Power struggle

COVENTRY — As he hiked through the Maxwell Mays Wildlife Refuge one morning, Scott Ruhren stopped beside some boulders. The lichens and mosses covering them created a striking patchwork in various shades of green.

“The colors are so vibrant,” said Ruhren, senior director of conservation with the Audubon Society of Rhode Island.

Ruhren’s eye was drawn to the smallest types of greenery in the refuge, but his purpose in bringing a couple of visitors through the 295-acre property was to give them a big-picture overview of the type of forest habitat in Rhode Island for which Audubon wants to strengthen protections.

Of course, the forest here, a mix of red maple, oak and white pine, is preserved in perpetuity — Mays, an artist known for his paintings of Rhode Island, donated it to Audubon upon his death in 2009 — but valuable woodlands of the same kind all around the state don’t have similar protection.

“Many people think there’s all this land out there. What’s problematic is how much is in private hands, for better or worse,” Ruhren said.

So Audubon is working with state legislators on a bill that aims to put in place the beginnings of a strategy to preserve and manage woodlands in Rhode Island, much like what the state has already done to protect farmland or wetlands.

Over the past half-century, residential and commercial development have steadily eaten away at the amount of forest in Rhode Island, but it has been recent proposals for energy projects in rural parts of the state that prompted the proposed Woodland Preservation and Stewardship Act, said Meg Kerr, senior director of policy for Audubon in Rhode Island.

There is the plan by Chicago developer Invenergy for a large fossil fuel-burning power plant on 67 acres of woodland in Burrillville which, according to The Nature Conservancy, Audubon and other state environmental groups, are part of an invaluable wildlife corridor.

And there are numerous plans for solar fields all around the state that in many instances have met with opposition because of the amount of tree-clearing they would require.

Although there is separate legislation under consideration in the General Assembly that aims to rein in solar development by using incentives to direct it to industrial sites, Kerr said the woodlands bill would take a broader approach to habitat protection.

“The two together,” she said, referring to the Invenergy project and solar development, “just highlighted for us the lack of a bigger strategy in the state.”

The bill — introduced in the House by Rep. Arthur Handy, D-Cranston, and in the Senate by Sen. Bridget Valverde, D-North Kingstown — would put together an advisory council that would identify critical forest areas in the state and would also make recommendations for forest stewardship to cities and towns.

At a recent hearing before the Senate Committee on Environment and Agriculture, Valverde said she was motivated to sponsor the bill because of the debate last year over a solar proposal on wooded land in North Kingstown, which is part of her district.

“A solar developer wanted to clear-cut acres and acres of forest to install a solar array,” she said of the proposal, which is now dead. “We’re seeing cities and towns being pressured by development both for housing and for things like solar installations. Planners don’t always have the tools they need to consider where those would be best put. This bill can help with that planning.”

The legislation has met with a mixed reception. The Rhode Island Farm Bureau supports it, as do the Conservation Law Foundation, The Nature Conservancy and Save The Bay.

The R.I. Department of Environmental Management hasn’t taken a position on the bill, but a spokesman said its goals can be achieved in part through solar guidelines developed by the Office of Energy Resources and Division of Statewide Planning. In addition, DEM director Janet Coit acknowledged that the state’s forests face “numerous and diverse stressors” and said the agency has worked to improve stewardship and identify conservation priorities.

“Efforts to highlight the important functions and values of our forests and other upland habitats are welcome,” she said in a statement. “I think more discussion is needed to share the tools we have now and to identify new and additional tools to protect important natural resources in Rhode Island.”

Others have come out against the legislation, saying that it would ultimately lead to more land in the state taken off the tax rolls. The Rhode Island Forest Conservators Organization, a group that represents private owners of forested land, argues that the bill would expand enforcement powers of the state and local authorities, to the detriment of landowners.

“We have concerns about property rights of individuals,” William Fortune, vice president of the group, said at the Senate hearing.

Kerr, however, said the intent behind the bill has never been to impinge on property rights.

“We recognize and respect the rights of property owners, and we want to work with them to identify and protect these important habitat areas,” she said.

The bill has been held for further study both in the House and the Senate.

Back at the Maxwell Mays refuge, Ruhren, an ecologist by training, walked past stands of oak trees that were killed by a combination of insect infestations, heat and drought. Unless the dead wood poses a danger, Audubon generally leaves it standing because it can be home to insects that birds feed on. Ruhren pointed to trees riddled with holes made by pileated woodpeckers in search of a meal.

Asked if he believes there’s more pressure now to develop woodland in Rhode Island than in the past, he said, “Sadly so, yeah, it seems like it.”

Ruhren said the DEM’s mission is focused more on protecting wildlife rather than habitat. There are wetlands rules and state regulations around tree-cutting, but he says, unlike Maryland or New Jersey, there are no broad protections for plants.

He brought up the recent development of a 21.5-megawatt solar farm in western Cranston that required the clearing of 60 acres of trees.

“One day it’s a forest and the next day it’s a clearing with a chain link fence around it,” Ruhren said.

—akuffner@providencejournal.com 

(401) 277-7457