In the time I have before you this morning, I want to talk to you about the
people, events and influences that have brought us and the forest we love to
this moment. I want to talk some about what the future may bring and the role
the Maryland Forest Service and state and private forestlands may have in that
I’m going to use the proverbial goose and golden egg analogy to illustrate the
changes in forest resource management philosophy over the last 100 years; the
goose represents the forest, and the golden egg represents forest values derived
from forest management (timber, recreation, water, wildlife).
The “Age of Exploitation” preceded the Maryland Conservation Law of 1906. In the
1800’s, the volume of cutting greatly exceeded growth. By the 1900’s, only 20%
mature forest cover existed east of the Mississippi River. The public feared a
timber shortage. Large, uncontrolled forest fires followed after the cutting. By
the early 1900’s, the forests of Maryland consisted primarily of stumps,
seedling and saplings. The goose was sick; during this period, forest health was
The “Custodial Period” followed the Age of Exploitation. During this time, the
emphasis was on protecting Maryland’s forest. The forests were surveyed,
inventoried and mapped for the first time. A State Tree Nursery was established
and millions of trees were planted on Maryland’s abandoned agricultural fields.
The State of Maryland actively acquired land, mostly cutover and abused land,
for public use. The CCC constructed roads and culverts, erected fire towers,
fought fires and planted trees. The health of the goose was slowly improving;
the forest in Maryland was recovering from earlier exploitation.
The “Sustained Yield Management Period"
occurred between the years 1940-1970.
This was the era of World War II and the arrival of the baby boomers. Forest
harvests equaled annual growth. A great demand for wood products occurred during
this intense period of economic growth. The population of the United States was
quickly growing; a rural society was quickly becoming urban. The forester made
management decisions independently, without public participation. The goose’s
health had returned; the trees were now merchantable and forest management
focused its attention on one egg—timber.
The “Multiple Use Management Period" marked the beginning of an
inter-disciplinary approach to forest management. A variety of natural resource
disciplines began providing the forest manager with management suggestions.
Social values as well as economic values were considered in forest management
plans. The management focus evolved from one egg (timber) to a basket of several
eggs (timber, air and water, wildlife and recreation).
The “Sustainable and Forest Health Period"
began about 1990, and continues to the
present time. Today, ecological processes, biodiversity, and forest health are
examined more closely. Outputs like recreation and timber, for example, are a
by-product of forest health and sustainable forest use. Annual growth of the
forest now greatly exceeds harvests (on Maryland’s State Forests, growth is more
than four times the harvest). At the same time, new generations of tools are
being utilized to get the job done, including satellite imagery, computers,
Geographic Information Systems (GIS), and Global Positioning Systems (GPS). The
focus is now on the goose (forests) and its health. The eggs (forest products)
are secondary to the health of the forest.
Over the last century, there have been many historical milestones and pieces of
legislation, both at the state and federal level, that serve to remind us today
of the rich and varied past that is forestry’s heritage here in Maryland. The
state forestry agency had a relatively stable history prior to the creation of
the Department of Natural Resources in 1969, but since then the Maryland Forest
Service has existed in 10 different organizational structures lending credence
to the phrase – “the only real constant is change”.
The agency’s more recent history begins with Donald E. MacLauchlan, “Mac” to
those who knew him, who became Maryland’s 5th State Forester in 1978. While
there was not a lot of activity in the State legislature, there was plenty of
action in Congress that year. Maryland passed the Pine Tree Reforestation Law,
affectionately know as the “Seed Tree Law”, to address the erosion of the pine
resource on the Shore due to heavy utilization. Congress passed the Cooperative
Forestry Assistance Act, the Renewable Resources Extension Act and authorized
the Forest Incentive Program – all three major pieces of forestry legislation.
The US Forest Service and the Cooperative Extension Service now had the
authority to work with state forestry agencies to help private forest landowners
manage and protect their forests to reduced erosion, enhanced water quality and
wildlife habitat as well as helping to assure a reliable supply of timber for
Tunis Lyons succeeded “Mac” in 1979 and soon after came face-to-face with a new
critter in town – building populations of Gypsy moth. Thousands of acres forests
were sprayed between 1981 and 1982 in a collaborative effort between Maryland
Department of Agriculture’s Forest Pest Management Section and the Department of
Natural Resources. Nineteen Eighty Two was a particularly busy year as it saw
the transfer of the State Forests from the Forest Service to the Park Service
due to the rapid increase of use of those lands for recreation, and in the same
year the first state-wide adoption of forestry BMPs to address potential impacts
to water quality from forest harvesting.
Jim Roberts took over the reins as State Forester from Tunis in 1983 and during
his tenure oversaw one of the most dynamic periods for forestry activities since
the inception of the agency. It was during Jim’s watch that elected officials
seemed to finally understand the connection between sound forest management and
improved water quality. “Forestry is the solution to non-point source pollution”
became the catch phrase and this notion was fully recognized in such major
pieces of legislation as the Chesapeake Bay Critical Area Law, the Woodlands
Incentive Program and the Green Shores Program. Urban and Community Forestry
also hit it stride under Jim’s leadership as evidenced by the passage of the
Urban & Community Forestry Law, the statewide Reforestation Law, and the Forest
In 1989, Jim became the third Maryland State Forester to serve the National
Association of State Foresters (NASF) as President while playing a leadership role in
ensuring that the 1990 Farm Bill contained a Forestry Title for the very first
time. In case you are wondering, Fred Besley was NASF President in 1926 and Joe
Kaylor was NASF President in 1950.
John Riley followed Jim as State Forester in 1991 and immediately began to deal
with shrinking fiscal and personnel resources brought on as the result of a
national recession. The agency was reorganized to improve efficiency while
providing improved opportunities for advancement. Still, in this era of tight
budgets and uncertainty, John presided over the inauguration of the first
Maryland Community Forest Council, the initiation of the Master Logger Program,
and the beginnings of the Revitalizing Baltimore Project.
In 1995 Jim Mallow became State Forester and during his six years at the helm he
skillfully guided the agency once again into a leadership role regarding the
importance of trees and forests as they can contribute to the Chesapeake Bay
restoration effort. It was on Jim's watch that the Riparian Forest Buffer
Initiative, the first CREP in the nation and the Potomac Watershed Partnership
were established to restore streamside forests to filter out sediments and
nutrients before getting into the waters of the Bay.
im also presided over the 58,000 acres Chesapeake Forest land acquisition,
making sure that the Maryland Forest Service would mange this property to
balance and sustain both the environmental and economic with the goal of
securing dual third party certification under both the Sustainable Forest
Initiative (SFI) and the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC ). Jim’s capstone
achievement was working with the University of Maryland to initiate a four-year
baccalaureate Urban Forestry degree program, which incidentally turned out its
first graduate this year.
After Jim retired in 2001, I served briefly as Acting State Forester and was
appointed as Maryland's 10th State Forester in September of that year. Like John
Riley’s tenure, mine has been plagued by the business cycle which took the
overall economy into a recessionary downturn. Again, the agency was reorganized
to improve efficiency and to adjust to the reality of our fiscal and staffing
situation. However, even in the face of adversity, the dedicated men and women
of the Maryland Forest Service continue to restore, manage and protect our
forest resources in a sustainable way. Along with Maryland Department of
Agriculture (MDA), we battled the Emerald Ash borer that was shipped to Maryland despite MI’s best plant quarantine
efforts. To date this is the only successful Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) eradication effort in the
nation. After our bout with EAB and with other nasty critters poised to pay us
an unwelcome visit, MDA, DNR and University of Maryland’s Center
for Excellence in Service (CES) adopted by a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) an
Emergency Response Plan for Invasive Forest Pests.
The current administration is very supportive of the management of our forests. Two
very positive Executive Orders directs the Department to seek dual third party
certification for all our working state forestlands as well as established a
Governor’s Commission to seek ways to conserve forests in the future. The State
Forests have been transferred back to the Forest Service given our experience
with the certification process and our desire to concentrate on resource
management on these lands.
Nearly 120 years ago, Dr. Bernhard Fernow began laying the groundwork for the
states to create their own forestry agencies. In his first report, he made a
statement about European forestry that I was most impressed with.
“It is not the
control of the Government over private property, it is not the exercise of
eminent domain, it is not police regulations and restrictions that have
produced desirable effect upon private forestry abroad, but simply the
example of a systematic and successful management of its own forests, and
the opportunity offered by the government to the private forest owner of
availing himself of the advice and guidance of well-qualified forestry
officials.” - Dr. Bernhard Fernow
In 1886, the head of the agency that would become the US Forest Service embraced
the philosophy that forms the root of what our State forestry agencies do today.
Simply put: “Lead by example - and educate.”
Gratefully, the state and private forests and their management have evolved and
distanced themselves from the early blissful ignorance of the “Myth of
Inexhaustibility” and its wasteful, abusive practices.
Today, a sophisticated, ecologically responsive suite of services and programs
that echo the twin paradigms of stewardship and sustainability serves the state
and private forests of Maryland. The successes during the end of the 19th and
first half of the 20th centuries came about through a miraculous confluence of
forceful, articulate and dedicated leaders, and the awakening of the American
citizen to the place of the American forest in their lives.
Sounds like we’ve attained a state and private forestry brand of utopia, doesn’t
it? Perhaps we can take a break and rest on our laurels for a while . . . pat
ourselves on the back, so to speak. Well, not so fast.
After I, Steve Koehn, became Maryland’s 10th
State Forester, in preparation for significant budget cuts that were in the
offing, I was asked to prioritize the programs of the Forest Service. To do
that, I had to soberly reflect upon where my Agency’s meager resources ought
best be expended. In preparation for today’s talk, I went through a similarly
reflective exercise. I feel that there are disquieting clouds gathering on the
horizon. The hairs on the back of my neck are telling me that a crisis or two is
brewing and that the future of state & private forests and their management
hangs in the balance.
During the last half of the 20th century, the amount of forest land in the
United States remained essentially unchanged. Recently, however, an increasing
amount of forested acres in many states has been lost to development or to a
shift from traditional forest to more highly fragmented, more urban forest. This
trend is the result of uncontrolled urban expansion, a lack of practicable land
use policies, and limited economic incentives to own and manage forest land.
Fragmentation, parcelization and urbanization are a cancer that is inexorably
destroying the ecological integrity of the forests of Maryland. If our forests
are to continue to provide the variety of amenities for life in our State, we
must find a cure for this cancer.
This cannot and will not be an easy task. The uniquely American lifestyle
contributes to the fragmentation of forests. In their drive to own a piece of
wilderness, more and more Marylanders are moving to rural areas and building big
houses on large lots. The proposed Terrapin Run development near Green Ridge
State Forest is but the most recent example of this trend.
This human-caused forest fragmentation disrupts many ecological processes and
threatens the health and sustainability of forests. It endangers wildlife
habitats, plant diversity, and water quality. Fragmentation also compromises the
economic value of a forest as a recreational or timber resource. When you think
about it, fragmentation destroys the very thing that draws humans to live in the
forest in the first place. It eats away at the unbroken forests’ inherent,
natural beauty. People are loving the forests of Maryland to death.
What can we do to address this problem? We are the experts. We are the trusted
servants of the public – and yet we have not seriously tried to raise their
awareness of this insidious problem. It is time to sound the alarm and educate,
educate, educate! We must teach a nation in love with its forests to “Love it
and Leave it!” People must learn to be content with recreating in the forest in
as many sustainable pursuits as may be invented – and then leaving the forest to
go home. The drive to own a chunk of our precious forested lands must end.
The future of the forests lies in the quality of life in the cities. If we can
make our cities a joy to live in, the demand to carve up the forests will abate.
Ironically, if we as foresters are to protect the integrity of our nation’s
forests, we must become the strongest of advocates for the renewal of our
nation’s cities. We need to advocate for more than just our own parochial
interest in urban forestry. We must be even stronger advocates for all urban
quality of life issues – for better services, better public safety, better
education, better public transportation, better local recreational facilities.
On the supply side of the equation are those who now own the forest and are
prone to subdivide it, carving it into chunks for sale. In general, we believe
that a landowner should have the right to do anything on or to his land,
provided his actions don’t infringe on others. We believe that a landowner
should have the right to sell all or part of his land if he wants to. Yes, we’re
all about property rights.- and that’s fine – in most cases.
But we, who love the land and care for the forest, know – or we should know –
that there is a difference between property rights and property
responsibilities. While a landowner may have the legal right to use the forest he owns by cutting
it up and selling it, piecemeal, every landowner has an ethical responsibility
to honor the future. Every landowner has an obligation to be a steward of the
We in the forestry community need to become the loud and insistent conscience of
today’s forest landowner. In today’s world, where the seductive lure of profit
has become a justification for any action, foresters need to shout a
counter-cultural message: “Subdivision is wrong. Your responsibilities as a
trustee for the future supersede your rights as a landowner.”
We need to promote the economic health and welfare of rural communities and the
working landscapes on which they depend, including the vitality of renewable
natural resource based industries (remember: no markets - no management; just
like the fire triangle, if the landowner/logger/forester triangle is broken,
then the battle is effectively lost). We need to retool conservation easements
to compensate forest landowners not just for the loss of their development
rights but to reward them for the environmental services they provide to all of
us – in many cases for free. Such easements should be made available to certain
gray industries in the form of mitigation banks as there will never be enough
public funding to ease the acreage necessary to assure sustainability.
I know what you’re thinking – it’s useless . . . we’ll be tilting at windmills
and doomed to failure. Maybe – or maybe not. But, it doesn’t really matter, does
it? It’s the truth and we have to say it. We have to say it loud and clear.
Because, if we don’t speak up for the integrity of the forest for the future, we
are betraying that future and betraying our past – and we have no right to call
Collectively, we all have tremendous potential to lead in protecting the
viability of privately owned forests and strengthening the incentives for forest
stewardship. This is truly our turf, and yet, in my 21 years as a member of
Maryland Forest Service, we have not meaningfully studied the role that federal,
state and local taxation plays in the involuntary liquidation and parcelization
of family-owned farms, and forests. Private forest owners are an endangered
species – upon which the well-being of all other endangered species clearly
depend. It is time to call together the best minds for a comprehensive review of
forest taxation policies and practices – and to recommend broad changes to
insure the future of privately owned forests.
Act to Protect our Nation’s Existing Forest
Resources from Damaging Agents that Effect Broad Areas of Forested Land
I believe our second priority must be to act to protect our nation’s existing
forest resources from damaging agents that effect broad areas of forested land.
We all know Smokey’s mantra by heart. We’re also familiar with the more recent
messages pertaining to fire in the wildland/urban interface. And, yes, wildfire
is a damaging agent for our forests. But, our concern for the safety of the
forest must extend beyond the old saw of fire.
We should recognize and act on what may be a greater imperative – that of
protecting the forest from poor or abusive management practices. Slipshod
pseudo-forestry and flat-out abusive practices have the potential to devastate
the genetic characteristics of forest stands. The damage from misapplied forest
practices can take generations to resolve – and, in some cases the ecological
and economic potential of the forest could be ruined forever. We, as foresters
are expected to act to be certain that our management of the public forests in
our charge is technically appropriate and environmentally responsive. We must
also act to insure that the practitioners of forestry and forest management on
private lands do no less.
When European settlers first arrived on this continent, globalization also
Europeans brought new diseases and pests with them – and the New World was
defenseless against them. Are things significantly different today? Only in
that, thanks to advances in transportation, the spread of new diseases and pests
can occur in the span of hours rather than months or years. For our forests, the
threat of non-native invasive insects and plants – and exotic diseases – has
never been more immediate and our forests are, essentially, defenseless. The
Asian Long-horned Beetle, Emerald Ash Borer, and Sudden Oak Death are all poster
children for what’s wrong with the regulation of interstate commerce. The
prospect of any such pest arriving in our state through infected shipments is
not only bad for the forest, it is bad for commerce. It is bad for the nursery
industry; it is bad for the timber industry. In the case of Sudden Oak Death,
shipments with infected plants or plants exposed to infection were shipped
throughout the East Coast - despite quarantine. That kind of quarantine is no
It is true that, under the Constitution, no individual state can regulate
interstate commerce - but the United States Congress can. We ought to be
demanding that Congress better regulate interstate commerce.
Protecting our state and private forests must also include shielding them from
extremes in policy or regulation. At one extreme, there are those who advocate
for policies that would place unreasonable and non-sustainable demands on the
state and private forests of Maryland. At the other extreme, there are those who
would bar any use of the state and private forest, sustainable or otherwise,
effectively putting our state’s greatest asset in the proverbial “lockbox” and
throwing away the key. State Foresters are called to lead policymakers and
the public, alike, to understand and endorse a balanced approach towards the use and
care of the state’s forested lands.
It is a daunting task – because forestry has a persistent image problem. As Don
Smith, Connecticut State Forester, said in a recent speech, the thing about
forestry is that we cannot hide the aspects of this business that are unpleasant
to the uninitiated.
Agriculture doesn’t have this problem. Cows grazing in the field look
wonderfully pastoral – and steak looks great in the supermarket. But those who
enjoy a sizzling steak, hot off the grill, never see what happens in the
Trees also look great as they stand majestically in the woods – and lumber looks
great at the lumberyard. But, for the most part, logging is a disruptive
activity that, to the untrained eye looks aesthetically displeasing. There is no
concealing it. The forestry version of the slaughterhouse is right out there in
the open, for everyone to see. The unsightliness of logging has been, and
probably always will be, a problem for forestry. There is an opportunity here
for us, as leaders, to be frank and honest about that. Honesty in government can
be refreshing, nowadays. We have an opportunity before us, the leaders of the
profession of forestry, to take a stand for honesty and openness. We can show
the public: this is where your lumber comes from, this is where your paper comes
from, and this is how we do it.
Like the inevitability of death and taxes, debates over appropriate uses of
forests will continue to rage – and, in those debates, foresters cannot afford
to be viewed as anti-environmentalist. The trick is to be a positive force in
the discourse that will take place. We need to recognize that whether we are
foresters, members of organized environmental groups, or simply citizens of our
planet, each of us looks for many of the same things in life: clean
air; clean water; good jobs; a safe, healthy environment; and healthy, diverse
forests. These are reasonable expectations. We simply cannot afford to expend
our energy battling with a small number of organized environmentalists over
different ways of working toward the same goals. As leaders, we need to think
seriously about how we can play a larger, more visible role in achieving these
positive societal goals.
Responsibly and Effectively Manage our
Publicly-owned Forested Lands
I believe that our third priority should be to responsibly and effectively
manage our publicly owned forested lands.
We have been entrusted with the management of forest lands for the public good.
Over the past few generations, the citizens of our state made conscious
decisions to fund the purchase of specific lands and to place those lands under
the care of their State government. Good and trusting people with a vision to
the future set aside these lands as their loving gift to descendants that they
will never know. To honor those expectations, we are called upon to be stewards
of these lands for the future. That is why Maryland is embracing the opportunity
that dual third party certification offers us to demonstrate to the public that
we are indeed trustworthy caretakers of our public forests.
Motivate and Educate Forested Landowners to Embrace
the Concept of Forest Stewardship
Finally, I believe that our fourth priority must be to motivate and educate
those who own forested lands and those who earn a living from them to embrace
the concept of forest stewardship and to employ sound forest management
practices on the land.
I spoke earlier about the difference between property rights and property
responsibilities as they pertain to forest fragmentation. The concept of rights
versus responsibilities also applies to the care of the forest. All forest land
owners need to exercise their property responsibilities as well as their
property rights. This means approaching their forests not from the perspective
of “What is the minimum we can get by with while yet complying with laws and
regulations?” but from the perspective of “What do we need to do to honor our
responsibilities to our neighbors, to those who depend on the forest for its
economic contributions, and to future generations?” This is what forestry is all
It is all about how to manage and sustainably use forests for human benefit.
It is a sad statement, but true, that there are foresters and forest products
harvesters who care nothing for the future. Each of us here could probably
relate at least a few instances of abusive forest practices and the
ne’er-do-wells that perpetrate them. As leaders in our respective local forestry
communities, we should be encouraging foresters and harvesters to recognize that
forestry is far broader than just timber sales and inventory. If a trail is to
be established in the forest, that is the forester’s domain. If warbler habitat
is the goal, if scenic vistas are the goal, those, too, are the work of the
forester. If there is an endangered plant in the forest, it is the forester’s
duty – and privilege – to care for that plant.
If the history of state and private forests in Maryland reveals anything, it is
that land and people are intertwined throughout that history. It took 250 years
for the "Myth of Inexhaustibility" to be seriously challenged. Another 100 years
of selfless dedication by a series of charismatic and influential forest
conservation leaders saw the return of the forest and the development of a suite
of forestry programs and services targeting our nation’s state and private
forestlands. In the past 30 years, user demands on State-owned forestland have
dramatically increased as have the threats to the continued viability of
privately-owned forested lands. This is a pivotal time in the history of the
state and private forestlands. It is a moment that cries out for a new cadre of
charismatic and influential forest conservation leaders.
Now is the time for all of us to step forward and become the catalyst . . .
calling out the visionary, charismatic and influential from within our own ranks
and from across the breadth of our state’s forestry community to lay the
foundation for the next century of progress.
Those who came before expect it of us - and we owe it to those who are yet to
Address by Steven W. Koehn, Maryland State Forester
for the Maryland Forests Association 2005 Annual Meeting,
Rocky Gap Lodge & Resort, November 2005
580 Taylor Ave, Annapolis MD 21401