Abstract
Maple syrup is an important non-timber forest product derived from the sap of the sugar maple (Acer saccharum Marshall). However, maple syrup producers are facing a diversity of challenges, including: potential range shifts in the maple resource; increasing variability in the timing, duration and yield of sap flow and syrup operations; invasive species, pests and diseases; and intergenerational land and business transfer challenges. Members of Maple Syrup Producer Associations in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan were surveyed to learn about their operations, adaptation strategies, concerns, and information needs. While many respondents indicated they have undertaken or plan to undertake adaptation activities, only 11% had done so out of specific concern over changing climate conditions. Climate-motivated activities included: being prepared to tap earlier and utilizing newer technology such as vacuum tubing or reverse osmosis to enhance sap collection and processing efficiency. Respondents were generally unlikely to consider planting climate-resilient maple cultivars or tapping trees other than sugar maple. They expressed the greatest concerns over tree health and forest pests, as well as their physical ability and family member interest to continue their operations. Boil season variability and weather issues were viewed with less concern. Respondents were generally optimistic that they can adapt to future conditions, likely in large measure through the adoption of new technologies, and they expect their syrup production levels to slightly increase in the future. If future climate scenarios play out, however, additional planning and adaptation strategies may be called for, particularly as they relate to forest health and productivity issues.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Cumulative ordered logit models were run for each of the 13 potential factors of concern to test for statistical differences in ratings by the producer size classes (See Snyder et al. 2018). Statistically significant differences were found in concern ratings by producer size class for all factors except for ‘threats from invasive plant species’ and ‘weather threats.’ Considering both the average Likert scale values (Table 7) and the cumulative ordered logit results from Snyder et al. (2018), concern for factors affecting one’s sugaring operation generally increase with producer size class. However, overall, respondents tended to rate most of the factors with only moderate levels of concern.
References
Armstrong JS, Overton T (1977) Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. J Mark Res 14(3):396–402
Bal TL, Richter DL, Storer AJ, Jurgensen MF (2013) The relationship of the Sapstreak Fungus, Ceratocystis virescens, to Sugar Maple dieback and decay in northern Michigan. Am J Plant Sci 4(2A):436–443. https://doi.org/10.4236/ajps.2013.42A056
Butler BJ, Catanzaro PF, Greene JL, Hewes JH, Kilgore MA, Kittredge DB, Zhao M, Tyrrell ML (2012) Taxing family forest owners: implications of federal and state policies in the United States. J For 110(7):371–380
Butler BJ, Hewes JH, Dickinson BJ, Andrejczyk K, Butler SM, Markowski-Lindsay M (2016) USDA Forest Service National Woodland Owner Survey: national, regional, and state statistics for family forest and woodland ownerships with 10+acres, 2011-2013. Res. Bull. NRS-99. USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Newtown Square, PA, p 39
Chamberlain JL, Emery MR, Patel-Weynand T (2018) Assessment of nontimber forest products in the United States under changing conditions. General Technical Report SRS-GTR-232. USDA Forest
Clark K, McLeman RA (2012) Maple sugar bush management and forest biodiversity conservation in eastern Ontario, Canada. Small-Scale For 11:263–284
Demchik MC, Finley JC, Davenport AL, Adams RD (2000) Assessing the characteristics of the Maple Syrup Industry in the PA to aid in the development of extension programs. North J Appl For 17(1):20–24
Dillman DA (2000) Mail and Telephone Surveys: The Total Design Method. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY
Dodds KJ, Orwig DA (2011) An invasive urban forest pest invades natural environments – Asian longhorned beetle in northeastern US hardwood forests. Can J For Res 41:1729–1742. https://doi.org/10.1139/X11-097
Duchesne L, Houle D, Côté MA, Logan T (2009) Modelling the effect of climate on maple syrup production in Québec, Canada. For Ecol Manag 258(12):2683–2689
Farrell M (2009) Assessing the growth potential and future outlook for the U.S. Maple Syrup Industry. In: Gold MA., Hall MM (eds) Agroforestry Comes of age: putting science into practice. Proceedings of the 1th North American Agroforestry Conference, Columbia, MO., May 31 – June 2, 2009, pp. 99–106
Farrell M (2013) Estimating the maple syrup production potential of American forests: an enhanced estimate that accounts for density and accessibility of tappable maple trees. Agroforest Syst 87:631–641
Farrell ML, Stedman RC (2013) Landowner attitudes toward maple syrup production in the Northern Forest: a survey of forest owners with≥100 acres in Maine, New Hampshire, New York and Vermont. North J Appl For 30(4):184–187
Foster NW, Morrison IK, Yin XY, Arp PA (1992) Impact of soil water deficits in a mature sugar maple forest: stand biogeochemistry. Can J For Res 22:1753–1760
Graham GW, Goebel PC, Heiligmann RB, Bumgardner MS (2006) Maple syrup production in Ohio and the Impact of Ohio State University (OSU) Extension Programming. J For 104(2):94–101
Graham GW, Goebel PC, Heiligmann RB, Bumgardner MS (2007) Influence of demographic characteristics on production practices within the Ohio Maple Syrup industry. North J Appl For 24(4):290–295
Hinrichs C (1998) Sideline and lifeline: The cultural economy of maple syrup production. Rural Sociol 63:507–532
Houston DR, Allen DC, Lachance D (1990) Sugarbush management: a guide to maintaining tree health. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report, NE-129, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, Radnor, PA. 55
Hsieh HF, Shannon SE (2005) Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res 15(9):1277–1288
Iverson L, Matthews S (2018) Appendix 2: Assessment of risk due to climate change: Sugar maple (Acer saccharum Marshall). In: Chamberlain J, Emery MR, Patel-Waynand T (eds) 2018 Assessment of nontimber forest products in the United States under changing conditions. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-232. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Asheville, NC, pp 249–251. https://www.fs.usda.gov/treesearch/pubs/56484
Iverson LR, Prasad AM (2002) Potential redistribution of tree species habitat under five climate change scenarios in the eastern US. For Ecol Manag 155:205–222
Iverson LR, Prasad AM, Matthews SN, Peters M (2008) Estimating potential habitat for 134 eastern US tree species under six climate scenarios. For Ecol Manag 254:390–406
Kuehn D, Chase L, Sharkey T, Powers S (2016) Perceptions of maple producers towards climate change. SUNY ESF, Syracuse, NY, p 38, http://www.esf.edu/for/kuehn/documents/mapleproducersreportfinal_001.pdf
Kuehn D, Chase LC, Sharkey T (2017) Adapting to climate change: perceptions of maple producers in New York and Vermont. J Agric, Food Syst Community Dev 7(3):43–65
Landscape Change Research Group (2014) Climate change atlas. Northern Research Station, U.S. Forest Service, Delaware, OH. http://www.nrs.fs.fed.us/atlas.
MacIver DC, Karsh M, Comer N, Klaassen J, Auld H, Fenech A (2006) Atmospheric influences on the sugar maple industry in North America. Adaptation and Impacts Research Division (AIRID): Meteorological Service of Canada, Environment Canada, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 23
Mathews SN, Iverson LR (2017) Managing for delicious ecosystem service under climate change: can United States maple (Acer saccharum) syrup production be maintained in a warming climate? Int J Biodivers Sci, Ecosyst Serv, Manag 13(2):40–52
Mehmood SR, Zhang D (2001) Forest parcelization in the United States: a study of contributing factors. J For 99(4):30–34
Murphy BL, Chretien AR, Brown LJ (2012) Non-timber forest products, maple syrup and climate change. J Rural Community Dev 7(3):42–64
Prasad AM, Iverson LR, Matthews S, Peters M (2007) A Climate Change Atlas for 134 Forest Tree Species of the Eastern United States [database]. Northern Research Station, USDA Forest Service, Delaware, Ohio, https://www.nrs.fs.fed.us/atlas/tree
QSR International (2012) NVivo Qualitative Data Analysis Software, Version 10. QSR International Pty Ltd, Doncaster, Victoria, Australia
Skinner CB, DeGaetano AT, Chabot BF (2010) Implications of twenty-first century climate change on Northeastern United States maple syrup production: impacts and adaptations. Clim Change 100:685–702
Smithers J, Blay-Palmer A (2001) Technology innovation as a strategy for climate adaptation in agriculture. Appl Geogr 21:175–197
Snyder SA, Kilgore MA, Emery MR, Schmitz M (2018) A profile of Lake States maple syrup producers and their attitudes and responses to economic, social, ecological and climate challenges. University of Minnesota, Dept. of Forest Resources, Staff Paper Series No. 248. 70 p. https://www.forestry.umn.edu/sites/forestry.umn.edu/files/staff_paper_248.pdf
Stein SM, McRoberts RE, Alig RJ, Nelson MD, Theobald DM, Eley M, Dechter M, Carr M (2005) Forests on the edge: housing development on America’s private forests. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-636. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR, p 16
USDA NASS (2016) Northeast Maple Syrup Production. USDA, National Agricultural Statistics Service. 4. https://www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics_by_State/New_England_includes/Publications/Current_News_Release/2016/Maple.pdf
USDA NASS (2017) Crop Production Statistics. (June 2017). USDA, National Agricultural Statistics Service, ISSN: 1936-3737, 30 p. http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/nass/CropProd//2010s/2017/CropProd-06-09-2017.pdf
van den Berg AK, Perkins TD, Isselhardt ML, Wilmot TR (2016) Growth rates of sugar maple trees tapped for maple syrup production using high-yield sap collection practices. For Sci 62(1):107–114
Whitney GG, Upmeyer MM (2004) Sweet trees, sour circumstances: the long search for sustainability in the North American maple products industry. For Ecol Manag 200:313–333
Withrow-Robinson B, Allred SB, Landgren C, Sisock M (2013) Planning across generations: Helping family landowners maintain their ties to the land. J Ext 51(5):Article # 5FEA6
Acknowledgements
Funding for this research was provided by the USDA Forest Service Research Joint Venture Agreement 14-JV-11242309-047 as well as the University of Minnesota’s Department of Forest Resources Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station Projects MIN-42-54 and MIN-42-65. We gratefully acknowledge the time and contribution by all of the maple syrup producers who participated in our research as well as the maple syrup producer association members who assisted us with contact information.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Snyder, S.A., Kilgore, M.A., Emery, M.R. et al. Maple Syrup Producers of the Lake States, USA: Attitudes Towards and Adaptation to Social, Ecological, and Climate Conditions. Environmental Management 63, 185–199 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-018-1121-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-018-1121-7