If a recreational camper lets a fire get out of hand, the USFS investigates cause and prosecutes if needed. I recall the person that was fingered for maybe Ham lake fire or one of those over Gunflint way even committed suicide in a DC hotel just before his trial (sadly). Yet, landowners who directly contribute to fire danger, through bad or non-management, are left off the hook?

But, now we have a wealthy landowner, just outside the BWCA, who owns over 1500 acres of land, that is non-managed, and it fuels the recent Greenwood fire. This fire cost taxpayers lots of money to put out, let alone emotional affects on the area's residents and cabin owners.

The fire is out now......but looking at the dead sticks waiting to go again, again no management pre-fire, no management post-fire. You can clearly see difference between USFS lands and their "clean-up" vs this landowner who has done nothing!

Its private land, I get it.....but their lack of management has caused lots of issues, and will continue to do so, unless we can figure out how to work with folks like this holding company in SE part of US that owns he land........I really don't want the government to tell me how or what to do in managing my lands, but I also see very clearly this issue needs resolution......or it repeats again and again.

What are the ideas for solutions??? just thinking, and perhaps too much!!!

BorealTriangle: "

Its private land, I get it.....but their lack of management has caused lots of issues, and will continue to do so, unless we can figure out how to work with folks like this holding company in SE part of US that owns he land........I really don't want the government to tell me how or what to do in managing my lands, but I also see very clearly this issue needs resolution......or it repeats again and again.

What are the ideas for solutions??? just thinking, and perhaps too much!!!"

There are a couple of solutions out there, some of which have been in place since 2001. Maybe it is just education, or fines, that need to be put in place to make landowners aware of the need for Forest Management.

For instance, there are two programs to incentivize private land owners to manage their forest lands. They are the Sustainable Forest Incentive Act (SFIA) and a Cost-share program. Both can be found here:
MN DNR Forest Stewardship The SFIA is basically a long term incentive, upto 50 years, and the Cost-Share is a short term, yearly program.

Also, the Minnesota Forest Resources Council has other educational and programs to help/prod/educate forest landowners to develop a plan for their land: Private Forest Landowners

Maybe it will take Insurance Companies not offering insurance unless forest management plans are in place when applying for insurance.

The Superior NF/USFS does not have direct authority on the management of private lands within its borders.

Start here for your questions.

Lake County MN Firewise.

Sustainable Forest Incentive Act, I have 55 acres of my land enrolled in this program and receive yearly payments if I manage it in certain ways.

I am not sure I am following? Some guy owns land and you want him to maintain it better? I don't think just owning land should make you accountable for fires. Nor do I think they should have to manage their land.

I happen to know a bit about this situation, having a cabin adjacent to the property in question.

First a correction: this person owns 12,000 acres, not 1500. FWIW, the property is currently for sale.

Really, the story of this property is kind of the tragic. It is as originally owned by Kimberly Clark, who high graded it I believe, then sold it to this person from North Carolina who did little if any replanting. It must have seemed like a good deal but a lot of the property is lowland spruce which grows very slowly it’s been for sale for years, and was in final negotiations right when the Greenwood fire broke out.

Although much has been made in the press and other places about budworm killed balsam fir being a primary cause of the fire, what I have observed is that the fire around my cabin was mostly about how extremely dry it was…the fire was worse in the spruce “bog”, where it burned the moss under the trees right down to mineral soil. That’s why it got so big—-it’s just really difficult to stop a fire like that. The woods are very thick, and it was difficult or impossible to directly fight this fire.

Behind my cabin, there is higher ground with budworm killed balsams and aspen, and the fire actually spared those areas.

So I take your point, but I don’t know that management of
These forests would have helped much in this case.

You mentioned sticks waiting to go up again…if you’re talking about the area on Highway 2 from the old LTV tracks to Sand River that mess was created by the forest Service either by a failed back burn or by logging a strip along the road (done after the fire was all but out.

Photo is of black spruce bog after the moss was burned out from under the trees.

I know the land you are talking about. I also know that up until recently (sometime in the last 10 years) he had employed a land manager. The land has been logged through the years. There were trails that served as fire breaks as well as small cabins on site. It's also alot more than 1500 acres this particular land owner owns in that area.

The Greenwood fire did not burn nearly to the degree of veracity a number of the recent fires in the BW. Also unlike the BW fires, since the greenwood fire they have gone into the fire perimeter and logged many of the trees dead, but suitable to log out.

I understand your point; in that private land not actively managed will contribute to fire safety issues and the discussion around the issue of should there be some level of expected or required maintenance can certianly be had. I just don't think this is a good example to make that point.

all I will say is you [OP] are very wrong about pretty much everything you stated about that property and how it was managed.

Speckled: "


The Greenwood fire did not burn nearly to the degree of veracity a number of the recent fires in the BW. Also unlike the BW fires,

"

Are you meaning that it didn’t burn as hot? Gee, it was a devastating fire. I paddled the 6mile length of Stony Lake last summer and it’s a moonscape. Likewise the area around Middle Mcdougal is very severely burned. So I’m not sure what you are talking about here.

Does this discussion mean that the BWCA is being managed and has areas that are burned on a regular basis? I have been worried about the whole area going up in smoke as the timber ages out. Some of the fires in Quebec are the size of the BWCA. I watched the fires in Woodland Caribou consume most of the area because aged timber and drought years brought on fires that could not be contained.

I believe some of the OP's assertions about the Ham Lake fire are misleading.

Burned