Principle – Yield and Quality of Forest Goods are Sustainable

Criterion- Forest management provides for sustainability of goods and services.

Indicator – Distribution of, and changes in, the landbase available for timber production are identified

Box B: Definition:

Productive capacity is a measure of the ability of the forest landbase to provide a flow of benefits to society. Productive capacity for timber production is a reflection of mean annual increment relative to the number of acres available for timber harvesting. Thus, one aspect of measuring productive capacity is to measure changes in the land base available for commercial harvest.

Box D: Applicability to Different Landowners. Explain any differences:

The distribution of, and changes in the landbase available for timber production are relevant to all landowners in their considerations for harvesting timber. However, current politics and policies are influencing the land base available for timber production due to increasing consideration of multiple resources. Some land is being taken out of the timber production landbase in deference to other amenities. This is especially true for the Boise National Forest administered lands where political constraints and social issues are bringing about considerable changes in the land base available for timber production.

Many non-industrial owners are influencing the land base available for timber production through subdivision and purchase of forest lands as a place to build their primary residence. This often removes these lands from consideration for timber production.

For the non-industrial private owners, the availability of the land for timber production is directly tied to the specific objectives they might have for owning the land. Some plan on harvesting, at least at some point in the future, while other have no plans at all for harvesting. In a 1989 survey of non-industrial owners of parcels 10 acres or larger, only 22% of those responding indicated that income from timber was a significant reason for owning their forested land. Grazing, wildlife appreciation, aesthetic enjoyment, obtaining wood for domestic use, hunting and fishing, hiking or backpacking and picnicking or camping were all rated as being more important than income from timber (Force and Lee 1989).

The state and industrial private lands available for timber management have remained relatively stable for many years. Changes have been aimed at increasing this land base, so as to allow increased production. These changes have come about primarily through trades with other agencies or owners, trading away land not suited for timber production for lands that do have this capability,

Some historical facts that influenced distribution of, and changes in, the landbase available for timber production:

1897 - The Forest Management Act of 1897 (often referred to as the Organic Administration Act of the Forest Service) directed that reserves were to be administered to improve and protect the reservations, aid in water flow, and assist in furnishing timber.

1905 - Forest Service transferred from Dept. of the Interior to Dept. of Agriculture.

1960 – Multiple-Use, Sustained Yield Act. Established the multiple-use and sustained yield policies for forest management.

1976 – National Forest Management Act provided standards for forest planning.

Idaho State endowment lands were reserved as permanent lands to be managed consistent with investment goals for the state reserve funds. (Idaho Code 57-723A)

Box E: Overlap:

CIFOR 2.3.2

CCFM 1.1.1 1.1.2 1.1.3 3.1.2

Notes: The availability of forestland for timber production and its rate of conversion are important at all scales. On global and national scales, loss of the forestland base available for production in one region will almost certainly impact production in a distant region. This can be observed by the high and ever increasing interest in importing raw wood materials and wood products from countries outside North America. The same can be said for the study area and tenure, where loss of availability of a local source of logs has forced the local industry to search far afield for a source of supply.

Notes: NA; Structure, function and composition are ecological parameters

Box I: Underlying Concepts:

The basic consideration is that people need wood products. In discussions of timber supply and future demand on that supply, the availability of a land base for timber production has to be considered (Conway 1976). Productive capacity is a measure of the ability of the forest land base to provide a flow of benefits to society. It applies to both timber and non-timber resources and is a key factor in assessing our progress toward sustainability. One aspect of measuring productive capacity is to measure changes in availability of land available for commercial harvesting. Conversion of land from timber harvesting to other uses can have significant effects on productivity. There has been a steady and continuing increase in the amount of public forestland protected for other uses, such as parks, wilderness areas and land set aside for threatened and endangered species (Conway 1976). Many acres have also been removed from use for commercial harvest in order to provide other amenities such as clean water and protection of soil (Idaho Forest Practices Act) and habitat and cover for wildlife.

According to Mather (1990) the use of the forest resource depends on the way in which it is controlled. The nature of this control, and in particular the form of ownership, provides the essential link between the forest resource and its use. The nature of ownership and tenure influences the objectives of use of the forest resource and the nature of its management.

The three most common controls on management include:

1. Forest Utilization
2. Forest Protection
3. Environmental Protection

Box J: Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Management:

Changes in acreage available for timber production have a direct impact on the sustainability of timber production (Canadian Council of Forest Ministers, 1977). One component of this challenge is that we cannot predict what areas will be set aside for other amenities. Yet, lands are being converted to other uses to meet the needs of society. It does not matter whether the needs are directly for people or for meeting ecological concerns, the end result is the same; there is less land available for timber production. Since changes in the amount of land available for timber production are not predictable, sustainability of fiber production can not be assured.

The Multiple-Use and Sustained Yield Act of 1960 prescribes multiple use as the general management policy for national forests. Section 4 of the Act defines use as follows:

"multiple-use" means: i) the management of all the various renewable surface resources of the forests so that they are utilized in the combination that will best meet the needs of the American people; ii) making the most judicious use of the land for some or all of these resources or related services over areas large enough to provide sufficient latitude for periodic adjustments in use to conform to changing needs and conditions; iii) that some land will be used for less than all the resources; and iv) harmonious and coordinated management of the various resources, each with the other, without impairment of the productivity of the land, with consideration being given to the relative values of the various resources, and not necessarily the combination of uses that will give the greatest dollar return or the greatest unit output.

Multiple-use has come to mean an emphasis on balanced use: all uses will be attentively considered and an effort made to reach some kind of optimal output of all major uses.

Multiple Use: The greatest good for the greatest number; a balanced allocation of timber, water, range, recreation, wildlife, and other resources found in the national forests.

The Multiple-use – Sustained Yield Act signed in 1960 organized the five major uses of the national forests; timber, wildlife, range, water, and outdoor recreation under one law which became the basic charter for the administration of the national forests.

Reference:

Steen, H.K. 1976. The U.S. Forest Service: A History. University of Washington Press, 356 p.

Box K: Measurement Methods:

Changes in the amount of land base available for timber management and production are the basic parameter to be measured. Measuring forest conversion can be accomplished from ground surveys, aerial photography, or, on a larger scale, from satellite imagery. Rates of change require historical information, which may be obtained from old aerial photos. These historical photos are available from the US Geomatronics Center in Salt Lake City, Utah. However, the photos will only allow for measures of gross forest cover without definition of suitability for timber production.

Box L: Data Required:

Tables of acres/hectares available for commercial forest production, through time. For a complete test, this information should cover all tenures.

Maps and documents that depict land use categories, management, and Forest land legislation.

Box M: Data Used for the North American Test:

The data used were from a USDA FS, Boise National Forest and Boise State University, Department of Geosciences 1998 joint data analysis and mapping project; "The Evolution of Forest Management, 25 years of change on the Boise National Forest". Map at BNF. Project performed by Charlla Adams and Wendy Eklund. Contact persons: Lyn Morelan (BNF), Joe Frost (BNF) and Tyson Taylor (BSU).

The USDA Forest Service, Boise National forest has made a comparison of the land base available for timber management, as outlined in their forest plans for 1996, 1976, and 1990. The data were used to prepare three GIS maps visually depicting the changes that have taken place. The land available for timber management in the 1990 plan has been reduced nearly 60% compared to 1966, 25 years ago.

Box N: Example Results:

PROJECTED HARVEST VOLUME

Box O: Assessing the Practicality:

Changes in the amount of land available for timber production can be tracked over time. Government agencies, both state and federal, and industrial owners are constantly updating their land use plans. This requires an up-to-date record of lands and designated uses. This work is now done with GIS databases; thus tracking changes through time is very possible and would not require any special arrangements. Tracking these changes for Non-industrial forestland owners would be much more challenging. Private forested land changes hands very frequently in Idaho, and whether it might or might not be available for commercial harvest could change with each new owner. Some degree of information could be obtained by tracking ownership patterns and size of parcel of land owned, which could be accomplished by a review of the land tax and Forest Protection (Fire Protection) tax records. The Forest Protection tax records would provide information about the size of ownership, while the land tax records would provide some idea about the ultimate availability of the land for timber production. Lands categorized as Class 6 and Class 7 are designated for timber production at some point in time. The law applies to forested land ownerships of at least five, but less than 5,000 acres, statewide (Idaho State Tax Commission, 1998).

Box P: Assessing the Information Value:

This indicator will provide a measure of stability that could be used in planning for utilization of all resources, not just timber production. Thus, it could be very useful for all stakeholders.

Box Q: Overall assessment:

Accepted -

Weaknesses: the vagueness associated with designating land as available for timber production makes it potentially difficult to gather the information. For the USDA Forest Service and other federally land managers, public opinion and pressure influence this designation. However, public opinion can change dramatically in a short time.

Strengths; Once the land use designation has been made, it will be relatively easy to track changes.

Box R: Did you rewrite or revise to a new indicator. If so what?

No

Box S: References:

• Conway, S. 1976. Logging practices, Principles of timber harvesting systems. Miller Freeman Publications, Inc. San Francisco. 416 p.
• Force, J. E. and H. W. Lee. 1989. Non-industrial private forest land use in Southern Idaho. A survey of landowner objectives. Contribution No. 459, Idaho Forest, Wildlife and Range Experimentation, college of Forestry, Wildlife and Range Sciences. University of Idaho, Moscow, Id. 41 p.
• Idaho’s Forest Land Taxation Law. Revised 4/98. Prepared by the Idaho State Tax Commission, Forest Land & Forest Tax Section. Boise, Idaho
• Mather, A. S. 1990 Global Forest Resources, Timber Press, 341p.
• Robinson G., O. 1975. The Forest Service, A Study In Public Land Management. The Johns Hopkins University Press, 337 p.
• Steen H.,K. 1976. The U.S. Forest Service: A History, University of Washington Press, 356 p.
• USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Region, Boise National Forest. 1990. Land and resource management plan for the Boise National Forest. April 27, 1990.
• USDA FS, BSU. 1998. The Evolution of Forest Management. 25 years of change on the Boise National Forest. Map at BNF 1966, 1976 and 1990. Project performed by Charlla Adams and Wendy Eklund. Contact persons: Lyn Morelan (BNF), Joe Frost (BNF) and Tyson Taylor (BSU).

Please record your notes on evaluating the indicator here.