The Boise Test Site

The Boise test site was selected by the USDA-Forest Service as an excellent place to conduct this test for the following reasons:

1. The area has a long management history and good documentation of forest management and forest structure and function.
2. There were a range of ownership groups who were willing to participate in the test, including National Forest, State lands and Industrial Freehold lands (Boise Cascade Corp.).
3. The Boise National Forest and State Endowment Lands are recognized as a permanent forest estate with goals of sustainable forest management.
4. The areas has been the subject of considerable research, and has well developed ecological and social models as well as accessible databases.
5. There is significant public involvement in the management of the forest and attention to multiple values.
6. The Boise National Forest was willing to host the test and take on much of the on-site organization.

 Description

The Boise Test Site encompasses an area of about 4.3 million acres (1.7 million hectares) and is located in the southwestern section of the State of Idaho, U.S.A. (Figure 1). The Boise site represents a highly managed forest area and is generally typical of conditions in the Idaho Batholith area of the Intermountain Region. Land ownership in the Test Site is 2.7 million acres (1.1 million ha.)(64%) National Forest (Boise and Payette National Forests), 211,222 acres (85,479 ha.)(5%) Bureau of Land Management, 200,461 acres (81,124 ha.)(5%) State of Idaho, 176,069 acres (71,253 ha.)(4%) Boise Cascade Corporation, and 896,957 acres (362,945 ha.)(21%) other private land ownership (Figure 2).

Figure 1. General location of the Boise Study Area, Idaho, USA

Landowners and Land Management Objectives

The following section provides a general description and overview of major landowners and their land management objectives in the Boise Test Site. The descriptions are based primarily on presentations made to the CIFOR test team by landowner representatives during the course of the field test and are not meant to be comprehensive listings of all management objectives of these groups.

Boise and Payette National Forests

Land Management Objectives:

Ecological/Biophysical

• Key objective: sustainability of the forest resource
• Maintain biological diversity (update knowledge with latest science)
• Recognize fire as a natural process (update knowledge with latest science)
• Manage riparian and aquatic areas (control erosion; plan for Bull Trout)
• Manage exotics/weeds
• Manage grazing/rangelands
• Protect designated Wilderness Areas and propose additions
• Identify areas with special management needs (Wild and Scenic Rivers, Wilderness, roadless areas, Research Natural Areas)

Social

• Scoping (i.e. involving the public in the planning phase of environmental analysis); public involvement is part of scoping process; a number of public meetings are currently on-going as part of scoping for the Forest Plan Revision.
• Compile various social indicators (e.g. county population trends, growth rates, population density; urban/rural ratios, labor force, per capita income, employment by industry, percent fund payment to counties, payments in Lieu of Taxes, etc.) for use in Forest Plan revision and project analyses.
• Demographic/economic calculations will identify the socio-economic effects on local communities of various alternatives (i.e. proposed changes in land use) in the Forest Plan revision process.

Economic

• Identify lands suitable for timber management
• Identify lands not suited for timber production
• New plan calculates a non-declining volume flow level (i.e. sustainable flow) to supply area mills
• Anticipate some below-cost timber sales in order to meet other objectives (e.g. wildlife habitat, ecosystem restoration) in the Forest Plan.

Forest management planning and policy

• Forest Plans are currently being revised (amended) given changes in local communities, changes in the natural environment (large fires), and new ecological knowledge
• Last Forest Management Plan signed in 1990 for the Boise National Forest; Forest Plan is to be revised every 10-15 years
• The products produced by the Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project (Integrated Science Assessments, ICBEMP Environmental Impact Statements and its Record of Decision) will serve as an umbrella for National Forest management plans and heavily influence the revisions; however, some of the ICBEMP recommendations and guidelines may not be realistic at the local or watershed level and may have to be adapted or modified
• Coordinate revisions to Forest Plan with the Payette and Sawtooth National Forests (i.e. part of the Southwest Idaho Ecogroup); the three Forest Plans are scheduled for completion by Dec 31, 2000; there is a need for a common framework for all three forests
• Propose designation of new Wilderness Areas
• Identify of areas with special management needs (Wilderness, Wild and Scenic Rivers, proposed Wilderness, roadless areas, Research Natural Areas)

Yield and Harvest

• Move away from growth and yield as the main objective in certain areas; this move has largely been driven by aquatic habitat needs and multiple resource needs
• Changes in Allowable Sale Quantity (ASQ) are calculated for new land use management areas
• Old plans projected the forest as being static (i.e. did not incorporate certain ecological processes very well)

Ecological/Biophysical

• The over arching land management objective is to maintain healthy ecosystems that will provide useful goods and commodities in perpetuity.

• Forest health is maintained principally to generate healthy timber production
• All management activities are done in accordance with the Forest Practices Act, which protects water quality and assures forest stocking levels
• Timber production is also constrained by concerns for wildlife and fish habitat and threatened and endangered species (e.g. Bull Trout and salmonid species)
• Water quality is a major concern that influences all management activities
• Fish and wildlife concerns and needs are coordinated with the State Department of Fish and Game

• Endowment lands (land grants) serve to support public schools and other institutions in Idaho
• Proceeds from the sale of land and timber, and royalties from the sale of minerals from endowment lands, go into a permanent trust (currently $692 million); interest and rentals go to schools and other endowments (about $14 million annually)
• The endowment fund provides 10% of funds needed by the public schools (this percentage could be increased with changes in legislation)
• Management constraints include viewsheds and urbanization
• Fire protection in the rural/urban interface is becoming an increasingly complex problem

Economic

• Key objective: lands are managed principally to generate revenue
• Goal is to maximize financial returns to beneficiary state institutions
• The Idaho Department of Lands has a very active timber sale program
• All timber is sold at public auction
• Idaho Code prevents forest lands from being sold
• Lands can be leased or traded

Forest management planning and policy

• Timber production is regulated by biological inventory predictions and other social and technical constraints.
• The state conducts a continuous forest inventory (10-year cycle) and is considering a 5-year cycle.
• Permanent plots are used to gather stand information for the inventory
• Activities are guided by the State Forest Practices Act (in place since 1974). The Forest Practices Act also regulates forestry activities on private lands and, to some extent, Federal Lands for clean air and clean water.
• Lands are identified as primary forest lands (commercial), secondary forest lands (non-commercial; emphasis on regeneration), and non-forested lands

Yield and Harvest

• The Idaho Department of Lands conducts a very active timber harvest but strives to maintain a sustainable timber supply for future generations
• Idaho Department of Lands conducts forest inventories

Ecological/Biophysical

• Maintain or improve habitat for wildlife (focus is on habitat needs for listed endangered species)
• Maintain productivity of soils
• Minimize impacts to water quality
• Facilitate management activities in riparian areas (N.W. Watershed Study)

 Social

• Provide access for the public for recreation, wildlife, timber, special areas uses
• Consider aesthetic and other social values
• Hire local people on a continuous basis; try to meet local employment interests

Economic

• Key objective: provide the best sustained harvest of forests for forest products with acceptable impacts and economic returns
• Apply a long-term, sustained yield philosophy to timber harvest
• Understand need to weigh tradeoffs between environmental benefits and economic returns
• Maintain shareholder values (i.e. economic return, environmental stewardship standards)
• Maintain company values
• Maintain forest industry values (i.e. 1996 Sustainable Forestry Initiative program; AF&PA condition of membership)

Forest management planning and policy

• Activities guided principally by the Forest Practices Act
• Understand the need for more information on forestry management than is provided by the Federal government; i.e. maintain multiple-resource data sets
• Understand that spatial scales affect information needs; multiple resource value needs demand information at a finer scale
• Planning is to be done from the sub-stand scale up to the landscape scale
• Currently developing a management program for riparian areas affected by grazing

Yield and Harvest

• Apply a long-term, sustained yield philosophy to timber harvest
• Forest development program looking at advantages of using herbicides, fertilizers
• A genetic tree improvement program exists in Idaho but is low key

Ecological/Biophysical

• Key objective: provide a balance between social and ecosystem needs
• Restore and maintain habitat for Federally listed threatened and endangered species, sensitive species, and other special status species
• Comply with approved State Water Quality Standards
• Maintain integrity of soil and ecological processes (i.e. rangeland health)
• Maintain properly functioning watersheds
• Maintain properly functioning wetlands and riparian areas
• Maintain or propagate productive and diverse native animal habitats and populations of native species
• Areas seeded with mixtures, including non-native plants, are to function in a manner which maintains diversity, production, native habitat, energy flow and the hydrologic cycle
• Exotic plant communities will meet minimum requirements of soil stability
• Consider habitat fragmentation

Social

• Need to provide for sustainability of rural communities; this is implied in maintaining a healthy sustainable ecosystem
• Provide for multiple use of public lands
• Maintaining stability in permit allotment for grazing in the interest of local communities

Economic

• Need to provide for sustainability in continuous flow of goods; this is implied in maintaining a healthy sustainable ecosystem

Forest management planning and policy

• Follow Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management
• Indicator evaluation is to be sensitive to the scale involved

Yield and Harvest

• Provide for multiple use and sustainable, continuous flow of goods

Land Management Objectives

General - Historical

Native occupation of the area prior to European contact consisted of Shoshone peoples (located mainly in the Snake River Valley), the Nez Perce, and the Northern Paiute. Shoshone peoples were widely spread with many local cultural adaptations. Population densities in the area never became very large due to generally harsh environmental conditions typified by hot, dry summers and very cold winters. Gathering wild foods was a generally more important activity among these peoples than big game hunting. Pine nuts were an important food source along with roots, berries, small mammals, and reptiles. Deer and hare were hunted in areas where they were plentiful. Before the introduction of the horse in the early to mid-1800’s, the Shoshone peoples traveled by foot in seasonal migration cycles. Following the adoption of the horse, a migratory plains-like lifestyle developed (Spencer et al., 1977).

Large-scale, European immigration to Idaho began in 1861, with the discovery of gold on a tributary of the Clearwater River. The territorial economy expanded greatly during the 1870s and 1880s, and livestock rearing became a major industry. During this time the railroad was constructed through the area and new mineral deposits, such as gold and silver, were discovered. Federal troops suppressed native Indian uprisings in the 1880s and thereafter most natives were placed on reservations. Idaho Territory became a U.S. state in 1890. In the 1890s, commercial lumbering became a major industry in the area.

Prior to establishment of the Forest Reserves in 1891, most of southwestern Idaho had undergone major changes in vegetation cover as a result of extensive timber harvesting, livestock grazing, and fire exclusion (Ogle and Dumond, 1997)

Lightning-caused fires were a common occurrence on the rangelands and on ponderosa pine systems. Prior to European settlement, native peoples traditionally burned the vegetation for a variety of reasons. Early prospectors ignited fires to expose mineral outcrops and settlers set fires to improve the condition of rangeland. Many such fires crept into the forest and burned unchecked until extinguished by fall rains (Steele et al., 1981).

After 1890, setters began to suppress fires to protect buildings and grazing areas. Also, extensive livestock and sheep grazing reduced the amount of grassland available for ignition. Active fire suppression by government agencies began in 1905 and essentially eliminated major fires from the system (Steele et al., 1981).

Early settlers in the region noted little sagebrush on the hills. The lack of sagebrush was probably due to frequent prairie fires set by Native Americans. During the summer, the country tended to be covered with a thick stand of grass (probably brome grass) 12-18 inches high and resembled a wheat field (Steele et al., 1981).

The arrival of the railroad in the early 1880s signaled the start of a boom in the sheep industry. Large sheep operations were set up near Boise, Caldwell, and Emmett. By 1880, ranches extended over many areas and sagebrush and bluegrass were prominent. By 1886, large bands of sheep were moved to higher, more accessible range. Most of the public rangelands were heavily stocked for sheep grazing by the 1890’s. Rangelands were severely overgrazed by the 1900s. Public lands were depleted of native grasses and forbs as animals were allowed to graze rangelands in the early spring before grasses had time to mature. Widespread grazing abuse eventually ended, but localized overgrazing and soil erosion still occur on rangelands and forest lands (Steele et al., 1981).

Federal funding led to the construction of large-scale irrigation systems in the Snake River Valley. The projects turned large areas of desert into arable land. An agricultural boom resulted in the area around the time of the First World War. After World War II, industrialization in centers such as Boise resulted in a growing urban population in parts of the southwest. Recreation and tourism became major industries with the development of Sun Valley resort in the Sawtooth Mountains during the 1960s and 1970s.

Population

Various population figures for counties comprising the Boise Test Site (Figure 3) are presented in Table 2. Ada County, containing the state capital of Boise, is the most heavily populated county in the region with over 80% of the total population. Over 91% of Ada County’s population resides in urban areas. Elmore County is the second most populated area with 10% of the region’s population. Major cities in the regional economy other than Boise include Nampa, Caldwell, Payette, and McCall (USDA - Forest Service, 1990).

 Population has increased substantially in all the counties over the past 30 years, with the largest population growth occurring in Ada, Elmore, and Payette counties. The greatest percentage population growth has been in Boise, Ada, and Valley counties. The economies of both Boise and Valley counties are heavily tied to outputs and activities of Forest Service lands, and thus population growth here may indicate greater land use pressures on these lands to fulfill local livelihood needs.

The Boise National Forest five-year evaluation report cites increased demand for recreational use of forested lands in the area. Large fires in recent years have also removed many areas from use by recreationalists and have put increased pressures on existing facilities. Major changes to the Boise Forest Management Plan are expected to meet increased public demands for places to camp, hike, and recreate on Forest Service lands and to minimize the negative environmental effects of such activities on riparian areas (USDA - Forest Service, 1996).

Social

Force and Lee (1989) examined socioeconomic characteristics among non-industrial private forest (NIPF) ownerships for all of southern Idaho. A total of 441 questionnaires were mailed in October 1988 to NIPF landowners, and 242 were returned for analysis. Key findings of this survey and highlights pertaining to southwestern Idaho are presented below.

The survey indicated that the average NIPF landowner in southern Idaho tended to be a farmer/rancher (33%) and live on the farm or ranch (41%). The second highest occupation category was retired (23%) with most being former farmers/ranchers (Force and Lee, 1989).

About 61% of landowners saw grazing as a benefit of owning forestland. Wildlife appreciation and aesthetic enjoyment were listed next with 57% and 55% of total responses, respectively. These values did not differ between parcel size or region. Wood for domestic use was listed next as a benefit (43%). Income from timber was a benefit to 36% of large landowners and those in the southwestern region. The benefits of an investment property and mining activities were more important to those in the southwestern region than in the southeastern region of Idaho (Force and Lee, 1989).

Respondents were asked to rate various reasons for owning forestland on a scale of 1 to 5 (1=not important, 5=very important). The most important reasons for owning forestland among all southern NIPF landowners, with the response scores in brackets, were: i) to preserve natural beauty and wildlife (3.67); ii) because of personal or sentimental attachment (3.17); iii) to use for personal recreation (3.16); iv) for the satisfaction of owning land (3.09); v) to obtain income from the sale of timber (2.94); vi) to have a place to practice conservation (2.88); vii) to use as a permanent residence (2.87); and, viii) to use for fishing and hunting (2.29). NIPF landowners in the southwest were more likely to list income from sale of timber and use of the land as a permanent residence as reasons for owning forestland than NIPF landowners in the southeast. Landowners in the southwest were also more likely to list speculation on timber value as a reason for owning forestland (Force and Lee, 1989).

Figure 3. Counties and communities in the Boise Study Area.

About 48% of landowners in the southwest region had harvested timber from their parcel of land. Small landowners were more likely to say that they would not harvest timber in the future (Force and Lee, 1989).

Only 30% of NIPF landowners in the southwest ever sought professional forest management assistance. Only 31% of those who had harvested timber had the trees marked by a professional forester. One-fifth of the respondents said they did not know where they could obtain forest management assistance. About 39% said they would be interested in knowing sources of contact for professional forest management services. The U.S. Forest Service was the most frequently mentioned (22%) source of information. Other sources sought included the Soil Conservation Service (14%), Idaho Department of Lands (13%), County Extension Agent (9%), Consulting forester (6%), family member or friend (6%), timber company (6%) or contract logger (4%)(Force and Lee, 1989).

Two-fifths of respondents said they were willing to attend educational meetings near their homes to learn more about care and management of forestland. About 60% of respondents were interested in receiving published information about forest management. The most frequently mentioned topic for information was forest insects and diseases (Force and Lee, 1989).

Sixty-seven percent of forestland in southern Idaho had been owned by the existing owners for more than 10 years. Small landowners owned their land for shorter periods than medium and large landowners. Sixty-three percent of land is owned by individuals or "joint tenants". Legal partnerships or corporations accounted for another 29%. One-third of landowners spent less than two weeks of the year on their forestland and another 34% spent two weeks to three months on their land. Thirteen percent lived on their land year-round. Six percent never visited their land holdings (Force and Lee, 1989).

John Freemuth, a social scientist at Boise State University, observes differences in the way National Forests are viewed today and how they have been viewed in the past in both Idaho and the U.S. In the past, National Forests were seen by most Americans as a resource to be used for economic gain or to support local communities and businesses. This view is still dominant among many people living in the Boise Test Site. Today, many Americans view forests from a conservation or protected area perspective. Since all Americans have a say in how U.S. National Forests are managed and for what purposes, conflicts tend to arise between these two views of forest management (Freemuth, pers. comm.).

Freemuth considers cultural context to be important in any consideration of sustainability. The dynamics of public participation/involvement are different in the U.S. than in other countries. A general distrust of expertise appears to be stronger in America than in other countries. The public is frequently willing to listen to expert opinion, but not willing to be led in a certain direction (Freemuth, pers. comm.).

Public perceptions of science and the manner in which it is done are also different. The presence of advocacy science in the U.S. renders people’s view of science as suspicious. The results of regional studies, such as the Interior Columbia Basin study, can also be viewed as being heavily politicized. A key conclusion of the Interior Columbia Basin study, suggesting that roadless areas in forests have higher ecological integrity, has been distrusted. There is also the problem of competing scientific disciplines. Do you listen to the economists or the ecologists when making a decision about forest management? (Freemuth, pers.comm.).

Some people may also perceive there to be too many laws on the environment, with no sense of priorities and no focus on what issues to address. Ecosystem management is generally distrusted for the fact that different groups define it in their own way. Questions about for whom forests are being sustained and for what reasons are seen as not being answered (Freemuth, pers.comm).

The economic and social conditions of communities in the Boise Test Site strongly influence local attitudes and perceptions of sustainability: residents have a strong sense of conservatism and self-reliance exists. A recent public survey on Idaho forest management policies indicated many people felt that the emphasis on recreational use of National Forest lands was too great. Use of the forests for timber harvest and ranching was felt to be a good thing (Freemuth, pers. comm.).

A range of activities and outputs of the Boise National Forest make contributions to the regional economy and serve to sustain industry in many small communities such as Mountain Home, Emmett, Idaho City, Lowman, Horseshoe Bend, Banks, Garden Valley, Cascade, and Donnelly as well as the major urban centers. Communities affected by the activities and outputs of the Payette National Forest include New Meadows, Cambridge, Council, and Midvale (USDA - Forest Service, 1990).

Ada County’s economy is highly developed and diversified, and thus not directly dependent on the forest commodity outputs of the Boise National Forest to the same degree as some of the other counties. Because of high population growth, however, Ada County does represent a large source of present and future recreational demand on Forest Service lands. Farming is a minor and declining part of Ada County’s economy. Unemployment has traditionally been low in this county given its diversified economy and healthy rate of economic growth (Table 3)(USDA - Forest Service, 1990).

Adams County had the highest unemployment rate of all counties in the Boise Test Site. Its economy is dominated by manufacturing (which includes logging) and farming and relies heavily on forest and wood products and employment by government land agencies. Major employers include the U.S. Forest Service, Morgans Logging, and Evergreen Lumber.

Elmore County’s dependence on the Boise National Forest is mixed. Many of the more permanent residents of the county are ranchers who depend on the Forest Service lands as grazing areas for livestock. Elmore County is also home to many military personnel based at the Mountain Home Air Force Base in Mountain Home (63% of the County’s population resides in Mountain Home). These residents use Forest Service lands for recreation but not for their livelihoods. Major employers in the county include the U.S. Air Force, school districts, Elmore Medical Center, Magic West Potatoes, and Health Electronics (USDA - Forest Service, 1990).

Gem County has a much stronger dependence on Boise National Forest than Ada or Elmore Counties. This county’s economy is divided among ranching, farming, wood products, and government. Major employers include Boise Cascade Corporation, Albertsons, Walter Knox Hospital, Sonbyrd Company, Idaho Northern Railroad, and the school district. Much of Gem County’s land is privately owned. About 20% of the workforce is employed in agriculture. The unemployment rate here tends to be high, and fluctuates with employment in the timber industry (USDA - Forest Service, 1990).

The most closely linked counties to Boise National Forest, in terms of economies, are Boise and Valley Counties. These almost exclusively rural counties are made up largely of Forest Service lands. Industries in these counties rely heavily on wood products and Forest Service activities for their employment. Manufacturing (mainly sawmilling) and construction comprise much of Boise County’s total employment (Table 4). Major employers in Boise County include Boise Cascade Corporation and local school districts. Another one-fifth of the employed work for the government, mostly for the Forest Service in Idaho City and Lowman Ranger Districts. Almost one-third of employment in Valley County is in government. Other major employers in Valley County are Shore Lodge, Brundage Ski Area, local school districts, and Boise Cascade Corporation. As in Gem County, the unemployment rate in Boise County tends to be high and fluctuates with employment in the timber industry. Many residents of southwestern Boise County commute to work in the city of Boise (USDA - Forest Service, 1990).

 Ada county had the highest per capita income in this region from 1962-1979. The trend is similar for per capita income figures for 1979-1995 shown in Table 5. Per capita incomes were lowest in Gem, Boise, Payette, and Washington Counties over this period.

 Biophysical

Geology and Climate

The eastern part of the Boise Test Site is located on the Southern Batholith Section of the Idaho Batholith, which forms the southwestern border of the Northern Rocky Mountain physiographic province (Figure 4). The Southern Batholith section is drained to the north mainly by the South and Middle Forks of the Salmon River and to the south by the Boise and Payette Rivers. Elevations range from 3,000 ft to over 10,000 ft (910 - 3,050 m) with a median elevation of about 6,500 ft (1,980 m). Although this area contains several flat basins, such as Long Valley, Idaho City, Warm Lake and Deadwood, most of the area has a mountainous relief ranging from 5,000 - 9,000 ft (1,520 - 2,740 m).

The Southern Batholith Section is underlain by granitic rocks with some overlying patches of Challis volcanics, some tertiary and quaternary sediments, and some basalts. Dike complexes of intermediate volcanic character are also common in some areas. Much of the soil originates from the granitic parent materials. These soils are mostly moderately coarse to coarse textured throughout their profiles and are stony in the glaciated, frost churned areas and in some depositional areas. Soils from parent materials other than granite range from sandy loam to predominantly stony. Most soils are deep except in extremely steep slope ridges and headlands (Steele et al., 1981).

Figure 4. Terrain elevation in the Boise Study Area and location of the Idaho Batholith.

A study by Sloan (1994) analyzed stand history data from plots located in the Bannock Creek Research Natural Area. The objective of the study was to determine how past management practices have influenced current stand conditions, and what the forests in the Boise Basin may have looked like before settlement. The study found notable effects on the structure, function, and composition of forest stands from the lack of fire. Before 1890, the forest was open-grown, old-growth ponderosa pine with an understory of pinegrass and elk sedge. Douglas fir grew on moister draws, on northern exposures and stream bottoms. These forests supported 5 to 50 trees per acre. With regeneration in the early 1900’s, livestock grazing, and lack of fire, the density increased to as many as 900 trees per acre with most stands having 250-600 trees per acre. Douglas fir is now the major component of these stands (Figure 6). The large amounts of fuel loading and ladder fuels have increased the risk of large, uncharacteristic stand replacing wildfires (Ogle and Dumond, 1997).

Figure 6. Tree densities and species composition in the Boise Basin (Sloan 1994).

HRV = Historic range of variability.

In 1996, Sloan investigated the effects of fire exclusion on a dry, grand fir habitat type in the Silver Creek drainage. In the past, fires maintained the site as a fairly open stand of mostly ponderosa pine (80%), with a minor component of Douglas-fir (10%), lodgepole pine (5%) and shrubs (5%). The lack of fire has allowed more shade-tolerant species to increase. Douglas-fir has increased by 300%, subalpine fir by 800%, Engelmann spruce by 1100%, and grand fir by 120%. Sloan (1996) reported there were 363% more trees on the site than in 1900. Ponderosa pine has not regenerated in this century, and without intervention could disappear from the stand (Ogle and Dumond, 1997).

The scientific evidence suggests that ponderosa pine systems, which were historically maintained by frequent, low-intensity fires that removed understories of saplings and increased the availability of nutrients, have been altered by years of fire suppression, grazing, and logging. As the Sloan (1996) study illustrated, many ponderosa pine stands are now dominated by dense stands of Douglas fir and other fire-sensitive species. These altered pine forests burn more intensely and severely than in the past . A hazards/risk assessment developed by Boise National Forest estimates that 40% of the Forest’s watersheds are at risk to these large, uncharacteristic fires (USDA - Forest Service, 1996). Tucker (1995) collected fire history data in several predominantly ponderosa pine stands. The mean fire interval ranged from 12 to 14 years. Tucker estimated a five- to seven-fold increase in the fire interval at these sites.

Since the Boise Forest Plan was approved in 1990, wildfires have affected 315,000 of the Forest’s 2,300,000 acres. Almost 10% of acres suitable for timber production have been burned severely through stand-replacing fires and have shifted to grass and shrubland (USDA - Forest Service, 1996).

General vegetation characteristics and community types

Steele et al. (1981) identified forest habitat types in central Idaho and the Boise National Forest area. Figure 7 shows the general distribution by elevation of trees in west-central Idaho.

In the south and east of the Southern Idaho Batholith, the minimum moisture required for ponderosa pine establishment occurs at increasingly higher elevations. Most soils in the ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) series are derived from granitics, basalt, or andesite. Soils derived from granitics and andesite are mostly sandy loams to loamy sands some of which are also gravelly. Those from basalt range from silty clay-loam to loam. Slowly creeping fires kill only the smaller trees and grasses; forbs and most shrubs regenerate quickly. Fire suppression has limited the occurrence of fires on these sites for over 70 years. Grazing has maintained low levels of light fuels in some areas. The Pinus ponderosa series reflects some of the least productive timberland in the area. Forage value for grazing often outweighs other values of these sites (Steele et al., 1981).

Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) occupies the broadest range of environmental conditions of any conifer in central Idaho. Pinus ponderosa is a vigorous seral conifer in major portions of the Pseudotsuga series. Pseudotsuga is often the seral dominant as well as the climax dominant. Undergrowth varies from dense shrubby layers to scattered, dry-site grasses. Several of the drier areas have an open forest to savannah-like appearance. Fire has strongly influenced stand development (Steele et al., 1981).

Figure 7. General distribution of forest trees in west-central Idaho. Arrows show the relative elevational range of each species; solid portion of the arrow indicates where a species is the potential climax, dashed portion shows where it is seral (Steele et al., 1981)

 Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii) and subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa) often extend down into the lower elevations of the Douglas-fir zone along streams with cool air drainage. On very wet sites, Engelmann spruce appears as the climax dominant, often replacing lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta). On drier sites, Englemann spruce co-dominates with Douglas-fir. Undergrowth in such sites is scarce consisting of a few scattered shrubs or forbs with mosses, lichens, and duff. Undergrowth in this series appears to be too wet or scarce to burn well, but the trees could maintain a hot fire that started elsewhere (Steele et al., 1981).

The Subalpine Fir (Abies lasiocarpa) series occurs at upper elevations throughout most of central Idaho. Lower limits of this series merge with grand fir. Here moisture is adequate for both species. Near its upper limits, the Subalpine Fir series borders various alpine communities or grassy balds dominated by Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis). Whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis) becomes increasingly prevalent towards the upper limits of this series and may form pure stands on the most severe exposures. Undergrowth may include dense, tall shrub layers, lush, moist-site forbs and open, grassy parks. Because of short growing seasons, disturbed undergrowth recovers very slowly. Alterations by fire can remain evident for many decades and even centuries (Steele et al., 1981).

The Whitebark Pine (Pinus albicaulis) series extends downward from the upper timberline. Pinus albicaulis is the dominant tree and is often deformed or stunted by wind, cold, or drought. Undergrowths range from a layer of Festuca idahoensis on very exposed sites to Carex geyeri and Grouse whortleberry (Vaccinium scoparium) on more moderate sites. This series has very low timber potential but may have high watershed values. Forage production can sustain light grazing, but overgrazing can decimate the forage and expose the soil. The vegetation recovers very slowly in some areas. These sites have generally low undergrowth (Steele et al., 1981).

The Lodgepole Pine (Pinus contorta) series consists of pure stands of lodgepole pine which act as pioneer species. It is similar to colder portions of the Pseudotsuga series and drier parts of the Subalpine Fir series. The species is well adapted to cold-air drainages. The undergrowth is generally sparse and produces little fuel, thus fire is a minor factor (Steele et al., 1981).

Grazing

In the 1800’s and early 1900’s, grazing by cattle and later by sheep caused considerable damage to rangelands and soils in central Idaho. Estimated forage depletions in many areas were more than 50% and some areas recorded depletions of over 75%. Cattle tended to deplete forage on non-forest or open forest areas at lower elevations. Sheep, which by 1903 had numbered 2.6 million in Idaho, depleted rangeland from lower elevations to the ridges and mountain meadows at upper elevations. In some areas, mud-rock and debris floods were attributed to severe overgrazing by sheep (Steele et al., 1981).

On many granitic soils, elk sedge (Carex geyeri) was once the dominant ground cover. Attempts by sheepherders to produce better forage for their animals resulted in heavy trampling of this sedge and overgrazing. Loss of this plant species in many areas led to problems with erosion and debris flows (Steele et al., 1981).

Although widespread grazing abuse has ended, small bands of sheep still graze upper ridges and meadow areas. Cattle graze densely forested lands near streams, in natural openings, and in openings created by logging. Although the range is recovering, localized damage may occur where animals congregate (Steele et al., 1981).

Wildlife

Boise National Forest estimates 210 bird species, 70 mammals, and 24 reptiles and amphibians reside in the Forest year-round or at some point during their life cycle (USDA - Forest Service, 1990).

The National Forests are focused predominantly on wildlife habitat management as compared to species management. The National Forests use indicator species to understand how land management practices may affect various classes of wildlife and fish. Elk are used as an indicator of successional summer ranges and good elevation meadow management. Mule deer are used as an indicator of successional summer and winter ranges. Red-backed voles are used to indicate old-growth habitats. Meadow voles, which are sensitive to overgrazing, are used as a riparian indicator species. Pileated woodpeckers are used to represent the needs of a wide range of large snag tree users. Mountain chickadees indicate the needs of smaller, primary and secondary cavity tree nesters. Yellow warblers are used as indicators of several types of riparian habitat (USDA - Forest Service, 1990).

Harvesting projections by the Boise National Forest to the year 2040 predict a reduction in the amount of mature sawtimber forest and more even distribution of immature sawtimber and seedling/sapling stands. This trend would tend to favor species that use early successional stages (such as elk and deer) and disfavor species that use late successional stages. Current harvests will reduce old-growth habitat conditions by 20-30%. Boise National Forest sees monitoring of all indicator species as helping to ensure that diverse habitat types are represented on the landscape to help ensure viable populations of all native vertebrates (USDA - Forest Service, 1990).

Under the Endangered Species Act, the National Forests have a legal responsibility to manage habitat for the recovery of threatened and endangered species. No threatened or endangered plant species have been identified on the Boise National Forest. Endangered animal species in the Forest include the gray wolf, bald eagle, and peregrine falcon (USDA - Forest Service, 1990).

Whereas the National Forests manage wildlife habitat, the Idaho Department of Fish and Game manages wildlife populations on National Forest lands. The Idaho Department of Fish and Game has long-range goals to transplant big-game species -- such as bighorn sheep, mountain goat, elk, and moose -- on National Forest land to enhance existing populations for recreational hunting purposes. The Department’s long term goal for elk is to increase the existing population and closely approach the maximum potential population (USDA - Forest Service, 1990).

Responsibility for wildlife management on waterways and lakes is similarly divided between the Forest Service and the State. The National Forests manage fish habitat while the Idaho Department of Fish and Game manages the fish resource.

Freshwater habitats in the area have been damaged by roading, logging, livestock grazing and mining, leading to declines in chinook salmon and other species. Boise National Forest uses several fish species (chinook salmon, steelhead trout, cutthroat trout, rainbow trout, and bull trout) as indicators of the effects of management activities. Many of these indicator species are also popular sport fish (USDA - Forest Service, 1990).