Conservation Values of the Colony Farm Orchard, Kalamazoo County, Michigan

The following is approximately what I said in my brief remarks at the Save the Colony Farm Orchard Rally last Tuesday night, 8 December 2009. I have, however, expanded on my thoughts under point 3, adding a consideration of conservation easements.

We need to recognize three aspects to the conservation value of this piece of land. One is what’s good about the land itself. Two is its beneficial effects on the adjacent Asylum Lake Preserve, which Western Michigan says is permanently protected. Three is the broad question of how the conversion of this dedicated conservation land to commercial use affects the status of conservation land all across the state.

Apple tree in old orchard at the Colony Farm Orchard. Photo by Richard Brewer

1. The Land Itself. Although this land has been referred to as the Colony Farm Orchard, the old orchard amounts to only a quarter or so of the approximately 53 acres. The fruit trees are surrounded and in some cases overrun by grape vines. Box-elder is a common invading tree in the orchard.

The rest of the property is varied habitat with a couple of sizable wooded areas at the north and south ends. Grasslands dominated by smooth brome grass and goldenrods with invading shrubs and trees surround the wooded areas and the orchard. The land of the wooded area at the north runs down to a springy area with a couple of ponds.

One part of the conservation value of this piece of land is what used to be here. The east edge of Genesee Prairie, one of the eight tall-grass prairies in Kalamazoo County, extended to the Orchard site. This is now the only part of Genesee Prairie in public hands and with any approach to natural vegetation. The rest is gone, beneath US-131 or occupied by the west edge of Western Michigan University’s BTR park and commercial and residential areas and croplands west of US-131.

It’s unlikely that much of the original prairie flora is left at the Orchard site. However, there are still bur oaks–a good many, some fairly large and old, others young. They are all almost certainly descendants of the bur oaks that were part of the savanna fringing this tall-grass prairie. They are a genetic connection extending back 180 years to when the first settlers arrived to homestead on the prairies and savannas of Kalamazoo County. But the connection extends back much further than that, to long before Europeans reached Michigan or North America, probably to some time in the Hypsithermal interval around 9000-6000 years ago.

Goldenrods, old orchard in background. Photo by Richard Brewer.

As for animals, we know from various sources that there are coyotes, deer, turkeys, woodcock, Red-tailed Hawks, Green Herons, and many smaller birds in the summer or year-round. I will shortly put up a list of summer bird species that several observers are supplying. The spot also has all the attributes of an excellent migratory stopover site for land birds in both spring and fall. As to the small mammals, reptiles, amphibians, insects, I think it may be time for WMU to fund a serious study to find out just what is here.

2. Benefits to Asylum Lake Preserve. The Colony Farm Orchard is properly part of Asylum Lake Preserve. From the edge of the Preserve vegetation to the edge of the Orchard vegetation is about the same distance as between third base and home plate on a baseball field. The Orchard makes the preserve a larger sanctuary by about 20 percent. This is good; bigger is better in sanctuaries, mainly because local extinction of species is rarer on bigger sanctuaries.

We could also think of the Orchard as an island near to the Preserve. It serves as a stepping stone that wandering animals not currently living on the Preserve can find and, from there, reach the sanctuary. The end result of all this is that the Orchard makes the Asylum Lake Preserve more diverse and less prone to fluctuations in populations, hence more stable.

Bur oak at Colony Farm Orchard. Photo by Richard Brewer

There are of course the other beneficial effects of buffering against the noise, noxious fumes, and bright artificial lights coming from US-131 and the commercial land beyond it.

3. Threats to Conservation Land Elsewhere in Michigan. The Colony Farm Orchard has a protective conservation covenant that many Kalamazoo residents now know by heart: “The conveyance shall provide that Western Michigan University may utilize the property solely for public park, recreation, or open space purposes, except that the legislature, by statute, may authorize Western Michigan University to utilize the property for some other public purpose.” The restrictions were placed on the land by the legislature at the time of its transfer from the state to WMU in 1977. If Representative Jones (D-Kalamazoo) and WMU can persuade the legislature to strip away this restriction, as HB 5207 provides, and if Governor Granholm signs it, WMU will be able to use the land for anything. This land, bought with taxpayer dollars and now designated for public use–specifically some variety of public open space–would be available to use as an Annex to WMU’s BTR park. But it could also be used any other way WMU chose.

If HB 5207 is passed and signed into law, what state or university land dedicated for conservation–or any kind of public use–is safe? What of the state parks? What of the arboretums, botanical gardens, and natural areas of the rest of the Michigan public universities?

What, in fact, of conservation easements? These are now the most popular way to protect land in perpetuity, widely used by land trusts and government agencies. They are discussed in many places in Conservancy: The Land Trust Movement in America but especially chapters 7 and 8. Very briefly, a conservation easement is a binding agreement that permanently restricts the development and future use of land so as to protect its conservation values. Conservation easements are held by conservation organizations or units of local, state, or federal government. The easement holders are charged with defending against violations of the easement provisions. As of 2005, land trusts in Michigan held conservation easements on about 55,000 acres. The amount of land in conservation easements held by government agencies is hard to determine but substantial. Conservation easements are a relatively new way to conserve land, rarely used before 1960. Most states have statutes providing the legal foundation for conservation easements; Michigan’s is Act 451 of 1954, called NREPA.

But we have seen what the state legislature, or the House at least, has done with statutes in the case of the Colony Farm Orchard. Suppose some well-connected land owner found that a conservation easement held by some land trust had become inconvenient to him. Might the Michigan legislature be willing to pass a statute saying the conservation easement on his land was rescinded? Maybe, maybe not. Suppose that this situation came up two or three times. Might the Michigan legislature decide that NREPA as currently written was becoming an unnecessary burden to worthy land owners who had changed their minds about the easements on their acreages. In that case, might the Michigan legislature amend the statute to make backing out easier–like, for example, by coming to the legislature with what seemed like a good argument, such as using the land to create jobs? Maybe, maybe not.

The land owners might still have a few hurdles remaining, with the IRS for example. But that’s what attorneys and accountants are for.

If the legislature did either of these things, a judge or two or more would decide whether what the legislature did was legally OK. Probably the judges wouldn’t say whether it was right or wrong or how much it damaged the cause of land conservation.

It is a dangerous path that Representative Jones and WMU are trying to steer the Michigan legislature towards.

A good time was had by all at the Save the Colony Farm Orchard Rally

Chelsea Thorpe of the SSE and Sherry Sims, Secretary of ALPA. Photo by Katy Takahashi.

The Save the Colony Farm Orchard Rally sponsored by the Asylum Lake Preservation Association was held Tuesday evening 8 November in Van Deusen auditorium at the Kalamazoo Public Library. ALPA vice president David Nesius said that 53 people signed in and his total head count was 67.

One highlight of the session was a screening of Matt Clysdale’s fine documentary film “The Colony Orchard: Here We Go Again.” The Here We Go Again refers to the fact that this all played out once before in the early 1990s, when Western Michigan University tried to include the orchard property in an earlier stab at a business park. WMU was beaten back then, but the current attempt has yet to play out, so the film will need a second act, for which Matt continues to assemble footage. (Contributions DSCN1928 [non-deductible] to support the effort would be gratefully accepted.)

Curiously, in the filmed interview with Bob Miller, a WMU vice president well known for his conversations with the Asylum Lake neighborhood groups, Miller seems to be denying knowledge of the earlier conflict. That’s my impression; you can judge for yourself by watching the film on You Tube.

The film provides a quick and painless way to get the essentials of the current attempt by WMU to strip away the open space/public use restriction on the orchard, seemingly as a prelude to using it to expand its existing BTR Park. Included is the developing realization of WMU’s intentions and the early stages of the opposition to it. This film was completed about the end of September. The only updating really needed at the moment is that the original version of HB 5207 said that WMU was required to use the land to expand its BTR park. That restriction is gone in the bill that reached the Senate. Now, if the bill should pass, WMU can use the land for anything.

Amy DeShon, President of ALPA. Photo by Katy Takahashi.

The other highlight of the evening was the opportunity for attendees to ask questions and get answers to them, mostly from ALPA president Amy DeShon, but occasionally from others involved with planning the event and also from other members of the audience. I didn’t count, but there must have been forty questions, plus as many comments in which attendees shared their ideas of what was happening and what ought to be done.

We heard a little about what the affected neighborhood groups are thinking and doing. Several students from the Students for a Sustainable Earth (SSE) at WMU were there. They have adopted the Colony Farm Orchard question as a project. Co-chairman Andrew Weissenborn told about their activities, some of which are listed on the Save the Enchanted Forest group page (under Events, on the left, and on the Wall) on Facebook). Their hard work was warmly received.

Just after the film, I spoke for five minutes or so on the conservation values of the Colony Farm Orchard. I was glad to have the opportunity to talk to somebody about conservation values, because WMU seems to find the subject uninteresting. When the subject of conservation comes up, they talk about what great things the BTR Park has done.

I don’t know yet how much media coverage the event got, but WMUK, the

Larry Ross of the Winchell Avenue-Oakland Drive Neighborhood Association. Photo by Katy Takahashi

NPR station at WMU in Kalamazoo had a story on the early news Wednesday morning during Morning Edition. I think it was good, but I wasn’t quite awake when it came on. This was not, however, WMUK’s first coverage of the matter. In September, they had a story about the House Commerce Committee passing the bill.

The Kalamazoo Gazette ran a front-page article Wednesday by Paula Davis, who has covered the topic since it first came up. Kalamazoo AM radio station WKZO also had a very brief story on the rally.

Another useful feature of the meeting was a hand-out sheet on what supporters of retaining the orchard property as public open space can do. The version at the meeting by Lad Hanka was crisp and punchy. I couldn’t quickly get it into this post, so I had to fall back on the following version.

What You Can Do
to Save the Colony Farm Orchard (=Enchanted Forest)

The bill passed the House after being introduced by and has been reported out of the Appropriations Committee in the Senate with Sen. Tom George (R-Kal) voting for it. The only Senator on the Appropriations Committee who voted against it was Sen. Liz Brater (D-Ann Arbor). The Senate has delayed taking it up for two months, perhaps partly in response to hundreds of calls and letters; however, it could be brought up at any time.

Contact key players in state government and educate them about the facts and your position on the stripping of restrictions from the Colony Farm Orchard in Bill 5207. Ask them either to keep the bill from being considered or to amend it to remove the section on the Colony Farm Orchard. Ask them to vote against the bill if the Colony Farm Orchard provision remains. Phone calls, personal visits, and letters sent through the mail are most effective; however e-mails are also useful. P.O. Box 30036, Lansing, MI 48909-7536 is the US Postal Service address for all Senators.

Senate Majority leader Mike Bishop controls the scheduling of bills. 517-373-2417. Senator Alan Cropsey, majority floor leader, works closely with Bishop in scheduling votes. 517 373-3760.

Senate Minority leader Mike Prusi should know how strongly the citizens of the Kalamazoo area feel about the bill. 517-373-7840 (Toll Free Phone Number: 866-305-2038).

Sen. Tom George (R–Kalamazoo has said he supports the bill and trusts WMU to do the right thing. He declined to meet with ALPA recently, saying he might have time in January. Separately, he also declined to met with the student representatives of SSE. As the Senator from this district, the position he ultimately takes may be influential. 517- 373-0793.

Sen. Liz Brater has said she will oppose the bill. She deserves support. 517-373-2406.

Rep. Robert Jones (D–Kalamazoo) is the sponsor of HB 5207. He could withdraw it or withdraw the section that involves the Colony Farm Orchard. Let him know what you think. 888-833-6636.

Gov. Jennifer Granholm will need to make a decision to veto or sign the bill if it passes the Senate. Let her know your position. 517-373-3400, 517-335-7858.

WMU President John M. Dunn needs to be more aware of community sentiment than he now is: john.dunn@wmich.edu, 269-387-2351, Office of President, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo MI 49008.

Some WMU Board members may be somewhat isolated from Kalamazoo events. A letter or email to Board of Trustees c/o Secretary of the Board Betty Kocher, with the request that your complete message be distributed to every Trustee would probably suffice. Email: betty.kocher@wmich.edu

And it is still very much worthwhile to continue sending letters and Viewpoints to the Kalamazoo Gazette. Go to http://www.mlive.com/mailforms/kzgazette/letters/

DSCN1939

Big Rally to Save the Colony Farm Orchard/Enchanted Forest

ALPA, the Asylum Lake Protection Association, will hold the first general public meeting for discussion of the attempt by State Representative Robert Jones (D-Kalamazoo) and Western Michigan University to remove conservation restrictions on the Colony Farm Orchard. The restriction placed on the land when it was conveyed by the state to WMU through the efforts of Bob and Jack Welborn (both R- Kalamazoo) states, “The conveyance shall provide that Western Michigan University may utilize the property solely for public park, recreation, or open space purposes, except that the legislature, by statute, may authorize Western Michigan University to utilize the property for some other public purpose.” WMU has stated that it plans to expand its BTR park onto this land located in Oshtemo Township.

Downtown Kalamazoo Public Library, Site of 8 December 2009 Rally to Save the Colony Farm Orchard

The meeting will be held Tuesday 8 December 2009 at 6:30 PM in the VanDeusen Room of the Kalamazoo Public Library (downtown Kalamazoo, 315 S. Rose St.). Parking is available on nearby streets. The program will include statements by concerned groups and individuals, a showing of Matt Clysdale’s documentary “Here We Go Again: Colony Farm Orchard” with new footage, a question-and- answer session, and information on how the concerned citizen can get involved.

Other Recent Developments

Something of the mood of the Kalamazoo public on the issue is shown by the Friday night (4 December) Viewpoint in the Kalamazoo Gazette by Holly Jensen. The Gazette headline was “Time to take a second look at donating to WMU.”

The Viewpoint takes a position against WMU selling the Orchard property to private developers. It mentions an e-mail and letter-writing campaign by a WMU alum to other alumni and donors suggesting they reconsider future donations/endowments/bequests. The article concludes: “Consider Scarlett O’Hara’s father’s conviction that land is ‘the only thing that lasts,’ because WMU has its ‘For Sale’ sign out.”

Another recent development that has come to my attention: An attempt by ALPA to arrange a face-to-face meeting with Senator Tom George (R-Kalamazoo) was unsuccessful. Senator George has stated his approval of the Colony Farm Orchard conversion and voted in favor of Representative Jones’s HB 5207 in the Senate Appropriations Committee. The explanation for his unwillingness to meet with local citizens, either here or in Lansing, was that he was too busy. It was suggested that ALPA could try again in January.

It may be of interest that the only member of the Senate Appropriations Committee who voted against HB 5207 was Liz Brater (D-Ann Arbor), who has probably the strongest record as a conservationist in either house. Thanks to Liz Brater are in order from all those striving to continue the existing protection of the Colony Farm Orchard. DSCN3201

See you at the Rally!

Colony Farm Orchard (= Enchanted Forest): Western Herald Wins Again

Large, old bur oak, one of many at Colony Farm Orchard. Photo by Richard Brewer

The major story in the Western Herald today, on the front page above the fold, is “SSE advocates Orchard property preservation.” The story was written by Fritz Klug, News Editor of the Herald.

SSE is the student organization Students for a Sustainable Earth. SSE describes itself as the premiere organization for student environmentalists at WMU. It’s a registered student organization whose mission is to promote attitudes and behaviors on the WMU campus and in the wider Kalamazoo community that are environmentally and culturally sustainable. It has a Facebook group of 435 members.

The story begins with a field trip that a mostly student group of 26 persons, took to the Colony Farm Orchard in October. SSE hosted it as a part of their campaign to save the Enchanted Forest. Benjamin Thayer, a WMU senior is quoted as saying, “It is enchanted because it’s a place in limbo.” This is an excellent, remarkably apt characterization. My dictionary defines limbo as a region of oblivion or neglect. WMU has neglected the Colony Farm Orchard, perhaps so that the claim could be made that the property is not utilized. And certainly, if WMU’s plans for the land are allowed to proceed, oblivion is its fate.

In the story, SSE Co-Chair Andrew Weissenborn indicates no opposition to the current BTR Park or the aim of job creation. “It is neat and extraordinary what WMU has done with the first BTR park,” he is quoted as saying, “but I do not think the park should be extended to the Colony Farm Orchard. The focus at this point is to preserve the land.”

The other front page story of the Herald, below the fold, is “WMU researchers study carbon sequestration benefits.” It describes research proposed by a Geosciences group to study sequestering carbon dioxide from large facilities such as factories and power plants by storing it at depths of 2500-3000 feet in porous sedimentary rocks where overlain by impermeable igneous rocks. It’s a possible technology that, along with many other techniques including conservation and alternative energy sources, may help us out of the global climate aspect of our current environmental predicament.

In the meantime, the Colony Farm Orchard continues sequestering carbon in its humble way–in the growth of old trees planted or self-seeded long ago and the many young ones that have volunteered in the past 50 years, in the vines of old grapes from the abandoned arbors as well as native grape-vines from seeds brought in by catbirds and robins, and in the large amounts of soil organic matter that accumulates each year mostly from foliage. Even a fair share of the carbon in the tree leaves from the west side of Kalamazoo that WMU allows the city to dump at the Orchard site becomes incorporated in rather long-lived compounds in the soil, making its own sequestration contribution.

Leaves from trees in the city of Kalamazoo dumped at Colony Farm Orchard

Tamarack in Oshtemo Township

Spicebush, late October, Oshtemo Township, Section 9. Photo by Richard Brewer

Wetlands are scarce in Oshtemo Township. Its thirty-six square miles are mostly high and dry and the soils are mostly well-drained. A few kettles exist in the moraine-outwash plain topoography. These are depressions formed when ice blocks left behind during the retreat of the last Pleistocene ice sheet melted. Most kettles in Oshtemo Township don’t hold water today. A few do some or most years; perhaps a clay lens lies somewhere beneath them, or perhaps enough clay occurred in the surrounding glacial drift to form a more-or-less impermeable layer when it eroded into the kettle.

The kettles that hold water year round or for a few months in the spring tend to have a buttonbush swamp at the bottom; some have a band of spicebush up the bank from the buttonbush. These are features of some of the sites disturbed least by agriculture and other human activity.

A small triangle of swamp forest is still present in the northwest corner of Oshtemo Township, but several wetland vegetation types that occur elsewhere in Kalamazoo County don’t seem to be present here. I’m unaware of any examples of open bog, bog forest, sedge fen, or prairie fen. Possibly small patches of some of these might have been here at the time of settlement.

Early this November I started noticing a good-sized tamarack tree in the wetland at the west edge of the Lilian Anderson Arboretum (Section 15) as I drove by. It was only 10 0r 15 yards south of West Main (M-43). At this time in the fall, tamarack needles turn a gold color, so the species is easily spotted. I finally stopped by on Saturday 14 November, by which time many of the leaves had fallen and the few remaining ones were dull brown.

The situation where the tamarack is growing is consistent with the possibility of fen. The site is at the base of a slope where ground water feeds the sizable wetland northeast of Bonnie Castle Lake. However, I haven’t noticed fen plants at other places along the edge of the wetland on many other visits to the Arboretum. I walked around near the tamarack, but I was just wearing short leather boots and couldn’t get very far out. I didn’t see any obvious fen indicator species, but this isn’t not a good time of year for botanizing anyway. I’ll have another look or two next spring and summer.

I’ll also make a point late next October of driving around the other wetlands in the township to see if more tamaracks are evident. Clarence and Florence Hanes found tamaracks in the Twin Lakes area which is right next door to Oshtemo, but nearly all the Twin Lake low ground is across the line, in Alamo Township.

Spotted wintergreen, Oshtemo Township, Section 9. Photo by Richard Brewer.

Spotted wintergreen, mid-November,Oshtemo Township, Section 9. Photo by Richard Brewer.

Walking back up the wooded slope above the wetland at the Arboretum, I saw a few spotted wintergreen plants (also called spotted pipsissewa). It’s a small plant, handsome with dark green leaves with a whitish line running along the midrib. The line is often rather jagged looking where the pale coloration runs off varying distances along the side veins. The leaves are evergreen and were peeking through the fallen oak leaves. A good share of the oak areas in Oshtemo Township that weren’t cleared still have the species, though I’ve never seen it abundant. A plant or two or small patches pretty widely scattered is the way it usually occurs. Its geographic range is basically eastern North America, in most parts of which its occurrence is much the same as here–never common but seemingly not in serious trouble.

A Conservation Plan for the Colony Farm Orchard (=Enchanted Forest)

Button from the Facebook group

As we all know, HB 5207 put forth by Representative Bob Jones (D–Kalamazoo) is designed to strip the conservation/public use restrictions from the Colony Farm Orchard as a first step in turning the 54 acres into an Annex to Western Michigan University’s BTR Park. Here are the stated restrictions: “The conveyance shall provide that Western Michigan University may utilize the property solely for public park, recreation, or open space purposes, except that the legislature, by statute, may authorize Western Michigan University to utilize the property for some other public purpose.” The bill, introduced in mid-July with no public notice, made its way quickly to the Senate but there progress has slowed.

This delay has given conservationists and other opponents of the measure a chance to make their views known, and they have done so in large numbers. As of now, we cannot know what will happen. But we should talk about what ought to be done with the property as conservation land. I made a start on this subject earlier and concluded that the best role for the land was exactly what it’s doing now, but better.

In that post, I discussed some important ecological functions of the Colony Farm Orchard. I won’t repeat them in detail, but here’s a quick list. It’s worth taking note that all these would be diminished or lost altogether by development as a BTR installation.

Many are beneficial effects that the Orchard exerts on the Asylum Lake Preserve, such as

Reducing noise from M-131

Filtering noxious fumes from trucks and automobiles on M-131

Reducing artificial lighting coming from M-131 and buildings across the highway to the west. Research on the dangerous effects that bright artificial lights have on insects, bats, amphibians in the breeding season, and other forms of wildlife is accumulating rapidly.

By serving as a very near island of similar but not identical habitats, the Orchard adds species, lowers extinctions and enhances immigration, all of which lead to higher biodiversity and ecosystem stability at Asylum Lake.

Other positive conservation roles the Orchard plays, not necessarily involving the Asylum Lake Preserve directly, include

Allowing for the presence and reproduction of shy animals, such as foxes and American woodcock, that are likely to be disturbed on the more heavily visited Asylum Lake Preserve.

Serving as a migratory bird stopover site well-supplied with cover, water, and food supplies in both spring and fall.

Preserving land within the historic Genesee tall-grass prairie and the adjacent bur oak opening. Perhaps few herbaceous species survive from those pre-settlement plant communities, but numerous bur oaks of various ages and sizes are present that are almost certainly descended from the oaks of the original savanna.

This is just a good start on a listing of the conservation values of the Orchard. There are, for example, the marvelous asparagus patches along the west edge. Not for nothing was Euell Gibbons’s first book named Stalking the Wild Asparagus. “When I am out along the hedgerows and waysides gathering wild asparagus,” he wrote, “I am twelve years old again and all the world is new and wonderful as the spring sun quickens the green things into life….”

There are also the old trees–horse chestnut, tulip tree, maples–planted by the original farm family or by the staff or patients of the Colony Farm. Big and open grown but surrounded now by many trees of smaller diameters, these are probably what suggested the “Enchanted Forest” name to the Facebook Group. They ought to be kept as a way of conserving human history as well as natural history.

Then there is the carbon sequestration that has gone on and is going on in the accumulation of tree biomass, which acts to temper the greenhouse effect and slow global climate change. Turning this land into a BTR park extension would almost certainly mean cutting most of the trees and brush and releasing the stored carbon into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide either by burning or by the slow fire of decomposition.

It’s not possible yet to come up with a complete conservation design, but here are some things we might want to do when the Colony Farm Orchard is devoted to conservation.

1. Construct a self-guided loop trail going through the property’s major habitats with the trailhead on the east side of the property next to Drake Road.
2. Next to the trailhead, construct a small bicycle parking space. Too much space for automobile parking has already been subtracted from the Asylum Lake Preserve to allow more to be lost for auto parking here.
3. Provide for safe passage of pedestrians from somewhere south of the Asylum Lake parking lot at the top of the hill on Drake by means of pedestrian on-demand lights, or an overpass.
4. Stop the dumping of leaves and yard waste from Kalamazoo. It’s a public service of a sort, but on a parcel of only 54 acres it takes up space that ought to be available for natural revegetation or restoration. The area of thick leaf mulch can be seen in one of the fine low-level aerial photographs of the Colony Farm Orchard by JaySeaAre. Locate the metal pole barn (“Butler building”) on the west border (toward the highway); the heavy leaf mulch is the unvegetated area east of the Butler building and running south toward the electric substation and north toward the old orchard. Several years accumulation are involved, ringed with rank growths of barnyard weeds.
5. Erect a signboard facing M-131 that says something like this:

Asylum Lake Preserve of Western Michigan University

A sanctuary of 320 acres protected for all time

that by education, research, and as green and open space

benefits the public and the Earth

Before describing what the trail could be like, it’s worth considering why we need a trail at all. People who are highly enough motivated have always made their way onto the Orchard for bird-watching, asparagus hunting, photography, and contemplation. And no trail is needed for the Orchard to continue its services to the Asylum Lake Preserve. But there are good reasons for the trail: One, it will make it much handier to visit the site, especially for education–classes, but also groups interested in natural history, and any strolling autodidact.

Two, if the Orchard is left as is, there will be those who say, as some connected with WMU have said, that the land is not utilized. Of course, the charge was and is bogus. But the trail is one way to demonstrate utilization. It will show most people that the land is utilized, though perhaps not that segment of humanity for whom the only meaningful way a piece of property can be utilized is to generate income.

What should the trail be like? I’d say most of it should be narrow, just wide enough for one person to walk comfortably, and unimproved. No dogs, I’d say. It’s nice that people can walk their pets on the Asylum Lake property, but the Orchard ought to continue to be a dog-free refuge, a place for the woodcocks and turkeys and other ground nesters.

There would be plenty to see along the trail, including many of the features already mentioned. Any trip would find dozens of things to look at and discourse on, as the changing seasons brought forth something new every day.

The trail should loop through the south part of the WMU Foundation property. In fact, I’d say that the south half of the Foundation land ought to be reunited with the Enchanted Forest. The eight acres extending up to Stadium Drive were regrettably severed from the Orchard property in 1957 and sold into commerce. The Foundation did Kalamazoo a service by acquiring it in 2007.

Pond with Mallards on WMU Foundation land just north of Colony Farm Orchard. Photo by R. Brewer

Having the trail run through the south part of what is now Foundation property would include a small pond and the ducks and aquatic life that could be seen there and also an area of great hydrological interest as the main source of ground water flow into Asylum Lake.

These are just some ideas of mine. I haven’t discussed them in detail with anybody. No charette was held. Nobody paid me a consulting fee; my work was all pro bono publico. Publico has been given short shrift in WMU’s proposals for the Orchard, so I’m glad to bring a little of it back.

Will the Colony Farm Orchard be allowed to fulfill these conservation aims? That depends on the Michigan Senate, or perhaps Governor Granholm. But, of course, it depends most of all on Western Michigan University, which could at any time, decide to let the Orchard live up to the purposes for which it was conveyed from state to university in 1977. That WMU has not already asked the Michigan legislature to withdraw the section of HB 5207 dealing with the Colony Farm Orchard reveals an anti-conservation, anti-environment, anti-sustainability mindset that may foretell a troubled future.

Save the Enchanted Forest (aka Colony Farm Orchard)!

DSCN3142 About a week ago, a group of students opposing the demolition of Western Michigan University’s Enchanted Forest, invited me to one of their meetings. The Enchanted Forest is what they call the land that is sometimes known as the Colony Farm Orchard. Enchanted Forest is a much better name.

This was a Thursday night and they were planning a letter writing session for the following evening. I talked for a little while about past and current threats to the Enchanted Forest. Andy Weissenborn and a dark-haired young woman whose name I didn’t get asked a few questions that I tried to answer. I gave them my take on how best to get in touch with members of the Michigan Senate, where the bill stripping the restriction that the land be kept as open space for public use was then, and still resides today (30 October).

The student group is on facebook. Here are the first few lines of the group’s description:

Western Michigan University is moving ahead with a plan to expand the Business Technology and Research Park. In order to do this, they are going to flatten the woods at the northwest corner of the Drake and Parkview intersection, the “Enchanted Forest.” Don’t get us wrong, we’re not against development in general. And we’re not against new business and new jobs.

The facebook group is open and the content is public.

The students have evidently put on a very effective campaign to reach members of the Senate. Check out Chelsea Thorpe’s comments for 29 October on the group’s Wall. Among other things, she says, “Call, write, my babies! Let’s save the dadgum Enchanted Forest!” and includes the phone number for the person to call in Lansing about postponing the vote (Senate majority leader Michael Bishop at 517 373 2417.)

I’ve heard that other actions to save the Enchanted Forest are being planned or contemplated.

In my opinion this effort is the greenest and most biospherically useful thing that’s happened at WMU at least since Dok Stevens left and maybe since Huey Johnson graduated.

Save the dadgum Enchanted Forest!

The Colony Farm Orchard is Not Trade Land

Horse chestnut tree at Colony Farm Orchard. Photo copyright October 2009 by Richard Brewer.

I’ve always wondered if there was one fundamental difference between conservationists and those other people whose disposition is exactly opposite–the exploiters, polluters, clear-cutters, mountaintop blasters, and all the other ill-users and abusers of the land and waters. In recent experiences with the case of the Colony Farm Orchard, I think I have an inkling of what the fundamental difference might be.

Several years ago The Nature Conservancy coined the term “trade land” to refer to real estate given to the organization merely as an asset, like a used car or shares of stock, rather than as land meant for preservation. In earlier days, people had sometimes been unhappy, even irate, when they heard of TNC selling land, thinking that sanctuary land was being sold. The term was invented to refer to lands with minor conservation value that are donated mainly for the money that TNC can raise by selling them.

The 54-acre Colony Farm Orchard (henceforth, just Orchard) in Oshtemo Township, Michigan, has certain features that make it desirable for conservation. I’ve listed these in more detail in earlier posts (such as this one), but they include a variety of habitats, historical interest from being located within the tall-grass Genesee Prairie and bur oak opening, and prime habitat as a migratory bird stopover site. Perhaps more important is that the Orchard contributes to increased biodiversity and stability of the 270-acre Asylum Lake Preserve which is adjacent to the east, across Drake Road. The Orchard serves as a very near island of similar but not identical habitat.

The State of Michigan gave the Orchard to Western Michigan University in 1977 for the purposes stated in the original legislative conveyance: “Western Michigan University may utilize the property solely for public park, recreation, or open space purposes, except that the legislature, by statute, may authorize Western Michigan University to utilize the property for some other public purpose.”

The intent is perfectly clear; this is land conveyed as dedicated open space for public use. The Orchard is not trade land.

Nevertheless, in the 1990s, WMU sought to develop the Orchard as part of a proposed BTR (Business Technology Research) Park. A long battle ensued between WMU, elements of Kalamazoo City government, and certain corporations on one side and various environmental and neighborhood groups plus a high percentage of the citizenry on the other. The first major skirmish was an attempt by WMU to get around the quoted restriction. WMU persuaded a local Michigan House member, Dale Shugars, to introduce legislation changing the permitted uses to “1. For a public park, recreation area, or open space area. 2. For a business, technology and research park…” The bill with the altered language passed the House, but a Senate committee concluded that a BTR park was not a public purpose, The Senate did not act on the bill, and in 1993 it died. The Orchard was saved.

Many things happened between 1993 and now. One was a compromise of sorts, by which land south of Parkview Avenue, which had come from the state to WMU with no restrictions, was opened to the development of a BTR park. Such a development was begun in 2001. The Asylum Lake parcel north of Parkview and east of Drake that had come to WMU in 1975 with exactly the same restrictions as the Orchard was designated as a Preserve. It was further protected in 2004 by a Declaration of Restrictions, meant to serve the same function as a conservation easement.

The Colony Farm Orchard is at the upper left in this diagrammatic map which appears on the Asylum Lake website

During the years between 1993 and 2004, agreement had been reached on a variety of topics. The conservationist participants in the discussions believed that the Orchard, north of Parkview and with the same legislative restrictions as the Asylum Lake property was a part of the Preserve. The WMU participants, however, rebuffed all attempts at explicit inclusion of the Orchard in the Declaration of Restrictions. Probably this should have been a signal that WMU was not giving up its plan to violate the restrictions on the Orchard, but the participants were comforted by the fact that the land was still protected by the original restriction. Perhaps they were also tired after the years-long debates.

Faint signals of a renewed attempt on the Orchard could have been noticed in late February 2009. WMU Vice-President Robert Miller emerged from WMU’s five-year Orchard dormancy to tell one of the Asylum Lake neighborhood groups: “There are no plans to develop that area, but it is one of the options we are looking at. I can tell you, should a decision be made to expand the Business, Technology, and Research Park, we would come to you, to the entire community with our plans and share them. [But] we have none.”

By 2 July, the signal was much stronger. The WMU Board of Trustees at its July meeting empowered the admistration to spend up to $985,000 to buy out a long-standing Michigan State University lease to conduct pest insect research on the Orchard. Greg Rosine, another WMU Vice President, made it all explicit; he mentioned the deed restrictions and said that WMU was “seeking to get those restrictions changed.” Local Representative Robert Jones introduced House Bill 5207 to strip the restrictions on 16 July, though the first local public notice was not until 1 August.

Local adverse reactions were evident as early as 14 July at a meeting of the Oshtemo Township Board. Numerous letters and phone calls followed in later days and weeks, to the Kalamazoo Gazette, WMU administrators and board members, and local members of the legislature. Much of this is related in earlier posts at this website. As of the day I write, 28 October 2009, the bill has passed the House and been approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee. Tardy and prolonged debate on the state budget, typical of the Michigan legislature, has delayed immediate action in the Senate.

Proponents of removing the restrictions and making the Orchard an annex to the current BTR park have said little publicly and have been unwilling to engage in any public forum or debate. Apparently, their arguments are that the BTR is full, that it created more than 1,300 jobs “directly or indirectly” and an expansion would create many more, and that it is a logical site for expansion because it is already owned by WMU, is adjacent to the current park, and is not utilized.

Some of the claims are questionable and the rest are wrong. The BTR park isn’t full. Were the jobs “created” or were they jobs that, in the absence of the BTR park, would still have lodged somewhere in the Kalamazoo area? Considering the current job market, how soon will a BTR Park annex actually be needed? Plenty of other sites exist for expansion, if expansion should ever be necessary. Included are other unrestricted properties owned by WMU as well as remediated brownfield sites in Kalamazoo that are going begging. Although WMU’s early, obfuscatory statements in February mentioned that expansion to the CFO was “one option,” evidence is lacking than any other site was considered.

In fact, the main argument in favor of the Orchard is money. The Orchard is land bought with taxpayer dollars and given to WMU by the state for public use as open space. Expansion of the BTR park would consist of dividing the parcel into a few lots and selling them for commercial use at market value. Estimates for total income from the sales start at around $3 million. With a cost basis of zero, WMU could reap a handsome profit.

In a rational accounting, the justification for converting this public open space to a BTR park annex fails. To me and a good many others, there is little need even to do the accounting. Here is land that in the transfer from state to university was set aside for the public good in language as plain as can be written.

I believe that here we are coming close to the fundamental distinction between conservationists and exploiters. The difference is the unwillingness or perhaps the constitutional inability of the exploiters to understand and honor a perfectly explicit covenant. They see it as nothing more than an obstacle to making money from the land, to be gotten around or over. To them, conserved land is not utilized; conserved land does not perform.

To the exploiters, all land is trade land.

Saving the Colony Farm Orchard: You don’t have to be an environmentalist

This is a response to an unsigned editorial published Monday 5 October 2009 in the Western Herald concerning Western Michigan University’s designs on the Colony Farm Orchard. Since it was unsigned, it’s presumably the official position of the Herald Editorial Board. My response was published in the Herald on Monday 12 October. The version here is slightly modified from the published version.

A small stream in the springy area at the north end of the Colony Farm Orchard. Photo by Richard Brewer.

A Herald editorial endorsed WMU’s attempt to turn the protected Colony Farm Orchard into an annex of the BTR park. After a kind of cost/benefit analysis the Herald concluded that the university would make a bunch of money. Just four quick points:

1. Since WMU paid nothing for the land (bought by the state with taxpayer money), WMU ought to be able to sell it at a profit. Who couldn’t? The BTR park has done well–or so we’re told. WMU never provides cash flow figures.

But the BTR park opened near the beginning of one of the biggest booms, or bubbles, in U.S. history. The Dow Jones Industrial Average went from below 10,000 to over 14,000 between 2001 and 2007. Then the economy crashed and burned. By early 2009 the Dow dropped below 7000; the wealth that people thought had been created disappeared. Today the Dow is struggling to get back to where it was in 2001.

The current BTR Park has three unsold lots and at least two vacancies, plus the soccer field which remains to be developed. It may be years before new lots in the Annex are needed. Or they may never be needed.

2. People like me who want to save the Orchard do not object to WMU making money. Most public universities, including WMU, have been so starved by state government that to stay in operation they need to beg, borrow, and accept grants and contracts from large corporations that do not have the public good uppermost in their minds. But there are lines that should not be crossed. WMU crossed the line with their Colony Farm Orchard plans.

3. The idea that WMU deserves credit for protecting the Asylum Lake Preserve is fantasy. Its protected status is the outcome of a long, intense battle all through the 1990s between the WMU administration on one side and many people on the other. Among the WMU opponents were the Asylum Lake Preservation Association; neighborhood groups; an active, vocal group of WMU students; assorted conservationists and environmentalists; and, toward the end, the Michigan Senate following the lead of Senator Jack Welborn.

As late as 1998 when the chance of a business park on the Asylum Lake property and the Orchard was long dead, the WMU administration was still trying to turn the Asylum Lake property into a golf course! WMU lost. This land became the Asylum Lake Preserve.

4. The editorial mentions Aldo Leopold’s land ethic. Adherents to the land ethic will be opposed to WMU’s plan, but you don’t have to be an environmentalist to know it’s not right. That follows from an older, easily understood ethical principle, the idea that we keep our promises. This is the first reason why WMU should not try to overturn the dedication of the Orchard as open space. A conservation reason is not far behind: How can conservation land ever be secure if the promises of protection by land holders such as the government and the university mean nothing?

Will those who come after us at WMU say of the current leadership, They kept the faith? Or will they say, They betrayed a trust?

Private Options: The Leading Edge in Conservation Today

This review was published in 2005 as the second entry in my Land Trust Reading List on the earlier version of this website. Slightly revised and updated, it’s republished here on the occasion of the 2009 Land Trust Alliance Rally.

Private Options: Tools and Concepts for Land Conservation. Barbara Rusmore, Alexandra Swaney, and Allan D. Spader, Editors. 1982. Island Press.

This proceedings volume brought together a great fund of information about land trusts at an important time in the development of the movement. Nearly thirty years later, the book is still useful to anyone trying to learn about land trust operations. Other than some specifics of tax law and regulations, little of the material is outmoded.

The approximately 75 papers came from the first two conferences aiming to take a national view of private land conservation by local organizations. Both were held around this time of year 28 years ago, in the fall of 1981. The first, the National Consultation on Local Land Conservation, was held in Cambridge MA October 14-16 under the auspices of the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. The second a month later, November 13-15, was Private Options for Land Preservation, A Conference for Practitioners. It was held in San Francisco, though under the sponsorship of the Montana Land Reliance.

The Lincoln Institute, a land use policy group, was relatively new, founded in 1974. The Montana Land Reliance, a local land trust, was still newer, formed in 1976 and awarded non-profit status in 1978.

Land trusts formed since the later 1980s have mostly been named “land trusts” or “land conservancies,” but those formed in the hundred years between 1891 (the Trustees of Reservations) and the early 1980s used a variety of names, sometimes “trusts” or “conservancies” with various modifiers, but also many “associations,” “societies,” or “foundations.” As far as I know, the Montana organization is still the only “reliance.” Perhaps it was called a “reliance” from the rarely used definition of “one relied on.” There may be more to it than that or, possibly, less.

The book combines material from the two conferences; that from the National Consultation amounts to about 60 percent to the Private Option’s 40 percent. A separate proceedings for the National Consultation had been quickly assembled and published by the Land Trust Exchange (later, Land Trust Alliance), the national umbrella organization to which the conference gave rise. The National Consultation material included in this book is virtually identical to the separately published proceedings. Proceedings from the Private Options conference were advertised but evidently never produced, probably being incorporated directly into the joint volume.

Two conflicting emotions dominated the conferences. One was gloom over the threat to conservation and environmental protection that came from the new (January 1981) administration in Washington, that is, from Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush and their appointees. “Somewhere between Teddy Roosevelt and James Watt, the Industrial Revolution won out over the purple mountains’ majesty,” wrote Maggie Hurchalla, a representative of a Florida land trust to the National Consultation. “Land trusts are largely an answer to government failure. As a result, they are an accusation.”

But there was also a feeling of excitement at the great potential of private land conservation. Cecil Andrus, governor of Idaho and Secretary of the Interior under Jimmy Carter, gave the keynote address at the Private Options conference. He called the blossoming land trust movement the “leading edge” and the “third wave” of conservation in the U.S. The first wave was the rise of government protection of land, wildlife, and forests–the National Parks, National Forests, game protective laws, and conservation advocacy groups. The second was the popular environmental movement of the late 1950s, 1960s, and early 1970s with its accompanying federal and state regulatory legislation. “I call you the third wave,” Andrus said to the gathering.

In a section of comments from participants of the National Consultation, Allan D. Spader, the organizer of the conference, said, “The relatively spontaneous accomplishments and growth of the local land trust movement [are] unique in a world where success is measured in terms of media hype…or a government program grant.” And Robert Augspurger of the Peninsula Open Space Trust (CA), wrote of the conference itself, “[O]ne might compare [it] to an old-fashioned revival meeting. Here we had a group of ‘circuit-riders’ from all over the country, coming together to refresh, reinspire and reeducate each other. The results were indeed electric.”

Authors include a good many persons still active in the land trust movement–after all, it was less than 30 years ago. Among these are Mark Ackelson, Joan Vilms, Martin Zeller, Jean Hocker, and William Hutton. Some figures important in the exponential growth phase of land trusts are gone or less engaged now. Among these are Kingsbury Browne, Jr., Russell L. Brenneman, Gordon Abbott, Jr., and Benjamin R. Emory. Several more who contributed to the discussions were active for a time but are no longer connected with land trusts or, at least, not in any very visible way. Where, for example, is Maggie Hurchalla, author of the provocative quote a couple of paragraphs back?

[Added 14 August 2009. I now know where Maggie Hurchalla is. I was put on the trail by a column in Parade magazine. (I make it a point to spend at least 30 seconds every Sunday reading Parade.) Her name came up in an answer to a question concerning former Attorney General Janet Reno.

I must have failed to google Maggie when I wrote the original review, because over five thousand entries came up when I tried the other day. In addition to being Janet Reno’s younger sister, she has been involved in environmental battles throughout her life. Among her causes have been growth management in Florida and wetlands protection and restoration, including the Everglades. She served as a Martin County commissioner for 20 years (1974-94), was chosen Florida Audubon’s Environmentalist of the year in 1981 and was a National Wetlands award recipient in 2003. As far as I can tell from material on the web, Hurchalla has little if any recent connection with the land trust movement. But she has continued to fight the good fight.]

Most topics of importance to land trusts are at least mentioned in the volume. Among other subjects, we read about marketing, preservation of agricultural and historic lands, community land trusts, negotiation skills, tax policy and income tax incentives, conservation easements (including some early comments on possible problems), partial development, cooperation with government (pros and cons), some summary material from the first real census of land trusts, a bit of history, some regional perspectives, organizational development, and ideas about forming a national umbrella organization.

Although there is material on fee acquisition and stewardship of natural lands, an emphasis on conservation easements and agricultural lands is evident. This emphasis was unrepresentative of what the majority of the more than 400 land trusts in existence were actually doing as of 1981. It was, however, prophetic of the shifts in emphasis that characterized much of the 1980s and 1990s and prevail today.