Resilient Forests Managing for Productivity, Health, Wealth, and Resilience in the Face of Pervasive Change Hal Salwasser Oregon State University, College of Forestry Sun River, OR July.

Download Report

Transcript Resilient Forests Managing for Productivity, Health, Wealth, and Resilience in the Face of Pervasive Change Hal Salwasser Oregon State University, College of Forestry Sun River, OR July.

Resilient Forests
Managing for Productivity, Health,
Wealth, and Resilience in the Face of
Pervasive Change
Hal Salwasser
Oregon State University, College of Forestry
Sun River, OR
July 21, 2005
What We’ll Cover
 Western deans’ vision for forests
 Forest values
 American forests in a global context
 Sustainability and forests
 Different roles for different forests
 The work ahead
Our Vision for Forests
Sustain and enrich human well being through
diverse values, uses, products and services;
Managed and conserved to meet changing
needs based on local knowledge plus everimproving science and technologies;
Serve current and future generations in
sustaining our communities and rich cultural
heritage.
Forests that …
 Deliver high quality water
 Sustainably meet domestic needs for forest-based
renewable resources
 Reward owners/stewards with multiple benefits
 Perpetuate biological and cultural diversity
 Ameliorate impacts of human activities
 Grow in extent, productivity, resilience
 Are managed for distinct local capabilities & values
 Restore human spirit and stewardship ethic
 Bring people together for common purpose
Lands of Many Values
 Western deans’ vision for forests
 Forest values
 American forests in a global context
 Sustainability and forests
 Different roles for different forests
 The work ahead
Forests are Sources of Life
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Clean water and air
Abundant fish and wildlife
Cultural heritage
Climate and carbon
Recreation and aesthetics
Wood and fiber
Non-wood forest products
Jobs and personal identity
Wealth and revenues
Global Forest Context
 Western deans’ vision for forests
 Forest values
 American forests in a global context
 Sustainability and forests
 Different roles for different forests
 The work ahead
Global Forces = Change
 Population growth: 6.3 Bil. in 2003 to ~ 8 Bil. in 2050
 Technology: steady advances + breakthroughs
 Political instability: local to global, ballot measures to wars
 Trade: barriers/subsidies, free vs fair
 Industry restructuring: global integration, dynamics in
timberland ownership, global capital
 Widening rich-poor gap: happening everywhere
 Raising of “green” consciousness: more than air/water
 Consumption growth: space, water, fossil fuels, food, wood,
minerals
 Climate change: yes but variable, uncertain regional effects
 Non-native invasive species + explosive natives
Pervasive Change
Need for prudent risk taking,
continual learning and adaptation
Global Forest Trends
 Forest area: ~ 9.6 Billion ac; 50-66% loss since 1600 ce
 Forest loss: ~ 23 Million ac/yr in 1990s
 Population + Economic Growth = Forest Loss
 But not always: - 30 mil ac/yr in tropics, + 7 mil ac/yr in non-tropics
 Demands for forest benefits ever growing
 Water quality, quantity: biggest future forest issue
 Wood use: range = flat near term to < 0.5%/yr long term
 Biodiversity conservation: yes but public still bewildered after 20 years
 Carbon storage: how much, trees + products, market uncertainty
 Recreation, subsistence, cultural uses: highly variable by ownership
Some Global Leaders
22
Forest Area: Russia
Wood Volume: Russia
23
Wood Biomass: Brazil
27
24
Plantation Forests: China
Solid Wood Produced: US
22
Solid Wood Used: US
30
Solid Wood Imports: US
30
Solid Wood Exports: Canada
32
0
UN FAO 2005: 2000, 2002 data
5
10
15
20
25
Percent of World Share
30
35
Global Plantation Forests
EU
4.7
Brazil + Chile + NZ + SA + Australia
5.6
24
Russia + US + Japan
42
India + China
0
UN FAO 2005: 2000 data
10
20
30
40
Percent of World Share
50
Global & U.S. Wood Use
 Ind. wood use rose 40% since 1960: ~ 1.6 BM3 but flat over last 20
 Fuel wood use > industrial wood use: ~ 1.8 BM3 and growing
 Ind. wood use could increase < 33% by 2050: from 1.6 - 2.1 BM3
 ~ 75% of global wood and fiber will come from planted forests by
mid century or earlier (Sedjo and others)
 ~ 31% of global solid wood consumption crosses an international
boundary from tree to product; most likely to increase
 US imports 31% of solid wood products consumed; exports
associated jobs & impacts (81% growth since 1991)
 US uses 30% of world’s solid wood products; largest per capita
 US forest and wood choices drive global wood market
UN FAO 2005: 2002 data + Perez-Garcia on future demand
US in Global Context
People
4.7
Forest Land
5.8
Wood Volume in Forests
8
Plantion Forests
8.6
Reserve Forest
9
Solid Wood Produced
22
Solid Wood Used
30
Solid Wood Imported
30
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Percent of World Share (UN FAO 2005: 2000, 2003 data)
Oregon in US Context
People
1.2
Land
2.6
Forest Land
3.7
Reserve Forest
11.4
Timberland
4.6
Softwood Growing Stock*
16
% US Softwood Harvest
8.3
0
*Timberland Only
5
10
15
20
Percent of National Share (ODF, USFS data 1999, 2002)
Sustainability
 Western deans’ vision for forests
 Forest values
 American forests in a global context
 Sustainability and forests
 Different roles for different forests
 The work ahead
Sustainability
Progressive improvement in environmental,
economic and cultural conditions
Equity across societal sectors and
generations
Engagement of people in social choices
that affect them
Adaptability to pervasive change
Sustainable Forestry
The suite of policies, plans and practices
that seek to protect, produce, and
perpetuate forest ecosystems for the
values, uses, products, and services
desired by communities and landowners
for this and future generations
NCSSF 2005
Sustainability
Not possible without taking risks and
continually adapting to change,
making things better
Its not about standing still!
Fitting Forest to Purpose
 Western deans’ vision for forests
 Forest values
 American forests in a global context
 Sustainability and forests
 Different roles for different forests
 The work ahead
Breadth of Sustainable
Forest Management
 Varies by forest type, ownership,
primary purpose
 Forest purposes:

Wood and fiber production

Multiple resource values/uses

Reserves, nature preservation

Urban and community forests
Wood Production Forests
 Most of world’s future wood will
come from planted forests:
 ~ 33% now, ~ 75% by 2050
 ~ 10% or less of global forest area
 Primary purposes:
 Grow trees for wood, fiber
 Increase forest value to owner
 Management challenges:
 Thrive in global markets
 Increase wood yield: > 2x over natural
 Improve environmental outcomes
 Improve wood quality, consistency
 Produce high return on investment
 Maintain social license to operate
Who Owns Prod. Forest?
Million Acres by Owner
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Site Class in
Ft3/Ac/Yr
1 = >120
2 = 85-120
3 = 50-85
4 = 20-50
5 = 0-20
National
Forest
Other
Public
Forest
Industry
Source: Powell et al. (1993) Tables 5 and 6
Family
Forests
Multi-resource Forests
 Most of the world’s accessible forests
have multiple resource purposes
 ~ 40% of global forest area eventually
 Primary purposes:
 Meet diverse landowner objectives
 Increase forest value to owner(s)
 Challenges:
 If US federal, clarify purpose and direction
 Deliver multi-resource/value outcomes at
acceptable costs
 Differentiate products in markets
 Finance non-market benefits
 Finance management of federal lands
Reserve Forests
 Parks, wilderness, natural areas:
 ~ 12% worldwide in 2000
 ~ 50% of global forest area eventually
 Primary purposes:
 Sustain at-risk species, natural
processes, “wild” ecosystems
 Recreation, cultural uses
 Management challenges:
 Minimize human use impacts
 Restore, promote wildness, naturalness
 Ameliorate effects of invasive species,
air pollution, explosive natives
 Achieve goals for least costs
 Finance management
Urban, Community
Forests
 Where 80% of the people live
 Primary purposes:
 Attractive communities, neighborhoods
 Conserve resources: water, energy
 Increase property values
 Backyard wildlife habitats
 Management challenges:
 Safety, infrastructure impacts
 Minimize sprawl
 Minimize invasive species escapes
Reserve Forests: Mostly
federal, some state, tribal,
private
Wood Production
Forests: Mostly
industry, family,
some state, tribal
Forest
Sustainability
Environmental Benefits
Urban, Community
Forests: Forests where
people live
Multi-resource
Forests: Mostly state,
tribal, some family,
some federal
Ownership Matters
Multi-resource
Wood Production
Reserve
Industry, TIMO
*
*
Private, large
Family, ENGO
Tribes
State
Federal
*
Streamside zones, leave trees, habitats as mini or micro reserves
Oregon’s Balance
Wood
Production
36%
Reserve
31%
Multi-use
33%
Oregon Forest Owners
Family
16%
State
3%
Other
3%
Federal
57%
Industry
21%
Oregon 2004 Harvest
State
7%
BLM Native American
2%
2%
Other Public
1%
National Forest
8%
Other Private
13%
4.45 BBF
Forest Industry
67%
Leading the Way
 Western deans’ vision for forests
 Forest values
 American forests in a global context
 Sustainability and forests
 Different roles for different forests
 The work ahead
Challenges
1.
Keep forest lands in forest uses for forest values

Sustain US forests in face of global forces, urban sprawl
2.
Meet people’s forest resource needs efficiently
3.
Improve production and conservation efficiency
4.
Restore and sustain health of at-risk forests
5.
Create new knowledge and technologies:
6.

Sciences and products for progressive sustainability

Products and practices innovations
Enhance lifelong learning and extended education
AND
Address Demand -Consumption Ethic
Intelligent consumption and production of
renewable natural resources is key to sustaining
quality of life;
Overuse, non-renewable substitutes, transfer effects
degrade ecosystems somewhere;
Prudent choices consider full impacts, the future,
and the entire life cycle of resources –
Domestic Renewables Win!
Restoration Challenge
 Defining forest health
 Normal stresses
 Choices
 Integrated strategies
 Essentials for success
 Roles for science
 Strategic decision tree
Threats to Forest Health
 Uncharacteristic
fire
 Invasive species
and explosive
natives
 Climate change
and drought
 Residential
encroachment
Magnitude of Problem
 67 M ac (52%) western
timberland in FRCC2
and FRCC3
 97 M ac (75%) western
timberland warrant
treatment
 62% of treatable volume
on NFS
 86% of trees to remove l.t.
10” dbh
 72% of volume in trees
g.t. 10” dbh
 1999 western industry used
32 M bdt for all products
 30 year plan for treatment
yields range from 8 to 51
M bdt/yr
 Potentially large impacts for
wood prices, mill/cogen
capacity
 Treatment costs w/o
products $35-$1,000/ac
 1.4% of fires g.t. 300 ac,
94% of suppression
costs, some g.t. $500/ac
 Now treating ~ 4 mil ac/yr
Healthy Forest?
 Functions as intended according to landowner goals, state
and/or federal, tribal policies
 Delivers high quality water in quantities and seasons that
sustain ecosystems and people
 Sustains native fish and wildlife compatible with primary
purpose(s)
 Resilient to future stresses, e.g., drought, insects, diseases,
storms, fires, invasive species, explosive natives
 Has community support to produce the array of values, uses,
products and services desired by owners
Some Stresses are Normal
 Fires, disease, storms, landslides are natural processes;
vital to renewal of productivity, resilience
 But some watershed conditions exceed range of natural
processes; impede water quality or create
unacceptable vulnerability to extreme stresses
 Under what conditions should we intervene to “solve”
problems, alter ecosystem conditions or trajectory of
recovery?
What are the Options?
 Let nature take its course
 Intervene to reduce or eliminate stresses
 Stop pollution, stop practices that impede health, manage pests
 Intervene to restore resilience before extreme stress
 Be bold enough, soon enough to make a difference
 Intervene after events to restore health or influence resilience
to stress and the trajectory and rate of ecosystem
recovery
 Act quickly and boldly to remove threats to desired future conditions,
contain costs, influence future species, stocking, competing
vegetation
Integrated Strategy
 Assess need for intervention and priorities at site, watershed
and landscape scales – collaborative, community
engagement if public lands involved
 Target actions/treatments strategically for highest success,
lowest failure; highest benefits @ lowest costs
 Design actions for learning – adaptive management
 Link restoration actions to complementary goals:
 Water, fish, wildlife, wood yield, aesthetics, recreation, carbon
 Energy, transportation, jobs, wood-based products
 Monitor and research to reduce costs, increase benefits
 Communicate, learn, adapt – close the loop on continual
learning
What is Needed for Success?
 Ready access to contemporary science, relevant information,
tools
 Ability to assess and act strategically at landscape/watershed
scale
 Financial resources, social capital for intervention
 Ability to accomplish multiple objectives and create wealth from
treatments to cover some costs of restoring health, resilience
 Integration of science with management and local knowledge for
place-based problem solving, adaptive learning
 Innovation in work processes and new products
 Bias for barrier-busting boldness – risks and costs increase with
delay; timidity could = failure on goals
Does Science Have All
the Answers?
No way!
Can We Get There
Without Science?
No way!
A Strategic Decision Tree
 Is policy/plan clear on direction for area in question?
 If no, messy gridlock; clarify policy/plan
 Will nature deliver what policy/plan calls for?
 If yes, work is through
 When restoration interventions are needed/warranted
 What kind?
 Where?
 How frequent is the need?
 How to pay for restoration work?





Public $$ – but state and federal discretionary $$ declining
Revenues generated from by-products of restoration work
Savings from reduced emergency spending
Carbon credits, biomass energy, biofuels
Other: conservation incentives, recreation?
The Case for Management
 Wood Production Forests
 Sustain progressive productivity and increase value as forests
 Compete in global markets
 Excellence in commodity woods, customer service
 Value-added, niche differentiated wood and wood-based products
 Sustain resilience to drought, insects, disease, fire
 Multi-resource Forests
 Sustain joint resource production
 Diversify revenues to finance management: wood + recreation +
ecosystem services
 Restore diversity, resilience to drought, insects, disease, fire
 Reserve Forests
 Restore wildness and natural processes
 Contain human impacts
University Roles …
 Educate a highly skilled forest/mill workforce and future
forest scientists and teachers
 Create a stronger science base for all SFM systems;
improve regulatory efficiency
 Innovations for improved market and environmental
performance of all US forests and forest products
 Innovations to increase productivity and sustainability of
US forest resources and forest products
 Educate a more knowledgeable, responsible citizenry
 Promote prudent policies, empowered communities
 Advocate for diverse, productive, resilient forests and
associated economies and human communities
Future Forest Resilience?
Its up to our generation to choose
and act if we want to deliver
healthy, productive, wealthy, and resilient
forests to our children and grandchildren