The state has rejected the 10-Year Stewardship Plan for the Connecticut Lakes Headwaters Forest proposed by Aurora Sustainable Lands, LLC, which purchased the property in 2022 subject to the terms of the conservation easement acquired by the state in 2003.
Along with conserving open space, protecting natural resources and fostering wildlife habitat, the easement affirms that foremost among its purposes is “to retain the property as an economically viable and sustainable tract of land for the production of timber, plywood and other forest products.”
Aurora, which calls itself “the largest private forestland owner focused entirely on climate mitigation,” intends to manage the property to sequester and store forest carbon and to sell carbon credits to offset greenhouse gas emissions on the market operated by the California Air Resources Board. In short, Aurora intends to reduce the harvesting of timber in order to capture the value of carbon harbored in standing trees.
In rejecting the plan, Sarah Stewart, commissioner of the Department of Natural and Cultural Resources, and Patrick Hackley, director of the Division of Forests and Lands, wrote to Aurora President and CEO Blake Stansell, “The overarching concern shared by all state agencies is the proposed plan’s clear intent to significantly reduce timber harvest and forest management activities, which is inconsistent with the terms, purpose and intent of the Connecticut Lakes Realty Trust Conservation Easement.”
The current stewardship plan for 2021 to 2031 includes an average annual timber harvest of some 35,000 cords. But Aurora intends “to grow carbon stocks at a much higher rate than in the recent past” by cutting between 10,000 and 20,000 cords annually over the next 10 years, a reduction of between 30% and 60%. The reduced timber harvest, the state claims, would “significantly negatively impact local economies and the property by failing to produce a productive working forest” in violation of the easement.
No specific minimum level of timber harvest is required by the easement. In the decade prior to 2013, when the property was first enrolled in a carbon credit program, annual harvests averaged 40,000 cords. Between 2013 and 2022, annual harvests averaged 30,000 cords.
Although the decrease adversely affected the forest economy, Stewart and Hackley acknowledge “it still supported viable logging businesses, regional sawmills, and many other factions of the local economy.” However, they conclude that “the proposed plan’s projected decrease in timber harvest of between 30% to 60% would not only result in critical negative consequences for the local and regional forest products industry, but also the local municipalities deriving much needed income from the forest products economy and timber taxes.”
The NH Fish & Game Department doubted that Aurora’s plan for managing the forest would provide the mix of trees of different ages and size most conducive to providing optimal wildlife habitat. The plan describes a structure composed of 20% of seedling/sapling, 25% of pole timber (at least 4.5 inches in diameter) and 55% of saw timber. Although the department found this goal “would likely support the full breadth of wildlife species native to the region,” it concluded that “the proposed plan was not working toward this goal.”
Finally, the Aurora suggested siting a wind farm on the property, which “can add to the bottom line”— a suggestion that was rejected out of hand as contrary to the terms of the easement.
The letter closes by indicating the state is open to negotiating the changes to the proposed stewardship plan required to bring it into compliance with the easement and ensure the property remains “an economically viable and sustainable working forest” providing economic stability to the region while enabling Aurora “to capitalize on carbon credit revenue.”
