Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
6 PRODUCTS FROM THE FORESTS The forests of the Pacific Northwest are the source of wood prod- ucts including lumber, plywood, pulp, and paperand nonwood productssuch as fish and wildlife, recreation, and assorted m~scelIa- neous products, including ornamental greens and foods. All of those products have or could have monetary value in ordinary markets. The forests also provide scenery, clean water, and clean air, amenities that are less readily bought and sold but that are valuable nonetheless. This chapter focuses on wood products and selected nonwood products. it examines the implications of changes in the use and management of Pacific Northwest forests for those products. The charge to the committee in its statement of task was drafted before adoption of the Northwest Forest Plan and at a time when the reg~on's wood products economy and management of its forests was changing rapidly. Substantial changes have since taken place as a result of that plan, but other changes have also occurred as controversies continue over the management and future uses of the reg~on's forests. One result of these changes has been a sharp decrease in timber harvests on federal land in the Pacific Northwest, as wed as in much of the rest of the western states. As implied in the statement of task, this has brought about shifts timber harvests in other regions that also supply national markets for wood products. This section of the report describes these changes in timber harvests and some of their implications for sustaining other forest values. 722
Products From the Forest PAC/F/C NORTHWEST WOOD PRODUCTS /N THE NATIONAL ECONOMY 7Z3 The Pacific Northwest wood products economy is driven by the United States market for softwood lumber and structural panels (softwood plywood and oriented-strand board (OSB), a pane! product made of wood that competes with softwood plywood). New home construction and home repairs and improvements are the major factors In this market, which has been expanding in recent years despite the cutbacks In fecleral timber harvests. National consumption of softwood lumber increased by 10% from peak to peak of the wood products cycle from 1977 to 1997 (Figure 6-1~. National consumption of ah softwood wood products, excluding fue~wood, also increased over this period (Figure 6-2~. WorIdwicle consumption of wood for industrial purposes has also increased in recent years and is expected to continue to increase over the next few decactes (Brooks et al. 1996~. At the same time, per capita consumption in the United States of the kind of timber that is the main product of Pacific Northwest forestssoftwood saw~ogs and softwood veneer logs shows no strong upward trenct (USES 1994~. Increasing demand for wood products nationally has been met over the years through various market responses. For example, softwood timber supplies have been extended by improving access to timber, increasing the number of tree species that is used, using wood more efficiently, substituting plentiful hardwoods for scarcer softwoods, using products made of wood particles in place of solid wood products, gluing small pieces of lumber together to make larger pieces, and recycling. Higher prices for wood products have also led to some use of substitute materials, such as aluminum and viny! siding. Some opportunities for increasing the efficiency of wood use remain, such as using modular units in construction; most of these opportunities are at the processing stage. Greater efficiency in wood use, including conservation measures, likely will continue, driven for the most part by · . . . increases in wood prices. The region west of the Great Plains, including the Pacific coast states and the intermountain and Rocky Mountain regions, was the nation's major softwood-lumber-producing region, but its share of the nation's total softwood lumber production has fallen from more than 70% in the
724 Pacific Northwest Forests U. S. Softwood Lumber fig ~ _ \ . ~ ~ I \ <i ~ I L_~ ~ a / at.. / I i; HE /~ /~ ~~\N .~ - - em' it, ado_ _ ~ ~ 1 . . 1 ' I ~ 78 ea 82 84 ~ 68 Go 92 ~ 96 +~ Pinion ~ Iropo~ ~~ Exams ~~ Consumptann FIGURE 6-1. U.S. production, imports, exports, and consumption of softwood lumber 1978-1997 (in billion board feet). Source: Howard 1999.
Products From the Forest Al 4000 - 120:~0 iO0Q~ ~0 I\ ~ 'of . :~ _/ ' ~ ~ AQUA - ~~ it 725 u. s. so - ~~a Valuer is /~ ' , at. - f _' t ~ i . ~ ~ t ~ ~ ' f . 1 . 1 fir . 1 i I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ He i ~ me l ~ i t ~ A ~ ~ ~ 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 44 96 In hi- Impose ~ Spots - ~ Cor,~£`nphon FIGURE 6-2. U.S. production, imports, exports, and consumption of softwood timber products, excluding fue~wood, 1978-1997 (in million cubic feet roundwood equivalent). Source: Howard 1999. -
726 Pacific Northwest Forests ~-1960s to about 55% now (Adams et al. 1988~. Washington and Oregon were the biggest lumber producers for many years, but their share of the nation's total has fallen from more than 40% in the m~- 1960s to about 30% recently (Adams et al. 1988~. The role of federal lands in supplying the timber that is processed into softwood lumber and plywooct has changed. From 1962 to 1989 in Oregon, timber harvests from federal lands were generally higher than those from private lands, but harvests on federal lands are now well below private harvests (Figure 6-3~. While timber harvests from privately owned forests have exceeded] those from federal forests for many years in Washington, the spread has widened considerably since 1988 (Figure 6-4~. Douglas-fir and hemlock from the region west of the Cascades summit are the main softwood lumber species from the Pacific North- west that compete generally in construction markets with softwood lumber from British Columbia, the Rocky Mountains, the southern United States, and eastern Canada. Sitka spruce and cedars go into specialty markets that depend on the characteristics of the particular species. Hardwooct {umber production, mostly red alder, has increased in the Pacific Northwest in recent years, but it is still a minor factor in the region. Ponderosa pine and western white pine from the interior of the Pacific Northwest (eastern Oregon and Washington, Idaho, and Montana) are used mainly for millwork (doors, windows, and molding) that goes into national markets. Other softwood species from the entire region (spruce, lodgepole pine, and fir) are used to make lumber that goes into national markets for construction materials. Little softwood lumber in the region is processed beyond the sawmill or planing mill before it is used in construction. Market factors determine that most use of softwood lumber in manufacturing takes place closer to the point of final use. Fiber used in production of wood pulp and paper in the Pacific Northwest depends heavily on chipped residues from lumber and plywood mills. That source is being supplemented increasingly with recycled paper and with hardwood pulpwood. Some chips from lumber and plywood mills are also exported, mainly to Japan.
Products From the Forest s000 . 4500 3500 3000- 2500 :~0 - ~ t / _ _' 150Ol~ - _ _ t 727 WAi<3~ lumber Rawest -(~ - ~ ~ ~ - ~ - ~ l ~ I. ~ - 'at: - ~ - -a 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 ~ 95 96 + WAPRiV - - WA,FED '_ oRpRIv - . oRFED FIGURE 6-3. Federal and private timber harvests by state, Washington and Oregon, 1987-1997 (in minion board feet). Source: Warren 1999.
128 Pacific Northwest Forests MT.~D amber Hawesm boom I 300 2ao - ~ - A , ~ {~, i.: , ~ ~ IN \ A y ~ , \\ \ \/ 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 + MTPRIV ~ Mall - ~ IOPRIV ~ I0FED FIGURE 6~. Federal and private timber harvests by state, Montana andIdaho,1987-1997(m~lion board feet). Source: Warren 1999.
Products From the Forest PRODUCTS /N NATIONAL AND /NTERNAT/ONAL MARKETS 729 The Pacific Northwest was the major source of softwood lumber and plywood for U.S. markets for many years, but production in the southern U.S. now exceeds that in the Pacific Northwest by significant margins (Figure 6-5 and Figure 6-6~. In addition, imports from Canada now account for about one-third of U.S. softwood lumber consumption, about the same as the southern United States (Figure 6-7~. The Pacific Northwest also once produced r~lyallc£thena~s softwood ply- wo 0 it, mainly from large old Douglas-fir. The South started producing pine plywood in the early 1960s and became the leading producer of softwood plywood by 1980 as plywood technology improved and markets changed to accept plywood with knots for structural uses. As timber prices increased in the late 1970s, first Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan and then the Northeast and South began producing panels made of wood particles, such as orientect- stranct boarcl (OSB), which competes directly with softwood plywood in construction. National OSB production now exceeds that of softwood plywood from the Pacific Northwest, which has fallen from its peak levels in the 1960s and 1970s (Figure 6-6~. Softwood log exports are now less than one-half of what they were in the late 1980s. The volume of log exports (about 2 billion board feet) is equivalent to about one-quarter of the Pacific Northwest softwood lumber production. Softwood lumber exports have grown to the point where they are now close to the same volume as log exports (Howard 1999~. The Pacific Northwest was the major source of softwood /umber and p/ywoo~ {or U.s. markets for many years, but proc/uction in the southern U.s. now exceeds that in the Pacific Northwest by significant margins. EFFECTS OF CHANGES IN FEDERAL TIMBER HARVESTS IN THE PAC/F/C NORTHWEST Any substantial change In Pacific Northwest timber harvests leads to changes in the markets for wood products, as well as to changes in other
130 Pacific Northwest Forests Scold. Lumber P-roducdon 1%~0 - 'Lao 2000 ~Vt I -I _ _ ~ in_+ ~ _ 76 78 80 B? 84 ~ J ~ t I I ~ 1 t t t t ~ ~ J T ~ -by- 1 ~ - ~ - ~ ~~ 66 88 90 92 ~ 9& + WAlOR ~ C~IF ~ ~,~ ~ SO~H FIGURE 6-5. Softwood lumber production by U.S. region (in million board feet). Source: Adams et al. 1988.
Products From the Forest t2000 10~O 4000 737 Scold, Plywood and OSB ~~ ~ ~~ If ~ / .~ ,~ = I- - -it -- - --i ~ in -----a------- -~---------~--- --- -i- - ---} - l--- --I-- - I----------~------- +~ 82 ~ 86 88 90 92 94 ~ ". ~ me_ _- \ ~ 1 1 1 ~ 1 ~ 76 78 80 PLWA/~R ~ PLYSOU + PLYR:I5ST - - OSSTOT FIGURE 6-6. Annual softwood plywood and oriented strandboard (OSB) production by U.S. region, 1976-1997 (in million square feet, 3/~" basis). PLYWA/OR = softwood plywood production in Washington and Oregon; PT~YSOU = softwood plywood production in the South; PLYREST = softwood plywood production in the rest of the U.S.; 0SBTOT = U.S. Oriented strandboard production. Source: Adams et al. 1988.
732 Pacific Northwest Forests 18000 . 14000 12000 r ~~~ So000d lipids and ~XpO~ . I/ by. ~ 51i/ ~ 1 ,~` l 4~0'T ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~% ~0 t ~^ ~ ~~ ~ . ~~ 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 LUMIMP ~~ LUM~P 4~ LOGiMP ~ LOG~P FIGURE 6-7. U.S. softwood lumber and softwood log imports and exports, 1978-1997 (in miDionboar~feet). Source: Howard 1999.
Products From the Forest 733 related forest outputs. In a market economy, changes in timber harvests are reflected in shifts in economic supply and demand. Such shifts lead to price changes and to income and substitution effects (Hicks 1946~. Income effects occur because price changes affect consumers' buying powergiving them more if prices fall or less if prices rise. Substitution effects occur because of changes in the relative prices of competing goods. Shifts In markets for wood products have been substantial as a result of the cutbacks in federal timber harvests over the past decade. The nature and extent of the shifts were not, however, wholly unexpected. Even though these markets are complex, economic models used to simulate the operation of the market economy provided useful insights. Two such economic models of the U.S. timber economythe Timber Assessment Market Mode} (TAMM) and the CINTRAFOR Global Trade Model (CGTM) - helped policy makers assess the likely effects of changes. TAMM was developed by the U.S. Forest Service (USES) in cooperation with Oregon State University and is used by the USES in much of its policy analysis (Adams and Haynes 1980~. CGTM was developed at the University of Washington (Cardellichio et al. 1988~. Actual changes in markets since implementation of the Northwest Forest Plan were reasonably close to those indicated in advance by analyses made using these models once producers and consumers had time to react and adjust manufacturing processes and consumption patterns. Changes in the markets for wood products occasioned by the cutback in Pacific Northwest federal timber harvests spread throughout the nation's timber economy (Haynes and Adams 1992~. Prices for standing timber (stumpage) rose throughout the West during the late 1980s and early 1990s as federaltimber sales were reduced. The sharpestincreases occurred west of the Cascades in Washington and Oregon as the President's Northwest Forest Plan was implemented. But timber prices also fell again, especially in western Washington and Oregon, as the timber industry began adjusting to the new situation. At the same time, prices for softwood timber in the U.S. South continued to go up, although their peak in the late 1990s was about the same as their peak in the late 1970s (Figure 6-~. This occurred as the effects of reduced timber supplies from federal forests in the West spread to other regions, but they soon spread to other regions whose wood products replaced
I34 Pacific Northwest Forests Ski Timber P606$ I A 400 ^ 350 30() 250~ . 2GO ~~ ^ / f i, t ~_. 1CQ `: ~ 3 ~ ~ . A-\ \~1' SO ~ '~1~ ) .- ~ . . ~ ~ or . . . 7~ 78 80 82 ~ ~ 88 90 En' i -i-- ~ I I 92 ~ S~MSOU ~ STUMNP STV~ ~ =UM~ FIGURE 6-~. Softwood sawtimber (stumpage~prices, deflated (1982 prices by U.S. region, 1976-1997 (per 1,000 board feet). STUMSOU = South; STUMNR = Northern Rockies; STUMWE = western Washington and Oregon; STUMEA = eastern Washington and Oregon. Source: Adams et al. 1988.
Products From the Forest 735 those that would have otherwise come from the Pacific Northwest (Haynes and Weigand 1997~. Five general kinds of responses are important and relevant: · Increased harvests at the extensive margin (forests that previously were uneconomic for harvesting, · Increased harvests at the intensive margin (forests that aIreacly were supplying wood to markets) · Increased use of hardwoods · Technology changes · Materials substitutions increases/ Harvests at the Extensive Margin General price increases for timber will make some previously submarginal timber economic for harvesting. That is the kind of effect that historically led to the lumber industry moving from region to region as timber resources in each area were depleted. The major areas of unexploitect softwood forests in North America at the time the North- west Forest Plan was adopted were in eastern Canada and, to a lesser extent, in western Canada. The United States has practically no softwood timber (other than that in reserved status) that is not already under some level of management and is not already consictered part of the market supply. Siberia has a large volume of potentially marketable softwood timber that is not now part of the worms market supply. Imports of either softwood logs or lumber from Siberia or other regions, other than those from Canada, have been negligible (Howard 1999~. Imports of unpro- cessed or untreated softwoods pose a significant problem in the possible introduction of harmful nonindigenous species (Office of Technology Assessment 1993a). This can have serious impacts on biocLiversity in general and on forests in particular (NRC 1999b). The United States now prohibits imports of various unprocessed wood products, but questions have been raised about the adequacy of these controls in preventing importing pests. The substantial increases in softwood lumber imports from Canada
136 Pacific Northwest Forests since adoption of the Northwest Forest Plan raise questions about their sustainability. Forestry Canada, the national government forestry agency, incticated in 1993 that timber harvests had reached allowable cut limits in some areas and that British Columbia might reduce its harvests, largely in response to pressure from environmental interests (Forestry Canada 1993~. Relying on harvesting primary forests in other regions to substitute for Pacific Northwest harvests may provide only short-term relief in the absence of substantial investments in more intensive forest practices. increased Harvests at the intensive Margin Some substitution for reduced federal timber harvests in the Pacific Northwest has come from forests, especially private forests in the South and the Pacific Northwest, that wiD have to be managed more inten- sively (the intensive margin) to sustain the additional harvests. Much of these private forests are already managed for timber production. Sustaining these higher harvest levels will require added investments in forest management. The most recent available USES assessment of the forest resources situation (USES 1994) indicates that softwood timber removals (harvest- ing and land clearing) in the South exceeds growth by 14%, a reversal of the long-standing situation of growth exceeding removal (USFS 1994~. Although the 1994 assessment notes that situation might again change in another couple of decades, some analysts suggest caution. Cubbage and associates, for example, suggest that "sustaining long-term timber inventory and harvest increases in the South will be extremely difficult in the areas where the wood is needed the most [areas of concentrated wood industry plants]" (Cubbage et al. 1995~. The USES has identified several practices that could be used to increase timber growth in the South. The top ones in terms of their contribution to increased timber growth are planting with site prepara- tion, clearcutting mature stands and regenerating stands, eliminating trees that compete for growing space with crop trees, and commercial thinning of overly dense stands of merchantable trees (USFS 198Sa). One indication of the level of investment is tree planting on privately
Products Fro rn the Forest 737 owned land. A steady upward trend since 1950 in the area planted each year peaked at about 3 million acres annually in the late 19SOs. It has been nearly level at about 2.5 million acres in the 199Os (Moulton et al. 1993; Moulton 1998~. But these totals mask to a degree the effect of more intensive timber management practices on forest industry land relative to that on other private land (Moulton 1998~. Forest industry lands, which make up only 14 percent of the nation's timberland, account for over one-third of the timber harvest, a proportion that is likely to go up because of increasingly intensive management (NRC 1998~. The role of intensively managed tree plantations in South America, New Zealand, Australia, and Africa in providing wood products is also likely to increase and, to a degree, substitute for federal timber from the Pacific Northwest in world markets. Because of high growth rates relative to forests in temperate zones, one estimate is that plantations, often of nonindigenous species such as eucalyptus, that are managed intensively could supply the equivalent of the current world demand for industrial wood from as little as 4 percent of the global forest area (Seiko and Botkin 1997~. So far, however, the direct role of products from such plantations in U.S. markets has been minimal. For example, changes in U.S. production, imports, and exports of paper and paperboard (the products of tropical forests most likely to compete effectively in U.S. markets) show that while U.S. production went up by 16.4 million tons and exports went up by 5.l million tons from 1990 to 1997, imports went up by only 2.5 million tons (Howard 1999~. Increased Use of Hardwoods Increased use of hardwoods in place of softwoods has been taking place for years in response to increasing prices for softwood timber. Cutbacks in federal timber harvests will speed this substitution. Increased use of hardwoods is likely in the north-central and northeastern United States, where more aspen will be used to make products that compete with softwood plywood and with softwood lumber used for millwork, and in the South (Haynes et al. 1995~. Potential shortages in the West of chips for making wood pulp are leading some firms to plant fast-growing, irrigated poplars as a supplementary source of wood fiber. Natural stands of hardwoods
738 Pacific Northwest Forests suitable for making pulp are generally thought to be in plentiful supply in most of the eastern states, but planting fast-growing species, such as poplar, might become economical in the East as pressure on natural hardwood forests mounts. Technology Changes Price increases for timber lead to higher costs for users anct are a spur to innovation. In the past, development of plywood lowered labor costs in construction. Then, the development of OSB made it possible to use low-cost timber as a substitute for the higher-cost softwood timber usecl in making plywood. Parallel developments, such as laminated veneer lumber and recycling (mainly for fiber products such as paper), are likely to be a further response to higher softwood timber prices. Other technological developments in sawmills and plywood plants driven by high timber prices have made it possible to use smaller logs in making lumber and plywood and for getting more lumber or plywood out of the same volume of timber (Office of Technology Assessment 1993b; Haynes et al. 1995). Materials Substitution Human needs, such as shelter and furnishings, being met by wood products can also be met using other materials. The choice of wood is usually ink uenced by price, as well as by more subjective preferences, such as experience and culture. Metals, plastics, and concrete appear to be increasingly used as substitutes for wood. In particular, steel studs used In framing houses and aluminum and vinyl siding are substituting for Pacific Northwest wood products. Recycled wastepaper is also usect in making fiber-based products to an increasing extent in the United States and worldwide (Ince 1994~. With the 1993-1994 increase in softwood lumber prices, steel studs became nearly price competitive with softwood studs. If the price of wood studs becomes greater than that for steel studs, tradition and familiarity with wood are unlikely to be sufficient barriers to prevent a significant shift in use in favor of steel. The use of recycled wastepaper
Products From the Forest 739 in papermaking has been, in good part, driven by policies. Cost advantages, apart from those imposed by changes in public policies, clo not appear to have played a big part in this increase (Haynes et al. 1995~. ENV/RONMENTA! EFFECTS The reduction in fecleral timber harvests affects environmental values. The positive environmental effects on federal lands in the Pacific Northwest are described in FEMAT and the Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Assessment (USFS 1996~. The potential negative effects occur mostly on nonfederal forest land in the U. S. ancE Canada where timber harvests have increased in response to the reductions on federal lands in the U. S. The U.S. South ant] Canacia account for most of the substitution for rectuced federal softwood timber harvests. Although some observers expected increased harvests from private forests in the Pacific Northwest in response to the reductions in federal harvests, private harvests have remained more or less level since 1987 in Oregon, Montana, and Idaho and have fallen somewhat in Washington (Figures 6-3 and 6-4~. increased timber harvests on private land in the U.S. South anct on provincial land in Canada have responded nearly equally in substituting for the reductions in Pacific Northwest harvests from federal land (Figures 6-5 and 6-6~. These regions are the focus of the discussion of environmental effects below. The increased harvests on private lands involve some environmental costs, as well as some economic costs (USFS 1990~. Substitution of other materials for wood products in the marketplace, an alternative to increased timber harvests, would also entail some environmental costs (Koch 1992~. In Canada, the increased timber harvests since adoption of the Northwest Forest Plan have come from forests that were economically submarginal prior adoption of the plan. These forests typically are less productive and have less economically usable timber per acre than private forests in the Pacific Northwest and the U.S. South. The extent of the environmental effects associated with these increases in harvests is related to the additional area that is harvested and to the specific character of the forests in which the harvesting occurs. Increased production of timber on private forests in the South has
740 Pacific Northwest Forests meant Tower average ages of trees at harvest and more intensive silvicultural operations in response to higher timber prices. These have meant conflicts with environmental values such as protection of wetlands and habitat for endangered species such as the red-cockaded woodpecker. State laws, as well as federal regulations, guide and constrain forest management practices on private forests. The five Pacific Northwest states have some of the strongest laws regulating forest practices in the country (Ellefson et al. 1995~. The extent to which more intensive forest management will increase environmental effects on private lands depends on the varied conditions under which such management occurs and the effectiveness, extent, and enforcement of state regulations. Increasing forest growth in the South to make future increases in timber harvests possible will require significant increases in forest-management investments. That might require public incentives such as cost-share payments and technical assistance to landowners in addition to the incentive of higher timber prices (NRC 1998~. Extending softwood tim- The /ike/ihood of more intensive forest her supplies by management in other regions of the substituting United States as a result of cutbacks in hardwoods for Genera/ timber harvests in the Pacific softwoods in Northwest raises questions about the some uses is an ability of the nation as a who/e to pursue ongoing pro- the goals of forest management cess that may identified in this report. have been speeded up by the reductions in federal timber harvests. Most of the potential expansion in hardwood harvests is in the eastern United States, where concerns have been raised about the effects on sustaining productivity, impacts on wetlands, and effects on endangered species. The other way of dealing with reduced softwood timber supplies is to use substitutes for lumber and plywood, such as metals, plastics, and concrete. These materials require more energy in production and use than do wood products, which may result in greater environmental impacts than producing and using the wood products that they replace (NRC 1976~. Other environmental effects associated with the use of these substitute materials could include effects on surface resources,
Products From the Forest I47 water quality, and air quality. Estimates of energy use or the effects on other resources depend on the specific conditions of production and use of Me substitutes. /MPL/CAT/ONS FOR OTHER REGIONS The likelihood of more intensive forest management in other regions of the United States as a result of cutbacks in federal timber harvests in the Pacific Northwest raises questions about the ability of the nation as a whole to pursue the goals of forest management identified in this report. For example, can viable populations of indigenous forest species be sustained in the eastern United States if wood products production increases to fill the gap caused by the reduction in Pacific Northwest harvests? Can ecological processes in general be sustained (especially in the South) as increasing pressure is put on its forests to produce softwood lumber and wood pulp? Several important characteristics of eastern forests distinguish them from those of the Pacific Northwest. The eastern United States has ahnost no untouched o16-growth forest and has more hardwood forests than softwood or coniferous forests (NRC 1998~. Forest ownership is mainly private, mostly owned by nonindustrial owners, although federal and state-owned forests are important In some areas (Table 6-1 and Table 6-2~. TABLE 6-~. Area of Forest Land (in Thousand Acres) by Major Class and Subregion in the Eastern United States, 1992 Total productive Forest land Timberland Reserves Other . Northeast 85,380 79,449 4,550 1,382 North central 83,108 78,350 2,992 1,766 Southeast 88,078 84,794 1,998 1,285 South central 123,760 114,515 1,050 8,193 Total 380,326 357,108 10,591 12,627 Source: Powell et al.1993.
742 Pacific Northwest Forests TABLE 6-2. Timberland Ownership tin Thousand Acres) In the Eastern United States by Subregion, 1992 National Forest Nonindustrial forest Other public industry private Northeast 2,179 6,498 11,858 58,914 North central 7,366 14,264 4,340 52,380 Southeast 4,847 4,309 16,252 59,387 South central 6,707 4,639 22,774 80,395 Total 21,099 29,709 55,223 251,076 Source: Powell et al. 1993. The most intensive forest-management practices in the East have focused on softwood forests, especially in the South, but also to a degree in the northern coniferous forests from Maine to Minnesota. Softwood forests in the northeast and north central regions been under adclitional pressure as a result of reductions in federal timber harvests in the West. But most of the pressure has fallen on the South and on southern pine timber, which is managed for both saw~ogs and pulpwood. Private forests account for about 90% of the total timberland in the South. Of that, 20% is now owned by forest-industry firms, and 70% is owned by non~nclustrial private owners. The forest-industry ownership is skewed toward the pines (Iongleaf-slash pine, loblolly-shortleaf pine, and oak-pine) and is mainly in the coastal plain ancE lower Piedmont portions of the South (Powell et al. 1993~. Much of this forest grew up on abandoned farm fields two or three generations ago; the farms had replaced pine forests previously maintained as fire-dependent types. Industry-owned forests in the South provided 60% as much timber for the market as nonindustrial private forests did in 1984, although the area of industry forests is less than one-third that of nonindustrial forests. The share coming from industry forests is expected to be nearly equal to that from nonindustrial forests by 2010 because of rapid increases in the intensity of timber management on industry forests (USFS 198Sa). Intensive management for southern pine timber production on forest- industry land now typically consists of site preparation after logging by spraying herbicides and using controlled burning to control brush, hand planting genetically improved pine seedlings, fertilizing sites that have a specific nutrient deficiency, and clearcu~ing the trees 22-35 years after planting. Plantations are typically thinned to yield commercial
Products From the Forest 743 products, mainly pulp wood, beginning at 15-20 years if the expected rotation age is greater than 25 years. The intensity of management on nonindustrial private forests in the South varies widely. The USES estimated that only 5 % of the non~ndus- trial pine plantation acreage received the highest level of management (similar to that described above), while 25% of the forest-industry plantations received that level in 1980-1985 and 50% received it by 1985 (USES 198Sa). One key to increased softwood timber supplies from the South is the extent of pine plantations. In 1984, pine plantations provided 13% of the softwood timber that was supplied to the market. That was estimated to increase to 25% in 1990, to 43% in 2000, and to 58% in 2010 (USES 198Sa). Further increases in response to reductions in federal softwood timber harvests in the West are likely to come from an expanded area of plantings. As in other regions, neither ownership patterns nor forest conditions are uniform over large areas. Forests owned by a firm tend to be an agglomeration of small (200-2,000 acres each) and often noncontiguous tracts generally within a racLius of 25 miles from a plant. The tracts are intermingled with those of other industrial firms ancl noninclustrial owners. Most tracts have 10-15 % or more of their area in hardwoods in strips along streams and in scattered patches. About 65% of the total acreage plantect in the United States in 1993 was in the nine southern states from North Carolina around the coast to Texas. The area planted in each state in 1993 was greater than 100,000 acres. The total area planted that year was down by about 120,000 acres from 1992 and by 975,000 acres (29%) from 198S, the peak year (USFS 1994~. But the potential for increasing softwood timber production through planting is still high. The USES estimated that 22 million acres of marginal cropland and pasture in the South would yield greater returns to the owners if planted to pine and that this would acid about 2.1 billion cubic feet to annual softwood growth (USES 1990~. increasing timber production in the South has raised concerns about susceptibility of pine plantations to insect and disease attacks, effects on wetlands, and effects on species viability. All of these concerns have some merit, but to date, none has substantially limited increases in overall timber growth and production. Major disease threats have to some degree been countered with genetic modifications in pine plantation stock. The southern pine beetle has not had a major effect on
744 Pacific Northwest Forests overall timber production, because infested trees usually are harvested (Bechtold et al. 1992~. Forest managers have avoided major effects on wetlands. Reduction in timber production to protect the major endangered species the red-cockaded woodpecker - has been limited largely to areas with mature timber and has had little effect on the bulk of the private forests. If any of these factors changed, the ability of the South to respond to reductions in federal timber harvests in the West would be affected. If investments in forest management and softwood timber production in the South are limited for some reason, the major burden of respond- ing to reductions in timber harvests in the West will shift to other sources. These will be increasing use of alternative timber species, especially hardwoods, in the eastern United States and possibly to even greater dependence for wood on Canada and the southern hemisphere. The increased use of aspen and other soft-textured hardwoods to make oriented-strandboard, a substitute for softwood plywood in construc- tion, is an example of the first of these responses. inasmuch as eastern hardwoods have generally been in plentiful supply, the impacts of this increased use has been limited so far, and management of these species has not been greatly intensified. Expansion of timber harvests since 1990 in boreal forests in Canada, especially in eastern Canada, has raised questions about the ability of these forests to sustain high harvest levels. For example, while the annual volume of logs harvested in Quebec went up by 94 percent from 1990 to 1995, the area planted and the area of site preparation each fell by 31 percent (Canadian Council of Forest Ministers 1997~. EFFECTS ON REGIONAL AND NATIONAL INCOME The reductions in federal timber harvests in the Pacific Northwest have led to some shifts in income among regions and have created some winners and losers. Regions that have seen increases in timber harvests (i.e., the South) have gained while those that bear the brunt of the cutbacks are the biggest losers, as expected (USES 1990; Adams et al. 1996~. Total losses in regional and national income were expected to exceed total gains (Perez-Garcia 1993; Haynes and Adams 1992~. Regional wood products producers are affected most, while the
Products From the Forest I45 reductions in federal timber harvests have had little impact on consum- ers (Haynes and Weigand 1997~. Possible negative impacts on workers and other dependent on federal timber harvests in the Pacific Northwest have been ameliorated by federal assistance provided by the Northwest Economic Adjustment Initiative that was part of the Northwest Forest Plan (Tuchmann et al. 1996~. CHANGE AND /NCENT/VES No change in Pacific Northwest forest management will be permanent. The situation is dynamic, just as it has been since the national forests were established at the beginning of the century. Markets for forest products will continue to change in response to various pressures, and our understanding of forest biology and management practices will continue to improve. The most important forces driving change lie outside the forest sector. World population and income continue to grow. Public policy in the United States is committed to sustaining economic growth. The country's high rate of consumption and associated low rate of savings help to explain increases in consumption of all types of forest products, including wood products. Lifestyles based on low gasoline costs also put substantial pressure on forests for recreation and home sites, as well as for wood products, especially in building and remodeling suburban homes. Pressures on forests for all uses in the Pacific Northwest and elsewhere in the United States will probably continue to rise. As overall demands on forest resources rise, the changes in use of federal forests in response to the Northwest Forest Plan and other initiatives will continue to change the range of incentives, market and otherwise, facing owners and managers of private forests in both the Pacific Northwest and other affected regions. The basic demands for materials, space, and environ- mental amenities will almost certainly continue to increase for the foreseeable future. For example, the emergence of markets for carbon sequestration, a new phenomenon brought about by growing concerns over global climate change, may create new opportunities and pressures for Pacific Northwestforests. These opportunities and pressures, which have come to the fore partly as a result of the Kyoto Treaty on Climate
746 Pacific Northwest Forests Change, were not evident a decade ago. They could alter investment opportunities, especially those involving retention of mature forests, but also those for young, rapidly growing forests. As overall demands rise, the changes in use and management of federal lands in response to the Northwest Forest Plan have changed the incentives facing owners and managers of over forests. Possible results of the changed incentives that operate through markets for wood products were discussed above. But the changes that will occur in the character of the Pacific Northwest forests relative to what is likely to have occurred in the absence of the plan, such as the added area of old- growth reserves, may lead to shifts in patterns of recreation and other aspects of lifestyles. Such shifts in turn are likely to create new and unknown incentives for management and use of private forests. NON WOOD PRODUCTS FROM FORESTS Dividing this chapter into separate sections on wood products and nonwood products inevitably win lead to comparisons of the treatment afforded each category. For the most part, wood products are bought and sold in ordinary markets that establish prices and values. The products are reasonably well defined and consistent and information on markets is collected and made widely available. The information can tee used to evaluate effects on discrete forest areas. Nonwood products, on the other hand, are heterogeneous and often sold in poorly formed markets. Price and value information, as well as other information on markets, is often poor if it is collected and available at ah. The informa- tion that is available often cannot be readily applied to discrete forest areas or situations. The decisions that led to the reductions in federal timber harvests in the Pacific Northwest affect the output of both nonwood and wood products. Nonwood products include wildlife, fish used commercially and for recreation, outdoor recreation not tied specifically to fish and wildlife, water, amenities such as scenic landscapes, and a wide variety of minor forest products, including berries, ornamental greens, and mushrooms. In many cases production of these nonwood products competes in the forest with production of wood products. The lack of roughly equivalent kinds and quantities of information for each
Products From the Forest 747 category impedes analyses of trade-offs that might help in making choices, such as those in the Northwest Forest Plan. At the same time, the wide range in the kinds of value systems involved in decisions about publicly owned forests and resources suggests the difficulty of finding a single calculus that fairly treats wood and nonwood products (NRC 1998~. Available information is used in the sections below to respond to the committee's charge in the statement of task that it "review the use of forest products from the Pacific Northwest and the degree to which forest products from other parts of the United States can be substituted for them." Most of the nonwood products of Pacific Northwest forests are not sold in national markets and do not have readily obvious substitutes from other regions of the United States. As a result, the available information does not permit a discussion of nonwood products that is parallel to that for wood products in the earlier sections of this chapter. The following discussion presents some information on wildlife- related recreation, other forest-related recreation, fisheries, mushrooms, end wafer. The informationis sketchy,butitaHows for some discussion of the implications of the reduction in federal timber harvests in the Pacific Northwest, and the implications of the value of nonwood products for allocating forest land to wood and nonwood products. Wi/~/ife-Re/ated Recreation More than 75% of the people in the Pacific Northwest (excluding the part of California in the region covered by this report) participate annually in wildlife-related recreation, with at {east 50% engaging in nonconsumptive appreciation of this resource (Table 6-3~. More than one in ten people in the region hunt, and about three of ten people fish. Those proportions are higher than for the United States as a whole (USDOl 1993~. Hunting, fishing, and nonconsumptive wildlife appreciation are not mutually exclusiveeach might be engaged in concurrently. Declines from 1985 to 1996 in the proportions of the population engaging in wildlife-related recreation (USDOT 1993, 1998) are related to a decline in economic conditions during the earlier parts of the period and possibly to increased urbanization, both of which tend
748 ~ 1~ 1~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~1= ED ~ oo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oo ~ ~ ~ by Lo ~ ~ or ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ cn c~ ~ ~ ~ or ~ * ~ °° so' oo ~ .= Hi ~ ~ ~ er) ~ ~ dot O o ~ ~ ~ di ~ O ~ ~ ~ oo ~ ~ ~ Cat ~ ~ ~ oo ~ ~ oo ~ ~ .s Us m~ ao Lo no ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ dot O ~ O ~ ~ ~ oo ~h O o ~ ~ ~ ~` ~ ,, oo oo ~ oo ~ o Em An: 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ CN ~ ~ ~ ~ oo Lo ~ oo ·_1 be ~ .5 do ~ ~ ~ ~ ED ~ ~ ~ O0 ~ Lou ~ dot ~ LO Lo 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I o . o ~ d~ O LO ~ ~1 ~ ~ c~ ~ co C~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 LO ~ O0 ~ L~ ·= o~0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ X ~ ~ ~ ~ O~m ~ ~ oO d~ L~ ~ ~ ~ CN ~ ~ o0 ~ ·~4 =~ O ~ ~ C~ ~ CN CN ~ CN ~ L~ ~ ~ ~ L~ U) ~ ~o ~ O L~ ~ O0 C~ 00 ~ In ~ LO ~D Ch ~ ~ ~ ._, ~ ~ ~ ~ L~ ~ di ~ ~ ~ LO ~D ~ ~ O ~5 ~i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ tn ~ .= ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C~ ~ L~ ~ ~ ~ Lf) ~ O .~-= ~o ~o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L~ ~ ~ et) L~ D o0 ~ (e oU Q ~ 00 ~ ~ ~ ~D 00 ~ 00 ~ ~ ~ 00 ·~~ I_ ~ ~I C-l C~l ~ ~ ~1 ~ ~) 00 ~ Is .= ~ ~ 5- ~ L~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Ln ~ ~ LO ~ ~ ~ (15 o0 ~ ~ o0 ~ ~ O0 ~ ~ O0 ~ ~ ~ . Ch ~ ~ .- U - 1 ~D; lb E =.& I~.c ~D ~ ~D di O ~ ~ ~ oo eo ~ L~ C~ o0 LO ~ o L~ ~ ~ o0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O c~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ * ~i ~ ~ ~ er) ~ ~i di O r~ di ~ O ~ ~ ~ oo ~ e~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L~ ~ o0 oo Lo Oo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c~~ a~ ~, d~ 00 ~ oo oo C~ °O Lo O ~i ~ ~i ~ oo oo ~ ~ ~ ~ L~ di ~1 ~ O ~ ~D ~ 00 ~ L~ e~ C`l - 1 ~ ~ ~) 00 Lt~ ~ 00 C~ d~ L~ L~ ~ ~ O0 ~ CM L~ ~ O0 C~ 00 ~ In ~ LO ~D Ch ~ ~ ~ Lo ~ di ~ ~ ~ LO ~D C~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Ln ~ ~ ~ ~ C~ c~ ~ ~ c~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~n C~ ~ ~ C~ ~ LO ~ ~ ~ Ln ~ ~ L~ ~ ~ et) L~ L~ L~ ~D o0 ~ oO d~ ~ ~ ~D 00 ~ 00 1~ ) ~ oo c~ c~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O0 ~ ~ d~ L~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Ln ~ ~ LO o0 ~ ~ o0 ~ ~ O0 ~ ~ O0 ~ ~ ~ Ch .c cn o 7 - a~ - o u 5 - :^ O \~) ~1 - ~ 0 u, u, (5 u, O · - ~ ~ =,=; 0 5- ~ O u, ~0 _. . O O ~ l.., _ O ~ C~ C~ aJ
Products From the Forest 749 to reduce participation (Walsh et al. 1989~. The least urbanized of the four states, Idaho and Montana, generally have higher participation rates than Oregon and Washington. Participation in big-game hunting increased nationwide from 1980 to 1996, although hunting for small game decreased. Hunting for migratory birds increased between 1991 ancE 1996, likely in response to increased waterfowl populations (USDOI 1993, 1998~. Flather et al. (1999) project a decline in big-game hunting in the Pacific Coast states ancl an increase in the Rocky Mountain states through 2050. Changes in participation in big-game hunting are related to amount of congestion on public hunting grounds, changes in land-use patterns, ancE family and work obligations. Satisfaction from big-game hunting derives from a variety of attributes in addition to success in taking game, including skins in woodsmanship and marksmanship, contact with nature, escape from daily routine, ant! companionship (Potter et al. 1973~. Three regions of Idaho with different ground conditions provide examples of different conditions for hunting elk anct their implications for wildlife management (Table 6-4~. {claho's southeastern region, for example, provides hunters more than 5 times the opportunity to see elk than the more clensely forested region of northern Idaho cloes. The elk numbers in southeastern, northern, and central Idaho are high (which indicate adequate habitat), but to prevent severely reducing the elk population, the hunting seasons must be shorter in the the open forest and rangeland habitat of the southeastern region. As a result, restricted- entry hunting, which limits the number of hunters in an area, is most common in that region. The data for the three regions of Idaho suggest that forest-manage- ment decisions require close coordination between land management anct the people who use the land. In particular, experience elsewhere in the United States suggests that participation and interest in hunting declines as hunting opportunities are constrained. Attempts in Oregon to address problems of low life expectancy for bull elk (which is attributable to heavy hunting pressure) by restricting hunting have led to a clecline in the number of hunters and intense controversy. Efforts in Idaho to address forest-health issues by changing forest conclitions from dense stands to more open stands, as has been suggested (e.g., O'haughlin et al. 1993), will increase access ant! affect hunting condi- tions.
750 Pacific Northwest Forests TABLE 64. Comparison of Hunting Statistics from Three Regions of Idaho, Illustrating the Effect of Access and Forest Conditions Region Estimated ells population ELk (number/square mile) Mean harvest of ells Mean harvest square mile 9563 1.88 242 Hunting season length (days) Mean number of hunters Mean percent success Mean days afield per hunter Panhandler Backcounb~y3 Southeast4 22369 1.86 0.048 1~24 1500 18.1 6.9 13935 1.51 282 0.024 38 1147 23.9 7.3 12a 0.013 9 623 14.7 3.8 Mean animals seen 1.1 2.6 6.3 Population estimates for units, 2, 4A, 5, and 62A projected from Toweill and Hanna 1985. Ells management plan, 1986-1990. Idaho Dept. Fish & Game, Boise. Other information for 1989-1993 period from Kuck, ed.1992. Statewide surveys and inventory. Ells. Project W170R16, Study I, lob 1; Kuck, ed. 1993. Statewide surveys and inventory. Epic. Project W170R17. Study I, lob 1.; Unsworth et al. 1991. Eric management plan, 1991-1995. Idaho Dept. Fish & Game. Boise, 62pp. Northern Idaho, heavily forested habitat with moderate to high access, hunting season October 10-24 for antlered ells, and October 15-24 for antlerless elf in 1993. Hunting units 2, 3, 4, 4A, 5, 6, 7, and 9. 3Central Idaho, mountainous habitat with poor access and more open forests than northern Idaho. Hunting seasons in wilderness Sept. 15-Nov. 18, elsewhere October 10 - November 8, in 1993. Hunting units 10, 12, 16!, 17,19, 19a, 20, 25, 26, 27, 34, 35, and 36. Bulls only during regular season. Permitted hunts for antlerless not included. Southeastern Idaho, open forests and rangeland which is highly accessible. Hunting seasons October 10-October 19 in 1993, bulls only during regular season. Permitted hunts for antlerless not included. Hunting units 51, 58, 59, 59A, 60, 61, 62, 62A, 64, 65, 66, 67, 69, 75, 77, 78. Harvest, number of hunters, % success, days afield, and animals seen are means for all units within region per year. Season length in days.
Products From the Forest 157 Expenditures by participants for wildlife-related recreation in the Pacific Northwest increased from 1985 to 1996 (Table 6-5~. Differences among the states are apparent, with lower 1991 fishing and hunting expenditures than in 1985 in Idaho, Oregon, ancE Washington, and higher expenditures in Montana over the same period. Expenditures on wildlife-related recreation in the region, including those for trips and equipment, nearly doubled from 1985 to 1991, reaching $3.6 billion in 1991. The increase in the region (35 %) was greater than that nationwide (6%~. The increase in total expenditures came during a period of clecTine in wildlife-related recreation (down 5% in the region and down 22% nationwide), which indicates increased expenditures per capita. Other Forest-Re/ated Recreation As the demand for outdoor recreation opportunities continues to increase, demand for particular kinds of opportunities changes in response to shifts in population, lifestyles, and interests. The changing trencEs in recreation use present no clear picture for the Pacific North- west. Nationally, people are traveling shorter distances and spending less money per recreation visit, ancE cteveloped-area camping is increasing while backcountry camping is decreasing (USFS 1988b). Physical activities, such as skiing, canoeing, and kayaking are gaining in popularity, and activities that present risks and adventure for the participant are expected to become even more popular (USES 198Sb). Categorizing current recreation trips involving lance, which includes forests but also much more, is problematical because of the wide range of clefinable uses. The largest number of trips nationwide in 1987 involved sightseeing (329 million), walking (273 million), pleasure driving (233 million), and picnicking (213 miDion). The least number of trips involved backpacking (13 million), visiting prehistoric sites (16 million), horseback riding (25 million), and primitive camping (camping in baclccountry areas) (28 million). There are presumably significant regional differences in the relative rankings of these kinds of recreation use that are related to the opportunities that are afforded for them. Rates of projected increase do not appear to be vastly different for the various uses mentioned above. Data on recreational use of wilderness areas on national forests are intriguing. Total use increased from 1971
152 ·_1 Cal .$ o .O Cal lo; a; ·_' o U: U) ¢ a; 5 - o CD o o cn In .s U) ·_1 x · ~ ~ A pa ~ ¢ o ~ Z o an o be U. bC O to ~:5 >- o = U OF 0 ~ Dow ~b C~ Cal ~ co LO ~ O C,) LO I) =~ C ~ ~ 00 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Hi O ~ ~ ' O ~ ~ ~ Do Dad ~ ~ ~ ~ O Cal Lo ~ ~ $ ~ ~ ~ C~ ~ O ~ C~ O ~ 00 ~ L~ ~ o L~ L~ C~ ~ 00 ~ CN ~ ~ tN ~ ~ CN1 - ` ~ O0 00 ~ O O0 C() 10 0 C-l 1` er) ~1 oo 1` ~ c~ ~ ' ' ~ - ' ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 c~ c~ ~ L~ ~ ~ ~i en oo O~ ~) =h ~ ~ X ~ ~ ~ ~ CN ~ ~ C~ 0 ~ 0 C~ 0 C-i ~ 0 ~ oo 0 ~ \o ~ ° ~ \C, O cn c~ ~ oo ~ co ec L~ ~ ~ ~ c~ ~ 0 =1 ~) L~ 1` ~ ~h ~) d~ O LO ~ C() O ~ ~) O0 10 t~ 00 C{) X C() ~ ~1 ~ ~ ~ ~ di ~i L{) C~ ~ CX) ~ C~ LO o C-l C-l O ~1 ~ ~) ~ ~ ~ ~ O ' CN ~ ~ L~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O0 ~i CN ~ ~ X X L~ ~ ~ L~ 00 ~ O CN ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~D L~ co L~ oo ~ X ~ C~ X ~ di L~ cr) ° L~ L~ ~ CN O0 ~ ~i X ~1 CN di LO O ~ ~ O ~ L O0 ~ C-l ~ ~ ~1 <) ~ C-l ~ - 1 O ~ L~ 00 L~ oo ~ en co ~ O ~ 00 ~ CN 00 ' 00 ~ ·- C~ \~) O O ~ O 00 O ~ ~ X ~ di L~ 00 di ~ oo ~ di c~ d~ ~ ~ CO ~ 00 L~ ~ ~ L~ ~ ~ Ln ~ ~D L~ 00 ~ ~ 00 ~ ~ X ~ ~ O0 ~ ·= ~ ~ ~ u, ~ ~ ~ ~ oo Oo ~ - o p cr~ · a; u o ~n
Products From the Forest 753 to 1986, but most of the increase in apparent use was on areas that were added to the National Wilderness Areas Protection System since 1971 (USFS 198Sb; Darr 1989~. Use of these areas before 1971 apparently was not counted as wilderness recreation because the land had not been formally designated as wilderness by Congress. Thus, the apparent increase in wilderness recreation on formally designated wilderness areas over this period may not be real. In addition, data for the national parks indicate an unexplained decline in overnight stays in major wilderness parks since the mid-1970s. This decline, if real, may be response to any number of factors. It may indicate a relative decline in interest in wilderness recreation. Or it may indicate that users are recognizing that overuse of wilderness areas degrades the quality of the wilderness experience. Or it may indicate that limits being placed on wilderness use by the administering agencies are having an effect on use. The current mix of recreation uses of forests clearly reflects, in addition to a variety of demand factors, the supply of recreation opportunities and charges for their use. Restrictions on use, real and perceived, affect the balance of use between public and private forests, as do the conditions of the forest. Inasmuch as most of the private forests in the region have been logged at least once and are managed fairly intensively for wood products, recreation that requires extensive areas of relatively wild land occurs mainly on public lands. But other kinds of recreation, especially those that involve recreational and off- road vehicles, might be spread more evenly between public and private forests. Changes in forest management brought about by the Northwest Forest Plan will affect the future mix of available recreation opportunities in the region. Fisheries Streams that emerge from or run through Pacific Northwest forests support important regional fisheries. Commercial fishing is limited mainly to anadromous species; sport fishing encompasses anadromous and nonanadromous inland fishing. Most of these fisheries depend on cold, clear water. Spawning usually requires silt-free, gravelly streambeds.
154 Pacific Northwest Forests With the exception of those for some of the salmon stocks in the Pacific Northwest, data on trends in fish populations are almost nonexistent (Flasher and Hoekstra 1989; FEMAT 1993~. What data there are clo not indicate the degree of dependence of fish numbers on forests. Commercial and sport fishing have been important economic activities in the region, and anadromous salmonids have accounted for a significant part of the overall fishery. For example, salmon in 197S, a typical year for the period from 1970 to 1986, accounted for about 12% of the weight of commercial fish landings in Oregon and for about 25% of the value (Carter 1988~. in recent years, the share of sahnon in weight and value has fallen in Washington, Oregon, and northern California fisheries. Salmon's proportion of the total weight of seafood landings fell from 6.6% in 1989 to 4.~% in 1991, while the share of value of total landings fell from 16.S% to 10.S% (FEMAT 1993~. Salmon and crab have consistently accounted for more than their share of value relative to weight of total landings. The value of salmon landings from commercial troll ocean fisheries in the region has varied widely over time. From peaks in the late 1970s and again in 198S, the value of landings in 1992 and 1993 was lower than at any time in the previous 15 years. Recreational catch was also low in 1992 and 1993. The economic impacts of ocean salmon fisheries on coastal communities have been substantial. In 1987, fishing contributed about I) % of the total personal income in an Oregon coastal area made up of five complete counties anct coastal portions of two others (Rac~tke and Davis 1988~. The timber industry accounted for about 15% and tourism for about 7% of the area's total personal income at that time. In 1974, a poor year for salmon, sport fishing accounted for 65 % of the total value of salmon from the Columbia River, including commercial, sport ocean fishing, and river fishing. The value of ocean sport and ocean commercial fishing were about equal, but river sport fishing contributed nearly 6 times the value of river commercial fishing (Powe] and Loth 1981~. in terms of its overall contribution to the economic impact of forest-related recreation, fishing accounted for about 6 % of the annual expenditures on recreation on BEM and national forest lands In the northern spotted owl region in 1990 (FEMAT 1993~. State-to-state differences in the role of anadromous fisheries are significant. About 33 % of the sport-fishing activity 1975-1977 in Oregon and Washington, but only 4% of the sport fishing in Idaho, was for
Products From the Forest I55 anadromous fish (Powe} and Tooth 1981~. But cold, clear water is important to the sport fisheries in all three states. Warm-water fishing accounted for only 12% of the sport-fishing activity in Idaho in 1975, while fishing for resident trout in streams and in lakes accounted for 46% and 29%, respectively. Recognizing the potential effects of logging on fish habitat, the Pacific Northwest states have regulated logging practices in streamside zones in recent years. The intent of regulations in Idaho, Oregon, and Washington is to maintain streambank integrity and cool water temperatures. At least until recently, regulations reduced but did not prohibit tree removals in streamside zones Mushrooms Mushrooms are one example of a"specialproduct" of Pacific Northwest forests. Others include decoratives such as floral greens and landscape materials, medicinals and herbs, and foods such as berries (Molina et al. 1997~. Together they account for a modest share of the marketed products of Pacific Northwest forests. The use of wild mushrooms is the example chosen here for discussion to represent a broad and varied set of nonwood products of Pacific Northwest forests. Commercial harvesting of mushrooms provides income for some people in the Pacific Northwest. Many of the favored mushrooms are the reproductive structures of mycorrhizal fungi that have symbiotic associations with tree species on Westside and interior forests. Most of the common mushrooms collected in the Pacific Northwest are mycorrhizal (Molina et al. 1993~. Other mushrooms collected are either saprophytes or root rotterse.g., edible morel (forests and nonforested areas) and cauliflower mushroom (mature conifer forests), which do not form symbiotic associations with tree species. A discussion of the ecological role of mycorrhizal associations is in Chapter 3. High interest in individual collection of mushrooms in the Pacific Northwest is shown by a large number of amateur mushroom societies. individual collectors stimulated the regulation of commercial mushroom collection in Washington in response to the increase in commercial mushroom harvesting and to the competition for this unmanaged resource that beganin the 1980s. Mushroom pickers in Washington now
756 Pacific Northwest Forests must buy a license and can be monitored, which provides something of an information base for the activity. Information on harvest levels and sales for commercial mushroom harvesting is available starting in 1989 and 1990. That information, however, is limited because commercial pickers probably represent only 10-20% of what was actually collected. The data indicate that $652,247 and $1,27S,910 was paid to licensed buyers and processors (dealers) for harvested mushrooms in Washington in 1989 and 1990 (Molina et al. 1993~. More} production in Oregon in 1987 was estimated to be worth more than $2.6 minion (equivalent to the value of the state's blueberry crop). Matsutake harvesting earned $9-10 minion for buyers and dealers in British Columbia in 1988 from sales of mushrooms to Japan. The sustainability of mushroom harvesting still needs to be determined. That is a real concern, because mushroom harvests in Europe have declined. Some of that decline can be attributed to pollution (Arnolds 1991), but some can also be attributed to changes in land use and in tree-species composition in the forests. Switzerland, Italy, and Germany have regulations that control or limit mushroom collecting in some regions (Molina et al. 1993), especially in some high- elevation forests where symbionts are critical for tree growth. In the United States, only Washington regulates mushroom harvesting, and that is limited to commercial harvesting. Molina et al. (1997) lists and categorizes information and research needs for adequate management of special forest products, including mushrooms. Water Water is an important nonwood product of Pacific Northwest forests, but one that received little attention in the Northwest Forest Plan. The Northwest is generally well watered, and water usage is not threatened by limited supplies. Changes in management as a result of adopting the plan presumably will have beneficial effects on the overall average quality of water flowing from the region's forests and some effect on the timing of flows. These effects will be more important locally than regionally. Supplying residential and community water continues to be an important concern of forest management. Portland and Seattle, as well
Products From the Forest I57 as many smaller communities in the region, depend on protected watersheds for their water. Protection of these watersheds to ensure high-quality water will continue to be an important consideration. Overall freshwater use in the Pacific Northwest is projected to remain nearly level from 1995 to 2040. irrigation use, by far the largest use in the region, is projected to drop, but other uses are expected to increase. Domestic and public use in the region, a relatively small part of the total but one that requires the highest quality of water, is projected to increase by 44% over the next four decades (Brown 1999~. Effects of Changes in Management of Pacific Northwest Forests on Non wood Products The Northwest Forest Plan was aimed at maintaining habitat for various species dependent on old-growth forests. But the reductions in Pacific Northwest federal timber harvests as a result of the Plan will also: · Favor some kinds of wildlife, game and nongame species, over others . Affect hunting conditions and hunters' expectations · improve habitat for anadromous and inland sport fisheries · Maintain some kinds of backcountry recreation opportunities Information on the effects of adopting the Northwest Forest Plan on nonwood forest products in the Pacific Northwest is spotty. For example, most of the information on effects on wildlife populations, aside from that concerning the northern spotted owl and other species at risk of extinction, has been with respect to big-game species. One study of the effects of forest structure on breeding birds in the Oregon Coast Range found that habitat fragmentation due to logging had mixed effects on bird populations (McGarigal and McComb ~ 995~. But relating the results of even this study to the changes brought about by the Northwest Forest Plan is somewhat speculative. Changes In future backcountry forest recreation opportunities on federal land will depend on the rules adopted for old-growth and late- successional reserves, other than designated wilderness areas, for which rules are clear. Rules similar to those that now apply to designated
758 Pacific Northwest Forests wilderness areas wit} lead to a set of results that are different from those that will result from rules that are less restrictive. Presumably there will be more opportunities for backcountry and wilderness-type recreation as a result of the cutbacks In federal timber harvests than would otherwise be the case. Effects of the Northwest Forest Plan on mushrooms and other special forest products and on water flows are also uncertain. Molina et al. (1997) note that the lack of information on the complex biology of managing and harvesting special forest products poses ctifficulties in integrating their management into broad ecosystem management guidelines. REGIONAL ECONOMIC EFFECTS Estimating the regional economic effect of shifts in the proportions of woocE and nonwood products resulting from reductions in federal timber harvests in the Pacific Northwest is difficult. For example, the extent to which timber harvests are competitive with or complementary to nonwood products is not clear. Tn adclition, economic data are not collected in a way that allows for really estimates of income or other measures of economic impacts from the nonwood industries. At best, most estimates of economic impacts relatecE to nonwood forest products are patched-together proxies for direct measures. There is even dispute over the effects on output and employment in the wood industries, for which there are fairly reliable measures (Tuchmann et al. 1996; Haynes and Weigand 1997~. Estimates of such economic measures as "expenditures for wildlife- associatecl recreation," "value . . . paid to harvesters tof mushrooms]," or "yearly recreation benefits" (FEMAT 1993) are almost meaningless by themselves or in the absence of trend information. They usually cannot be compared with standard economic measures of performance for other sectors and, therefore, are not useful in estimating net effects of changes in policies or programs. The basis for estimating economic welfare effects of changes in nonwood products outputs that couIcE be compared with those for changes in wood products outputs is exceedingly weak (Haynes and Weigand 1997~. Even official statistics for well-defined measures can be misreading if
Products From the Forest 759 not adequately put in context. For example, the value of shipments of the lumber and wood products industry in Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and Washington ~ ~ 987 was $16.5 billion (US Bureau of the Census 1991~. If We timber-dependent woo~puIp and paper industries were added, the total would be well over $20 billion. But, these numbers by themselves can also be highly misleading. How do they, for example, relate to parallel numbers for nonmanufacturing forest-related industries? How much of the value is for shipments outside of the region (export base) relative to that which stays in the region? Do the numbers reflect particular stages of the business cycle? In the absence of answers to these questions, we have chosen not to present further economic impacts estimates. SUMMARY The reduction in federal softwood timber harvests in the Pacific Northwest has resulted in a roughly equal increase in softwood timber harvests in the U.S. South and Canada. This has come about in response to normal market forces. The increase in southern timber harvests is being met in part by increases in the intensity of forest management, especially onforestindustry land. This increased managementintensity potentially will affect some environmental values, such as maintenance of wetland ecosystems and protection of species such as the red- cockaded woodpecker. Nonwood forest products in the Pacific Northwest for the most part are not competitive with similar forest products from other regions. The extent to which their availability to markets within the Pacific Northwest has been affected by adoption of the Northwest Forest Plan is generally unclear due to lack of information based on research results.
