|
For sale! The ownership of Wisconsin's northwoods is rapidly changing hands |
| 11/27/02 |
A smattering of early fall colors sprinkle the Wisconsin River's wooded shorelines as a canoe slides along its quiet banks. The shifting colors signal the annual seasonal transition. But there's another change occurring on this stretch of the river, one that profoundly affects the character of northern Wisconsin.
The land on both
sides of the Wisconsin River, at this point south of Tomahawk, is undergoing
residential housing development. For most of the 20th century, the woods
surrounding this shoreline were dedicated to logging and fiber production for
the paper industry. The developers of Mistwood and Rivers Edge Estates intend
to change that.
A few miles downstream, Jim Wise, of Tomahawk, gestures from his canoe at the homes and development already lining the river banks. He calls it "shoreland sprawl." Cleared swaths, manicured lawns, rip-rapped rocks, docks and homes define the shore.
"You lose habitat," says Wise, assessing the damage. "The riparian zone, where most species live a part of their lives, becomes compromised."
The splendor of this location makes it obvious why this is a desirable home site. What's less obvious are the impacts as this plays out again and again across the face of northern Wisconsin.
In recent years, with almost no notice from the public, the state's largest private landowners have been holding a fire sale. Since 1997, an astonishing 94% of Wisconsin's corporate-owned woodlands -- which total 1.1 million acres, including large contiguous tracks offering premium opportunities for wildlife, recreation and fiber production -- have been sold and even re-sold, according to the state Department of Natural Resources. Some prime parcels were snatched up for development, while the remaining properties were traded between various corporate entities.
"The paper industry is selling its land, which is bought up and developed," says Wise. "It's part of an age-old formula in America for making money."
The latest big swap happened in September when Finnish-based Stora Enso -- the world's largest wood-products company and recent buyer of the Wisconsin Rapids firm, Consolidated Paper -- divested itself of all of its Wisconsin holdings. Stora Enso sold 309,000 acres to Plum Creek Timber, located in Seattle. (Even prior to its purchase, Consolidated Paper had been whittling down its state acreage by selling off small land parcels to eager buyers.)
The volatility and dizzying pace of the land deals has some land managers worried. "We are very concerned that these lands could end up being fragmented," says John Schwarzmann, a state forester who works out of his native Minocqua, helping manage forest usage. He also chairs the Wisconsin Stewardship Network, a loose alliance of the state's hunting, fishing, conservation and environmental groups who are concerned about this issue.
Fragmentation is a
problem because it cuts up large tracts of woodlands into smaller parcels with
mixed -- if not conflicting -- uses. "We see the impacts firsthand on our
day-to-day management," says Schwarzmann. "We are talking about
losing the rural character of the northern third of the state."
Wisconsin, it should be noted, is not in imminent danger of running out of woodlands. According to the DNR, the state has about 1,700 trees for every human resident. Moreover, most land sales of recent years have not led to dramatic changes in land use.
But the sales are of concern because industrial forestland is used by the public for a variety of sporting and recreational purposes. "They hunt there, fish, hike, pick berries, and trap," says Schwarzmann. This access is part of a deal that the state cut with the land's private owners, giving them a tiny property-tax rate -- 74 cents per acre -- in exchange for following certain forestry management practices and allowing public use. Access to these lands could change dramatically if the new owners decide to opt for uses other than timber.
In 1999, the Packaging Corporation of America -- the owner of the Tomahawk paper mill -- sold off its 161,000 acres of Wisconsin forestland. Title to the land is now fractured among dozens of new owners. At least 20,000 acres are being subdivided and sold.
Schwarzmann also cites a case in Oneida County where the new property owner closed public use of a cross-country skiing and snowmobile trail while determining future use of the land. An accommodation was reached with the owner, but it demonstrates the potential for future land-use conflicts. Loss of access could further shift recreation, hunting and tourism pressure onto the remaining public lands.
Many of the corporate woodlands are also critically located, abutting state and federal lands. This seamless transition has helped create sizeable habitat zones necessary for large mammals. "Bear, wolves and bobcat don't need pristine wilderness but they do need uninhabited land," notes Schwarzmann. Fragmentation threatens their future survival by turning public lands into isolated islands.
Development of former forest land creates favorable conditions for the state's burgeoning deer herd. Landscaping by multiple property owners usually produces edge habitat where woods abut lawns or clear-cut zones. Deer love this environment. It offers abundant food from seedlings growing in the sunlit edges and a quick getaway into the shelter of the forest's cover.
"Fragmentation," says Schwarzmann, "is one of the three main reasons for the state's deer population explosion." (The other two reasons: mild winters and feeding/baiting practices.)
And Schwarzmann blames deer for ruining the future of the state's cedar population. The northern white cedar is the third most common fir tree in the state. At densities approaching 60 an acre in northern portions of the state, deer are chewing up the cedar's seedlings. "We are seeing a total regeneration failure for cedar," he says.
The state's managed forest law somewhat hinders development pressure. Paul DeLong, the DNR's deputy state forester, says removing land from this use entails "a substantial withdrawal penalty." And enrollment of land in the managed forest law automatically transfers with any property-title change.
While acreage devoted to forestland has slowly increased over the past two decades, DeLong observes that the average parcel size is shrinking. "This makes it harder to reach landowners to help them and to get accountability," he says. DeLong thinks the industrial forests and fiber industry are still viable in present-day Wisconsin. But, he says, "It's hard to speculate what the future will hold."
Controlling all of
its supply has never been a goal of the pulp and paper industry. Typically,
the mills have owned enough woodlands to set the terms of trade with local
loggers, who provide the rest of the industry's needs.
"It's a buffer against price fluctuations," says Tim Laatsch, a senior vice president for Stora Enso's North American division in Wisconsin Rapids. The company has operations in more than 40 countries, employing 43,000 workers. Says Laatsch, "We get roughly 10% of our fiber from our own lands."
Stora Enso is the world's oldest documented corporation, with a (pun intended) paper trail stretching back 700 years in Finland. But the fact that it has survived so long doesn't guarantee success in 21st century's global economy. Consolidation, says Laatsch, has made the pulp and paper industry extremely competitive -- a reality driven home at the company's Wisconsin Rapids plant this September, when officials announced the permanent closing of a production line and the resulting layoffs of 120 workers.
When Stora Enso sold off its Wisconsin timber, one important consideration was procuring a fiber-supply agreement with the new owner, Plum Creek Timber. Another corporate objective was to sell the land to a party willing to continue managing it as forestland.
Indeed, the company's announcement that it planned to sell its forestland prompted a slew of inquiries from potential buyers interested in acquiring small chunks and parcels. "That was not our intent," explains Laatsch, also expressing concerns about fragmentation of the land.
It's hard for the state to become a player in these purchases because of how costly it can be. Plum Creek, for instance, paid $142 million for Stora Enso's land.
In 1999, however, the state did manage to acquire some of the land being unloaded by Packaging Corporation of America. Using money from the state's Stewardship Fund, the DNR scrambled to buy 32,000 acres around the Willow Flowage in Oneida County. Dubbed the "Great Addition," the $25 million, 50-square-mile land deal is the largest in state history.
Doug La Follette,
Wisconsin's longtime secretary of state, suggests that similar deals will need
to occur to preserve waterfronts, recreational opportunities and unique
landscapes. "I see this as our last chance to save things for our
grandchildren," he says. "We need to protect the timber base so that
we can produce timber sustainably."
As a state constitutional officer, La Follette is one of three members of an obscure state agency called the Board of Commissioners of Public Lands. (The other members are the state Attorney General and Treasurer.) He thinks the board, working with the DNR and the state's Stewardship Fund, can play a vital role in protecting northern Wisconsin's heritage.
Already, the board has helped shape Wisconsin's landscape. When Wisconsin joined the union in 1848, it was given a federal land grant totaling 10 million acres and charged with parceling it out. The board did its job well. Funds from the land sales and management activities went into a segregated trust fund benefiting educational needs in Wisconsin. That fund -- growing yet today -- exceeds $500 million, most of which is on loan to school districts for capital needs.
The board still retains title to 80,000 acres, mostly in northeastern Wisconsin. But according to executive secretary Dan Wisniewski, it is prohibited from acquiring new land. He and La Follette suggest changing the law.
"Let us purchase land for timber purposes, especially if it looks like it's going to be developed," says Wisniewski, noting that states in the eastern U.S. are doing this to preserve large forest blocks.
Wisniewski suggests that the board take a cautious approach, applying about $10 million a year toward land acquisitions. And it could sell off some smaller parcels -- like a 3.8 acre patch in Richland County -- to reinvest in land near larger chunks.
Another possibility is that the board could swap lands with the DNR, perhaps securing some of the back lands away from the Willow Flowage that were part of the Great Addition. These backlands could then be managed for timber. "We would like to move into a hardwood veneer log base, a nice niche market," says Wisniewski. The board presently logs about 1,000 acres a year, much of which is in hardwoods.
But it only takes one sale to a developer to lose land forever, imbuing the issue with a sense of urgency. "We have a limited number of years to look at the large blocks of land [in terms of what should be preserved] as a matter of state policy," says Wisniewski. "What it all points to is our agency and the DNR should work together on these issues."
Allowing the Board of Commissioners of Public Lands to get into the business of buying new holdings will require a change in state law. A few years back, legislation to this effect was spiked by Gov. Tommy Thompson. Says La Follette, "I hope that if we get a new governor we will get better leadership."
Jim Doyle,
Wisconsin's newly elected governor, cites protecting northern Wisconsin forests
during a period of rapid ownership turnover as a major priority: " It’s
something I really want to focus on,” says Doyle. “I want to try to make sure we preserve the northwoods as the
northwoods.” He suggests mixing state
purchases with tax incentives for private parties and public private
partnerships as the path to preservation.
Already, the state has committed $60 million a year to land acquisition through the state Stewardship Fund. The DNR's Land Legacy Project helps guide these activities. The effort seeks to develop criteria for the protection of state lands, waters and habitat through the next 50 years. "We are very excited about this," says the DNR's DeLong.
One new tool the agency is using involves buying land development and public-access rights. Basically, it means the property owner sells the right to convert the land from forestry uses and permanently agrees to allow public access. These rights, like mineral rights, stay with the property even if the land is resold.
DeLong sees the approach as a winner for everyone: "A landowner can receive an economic return on that land while providing a lot of ecological benefits." And it allows the state to stretch its limited dollars while the land remains under less costly private management.
"If you can't
afford to buy the land, protecting it with easements is the next best
thing," agrees 
Jim Wise. But it's not a cure-all for the subdivision of
northern Wisconsin. "One of the biggest issues with more owners is it
means more driveways and more management styles," he says. And even if an individual buys 40 acres and
manages it for mature, old growth forest, Wise insists it doesn’t address the
larger problem. “You need big blocks for species management,” he says.
He adds that those who use the forests for hiking, silent sports, berry picking and mushroom gathering may see their activities crimped as well.
But it’s the economy of hunting, Wise says, “that really gets everyone’s attention in the northwoods.” Many more landowners on smaller parcels will make safe hunting more difficult. Explains Wise: “We are asking more hunters to hunt in a smaller space. They [the landowners] may not appreciate you shooting a gun off under their window.”
