Available here — thanks to AFRC’s newsletter for the link — abstract below.
AFRC’s take on the report is worth a read:
The report determined that wildfire remains the leading cause for older forest losses on federal lands, accounting for about 70 percent of all losses since 1993. Naturally, those losses have not occurred evenly across the range of the NWFP. The most significant losses occurred in the eastern Cascade Ranges of Washington and Oregon, and the Klamath provinces in Oregon and California. Those losses were partially offset by old forest recruitment through stand growth in the Oregon Coast Range, Olympic Peninsula, and western Cascade Range in Washington, where catastrophic wildfires have been less common.
Despite being a minor component of overall losses, it is important to understand precisely what “losses” refers to in the context of timber harvest. A likely assumption is that a loss of old forest from timber harvest is a function of a regeneration treatment (clearcut, shelterwood, etc.) However, the data in the report suggests otherwise. The graphs below illustrate old forest losses (black line) on top of disturbance intensity; note that the two datasets are not graphed across equivalent acreages on the y-axis. The data shows that some moderate intensity fire causes a loss of older forest, and some does not; the same applied to timber harvest. What is noticeable is the complete absence of high intensity timber disturbance–the kind that would result from regeneration harvest. Instead, nearly all the losses are a result of moderate timber harvest such as thinning or intermediate harvest to restore historic open forest conditions or to reduce the likelihood of high-intensity wildfire.
I’d add that LSOG harvesting virtually stopped in 1993 and shortly after, and that future large fires are likely to change the equation in a significant way.
LSOG = late-successional and old growth forests
Abstract
This is the fourth in a series of periodic monitoring reports on the status and trends of late-successional and old-growth (LSOG) forests since the implementation of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) in 1994. The objective of this monitoring is to evaluate the success of the plan in reaching its desired amount and distribution of LSOG forest on federal lands within the range of the northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) in the United States. We began our assessment in the years shortly preceding the NWFP, but primarily focused on how LSOG forests have changed as a result of disturbance and forest succession since 1993, the year of the assessment that led to the implementation of the NWFP. We developed an annual time series (1986–2017) of LSOG maps based on an “old-growth structure index” (OGSI) using two age thresholds: ≥80 and ≥200 years. These ages represent when forests commonly attain stand structure associated with late-successional forests (OGSI 80) and old-growth forests (OGSI 200) in this region.
Maps showed a slightly increasing trend in LSOG forests (OGSI 80) on federal lands with a 0.3-percent net gain between 1993 and 2017. Forest Inventory and Analysis plot data from two measurement/remeasurement periods (2000s and 2010s) were used to corroborate mapped estimates. For OGSI 80 and OGSI 200 forests, we estimated gross losses from wildfire at 6.2 and 6.9 percent, respectively; timber harvest losses at 1.9 and 2 percent, respectively; and loss from insects or other causes at 0.7 and 0.9 percent, respectively. This indicates that, at the NWFP scale, processes of forest succession compensated for losses. The NWFP anticipated a continued decline in LSOG forests for the first few decades until the rate of forest succession exceeds the rate of losses. Decadal gross losses of about 5 percent per decade from timber harvesting and wildfire (combined) were expected. Over the extent of the NWFP, observed losses from wildfire generally met expectations, but losses from timber harvesting were about one-third of what was anticipated. Results were consistent with expectations for OGSI 80 abundance, diversity, and connectivity outcomes for this period of time. For OGSI 200, these outcomes were slightly degraded. Given that we are only one quarter into a 100-year plan, nothing in these findings suggests that desired outcomes are unattainable over the next 75 years. However, observed increases in frequency and extent of large wildfires, and expected additional increases owing to climate change, provide reasons for concern.
I’d think that an independent review of the success of the NW Forest Plan in meeting its objectives, including various aspects such as Survey and Monitor and Adaptive Management would be a great idea prior to initiating any new planning efforts…
Actually, the Science Synthesis accomplishes much of that:
https://www.fs.usda.gov/pnw/projects/science-synthesis-inform-plan-revisions-within-northwest-forest-plan-nwfp-area
Thought so. Of course, it’s five years old now, and (noted with regard to the new advisory committee), it looks like another 2+ years before they invite the public into the assessment process prior to beginning plan revisions.
I was thinking of something less, perhaps, sciency.
As in “here were the things the NW Forest Plan set out to accomplish- with species with people, etc. Did they accomplish those things? Did the things they spent money one (say survey and monitoring) do what they intended to accomplish? Could they have been done differently or less expensively? What tweaks might help?
I’d think that since the NW Forest Plan was a “plan” not a science review… that those stakeholders involved in developing it might be the ones to get together and hash out how well it worked.
Those topics are addressed in the monitoring reports, but not from the stakeholder perspective. The NFP wasn’t really “stakeholder-developed” – it was developed by agency (mostly USFS) scientists. Nearly all of those folks are now retired, but have published several articles over the years with soft answers to those questions. As you would expect, the top-level answer to “did it work” is “it depends” 🙂
Yes that makes sense, I remember parts of it sounded like a full employment program for scientists
“The Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) is a landscape approach to federal land management designed to protect threatened and endangered species while also contributing to social and economic sustainability in the region. It is intended to provide an management approach that is scientifically credible, socially responsible, and legally sound.”
And yet, to an outsider, it seems like there is still controversy about the same things as before. For example, some people think that areas were allowed to be logged. But how did that work out? It seems like there are lawsuits about logging the areas designated in the NWFP for logging.
Here’s what our friends at the ABA say about it.
“The Northwest Forest Plan was created through the efforts of federal agencies, environmental groups, Native American tribes, local governments, and the president of the United States. The Northwest Forest Plan was enacted to balance habitat protection of threatened species and the financial concerns of timber companies and rural communities. The plan is an example of how interagency coalitions can work with businesses, local activists, and municipal leaders to construct a lasting compromise. ”
I like how the concerns of rural communities are characterized as “financial” by these folks..
One of the key aims — and promises — of the NWFP was to reduce timber harvesting to ~1 billion board feet/year — ~1/4 of that in the years leading up to 1993. That target has never been reached. I don’t have recent figures, but I think harvests in the 24-million-acre plan have never exceeded ~350,000 board feet/year.
NOT a “promise” but an estimate of potential volume. An estimate that didn’t include things like the effect of the Survey and Manage program, to be sure, but an estimate all the same 😉
The 1 bbf/year was taken as a hard target. Many were and are disappointed.
“Hard” timber target is an oxymoron, i.e., “target” is inherently aspirational. The Forest Service has never had enforceable timber production quotas. Not in the Northwest Forest Plan, nor in any other forest plan. On several occasions, the timber industry has sued to enforce what it believed to be forest plan timber production quotas only to lose every time.
This AP article from 2019 mentions a “sustainable and predictable” level of timber harvest. Well, I guess the harvest has been predictable — just at a lower than hoped for level.
https://apnews.com/article/a3814c0bdccc4a7cb55a9d40fabff071
Starved of timber in a sea of trees
Citing a lack of federal timber, the Swanson Group recently announced the permanent closure of its sawmill in Glendale, which had operated since 1951. This is yet another economic sacrifice in Douglas County as federal forest management policies fail to deliver their ecological and economic goals.
To put this in perspective, the Swanson mill consumed about 120 million board feet of timber a year. If you took all the timber sold from the Umpqua National Forest, Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, and both the Roseburg and Medford Bureau of Land Management Districts – the combined volume from those millions of acres couldn’t sustain even this one mill.
Citing a lack of federal timber, the Swanson Group recently announced the permanent closure of its sawmill in Glendale, which had operated since 1951. This is yet another economic sacrifice in Douglas County as federal forest management policies fail to deliver their ecological and economic goals.
To put this in perspective, the Swanson mill consumed about 120 million board feet of timber a year. If you took all the timber sold from the Umpqua National Forest, Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, and both the Roseburg and Medford Bureau of Land Management Districts – the combined volume from those millions of acres couldn’t sustain even this one mill.
This artificial log shortage in the middle of the world’s most productive softwood forests is decades in the making. A quarter century ago, President Bill Clinton came to Oregon to strike a new deal – a balance between jobs and the environment. His Northwest Forest Plan promised to generate a “sustainable and predictable” level of timber harvest in western Oregon while recovering the northern spotted owl. Neither of those promises has materialized, and Douglas County continues to pay the price.
National Forests in Southern Oregon are producing less than half the volume anticipated under the Clinton Northwest Forest Plan. Meanwhile, the current BLM management plans allow sustained-yield commercial timber harvest on only 20 percent of the lands formerly owned by the Oregon and California Railroad. As a result, the federal agencies that manage 60 percent of Oregon’s forests only produce 13 percent of the statewide timber volume. On federal land, in fact, only one-tenth of the annual growth rate is harvested.
…
I should have mentioned that the AP “article” was an op-ed by Matt Hill, Executive Director of Douglas Timber Operators.
He goes on to write:
The Glendale mill joins over 300 lumber mills that have closed in Oregon since 1980. Fortunately, workers there can be relocated to other Swanson facilities. But over 30,000 Oregonians from all the other mills lost their jobs permanently.
“The Glendale mill joins over 300 lumber mills that have closed in Oregon since 1980.”
Lest we forget, the early 1980s were a period of economic recession in the housing and wood products industry. Many mills closed because they couldn’t compete with more efficient operators in the southern states. The Forest Service was selling a LOT of timber during this period. The timber industry lobbied successfully to give back billions of board feet that it couldn’t sell as wood products.
“As a result, the federal agencies that manage 60 percent of Oregon’s forests only produce 13 percent of the statewide timber volume. On federal land, in fact, only one-tenth of the annual growth rate is harvested.” That seems pretty reasonable to me, given the federal lands multiple-use mandate and species conservation/recovery obligations.
So it was a bit of a “quid pro.. maybe not”? So “we guessed that it would lead to successful spotted owl recovery and x level of timber harvest”- but it didn’t work out that way, it sounds like to me. So that’s what would be interesting to review. And at the time the narrative was “the agreement that ended the timber wars” but it didn’t seem to do that.
Yes we have lots of great monitoring data.. but that’s not exactly what was advertised at the time.
I imagine “financial” means they are looking at things like community tax revenues from businesses that profit from public lands; probably also jobs and paychecks for individuals (that also lead to community tax revenues). Of course, financial issues of any kind can lead to secondary sociological issues, but it gets harder for monitoring to discern the cause and effect relationships with public land policies.
There seemed to be a purpose to follow the smokey wire but experience indicates the discussion is a form of musical chairs . 50 million people residing along the west coast is an overpopultion and heat pump , ect causing the naked effects on the landscape…seldom.does the guilty admit their unconvicted crimes nor their hidden agendas..
What would be the motive for A to state ” i can see your tinfoil helmet” . Who would say that , except someone with hidden , financially contrived supportation .
Following sent to US CONGRESSMAN
USPS–Sure post is a joke…order item and seller announces cant deliver to po box- USPS is supposed to deliver our mail= 1787 Constitutional Mandate…the sure post system ends up dropping it off at an all po boxes post office which doesnt work for me…items get sent back within minutes…
Phone service–copper land line -plan in progress to destroy that system ” very important backup” if war ever comes to America…and
Mobile phone service that is 2g, 3g , 4g just disconnected….everything related now through internet 4g lte services – do you understand the ramifications- did you care – or is Congress really employed for Corporations = ? 9 million simple voice mobile phones disconnected last spring 2022 and 3g onstar , medical devices ect…
Verizon= 40% of USA phone market …a corporation involved in bribing Pennsylvania regulators there in…and allowed now in all 50 states…thats what ? Verizon CEO a citizen of Sweeden a country of a Constitutional Monarchy= the king decides all matters…isnt a resident citizen of Sweeden and a king required to do “as ordered” and 40% of Americas phone business income controlled off shore! $ going out of USA economy..no wonder Sweeden is volunteering to paybPoland for tanks and jets sent to UKRAINE!
PNM merger with Connecticut company! NM regulators nixed the merger citing ulility cost would go up for NEW MEXICANS !! And so when corporations are denied -unfavorable decision-they simply shoot for a new decision elsewhere..higher utility prices and in the next sentence the Governor claims such merger would be good for New Mexico to transition to zero carbon…..
Prescribed USFS forest fires that as fast as 340,000 acres went up in flames in Las Vegas and Mora the powers that preach prescription fires as “useful and necessary” particularly with climate change and recent megafires….
Insert from the past in Pennsylvania 1900. forest fires there causing devastation yearly of 135,000 acres yearly….
“A History as Strong as the Trees it PROTECTS” by Claire J Woods
excerpt:
When he finally got his school, Rothrock spent little time celebrating. He and his faculty went right to work, trying to minimize the current crises of vandalism, timber thievery, and most importantly fire destruction. Fire crews tended to be small and inefficient, and access to the fires via roads was virtually nonexistent. In the early 1900s, a “good” year was when only 30,000 acres burned; in a “bad” year, well over 170,000 acres could be destroyed. Rothrock knew that is was not only the trees at risk—forest fires left many buildings and lives destroyed in their path. Therefore, reforestation had to come second to fire prevention. There was no point planting thousands of seedlings when tens of thousands were burning.
Boys and girls mega fires were occuring before and at the begin of industrialization: do we need a PHD to tell us why constitutes lying and cognitive psychology being played upon Americans ..
Los Alamos And Cerro Grande was a disaster in 2000 and yet USFS came right back in 2022 and destroyed cultural lives with Hermits Peak and the likely plabnned arson at Calf Canyon to upend traditional life from Las Vegas to and beyond Mora…
Mr. lujan Jr. and Congressman nationwide. It appears thru government allowances corporations are consuming our continental resources , abilities, livelyhood , ect , ect….it appears General George Patton , JFK and RFK and others who stand against corporate fascism – our best leaders , have systematically been rubbed out and replaced by millionaire and billionaire ” go alongs”….
Meanwhile USFS charged with resources to protect reshuffles the deck and prescribes more fires no longer calling it controlled burning after so many became uncontrolled disasters…