American Chestnut Land Trust

a land conservancy

  • Home
  • About
    • What We Do
    • Staff and Board
    • Mission and History
    • Reports, Publications and Slides
    • ACLT Blog
    • Latest Newsletter
    • Newsletter Search Page
    • ACLT Press Kit
    • Contact Us
  • Climate Change
  • Land & Maps
    • Trails and Trailheads
    • Double Oak Farm
    • The Land
    • Watershed Ecology
    • Parkers Creek Heritage Trail
    • Cultural History
  • Support ACLT
    • Ways to Support ACLT
    • ACLT Merchandise
    • General Donation
    • Join/Renew Membership
    • Friends Forever – Planned Giving
    • ACLT’s Sponsors
  • Get Involved
    • Become a Volunteer
    • Volunteer Hours
    • Calendar of Events
    • Conserve Your Land
    • Southern Maryland Conservation Alliance
    • Watershed Friends Groups
      • Friends of Hunting Creek
      • Friends of St. Leonard Creek
      • Friends of Mill Creek
      • Friends of Fishing Creek
      • Friends of Hall Creek
  • Join/Renew
  • Donate
Home / Archives for Uncategorized

Change Is Coming. Grow Into It.

April 19, 2023 By Community Relations Manager

By Kassandra Patrick, Chesapeake Conservation Corps Intern/Double Oak Farm Manager

Our food systems are under threat, and our food systems are threatening us. Threats to us come from agriculture’s greenhouse gas emissions, but climate change caused by the emissions threaten agriculture as well, and by extension all food systems, through catastrophic weather changes. Luckily, agriculture has the potential to reverse its own trend of releasing emissions by making farming more ecologically friendly. Changing farming practices across the globe to incorporate perennial crops, cover crops, minimal tillage, and other sustainable practices would not only sequester more carbon but also improve soil health and food production[1].

Changing a whole world’s worth of farming practices is already a near impossible task, but what makes things worse is our current food system, which does not support farmers trying to adopt these practices. Farming careers are undervalued by society, leading to interested young people being discouraged from going into the field and people who do work in the field being subjected to poor working conditions[2], low pay[3], and little to no benefits[4]. I love agriculture, and I would love nothing more than to farm for the rest of my life in a way that serves the Earth and the communities around me. If I thought that it was possible for me to start farming as a career and have good working conditions, a living wage, and benefits, I would have already been farming while I was still attending college, gaining the experience to continue in the field as I worked toward my degree in Environment and Sustainability. I may have even chosen to focus my major electives around agriculture and food systems, but farming as a career path just did not seem feasible at the time, especially knowing I would be graduating with debts to pay. Luckily for me, I did end up finding a way to start farming by coming to ACLT. Becoming the Double Oak Farm Manager has not only allowed me to start gaining the valuable experience necessary to improve as a beginning farmer, but also showed me the inherent value of stewarding the land one farms.

As things stand, land is mostly seen through its ability to be exploited, leading to prime agricultural land being degraded or developed for housing, utilities, and other buildings before a single crop can be grown. Food systems are disconnected from the people they feed, leaving them incredibly vulnerable to disruptions to supply chains. Food that can not be moved goes bad and becomes food waste, and people facing food insecurity go hungry even when there is enough food produced to feed them. Despite the above systemic issues impacting the food system, a lot of public pressure has been directed towards farmers[5]. Farmers are told that their practices are hurting the planet, and that they need to change and be more sustainable or regenerative, which means different things depending on who is asking. When so many definitions of “sustainable agriculture[6]” and “regenerative agriculture[7]” exist, what are we asking from our farmers, and are the changes we’re asking for feasible?

The definitions of “sustainable” and “regenerative” seem to constantly morph. There are widely accepted aspects of both, but there is no standard that says any aspects must be included[8]. Therefore, rather than attempt to craft a universal definition, I aim to argue for what I believe “sustainable agriculture” and “regenerative agriculture” ought to mean. Sustainable agriculture ought to mean farming to sustain public health, environmental health, and farmers’ financial health. Sustaining public health goes beyond reducing greenhouse gasses. Nutrients in modern food have been dropping since 1950[9], but since food pricing is normally based on calories, farming food with higher nutritional value isn’t valued in the market. Environmental health includes issues of  climate change and biodiversity. The UN Environment Programme identified international food systems as the main driver of global biodiversity loss due to habitat loss when land is cleared for farming[10].

To solve the first two issues, sustainable profit is key because directing our money toward sustainable agriculture collectively assigns worth to ethically grown, nutritious produce; when our money is put toward resilient food systems, the systems can continue to provide for our communities during times of economic hardship and supply chain shortages. All farmers, whether they own land or work on a farm, deserve fair, livable wages and healthcare.

If separating the term “farmer” from “land owner” confuses you, it’s likely because the two have been synonymous in America for decades now. Not Our Farm, a non-profit organization that represents people who have chosen farming for their career but do not own land, has interviewed many farmers currently employed as farm workers, farm employees, members of farm crews, farm managers, and apprentices and interns and asked them who should be considered a “farmer[11].” Quotes from the farmers interviewed point out that the terms “farmer” and “farm worker” perpetuate a class difference and power imbalance between agricultural landowners and people who work for them, that sometimes landowners do not personally farm their land, and that gatekeeping of the term “farmer” is often said to be based on years of experience despite immigrant farmers with years of experience being labeled as  “unskilled labor.” Nomenclature aside, many of the farmers interviewed  spoke of harrowing experiences with workplace harassment, lack of access to potable water and bathrooms, and, ironically enough, food insecurity. These experiences were and are not exclusive to large industrial farms, but they can not be completely blamed on the farming industry either. The devaluing of the work required to produce food creates situations where farmers who don’t own farms contribute valuable, skilled labor yet still go unprotected by minimum wage laws.

On the land-owning farmers’ side of things, profit margins are incredibly slim and getting slimmer as input costs continue to rise. Research on global farming economics has shown that farmer owners receive an average of 27% of what consumers spend on food if the food is sold and consumed in their home country, and the percentage becomes lower if the food is exported, which it often is in the US[12]. In fact, the same 2021 study found that the average return in America is much lower than 27% at an average of 9%[13]. The American Farm Bureau Federation reports an even lower rate of return of only 8 cents per dollar a consumer spends[14].

To put into perspective just how tight a profit margin that is, I ask one question: Could you survive selling heads of broccoli? Broccoli is a high value crop rated as the 6th most popular vegetable as of October 2021.  A single head of broccoli, regarded by the USDA as crown cut broccoli, can sell for as much as $2.99 a crown, with the average price across the US being $2.05. That means that just to get above the federal poverty line for a single person, you would need to sell 82,866 crowns, and if you’re supporting a family of four, that number increases to a whopping 169,208 crowns. It bears repeating that this is just to clear the poverty line. If you want to clear the median household income with your broccoli, you’d need to sell 431,610 crowns. Granted, this 8 cents assumption takes into account wages for labor, so a farm owner may be able to make more by hiring only the bare minimum of employees and paying the lowest wages possible, which leads to the exploitation of employed farmers as described above. Costs of production are also taken into account, but referring back to the fact that the costs of inputs are increasing, lowering production costs simply may not be an option. This leaves little to no money, and likely little to no time, to invest in adopting sustainable practices. Rather than sustain these trends, we should want to change them. Where do we go from here to create a better agricultural system for these farmers?

Enter regenerative agriculture, which ought to mean farming to restore and improve public health, environmental health, farmer’s lives and livelihoods, and the culture of farming. The American idea of agriculture is dominated by the idyllic vision of small farms centered around the family unit, but this vision is only one way of farming, rooted in cultures in large part due to colonialism. In his Keynote speech for the 2023 Pasa Virtual Conference, Col Grodon details the history of farming in his home country of Scotland, describing how the invading British forces dispossessed indigenous people (in this case, the Gaelic people) from land with the excuse of  “agricultural improvement” to institute British family controlled farms. Patterns of colonialism leading to land being taken from indigenous groups are observable in every colonized country, but before those events, land was still being managed to produce food. According to Col, in the case of the Gaelic people, the land was often managed communally with no private ownership. The consequence of colonizing countries enforcing their model of farming onto new areas was that colonizers farmed while culturally disconnected from the previous history and cultures of the land they were farming, meaning they lacked an essential motivation to foster land stewardship. Regenerative agriculture’s fourth goal is to recreate those cultural connections. In the words of Jason Gerhardt, another Pasa conference speaker who presented on Community Action Farming, “The real point of regenerative agriculture is to regenerate the culture of agriculture.” Whether land is farmed by a family or communally, all farms need the support of the people they serve. Like the relationship between agriculture and climate change, the relationship is two-way. Cultural support for farmers leads people to care about the land and its management, protecting agricultural land and farmers’ access to it. Farmers who are integrated into a culture of agricultural appreciation can have a dialogue with the people they feed about community needs and the farming practices used to make their products, which creates trust in the farmers’ produce and an appreciation of their work, ultimately leading to a dedicated customer-base that will be less phased by higher prices that internalize the full cost of farm production.

How do we rebuild the culture of agriculture? Firstly, we restore the land. Once again, when I say “restore,” I am referring to more than just ecological restoration. To truly restore the land, in the words of Col, “we must re-story the land.” We need to reconnect the stories and traditions of the landscape with the people living on it, cultivating their appreciation of the land and stimulating their imagination with ideas for a future in harmony with the land. Re-storying also serves to connect people within a community through a shared local culture. Secondly, we empower communities to create robust local food systems. Reconnecting people not only to their neighbors, but also to their food and the land that they inhabit is essential to rebuild the value of farming within American culture. Finally, we mobilize as communities in financial support of agricultural practices that serve the goals of the first two steps. The food systems these practices support will create long-term, fresh, nutritious, and local yields of produce and animal products that can meet community needs. These financial systems won’t be one-size fit all. In some places, there may be family farms, while in others, there may be community gardens. Some communities may utilize land protected by conservation easements, while others may participate in Co-op farming. Whatever way works best for the people involved is fine, as long as it stabilizes the profit of agriculture, allowing for farmer owners to live well despite incurring extra costs to farm in an ecologically and public-health conscious way, for farm-employed farmers to receive a living wage and other necessary benefits, such as healthcare, and for the community to directly benefit from the extra dollars they choose to spend on food grown and raised fairly and consciously.

To even begin changing the world’s worth of farming practices, we need to change the way farmers and their contributions are viewed. If we want to continue eating, we need to build our food systems to be more resilient, not only to climate change, but also to changes in our communities. If we are all to continue living on this planet, we need even more than just a planet where climate change has been mitigated. Lack of access to nature, pollution of water and air, and degradation of soils are only a few of the other environmental problems directly affecting public health that we can fix through regenerative agriculture. Regenerative agriculture recognizes that a food system is just as dynamic as the larger society that it serves. Building resilience in culture protects our land, in people protects public health, in ecosystems protect the environment, and in profit contributes back to the systems that people rely on outside of food to live healthy lives.

A transition is coming whether we want it to or not. 50% of agricultural land is set to change hands in the next two decades. 78% of young farmers do not come from farming families. The 2023 Farm Bill, legislation that sets federal agriculture, nutrition, conservation, and forestry policy every five years, is being discussed in the Senate right now, with public hearings still ongoing. Agriculture is going to change, and our food systems along with it. Luckily, if anyone has experience adapting to dynamic, ever-changing systems, it’s farmers. Whether beginning or experienced, young or old, owner or employee, farmers dedicate a large portion of their work to adapting, but they aren’t well prepared. They can’t be, because their level of preparedness depends in large part on the support from the people they feed. Yes, that means the government needs better agriculture policies, and we should support the policies that increase the capacity of farmers to adopt regenerative practices. Start by commenting on the 2023 Farm Bill, but comments can’t be our only collective action. The best thing that all of us can do to create change is to buy local. It’s the key action to create the financial conditions for regenerative agriculture and resilient food systems. The second best thing we can all do is grow some of our own food. This is for the sake of protecting ourselves from the next break in the global food chain, understanding the time commitment and skilled labor of farmers, and creating a personal connection to the land literally in our own backyards. These actions will defend our food systems from threats of all nature, from climate change to pandemics, and they will demand that our food systems no longer threaten our health and instead increase our quality of life. If change is inevitable, then let’s take a lesson from our farmers and grow into it.

 

 

 

[1] “Soil-Based Carbon Sequestration.” April 15, 2021. MIT Climate Portal. Accessed February 10, 2023. https://climate.mit.edu/explainers/soil-based-carbon-sequestration.

[2] “Resources.” 2021. Not Our Farm (blog). October 22, 2021. https://notourfarm.org/resources/.

[3] Kelmenson, Sophie. 2022. “Between the Farm and the Fork: Job Quality in Sustainable Food Systems.” Agriculture and Human Values, October. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-022-10362-x.

[4] See note 2 above.

[5] Karst, Tom. “Growers Feel Shortchanged with Sustainability Efforts.” 2022. AgWeb. June 30, 2022. https://www.agweb.com/news/business/conservation/growers-feel-shortchanged-sustainability-efforts.

[6]Gambino, Chris. “Defining Sustainable Agriculture & Why That Matters.” Lecture, Pasa 2023 Virtual Sustainable Agriculture Conference, January 17, 2023.

[7] Johnson, Nathanael. 2019. “‘Regenerative Agriculture’: World-Saving Idea or Food Marketing Ploy?” Grist. March 12, 2019. https://grist.org/article/regenerative-agriculture-world-saving-idea-or-food-marketing-ploy/.

[8] See note 7 above.

[9] Lovell, Rachel. “How Modern Food Can Regain Its Nutrients.” 2021. Accessed February 13, 2023. https://www.bbc.com/future/bespoke/follow-the-food-test/why-modern-food-lost-its-nutrients/.

[10] “Our Global Food System Is the Primary Driver of Biodiversity Loss.” 2021. UN Environment. February 3, 2021. http://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/press-release/our-global-food-system-primary-driver-biodiversity-loss.

[11] Adalja, Anita. “Not Our Farm: Stories from Farmers Who Don’t Own Farms.” Lecture, Pasa 2023 Virtual Sustainable Agriculture Conference, January 17, 2023.

[12] Yi, Jing, Eva-Marie Meemken, Veronica Mazariegos-Anastassiou, Jiali Liu, Ejin Kim, Miguel I. Gómez, Patrick Canning, and Christopher B. Barrett. 2021. “Post-Farmgate Food Value Chains Make up Most of Consumer Food Expenditures Globally.” Nature Food 2 (6): 4??–??. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-021-00279-9.

[13] Yi et al.“Post-Farmgate Food Value Chains Make up Most of Consumer Food Expenditures Globally.” 4??

[14] “Fast Facts About Agriculture & Food.” 2021. American Farm Bureau Federation. Accessed February 10, 2023. https://www.fb.org/newsroom/fast-facts?token=H0IEw1v7wfq7RwDCypu3W-Vm5E_CupKz.

Share

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Giving Props to Hunting Creek

March 2, 2023 By Community Relations Manager

By Mary Hoover and Ron Klauda

A major Calvert County stream flows under Rts. 2/4 just north of the Plum Pt. Rd. intersection and then meanders west for about 6 miles to the Patuxent River. Hundreds of motorists cross this stream everyday. Most may not even notice it. If they do, how many know its name?

The name of the stream is Hunting Creek. Until recently, this important Calvert stream went largely overlooked, as it lacked signage to denote its existence. This all changed in October 2022 when two Hunting Creek signs were installed by the Maryland State Highway Administration in response to a request from the watershed advocacy group known as the Friends of Hunting Creek (FOHC).

This signage, although a seemingly minor achievement, is no small accomplishment for the FOHC, who had been waiting for over nine months to see their beloved creek acknowledged. The request was submitted in early January 2022, with the hopes that highway signs would help raise awareness–if even subconsciously–for the ecological environs of our everyday commutes. 

Despite Calvert County’s abundant wildlife and unique ecological diversity, it is surprisingly easy to live on the peninsula and remain largely detached from its astounding nature. With the county’s main road running through its center, many commuters drive back and forth each day without appreciating the intricate network of forests and streams interlaced among the plentiful strip malls and subdivisions. Just as highway signage denotes which town center you are entering or which neighborhood you are passing, should there not also be signs indicating the county’s significant environmental features? The FOHC believes that our natural environment deserves the same recognition as our built environment, and the installation of Hunting Creek signposts is just one of the many efforts the group has made to advocate on behalf of the watershed. 

Since its formation in early 2020, the FOHC has been active in the community, pursuing a range of stewardship tactics to promote the health of the watershed. Notably, the group has taken the initiative in monitoring stormwater management infrastructure in the area and reporting observed failings to the county. The FOHC has also been monitoring water quality in the watershed for the past couple of years and writing extensive reports on their findings. Furthermore, FOHC has testified at many planning commission meetings regarding the Prince Frederick Town Center Master Plan Update, and their strong testimonies on the environmental implications of the Phase II expansion may have contributed to its eradication from the plan.

Awareness is a necessary stepping stone for environmental change. By bringing environmental awareness to the county, the planning commission, Hunting Creek residents, and now anyone who notices the new sign on route 2/4, the FOHC is helping to affect positive environmental change in Calvert. So, next time you find yourself passing this little green sign, remind yourself of the stream it signifies, and know that this stream is not only highly important to the FOHC who steward it, but also to all Calvert residents. Because even the most seemingly minor natural features of our landscape play a critical role in the larger, shared ecosystem that ultimately sustains us.

Interested in joining the FOHC or learning more about watershed stewardship in Calvert County? Contact mary@acltweb.org to be added to the list!





FOHC members Kyle Greene (and children), Ron Klauda, and Bob Estes; along with Greg Bowen, ACLT Executive Director, and Mary Hoover, SMCA coordinator, admire the new sign along the northbound lanes
Share

Filed Under: Uncategorized

The Generosity of Mother Nature

March 2, 2023 By Community Relations Manager

By Ron Klauda and Mary Hoover

According to Dr. Elliott Campbell, Acting Director of the Office of Science and Stewardship at the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, the Hunting Creek Watershed, located in the heart of Calvert County, Maryland, provides a whopping $26 million worth of total ecosystem services benefits each and every year.  With a total area of 19,878 acres, that generous gift translates to $1,308 in annual free benefits per acre.

So, what are ecosystem services?  Simply stated, they are any and all benefits that people receive from the environment.  Ecosystem services make human life possible.  The ecosystem services concept offers a succinct description of how our well-being depends, in so many ways, on Nature.  Check out this video for an informative visual description (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIH2v4Nr9i4).

Hunting creek is highlighted in yellow on this map of Calvert County's 22 sub-watersheds.

The forests, fields, wetlands, and streams in the Hunting Creek watershed:

  • absorb and remove 578 tons of air pollutants, helping us avoid $192,116 in human health-related costs;
  • capture and store 8,364 tons of carbon dioxide, equivalent to the carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from 6,000 cars (CO2 is a major contributor to global warming and climate change);
  • recharge and replenish 71,276,790 gallons of water to our underground aquifers that feed our wells and upon which all Calvert County residents depend, an amount equivalent to the annual groundwater usage of over 9,000 people; and
  • save us almost $11,000,000 in stormwater management and treatment costs.

Hunting Creek residents don’t receive an annual bill for the $26 million in ecosystem services benefits that the watershed provides.  But that doesn’t mean we owe nothing for these benefits.  As the adage goes, “There is no such thing as a free lunch.”  To ensure that we will continue to receive these essential ecosystem services, we have the dual responsibilities of (a) being good stewards of the environment and (b) protecting the watershed from degradation by our careless activities.

Dr. Elliott also informed the Friends of Hunting Creek that our watershed is special in other ways. More specifically, we learned that 80% of the watershed is identified by the Maryland Department of Natural Resources as being important wildlife habitat.  This designation comes from either being a targeted ecological area through Maryland Bio-Net or included in Maryland’s Green Infrastructure Network.   

With that, we thank the Hunting Creek watershed for the $26 million worth of ecosystem services benefits that it consistently provides each year.  We will strive to do everything possible to protect and enhance its ecological health to keep these benefits coming for many years into the future!

Share

Filed Under: Uncategorized

BeaverCON 2022: A Dam Good Time

August 30, 2022 By Community Relations Manager

By Clara Brill-Carlat, Assistant Land Manager

 

Earlier this summer, I had the opportunity to attend BeaverCON, a three-day conference all about beavers that was held in Baltimore County. While its name evokes images of Comic-Con, there were no people in beaver costumes running through the hallways at BeaverCON (at least until the last day, when a mascot named Castor made a brief appearance). Instead, there were experts from the East and West Coasts and even from Europe who presented on beaver dam analogs (BDAs), flow devices, beaver relocation, fish passage, and much more. Many of my fellow conference attendees were experts in their own right and had attended BeaverCON in 2020 as well, while I first learned about the conference this fall when I started to research BDAs and their many ecological benefits. Read more from an article I wrote about BDAs for ACLT’s Spring Newsletter here. (See pg. 3)

I quickly made my newcomer status known at BeaverCON when I tried to strike up a conversation with a young graduate student who, like me, had received a scholarship to attend the conference. “What are you studying in grad school?” I asked. She gave me a quizzical, almost pitying look and said, “Beavers.”

During the first two and a half days of the conference, I attended presentations about stream restoration projects, human conflict and coexistence with beavers, mapping beaver habitat, and even the history of beavers in North American literature. One of the most engaging talks was by Emily Fairfax, a researcher at California State University Channel Islands, who studies how beaver complexes protect land during wildfires. She presented striking satellite images of landscapes in the Western U.S. before and after fires; the images showed that areas with active beaver populations burned much less than areas without beavers. Her most recent research has focused on megafires, which are becoming increasingly common due to climate change. Megafires cover much larger areas than typical wildfires (over 100,000 acres), often spread extremely fast, and burn landscapes so severely that ecosystems struggle to recover. While people are often unable to control these fast-spreading megafires, Fairfax found that beavers are still able to significantly reduce the acreage that gets severely burned.

Watch the presentation here: https://youtu.be/wa1B4ijrgcc

Another particularly memorable presentation was by NOAA Fisheries biologist Chris Jordan, who dispelled some common misconceptions about streams. Humans have spent countless time and money transforming streams into conveyance systems that efficiently transport water from one place to the next while rarely overflowing their banks. However, a truly healthy stream is inefficient (to the human eye), meandering, and messy. We might imagine that a stream channel lined with old, tall trees is the epitome of ecological health, but counterintuitively, the presence of such trees can indicate that the stream has been prevented from flooding its banks. When it comes to trying to reverse the damage done to streams, Jordan explained, we are our own worst enemy. He spoke about how regulations designed to protect infrastructure from flooding and to protect streams from environmental degradation have created unintended barriers against nature-based restoration projects. For example, although building BDAs is a relatively low-tech way to reconnect a stream with its floodplain by raising the water level of the stream, regulations meant to prevent flooding make the implementation challenging. Having researched the permitting process for building BDAs at ACLT, this part of Jordan’s presentation certainly rang true. Luckily, as I would soon see, large-scale BDA projects are possible and are becoming more popular here on the East Coast. 

Watch the presentation here: https://youtu.be/6h005lBptLE

A beaver dam analog under construction at the Carroll Branch restoration site in April. The BDA is made of sticks woven between cedar posts, with silt fence material on top (photo courtesy of Ecotone).
Two beaver dam analogs at the Carroll Branch restoration site in July. BDAs can be built close together, like natural beaver dams sometimes are, to increase their resilience during storms (photo courtesy of Ecotone).
Two beaver dam analogs at the Carroll Branch restoration site in July. BDAs can be built close together, like natural beaver dams sometimes are, to increase their resilience during storms (photo courtesy of Ecotone).
A beaver dam analog made with large logs at the Carroll Branch site, shown in July (photo courtesy of Ecotone).

After the official end of BeaverCON, I joined an impromptu tour of a stream restoration site composed of BDAs and log jam structures. Ecotone, an ecological restoration company based in Maryland, had designed the project on the Carroll Branch in Baltimore County. The tour was led by Scott McGill (a co-founder of BeaverCON and the CEO of Ecotone) and was made possible by the persistent begging of some of my fellow conference attendees. 

This was the highlight of BeaverCON for me since we were able to walk right up to each of the structures, which had only been put in place about eight weeks before, and pester McGill with questions. I was struck by how the restoration was both a science and an art. The project had clearly been thoroughly planned, down to each impeccably sharpened cedar post that formed the backbone of the BDAs. At the same time, the materials used (sticks, logs, mud, vines, and netting) and the spacing between the structures varied such that no two dams were exactly the same. Most of the structures were BDAs, meaning that they spanned the entire channel, but a few were constructed log jams that only took up part of the stream. Since all the structures were so new, we could see that they were beginning to slow down the water but had not ponded it yet, and Ecotone was in the process of extending some of them farther onto the banks because the stream was cutting around them. McGill explained that adaptive management is critical for nature-based restoration projects like this one and that Ecotone had a five-year grant to continue managing the restoration.

After the three days of the conference were up, I returned to ACLT with a lot to chew on. Although I felt like a kit (the term for a baby beaver) compared to all the experts, restoration professionals, and beaver-researching grad students in the room, I learned more about beavers in those three days than I have in most of the rest of my life. I know the knowledge and connections I gained at BeaverCON will be helpful as we continue to explore the possibility of beaver dam analogs here at ACLT.

Share

Filed Under: Ecological Features, Front Page, Uncategorized

Little Lending Library Now Open at Double Oak Barn

July 27, 2022 By Community Relations Manager

ACLT’s New Little Lending Library Now Open at Double Oak Barn

We are pleased to announce that ACLT’s long-time supporter and super talented-carpenter, Tay Vaughan, has built us a new Little Lending Library for the barns at both trailheads. The south side library will be installed soon, but the first one is now installed and fully stocked on the barn porch at Double Oak Farm. The books are primarily intended for children. Please feel free to take a couple and bring back a couple of yours to share. We are looking for books having anything to do with nature, the earth, climate, etc. If the library is full, please do not leave your books – just bring them back at another time. 

The renovations/updates being done on the D.O. porch are part of a group project by graduates of this year’s Master Naturalist class. We think you will enjoy the work they have done! They have added and organized the artifacts found along the trails, added informative posters, and plenty of new chairs to welcome you! There’s more to come, include an exhibit on climate change, so visit often!

North Side Lending Library
New Little Lending Library stocked with kids' books.
Little Lending Library pre-installation
Little Lending Library pre-installation
First Batch of Kids' Books
First batch of kids' books for the Little Lending Library
Clover Young
Lots of kids' books to choose from
Owen Young Reading to Clover
Comfy rocking chair is welcoming to readers of all ages.
Sisters Choosing Books
Books are for kids of all ages and all related to nature.
Kailani Young
Kailani found the perfect nature book
D.O. Farm Porch-BEFORE
D.O. Farm Porch-BEFORE
D.O. Farm Porch-BEFORE (left side)
D.O. Farm Porch-BEFORE (left side)
D.O. Farm Porch-BEFORE (right side)
D.O. Farm Porch-BEFORE (right side)
Tables & Chairs-D-O Porch
New chairs & freshly stained table at D.O. Farm porch
D.O. Farm Porch-AFTER
D.O. Farm Porch-AFTER
D.O. Farm Porch-AFTER
D.O. Farm Porch-AFTER (but before library was installed)

;

 

Share

Filed Under: Front Page, Uncategorized

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • …
  • 12
  • Next Page »

© 2025 American Chestnut Land Trust. All rights reserved. CFC #53731.