The Martha’s Vineyard Island Plan
The Martha’s Vineyard Island Plan is the Island's regional land use and environmental policy framework, completed by the Martha's Vineyard Commission (MVC) in 2009–2010 following years of community-wide planning. It sets out shared goals for housing, transportation, water quality, economic vitality, and — centrally — land conservation & forest stewardship. The Island Plan is not a regulatory instrument; it is a statement of community values intended to guide the MVC's review of development proposals under the Developments of Regional Impact (DRI) process. FVF draws inspiration from the Island Plan's conservation goals, including its emphasis on protecting forests, groundwater, and the natural character of the Vineyard.
Timeline
Source: White Pine Friendly / MVWhitePines. See that site for the full timeline, petition, talking points, and supporting documents.
1998
Harvard forest ecologists David Foster and Glenn Motzkin assess the validity of a state plan to clearcut and “reestablish” grassland in Manuel Correllus. Their findings undermine the state's assertion that this area was historically grassland. Harvard Forest Paper No. 23, 1999.
2000
Due to growing media attention and opposition from the Vineyard Conservation Society and PEER, the State Secretary of Environment brings the plan to clearcut to a halt.
2001
DCR illegally cuts fire lanes through the State Forest. Secretary of Environment Bob Durand formally requires an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) before further work proceeds. There is no record that this EIR was ever submitted or made subject to public comment.
2020
Sheriff's Meadow Foundation and DCR staff illegally clear bike trails in the State Forest, triggering NHESP to mandate trail closures and set restoration requirements. Separately, peer-reviewed research (Oswald, Foster et al., Nature Sustainability, 2020) concludes that the Island was dominated by diverse woodlands including old-growth forests for millennia, and that the “barrens,” “heathlands,” and “grasslands” being managed for by DCR were largely the product of Colonial deforestation and environmental degradation.
2023
The state's Climate Forestry Committee issues its report, recommending that tree cutting and ecological disturbance be minimized statewide. Its central finding: “The Committee unanimously agreed that maintaining forest cover is essential, recognizing that every acre of forest lost to conversion represents a loss of stored carbon to the atmosphere as well as a loss of future carbon sequestration.”
2024
The Healey administration formally adopts a plan to protect and expand forest conservation to mitigate climate change — in direct response to the Climate Forestry Committee's recommendations. DCR presses forward with the Correllus cutting plan regardless. At a public listening session in October, Islanders overwhelmingly ask DCR to prioritize bike path repairs, staff housing, and restoring a full-time presence in the forest. DCR makes no mention of its clearcut plan at this meeting.
2025–26
DCR moves forward with a plan created in 2001. As White Pine Friendly notes, “This plan is over 20 years old and in no way incorporates up-to-date research and management recommendations.” In January 2026, the MEPA Office issues an advisory opinion finding no Environmental Impact Report is required — despite the 2001 EIR mandate. Over 1,500 Islanders have signed the petition to stop the clearcut. Community members, including Johanna Hynes (whose March 2025 MV Times letter is titled “Deforestation Is Not Conservation”) and Katherine Scott (MV Times, Feb. 2025, “Should We Clear-Cut White Pines in the State Forest?”), have called on conservation groups and state officials to reconsider.
The “Native” Question
A central argument in the debate over the Correllus State Forest white pines — and in many residential clearing decisions — is that the trees in question are not "native." FVF believes this framing, while not without merit, is often applied too simply.
Eastern white pine is unambiguously native to New England. Its historical presence on Martha's Vineyard before widespread agricultural clearing is documented in the Harvard Forest pollen record. The trees at Correllus were planted — but they are not exotic or invasive species. They are native trees, growing in a native region, that have developed into a mature ecological community over ninety years.
More broadly, FVF believes that the question "is this tree native?" should be one input into land management decisions — not the only one. The ecological services a tree provides, the wildlife community it supports, the carbon it stores, the soil it anchors: these are real and present, regardless of whether the tree arrived by wind, bird, or human hand.
Harvard Forest researchers have consistently emphasized that the question of nativeness, while valid, should not override a fuller ecological accounting of what a forest community is currently providing — in terms of carbon, habitat, soil, and resilience.
What Science Says:
The Value of Mature White Pines
Benefit
Carbon Storage
Mature white pines are among the highest carbon-storing trees in New England. The 2023 Massachusetts Climate Forestry Committee found that “maintaining forest cover is essential” and that every acre cleared releases stored carbon.
Clearing 175 acres of mature forest should require a full accounting of carbon impacts — something the community has asked for and the state has not provided.
Groundwater
The Correllus State Forest sits over Martha's Vineyard's sole-source aquifer. The white pine forest filters the water the Island drinks. White Pine Friendly states this plainly: “This white pine forest sequesters carbon and filters the water we all drink.”
The groundwater recharge question — comparing a mature pine forest to a managed sandplain — warrants site-specific analysis before large-scale clearing proceeds.
What Research Shows
Wildlife Habitat
Mature pine forests support species including pine warbler, black-throated green warbler, and red-breasted nuthatch. The trees are 80-100 years old; the habitat they provide cannot be recreated on any near-term timescale.
The value of existing wildlife habitat in the pines should be weighed against the theoretical future value of a restored sandplain - a comparison the current plan does not address.
The “Native” Question
Oswald, Foster et al. (Nature Sustainability, 2020) found that the Island was dominated by diverse woodlands for millennia, and that the “barrens” and “grasslands” DCR is managing for were largely the product of Colonial land clearing — not the Island's natural historical baseline.
The science on what is “native” here is more contested than the state's plan acknowledges. The 1998–1999 Harvard Forest work already raised this question. It deserves a current, transparent answer.
Public Process
In 2001, the Secretary of Environment required an EIR before this type of forest work could proceed. There is no record that it was completed. The MEPA Office's January 2026 advisory opinion declines to require one now.
As Michael Blanchard wrote to MEPA: “Neither I nor others I am working with are attempting to stop forest management, restoration, or responsible stewardship. We are asking that decisions of this scale, permanence, and sensitivity be made through the process the commonwealth itself established.” (MV Times, Jan. 7, 2026)
FVF’s Perspective
Source Note: FVF's State Forest advocacy draws on the public timeline, talking points, and research archive compiled by White Pine Friendly / MVWhitePines. For the full petition, complete timeline, and supporting scientific documents, visit whitepinefriendly.weebly.com.
Donate Now
☼
Donate Now ☼
Support Forest Conservation on Martha’s Vineyard
Donations help us advance public education, ecological stewardship, scientific engagement, and responsible conservation initiatives across the Island.
