Related posts:

1. 48th Minnesota Shade Tree Short Course March 16-17, 2010
2. 49th Minnesota Shade Tree Short Course March 15-16, 2011
3. Read the March 2012 update now

By Sean Peterson

Related posts:

1. The Road to a Thoughtful Street Tree Masterplan
2. Read the December 2011 update now
3. Extension’s 2011 woodland webinar series

Click here to watch the complete recording now

After watching, please complete our quick evaluation form.

Related links:

• The handout Angela Gupta refers to in her presentation (MS Word doc).
• Emerald ash borer in Minnesota (UMN Extension)
• Emerald ash borer and your Minnesota woodlands, including the 70-page Ash Management Guide book.
• Minnesota EAB Preparedness Community Outreach Program (MDA)

Related posts:

1. New Emerald Ash Borer training: April 28, Winona
2. Emerald Ash Borer Update, June 2009
3. Emerald ash borer and your Minnesota woodlands: Management guidelines

The bill, S.F. 364, was introduced by state senator John C. Pederson to the Environment and Natural Resources Committee, chaired by Sen. Bill Ingebrigtsen,  Alexandria.  A parallel house bill, H.F. 635, was supported by the House Committee on Environment, Energy and Natural Resources Policy and Finance, chaired by Dennis McNamara of Hastings.  The following text was taken from the testimony by Bob Fitch and Bill Sayward.  Their recorded testimony is available here.

Partial testimony from Bob Fitch, executive director of the Minnesota Nursery and Landscape Association:

“Mr. Chairman, thanks for the opportunity to meet with you today. My name is Bob Fitch and I’m the executive director of the Minnesota Nursery & Landscape Association, the region’s oldest and largest green industry trade organization, founded in 1925. Approximately 1,500 companies are members of MNLA, making it one of the five largest state green industry associations in the U.S. The vast majority of our members are small, family-owned companies that have 10 or fewer full-time, year-round employees. I am going to be very blunt this afternoon. For those of you who campaigned on a platform of getting government out of the way so private business could grow: There is no better chance than this bill to fulfill that promise.

“You’re going to hear a lot of doomsday scenarios from various sources. You’re going to hear about the price of seedlings. The truth is that the private sector has always been higher-priced on some species and lower on others. We say let the marketplace determine prices and, if the government wants to subsidize reforestation, do so on the purchase of seedlings, not the production.  You’re going to hear that the private sector can’t produce enough seedlings. That’s simply not true. The DNR’s production has sunk to its lowest level ever. Meanwhile, private growers have excess production capacity, without even having to expand their facilities. In fact, private growers have had to plow under thousands of seedlings the last several years. A three-year phase-out of the DNR nurseries will allow sufficient time for the private growers to ramp up. You’re going to hear that the private sector can’t track seed source adequately. That’s simply not true. The private sector tracks its seed source very carefully. Private growers are not going to sell what the market won’t buy. Growers will produce what the market wants and will track seed source in the manner requested by customers.

“You’re going to hear that important research will be jeopardized. Over the years, we’ve heard a lot of excuses why the DNR nurseries should stay open, but this is the first time we’ve seen this card played. It’s hard to think the state would keep $2 million in nursery sales away from private growers just to save $20,000-$30,000 in research support. Meanwhile, I can tell you that the private sector is drafting a plan to invest its own resources to support the Minnesota Tree Improvement Cooperative and find other ways to actually increase the financial resources available for research.”

Partial testimony from Bill Sayward, Itasca Greenhouse:

“My name is Bill Sayward. My family owns and operates Itasca Greenhouse in Cohasset, Minnesota in Itasca Greenhouse, Inc County. We purchased the business in 1989. We have 15 full-time employees and 10 to 12 seasonal or part-time employees. Our nursery grows Native Conifers and Hardwoods, Non Native Conifers and Hardwoods, and some shrubs. They are used primarily in reforestation and conservation plantings, shelter belts, wildlife habit improvement, Christmas tree liners, nursery liners and for promotions. Our customers include Itasca County, Atkin Co. Kootchinching Co, MN DNR, USFS, SWCD, Blandin Paper Company, other forest based industries, and many private woodlot owners, Christmas tree farm and nurseries. We have committed our lives to reforestation and conservation efforts. As a private business, we believe that good competition makes us better. But we believe competition should be fair and that the playing field should be level. Among the many expenses we have to incur are:

• • Capital investments in land and equipment
  • Property taxes
  • Income taxes
  • Interest payments on our line of credit

The DNR State Forest Nurseries have none of these costs. That creates an unlevel playing field. It limits our ability to grow as a business and to employ more people and, yes, even pay more taxes.

We’re glad that the state of Minnesota values reforestation and conservation plantings. My company and our fellow growers support reforestation too. But we think the taxpayers of Minnesota would be better served by phasing out the DNR nurseries and allowing private growers the chance to grow our businesses.”

Update, April 27:
Partial written testimony provided by Alan Ek, Professor in the University of Minnesota’s Department of Forest Resources:

“The Minnesota Tree Improvement Cooperative… [facilitates] the improvement of Minnesota’s forests through a program of superior tree selection, breeding, propagation, and distribution of the resulting improved seed and seedlings.  The MTIC makes this possible by leveraging membership dues from 18 state and county land agencies, private companies, and tribal landholdings with in-kind contributions and research and outreach support from the University of Minnesota’s Department of Forest Resources.

“The MTIC would be financially crippled, and would likely fold, without the financial and logistical support and expertise of the state nursery program.  [The state nursery program] processes and stores seed collected from orchards for all members for a nominal fee….  The State Nursery program provides crucial support in terms of assistance with seed cleaning, storage, and distribution…. The DNR collects the vast majority of improved seed in the state, and remains the only entity with enough surplus seed to make improved seedlings available to the general public.  The DNR places a surcharge on all improved seedlings to help offset costs….

“The use of improved seed is a critical strategy to increase the health and productivity of future forests.  Seed designated as improved has undergone extensive testing so that its quality is quantifiable and superior to local seed sources.  Traits that are improved through the MTIC include tree volume, stem straightness, wood quality, and disease resistance.  These traits are improved by capitalizing on natural variation, not through the use of genetically modified organisms….  Without a centralized, cost-sharing effort like the MTIC, member organizations could not afford this program independently….

“Operationally, most private growers require a 2-year lag time from order placement to seedling delivery, but the DNR has the capacity to supply seedlings n short notice for reforestation projects that arise unexpectedly….

“The DNR is further the only entity in the state to practice and implement seed source control in which the provenance of all seed that enters the nursery is maintained and seed is deployed within pre-designated seed zones.  The seed zones used by the MN DNR help prevent mal-adaptation that arises when seed is transferred long distances….

“No other single entity other than the DNR has the orchards and labor to supply large amounts of any single improved seed source….  Many of the services provided by the state nursery program lack an equivalent competitor in the private sector and would disappear with the closure of the state nursery program.

“The effects of a state nursery closure would be seen for generations as losses in forest productivity mount from a combination of poor to no seed source control. a lack of improved seed on the landscape, and little to no related services.  Without seed source control, attempts to monitor and adjust seed sources in response to environmental change would be rendered infeasible.”

Commentary from Bruce zumBahlen on behalf of the Minnesota Forestry Association:

The MN Forestry Association (MFA) testified at legislative hearings on this issue. MFA and nine other organizations are on record of stating that the current balance between private nurseries that grow conservation-grade seedlings and the DNR nurseries is just fine. We oppose the closures. The DNR nurseries only grow bare-root stock, while MN’s two private green house nurseries primarily grow containerized seedlings in soil plugs.

The DNR nurseries are self-sufficient on the revenue generated on the sale of their seedlings; they do not depend on state funding, haven’t been for 25 years. Closing them would not save the state money.  The recent recession has been difficult for both private and public nurseries.  Like the private nurseries who had to dispose of unbought stock, the DNR nurseries also had to plow under seedlings that had been seeded 3 years ago in anticipation of their sale three years hence. This year, seedling sales are up significantly.

MFA sees competition between private and public nurseries as minimal because of the kind of planting stock grown. DNR nurseries are prohibited by law from selling less than 500 seedlings leaving that market to private nurseries. From our observation, there is more competion between growers of containerized trees in the private sector, often from outside the state’s border, than there is between the bare-root and containerized seedlings grown in MN. Eliminating the DNR nurseries will not reduce competition amongst those growers of containerized seedlings.

While containerized stock has advantages over bare-root seedlings by lengthening the planting season, their list price is about 25% more for most of the major reforestation species. Commonly though, bare-root stock is all that is needed for afforestation and reforestation. The DNR also provides  transplant stock for situations that demand larger planting stock when smaller bare-root and containerized seedlings would not suffice.

DNR nurseries also serve an important role in the collection, extraction of seed and the long-term storage of local seed sources. A number of state parks, county land departments, the Bureau of Indian Affairs and some forest industries depend on the DNR to extract and store their seed for eventual use on their respective lands. These DNR seed facilities and the institutional knowledge of the personnel are crucial in assuring that seedlings and seed for direct seeding are returned to the same locale where it was collected. That plays an important role in maintaining MN’s biological diversity. We question whether a private nursery  would be willing or able to undertake this role. THERE IS NO PLAN IN PLACE TO TRANSFER THIS RESPONSIBILITY IN THE EVENT THE DNR NURSERIES ARE CLOSED ON JULY 1.

MFA also questions the capability of private nurseries to ramp up production to replace the DNR’s production. The last time this private-public nusery issue was debated by the legislature in 1997, the DNR was required to reduce its production to 10 million seedlings over a 3 year period. This time period was intended to allow the private nurseries to ramp up their production as the DNR nurseries curtailed their production. Four years later, that cap had to be lifted due to a shortage of seedlings needed to meet the demand.

The state of MN’s forests will be less for future generations of Minnesotans if these closures were to occur.

Related posts:

1. MN DNR celebrations one billionth seedling
2. Growing Trees from Seed
3. What is an “improved” tree?

Whether someone is looking to buy or sell firewood, have their tree removed, a new one planted, or any other tree need, the list of companies and organizations is diverse and geographically specific. So far we have directories for 6 different areas in Minnesota, each with a radius of 45 miles. We are working to expand the resource to include the entire state. Though preparing for EAB is the main purpose of creating the directory, it is intended to be an all-purpose tree care and wood use resource.

Through a Google maps interface, a user can view their area and see who the companies are and where they are located.

Please visit the directory and fill out the registration form to enter your company in this growing online resource

Click here, or on the map, to view the directory.

Additional information on Emerald Ash Borer:
Minnesota DNR page
National EAB Information Website
Minnesota Department of Agriculture
University of Minnesota Extension

Related posts:

1. New Emerald Ash Borer training: April 28, Winona
2. Emerald Ash Borer Update, June 2009
3. Emerald ash borer first detectors

This is a two-day course for everyone involved in urban forestry and arboriculture. ISA Certified Arborist CEUs are available for all sessions.

Please look over the list of sessions and speakers and register for this year’s course.  There are 35 different sessions to chose from.  It’s gonna be Treerifiic!

Click on the links below to find out more.  [Links no longer active--event materials have been removed by the College of Continuing Education.]

Related posts:

1. 48th Minnesota Shade Tree Short Course March 16-17, 2010
2. 50th Minnesota Shade Tree Shortcourse: March 20-21, 2012
3. The Road to a Thoughtful Street Tree Masterplan

We know that Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) is a significant invasive forest pest.  EAB has the potential to cause extensive tree mortality in ash and seriously alter forest stand composition in stands with ash.  EAB may also negatively impact traditional forest product economies, plant communities, wildlife and water quality.  In May 2009, EAB was discovered in St. Paul, MN with subsequent detections in Minneapolis and Houston County-make it a very real threat to Minnesota’s forested landscape.   Currently, there are several joint efforts between agencies to make educating the public and communities throughout Minnesota on EAB.

Many people learned during the Black Ash Symposium held in Bemidji in May 2010, the ash genus (Fraxinus) is a significant component of Minnesota’s landscape with nearly 1 billion trees.  Minnesota’s wetland hardwood forests are more than 50% ash.  Land managers recognize the variability and complexities among native plant communities, especially in relation to hydrology.  There is also general consensus among forestry professionals on the lack of silvicultural knowledge to manage ash stand with regard to EAB (MyMinnesotaWoods produced a video on this topic in 2009).  Currently, natural resource professionals are working to address this issue on public lands.  Researchers are now launching ash management research projects that will help us learn more about the ash resource and develop strategies to maintain the resiliency of our forests.

But how do we help Minnesota’s Family Forest Landowners who own approximately one third of Minnesota’s forest when we aren’t really sure ourselves?

This fall, Angie Gupta and I will facilitate an expert panel (DNR, University of Minnesota, US Forest Service and many others) to develop recommendations for family forest landowners using a tool known as “the Delphi Process”.  The Delphi process is a method for structuring a group communication process that allows all voices to be heard.   The Delphi process has been touted as an effective way that allows a group to deal with complex problems, especially when asked to predict future ecological consequences of plans that have never been tried.  After the panel settles on content and preliminary recommendations, a publication for this special audience will be written and distributed in May 2011.

Do you have ash in your Minnesota woodland?  If you have questions or comments about the future of your ash, leave a reply below.

Sponsors of the Ash Management Guide for Family Forest Landowners include: the Renewable Resources Extension Act, DNR-Forestry, and the MN State Stewardship Funds.

Related posts:

1. Book review: Timber Tax Management for Family Forest Owners
2. One Family’s Forest: New book on keeping the family forest in the family
3. Comment on Minnesota’s Forest Management Guidelines

Eli Sagor photo

Ash is an important part of Minnesota’s forest environment and our communities. It is also very common in wind and snow fencing around the state.

University of Minnesota Extension recognized the serious impact EAB would have when it helped fund and develop the EAB First Detector program in 2007. The program trains dedicated citizens to look for the first signs of this invasive forest pest, and trainees were involved in the first discovery of EAB in Minnesota last year.

Since 2007, Extension’s EAB education has broadened to include Forest Pest First Detectors, EAB Community Preparedness and numerous other training opportunities. Additionally, Extension has begun to develop ash management recommendations for private forest landowners.

If you have ash trees on your property, now is the time to plan for a future with fewer ash trees. If you live within 15 miles of known EAB infestations in St. Paul, Minneapolis or Houston County, consider insecticides for your trees. If you live anywhere else in the state, you need to start preparing for a future without ash.

Here are some helpful tips for homeowners:

• Think outside the box. Contemplate a wider choice of tree species appropriate to your site and needs.
• Underplanting. Consider planting shade-tolerant trees beneath canopies of existing trees.
• Diversify the species you select. Tree and plant diversity will help prevent future large-scale mortality the next time we discover a major pest attacking a tree species. When Dutch elm disease killed the elms, for example, many communities planted ash. It would be unfortunate if we replanted with only maple (a tree already overplanted in many communities) and then found Asian longhorned beetle, an insect that kills maple.

Extension’s Tree and Shrub Selection: Recommended Trees for Minnesota by Region features resources for identifying trees suitable for your location. If you own woodlands, find woodland management recommendations and an informative video at EAB and Your Minnesota Woodlands.  Learn more about emerald ash borer at Extension’ EAB page.

Related posts:

1. Emerald ash borer and the future of the Minnesota woods
2. Trees can run?! Ensuring healthy, productive future forests in Minnesota
3. Diseases and Insect Pests of Hardwoods (Broadleaf trees)

(Dieback in Black Walnut and Pecan in Missouri, Iowa, and Minnesota)

USDA Forest Service specialists, in cooperation with state agency specialists, plan to conduct a targeted survey of black walnut and pecan with reported occurrence of trees exhibiting unexplained dieback in the their crowns. Samples will be collected from > 2 in. diameter branches from affected trees. Insects and fungi associated with the symptomatic branches will be identified. The geographic focus of the survey will be states on the western edge of the range of Juglans nigra (e.g. Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, and Kansas).

How you can help:
If you know of a plantation, stand (particularly in a riparian area), urban and community forest, or roadway setting with trees meeting these criteria and think they would be good candidate trees for the survey, would you consider supplying the information to us?  You can fill out the online form here.

See the following attachments for more info:

• Identifying black walnut (PDF)
• Thousand Cankers Disease (PDF)
• Potential TCD Trees Minnesota
• Minnesota TCD Map (PDF)

Thank you! Your interest and cooperation is much appreciated!

Related posts:

1. MN DNR Insect & Disease Newsletter June 2010
2. MN DNR releases Jan. 2010 Forest Insect & Disease Newsletter
3. Community-based Forestry Survey

Current oak wilt status in Minnesota

Q:  Why the early transition to the high risk period in 2012?
A:  Forecasted temperatures of 65° F to 76° F accompanied by sunny or partly cloudy conditions between 13 March and 20 March will be conducive to emergence of Colopterus truncatus. This is one of the two principal nitidulid beetle species that transmits the oak wilt fungus. The lack of snow cover and these higher than average temperatures are the basis for prediction of the earliest calendar date this website has reported for shifting from “safe” to “high risk” in early spring in Minnesota. Temperatures between 43° to 85° F are conducive to oak wilt mat formation.

Add the oak wilt risk status widget to your site.

Q.  What are the “risk season” references?
A.  There are three Risk Season timeframes: High Risk, Low Risk and Safe.  They refer to the probability that oak wilt will infect a tree.

High Risk months in Minnesota are April, May and June.
Low Risk months are July, August, September and October.
Safe months are November, December, January, February and March.

Q.  What are these probabilities or “risks” based on?
A.  Three criteria are considered.  First, is the fungus that actually causes the disease active?  Second, is the beetle that carries the fungus to the oak active?  Third, is there oak wilt in the area?  If all three criteria are met, then the transmission of oak wilt from one area to another is very likely.  This is referred to as “over-land transmission” of oak wilt.

Q.  What are the best ways to either avoid or minimize the probability of oak wilt infection?
A.  First, avoid any wounding during the High Risk (and hopefully, the Low Risk) period…no pruning, no construction activities near the oaks.  If a tree is wounded, seal the wound quickly (within 15 minutes) with one coat of shellac (preferable) or a water-based paint.  If oak wilt is in the area, it’s the High Risk season, and the wounding is unattended for more than 15 minutes, the probability of infection rises dramatically.

Second, and especially important if oak wilt is established in an oak woodland, prevent the spread of the pathogen through root grafts by cutting through the connecting roots using a vibratory plow.  This will need to be done by a professional, preferably a Certified Arborist and if done correctly is a very reliable technique to reduce the amount of oak wilt spread.

Third, injection of a chemical fungicide may reduce the risk of oak wilt-related tree mortality from root graft infections for 2-3 years. If combined with vibratory plowing, chemical treatment may provide long-term protection. This should only be done by a trusted and experienced professional that is licensed to apply pesticides and ideally is a Certified Arborist.

Fourth, do not move firewood from oaks that have died from oak wilt off of or on to the property in question.  The red oak group in particular harbors the fungus for several months under their bark, even if they’ve been cut down.  Unless the bark of oak wilt-killed oaks has been removed, that firewood needs to be used on site (burn before the next High Risk period) or covered completely.  If the wood with the bark on is tarped, the tarp must be at least 40 mil. thick and preferably clear in color.  The tarp should be weighted down at the ground line and sealed with soil at the ground line so no beetles can crawl in and out.  Keep the wood covered for at least one full year after the tree has died.

Q.  Can any beetle move the fungus from one area with oak wilt to another?
A.  The nitidulid beetles that move oak wilt are commonly called “sap-feeding beetles.”  There are only a couple of these types in Minnesota and they’re very small.

Q.  Can an oak become infected during the Low Risk or Safe periods in Minnesota?
A.  Oaks can become infected during the Low Risk period, but the probability is very low.  However, since it could happen, it’s best to delay pruning of the oaks until the Safe period or to quickly seal the pruning wounds with shellac or paint to avoid attracting the beetle if pruning during the Low Risk period is unavoidable.  During the Safe period, there is virtually no risk that an oak can become infected with oak wilt by over-land transmission of the fungus.

Q.  Is “over-land” transmission the only way oaks can become infected with oak wilt?
A.  No.  Most oak wilt is spread via root grafts.  Oaks of similar species, for instance red oaks, can root graft with other oaks nearby…easily within 60-80 feet of mature oaks.  When this happens, fluids can pass from one oak to another, including fluids that carry the fungal pathogen.  Oak wilt spreads from one area to another (distances greater than a quarter mile or more) via the beetles carrying the fungus.  Once the disease is established in a tree, it spreads from that tree to others via root grafts.

Q.  Are all oaks affected the same way?
A.  The red oak group (red, black, Eastern pin, northern pin and scarlet) are more seriously affected by the disease-causing pathogen.  Once infected, they do not recover and die very quickly, often within 4-6 weeks of infection during the growing season.  The white oak group (bur, white, bicolor) can become infected, but they often live with the disease for a long time before dying.  This lengthy period allows tree care professionals to intervene, even after infection, and can often save the trees.

Q.  Once the tree becomes infected, is there any treatment?
A.  For oaks in the red oak group, no.  For oaks in the white oak group, yes.  A qualified tree care professional will prune out the dead wood (if the disease hasn’t progressed too far) and if licensed, inject the tree with a systemic fungicide.  In most cases, the trees will recover if there are no other health problems affecting them.

Q.  In areas where oak wilt has killed the oaks, should replacements be other than oaks?
A.  Genetic diversity is always a good way to make a forest, woodland or landscape healthier.  Few insects or disease-causing pathogens kill wide varieties of trees.  If the area that suffered oak wilt losses is dominated by oaks, replant with other species such as sugar maples, black cherries, hackberries, white or river birches or maybe some of the disease-resistant American elms.  If oaks didn’t dominate the landscape (made up less than 10% of the tree population), some of the replacements can be oaks, especially those in the white oak group.

Q.  Is there any other resource that can provide more detailed information and pictures of oak wilt?
A.  The publication “Oak Wilt in Minnesota” by David French and Jennifer Juzwik is probably the best available resource.  Additionally, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources web site has very valuable oak wilt information.

Q.  Can I add the University of Minnesota oak wilt widget to my site?
A. Yes!  You can download the embed code here.

Related posts:

1. Add the oak wilt status widget to your site
2. US Forest Service report spotlights at-risk species on private lands
3. Minnesota’s oak-hickory forest type