SERIES: DIMINISHED TREE SPECIES Virginia Round-leaf Birch & Atlantic White Cedar RESEARCH & RESTORATION FALL 2024
Fall 2024 Volume LXXX, Number 4 Magazine Editorial Committee Anne Beals (Chairman), Spotsylvania Justin Barnes, Shipman Carolyn Copenheaver, Blacksburg Matt Dowdy, Louisa Glenda Parrish, Edenton, NC Fred Schatzki, Troy Luke Shenk, Powhatan Corydon Swift-Turner, Charlottesville Anitra Webster, Lynchburg Lesha L. Berkel (Editor) S. Chesterfield Advertising and Design William Hutabarat Advertising Sales Hope Sudol Design & Layout For advertising opportunities contact Big Red M or [email protected]. A unifying voice for Virginia’s forestry community. 3808 AUGUSTA AVENUE RICHMOND, VA 23230 (804) 278-8733 [email protected] VISIT US ONLINE www.vaforestry.org Virginia Forests Virginia Forests magazine is published quarterly by the Virginia Forestry Association, 3808 Augusta Avenue, Richmond, VA 23230-3910. Subscription is by membership in the Association with annual dues ranging upward from a minimum of $65 for individuals. Extra copies at $3.00. Advertising rates upon request. The sole criterion for publication in Virginia Forests is that material be sound and informative. All opinions expressed are those of the individual authors and not necessarily those of Virginia Forests or the Virginia Forestry Association. The Association does not pay for materials used. A cumulative index of Virginia Forests is maintained at VFA headquarters. Copyright © 2024 by the Virginia Forestry Association. ISSN 0740-011X. 6 Recovery Efforts for the Endangered Virginia Round-leaf Birch by Terry Sharik 12 Atlantic White Cedar: Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow by Fred Schatzki 16 Building Your Business Success: VFA’s Forest Leadership Retreat by Luke Shenk 18 Generation NEXT Update: Helping Forest Landowners Prepare for the Future of Their Woodland Legacy by Karen Snape CONTENTS SERIES: DIMINISHED TREE SPECIES Virginia Round-leaf Birch & Atlantic White Cedar RESEARCH & RESTORATION FALL 2024 ON THE COVER: Leaves of round-leaf birch (bottom) and sweet birch (top) on the forest floor in autumn. (PHOTO BY TERRY SHARIK, SEPTEMBER 2024) LEGISLATIVE UPDATE Anxiously Awaiting January, by Kyle Shreve................... 3 PRESIDENT’S COLUMN The Virginia Forestry Foundation is Born, by Chris Harris.................. 5 VIRGINIA CHAPTER, ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTING FORESTERS Minimize Diminution.. . . . . . . . . 21 VIRGINIA FORESTRY EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION UPDATE What Will Your Legacy Be?, by Jim Youngblood ..............22 THE LOGROLL Markets Make the Difference, by Scott Barrett, Ph.D. .......... 23 RESOURCE REVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 DEPARTMENTS Atlantic white cedar near the edge of a bog along the Mount Misery Trail in Brendan T. Byrne State Forest, New Jersey (2013). PHOTO BY FAMARTIN AT WIKIMEDIA COMMONS
2 VIRGINIA FORESTS
Fall 2024 3 The results of our November elections are in, and those those of us engaged in Virginia political affairs are now awaiting another key date: January 8. That’s the date the Virginia General Assembly will return and begin its 2025 session. Preparations are already underway for requests for legislation or items to be included in Virginia’s budget. Legislators will return to Richmond with a $1.2 billion surplus and General Fund revenues exceeding forecast expectations by $601.4 million year-to-date. Much like last year, there will likely be a disagreement between Governor Glenn Youngkin and the Democratically controlled General Assembly about how best to utilize that surplus. The General Assembly must also deal with the devastating impacts of Hurricane Helene on Southwest Virginia. The funding for Southwest Virginia is particularly important for our agriculture and forestry communities. Virginia Cooperative Extension has estimated the agriculture and forestry losses due to the storm at $160 million and climbing. Landowner losses include damage to buildings, land, infrastructure, and crops. The crop numbers include a rough estimate of $24 million in timber damage provided by the Virginia Dept. of Forestry. This effort has spawned a widespread recovery effort, including a special small business loan fund for agricultural producers and USDA Disaster Relief Funding, as well as private relief donations. Virginia Cooperative Extension has set up a relief resource page at ext.vt.edu/hurricane-relief.html for those who may need assistance or want to get involved in helping out. Outside of needed landowner assistance, VFA will once again be advocating for funding for the Forest Sustainability Fund. This novel program, created in 2022, reimburses localities for revenue lost for adopting forest land-use taxation programs. VFA was successful in securing $2.5 million in the first year in the biennium—a record amount of funding—and will be asking for additional funds for the second year. It will also be important to strengthen the recently created Office of Working Lands. This office, housed at the Dept. of Forestry, consolidates the Commonwealth’s conservation programs for both agriculture and forestry and will be vital to preserving our forest resources. The General Assembly will also grapple with balancing our renewable energy goals and conserving our working forests. Several bills were introduced last session to overrule or limit local land-use authority with regards to proposed solar projects. VFA opposed those efforts as local landuse authority should be preserved. However, the association does recognize the need to preserve private property rights and preserve a potential form of revenue for landowners. Tree conservation is also an important tool in accomplishing our Chesapeake Bay Watershed Implementation Plan (WIP) III goals. To date, 90 percent of solar installations have been on farm and forestland with over 60 percent of those being on forestland. A majority have been placed on lands in Southside and across the Piedmont, right in the wood basket of Virginia. The issue will come back in the 2025 General Assembly given the interest in solar facility permitting reform. While the results of the November election are likely to cause some anxiety, your advocates in Richmond are already preparing for that stressful time of year, where legislators return to make decisions on important policy topics that impact our industry. The coming short, 45-day session will be here before you know it. Your Support Can Amplify The Voice of Forestry in Virginia The Virginia Forest Resources Political Action Committee (VAForestPAC) is critical to educating a new generation of public officials on the importance of our industry, our products, our people, and our forest resource to Virginia. VAForestPAC was created to support candidates for elected statewide office who demonstrate understanding and leadership on issues favoring Virginia’s diverse forestry community, namely: promoting the sustainable use and conservation of forest resources to ensure their long-term benefits for all Virginians. Candidates supported by VAForestPAC must value the conservation and sustainable use of forest resources as a driver of ecological, economic, and social prosperity in Virginians. They must further commit to maintaining a climate favorable for forest ownership and the forest industry in the state. Whether you are involved in timber management, harvesting, wood products manufacturing, conservation or another forestryrelated practice, legislation that affects forestry can have a huge influence. Visit www.vaforestry.org/political-action-committee to make your donation today that will help unify and strengthen a voice for forestry in Virginia. VAForestPAC is a non-partisan state PAC that can accept contributions from any U.S. individual, corporation, union, association, or partnership. Anxiously Awaiting January LEGISLATIVE UPDATE Kyle Shreve, Advantus Strategies
4 VIRGINIA FORESTS
W hat began many sunrises ago as a vision of several forward thinking VFA members has finally come to fruition. We are pleased to announce the official establishment of the Virginia Forestry Foundation (VFF), a Virginia nonstock corporation that will serve as a platform for donors to give to support forestry interests in Virginia. The Articles of Incorporation for the VFF were accepted by the Virginia State Corporation Commission on May 3, 2024, and the first organizational meeting of its Board of Directors was held on May 30, 2024. The VFF acts independently from the VFA, but at the pleasure of the VFA Board of Directors. Virginia Forestry Foundation directors are nominated and elected by the VFA Board, and the Foundation officers are appointed from within their own Board. The VFF Board appointed it’s first officers at the May 30, meeting and I’m excited about and extremely confident in the leadership and wisdom of those officers as they lead the effort to get the VFF off the ground. Michael Harold serves as Chairman, Steven Peter is ViceChairman, Dan Hockenberger is Treasurer, and the Secretary (non-voting) role is filled by the Executive Director of Virginia Forestry Association, which allows this individual to conduct the business of the Foundation between meetings. The purposes and objectives of the Virginia Forestry Foundation include: • To promote widespread knowledge of forestry, the benefits of wood utilization, and the contribution of forestry and the forest products industry to the environmental, economic, and social well-being of Virginia’s citizens • To promote and conduct programs to conserve and enhance Virginia’s forest resources • To promote and conduct educational forestry programs and to assist landowners in the stewardship of their forest resources • To promote programs for increasing the knowledge, proficiency, and advancement of logging and natural resource professionals • To promote and conduct programs to develop a qualified workforce for Virginia’s forest-based businesses • To ensure programs and activities of the Foundation support the charitable goals and objectives of the Virginia Forestry Association On August 8, 2024, the IRS officially determined the Virginia Forestry Foundation’s tax exempt status as a 501(c)(3) public charity where donors may make tax-deductible gifts and contributions. In September, VFA hosted the second annual Forest Leadership Retreat (FLR), and it was an outstanding event for our members (Read a recap of the FLR on page 16.) Much was learned and taken away from Wintergreen Mountain by the attendees, but nothing gave me more optimism for the hope and future of forestry in Virginia as the generosity of the FLR attendees whose donations provided funds for the establishment of the VFF bank account with startup seed money. Attendees pledged more than $11,000, and with an extraordinary gesture of generosity and a commitment to the value and importance of this new Foundation, John Magruder of Three Rivers Forestry matched that amount! We are immensely Chris Harris B PRESIDENT’S COLUMN 3808 Augusta Avenue Richmond, VA 23230-3910 Phone: 804-278-8733 • Fax: 804-278-8774 [email protected] • www.vaforestry.org OFFICERS (2024–2025) President Chris Harris Pinecrest Timber Co. Prince George Vice President and President Elect Jay Phaup Greif Packaging LLC Amherst Treasurer Christina Hager Dominion Energy Richmond Past President Dan Hockenberger Virginia Forest Resources, LLC West Point Interim Executive Director Sonnia Montemayor Ashland EX-OFFICIO OFFICERS Paul Winistorfer Virginia Tech—CNRE Blacksburg Rob Farrell Va. Dept. of Forestry Charlottesville DIRECTORS Term Expiring 2025 Ben Cole Cole Timberland Management LLC Appomattox Laurie Wright Wright Forestry LLC Blackridge Term Expiring 2026 Scott Barrett Virginia Tech Blacksburg Eric Goodman WestRock Clarksville Brian Irvine Roseburg Roanoke Rapids, NC John Reid Forest Resources Mgmt. Aylett Term Expiring 2027 Jason Critzer Gaines & Critzer, Ltd. N. Chesterfield Michael Harold Speyside Bourbon Cooperage, Inc. Harrisonburg John E. Jones, III Central VA Land & Timber Montpelior Steven Peter South Paw Forest Products Inc St Stephens Church Doug Pond Nutrien Solutions S. Chesterfield STAFF Sonnia Montemayor, InterimExecutive Director Chris Frost, Operations Assistant The Virginia Forestry Association, chartered in 1943, is a notfor-profit, non-governmental, privately-supported association of forest landowners, wood product industries and businesses, loggers, foresters, forest use groups, and conservation-minded citizens. New board members are elected annually by mail ballot to all VFA members. Any VFA member may be a candidate for the board. Fall 2024 5 —continued on page 28 The Virginia Forestry Foundation is Born
6 VIRGINIA FORESTS RECOVERY EFFORTS FOR THE Endangered Virginia Round-leaf Birch Discovery Our story about the Virginia round-leaf birch, Betula uber (Ashe) Fernald, begins on June 14, 1914, when U.S. Forest Service forester and botanist William Willard Ashe came upon a round-leaved variant of the common black or sweet birch (Betula lenta L) while conducting surveys along the banks of Dickey Creek in Smyth County, Va., at 2,800 ft. in elevation. He named the variant Betula lenta var. uber, but provided no information on the size dimensions or number of individuals in his 1918 published report. Ashe noted that the leaves were quite distinct, being nearly as wide as long with only three to six pairs of primary veins, and nutlets that were narrowly winged, and its bark typical of black or sweet birch with “characteristic birch oil fragrance and flavor,” that is distinctive due to oil of wintergreen. Renowned botanist Merritt Lydon Fernald, director of Harvard University’s Gray Herbarium, later examined the annotated specimens collected by Ashe and noted that he had made reference to the tree being 20–25 ft. high. Fernald, upon examining the specimens more closely, along with specimens of the typical black or sweet birch, concluded that Ashe’s specimens had little in common with the typical sweet or black birch other than aromatic bark, and thus elevated it to the level of a species, naming it Betula uber (Ashe) Fernald and transferring it from the darkbarked tree-birch section of the genus (series Costatae, which included sweet birch and yellow birch [B. alleghaninesis Britton]) to the shrub section (series Humiles). Fernald noted, in particular, the nearly round leaves with a small number of primary veins as compared to sweet birch with its egg-shaped leaves and 10–20 pairs of primary veins. He further observed that the female fruit clusters (i.e., catkins or aments) were more slender in the former species, and the three-lobed bracts of the catkins (each having three winged nutlets at their base) were less elongate and without a prolonged middle lobe compared to B. lenta. Fernald concluded by stating that “It is very important to learn more about B. uber, whether it is shrubby, the range of variation of foliage, the characters of the staminate (male) ament, and its abundance and range.” Loss and Rediscovery In the years that followed Ashe’s discovery, many attempts were made to relocate B. uber with no success, leading the Smithsonian Institute to conclude in its 1974 report on “Endangered and Threatened Plant Species of the United States” that the species was probably extinct. In 1975, the U.S. Department of Interior reached the same conclusion in its report on “Threatened or Endangered Fauna or Flora” in the Federal Register. Around that same time, Peter Mazzeo, research assistant at the U.S. National Arboretum, reported in his paper published in 1974 that an undated collection of the species by H.B. Ayres—that heretofore had not been known—bore the location as Cressy Creek, the watershed just to the east of Dickey Creek. Doug Ogle, a faculty member at nearby Virginia Highlands Community College in Abingdon, Va., read Mazzeo’s account and set out to locate the species through a systematic search along both Dickey and Cressy Creeks. Ogle came upon the species in a mixed deciduous forest along the banks of Cressy Creek on August 22, 1975 at First-year, round-leaf birch seedling (PHOTO BY TERRY SHARIK, SEPT. 4, 2024) By Terry Sharik, Ph.D.
Fall 2024 7 The author standing beside the largest individual of round-leaf birch in the original population. It measures 11.7 inches in diameter and is 74 ft. tall. It is one of only three trees left in the original population, all on public land. (PHOTO BY BOB FORD, JUNE 2014) 2,753 ft. in elevation, a close match to the elevation reported by Ashe in his discovery. It is suspected that Ashe must have been in error in noting the species occurrence along Dickey Creek rather than Cressy Creek where Ogle rediscovered the trees nearly 60 years later. By mid-September of 1975, 12 reproductively mature adults, 1 sapling, and 21 seedlings were reported by Ogle and Mazzeo. The 12 mature trees varied from 25 to 46 ft in height. Diameters at breast height (DBH) ranged from 1.5 to 5.0 in). The trees were reported to occupy a subcanopy layer and often angled to presumably catch more sunlight in small gaps in the overstory. Further reconnaissance of the Cressy Creek population in the spring of 1976 revealed that there were 41 individuals of B. uber in the natural population, extending over a distance of about one-half of a mile along Cressy Creek in a 200 ft.-wide band, including three individuals on the Jefferson National Forest (Mount Rogers National Recreation Area, MRNRA) immediately downstream of the two private landholdings where the remainder of the population occurred. Conservation and Recovery Efforts accelerated in 1977 with the formation of the Betula uber Protection, Management, and Research Coordinating Committee. The committee functioned as an ad hoc “recovery team,” a formal designation recognized by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for endangered species recovery work, with up to 23 members from 10 organizations—including the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), U.S. National Arboretum, USFWS, Virginia Tech, Virginia Highlands Community College, and West Virginia University as well as individuals in private sectors— participating over the next two decades. Later that same year, round-leaf birch was officially listed as “endangered” under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), the first tree to have this designation. One year later, the species was listed as “endangered” under the Virginia Endangered Plant and Insect Act of 1979. The latter would usher in the involvement of the Virginia Dept. of Agriculture and Consumer Services (VDACS). Thus began the collaboration of three government agencies, USFS, USFWS, and VDACS, in the recovery efforts that continue to this day. Collectively, these agencies allocated approximately $277,000 for recovery efforts over the years. The Committee’s early efforts resulted in the formulation of a recovery plan for round-leaf birch that was officially approved by the USFWS in 1982. It was the first recovery plan for a plant species under the federal act and was revised in 1986 and 1990 by the USFWS and the author, respectively. Five-year reviews of the status of the species were conducted by the USFWS in 2006, 2012, and 2020. The overall goal of the plan was to increase the number of round-leaved birches in the wild to a point where the species could be delisted—at the time estimated at 1,000 individual trees in each of ten populations but later revised to include 500 to 1,000 individuals greater than 6.5 ft. in height. To accomplish this goal, actions were put forth in five areas: (1) Maintenance and expansion of the natural population; (2) Establishment of (self-sustaining) additional populations in the wild; (3) Continued searches for other natural populations; (4) Determination of systematic relationships with other birch species; (5) Retention of existing germplasm through cultivation; and (6) Implementation of educational programs. The first action was given the highest priority, followed by actions 2 and 3 (priority 2), then actions 4 and 5 (priority 3), and finally action 6 (priority 4). Space limitations preclude addressing each of the above actions here, so our focus will be on the work toward establishing additional populations given that efforts in this area successfully resulted in the downlisting of the species under the ESA from “endangered” to “threatened” status
8 VIRGINIA FORESTS A typical round-leaf birch progeny population. There are no seedlings or saplings of the species in the understory despite millions of seeds having been deposited on the forest floor over decades. (PHOTO BY TERRY SHARIK, SEPT. 25, 2024) in 1994 and are ongoing today. For greater detail about all of the actions taken for the recovery of round-leaf birch, read “Virginia round-leaf birch (Betula uber) revised recovery plan” published by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Sharik, 1990) at www.fs.usda.gov/wildflowers/Rare_Plants/ profiles/TEP/betula_uber/index.shtml, and explore other related publications cited at the end of this article. Recovery efforts for Virginia round-leaf birch faced several challenges. To place the establishment of additional populations in the wild in context, it is important to note that the original population underwent severe decline—from 41 individuals initially in 1976 to 26 the next year to 10 in 1994 and to just three trees remaining in 2021—with all of this decline occurring on private land. The first wave of decline involved mostly subadults and was largely due to a combination of human factors, including removal of individuals for study and propagation purposes, vandalism, and transplanting of individual trees by one of the private landowners. The second wave of decline included mostly reproductively mature adults and was largely due to natural factors associated with the trees being stressed. The reasons for the third wave are unknown as the population was not monitored closely during this period of time. Notably, the decline occurred despite considerable effort to prevent it, and certainly elevated the need to establish additional populations in the wild. The Recovery Plan, as designed by the Committee, called for the establishment of 10 additional populations (also referred to as progeny populations) in the wild. All were to be on public (USFS) land and confined to the watershed where the original population occurred—but at some distance from it. To be on the safe side, the Committee decided to establish 20 populations across a range of sites where sweet birch was known to occur. Thus, 20 such forested areas in the Cressy Creek watershed were cleared of all woody vegetation, and 96 birch seedlings were planted with spacing that would create a closed canopy of birches and thereby exclude other tree species. The seedlings originated from six open-pollinated, round-leaf mother trees and four sweet birch mother trees in the natural population from seeds germinated in the greenhouse at Virginia Tech’s Homestead Research Center in Critz, Va., in 1982 and held in cultivation for two to three years before out-planting in 1984 and 1985. Additional seeds were germinated in 1985 for out-planting of seedlings in 1986 and 1987. Five populations were established in each of the four years. Individuals of the closely related and widely distributed sweet birch were included to allow for comparisons of growth rates, fruitfulness, and longevity with round-leaf birches. Seventy-four percent of the 1960 transplants were from round-leaved mother trees, and 76 percent had round leaves. Mortality, and to a lesser extent growth rates (diameters and heights) and catkin production, were recorded annually in all populations through 1993 and somewhat less frequently through 2003, followed by a hiatus through 2021 due to a lack of funding. Various methods were used to maximize survival of the trees over the years, including fencing around individuals to preclude browsing,
Fall 2024 9 One of the six areas (each about one-tenth acre) bordering progeny population 3 treated to secure natural regeneration of roundleaf birch. The adult trees providing the seeds are shown in the background. (PHOTO BY BUTCH SHAW, NOVEMBER 2023) mechanical removal of competing vegetation, and targeted application of pesticides to control pests. At the end of the 1987 growing season, survival averaged 81 percent among the 20 populations and ranged from 21–99 percent. The 21 percent was an outlier and occurred in a former pasture area, a last-minute substitute for one of the forested areas, demonstrating that birch seedlings do poorly under such highly exposed, not-forested conditions. In 2023, survival averaged 56 percent and ranged from 2–89 percent. Most of the mortality was due to natural causes, including ice damage, deer-antler rubbing, and competition for space. All of the populations, except for the former pasture area, have birches forming closed canopies, with trees on the best sites (i.e., bottomlands and lower slopes bordering small streams) having diameters exceeding 11 in. and heights in excess of 80 ft. (See the photo on page 8). There were no appreciable differences between round-leaf birch and sweet birch in growth rates or mortality. Virtually all of the mortality recorded since 2021 occurred in trees that were relegated to the understory for various reasons, harking back to what occurred in the original population. The establishment of the additional/progeny populations resulted in the USFWS downlisting round-leaf birch from “endangered” to “threatened” in 1994. In keeping with the Recovery Plan and in order to have the species delisted, the next step was to secure natural regeneration in these populations, which had not occurred as of 2021 despite the trees in these populations having produced billions of seeds over several decades. This was not surprising given what we know about the regeneration of birches (demonstrated in the original population in the 1980s), that regeneration will not occur beneath woody vegetation and with a litter layer on the forest floor associated with this vegetation. Moreover, the exposed forest floor must provide cool, moist conditions over several weeks in the spring—conditions provided by moderate temperatures and well-drained mineral soil, decayed logs, or crevices between rocks—given the tiny seeds with little food reserves and a tiny emerging primary root highly susceptible to desiccation. The emerged seedlings in turn require partial shading, typical of small gaps in the forest or burned over areas. Thus, in 2023 we systematically went about deciding on which populations should be treated to secure this regeneration based on site conditions and the production of male (pollen-bearing) and female (fruit and seed-bearing) reproductive structures. Highest preference would be given to high-quality sites that produced an abundance of both pollen and seeds to maximize the genetic diversity of the resulting seedlings and their survival. Five populations were identified as meeting these criteria, but limited funding only allowed one to be treated. Several areas bordering the selected population were cleared of woody vegetation, and the litter layer was removed using mechanized equipment in mid-November prior to dispersal of the tiny wind-blown seeds in December through February (see the photo above). The intent was to mimic natural disturbances, such as fire, in creating the conditions for optimum seed germination and seedling establishment. The number of birch seeds produced by the population in that year was estimated at 5.6 million. In early September 2024 near the end of the first growing season, we sampled the treated areas for birch regeneration, along with other trees species and substrate conditions. The result was an average of 2.1 birch seedlings per square meter, with 15 percent being positively identified as round-leaf birches and the remainder being largely sweet birch with a few perhaps being yellow birch from wild trees bordering the progeny population. However, with interbreeding and genetic-trait dominance of sweet birch, 15 percent is a conservative estimate as some of the trees appearing to be sweet birch undoubtedly contain round-leaf birch genes. Interestingly, this percentage closely approximates the percentage of adult round-leaved trees in the progeny population and more than twice that in the original population. In total, we found 54 round-leaf birch seedlings, which when extrapolated to the area treated as a whole, is 864 seedlings (of 5,968 total birch seedlings). The area treated is capable of supporting 270 trees at reproductive maturity, a number that seems reachable given normal rates of mortality over time. We will resample the treated areas near the end of the 2025 growing season and take measures to maximize seedling survival, as implemented in the population following its establishment in 1984. One limiting factor was the USFS regulation that no treatments could be implemented within 15 ft. of a streambank in order
10 VIRGINIA FORESTS First-year seedlings of round-leaf birch (at bottom of photo) and sweet birch (at top) in one of the treated areas bordering progeny population 3. (PHOTO BY TERRY SHARIK, SEPT. 2, 2024) Acknowledgements by the author Conservation and recovery efforts over the past nearly half century would not have been possible without the involvement of numerous individuals and organizations, far too numerous to mention here. Key people currently involved in these efforts include Robert Ford, my former graduate student and colleague; Amarilys Irizarry, Virginia Field Office of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Chris Shaw and Brittany Phillips, Mount Rogers National Recreation Area—George Washington/Jefferson National Forests; Keith Tignor, Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services; Kim Shearer, the Morton Arboretum; Vasiliy Lakoba, The American Chestnut Foundation; and Justin Showalter and Butch Shaw, RX Fire Effects. to protect aquatic ecosystems, thereby precluding the most favorable habitat for the regeneration of round-leaf birch, a state endangered and federally threatened tree species. This is a prime example of tradeoffs between conservation efforts. The Future The Virginia round-leaf birch has been in existence for at least a century, with the latter half of that time devoted to its conservation and recovery. While there have been disapointments along the way, there are more individuals in existence today than there were at the time of its rediscovery in 1975 when only 41 individuals were known to exist. Included in this count are the three remaining individuals in the original population, the 824 individuals in the 20 progeny populations, the approximately 864 seedlings originating from planned disturbances bordering one of these progeny populations last fall, 72 trees in the forest reserve at Virginia Tech’s Reynolds Research Station in Critz, Va., and the more than 800 individuals distributed to various botanical gardens, arboreta, nurseries, and academic institutions around the world, and to private citizens. All of this success has gotten us to the point where the species has been downlisted from federally endangered to threatened, and efforts are underway that would result in the species being delisted—the ultimate goal of the Round-leaf Birch Recovery Plan under the Endangered Species Act. Reaching this final goal will require a considerable amount of funding and in-kind contributions from various sources, which is far from a given. As in the past, volunteerism and collaboration will likely play an important role. Readers who may be interested in contributing in some way, be it helping with data collection, identifying possible sources of funding, writing proposals to secure this funding, or publishing the results from this funding, etc., may contact the author by email at [email protected]. References Cited Ashe, W.W. 1918. “Notes on Betula. Rhodora” 20:63-64. Ogle, D.W. and P. M. Mazzeo. 1976. “Betula uber, the Virginia round-leaf birch, rediscovered in southwest Virginia.” Castanea 41:248-256. Sharik, T.L. 1982. “Virginia round-leaf birch recovery plan.” U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 5, Newton Corner, MA. Sharik, T.L., P.P. Feret, and R.W. Dyer. 1990. “Recovery of the endangered Virginia round-leaf birch (Betula uber): A decade of effort.” Pp. 185-188 In R.S. Mitchell, C.J. Sheviak, and D.J. Leopold (eds.) Ecosystem Management: Rare Species and Significant Habitats. Proc. 15th Ann. Natural Areas Conference, June 6-9, 1990. New York State Museum Bulletin 471. https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/ item/228053#page/199/mode/1up. Sharik, T. L. 1990. “Virginia round-leaf birch (Betula uber) revised recovery plan:” (Original approved March 3, 1982; revision approved September 1985). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 5, Newton Corner, MA. 28 p. Approved September 24, 1990. https://www.fs.usda.gov/ wildflowers/Rare_Plants/profiles/TEP/betula_uber/index.shtml. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1986. “Virginia round-leaf birch recovery plan:” (Original approval March 3, 1982). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 5, Newton Corner, MA. 28 p. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2020. “Virginia round-leaf birch (Betula uber) 5-year review: Summary and evaluation.” U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Virginia Field Office, Gloucester, VA. Terry Sharik is emeritus professor and dean in the College of Forest Resources and Environmental Science at Michigan Technological University. He joined the faculty of the School of Forestry and Wildlife Resources at Virginia Tech in December of 1975, four months after the rediscovery of the Virginia roundleaf birch, having recently completed his Ph.D. research at the University of Michigan on the ecological genetics of the darkbarked tree birches in the Appalachians. He became involved in the recovery of the species from the start, in the spring of 1976, and served as the founding chair of the Betula uber (Virginia Round-leaf Birch) Protection, Management, and Research Coordinating Committee, and in 1982 authored the initial version of the Recovery Plan, the first such plan for an endangered plant species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973. Dr. Sharik now resides in southeastern Michigan and since 2021 has traveled to Sugar Grove, Va., two to four times yearly to continue recovery efforts. He can be reached by email at [email protected].
Fall 2024 11
12 VIRGINIA FORESTS Historic Range of Atlantic White Cedar, based on data from E.L., Jr, 1971. Atlas of the United States trees, Vol. 1, conifer and important hardwoods: U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Miscellaneous Publication 1146. Atlantic white cedar, (Chamaecyparis thyoides, a member of the cypress family Cupres sacea), is native to the Atlantic coast, originally found from Georgia to Maine and along the Gulf coast from Florida to Mississippi. Today, while still present across much of its historic range, Atlantic white cedar’s presence is much diminished in our costal forests. Growing up to 90 ft. in height with a DBH up to 30 in., and with a maximum lifespan of about 200 years this tree regularly dominated the forest canopy. The historical estimate of 500,000 acres dominated by Atlantic White Cedar has been reduced to about 100,000 acres Atlantic White Cedar Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow today as a result of habitat loss and prior, unsustainable harvest. Found in coastal swamps and bogs, Atlantic white cedar is commonly associated with red maple (Acer rubrum) and Black gum (Nyssa sylvatica). It thrives on acidic, swampy sites. It reproduces through windborne seeds from cones and does best with an open, debris free forest floor. Swamp microsites are particularly important; the best germination is found on hummocks that lie high enough for the seed to find exposed soil but low enough to provide moisture during dry summer periods to the shallowrooted seedlings. While it is somewhat shade tolerant, it does best on sites with little ground cover or overtopping vegetation. Atlantic White Cedar trees in The Nature Conservancy’s Pemberton Forest Preserve in Delaware. The state’s largest Atlantic White Cedar tree was discovered in this preserve in 2023, which measures 38 inches in diameter and 119 inches in circumference. (©THE NATURE CONSERVANCY) Being shallow rooted, Atlantic white cedar is particularly susceptible to windthrow. Low-level damage from wind or ice disfavors regeneration due to competition from hardwoods, but major damage, such as from hurricanes, tends to favor regeneration of pure stands. Atlantic white cedar can form extremely dense stands, with stocking levels of up to 300 sq. ft. per acre of basal area and 1,700 trees per acre. Mature stands on good sites have been known to contain as much as 110 cords per acre of volume. Interestingly, the highest recorded volumes for Atlantic white cedar were found in the VirginiaNorth Carolina section of its range, from 34 to 37 degrees north latitude. Correspondingly, the highest concentrations of Atlantic white cedar were found in the peat swamps of Virginia and North Carolina, particularly the Great Dismal Swamp. Yesterday Early settlers found that Atlantic white cedar was particularly suited for By Fred Schatzki, VFM Editorial Board
Fall 2024 13 applications requiring light weight, strength, dimensional stability, and decay resistance. Common uses were for shingles, barrels, poles and pilings, house siding, small boats and canoes, and even ice cream tubs. Cedar charcoal was used during the Revolutionary War to make gunpowder. Early on, sites containing Atlantic white cedar were generally held in common, for the public good. Unfortunately, this often led to lack of controls over harvest, and at the time, there was no conception of sustainable harvest. Over-cutting, combined with no provision for regeneration, led to early reductions in range of the species. Technological advances in harvesting in the late 1800s, including steam-powered equipment and dredging (for draining of swamps for access and agriculture), led to accelerated harvest and further reductions in habitat. Fire also played a role. While infrequent, low-intensity fire could be beneficial in reducing forest floor competition, high-intensity fire often resulted in crown fires that killed Atlantic white cedar. Sites that Atlantic white cedar requires were not, by their nature, particularly prone to fire, but when fires did occur, they were often large-scale conflagrations that were devastating; killing both the trees themselves (future seed) and consuming the seed bank in the organic, peaty soils. Harvests accelerated during the late 1800s and early 1900s. For example, the period of 1880 to 1900 saw a harvest of about half the extant Atlantic white cedar range in North Carolina, perhaps as much as 100,000 acres. As the supply of Atlantic white cedar “in the woods” diminished, so did its annual harvest, leading to today’s estimate of approximately 400,000–700,000 board feet per year. A close-up of an Atlantic white cedar tree located at The Nature Conservancy’s restoration site at their Nassawango Creek Preserve. The cedar trees have been planted through an annual school and volunteer tree planting event that has been organized in partnership with the National Aquarium in Baltimore since 2009. (©MATT KANE/TNC) High-intensity fire on sites where Atlantic white cedar grows can result in loss of trees as well as destruction of the seed bank that would help restore the trees in that area. (PHOTO BY FRED SCHATZKI)
14 VIRGINIA FORESTS Today Beginning in the 1980s, recognition of Atlantic white cedar’s diminished status was becoming apparent to non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and forestry agencies. Conservation efforts today can be divided into three broad categories: 1. Habitat Restoration. Conserving the site types required for Atlantic white cedar is critical to the species’ long-term success. Projects aimed at rewetting drained swamps and restoring natural hydrology help protect and expand sites suitable for Atlantic white cedar. Tree planting projects have occurred throughout its range. Seedlings are being produced by at least one state forestry agency, the North Carolina Forest Service, and are available for public purchase. (See https://nc-forestry.stores.turbify. net/ for more information.) 2. Conservation Policies. Both state and federal rules and regulations provide for conservation of Atlantic white cedar habitat. Going back to the Clean Water Act of 1972, projects involving the dredging or filling of wetlands on “waters of the United States” required authorization from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. At the state level, laws such as Virginia’s Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act and policies such as the Coastal Zone Management Program work to protect vital Atlantic white cedar sites from conversion and development. Private landowners recognize the importance of this tree’s habitats and engage in reestablishment projects. NGOs protect sites through purchase or conservation easement, and state and federal parks protect additional lands from encroaching development. 3. Research and Monitoring. Programs by NGOs, state, and federal governments not only map and measure existing stands, but they also provide fundamental research into the silviculture of Atlantic white cedar and the biology of the sites it occupies. The U.S. Forest Service, through the Forest Inventory and Analysis program, incorporates data collection on Atlantic white cedar into its reporting. The North Carolina Forest Service has conducted several studies of Atlantic white cedar and has perfected seedling production (albeit in small quantities). NGOs such as the Atlantic White Cedar Initiative and particularly The Nature Conservancy provide sources of information, public outreach, and restoration work throughout the Atlantic white cedar’s range. Tomorrow Two things are required for the return of Atlantic white cedar to tomorrow’s coastal forests: cooperation of those controlling suitable sites, and replanting the tree itself. Conservation of coastal cypress swamps is paramount in furthering the species. Through state and federal regulation, NGO purchase and easements, and private land ownership, thousands of acres favorable to the These Atlantic white cedar saplings were grown by students in local Maryland schools to be planted at The Nature Conservancy’s Nassawango Creek Preserve as part of their annual planting event, which is organized in partnership with the National Aquarium in Baltimore. These saplings were planted in an area of the preserve that TNC has worked to restore from a former loblolly pine plantation. (©MATT KANE/TNC) expansion of Atlantic white cedar are now protected. Tree planting projects have been undertaken in all states lying within the tree’s native range, with hundreds of thousands of seedlings being planted in the past few decades. Today, while the lumber is produced by a few mills (and the demand for the finished product is high) sources of the raw material are limited. Tomorrow, and in the future, we can expect to see increased supply and greater use of this durable, valuable wood as we walk (or row, or swim!) through majestic canopies of newly established Atlantic white cedar forests throughout its natural range. Fred Schatzki is a Consulting Forester with American Forest Management, Inc., and serves on the Virginia Forestry Association’s Magazine Editorial Committee.
Fall 2024 15
16 VIRGINIA FORESTS Building Your Business Success: VFA’s Forest Leadership Retreat By Luke Shenk Attendees of the second annual Forest Leadership Retreat (FLR) gathered at Wintergreen Resort in September to discuss the dynamics of operating a profitable forestry-related business. The two-day event hosted a variety of business-related presentations that defined the key components for maintaining sustained excellence while leading organizations through an ever-changing landscape. Dave Tenny, president of National Alliance of Forest Owners, discussed big ticket items such as climate change, wildlife habitat, and land degradation in the opening keynote session. “While those in the forest industry are well versed in the vast benefits working forests provide for the climate and countless numbers of wildlife species, what does the rest of the world see?” Tenny asked his audience. Providing an economic overview and addressing the widespread cultural views surrounding the industry, Dave uniquely illustrated how the achievement of positive cultural change goes far beyond, and is sometimes even more significant than, policy change. As working forests are essential to ecological balance and economic stability, advocacy and sustainable practices continue to play an important role in the wellbeing of the forest industry. The remaining sessions focused more keenly on operating a forestryrelated business and dissecting some of the challenges many incur while striving for excellence. Attendees listened to engaging presentations revolving around entrepreneurial business strategy, leadership, and professional growth. From updating your business plan to hiring the right people, many topics were discussed allowing attendees to capitalize on the wealth of knowledge, advice, and information that was shared. Scheduled networking breaks peppered throughout the retreat offered opportunities for more in-depth conversations while catching up with colleagues and friends. Small group discussions allowed participants to share information and talk about successful business strategies that can help meet today’s challenges. A relaxed atmosphere gave everyone the chance for plenty of conversation and relationship-building at the Forest Leadership Retreat.
Fall 2024 17 An evening reception, held in the Hearthside Room, featured live music and tastings of the award-winning whiskey from Virginia Distillery Co. A cozy and inviting atmosphere was embraced by attendees, who enjoyed the opportunity to mingle over delicious food and drinks while listening to the unleashed talents of John Shenk, who entertained the audience with original songs along with well-known favorites from artists like Tyler Childers, Billy Strings, and many more. The whole room was filled with great tunes, laughter, and shop talk as old friends and mentors caught up and new connections and friendships were forged. The second annual Forest Leadership Retreat, organized by the Virginia Forestry Association, fostered an engaging atmosphere that emphasized professional growth and development. This smaller, more intimate event featured a targeted agenda that allowed participants to explore specific topics in greater depth, enhanced their understanding of the forest industry, and better understand the many facets of operating a successful business. The event was a huge success, enjoyed by all, and this could not have been achieved without the support of its dedicated sponsors. The Virginia Forestry Association is looking forward to hosting the Forest Leadership Retreat again in 2025. From an early age, Luke Shenk has had a deep appreciation for nature and the outdoors. He channeled this passion into his education and career path, earning his bachelor’s degree in forestry from Virginia Tech in 2009. For over 15 years, Shenk’s professional career has provided him with experience in procurement forestry, consulting forestry, land management and real estate across Central Virginia. He established Ridgeline Forestry Company in 2019, a consulting forestry company that assists landowners across central Virginia with timberland management and timber sales. Shenk is a member of Virginia Forestry Association’s Magazine Editorial Committee. Randy Asbell, owner of The Point Selling Solutions, shared strategies for building a sales team and developing a sales plan. Wendy Dickinson, PCC, presented a session titled, “The Right People, The Right Seats: Hiring for Your Exit,” that included the steps needed to build a self-sustaining business operation. John Magruder (center) and Steve Peter (right) helped plan this year’s Forest Leadership Retreat at Wintergreen Resort. Entertainment was provided by John Shenk.
18 VIRGINIA FORESTS Generation NEXT Update Helping Forest Landowners Prepare for the Future of Their Woodland Legacy By Karen Snape Generation NEXT helps landowners plan for the future of their woodlands with tools and resources for legacy planning. Fifteen years ago, Mike Santucci, Virginia Department of Forestry (DOF), and Adam Downing, Virginia Cooperative Extension (VCE), recognized the need to reach Virginia’s woodland owners with a palatable approach to legacy planning that resulted in the creation of the Generation NEXT program. Legacy planning means working out the legal and financial estate plan to pass on your woodland and also working with your heirs to pass on knowledge and a love of the land. Generation NEXT was designed as a resource for landowners that would allow them to begin the process of legacy planning and help determine the future of their woodland after death. Two-thirds of Virginia’s forests are owned by individuals and families, and during a time of generational transition, that land is most at risk of being subdivided and converted out of forest. This makes legacy planning an important topic for all Virginians who care about our forests. Today, DOF and VCE, along with many other collaborators, continue to meet this educational need through
Fall 2024 19 the Generation NEXT program. In 2017, Virginia Forests magazine featured information on legacy planning and the Generation NEXT program. Here, we will share the progress and new resources developed over the past eight years. All of the resources of the Generation NEXT Program are available on our website: https://sites. google.com/vt.edu/generationnext/ home. This newer website includes resources, links to our partners, the schedule of workshops, and contact information for the Generation NEXT team. The newest feature is a “notify me” button to subscribe to receive information about upcoming workshops and webinars. Curated List of Attorneys An important piece of legacy planning is estate planning: putting in place the wills, trusts, and/ or corporate ownership structures needed to pass land to designated heirs. To do this, landowners need the services of an attorney, but not all attorneys are familiar with the value and challenges of owning, bequeathing, and inheriting rural land. The Virginia Farm and Forestland Legacy Planning Attorney List contains almost 50 lawyers with self-reported experience in estate planning for owners of rural land. The list is dynamic, with an online survey and rolling consideration. Heirs’ Property Education The Generation NEXT program has also been assisting partners at Virginia State University’s Small Farm Outreach Program to provide education on heirs’ property. Heirs’ property results when a landowner dies without a will, or their will is badly written or not properly probated. As a result, all of a person’s children or grandchildren (possibly dozens of people) become part owners of the property, with no Our flagship (and award-winning) publication, Legacy Planning: A Guide for Virginia Landowners, was released in 2019. This 56-page guide, including nine worksheets and six case studies, lays out the nine steps of successful legacy planning: Legacy Planning: A Guide for Virginia Landowners Begin the process and commit to moving forward. Determine your family assets. Write down long-term goals for your land. Hold a family meeting. Gather or create essential documents. Establish your legacy planning team. Determine the legal, financial, and conservation tools available to help you meet your goals. Provide opportunities for your family to learn about and enjoy your woodlands. Revisit your plan on a regular basis and adapt as your land, assets, and family change. The guide is available at our workshops, on our website, and by mail. Workshops help educate landowners about ways to ensure that your forest and farm land is properly transferred after death. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.
www.vaforestry.orgRkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy Nzc3ODM=