State officials endorsed a plan to cut almost 200 acres of white pines in the Manuel F. Correllus State Forest, without an environmental impact report that was sought by some Islanders opposed to the plan.
The Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) Office, which conducts reviews of environmental impacts of development projects, under Assistant Secretary Tori Kim found that earlier processes and other documents were sufficient to stand in the place of a report, and issued a six-page advisory opinion on the matter on Dec. 26.
The goal is to remove 175 acres of white pine plantations by 2035, but phase one of the project, approved by MassWildlife’s Natural Heritage Endangered Species Program in July, includes a 52-acre cut of white pine plantations, in an effort to restore native species in the State Forest. The effort is led by the Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR), as landowners of the 5,300-acre forest.
David Foster, director emeritus of the Harvard Forest, and Megan Ottens-Sargent, a former Martha’s Vineyard commissioner, asked the state in October to review what they said were documents that show that in 2001, Bob Durand, then Massachusetts secretary of the environment, required an environmental impact report for a previous project in the State Forest that was intended to widen fire lines. There isn’t a record that a report was submitted or made subject to public comment.
Foster argued that the current plan is a continuation of that project, and should require the report, which is a more comprehensive review of the forest project and could enlist the state to draft a firebreak management plan, conduct a study on impacts of management techniques, and create protocols for an annual survey. Their request virtually stalled progress on the project for months.
But that’s no longer the case. Though further review from MEPA isn’t required, Kim’s advisory opinion instead directs the state department to submit a forest management plan that describes operations and maintenance activities as well as habitat management activities, such as plantation removal, invasive species control, and prescribed fire, by Dec. 31, 2026, and then make that plan available for public comment through a public notice in the environmental monitor.
The state department previously stated that they didn’t believe they needed to do an environmental impact report, but pushed the issue toward MEPA to be sure. The habitat management project was slated to begin in December, but DCR said in early December that the plan is to issue bids for vendor selection for the project over the winter. A spokesperson for DCR said Wednesday it plans to continue work, and will update its timeline based on the advisory opinion.
Islanders opposed to the project have raised concerns since the issuance of Kim’s advisory opinion. In fact, a few of them wrote to Kim about her decision.
Michael Blanchard, a photographer, gallery owner, and daily patron of the forest, shared his letter to Kim, which said the area is the most accessible and utilized public forest on Martha’s Vineyard. “People walk there, grieve there, recover there, bring their children there, and depend on it as a rare and shared public space,” he wrote.
Blanchard also reiterated his and others’ thoughts on the importance of an environmental impact report. “That kind of analysis has never been done here, despite being formally required. After more than two decades, asking that it finally be completed does not feel unreasonable. It feels like the minimum necessary step to restore trust, clarity, and legitimacy to a decision of this magnitude,” he wrote.
Blanchard is part of a group of Islanders who are opposed to the plan as is, and want more transparency in the approval process.
“Neither I nor others I am working with are attempting to stop forest management, restoration, or responsible stewardship. We are asking that decisions of this scale, permanence, and sensitivity be made through the process the commonwealth itself established for precisely these circumstances — one that is transparent, contemporaneous, and grounded in current science, current conditions, and full public disclosure,” he added.
Katherine Scott, an Islander against the plan, also wrote to Kim and said that the “current scientific concept of ‘environmental impacts’” is larger than was understood more than two decades ago.
Toward the end of his letter, Blanchard also said the group against the plan may take this matter through legal review: “I want to be transparent that if these concerns cannot be addressed through a collegial and corrective process, we are seeking the advice of an environmental attorney regarding potential next steps. We believe the procedural issues identified are significant and warrant careful reconsideration before further implementation proceeds.” He told The Times that legal action isn’t what any of them wanted to have to do.
A letter out to more than 1,500 people that signed a petition called “Stop the Clearcut Update” on charge.org over a year ago also said the group plans to “pursue every appropriate path — including legal review if necessary — to ensure this process is done carefully, transparently, and with respect for the Island community.” The group also asked that previous petitioners write to Kim about their concerns.
Re “what they said were documents that show that in 2001, Bob Durand, then Massachusetts secretary of the environment, required an environmental impact report for a previous project in the State Forest that was intended to widen fire lines. There isn’t a record that a report was submitted or made subject to public comment.”
Foster and Sargent SAID that the documents show this because they DO show this.
A list of relevant documents was linked in a letter to the MV Times published on October 27, 2025.
Specifically, in his “CERTIFICATE OF THE SECRETARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS
ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL NOTIFICATION FORM” Secretary Bob Durand required (and he put “required” in boldface type) that an EIR be carried out before the work described in the ENF was carried out.
Here is a link to that document:
2001 ENF MEPA0513 Durand EIR Requirement: https://tinyurl.com/3ypme6kf
In it Secretary Durand wrote:
“Pursuant to the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (G. L. c. 30, ss.• 61-62H) and Section 11.03 of the MEPA regulations (301 CMR 11.00), I hereby determine that this project requires the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR).”
In the rest of the certificate Secretary Durand gave specific instructions regarding the scope of the mandated EIR.
These are introduced non-native tree species to create a lumber industry. Essentially a farm. The tree farming attempt was well intended, but a failure.
The “non-native” designation is in contention, unlike in the case of obviously non-native red and scotch pine. Might that be why they failed to thrive on Martha’s Vineyard.
The white piine are healthy forests, so how come “a failure”?
Ironically, the DCR is now trying to convince Islanders that cutting down Eastern white pines will produce a lot of good timber!
Even though Correllus is a forest reserve, hence by law no timber can be taken from it.
Can’t make this up!!
You couldn’t build an orphanage, convent, or puppy rescue without full throated opposition anywhere on the island.
White pines aren’t native to the island. The don’t provide food for native species, except maybe Chickadees and mice. They grow faster and taller than native species, shading the understory.
It’s not like once they’re cut down, nothing will grow there. Oak trees seedlings will proliferate, along with other species that are beneficial to our environment.
My question is, will the logs be turned into lumber? Will it be chipped to burn for electricity. Shipped off the island?
Comments are closed.