The URL can be used to link to this page

0. Southern Mineral Draft FSP.pdfFOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN Submitted to: Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation For enrollment in CH61/61A/61B and/or Forest Stewardship Program CHECK-OFFS Administrative Box CH61 CH61A CH61B STWSHP C-S Case No. Orig. Case No. cert. cert. cert. new EEA Owner ID Add. Case No. recert. recert. recert. renew Other Date Rec’d Ecoregion amend amend amend FSC Birds Plan Period Topo Name Easth. Conservation Rest. Rare Spp. Hab. River Basin CT. Plan Change: to CR Holder OWNER, PROPERTY, and PREPARER INFORMATION Property Owner(s) City of Northampton (c/o Conservation Commission)** Southern Mineral Hills Mailing Address 210 Main Street, Room 11, Northampton, MA 01060 Phone (413) 587-1265 Email Address wfeiden@northamptonma.gov Property Location: Town(s) Northampton Road(s) Route 66 & off other roads Plan Preparer Michael Mauri, Forester Mass. Forester License # 161 Mailing Address 20 West Street, South Deerfield, MA 01373 Phone (413) 665-6829 RECORDS Assessor’s Map No. Lot/Parcel No. Deed Book Deed Page Total Acres Ch61/61A 61B Excluded Acres Ch61/61A 61B Certified Acres Stewshp Excluded Acres Stewshp Acres SEE NEXT PAGE TOTALS Excluded Area Description(s) (if additional space needed, continue on separate paper) NONE HISTORY Year acquired 2003-2017 Year management began 2017 Are boundaries marked: Yes blazed/painted/flagged/signs posted (circle all that apply)? No Partially What treatments have been prescribed, but not carried out (last 10 years if plan is a recert.)? stand no. treatment reason (if additional space needed, continue on separate page) Previous Management Practices (last 10 years) Stand # Cutting Plan # Treatment Yield Acres Date Remarks: (if additional space needed, continue on separate page) **Attention Wayne Feiden, Director of Planning and Sustainability. (Form revised April 2014) Page 1 of Records: Burts Bog Greenway Tax Map Tax Parcel Deed Book Deed Page Year acquired ACRES CH 61/61A Excluded Acres Ch 61/61A Certified Acres Forest Stewardship Excluded Acres Forest Stewardship Enrolled Acres TBA TBA 2017 114.35 114.35 0 0 114.35 29 484 3536 85 1990 15.00 15.00 0 0 15.00 29 414 5042 12 0.40 0.40 0 0 0.40 30C 48 4539 153 1994 5.00 5.00 0 0 5.00 0.00 134.75 134.75 0 0 134.75 Records: Southern Mineral Hills Tax Map Tax Parcel Deed Book Deed Page Year acquired ACRES CH 61/61A Excluded Acres Ch 61/61A Certified Acres Forest Stewardship Excluded Acres Forest Stewardship Enrolled Acres 41 66 8281 88 2003 36.50 36.50 0 0 36.50 41 66 12546 165 2017 53.01 53.01 0 0 53.01 89.51 89.51 0 0 89.51 Overview page 1 Property Overview: Southern Mineral Hills Land of City of Northampton Westhampton Road, Glendale Road, etc., Northampton, MA Landscape/Regional Context The local pattern of land use is a fragmented residential-rural interface landscape within a matrix of forestland and scattered farms. See Additional Property Overview: Bird habitat for a more detailed discussion. Distinguishing or special features include: This property has 2 streams listed as coldwater fisheries (North Branch of the Manhan River and Hannum Brook) and is currently a breeding ground for woodcock. Protection: This property is under the ownership and protection of the City of Northampton. Property Overview Topography: flat or gently sloping, with low, wet areas. Dominant forest types are: mixed oak and hardwood upland forest with red maple, mixed white pine and pitch pine or hemlock and oak; and an overgrown field with abundant poplar. Main tree ages: Quite variable, probably mostly 25 to 90 years old, though many relic trees are probably > 150 years old (see large trees referenced in Map A). Overall forest health: the native hardwood species are thriving. Some areas of the property, including edge forest, are overrun with non-native invasive plants, which increasingly compromise some aspects of the forest, such as the ability to grow new trees or offer tree-based habitat. Invasive species are are largely absent but where present tend to be quite concentrated (Stand 2) and pose a fundamental long-term threat to desired forest functions, including the maintenance of native floral biodiversity and habitat structure. Most areas of the property are not yet infested and are not at immanent risk of rapid infestation as long as disturbances can be avoided. See Stand Descriptions for stand-level discussions of non-native invasive plants. Main habitat types are mature mixed forest (see description above) and an overgrown field in a dense brushy phase on about 50% of the acreage and tall poplars on the other 50% (Stand 2). Water resources concerns are are “normal”: This parcel does not fall within a surface-water drinking-water supply. However, as coldwater fisheries, exceptional efforts should be taken to safeguard the water quality in the streams, including limiting sedimentation caused by unauthorized uses (e.g. the Hannum Brook ATV crossing) and ensuring that tall forest trees will be able to shade the banks of the streams in most places (i.e. by ensuring that invasive plants do not prevent native trees from becoming established and thriving). Property-wide stewardship concerns include: (From Landowner Questionaire) “Preserve coldwater stream habitat, enhance native forest + control invasive species, promote recreation, promote climate resiliency” Overview page 2 Role/Impact wrt. nearby Protected Lands Water supply No impact to water supply lands or waters are anticipated (the land is not within a water supply) Wildlife habitat The anticipated activities are expected to sustain or improve the current habitats. Recreation The anticipated activities will improve recreation access. The between-property impact of any management is expected to be essentially non-existent. Summary of Management Recommendations The landowner’s main goals include (1) completing this plan as a way of taking stock of the property and identifying major concerns and opportunities; (2) address the property-wide Landowner Goals stated above; (3) enroll in the DCR Forest Birds program. The property’s potential to achieve the landowner’s goals is outstanding, with the most notable challenge being the current infestation of invasive plants in Stand 2, especially autumn olive, which threaten to devastate the entire forest over the coming decades. Working towards these goals, the main recommendations include: is outstanding, with the most notable challenge being perhaps the combined threats of fragmentation pressure, including non-native invasive plants, overbrowsing by deer, elevated populations of certain predators (e.g. housecats and raccoons), potential restrictions on management, and destructive encroachments. The well-established infestation of invasive plants in Stand 2, especially autumn olive, will be a special challenge. The overcrowded pine stand near Glendale Ave poses another challenge. Addressing water quality issues related to coldwater fisheries (see above) will also be challenging. The overall focus in established forest areas (i.e. all stands except Stand 2) should be on the preservation and, where needed, restoration, of intact interior forest habitat. Habitat overview page 1 Additional Property Overview: Bird habitat Regional and Landscape-Level Habitat Assessments, Burts Bog Greenway and Southern Mineral Hills, Land of City of Northampton, Northampton, MA This plan refers to and makes use of two documents published by Mass Audubon and provided by Mass Audubon, DCR, and the Franklin Land Trust: Birds with Silviculture in Mind and Managing Forests for Trees and Birds in Massachusetts. These are important, full color references and are meant to be used in conjunction with this plan. This plan will assess forest bird habitat at three levels: 1. The ecoregional context 2. The landscape surrounding the parcel 3. The stand level characteristics 1. Regional/ecoregion habitat assessment: The Forest for the Birds program divides Massachusetts into three ecoregions. Atlantic Coastal Pine Barrens: SE (SOUTHEAST) Covering Cape Cod, the Islands, and much of Plymouth County. Northeastern Coastal Zone C (CENTRAL): Found in central and northeastern Massachusetts, this is perhaps the most heterogeneous region, with densely and sparsely populated areas. These forests typically support oak-pine and oak-mixed hardwood stands Northeastern Highlands W (WEST) This region covers western and north central Massachusetts and is the most sparsely populated. By coincidence, the Burts Bog and Southern Mineral Hills properties fall in different ecoregions (Central and West). For purposes of this plan, focal birds from both regions will be addressed. Birds listed by ecoregion are shown in the Table 1 below. Habitat overview page 2 2. Landscape-level habitat assessment: General considerations: Rather than being lost outright, sometimes large areas of habitat become subdivided by human-created features like roads and housing developments, leading to what is known as habitat fragmentation. A fragmented habitat can obstruct movement and make it easier for invasive species and predators to spread. This splintering effect can have dire consequences for breeding birds. Canada warbler, black and white warbler, wood thrush and scarlet tanager are examples of birds that are vulnerable to fragmenting edge effects Mass Audubon estimated the negative effects of development actually impact an area three to four times greater than the developed footprint For example, roads, suburban yards, and power lines along wooded edges often serve as corridors for nest predators so that birds nesting near these features are more likely to sustain predation. Brown-headed Cowbirds also tend to be very common along habitat edges. This nest parasite will lay its own eggs in the nests of other species so that the host species ends up using its resources to raise the young cowbird at the expense of its own young. Atlas 2 analyses indicate that for several forest species (e.g., Canada Warbler), edge effects likely play a role in Massachusetts declines. The domestic cat represents one of the most serious threats to breeding birds in North America. Recent analyses indicate that at least one billion birds are taken by cats annually in the US, and the total number may be much higher. The species most affected are native songbirds, which have a total US population estimated at only 10 to 20 billion so that this annual loss is quite significant. Predators are the number one Habitat overview page 3 cause of nest failure for breeding birds, and domestic cats, which we can control, contribute substantially to this source of mortality. Overgrazing by deer can also cause a decline in the insects that are necessary to feed nestlings as well as the outright loss of thick vegetation needed for nest sites for some birds. Northampton landscape assessment: For the Forest for the Birds program, the landscape refers to an area of at least 2500 acres, which is the approximate land area within a radius of one mile from a point at the center of the property. For this plan, with tax maps from four towns and other resources, I was able to conduct a somewhat more nuanced study of the degree of the landscape condition surrounding the Burst Bog Greenway and the Southern Mineral Hills conservation areas. In particular, I wanted to quantify the degree of fragmentation, which seemed high based on my visits to the properties. As a less-fragmented reference, I used the land around the City of Northampton Roberts Meadow watershed properties. For this quick study, the degree fragmentation was represented by the total number of parcels falling within a one-mile zone radiating around the edge of the property as well as by the number of immediate abutters. I combined these numbers to get an interiority index, where interiority is the opposite of fragmentation. The results are presented in the Habitat Locus Map and in the table below. Parcel Burts Bog Greenway Southern Mineral Hills Roberts Meadow Reservoir watershed Town N'hampton N'hampton N'hampton Parcel size (ac) 136 89 450 Size of one-mile habitat zone (ac) 3,645 3,630 6,132 No. of tax parcels w/in 1-mile habitat zone 2,583 886 782 (a) No. of interior acres per parcel in 1-mile habitat zone 0.05 0.10 0.58 No. of immediate abutters 100 15 67 (b) No. of interior acres per parcel in immediate abutter zone 1.4 5.9 6.7 Interiority Index (Multiply a * b) 0.07 0.60 3.9 as percent of highest 2% 15% 100% Table A: The table above shows the results of an analysis of landscape-level fragmentation surrounding three subject parcels belonging to the City of Northampton and occurring within City limits (please refer also to the attached Habitat Locus Map). The index is constructed as follows: (a) divide the number of parcels occurring within one mile of the property by the subject parcel acreage (this captures the general condition of the landscape); (b) divide the number of parcels immediately abutting the property by the subject parcel acreage (this captures the immediate abutting environment). Multiply a * b. The Roberts Meadow watershed forest had the lowest level of fragmentation, and therefore the highest interior habitat value. Burst Bog was the most fragmented, with Southern Mineral Hills falling in between. This ranking probably would correspond to impressions of the landscape that people familiar with these properties might have, but it is interesting to see the quantification. The properties differ by an order of magnitude. This index is only an experimental model. If this index is truly a valid reflection of relative interior habitat value, then it would seem that there are significant differences among the properties, and Habitat overview page 4 that the effort to protect the Burst Bog Greenway from fragmentation pressures will be proportionally much greater than for Southern Mineral Hills. Discussion of landscape fragmentation: For the Burts Bog Greenway, all of the acreage (3,645 acres) fell within Northampton. For the Southern Mineral Hills, the 3,630 fell in Northampton, Easthampton, Westhampton and Southampton. The area around Roberts Meadow (6,132 acres) fell in both Northampton and Westhampton. The Burts Bog Greenway had by far the highest rate of fragmentation, with 2,5683 parcels occurring within one mile, averaging only 1.4 acres per parcel. With approximately 100 immediate abutters sharing a common boundary with the Burts Bog Greenway, the landscape around the Burts Bog Greenway is heavily fragmented on all sides. Finally, the Burts Bog Greenway is fragmented from within by a number of dead-end streets from the north. The Southern Mineral Hills was much less fragmented than Burts Bog, with 886 parcels occurring within the 3,630 acres falling within a mile of the property. On average, the parcels were 4.1 acres in size. The Southern Mineral Hills parcel has about 15 abutters sharing a common boundary, with fragmentation concentrated unevenly. Like Burts Bog, the Southern Mineral Hills parcel is fragmented from within by the cul-de-sac. By comparison, the Roberts Meadow property was much less fragmented, with 782 parcels averaging 7.8 acres occurring within a 6,132-acre area. Furthermore, the fragmentation around the Roberts Meadow property is concentrated in the NE quadrant. From a forest bird perspective, the greatest challenges are likely to occur in the most fragmented areas. With fragmentation of the landscape comes fragmentation pressure ⎯ which, as used here, refers to the aggregate of interfering and disrupting factors associated with fragmentation. These include, notoriously, the spread of non- native invasive plants, nest parasitism by the Brown-headed Cowbird, nest predation by a number of species that thrive in fragmented landscapes (predation by raccoons, skunks, house cats, etc.), and overbrowsing of native vegetation by deer. Condition of the non-developed landscape: That portion of the landscape that is not developed consists primarily of a blend of forests, generally mixed-species hardwood-softwood maturing, closed-canopy forest interspersed with upland fields. Oaks, including red oak, scarlet oak and chestnut oak, are abundant on uplands, as is white pine, while red maple is abundant in forested wetlands. Types of surrounding land uses: See discussion above of fragmentation and non-developed landscape. There are a number of protected parcels nearby (e.g. Northampton’s Mineral Hills, Sawmill Hills, Roberts Hill and Rocky Hill Greenway parcels as well as the City’s Roberts Meadow Reservoir watershed. There are other municipally-protected parcels in Northampton as well as Easthampton, and a number of private-land conservation restrictions. Furthermore, the 750-acre Arcadia Wildlife Sanctuary and West Meadows, which is classified as an Important Birding Area, lies about 2.5 miles to the SE of the Burts Bog Greenway. Together, these areas are important “islands” within the larger, fragmented landscape. Protection from development does not ensure protection of ecological resources, however, as factors such as unchecked invasive plants, over- browsing by deer, and destructive uses of protected lands (e.g. encroachments or ATV use) can undermine the well- meant ecological goals of protection. The more theoretical question of habitat “sinks” caused by ecological “islands” (i.e. will birds be drawn in to breed but then be predated upon by neighboring house cats) goes beyond the scope of this plan. Habitat overview page 5 According to the Mass Audubon website, at the nearby Arcadia Wildlife Sanctuary and West Meadows, the major threat is invasive plants, including purple loosestrife, water chestnut, Eurasian milfoil, glossy buckthorn, honeysuckle, barberry, multiflora rose, and bittersweet. Other pressures include nest parasitism by cowbirds. According to the Mass Audubon website, cowbird eggs have been found in about 33% of Wood Thrush nests, and several other species have been seen feeding young cowbirds. Situated close to Springfield, the City of Northampton lies at the fringe of the most densely populated area in the western part of Massachusetts and so is actually not typical for the ecoregions as a whole. Development, both residential and commercial, has increased dramatically in recent decades, starting with the post WWII housing boom. This has tended to sprawl away from the historic City center, consuming flatter, well-drained sites and stretching into adjacent steeper and rougher terrain. Furthermore, the undeveloped rich farmlands of the CT River Valley, which naturally would support forest habitat, are generally still in cultivation. Cultivated areas tend to form scrubby, invasive-plant-ridden edges that then take over fields if and when they are abandoned. The upshot is that there is a high degree of fragmentation in the immediate landscape, with significant edge effects that combine to unfavorably to forest birds. These include: ⎯ outright loss and degradation of forest by development and encroachments (e.g. lawns stretching into conservation areas, altered drainage, etc.) ⎯ degradation of forest by the increase in invasive plants emanating from edge areas ⎯ habitat conditions that favor bird predators such as house cats (which prey on over one billion wild birds annually in the U.S.) but also raccoons, skunks, gray squirrels, etc. ⎯ habitat conditions that favor competition by other birds such as blue jays, crows, starlings, house sparrows and brown-headed cowbirds ⎯ reduction in native plant biodiversity and simplification of structure due to an overabundance of deer and an overall limit in the ability to replicate and replace diverse forests ⎯ use of toxins in developed areas (e.g. insecticides) that can become part of forest food chain ⎯ off-road vehicle use ⎯ possible limitations in the ability to manage the property and address fragmentation issues caused by limited access or by neighborhood or public sentiments including potential limitations on hunting, logging and herbicide use. Summary of landscape condition for these properties and practical application for bird habitat The Burts Bog Greenway and South Mineral Hills conservation areas occur within highly fragmented landscapes. This is especially true for the Burts Bog Greenway. Large, less fragmented areas of forest occur to the north, west and southwest, and there are other protected lands nearby. Yes, due to their large size, these properties may be able to offer interior forest areas that are less exposed to the pressures of fragmentation. In thinking about management of these areas, it is important to keep in mind the risk that fragmentation pressure can undermine the intentions of management. A management approach that promotes features of intact forest while not increasing the exposure to fragmentation pressure makes the most sense. Accordingly, these properties are best-suited for management for birds that thrive in mature and maturing forest conditions characterized by small and infrequent disturbances that maintain an average of >80% cover (see table below). Partial disturbances (from microbursts and ice storms, for example) will tend to have limited effect on this canopy status, or potentially will create temporary intermediate openings and favor birds that use these types of openings (see table below). Early successional openings on a large scale (i.e. > 2.5 acres in size) are unlikely to occur as a result of natural events (though in theory it is possible for a tornado to swing through). The only area of early successional upland is Stand 2 at Southern Mineral Hills which is used by woodcock as a singing ground. The habitat is quickly becoming a closed-canopy habitat and may not remain attractive to woodcock without intervention. 3. Property- and stand level habitat assessment: A bird’s ability to survive and successfully reproduce is related to the presence of specific structural features such as nest sites, food and foraging substrates, singing perches, and cover from predators. The mere presence of a particular Habitat overview page 6 species does not necessarily indicate high-quality habitat. Managing forest conditions to develop appropriate structural features and conditions can increase the habitat quality of a stand, and make it more likely that a given species is not only present, but can also successfully survive and reproduce. Not all birds require the same habitat conditions, and it is rarely possible to manage for all species in the same space. Birds select breeding habitat in part based on the habitat structure. The Foresters for the Birds program groups forest-breeding birds into three types of habitats based on structure, which is a function of the disturbance history. Below I provide Table 4 showing forest- breeding bird usage by structure/disturbance type, and below that I provide illustrations. Source: DCR Foresters for the Birds materials. Habitat overview page 7 Some habitat types and usage are illustrated in the following conceptual illustrations taken from DCR publications: Stand-replacing disturbance regime (heavy disturbance) / Open Canopy Example: Eastern towhee Example: Chestnut-sided warbler Open canopy, canopy < 30% closed, openings, >2.5 acres in size, patches of young forest Deciduous and mixed forest: Eastern Towhee, Chestnut-sided Warbler, Mourning Warbler, Ruffed Grouse, American Woodcock, Brown Thrasher, Northern Bobwhite, Northern Flicker With coniferous: Mourning Warbler. Habitat overview page 8 Canopy gaps and pockets of regeneration disturbance (moderate to heavy disturbance) / Intermediate Canopy White-throated sparrow Canada warbler Black-throated blue warbler Intermediate canopy: canopy >30% < 80% closed, canopy gaps between ¼ and ¾ acre Habitat overview page 9 Small and infrequent disturbances (partial disturbances) that maintain an average of >80% canopy / Closed Canopy Yellow-bellied sapsucker. Deciduous and mixed forest: Black-and-white Warbler, Black-throated Blue Warbler, Canada Warbler, Eastern Wood-pewee, Ruffed Grouse, Veery, Wood Thrush, Northern Flicker With coniferous: Mourning Warbler, White-throated Sparrow, Canada Warbler Eastern wood peewee Closed canopy: canopy >80%, minor gaps, large trees Deciduous and mixed forest: Black-and-white Warbler, Black-throated Blue Warbler, Canada Warbler, Eastern Wood-pewee, Wood Thrush, Yellow-bellied Sapsucker With coniferous: Black-throated Green Warbler Habitat overview page 10 Wood thrush Black-throated green warbler Property-level habitat attributes for consideration: Forest Edge Birds nesting close to the forest edge face a higher abundance of nest predators and the brood-parasitizing Brown- headed Cowbird, especially in fragmented landscapes. Negative effects of edge can extend 150-300 feet into the forest interior. (see also predation by raccoons, cats, etc.). A long, thin strip of forest is the least desirable for birds and other edge-sensitive wildlife. Consider regenerating areas between peninsulas and indentations to improve the shape. Regeneration can also connect smaller patches to form one large forest area. Edge plays a large role in the Burst Bog Greenway and South Mineral Hills areas. This is especially true for Burts Bog, with approximately 100 immediate abutters. Canopy Composition For the purposes of forest bird habitat, a mature forest is greater than 30 feet high, and has a generally closed canopy (>80%) with relatively small gap openings throughout. This favors a suite of mature forest-nesting bird species, including Ovenbird and Black-throated Green Warbler (see Chart). Openings at this scale mimic small natural disturbances and create opportunities for regenerating intermediate- and shade-tolerant tree species. Canopy gaps and regeneration patches can be much larger, up to about 3/4 of an acre, for birds preferring a canopy with a moderate degree of closure (30%-80%). Within this framework there is a broad spectrum of conditions. Regeneration in these openings provides nesting and foraging habitat for birds such as Black-throated Blue Warbler, Wood Thrush, and Veery. The distribution of these openings may vary, but mature forest conditions should be maintained on the whole. Habitat overview page 11 Width across circular opening (radius in ft) Area (acres) Percent of One acre Max canopy Height (ft) of a tree that would reach the middle of the opening if it fell 50 0.0 5% 25 120 0.3 26% 60 170 0.5 52% 85 200 0.7 72% 100 330 2.0 500 4.5 750 10.1 1000 18.0 1500 41 Table B. The table above shows gap opening size (in acres) for a range of theoretical circular openings and shows the tallest tree that would reach the middle of a circular opening if it fell. Type of harvest Max gap size Min gap size Low intensity 1/4 ac Moderate intensity 3/4 ac High intensity > 25 acres 2.5 acres Table C. The table above shows the types of gap opening sizse (in acres) for different intensities of harvesting and is intended as a hypothetical guide. Midstory Vegetation Defined as woody vegetation 5-30 feet high, this layer includes understory trees like striped maple and hophornbeam, young or suppressed canopy tree species, and taller shrubs, like witch-hazel. As with the understory layer, locally high stem and foliage densities distributed throughout a stand will provide nest sites, foraging substrates and protective cover. Structure is more important than species composition, though a diversity of species is ideal. While exact preference will vary by species, having coverage in 30%-70% of this layer is desirable. Understory Vegetation For bird habitat purposes, understory is defined as live vegetation 0-5 feet high, including tree seedlings and saplings, shrubs, and herbaceous vegetation. High stem and foliage densities of woody plants in this layer provide nest sites, foraging substrates, and protective cover. Some birds tend to associate with particular plant species. For example, Black-throated Blue Warblers are known to nest in dense clumps of hobblebush or mountain laurel. However, in general the overall complexity of the understory vegetation plays a more important role than plant species composition. In many forests across the state, understory is thin or lacking, and enhancing this cover is often beneficial. Well-distributed patches of understory vegetation covering 50%-80% of the stand is desirable. Care should be taken to not disturb existing areas of thick understory, especially near wetlands including small wooded swamps or streams. Canada Warbler relies on nearly impenetrable understory and midstory near wooded streams or swamps. Disturbing that habitat can result in losing Canada Warbler from a site. Soft Mast This refers to species such as black cherry and pin cherry, shadbush, blueberries, hawthorn, viburnums, dogwoods, blackberries, raspberries, and apples. These produce food sources that are especially important in late summer when many species are preparing for a strenuous migration and undergoing energy-intensive molt. Habitat overview page 12 Non-native Invasive Plant Species Consideration Non-native, invasive plants, such as oriental bittersweet, bush honeysuckles, buckthorn, autumn olive, and Japanese barberry, present a variety of threats to forest health in Massachusetts and the Northeast. Although some species of birds successfully use invasive plants as nesting sites and eat their fruits, the fruits generally have low nutritional value and the arthropod diversity and abundance on non-native plants is often lower, providing less forage. Invasive plants compete directly with native vegetation and often outcompete it, reducing the diversity of other nesting and foraging substrates in forest ecosystems. Control, and monitoring of non-native, invasive plant species is a management objective for improved habitat as well as a silvicultural objective. Cutting may not be a suitable option in the presence of non-native plants because these can dominate the desirable new vegetation. If cutting must take place in the presence of non-native plants, openings should be located near already disturbed areas (e.g., agricultural lands) and away from interior sections. Deciduous Leaf Litter A thick layer of leaf litter is home to an array of insects, mites, and spiders — the prey of many birds. Some species, such as Veery, Wood Thrush, and Ovenbird, largely forage on the ground, searching the leaf litter for food. Ovenbirds also rely upon a deep layer of deciduous litter for constructing their ground nests. An abundant amount of leaf litter is a few inches thick with few, if any, bare spots on the forest floor. While pine needles are used as material in nests, a leaf litter of pure needles is not as beneficial to these birds. Coarse and Fine Woody Material (often referred to as “a mess”) Coarse woody material (CWM), commonly also know as coarse woody debris, is defined as downed logs and branches ≥5 inches diameter at the tip, and >5 feet long. Fine woody material (FWM) is composed of limbs and branches <4 inches diameter. Blowdowns and slash are the most common sources of coarse woody material and fine woody material. Coarse woody material may provide sites for singing and other behaviors, such as the Ruffed Grouse’s familiar drumming. Additionally, the decaying wood provides habitat for insects and other arthropods that are a significant part of the diet for many birds. A rule of thumb is to retain a minimum of two cords of coarse woody material per acre, especially in the form of large cull logs that will remain for long periods of time. Individual pieces of fine woody material have their greatest value when it is aggregated into piles (e.g., slash piles), offering perches, nesting substrate, and protective cover for birds like White-throated Sparrow and Veery. Coarse and fine woody material (together with snags and cavity trees – see below) is often thought of as a mess needing clean up, but in reality woody materials are a defining feature of the forest ecosystem. Snags and Cavity Trees Snags are standing dead or partially dead trees. Snags provide opportunities for nest cavity excavation by Yellow- bellied Sapsucker and Northern Flicker, which may be re-used in subsequent years by other species like Saw- whet Owl. As with CWM, the dead wood creates abundant forage for bole-feeding birds like Hairy Woodpecker and Brown Creeper. Branches on snags may be used as foraging perches and nest sites. A minimum of 5 snags per acre greater than 10 inches diameter is desirable. Where lacking, snags can be created by girdling. Over time, snags form by natural processes and will accumulate if not “cleaned up”. Cavity trees may be alive or dead. Suggested targets for cavity trees are 1-3 trees >18 inches diameter per acre, and 4 in the 12-18 inch range. Spacing of snags and cavity trees is important because most cavity users are territorial, and clustering snags will result in fewer individuals using the nest holes. Aspen and paper birch make particularly good live cavity trees, as they are frequently chosen for cavity excavation, possibly due to their soft wood and vulnerability. Large Diameter Trees Large-diameter cavity trees are critical for larger cavity nesting species including Barred Owl and Pileated Woodpecker. Some large-diameter (24+” DBH) trees should be present in the forest. Structurally-sound, large- diameter trees are important stick nest sites for woodland raptors, such as the Northern Goshawk. Native Plant Diversity Plant species composition should reflect the range of species that are part of the natural community type. Native species diversity is important for regeneration, overall forest health and resiliency, and for forest birds that tend to select specific vegetation types for foraging or nesting. For example, yellow birch provides preferential foraging substrates for many insect-eating bird species including Blackburnian Warbler, Black-throated Green Warbler, and Scarlet Tanager. Habitat overview page 13 Softwood Inclusions Retain softwood inclusions in hardwood stands to provide increased structural complexity and species diversity, as well as varied foraging and nesting opportunities. Such components are particularly beneficial for species such as the Black-throated Green Warbler, Blackburnian Warbler, and Blue-headed Vireo. Water and Wetland Features Streams, ponds, and wetlands add to the diversity of habitats available for forest birds. For example: • Rock- or gravel-bottomed streams within a forest matrix may support Louisiana Waterthrush, a warbler that nests in cavities under steep streamside banks or in upturned roots of a fallen tree over or near water. • Forested wetland communities such as red maple, Atlantic white-cedar, and hemlock-hardwood swamps provide breeding habitat important to Canada Warbler. These forests tend to have a low canopy height and an abundance of ground cover — primarily ferns and shrubs. They also have structurally complex and uneven forest floors with hummocks, rootballs, and downed woody debris that provide concealment for nests and young • Shrub-dominated wetlands provide habitat for American Woodcock and Alder Flycatcher as well as Redwinged blackbird. Habitat overview page 14 SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR YOUNG FOREST HABITAT According to Mass Audubon, creating a young forest patch on the landscape is one of the most beneficial actions a forester or a landowner can accomplish for wildlife. Young, regenerating forests are critical for a suite of birds that exclusively use early successional habitat for breeding and foraging. Many of these species have experienced severe population declines, largely due to loss of habitat (Schlossberg and King 2007). Additionally, some species that breed in mature forest, such as Black-and-white Warbler and Wood Thrush, move into these areas after the breeding period, but before migrating south (Anders et al. 1998, Marshall et al. 2003, Vitz and Rodewald 2006). Finally, early successional habitat is used by many other types of wildlife, like some mammals, reptiles, and pollinator species. A reasonable goal is to have about 10% of the forest in a landscape in an early successional stage at any point of time (DeGraaf et al. 1992). For the purposes of bird habitat, a young forest is defined as an area of at least 2.5 acres with dense, regenerating forest, and an open canopy (<30% cover). These young forest habitats are ephemeral by nature, benefiting some bird species for a small window of time as forest succession proceeds for about 15-20 years. Young forest patches of all sizes will benefit birds in Massachusetts, from small 2.5 acre openings distributed throughout a forested matrix, to large openings in excess of 25 acres (Litvaitis 2006, Askins et al. 2007, Schlossberg and King 2008, Shake et al. 2012). Staggering the creation of adjacent patches can extend the utility of a site, and the maintenance of young forest should be included in forest and wildlife management planning. Young forest birds are also sensitive to edge. Create square or circular patches of young forest rather than rectangular or irregularly shaped patches to reduce the amount of edge. Both early successional and mature forest birds (during the post-breeding period) have been found to prefer interior young forest habitat (≥ 164 feet from the edge) compared to edge habitat (Rodewald and Vitz 2005, Vitz and Rodewald 2006, Schlossberg and King 2008, Shake et al. 2011) (Note: the center of a 2-acre opening is about 164’ from the edge, which means that a 2-acre opening is the minimum size needed to achieve this preferred condition). The previously mentioned concepts of soft mast, coarse and fine woody material, snags and cavities, and invasive plant species apply to both mature and young forest habitats. In other words, young forest habitat quality is improved by the retention of coarse and fine woody material, snags, large trees, and soft-mast-producing plants. Preventing non-native invasive plants from becoming established or thriving is very important. Soft (i.e. irregular and thick) edges between mature and young forest openings are better than abrupt hard edges. Soft edges provide a buffer against predators and Brown-headed Cowbirds entering deeply into the forest, and obscure their view of nesting birds. ADVERSE IMPACTS OF DEER Many regions in Massachusetts have high densities of deer, which can have significant adverse ecological impacts. For example, large numbers of deer can overbrowse a forest interior, affecting the abundance, species composition, and density of understory vegetation and regenerating canopy trees. In turn, this can negatively affect the abundance and diversity of birds that nest and forage below the canopy. While deer densities are particularly high in eastern Massachusetts, deer impacts are prevalent statewide with the result that the future forest may consist largely of plants avoided by deer. Currently, oak is one of the dominant canopy species in Massachusetts yet oaks are not abundant in the seedling and saplings layers. Deer preferentially browse oak seedlings. The impressive oaks forests of today arose at a time when deer populations were very low in Massachusetts. A landowner concerned about the future of the forest on their land needs to be aware of the impact of deer; likewise, deer have implications for bird species that they may be trying to promote. According to the Mass Audubon website, citing Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, there are approximately 85,000 to 95,000 deer statewide, with densities ranging from about 10 per square mile in northwestern Massachusetts to 45 to 55 per square mile on Nantucket Island. In the early 1900's, there were fewer than 1,000 deer in Massachusetts. General Management Considerations ⎯ What are the bird habitat strengths and deficiencies across the ecoregion, landscape, and property? ⎯ What birds are presently benefiting? What birds could or should be here? Habitat overview page 15 ⎯ Is there unique habitat on the property? In the landscape? Is there a decided lack of certain habitat, like young, early successional forest? ⎯ Does the habitat need to be enhanced or is doing nothing the most appropriate action? ⎯ Are there opportunities to design improvements to habitat by drawing on existing high quality habitat? ⎯ Are there timber management priorities that can be designed and implemented in a way that enhances habitat creation? Property Condition: The tables provided at the end of this section provide an overview of forest habitat features observed at the property/stand level. Please refer to the Forest Stand and Boundary Maps as needed. Stand-level habitat features are further discussed in the Stand Descriptions section. Major Conclusions from a Bird Habitat Perspective: Given the highly fragmented landscape settings for Southern Mineral Hills and, especially, for Burts Bog, the primary focus should be on protecting and promoting closed-canopy structure. The major exception is Stand 2 at Southern Mineral Hills which can (and should) be managed for early-successional habitat in conjunction with invasive plant control and riparian forest restoration. Thinning (Stand 1 at Southern Mineral Hills) may be necessary for reasons of stand health and would create intermediate canopy conditions. Invasive plants should be controlled, access should be restricted to allowed uses, and boundaries should be maintained to prevent encroachments in all areas. Specific recommendations are made in the Management Practices section. Habitat overview page 16 Live cavity and snag trees per acre Tree feature by diameter class Burts Bog 1 Burts Bog 3 South Mineral Hills 1 South Mineral Hills 3 South Mineral Hills 4 South Mineral Hills 5 Avg. DCR Birds Program recom- mended Cavity <12" 12 24 0 11 12 0 9.8 - Cavity 12"- 18" 0 0 7 8 6 0 3.5 4 Cavity >18" 1 0 0 0 2 0 0.5 1 to 3 Snag <10" 24 24 12 0 19 21 16.7 - Snag >=10" 4 0 10 0 0 3 2.8 5 The table above shows the per-acre rates of various habitat trees for applicable stands. Cavity trees and snags were present but mostly occurred in smaller diameter classes. Snag formation in smaller size classes is primarily due to competition typical of post-agricultural forests rather than partial disturbance or senescence, as in old-growth forests. Large cavity trees and large snags were underrepresented compared to DCR Forests for the Birds guidelines. A forestry-based remedy for this situation would be girdling selected trees, killing them or causing them to die or survive with significant rot. Overview of Forest Habitat Features (see separate table for snags and cavity trees) Southern Mineral Hills Stand Type Ac.Canopy Midstory Understory Hard mast Soft mast Leaf litter Coarse woody debris Fine woody debris 1 * *60'-100' closed, dense very thick hdwd seedling/ saplings lacking pine nuts lacking thick pine needle layer lacking - moderate lacking 2 * * 20’-60’, irregular, 50% cover either invasives or lacking goldenrod lacking lacking lacking lacking lacking 3 * *60'-80' closed, dense thick hdwd shrub lacking sparse acorn and hickory nut source lacking thick oak layer moderate adequate 4 * *60'-80' closed, dense thick hdwd shrub w/ mountain laurel lacking excellent acorn source lacking thick oak layer moderate adequate 5 * *60'-100' closed, dense thick hdwd shrub w/ hemlock lowbush blueberry or lacking excellent acorn and minor hickory nut source lacking thick oak layer moderate adequate *see Stand Descriptions Page ____ of ____ Stewardship Issues Massachusetts is a small state, but it contains a tremendous variety of ecosystems, plant and animal species, management challenges, and opportunities. This section of your plan will provide background information about the Massachusetts forest landscape as well as issues that might affect your land. The Stand Descriptions and Management Practices sections of your plan will give more detailed property specific information on these subjects tailored to your management goals. Biodiversity: Biological diversity is, in part, a measure of the variety of plants and animals, the communities they form, and the ecological processes (such as water and nutrient cycling) that sustain them. With the recognition that each species has value, individually and as part of its natural community, maintaining biodiversity has become an important resource management goal. While the biggest threat to biodiversity in Massachusetts is the loss of habitat to development, another threat is the introduction and spread of invasive non-native plants. Non-native invasives like European Buckthorn, Asiatic Bittersweet, and Japanese Honeysuckle spread quickly, crowding out or smothering native species and upsetting and dramatically altering ecosystem structure and function. Once established, invasives are difficult to control and even harder to eradicate. Therefore, vigilance and early intervention are paramount. Another factor influencing biodiversity in Massachusetts concerns the amount and distribution of forest growth stages. Wildlife biologists have recommended that, for optimal wildlife habitat on a landscape scale, 5-15% of the forest should be in the seedling stage (less than 1” in diameter). Yet we currently have no more than 2-3% early successional stage seedling forest across the state. There is also a shortage of forest with large diameter trees (greater than 20”). See more about how you can manage your land with biodiversity in mind in the “Wildlife” section below. (Also refer to Managing Forests to Enhance Wildlife Diversity in Massachusetts and A Guide to Invasive Plants in Massachusetts in the binder pockets.) Rare Species: Rare species include those that are threatened (abundant in parts of its range but declining in total numbers, those of special concern (any species that has suffered a decline that could threaten the species if left unchecked), and endangered (at immediate risk of extinction and probably cannot survive without direct human intervention). Some species are threatened or endangered globally, while others are common globally but rare in Massachusetts. Of the 2,040 plant and animal species (not including insects) in Massachusetts, 424 are considered rare. About 100 of these rare species are known to occur in woodlands. Most of these are found in wooded wetlands, especially vernal pools. These temporary shallow pools dry up by late summer, but provide crucial breeding habitat for rare salamanders and a host of other unusual forest dwelling invertebrates. Although many species in Massachusetts are adapted to and thrive in recently disturbed forests, rare species are often very sensitive to any changes in their habitat Indispensable to rare species protection is a set of maps maintained by the Division of Fisheries and Wildlife’s Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program (NHESP) that show current and historic locations of rare species and their habitats. The maps of your property will be compared to these rare species maps and the result indicated on the upper right corner of the front page of the plan. Prior to any Page ____ of ____ regulated timber harvest, if an occurrence does show on the map, the NHESP will recommend protective measures. Possible measures include restricting logging operations to frozen periods of the year, or keeping logging equipment out of sensitive areas. You might also use information from NHESP to consider implementing management activities to improve the habitat for these special species. Riparian and Wetlands Areas: Riparian and wetland areas are transition areas between open water features (lakes, ponds, streams, and rivers) and the drier terrestrial ecosystems. More specifically, a wetland is an area that has hydric (wet) soils and a unique community of plants that are adapted to live in these wet soils. Wetlands may be adjacent to streams or ponds, or a wetland may be found isolated in an otherwise drier landscape. A riparian area is the transition zone between an open water feature and the uplands (see Figure 1). A riparian zone may contain wetlands, but also includes areas with somewhat better drained soils. It is easiest to think of riparian areas as the places where land and water meet. Figure 1: Example of a riparian zone. The presence of water in riparian and wetland areas make these special places very important. Some of the functions and values that these areas provide are described below: Filtration: Riparian zones capture and filter out sediment, chemicals and debris before they reach streams, rivers, lakes and drinking water supplies. This helps to keeps our drinking water cleaner, and saves communities money by making the need for costly filtration much less likely. Flood control: By storing water after rainstorms, these areas reduce downstream flooding. Like a sponge, wetland and riparian areas absorb stormwater, then release it slowly over time instead of in one flush. Critical wildlife habitat: Many birds and mammals need riparian and wetland areas for all or part of their life cycles. These areas provide food and water, cover, and travel corridors. They are often the most important habitat feature in Massachusetts’ forests. Page ____ of ____ Recreational opportunities: Our lakes, rivers, streams, and ponds are often focal points for recreation. We enjoy them when we boat, fish, swim, or just sit and enjoy the view. In order to protect wetlands and riparian areas and to prevent soil erosion during timber harvesting activities, Massachusetts promotes the use of “Best Management Practices” or BMPs. Maintaining or reestablishing the protective vegetative layer and protecting critical areas are the two rules that underlie these common sense measures. DCR’s Massachusetts Forestry Best Practices Manual (included with this plan) details both the legally required and voluntary specifications for log landings, skid trails, water bars, buffer strips, filter strips, harvest timing, and much more. The two Massachusetts laws that regulate timber harvesting in and around wetlands and riparian areas are the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act (CH 131), and the Forest Cutting Practices Act (CH132). Among other things, CH132 requires the filing of a cutting plan and on-site inspection of a harvest operation by a DCR Service Forester to ensure that required BMPs are being followed when a commercial harvest exceeds 25,000 board feet or 50 cords (or combination thereof). Soil and Water Quality: Forests provide a very effective natural buffer that holds soil in place and protects the purity of our water. The trees, understory vegetation, and the organic material on the forest floor reduce the impact of falling rain, and help to insure that soil will not be carried into our streams and waterways. To maintain a supply of clean water, forests must be kept as healthy as possible. Forests with a diverse mixture of vigorous trees of different ages and species can better cope with periodic and unpredictable stress such as insect attacks or windstorms. Timber harvesting must be conducted with the utmost care to ensure that erosion is minimized and that sediment does not enter streams or wetlands. Sediment causes turbidity which degrades water quality and can harm fish and other aquatic life. As long as Best Management Practices (BMPs) are implemented correctly, it is possible to undertake active forest management without harming water quality. Forest Health: Like individual organisms, forests vary in their overall health. The health of a forest is affected by many factors including weather, soil, insects, diseases, air quality, and human activity. Forest owners do not usually focus on the health of a single tree, but are concerned about catastrophic events such as insect or disease outbreaks that affect so many individual trees that the whole forest community is impacted. Like our own health, it is easier to prevent forest health problems then to cure them. This preventative approach usually involves two steps. First, it is desirable to maintain or encourage a wide diversity of tree species and age classes within the forest. This diversity makes a forest less susceptible to a single devastating health threat. Second, by thinning out weaker and less desirable trees, well-spaced healthy individual trees are assured enough water and light to thrive. These two steps will result in a forest of vigorously growing trees that is more resistant to environmental stress. Page ____ of ____ Fire: Most forests in Massachusetts are relatively resistant to catastrophic fire. Historically, Native Americans commonly burned certain forests to improve hunting grounds. In modern times, fires most often result from careless human actions. The risk of an unintentional and damaging fire in your woods could increase as a result of logging activity if the slash (tree tops, branches, and debris) is not treated correctly. Adherence to the Massachusetts slash law minimizes this risk. Under the law, slash is to be removed from buffer areas near roads, boundaries, and critical areas and lopped close to the ground to speed decay. Well-maintained woods roads are always desirable to provide access should a fire occur. Depending on the type of fire and the goals of the landowner, fire can also be considered as a management tool to favor certain species of plants and animals. Today the use of prescribed burning is largely restricted to the coast and islands, where it is used to maintain unique natural communities such as sandplain grasslands and pitch pine/scrub oak barrens. However, state land managers are also attempting to bring fire back to many of the fire-adapted communities found elsewhere around the state. Wildlife Management: Enhancing the wildlife potential of a forested property is a common and important goal for many woodland owners. Sometimes actions can be taken to benefit a particular species of interest (e.g., put up Wood Duck nest boxes). In most cases, recommended management practices can benefit many species, and fall into one of three broad strategies. These are managing for diversity, protecting existing habitat, and enhancing existing habitat. Managing for Diversity – Many species of wildlife need a variety of plant communities to meet their lifecycle requirements. In general, a property that contains a diversity of habitats will support a more varied wildlife population. A thick area of brush and young trees might provide food and cover for grouse and cedar waxwing; a mature stand of oaks provides acorns for foraging deer and turkey; while an open field provides the right food and cover for cottontail rabbits and red fox. It is often possible to create these different habitats on your property through active management. The appropriate mix of habitat types will primarily depend on the composition of the surrounding landscape and your objectives. It may be a good idea to create a brushy area where early successional habitats are rare, but the same practice may be inappropriate in the area’s last block of mature forest. Protecting Existing Habitat – This strategy is commonly associated with managing for rare species or those species that require unique habitat features. These habitat features include vernal pools, springs and seeps, forested wetlands, rock outcrops, snags, den trees, and large blocks of unbroken forest. Some of these features are rare, and they provide the right mix of food, water, and shelter for a particular species or specialized community of wildlife. It is important to recognize their value and protect their function. This usually means not altering the feature and buffering the resource area from potential impacts. Enhancing Existing Habitat – This strategy falls somewhere between the previous two. One way the wildlife value of a forest can be enhanced is by modifying its structure (number of canopy layers, average tree size, density). Thinning out undesirable trees from around large crowned mast (nut and fruit) trees will allow these trees to grow faster and produce more food. The faster growth will also accelerate the development of a more mature forest structure, which is important for some species. Creating small gaps or forest openings generates groups of seedlings and saplings that provide an additional layer of cover, food, and perch sites. Page ____ of ____ Each of these three strategies can be applied on a single property. For example, a landowner might want to increase the habitat diversity by reclaiming an old abandoned field. Elsewhere on the property, a stand of young hardwoods might be thinned to reduce competition, while a “no cut” buffer is set up around a vernal pool or other habitat feature. The overview, stand description and management practice sections of this plan will help you understand your woodland within the context of the surrounding landscape and the potential to diversify, protect or enhance wildlife habitat. Wood Products: If managed wisely, forests can produce a periodic flow of wood products on a sustained basis. Stewardship encompasses finding ways to meet your current needs while protecting the forest’s ecological integrity. In this way, you can harvest timber and generate income without compromising the opportunities of future generations. Massachusetts forests grow many highly valued species (white pine, red oak, sugar maple, white ash, and black cherry) whose lumber is sold throughout the world. Other lower valued species (hemlock, birch, beech, red maple) are marketed locally or regionally, and become products like pallets, pulpwood, firewood, and lumber. These products and their associated value-added industries contribute between 200 and 300 million dollars annually to the Massachusetts economy. By growing and selling wood products in a responsible way you are helping to our society’s demand for these goods. Harvesting from sustainably managed woodlands − rather than from unmanaged or poorly managed forest – benefits the public in a multitude of ways. The sale of timber, pulpwood, and firewood also provides periodic income that you can reinvest in the property, increasing its value and helping you meet your long-term goals. Producing wood products helps defray the costs of owning woodland, and helps private landowners keep their forestland undeveloped. Cultural Resources: Cultural resources are the places containing evidence of people who once lived in the area. Whether a Native American village from 1,700 years ago, or the remains of a farmstead from the 1800’s, these features all tell important and interesting stories about the landscape, and should be protected from damage or loss. Massachusetts has a long and diverse history of human habitation and use. Native American tribes first took advantage of the natural bounty of this area over 10,000 years ago. Many of these villages were located along the coasts and rivers of the state. The interior woodlands were also used for hunting, traveling, and temporary camps. Signs of these activities are difficult to find in today’s forests. They were obscured by the dramatic landscape impacts brought by European settlers as they swept over the area in the 17th and 18th centuries. By the middle 1800’s, more than 70% of the forests of Massachusetts had been cleared for crops and pastureland. Houses, barns, wells, fences, mills, and roads were all constructed as woodlands were converted for agricultural production. But when the Erie Canal connected the Midwest with the eastern cities, New England farms were abandoned for the more productive land in the Ohio River valley, and the landscape began to revert to forest. Many of the abandoned buildings were disassembled and moved, but the supporting stonework and other changes to the landscape can be easily seen today. One particularly ubiquitous legacy of this period is stone walls. Most were constructed between 1810 and 1840 as stone fences (wooden fence rails had become scarce) to enclose sheep within pastures, or to Page ____ of ____ exclude them from croplands and hayfields. Clues to their purpose are found in their construction. Walls that surrounded pasture areas were comprised mostly of large stones, while walls abutting former cropland accumulated many small stones as farmers cleared rocks turned up by their plows. Other cultural features to look for include cellar holes, wells, old roads and even old trash dumps. History of Natural Disturbance: As noted above, the mid 19th century was the height of forestland clearing for agriculture and pasturing. The availability of richer, more productive farmland in the Midwest resulted in farm abandonment and subsequent regrowth of white pine, chestnut, and mixed hardwoods including red oak. In the early 20th century these stands, particularly white pine, were cut to supply the wood container industry. Farm activity on the newly cleared land was truncated by World Wars I and II and brought about another wave of farm abandonment and regrowth. Natural disturbances since 1900 include the Chestnut blight of 1900-1908, the hurricane of 1938, the Gypsy Moth outbreak of 1980-1982, wind events, and ice damage, most notably in December 2008. Recreation and Aesthetic Considerations: Recreational opportunities and aesthetic quality are the most important values for many forest landowners, and represent valid goals in and of themselves. Removing interfering vegetation can open a vista or highlight a beautiful tree, for example. When a landowner’s goals include timber, thoughtful forest management can be used to accomplish silvicultural objectives while also reaching recreational and/or aesthetic objectives. For example, logging trails might be designed to provide a network of cross-country ski trails that lead through a variety of habitats and reveal points of interest. If aesthetics is a concern and you are planning a timber harvest, obtain a copy of this excellent booklet: A Guide to Logging Aesthetics: Practical Tips for Loggers, Foresters & Landowners, by Geoffrey T. Jones, 1993. (Available from the Northeast Regional Agricultural Engineering Service, (607) 255-7654, for $7). Work closely with your consultant to make sure the aesthetic standards you want are included in the contract and that the logger selected to do the job executes it properly. The time you take to plan ahead of the job will reward you and your family many times over with a fuller enjoyment of your forest, now and well into the future. Invasive Species Management: Invasive species pose immediate and long-term threats to the woodlands of MA. Defined as a non-native species whose introduction does or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human, animal, or plant health, invasives are well- adapted to a variety of environmental conditions, out-compete more desirable native species, and often create monocultures devoid of biological diversity. The websites of the Invasive Plant Atlas of New England, www.nbii-nin.ciesin.columbia.edu/ipane, and the New England Wildflower Society, Page ____ of ____ www.newfs.org are excellent sources of information regarding the identification and management of invasive plants. Some of the common invasive plants found in MA are listed below. • Oriental Bittersweet (Celastrus orbiculata) • Glossy Buckthorn (Frangula alnus) • Multiflora Rose (Rosa multiflora) • Japanese Barberry (Berbis thunbergii) • Japanese Knotweed (Fallopia japonica) • Autumn Olive (Eleaeagnus umbellata) Early detection and the initiation of control methods soon after detection are critical to suppressing the spread of invasive species. Selective application of the proper herbicide is often the most effective control method. See the next section for information on the use of chemicals in forest management activities. Asian Longhorned Beetle Pesticide Use Pesticides such as herbicides, insecticides, fungicides, and rodenticides are used to control “pests”. A pest is any mammal, bird, invertebrate, plant, fungi, bacteria or virus deemed injurious to humans and/or other mammals, birds, plants, etc. The most common forest management use of a pesticide by woodland owners is the application of herbicide to combat invasive species. MA DCR suggests using a management system(s) that promotes the development and adoption of environmentally friendly no- chemical methods of pest management that strives to avoid the use of chemical pesticides. If chemicals are used, proper equipment and training should be utilized to minimize health and environmental risks. In Massachusetts, the application of pesticides is regulated by the MA Pesticide Control Board. For more information, contact MA Department of Agricultural Resources (MDAR), Pesticide Bureau at (617) 626-1776 Please refer to FSC Pesticides Policy: Guidance on Implementation (FSC-GUI30-001 Version 2-0 EN, May 5, 2007) for information on chemicals banned from use on MA Private Lands Group Certification member properties. Page ____ of ____ This is your Stewardship Plan. It is based on the goals that you have identified. The final success of your Stewardship Plan will be determined first, by how well you are able to identify and define your goals, and second, by the support you find and the resources you commit to implement each step. It can be helpful and enjoyable to visit other properties to sample the range of management activities and see the accomplishments of others. This may help you visualize the outcome of alternative management decisions and can either stimulate new ideas or confirm your own personal philosophies. Don’t hesitate to express your thoughts, concerns, and ideas. Keep asking questions! Please be involved and enjoy the fact that you are the steward of a very special place. STAND DESCRIPTIONS Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Stand Descriptions Page 1 Notes Applying to All Stands Maps: Please refer to the attached Locus Map and Forest Stand and Boundary Map. The sources for the map are provided on each of the two maps. Boundaries: The external boundaries of the property are documented in surveys referenced in the Forest Stand and Boundary Map. The Burts Bog parcel has roughly 100 abutters. The Southern Mineral Hills parcel has about 15 abutters. Boundary marking is recommended to clarify the location of the boundaries on the ground and to serve as a basis for property management, monitoring, and for dealing with encroachment (see Management Practices section) Field method for volume per acre: In all stands a nested point-sampling cruise was conducted using a BAF-20 prism for “count trees” and a BAF 20 prism for volume trees (diameter and height) (see “Using a large-angle gauge to select trees for measurement in variable plot sampling”, Marshall, Lles and Bell, Canadian Journal of Forest Research 34: 840-845 (2004)). Product volumes were calculated using Forest Metrix, a forestry software package. Results are reported in the Stand Overview table below. Stand delineation, acreage and type classification: Stand delineations are based broadly on forest or habitat type but are designed with the purpose of organizing the forest into practical management units that are recognizable on the ground. For CH 61 plans, acreages are calculated using available maps and resources and then rectified to match Assessors’ acreages. A forest type (e.g. white pine and hardwoods, oak and hardwoods, etc.) is provided as a broad “best fit” for each stand. Unique and noteworthy areas occurring within a stand are described as inclusions Overview of Soil Types and Productivity: The USDA NRCS Web Soil Survey indicates a number of soil types for each property, based parent material and on drainage. These affects what kinds of trees grow and how well they grow, as well as how operable the site is for logging at various times of year. Soils are further discussed below. Soil productivity is represented by a rough measure of soil fertility for species-specific tree growth called site index. The site index is considered to be the height, in feet, of a vigorous, free-to-grow tree at age 50. A higher site index represents greater soil fertility for the species in question. Site indices published in the USDA NRCS Web Soil Survey are used here and will be further discussed as needed in each stand section below. Southern Mineral Hills Stand 1: Hinckley loamy sand: consists of loose sandy and gravelly glaciofluvial deposits. Depth to a root restrictive layer is greater than 60 inches. The natural drainage class is excessively drained. Site index white pine 60, red oak 49. Walpole fine sandy loam: consists of sandy glaciofluvial deposits. Depth to a root restrictive layer is greater than 60 inches. The natural drainage class is poorly drained. Site index white pine 68, red maple 75. Stand 2: STAND DESCRIPTIONS Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Stand Descriptions Page 2 Merrimac fine sand loam: this soil formed in outwash plains and consists of friable loamy eolian deposits over loose sandy glaciofluvial deposits derived from granite and gneiss. Depth to a root restrictive layer is greater than 60 inches. The natural drainage class is somewhat excessively drained. Site index white pine 64, red oak 51. Stand 3: Gloucester fine sandy loam: consists of friable sandy eolian deposits over friable sandy basal till derived from granite and gneiss. Depth to a root restrictive layer is greater than 60 inches. The natural drainage class is somewhat excessively drained. Site index white pine 61, red oak 60. Stand 4: Charlton fine sandy loam: consists of friable loamy eolian deposits over friable loamy basal till derived from granite and gneiss. Depth to a root restrictive layer is greater than 60 inches. The natural drainage class is well drained. Site index white pine 65, red oak 65. Charlton rock outcrop: consists Charlton soil, bare rock outcrops, and friable loamy basal till over granite and gneiss. Depth to a root restrictive layer, bedrock, lithic, is 10 to 20 inches. The natural drainage class is well drained. Site index white pine 65, red oak 65 to white pine 55, red oak 47. Stand 5: Gloucester fine sandy loam: consists of friable sandy eolian deposits over friable sandy basal till derived from granite and gneiss. Depth to a root restrictive layer is greater than 60 inches. The natural drainage class is somewhat excessively drained. Site index white pine 61, red oak 60. Walpole fine sandy loam: consists of sandy glaciofluvial deposits. Depth to a root restrictive layer is greater than 60 inches. The natural drainage class is poorly drained. Site index white pine 68, red maple 75. Forest health: The fundamental processes that create and sustain forests are still intact even as individual species suffer from an onslaught of introduced pests. Pests of white pine, hemlock, and ash are discussed below. Gypsy moth, a pest of oaks and other hardwoods, is making a come back. None of these pests can be thought of as “welcome”, yet there may be more serious threats to forest health caused by excessive browsing by overabundant deer (reducing native plant diversity and restricting the ability of the forest to replenish its stock of trees), direct competition from non-native invasive plants (which also reduce native plant diversity and restrict the ability of the forest to replenish its stock of trees while, at the same time, offering a poor substitute for food and as foraging substrates for native birds and other wildlife), and direct destruction of the forest by human activities such as development and the encroaching creep of edge effects (see discussion of fragmentation pressure) from edge areas into adjacent intact areas. Needle cast syndrome and Caliciopsis canker in white pine: In June of 2016, a stunning browning and dropping of pine needles was observed throughout the region. This turned out to be the effect STAND DESCRIPTIONS Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Stand Descriptions Page 3 of a group of fungi known as “needle cast fungi”. These caused existing needles to prematurely break in half or break off altogether, leaving the trees with only their emerging set of new needles. This shocking effect varied in its intensity across the region, and may, due to dry conditions in June 2016, not recur to the same extent in 2017. However, this is unknown. What is known is that, for all pines, needle cast syndrome is a serious health issue. Other than luck of the weather, which determines favorable or unfavorable conditions for the spread and breeding of these fungi, a landowner’s primary option in confronting the prospect of large numbers of unhealthy pine trees is to use thinning to provide better spacing to those pine trees which appear to be on the better half of the health or vigor spectrum, as evidenced by their crowns. Forests in general are subject to chronic overcrowding, with the result that few trees have full, well- developed crowns. Thick, full crowns are associated with better health and vigor. Better spacing around those crowns allows those trees to increase their total photosynthesis, giving them more energy to deal with pests and pathogens. As needles were dropping off white pines it became apparent that there was a second pathogen causing sap to drip out of the upper crowns. This pathogen turned out to be Caliciopsis canker in many cases; this is a canker found on the thinner, younger bark of upper tree crowns as well as on young trees. Many young trees have been devastated by the combination of needle cast fungi and Caliciopsis, often in conjunction with chronic overcrowding. A caveat: while better spacing around tree crowns incresases photosynthesis, it does not guarantee trees can resist the above-mentioned needle cast and Caliciposis. Pests of hemlock: Hemlock in this region is suffering from hemlock woolly adelgid and elongate hemlock scale, which are both introduced insects that weaken trees by their feeding. The infestation is irregular in its distribution: some areas are more advanced than others. Hemlocks infested with one or both of these pests exhibit weak (i.e. thin) crowns. The prognosis for infested hemlocks is that they will continue to become weaker and ultimately die. Presumably, this will be a staggered process, with some trees lasting longer than others. An unrelated pathogen, a stem rot, causes stems of mature hemlocks to snap off at heights of 5’-20’, which can create interesting snags. It is hard to know whether there is any way to address these problems other than to identify vigorous-looking trees and, using thinning where possible, to make sure they are not overcrowded. Emerald ash borer: This exotic beetle is a pest of white ash and other ashes and is expected to cause significant mortality as it spreads throughout Massachusetts. Overall forest condition: The condition of the forest is described in some detail for each stand below. Overall, the major forested stands are in an overcrowded condition that limits the potential vigor and the health and resilience of most trees. One measure of crowdedness is the number of sides of a tree canopy that are free to grow, i.e. not directly shaded by abutting trees. Free to grow data was gathered as part of the inventory and is presented in the table below: STAND DESCRIPTIONS Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Stand Descriptions Page 4 Forest Overstory Crowding # of canopy sides free to grow Burts Bog 1 Burts Bog 3 South Mineral Hills 1 South Mineral Hills 3 South Mineral Hills 4 South Mineral Hills 5 Average Zero sides free to grow 59% 69% 20% 18% 36% 35% 38% 1 side free to grow 21% 15% 55% 58% 54% 37% 43% 2 sides free to grow 11% 12% 15% 18% 9% 20% 14% 3 sides free to grow 7% 1% 10% 1% 0% 8% 4% 4 sides free to grow 2% 2% 0% 5% 0% 0% 1% 100% The table above shows the degree of crowding as measured by free-to-grow rating. Most canopy trees (>80%) are free to grow on zero or one side only. Only 5% of the trees are free to grow on 3 or 4 sides. For most trees, the ability to photosynthesize is greatly compromised by competition from nearby trees. A conventional forestry remedy for this situation would be thinning, which would identify trees to keep and then remove some or all of the competitor trees. The potential to accomplish thinning is greatly restricted by prevailing circumstances such as presumed or actual neighborhood and public aversion to logging and by the necessity of pre-controlling invasive plants in many circumstances. Forest Management Objectives and Desired Future Condition: The main objective is to maintain intact, resilient, fully functioning forest ecosystems and related natural habitats that protect native biodiversity and offer opportunities for passive, non-destructive recreation. The desired future forest will be on one in which this can occur. Specific focal areas are mentioned in the Landowner Goals Section. Challenges and opportunities are discussed in the plan. Major conclusions: The forested and affiliated wetland portions of the Burts Bog Greenway and Southern Mineral are under substantial fragmentation pressure but are surprisingly intact. Invasive plants, encroachments, and excessive browsing by deer are major threats going forward. For the coldwater fishery (Hannum Brook) at Southern Mineral Hills, ATV riding is an issue mainly due to a messy stream crossing. Overall, ATV riding is an issue at Southern Mineral Hills but not Buts Bog at this time. There is also a risk that white pine could dramatically decline in health. The forested portions of these properties have abundant forest habitat favored by breeding birds seeking moderate or minimal levels of canopy disturbance and favoring interior forest situations. However, the availability of large cavity trees and large snags is generally below ideal levels. The forest is generally overcrowded and therefore not in as vigorous and resilient a condition as desired. The overcrowding in Stand 1at Southern Mineral Hills is perhaps a special concern because of the large volume of pine, both live and dead but also in risk of decline due to a combination of factors, including over ¾ of the trees being crowded; the juxtaposition of this stand with the STAND DESCRIPTIONS Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Stand Descriptions Page 5 residential neighborhood presents a special fire and safety risk. Early-successional habitat is generally lacking, with the exception of the Brookwood Marsh at Burts Bog and its immediate perimeter, and an area along Route 66 labeled here as Stand 2 at Southern Mineral Hills. Woodcock were using Stand 2 at Southern Mineral Hills as a singing ground in April, 2017. Marking boundaries, addressing boundary encroachments and improper trail usage, and providing for safe hunting of deer are major recommendations. Stand 2 at Southern Mineral Hills presents a remarkable opportunity to provide high-quality early-successional habitat but comes with the significant challenge of controlling a significant infestation of invasive plants and also the challenge of access to the site once a proposed development is in place and greatly impedes necessary access. Controlling invasives at Stand 2 at Southern Mineral Hills will benefit the coldwater fishery (Hannum Brook) by allowing restoration of forested conditions in the west/north riparian zone, and solving the ATV crossing will reduce unwanted sediment inflows. Overcrowding in in Stand 1at Southern Mineral Hills can be addressed by thinning which should be combined with invasive plant control. In Stands 3, 4 & 5 at Southern Mineral Hills, and in Stands 1 & 3 at Burts Bog, girdling can be used to create more snags as well as to reduce crowding (note: for a trade-off of increased disruption, these objectives can be achieved with logging and also yield money for use in other aspects of managing these properties). For Stand 2 (Brookwood Marsh) at Burts Bog and Stand 4, a suburban peninsula forest, an executive decision is needed as to whether invasive plants and encroachments can be successfully dealt with or whether outcomes at these sites will be left on their current course, which is the slow degradation of habitat. STAND DESCRIPTIONS Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Stand Descriptions Page 6 Overview of Stands: Southern Mineral Hills OBJ Stand Type Acres Size BA Mbf / acre Cords / acre Site Index STEW 1 WP 18.4 13.5 267 30.6 35.6 49 STEW 2 PA 14.8 9.8 55 0.6 11.5 51 STEW 3 BB 21.8 11.3 120 4.9 18.3 60 STEW 4 WH 14.6 9.6 115 4.9 13.7 47-65 STEW 5 WH 19.9 13.7 140 14.9 17.1 60 Total 89.51 Table 1: Basic stand information including objective (OBJ), stand number, stand acreage, stand size (quadratic mean stand diameter), basal area (square feet per acre), timber volume (thousand board feet per acre International ¼” rule), cords of stemwood per acre (1 cord = 128 cubic feet of wood, bark and air) but not including topwood, site index (see explanation in introductory section). \ OBJ Stand Type Acres Size BA Mbf / acre Cords / acre Site Index STEW 1 WP 18.4 13.5 267 30.6 35.6 49 This is a mixed white pine, pitch pine and hardwood (mostly red maple) stand that includes many stupendous old fenceline trees, including a simply gigantic white oak on the north boundary, and many large-crowned white and scarlet oaks along the long N-S boundary with Stand 2. This stand has three main concentrations: ⎯ the southern part is a very dense, tall, mature stand of white pine with a thick hardwood seedling/sapling understory with white oak, red maple, sugar maple, black birch and other hardwoods. The white pine is a two-age mix with very huge relic trees (>40” diameter) and a dense in-filling between them of tall timber trees 12”-26”. This is an overcrowded stand with snags beginning to form due to competition. Bittersweet is present, climbing up some of the hardwood saplings; though not free to grow now, it will only get worse with time, and will aggressively grow into any blowdowns or other disturbances. If bittersweet were not present, it would be possible and desirable to release some of the regeneration. ⎯ the central part is a tall, dense mix of maturing white pine and pitch pine that is overcrowded and also has a thick hardwood seedling/sapling understory with white oak, red maple, sugar maple, black birch and other hardwoods. The abundance of pitch pine makes this stand somewhat unique. There is a significant amount of deadwood on the ground (mostly trees <10” in diameter that died presumably due to self- thinning) and this could constitute a fire hazard, especially if factors such as overcrowding, drought and pests of pine cause appreciable mortality. Most of the pitch pine show beetle emergence holes, which means that the trees are under some level of attack. The overstory trees are, remarkably for their size, only in the 50-60-year age range. I was able to count rings on some nearby stumps that seem to have come from the same run of forest. A thinning to improve stand vigor and reduce fire risk is advisable in this trult overcrowded area. With the residential neighborhood directly adjacent, and more housing to be built, this STAND DESCRIPTIONS Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Stand Descriptions Page 7 would not be a good place to have a large build up of hazardous dead trees or flammable woody material on the ground. ⎯ the northern part is a mix of mature white pine and minor pitch pine with a significant amount of red maples in the 8”-12” range (with maples up to 17”) bordered on the west and north by the gigantic fenceline trees mentioned above. The central part of the stand seems surprisingly wet, with small puddles of standing water that linger after the rest of the stand has dried up following an April rainstorm. Notable inclusions: 1) The fenceline (mentioned above) is an area that can be appreciated in its own right. These trees would become visible if the proposed early-successional management in Stand 2 is carried out, and it would be very impressive. 2) There is a major infestation of bittersweet, with large vines, in the small wetland on the south boundary (this area is lumped in with Stand 2). This problem area will only get worse with time, and seeds produced here will be carried by birds to surrounding stands, undermining efforts to manage and preserve the land. Birds: this stand has habitat features attractive to birds seeking both closed canopy forest structure and moderate disturbance structure (see chart), including those birds seeking a softwood component or a midstory of laurel. Large cavity trees and snags are not abundant. This stand would also be especially attractive to brown creeper and pine warbler. Management: thinning to improve vigor and reduce hazards, and control of invasive plants is recommended (see Management Practices section) STAND DESCRIPTIONS Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Stand Descriptions Page 8 OBJ Stand Type Acres Size BA Mbf / acre Cords / acre Site Index STEW 2 PA 14.8 9.8 55 0,6 11.5 51 This is a former field with wet soil that has been taken over primarily by vigorous poplar reaching 40’-60’ in height and 6”-11” in diameter, with some paper birch and black birch, and, in some areas, by scraggly white pine up to about 30’ and 6”-12” diameter. In many areas, invasive plants are well established and dominant, especially large, thick-stemmed autumn olive (which seems to have been brish hogged in the past but, ultimately, allowed to regrow), multiflora rose, and bittersweet, which are displacing native plants (also found here) such as dogwood and spirea. Japanese knotweed is established near the stream. ATV tracks come off Rte 66 and head straight into the stand. The ATV trail approaches Hannum Brook from the east by a long, muddy, poorly-conceived crossing. The ground is better on the western side. Two male woodcocks were singing in the southern portion of this stand at around 7:30 p.m. on 4/3/2017. Notable inclusions: 1) A swamp next to Rte 66 classified by DEP as a shrub swamp but is no longer so; instead, this is currently a tall poplar swamp. On the north side of Rte 66 there is a vernal pool which had wood frogs and spring peepers calling on 4/3/2017. There is a pipe under Rte 66 that probably flows from N to S. 2) A gigantic shagbark hickory (>40”) was observed at the edge of Hannum Brook (see map). 3) A gigantic white pine (>40”) near the southern boundary of this stand, just east of the old manmade pond. (see map). Birds: this stand has habitat features attractive to birds seeking both early-successional canopy forest structure and moderate disturbance structure (see chart), including woodcock (two males were singing here on 4/3/2017). This stand is in a transition from early-successional to closed canopy forest ⎯ areas with native vegetation are becoming closed-canopy, whereas areas dominated by invasive plant are still in a scrubby stage with no tall overstory. With its high poplar component, this stand has significant potential for a project that would enhance early successional habitat. Management: major creation/restoration of early-successional habitat using logging/mulch-mowing and invasive species control is recommended (see Management Practices section). The presence of abundant poplar is fortuitous because it could be expected to sprout back vigorously after cutting or mulch-mowing. Without management, the invasive plants will continue to increase. STAND DESCRIPTIONS Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Stand Descriptions Page 9 OBJ Stand Type Acres Size BA Mbf / acre Cords / acre Site Index STEW 3 BB 21.8 11.3 120 4.9 18.3 60 Set on a wet hillside, this is a mature hardwood stand that is a hybrid mix of northern hardwoods, red maples in a wetland setting, and red oaks, with a pocket of shagbark hickory. Most of the red oaks were cut a few decades ago (the stumps are visible but very rotted, all the logging slash is gone but there are many ruts), giving the stand its present composition. One very notable feature of this stand, given the intense fragmentation of the surrounding landscape, is its remarkable lack of non-native invasive plants. Many woody invasive plants seem to thrive on soils such as this and so this invasives-free condition may not persist. The one exception is mentioned below and is cause for concern. A rock dust path winds from the culdesac toward the northern boundary and then dead ends at the wetland “bottleneck” connecting to Stands 1 & 2. Notable inclusions: 1) Very large white pines in the small dogleg on the northern boundary. The pines are 25”-35” in diameter and have good spacing due to past thinning. Mixed in are tall midstory hemlocks and a number of large hardwoods, mostly black birch and red maple, with one black birch being a giant, 40”-diameter 2-stem tree. 2) A hummocky hardwood swamp along the eastern boundary with red maple as the dominant tree – some of which are in the 20”-22” range – with yellow birch, hemlock and elm that mostly occur as slender midstory trees, though some yellow birch were as large as 16” diameter. There is a nice shrub layer with musclewood and winterberry and a few slender black gum trees and mossy rotten logs. 3) Very nice northern hardwoods along the eastern edge of the swamp. It appears that the oak- logging of the past stopped short of the top of the bank heading down into the swamp and left a nice, mixed stand of 16”-22” black birch, red oak, red maple, yellow birch, sugar maple and a few ash. Not surprisingly, at the toe of a slope, these trees are decidedly taller than the general run of hardwood heights in the stand. 4) A grove of about a dozen shagbark hickories hickories up to about 16” diameter occurring in a defined grove with a pignut hickory as well. 5) INVASIVES:A younger “patch” of tall black and paper birch saplings just east of the culdesac that has mostly ben pulled down by grapes and has filled in with multiflora rose and incipient bittersweet. This area is a problem because it threatens, over time, to contaminate surrounding areas that are free of invasives. This area may be off the property, but, if so, it should be addressed together with the abutter to prevent it from becoming a further nuisance. Birds: this stand has habitat features attractive to birds seeking both closed canopy forest structure and moderate disturbance structure (see chart), including those birds seeking a softwood component or a midstory of laurel. Large cavity trees and snags are not abundant. Management: a minor level of management to create large snags would help in the transition to a more mature stand in the future in which snags will form by partial disturbance and/or senescence (see Management Practices section). STAND DESCRIPTIONS Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Stand Descriptions Page 11 OBJ Stand Type Acres Size BA Mbf / acre Cords / acre Site Index STEW 4 WH 14.6 9.6 115 4.9 13.7 47-65 This is a mature or maturing mix of oaks and white pine with a 3’-6’ mountain laurel understory that is nearly continuous but not (yet) impenetrable in most places. The size of the trees reflects the decreasing fertility of the site from the top to the bottom of the slope: in particular, the oaks, have a somewhat dwarfed and scraggly appearance at the eastern/top end of the stand but are tall and impressive at the bottom of the slope. The oaks tend to be scarlet oak at the top of the slope and red oak at the bottom. Hemlock occurs as a scattered midstory tree with one concentrated occurrence (see below) Notable inclusions: 1) The North Branch of the Manhan River and the cliff and large pine trees. This parcel includes a short stretch of the east bank of the river, and features a dramatic, steep, bare rock cliff with a hemlock and black birch forest type on top and cliffbrake and partridgeberry. The cliff drops down to a small plateau next to the river. At the north end of the cliff there are a number of very tall, very large white pines (30”-40” in diameter) and a large hemlock. 2) Black gum-red maple-hemlock vernal pool. Located on the west side of the culdesac, the red and white oak forest runs right up to a sudden transition to hemlock and red maple around the perimeter of the vernal pool with a concentration of black gum in the pool, at the southern end of it and red maple at the northern end, which extends over the property line. 3) A nice beech tree: this tree is located on the west side of the vernal pool and is free of disease. This tree has a pronounced bear claw mark on the NW side. Birds: this stand has habitat features attractive to birds seeking both closed canopy forest structure and moderate disturbance structure (see chart), including those birds seeking a softwood component or a midstory of laurel. Large cavity trees and snags are not abundant. Management: same recommendation as for Stand 3. STAND DESCRIPTIONS Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Stand Descriptions Page 12 OBJ Stand Type Acres Size BA Mbf / acre Cords / acre Site Index STEW 5 WH 19.9 13.7 140 14.9 17.1 60 This is a wonderful, intact stand of mature white pine, often with a scattered, tall hemlock midstory (and a few scattered overstory hemlocks), and or mature scarlet oak. The pine and the oak tend to occur in separate concentrations within the stand. Other hardwoods co-occurring include red oak, white oak, red maple, white ash, poplar and shagbark hickory (see below). Many very old, rotten stumps indicate a thinning that took place decades ago and which helped provide growing space for many of the overstory trees. In a few small pockets there are pole-sized black birches that grew into a gap created by past logging. At that time, the overstory canopy would have fallen in the 30%-80% closed range but now it is <80% closed. The midstory consists of witch hazel and mountain laurel and many hemlocks 5’-15’ tall. Tree regeneration was lacking, other than scattered pine saplings (1” diameter) under concentrations of scarlet oak. Understory vegetation includes lowbush blueberry and, near the stream, Xmas fern. Japanese barberry is a minor component near the stream. Notable inclusions: 1) A hummocky wetland with yellow birch (up to 16” diameter), red maple, hemlock and a minor amount of elm and black gum, with winterberry and cinnamon fern. 2) A small concentration of shagbark hickories across the stream from the location of a gigantic shagbark hickory in Stand 2. 3) The riparian area of Hannum Brook, which includes yellow birch and shagbark hickory as well as an old, fieldstone dam that was used to form a small pond that is now a swampy area overgrown with multiflora rose. The ATV trail crosses the brook in a very sloppy, muddy ford, allowing sediment to flow and/or be sloshed into the brook. As a coldwater fishery, an approach that protects the riparian area from invasive plants, keeps the riparian area shaded, prevents sediment inflows into the stream from ATV trails, and allows large coarse woody debris to form and fall into the brook will help sustain this resource into the future. Birds: this stand has habitat features attractive to birds seeking both closed canopy forest structure and moderate disturbance structure (see chart), including those birds seeking a softwood component. Brown creeper was heard singing (4/2017). Large cavity trees and snags are not abundant. Management: same recommendation as for Stand 3. MANAGEMENT PRACTICES to be done within next 10 years Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Management Practices Page 1 Management Recommendations 2017-2027 Harvesting recommendations are listed immediately below and all other management recommendations are listed in the following tables and are explained further below if/as needed. Harvesting 2017-2027: Southern Mineral Hills Stand Type Silviculture (harvesting) Acres to Cut BA to Cut Mbf to Cut Cords wood to Cut Cords pulp & chips to Cut Timing* 1 OM Thin 15 70 75 0 250 2017/18 Practice purpose (how it helps create desired future condition) This cutting is only recommended as a way of reducing the build up of standing and downed dead wood and of improving stand vigor in this residential edge area. This cutting is not recommended without the concurrent control of invasive plants. Trees to be removed & retained (types, conditions, sizes): Trees with very thin crowns indicating poor vigor would be cut so that nearby trees with better crowns could become more vigorous. Most trees to keep and cut would be white pine and pitch pine. Special soil considerations (erosion, seasonal timing, cultural, etc.): Downed woody material and snags, which are normally appreciated for their habitat and soil-building qualities, are likely to become a risk and a nuisance in this setting. A logging system that can reduce this as much as possible would be best. Other considerations (access, outreach, etc): The City currently does not seem to have good access to the property for purposes of logging (there is a nice road on dry ground, but this land is not owned by the City. The City will need to obtain permission from one of the abutters to allow the logging. Because this cutting will involve chipping (a loud activity) and 18 wheelers coming and going, it would be good to have the landing well away from the houses. MANAGEMENT PRACTICES to be done within next 10 years Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Management Practices Page 2 It would probably be a good idea to reach out to the neighborhood in a number of ways, including a field trip, to give people a chance to understand what to expect and why the City would be doing this. Stand Type Silviculture (harvesting) Acres to Cut BA to Cut Mbf to Cut Cords wood to Cut Cords pulp & chips to Cut Timing* 2 PA coppice 14.8 55 9 0 170 2017/18 Practice purpose (how it helps create desired future condition) This cutting involves removing most of the overstory. It will seem to be a clearcut, but, technically, is it a coppice cut because we do not expect most of the regeneration to come from seed; rather, we expect it to come from vigorous root suckering of poplar. This cut is recommended as a way of restoring early-successional habitat but also as part of a larger plan to control invasive plants and restore the riparian area along the east side Hannum Brook so that, someday, native forest can provide the conditions that are best for coldwater fishery habitat. This cut is recommended in conjunction with mulch-mowing of all the scrubby pines and invasive plants that dominate, especially in the southern part of the stand. Invasive plant control is a necessary component of this as well. This cutting is not recommended without the concurrent mulching and control of invasive plants. Without all three components, it would be better to let the poplars mature. Trees to be removed & retained (types, conditions, sizes): Remove as much of the overstory as possible and as regulatory setbacks and restrictions will allow. Special soil considerations (erosion, seasonal timing, cultural, etc.): Some areas of the stand are wet; logging needs to be restricted to stable ground conditions. Other considerations (access, outreach, etc): Same as Stand 1 (Please see above). Also, as an enhancement to the riparian zone, logging equipment could be used to place large woody material near the stream MANAGEMENT PRACTICES to be done within next 10 years Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Management Practices Page 3 General Ownership Practices (BB = Burts Bog, SM = Southern Mineral Hills) Practice Stand(s) OBJ Recommendation Economic Area Timing A BB & SM STEW Boundaries: Mark External Boundaries net cost entire external boundary 2017/ 2018 B BB & SM STEW Trail signs: Place signs at trailheads and mark trails as appropriate. net cost at appropriate locations 2017/ 2018 C BB (SM) STEW Encroachments: identify encroachments and take steps to resolve. Monitor boundaries for future encroachments. net cost entire external boundary 2017/ 2018 and ongoing D SM (BB) STEW Off-road vehicle usage: identify non- allowed vehicle use and take steps to resolve. Monitor usage. net cost entire external boundary but especially at known access points 2017/ 2018 and ongoing E BB & SM (see next section) STEW Invasive plants: identify and treat invasive plants. Monitor treatment outcomes and monitor/scout for new infestations. net cost entire property including external boundary but especially at known infestation sites 2017/ 2018 and ongoing G neighbor- hood of BB (SM) STEW Invasive plants: conduct outreach and assistance with the intention of working with immediate abutters on a voluntary basis to eliminate invasive plant seed sources from abutting and nearby properties as well as from semi- public areas such as cul-de-sac islands (e.g. burning bush). net cost entire property including external boundary but especially at known infestation sites 2017/ 2018 and ongoing MANAGEMENT PRACTICES to be done within next 10 years Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Management Practices Page 4 SM Stand 1 STEW Alter trail so that it does not cross Hannum Brook net cost Stand 1 2017/ 2018 No further discussion needed. Stand-Level Invasive Plant Practices Practice Stand(s) OBJ Recommendation Economic Area Timing F Stand 2 (and 1) at SM STEW Invasive plants: treat invasive plants in specific problem areas identified by this plan. Monitor treatment outcomes and monitor/scout for satellite infestations. net cost ca. 32 acres (14.8 heavy and 18.4 light) 2017/ 2018 and ongoing See further discussion above in section on harvesting. MANAGEMENT PRACTICES to be done within next 10 years Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Management Practices Page 5 Resiliency-Specific Management Practices Practice Stand(s) OBJ Recommendation Economic Area Timing R1 BB 1 & 3, SM 3 & 4 STEW Promote locally uncommon tree species (e.g. swamp white oak, pitch pine, shagbark hickory, etc.) by girdling competitors net cost spot basis around established trees such as pitch pine, black gum swamp white oak 2017- 2018 R1 BB 1 & 3, SM 3 & 4 STEW Promote general overstory vigor and the development of large-crowned, healthy trees by logging (thinning) or by girdling competitors net cost spot basis can be done as cut & leave or as very light logging e.g. with horses 2017- 2018 R1 SM 1 STEW Promote coldwater fisheries habitat by girdling scattered large trees in the riparian zone with the intention of letting these fall into the brook net cost spot basis 2017- 2018 B2 property STEW Promote native understory diversity by hunting deer to reduce browsing pressure net cost areas to be determined ongoing All of these practices are presented for consideration. Girdling guidelines can be developed as needed and should be based on information presented on snags in the Bird Habitat overview section. MANAGEMENT PRACTICES to be done within next 10 years Town(s) Northampton Owner(s) City of Northampton Management Practices Page 6 Bird-Specific Management Practices Practice Stand(s) OBJ Recommendation Economic Area Timing B1 BB 1 & 3; SM 3 STEW Snag creation including large snag creation net cost spot basis; can be done in conjunction with very light logging e.g. with horses 2017- 2018 B2 SM 2 STEW Create early successional habitat by cutting all vegetation and promoting the thick resprouting of poplar net cost 14.8 acres 2017- 2018 See harvesting recommendations. Forest Health Management Practices Practice Stand(s) OBJ Recommendation Economic Area Timing H1 SM 1 STEW Reduce overcrowding by thinning overstory, ideally with slash removal neutral or net gain ca. 15 acres 2017/ 2018 See harvesting recommendations. Rte 66 Burts Pit Rd Locus Map showing 1-‐mile habitat zone around 3 Northampton proper?es Map by michael mauri LF 5/5/2017, data from MassGIS layers, light parcels are open space Revised May 2009 Signature Page Please check each box that applies. CH. 61/61A Management Plan I attest that I am familiar with and will be bound by all applicable Federal, State, and Local environmental laws and /or rules and regulations of the Department of Conservation and Recreation. I further understand that in the event that I convey all or any portion of this land during the period of classification, I am under obligation to notify the grantee(s) of all obligations of this plan which become his/hers to perform and will notify the Department of Conservation and Recreation of said change of ownership. Forest Stewardship Plan. When undertaking management activities, I pledge to abide by the management provisions of this Stewardship Management Plan during the ten year period following approval. I understand that in the event that I convey all or a portion of the land described in this plan during the period of the plan, I will notify the Department of Conservation and Recreation of this change in ownership. Green Certification. I pledge to abide by the FSC Northeast Regional Standards and MA private lands group certification for a period of five years. To be eligible for Green Certification you must also check the box below. Tax considerations. I attest that I am the registered owner of this property and have paid any and all applicable taxes, including outstanding balances, on this property. Signed under the pains of perjury: Owner(s) Date Owner(s) Date I attest that I have prepared this plan in good faith to reflect the landowner's interest. Plan Preparer Date I attest that the plan satisfactorily meets the requirements of CH61/61A and/or the Forest Stewardship Program. Approved, Service Forester Date Approved, Regional Supervisor Date Owner(s) City of Northampton Town(s) Northampton SOUTHERN MIN. Page – of In the event of a change of ownership of all or part of the property, the new owner must file an amended Ch. 61/61A plan within 90 days from the transfer of title to insure continuation of Ch. 61/61A classification.