and establishment of regeneration. Habitat Shift: The available wildlife habitats will remain diverse, including younger forest types, especially in aspen-birch and pine, and older types, particularly in hardwoods and conifers. Late successional stage hardwoods will be a continued habitat feature across the landscape.

► iv Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Photo Credit: North Country Nordic Ski Club

► 1 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Chapter 1.0 Mission

1.1 Mission It is the mission of the Cass County Land Department to: “Professionally manage the County’s forest land base within the confines of Minnesota Statutes 282 and to improve the quality and value of the County’s forest land resources.”

1.2 Management Approach

Cass County adopts the approach that its responsibility is to manage the resource and will hold its focus on long-term goals and objectives. The County understands that the landscape it inherited resulted from a century of activity little of which, at least not until the past forty years, was intentionally directed at sustaining the resource. Within the limits of this context, the County intends to create a future forest that is natural in character and context. Finally, the County recognizes the complexity of the forested landscape and the limits of human knowledge about it. This is a plan which will be implemented stand by stand, one year at a time, with the lessons learned used to revise and improve subsequent versions of the plan.

1.3 Certification In 2001 Cass County’s forest management achieved Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certification. The County sought this certification to assure the public and consumers of products from the forest that the lands are being managed in an environmentally, economically, and socially sound manner. Cass County has been continuously FSC® certified since 2001 and is audited annually to assess conformance with the FSC® standards.

Under the terms of its FSC® certification Cass County agrees to adhere, as appropriate to the resource base and area, to the FSC ® Principles and Criteria. The County’s Certification Policy represents a commitment to manage the forest in conformance with FSC ® standards and policies.

Certification Policy Implement the FSC US Forest Management Standard of the Forest Stewardship Council as County policy. Further, the County will conduct itself so as to sustain its FSC® certification.

► 2 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Chapter 2.0 Strategic Initiatives

2.1. Progress in Meeting Management Plan Goals The Cass County Land Department has made steady progress in implementing its past management plan and in progressing towards achieving its objectives. Among the major accomplishments are: • Successful continuation of FSC certification. • Annual management of diverse forested lands in accordance with plan guidelines and regional markets. • Operation of a well-managed timber sales program, which aligns with markets, ensures a continual supply of forest resources, and supports efficient planning and operations.

2.2. Strategic Assumptions The Cass County Land Department has identified a number of strategic assumptions related to implementing forest management.

► 3 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

• Leases The county no longer grants leases for uses including recreational cabin leases on tax forfeited lands. This continues an existing policy and expands it to include all uses. While leases for cabins and hunting shacks can generate revenues for a county, the position against the leases is multi-faceted including the following: conflicts arise when the County harvests land near a leased site; general public is directly or indirectly deterred from using land in the vicinity of lease cabins; cabins increase likelihood of creation of unauthorized trails for motorized vehicles; presence of cabins ruin the wild character of the land; and the time and cost to administer the program including checking on all sites to insure they comply with the terms of the leases.

► 4 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Chapter 3.0 Socio-Economic Context

3.1. Socio-Economic Context

• Population Trends & Projections Cass County’s population has been increasing with the county ranking as the 26th fastest growing of the 87 counties in the state from 2010 to 2018. It is now the 36th largest in the state. Cass County’s population has an older median age than the state and a larger percentage of people aged 65 years and older. The population is aging, especially as the Baby Boom generation moves through the population pyramid.

Cass County experienced a natural increase in population due to more births than deaths from 2010 to 2018, and also experienced net in- migration with more people moving into than out of the County. According to the Minnesota State Demographic Center, Cass County's total population is expected to decline from 2020 to 2030 (Table 1). Cass County is comprised of 15 incorporated cities and 50 organized townships.

Table 1. Population by Age Group, 2018 and Projections for 2020 and 2030 Percent Number Number Percent Projection Projection Age change (2000) (2018) (2018) (2020) (2030) (’20 vs ’30) 0-5 1,376 1,618 5.5% 1,382 1,651 19.5% 5-14 3,997 3,570 12.1% 3,216 2,817 -12.4% 15-24 3,062 2,825 9.6% 3,358 3,455 2.9% 25-34 2,381 2,740 9.3% 2,431 3,147 29.5% 35-44 3,858 2,834 9.6% 2,524 2,344 -7.1% 45-54 3,849 3,272 11.1% 2,818 2,374 -15.8% 55-64 3,728 5,001 16.9% 4,197 2,658 -36.7% 65-74 2,882 4,546 15.4% 4,514 4,013 -11.1% 75-84 1,518 2,373 8.0% 2,979 4,002 34.3% 85 + 499 740 2.5% 715 1,279 78.9% Total 27,150 29,519 100.00% 28,134 27,740 -1.4% Source: MN DEED, County Profiles, Cass County, published Oct. 2019

► 5 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

• County Economy As of 2018, Cass County had the 39th largest economy of the 87 counties in the state. Cass County’s economy was the 29th fastest growing for the year and the 22nd fastest growing since 2013. From 2013 to 2018, employers in Cass County added approximately 661 jobs, for a growth rate of 6.8%, which was just below the statewide job growth rate of 7.0%. As of 2018, there are 896 business establishments in the county providing a total of 10,444 jobs (Table 2).

The top industries in the County are trade related, leisure and hospitality, construction, education & health services and professional & business services. The median household income in the County is $50,162, which is below the statewide median of $65,699. Overall, Cass County is ranked 73rd in median household income of the 87 counties in the state.

Table 2. Industries in Cass County, 2018 # of Industry # of Firms Change % Change Employees Natural Resources & 17 53 -31 -36.9% Mining Construction 123 411 27 7.0% Manufacturing 43 648 299 85.7% Trade, Transportation, 190 1,478 122 9.0% & Utilities Information 7 109 4 3.8% Financial Activities 55 440 -23 -5.0% Professional & 87 329 37 12.7% Business Services Education & Health 91 2,154 49 2.9% Services Leisure & Hospitality 165 2,863 205 7.7% Other Services 74 211 23 12.2% Public Administration 45 1,747 -49 -2.7% Total, all industries 896 10,444 661 6.8% Source: MN DEED’s Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCBW)

► 6 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

• Forest Resource Economic Issues The forest resources of the region have a significant economic impact (Figure 1). According to the most recent statewide reporting. Minnesota’s forest industry provides 30,500 direct jobs and a total employment effect of 64,000 jobs. For every dollar of stumpage value, it is estimated that there is $40 of value added by primary manufacturing with $24 remaining in-state.

Figure 1. Value of Forest Products Manufactured in Minnesota

Source: MNDNR, 2019

The forest sector is the 5th largest manufacturing sector in Minnesota by employment (MNDNR, 2019).1 Important forest products sectors in the region include pulp, paper, paperboard, engineered wood products, converted paper products, window & door components, kitchen cabinets and cabinet parts, store fixtures, wood office & residential furniture, pallets and crating, millwork, wood shavings for poultry industry, and wood energy. There are also non-traditional and non-timber forest products that are of value economically and socially within the region. These products include balsam boughs, spruce tops, birch bark, maple and birch syrup, wood for grilling and smoking, medicinal plants, and others.

1 MNDNR. 2019. Minnesota’s Forest Resources 2017. Published May 2019. Available at: http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/forestry/um/index.html

► 7 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Minnesota has:  3 primary pulp & paper mills (located in Grand Rapids, International Falls and Cloquet) and 3 recycled pulp & paper mills (located in St. Paul, Duluth, and Becker)  2 Oriented Strand Board (OSB) and Engineered Wood Products Companies (located in Two Harbors and Bemidji)  94 converted paper products plants  329 sawmills and wood products plants (including mills in Cass Lake, Isle, Grand Marais, Onamia, Bemidji, Deer River, McGregor, Cohasset and McGrath)  328 wood kitchen cabinet and countertop manufacturers  62 wood furniture and custom architectural woodwork shops

Locations of mills are an important factor in determining wood markets because haul distances have a significant impact on production costs. The pulpwood mills utilize various species of wood material, with aspen being dominant. Wood energy facilities utilize the most diverse species mix while some specialty sawmills may utilize only one species. In 2017, the major sawmills in the state utilized 63% softwoods and 37% hardwood species.

► 8 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Chapter 4.0 Resource Description

4.1. Land Ownership The number of acres of tax-forfeited land in Cass County has remained relatively unchanged. Currently, the number of acres is approximately 257,719. The total acreage was 254,600 during the last planning period. The variation reflects the normal flow of lands going tax-forfeit and some parcels being sold or transferred.

The 257,719 acres administered by the County Land Department represents 20% of the entire county. Another 22% is administered by the Federal government (primarily the Chippewa National Forest managed by the US Forest Service), the State lands represent 15% (most managed by the Department of Natural Resources), and the Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe directly manages slightly more than 1%; however, the Tribe does hold rights for a much larger area. The remaining 41% is owned by private interests including industrial and family forest owners. These land ownerships are illustrated in Figure 2 below.

Figure 2. Land Ownership in Cass County

20%

41%

22%

15%

County Administered Federal State Private Tribe

Map 2 shows land ownerships in Cass County. Map 3 shows the location of county managed forests (county administered and county fee ownership).

► 9 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Map 2. Ownership

► 10 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Map 3. Cass County Managed Forests

► 11 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

4.2 Ecological Context A system called the National Hierarchical Framework of Ecological Units has been established to describe America’s landscape.2 This Ecological Classification System (ECS) is used to identify, describe, and map progressively smaller areas of land with increasingly uniform ecological features. The system uses biotic and environmental factors, including climate, geology, topography, soils, hydrology, and vegetation. ECS mapping enables resource managers to consider ecological patterns for areas as large as North America or as small as a single timber stand and identify areas with similar management opportunities or constraints. ECS mapping is extremely useful in understanding the potential of the landscape to grow diverse forest types. • Provinces: Within Minnesota, the first ECS level is the province. Provinces are units of land defined using major climate zones, native vegetation, and biomes such as prairies, deciduous forests, or boreal forests. There are 4 Provinces in Minnesota.3 Of these, Cass County is entirely within the Laurentian Mixed Forest Province (Map 4). This province is characterized by broad areas of conifer forest, mixed hardwood and conifer forests, and conifer bogs and swamps. The landscape ranges from rugged lake-dotted terrain with thin glacial deposits over bedrock, to hummocky or undulating plains with deep glacial drift, to large, flat, poorly drained peatlands. • Sections: Provinces are in turn divided into sections. These are defined mostly by the origin of glacial deposits, regional elevation, distribution of plants, and regional climate. Minnesota has ten sections, and Cass County lies in the Northern Minnesota Drift and Lake Plains Section (Map 5) which covers the center of northern Minnesota and has complex surface geology, formed over many episodes of glaciation. It is characterized by deep glacial deposits in outwash plains, lake plains, till plains, outwash channels, moraines, and drumlin fields. The patterns of vegetation reflect the complex and patchy distribution of these glacial deposits. Mesic forests of sugar maple, basswood, paper birch, aspen, and northern red oak are widespread. They occur mostly on moraines or till plains characterized by rough topography, fine-textured parent material, or soils with subhorizons that perch snowmelt and rainfall. Historically, forests and woodlands of jack pine and red pine were very common. These fire- dependent communities occur on the sandy outwash plains formed by glacial meltwater. Sandy and gravelly deposits that cap many of the major moraines in the western part of the section provide habitat for mixed forests of pine and boreal hardwood species such as quaking aspen and paper birch. The eastern part of the section is formed of deposits from glacial lakes Upham and Aitkin. These lake plains have expansive areas of acid peatland communities such as black spruce bogs and poor swamp forests, along with rich swamp forests of white cedar and black ash. Sedge meadows and alder and willow swamps occur along the sluggish streams

2 McNab, W. H. and P.E. Avers, 1994, Ecological Subregions of the United States: Section Descriptions, US Forest Service publication WO-WSA-5, Washington, D.C. 3 The descriptions for the ECS levels come from the MDNR’s web site [https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/ecs/index.html]

► 12 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

draining the flat lake plains and along the Mississippi and Leech Lake rivers. • Subsections: Minnesota’s 10 sections are divided into 26 subsections of which three cover Cass County (Maps 6 and 7). o Pine Moraines and Outwash Plains: This subsection is a mix of end moraines, outwash plains, till plains, and drumlin fields. White and red pine dominated the majority of forest communities on end moraines and till plains. Jack pine barrens and jack pine woodlands were found on well-drained sites on outwash plains. Black spruce, tamarack, white cedar, and black ash were prominent tree species in poorly to very poorly drained soils. Lakes are very common on the end moraines and some of the Outwash plains. There are hundreds of lakes within the subsection that have a surface area greater than 160 acres. The headwaters of the Mississippi River (Itasca Lake in Itasca State Park) is in this subsection. Other large rivers flowing through the outwash plains of the subsection include the Pine and Crow Wing rivers. Forest management and tourism are the most important land uses. Agriculture is common in the west. Tourism is common where there are concentrations of lakes. Summertime swells the population of these areas significantly. Most of Cass County’s land holdings are in this subsection. o Chippewa Plains: Level to gently rolling lake plains and till plains characterize this subsection. Three large, heavily used lakes are found here, Leech Lake, Lake Winnibigoshish, and Cass Lake. Conifers dominated the sandier portions of the subsection before settlement. Aspen-birch, sugar maple, basswood, northern red oak, and bur oak were common components on more productive sites. Present day land use is recreation and forestry. o St. Louis Moraines: The most important land uses in this subsection are forestry and recreation. This area is heavily forested and timber harvesting is extensive. Quaking aspen is the primary species harvested. Recreation is primarily associated with the subsection's lakes and the areas around them. Fishing, hunting, snowmobiling, and skiing are popular.

► 13 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Map 4. Ecological Provinces in Minnesota

► 14 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Map 5. Ecological Sections in Minnesota

► 15 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Map 6. Ecological Subsections in Minnesota

► 16 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Map 7. Ecological Subsections in Cass County

► 17 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

• Land Type Associations: After subsections, the next division of the landscape is Land Type Associations (LTA). 4 This geographic level is well suited to forest management planning. LTAs are defined using glacial landforms, bedrock types, topographic roughness, lake and stream distributions, wetland patterns, depth to ground water table, soil parent material, and pre-European settlement vegetation. Minnesota has 291 land type associations. There are 21 LTAs within Cass County (Map 8). o Pine Moraines & Outwash Plains Subsection Pequot Lakes Outwash Plain (Nc01): A gently rolling pitted outwash plain with islands of till, all formed by the Rainy Lobe. Soil parent material is sandy loam or sand. Soils were formed under forest vegetation. Lakes occupy 24%. St. Croix Moraine (Nc02): steep end moraine formed by the Rainy Lobe glacier. Soil parent material is coarse loamy (sandy loam) and sandy till. Soils formed under forest vegetation. Uplands occupy over three-quarters of the landscape. Pine River Drumlin Plain (Nc03): A rolling till plain with some drumlin features. Pillager Outwash Plain (Nc04): A nearly level to rolling outwash plain intermixed with peatlands (west side) formed by the Superior Lobe glacier. Soil parent material is sand and gravel. Soils were formed under forest and occasionally prairie vegetation. Mosquito Creek Drumlin Plain (Nc06): A rolling drumlin field whose till layer is blanketed by sand. Peatlands are common. Swan Creek Outwash Plain (Nc08): Landscape dominated by level outwash plains which have been reworked by wind; dune features are common. Peatlands are very common. Beaver Creek Drumlin Plain (Nc10): Landscape dominated by level outwash plains. Long, narrow ridges (drumlins) of till material are very common. Peatlands are very common. Park Rapids Outwash Plain (Nc11): Landscape dominated by level to rolling outwash plains. Channels formed by post-glacial meltwater are common; lakes can be found in the channels. Mildred Outwash Plain (Nc12): A landscape dominated by rolling to steep terrain. The landforms were deposited by melt water flowing from the Rainy and Wadena Lobes. Soils in the east unit were formed under forest vegetation from sandy loam, sand, and gravel parent material. Soils in the west unit have formed under both forest/woodland vegetation (northern half) and prairie vegetation (southern half). The soil parent material in the west unit is a mixture of sandy loam over clay loam with a minor amount of sandy loam in the northeast corner. Peatlands are common in both units. Lakes occupy 1% of the area. Spring Brook Till Plain (Nc13): Landscape dominated by rolling till plain with small areas of hummocky pitted outwash, eskers, and

4 LTA descriptions prepared by Dan Hanson, ECS Specialist, MNDNR Division of Forestry for Minnesota County Biological Survey.

► 18 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

meltwater channels. All landforms were created by the Rainy Lobe. Lakes occupy 6% of the area. Outing Moraine (Nc14): A landscape dominated by rolling till plains and steep end moraines all dissected by outwash channels. All features were formed by the Rainy Lobe. Soil parent material is stony sandy loam till in the till plains and moraines and sandy in the outwash channels. Soils were formed under forest vegetation. Lakes occupy 5% of the area. Itasca Moraine (Nc16): A rolling to hummocky complex stagnation moraine. Soil parent material is complex of sandy to loamy and clay loam till. Organic soil deposits are common, often as small, closed depressions. Lakes occupy a fifth of the area. landscape characterized by steep irregularly shaped slopes with many closed depressions. This end moraine was formed by the Wadena Lobe. Soil parent material is a complex of sand, loam, and clay loam till with a high content of granitic stones. Soils have formed under forest vegetation. Organic soil deposits are common, often as small closed depressions. Lakes occupy 21% of the area. Itasca Moraine, Steep (Nc30): A stagnation moraine characterized by steep, rugged terrain. Small kettle lakes are abundant o Chippewa Plains Subsection Guthrie Till Plain (Na03): A nearly level to gently rolling till plain with loamy till soils with a moderate amount of stones and calcium. Many small, mostly intermittent streams are present. Bemidji Sand Plain (Na07): A nearly level to gently rolling outwash plain whose soil parent material is sand. Bena Dunes and Peatlands (Na08): A nearly level outwash plain extensively reshaped by wind action. Soil parent material is predominantly fine sand. Extensive swamps and bogs occur, especially in the southern portions. Rosey Lake Plain (Na09): A nearly level glacial lake basin (Aitkin) whose soil parent material is predominantly fine-textured lake sediments. Deer River Peatlands (Na10): A level glacial lake basin on which extensive peatlands now cover the fine-textured soil parent materials. St. Louis Moraines Subsection Aitkin Moraine (Nb02): A landscape dominated by rolling to steep end moraine formed by the St. Louis Lobe. Small area of rolling outwash is present at the elbow. Soil parent material is clayey and sandy till with some silty lake sediments in areas. Lakes occupy 10% (33,328 acres). A rolling to steep landscape with soils being generally clayey and sandy till with some silty lake sediments in areas. Sugar Hills Moraine (Nb03): A rolling to hummocky stagnation moraine whose soil parent material is loamy till; coarse sandy material is common in the western portions. Rocks and stones are common. Some places have windblown silt. Hill City Till Plain (Nb12): A nearly level to gently rolling till plain whose soil parent materials consist of loamy till with a low amount of

► 19 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

stones. A thin, wind deposited silty mantle covers much of it. Several large and many small to medium sized swamps and bogs are present. • Native Plant Community: The smallest geographic unit with the ECS is the Native Plant Community (NPC) (Map 9). NPCs are units of vegetation with “generally uniform soil texture, soil moisture, soil nutrients, topography, and disturbance regimes.”5 Maps 10 and 11 illustrate current land cover across the county from two different sources of mapping information. o FDc24: Fire Dependent Central Rich Dry Pine Woodland: Dry-mesic pine woodlands on sandy, level to gently undulating outwash deposits or occasionally on sandy inclusions in rolling to hummocky stagnation moraines and till plains. Canopy strongly dominated by jack pine with minor amounts of paper birch, red pine, quaking aspen, bur oak and northern red oak. Crown fires and mild surface fires were common historically. o FDn33: Fire Dependent Northern Dry-Mesic Mixed Woodland: Dry- mesic conifer, conifer hardwood, or hardwood woodlands dominated by red pine, white pine, jack pine, black spruce, quaking aspen, or paper birch. Most common on sandy soils but also present on shallow, loamy soils over bedrock. Crown and surface fires were common historically. o FDc34: Central Dry-Mesic Pine-Hardwood Forest: Dry-mesic pine, hardwood, or pine hardwood forests on hummocky glacial moraines, often adjacent to outwash plains. Crown fires and mild surface fires were common historically. o MHc26: Central Dry-Mesic Oak-Aspen Forest: Dry-mesic hardwood or, rarely, hardwood conifer forests, usually with northern red oak as a canopy dominant. Present on well-drained loamy or sandy soils, primarily on stagnation moraines and less frequently on till plains or glacial river terraces. o MHc36: Central Mesic Hardwood Forest Eastern): Mesic hardwood forests dominated by basswood, northern red oak, and sugar maple. Present on loamy or sandy loam soils on hummocky stagnation moraines and rolling till plains. o MHn35: Mesic Hardwood: Northern Mesic Hardwood Forest: Mesic to dry-mesic hardwood forests on well-drained to moderately well- drained loamy soils, most often on stagnation moraines and till plains and less frequently on bedrock hills. o MHn44: Mesic Hardwood: Northern Wet-Mesic Boreal Hardwood- Conifer Forest Wet mesic or mesic hardwood and hardwood-conifer forests, most commonly on level, clayey sites with high local water tables on glacial lake deposits, stagnation moraines, and till plains. o FPn82: Forested Peatland: Northern Rich Tamarack Swamp (Western Basin): Tamarack dominated swamps on moderately deep to deep peat in basins on glacial till or outwash deposits, or occasionally along

5 “Field Guide to the Native Plant Communities of Minnesota, The Laurentian Mixed Forest Province”, Minnesota DNR, August 2003.

► 20 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

the margins of large peatlands on glacial lake plains or on floating mats along lake or river shores. o WMn82: Wet Meadow/Carr: Northern Wet Meadow/Carr: Open wetlands dominated by dense cover of broad-leaved graminoids or tall shrubs. Present on mineral to sapric peat soils in basins or along streams. o WFn64: Northern Very Wet Ash Swamp: Dominated by black ash and likely to have conifers such as white cedar, balsam fir, or tamarack in the canopy or understory and abundant wetland grasses and sedges in the ground layer.

► 21 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Map 8: Ecological Land Type Associations in Cass County

► 22 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Map 9: Native Plant Communities in Cass County

► 23 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Map 10. Current Land Cover (NLCD, 2016)

► 24 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

4.3 Cover Types and Water Resources The term “cover type” is used to describe the type of forest (or land use) occupying a given stand. For forested areas, cover type is defined by the dominant overstory tree. However, in many stands there is a mix of species and the dominant, defining species used to describe the cover type may account for as little as one-third of the trees. Because most trees can occupy a wide variety of ecological sites, cover type does not generally indicate the potential of a given stand to develop into a mature, late-successional forest. Yet, the term remains as one of the most effective and efficient descriptors of the current forest condition. Map 11 shows the forest cover types on Cass County Lands from the 2019 inventory data.

Cass County contains 6 major watersheds, 1,054 lakes, 62 miles of the Mississippi River and an additional 59 rivers combining for a total of 3,477 miles of shoreline. Map 12 shows water bodies and the watersheds of Cass County.

The Cass County Local Water Management Plan 2017-2027 was written to assess priority water resource concerns throughout the entirety of Cass County and to develop goals and objectives that address the priority concerns. The scope of the plan focused on the minor watershed level. Implementation strategies were developed from the priority concerns and tailored specifically for each of the 193 minor watersheds in the County. Analysis of existing, readily available data has revealed the details of these minor watersheds while showing where data-driven strategies can be implemented in a more targeted and efficient manner. The priority concerns addressed in the plan include aquatic invasive species, surface water integrity, and ground water maintenance. The complete plan is available at the county website.6

The One Watershed, One Plan (1W1P) program through the Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) supports partnerships of local governments in developing prioritized, targeted, and measurable implementation plans. Key principles are planning at the major watershed scale and aligning local plans with state strategies. Plans created through the 1W1P program are called comprehensive watershed management plans (described in MN Statue 103B.801). Comprehensive watershed management plans have been completed for Leech Lake River and Pine River and are available from the county website.

6 http://www.co.cass.mn.us/document_center/esd/waterplan/2017-2027%20Water%20Plan.pdf

► 25 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Map 11. Forest Cover Types on Cass County Lands

► 26 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Map 12. Water Bodies and Watersheds

► 27 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Table 1 shows the acres of each cover type on Cass County-administered tax- forfeit land. Nearly 30% or approximately 75,000 acres are wet habitats, including marsh, lowland brush, non-permanent water, permanent water, lowland grass, lowland hardwoods, stagnant cedar, muskeg, and stagnant spruce. Some tamarack and black spruce acres are also associated with wet sites.

Table 1. Distribution of Cover Types on Cass County Tax-Forfeited Land

Cover Type Acres % of Total Aspen 120,675 46.8% Marsh 26,777 10.4% Lowland Brush 23,591 9.2% Red Pine 10,391 4.0% Oak 10,233 4.0% Northern Hardwoods 7,812 3.0% Non-Permanent Water 6,334 2.5% Ash 5,874 2.3% Birch 5,806 2.3% Permanent Water 5,211 2.0% Tamarack 4,391 1.7% Lowland Grass 4,045 1.6% White Cedar 3,799 1.5% Lowland Hardwoods 3,633 1.4% Black Spruce 2,961 1.1% Jack Pine 2,114 0.8% Cutover Area 2,012 0.8% Stagnant Cedar 1,898 0.7% Muskeg 1,850 0.7% Upland Grass 1,699 0.7% Balsam Fir 1,336 0.5% Stagnant Spruce 1,031 0.4% Industrial Development 933 0.4% Not Classified 684 0.3% White Pine 596 0.2% Upland Brush 498 0.2% Roads 404 0.2% Balm of Gilead 295 0.1% Stagnant Tamarack 289 0.1% White Spruce 270 0.1% Agriculture 267 0.1% Recreational Development 12 0.0% Total 257,719 100.0%

► 28 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Table 2 focuses on just the “commercial” forest, those stands with the productive capacity to produce merchantable trees. However, even within a commercial forest cover type, not every acre can be harvested. Factors such as slope, isolation due to wetlands, and adjacency to water can subtract harvestable land from the total. Table 2 shows the amount of harvestable acres within each cover type once riparian and other inoperable lands have been deducted.

Table 2. Amount of Commercial Forest Cover Types Available for Harvest on Cass County Tax-Forfeited Land

Harvestable % of Commercial Inoperable Acres Cover Type Harvestable Acres Acres* (Commercial Acres – Inoperable) Aspen 120,617 8,188 112,429 67.5% Red Pine‡ 10,387 432 9,955 6.0% Oak 10,228 1,448 8,780 5.3% Northern 7,808 763 7,044 4.2% Hardwoods Ash 5,870 400 5,470 3.3% Birch 5,803 1,131 4,672 2.8% Tamarack 4,388 126 4,262 2.6% White Cedar 3,797 153 3,644 2.2% Lowland 3,631 421 3,209 1.9% Hardwoods Black Spruce 2,959 109 2,850 1.7% Jack Pine 2,113 131 1,982 1.2% Balsam Fir 1,335 145 1,190 0.7% White Pine 596 32 564 0.3% Balm of Gilead 295 13 282 0.2% White Spruce 270 8 262 0.2% Total 180,097 13,500 166,598 100.0% *These are acres occupied by wetlands or within buffer zones around wetlands, lakes, and streams, and areas with steep slope or are isolated very small tracts. ‡Red pine is also known as Norway Pine.

► 29 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Figure 3 shows the relationship between the total county managed lands, commercial forest land, and harvestable lands.

Figure 3. Total, Commercial, and Harvestable County-Managed Lands

Total County- Managed Land 257,719 acres

Commercial Forest Land 180,097 acres

Harvestable Forest Land 166,598 acres

4.4 Ecological Classification The county organizes its resource management by Land Type Associations and Native Plant Communities as these ecological levels provide appropriate geographic scale and ecological information to facilitate management decisions. LTAs provide a defined geography that roughly correspond to Forest Resource Manager Districts, offer a distinct basis for setting management objectives, and have enough homogeneity of resource characteristics to make strategic assessments.

Table 3 indicates the number of acres of county administered harvestable commercial forest lying within each of the 21 LTAs in Cass County. Appendix A provides a description and information about each LTA Management Unit.

► 30 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Table 3. Cass County Tax-Forfeited Land by Land Type Association – Commercial Forest Available for Harvest

Land Type Association Harvestable % of Total Acres Aitkin Moraine 5,668 3.4% Bemidji Sand Plain 723 0.4% Bena Dunes and Peatlands 601 0.4% Crow Wing Sand Plain 1,150 0.7% Deer River Peatlands 10 0.0% Guthrie Till Plain 3,288 2.0% Hill City Till Plain 4,168 2.5% Itasca Moraine 31,790 19.1% Itasca Moraine, Steep 3,955 2.4% Mildred Sand Plain 5,898 3.5% Mosquito Creek Drumlin Plain 3,262 2.0% Nimrod Drumlin Plain 6,787 4.1% Outing Moraine 20,424 12.3% Park Rapids Sand Plain 1,777 1.1% Pillager Sand Plain 189 0.1% Pine River Drumlin Plain 7,333 4.4% Rosey Lake Plain 6,645 4.0% Spring Brook Till Plain 28,053 16.8% St. Croix Moraine 24,611 14.8% Sugar Hills Moraine 6,408 3.8% Swan Creek Sand Plain 3,857 2.3% Total 166,598 100.0%

Appendix A provides a description and information about each LTA Management Unit. Within the context of LTAs, Forest Resource Managers will use a stand’s native plant community to guide tactical level management. NPC will be considered when determining the intensity of harvest, management objectives, regeneration methods, potential stand conversion, and other vital considerations. During the development of the previous long range resource management plan, Cass County had a map of likely NPCs prepared with the data integrated into its GIS databases. These NPC designations at the stand level indicated the likely NPC but there is an error factor due to the various data sources used in the mapping process. The data provides guidance for management and establishes a beginning point for field typing of NPC at the stand level.7 Table 4 shows the distribution of county administered commercial forest land by NPC.

7 For more information on NPC see Field Guide to the Native Plant Communities of Minnesota, The Laurentian Mixed Forest Province, Minnesota DNR, August 2003. Additional information can be found at the DNR’s website: www.dnr.state.mn.us.

► 31 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Table 4. Cass County Tax-Forfeited Land by Native Plant Community – Commercial Forest Available for Harvest

Native Plant Community Acres % of Total FDn33: Northern Dry-Mesic Mixed Woodland 59,881 35.9% FDc34: Central Dry-Mesic Pine-Hardwood Forest 40,961 24.6% MHn44: Northern Wet-Mesic Boreal Hardwood-Conifer Forest 16,733 10.0% FPn82: Northern Rich Tamarack Swamp 14,185 8.5% MHc26: Central Dry-Mesic Oak-Aspen Forest 9,182 5.5% MHc36: Central Mesic Hardwood Forest 8,941 5.4% FDc24: Central Rich Dry Pine Woodland 7,193 4.3% MHn35: Northern Mesic Hardwood Forest 3,459 2.1% WMn82: Northern Wet Meadow/Carr 3,000 1.8% WFn64: Northern Very Wet Ash Swamp 1,954 1.2% Not Classified/Water 1108 0.7% Total 166,598 100.0%

Tables 5 and 6 provide further details and illustrate the distribution of cover types by LTAs and NPCs, respectively. Appendix A provides a description and information about each LTA Management Unit.

► 32 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Table 5. Commercial Forest Available for Harvest: Distribution by Land Type Association and Cover Type on Cass County Tax-Forfeited Lands (acres)

Land Type Association Ash Aspen Balm of Balsam Birch Black Jack Lowland Northern Red Oak Tamarack White White White Total Gilead Fir Spruce Pine Hardwoods Hardwoods Pine Cedar Pine Spruce

Aitkin Moraine 355 4,183 0 40 30 191 0 198 326 8 234 93 12 0 0 5,668 Bemidji Sand Plain 14 353 0 0 0 10 129 7 56 28 0 11 114 0 0 723 Bena Dunes and 13 445 0 0 28 0 0 32 13 41 2 0 26 0 0 601 Peatlands Crow Wing Sand Plain 0 790 0 9 0 0 10 91 3 227 6 16 0 0 0 1,150 Guthrie Till Plain 54 1,490 0 21 315 80 12 36 892 0 184 31 172 0 0 3,288 Hill City Till Plain 348 2,131 49 77 36 256 0 254 279 2 31 123 581 0 0 4,168 Itasca Moraine 711 22,240 2 288 1,849 591 552 316 1,621 1,242 1,038 666 497 137 39 31,790 Itasca Moraine, Steep 4 3,095 0 0 165 28 4 0 110 106 349 5 64 8 3 3,940 Mildred Sand Plain 266 4,067 8 107 57 52 56 169 0 641 51 355 34 0 36 5,898 Mosquito Creek 87 2,058 14 0 17 0 10 124 48 381 429 93 0 0 0 3,262 Drumlin Plain Nimrod Drumlin Plain 165 4,500 0 37 14 0 222 162 0 1,232 0 446 0 0 7 6,787 Outing Moraine 965 14,067 0 63 234 404 21 179 985 680 1,421 415 649 326 15 20,424 Park Rapids Sand Plain 0 1,074 0 0 4 0 352 0 0 317 24 0 0 6 0 1,777 Pillager Sand Plain* 37 87 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 58 0 0 0 189 Pine River Drumlin Plain 363 4,971 15 173 184 33 102 221 433 363 260 206 0 6 3 7,333 Rosey Lake Plain** 344 3,332 148 38 47 513 3 413 290 40 0 1,166 305 0 6 6,645 Spring Brook Till Plain 1,142 20,642 28 209 508 545 164 469 814 877 1,464 411 707 22 50 28,053 St. Croix Moraine 468 17,236 0 55 1,037 2 15 348 319 1,502 3,275 72 135 60 88 24,611 Sugar Hills Moraine 108 4,512 17 58 144 135 0 191 855 14 6 16 349 0 2 6,408 Swan Creek Sand Plain 27 1,148 0 0 0 9 331 0 0 2,251 0 78 0 0 13 3,857 Total 5,470 112,422 282 1,175 4,672 2,850 1,982 3,209 7,044 9,952 8,780 4,262 3,643 564 262 166,572

*Includes very small portion (<0.5%) of Deer River Peatlands **Includes very small portion (<0.1%) of Mississippi Sand Plain Note: figures may vary slightly from those in other tables due to rounding

► 33 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Table 6. Commercial Forest Available for Harvest: Distribution by Native Plant Community and Cover Types on Cass County Tax-Forfeited Lands (acres)

Native Plant Ash Aspen Balm of Balsam Birch Black Jack Pine Lowland Northern Red Pine Oak Tamarack White White White Total Community Gilead Fir Spruce Hardwoods Hardwoods Cedar Pine Spruce

FDc24: Central Rich 0 4,676 0 21 154 0 279 25 49 1,893 56 0 0 19 22 7,194 Dry Pine Woodland FDc34: Central Dry- 35 29,755 0 79 1,584 0 503 58 1,409 2,451 4,668 0 0 356 64 40,962 Mesic Pine- Hardwood Forest FDn33: Northern Dry- 34 46,733 25 302 1,960 21 840 24 2,334 4,350 2,941 34 0 162 121 59,881 Mesic Mixed Woodland FPn82: Northern Rich 3,270 331 53 349 27 2,537 5 1,306 66 11 1 2,881 3,348 0 0 14,185 Tamarack Swamp MHc26: Centry Dry- 346 6,911 8 71 117 0 122 380 367 432 420 2 0 0 6 9,182 Mesic Oak-Aspen Forest MHc36: Central 100 7,432 5 14 290 0 212 14 264 231 252 30 35 23 39 8,941 Mesic Hardwood Forest MHn35: Northern 14 2,089 0 11 203 0 0 0 940 11 178 0 9 5 0 3,460 Mesic Hardwood Forest MHn44: Northern 608 12,978 161 116 229 135 3 494 1,554 60 228 58 98 0 11 16,733 Wet-Mesic Boreal Hardwood-Conifer Forest WFn64: Northern 431 981 0 49 53 7 6 277 25 0 27 8 90 0 0 1,954 Very Wet Ash Swamp WMn82: Northern 596 188 30 178 0 95 0 600 0 46 0 1,226 41 0 0 3,000 Wet Meadow/Carr Water 0 35 0 0 8 57 0 0 33 1 6 10 23 0 0 173

Total 5,434 112,109 282 1,190 4,625 2,852 1,970 3,178 7,041 9,486 8,777 4,249 3,644 565 263 165,665

► 34 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

4.5 Resource Assessment

Cover type by LTA and NPC As illustrated in the prior section, Cass County has structured its forest management around Land Type Associations (LTAs) and Native Plant Communities (NPCs) as a means to use ecological potential as the basis for management. Tables 3 through 6 provide an overview of the county’s forest resources by LTA and NPC (also see Appendix A). Again, it must be noted that the acres listed in the tables are “harvestable” acres, that is, those likely available for active management (excluding acres occupied by wetlands or within buffer zones around wetlands, lakes, and streams, and areas with steep slope or are isolated very small tracts).

Age class distribution Depicting forest cover types by ten-year age-class groups provides a valuable understanding of the forest. Age-class distributions can indicate the expected flow of harvestable trees, the character of the forests (young vs old) and stands that may be naturally succeeding into other cover types. Table 7 shows the age- class distributions for the harvestable commercial forest on Cass County’s tax- forfeited lands.

In reviewing the information in Table 7 it is important to understand how Minnesota’s forests have been shaped over the past century plus. Over 100 years ago much of the forest was harvested. Then came extensive fires and conversion of former forestland to agriculture; during the Great Depression many farms were abandoned. Slowly, the forest reclaimed these lands through natural regeneration and during a period of time when public lands were not being actively managed for multiple use goals. Around 1970, aspen, an early succession species then nearing maturity became the primary raw material for paper making and other forest product manufacturers in the region. This led to harvesting of the aspen resource and the resetting of stands back to the regeneration phase. Other than aspen, most of the other cover types are older and reflect the natural reforestation that occurred decades ago; many of these species are longer-lived trees such as oak, northern hardwoods, and black spruce. Some species such as ash and tamarack do not have consistent markets making management cost prohibitive and resulting in cover type acres in older age classes.

► 35 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Table 7. Age-class Distribution for Harvestable Commercial Forest Cover Types on Cass County Tax-Forfeited Lands, 2019 (acres)

Cover Type 0-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71-80 81-90 91-100 101-110 111-120 121+ Total Ash 110 0 9 14 83 113 53 145 481 1,127 1,151 1,076 1,108 5,470 Aspen 21,568 23,630 24,998 19,511 10,233 1,737 769 2,488 5,135 2,042 252 19 26 112,408 Balm of Gilead 59 32 0 0 14 0 0 13 119 44 0 0 0 282 Balsam Fir 118 5 0 20 66 171 83 114 258 167 147 42 0 1,190 Birch 1,522 929 128 81 44 41 118 418 853 475 45 16 0 4,672 Black Spruce 1 0 24 76 163 349 157 303 555 403 241 234 344 2,850 Jack Pine 293 394 395 186 384 28 20 112 136 28 5 0 1 1,982 Lowland Hardwoods 209 26 2 28 44 35 12 68 706 997 360 223 500 3,209 Northern Hardwoods 1,950 203 74 175 45 144 298 628 1,574 1,165 665 85 38 7,044 Red Pine 1,036 2,497 326 1,470 939 490 176 174 480 441 530 982 414 9,955 Oak 2,416 173 32 42 0 147 187 568 1,960 2,943 293 18 2 8,780 Tamarack 153 23 0 133 341 131 272 222 426 350 596 911 705 4,262 White Cedar 0 0 0 0 24 33 138 35 312 366 213 365 2,159 3,644 White Pine 10 16 12 45 7 13 37 95 39 5 110 41 136 564 White Spruce 17 0 35 126 0 1 15 22 32 1 13 0 0 262 Total 29,463 27,927 26,034 21,907 12,389 3,432 2,336 5,405 13,067 10,554 4,620 4,013 5,430 166,576

*Harvestable acres are total commercial forested acres minus those within buffer zones around wetlands, streams, and bodies of water, or on steep slope or in very small tracts.

► 36 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

High Conservation Value Forests Cass County is certified to the standards of the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). One of the FSC principles is that a certified forest manager will assess its resource for the presence of “high conservation value forests” (HCVF) and manage them accordingly. The FSC® recognizes six categories of HCV and provides additional regional guidance for their identification and designation. • HCV1: forest areas containing globally, regionally, or nationally significant concentrations of biodiversity values (e.g., endemism, endangered species, refugia); • HCV2: forest areas containing globally, regionally, or nationally significant large landscape level forests, contained within, or containing the management unit, where viable populations of most if not all naturally occurring species exist in natural patterns of distribution and abundance; • HCV3: forest areas that are in or contain rare, threatened, or endangered ecosystems; • HCV4: forest areas that provide basic services of nature in critical situations (e.g., watershed protection, erosion control); • HCV5: forest areas fundamental to meeting basic needs of local communities (e.g., subsistence, health); or, • HCV6: forest areas critical to local communities’ traditional cultural identity (areas of cultural, ecological, economic or religious significance identified in cooperation with such local communities).

In accordance with FSC® policies and standards, Cass County has conducted an assessment to identify HCVFs and engaged in consultation with experts and stakeholders, including affected Tribal interests to provide input to the HCVF designations. In accordance with the certification requirements Cass County has undertaken a process to identify, consult, manage, and monitor HCVFs occurring on county-managed lands. As a result of this process Cass County has designated the following HCVF and provides for its management and monitoring as described below.

Bear Island (in Leech Lake), Designated HCVF Size: 138.2 Acres

Location: All county administered land in Sections 2, 11, 12-142-29 on Bear Island in Leech Lake falling within a larger matrix of Leech Lake Reservation lands, U.S.F.S. Chippewa National Forest lands, and private land.

High Conservation Values (HCV3 and HCV6): 1) Bear Island is an island in Leech Lake with significant American Indian heritage and contains unusual plant communities because of its location in a warmer lake-affected micro-climate. 2) Bear Island has known populations of rare plants and forest communities as indicated on the Natural Resource Heritage Database. Therefore, 138.2 acres of

► 37

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

county administered land has a potential to contain American Indian cultural sites, endemic species, and rare plant and forest communities.

Activities: No timber harvesting will be allowed.

Land sale: The county may sell or exchange out of any or all of the 138.2 acres with the following stipulations: The acquiring party is either DNR, U.S.F.S., Leech Lake Band of Chippewa, The Nature Conservancy, or, A conservation easement protecting or enhancing the High Conservation Value Forest is in place.

Monitoring: Monitoring is conducted regularly to ensure that no harvest activities have taken place by Cass County or through trespass by any other entity. The Natural Heritage database is monitored at least once every five years to determine whether the status of any species that occur or potentially occur within the HCVF has changed. The Tribal Historic Preservation Office database is monitored at least once every five years to determine whether the status of any sites that exist or potentially exist within the HCVF have changed. If a land sale or exchange would occur involving any or all of the HCVF, monitoring shall be continued to ensure that the applicable stipulations have been met.

► 38

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Representative Sample Areas In addition to high conservation value forests, FSC certification stipulates management requirements for “representative sample areas”. These are areas designated to serve one or more of three purposes: (1) to establish and/or maintain an ecological reference condition; (2) to create or maintain an under- represented ecological condition (e.g., includes samples of successional phases, forest types, ecosystems, and/or ecological communities); or (3) to serve as a set of protected areas or refugia for species, communities and community types not captured in other Criteria of this Standard (e.g., to prevent common ecosystems or components from becoming rare). Areas serving purposes 1 and 3 will be generally fixed in location. Areas serving purpose 2 may move across the landscape as under-represented conditions change or may be fixed in an area and manipulated to maintain the desired conditions.

FSC requirements state: “Representative samples of existing ecosystems within the landscape shall be protected in their natural state and recorded on maps, appropriate to the scale and intensity of operations and the uniqueness of the affected resources.” When forest management activities (including timber harvest) create and maintain conditions that emulate an intact, mature forest or other successional phases that may be under-represented in the landscape, the management system that created those conditions may be used to maintain them, and the area may be considered as a representative sample for the purposes of meeting this criterion.

The designated representative sample areas on Cass County tax-forfeited land are:

Bear Island (Also, an HCVF, see description in previous discussion).

Deep Portage Learning Center Size: 655 Acres

Location: All county administered lands in 31-140-29; N½ NW¼, 6-139-29; N½ NE¼, 6-139-29; part of W½ NW¼, 32-140-29; and part of NE¼ NW¼, 32-140-29 (Ponto Lake and Blind Lake Townships)

Description: The Deep Portage Learning Center was originally created as a “Natural and Scientific Area”, with the intent that no timber harvest would occur within its boundaries. Timber cover types within the preserve include Aspen, Paper Birch, Jack Pine and Red Pine. These cover types will be monitored as representative samples for the county. The Red Pine will also be evaluated for old growth characteristics. A section of the Boy River, part of Blind Lake and the southern shore of Big Deep Lake is included and is a wildlife travel corridor. The Natural Resources Heritage Database indicates the existence of nesting of rare species within the preserve.

► 39

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Monitoring: Annual monitoring will occur to ensure that no harvest activities have taken place by Cass County or through trespass by any other entity. The Natural Heritage database will be monitored at least once every five years to determine whether the status of any species that occur or potentially occur with the area has changed. Aerial photos are reviewed for monitoring the aspen, birch, jack pine, and red pine.

Climate Change Mitigation and Response Climate change is a recognized major threat to the environment and natural resources. In a September 2020 report prepared for the Minnesota Forest Resources Council (MFRC)8, the Council’s Research Advisory Committee acknowledges that through science-based adaptation of forest management strategies Minnesota’s forests provide a potential tool for mitigating emissions and building a comprehensive climate strategy. Maintaining and developing forest product industries which contribute to the storage of carbon in wood products, mitigation of the use of fossil fuels through biobased products and energy sources, and contributions to the enhancement of forest cover are essential components of this strategy. The results of on-going research and climate change vulnerability assessments in the region provide guidance on adaptation approaches for land management.9 This guidance informs the management strategies of the Cass County Land Department.

8 MFRC. 2020. Climate change and Minnesota’s forests: A report prepared for the Minnesota Forest Resources Council by the Research Advisory Committee. September 16, 2020. https://mn.gov/frc/docs/Climate_Change_and_Minnesota's_Forests_2020.pdf 9 Swanston, Christopher W.; Janowiak, Maria K.; Brandt, Leslie A.; Butler, Patricia R.; Handler, Stephen D.; Shannon, P. Danielle; Derby Lewis, Abigail; Hall, Kimberly; Fahey, Robert T.; Scott, Lydia; Kerber, Angela; Miesbauer, Jason W.; Darling, Lindsay; Parker, Linda; St. Pierre, Matt. 2016. Forest Adaptation Resources: climate change tools and approaches for land managers, 2nd ed. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-GTR-87-2. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station. 161p. https://www.fs.usda.gov/treesearch/pubs/52760

► 40

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Chapter 5.0 Department Administration

5.1. Assessment

Department Organization Under state law M.S. 282 counties are authorized to administer land that has been forfeited to the State of Minnesota for non-payment of property taxes. The counties administer as a statutory trust on behalf of the taxpayers, school districts, and local units of government.

Cass County administers its tax forfeited lands through the Land Department. The Department operates through the following staff structure: • Cass County Board of Commissioners: governing body for Cass County • Land Commissioner: oversees the Department; reports to the County Board • Forest Resource Managers: each is a professional forester with an assigned district to manage

Advisory Committees The Land Department is advised by the Cass County Natural Resources Advisory Committee comprised of the elected officials of the Soil & Water Conservation District (SWCD) Board concerned about responsible private and public land management. The committee, which also serves other Cass County departments, provides advice to the Land Department on policy issues. It is utilized in planning efforts such as this strategic plan to facilitate public input and involvement.

Advisory Committee Policy 1. The Cass County Natural Resources Advisory Committee comprised of the elected officials from the SWCD Board will serve as the citizen’s review board for the Land Department, which the Department will regularly consult during the year. 2. Establish and use a process, in conformance with state law, by which Land Department decisions may be appealed.

Planning and Coordination This strategic plan updates one that was adopted in 2010. The Land Department is committed to reviewing its strategic plan every 10 years and preparing an update as needed based upon the results of the periodic review.

The County has identified an overall need to have broader and more intensive formal cooperation with key entities including the US Forest Service (Chippewa National Forest), Minnesota DNR, and the Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe. As part of this need, the County seeks to develop working agreements with these entities

► 41

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

on a range of issues including enforcement, resource management in defined areas, recreational trail development and maintenance, and others. One specific example of this type of working agreement is the collaboration between Cass County, the USFS, and the MNDNR on a prescribed burning program.

Planning and Coordination Policy 1. Regularly consult with the MNDNR, US Forest Service, and Leech Lake Reservation about strategic and tactical management issues and activities. This includes providing opportunities for these entities to comment on strategic and tactical plans. 2. Prepare and review periodic timber harvest plans and make information about harvesting activities available to the public.

Deep Portage: A Special Resource Deep Portage Learning Center occupies 6,300 acres of land administered by Cass County through its Land Department. The reserve is the focal point of the County’s initiatives in education and conservation. Although the land and buildings at Deep Portage are owned by the County, the operation of the reserve and its programs is done by the Deep Portage Foundation, a non-profit organization with a long-term contract with the County.

The mission of Deep Portage is to generate a citizenry that will be environmentally responsible on its own volition. Deep Portage seeks to achieve that mission by providing a quality experience in a quality outdoor environment where participants learn a personal commitment preserving the environment for future generations.

The developed campus includes a 50,000+ square foot Resources Heritage Center with meeting rooms, library, classrooms, theater, food service, and overnight accommodations for up to 175. The Interpretive Center houses a museum, freshwater lab, and bookstore and is the starting point for the many miles of nature and cross-country ski trails. Outside classrooms include the wildflower gardens, eleven miles of ski trails, lake piers, weather station, archery range, compass schoolyard, rifle and trap ranges, sporting clays, bog boardwalk, orienteering course, and forest management demonstrations. That latter point is important for the Land Department actively manages the forested land of the reserve. Key to Deep Portage is recognition of how modern- era forests require proper forest management.

Deep Portage was established in 1973, a master plan adopted in 1975, and development of the first interpretive center and recreational trails in 1979. Construction of the Heritage Center in 1987 allowed for overnight residential stays and learning programs.

The facility is accredited by the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools and has received numerous awards and commendations over the years.

► 42

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Deep Portage Policy 1. Retain, maintain, and enhance the Deep Portage Learning Center as preeminent conservation education facility.

County Ordinances Section 1105 County Administered Lands – Private Use from the Land Use Ordinances for Cass County MN provides the following guidance.

A. It shall be a violation of this Ordinance for any person to create campsites on County administered lands except in areas specifically designated by the Cass County Land Commissioner for those uses. B. It shall be a violation of this Ordinance for any person to operate a motor vehicle on County-administered land within fifty (50) feet of a lake, river or type 1-8 wetland except on county administered forest trails. C. It shall also be a violation of this Ordinance for any person to destroy native aquatic or upland vegetation, create erosion problems, or cause an increase in sediment deposition into lakes, rivers, or type 1-8 wetlands. D. It shall be a violation of this Ordinance for any person to operate a motor vehicle on County-administered forest trails that are posted: “CLOSED TO MOTORIZED VEHICLES”. E. This Section may be enforced by Cass County enforcement personnel or other jurisdictions by mutual agreement.

County Ordinance 1988-3 governs the Soo Line recreational trail.

Ordinance 1997-03 concerns shoreland/wetlands and addresses a limit aspect of use on public lands.

Land Use Ordinance (Ordinance 2018-02) applies to private structures and uses (e.g., gravel pits, towers) on County administered tax forfeit land.

Ordinance and Regulation Policy 1. Establish appropriate and enforceable regulations governing use of tax forfeited lands.

Resource Data The County maintains a detailed inventory of its resources and regularly updates its photo library. However, there is a continual need to enhance the level of information contained in the inventory and keep the data up to date. Particular attention must be given to regenerating stands as well as to older stands that may be succeeding into other cover types.

Resource Data Policy 1. Maintain, enhance, and keep up to date the electronic forest inventory database of the County administered tax-forfeited lands.

► 43

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

2. Utilize the inventory database to include information on stand-level management decisions to inform future land managers about current decisions, and provide the basis for monitoring, evaluating, and modifying management decisions.

Procedures The Land Department has adopted procedures that guide day-to-day activities within the Department. Some procedures are purely internally oriented such as those concerning data recording and personnel actions. Others have external applications such as how to obtain permits and timber sale directions.

Procedure Development Policy 1. Update as appropriate procedures governing key aspects of Department activity. 2. Adopt uniform Documentation Control for procedures including at a minimum: unique name, page numbering, revision date, and revision history.

5.2 Procedures The Land Department has adopted procedures addressing administration and planning. These procedures are amended from time to time. Readers are directed to the Land Department website for the latest versions (www.co.cass.mn.us/land/land_home.html ).

► 44

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Chapter 6.0 Revenue Generation

Public land provides many values to residents and visitors with a critical one being economic. Cass County’s lands support a timber products industry and are vital to the region’s tourism economy. In addition, the lands generate direct income to local government.

It must be noted that County is required by state law to generate income for the tax jurisdictions within the county. While this mandate does not necessarily overwhelm all other management values, the County cannot lose sight of it.

Table 8 shows the general sources of income and the annual tax forfeit settlement for the Land Department over the most recent 10-year period

Table 8. Cass County Land Department Income and Tax Forfeit Apportionment, 2010-2019

Income Tax Forfeit Year Settlement* Timber Sales Land Sales All Other Total 2010 $1,893,591 $373,330 $82,395 $2,349,316 $1,341,021 2011 $1,785,382 $35,800 $71,290 $1,892,472 $1,201,930 2012 $1,501,604 $750,175 $60,411 $2,312,190 $1,021,682 2013 $1,356,809 $480,700 $84,981 $1,922,490 $1,396,809 2014 $1,821,278 $408,775 $65,468 $2,295,521 $915,231 2015 $1,738,077 $231,448 $77,303 $2,046,828 $1,376,217 2016 $1,833,007 $483,210 $125,131 $2,441,348 $1,219,192 2017 $2,098,296 $378,872 $94,815 $2,571,983 $1,562,051 2018 $1,908,160 $511,733 $100,462 $2,520,335 $1,720,188 2019 $1,881,180 $603,885 $322,521 $2,807,586 $1,647,236 *” Tax forfeit settlement” is the net funds remaining after expenses are deducted from annual revenues. Distribution of the settlement is determined by state law by which a portion can be retained by the department for reforestation activities and recreational facilities; the remainder is distributed to the County and local taxing jurisdictions. These funds are generated in one year and distributed in the next.

The Tax Forfeit Settlement is the amount remaining after expenses have been subtracted from annual income. The County is required by law to distribute the Settlement as follows: up to 30% can be retained by the Land Department to finance reforestation; 20% may be retained by the County for recreational facilities; the remainder is distributed to the taxing jurisdictions of the county according to guidelines set in legislation.

In addition to the apportionment of net revenues generated by activities on forfeited tax land, the county and local jurisdictions also receive payments-in-

► 45

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

lieu-of-taxes (PILT) from the Federal and State governments to help compensate for the large public land holdings in the county.

Revenue Distribution Policy 1. Distribute the annual Tax Forfeit Settlement generated by Land Department activity in accord with state statute. 2. Provide a consistent and stable annual tax forfeit settlement.

Conservation Trust -- Fund 73 In 2000 the Minnesota legislature directed Cass County and other counties to sell former State lakeshore lease lots and to legally reserve the principal amount of the proceeds in perpetuity. The interest earned on these funds is available to Cass County for “improvement of natural resources.” As of January 2020, the principal amount was over $4.1 million in this Conservation Trust (Fund 73). Uses of the fund are listed in the following policy.

Conservation Trust – Fund 73 Policy 1. Eligible projects in order of priority: • Presently inaccessible public land – consolidation of public land base. • Permanent ownership and development of year-round destination trails. • Individual sewage treatment systems (ISTS) performance audits managed by Cities, Townships, or Lake Associations. • Purchase of critical habitat. • The percent of matching funds elevates the priority. 2. Minimum project criteria: • Submittal and approval by the affected Township or City. • No net loss or gain to tax capacity on a value basis – identify replacement sale scenario. • A minimum 50% match to the fund 73 cash proposed for use for purchase of critical habitat.

Undivided Ownership A small portion of county administered tax-forfeit lands include what is known as undivided ownership. In nearly all cases these are lands formerly owned by members of the Leech Lake Band of Chippewa in which multiple descendants of the original owners now share increasingly small percentages of ownership in the entire parcel. Many of the subsequent owners are not known.

After securing legal advice, the county is managing these lands as part of its overall forest management program. At some point, if and when the undivided interest owners are identified, any revenues generated by management of these lands will be shared, based on ownership percentage, with these owners.

► 46

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Undivided Interest Ownership Management & Revenue Distribution Policy 1. Cass County will manage lands with multiple undivided ownership interests, one of which is the County or State through tax-forfeiture, as part of its overall land base. This will include timber harvesting. 2. Cass County will continue to notify the Leech Lake Band of all public land auctions. 3. As with any other tax-forfeit parcel, if an individual, including the Leech Lake Band, feels that he, she or it has a legal title interest in the property, it is incumbent upon that person or entity to advance that interest and prove that claim. The county will act according to the disposition of that claim.

► 47

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Chapter 7.0 Land Base, Leases, Easements & Use Permits

7.1. Assessment Cass County administers about 257,719 acres or 20% of the entire county. Another 22% is administered by the Federal government (primarily the Chippewa National Forest managed by the US Forest Service), the State 15% (most managed by the Department of Natural Resources), and the Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe directly owns slightly more than 1% (the Tribe holds rights on a much greater area). The remaining 41% is owned by private interests including industrial forest owners.

The ownerships are roughly grouped as follows: Federal and tribal ownership dominates the northern third of the county; state ownership is mixed throughout but is heavy in the middle and southwest; County ownership is heaviest in an arc that stretches westward from Smokey Hollow and Beulah Townships down the middle of the southern portion of the county.

The management of public lands is vital to the well-being of the residents and visitors to the County. Cass County recognizes the multi-faceted value of its tax forfeited land base relative to sustaining the forest products and tourism economy, providing wildlife habitat and clean water, conserving vital natural features and processes, and offering a setting for education. To these ends, the County has the objective of maintaining its public land base. The County will seek to consolidate its holdings in order to facilitate various management purposes. However, all acquisitions and exchanges are intended to be tax base neutral in that the net taxable land in the county is not diminished. It will also ensure there is no net loss of acres of County administered land.

In 1998 the County Board authorized the Land Department to purchase land from private owners, then re-sell other County administered land of equal value. This program is designed to enable the county to acquire environmentally sensitive tracts (often wetlands or tracts not currently served by roads) and ones that are usually adjacent to other County-managed lands. This program helps to manage the need to extend public roads and services to remote, expensive to serve areas and thereby reducing future County expenditures.

Cass County will seek to acquire land through purchase, donation, or exchange in order to protect and preserve public access to lakes, streams and forests and to protect recreational corridors (e.g., trails).

General Land Base Policy 1. Continue to allocate resources in conjunction with citizen conservation groups to acquire critical habitat and recreational corridor parcels.

► 48

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Acquisitions should be considered if they meet one or more of the following criteria. • Consolidates the ownership of county managed land. • Improve public access to county managed land and other public land. • Reduce the amount of property line. • Provide and/or enhance an important recreational need • Serves to protect environmentally sensitive tracts from potential development and subsequent degradation of natural and/or cultural resources. • Increase timber productivity (acres of upland/commercial forest land) • All acquisitions approved by the local unit of government (Township or City) prior to County Board approval. 2. Support a tax policy that encourages increased use by private individuals and corporations of conservation easements and land management practices that preserve and/or enhance the north woods aesthetics of Cass County particularly along lakes and streams. 3. There is no net loss of County-administered land. 4. County administered land that is inaccessible to the public is to be identified and analyzed on a case by case basis. Within the context of the overall Land Asset Management Program for the County each tract is to be considered for retention as is, sale and replacement, or for development of public access. If it is determined that access to the public is the best solution, the first option will be to request an easement from adjoining landowners or, if that is not viable, then the County will petition the Township for access. Any change in management on these parcels will require consent of the affected local units of government. The Forest Resource Manager for the area will approach the local units of government providing site information and a history of the forest road or location in question. All fees associated with acquiring access will be the responsibility of the County. 5. Retain ownership of riparian forest lands and forest lands important for the protection of wetlands as needed. The County lands include approximately 75,000 acres of wetland types, nearly 30% of the County- administered ownership.

Land Administration and Classification State law (MS 282.01, Subd. 1) requires county boards to classify all tax-forfeited land as either conservation or non-conservation land. Conservation lands are to be retained for county management and non-conservation lands may be sold or transferred. As guided by statute, classification is to consider such issues as current use of adjacent lands, soil productivity, character of the forest or other growth, access to established roads, schools and public services, and the suitability of the forest resources for management by the county. The County considers the following criteria when determining if a parcel should be acquired, retained if newly forfeited, and if retained, should it be classified as conservation land.

► 49

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Consolidation 1. Does the parcel consolidate Public ownership (federal, state, county, local) particularly in areas where larger land blocks contribute to proper forest management, where watershed management concerns are especially vital, or where recreational opportunities can be enhanced? 2. Does the parcel adjoin existing TF lands? If so, on how many sides? Access 1. Does the parcel have physical, legal access? 3. What is the accessibility of this land to established roads, schools, and other public services? 4. Does the parcel obtain forest management or recreation access to larger blocks of land (summer access and access to landlocked parcels being most desirable)? 5. Is the access on a paved road, gravel road or dirt road? Present/ Future Use 1. What is the present use of adjacent lands? 2. Does the parcel have a peculiar suitability or desirability for particular uses? 3. Does the parcel encourage and foster a mode of land utilization that will facilitate the economical and adequate provision of transportation, roads, water supply, drainage, sanitation, education, and recreation? 4. Does/Can the land facilitate a reduction of governmental expenditures? 6. Does the parcel foster and develop agriculture and other industries in the districts and places best suited to them? 7. Is the tax forfeit parcel better suited for development? (ie. adjacent to transportation and/or utility infrastructure or other development considerations. 8. Is the parcel better off in other ownership (Fed, State, City, Township Private)? Natural Resource Management 1. What is the productivity of the soil? 2. What is the character of forest or other growth? 3. Does the parcel conserve and develop the natural resources? 4. Does the parcel serve to protect environmentally sensitive tracts from potential development and subsequent degradation of natural and/or cultural resources? 5. Does the parcel have potential gravel sources? 6. Are there any significant cultural historical features located on the parcel? Forest Management 1. Is the parcel suitable forest resource, multiple use or sustained yield management?

► 50

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

2. Does the parcel increase timber productivity (acres of upland/commercial forest land)? 3. Does the parcel have mature timber? What is the timber value? 4. Does the parcel reduce the amount of property line to maintain? Recreation Management 1. Does the parcel provide and/or enhance an important recreational need (lake access, existing snowmobile trail or future recreation)?

Land Classification Policy 1. Use the Natural Resource Advisory Committee as the on-going group to provide input and oversight concerning the land base. 2. The Land Commissioner shall conduct annual classification review of newly acquired tax forfeit lands with recommendations acted upon by County Board under state law. Conduct 5-10-year reviews of all lands.

Mississippi River Corridor Cass is one of eight counties comprising of the Mississippi River Headwaters Board (MHB), a cooperative venture created to oversee public and private land use and management within the river corridor. Of particular interest to this plan is the MHB’s desire to expand the amount of public land within the corridor and to insure responsible forest management.

Most of the river corridor lying within Cass County is in public ownership, primarily Federal or tribal lands. The management of County administered lands within the corridor has been in accord with MHB guidelines and will continue to be so under this updated strategic plan.

Leases State law authorizes counties to lease the right to occupy or use public land; leases can be with private or public entities. Leases can be used for hunting cabins, agriculture, gravel extraction, placement of structures such as communication towers, and similar uses.

Over the years Cass County has issued leases for agricultural activities, primarily harvesting of hay. The number of active leases varies by the year; currently there are no leases. The County has had three hay stumpage permits in the past but plans to phase these out in the near future. There have been instances of agricultural trespass where non-leaseholders have harvested hay on County land. The county is seeking to cease all such leases.

Cass County has never issued many leases for cabins or hunting shacks. Currently there is only one such lease, which will terminate upon the death of the leaseholder. No new leases will be issued.

► 51

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

The County has issued a small number of leases for lake lots in the past. The remaining leases will terminate upon the death of the leaseholder. No additional leases will be issued.

Gravel from County lands is available to the County and private sector. Major sales and operations are handled through the County Highway Department. Sites are not leased to private operators, but they can contract to remove gravel from a pit or to create a new one. Creation of new pits must meet the standards of Cass County’s zoning and other pertinent ordinances and FSC Standards.

Lease Policy 1. No new leases for any purpose will be issued by the county. 2. No new recreational cabin (hunting shack leases) shall be granted and all existing such leases shall be terminated upon the death of the leaseholders. 3. Specifically, no new lake lot leases shall be granted and all existing such leases shall terminate upon the death the current leaseholder. 4. No new hay leases shall be issued. Existing hay leases have been replaced by hay stumpage permits. No new hay stumpage permits shall be issued. Existing hay stumpage permits shall be terminated if no bids on them are received.

Gravel Sale Policy 1. Regarding gravel pit operations, the County’s policy is: all gravel and or fill resources proposed for sale are reviewed by the County Highway Department to ensure that critical resources are reserved for County road projects. A uniform price per yard sale shall be established by the County with said price being reviewed every 3-5 years for consistency with the market; and, establishment of new pits are subject to the standards and requirements of all appropriate County ordinances and FSC Standards.

Non-Timber Forest Products and Values While timber harvesting dominates management activities, a number of non- timber values are also present in the landscape. The County recognizes these, many of which support traditional cultural activities, as valid and valuable uses of the forest. These include gathering of fruits and berries, maple syrup tapping, and similar activities.

At present, the County does not see any conflicts or issues with most of these activities. However, there are several that may require a policy response. These uses include trapping leeches from natural ponds, seining minnows from natural ponds, and maple syrup tapping. Of these, the first two are quite prevalent on Cass County lands although there are no precise figures. Currently, the County does not require a permit or any form of authorization for individuals or firms to trap leeches or seine minnows on County managed lands although State licenses are required.

► 52

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

The gathering of plants (whole or parts including berries), pine/fir cones, nuts and seeds, and other similar vegetative materials is allowed without a permit provided such activity is consistent with State and Federal laws and does not result in the destruction or serious depletion of the resource. Under no circumstances may Federal or State listed rare, threatened, endangered, or species of concern be gathered.

Potentially damaging activities such as balsam bough and birch bark collecting will be by permit only. The harvest of products whose harvest could potentially damage trees shall be permitted in a fashion similar to timber harvesting. The current level of activity is relatively low and/or highly localized. However, the County deems it appropriate to have a system in place to track this activity and direct harvesting to designated areas.

No road use permits will be issued for non-timber resource harvest, including firewood, if access is closed or restricted, unless the big game exception applies.

Maple Tapping Maple sugar tapping on County administered tax-forfeited lands requires a Land Department permit. The purpose of these permits is to define sugar bushes, encourage responsible tapping, and prevent conflict between tappers. To date there have been no issues but the permit system helps preclude them in the future. Tapping and collecting of tree sap for making syrup may be allowed provided that the individual obtains a permit for such activity.

Balsam Boughs Permits for balsam bough harvesting will be issued to individuals for general geographic areas, most likely legal sections. The permits will require application of best management practices (state guidelines on balsam bough harvesting), inform harvesters they are legally liable for any trespass that may occur, and require harvesters to have a copy of their permit on them when harvesting.

Birch Bark Birch bark harvesting permits will be restricted to areas included in upcoming, marked timber sales. The boundaries of these areas will be marked with boundary paint. Harvesters will be required to secure permission from loggers if they wish to harvest balsam boughs or birch bark on lands that are controlled by an active timber sale permit.

Firewood Policy Firewood sales, unless part of an Informal Sale, will be open to all purchasers. Firewood sales will be of down wood only; there will be no firewood sales in standing timber unless the wood is standing dead and is deemed necessary to improve the stand by the area Resource Manager. The cost is $25.00 for up to 10 cords of firewood.

► 53

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Easements State law allows counties to grant easements to parties that require access across County land in order to use their property or for utility corridors. Easements are conditional and may be revoked. Payments for easements may be one-time or annual. The major easements across Cass County lands are for utility companies for power lines - Lake Country Power, Crow Wing Co-op, Great River Energy, and Minnesota Power.

Easement Policy 1. Cass County’s policy for reviewing and issuing easements is: 2. The review of easement requests will include a requirement to demonstrate that no other reasonable alternative exist and that the easement will not cause adverse or significant environmental impact. Easements granted across County Administered Land that require new road construction are subject to Local Unit of Government approval. The Land Department will encourage the Local Unit of Government to be the recipient of the easement when appropriate. The Resource Manager for the area will approach the local unit of government providing local information and a history of the forest road or location in question. 3. All fees associated with the easement will be the responsibility of the requesting party.

Special Use Deeds Since the 1940s the Minnesota Department of Revenue (DOR) has issued special use deeds to local government units (LGU) conveying State Tax Forfeited land free of charge for roads, trails, public dump grounds, landfills, parks, fire halls, and other authorized public uses. A 2010 state law change has placed an expiration date on issued special use deeds. The first expiration date is effective January 1, 2015 for special use deeds older than 30 years.

Property conveyed to an LGU under a special use deed must be used for the authorized public use or the property shall automatically return to tax-forfeit status. Property conveyed to an LGU under a special use deed set to expire and used for the authorized public use will result automatically in the LGU holding title to the property in fee simple.

The 2010 legislation defined authorized public uses as: 1. A road, or right-of-way for a road 2. A park that is both available to, and accessible by, the public that contains amenities such as campgrounds, playgrounds, athletic fields, trails, or shelters 3. Trails for walking, biking, snowmobiling, or other recreational purposes along with a reasonable amount of surrounding land 4. Transit facilities for buses, light rail, commuter rail or passenger rail 5. Public beaches or boat launches 6. Civic recreation or conference facilities

► 54

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

7. Public services facilities such as fire halls, police station, lift stations, water towers sanitation and water treatment facilities and administrative offices

Special Use Deed Policy 1. Cass County encourages the Local Unit of Government to purchase the public use parcels at their market value.

7.2 Procedures The Land Department has adopted procedures addressing land base management. These procedures are amended from time to time. Readers are directed to the Land Department website for the latest versions (www.co.cass.mn.us/land/land_home.html ).

► 55

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Chapter 8.0 Recreation Facilities and Trails

8.1. Assessment Cass County is meeting its obligation to provide recreational opportunities on its land base by managing the land in a manner that encourages and supports dispersed recreation (e.g., hunting, hiking, wildlife watching, etc.). Outside of trails, the County does not intend to create recreational facilities such as picnic grounds, parks, campgrounds, or boat accesses.

Travel on recreational trails is a major activity across County lands. While the County does not intend to construct the trails, it will make its land base available to agencies such as the MNDNR and organized user groups to locate and develop appropriate trails on its land. The County will work with user groups, the DNR, and affected property owners on planning for future trails. In general, the County will encourage user groups to prepare comprehensive trail system plans so that the County, MNDNR and others can evaluate an entire system of trails, even if development occurs a segment at a time. The County will take action to insure that established recreational corridors are protected and to assist in the acquisition of land for future corridors.

Currently, 89% of the County’s land is open for motorized uses on trails; only 11% is designated solely for non-motorized recreational use. Current policy prohibits driving on- or off-road vehicles on County administered land within 50 feet of a lake, river, or type 1-8 wetland except while on a designated forest road or trail.

Deep Portage Learning Center Area of Limitations In 2011, the Deep Portage Learning Center was designated as an area with limitations and as non-motorized. Public consultation was conducted to seek input from local property owners, the Town Board, area land managers and neighbors. Letters of notification were sent to landowners who own property within a half mile of this property as input to the process is very important. The County Board considers designation requests and neighborhood decisions. In September of 2018, 157 acres in Section 35 of Birch Lake Township were designated as an area with limitations and as non-motorized following public consultation and County Board consideration.

Trails Trails are a major recreational feature on Cass County’s tax forfeited lands. The Land Department directly develops and maintains some systems while others are developed and maintained by private or public entities with County cooperation. • 443 miles of Grant-in-Aid snowmobile trails managed by Cass County. • 58 kilometers of cross-country ski trails: Cut Lake trail (16.5 km); Hiram trail (8.0 km); Washburn Lake (11 km): Goose (14.8km. The Deep Portage trail

► 56

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

(18.2 km) is maintained Deep Portage. These trails also serve as mountain bike trails in the summer. • The County has no restrictions on horseback riding on any County Forest Roads or trails. Currently there are several miles of posted horse trails that are maintained by the Cass County Land Department in cooperation with local users. These trails are not designated and do not require a permit to use. • 20 miles of designated hunter walking trails. All cross-country ski trails are also hunter walking trails (non-motorized). Further, except for designated use by hunters with disabilities, most of Deep Portage is set aside for non- motorized trail use. Approximately 28,000 acres lie within these various non- motorized areas; this is 11% of the entire tax forfeited land base or 15% of the forested lands.

For current maps of trails, readers should visit Cass County’s website (http://www.co.cass.mn.us). This will direct users to an interactive mapping program through which trails can be identified. Interested people can also contact the Land Department for printed maps.

Any development of new trails or expansion or redevelopment of existing ones will be done with several guidelines in mind. First, the County will require the active participation of affected user groups and, preferably, the sponsorship of a local club. Second, wherever possible, trails will be designed to be year-round and support multi-use. Third, trails are to be designed to avoid or at least minimize use of road rights-of-way and to eliminate back-tracking. Fourth, permanent protection of trail corridors and critical segments will be sought.

Recreational Trail Policy 1. The County will use its land base to help establish, promote, manage and retain recreational trail corridors in Cass County. 2. All officially recognized forest roads and trails on tax forfeited lands that are designated by the County Board will be signed as appropriate. 3. All designated forest roads and recreational trails on County administered lands are considered open to motorized recreational vehicles unless specifically posted closed. “Posted closed” includes such measures as signage, gating, and placement of boulders, earth, and other natural materials to indicate that passage by motorized vehicles is clearly prohibited. The big game exemption applies to these trails and licensed hunters are encouraged to use them while pursuing big game. Cass County will work with the State and Federal land managers to secure consistent use designations to avoid conflict and confusion. 4. Off trail motorized travel across County administered tax forfeited lands is prohibited. All motorized recreational vehicles must stay on existing roads and trails in accordance with use designations. In response to unauthorized off trail or cross-country travel, the Land Department, with County Board consent, will post areas closed as a tool to limit resource damage. 5. Motorized recreation scramble areas (e.g., hill climbs, mud runs, etc.) are deemed inappropriate for public forest lands and are not to be allowed.

► 57

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

6. The design and development of recreational trails will involve user groups, the general public, public and private landowners potentially affected by a trail, and demonstrate support from the local units of government (i.e., township(s)) where the trails are located. 7. While priority is given to forest management activities, good faith efforts will be made to adjust schedules and procedures so as to avoid or minimize conflicts with recreational uses, including use of trails. 8. Requests for Designation of County Administered Land will require local unit of government consent. The Cass County Land Department has created a template of land use designations for discussion that was drafted considering historic use, neighboring public land designations, soils, existing resources, wetlands, and forest cover type. This template will be used for reference. Designations will be brought to the County Board for consideration after the following criteria has been reached. • Local units of government need to provide written consent with the proposed routes or areas of limitations. This includes permission from all road authorities where either road right of way or road surface is required. This will avoid County approval on a route that a township or city does not condone. If we require local units of government to approve the plan first, the County will not be pushing a specific route or area on a local unit of government. • Routes and areas of limitations must follow the existing draft management plan that was produced during the public review process for the East Central Trail designations. This map was created by professionals with the intent of protecting the resource and to avoid landowner conflicts. If the proposed route or area of limitations is outside those recommendations, specific mitigation measures must be identified to ensure the resource is being protected and that all affected private property owners have been notified and agree to the use of their property for this purpose. • Designated trails across County Administered Land need to be under the Grant in Aid system (GIA) or maintained by the State of Minnesota. This will not only provide a means of liability protection for the County but will also provide the club or requesting party an additional source of funding for maintenance and signs. All recommendations from the County should require GIA status within a specific time period as a condition of the conditional use permit or recreational trail permit. • Funding for maintenance and construction of the trail or area of limitation signage must be identified by the party requesting the designation or trail permit. The Cass County Land Department currently spends money on designated GIA trails only if there is a benefit to resource management. All other funds are currently coming from GIA funds or local clubs. • An enforcement plan must be identified by the party requesting the permit. This should include existing programs like trail ambassadors and required ordinances from local units of government to use road surfaces or right of ways for trail connections when needed. The trail proposals and areas of limitations should be as self-sufficient as possible given the current limitations on laws and regulations from both the State of

► 58

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Minnesota and existing local ordinances. If a new ordinance is required to help police the proposed trail or area of limitation, it should come from a local unit of government below the County with an enforcement plan. This again will not require the County to force trail routes, areas of limitations, and regulations on a local unit of government.

Additional details about the County’s policies and rules for motorized use of forest roads and trails is available at the county website. The available information includes: • Rules for County Administered Land in the Spider Lake and Foot Hills State Forest area

• Rules for Soo Line Trail in Cass County

• Minnesota Off-Highway Vehicle Regulations

Photo Credit: Dave Halsey

► 59

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Map 13. Recreational - Trails

► 60

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Map 14a. Recreational Trails - Summer

► 61

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Map 14b. Recreational Trails - Winter

► 62

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Boat Accesses The County currently has ten managed boat accesses: • Jack Lake (3-141-30) / cement boat ramp • Beuber Lake (7-139-30) / cement boat ramp • Long Lake (Lost) (23-139-31) / cement boat ramp • Fish Lake (29-137-31) / cement boat ramp • Green Lake (29-137-31) / cement boat ramp • Deer Lake (30-138-31) / cement boat ramp • Sand Lake (6-138-29) / carry-in access • Egg Lake (23-139-25) • Spider Lake (13-137-32) / cement boat ramp • Cut Lake (30-138-31) / cement boat ramp.

It is the County’s intent to eliminate its role in providing developed access to public waters. This is a role the County believes the MNDNR and USFS are more qualified to provide. The County will continue to work with these entities to exchange boat access sites for other lands. The County will retain and keep open all accesses that cannot be exchanged.

Boat Access Policy 1. No new boat accesses are to be built by the County and the County will seek to transfer existing ones to the MNDNR, USFS, or local unit of government. The County will insure through legal agreements that transferred accesses remain at the same or lower level of authorized use (e.g., carry-in sites are to remain carry-in sites). Existing accesses that are not transferred to another owner will remain open. Where resource damage is occurring, the Land Department, with County Board consent, will as a last resort close the access.

Long-Term Primitive Camping Camping is allowed on most tax forfeited land. Most of it occurs during the fall hunting seasons. Serious problems with people squatting on public land, being a nuisance, or causing damage to the resource are rare. However, the County feels it is prudent to set policy to ensure no problems emerge in the future.

The policy presented in this plan generally conforms to that of the MNDNR, USFS, and adjoining counties. It is intended to allow camping in appropriate areas and for appropriate lengths of time without creating unnecessary hardships for people wishing to do this form of camping. No permits or fees will be required.

Primitive Camping Policy 1. Primitive camping on County-administered tax forfeit land is permitted under the following guidelines: dispersed camping on forest lands shall be limited to a total period of 14 days in any one section, township, and range from the first Saturday in May to the second Sunday in September, or 21 days

► 63

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

the rest of the year. If a camp location is changed during a calendar year, the new camp must be established at least one mile from the previous camp. Campers must remove all trash and debris from the site; live trees may not be felled for making a camp, accessing a camp, or for use as firewood. No camping is allowed within a quarter mile of a public boat access (unless otherwise marked) or a designated County, State or Federal campground; camping is not allowed in any area designated no camping by the County.

Permanent Hunting Stands and Recreational Structures A long-running discussion throughout Minnesota has centered on whether permanent hunting stands should be allowed on public lands. The pro side of the argument focuses on maintaining tradition, safety, and ease of use. The con side focuses on damage to trees (considered by State law as timber trespass), threat of damage to harvest and processing equipment and operators, illegal cutting of shooting lanes, debris left by abandoned stands, unsightliness, unauthorized trails created by hunters using ATVs to haul in building materials, and implied exclusive use of public land.

Permanent stands come in two varieties. First there is the traditional stand placed in a tree or group of trees. The second is the free-standing unit often involving posts embedded in the ground and elaborate enclosed shooting platforms.

Permanent Hunting Stand and Structures Policy 1. Except as specifically allowed within this plan, permanent structures for personal recreational use are prohibited on County administered tax forfeited lands. Such prohibited structures include, but are not limited to, docks and shacks (unless allowed through a specific lease) or any production or piece of work artificially built up or composed of parts joined together in some definite manner; that which is built or constructed; an edifice or building of any kind; a combination of material to form a construction for occupancy, use or ornamentation whether installed on, above, or below the surface of a parcel of land. 2. Hunting stands permanently affixed to trees are prohibited. Portable tree stands and free-standing stands that do not damage live trees are permitted. Nails and other similar fasteners may not be driven into trees for any purpose. All portable or temporary hunting stands should be removed by the end of the hunting season. 3. The County has the right to remove any non-authorized structure on County administered tax forfeited land without cause or notice.

Shooting Lane Policy 1. The cutting or felling of live trees regardless of size for the purpose of creating shooting lanes is considered timber trespass and prohibited. Cutting of lateral limbs and branches less than four inches in diameter is allowed to facilitate use of portable stands; all other cutting is prohibited.

► 64

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

8.2 Procedures The Land Department has adopted procedures addressing recreational facilities. These procedures are amended from time to time. Readers are directed to the Land Department website for the latest versions (www.co.cass.mn.us/land/land_home.html ).

► 65

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Chapter 9.0 Forest Roads

9.1. Assessment Cass County administered land contains over 1,000 miles of forest roads whose purpose is to provide access to the land for management purposes. While portions of some of the roads also serve as recreational trails, they are distinguished from recreational trails by their use as forest roads for the purpose of resource management. There are also instances of temporary roads used for specific management activities. Temporary roads are expected to be abandoned after the specific intended use and are within the scope of the forest roads and trails policy.

Forest roads on County administered land can be found at various stages of development and maintenance depending upon location and successional stage of the surrounding resource. This reflects the intended use of the road and level of its construction and maintenance.

In addition, forest roads on County administered lands are considered open to use to motorized recreational vehicles unless specifically posted closed. When persistent damage to the resource occurs from unauthorized use, access is controlled through gates and/or rocks and berms with County Board consent. The reasons for controlling access along a road include: • Prevent dumping of garbage and demolition waste • Allow for successful seeding of trails • Protect hunter walking trails • Protect roadbed of newly constructed trails • Restrict motorized traffic on cross country ski/mountain bike trails; or • Prevent erosion on access roads traversing highly erodible soil

Some control gates are permanent such as those on hunter walking trails and on ski / mountain bike trails. Gates installed for the protection of new seeding or newly created roadbeds are moveable and are reused. Gates on trails that need seasonal protection such as for the prevention of erosion are open when weather or road conditions permit.

Wherever possible, the County cooperates with other landowners on the development and maintenance of forest access roads. The intent is to minimize the number of roads while insuring adequate access.

The County does not plan to develop new major maintained-class forest roads. Additional non-maintained-class roads may be needed for future management activities.

► 66

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Forest Roads and Trails Policy 1. All forest roads will be designed and built in accordance with best management practices regarding location, terrain, water quality and quantity and visual qualities. 2. Road development and improvement will be coordinated between the Land Department and affected property owners to maximize safety, minimize conflicts, reduce costs, and encourage appropriate cooperative development and use. 3. All forest roads are considered open to motorized travel unless posted closed with County Board consent. 4. Roads will restrict access with County Board consent for any one or more of the following reasons: Prevent dumping of garbage and demolition waste; Allow for successful seeding of trails; Hunter walking trails; Protect road bed of newly constructed trails; Restrict motorized traffic on cross country ski/mountain bike trails; Prevent erosion on access roads traversing highly saturated or erodible soils. 5. All forest roads and trails will be inventoried, mapped using geographic positioning systems (GPS) technology or air photos during forest inventory updates. 6. Forest roads and trails will be signed regarding their designated use. 7. Relative to potential impacts on wetlands due to forest road construction, the County’s policy is: • Additional fill placed in wetlands for any reason, including road construction, requires mitigation and replacement. • Roads must be built and maintained for forest uses only. • Trail Designation cancels all exemptions from wetland requirements. • Easements providing access to private property cancels all exemptions from wetland requirements. • Grant-in-Aid Trail grants on corridors cancels all exemptions from wetland requirements. • Existing wetland crossings are to be maintained “as is” with no expansion of the current footprint within a wetland.

9.2 Procedures The Land Department has adopted procedures addressing roads and trails. These procedures are amended from time to time. Readers are directed to the Land Department website for the latest versions (www.co.cass.mn.us/land/land_home.html ).

► 67

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Chapter 10.0 Habitat

10.1. Assessment Cass County has a long history of considering habitat values in its overall management programs. In 1998 the MNDNR published the County Biological Survey for Cass County.10 This report presents an extensive examination of rare and critical biotic communities and individual species (plants, animals, insects). The detailed information concerning locations of particular specimens is not part of the public record but is accessible by County staff as it undertakes site-specific work.

Rare, Endangered or Species of Special Concern The County Biological Survey revealed a number of plants and animals that are rare, endangered, or of special concern for which management practices should be adopted. The current listing of Minnesota’s Endangered, Threatened, and Special Concern Species is referenced in Appendix B and available at: https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/ets/index.html

Coarse Filter / Fine Filter Approach Cass County has adopted a policy of a dual level coarse filter / fine filter approach to habitat. The coarse filter aspect is achieved by striving to insure that all major habitats are represented on the landscape; the underlying premise is that if the habitats exist they will be capable of supporting the various species and biotic communities that depend upon them. The fine filter level is undertaken through direct management for individual species when such action is required or desired.

Table 9 presents the definitions of the coarse level habitats applied to Cass County. These definitions were originally generated by the US Forest Service for use in northern Minnesota. Table 10 shows the amount of each coarse level habitat on Cass County’s tax-forfeited lands.

10 Minnesota Biological Survey. 1998. Cass County biological survey 1992-1995. Biological Report No. 59. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 325 pp.

► 68

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Table 9. Upland Habitats for Use in Analyzing Wildlife Impacts of Forest Plan

Habitat Categories Definitions (age or size: cover types) Lowland open Lowland grass, brush, marsh or muskeg

Upland grass Upland grass opening Open Habitat Types Shrub-Sapling Upland brush, cutover area, and all regeneration under age 11 opening /

Regeneration Young 11-40 yrs: aspen, Balm of Gilead, off-site aspen 11-50 yrs: birch Upland Forest: Mature 41-60 yrs: aspen, Balm of Gilead, off-site aspen Deciduous 51-80 yrs: birch Aspen-Birch Old 61+ yrs: aspen, Balm of Gilead, off-site aspen 81+ yrs: birch Upland Forest: Young 11-60 yrs: northern hardwoods, oak Deciduous Mature 61-120 yrs: A [NoHdwd/Oak] Old 121+ yrs: A

Young 11-40 yrs: balsam fir 11-30 yrs: jack pine 11-70 yrs: red/white pine, white spruce, upland black spruce

Mature 41-60 yrs: balsam fir

31-60 yrs: jack pine Upland Forest: 71-120 yrs: red/white pine Coniferous 71-100 yrs: white spruce, upland black spruce

Old 61+ yrs: balsam fir, jack pine 121+ yrs: red/white pine 101+ yrs: white spruce, upland black spruce Lowland Young 11-60 yrs: ash, lowland hardwood Forest: Mature 61-120 yrs: A Deciduous Old 121+ yrs: A

Young 11-70 yrs: blk spruce, tamarack, white cedar, stagnant blk spruce/tam/white cedar Lowland Forest: Mature 71-100 yrs:blk spruce, tamarack, stagnant blk spruce/tam/white cedar Coniferous 71-120 yrs: white cedar Old 101+ yrs:blk spruce, tamarack, stagnant blk spruce/tam/white cedar 121+ yrs: white cedar

► 69

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Table 10. Distribution of Habitats on Cass County Tax-Forfeited Land, 2019

Habitat Categories Acres % of Land Open Habitat Types Lowland Open 56,237 21.8% Upland Grass Opening 1,698 0.7%

Shrub-Sapling Opening / Regeneration 33,732 13.1% Upland Forest: Young 72,768 28.2% Deciduous Aspen-Birch Mature 13,689 5.3% Old 16,234 6.3% Upland Forest: Young 1,171 0.5% Deciduous (Northern Mature 12,243 4.8% Hardwoods, Oaks) Old 48 0.0%

Upland Forest: Young 7,305 2.8%

Coniferous Mature 4,024 1.6% Old 1,935 0.8% Lowland Forest: Young 362 0.1% Deciduous Mature 7,010 2.7% Old 1,782 0.7% Lowland Forest: Young 2,564 1.0%

Coniferous Mature 4,278 1.7%

Old 7,359 2.9% Not Included Developed, Roads, Ag, Water, etc. 13,155 5.1%

Among the findings generated by Table 10 are: • The aspen-birch defined habitat types dominate, with most acres in the young category. • There are extensive amounts of the open lowland and shrub-sapling/regeneration habitat. The amount of open upland is small. The County has indicated a desire to retain open upland for animal species that need this habitat. • Upland deciduous hardwood-oak habitats are dominated by the mature range. This reflects a forest that was reset 70-90 years ago and has seen little active management. This will change as the forest ages and management focuses on maintaining this type in the mature and old stages. The challenge will be to continually reset enough of this type into younger habitat. • Upland conifer shows a good balance across all three habitat niches. This should continue in the future as this type will see active management allowing the forest to age while resetting stands through harvesting. • Lowland deciduous shows the same imbalance, and for the same reason, as the upland deciduous forest. While in the past this forest type has not seen much management and hence the imbalance toward older types, it may experience more active management in the future. In addition, it may undergo change due to the potential impact of the emerald ash borer. • Lowland conifer habitats have an acceptable balance. They will tend to age but will also see active management on enough acres to reset land into the younger niche.

► 70

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Habitat Projects One example of fine filter level habitat actions are projects undertaken for specific species. Among the cooperative projects taken to date by Cass County are: Participation in the Minnesota Wolf Survey, American Woodcock Monitoring, breeding bird counts at Deep Portage and using LIDAR to identify Wood Duck habitat. Future projects include a partnership with American Bird Conservancy to enhance Golden Winged Warbler, Woodcock and Ruffed Grouse habitat in lowland alder and willow types.

Habitat and Wildlife Policy 1. The County will strive to provide the range of habitats supportable by its land base with a geographic distribution, variation in size and character, and other attributes as necessary for sustaining the habitat and the species that depend upon them. 2. The County will undertake on its own and/or coordinate with other entities species-specific habitat management as may be required or desired to sustain those species. 3. No person or group of persons shall destroy native aquatic or upland vegetation, create erosion problems, or cause an increase in sediment deposition into lakes, rivers, or type 1-8 wetlands. 4. The County may coordinate and cooperate with State, Federal, Tribal, or private entities regarding the establishment and management of areas dedicated to wildlife habitat and values, monitoring and evaluation of habitat and key species, and similar activities. 5. The County will review natural heritage information as part of all management planning including preparation of stand-level prescriptions and will act accordingly. 6. The coarse filter approach will be applied generally across Cass County’s ownership to provide and maintain representation of all major habitat types to the degree this can be achieved on County administered lands. 7. Minnesota’s Natural Heritage database will be consulted for all site-specific management activities to determine if any recorded sightings apply to the project. 8. Fine filter management procedures will be established for species and habitat areas for such species and areas that Cass County Land Department management is likely to impact and for such species and areas that such management direction can be determined.

10.2 Procedures The Land Department has adopted procedures addressing habitat. These procedures are amended from time to time. Readers are directed to the Land Department website for the latest versions (www.co.cass.mn.us/land/land_home.html ).

► 71

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Chapter 11.0 Timber Management

11.1. Assessment This chapter discusses timber management and the management of specific cover types. Managing the vegetation that covers the landscape is the primary activity of the Land Department. It is critical to understand how the County views the forested landscape and its general direction of management.

Forest Resource The following assessment is based upon the information presented in Chapter 4.0 which describes the various aspects of the tax forfeited land base.

The aspen cover type dominates the County’s forest over 120,000 acres representing 46% of the total tax forfeited land base and 67% of its commercial forest acres. How the County manages aspen is the single most important aspect of this strategic plan.

Cass County successfully addressed the following cover types that required attention in the previous strategic plan. • In the last 10 years, over 8,300 acres of oak and northern hardwood have been managed through harvesting to start to balance the age classes. • Birch, balsam fir, and jack pine have been aggressively managed over the last 10 years to recover merchantable wood and promote quality regeneration due to a combination of older stands, disease and environmental stress. In some cases, stands were converted to an appropriate species based on the native plant community.

General Timber Management Policy 1. The basic management approach is to make progress toward the desired future condition of the forest and not specific near-term resource output targets. The County will implement this approach by managing for acres and not resource volume at both the stand and overall landscape levels.

Timber Sales The primary management tool and source of revenue for the Cass County Land Department is timber sales. These sales are governed by State Statute. The Department issues harvest permits at regularly scheduled auctions. Staff foresters design individual sales, sales are auctioned, and the foresters monitor logging operations during and after harvest. Most sales are sold by auction although informal sales are used for sensitive tracts, tracts with unusual characteristics or limited access, or similar factors.

► 72

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Timber Sale Policy 1. The Land Department has established and implemented procedures for the sale of timber harvest rights in accord with state law. These procedures will be guided by these policies: a. Timber sales may be by Regular Auction (open to all bidders), Intermediate Auction (restricted to bidders with 30 full-time employees or less), or Informal Sale (timber sales not purchased at auction or where unique circumstances apply). b. Extensions on sales may be granted.

Landscape Level Management Cass County recognizes that its forest management objectives and practices are to be integrated with those of other major landowners so as to help achieve mutually agreed upon and beneficial landscape scale goals. Cass County has participated in the North Central Landscape Committee (NCLC) of the Minnesota Forest Resources Council as well as the Leech Lake Pine Collaborative, a sub-group of the NCLC. In addition, the county seeks to coordinate its strategic and tactical activities with major forest landowners so as to help attain landscape scale objectives.

Riparian Zones

The County will exercise best management practices as directed by the Site-Level Guidelines and other County policies. Management will consider ecological and scenic / visual quality issues when managing these lands.

Visual Qualities Management The County recognizes that the forest’s scenic qualities are critical to recreation, tourism, and local quality of life.

The County has adopted the Voluntary Site-Level Forest Management Guidelines established by the Minnesota Forest Resources Council. These guidelines are applied on County managed land and address such topics as: timing and coordination of activities to reduce noise and visual impacts; reducing visual impacts due to alignment and location of roads; reducing noise and visual impacts of gravel pits and borrow areas; and, reducing visual impacts of apparent harvest size, mechanical site preparation, planting layout and design, timber stand improvement, and vegetation treated with herbicides. Roads in Cass County were reviewed for visual sensitivity relative to such impacts; Map 9 shows roads with high, medium, and low visual sensitivity.

The County will cooperate with the USFS to manage land along the south shore of Leech Lake as a scenic landscape important to area recreational values. This area has a number of resorts and second homes and is along the heavily traveled Highway 200 and Highway 371 corridors.

► 73

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Visual Quality Management Policy 1. Consider impacts of management actions on visual qualities especially in areas of high scenic or recreation value and modify management activities accordingly.

► 74

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Map 15. Visual Sensitivity of Roads

► 75

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

11.2 General Silvicultural Practices This section presents the basic silvicultural practices applied by the Land Department.

Site Level Activities

The County has adopted the Voluntary Site-Level Forest Management Guidelines for Landowners, Loggers and Resource Managers adopted by the Minnesota Forest Resources Council. These guidelines direct forest management activities across a range of topics including harvest, riparian zones, forest road construction, and more.

Site Level Management Policy 1. Adopt Sustaining Minnesota Forest Resources: Voluntary Site-Level Forest Management Guidelines as County policy.

Stand Evaluation Stands are evaluated as part of the preliminary phase of the timber sale process. Some stands so evaluated will not be designated for immediate harvest but will still have the updated information entered into the resource inventory.

Items to be included in the stand evaluation are: presence of rare, threatened or endangered species; historical and cultural values; ground typing of forest ecological system; required coordination with other landowners; visual management qualities and recreational values; landscape scale management objectives; timing and season of harvest; all Site-Level Guidelines; check for presence of exotic species that should be eliminated; riparian zone, wetlands or similar concerns; status of regeneration.

Harvest Intensity The intensity of harvest for a given stand is determined by the cover type, the forest ecological system, patch characteristics, and overall management objectives (e.g., conversion, maintenance of type, etc.). The range of potential intensities is large. In general terms it includes various forms of these approaches: even-aged harvests, clearcuts, seed tree, shelterwood, salvage, two-aged regeneration, uneven-aged regeneration, single tree selection, intermediate harvests, non- timber harvest, management for understory, non-timber products, and stand evaluation visits. The following cover type management summary sheets indicate the likely methods to be used for each cover type.

Patch Management In forestry a patch is defined as an area of forest that is relatively homogeneous in structure, primarily in height and density, and differs from the surrounding forest. It may be one stand or a group of stands. Historically patch size dynamics have not been fully considered in forest management across the state. The

► 76

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

primary exception to this pattern are areas where game species management, especially ruffed grouse, has been emphasized; in these areas smaller patches with lots of edge have been stressed. Recent years have seen greater consideration for patch size, particularly to provide more variety with an emphasis on larger patches to emulate natural disturbance regimes.

Cass County has taken the strategic tact of promoting a patch size distribution that tends to favor larger, aggregated patches. The exceptions to this general guidance are areas where management objectives, such as wildlife considerations, support smaller forest patches.

Riparian Area Management Riparian and other “inoperable” acres will be managed on a case-by-case basis. Management directions will be determined through field visits by Natural Resource Managers.

Fire Primary responsibility for fighting fire lies with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.

The County will use prescribed fire for certain management activities. Burns will be contracted with and may be done in coordination with the MNDNR, USFS and others as appropriate. All burns will follow standards and procedures modified from both State and Federal guidelines. Contracts for prescribed burns will follow the current Cass County contract policy.

Pest Control The County monitors its lands for signs of pest infestations. Because of its greater staff resources primary control of pests lies with the MNDNR. The County utilizes up-to-date Integrated Pest Management (IPM) strategies to reduce potential for pest infestations. These are updated through workshops and information from the MNDNR and USFS. At the sign of a potential infestation or insect outbreak county staff will contact MNDNR Forest Health Specialists to help assess the situation and devise an appropriate response.

Exotic Species The County monitors its lands for signs of undesired exotic species. In general range of species being looked for are trees and upland shrubs. The policy is to remove such species when they occur in situations where they jeopardize stand or area management objectives. The County may confer with MNDNR and USFS specialists when devising appropriate measures to address a particular situation.

► 77

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Reforestation As noted in the cover type summary sheets, reforestation depends upon the cover type / species. Natural regeneration is relied upon whenever possible or viable; this includes monitoring for advanced regeneration prior to harvest.

Artificial regeneration (planting, seeding) will be used when appropriate for the target species. Artificially regenerated stands will have stand specific management objectives. These will address the need for artificial versus natural regeneration, long-term objective for the stand, the use of artificial planting to mimic natural regeneration processes, and the stands desired characteristics throughout its developmental cycle. Trees chosen to be planted will be indigenous species appropriate to the NPC. Among the possible measures to be used to allow artificially regenerated stands to better achieve the characteristics of a natural forest are: • Leave areas of natural vegetation untreated by herbicides in the understory • Where possible, leave live trees and snags • Leave coarse woody debris with general practice being to lop and scatter slash. Small piles may be used to create desired micro-habitat. • Leave select strips or patches untreated to enhance diversity • Use herbicides at rates that allow for establishment of the target cover type species yet allow others to regenerate naturally • Allow occurring tree species to survive to enhance diversity. • Use planting and chemical application techniques which focus disturbance and application on just the immediate area of each planted seedling. • Conserve hardwood tree and shrub components when thinning. • Release desirable hardwood species with good growth characteristics when thinning. • Reduce canopy coverage over unique or high diversity areas when thinning. • Allow non-target pine regeneration to accumulate under target pine trees (ex: white pine within a red pine stand).

Stands will be converted based on the forest ecological classification system on which they lie. That is, pine will be planted only on sites which are appropriate for pine forests.

Certain species require site preparation for successful regeneration or conversion. The County uses mechanical scarification wherever appropriate and viable. Otherwise, every precaution is taken to avoid damage to the site during harvest.

The use of chemicals to prepare a site or release a regenerating forest is kept to the minimum. All applications are in accord with pertinent instructions and regulations. No aerial applications will be made. Certain species of significance to Cass County are difficult to successfully regenerate. Key among these are jack pine and white pine both of which fall prey to browsing by deer. Cass County intends to use a variety of approaches to regenerate these species. These will include: focusing regeneration on ecological

► 78

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

systems that best support the species; using physical methods such as bud- capping to prevent browsing; using non-toxic chemical means to discourage browsing; and to work with the DNR on focused culling of the deer herd to give young trees a chance to grow past the high risk browsing stage.

Planned Retention The County has the general objective to retain reserve patches within harvest units in order to: retain structure, den sites, and food sources for wildlife; provide refugia for sensitive plants, invertebrates, and micro-organisms allowing quick recovery and recolonization; provide a seed source; and maintain tree species diversity. Among the practices to be considered are: • Retain roughly 5% of harvest unit in undisturbed clumps, strips, or islands on harvest units 15 acres or greater in size. • Favor areas with diverse or intact plant communities and/or unique micro- sites. • Avoid any equipment operation within retained areas especially in summer harvest. • Retain equivalent number of scattered leave trees where retaining patch is not feasible.

Natural Disturbance After a fire or wind event, severe outbreak of disease, or pest infestation, Cass County staff evaluates the affected stand(s) according to the following general procedures: • Assess the stand for immediate and future management actions. This assessment involves consideration of the Forest Ecological System, surviving trees (type, condition, age), and defined management objectives (including recreational activities) for the area. Based on this assessment the County will prepare an action plan that integrates strategic and tactical considerations. • Salvage merchantable timber. If the action plan determines that salvage is desired and feasible, a salvage timber sale will be designed and implemented. • Revise inventory and management schedules. As part of the County’s annual inventory update, information reflecting the stands new condition and status (e.g., change in cover type) would be entered into the database. Staff would also re-examine its management schedules (strategic and tactical) to determine if and how they should be revised to reflect the impacts of the natural disturbance and any timber salvage that occurs.

► 79

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

11.3 NPC Management The native plant community (NPC) of a stand will help guide resource manager decisions regarding stand-specific management. That is, the NPC of a site may determine that a mixed aspen stand should be managed to foster regeneration of oak and northern hardwoods, or, into pine. NPC will also assist decisions regarding harvest intensity. No overall management goals (e.g., harvest levels) will be established by NPC. Instead, NPC typing will help direct stand-level decision making.

11.4 Cover Type Management The information in Appendix C provides guidance regarding the County’s strategic management direction for each of the major forest cover types. Cover type is the term used by foresters to describe individual forest stands. A stand is typed by the dominant tree species but in most stands, there are many other tree species.

The information provided for each cover type is: • Age Class Distribution: number of acres within 20-year age classes in the base year. • General Management Objective: a short statement of the basic purpose of County management for this cover type. • Management Notes: Harvest states the guiding standard for harvesting this cover type. • Management Notes: Other: additional notes regarding management of the cover type. • Native Plant Community: listing of NPCs on which the species is most suited. • Stand Composition: information on desired stand conditions and management considerations. • Patch Management: statements on distribution of cover type on the landscape.

11.5 Procedures The Land Department has adopted procedures addressing forest resource management. These procedures are amended from time to time. Readers are directed to the Land Department website for the latest versions (www.co.cass.mn.us/land/land_home.html ).

► 80

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

11.6 Forest Management Summary The tables in Appendix D summarize the anticipated impact on Cass County’s tax-forfeited lands if the management described in this long-range resource plan is undertaken. Given the range of possible unconsidered factors affecting the forest over a century such as fire and disease, these tables should be seen as depicting the direction and magnitude of the expected trends in forest change.

Table D-1 presents a summary view of management on all cover types over the course of the next century. This table identifies management in terms of acres harvested annually in each decade.

Tables D-2 thru D-15 present age-class distributions for each major cover type over the next 100 years. These show the impact of management on the structure of the forest. Acres in the 0-10 age-class indicate the number of acres harvested in the prior decade and are now regenerating the new forest.

It should be noted that the management acres determined in this plan essentially comprise a stand-examination list that will be field-visited over the 10-year plan implementation period. Stands on this 10-year list will be field-visited based on the annual treatment acres recommended for each of the cover types. There may be a deviation from year to year, but the 10-year average should equal the annual treatment acres.

11.7 Overview of Change Appendix E presents the likely changes to occur to Cass County’s forested lands over the course of 100 years as this management plan is implemented. Given the wide range of possible unconsidered factors affecting the forest over a century, the most illustrative aspect to evaluate is the direction and magnitude of the trends in forest change.

The figures in Appendix E portray in graphic form the likely changes in age-class distributions for each cover type that were numerically presented in the tables in Appendix D.

► 81

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Appendix A

Land Type Association (LTA) Management Unit Descriptions

► 82

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

► 83

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

► 84

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

► 85

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

► 86

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

► 87

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

► 88

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

► 89

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

► 90

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

► 91

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

► 92

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Appendix B

Rare, Threatened and Endangered Species

Minnesota’s Endangered Species Statute (Minnesota Statutes, Section 84.0895) requires the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to adopt rules designating species meeting the statutory definitions of endangered, threatened, or species of special concern. The resulting List of Endangered, Threatened, and Special Concern Species is codified as Minnesota Rules, Chapter 6134. The Endangered Species Statute also authorizes the DNR to adopt rules that regulate treatment of species designated as endangered and threatened. These regulations are codified as Minnesota Rules, Parts 6212.1800 to 6212.2300.

Minnesota’s Endangered Species Statute and the associated Rules impose a variety of restrictions, a permit program, and several exemptions pertaining to species designated as endangered or threatened. A person may not take, import, transport, or sell any portion of an endangered or threatened species. However, these acts may be allowed by permit issued by the DNR; plants on certain agricultural lands and plants destroyed in consequence of certain agricultural practices are exempt; and the accidental, unknowing destruction of designated plants is exempt.

Note that the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 USC 1531 - 1544) requires the U.S. Department of the Interior to identify species as endangered or threatened according to a separate set of definitions, and imposes a separate set of restrictions pertaining to those species.

A species is considered endangered if the species is threatened with extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range within Minnesota. A species is considered threatened if the species is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range within Minnesota. A species is considered a species of special concern if, although the species is not endangered or threatened, it is extremely uncommon in Minnesota, or has unique or highly specific habitat requirements and deserves careful monitoring of its status.

The most current list of can be found on the Department of Natural Resources website. https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/ets/index.html

The list was most recently updated August 19, 2013 and the document is available at the following link as of August 2020:

https://files.dnr.state.mn.us/natural_resources/ets/endlist.pdf

► 93

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Appendix C

Cover Type Strategic Timber Management Summaries

► 94

ASH-LOWLAND HARDWOODS Strategic Timber Management

Ash-Lowland Hardwoods Age Class Distribution: 2019* 0 - 20 21 - 40 41- 60 61 - 80 81 - 100 101 - 120 121+ Total Ash 110 23 196 198 1608 2,227 1,108 5,470 Lowland Hardwoods 234 30 79 80 1,703 583 500 3,209 *Acres of harvestable land.

Native Plant Community Ash/Lowland Hardwoods is a broad cover type in that the lowland hardwood species can be found in a number of different Native Plant Communities (NPCs). The species that comprise the Ash/LH cover type are excellent competitors in the following NPCs: Black Ash-WFn55, WFn64; Green Ash- WFn55; Balsam Poplar-WFn55.

General Landscape Objective Maintain the amount of cover type acres.

Management Notes Harvest Guidelines: • Stands will be evaluated at age 80 for potential harvest with a general rotation age of 80 – 110 years. • Up to 1,600 acres will be targeted for harvest during 2020-2029 and 2030-2039. • Harvest levels will decrease to 1,500 acres per decade, then 400, then 200 as the older resource is evaluated. Other Notes: • Initial large-scale harvests will be on tracts whose immediate surface drainage is within County ownership. This is to allow for monitoring of any potential negative impacts on hydrology (i.e., “swamping”) caused by tree removal. • There are many species of concern located in ash/lowland hardwood areas; management will be sensitive to these species. • Documented presence of emerald ash borer within or adjacent to Cass County will necessitate reconsideration of all aspects of ash/lowland hardwood management at the strategic and tactical levels. Stand Composition The stand composition goal is to maintain the species composition and structure that naturally occurs within these forest communities. Windthrow is a dominant natural disturbance in Ash/LH stands, resulting in large downed logs, hummocks, and hollows that promote tree seedling establishment and creates diverse sites for wet and mesic forest herbs. Recommendations for within stand management are:

► 95

ASH-LOWLAND HARDWOODS Strategic Timber Management

a. Maintain or restore associated tree species such as yellow birch, white cedar, tamarack, silver maple, bur oak, box elder, elm, green ash, balm of Gilead, or basswood appropriate to the site. b. Retain the older forest characteristics within stands by retaining a component of large, old trees, coarse woody debris, and snags. c. Retain large, old trees in the canopy for recruitment of future downed logs and the protection of hummock and hollow microtopography to promote seedling establishment. d. Encourage multi-layered understory development. e. Where practicing uneven-aged management, retain trees from all size-classes. Foresters will consider ECS and consult the appropriate Native Plant Community Fact Sheets in the Field Guide to the Native Plant Communities of Minnesota: Laurentian Mixed Forest Province, to determine most appropriate species composition as stand management decisions are made.

Stand Management Management Direction: Ash and lowland hardwoods stands will be managed primarily as uneven aged stands. However even-aged methods will be an option where a field visit determines it is the best method to regenerate the stand. During the field visit, staff will consider the hydrology, soils, existing stand composition, and riparian considerations of the stand in determining the stand treatment method. Stand density will be maintained at a level that promotes continued stand health and growth. Hydrologic alteration will be avoided. It is recommended that stands less than site index 45 not be managed through harvest but rather through the objective of maintaining wildlife habitat and water quality.

Patch Management: Objectives are to retain the existing ash/lowland hardwoods patches found within the county.

Even-Aged Management Direction: Manage some stands of ash/lowland hardwoods on an even- aged basis, if warranted to regenerate the stands and improve site productivity and vigor while maintaining or improving wildlife habitat.

Even-Aged Management Prescriptions: The following are the most common prescriptions that will be used on Ash/LH timber sale acres where even-aged management is the objective: a. Clearcut with Reserves - Sprouting b. Clearcut with Reserves - Natural Seeding c. Seed Tree with Reserves d. Shelterwood e. Shelterwood-with Reserves

Uneven-Aged Management Direction: Manage Ash/LH on an uneven-aged basis for pulpwood, bolts, sawtimber, and veneer products while maintaining or improving site productivity and wildlife habitat. Small group selection may be prescribed in even-aged stands to attain an uneven-aged condition. Selective harvest should retain trees from all size-classes, so that the residual basal area is approximately the same for trees under 10 inches as for those over 10 inches.

► 96

ASH-LOWLAND HARDWOODS Strategic Timber Management

Uneven-Aged Management Prescriptions: The following are the most common prescriptions that will be used on Ash/LH timber sale acres where uneven-aged management is the objective: a. Group Selection b. Group Selection with Reserves c. Single Tree Selection

Intermediate Harvest Methods: Some stands of Ash/LH may be thinned or given an intermediate harvest prescription. Thinning will increase tree diameter and quality, resulting in more sawlog or veneer sized trees. Any harvest should reduce basal area to 60-90 square feet per acre in order to avoid adverse hydrological impacts and epicormic branching.

► 97

ASPEN & BALM of GILEAD Strategic Timber Management

Aspen & Balm of Gilead Management

Age Class Distribution: 2019* 0 - 20 21 - 40 41- 60 61 - 80 81 - 100 101 - 120 121+ Total Aspen 45,198 44,509 11,970 3,257 7,177 271 26 112,408 Balm of Gilead 92 0 14 13 164 0 0 282 *Acres of harvestable land.

Native Plant Community Aspen generally competes well on most Land Type Associations within Cass County, but quaking aspen is identified as not an excellent competitor in the following upland forest Native Plant Communities (NPCs): FDn12, FDc12, FDc23, FDs37, MHn47, MHc47, and MHs39. In early stages aspen is so prolific, it is typed as an aspen stand, however as the stand matures, other cover types, such as birch, come to dominate aspen stands, consequently changing the cover type classification.

General Landscape Objective The amount of high-density aspen cover type acres are to be maintained. Mixed forest stands, where aspen is a co-dominant, are to be maintained or are to be considered for conversion to more site appropriate cover types. Stands with very low density of aspen and/or are on inappropriate native plant communities are to be considered for conversion to a more site-appropriate cover type.

Management Notes Harvest Guidelines: • Harvest of aspen will occur between the ages of 40-45 years depending on tree size, quality and site. • Forest Resource Managers will evaluate stands once they approach age 40 to determine harvest schedule. Evaluation factors include: stand quality (site index), location (Land Type Association), native plant community, condition (disease and insect presence), historical record of the stand, and manager’s knowledge of the terrain and site. • Balm of Gilead will be harvested at age 40-45. Other Notes: • Most stands over age 75 will be managed by 2030. • A consistent level of annually harvested acres will be achieved by 2020. • The desired age class distribution will be achieved by 2060. • Given the few number of acres of Balm of Gilead, there will be no attempt to balance the size of its age-classes.

► 98

ASPEN & BALM of GILEAD Strategic Timber Management

Stand Composition Mature aspen stands are typically comprised of a mixture of species. At times, the volume of associated species may be quite high, nearly approaching the volume of aspen in the stand. It is not uncommon for the total volume of associated species to exceed that of the aspen.

Stand Management Patch Management: Objectives are to maintain existing large patches consisting of aspen, and increase the size of patches where possible

Even-aged Management Direction: The aspen/Balm of Gilead cover type will be managed on an even-aged basis. The goal is to move toward a balanced age-class structure while maintaining or improving site productivity, forest wildlife habitat, and biodiversity.

Final Harvest: Aspen and balm of Gilead stands to be maintained in this cover type will be managed using clearcut or clearcut-with-reserves as the final harvest method. Natural stand boundaries or natural features such as topography or soil type should be used when possible to delineate timber sale boundaries. Harvest regulations and methods that favor maintaining or increasing within-stand diversity, with an emphasis on long-lived conifers, while retaining aspen or balm of Gilead as the main cover type are recommended. One strategy to accomplish this would be to reserve some existing individual trees or patches of long-lived conifer species from harvest. These reserve trees would maintain the within stand species diversity as well as add structural diversity for the newly regenerating stand. Reserve trees may also function as a seed source that could aid in increasing the abundance of these long-lived species in the new stand. Most individual trees and patches of trees to be reserved should be healthy and able to last another rotation. However, some dead and dying trees should be reserved as wildlife trees. Seed trees should be of good health and form. A goal is to increase the average size of harvest areas. Selected larger blocks (100+ acres) should be harvested, where appropriate, using consolidated or natural stand boundaries. Small harvest blocks (less than 40 acres) will continue to be prescribed. Implementing a range of harvest block sizes will provide for a range of wildlife habitat needs.

Even-Aged Management Prescriptions: The following are the most common prescriptions that will be used on aspen/Balm of Gilead timber sales: a. Clearcut-Sprouting b. Clearcut with Reserves – Sprouting

Regeneration Methods after Final Harvest: Aspen and Balm of Gilead stands regenerate naturally through root sprouting (suckering) and seeding. The recommended minimum stocking of aspen regeneration two years after harvest is 4000+ stems per acre scattered throughout the stand. Forest managers should consider the following strategies when the goal is to increase within-stand diversity or to create a more mixed hardwood-conifer composition in the future stand. a. Direct seeding: This is most appropriate on sites where harvesting operations have scarified the soil creating a seedbed suitable for seed germination. b. Planting: Planting long-lived conifers using small patches or variable density scattered plantings, with or without site preparation can be considered or implemented.

► 99

BIRCH Strategic Timber Management

Birch Management

Age Class Distribution: 2019* 0 - 20 21 - 40 41- 60 61 - 80 81 - 100 101 - 120 121+ Total Birch 2,451 209 86 536 1,328 61 0 4,672 *Acres of harvestable land.

Native Plant Community Paper birch is an excellent competitor in the following upland forest Native Plant Communities (NPCs): FDn33, FDn43, FDc25, FDc34, MHn35, MHn44, MHn46, MHc26, and MHc37.

General Landscape Objective • Generally, maintain number of acres of cover type and reclaim acres where appropriate. • Birch stands on inappropriate native plant communities will be considered for conversion to more appropriate cover types.

Management Notes Harvest Guidelines: Harvest between the ages of 40 – 60. Other Notes: • Birch is in a crisis situation with many old stands that may have naturally succeeded to some other cover type. • Initial management is to visit all stands over age 60 and evaluate them regarding: immediate harvest and regeneration as a birch stand, harvest and convert to a more appropriate cover type. • Given the low number of acres and current age-class distribution, there will be no attempt to seek relatively evenly sized age-classes. However, management in the latter part of the century should attempt to reduce the severity of the imbalance.

Stand Composition The desired future within-stand composition will range from pure birch to a more diverse stand structure where birch is the majority species. Associated species will most often include aspen, red maple, balsam fir, and white spruce. Foresters will consider ECS and consult the appropriate Native Plant Community Fact Sheets in the Field Guide to the Native Plant Communities of Minnesota: Laurentian Mixed Forest Province, to determine most appropriate species composition as stand management decisions are made.

► 100

BIRCH Strategic Timber Management

Stand Management Patch Management: Where possible, birch stands should be managed to maintain or increase the number of large patches.

Even-aged Management Direction: Due to birch’s shade intolerance, it is recommended to manage the cover type on an even-aged basis. The goal is to move toward a balanced age-class structure while maintaining or improving site productivity, forest wildlife habitat, and biodiversity.

Final Harvest: Birch stands will be managed using shelterwood, seed tree, clearcut, or clearcut with reserves as the final harvest method. Natural stand boundaries, or natural features such as topography or soil type, will be used to delineate timber sale boundaries.

Even-Aged Management Prescriptions: The following are the most common prescriptions that will be used on birch timber sale acres: a. Shelterwood b. Shelterwood with Reserves c. Seed Tree d. Seed Tree with Reserves e. Clearcut - Sprouting f. Clearcut with Reserves – Sprouting

Regeneration Methods after Final Harvest: Birch stands regenerate naturally through stump sprouting and seeding. Stump sprouting alone usually does not provide adequate stocking. A shelterwood or seed tree harvest method is preferred for regenerating a birch stand. A shelterwood provides the moderated environment preferred for the initial establishment of birch seedlings. Retention of 20 to 40 percent crown cover is recommended for seed production and seedling development. Other recommendations include: a. Scarification (e.g., summer harvest or disking) or prescribed fire to provide a mineral soil seedbed. b. Site preparation, such as disking or anchor-chaining, to incorporate birch seed into the mineral soil. This is best done in late fall during seed fall, or within two years after a good seed crop. c. Control competing vegetation on richer sites if aspen regeneration or shrubs are expected to overtop and suppress the birch seedlings. d. The removal of shelterwood trees is an option after sufficient birch seedlings are established. Intermediate Harvest Methods: Commercial thinning in merchantable birch stands is not recommended because it may result in unacceptable levels of damage to residual trees.

Limiting Factors: Factors limiting birch management include: competition from other species (especially in over mature stands), browsing by deer and rabbits, insect damage from forest tent caterpillar and bronze birch borer, and drought impacts on poorer sites.

► 101

NORTHERN HARDWOODS Strategic Timber Management

Northern Hardwoods Management

Age Class Distribution: 2019* 0 - 20 21 - 40 41- 60 61 - 80 81 - 100 101 - 120 121+ Total Northern 2,154 249 190 926 2,739 750 38 7,044 Hardwoods *Acres of harvestable land.

Native Plant Community Primary components of the northern hardwoods cover type are sugar maple and basswood that are good competitors in most mesic Native Plant Communities (NPCs). These component species are listed as being not excellent competitors in the following NPC classes: Sugar maple is not an excellent competitor in the following upland forest communities: FDn12, FDn33, FDn43, FDc12, FDc23, FDc24, FDc25, FDc34, FDs37, and MHn44. Basswood is not an excellent competitor in the following upland forest communities: FDn12, FDn33, FDn43, FDc12, FDc23, FDc24, FDc25, FDc34, and FDs37. Ash / lowland hardwoods is a broad community that can be found in a number of NPCs.

General Landscape Objective Increase the number of acres of this type. Increase the quality of the stands. Increase the amount of the type with “old forest” characteristics.

Management Notes Harvest Guidelines: Stands will be initially examined at age 45 and then every 10-15 years thereafter with no set rotation age. Most harvests will be various forms of thinnings so as to develop and sustain older forest characteristics. Low quality dry-mesic sites will be clearcut to continually provide young and mature sequence stands. Other Notes: Attempt will be to produce saw-timber quality trees. Stands with aspen component will be harvested in such a way as to retain northern hardwood status and prevent conversion to aspen. There is no rotation age as such; trees will be harvested across multiple ages. Objective is to uneven- aged stands with 80 to 140 BA. Stands on FDc24 Central Rich Dry Pine Woodland native plant community will be considered for conversion to pine.

► 102

NORTHERN HARDWOODS Strategic Timber Management

Stand Composition Stand Composition: The northern hardwoods cover type is among the most diverse cover types in Cass County with a distinct variation in tree species composition across the landscape. Northern hardwoods nearly always contain sugar maple mixed with basswood as the primary species. Found to varying degrees and in localized areas are a wide range of secondary species, including white pine, balsam fir, red oak, bur oak, ironwood, quaking aspen, bigtooth aspen, paper birch, red maple, white spruce, green ash, black ash, yellow birch, and white cedar. Foresters will consider ECS and consult the appropriate Native Plant Community Fact Sheets in the Field Guide to the Native Plan Communities of Minnesota: Laurentian Mixed Forest Province, to determine most appropriate species composition as stand management decisions are made.

Most stands are not regulated uneven-aged stands because they are lacking one or more size classes. A regulated uneven-aged stand has trees of many age or sizes that form a relatively homogeneous mixture. Periodically removing trees from all size-classes can achieve and maintain a specified diameter distribution. Regulated stands meet the desired stocking level for all size classes. Almost all northern hardwood stands in Cass County are found on mesic soils, which are suitable for this cover type. But many of these stands are dominated by poor quality timber. Reasons for this include: stand history of fires, grazing, and past harvesting to remove higher quality trees; the key species of this cover type are living near the edge of their range; insect and disease attacks on trees of advancing age; frost cracks and canker damage; poor form; and gap size. It is important to note that many species found in the northern hardwoods cover type are preferred host species for the gypsy moth and are likely to experience repeated prolonged defoliation and mortality. This may lead to changes in the composition of many northern hardwood stands.

Within-stand composition goals will be to restore a more diverse stand structure and mix of species in most stands. It is desirable to increase the presence of birch, basswood, red oak, white pine, white cedar, aspen, and white spruce as components where NPC evaluations indicate. Artificial regeneration may be necessary where these species are no longer present, are not regenerating naturally, or there is a need to add species to the stand to meet various objectives. During selection or partial cuts, provide for at least six cavity trees, potential cavity trees or snags per acre as recommended in the MFRC Voluntary Site-level Forest Management Guidelines: Timber Harvest p.36 - and in TSI p. 7.

Stand Management: Uneven-aged Patch Management: Objectives are to maintain existing large patches consisting of primarily northern hardwoods and increase the size or number where possible. This includes maintaining any designated old growth stands

Uneven-aged Management Direction The first step in uneven-aged management decision-making is to evaluate the stand and determine if it is a regulated or unregulated stand. Regulated stands must meet the desired stocking level for all size classes (see Table 4.5c and Figure 4.5b).

► 103

NORTHERN HARDWOODS Strategic Timber Management

Table 4.5c Desirable Stocking Per Acre of Stems 2-inch DBH and Greater in a Regulated Stand for Good Continuous Growth of Northern Hardwoods Under Uneven-Aged (All-Aged) Management Desirable Residuals after Harvest by Size Class Size Class DBH (inches) No. of Trees Basal Area (sq. ft.)

Adapted from Eyre, E.H. and W.M. Zillgitt. 1953. Partial cuttings in northern hardwoods of the Lake States. USDA Gen. Tech. Bull. 1076. 124 p.

Figure 4.5b Desirable Stocking for an All-Aged Stand in a Regulated Condition Desirable Stocking Per Acre After Harvest All-aged stand

Regulated Stands: Consider the following sequence when marking regulated stands for harvest: a. Remove volume only from overstocked size classes. b. Avoid harvest during and immediately following a drought or defoliation event. Selectively salvage oak, basswood, aspen, and birch mortality more than one year after a severe drought.

► 104

NORTHERN HARDWOODS Strategic Timber Management

c. Remove high-risk and cull trees while retaining leave trees needed for plant and animal habitat, such as snags and recruitment of coarse woody debris. Retain a minimum of six cavity trees, potential cavity trees, and/or snags per acre. d. Use three sawtimber size classes, 10-12”, 13-15” and 16 - 24” for determining the basal areas to retain after harvest. e. Remove crop trees that have reached the rotation size up to 24” DBH, depending on the species, while retaining two or more trees per acre beyond the rotation size DBH as leave trees (may include cull trees). Fell all stems in the gaps created by removing these mature trees. Gaps may be a range of sizes (depending on hardwood species) with the gap width limited to twice the height of the surrounding timber. Cuts in the pole-size class should be for improvement only, removing poorest quality trees. f. Cut from the sapling size class only those saplings located within the canopy gaps. g. Re-entry should be considered after 10-15 years when the stocking has increased to the point where another harvest is feasible.

Unregulated Stands: Typically, stands are overstocked in the smaller sawtimber size classes and lack adequate stocking in the sapling and large sawtimber size classes. Sawlog quality is generally poor. Within 3-4 cuts (30-50 years) these stands may become fully regulated with a marked improvement in log quality. Consider the following recommendations when moving an unregulated stand toward a regulated condition: a. To increase the seedling and sapling size classes, apply the following gap management techniques: • Use individual tree and group selection to create gaps of various sizes ranging from 30 to 100-feet in diameter (depending on hardwood species) while retaining an average of 60 – 80 percent crown closure across the stand. • Fell or girdle culls and poor-quality trees to create gaps. This provides space for the development of seedlings and saplings while retaining nurse logs and coarse woody debris. • For regenerating light seeded hardwoods, scarify, burn, or herbicide the gaps to prepare a seedbed and remove unwanted competition. • Remove all trees greater than one-inch diameter from the gaps. b. To improve timber quality and desired stocking while retaining elements of structural diversity: • Leave additional high-quality trees in the next smaller size class to allow them to grow into a deficient size class. • Remove poorer quality trees that compete with higher quality trees. • Remove trees infected with Nectria and Eutypella cankers. • Retain leave trees needed for plant and animal habitat, such as snags and recruitment of coarse woody debris. Retain a minimum of six cavity trees, potential cavity trees, and/or snags per acre. • Encourage drought-tolerant species on ridge-tops and southwest facing slopes. After the initial entry, wait 10-20 years for the next entry. Subsequent entries may require repeated use of the above recommendations until the desired stocking level is reached for managing a regulated stand. Depending on the hardwood species, 60 - 80 percent crown closure is recommended

► 105

NORTHERN HARDWOODS Strategic Timber Management

after selective harvest. Because basal area is not a good indicator of crown closure for different species with different crown shapes and sizes, stand densities to be left should be based on crown closure. For both regulated and unregulated stands, as a general guide, average stand basal area of trees greater than 5-inch DBH should be reduced to 60 – 80 square feet per acre. For stands with a larger average diameter of codominant trees, higher basal areas should be maintained.

Harvest Methods in Uneven-aged Managed Stands Single Tree Selection: Single or individual tree selection will retain an unbroken and/or multistory canopy throughout the stand, providing aesthetic, wildlife, and ecological values. This technique favors shade tolerant species at the expense of moderately tolerant or intolerant species. If the objective is to increase intolerant species such as red oak or paper birch in the northern hardwood stand, use group selection to provide larger openings and more sunlight. Use harvest systems, methods, and sale regulations to protect advanced regeneration and maintain or improve the patterns, diversity, and composition of forest vegetation present before harvest.

Group Selection: A second technique, group selection, should be used when attempting to maintain or encourage species that are intolerant or only moderately tolerant, where canopy gaps are acceptable, and for moving from an unregulated forest to a regulated forest. Group selection attempts to mimic natural disturbance patterns to meet species-specific regeneration requirements. Gaps are created naturally by ice or windstorm events, individual trees senescence, or during a large disturbance event where part of the stand is impacted. Group selection should be used to encourage red oak, paper birch, yellow birch, white spruce, and white cedar. Landscape position (aspect), microclimate, and adjacency to seed source should be considered when cedar, birch, and white spruce are desired. Other methods that produce more shade should be used to increase white pine in northern hardwood stands, due to increased risk of white pine blister rust infection in small openings. Group selection cuts should remove most or all timber in the gap, with the gap width limited to twice the height of the surrounding timber. Whenever possible, gaps should be oriented to take advantage of prevailing winds near the desired seed source trees. For heavier seed, such as oak, wind dispersal is not a concern. Rkaeserve legacy patches and inclusions in stands for seed sources and native plant diversity as well as to favor regeneration and seeding of native vegetation.

Uneven-aged Management Prescriptions: The following uneven-aged management harvest prescriptions will primarily be used: a. Group Selection with Reserves b. Single Tree Selection

Stand Management: Even aged Following a field visit, a very small portion of the northern hardwoods type may be harvested using even-aged methods, with long-term objectives of improving tree quality and eventually managing them as uneven-aged stands. Even-aged harvest methods may be needed because of undesirable conditions in some stands resulting from past management, or to move low quality even-aged hardwood stands toward an uneven-aged stand condition. A field visit to evaluate the site is required prior to deciding if a stand will be managed through even-aged methods.

► 106

NORTHERN HARDWOODS Strategic Timber Management

Stands eligible for even-aged management option tend to be the poorest quality with the lowest site index (less than SI 45) and may be candidates for conversion to conifers or other drought-tolerant species, particularly on ridge-tops and southwest facing slopes. NPC indicators should be identified to determine if these stands are suitable for conifers.

Shelterwood: Shelterwood systems are recommended because they have proven to be the most effective process for regenerating a wide variety of species. A two-aged shelterwood system is the most reliable method of regenerating an even-aged northern hardwood stand. This system works for both small seeded (birch) and large seeded species (sugar maple and red oak). The key is to establish adequate advanced (2-4 foot tall) reproduction prior to the removal of the overstory. Small seeded species will require scarification, herbicide application, and/or prescribed fire to prepare a seedbed. To regenerate maples: a. Cut from below down to 60 percent crown cover. b. Logging in the winter is preferable to retain the leaf litter ground cover, which is more suitable for regenerating sugar maple over other northern hardwood species. c. Do not scarify. d. Remove overstory after regeneration is 2-4 feet tall (3-8 years). To regenerate small seeded species in addition to maples: a. Cut from below to 70-80 percent crown cover and remove trees infected with Nectria and Eutypella cankers. b. Scarify, burn, or herbicide the site to prepare a seedbed and remove unwanted competition. c. Remove overstory after regeneration is 2-4 feet tall (3-8 years).

Clearcut: Where the existing stand quality is very poor, and sugar and red maple dominate the stand, it may be desirable to use a clearcut technique. Advanced reproduction of preferred species is required prior to the final harvest. If advanced reproduction is absent, one or two thinnings should be done to encourage seedling establishment. Consider the regeneration needs for the next stand when selecting the management prescription. Most northern hardwood species regenerate best in partial shade, but shade intolerant species require more sunlight. Species regenerating largely from stump sprouts may require thinning treatments in the future to reduce stems per clump.

Even-aged Prescriptions: The following even-aged management harvest prescriptions will primarily be used: a. Clearcut with Reserves • Clearcut with Reserves – Sprouting • Shelterwood • Shelterwood with Reserves • Shelterwood with Reserves- Final Harvest

Intermediate Harvest Methods a. Thinning in Even-Aged Pole-Sized Stands: Thinning in even-aged pole timber stands (5”-9” DBH) can be used to improve the quality of the timber, adjust the stands species composition, and capture volume that would otherwise be lost due to mortality. Following are recommendations:

► 107

NORTHERN HARDWOODS Strategic Timber Management

• Limit the harvest of trees 10 inches DBH or larger to retain these larger diameter trees in the stand for moving toward a regulated stand. Release crop trees (Class 1&2) down to 80 percent crown cover for trees greater than 5 inches diameter (DBH). A crop tree is one that is retained for future commercial harvest. Crop trees are desired species that have good form and quality, good crown vigor, a low risk to loss, are usually dominant or strong codominant trees, and have a good potential for producing high value sawlogs or veneer. • Crown release, seven feet on at least three sides, on 60-75 crop trees per acre. • Thin from below, removing primarily the culls, poorest formed, poorest quality, and suppressed trees, until the desired stocking level is reached. • Leave an adjacent tree crown to correct for a fork. • Avoid creating large canopy gaps (>15 feet). • Delay next thinning until crown closure and lower branch mortality is achieved (15-20 years) • Avoid harvest during and immediately following a drought or defoliation event. Selectively salvage oak, basswood, aspen, and birch mortality more than one year after a severe drought. b. Thinning Prescription: Selective thinning is the most common prescription.

Regeneration Methods: When the stand is to be retained in the northern hardwoods cover type, harvest prescriptions are most often the regeneration methods. Consideration will be given to stand conversion for very poor-quality stands or stands on offsite conditions (site index less than 45). Where conversion is the chosen option, see the desired cover type management recommendations for conversion methods. Conversion will favor white pine, white spruce, and red pine depending on soil conditions and native plant community indicators.

To artificially regenerate species that are present in low numbers or are no longer present, regeneration techniques including scarification, herbicide treatment, and/or fire is recommended, followed by direct seeding or planting. Species to consider are red oak, basswood, black and green ash, yellow birch, white spruce, and white cedar. White pine can be considered in shelterwood situations.

► 108

OAK Strategic Timber Management

Oak Management

Age Class Distribution: 2019* 0 - 20 21 - 40 41- 60 61 - 80 81 - 100 101 - 120 121+ Total Oak 2,589 73 147 755 4,903 311 2 8,780 *Acres of harvestable land.

Native Plant Community Northern red oak is an excellent competitor in the following upland forest Native Plant Communities (NPCs): FDc34, FDs37, MHn35, MHc26, MHc36, MHc37, MHc47, and MHs39. Bur oak is an excellent competitor in the following upland forest NPCs: FDc24, FDs37, MHn46, MHc26, MHc36, MHc37, and MHc47.

General Landscape Objective • Maintain or increase the number of acres of the oak cover type. • Improve the quality of the stands.

Management Notes Harvest Guidelines: Stands will be initially examined at age 45 and then every 10-15 years thereafter with site dependent upper rotation age of 150 years. Other Notes: • Shelterwood cuts followed by clearcuts will be used extensively to provide enough light for regeneration while sustaining stand as oak type. • When aspen is present, harvests will be designed to prevent conversion to aspen type. • Signs of advanced regeneration will be preferred prior to harvest. • Thinnings will be avoided when oaks are stressed by drought and/or defoliation. • Oak stands harvested on FDc24 Central Rich Dry Pine Woodland NPC will be considered for conversion to pine; on MHc36 Central Mesic Hardwood and MHn35 Northern Mesic Hardwood Forest they will be considered for conversion to northern hardwoods. • On FDn33 Northern Dry-Mesic Mixed Woodland and FDc34 Central Dry-Mesic Pine Hardwood Forest, thins will be used to remove aspen component.

► 109

OAK Strategic Timber Management

Stand Composition The objective is to maintain the species composition and structure that naturally occurs within the oak forest communities. Recommendations for within-stand management include: a. Maintain or restore associated tree species such as paper birch, red maple, quaking aspen, bigtooth aspen, jack pine, red pine, sugar maple, basswood, black ash, green ash, white cedar, balsam poplar, ironwood, American elm, and white pine where appropriate to the site. b. Retain the older forest characteristics within stands by retaining a component of large, old trees, coarse woody debris, and snags. c. Retain large, old trees in the canopy for recruitment of future downed logs and cavity dens/nests. d. Attempt to retain trees from all size-classes to retain mast production and availability to wildlife over time. e. Increase mixed forest conditions in most stands. This will aid in reducing potential impacts of forest pests and diseases. f. Maintain/restore conifer component, where suitable to the site, according to NPCs. g. Reserve legacy patches and inclusions within stands for seed sources and native plant diversity as well as to favor regeneration of native vegetation. Foresters will consider ECS and consult the appropriate Native Plant Community Fact Sheets in the Field Guide to the Native Plant Communities of Minnesota: Laurentian Mixed Forest Province, to determine most appropriate species composition as stand management decisions are made.

Stand Management Patch Management: Objectives are to retain the existing oak patches. Some oak stands will be managed together with adjacent hardwood stands to create larger, similarly aged hardwood patches

Even-aged Management Direction: Oak is shade intolerant and will be managed on an even-aged basis. Oaks are long-lived, with red and bur oak capable of exceeding 200 years of age.

Final Harvest: Oak stands will be managed using shelterwood, seed tree, clearcut, or clearcut with reserves as the final harvest method. Final harvest will be based on average tree diameter of the crop trees, depending on site index. The use of natural stand boundaries or natural features such as topography or soil type to delineate timber sale boundaries is recommended

Regeneration Methods: It is recommended to use harvest systems, methods and sale regulations that protect advanced regeneration and maintain or improve the patterns, diversity and composition of forest vegetation present prior to harvest. The preferred method of regenerating oak is to use the shelterwood system to establish advanced regeneration.

Some control of understory competition may be necessary after a shelterwood harvest or prior to planting. This will be particularly useful where advanced sugar or red maple reproduction is already established or where competition from sprouting aspen is anticipated. This can be accomplished using ground application of herbicide or by prescribed burning.

► 110

OAK Strategic Timber Management

Advanced reproduction must be well distributed and well established (2-4 feet tall) to compete successfully with other woody vegetation in the new stand. Once advanced reproduction is adequate, the overstory should be removed. Legacy patches and inclusions will be preserved within stands for seed sources and native plant diversity as well as to favor regeneration and seeding of native vegetation.

Planted stands will be established and managed to more closely resemble naturally occurring stands by planting a variety of tree species and using a variety of variable density thinning techniques, with the objective of preserving existing natural vegetation and preserving advanced regeneration. In addition, protection of the seedlings from herbivory may be required.

Intermediate Harvest Methods: Where appropriate, thinning will be implemented according to standard stocking tables to increase the vigor of existing stands. During the thinning process, crop tree selection criteria should include the following: a. Dominant/co-dominant trees with large crowns relative to DBH b. No epicormic branches or dormant buds on the butt log c. Trees should appear to have good life expectancy d. Avoid selecting leaners, poor form trees as crop trees e. Either stump sprouts or seedling origin stems are acceptable Utilizing these criteria, it is possible to economically manage as few as five red oak pole or sawtimber crop trees (high value trees) per acre while maintaining wildlife habitat and biodiversity values from these trees and the others in the stand.

Limiting Factors: Oak decline and mortality are caused by several factors, including drought stress and defoliation; it culminates in mortality caused by two-line chestnut borers (TLCB) and Armillaria root disease. Expect most losses on light soils, along ridge tops, and on steep slopes. a. Avoid harvesting during, and immediately after a severe drought and/or defoliation by forest tent caterpillar. b. Prepare oak stands for the future. Recognize competition from shade tolerant species. c. Anticipate oak wilt and gypsy moth defoliation in the next 20 years and subsequent TLCB attack. To minimize the potential impacts of these pests, it is important to maintain vigorous, structurally diverse forest stands, promote species diversity, avoid the transport of infected wood, and implement harvest strategies that minimize damage to reserve trees.

► 111

WHITE PINE Strategic Timber Management

White Pine Management

Age Class Distribution: 2019* 0 - 20 21 - 40 41- 60 61 - 80 81 - 100 101 - 120 121+ Total White Pine 25 57 20 132 44 151 136 564 *Acres of harvestable land.

Native Plant Community Desired sites for retaining or introducing white pine as a cover type or component are sites that support a plant community where white pine is typically one of the dominant species in the older growth stages. This includes the following native plant communities: FDn12, FDn33, FDn43, FDc34, and MHn35

General Landscape Objective Increase white pine as a component species in other appropriate cover types.

Management Notes Harvest Guidelines: Examine at age 25 with no set rotation age although age 180-240 will be a rough guide. Harvests will be primarily to capture mortality. Other Notes: Select tree harvest will be primary harvest technique. White pine is to be underplanted in other cover types, especially aspen and birch.

Stand Composition White pine stands will range in species composition from nearly pure white pine stands to stands that are composed of mixed species (conifer, deciduous) with white pine being the predominant species. Forest Resource Managers will consider ECS information and consult the appropriate Native Plant Community Fact Sheets in the Field Guide to the Native Plant Communities of Minnesota: Laurentian Mixed Forest Province, to determine most appropriate species composition as stand management decisions are made.

► 112

WHITE PINE Strategic Timber Management

Stand Management Patch Management: Objectives are to retain the existing upland conifer patches found in Cass County and to manage upland conifers to create larger and older patches.

Limiting Factors: Protective measures against insects, disease, and animal depredation need to be used for growing white pine in Cass County. The following summarizes limiting factors and selected management recommendations for white pine: a. The presence of white pine blister rust (WPBR), an exotic disease, has altered the ability of white pines to grow and regenerate in northern Minnesota. Seedlings and saplings often die due to WPBR infections, especially if planted in open plantations. Establish white pines under an overstory to prevent dew formation on their needles and subsequent infection by WPBR. Once established, seedlings and saplings require tending: pathological pruning and deer browse protection. Pole-sized and mature trees can often live a long life and produce seed for many years, even though some branches have succumbed to WPBR. White pine weevil (WPW) repeatedly infests leaders when trees are young, causing stunting, cabbagy tree form, and forking of the stems. WPW attack can be prevented by planting/ regenerating seedlings under an overstory. b. Strictly avoid open-field plantings of white pine. Instead, plant or regenerate white pine seedlings under a light overstory. Establishing solid blocks of white pine is not recommended, but rather scatter white pine seedlings among other species to become a component of the future stand. Be prepared to accept significant white pine losses. Regenerate white pine seedlings under a light over-story. c. Implement pathological pruning until there is nine feet of branch-free bole. d. If natural regeneration is desired: • Mature white pines must be within 200 feet of each other to ensure pollination. • Scarification of the soil should be done just before seeds fall during a “good” seed year.

The establishment and follow-up management of new stands of white pine will be critical to the effectiveness of efforts to maintain and expand this cover type and to increase the white pine component in other cover types.

Management Direction: White pine stands will be managed primarily as uneven-aged stands with periodic intermediate thinnings, while maintaining or enhancing within-stand tree species diversity. Older white pine stands (90+ years) should be managed predominantly as multi-aged stands consisting of white pine and other species such as white spruce, balsam fir, red pine, birch, and aspen. In younger white pine stands (up to 90 years old), even-aged management treatments such as a shelterwood harvest to establish long term goals of natural regeneration are recommended. All white pine stands that are 25 years and older will be selected for a stand exam in the next 10 years.

Final Harvest Method: Due to the less-than-desired current acreage in older age-classes, no final harvest is planned in the white pine cover type during the next 10 years. Final harvest in the white pine cover type may occur in the future but is recommended to occur only after a stand reaches 180 to 240 years old.

► 113

WHITE PINE Strategic Timber Management

Intermediate Harvest Methods: Thinning will be used to: capture mortality; reduce stand density to increase future tree growth, quality, and vigor; and maintain or enhance species diversity. Stands of merchantable size and basal area will be thinned at 10-25-year intervals, reducing the basal area usually to 90 square feet. In some stands, residual basal area may be modified to meet other objectives. Examples are: 1) thin to 60 BA versus 90 BA to encourage within-stand diversity and 2) maintain higher residual basal areas because of the larger diameter of older trees. Older stands may have longer intervals between thinnings to compensate for slower growth rates and to facilitate the growth of desirable understory species.

Thinning in stands will maintain or increase within-stand diversity, while retaining white pine as the main cover type. For example, the younger white pine stands may have a larger component of aspen and birch, while older stands (90+ years) may increase in white spruce and cedar with smaller amounts of aspen, birch, and balsam fir. Red pine may be present throughout the life of the stand. The following methods should be considered: a. Consider creating or maintaining variable densities within stands when thinning ranging from unthinned areas to heavily thinned or group-selected areas within a stand. b. Protect advanced regeneration of desirable understory species, where possible. c. Higher stand densities (BA) are recommended along stand edges exposed to wind and along high visual quality corridors, such as major roads and lakes.

Shelterwood harvests may also be used as an intermediate harvest method to regenerate white pine in the understory. Some method of scarification may be needed to establish a suitable seedbed.

Intermediate Harvest Prescriptions: The most common prescriptions are: a. Row Thinning (initial thinning only) b. Strip Thinning (initial thinning only) c. Selective Thinning d. Shelterwood with Reserves-Intermediate harvest

Multi-Aged Stand Management: Older (90+ years) white pine stands will be managed primarily for a multi-aged stand structure using even-aged management techniques. The move toward a multi- aged structure will be accomplished through thinning and shelterwood harvests. A goal is to mimic light to high intensity surface fires and partial crown fires that historically occurred.

During thinning or shelterwood harvests, from 90 years old to final harvest, retain at least 25 percent of the largest white pine present, and manage out to age of 180 - 240 years. The goal is to retain a significant number of the largest cohorts out to the final harvest age, while creating or maintaining a multi-aged white pine stand.

Every third entry should be a group selection harvest, with goal of establishing a new age-class of white pine within the stand. The long-term goal is to create stands with layered age-classes (two or more). Timing of the first group selection harvest will depend on seed production and stand condition (age, density, and distribution of white pine).

► 114

WHITE PINE Strategic Timber Management

Multi-aged harvest prescriptions: The most common prescriptions to use are thinning and shelterwood

Regeneration Methods: Following are recommendations to consider in regenerating white pine, both in stands that are white pine cover types now and stands of other cover types that will be converted to white pine. 1. Use a variety of site preparation techniques to provide the necessary ground scarification to prepare the seedbed or planting site. a. Site preparation techniques such as prescribed fire, anchor chains, broadcast skidding, disc-trenching, and/or herbicide will be favored over those that create more disturbance to the soil profile, such as deep rock raking. b. Decisions regarding whether or not site preparation is necessary, and the technique used, will be made following on-the-ground site evaluations. 2. Natural or artificial seeding, underplanting, and reserving advanced regeneration will be used to regenerate young white pine components in existing white pine stands. a. Varying proportions of aspen, birch, balsam fir, white spruce, white cedar, or red pine should co-exist as secondary stand components depending on site conditions and native plant community. 3. Reserving seed trees or clumps of mature or advanced regeneration of these secondary species will maintain their presence in the white pine cover type, especially in single species plantations. 4. Tending of white pine regeneration will be important to their survival. Site selection, bud capping, application of animal repellents, fencing, basal pruning, and release from competing vegetation are important for the long-term survival of young white pine. a. In some cases, areas of historically high incidence of white pine may be passed over for white pine regeneration efforts

► 115

RED PINE Strategic Timber Management

Red Pine Management

Age Class Distribution: 2019* 0 - 20 21 - 40 41- 60 61 - 80 81 - 100 101 - 120 121+ Total Red Pine 3,533 1,796 1,430 350 921 1,512 414 9,955 *Acres of harvestable land.

Native Plant Community Desired sites for conversion to the red pine cover type are sites that support a plant community where red pine is typically one of the dominant species. The native plant communities that are likely to be associated with the red pine cover type are the FDn12, FDn33, FDn43, FDc12, FDc24, and FDc34.

General Landscape Objective Increase the number of acres of red pine cover type.

Increases stand quality and productivity.

Maintain red pine and restore as a component species in other cover types.

Management Notes Harvest Guidelines: First thin will occur around age 25 and then every 10 years thereafter as growth allows / requires with site dependent rotation age of 60 years for artificial stands and120 years for natural stands. Other Notes: Harvested stands will remain as red pine cover type.

Selected stands of oak, northern hardwood, aspen, birch, and jack pine will be converted to red pine. Most of this will occur on the FDc24 Central Rich Dry Pine Woodland NPC.

► 116

RED PINE Strategic Timber Management

Stand Composition On drier sites, red pine forests range from nearly pure stands to mixtures of jack pine, eastern white pine, aspen, paper birch, and oaks. On wetter sites, red pine is found growing with eastern white pine, red maple, red oak, balsam fir, and white spruce. Red pine grows best on well-drained sandy to loamy sand soils but is most common on sandy soils with trees having heights of 45 to 75 feet at 50 years of age.

The desired structure within the red pine cover type will range from predominantly single-canopied even-aged stands to multi-canopied, mixed-aged stands with red pine, other conifers, and deciduous species as co-dominants (as stands are thinned).

Foresters will consider ECS As Stand Silvicultural Prescription Worksheets are developed, field foresters will consider ECS information and consult the appropriate Native Plant Community Fact Sheets in the Field Guide to the Native Plant Communities of Minnesota: Laurentian Mixed Forest Province, to determine most appropriate species composition as stand management decisions are made.

Stand Management Patch Management: Objectives are to retain the existing upland conifer patches and to manage upland conifers to create larger and older patches

Even-aged Management Direction: Red pine will be managed predominantly as an even-aged cover type for poles, high value sawtimber products, biological diversity, riparian buffers, recreation, aesthetics and wildlife habitat. As red pine stands age, manage to diversify within-stand species composition and increase within-stand structure to maintain or improve site productivity, wildlife habitat, and biodiversity.

Uneven-Aged Management: Isolated opportunities to manage red pine in uneven-aged stands include sites in the FDc12 NPC where feather moss provides an adequate seedbed. Removals of mature trees should not be so heavy as to allow the feather moss to dry out. Regeneration in uneven- aged red pine stands must be monitored for Diplodia and Sirococcus shoot blights.

Final Harvest Method: If the objective is to regenerate red pine, final harvest will occur using clearcut or clearcut with reserves. Shelterwood will be employed when converting to white pine. With either system, reserving biological legacies such as large, healthy, live trees, decadent trees, snags, and logs, and other coarse woody debris on the forest floor can carry some ecological complexity into the next rotation.

Intermediate Harvest Methods: Thinning will be used to reduce stand density to increase future tree growth, quality, and vigor, and to obtain the desired composition of the stand. Recommendations are: a. Normal rotation stand thinnings will occur in merchantable stands at approximately 10- year intervals, depending on site quality.

► 117

RED PINE Strategic Timber Management

b. Older stands may have longer intervals between thinnings to compensate for slower growth rates and to facilitate the growth of desirable understory species. c. Variable density thinning, or other techniques will be incorporated to meet ERF or other objectives. Examples are: 1) thin 20 percent of the stand to 60 BA, 60 percent to 90 BA, and skip thinning in 20 percent to encourage within-stand diversity. d. Large gaps (~3 ac) may be produced during early thinnings in mixed red pine/jack pine stands to encourage jack pine seeding, thereby ensuring that the species is not eliminated from the stand during later thinnings or due to early mortality.

Thinning in normal rotation and ERF stands will maintain (especially in natural origin stands) or increase within-stand diversity, while retaining red pine as the main cover type by the following methods: a. Reserve from harvest individual trees or patches of other species appropriate to the site, where possible. b. Consider creating or maintaining variable densities within stands when thinning. c. Protect advanced regeneration of desirable understory species, where possible. d. Higher stand densities (basal area) are recommended along stand edges exposed to wind and along high visual quality corridors, such as major roads and lakes. e. Consider underplanting tolerant species, where seed sources or advance regeneration for these are lacking. For species suggestions, refer to the natural history section for the pertinent native plant community in the Field Guide to Native Plant Communities of Minnesota. f. Provide for six cavity trees, potential cavity trees, or snags per acre as recommended in the MFRC Voluntary Site-level Forest Management Guidelines: Timber Harvest p.36 and TSI p. 7).

Potential impacts of bark beetles should be considered during intermediate harvest in the red pine cover type in these subsections. Bark beetle (Ips pini) feed and reproduce in the moist cambium of freshly cut, recently killed, or blown-down red pine, jack pine, and occasionally white pine. Bark beetles normally attack standing live trees in patches or pockets near the dead material in which they developed into adults.

Intermediate Harvest Prescriptions: The following are the most common management prescriptions that will be used for the red pine cover type: a. Row Thinning b. Strip Thinning a. Selective Thinning d. Variable Density Thinning

Where the goal is to artificially or naturally regenerate white pine in the understory of a red pine stand, the following prescriptions may be applied: a. Shelterwood-Intermediate Cut b. Shelterwood-With Reserves-Intermediate Cut

Intermediate thinning and even-aged management prescriptions should be modified to maintain or increase the proportion of other species in the canopy, understory, and ground cover.

► 118

RED PINE Strategic Timber Management

Regeneration Methods: The following recommendations should be considered when regenerating red pine: a. Plant using stock from local seed source. b. Site preparation and herbicide use should consider maintaining within-stand diversity. c. Scarify to encourage natural seeding of red pine and other species. d. Scarify and artificially seed red pine and/or other species. e. Prescribed surface fire in mature red pine stands can be an effective management tool for eliminating shrub competition, reducing thick duff layers, and preparing mineral seedbeds. Summer fires conducted over several growing seasons are most effective at controlling dense shrub competition and exposing mineral soil. This may be done before harvesting to prepare seedbeds, unless charred bark on harvested trees poses a problem. (“Red Pine Handbook”). f. Consider the risk of Diplodia tip blight and canker (Sphaeropsis sapinea) and shoot blight (Sirococcus conigens) infection on sites where taller infected red pine or jack pine are left on or next to sites being regenerated to red pine. g. Provide for six cavity trees, potential cavity trees, or snags per acre as recommended in the MFRC Voluntary Site-Level Forest Management Guidelines. h. Use natural regeneration in natural origin stands.

Limiting Factors: Pole-sized and mature stands can be attacked by bark beetles (Ips and Dendroctonus species) during (1) droughty weather, especially if basal area is high, (2) if bark beetles have built up in slash or cut products on the site or on an adjacent site, or (3) after a fire has scorched crowns and/or created or enlarged basal fire scars. Avoid creating pine slash, cut products, and wounding pines from March through August, especially when the weather is droughty. Natural and artificial regeneration can succumb to infections caused by Diplodia pinea, an invasive pathogen. Fortunately, spores are spread in raindrops (and by cone insects), so this disease can be managed. Only seedlings growing directly beneath an infected overstory of red pines or growing within one chain of overstory trees are likely to be heavily infected and die when drought stressed. The following are recommended: a. Do not rely on the survival of understory red pine seedlings and saplings when they are growing under an overstory of red pine trees. b. Planting red pine seedlings under red pine overstories should be discouraged. c. Create a one-chain buffer between planted red pine seedlings and adjacent overstory red pines to minimize red pine losses. Do not plant jack pine in the buffer strip. d. If red pine trees are retained as leave trees, choose locations where they are clumped together and are near the stand edges. This will minimize the area of disease impact.

► 119

JACK PINE Strategic Timber Management

Jack Pine Management

Age Class Distribution: 2019* 0 - 20 21 - 40 41- 60 61 - 80 81 - 100 101 - 120 121+ Total Jack Pine 687 580 412 132 164 5 1 1,982 *Acres of harvestable land.

Native Plant Community Jack pine is a good competitor on the following native plant communities (NPC): FDn12, FDc12, FDc23, FDc24, and FDc25.

General Landscape Objective Cass County has the long-term landscape objective to increase the number of acres of jack pine cover type, but excessive deer browse and seedling mortality in general makes achieving this goal difficult in the near-term.

Management Notes Harvest Guidelines: • Harvest will occur between the ages of 40 and 50. • Natural Resource Managers will evaluate stands as they approach age 40 to determine harvest schedule. Evaluation factors include: stand quality (site index), location (LandType Association), native plant community, condition (disease and insect presence), historical record of the stand, and manager’s knowledge of the terrain and site. Other Notes: • Deer browse on regenerating stands remains a serious issue. • The current accelerated harvest will be continued over the next decade; this is intended to capture mortality on rapidly degenerating stands and begin the process of evening out age- classes. Some of these stands may be converted to red pine. • Jack pine harvests will be designed to encourage regeneration back into jack pine. Issues with deer browse will have to be considered and resolved for this to occur.

Stand Composition Due to declines in the jack pine cover type in Cass County, the first priority is to maintain the existing acreage. Associated species in jack pine stands may include red pine, aspen, bur oak, balsam fir, white spruce, paper birch, and/or white pine. Most jack pine stands occur in Native Plant Community Classes that are woodlands (canopy cover ranging from 100 percent down to 25 percent). With recent fire suppression, many of these jack pine stands have developed more of a closed canopy condition.

► 120

JACK PINE Strategic Timber Management

Most jack pine in the Cass County inventory is currently within the central floristic region. The remainder of jack pine resource occurs in the northern floristic region. The following jack pine communities are identified as imperiled (very restricted range, very few populations, steep declines, or other factors) at the state (S2) and/or global (G2) level: FDc12a (S2), FDc23a (S2 and G2), FDc25a (S2), and FDn12a (S2).

The desired within-stand composition will be relatively pure jack pine in younger growth stages. Associated species may include red pine, aspen, bur oak, balsam fir, white spruce, paper birch, and/or white pine depending on the NPC. For detailed tree species composition descriptions, refer to the Vegetation Structure & Composition and the Natural History section for the pertinent NPC in the “Field Guide to Native Plant Communities of Minnesota.”

Most jack pine stands occur in NPC classes which are woodlands and should have canopy cover ranging from 100 percent down to 25 percent. Canopy cover generally increases as these stands age. The jack pine dominated communities in the central floristic region evolved with frequent, mild surface fires in between catastrophic fires. Consequently, the jack pines in these LTAs have adapted to this disturbance regime with a shorter life span and very few serotinous cones. These natural jack pine stands appear to have regenerated over a period of about 30 years with several age-classes of seedlings contributing to these classes. The remainder of the jack pine resource occurs in the northern floristic region. In this floristic region, natural jack pine stands usually regenerate in a single cohort after a catastrophic fire stimulates the serotinous cones to shed seed.

Stand Management Patch Management: Catastrophic fires generally would have created larger patches, while mild surface fires would have created smaller patches.

Limiting Factors: Jack pine budworm is a perennial problem in Cass County. Stands older than 50 years are at high risk for significant mortality due to budworm outbreaks. Outbreaks occur at 6- 12- year intervals and usually last three to four years in any one location. Following are suggestions to address these limiting factors: a. Maintain age-class diversity to minimize mortality losses. b. Use a harvest age between 40 and 50 to manage jack pine stands. c. Salvage budworm killed trees. Pre-salvage if intended products include dimensional lumber. d. Minimize “edge” when designing timber sales as this also decreases the severity of budworm impact. e. Regenerate jack pine from local seed sources to preserve the natural diversity of these drought tolerant populations. f. Recognize that natural regeneration on the central floristic sites can take many years to reach full stocking. Even-aged Management Direction: The jack pine cover type will be managed primarily on an even- aged basis for pulpwood and bolts, and to support forest wildlife habitat and biodiversity. The goal is to move toward a balanced age-class structure while maintaining or improving site productivity and stand health.

► 121

JACK PINE Strategic Timber Management

Harvest Methods: The jack pine cover type will generally be treated through even-aged prescriptions using seed tree methods, clearcuts with reserves (e.g., jack pine, aspen, oak, red pine, white pine, white spruce, balsam fir, and/or birch), or clearcuts. In the central floristic region, natural seeding may be accomplished by reserving ~30 sq. ft. of BA scattered seed trees, islands or clumps of mature seed trees, or advanced jack pine regeneration. Small gaps (~3 acre) could also be created in existing jack pine stands through a group selection harvest. These should be allowed to regenerate through natural seeding from remaining mature stands. In the northern floristic region, natural seeding can be accomplished through summer harvest treatments and full tree skidding that distributes serotinous cones on mineral soil.

Harvest Prescriptions: The following are the most common prescriptions that will be used on jack pine timber sales: a. Seed tree b. Clearcut with reserves followed by natural seeding c. Clearcut with reserves followed by artificial seeding or planting d. Clearcut followed by natural seeding (from serotinous cones on exposed soil) e. Clearcut followed by artificial seeding or planting f. Group Selection

Intermediate Harvest Methods: Thinning is generally not recommended for Cass County jack pine stands. Precommercial treatments may be considered to reduce extreme stand density or to manipulate stand composition to the desired species.

Intermediate Harvest Prescriptions: No thinning prescriptions are recommended for Cass County jack pine stands.

Regeneration Methods: Natural seeding, artificial seeding, or planting will be used to regenerate jack pine. Consider that natural regeneration on the central floristic sites can take many years to reach full stocking. Regeneration recommendations are to: a. Separate treatment/prescription types by northern and central floristic regions. b. Promote natural regeneration through seed tree and small gap harvests in the central floristic region and use clearcuts with appropriate slash management in the northern floristic region. c. Regenerate jack pine from local seed sources on these sites to preserve the natural diversity of these drought-tolerant populations. d. Conduct brush and sod control when necessary, manage for prairie grasses and forbs (ground layer) in appropriate NPCs, use herbicides or prescribed burning (understory and light slash burns) when possible, and discourage establishment of invasive or cool-season sod- forming grass species. e. Consider mixing some other species that are appropriate to the site and NPC with jack pine when seeding or planting to regenerate some jack pine stands. Other species that may be included in smaller proportions are white pine and red pine.

► 122

WHITE SPRUCE Strategic Timber Management

White Spruce Management

Age Class Distribution: 2019* 0 - 20 21 - 40 41- 60 61 - 80 81 - 100 101 - 120 121+ Total White Spruce 17 161 1 37 34 13 0 262 *Acres of harvestable land.

Native Plant Community The native plant communities (NPCs) identified where white spruce is an excellent competitor are FDn43 and MHn44.

General Landscape Objective Maintain or increase the number of acres of white spruce cover type.

Management Notes Harvest Guidelines: Harvest will occur between the ages of 60 – 100. Other Notes: In most cases even age clearcuts will be used as final harvest in these stands.

Even age thins will be conducted in existing artificially planted stands.

There are currently few acres of this type in the boreal hardwood native plant communities, but it will be encouraged as a component species.

White spruce stands harvested on the FDc24 Central Rich Dry Pine Woodland NPC will be considered for conversion to pine. All other stands will be regenerated as white spruce.

Stand Composition Most of the older, natural origin white spruce stands have a mixed coniferous-deciduous canopy with varying amounts of quaking aspen, paper birch and balsam fir. They also have smaller amounts of white pine, tamarack, or black spruce depending on landscape context, site conditions, and management history. Natural origin white spruce will be managed on a normal rotation age of 60 years. Foresters will consider ECS and consult the appropriate Native Plant Community Fact Sheets in the Field Guide to the Native Plant Communities of Minnesota: Laurentian Mixed Forest Province, to determine most appropriate species composition as stand management decisions are made.

► 123

WHITE SPRUCE Strategic Timber Management

White spruce stands will vary from mostly pure white spruce to mixed species stands. A decreasing proportion of the white spruce plantations will be managed as single species, favoring a more diverse stand structure that includes varying amounts of conifers such as white pine, red pine, tamarack, black spruce, balsam fir, upland white cedar, and upland hardwoods such as aspen and birch depending on landscape context, site conditions, and management history.

Stand Management: Even aged Patch Management: Objectives include creating more large patches, identifying both younger and older forest patches, and in particular, increasing the patch size and age class distribution of all lowland conifers

Even-aged Management Direction: Planted white spruce will be managed as normal rotation stands on an even-aged basis for pulpwood, bolts, and sawtimber products while moving toward a balanced age-class structure and maintaining or improving site productivity and wildlife habitat.

Even-Aged Harvest Methods: Harvest methods for normal rotation white spruce stands will include clearcut, shelterwood, or seed tree prescriptions. The use of natural stand boundaries or natural features such as topography and soil type to delineate timber sale boundaries is recommended. Harvest regulations and techniques should be applied that will favor maintaining or increasing within stand diversity by reserving from harvest a portion of the hardwoods and other long-lived conifers and protecting desirable advanced regeneration. These reserve trees will maintain the within-stand species diversity, add structural diversity for the newly regenerating stand, and may also function as a seed source that could aid in increasing the density of these species in the new stand. The two most common defoliators of white spruce are spruce budworm and yellow-headed spruce sawfly. Reserve trees may mitigate impacts from the sawfly by providing partial overstory shade. When regenerating white spruce stands, efforts should be made to reduce the amount of balsam fir in the stand, since balsam fir is the preferred host for spruce budworm.

Intermediate Harvest Methods: a. Thinning will be used to reduce stand density to increase future tree growth, quality, and vigor, and to reduce the risk of spruce budworm outbreaks and damage. Recommendations are: • Thinning in normal rotation stands will occur in merchantable stands at approximately 10- year intervals, depending on site quality. • Older stands may have longer intervals (15 – 20 years) between thinnings to compensate for slower growth rates and to facilitate the growth of desirable understory species. • In multi-aged stands, residual basal area may be modified to meet objectives. Examples are: 1) to encourage within stand diversity and 2) maintain higher residual basal areas because of the larger diameter of older trees. b. Thinning will maintain (especially in natural origin stands) or increase within-stand diversity, while retaining white spruce as the main cover type by the following methods: • Reserve from harvest, or regenerate individual trees or patches of other tree species appropriate to the site, where possible. Efforts should be made to reduce the amount of balsam fir in the stand, since balsam fir is the preferred host for spruce budworm.

► 124

WHITE SPRUCE Strategic Timber Management

• Protect advanced regeneration of desirable understory species, where possible. • Consider creating or maintaining variable densities within stands when thinning. • Higher stand densities (BA) are recommended along stand edges exposed to wind, and along high visual quality corridors such as major roads and lakes. • Attempt to retain shrub and forb species diversity appropriate to the site during management activities. An example to achieve this is to locate thinning rows or landings to avoid disturbance of some patches of shrubs or forbs. c. If the stand is used as a thermal cover area by wildlife, consider applying one of the following options: • Maintain a higher stand basal area (e.g., wider reserve strips with canopy closure). • Thin only a portion of the stand. • Don’t thin.

Thinning Prescriptions: Prescriptions for thinning include: a. Row thin. b. Strip thin c. Selective thin. d. Thin only when the ground is frozen, and snow is present. e. Evaluate for the first thinning before the plantation is 30 years old.

Even-Aged Management Prescriptions: The following are the most common prescriptions that will be used on normal rotation, white spruce timber sale acres: a. Clearcut with Reserves. b. Clearcut followed by artificial regeneration (planting or seeding). c. Clearcut with Reserves followed by artificial regeneration (planting or seeding). d. Seed Tree. e. Shelterwood. Some research shows that light shade will aid survival and promote healthier and more vigorous growth.

Stand Management: Uneven-aged Uneven-aged Management Direction: This is recommended specifically for riparian areas and other identified special management zones where even-aged management isn’t appropriate. Uneven-aged managed stands should result in multi-canopy, mixed species conditions that are desired on specific sites. Recommendations include: a. Retain some super canopy trees (e.g., white spruce, white pine, or other species) in patches or clumps at each treatment. a. Encourage multi-layered understory development. b. Emphasize regenerating white spruce in the understory. c. Increase the amount of non-host tree species such as pines and hardwoods in the stand.

Uneven-Aged / Multi-Aged Management Prescriptions: Single-tree and group selection harvest methods should be used where multiple ages already exist in the stand. Where the stand is currently even-aged, shelterwood, seed tree with reserves, or group selection harvest methods may be needed

► 125

WHITE SPRUCE Strategic Timber Management

to move the stand toward a multiple-aged stand. The following are the most common management prescriptions that will be used for white spruce stands: a. Group Selection b. Single Tree Selection / Selective Tree Harvest c. Seed Tree with Reserves d. Shelterwood with Reserves

Limiting Factors / Regeneration Limiting Factors: White spruce is usually a component of stands and is rarely found as a “pure” stand. Their root systems are shallow, so they are easily damaged during thinning. Declines observed in thinned white spruce plantations are likely due to thinning damage, attack by opportunistic insects (spruce weevil, spruce beetle, etc.), and to needlecast diseases. Spruce budworm is occasionally a defoliator in these subsections and can lead the white spruce stand into a decline. a. Plant white spruce seedlings under a light overstory of aspen or aspen/birch as this discourages insect pests that cause seedling mortality and impact height growth. b. Thin only when the ground is frozen, and snow is present. c. Conduct the first thinning before the plantation is 30 years old. Some observations indicate that white spruce stands may decline as a result of multiple stand entries to thin.

Regeneration: After final or selective harvest, following are recommendations to consider when regenerating white spruce stands: a. Use prescribed fire, mechanical scarification, or herbicides to site prep for natural or artificial seeding or planting. b. During site preparation, discriminate against balsam fir and maintain non-host tree species such as pines and hardwoods in the stand to reduce the risk of spruce budworm infestation. c. Consider within-stand diversity goals when determining the method, timing, and intensity of the site preparation or release so that species composition and structure within the stand is allowed to develop. For example, reduce the concentration of herbicide used or use a less intense method than rock raking. d. Consider using techniques that make plantations look more like naturally regenerated stands. • Retain advanced regeneration of desired species from the previous stand. • Plant fewer trees per acre to allow other species to develop. • Plant trees at varied densities. e. When regenerating spruce-fir stands, emphasis should be given to regenerating the white spruce and not the balsam fir, and also to increase the amount of non-host tree species such as pines and hardwoods in the stand. f. Consider underplanting or artificial seeding of white spruce and other desired species to supplement natural seeding.

► 126

BALSAM FIR Strategic Timber Management

Balsam Fir Management

Age Class Distribution: 2019* 0 - 20 21 - 40 41- 60 61 - 80 81 - 100 101 - 120 121+ Total Balsam Fir 123 20 237 197 425 189 0 1,190 *Acres of harvestable land.

Native Plant Community Balsam fir is an excellent competitor in Native Plant Communities (NPCs): FDn33, FDn43, MHn44, WFn53, and FPn63. NPCs favorable for balsam fir cover type maintenance are FDn33, FDn43 and MHn44. Balsam fir is best suited to wet-mesic sites where adequate soil moisture is available throughout the growing season. After harvest, some balsam stands will naturally regenerate aspen or birch cover types with balsam as a component.

General Landscape Objective Maintain the number of acres of balsam fir cover type.

Management Notes Harvest Guidelines: Harvest will occur at age 50. Other Notes: Most harvests will be even age clearcuts, even age clearcut with residuals, or even age patch cut. A number of balsam fir may be left as seed trees. Generally merchantable-sized balsam fir will not be retained as residuals due to susceptibility to blowdown.

Balsam fir is a component in many other cover types and will be retained wherever viable.

► 127

BALSAM FIR Strategic Timber Management

Stand Composition The desired future within stand composition for the balsam fir cover type has been identified as mixed forests that include upland hardwoods and long-lived conifers appropriate to the site. It will also be managed as a component of other mixed species cover types. Foresters will consider ECS and consult the appropriate Native Plant Community Fact Sheets in the Field Guide to the Native Plant Communities of Minnesota: Laurentian Mixed Forest Province, to determine most appropriate species composition as stand management decisions are made.

Stand Management Patch Management: Objectives include: creating more large patches; identifying both younger and older forest patches; and, in, increasing the patch size and age-class distribution of lowland conifers.

Limiting Factors: Balsam fir trees and stands in Cass County are rarely defoliated and killed by spruce budworms. However, management strategies that increase the balsam fir component or its age will lead to more frequent incursions and mortality by spruce budworms. Recommendations to address these limiting factors include: a. Keep the rotation age of balsam fir as low as possible as older trees are more vulnerable to spruce budworm-caused mortality. b. When regenerating stands with spruce and fir in them, favor the spruce. Occasionally, stands may be harvested below normal rotation age (50 years) if necessary to reduce rot, wind throw, and spruce budworm losses. (Note: To date, spruce budworm has not been a significant problem in Cass County.

Even-aged Management Direction: The balsam fir cover type will be managed primarily on an even- aged basis for pulpwood and small saw logs. This will be accomplished while moving toward a balanced age-class structure and maintaining or improving forest wildlife habitat and biodiversity. Balsam is important for wildlife benefits, both as a cover type and as individual trees in other cover types.

Balsam fir is shade tolerant but grows best in about 50 percent or more sunlight. Intermediate treatments offer an excellent opportunity to control species composition and speed up development of dense balsam fir stands. Mixed stands with 50-80 percent balsam fir component are likely the best candidates for enhancing wildlife habitat and aesthetics. Balsam fir responds well to release. The best results occur when this is done while stands are young, vigorous and approximately 6-10 feet tall.

Uneven-aged Management Direction: Uneven-aged management may be appropriate where aesthetics is a priority.

Final Harvest: It is recommended that balsam fir final harvest be accomplished by overstory removal. Advanced balsam fir regeneration islands should be protected as a seed source where the goal is to maintain the stand as a balsam fir cover type, or to maintain balsam fir as a stand component. Final Harvest Prescriptions: The following are the most common prescriptions that will be used on balsam fir timber sales:

► 128

BALSAM FIR Strategic Timber Management

a. Clearcut with reserves followed by natural seeding on exposed mineral soil. b. Uneven-aged harvest with removal of older individuals creating space for new regeneration. c. Artificial regeneration is not recommended. d. Natural regeneration relying on advance regeneration and natural seeding.

Regeneration Methods after Final Harvest: Natural regeneration to mixed species stands is recommended. Natural regeneration of mixed stands relies on recent seed fall or advanced balsam fir reproduction present at the time of harvesting, seeding from surrounding stands, and sprouting or suckering of other tree species. Intermediate treatments may be used to increase balsam fir as a stand component.

Intermediate Harvest Methods: Thinning may be used to promote balsam as a stand component, or to increase future tree growth, quality, and vigor. Pre-commercial thinning may be used on some densely stocked young stands. Thinning may be implemented on a small fraction of the cover type to enhance composition but will not typically be applied for increasing volume production. Following are recommendations for thinning balsam fir stands: a. Pre-commercial thinning may be needed to alter species composition favoring balsam fir on desired sites. b. Commercial thinning is acceptable in merchantable stands between 25 and 35 years old with a basal area greater than 120 square feet on the more productive sites (SI > 50). c. Do not remove more than one-third of the stand BA during a thinning. Protect advanced regeneration of desirable understory species. d. Higher stand densities (BA) are recommended along stand edges exposed to wind and along high visual quality corridors, such as major roads and lakes. e. If the stand is used as thermal cover by wildlife, consider applying one of the following options: • Maintain a higher stand basal area (e.g., wider reserve strips with canopy closure). • Thin only a portion of the stand. • Don’t thin.

► 129

BLACK SPRUCE Strategic Timber Management

Black Spruce Management

Age Class Distribution: 2019* 0 - 20 21 - 40 41- 60 61 - 80 81 - 100 101 - 120 121+ Total Black spruce 1 100 511 460 958 476 344 2,850 *Acres of harvestable land.

Native Plant Community Black spruce is an excellent competitor in the FPn63, FPn82, FPs63, APn80, and APn81 wetland forest native plant communities (NPC).

General Landscape Objective Maintain the number of acres of lowland black spruce cover type.

Management Notes Harvest Guidelines: Harvests will occur at age 100. Other Notes: Black spruce “tips” may be harvested for ornamental tree market. These sales will have longer terms to encourage sustained yield harvesting.

Black spruce stands that are heavily affected by mistletoe may be targeted for conversion to tamarack.

There are many species of concern located in lowland conifer areas; management will be sensitive to these species.

Much of the harvest of lowland conifer will be salvage cuts in areas with insect, disease, and damage.

► 130

BLACK SPRUCE Strategic Timber Management

Stand Composition The black spruce cover type is generally dominated by black spruce but there may be secondary species such as tamarack and white cedar present in stands. The desired composition will range from pure black spruce to mixed coniferous stands, depending on the plant community appropriate to the site. Appropriate NPCs for this cover type include Apn80, Apn81, FPn63, FPn82, and FPs63. Foresters will consider ECS and consult the appropriate Native Plant Community Fact Sheets in the Field Guide to the Native Plant Communities of Minnesota: Laurentian Mixed Forest Province, to determine most appropriate species composition as stand management decisions are made.

Stand Management Patch Management: Objectives include: creating more large patches, identifying both younger and older forest patches, and, in, increasing the patch size and age class distribution of all lowland conifers.

Limiting Factors: Many stands in the black spruce cover type are infected with dwarf mistletoe, a slow spreading disease that deforms and ultimately kills individual trees. A primary goal is to use harvesting techniques to regenerate infected stands while minimizing volume and sustainability losses. To the extent possible, infected stands will be selected for field visit and potential treatment during the 10-year plan implementation period.

Even-Aged Management Direction: The black spruce cover type will be managed on an even-aged basis for pulpwood, while providing forest wildlife habitat and maintaining biodiversity.

Final Harvest: Black spruce will be treated through even-aged management using clear-cuts or clearcuts with reserves (of secondary species). Where possible, larger blocks (100+ acres), will be harvested using natural stand boundaries. Secondary component species in black spruce stands such as tamarack, white cedar, balsam fir, and paper birch will be maintained.

The spread of eastern dwarf mistletoe to regenerating stands of black spruce is a primary concern in the management of this cover type. All sales should specify that the 5-foot cutting rule be applied unless another management method is specifically described in the stand’s harvest prescription. The following recommendations for harvest and post-sale treatment are recommended to further limit the spread of dwarf mistletoe: a. During the stand selection process, infected stands will be selected for field visit and potential harvest during this plan implementation period. b. Black spruce reserve trees are not recommended due to the possibility of spreading dwarf mistletoe to the regenerating stand. c. All clearcuts should kill all live black spruce greater than 5 feet in height. If the 5-foot recommendation is not used, follow-up inspections and treatments of harvested sites are suggested two years after harvest. d. If the site is to be prescribed burned, slash should be distributed evenly. e. Timber sales boundaries should be designed to include mistletoe pockets, plus a two-chain (102 feet) buffer of non-infected black spruce. f. Follow-up inspection and treatment of harvested sites two years after harvest are suggested, with the intent of killing all remaining black spruce that are 5 feet and taller on the site.

► 131

BLACK SPRUCE Strategic Timber Management

Harvest Prescriptions: Following are the most common prescriptions that will be used on black spruce timber sale acres: a. Clear-cut followed by natural seeding. b. Clear-cut with reserves followed by natural seeding. c. Clear-cut followed by artificial seeding. d. Clear-cut with reserves followed by artificial seeding.

Regeneration Methods: Natural seeding or artificial seeding will be used to regenerate black spruce stands after harvest. To reduce dwarf mistletoe infection in newly regenerating stands: a. Use prescribed fire or winter shearing to remove all residual infected trees if they are not removed during timber harvest. b. Regenerate densely stocked stands of black spruce because mistletoe spreads more slowly and causes less damage in dense stands than in open ones.

► 132

TAMARACK Strategic Timber Management

Tamarack

Age Class Distribution: 2019* 0 - 20 21 - 40 41- 60 61 - 80 81 - 100 101 - 120 121+ Total Tamarack 176 133 472 494 777 1,507 705 4,262 *Acres of harvestable land.

Native Plant Community Tamarack is often dominant in the following native plant community (NPC) types: WFn64 (N. Very Wet Ash Swamp), FPn82 (N. Rich Tamarack Swamp), and APn81 (N. Poor Conifer Swamp), FPn72 and FPs 63 NPC classes.

General Landscape Objective Maintain the number of acres of the tamarack cover type.

Management Notes Harvest Guidelines: Harvests will occur at age 100. Other Notes: Larch beetle impacts may result in accelerated harvest of impacted Tamarack stands.

Black spruce stands that are heavily affected by mistletoe may be targeted for conversion to tamarack.

There are many species of concern located in lowland conifer areas; management will be sensitive to these species.

Much of the harvest of lowland conifer will be salvage cuts in areas with insect, disease, and damage.

Stand Composition The desired composition of the tamarack cover type will range from pure tamarack to mixed stands, depending on the plant community appropriate to the site. Foresters will consider ECS and consult the appropriate Native Plant Community Fact Sheets in the Field Guide to the Native Plant Communities of Minnesota: Laurentian Mixed Forest Province, to determine most appropriate species composition as stand management decisions are made.

► 133

TAMARACK Strategic Timber Management

Stand Management Patch Management: Patch management objectives are to maintain existing large patches and increase the size of patches where possible.

Limiting Factors: Since 2000, a statewide insect outbreak of eastern larch beetle has caused widespread mortality, ranging from 10-90 percent in individual stands. Consider pre-salvage or salvage harvest when stands are currently infested or are dying due to the infestation. Consider retaining a minimum of 5 to10 live tamarack per acre to serve as seed trees.

Even-Aged Management Direction: The tamarack cover type will be managed primarily by even- aged management methods for pulpwood, while providing forest wildlife habitat and maintaining biodiversity.

Harvest Method: Even-aged management using seed tree with reserves is the preferred method of harvest treatment for tamarack stands. Leaving about 10 tamarack per acre is recommended for successful seeding.

Where possible, maintain secondary component species of tamarack stands such as white cedar, paper birch, black spruce, and balsam fir. This can be accomplished by reserving seed trees, reserve islands, or clumps of mature trees or advanced regeneration.

Where possible, large treatment sites (100+ acres) are recommended using natural stand boundaries.

Harvest Prescriptions: Seed tree with reserves is the most common prescription that will be used on tamarack timber sales.

Regeneration Methods: Natural seeding from seed trees or artificial seeding are the methods used to regenerate tamarack stands. Where within-stand diversity is desired, artificial seeding may be an option for maintaining secondary species such as black spruce and cedar.

► 134

WHITE CEDAR Strategic Timber Management

White Cedar

Age Class Distribution: 2019* 0 - 20 21 - 40 41- 60 61 - 80 81 - 100 101 - 120 121+ Total White Cedar 0 0 57 173 678 578 2,159 3,644 *Acres of harvestable land.

Native Plant Community White cedar is an excellent competitor on lowland Native Plant Communities (NPCs) including: FPn63; FPn82; WFn53 and WFn55.

General Landscape Objective Maintain the number of acres of white cedar cover type.

Management Notes Harvest Guidelines: [See notes below.] Other Notes: There are many species of concern located in lowland conifer areas; management will be sensitive to these species.

Much of the harvest of lowland conifer will be salvage cuts in areas with insect, disease, and damage.

Harvest of white cedar will be done only when regeneration of cedar is highly likely to be successful or for research purposes. Harvests would be likely use seed tree or narrow shelterwood strips.

Stand Composition On MHn46 sites, white cedar will be found with quaking aspen, black ash, and basswood. On lowland sites, white cedar occurs with black ash, balsam fir, or black spruce. White cedar grows on clay loams on upland sites and a variety of peat soils and mucks on lowland sites. Foresters will consider ECS and consult the Minnesota: Laurentian Mixed Forest Province, to determine most appropriate species composition as stand management decisions are made.

► 135

WHITE CEDAR Strategic Timber Management

Stand Management Patch Management: Objectives include: creating more large patches, identifying both younger and older forest patches, and in, increasing the patch size and age-class distribution of lowland conifers.

Management Direction: The white cedar cover type in Cass County will be allowed to succeed naturally. White cedar provides significant value as wintering cover for deer; however, regeneration is challenged due to browsing.

Further, desired sites for conversion to the white cedar cover type are upland sites that support a plant community where aspen or balm-of-Gilead predominates with light amounts of basswood and black ash. Otherwise, in Cass County the lowland plant communities that are likely to be associated with the white cedar cover type are the WFn53, WFn55, and FPn63.

Intermediate Harvest Methods: Some harvest of associated secondary species in cedar stands may be attempted in an effort to encourage natural regeneration of white cedar following a disturbance.

Final Harvest Methods: Final harvest in the white cedar is not planned until knowledge regarding its successful regeneration can be obtained.

Even-Aged Management Prescriptions: No even-aged management prescriptions for this cover type are recommended.

Regeneration Methods: The following recommendations should be considered when regenerating white cedar: a. Plant using stock from local seed source. b. Site preparation and herbicide use should consider maintaining within-stand diversity. c. Protection from browsing is critical to a successful project. d. Provide for six cavity trees, potential cavity trees, or snags per acre.

► 136

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Appendix D

Harvest Levels by Cover Type and Decade

► 137

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan: 2015 Revision Background and Purpose Cass County adopted its current “Forest Resources Management Plan” in May 2010 and began its implementation. The county, as is the case across Minnesota’s forested counties, is in the final years of working through the last and older stands created by the huge age class imbalance in the state’s forests especially for the aspen cover type. As Land & Forestry Department staff examined these stands for potential management they came to realize: • Especially for the oldest stands not harvested since the initial inventory was completed in the 1980s and particularly for forest types such as aspen, birch and balsam fir, certain stand data were no longer reliable. • The result was that roughly half the acres examined for sale by foresters was no longer the cover type listed in the inventory, or did not contain immediately merchantable timber, or was otherwise inoperable. • This meant that the harvest schedules established in the 2010 management plan required adjustment to account for the revised inventory or risk excessive harvesting of some forest types or under management of others.

An analysis was conducted to identify necessary inventory adjustments including reallocation of stands by their appropriate cover types. This analysis also produced a revised flow of acres for management especially for the period of 2016-2029. Management Assumptions It is important to note that the revised management schedule presented herein: • Retains the overall management goals, objectives and policies of the 2010 management plan. • Retains the cover type-specific management directives listed in Section 11.4 of the 2010 management plan with the exception that the use of Native Plant Communities has been replaced by the broader Land Type Associations. • Impacts management levels for 2016-2029 but essentially retains management levels for subsequent decades. Management Schedule: 2016 – 2109 Table 1 presents the revised management plan for Cass County county-administered tax forfeited lands for 2016-2109. Key components include: • Annual management figures are shown for 2016-2019 to provide a finer level of detail with the 2013-2015 data offered to show the recent trend in management. • Beginning with the 2020-2029-decade average annual figures for each decade are shown.

► 138

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

• Ash/Lowland Hardwoods, Northern Hardwoods and Oak harvests are a blend of select tree / timber stand improvement (about 30% of annual acres) and final, stand regeneration harvests. • Roughly 50% of the Balsam Fir, Birch and Balm of Gilead stands harvested through 2019 will be converted upon harvest to another cover type, most likely aspen (this is in keeping with overall management objectives and understanding of stand character). • A limited number of non-forest type stands are included in the management schedule as some of these are misclassified and/or contain inclusions of harvestable timber. • The jump in 2020-2029 for aspen is intentional. As the largest and most malleable cover type, aspen is used to allow more aggressive harvests of other cover types through 2019 and then is adjusted upward to sustain overall acres of harvested land. Further, by 2020 the next generation of aspen is beginning to reach maturation significantly increasing the number of acres available for management. These next generation of stands are of a higher quality than those in the previous generation and will provide the basis for sustained management in accordance with desired rotation ages.

► 139

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Table 1. Cass County Management Plan for 2016 - 2109, Revised in 2015

2060- 2070- 2080- 2090- Year/Acres 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020-29 2030-39 2040-49 2050-59 69 79 89 99 2100-09 Ash/Low Hdwd 87 202 225 40 40 40 40 80 84 75 75 110 110 55 0 0 Aspen 1,476 1,134 880 1,100 1,100 1,100 1,100 1,939 1,939 2,017 2,017 2,017 2,050 2,050 2,050 2,050 Birch 500 454 578 412 412 412 412 3 1 13 47 132 98 13 47 132 Balm of Gilead 9 19 53 53 53 53 53 0 0 0 3 32 0 0 0 3 Northern Hdwd 523 641 484 380 380 380 380 155 150 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 Oak 355 516 485 436 436 436 436 181 150 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 White/Red Pine 568 487 452 387 387 386 386 425 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 Jack Pine 101 146 210 36 35 35 35 13 41 18 46 65 13 41 18 46 White Spruce 7 9 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 Balsam Fir 19 134 178 194 194 194 195 13 12 0 0 80 13 12 0 80 Black Spruce 0 59 72 72 72 72 72 72 69 14 38 15 1 0 0 72 Tamarack 1 118 94 100 100 100 100 100 100 10 0 2 85 67 67 67 White Cedar 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Non-forest types 20 267 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Total Acres 3,666 4,188 3,825 3,324 3,323 3,322 3,323 3,095 3,110 3,111 3,190 3,417 3,334 3,202 3,146 3,414

► 140

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Cass County Management Report 2016-2029

District 100 200 400 600 700 800 Total

Aspen 405 315 43 378 314 322 1777 Birch 13 39 5 7 19 10 93 Oak 102 57 3 76 18 100 356 N. Hardwoods 35 31 19 52 74 33 244 Red/White Pine 74 68 1 75 12 76 306 Jack Pine 10 4 2 1 1 2 20 Balsam Fir 6 10 2 5 12 13 48 Balm of Gilead 2 1 1 1 11 2 18 Ash/ L. Hardwoods 10 6 1 19 22 12 70 Tamarack 15 3 0 7 12 7 44 Black Spruce L. 2 10 3 14 26 6 61 White Spruce 5 2 0 1 3 2 13 Other 19 19 5 19 19 19 100

Total 698 565 85 655 543 604 3150

Actual Planned Acres

► 141

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Table D-1. CASS COUNTY: HARVEST LEVELS BY COVER TYPE BY DECADE (annual in acres) Balm Red- Ash/Low Northern Jack Balsam Black Tam- White Decade Aspen Birch of Oak4 Whit Other Total Hdwds3 Hdwds4 Pine5 Fir Spruce6 arack Spruce Gilead e Pine Eval.

Acres 2020-29 86 2,041 115 20 303 445 366 23 60 75 54 16 100 3,704 2030-39 84 1,939 1 0 150 150 450 41 12 69 100 0 100 3,096 2040-49 75 2,017 13 0 200 200 450 18 0 14 10 0 100 3,097 2050-59 75 2,017 47 3 200 200 450 46 0 38 0 0 100 3,176 2060-69 110 2,017 132 32 200 200 450 65 80 15 2 0 100 3,403 2070-79 110 2,050 98 0 200 200 450 13 13 1 85 0 100 3,320 2080-89 55 2,050 13 0 200 200 450 41 12 0 67 0 100 3,188 2090-99 0 2,050 47 0 200 200 450 18 0 0 67 0 100 3,132 2100-09 0 2,050 132 3 200 200 450 46 80 72 67 0 100 3,400

1Evaluated Acres = total acres assessed by natural resource manager. Not all assessments result in harvest action in that year. 2Harvested Acres = the number of Evaluated Acres that are actually harvested. 3For 2020 and beyond the acres are evaluated/harvested acres resulting in regenerated stands; they do not include selective harvested stands. 4For 2010 and beyond, the management formula is: in-growth at age 45 + regenerated (harvested) stands + select harvest re-entry in 33% of stands at age 80+. 5 All current cut over area is assumed to be managed as jack pine so it is accounted for, but some will be other conifer which with thinning will create higher levels of harvest activity. 6Beginning in 2020, 50 acres per decade is stagnant black spruce.

► 142 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Table D-2. ASH Cover Type Management on Cass County Tax-Forfeited Lands Age-class Distribution at end of Management Decade in Acres Decade 0-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71-80 81-90 91-100 101-110 111-120 121+ Total* 2020 110 0 9 14 83 113 53 145 481 1127 1,151 1,076 1,108 5,470 2029 680 110 0 9 14 83 113 53 145 481 1127 1,151 1,184 5,150 2039 1,000 680 110 0 9 14 83 113 53 145 481 1,127 1,335 5,150 2049 1,000 1,000 680 110 0 9 14 83 113 53 145 481 1,462 5,150 2059 1000 1,000 1,000 680 110 0 9 14 83 113 53 145 943 5,150 2069 1000 1000 1,000 1,000 680 110 0 9 14 83 113 53 88 5,150 2079 360 1000 1000 1,000 1,000 680 110 0 5,150 2089 0 360 1000 1000 1,000 1,000 680 110 5,150 2099 110 0 360 1000 1000 1,000 1,000 680 5,150 2109 680 110 0 360 1000 1000 1,000 1,000 5,150 MANAGEMENT APPROACH: Stands are field evaluated at age 80. *An additional 627 acres is riparian and inoperable forest that will be specially managed on a stand-specific basis.

Notes: The term “management” includes stand visit and assessment, reinventory, and various intermediate and final harvest techniques. Reinventory may change total acres over time. The above plan only applies if the emerald ash borer does not infest Cass County ash stands in the next ten years.

► 143 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Table D-3. LOWLAND HARDWOODS Cover Type Management on Cass County Tax-Forfeited Lands Age-class Distribution at end of Management Decade in Acres Decade 0-10 11-21 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71-80 81-90 91-100 101-110 111-120 121+ Total* 2020 209 26 2 28 44 35 12 68 706 997 360 223 500 3,210 2029 300 209 26 2 28 44 35 12 68 706 997 360 423 3,210 2039 600 300 209 26 2 28 44 35 12 68 706 997 183 3,210 2049 600 600 300 209 26 2 28 44 35 12 68 706 580 3,210 2059 600 600 600 300 209 26 2 28 44 35 12 68 686 3,210 2069 600 600 600 600 300 209 26 2 28 44 35 12 154 3,210 2079 275 600 600 600 600 300 209 26 3,210 2089 26 275 600 600 600 600 300 209 3,210 2099 0 26 275 600 600 600 600 300 209 3,210 2109 209 0 26 275 600 600 600 600 300 3,210 MANAGEMENT APPROACH: Stands are field evaluated at ages 45 and 80. *An additional 340 acres is riparian and inoperable forest that will be specially managed on a stand-specific basis.

Notes: The term “management” includes stand visit and assessment, reinventory, and various intermediate and final harvest techniques. Reinventory may change total acres over time.

► 144 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Table D-4. ASPEN Cover Type Management on Cass County Tax-Forfeited Lands Age-class Distribution at end of Management Decade in Acres 20- Decade 0-10 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71-80 81-90 91-100 101-110 111-120 121+ Total* Nov 2020 21,568 23,630 24,998 19,511 10,233 1,737 769 2,488 5,135 2042 252 19 26 112,408 2029 17,770 21,568 23,630 24,998 19,511 4,931 112,408 2039 24,442 17,770 21,568 23,630 24,998 112,408 2049 24,998 24,442 17,770 21,568 23,630 112,408 2059 23,630 24,998 24,442 17,770 21,568 112,408 2069 21,568 23,630 24,998 24,442 17,770 112,408 2079 17,770 21,568 23,630 24,998 24,442 112,408 2089 24,442 17,770 21,568 23,630 24,998 112,408 2099 24,998 24,442 17,770 21,568 23,630 112,408 2109 23,630 24,998 24,442 17,770 21,568 112,408 MANAGEMENT APPROACH: Rotation age of 40- 45 years depending on size, quality and site.

Notes: The term “management” includes stand visit and assessment, reinventory, and various intermediate and final harvest techniques. Reinventory may change total acres over time.

► 145 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Table D-5. BALM OF GILEAD Cover Type Management on Cass County Tax-Forfeited Lands Age-class Distribution at end of Management Decade in Acres Decade 0-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71-80 81-90 91-100 101-110 111-120 121+ Total* 2020 59 32 0 0 14 0 0 13 119 44 0 0 0 281 2029 190 59 32 0 0 281 2039 0 190 59 32 0 281 2049 0 0 190 59 32 281 2059 32 0 0 190 59 281 2069 59 32 0 0 190 281 2079 190 59 32 0 0 281 2089 0 190 59 32 0 281 2099 0 0 190 59 32 281 2109 32 0 0 190 59 281 MANAGEMENT APPROACH: All stands will be harvested at age 50. *An additional 72 acres is riparian and inoperable forest that will be specially managed on a stand-specific basis.

Notes: The term “management” includes stand visit and assessment, reinventory, and various intermediate and final harvest techniques. Reinventory may change total acres over time.

► 146 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Table D-6. BIRCH Cover Type Management on Cass County Tax-Forfeited Lands Age-class Distribution at end of Management Decade in Acres 20- Decade 0-10 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71-80 81-90 91-100 101-110 111-120 120+ Total Nov 2020 1,522 929 128 81 44 41 118 418 853 475 45 16 0 4,670 2029 930 1,522 929 128 81 44 41 118 418 459 4,670 2039 1,161 930 1,522 929 128 4,670 2049 128 1,161 930 1,522 929 4,670 2059 1,030 128 1,161 930 1,522 4,771 2069 1,522 1,030 128 1,161 930 4,771 2079 930 1,522 1,030 128 1,161 4,771 2089 1,161 930 1,030 929 128 4,178 2099 128 1,161 930 1,030 929 4,178 2109 929 128 1,161 930 1,030 4,178 MANAGEMENT APPROACH: Harvest between ages 40-60. *An additional 1,347 acres is riparian and inoperable forest that will be specially managed on a stand-specific basis.

Notes: The term “management” includes stand visit and assessment, reinventory, and various intermediate and final harvest techniques. Reinventory may change total acres over time.

► 147 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Table D-7. NORTHERN HARDWOODS Cover Type Management on Cass County Tax-Forfeited Lands Age-class Distribution at end of Management Decade in Acres Decade 0-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71-80 81-90 91-100 101-110 111-120 121+ Total* 2020 1,950 203 74 175 45 144 298 628 1574 1,165 665 85 38 7,044 2029 2,440 1950 203 74 175 45 144 298 628 1,087 7,044 2039 700 2,440 1950 203 74 175 45 144 298 628 387 7,044 2049 700 700 2,440 1950 203 74 175 45 144 315 298 7,044 2059 298 700 700 2,440 1950 203 74 175 45 144 315 7,044 2069 315 298 700 700 2,440 1950 203 74 175 45 144 7,044 2079 144 315 298 700 700 2,440 1950 203 74 175 45 7,044 2089 45 144 318 298 700 700 2,440 1950 203 74 175 7,047 2099 175 442 700 700 700 700 700 700 1950 203 74 7,044 2109 74 175 442 700 700 700 700 700 700 1950 203 7,044 MANAGEMENT APPROACH: All stands field evaluated at age 45. Fifty percent of acreage is managed by clearcut when reaching age 100. Fifty percent is managed through repeat-entry selective harvest (these stands will assume characteristics of older forest). *An additional 600 acres is riparian and inoperable forest that will be specially managed on a stand-specific basis.

Notes: The term “management” includes stand visit and assessment, reinventory, and various intermediate and final harvest techniques. Reinventory may change total acres over time.

► 148 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Table D-8. OAK Cover Type Management on Cass County Tax-Forfeited Lands Age-class Distribution at end of Management Decade in Acres 20- Decade 0-10 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71-80 81-90 91-100 101-110 111-120 121+ Total* Nov 2020 2416 173 32 42 0 147 187 568 1,960 2,943 292 18 2 8,780 2029 3,560 2416 173 32 42 0 147 187 568 1,655 8,780 2039 880 3,560 2416 173 32 42 0 147 187 568 775 8,780 2049 880 880 3,560 2416 173 32 42 0 147 187 463 8,780 2059 463 880 880 3,560 2416 173 32 42 0 147 187 8,780 2069 187 463 880 880 3,560 2416 173 32 42 0 147 8,780 2079 147 187 463 880 880 3,560 2416 173 32 42 8,780 2089 42 147 187 463 880 880 3,560 2416 173 32 8,780 2099 32 42 147 187 463 880 880 3,560 2416 173 8,780 2109 173 32 42 147 187 463 880 880 3,560 2416 8,780 MANAGEMENT APPROACH: Custom: All stands field evaluated at age 45. Fifty percent of acreage is managed by clearcut when reaching age 100. Fifty percent is managed through repeat-entry selective harvest (these stands will assume characteristics of older forest). *An additional 926 acres is riparian and inoperable forest that will be specially managed on a stand-specific basis.

Notes: The term “management” includes stand visit and assessment, reinventory, and various intermediate and final harvest techniques. Reinventory may change total acres over time.

► 149 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Table D-9. RED/WHITE PINE Cover Type Management on Cass County Tax-Forfeited Lands Age-class Distribution at end of Management Decade in Acres Decade 0-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71-80 81-90 91-100 101-110 111-120 121+ Total* 2020 1,046 2,513 338 1515 946 503 731 269 519 446 640 1023 550 11,039 2029 3060 1,046 2,513 338 1515 946 503 731 269 118 11,039 2039 387 3,060 1,046 2,513 338 1515 946 503 731 11,039 2049 731 387 3,060 1,046 2513 338 1515 946 503 11,039 2059 503 731 387 3,060 1,046 2513 338 1,515 946 11,039 2069 946 503 731 387 3,060 1046 2513 338 1515 11,039 2079 1515 946 503 731 387 3,060 1046 2513 338 11,039 2089 338 1,515 946 503 731 387 3060 1046 2513 11,039 2099 2513 338 1,515 946 503 731 387 3060 1046 11,039 2109 1046 2513 338 1515 946 503 731 387 3060 11,039 MANAGEMENT APPROACH: Evaluate stands at age 25, harvest red pine on a 120-year rotation for natural stands and 60 years for artificial stands, with some acres extended past that age. Assume 50% of stands are natural. *An additional 651 acres is riparian and inoperable forest that will be specially managed on a stand-specific basis.

Notes: The term “management” includes stand visit and assessment, reinventory, and various intermediate and final harvest techniques. Reinventory may change total acres over time.

► 150 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Table D-10. JACK PINE Cover Type Management on Cass County Tax-Forfeited Lands Age-class Distribution at end of Management Decade in Acres Decade 0-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71-80 81-90 91-100 101-110 111-120 121+ Total* 2020 293 394 395 186 384 28 20 112 136 28 5 0 1 1,982 2029 200 293 387 395 186 384 28 19 90 1,982 2039 440 200 293 387 395 267 1,982 2049 440 440 200 293 387 222 1,982 2059 440 440 440 200 293 169 1,982 2069 440 440 440 440 222 1,982 2079 222 440 440 440 440 1,982 2089 440 222 440 440 440 1,982 2099 440 440 222 440 440 1,982 2109 440 440 440 220 440 1,980 MANAGEMENT APPROACH: Stands are harvested at ages 40 and 50. *An additional 330 acres is riparian and inoperable forest that will be specially managed on a stand-specific basis.

Notes: The term “management” includes stand visit and assessment, reinventory, and various intermediate and final harvest techniques. Reinventory may change total acres over time. Currently any jack pine acres are being converted to red pine.

► 151 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Table D-11. WHITE SPRUCE Cover Type Management on Cass County Tax-Forfeited Lands Age-class Distribution at end of Management Decade in Acres Decade 0-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71-80 81-90 91-100 101-110 111-120 121+ Total* 2020 17 0 35 126 0 1 15 22 32 1 13 0 0 262 2029 46 17 0 35 126 0 1 15 22 262 2039 22 46 17 0 35 126 0 1 15 262 2049 15 22 46 17 0 35 126 0 1 262 2059 1 15 22 46 17 0 35 126 0 262 2069 0 1 15 22 46 17 0 35 126 262 2079 126 0 1 15 22 46 17 0 35 262 2089 35 126 0 1 15 22 46 17 0 262 2099 0 35 126 0 1 15 22 46 17 262 2109 17 0 35 126 0 1 15 22 46 262 MANAGEMENT APPROACH: Stands will be harvested at age 85. *An additional 20 acres is riparian and inoperable forest that will be specially managed on a stand-specific basis.

Notes: The term “management” includes stand visit and assessment, reinventory, and various intermediate and final harvest techniques. Reinventory may change total acres over time.

► 152 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Table D-12. BALSAM FIR Cover Type Management on Cass County Tax-Forfeited Lands Age-class Distribution at end of Management Decade in Acres 20- Decade 0-10 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71-80 81-90 91-100 101-110 111-120 121+ Total* Nov 2020 118 5 0 20 66 171 83 114 258 167 147 42 0 1,191 2029 480 118 5 0 20 66 171 83 114 134 1,191 2039 230 480 118 5 0 20 66 171 83 18 1,191 2049 230 230 480 118 5 0 20 66 42 1,191 2059 133 230 230 480 118 1,191 2069 118 133 230 230 480 1,191 2079 480 118 133 230 230 1,191 2089 230 480 118 133 230 1,191 2099 230 230 480 118 133 1,191 2109 133 230 230 480 118 1,191 MANAGEMENT APPROACH: Stands will be harvested at age 50. *An additional 244 acres is riparian and inoperable forest that will be specially managed on a stand-specific basis.

Notes: The term “management” includes stand visit and assessment, reinventory, and various intermediate and final harvest techniques. Reinventory may change total acres over time.

► 153 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Table D-13. BLACK SPRUCE Cover Type Management on Cass County Tax-Forfeited Lands Age-class Distribution at end of Management Decade in Acres Decade 0-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71-80 81-90 91-100 101-110 111-120 121+ Total* 2020 1 0 24 76 163 349 157 303 555 403 241 234 344 2,850 2029 610 1 0 24 76 197 349 157 303 555 403 175 2,850 2039 350 610 1 0 24 76 197 349 157 303 555 228 2,850 2049 350 350 610 1 0 24 76 197 349 157 303 433 2,850 2059 350 350 350 610 1 0 27 76 197 349 157 383 2,850 2069 350 350 350 350 610 1 0 27 76 197 349 190 2,850 2079 350 350 350 350 350 610 1 0 27 76 197 189 2,850 2089 350 350 350 350 350 350 610 1 0 27 112 2,850 2099 139 350 350 350 350 350 350 610 1 2,850 2109 1 139 350 350 350 350 350 350 610 2,850 MANAGEMENT APPROACH: Harvest at age 90 with some acres managed past that age. *An additional 175 acres is riparian and inoperable forest that will be specially managed on a stand-specific basis.

Notes: The term “management” includes stand visit and assessment, reinventory, and various intermediate and final harvest techniques. Reinventory may change total acres over time.

► 154 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Table D-14. TAMARACK Cover Type Management on Cass County Tax-Forfeited Lands Age-class Distribution at end of Management Decade in Acres Decade 0-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71-80 81-90 91-100 101-110 111-120 121+ Total* 2020 153 23 0 133 341 131 272 222 426 350 596 911 705 4263 2029 440 153 23 0 133 341 131 272 222 426 350 596 1176 4263 2039 710 440 153 23 0 133 341 131 281 222 426 350 1053 4263 2049 710 710 440 153 23 0 133 341 131 281 222 426 693 4263 2059 710 710 710 440 153 23 0 133 341 131 281 222 409 4263 2069 710 710 710 710 440 153 23 0 133 341 131 202 4263 2079 710 710 710 710 710 440 153 23 0 97 4263 2089 273 710 710 710 710 710 440 4263 2099 440 273 710 710 710 710 710 4263 2109 710 440 273 710 710 710 710 4263 MANAGEMENT APPROACH: Harvest at age 60 with some stands managed past that age. *An additional 492 acres is riparian and inoperable forest that will be specially managed on a stand-specific basis.

Notes: The term “management” includes stand visit and assessment, reinventory, and various intermediate and final harvest techniques. Reinventory may change total acres over time.

► 155 Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Table D-15. WHITE CEDAR Cover Type Management on Cass County Tax-Forfeited Lands Age-class Distribution at end of Management Decade in Acres Decade 0-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71-80 81-90 91-100 101-110 111-120 121+ Total 2019 0 0 0 0 24 33 138 35 312 366 213 365 2159 3,645 2029 0 0 0 0 0 24 33 138 35 312 366 213 2524 3,645 2039 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 33 138 35 312 366 2737 3,645 2049 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 33 138 35 312 3103 3,645 2059 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 33 138 35 3415 3,645 2069 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 33 138 3450 3,645 2079 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 33 3588 3,645 2089 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 3621 3,645 2099 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,645 3,645 MANAGEMENT APPROACH: There is no active management by harvest for white cedar.

Notes: The term “management” includes stand visit and assessment, reinventory, and various intermediate and final harvest techniques. Reinventory may change total acres over time.

► 156

Cass County Forest Resources Management Plan

Prepared by: Dovetail Partners January 2021