Comments on: Forest preserve or prairie preserve?

By: Slaphead28

Slaphead28 — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 20:54:33 +0000

Woolery is 100% right. Pine don’t act like other trees. they were planted probably 5-6 feet apart initially. The problem with pine is that if they are not thinned, stand vigor declines. Trees die and invite insects to finish them off. Once the bugs make it through the dead trees the will them attack live ones.

Pine also have another issue that is directly related here. Once a pine’s crown is less that 1/3 of the total height of the tree, the tree is finished. It wont respond to a thinning, in fact the stand now becomes a giant fire hazard.
In Illinois, I challange you to find a white pine that is anywhere near 200-400 years old. It dosent exist east of the Mississippi River.
the trees to replace are native “Prairie” trees like the awful bur oak, white oak (our state tree)and red oak.
These trees provide hard mast to wildlife…where pine does not.

If these trees had been properly managed 30 years ago,(removing every other tree or every other row of trees, the stand would have been much healthier and we probably wouldn’t have this problem.

By: marva teche

marva teche — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 22:41:04 +0000

check out page 17 of thge Yellow book . It is inviting everyone to visit parks and the picture is tall standing pines

By: Gloria Maloney

Gloria Maloney — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 20:16:57 +0000

Mr. Woolery,
I don’t think your argument that the pine trees might become infested and die at some future date and become a liability is a good reason to deprive the public of these beautiful trees. I found a website “whitepines.org” that explains that a White Pine should live to be 200 to 400 years old. The White Pine Society is trying to save these trees.

At what age do you think a White Pine should be killed because it is going to die someday? Dying White Pines provide nest sites for bald eagles. The Pines that were cut are not nearly 200 years old. I think I read that these trees are 50 to 70 years old.

There are no plans to replace the Pines with “prairie trees.” Whether the private company profited a lot or a little according to your calculations, they still profited from the public’s trees.

By: Mike Woolery

Mike Woolery — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 17:40:59 +0000

There are two main issues here. The first is the apparent lack of public notification & involvement in the management decision. If this was done poorly, or not at all, then the WCFPD deserves to take some heat.
The second issue is the science behind managing the forest preserve properties. Within the management science we have the pine removal issue and the decision of what to replace the harvested trees with, in this case prairie. Most pine plantations (especially if they are left un-managed and un-thinned) cannot be thinned out once they reach a certain age, and need to be totally removed. If these plantations are left to die “naturally”, many times we are faced with an insect or disease outbreak that can lead to entire blocks of pines dying around the same time. This can be a liability issue, which I am sure is a big factor for the WCFPD. The article mentioned that a “forestry expert” did not think the contract was very advantageous. In our area there is very little market for pine trees or pulp wood in general. Before Premiere Forest Products began operating in northern Illinois, there was literally no market for these products. Landowners who needed pine thinning services would have to do the work themselves (which is hard work, and can be very dangerous), or pay a contractor to do it, at prices up to $2,000 per acre! Pulpwood is not a very valuable product to begin with, add the freight and labor cost into it, and we are left with pulp grade trees in our area being worth only a buck or two a ton. That is just economic reality. When a landowner has the opportunity to get some forestry work done and actually get a couple bucks in his or her pocket, I think that is a pretty big deal. I am in total disagreement with the “forestry expert” who was consulted for a reading of the contract.
The final point that I would like to make is regarding the apparent management preference for prairie habitat as opposed to forest. We see this everywhere, so Winnebago County is not alone here. In my opinion, prairie management is a lot easier than forest. I am not implying that I don’t like prairie habitat, or that I think there is no place for it on the landscape. I think the “rotation age” of the two habitats coupled with our shortsightedness is the main problem. You can establish a prairie planting and have it look nice in a couple years. Some periodic burning and/or mowing and you are set. Forest, on the other hand, could take 10 years of hard work (planting, weed control, wildlife control) to establish trees and another 20 to a closed-canopy situation. We are very shortsighted with our land management. Cutting trees makes a mess. Most people don’t think it looks good. The fact is that harvesting can be necessary for the long term health of the forest, and it is essential if we are managing for oaks, these trees need large canopy openings (minimum 1 -2 acres in size) to grow. A properly planned harvest can be looked at as making a temporary mess, but essential for the long term health of the forest.
Mike Woolery, Forester
Greenwood Forestry Consulting
Winnebago, IL

By: Dan Waeffler

Dan Waeffler — Sat, 07 Jan 2012 21:12:07 +0000

THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!!!!My intent today was to take my dog for a hike at the beautiful pecatonica forest preserve.I was egar to stroll through the pines. My favorite part of the forest preserve where it is so peaceful and protected from the eliments. ONLY TO FIND ALL THE PINES WERE CLEAR CUT AND STACKED IN ROWS 30 feet high. This whole thing makes me sick WHY WAS IT SO NECASSARY TO DESTROY THESE TREES?? There is too much open land already in Northern Illinois. The forest preserve should preserve the forest not destroy it!!!. WE NEED TO GET SOME OF THESE PEOPLE (like TOM HARTLY)OFF THE BOARD NOW!!!!!!!THIS THING NEEDS TO BE INVESTIGATED.

By: Georgine Arena

Georgine Arena — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 20:27:54 +0000

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Roland-Olson-Forest-Preserve-Community-Opinions/243136995759862
Thank you for printing the story about the unchecked destruction of the communities forest preserves. Above is a link to a facebook page for everyone to post what their thoughts are on the subject and what has happened to the forest preserves near them. This needs to be stopped before all the forest preserve in Winnebago County are obliterated.

By: Gloria Maloney

Gloria Maloney — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 18:10:52 +0000

I do not agree with turning forest preserves into prairie preserves. Maybe we should cut down all the apple trees because they weren’t here until Johnny Appleseed planted them.

It is my understanding that in order to maintain these newly created prairies that they burn them every two years. This causes breathing problems for people in nearby subdivisions, like those around Kieselberg in Roscoe and Machesney Park.

The “prairie” they planted across from our house on Swanson Rd. in Kieselberg forest preserve after removing many large, beautiful trees, looks like a huge weed pasture.

The environment for larger mammals and birds such as owls and hawks is being destroyed for no good public purpose.

By: VeryModest

VeryModest — Thu, 05 Jan 2012 09:27:10 +0000

Something here just doesn’t ring true. I love venturing out to the Forrest Preserves during the summer to walk around under the trees in the cooling shade when the sun is hot. Guess that won’t be happening any longer. Why was there no public input on this decision before it was carried out? Who is benefiting from this? Did we make a mistake in voting in another board that is going to work against the best interests of the people and behind closed doors? Someone is making money of this, you just know it.