Critique of Seven Helicopter Timber Sales
With Recommendations for Improved Planning
by
Inga T. Petaisto
In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of:
Master of Forestry
Presented to:
Department of Forest Engineering Oregon State University Corvallis, Oregon 97331
April 1995 PREFACE
The focus of this study centers around the economic, technical, and environmentaleffects analysis of seven helicopter timber sales on four different national forests in Oregon and Washington. This paper is a constructive critique of these seven sales basedon the author's personal observations and data collected from planning documents, field visits, and interviews with fortyone resource specialists who were actively involved in the planning and effects analysis of theseseven timber sales.
Additionally, the study examines the effectiveness of the Forest Servic&s' timbersale planning process and points out there are human factors (such as politics, public involvement, and organization)as well as scientific reasons for many forest management decisions. This paper includes a review of published critiques of planning legislation and other aspects of Forest Service planningprocesses.
The three research questions that drove the analysis were: How important were economic and technical issues on recent helicopter timber sales? Were issues regarding logging systems and roads clearly described, analyzed, mitigated, and monitored in the Environmental Assessment2? What are the main strengths, weaknesses, bottlenecks, and improvements needed in the timber sale planning process?
The final chapter summarizes the main findings and proposes several ideas that may be fairly easy to implement and have the potential to improve and strengthen the Forest Servic&s timber sale planning process. The findings in this study indicate that:1) economic and technical issues are generally considered 'insignificant' in timber sale planning; and 2) the issues regarding logging systems and roads are not clearly described, analyzed, mitigated, and monitored in the Environmental Assessments.
This report does not imply that these sales were ineffective or failures. The findings and conclusions are based on the author's interpretation of the data collected on these seven case studies. The conclusions do not reflect the views of the Forest Service nor the Department of Forest Engineering at Oregon State University. These findings appear to be consistent with other research studies that evaluated federal environmental assessments and found that they could be more technically and economically informed and more precise in predicting effects and trade-offs.
1 Forest Service- largest bureau in the United StatesDepartment of Agriculture.
2 Assessment (EA)- a public document required by the National Environmental Policy Act to plan actions, disclose effects, and make decisions. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This project was indeed a most valuable learning and training experience for me.I feel that this
paper shares only one-tenth of the knowledge I gained from many individuals, documents,
research articles, and field trips.Assistance on this study was generous and overwhelming.
All of the following people helped make this work possible and deserve credit for what is of value
in it.
I feel fortunate to have had the opportunity to advance and enrich my education and profession through the two-year forest engineering and decision making program at Oregon State University.
I wish to express my gratitude to the U.S. Forest Service and the O.S.U. Forest Engineering
Department for their support, assistance, and encouragement.
A special debt of gratitude is due to my major professor, Dr. William Atkinson, for his guidance,
editing, and unfailing professional and personal concern.I would also like to thank Brian Kramer
and Dr. Eldon Olsen for serving on my committee and providing helpful suggestions. I gratefully
acknowledge the advice and wisdom I received on this project and the two-year program from
Donald Studier and Jose Linares, program coordinators.
I am indebted to the scores of Forest Service employees who willingly, candidly, and generously
answered many questions and shared their experiences and suggestions.Without their
cooperation, this report would not have been possible. I assume full responsibility for all
interpretations, shortcomings, and errors.
It is my fondest hope that this study will foster further research and interest in improving the efficiency and equity of public land management and planning. TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page Introduction and Problem 1
1.1Introduction 1 1.2Objectives 2 1.3Research Questions and Concern 3
Legislative History 9 2.1Organic Administration Act 11 2.2Multiple Use - Sustained Yield Act 11 2.3National Environmental Policy Act 12 2.4Renewable Resources Planning Act 13 2.5National Forest Management Act 14
Methodology 17 3.1Project Origin 17 3.2Case Study Selection 19 3.3Data Collection 24 3.4Data Analysis 25 3.5Additional Research 26
Results and Discussion 28 4.1Timber Sale Characteristics 28 4.2Forest Plan Direction 29 4.3Environmental Assessment 30 4.4Logging Feasibility Report 32 4.5Economic Comments 34 4.6Timber Sale Planning Process 34
Conclusions and Recommendations 38 5.1Research Question # 1 38 5.2Research Question # 2 40 5.3Research Question #3 41 5.4Concluding Remarks 45
Literature Cited 46 LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Page
Figure 2.1Major eras in federal land management 10
Figure 2.2Multiple planning levels in the Forest Service 10
Figure 3.1Scope of Study - three planning levels 18
Table 3.2 Forest Service helicopter timber sales 19
Figure 3.3Distribution of seven case studies 20
Table 3.4 Range of sale patterns 21
Figure 3.5Four clearcut and shelterwood timber sales 22
Figure 3.6Three commercial thinning sales 23
Table 3.7Number of specialists interviewed 25
Table 4.1 Primary reason for selecting 'helicopter logging 31 and no roads'
Figure 5.1Recommendation- reduce number of planning levels 44
iv APPENDICES
Organic Administration Act of 1897
Multiple Use - Sustained Yield Act of 1960
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974
National Forest Management Act of 1976
Economic Analysis Section of the Forest Service's Timber Sale Preparation Handbook
Preliminary Survey and Results
Data Collection Questions
Timber Sale Maps for Sales 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7
Summary Table 1 - Timber Sale Characteristics
Summary Table 2 - Forest Plan Direction
Summary Table 3 - Environmental Assessment
Summary Table 4 - Logging Feasibility Report
Summary Table 5- Economic Comments
0. Summary Table 6- Timber Sale Planning Process
V CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND PROBLEM
1.1 Introduction
The U.S. Forest Service is one of the most publicly accessibleagencies in the federal government. At present, virtually all projects, including timber sales, involve at least four levels of planning:forest, watershed, project, and activity. There is an extensive library of critiques,reviews, debates, and arguments regarding the effectiveness of planning in the Forest Service.It is beyond the author's disciplinary competence and beyond the scope ofa Master's paper to evaluate all aspects (political, social, economic, and biological) of the agency's timber sale planningprocess. Therefore, this paper will focus primarily on the NEPA' phase in the timber sale planningprocess and on two significant forest engineering questions:
Research Question # 1- How important were economic and technical issues on recent helicopter timber sales?
Research Question # 2- Were issues regarding logging systems and roads-clearly described, analyzed, monitored, and mitigated in the Environniental Assessment?
The Forest Service has responded to controversies by developing detailed planningprocesses and by changing land use allocations.Despite the time, money, and effort spenton planning, critics feel that few people are satisfied with the results- there are complaints of biases, inadequacies, inefficiencies, overplanning, wasted moneys, delays, and unsolved problems (1, 2, 3, 4, 5).Several administrations have tried to "streamline" the planning process.
This paper attempts to search for possible improvements by usinga broad, top-down approach which includes:
INEPA- National Environmental Quality Act which requiresan Environmental Assessment. a review of published critiques of planning legislation and other aspects of planningprocesses; an empirical study of seven timber sales to identify key factors at the Forest Plan and NEPA planning levels which influence logging system decisions; field investigations to examine and clarify the logging and road issuesidentified in the EA; interviews to ask individual Interdisciplinary team2 members the third majorquestion in this study:
Research Question # 3- What are the main strengths, weaknesses, bottlenecks, and improvements needed in the timber sale planning process?
This paper is a constructive critiqu& based on the author'sown observations and perspective as a
Forest Service employee and forest engineering graduate student and basedon data collected from planning documents and from interviews with people whoare experts in their field. Most of the people interviewed take their responsibilities very seriously andare concerned about the resources and customer service.This review represents the viewpoint of the field specialists, those whoare planning and implementing projects.
1.2 Objectives
The ultimate purpose of this paper is to enhance the long term success of the Forest Servic&s timber sale planning process. Study objectives are to: 1) clarify the economic and scientific basis for selecting a logging system; 2) identify the main weaknesses, strengths, and bottlenecks; 3) propose changes or courses of action that would be effective and feasible; and 4) share these findings, conclusions, and recommendations in a report.
2 Interdisciplinary (ID) team-a group of resource specialists representing several different resource areas (Wildlife, Timber, Fish, Recreation, Visuals, Watershed, Fire Management, Botany, and Cultural Resources) working together to plan a project and to analyze its effects.
Webster's Dictionary defines critique as:"the art of evaluating or analyzing with knowledge and propriety; the scientific investigation of literary documents in regard to suchmatters as origin, text, composition, character, or history" (6). 1.3 Research Questions and Concern
This study was structured around three closely related questions.This section elaborates on each of these three questions and discusses why they were posed.
Research Question #1- "How important were economic and technical issues on recent helicopter timber sales?"
For the past several years, ecological and economic issues have beenat the forefront in the Pacific
Northwest, where the political debate about forest management has reacheda fever pitch (7). However, the economic and environmental controversy over national forest timber sales is nothing new. A review of the five planning acts in Chapter 2 shows how Congress has always playeda significant role in authorizing legislation and appropriations and how the Court's role in national forest management is expanding with increasing legislation and lawsuits.
Balancing land allocation and management among conflicting and competing demands, overpowering political pressures, and court challenges has become extremely difficult. Timber harvesting, especially, has faced a considerable impasse on national forests (8). Whether this is fairor a mistake has been argued from many different perspectives and philosophies. Foresters like to point out that national forests are essential to the nation's welfare. The National Timber Supply Act in
1969 estimated that the national forests contained 97 million acres of commercial forest land,or 54% of the nation's total softwood timber supply. In 1984, the national forests provided approximately one-fifth of the raw materials for the nation's total consumption of wood andpaper products.In 1979, timber receipts deposited $968 million into the federal treasury (9).Even Robert Marshall, the Forest Service's most famous wilderness advocate insisted that the national forests merited regulation: "As sources of greatly needed raw material, the forests playa vital part in raising the physical standards of American life... Economic, physical, and social considerations alldemand that we maintain a bountiful forest resource" (9).
The characteristic of wood that will make it an extremely valuable and versatileraw material in the future is its renewability, growth, and biodegradability (10). Twentyto thirty years from now, will
the public be asking 'why didn't the public land forestersmanage, renew, and thin many of these stands 20-40 years ago?
The first obligation of national forest managers in planninga timber sale is to satisfy all legal requirements. If the agency does not meet these responsibilities the project isvery much open to
appeal and court litigation. Since 1960, most laws relating to Forest Service activities havedealt with preservation of clean air, wilderness, archaeological resources, threatened and endangered
species, wild and scenic rivers, soil and water resources, fish and wildlife conservation, recreation,
cave resources, wetlands, pacific yew, etc.This raises a concern for forest engineers- are
interdisciplinary teams and decision-makers losing sight of economic and technical issueson national forest timber sales?
Every forest harvesting and transportation alternative results in unique financial and non-financial
consequences. Decisions are based on expectations of these consequences and are rarely based on
financial criteria alone (11).Since both helicopters and roads are expensive, this study examines
helicopter timber sales (with road issues) to determine whether economic and technical issues
influenced the logging decision.
One can find numerous references in the planning Acts (Appendices A-E) which require national forest managers to analyze cost effectiveness, supply and demand, foregone opportunities, and
accountability of agency expenditures. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) doesnot state that environmental values have priority over nonenvironmental values. The courts have held that NEPA mandates a rational decision-making procedure that balances environmental,technical, and economic issues (12).This paper analyzes whether the timber sale planningprocess on seven USFS timber sales balanced environmental, technical, and economic issues.
Question #2 - Were the issues regarding logging systems and roads clearly described, analyzed, monitored, and mitigated?
The logging systems person and transportation planner on the Interdisciplinary Planning Team (ID team) have the responsibility for not only analyzing different logging and road systems, but also identifying the one that is most cost-effective. The decision-maker has to balance the information with environmental impacts, and may not choose the least cost alternative because of valid environmental concerns.Ideally, the planning process allows the decisionmaker to make a reasoned, supportable, and defensible decision.
The Environmental Assessment (EA) that is required by NEPA is a written, public record of decisionmaking which describes the proposed action, provides justification, and considers cumulative effects of past, present, and future actions within and adjacent to the proposed activity.
Goals are to disclose information about environmental consequences and to foster excellent decision- making. One critic of NEPA believes:
"Proper scientific inquiry must proceed under the fill scrutiny of a skeptical and disciplined profession. Ideally, the information should be as precise enough to enable us to make informed trade-offs... Some inadequacies always exist because knowledge is imperfect... The point is that decision-making in federal agencies is not rational in the classic sense.. .Even perfect under- standing of all of the ecological ramifications of a project would not indicate the appropriate course of action. A wide variety of economic, social, and political variables have at least as much to do with decisions as ecological constraints" (1).
However, another NEPA commentator believes: "The legal requirements imposed on EIS writers are not quiteas strict as those of the scientific version of the rational model... The courts demand objective 'good faith' analysisand 'ftill disclosure' of all impacts reasonably anticipatable... They have declinedto require perfect analysis...The technical complexity of EIS analysis must be appropriate to thepurposes of the document... Thus, the minimum legal version is a rational-objective model... (in otherwords) EISs should be technically informed, reasonably thorough, and above all else, unbiased."(12)
According to CEQ4 regulations, the Environmental Assessment must concentrateon 'significant' issues (13). Issues are the discussion, debate, or dispute regarding environmental effects.
Identifying and clarifying the 'significant' issues is critical because it helps to develop alternativesand to formulate mitigation or monitoring to resolve, measure, and track effects. Units ofmeasure should be quantitative (where possible), measurable, predictable, and linked to cause-effect relationships (14).Factors used in determining 'significance' are:
extent- the geographic distribution of the issue; duration- the length of time the issue is likely to be of interest; intensity- the level of interest or conflict generated by the issue.
This paper evaluates the quality of science in the logging and road effects analysis of seven timber sales in terms of Question #2 - Were issues regarding logging systems and roads clearly described, analyzed, mitigated, or monitored?
Question #3 - What are the main strengths, weaknesses, bottlenecks and improvements needed in the timber sale planning process?
The need for and benefits of 'good' planning (which includes communication, teamwork, training, technology transfer, efficiency, and field verification) has long been acknowledged by landmanagers. Planning a national forest timber sale involves an ever-increasing number of issues anda concomitant
4CEQ - Council on Environmental Quality established by NEPA for the Executive Office of the President. increase in the quantity of information. Legal challenges often claim thata law or regulation was violated, that the effects analysis was not properly assessed, or that the planningprocess was deficient (8).
Some critics feel that the Forest Service's planning process is too expensive and inefficient (1).
There are complaints of wasted time and money on planning documents thatare short-lived due to changing information and shifting direction and guidelines (2, 3, 7, 8). Issues are difficult to resolve because each discipline analyzes different information in a different logical framework and defines the
'truth' differently (4).The amount of paperwork and number of meetings keep personnelaway from actual on-the-ground analysis and management (1, 4, 15). Generally, uncertainty increases and confidence decreases as the size of the planning area expands (16).
On Forest Service timber sales, the selection of a logging system is determined at the EA and logging feasibility report planning levels. Of all the federal laws, NEPA, by far, dictates Forest Service's timber sale planning process. For this reason, this analysis concentrates on the NEPA planning phase which involves: the EA, ID teams, and analysis file which includes the logging feasibility report.
Streamlining the Forest Service's timber sale planning process needs to involve people with a bone- deep appreciation for reality and consistency. Some of this can only come from those who are working in the field.This is why the author interviewed ID team members at the District level, those who are planning and implementing projects. By seeking critique and recommendations from field personnel, not only is it possible to streamline the process but also to identifj creative and innovative additions as well as impractical aspects. People are more likely to buy-into a plan of action and carry their part of the load if they had the opportunity to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives.The following paragraph is based on observations made by a team of Organization
Development scientists: When conflict is faced, critique becomes valuable. Critique is a way of identifying sound alternatives that can produce stronger results. When people are engaged in critiqueing and when corporate-wide commitment to excellence is strong, the employeesare able to act in a mature and adult manner with mutual trust and respect replacing competiveness and win/lose power struggles. Since the human factor is the last barrier to excellence, effective organizations allow extensive two-way feedback and critique to assess how well human, financial, and technical resources are employed to achieve goals and quality standards. Energy is ftinneled into identifying why something failed and finding better ways to achieve goals (17).
Typically, Forest Service review teams consist of upper level staff officers meeting with other staff officers. This report is an exception- it presents the field specialists' viewpoint of weaknesses, strengths, bottlenecks, and improvements needed. While this study analyzes and critiques specific details at the project level, it also steps back and looks at the legislative history and multiple levels of planning.Such a strategy provides a better understanding of forest engineering details within a comprehensive framework and helps the analyst design and propose effective recommendations.
The next chapter presents a brief history of planning legislation and discusses their implications.
The third chapter describes the methodology used for this study and how it evolved.Chapter 4 analyzes and discusses the data collected on seven case studies. The last chapter summarizes the findings, conclusions, and recommendations. CHAPTER 2 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
A brief discussion of the legal framework for national forest management and planning helpsus understand the present situation and make suggestions for improvement. The broad timeline in
Figure 2.1 depicts six major but overlapping historical eras in federal land management from 1782 to 2000 (18). One notices that the present era (from 1964 to 2000) is labeled as the period of
consultation and confrontation.
The Forest Service manages 191 million acres of national forest and rangeland (15).Congress has directed the Forest Service to manage resources under its responsibility with efficiency and equity.
However, with over 250 million public stockholders with different perceptions and needs, the formulas for resolution have become very complex.
There are many laws and regulations that relate to planning and managing the national forestlands.
Figure 2.2 shows the multi-level planning process the Forest Service uses in land and resource management decision making. Prior to 1994, there were five planning levels: national, regional, forest, project, and activity. Then in 1994, last year, the President's Plan added two more processes: province and watershed. Plans at the activity level (i.e., logging feasibility reports, sale layout, and other technical designs) seem to be the most unstable because they are constantly affected by broad- sweeping changes made in the upper levels.
At each level, the agency must comply with all applicable laws and regulations. This chapter provides a brief overview of how land use and project planning has changed and evolved over time.
This report is divided into five sections, one for each of the major planning Acts.Copies of these five direction-setting Acts are provided in Appendices A-B. Most people are surprised to see that they are fairly short, basically just establishing the general direction and constraints for national forest Consultation & Confrontation
Intensive Mgmt. CustodaI Mgmt.
Reservation
1850 1900 1950 2000
Figure 2.1 Major eras in federal land management from 1875 to 2000 (18)
0 c.
tviiic - 2 / These two levels added 4 ::Wat,&shed; in 1994
S.
Figure 2.2 Multiple planning levels in the Forest Service
10 management. Congress purposely left to the Forest Service the expertise and sound discretion to formulate, adapt, and adjust standards, criteria, and processes to changing circumstances.
2.1 Organic Administration Act of 1897
The legal charter for land use planning prior to 1960 was the Organic Act of 1897.It permitted the use and development of timber, water, and mineral resources on national forestlands.
"Various techniques were used to delineate land uses but typically they involved an analysis of historical trends and an intuitive judgement as to what would be the best ftiture use. Prior to this type of planning, management practices were largely evolutionary and based upon day-to- day occurrences.Despite the crudity of these earliest plans and management practices, they reveal some good thinking and a substantial degree of foresight." (19)
1903- "Timber sale procedures were described in detail. The two basic criteria were that removal of timber would be limited to that which would benefit the forest (or at least not be detrimental) and that local demand would have preference.' (20)
2.2 MuLtipLe Use - Sustained YieLd Act of 1960
Congress enacted the Multiple Use - Sustained Yield Act (MTJSYA) to expand the Organic Act and to recognize five national forest uses: outdoor recreation, range, timber, watershed, and wildlife and fish. The act defined 'sustained yield' as the maintenance in perpetuity of a high level of annual or periodic output of the renewable resources without impairing the productivity of the land. Each ranger district began to prepare Multiple Use Plans and focused on coordinating the various uses to avoid or resolve conflicts. A few weaknesses were:1) these plans seldom identified a list of outputs from a ranger district that might be optimum in terms of providing for the American people; and 2) they sometimes implied that all uses would be carried out on every acre. (19)
11 2.3 National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 was a turning point. It significantly reduced the Forest Servicets planning and management discretion by mandating public participation, environmental impact assessments, and interdisciplinary planning. The agency had always consulted with special interest groups but after Congress enacted NEPA, the public and the courts became directly involved in the daily operations of the Forest Service. NEPA set a precedent by expanding the citizen's standing to sue the agency in court (21).
UA residue of confrontation tactics and distrust of government agencies stemming from the Vietnam War protests, general post-Watergate cynicism, and activism in courts... NEPA constitutes one of the most sustained and frequently analyzed administration reform efforts in our nation's history... After nearly a decade of litigation.., the costs of confrontation and litigation are high both in dollar terms and in terms of effort that could be more constructively employed." (21)
"Conflicts, administrative appeals, and lawsuits are beoming commonplace in the planning and management of timber resources on the national forests. Between 1983 and 1988, the total number of appeals filed annually nationwide more than doubled, increasing from 584 to 1298 (per year)... Of the total appeals filed, 42 percent were related to either timber sales or national forest plans in 1983 and rose to 60 percent by 1988." (8)
The cost of handling and processing appeals in fiscal year 1989 was $10.1 million (15). However, relatively few of these appeals end up in court.For instance, in fiscal year 1989, only 11 of 500 forest plan appeals and 32 of 500 timber sale appeals were litigated. (15)
NEPA (and its CEQ' regulations) contain numerous references to economic analysis. Some court decisions indicate that a defective economic analysis, by itself, does not destroy the legal defensibility of an Environmental Assessment. While in other court cases, the basis for economic assertions were reviewed closely.
'CEQ- Council on Environmental Quality
12 "The failure to develop understandable methods and procedures virtually guarantees capricious treatment of unquantifiable environmental and economic values. It is a serious mistake to equate economics and dollars, as is commonly done. The dollar is the principal means of economic exchange and is important for that reason. However, none of the standards of economic performance- such as 'utility', 'value', etc., are completely measurable in dollar terms.'t (22)
In the NEPA planning phase, the Interdisciplinary (ID) Team: 1) identifies the purpose and need; 2) clarifies the issues and determines which ones are 'significant'; 3) develops a reasonable range of alternatives; 4) discloses the effects in a rational and objective manner; and 5) proposes mitigation measures and prescribes monitoring.
In concept, NEPA provides an intellectual framework and a usefril tool for decision-making. But in the opinion of some people, the ease with which a NEPA project can be appealed has:1) led to evermore complex and intricate requirements; 2) diverted the land manager's energy, attention, and effort into preparing tbomb-proof reports; and 3) resulted in irresponsible public input (1, 25).
"Meaningfril reform is achieved by altering the underlying premises of decisions. It cannot result from efforts which begin with the assumption that executive agencies lack diversity, sensitivity, and insight. Agencies contain interest groups and interactions of their own, and the range of view present on the inside can be frilly reflective of that without.This aspect has been inadequately considered in academic literature on the subject.. .Would-be reformers of the administrative process have much to gain from closer attention to and filler appreciation of the creative potential within public agencies." (21)
2.4 Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974
The Resources Planning Act (RPA) requires 1 0-year assessments of all the nation's forests and rangelands (both public and private) and 5-year national programs and annual progress reports from the Forest Service.There are numerous economic references in the Act directing the agency to analyze: supply and demand, costs and benefits, rates of return, prices, cost-effectiveness, foregone
13 opportunities, and accountability of agency expenditures (24). RPA strongly directs forest and rangeland managers to pursue economic efficiency (25).
"Initially, conflicts were managed by seperating uses over space and time. However, demands on the resources continued to climb, and unmarketed resources are now more widely valued by our society. The principal purpose of RPA was to establish a national strategic planning process for meeting these conflicting demands while assuring the sustainability of America's renewable resources" (15).
"RPA should not be expected to eliminate or even reduce controversy. To the contrary, improvements in the process are likely to intensify controversy as the potential results of actions become clear to the various interested parties. RPA should not be expected to always produce rational decisions. Inevitably, decisions will be based on value judgernents influenced by the persuasive powers of competing interests and arrived at through the political process." (26)
"There are public goods, such as maintaining the productivity of the land through watershed management, which can neither be monetized nor adequately valued economically... The problem of adequately evaluating the outcome of alternative courses of action which are uncertain.., is difficult, if not impossible... These are all problems which involve the national interest.. .and should not be subject to veto by parochial interests at the local level." (25)
2.5 National Forest Management Act of 1976
Congress passed the National Forest Management Act (NFMA) in response to several lawsuits which indicated public dissatisfaction, especially with clearcutting. NFMA amended six other laws
(particularly RPA) and established the standards and guidelines for preparing a 10-year forest plan for each national forest. NFMA requires an interdisciplinary approach and consideration of a broad range of physical, economic, biological, and social factors in determining multiple use, sustained yield, and land allocations.
"To implement economic analysis... the Forest Service issued conceptual and methodological direction to planners through the Forest Service Manual, administrative policy statements, regional handbooks, and other publications. The principles of economic efficiency analysis are effectively established and integrated in these documents. The agency is to be commended for
14 its efforts in this area, for it representsa sharp break from past traditions and meets head-on difficult pricing and evaluation problems." (27) (Acopy of the Economics Section of the Forest Service's Timber Sale Preparation Handbook is provided inAppendix F)
The act explicitly mandates public participation in the development,review, and revision of land management plans. Congress envisioned a public planning process that would reducenationwide conflicts and resolve local controversies. But after spendingan enormous amount of money and time
(over 10 years) on the first-round of forest plans, Congress foundout that nearly all the forest plans (and many actions under those plans) were appealed (15).
"Citizen involvement in the sense of truly effective participatory democracyis unworkable... The functions, powers, and programs of government have multiplied beyondthe average citizen's comprehension. Greater expertise, specialization, and professionalismare required in the planning process. Few citizens can evaluateor intelligently or effectively comment on efficiency criteria, externalities, the provision of public services, supplyand demand factors, or spatial or temporal interrelationships. Citizens provide at best a broad litmus of political acceptability, an opportunity to test the water." (25)
"To obtain good basic legislation, all the affected parties, or theirrepresentatives, need to be involved in the preliminary debate and ultimate outcome... Public participationshould involve the Forest Service in two kinds of activities pursuant to its legislative mandate.One consists of reaching outside of its own cadre for specialized expertiseas provided for in the legislation. The second is to consult the (consuming) public(s) to ascertain their preferences,constrained by their income, in order to obtain the informationnecessary for planning efficient allocation and management of forest and rangeland renewable resources." (25)
Former Forest Service Chief Dale Robertson expressed concern that: "thenumerous compounding and possibly conflicting requirements make national forest planning andmanage- ment an exceedingly complicated task. At the extreme, the sum total of the various protection standards and restrictions may make any on-the-ground management actions infeasible."(15)
'People typically sue only if they believe the agency is being arbitraryor unfair. Such beliefs can generally be overcome through an open, honest exchange of desires andconcerns among the agency and the various interested and affected individuals and groups, leading to understanding and acceptance of the possibilities and limitations for managing the nationalforests." (15)
15 While this chapter provides a broader political perspective of national forest management and planning, the next two chapters focus on analyzing the timber sale planning process on seven helicopter timber sales in Region 6 (Oregon and Washington).
16 CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY
Research reports usually suggest that a project was planned and executed with precision.
Few reports admit that all did not go according to a foreordained plan.Although a 17- page study plan was developed and a lot of data was collected for this project, the analysis was eventually narrowed down to three major research questions and revealed that more research was needed to understand the bureaucracy and human factors that influence project planning processes.
This chapter presents the study design and method of analysis in five chronological steps: 1) Project Origin; 2) Case Study Selection; 3) Data Collection; 4) Data Analysis; and 5) Additional Research.
3.1 Project Origin
The idea for this project originated as a question- "How many helicopter timber sales could have been logged with cable systems which would have met resource management objectives at a lower cost?". At first, the author envisioned analyzing an adequate number of helicopter units at the activity planning level. But when a preliminary survey (Appendix G) revealed that the main reason for helicopter logging was a road or access issue, the author realized that the study plan needed to focus on the project planning level (Figure 3.1). A study plan was developed which explained the purpose and need, listed questions for each planning level (Appendix H), and scheduled visits to several ranger districts to collect data from documents, interviews, and field trips.
17 NFMA Forest Plan Forest Level
FOCUS > Project Level
Activity Level
Figure 3.1Scope of Study - three planning levels
18 3.2 Case Study Selection
The following procedure was used to select the number and distribution of case studies:
A list of all Forest Service helicopter timber sales sold during the last three years
(Fall 1990 to Fall 1993) in Oregon and Washington was obtained and sorted.
Table 3.2 shows how the salvage and non-salvage timber sales were separated and divided
into four geographic categories:
Mountain Range No. of Non-Salvage Sales No. of Salvage Sales (>1 million bd. ft.) (>1 million bd. ft.)
Washington Cascades 6 1 Oregon Cascades 15 10
All other mountain 1 1 ranges in Washington All other mountain 12 7 ranges in Oregon Table 3.2 Forest Service Helicopter Timber Sales sold in Region 6 (from 10/90 to 10/93)
Salvage sales were not included in the sample since the planning process, rules and regulations
are quite different. Salvage sales often need to belogged as soon as possible and may be
classified as categorical exclusions, meaning an Environmental Assessment is not required.
Since the Cascades provided the largest number of candidate timber sales, a decision was
made to gather basic information on 21 non-salvage helicopter timber sales in the Oregon-
WashingtonCascades. A preliminary survey form (Appendix G) was mailed to twelve timber managers,asking them
to provide a sale area map, unit acres and volumes, and the main reasonfor helicopter logging
on 21 non-salvage timber sales. Results aresummarized in Appendix G. Since the preliminary survey revealed that the most common reason for helicopter logging was
roads, the author decided to investigate road issues and economic analyses.Thus, only
helicopter sales with road issues were selected for this study.
19 Pacific Ocean
Idaho Due to time limitations, the author decided not to try to obtain a statistical sample but rather,
to present a number of 'case studies'. A case study is a narrative description of interesting
findings.
"The case-study technique is borrowed from the field of medicine where a report of findings is usually published to alert other doctors to watch for a phenomenon or to consider a change in treatment. Although authors often present after-the-fact conclusions, case study information is considered to be suggestive rather than a scientific conclusion based on controlled, systematic observations. Case studies are valuable as suggestions for future more controlled research."(28)
It was determined that7-9was a reasonable number of case studies that could be adequately examined in one summer. This number was large enough to allow the author to search for
common problems, weaknesses, bottlenecks, and uniquestrengths among these sales.
Figure 3.3 shows how the case studies were distributed geographically (seven different
ranger districts and four national forests). When the choice was between more than one sale on a District, the selection was based on
which one provided the study with a typical range of sale patterns (Table 3.4).Four of the
sales had clearcut and shelterwood units; three were commercial thinning sales (Figures 3.5
and 3.6).
No. of SalesSilvicultural TreatmentNo. of Units (& Size)Harvest Volume / Acre
3 Clearcut & Shelterwood 7-16 scattered units High (45-56 mbf/acre) (<10 acres in size)
1 80%Clearcut & Shelter- 11 units within large High (34 mbf/acre) wood;20%Thinning contiguous* blocks (40-160 acres)
1 Thinning 10 units within large Medium (16 mbf/ acre) large contiguous* blocks(180ac.) 2 80-90%Thinning; 8-12scattered units Medium (16 mbf/acre) 10-20%Clearcut (15-35 acres in size)
Table 3.4 Range of sale patterns.(* 'contiguous' means units are adjoining or seperated by 100-300 ft. buffer strips)
21 SALE 4
SALE 3 Small CC & Shelterwood
Figure 3.5 Four clearcut and shelterwood timber sales (map enlargements in Appendix I) 22 SALE 5 SALE 6 Larger CT Small Commercial Thinning (CT) - - T );
'
'Jr
'I1I )'/
eIo
Figure 3.6 Three commercial thinning sales (map enlargements in Appendix I) 23 3.3 Data Collection
Much of the information in this paper is based on data collected during the summer of 1994.
Arrangements were made to spend 3-4 days at each District office to review planning documents and to schedule individual interviews (15-30 minutes) with several Interdisciplinary (ID) team members.
First, a copy of the Forest Plan was reviewed to note any management direction in terms of analyzing economic and logging feasibility in timber sale planning. The second document, the EA, was scrutinized for the following items: significantissues, logging and road effects analyses, economic analyses, transportation plan, range of alternatives, rationale for choosing helicopter logging, mitigation measures, and monitoring. The Logging Feasibility Report was examined for: cost analyses, computer analyses, technical concerns, maps, andrationale (for choosing helicopter).
Next, the author requested to interview ID team members, especially, those who had mentioned a concern regarding logging and roads in the EA.The purpose of the interview was to:1) clarify logging and road issues; 2) pinpoint site-specific examples of effects on a map oraerial photo; 3) solicit opinions regarding the importance of economic analyses in timber saleplanning; 4) identify strengths, weaknesses, bottlenecks, and improvements needed in the timber sale planning process.
The interviews focused on these subject areas but often expanded into otherdiscussions about past experiences and general concerns.Although the interviews were taped, the specialists were candid and generous in answering questions. For their cooperation, assistance, and frankness, their identities (along with the sales and Districts) will be kept confidential. A total of 41 specialists were interviewed (Table 3.7).
24 Resource Specialists Interviewed Number Timber Mgmt./ Resource Mgmt. Assistants 3 Sale Prep. Foresters / Technicians 3 Logging Specialists 4 Sale Administrators 5 Silviculturists 5 Transportation Planners / Engineers 4 Hydrologists / Soil Scientists 4 Wildlife Biologists 4 Fish Biologists 2 GIS Specialists 2 Landscape Architect 1 NEPA Coordinators 4 41
Table 3.7 Number of Specialists Interviewed
On the final day, 1-3 specialists accompanied the author to the sale area to examine and discuss environmental impacts from road and logging systems, economic and technical feasibility, and the main reason for choosing "helicopter and no roads".By the end of September 1994, all seven sales had been visited. Two hundred and fifty pages of transcribed interviews, field notes, and documents reviews were compiled into one notebook divided into seven sections, one for each timber sale.
3.4 Data Analysis
The first phase of analysis involved reading all the notes and deciding how to summarize 250 pages of data collection.Six summary tables were devised: the first one compared timber sale characteristics; the next three focused on important items in each planning document (Forest
Plan, EA, and LFR); the fifth table listed many of the interview comments regarding the importance of economics in timber sale planning, and the final table summarized strengths, weaknesses, bottlenecks, and improvements needed in the timber sale planning process.
25 The completed summary tables are included in this report as Appendices J-O.This type of
organization allowed the author to compare different and related aspects for all the sales at a
glance.Although this procedure is subjective, the tables reveal some common problems and
areas of concern. The next chapter discusses these findings.
3.5 Additional Research
During interviews conducted for this study, human factors (politics, team dynamics, public values,
organization) were mentioned as often as scientific reasons for many forest management
decisions. Although these factors are broad in scope, they could not be disregarded due to their
significant influence on timber sale planning processes (2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 11, 14, 16, 19, 20, 21, 22, 25,
26, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33).
Complex endeavors for Master's Projects are usually discouraged due to time limitations. But if
no one attempts to broaden the scope of their project to include human factors along with science,
the problem may get worse. A solution that assesses human realities is much more likely to work
than a scientifically correct decision. The influence of politics on forest engineering issues has
received surprisingly little study, despite its evident significance (legislation and funding).
Planning at the ground level is often constrained and determined by broad sweeping decisions
made at higher levels.
"It is almost never the case that a decision regarding public land management is based purely on analysis.Public land managers must fully understand the advantage of using an analytical approach for guiding their actions and for allocating resources but at the same time must face the realities of politics." (16)
To obtain a better understanding of these human factors and political realities, the author not only researched the history of federal land management and planning legislation but also reviewed an extensive list of critiques, debates, and recommendations written by planning experts within and
26 outside the Forest Service. Many of the articles and booksare listed in the bibliography section at the end of this paper.The knowledge gained from this research was then incorporated into the body of this paper, especially Chapters 1, 2, and 5.
27 CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The data that was collected during the summer of 1994 amounted to 250 pages of typed notes.
The notes were analyzed, summarized, and organized into six Summary Tables (Appendices J-O).
This chapter presents and discusses the main findings from each Summary Table.
4.1 Table 1 - Timber Sale Characteristics
It is interesting to note that although the main reason given for helicopter logging on these seven sales was a road issue, six of the sales had some road construction (average = 1.5 miles).
In the sales that were mostly clearcut or shelterwood (Sales 1-4), the average unit size was 14 acres; average sale area (area encompassing the units) was 4-10,000 acres; average number of acres treated was 165 (5% of the sale area); and the average time period between entries was 9 years.In the thinning sales (Sales 5-7), the average unit size was 45 acres; average sale area was 1500 acres; average number of acres treated = 342 (22% of the sale area); and the average time period between entries was 23 years.
The most notable finding in this table is that none of the sales were implemented according to the
Decision Notice' signed by the responsible official.Decision Notices for these seven sales called for: 50% helicopter, 43% cable, and 7% tractor. The actual sale contracts offered: 65% helicopter,
31% cable, and 3% tractor.
1The Decision Notice discloses the selected alternative, rationale, alternatives considered, public involvement, findings (significant or no significant impact), implementation dates, appeal rights, contact person, and responsible decision-maker.
28 Since none of the timber sale maps exactly matched the selected alternative,all of the decision notices
should have had clauses stating: "Adjustments can be made for unforeseenproblems that may show up on-the-ground during layout";"Adjustments will be properly documented and evaluated for significant
effects"; and "The project may be split and offered inmore that one contract". Although the decision notices for Sales 3, 4, 5, & 6 included one such clause for these type of adjustments,none of them had enough clauses to cover the changes in the Decision.
4.2 Table 2 - Forest Plan Direction
There was little direction in any of the four Forest Plans (1990) for loggingsystems. The following statements came from two Forest Plans (Sales 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7): "All available logging systems should be considered for use. The selection of a logging system shall be basedon resource considerations, economics, and technical feasibility" and "Utilize appropriate logging systems to achieve multipleuse and silvicultural objectives in a cost-efficient manner."
Current management direction heavily emphasizes reservation and downplays production (23).The
1994 President's Plan changed most of the area in Sales 1-4 (where 5% of the salearea was treated about every 9 years) from land use allocations that were mostly 'Scenic Viewshed' and 'General Forest' to mostly 'Late Succession'2.Land use allocations in Sales 5-7 (where 22% of the sale area was treated about every 23 years) changed from mostly 'Scenic Viewshed', 'Wildlife', and 'Timber Emphasis' to mostly 'Matrix'3.
2 Areas designatedas 'Late Succession' will have no programmed timber harvest, no thinning or other silvicultural treatments in stands that are over 80 years of age (23).
The management objective in areas designated as 'Matrix' is to create patches of late successionand to retain 15% old growth where it remains (23).
29 4.3 Table 3- Environmental Assessment (EM
Regarding Research Question # 1, "How importantwere economic and technical issues?", it is obvious
in Table 3 (Appendix L), that nearly all the issuesare enviromental.Thirty-one of the 36 issues (86%) in these seven ENs are environmental issues. Threecan be considered economic issues: timber demand/supply, benefit/cost ratio, and economics.
Looking at Tables 2 and 3, it appears that it doesn't matter if theForest Plan's land use allocationwas timber production. For instance, in Sale 2, where 'Timber Production'was the land use allocation,
timber growth was not identified asan issue in the EA. Likewise in Sale 5, where 'General Forest'was the land use allocation, timber growthwas not listed as an issue in the EA.
On Sale 4, where the land allocation was 'High Intensive TimberManagement', many of the ID team members stated: "The silvicultural treatmentsare prescribed to benefit something else besides timber" and "Timber production is on its way out."
Table 2 shows that the only Forest Plan that placedsome emphasis on economic analyses was the one for Sales 6 and 7.The only ENs that listed economics as an issuewere Sales 2 and 7. Yet, most of
the comments for Sale 7 in Table 5 indicate that the ID Team's focuson economics was not influenced by any economic guidelines in the Forest Plan. Instead, the specialists felt that: "The economics emphasis comes from the foresters on the ID Team"; "We have a forest economist in the
S.O.(Supervisor's Office) who provided training sessions for the district people"; and "The District
Ranger was being pressured about the negative impacts of building roads. So, he instructed the ID
Team to do an economic analysis comparing specified road construction (and obliteration)to helicopter
logging costs. Helicopter logging doesn't lookso expensive when you throw big costs into roading."
In terms of technical feasibility, all of the ID Teams had eithera leader (Sales 1, 2, 3, 4, & 7) or
a member (Sales 5 & 6) who was well-versed in logging systems. Allseven ENs analyzed a range of alternatives that included: different logging systems, different road options,and different silvicultural prescriptions.The only EA that did not consider different roading optionswas Sale 3.
30 Referring to Research Question # 2, "Were issues regarding logging systems and roads clearly described, analyzed, monitored, and mitigated in the EA?", none of the EAts or specialist reports really quantified the effects of cable logging or roads in terms of extent, duration, and intensity. Table 3 shows that half of the specialists attempted to quantify the effects but none of the effects predictions provided sufficient evidence to strongly support a decision against 'cable logging and roads'. Examples of road effects were mentioned in Sale 6 and 7, but not in Sales 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5.Four of the ENs (Sales 1, 2, 6, & 7) proposed mitigation measures to resolve road effects but only two specialist reports (Sales
6 & 7) mentioned monitoring these issues (Sales 6 & 7).
One of the specialists commented on the value of scientific analyses: "A specialist that presents facts or who cites examples of concern has more credibility.It is less opinion and more of an objective protrayal of what the expected consequences are." Most of the reasons or descriptions of effects (related to logging systems and roads) were either not mentioned or they were vague with little or no supporting documentation. In fact, no research or documentation was cited in any of the EA's to support the primary reason for selecting 'helicopter and no roads'. In most cases, the primary reason
(Table 4.1) was not mentioned in any of the planning documents. The rationale was not clear in the documents but was clarified during the interviews.
Sale #Primary Reason for 'Helo and No Roads'
1 Time factor / Fish habitat 2 Adjacent wilderness 3 Visuals / Adj .wilderness and roadless area 4 Time factor 5 Time factor 6 Soils 7 Visuals / Economics
Table 4.1 Primary reason for selecting 'helicopter logging and no roads'.
31 'Time factor' was the most common category of road issueson these seven helicopter timber sales.
Examples include:the time involved in waiting for cultural resource and protectedspecies surveys; then the time involved in relocating proposed roads untilno protected resources are found along the route, and the one-year timeline for "Section 318" ' sales.
4.4 TabLe 4- Logging Feasibility Report (LFR)
As stated earlier, all seven timber sales had someone on the ID Team that had loggingsystems training and experience. However, only one logging specialist (Sale 4), prepareda Preliminary LFR (6 pages)
for the EA planning record.The Pinal' LFR's ranged from 10 to 43 pages andwere written after the
decision maker had selected an alternative. All of the logging specialists explained: "Thepurpose of an
LFR is to confirm the technical feasibility of the selected alternative".It seems that a 'Preliminary' LFR would be useful when the ID team is developing alternatives by providinga general overview of logging system options and concerns. Then, after an alternative has been selected, a 'Final' LFR could bepre- pared to assure that the proposed logging system is feasible and meetsresource objectives. It could also prescribe a detailed logging design and provide information for sale layout and timber sale contracts.
Four of the LFR's (Sales 1, 2, 3, & 4) were critiqued by another Logging Specialist or a Review Team.
When asked if the suggestions in the critique were followed, specialists on Sales 3 and 4 replied:"We figured we knew what we were doing- we just had the SO. Logging Specialist come out and writea review for formality, I guess"; and "His ideas were okay, it's just hard to break tradition sometimes".
The Review (or critique) of the LFR or Sale Layout was the only document in the planning files that really addressed technical and economic issues. Site-specific problems were identified and suggestions were made for improvement, such as: "It was difficult to find, in either the EA or LFR, the economic or
' Section 318 of the fiscal year 1990 Appropriations Act directed federal agencies in Region 6to sell 7.7 billion bd.ft. of timber in fiscal years 1989-90 (without appeal) to generaterevenue for the national and local economies while protecting old growth forests and Spotted owl habitat. (40)
32 other trade-offs for using helicopter....Several planned helicopter units can be logged with skyline,but this method was rejected because of timing considerations. While thismay be a valid judgement, it is
important to know what the differences are, especially the cost differences between helicopterand skyline"; "1 agree with your Planners that the timber will support the cost of helicopter logging,
however, I would suggest that this decision to helicopter log be supported in the BA witha good
economic analysis and valid resource opinions"; "I suggest pespective plots be doneon the final layout
of Unit 3 to confirm that a 'notched' skyline is not created"; "There area number of timber cutters with experience in line pulling- I can put you in touch with some."; "The roading pattern in Alternative 9 is
consistent with future roading objectives and does not foreclose future logging system options"; "Do
you propose to helicopter-yard the tops, and if so, how will you accomodate the slash pile on the
restricted landing?"; and "Information regarding scope and timing of the next entry would have been
valuable in evaluating this entry in context of the total timber harvest plans for the planning area."
The sale area in Sale 3 had a previous helicopter sale in 1987. The 1990 EA stated: "Alternatives
which would require new road construction in the unroaded area were eliminated from detailed study.
Roading was looked at in detail in the (1987) Transportation Plan. During that analysis, it was detennined that additional roading would be economically and environmentally unacceptable due to the
steep, deeply incised drainage occuring throughout the planning area." This raises a concern whether
any previous 'helicopter and no roadst decisions will be re-evaluated in future timber sales BA's.
On the ground, the most common technical problems were:
Not being able to leave 'old' snags in the helicopter units for safety reasons. There are no studies that show how many more 'old' snags are left in cable units vs. helicopter units. Slash does not get knocked down adequately in helo units, making planting more difficult and burning more risky. Trails are needed to provide a safe route through steep, rugged tenain for any post-sale activities (planting, piling, burning, sale adm., thinning, K-V6 projects, and monitoring) resulting in higher resource management costs.
6K..V. Knutson-Vandenberg Act of 1930 authorized additional charges on timber sales to establish funds for reforestation, silviculture, and other resource improvements in the sale area.
33 4.5 Table 5 - Economic Comments
Attitude is a predisposition to respond in either a favorable or unfavorableway to an object, person, or concept (34). A total of4l specialists were asked to comment on the importance of economics. Table
5 indicates there is a common attitude in the Forest Service that profit-making isnot a management objective and that costs, revenues, and other economic considerationsare at the bottom of the list of
issues. Although several specialists were more concerned about 'what the public wants', amenityvalues, ecosystems, and resource objectives, the majority of the comments reveal that most of the interviewees
are frustrated that economic and technical issues are totally subordinate to overriding environmental
issues and societal mores. The following sentiment expresses this viewpoint.
"One of the things that's hard about working for a government agency is that the peopleon the ground can really see what they think will work, but such a large part of our directioncomes from legislation and you have to balance compliance with legislation with whatyou know from your profession. It's hard to keep the economics and technical end balanced with all the environmental legislation."(Interview comment)
Although the author did not evaluate the quality and adequacy of economic analyses which ranged from
0-13 pages on these seven timber sales, the following factors reveal that costs and economics are generally considered 'insignificant' and irrelevant:1) lack of economic considerations in the Decision Notices; 2) very little emphasis for economic analyses in the Forest Plan; and 3) 86% of the issues in the seven Environmental Assessments were environmental.
4.6 Table 6- Timber Sale Planning Process
Five strengths that made the timber sale planning process more balanced and credible were:
Having a review team critique the EA, Sale Layout, and LFR. The EA planning record is well-organized and includes: road management objective worksheets, a preliminary LFR, a transportation plan, and an economic analysis. An aggressive program of taking the public out to look at past and recent timber sales. The Forest Economist provided economic training sessions on the Districts. Specialists present facts by citing scientific studies or site-specific examples of effects.
34 Everything involved with roads and cable logging takesa lot more time than helicopter logging. The cost of time is not accounted. For example, if less time andeffort is put into preparinga sale, then there will be less rework (and wasted time) when the ruleschange.Sale Planners also realize that people are satisfied with helicopter andare less likely to appeal.
As stated earlier, none of these seven sales were implemented exactlyas planned in the EA. Possible factors include: a rush to put up sales (without appeal) under Section 318;the 1990 windstonn; and
changing rules and regulations. Five of the seven saleswere "318 sales" (Sales 1, 2, 3, 4, & 6).
The author estimated that Sales 2 and 7 were 90-95% implementedas planned and that Sales 3, 4, 5, and 6 were 70-80% implemented as planned in the ENs. Sale 1 (which hadthree ENs) was less than 10% implemented as planned. The percentage was basedon how many of the units were dropped, added, or changed (boundarys or logging systems).
The explanation for Sale 1 was: "an Advisory Board substituted units in thevicinity due to blowdown and suggested combining several helicopter units from three EA's to makea 318 sale".Only one unit in Sale 1 was mentioned in one of the three EA's that covered this sale. Therest of the units were in the vicinity of those shown in the ENs. Technically, another EA should have been written.In Sales 3 and
6, an outside unit was added to the sale that was not mentioned in the EA. Therewas no documentation or reference to an effects analysis of these additional units (in Sales 1, 3, & 6) and whether the effects due to these changes were insignificant.
Changes (greater than 10%) made during implementation with littleor no documentation indicate poor planning and not enough ground-truthing. The problem with changing the decision is that it damages the Forest Service's credibility and defeats the purpose of NIEPA and planning.
35 The most common and most critical weaknesses were:
None of the Decision Notices mentioned economic considerations. The decision (selected alternative) is not implemented as proposed. It appears there is not enough 'ground-truthing'- site-specific examples are not cited; some of the critical forecasts and controversial mitigation measures are not monitored; maps and proposed actions are not field-checked. Pertinent records are hard to find; important decisions are not documented; the folders and files are not organized or readily accessible (scattered). A great deal of data is collected but not digested into a written report, peer reviewed, and shared or published.
During the interviews the ID team members identified the following bottlenecks in the timber sale planning process:
Watershed Analyses- "... the inordinate detailed analyses and multiple levels of planningi!. Changes in direction and short life-span of plans- "We spend hundreds of hours on plans that are outdated in 3-5 years"; and "the rules keep changing, we have to re-do our work too many times". Roads- surveying for different road options; waiting for cultural resource & plant surveys; re-routing if none of the road options are acceptable due to issues; waiting for cultural resource and plant surveys; and arguing about costs and issues. Lack of knowledge- "We're grasping for knowledge that's out of our realm- trying to formulate all the interactions between vegetation, wildlife, and fisheries"; "Working with trees and ecosystems is long term- often you don't see the results for years"; 'Publics discredit our analyses because we don't knowllthe effects"; and "We can't do anything until we know everything". Politics- "Congress has passed numerous laws that are contradictory"; "We just can't have everything on every single acre"; "A large part of society wants a working forest, another large part of society wants a biological reserve or a national park"; and "We don't manage our own affairs - the court does".
36 There were many suggestions for improvements, thefollowing were mentionedmost often:
"If the public wants the National Forest to bea national park, then we will need more law enforcement officers (the National Park Serviceworkforce is 3/4 law enforcement). If the public wants a biological reserve/researchcenter, then we will need dependable multi-year funding for monitoring and long-term researchprojects.° "One of our downfalls is that whenwe collected timber receipts, 90% of the moneywent into the general treasury." uWe need to look foropportunities for projects (anduser fees) to generate revenue and ways to use the revenue in the USFS. Theagency has the potential to pay its way." "I think we have more monitoring thanyou can believe but it's never written up. Putting it in a ifie is not good enough. It needs to be reviewed and publishedso it can be used for reference. The key is to know why something failed,document it, share it in a report, and avoid it next time." "On one hand, I think we need all the researchwe can get, and on the other hand I think there's so much research we're not paying attentionto. We need some emphasis on reviewing research, designing studies, and writingreports." "Universities have Master's students who are looking for projects and need to writereports." "Have specialists bring facts to an ID Team and present facts inan EA. If there is a disagree- ment, go out to the field and look at examples and talk about what happened.""ENs and specialist reports should state any assumptions." "Interdisciplinary means figuring out what is best for the land, plants,animals, and people. 'Protecting your own bailiwick' is not interdisciplinary" "I would highlyrecommend the 'Consent and Public Participation' training session. People needto feel they've been dealt with fairly, that the process was followed, and thatno basic values were infringed upon."
The findings in this chapter were used to answer the three research questionswith conclusions and recommendations in the following final chapter.
37 CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The purpose of this chapter is to suggest several ideas that should be fairlyeasy to implement and have the potential to improve and strengthen the Forest Service's timber sale planningprocess. The three sections in this chapter address the three questions by first, listing the findings; second, providing a conclusion; and then responding with recommendations.
5.1Research Question # 1
How important were economic and technical issues on recent helicopter timber sales?
The findings from Chapter 4 are:
Eighty-six percent of the issues in the seven ENs were environmental issues. Three of the 36 issues identified by the ID teams were economic issues. There was very little direction in any of the Forest Plans for logging systems. One Forest Plan emphasized economic analyses in timber sale planning. None of the Decision Notices mentioned economic considerations. On one forest, the forest economist provided economic training sessions for the Districts. All ID Teams had either a leader or a member who was well-versed in logging systems. All EA's analyzed a range of alternatives that included different logging systems, different road options, and different silvicultural prescriptions. Only one logging specialist prepared a 'Preliminary' Logging Feasibility Report for the EA. Four LFR's wre critiqued. The LFR Review (or critique) was the only document that really addressed forest engineering issues. Two of the four critiques were considered just a formality' and not important. Comments from a NEPA Coordinator and two ID team leaders: "The concern for economics comes from the foresters on the ID team- they have the economics background." NIt's hard to keep the economics and technical end balanced with all the environmental legislation" "Economics has very little to do with most of this stuff."
38 CONCLUSION: These findings from planning documents and interviewson these seven timber sales indicate that economic and technical issues are generally considered 'insignificant' in timber sale planning. This is probably because the Forest Service's first obligation is to satisfy all legal requirements which are mostly environmental.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Strengthen economic analyses by providing economic workshops where different ID teams
would prepare a report or presentation of how they handled a challenging economic analysis.
Since many non-foresters do not have an economic background, encourage non-forestry
disciplines to participate by providing special recognition or cash awards for reports or
presentations by non-foresters.
Provide the same incentive for technical logging analyses. For example, have two ID Team
members present a riparian management "problem-solution" at a logging workshop and try to
include non-foresters.These type of workshops are very effective and interesting because 'real'
problems and innovative solutions are presented.
Require all timber sale EA's to include a preliminary logging feasibility report which would be a
general overview of forest engineering issues and options in the sale area.The purpose is to have this information available to the ID team when they are developing alternatives. A fli
logging feasibility report would assure that the logging system proposed in the selected
alternative is feasible and meets resource objectives.The final logging feasibility report would
also prescribe a detailed logging design and information for sale layout and contracts.
Reinstate the practice of having logging feasibility reports critiqued by a highly qualified logging
engineer or logging specialist. The critique would identify site-specific problems and suggestions
for improvement. Someone on the ID Team or the Decision-maker should document why the
suggestions cannot be followed and attach their rationale to the critique, keeping the two
documents in the BA planning file. Critiqueing is a skill. If done properly, it can increase
synergy dramatically and make people try to improve (17).
39 5) Develop criteria for employee performance evaluations requiring ID team members to analyze
cost effectiveness, foregone opportunities, supply and demand, employment, taxes, delay costs,
planning costs, and impacts to the national and local economies.Analysis assumptions, timeframe, and geographic area should be carefully specified. Due to unpredictable economic
factors and political changes, shorter timeframes have been found to be significantly more
accurate than longer timeframes (35).
5.2 Research Question # 2
Were issues regarding logging systems and roads clearly described, analyzed, monitored, and mitigated in the EA?
The findings from Chapter 4 are:
Although half of the specialists attempted to quantify the effects of logging and roads, none of the effects predictions strongly supported a decision against 'cable logging and roads'. Most of the reasons or descriptions of logging and road effects were vague with little or no supporting documentation. The primary reason (i.e., time factor, visuals) for helicopter logging was rarely mentioned in the EA or LFR. Four BA's proposed mitigation measures to resolve road effects. Debatable mitigation measures to resolve logging and road effects were not monitored. Two specialists planned to monitor road and logging effects. A great deal of data is collected but not digested into a written report, peer reviewed, and shared or published. Since site-specific examples of effects were rarely cited, debatable effects and controversial mitigation measures were rarely monitored, and since the selected alternative maps often changed during implementation, it appears there is not enough ground-truthing.
CONCLUSION: These finding suggest that the issues regarding logging systems and roads are not clearly described, analyzed, monitored, and mitigated in the EA.
40 RECOMMENDATIONS:
Provide an incentive for ID teams to examine and disclose the economic, biological, physical,
and operational feasibility and consequences in timber sale environmental assessments by offering
a cash award for the 'most balanced' EA and logging feasibility report.Since there are many
requests for 'model' logging feasibility reports and environmental assessments, these 'best' ones
could then be shared as models. If the EA also clearly describes, analyzes, monitors, and
mitigates the significant environmental, economic, and technical issues, then the Decision Maker
can consider, identify, and balance the trade-offs and impacts to the natural environment with
economic and technical advantages (36).
Reinstate the West Fornet, a former research library service which published an annotated
listing of recent publications and allowed specialists to request a literature search using key
words.This would help specialists cite supporting documentation for effects analyses.
Encourage specialists to analyze collected data and share written reports of findings regarding
significant or debatable issues. Require these reports to be peer reviewed within and outside the
agency. Provide special recognition for these efforts, especially published reports.Again, this
would provide supporting documentation and site-specific examples of effects.
Encourage specialists to review research, propose studies, and write reports.Universities
have graduate students who need to design studies, collect data, and write reports.
Three ID team leaders were well organized in filing and recordkeeping. Important decisions
were easily tracked and readily accessible.Perhaps they could share their file management procedures with other ID team leaders and NEPA coordinators.
5.3 Research Question #3
What are the main strengths, weaknesses, bottlenecks, and improvements needed in the timber sale planning process?
41 Since many of the main strengths, weaknesses, bottlenecks, and improvements listed at the end of
Chapter 4 were used to answer the first two research questions, they do not need to be repeated to answer this question.Instead, the following recommendations address the human factors since many specialists mentioned these political, social, and organizational bottlenecks in the timber sale planning process.
ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS: Establish an aggressive public relations program. For example, have each resource specialist
plan, invite, and lead one field trip every year to look at recent or past management activities.
Offer a cash award for the one with the largest attendance.The author has seen several cases
where projects did not get appealed as a result of a strong public relations program which
included public field trips.Most Americans desire a balance of uses and want to know how the
Forest Service is managing the national forests and rangelands.
Encourage ID members and planning folks to attend 'Consent and Public Participation' training.
Several specialists highly recommended this workshop where the trainers emphasize "how people
need to feel their viewpoint is understood, that the process was followed, and that basic values
were not infringed upon" (quote from one specialist).Hewlett-Packard, Proctor and Gamble,
and the Japanese have applied similar consensus decision making processes where every
participant believes that even though they may not prefer a particular decision, they will
support it because they know it was arrived at in an open and fair manner (32).
Strengthen the agency's authority by dropping or minimizing appeals.Although it seems it
would be impossible to take appeal rights away from the publics after all these years, we need the
courage to question these assumptions. The real constraints are not the people inside or outside
the agency but the devestating, erroneous policies (33).
"The Forest Service is not required by law to offer an administrative appeals process. Nonetheless, the agency has maintained various systems for administrative appeals of agency decisions since 1906. The systems have varied in fonnality and complexity; some processes have... confined the right to appeal to those in a contractual relationship with the agency, while
42 others have permitted any person having a grievance with particular agency decisionsto request administrative review. Il(15)
Perhaps the next step would be to ascertain the true total costs involved with appeals. Suchan analysis would not only reveal the cost of handling and processing appeals ($7-bmillion per year) but also the costs and time involved with: 1) rewriting documents and redoing work in the field; 2) national and local impacts due to delay; and 3) losses in growth.It seems that if these true costs were known along with the fact that the number of appeals is increasing by 700 every 5 years (and only 7% of the appeals are litigated), the public would probably agree that a change in the Forest Service's administrative appeals process is urgently needed.
Streamline the multi-level planning process back to five planning levels (Figure 5.1).
An enormous amount of money, time, and effort is invested in planning documents at each level.Cunently, almost all on-the-ground management activities and projects are waiting for an inordinate, detailed watershed analysis to be completed.. Due to changing regulations and policies, the life-span of many documents is 1-5 years. Here again, a serious comprehensive financial and time management review of each planning level is needed and should include the amount of data collection required and amount of time spent updating documents every time rules, regulations and policies change.
Re-educate upper levels and politicians to improve the agency's efficiency and consistency.
The aim of this recommendation is to have upper level managers visit the ranger districts to see what happens in reality.Comments from field-going resource specialists:
"The people in upper managment, starting at the Supervisor's Office and all the way up, need to be re-educated and informed of what's really happening at the ground level. They don't see what we're going through and how often we have to re-do our work." "Those who are giving direction don't know what's happening on the ground. The Watershed Analysis is such a massive, massive undertaking. The President's Plan requires data collection, research, and a lot of information we don't have and don't know where to find." "We're grasping for knowledge out of our realm trying to formulate all the interactions between vegetation, wildlife, fish, etc."
43 Figure 5.1Recommendation: reduce number of planning levels with degree of detail relative to planning area size.
44 5.4 Concluding Remarks
These findings, conclusions, and recommendations are based on what is believed to be a valid interpretation of the data collected on these seven sales.Although the appropriateness of these observations may be limited to these seven sales, these suggestions can be applicable and useful in other geographic areas. Many of the findings appear to be consistent with several other studies that have evaluated the predictive accuracy and technical precision of government environmental impact statements (11).These findings, conclusions, and recommendations do not imply that these sales were ineffective or failures.This last chapter only suggests how the Forest Service's timber sale planning process could:1) be more technically and economically informed;2) improve the prediction of effects and trade-offs;3) build a stronger public relations program; and 4) reinforce management efficiency and resource equity.
45 LITERATURE CITED
FAIRFAX, S. K. 1978. A Disaster in the Environmental Movement. Science 199 (February 1978): 743-748.
CORTNER, H. J. and M. T. Richards. 1983. The Political Component of National Forest Planning. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 38 (2): 79-8 1.
O'TOOLE, R. 1988. Reforming the Forest Service. Cascade Holistic Economic Consultants. (Washington, D.C. - Island Press)
Oregon Law Review Volume 64, 1985.
BEHAN, R. V. 1981. RPA/NFMA - Time to Punt. Journal of Forestry Vol. 79, No. 12 (December 1981): 802-805
Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary. 1969. G. & C. Merriam Company. (Chicago,IlL - LakesidePress).
RAPHAEL, R. 1994. More Tree Talk: The People, Politics, and Economics of Timber (Washington, D.C. & Covelo, CA - Island Press).
USDA FOREST SERVICE. 1990. Analysis of an Emerging Timber Supply Disruption. FS-460 Critique of Land Management Planning Volume 9.
FROME, M. 1984. The Forest Service. (Boulder, CO - Westview Press)
CLAWSON, M. 1975.Forests for Whom and for What? Resources for the Future, Inc. (Baltimore, MD - John Hopkins University Press).
GONSIOR, M. 1988. Mountain Logging Controversy:Perspective and Prospects for Technological Solutions. Ii Proceedings, InternationalMountain Logging and Pacific Northwest Skyline Symposium (December, 1988). 167-172.
CULHANE, P. H., FRIESEMA, H. P., and J. A. BEECHER.1987. Forecasts and Environmental Decisionmaking: The Content and Predictive Accuracyof Environmental Impact Statements (Boulder, CO - Westview Press).
COUNCIL OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY. 1986.Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act. (Washington, D.C. - U.S. Government Printing Office).
USDA FOREST SERVICE. 1992. Forest Plan ImplementationTraining Course 1900: NFMA-NEPA Workbook.
46 U.S. CONGRESS. 1992. Forest Service Planning: Accomodating Uses, Producing Outputs, and Sustaining Ecosystems. Office of Technology Assessment. OTA-F-505. (Washington, D.C. - U.S. Government Printing Office).
QUADE, E. 5. 1975. Analysis for Public Decisions. (New York - American Elsevier Publishing Company, Inc.).
BLAKE, R. R., MOUTON, J. S., and McCANSE, A. A.1989. Change by Design. (Redding, MA - Addison-Wesley Publishing Company).
CLAWSON, M. 1983. The Federal Lands Revisited. Resources for the Future, Inc. (Baltimore, MD - John Hopkins University Press)
WILSON, C.N. 1978. Land Management Planning Processes of the Forest Service. Environmental Law Vol. 8 (1978): 461-477.
STEEN, H. K. 1991. The U.S. Forest Service History. (Seattle & London - University of Washington Press).
FAIRFAX, 5K. and ANDREWS, B.T. 1979. Debate Within and Debate Without: NEPA and the Redefinition of the 'Prudent Man" Rule. Natural Resources Journal 19 (July 1979): 505-535.
APPLEGATE, R. 1978. The Multiple Use Planning Process: Descent into the Maelstrom? Environmental Law Vol. 8 (1978): 427-460.
USDA FOREST SERVICE and USD1 BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT. 1994. Record of Decision for Amendments to Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management Documents Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl. Standards and Guidelines for Management of Habitats for Late Succession and Old Growth Forest Related Species Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl. (Washington, D.C.)
WALKER, J.L. 1977. Economic Efficiency and the National Forest ManagementAct of 1976. Journal of Forestry Vol. 75, No. 11 (November 1977): 715-718.
KRUTILLA, J.V. and J.A. HAIGH. 1978. An Integrated Approach toNational Forest Management. Environmental Law Vol. 8 (1978): 373-415.
SHANDS, W.E. 1986. RPA at the Turning Point. Journal of Forestry Vol. 84, No. 2 (February 1986): 20-24.
TEEGUARDEN, D.E. 1990. National Forest Service Planning Under RPA/NFMA: What Needs Fixing? FS-462. Critique of Land Management Planning Volume 11.
SASLOW, C. A. 1982. Basic Research Methods. (Redding, MA - Addison-Wesley Publishing Company).
47 FRIESEMA, H. P. and P. J. CULHANE. 1976.Social Impacts, Politics, and the Environmental Impact Statement Process.Natural Resources Journal 16 (April 1976): 339-3 56.
DANA, S. T. 1956. Forest and Range Policy. (New York - McGraw-Hill Book Company).
CLARY, D. A. 1986. Timber and the Forest Service. (Lawrence, KS - University Press of Kansas).
DINSMORE, J. B. 1984. Human Factors in Project Management. (American Management Association, New York).
GOLDRATT, E. M. 1992. The Goal - A Process of Ongoing Improvement. 2nd edition. (Great Barrington, MA - North River Press)
EBERT, R. J. and MITCHELL, T. R. 1975. Organizational Decision Processes. (New York - Crane,Russak, and Company, Inc.).
SCHUSTER, E. G. and MEDEMA, E. L. 1989. Accuracy of Economic ImpactAnalysis. Journal of Forestry Vol. 87, No. 8 (August 1989): 27-32.
FREEMAN, A.M. and PORTNEY P.R. 1989. Economics Clarifies Choices. Journal of Forestry Vol. 87, No. 11 (November 1989): 34-38.
USDA FOREST SERVICE. 1993. The Principal Laws Relating to Forest ServiceActivities. (Washington, D.C. - U.S. Government Printing Office).
USDA FOREST SERVICE: 1993. RPA Assessment of the Forest andRangeland Situation in the United States. Forest Resource Report No. 27.
BERGSTROM, G. 1988. Logging Feasibility Reports. j: Proceedings:Logging Systems and Transportation Planning Seminar (April 1988). 26-37.
USDA FOREST SERVICE. 1990. Forest Service Report to theCongress. Implementation of Section 318 of the Interior and Related Agencies AppropriationsAct for Fiscal Year 1990. Ninth Report. (Washington. D.C.)
48 APPENDICES APPENDICES
Organic Administration Act of 1897
Multiple Use - Sustained Yield Act of 1960
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974
National Forest Management Act of 1976
Economic Analysis Section of the Forest Service's Timber Sale Preparation Handbook
Preliminary Survey and Results
Data Collection Questions
Timber Sale Maps for Sales 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7
Summary Table 1 - Timber Sale Characteristics
Summary Table 2 - Forest Plan Direction
Summary Table 3 - Environmental Assessment
Summary Table 4- Logging Feasibility Report
Summary Table 5 - Economic Comments
0. Summary Table 6 - Timber Sale Planning Process Organic Administration Act NoteThe473.475,Act of Junefollowing 477-482, 4, 1897 551) (Ch. 2, 30 Stat. 11, as amended; 16 U.s.c. provi- (National Forests) was provid- Creation of National ForestsforExpensesSectionsions Fiscal originated 1 YearofAppropriation the 1898. Sundry as parts Civil Act of stated:ofreferreded 1103; 1891for in to 16(Ch. an as U.S.C. theact 561, Creativecommonly 471) 26 Stat. whichAct andStatesmations,to all revoke, is Executive authorized or modify, any orders part and or thereof, empoweredand suspend Theprocla- issued President any of the United ingtoryreserve,timeof the forests, having toUnited intime, any publicin States any setState land partapartmay, or ofTerri-bear- fromand the"Sec. 24, That the President vacateormodificationfortimeunder change the to sectionaltogether publictime the he as boundary471 interests. mayhe any of shall reduce thisorder lines deemtitle, creatingthe or from mayareabest By such reservations,coveredpublicshall,cialgrowth, landvalue withby whetherpublic wholly and timberor thenot, proclamation, ofororPresident as commer-inunder- publicpart 473)such national forest. containedNoteTheManagement the National following: Act of (16 U.S.C. Forest 1976 Section 704(a) Thislimitssuchdeclare sectionthereof." the establishment was repealed of by reservations of P.L. and 94-579, the 473),1897sions no (30 landof theStat. now act 34; or of hereafter16 June U.S.C."Notwithstanding 4, the provi- returnedAuthorityFLPMA. from to Conduct the survey Surveys of Surveys,public field notes, and plats reservedpealed)),16Marchforeststhe public 3,orpursuant 1891 withdrawnordomain any (26 to act asStat. the nationalsupple-from Act 1103; of U.S.C. 471 (now re- withGeologicaltheundertakenlands Director provisions designated under Survey of of the asthe this nationalinUnited supervision Act,accordance chapter forestsStates of 1609)"anthethereof,men act publictary of shall Congress. domain be returned except (U.S.C. byto to and amend atory surveys,Fieldnotes,forcees2, section34, Surveyingand shall which 1, platseffect Thirtieth have returnedinclude Service;as the surveys, Statutes, same subdivisionthrough and legal field suchpag- the NoteThefor creation original of Forest authority Reserves (5) tem,surveys under the rectangular sys- shall be approved by the respectivecopiesotherofficerSecretary cases, thereof as land and heof shall offices maytheproperly Interiorbe designate offiled certifiedthe inor dis- theassuch in prescribedpermit,Use of Timber by him, and the Stone use Theof timber Secretary of Agriculture may under regulations to be U.S.C.andingthethatwithin said two purposeone such479) nationalacres acre nationalmay for for forests, occupyeach a forests,church. schoolhouse not any exceed-and part for of (16 AndbepurposesedInterior,the restoredforpurpose any mining shall thanmineral byto befor theor found forest lands forpublicSecretary agriculturalbetter usage, in domain. any adapt-of may na-the everyrespectshereofinconsistented,tricts as in topographicinare which such other declared survey.such cases. landsmap inoperative andare situat-other as with the A copyprovisions of All laws ing,fencing,pectorssettlers,ests,and stoneand free forminers,buildings,other foundof minerals, charge, domestic residents, upon mining, forby national purposes, bonafirewood, prospect-and pros- fidefor- as criminal,Civil and over Criminal persons Jurisdiction withinThe na- jurisdiction, both civil and andingwhichtional miningsubjectrules forestmay and lawsto be whichentryregulations shownof the under have United to theapplyingbe been Statessuch,exist- or thethereto,notesforests,maps Director showing shall together of be the the certified distribution withSurvey such thereto and of fieldfiled theby as may be taken relating forestsrespectively,usedsuchmay bewithinpurposes; mayneeded bethe where located.by Statesuch such such timberor persons(16 Territory, national U.S.C. to forbe Statesmentence,changedtional ofexcept offensesforests by reasonso shall far against as ofnot the their bethe punish- affected United exist- or therein is concerned; the tained.standingtothereto, such location (16shall any U.S.C. provisionscontinue and 482) entry, to herein be notwith- subject con- N:ationatDesignation(16in the U.S.C. Bureau Forests 474) of Land Management. and Purposes of Access477) Nothing herein shall be construed inhabitantsthereof,not,suchintentbeing bynational and reasonlose that meaning thereof its forestthe of jurisdiction, theState of istheir establishment thissituated wherein rightprovision nor shall and the any redationsagainstmakeRules provisionsand destructionupon Regulations the forpublic by the fire protection forestsThe and Secretary dep- of Agriculture shall Marchunderthereserved President the3, 1891,prior provisions of tothe the June orders United of 4, the forAll1897, ActStateswhich public byof lands designated and wagontheirfromboundariesofas actualprohibiting propertycrossing roads settlers of and thethe ornational residing homes;sameegressother to forests,improve- orwithin andand ingress suchfrom the or WaterState.fromprivileges their (16 use as U.S.C.duties citizens as480) citizensor be absolved of the andsionshereafterbeenand which national ofset the may setaside forestsActaside be or ofcontinued; under whichMarch the may 3,may provi- and1891, have be tionalterandeffect,shall be all be setforests unsuspendedpublic and aside remain underland and that in reservedandsaid full may unrevoked, Act, force hereaf- as shall andna- mayunderasments homesmay be suchmay beprescribed and necessaryrulesbe to constructed utilizeand by regulations tothe theirreach Secretary thereon property their as Statetiondomestic,of national purposes, wherein mining, forests suchunder milling, may national the belaws orused Allforests irriga-of watersthefor within the boundaries theoccupancyvations,willtionshe may forests insure and make namely, establish thereon theand such objects use tofromrules suchand regulate of destruction; toand suchservice preserve regula- reser- their as forestexcepttionaltheandbe as followingadministered far withinforest to as improve practicable the shallprovisions. inboundaries, beaccordanceand established, protectcontrolled or with thefor No na- enteringing,includingforhereinof Agriculture. all and uponproper prohibit developingthat such andof Nor prospecting,anynational lawful shall person the purposes, forestsanythingmineral locat-from (16regulationsUnitedare situated,U.S.C. States 481) establishedor under and the thereunder. lawsrules of and the fornottionsofand this morenotany shall Act moreviolation than beor such$500punishedthan ofrules orsix the imprisonment months, by andprovisions a regula-fine orof citizensberfurnishconditionsthe purposefor a theof continuous theofuse of waterUnited securingand necessitiessupplyflows, States; favorable ofand but tim- toof it regulationsresourcesforests.must comply thereof:(16 covering U.S.C. with such 479) the nationalrules and Such persons daysapprovalSecretaryMining notice locationof of the thereof,the President, Interior,and publishedentry afterUpon with sixty the in recommendation of the theciallyanytionsviolationboth. court designated United mayAny by ofwhich beperson Statessuch tried for he that ruleschargedand magistrate was purposesentenced and appoint- with regula- byspe- the by forin,morerizeprovisions,is not orforest the valuableforthe inclusion agriculturalpurposes.purpose or forof the the ortherein (16 Act,intentpurposes,mineral U.S.C. to of of autho- there- lands these 475)than mayForests,exteriorSites maintain for orSchools in schoolsthe vicinityand and Churches The churchesthereof, settlers residing within the boundaries of National thenationallandsthetwo said Statepapers nationalembracedforest or of Territoryis general forests,situated, within circulationanywherein the and publiclimits near any inof fortoed, 18.the in sectionthesame(16 same U.S.C. conditions 3401(b) manner 551) to asand (e) provided subjectof Title (6) examinationofany a competentsuch byforest personal person which, appointedinspection after due for (7) repealedmitsNoteAuthority by section to issue 706(a) per- of for rights-of-way was languageManagementthe Federal does Land Act not of Policychange 1976. andThebut thispermitsFLMPA section. for precluded Rights-of-Way issuance under of
(8) 528-531)Act of June 12, 1960 (P.L. 86-517, 74 Stat. 215; 16 U.S.C. 528(note), Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act of 1960 fishteredtimber,areCongress purposes. forestablished outdoor watershed, that The theandrecreation, purposes Nationalshalland wildlifebeSec. range,ofadminis- Forests this 1. and It is the policy of the tionalmentagenciesfollowing andForests. and managementterms others (16 shall U.S.C. in havethe of develop-530) theSec. Na-fol- 4. As used in this Act, the Forestspurposesinto,Act butare were declaredfornot established whichin derogation to bethe supplementalas National set of,forth thethe Act of June 4, 1897 (16 Nationalnewablemanagementlowing meanings: surfaceForests of all resourcesso the that various they of arethere- "Multiple use" means the lifedictionbeU.S.C. Nothingseveralconstrued and 475). fishor States hereinresponsibilities on as the affecting with shall National respect be theconstrued Forests. ofjuris-to wild-the so Nothing herein shall overtheseusepeople;bestutilized ofmeet areas resources the inmaking the thelargeland needs combination ortheforenough relatedof mostsome the to Americanjudicious orservicesthatprovide all will of (16landstheofministrationas U.S.C. Nationalto use affect not or 528) withinadministration Foresttheof the use National minerallands or lands or of resources Forests.to Federalor affect ad- justmentsandallsomechangingsufficient of coordinated theland resources;inneeds latitudewill use be and managementto used for andconformconditions; periodicfor harmonious less of tothan that ad-the alabledevelopture Forests surfaceis authorized and for resources administer multiple and of use directedthe and Nation-renew-Sec. sus- 2.to The Secretary of Agricul- notvaluessiderationproductivityother,various necessarily ofwithout resources, thebeing ofvarious impairmentthegiven combinationland, eachresources, to the with with relative of con- andthethe of givenForeststheandtainedvarious administrationservices toyield due the resources ofconsiderationobtainedrelative the several ofin values therefrom.particularthe National productsshall of areas.the beIn perpetuityachievementproductslaruses return that willorand of the a giveservices"and high-level greatest maintenancethe greatest unitmeans annual output. dol- the orin "Sustained yield of the several withofThe thisareas establishmentthe Act. ofpurposes wilderness (16 U.S.C. andand are provisionsmaintenance529) consistentSec. 3.of In the effectuation of this U.S.C.ofNationalousregular the renewable productivity 531)periodic Forests resourceswithoutoutput of the ofimpairment land.the vari- (16 of the estedauthorizedAct the State Secretary toand cooperate local of Agriculturegovernmental with inter- is (275) Actthe "Multiple-Useof 1960." (16 U.S.C. Sustained-Yield 528(note))Sec. 5. This Act may be cited as National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 tionsNoteImpleinenting4321(note),Act offound January at4321, 40 CFR1,4331-4335, 1970 1500 (P.L. 4341-4346, 91-190, 4346a-b, 83 Stat. 4347) 852; 42 U.s.c. regula- ronmental quality to the overall 4321Policyas (note)) Act of 1969." Sec. 1. the "National EnvironmentalThis Act may be cited (42 U.S.C. publicgovernments,inpolicydeclares welfarecooperation andof thatthe privateand Federal and it withdevelopment is organizations,otherthe State Government, continuing concerned and oflocal man, to whichare:Purpose will encourage productiveSec. 2. The purposes of this ActTo declare a national policy conditionswelfare,edcalsures, use toassistance, foster includingall practicable andunder in promotefinancial a whichmanner means theand man calculat- andgeneral techni- and mea- to create and maintain motethementeliminatemanand efforts health enjoyableand and his biosphere damagewhichand environment; welfareharmony will to and theprevent of stimulatebetweenenviron- man; to orpro- to presentnomic,mony,natureAmericans. can and andand exist fulfill otherfuture in requirements the productivegenerations social,(b) In eco-har- order of to carry out the poli- enrichmentaltosourcesecological establish the Quality.important understanding systems a Council (42 to U.S.C.andthe on Nation; natural Environ-of 4321) the and re- policy,Federalcontinuingcyessentialticable set forthtoGovernment means, improve considerations in this consistent and toAct, use coordinate ofitall with isnational prac- the other responsibility of the FederalPOLICYNATIONALTITLE I Government - DECLARATION ENVIRONMENTAL Responsi. OF FederalenvironmenteachNationand resources plans,generation may functions, for tosucceeding asthe trustee endprograms, thatgenera- of the fulfill the responsibilities of man'srecognizingbility activity the on profound the interrelations impactSec. 101.of (a) The Congress, surroundings;aestheticallysafe,tions; and culturally pleasing healthful, assure for all Americans productive, and ploitation,industrialgrowth,foundenvironment,of all components high-density expansion,and particularly new andof urbanization,resource the expanding thenatural pro- ex- influences of population unintendedorwithoutbeneficial safety, degradation, oruses consequences; other of theundesirable riskenvironment to health and attain the widest range of nizingtechnologicalof restoring further theadvances and critical maintaining andimportance recog- envi- (455) nationalcultural, and natural aspects of our preserve importantheritage, historic, and maintain, the responsible Federal maintaining, and enhancing the willpopulationofwhichwherever individual permit supports possible, andhigh choice; diversityresource standards an environment anduse of varietywhichliving achieve a balance between officialqualityofdetailedactions the of proposedon- the significantlystatement human action, byenvironment, the affecting responsible athe the environmental impact statementofficialparticipates independently prior in such to its preparation, evaluatesapproval such and furnishes the responsible Federal guidance and edandlogicalquality projects; development ofinformation the and environment; of resource-orient-in the planning initiate and utilize eco- therenewableties;and maximum aand wide resourcessharing attainable of and life's recycling approach ameni- of enhance the quality of implemented,avoidedmental should effects which cannot be alternativesany adverse to the environ- pro- the proposal be anyitsvidestheadoption, the responsibleFederal early views and notification land of, Federal managementany other to, official and State entitysolic- pro- or after January 1, 1976, 4332)byEnvironmental Title II of this Quality Act. established assist the Council on (42 U.S.C. hasenvironmenteachdepletable a person responsibility resources. should and that enjoy to contributeeach a(c) healthful person The toCongress recognizes that ronmentenhancementlocalposed short-term action,and the of maintenance useslong-term of man's produc- and envi- the relationship between ifFederalimpactstheretoof there any whichis landactionupon any management suchdisagreementmay or any Statehave alternative or significantentity affected on suchand, theirFederalProceduresConformity Government shallSec. review 103, present Allof agenciesstatutory of the Administrative authority, ImpactstheConsiderationthe environment. preservation (42 of'and EnvironmentalU.S.C. enhancement 4331) of proposedwhichtrievabletivity, would and action commitments be should involved it beof resourcesiniinple- any irreversible and irre- the subparagraphstatement.incorporationmentimpacts, of such prepares The impacts shall procedures a writtennot and relieve views assess- in this thefor into such detailed sistenciestherepurposerentadministrative policies are anyoftherein determiningand deficiencies regulations, procedureswhich prohibit orwhetherand forincon- cur- fullthe extentesUnitedregulations, and possible: directsStates and shall that, public be to interpretedlawstheSec. fullest of 102. the The Congress authoriz- (1) the policies, Federaltailedtionandmented. byobtain agencyofficial law orthe whichspecialshall Comments consulthas expertise jurisdic- withof withany statement, Prior to making any de- the responsible Act;anycontenttiesFederal for otherand theofofficial further, responsibilitythe scope, entire of this objectivity,his statement subparagraph responsibili- under orandthis of thanproposemayprovisionscompliance July be to1, necessary the1971, ofwith President thissuch the toAct measures purposes not and later shall as and bring their ernment(2)theand allpoliciesadministered agencies shall set forth of in the accordance in Federal this Act, Gov- with and (A) utilize a systematic, involved.respectagencies,appropriateand the to anyCopiescomments which environmentalFederal, of aresuch and State, authorized viewsstatement impactand of local the to jurisdiction.describeagenciesofdoes statements not affectappropriate with thelessprepared legal than alternatives sufficiency statewide by State to study, develop, and (42procedurestyauthority with U.S.C. the and 4333) intent, setpolicies forth purposes, into in conformi-this Act.and ningenvironmentalnaturalwillinterdisciplinarymay insure and haveand in the socialdecisionmaking an integrateddesignimpact sciences artson useman's inand which ofplan- theenvi- approach which 5,asronmentalthestandards,develop providedUnited President, and shallQualityStates byenforce the besection Council Code,madeand environmental to552 available theand on of public Envi- shallTitle to tivesolvedanyrecommended proposaluses conflicts of available which courses concerning involves resources; of action alterna- unre- in recognize the worldwide specificorAgenciesOther 103 Statutoryshall statutory in any obligations Obligations way affectSec. of 104. anythe of Nothing in Section 102 mentaltationmethodsronment; with Quality and the procedures, Council established on in Environ- byconsul- Title (B) identify and develop afterrequiredexistingaccompany January agency under the 1, proposal 1970,reviewsubparagraph for processes; through any major (C)the (D) Any detailed statement andsupportUnitedtentmental long-rangeprogramswith problems to the initiatives, foreigndesigned character and, wherepolicy toresolutions, of maximize environ- consis- of the States, lend appropriate criteriaFederalfromStateconsulttal or agency,agencyacting standards with contingentorany(I) (3) toof other tocomplyenvironmen- act, Federal uponor with refrain the or quality, (2) to coordinate or icdecisioninakinggiventalpresentlyII ofand amenities this appropriatetechnical Act,unquantified which and alongconsiderations; considerationvalues will with environmen- insure econom-may that be in cial,preparedsolelydeemedgramFederal if: of by actiongrants toby reason be a Statetolegallyfunded States of agency having underinsufficient shall or nota been offi-pro- be environment;thepatinginternational and preventing cooperation a decline in antici- in quality of manldnd'smake world available to (42anyrecommendations U.S.C.other Federal 4334) oror certificationStateSec. agency. 105. of The policies and goals legislationmendation orand report other on major proposals Federal for (C) include in every recom- (456) hascial the has responsibility statewide jurisdiction for such action, and (i) the State agency or offi- andinstitutions,States, information and individuals,useful in restoring, advice counties, municipalities, (457) taryset to forth those in thisset forthAct are in supplemen-existing TITLE(42authorizationsVIRONMENTAL U.S.C. 4335) of Federal QUALITY agencies. COUNCIL ON EN- CouncilExecutive on Office Environmental of the PresidentSec. Quality 202. a There is created in the (42anceuncompensatedaccept U.S.C. of andthe 4343)purposesemploy services voluntaryof the in Council. further- and theiror continuingdatatrends underlying and and other analysis an causes; interpretation information of these changes for of a dationsReports forto Congress; Legislation Recommen-Sec. 201. The President shall toshallcomposed"Council").(hereinafter serve be atappointed hisof The threepleasure, council by members the by President andshall .who with be referred to as the functionDuty and ofFunction the Council of CouncilSec. 204. It shall be the duty and to assist and advise the studies,andyear condition to reportsthe President ofthereon, the environment; on and the recom- state to reportto make at andleast furnish once each such conditionshallreferredmentalbeginningtransmit set Quality to forthofJuly theasthe 1,the ReportCongress(1)major 1970, "report') the natural, (hereinafteranstatus annuallyEnviron- which man- and bertooneate.the serve adviceofshall the as be members andChairman. a consentperson of Each thewho,of theSen-council mem- as a The President shall designate thoritativequiredEnvironmentalPresident by sectionin information the Qualitypreparation 201; concerning Report of there- to gather timely and au- 4344)Presidentofmendations policy may and with request.legislation respect to matters (42 U.S.C. as the notclassesfreshincludingmade, limited ofwater, the to, Nation, and the theair, including,terrestrial the aquatic, envi-but or marine, altered estuarine,environmental and programsmationpretwellandresult attainments,environmentalqualified of of hisand all training, activitiesto analyze trends experience, of and the inter-infor-Fed- kinds; is exceptionallyto appraise theandcurrentquality purpose conditionsinterpret andof theprospective,of such determining environment and information trends to whetheranalyze in both thefor ers,AdvisoryObtaining functions, Committee and duties underSec. 205. this In exercising its Informationusing pow- environment;range,ronment,seeableto, urban, including, trends (2)suburban, in current thebut quality, not andand limited ruralfore- man- the forest, dryland, wetland, social,siveAct;policyeral Governmentto aesthetic,beset conscious forth andin in ofTitle cultural and I respon- of needs this to the scientific, economic, light of the denttosetwithfering, suchcompile forth studiesthe conditionsor achievementin areand Titlerelating likelysubmit I and of to thistoof trends tosuch theinterfere,the Act, condi- policyPresi- and are inter- utivementalAdvisoryAct, theOrder Quality Council Committee numbered established shall 11472,on Environ- by Exec-dated consult with the Citizen's Nation;ic,thoseenvironmentsagement, and trends other(3) and theon requirements utilization theadequacyand social, the effects econom- ofof ofavail- such the of ofpoliciesformulateand (42the interests U.S.C.quality to andpromote of4342) ofrecommend the the the Nation; environment. improvement national and to thevarioustions policyFederal andprograms set Governmenttrends; forth and in Title activities in Ilight of this of to review and appraise the advisable;ments,zations,culture,sentativesMay and 29,labor, andother1969, of conservation science, groups, and with industry, as suchit organi- deems agri- State and local govern- repre- ed viewofhumanablepopulation the natural of Nation and the economic programsresourcespressures; in the light andrequirements for (4) of activitiesfulfilling aexpect- re- employStaffing such the officers Council and employeesSec. 203. (a) The Council may makeachievementandtheAct extentactivities recommendations for theto whichofare purpose such contributing such policy, of to programsdeterminingthe and Presi-to the to agenciesinformation)informationpossible, the and services, of public facilities, and private and utilize, to the fullest extent (including organizations, statistical and effectwithgovernmentalandthe(including Federal local particular on thegovernments, regulatory Government, entitiesenvironment reference or activities) individuals, andthe to and Statetheirnon- on of andfixfunctionsas fortion, maythe consultants the compensation bethe carrying undernecessary Council as this may out mayoftoAct. ofbecarrysuch itsemploynecessary experts functionsout its and In addi- offosterdent toenvironmental withthe and President respectpromote qualitythereto; nationalthe improvement to policies to to develop and recommend meet the lapactivitiesed,ofindividuals, effort orthus conflict assuringand will in expense withnotorder that necessarily similar that may the duplication Council's beactivities avoid- over- anddeficiencies(5)utilizationthe conservation,a program of naturalof forexisting development, remedying resources; programs andthe activities, together with Statesunderthesection lastthisCode sentence Act,3109 (but in withoutof accordance thereot). Title regard 5,(b) United with to Notwithstanding section ysesstudies,goalshealth,conservation, relating of and surveys,the otherNation; to ecological research, requirements and systems anal- and to conduct investigations, social, economic, MembersCompensation4345)establishedauthorized agencies. by law and performed by for (42 U.S.C. Council (42recommendations U.S.C. 4341) for legislation. U.S.C.3679(b) 665(b)),of the Revised the Council Statutes may (31 tems,includingchangesand environmental and in the tothe accumulateplant natural quality;and environment, animal necessary to document and define sys- compensatedChairmancil atof the the rate Council provided shallSec. for 206. Membersshall serve of the full Coun- time and the be C3C) (458) (459) Level II of the Executive Schedule International Activities forbeotherPay compensated LevelRates members (5IV U.S.C. of at thethe 5313).Councilrate Executive provided shall (5 U.S.C. The expendituresinternationalmake expenditures for: in supportSec. of its208. activities, The Council may (1) international including Travel5315).Schedule (42Reimbursement PayU.S.C. Rates 4346) Sec. 207. The Council may Statesexchange(3)tiontravel; of international(2)and activitiesprograms agreements;in in implementa- the United and the support of international in foreign countries. reasonableStatementalityanyvateaccept department,nonprofit or reimbursements local oftravel the government,organization agency,expensesFederal from or Govany anyincunedor forinstru- from pri- the beAuthorization(42 appropriated U.S.C. 4346b) of toAppropriations carry OutSec. the 209. There are authorized to for(42nar,attendanceCouncilby the anU.S.C. or benefit officer similar in at4346a) any or ofmeeting employeeconference,the Council. conducted of semi- the connection with his thereafter.$1,000,000$700,000$300,000provisions for of(42 for thisfiscal U.S.C. Act year not4347) 1971, to exceed and for fiscal each yearfiscal 1970, year
C)A (460) Forest16Act U.S.C. of and August 1600(note), Rangeland 17, 1974 1600-1614) Renewable (P.L. 93.378, Resources 88 Stat. 476, Planning as amended; Act of 1974 1974.ablethe "Forest Resources (16 U.S.C. and Rangeland Planning 1600(note)) Renew- Sec.Act 1.of This Act may be cited as resources;protectionforsound effective technical of management,the and Nation's ecological renewable use, base and thatFindings Sec. 2. the management of the The Congress finds ducethelocallandof the Nation's governmentalgoodsis Nation's under and major private, servicesforests managementcapacity and State,is based range-to pro-and and on inasmuch as the majority resourcestime;mandhighlyNation's for, arecomplex andsubject supply and to change ofthe the uses, variousover de- the public interest isrenewable served resources is mentefficientageablethese andresources, ofshouldnonfederally theselong-termassist be lands thesethea catalyst manageduseFederaland owners and their to improve-Govern- encour-renew- in the developingotherof renewableNation'sbyAgriculture, the Forest andrenewable resource inpreparing Service, cooperation program, resources, Departmenta national with which and agencies, assessing the managementvirtuemultipleprinciplesable resources of use; its of statutory of sustained consistent the National authority yield with Forest and thefor the Forest Service, by mustest,assessmented;is the periodically be renewable based of on presentreviewed resourcea comprehensive and andprogram anticipat- updat- to serve the national inter- opportunityinghasinprograms,System, the thatboth Department research theto aand responsibilitybe Nation its a leaderrole and of maintainsas Agriculture,cooperative in an assur- andagency an a pacts,environmentalandNation'srenewableed uses, rangelands, coordination demandpublic andthrough for, ofeconomicprivate and multiple analysis supply forests im-use ofof resources from the renewablematerialsofturenatural our that people areresourceforest will as meet muchinresources perpetuity; conservation the a partrequirements as areof and our the pos- recycled timber product mentpublicStat.Sustained-Yieldprovidedand sustained 15;of participation the 16 program; U.S.C. yield Act opportunitiesin528-531), ofthe 1960 develop- and(74 as in the Multiple-Use Forestproductionandtimbercame,trees reduce from andServiceand frominwhichtimber pressures order should Federal theyfiber to expandextendfor originallyresourceslands, timber re-ourthe researchfrom coordinated programs public will andpromote private a the new knowledge derived (591) developwastesearch in the use of recycled and timber techniques product materials,for the recycledpromoteterialssubstitution for timberand primary of encourage these product materials,secondary materials.the use andma- of policytothese public programs considerations, and private and responsibilities activities; laws, regula- a discussion of important exceedauthorizedprivateeitherpossession through or$20,000,000 othertoof bethe them appropriatedagencies. United or indirectly States,any There notfiscal with and tois agencies.edand governmental shall consult with departments other interest- and Forest Renewable(16 U.S.C. 1600) Resource AssessmentSec. 3. (a) In recognition of the lands;forest,use,influencetions, ownership, andand range, and other affect and andfactors other significantly. management expected associated the toof an analysis of the potential mentsthethisyear 1979section." to carryon and subsequentout the purposes Assess-(c) The of Secretary shall report in 22,NoteThetext.mistakeanotherManagement subsection Nationalis preserved Act of (d). October in this 1976, mistakenly added This newablevitalawell-being,therange, long importance Nation's andtermresources other andperspective social of ofassociated America'softhe and the necessity in economic planning lands re- for to forest, Unitedontheeffects thecondition forestsStates;of global of andand renewable climate rangelands change resources of theon an analysis of the rural and productspotential,forestincluding,tial in themortality, sales, potentialNatic' economic growth, increased constraints, salvage forest the additional fiber poten-bu' iot Forest Systemrestricted to, tainedNationalgress that in Forestappropriate all forested System forestlands be(d)(l) main-incover the It is the policy of the Con- isteredrenewableandpareSecretary undertaldng aby Renewable resource the of ForestAgriculture related programs Resource Service, shalladmin- Assess- the pre- national urbanofcarbongate global forestry the dioxide buildupclimate opportunities and change, of reduce atmospheric to therniti-(b) riskTo assure the availability of utilizationsiderations;ations,alternate and markets, of other forest multiplecontract and wood consider-use prod- con- the potential for increased cordancesustainedmaximumtionsstocking,with ofspecies stand rate yield withbenefits designedof of management landgrowth, trees, of management multipleto degreeand secure condi-in useac- theof 31,preparedment").menting 1975, (hereinafter 1979 The notand and Assessment latershall each called thanbe tenth updated the December shall"Assess-year dur- there-be mationadequate22,McSweeney-McNarythe 1928Assessment, needed data (45 and forStat. scientificdevelopment 702,section asAct amended, infor-9 of of Mayof the dationsurbanSystemuctuct wastes recycling,wood and in wasteson the otherincluding National and lands, wood recommen- Forestand prod- of to Congress for actions togethersubmissionCongressdirectedplans. Accordingly, to annually identifyof the President's and the at reporttheSecretary time budget to the ofis with the anticipatedlimitedafter,supply and toof shall uses,the includerenewable demand but for, resources, not and be an analysis of present and herebymaketo16 readyU.S.C. authorized and as 581h),keep follows: current isand hereby directed a "Thecompre- amended toSecretary of Agriculture is bothwhichturedzation in would theproducts; of forestsmaterial lead and toand nowincreased in beingmanufac- utili-wasted the milling and other wood byyearofthisprovided theForests Act, 1978, President's beginning for theand under amount States budget with section and submission for locationby 8(c) fiscal pro- of annual report demandemphasistionalwithtrends; consideration resource of pertinent situation, of thesupply interna- and and an and price relationship ofpresenthensive rangeableand requirements andresources surveylands prospective of and the of analysisUnitedfor the theconditions forest States,renew- of the and its cilities,forestedandfiberStates, their product areas notinglocation fabrication that the supplypublic facilities andsuch private fa- assessing in the United tomanagementSystemallductivity whereclass, plans where objectives indicate practicable, theof landneed ofreforestlands areas in the National Forest that have been resources,ofServiceinformation present and and anddevelopedother potential an Federal evaluation by renewable theagencies, Forest an inventory, based on of factstivityofsources,theterritories the supplies as ofpresent may theincluding and land, ofbe and possessions, suchnecessary andpotential a renewabledetermination of such and produc- and other use- re- of proveappropriateandharvestedutilization setting utilization trees toforth the byeither facilities such individually facilities, to im- into product form of thethe technology degree of Nationalbestofdeforested,cut-over trees potential that orForest and areotherwise rate allnot lands landsor growing growth. treated denuded with atstands from their or All Federaldirectestimatesgoodsyieldopportunities ofand Government; tangible of services,indirect investment for improvingand returnstogether intangible costs to withtheir andthe mandinnewablemeansful meeting in for the needed andresources, determination the supply needs to benefitsbalance of of theseof the ways and thepeople re- uses de-and giesbyafibers.treesor program inthese for aggregateand The improvingfacilities to Secretary encouragereduce units of wood thesewasted shall of the fiberharvested technolo- adoptionset wood utili-forth ratesectionreportandtheyear firstcertifiedin to relationprovided year asand to shall thirdbystocking to thefor potentialbe growing Secretary underexamined rate, andthis seasonsgrowth in otheraftersub- the Servicetionships,tionalgramsties in programsForest andresearch, managementand System, andthe cooperative relationshipresponsibili- their of interrela- the pro-Na- of a description of Forest determineshallof officialsandsisthe carry underUnited Out toof besuchStates.each the fair survey State,plans andThe equitable,and ten-itory,Secretaryas analy-he may or cooperate with appropriate section,requiredzation.opportunity theunder Secretary forsubsection public shall involvement (c) provide(d) of this In developing the reports leveluledreturnedcertifiedpertinent forand promptto typesasmeasures. the ofbacklog treatment.treatment Any and lands shall sched- not be satisfactory shall The be r%) (592) (593) Secretarysionstivethose multiple whichof section shall secureuse annually benefits.9 ofthe this most forAct, effec- eight the (2) Notwithstanding the provi- plannedareasversefenceimprove andto excludeproduction otherwise growing livestock forestsestablish of trees and to secure andad- wildlife from regeneration TheinaccordanceServiceand Programsthe trails; Multiple-Use programs; forwithshall cooperative principlesbe and Sustained-Yield developed for research.set Forest forthin canandsustained-yieldin bewithin determined; the renewablerelationships resources among order thatexplain the opportunities multiple-use and additionsubsectiongressyearsnecessarythis in followingsubsection, theto theanmanner to estimatefunds be the transmit providedappropriated, availableenactment of theto inthe sumsfrom this Con-of in herebyeachotherbeginning fiscalmultiple authorized year October use thereafter, to values. be appropriated there is (3) Effective for the fiscal year 1, 1977, and 4321-4347).Act1969al of 16Environmental June U.S.C.(83 12, The 528-531), 1960 Program (74 Policy andStat. shall the 215;Act beNation- of Stat. 852; 42 U.S.C. sourceofimprovetofor participatethe owners landproducts and of and enhance forests in therefrom;the the renewable and programsthe rangelandcondition re- to recognize the fundamen- logplusacreagewiseother of a treat sufficientlands sources, to an be found acreage cut portion to overtoreplant be equal of thatin the andneed to year,back- other-the of purposes(d).meetSystemtreatingfor the requirements purposelands$200,000,000 of this in subsectiontheof of reforestingNational this annually subsection shall Forest and beto All sums appropriated for the decadesandperiod31,prepared 1975,at leastbeginning next not to each following latercover ofOctober than the such Decemberfourfour-year 1, period, 1976,fiscal recognizesoil,propriate,tal need water, to improveandprotect air resources;and, the wherequality ap- of statethe national goals that interrelationships gressshallsuchwithintreatment eight-yeartransmitan the estimate to eight-year eliminate annually period, of the period. the thesumsto Secretarythe backlog neces- Con-After cidesamounts,annualavailable andreport untiltypes, pesticides to expended. theand Congress uses used of (e) herbi-inon The thethe Secretary shall submit an ofyearandduring the theshall thereafterending four firstthe be fiscal first halfupdatedSeptember to decadesofhalfcover each noof at fifth the30,laterbeginningleast fiscal1980,fiscal thaneach uponthebetween renewableexport domestic and and interdependence resources; timberimport supplies of raw within logs and evaluate the impact of venttionalalltainsary landsother plannedtothe Forest replant developmentbeingforested timberSystem andcut lands overotherwise production soof inandasa backlogthe to main- treatpre-Na- on RenewablesuchtheNational beneficial uses. Forest (16 Resource orU.S.C. System, adverse 1601)Program includingeffects of publicneedsedgramnext to aftershall and such include, privateopportunities updating. programbut not Thebefor invest- limit- bothPro- an inventory of specific rangespotentialandofprices; global rangeland ofand effectsspecies,climate conditions, on changeand the on geographic forestonincluding forest and account for the effects authorities,fiscalneededof tomateneeded the year. workof sums sums workfor at availablethe accomplishmentnecessary, largerbeginning underthan in additionof thetheother of The Secretary's esti- privatesearch,themanagementperiodic National Forest for review cooperative ForestandService ofadministration System programsprograms, State Sec.for and andre-for 4.of In order to provide for Programofatiatements. capital an between operational The natureoutputs, inventory activities and resultsnature; those shall which anticipated, which differen- are are of specific identification of rangelandInventoriesNational1602) products. Forest System Resource (16 U.S.C. transmittedPresident'sannuallyunderof theNational reforestationthis section budget toForest the shall andSpeaker System shallotherbe provided also treatmentoflands the be for inclusion in the otheravailableAgriculture,ofactivitiesfor the conduct agenciesAssessment, into ofrelationthe other withinForest the toForest theSecretaryService findings Depart-Service and of utilizing information comparedandreturnsbenefitsanticipatedments benefits into with and associatedthesuch costs Federal a manner can with Government; be invest- directlythat the direct and the total indirectrelated ofandcontinuingshallment, all appropriately Nationaldevelopthe Secretary basis Forestand detaileda comprehensive maintainof System Agriculture Sec.inventory landson5. As a a part of the Assess- themission8(c)reportSenateHouse Congress of provided thisandtogetherof the Act the President'sbeginning at Presidentfor with the under time the budgetwith sectionannual ofof sub- the to ablePresidentshallthepreparedment Rural Resource ofprepare Agriculture, pursuantDevelopment a recommended Programand to transmit includingsection Act(hereinafter Renew-of 302to 1972, data the of efits;fledProgramfor accomplishment costs, opportunities, outputs, results, of withinventoried and speci- ben- a detaileda discussion study of ofperson- priorities andidentifytoinventory reflect values.renewable new changesshall (16and be U.S.C.resources.emerging inkept conditions current 1603) resources so and as This reforestationsumsbudgetsecureshall estimated forinclude seed, fiscal andgrow moneys asyear other seedlings,necessary 1978. treatment needed prepare for The to tion,videincludetransmittedcalled inmanagement, the appropriate alternatives, "Program'). to the anddetail President and Thedevelopment forshall Program protec- maypro- whichongoingplementnel requirements programs;and monitor as and needed existing to andim- Program recommendations gramPlanningNational provided Forest for System by section ResourceSec. 6. 3 of (a) As a part of the Pro- terioussites, plant growth trees, and thin, underbrush, remove0 dele-build (594) cludingof the National forest development Forest System, roads in- the major Forest Service programs (A) evaluate objectives for (595) turethis Act,shall thedevelop, Secretary maintain, of Agricul- and, as appropriate, revise land and resource thisNational Forest System pursuant to section, the Secretary shall involvement comparable to that ousto resources alternative and activities; their relationship FederalandmentwithNationalmanagement localthe planning agencies. landForest governments andplans System,processes resource for unitscoordinated and manage-of ofotherState the accordanceandassure servicessustained that with suchobtained yield the plans of Multiple-Use therefromthe products in provide for multiple use unitthesection;required Secretary have and bysignificantly subsection finds conditions changed, (d) of thisinbut a be revised from time to time when whichtoland achieve management the goals plans of the developed Program (3) specifying guidelines for insure consideration of Forestfortenance use System, ofon land units themanagement of Secretary the National(b) In plansshall the development and main- watershed,outdoorparticular,Sustained-Yield recreation, include wildlife Act coordination ofrange, and 1960, fish, timber, and, and inof ofprovisionsat least every of subsectionsfifteen years, (e) and and (f) this section in accordance with the and public in- tureingableaspectsthe theeconomic andresource ofrelated protection various management, andsystems systems of environmental forest of of silvicul- resourc- includ-renew- incorporateeconomic,siderationapproachuse a systematic to andof theachieve physical, otherstandards interdisciplinary integratedsciences. biological, and(c) guide-The con- Secretary shall begin to theusesproceduresmentwilderness; definition setsystems, forth inand ofharvestinginthe thesubsection light terms of levels, all"multiple (c)(1), of andthe determine forest manage- quiredvolvementmentnotsection. later byof thisthan subsectioncomparable subsection,two years (d) to after the that(g)of enact-Secre- this Asre- soon as practicable, but plantber,(includinges, to watershed, andprovide animal wilderness), for wildlife, communitiesoutdoor range, and recreation fish; based tim- provide for diversity of linesandafterestplans System shall enactmentrequiredfor unitsattempt as soonof by of theto thisthis ascomplete National practicable subsection suchFor- section in suitabilitytheSustained-Yieldvideduse' availability and "sustained for resource of Act lands yield" ofmanagement. 1960, and as theirpro- and in the Multiple-Use ciplesproceduresmulgateoftary title shall 5, regulations, set United in forth accordance States in undersection Code, withthe 553 prin-pro- the of the Multiple-Use tivesandmeettheon the specificwithin overallof suitability a land the multiple-use land multiple-use management andarea capability in objectives, order objec- plan toof this section, incorporationCongressTheno later Secretary than on Septemberthe fdrin shall the progressall annualsuchreport 30, unitsof toreport1985. such the by System,forwith each this incorporatingunit section of the shall National in one(f) Forestdocu- Plans developed in accordance form one integrated plan subsection.andagementmentsetSustained-Yield out standards and the plans,revision process prescribedand Act offor the theof the guidelines1960,land develop- by man- thisthat intreetakendegreeprovide,adopted the species regionto practicable, pursuantwherepreserve similar controlled appropriate, tothe tofor thatdiversity bysteps theexisting to toplan; the beof suchwithunderNationalUntilrequired unitthis planssuch by ForestmayAct, developed sectiontime continue the System asmanagement 8(c) a in underunit isofaccordance managedthis of exist- Act.the of writtenbylocations,ablement this toor section;material, one all set of theof including documents, features maps required avail- and be embodiedthe public in appropriate at convenient Nationalpreparedsureinclude, that landEnvironmental butin accordance managementnot be limited Policy with(1) plans specifyingto Act are procedures to in- The regulations shall the menttionand(based assessmentof system theon effectscontinuous to in the theof end each field) monitoring that manage- evalua- it will insure research on and opment,forplans.ing publicland review,and participation resource and revision management in the (d) ofdevel- land The Secretary shall provide ableprogramincludingingother proposed methodsdescriptive and the the andplanned ofproportiondocuments, possibletimber timber harvestofactions, reflect- prob- sale mentplansto,of 102(2)(C) 1969,direction an environmental including, onof thatwhen butAct andimpact not shall for limited state-whatbe pre- required under section harvestofnentnot the produce impairment land; levels substantial based of the on productivityand intensified perma- permit increases in atofconvenientrevisionslimitedmanagement leastthe affected three available locations plans months unit including, tofor in thebefore thea periodpublic vicinity but final not ofat to, making the plans or ofprepareciplinarythewithin the plan; applicable theits team. planunit basednecessary resources on inventories to offulfill the be prepared by an interdis- Each team shall ourceofwhichpared; the management; suitability of lands for res- (2) specifyingrequire the identification guidelines provementwithcreasingforestation,management the Multiple-Usethe if- thinning,harvests practices, in Sustained-and accordancesuch tree as im- re- such practices justify in- publicSecretaryadoption,participationcesses meetings at duringshall locations ofpublicizein which comparablethe that review periodfoster and pro-ofhold publicthe such publicwhatsoeverforest;ment notice, would after and, result final if adoptionsuchin a significant amend- after be amended in any manner ablematerial,includinginventory resources, anddata pertinent andexplanatory on thesoil maps,various and aids;water, graphic renew- and provide for obtaining beningdecreasedYield period Act ofat if 1960,the such end andpractices of each cannot plan- successfully such harvest levels are implemented or andplans revising or revisions. plans for units(e) ofIn thedeveloping, maintaining, (596) withchange(e) the and in provisions (f)such of plan,this section of in subsectionsaccordance and public tionsidentify involving special conditionshazards to orthe situa- van- provide for methods to (597) tiallysuchfunds practicesas are planned; not toreceived continue to substan- permit watershedSystembe harvested lands conditions from only National where- will notForest be (E) insure that timber will soil, slope, or other areastionstypes,according tothe or be maximumotherto cut geographic in suitable one sizeharvest areas, classifica- limits opera- forest for there are established atbe a ofentitled rate the ofcommittee, $100to receive per diem,the compensation members including shall (3) While attending meetings Landsprotectionposes,tofor be timber once treated particularly identified production for reforestation with as shall unsuitable regard continue to pur- the of other multiple-use vest;stockedsuchirreversibly lands within damaged;can five be adequatelyyears after har- re- there is assurance that oneresponsibleatethetion, publicestablished level including abovenotice Forest limits the andprovision Service Forest afterreview appropri- Service toofficer by exceed the sectionexpenses,businesstheirtravelof subsistence,homes time, 5703 they including andof mayor title regularwhile be as5,per allowed Unitedauthorized diemaway places in Statestravelfrom lieu of by returnatashisvalues. leastnot decision thesesuited The every landsSecretary tofor classify10 timber to years timber shall theseproduction and produc-review landsshall waterlakes,forwater streams, courses,wetlands, fromtemperatures, streambanks, detrimentaland and deposits other blockagesshorelines, bodieschanges of sedi- of inof protection is provided asnaturalsizesuchtheofficer fire, harvest of limits whoareascatastrophicinsect proposal;normally shallharvested and diseasenot conditions wouldProvided, applyas aattack, resultapprove to suchThat the ofor contracts,thetently.mentCode, use service for and persons otheroccupancy employed instruments in the of intermit-Govern-National for Resource plans and permits, bertheyconditionstion production. wheneverhave become have he changed suitabledetermines(1) forso The tim-that Secretary shall formulate and implement, becausebeconditionsseriouslyment, used where isitand ornot harvestsadverselyfish selected habitat; are affect primarily andlikely water to willthe harvesting give the systemgreatest to resources,wildlife,tectioninwindstorm; a manner and andconsistent the regeneration with the pro- of of recreation, such cutssoil, are carried out watershed, and esthetic fish, instrumentspermits,Forestshallplans.tent System be contracts, revised currently lands as andshall soon in other beexistence as consis- practica- such with Those resource plans and the land management mentsThisevaluationbenefitsestimatingas soon process to as provide practicable,requirements shall information include a ofprocess thisrequire- onAct. for a to long-termssupport the program costs and seedoutputdollarting, tree ofreturn and cutting,timber, other or andtheshelterwood cuts greatest designed unitcut- to (F) insure that clearcutting, whoappointthees of timberSecretary aresubsection anot committeeresource. officers of (g) Agriculture of or ofthis employees scientists section,(h)(l) shall In carrying out the purpos- permits,plansplans.blements, to arebe contracts,maderevised, when consistent necessary resource and other withplans instru- such and When land management shall be theprovement,matedrepresentative reforestation,National expenditures and Forestsample sale timber associated of System,basis timber stand of from esti-with andim- determinedlandsmethodregeneratetimber only on will Nationaltoanwhere- be even-agedbe the used optimumForest as stand Systema meth-cutting of for clearcutting, it is assureposednicalteeof the shall advice Forestguidelinesthat provide an Service.and effective scientificand counsel procedures The interdisci- and commit-on tech-pro- to contracts,revisionrevisedbemade subject asinpursuant soonpresent to validas to orpracticable. this futureexisting section permits, rights. Any shall Land management plans and and other instruments andofGovernmentexpendituresshall timber; findings provide and resulting aresulting tocomparison the returnfrom from ofthe to thesethese salethe include a summary of data mentmeetdeterminedod,ments and plan;the forof objectives the otherto relevantbe appropriate,such and land cuts require- manage- to the interdisciplinary it is committeesfromregulations,minateadopted.plinary time uponapproach The to whenbut time, promulgationcommittee the considering is appointSecretary proposed shall similar of revi-may, andter-the revisionsrequirednotificationlicthirty participation days under after section completionand publication6(d) of of this pub- of shall by the become effective Secretary as basisfication8(c)reportestimates of requiredthis on asAct,a representativea partpursuantincluding of the to an annualsectionsample identi- of those advertised timber impactsreviewesthetic,potentialtary ashas on determined eachengineering,environmental,been advertised completed by andthe salebiological, economicSecre- and area the forwheninofsions the adoption. of thecommitteespublic the regulations regulations. information shall are be The proposed suppliedincluded views Act.suitedtheSecretaryment management plans for timbershall pursuant identify production,area to which landsthis Act, consid- arewithin notthe In developing land manage- cess;determinedexpendituressales andmade bybelow forthe suchabove the estimatedtimber cost(m) pro- Theas Secretary shall estab- multipleconsistencystripshave been areuse shaped of assessed,of the the generaland sale asblended withwell area; theasto thethe cut blocks, patches, or personneltee,dischargeassistance, the asof duties maythe Departmentbe of necessary the commit- ofto shall(2) be provided from the Clerical and technical andpertinenteringsalvageble, shall physical, as factorsdetermined salesassure economic,or to salesthat, the by extent necessitated exceptthe and Secretary, feasi- other for to culminationtemthroughoutpriorlish shall generally the National have Forestreached Sys- the (1) standardsto to insure that, harvest, stands of mean of trees annual terrain;extent practicable with the natural (598) Agriculture. protectsuchtimber otherlands harvesting multiple-use for a period shall values,of occur10 years. no on (599) othertheincrement basis methods of of cubic growth of calculation measurement (calculated at the onor discretion of the Secretary): Provid- Policy intended to be used in fram- under the budget meet the policies implementing the Program required sures:orcultural precludeed,other practices,stand the improvement use such of assound thinning mea- silvi- That these standards shall notProvided furt her, periodforistrationing the budgetbeginning five- for orrequests Forest ten-year during Service by the thatprogram term activities Adniin- of coursebudgetsection.danceapproved withwhichso In bypresented any subsectionthe fails case Congress to recommends inmeet which (a) inthe of accor- such poli-this a jectivesobjectivesofAct,to bethe together shouldprepared Program of be withthe bysetas Assessment. accomplishmentsthey sectionforth relate in 3quali- of to Ob-this the windthrowareharvestingSecretarystandards substantially or from ofother timber salvage damagedcatastrophe, stands or sanitation by which fire,or shall not preclude the That these dentandsionCongress.actionsuch Statement shall, of Congress deemedsuch subject Following ofAssessment, Policy, appropriate to other the the actionstransmis-Program, Presi- by the for such further orgressshallcies reasonspolicies so specificallyto established,approve forpresented. requesting theset lesserforth the President theprogramsthe reason Con- Amounts pertinenttainaccordingly.accomplishmentstative appropriate and costs quantitative The and shouldmeasurements report benefits. be termsshall reported con- Theand of speciesdardsinsectwhich orforare of disease treesthein imminent harvest in attack; management ofdanger and particular fromunits (2) exceptions to these stan- dancemodificationoralreadyof theany with Congress, subsequentestablished such Statementthereof carry by amendment outlawapproved of programs inPolicy accor- byor beciesappropriated Congressionalsubsectionexpended approved in to(a) inaccordance Budgetcarry ofaccordance this out and section the withImpound- poli-with the shall benefitsronmentalbetweenevaluationlimited economicshall qualityshall include, assess factors.factors the but andProgram balance not envi- be to, environmental quality cluding,afteration,the multiple considerationcompletion wildlife but not uses habitat, limited of has ofpublic the andbeen to, forest rangeparticipa-recre- given andin- to Presidentgressdaystheof Congress, theof after continuous first ofthe period unless,the date Senate sessionof onbefore ninety which and ofthe calendar Con- endthe improveinLaw informationmentits 93-344. oversight Controlthe accountability thatresponsibilities Act will of aid1974 of Congress agen- Publicand For the purpose of providing benefitsfactorsandaccess,savings wilderness wildlife suchsuch and over astheas habitat, use,thethe esthetics,rate value excessand of recreational economic returnof of publicforegone cost on Cooperationdurestion.tion of processes(16 subsection U.S.C. in Resource utilizing 1604) (d) of Planning thisthe sec-proce- committeetionPolicy,ment,ofSpeaker the reported transmissionProgram, either of or the jurisdictionHouse Houseby and the ofadopts Statementare suchappropriate disapprov- recipients aAssess- resolu- of cy ProgramatespareSecretaryexpenditures thean annualcomponent required of Agriculture and report to activities, elements be which prepared shall evalu-theof pre- the by renewablelationandfor implementingrecommendations where resources. waffanted. corrective for new action legis- The report shall indicate plans Statesparedresourceture may pursuant and surveys, utilize other to the andorganizationsthis Assessment,Program Act toSec. assist pre- 7.in The Secretary of Agricul- menttonuitypurposeing be the ofbrokensine Statement ofa sessionthis die, only subsection, and ofshall by Policy. the an be adjourn-thedays deemed For conti- onthe thirdfiscaltimefurnishedsection fiscal ofbudget 4submission of toyear this commencingthe afterAct Congress whichofthe the enactment with shallannual at the be Nationalappendices.formfor Congress with Forest necessary (16 in System U.S.C.concise detailed Renewable1606) summary data in The reports shall be structured renewableproposingPresidentland.tection, (16 resourcesthe use, U.S.C.Budget planning and 1605)on managementRequests non-Federalfor the pro- of standingofshallthanbecausewhich the bethree ninety-dayeither excluded ofany an days Houseother adjournment in toperiod. provision isthe a not daycomputation inNotwith- of certainsession of more this cantoflimitedtheresearch majorthis report findings, to,Act. componentresearch ashall description and include, programs, how of the of these but theprogram, signifi- not statusfind- be With regard to the assuretureResources shall that takethe development such actionSec. andas 9.will ad- The Secretary of Agricul- Assessmentfollowingfirst convenes each and in 1976 the Program,and thereafterSec. the 8. (a) On the date Congress updating of the bemodifiedbytheAct, used theStatement Congress President, in Statement framing ofmay Policyand budgetrevise of the Policytransmitted orrevised requests. modify shall or cooperativeForestingsparttheService will cooperative ofSystem the be programs. State Program,applied management and forestry private Withinthe National report assistance regardForestand shallin to forthyieldceptstemsourcesministration are inoffor theinofproducts multiple full theMultiple-Use of Nationalaccord the and use renewable services andwith Forest Sustained- sustained the as Sys-con- re-set ofAssessmentSpeakerPresident ate,tivesthis whenAct andof the and asthe Congress Houseset thePresident forth Program of convenes,Representa-in ofsection theas setSen- 3the shall transmit to the expresserningtheberbudget President30, Forest for1977, in qualitativethe Servicerequests toyear the ending Congress activities andpresented quantita- Septem-(b) shallgov- Commencing by with the fiscal conductedlogsplishments,descriptioninclude, for the but under programs needs,of not the bethe andstatus, limitedandCooperative work activities accom- back- to, a Nationalwhentheconcepts,Yield year theAct renewable Forest2000theof 1960. Congress asSystem theTo resources further targethereby shall of thesebeyear sets the in getherforth in with section a detailed 4 of thisStatement Act, to- of (600) programstive terms andthe extent to which the policies projected Forestryports Assistance Act of 1978. shallThese annual evaluation re- set forth progress in (601) theirbacklogsan restorationoperating of needed shallposture be treatment reducedwhereby to forall tiona current of planned basis andintensive the major multiple- por- ingsigned vegetative with the cover goal onof thereestablish- roadway withdrawnno land now from or hereafter the public domain reserved or quantitya quantity which equal canto or be removed less than a containsoundoperatingproceduresuse basis. requests on Theshall an annualenvironmentally- forbe installedfunds budget for shalland an sustained-yield management contract,yearsconstructioncoverand afterhas beenthe of thetermination disturbed road, within byof theten areas permit, or lease eitherwhere the vegetative as publicthereof,supplementary1103;ActNational of 16domain March shallForests U.S.C. beexceptto3, pursuant 471),andreturned1891 amendatoryby or (26 anto any to actStat. theact of the SecretaryProvided,tuityfromableoverall suchon sale a multiple-use mayforestsustained-yieldThat, quantity establish annually in order for objectives, ananyin to allow-perpe- meetdecade the basis: thetreatmentofbacklogs:orderly Secretaryareas cost programof that Provided,hastreating finds willbeen to that benefitthe eliminated, eliminateThat (1)remainder whenthe by backlogsuch the(2) of tionalneededisSuchthrough later actionForest determined forartificial use shallTransportation as or bea thatpart naturaltaken theof unless System.the means.(c)road Na-Roads isit constructed on National es,Congress.viceregional field shall supervisory offices be so situatedof offices,the Forest as(b) to The pro-Ser- on-the-ground field offic- and Providedlong-termwhichplannedwould departs otherwiseaverage further,departure from sale That themust quantity projectedany be suchconsis- that be established: ofsuppliesfromenvironmentalsuch the areatheir United of exceeds treatment, the States benefitsrenewable the are or economic to (3)adequate be resources the secured total and to pactsty,thesignedForest costintended on toSystem of landstandards transportation, uses, and lands considering resources. appropriate shall and be safe- im-de- for (16 givingnient,videareasand the useful locationpriority andoptimum townsservices to of the levelfacilitiesnear tomaintenance the theof conve-public, in rural National thementtentmade allowable with objectivesplan. withthe multiple-use salepublic of thequantity participationland manage- must be as Plans for variations in adjustedthesecanmeet1607) people, theelements accordingly.future the of needs budget restoration of requestthe mayAmeri- forbe (16 U.S.C. NationalU.S.C. 1608) Forest System DefinedSec. 11. (a) Congress declares ActstandardslocationsForest1383), of Novemberand asin Forest amended.sectionaccordance 30, Service 1970901(b) withprogram(84 of Stat. the (16 U.S.C. quantityexcessSecretaryInrequired addition, of establishedby the may sectionwithin annual sell any6(d)pursuant allowablea quantity decade,of this to Act. thisthe in sale claresTransportation that the installation System of aSec. prop- 10. (a) The Congress de- territories,throughoutforest,consiststhat of unitsunitedthe United of into federally States a nationally ownedand its the National Forest Systemrange, and related lands Renewable1609) Resources DefinedSec. 12. In carrying out this Act, quantityeredtionalquantitiesForestsection by Forest sointhe limitation. longtheof plan timberover case as do the ofnot from anydecadeaverage exceed suchNational cov- suchsaleNa- In those cases ried(1688-657,isviceer system U.S.C. forwardthe theNational of 532-538),Act intransportation timeof Forest October to shall meet System, 13,1964 be toantici- car-ser- asprovided for in Public Law Thesuchpurposefuturelong-termsignificant "National areas generations, of intothisbenefitsystem Forestsectionone dedicatedforandintegral System" to presentthat include system.it tois shall and theall duplicationprivateableutilizetheassessment Secretary from informationorganizations other and ofand overlapFederal, Agriculture program and and ofdata shallState, resource planning avail- avoidshall and esusecialhundredwhere of twoforest determining a or thousandForest land,more theForestshas acres Secretarytheless of thancommer- maytwo for purpos- sustained constructiontheenvironmentallypatedtransportation method needs chosen andon an systemmaintenance sound foreconomical financing should basis, of be and the such throughallpublicreservedinclude National domain purchase,all or National Forestwithdrawn of the exchange, lands UnitedForest fromacquired States,landsdona- the sibilitiesmattersshallTheefforts termbe of within construedand other authorities the Federal scopeto involve of ofagencies. therespon- those For- "renewable resources" yield.vestingtarythissubstantially sectionfrom of salvage timber shall damaged prohibit standsor sanitation by whichthe(b) fire, Secre-Nothing arewind- in subsection (a) of har- tionshallThatnationalas of betono forest enhance obligatedmore benefits. roads than local, for by$242,542,000Provided the timberregional, construc- further, pur- and ActofprojectsGrasslandstion, the or Bankhead-Jones otheradministered means, undertheFarm National Tenanttitle III (50 Stat. and 525,land 7 utilization U.S.C. mentarylegislationandest Serviceon the thereto. date amendatoryon theof (16 enactment date U.S.C. ofor thissupple- 1610)of Actany taryinsectwhichthrow, may orare diseaseeither in imminent substitute attack. danger The Secre- from or other catastrophe, such tim- or forestpermanentchasers.plan, development any(95 road roadStat. is constructed1391) set road forth(b) in on theUnless land the necessity for a system throughdesignatedisteredor 1010-1012),interests by the thetherein Forest Forestand whichServiceother Service lands,are as admin- ora waters, part are for administration LimitationstimberAgriculture from on each shallTimber National limit Removal theSec. Forest sale 13. ofto (a) The Secretary of berabovefeasible,be for1611) sold timber the undersell plan that such volume.thewould timber plan otherwise (16 or, over U.S.C. if andnot otherconnectionof the permit National with or alease timber Forest shall contract System be de- or in (602) provisionsof 1897the system. (30 Stat.of Notwithstanding the 34; Act 16 ofU.S.C. June the473), 4, (603) BoardsPublic Participation and AdvisorySec. 14. (a) In exercising his mentedofsuch ain cross boardstheof the planning section National shall of befor groups Forestrepresentative and manage- interest- System topublicshallvice,lawsauthorities give establishapplicablethe hearingsthe Secretaiy, Federal,under procedures, where tothis theState, by Act appropriate, Forestregulation, includingand otherlocalSer- RegulationsU.S.C.enjoymentand the 1612) various of the typeslands thereof.of use and (16 grams.applicablestandards,commentquategovernments notice upon criteria,to and Forestand the an the andformulationopportunity Service public guidelines pro-ade- toof ofdesirabletionsculture this as Act. shallhe to determines (16carry prescribe U.S.C. out thenecessary such1613) provisionsSec. regula- 15. and The Secretary of Agri- theagementipationSystem, Federal in theof the Advisory theplanning Secretary, National forCommittee andpursuant Forest(b) man- In providing to for public partic- personActSeverability or the or applicationcircumstances thereofSec. to 16. any If any provision of this is held responsibilities.andnecessarysuchbleAct law,(86advice advisory Stat. shall to on secure770) establish theboards The and execution full membership other as informationand he applica- consultdeems of his of thereby.circumstancessuchofinvalid, the provision Act the (16 and validity U.S.C. shallofto theother of not1614) application the personsbe remainder affected and of
(604) National Forest Management Act of 1976 asthereof follows: new (see subsections P.L. 93-378) (b) and (c) Amendment to the Organic Act 1608-1614)576b,16Act U.S.C. of 594-2(note), October 472a, 22,476, 1600(note),1976 476 (note),(P.L. 94-588,1601(note), 500, 513-516, 90 Stat.1600-1602, 518, 2949, 521b, as 1604, amended;528(note), 1606, ResourcesForestNational and Forest Planning Rangeland System Act RenewableofSec. 1974, 9. as Section 11(a) of the 476),ated(30LANDS""SURVEYING paragraph is Stat. hereby 35, in theasrepealed. under amended; Act ofthe (16June heading 16 Sec.U.S.C. 4, U.S.C. 189713. The twelfth undesign- THE PUBLIC Actthe "National Forest ManagementSec. 1. This Act may be cited as of 1976". (16 U.S.C. amendednatedes Planning by sectionby Act striking of 21974, of out this as the redesig- Act, word is 93-378)Act,redesignated is amended by bysection . 2 of this . . (see P.L. TimberSystem476) Sales Lands on National Forest Findings1 600(note)) Sec. 2. The Forest and Range- ingandinsertingstriking"and" monitor"out at out thethein lieu the endperiodin paragraph thereofword of paragraph at 'satisfy" the"implement (4); end strik- (3);and of moreseparatecombinethoritynotNote-This affect (16 a theforestamendment U.S.C. President's into 473) two does au- toor National National Forests, Forests, or U.S.C.Acttheachieving Multiple-Use, of 528-53 1960 the 1)policies(74 and Sustained-Yield Stat. the set ForestSec. forth 14. and in (a) For the purpose of 215; 16 redesignatingU.S.C.Actlandly;as Renewableofsections and 1601-1610)1974 by 3addingsections (88through Resources is a 2 amended new12, through Planningrespective- section 11by 2 Stat. 476; 16 93-378)graphthereofparagraph'and"; (5) a andsemicolon as(4) follows:by and adding inserting and a the new in word lieu para- (see P.L. doForest,changeateNational not Report providing theremove boundary Forest No. suchlands 94-898,Status. lines changes from of (Sen-May a andtaryPlanningRangeland16 regulationsof U.S.C. Agriculture, Act Renewable 1600 of as 1974 heet under seq.),may (88 Resources suchprescribe,Stat. the rulesSecre-476; andUtilizationReportsas Wood follows: onProduct by(seeFiber Mills, P.L. RecyclingPotential, Wood93-378) Wastes Wood andPlanningNational Rangeland Forest Renewable System Resource Resourc-Sec. 6. Section 6 of the Forest andRenewable Rangeland Resources Renewable Resourc-Sec.14, 10. 1976) Section 12 of the Forest shallForestforestvalue,may sell,be products Systemtrees, designated at not portions lands. locatedless onthan maps,onof appraised Nationaltrees, and or a All advertised timber sales es signedandPlanning Rangeland by Actsection ofRenewable 1974, 2 of this asSec. Resourc- rede- Act, 3, is Section 3 of the Forest ofamendednatedes asPlanningnew follows: by subsections bysection Actadding (see of 21974, P.L.at(c) of the through this93-378) as end redesig- Act, there- (m) is amendednatedes Planning by .section Act of 1974,2 of this as redesig- Act, is . . (see P.L. 93-378) ders.publicprospectus and interestedshall be available, potential to bid- the The length and other terms of Reforestation(seeofamended a newP.L. 93-378)bysubsection adding at (c) the as end follows: there- esNational andPlanning Rangeland Participation Act of Renewable 1974, as redesig-Sec. Resourc 7. Section 8 of the Forest landBoards;PublicLimitations Renewable Participation Regulations; on Resources Timber and Severability PlanningRemoval; AdvisorySec. 11. The Forest and Range- Actlandpromotesectiontentthe of Renewable contract1974,with orderly 6 oftheas theamended shallResources principlesharvesting Forest be (16designed andPlanning set consis-U.S.C. Range- out toin natedesand Planning Raneland by section Act Renewable of 21974, of this as Sec.Resourc- redesig- Act, 4. is Section 3 of the Forest Transportationamended-nated by section (see SystemP.L. 2 of 93-378) this Act, is ForestActConforming of 1974and Rangeland is amended Amendments Renewable by adding to the (see P.L. 93-378) provisionsbettertheforest1604). Secretary resources Unless of there Agriculture (consistent is a finding with that theby utilization of the of the Multiple-Use, various Renewablefollows:ofamended new subsections (seeby addingResource P.L. 93-378) at (d) the Program andend there-(e) as amendednatedesand Planning Rangeland by bysection Actinserting Renewable of 21974, of "(a)" this asSec. Resourc- immedi- redesig-Act, 8. isSection 10 of the Forest ActlandResources Renewableof 1974 Planningis Resources amended Act Planning asofSec. 1974fol- 12. The Forest and Range- suchexceedcontractsU.S.C.Sustained-Yield period 528-531)ten shall years: may be beforwillAct adjusteda ofperiodresult, 1960; notatsales the16 to Provided, That -m and Rangeland Renewable Resourc-Sec. 5. Section 4 of the Forest (736) gress"ately before and inserting the words "The Con- at the end lows-(see P.L. 93-378) (737) discretion of the Secretary to thecircumstancesdelaysofprovide purchaser. the caused United additional bybeyond The anStates Secretaiyact time the of orcontrol duean by agent shallto other timeof methodsselectfederalobjectives or statutes. alteras heof the determines this The bidding ActSecretary and methodnecessary other shall or (D) are consistent with the chaserlyandpurchaseshall in shall havethe thereof. ornotemployment no harvest bepersonal directly of suchinterest ofor theindirect-products in pur- the creditincludetheferred Treasury forto a miscellaneousconstruction provision of the United for of receiptspurchaserpermanent States.(i)(l) inFor sales of timber which ofacontractasrequire term operation,practicable ofthe for two purchaserany which years after advertised shallorexecution to more, file be sale assubject a soonwithplanof a Secretaryparagraph.clausesto achieve (A), selects the (B), objectives (C)oral and auction (D) stated ofas thisthe in In those instances when the productstrees,vestingshallmethods develop portions practices to provideor utilizationmeasurement, of for trees,for the the removalstandards, oroptimum forestand ofhar- The Secretary of Agriculture saletionsexcessroadsfyingAgriculture afford requiring withof as $20,000, timber"small an shall estimated that purchasersbusiness promulgatethe the Secretary notice costconcerns" quali- regula- inof diligentlyofcontractTheto concurrencetwo Secretary or period performedmore shallwith unlessby anthenot in original accordanceextendSecretary.he finds term any that the purchaser has whosebids.ersrequireNationalbidding submit written that method Forest written all sealed prospective materials,for sealed thequalifying sale qualifying purchas-he of shall bidsany Only prospective purchasers opportunitiespracticaltiveticesSuch wood shallstandards, use utilization,toofreflect promote the methods, wood consideration moreregional material. and effec- prac-con- of estimateamended,underwhenthe regulationsthe submitting of(5 Small theU.S.C. cost issuedBusiness 631a andbid, thereunder,et thetoseq.) Act, elect right, and as that an theoverridingorwith extension. an approved public planinterest of operation(d) justified The Secretary of Agriculture that the substantial biddingtheForestappraisedare oralequal materials patternsbidding valueto or involvedprocess. mayinof excesssuch participate in National theof salethe in The Secretary shall monitor complishtiontivespleandditions, use shallin in thesituationsresource andthe be purpose affectedcompatiblespecies management involving of characteristicsarea.this with subsec- salvage objec-multi- To ac- quentlyroad.includesuchthe Secretary an paid allelection, offor the build the estimatedthe timber the price proposed shall subse-cost of (2) If the purchaser makes propersaleortionsdeterminesshall that isoffering, exist,advertise less the asthatthanappraised definedno extraordinary all$10,000. satisfactory sales by value regulation, unless condi- ofbid the he If, upon instancesbeSecretarythatof occurring, National collusive of has possible Forest athen bidding reasonable materials.collusive practices belief bid- may (A) he shall report any such If the toquiretheateddownof makeinsect-infested, Secretary trees thetimber, monetary purchaser for and standis authorized dead,todeposits, removeimprovement,of suchdamaged, as associ- timber toa part re- or oreitherpleteddateSecretarythe the road. when constructionSecretary,which of such Agriculture shall road depending bybe shall theapplicable shall purchaser be on com-set the to a In the notice of sale, the outsalefailsis received further mayto complete be advertisement.for offered a sale, the and purchase,or soldthe(e)(1) bidder with- theIn the sale of trees, por- thepracticesdingsupporting United or suspected to Statesthe data; Attorney collusivewith any General biddingand allof (B) he may alter the bidding design,thewhichdepositedof the cost paymentsums engineering, to in thearea designated for toUnited bethe and used, timber, supervisionStates fund to cover tofrom for be andmateofusework,election. timber fromsuch forthe additional timberToany Secretarya sumaccomplish receipts purchaser equal sumsis authorizedfrom to asrequested the credits,themay esti- sale beto section(hereinaftertionsshallals"),from of as Nationalselect thetrees, "National Secretaryreferred the or Forest biddingforest Forestto of inSystem productsAgriculture this method materi- sub- lands or affectedeliminateactionarea;methods and as area. used hesuch deems within practices necessary the withaffected the to (C) he shall take such other ofharvestingpreparationand aremoneythe the toconstruction cost be pursuant ofavailable andfor such Forestsupervision to timber.of thisuntil needed Service subsection expendedDeposits ofroads sale the to thethatuntilroads,appropriated noticemeets expended, such ofthe fundssale.for standards tothe constructto construction be specified available a road inof governmentcompetition;methods receive which not less than the insureinsure that the open federal and fair disposeheunder may such prescribe,of, rules by sale and is orregulationsauthorized otherwise, asto The Secretary of Agriculture, eredsuchofcover whichaccomplishing asdeposits the moneys deposited: cost shallto received the the not United purposes be from consid- States thefor Provided, That NoteP.L.tivetheAppropriations following 99-500, provision FY 1987 rela- to this subsectionbill, included of economiesstabilitysectionappraised (a) are value of dependent this as section; required on bysuch sub- of communities consider the economic whose vestingnecessary,andforesttrees, demonstration productsportions of trees, and supervision portionsrelatedof projects. trees, to of orresearch trees, of other har- or Designation, marking when further,excessof UnitedNationalsections of theStates Forests500 cost andCode: of within 501accomplishing of the title meaning 16, That sums found to be in And provided fromhereafterSecretaryotherNFMA: anyprovision "Notwithstanding authorized receipts of fromlaw, anythe of Agriculture to use is Nationaltarysuch deems other Forest objectivesnecessary; materials, asand or the achieve Secre- (738) byforest tarypersons productsof Agriculture. employed shall beby conductedthe Secre- Such persons anythe purposes National for Forest which shall deposited be trans- on (739) thesale costof timber of construction a sum equal to of agementofandelectionroads the authorized National programAct of in 1976.".Forest sectionas described Man- 14(i) under the purchaser theshall1976,sentence:of,amended respectively, Act include the ofby term Juneadding all 'moneys the collections9, at following1930, the endreceived' and underthere- new all 'Beginning October 1, repealed.Commissioninformation"the National (16 and'.U.S.C. that Forest (16 will 514) U.S.C. aidReservation (b)the 518) ForCon- purposes of providing Section 14, as amended, is thelandthesuant Secretary is Federal being to section acquired;of Land relative 206(f)(2)(B)(ii) Policy and value and pur- Man- of the personany adjustments from whom made the by tractsValidationOctobersubsection 1, shall 1976.of Timber become (16 U.S.C. Saleseffective 472a)Con- on (3) The provisions of this Nationalthesuchandpurchaseramounts construction otherState Forest of asforest earnedNational purchaser Transportation productsof orroads Forest allowedcredits, onwithin timber Sys-the for any landtureforestexpendituresandgress may improve purchase inland, its not oversightthe hereafter thefor orSecretary exchangetheaccountability responsibilities acquisitionenter of Agricul-intorelating any ofof enbergAmendmentagement1716). Act (16Act to U.S.C. of the 1976 Knutson-Vand- 521b) (43 U.S.C. 476),(30pursuant Stat. prior 35,to tothe as the amended;Act date of ofJune enactment16 4, Sec.U.S.C. 1897 15. (a) Timber sales made fromTheForestpartstem withinSecretary thereoftime Service such in timber ofconnection National Agriculture sales Forests contract.with shall, any or to time as he goes to Reservationapprovedlands$150,000the National which orby Commission havemore theForest National beenfor System the heretofore until types Forest ofafter of JuneP.L.U.S.C. 9, 71-319) 576b), Sec. 18. Section 3 of the Act of 1930 (46 Stat. 527; is amended-(see 16 timeandForesttheof sales ofthis timberService the sectionprocedures sale, was silvicultural subjectshall sold in not ineffect to accordbe practicesthe invalid at pro- the with if estimatedprojectionsavailablethethrough budget his to revenueof processbethe revenues made States estimates, of under and developinghis payment currentthe make Act onferingdetailed30 daysAgricultureissuch submitted fromreportproposed the of todate ofthepurchase the the factsupon Committee House concern- orwhich trans- of a 1960Amendment1960 (74 to the Act of JuneSec. 12, 19. Stat. The Act of June 12, 215; 16 U.S.C. ofoperatingissection.visions directed,existing of plans subsectioninfifty-year developing under the timber (b) provisions (b)five-year of Thesales this Secretary of Agriculture (16foranymentsof local U.S.C.other May budgetin special 23, 500)lieu 1908, planningof Acts taxes, as making amended,purposes." for their pay- use or Representativestaincommittees.maythetee on Senateat be leastAgriculture approved orthe Suchand such following: to report andtheearlierby Commit-Forestryboth shall time such con- asof 528-531),Severabilitysection:the end isthereof(see amended P.L. the 86-5 followingby 17)adding newat PlanningprovidedwithcontractsRangeland the guidelines Actintofor Alaska,make of 1974, them andto as revise consistentstandardsamended, such Renewable in the Forest and Resource U.S.C.SystemAcquisition1911 (36480,Lands Stat. 500, of 961),National 513-517, as amended ForestSec. 517a, 17. (16 (a) The Act of March 1, landSecretaryland; should in be determining acquired; that the the locationguidelinesthe purchaseand utilizedsize of price the by ofthe the personsuchofinvalid,Act the or provisionor Actthe thecircumstances applicationand validity ofto otherthe of applicationthereofthe persons remainderSec. to 21. andany of If any provision of this is held reflect(16price U.S.C. such of timber. revisions1600 et inseq.), the contract and to Any such action ed518, as 519, follows- 521, 552, 563), is amend- Section, 4, as amended, is Secretaryland and inthe determining criteria used such by price; the thereby.circumstances (16 U.S.C. shall not1600(note)) be affected Paymentsjurisdiction.judgementcontractshall notrights oftobe (16 a approvedStatesinconsistent court U.S.C. offor 476(note))bycompetent Schools thewith final valid U.S.C.tarymissionNationalrepealed of Agriculture.513) are Forest transferred Reservation (16 to U.S.C. the Secre-Com- 513) Section 5 is repealed.and all(16 functions of the andasVICE"under Roads amended, the in theheading andAct of section"FOREST May 23,Sec.13 of1908,SER- 16. the The sixth paragraph P.L.readamended 61-435)as follows: to read (see as P.L. follows: 6 1-435) SectionSectionSection 9, as7, asamended,6 isamended, amended is is to (see amended(35Act of March ; 16 U.S.C.1, 1911,ri 500), as amended are each Stat. 260; 36 Stat. 963, as (740) ingamended language by striking in the firstout the sentence: follow- (741) WO AMENDNENT 2L1O9.18-92--14 !2'4O9.18,3O Contents EFFECTIVE 11/23/92 Page 2 of 2
FSH 2L1O9.18 - TIMBER SALE PREPARATION HANDBOOK WO AMENDMENT 21409.18-92-14 EFFECTIVE 11/23/92
CHAPTER 30 - SALE AREA DESIGN - GATE 2
Contents
31 SALE AREA DESIGN PROCESS 31.1 Field Reconnaissance 31.2 Documentation 31.3 Area Analysis 31.4 Interdisciplinary Skills
32 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS AT GATE 2 32.1 Analytical Procedures 32.2 Analytical Standards 32.21 Efficiency Measures 32.22 Time Period 32.23 Monetary Costs 32.214 Monetary Benefits 32.25 Nonmonetary Benefits and Costs 32.26 Discounting 32.27 Inflation and Trends 32.28 Risk and Uncertainty 32.3 Display of Economic Analysis 32.31 Each Alternative 32.32 Recommended Alternative
33 TRANSPORTATION PLANNING 33.1 Transportation Planning in Project Design 33.2 Planned Capacity 33.3 Purchaser Credit
314 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
35 TRACKING AND REPORTING GATE 2 35.1 Documentation 35.2 Sale Tracking and Reporting
F-i WO AMENDMENT21409. 18-92-5 21409.18,30 EFFECTIVE11/23/92 Page3of12
FSH21409.18 -TIMBER SALE PREPARATION HANDBOOK WO AMENDMENT21409.18-92-5 EFFECTIVE11/23/92
CHAPTER30 -SALE AREA DESIGN - GATE2
31 -SALE AREA DESIGN PROCESS. The sale area design process in timber sale preparation shall:
Develop criteria and provide for the collection, analysis, and evaluation of data necessary to respond to issues.
Guide preparation of site-specific design alternatives for the approving officer.
Assist the line officer in making a decision.
Provide, where necessary, an appropriate document as specified by the National Environmental Policy Act policy and procedures (FSM1950; FSH1909.15). Produce a timber sale project plan for use by those who prepare timber sales during sale plan implementation (gate3).
Include lands within and adjacent to the proposed project area.
Line officers must actively participate in developing issues and must guide data collection ensuring it serves the design process in a cost-effective manner and leads to development of a cost-effective and cost-efficient alternative.
In salvage sale situations, line officers and interdisciplinary teams must know and utilize the measures available to facilitate prompt preparation of salvage sales. Catastrophic events such as fire, windstorms, or insect epidemics often result in damaged timber which requires prompt salvage activities to maximize volume recovery and minimize value losses. Timber susceptible to rapid deterioration or damage because of insects in epidemic stages or some disease also requires prompt removal to minimize value loss. Line officers shall utilize categorical exclusions and must consider recommendations for exemption from appeals to the fullest extent possible to expedite timber salvage sales. See FSH 1909.15 for direction on categorical exclusion and see Title36,Code of Federal Regulations, section217.14 (a)(11)and FSH 1509.12 for direction on exemption from appeal.
31.1 -Field Reconnaissance. Conduct adequate field reconnaissance to develop sale designs. Gate2is where the most critical decisions are reached and the greatest expense tends to occur. Avoid too much reliance on summarized data and "paper" design. Conduct a much more intensive field reconnaissance than was performed for gate 1. Leave enough flagging, stakes, marks, or other tracks in the field so that the selected alternative can be implemented with the least amount of effort and chance for error during the sale plan implementation phase. FSM2361 includes techniques for obtaining required archeological resource clearances and FSM2672.4provides guidance on preparing biological evaluations. F-2 WO AMENDMENT 2409.18-92-5 2409.18,30 EFFECTIVE 11/23/92 Page 4 of 12
In salvage situations, use existing data and professional judgment to quicken the analysis process. The Land and Resource Management Planning Handbook, FSH 1909.12 and Title36,Code of Federal Regulations(36CFR 219.27(d) (2) (iii)) direct that unit size limitations shall not apply to the size of areas harvested as a result of natural catastrophic conditions such as fire, insect and disease attack, or windstorm. Follow Regional guidelines for exceptions to unit size limitations in these situations.
31.2 - Documentation. Include in sale area design documents sufficient site-specific information, preliminary sale design, and management guidance to permit a smooth transition to gate 3, sale plan implementation. Include such details as the following:
Approximate cutting unit location and size.
Nature and condition of timber stands proposed for harvest.
Silvicultural prescriptions.
Selected logging systems information.
Locations of key local roads.
Planned fuel treatments.
Locations of key resource values.
Preliminary design for resource improvements.
Zones or areas with specific management requirements, constraints, or mitigation requirements.
Use of locally or Regionally developed forms, marking guides, cutting unit cards or check-lists is encouraged to insure a more complete transfer of information. Avoid excessive use of jargon, codes or abbreviations that could be misinterpreted.
31.3 -Area Analysis. In sale ar-ea design, consider the development of the entire drainage, the adjacent area, the transportation analysis area, and other logical units, even though a proposed sale may affect only a portion of the area. Consider the pattern, methods, and timing of treatments for the entire area to ensure that future treatments and options continue to meet management objectives.
31.4 - Interdisciplinary Skills. The efforts and skills needed to assess a project area vary, depending on the complexity of the sale proposal, its possible environmental impact, the status of land and resource management plans applicable to the area, current issues, and specific management concerns. Based on these variables, develop the levels and types of inventory information and resource specialist involvement needed for environmental analysis.
F-3 WO AMENDMENT2'4O9.18-92-5 2O9.18,3O EFFECTIVE 11/23/92 Page5of 12
32 - ECONOMIC ANALYSIS AT GATE 2. Analyze the costs and benefits of project alternatives.
32.1 - Analytical Procedures. Choose procedures to emphasize differences among project alternatives. When developing alternatives to meet management objectives, including cost-efficiency, consider variations in activities and methods, but also, variations in scheduling, location, or size of the project (volume or acres).
For salvage sales, conduct the economic analysis to assess the alternatives related to reducing the loss of value of the timber. In the analysis procedures, focus on maximizing value more than least-cost or cost-efficiency objectives. To save time, use applicable existing analyses, such as those performed by the Forest Pest Management staff, and limit the scope of the analysis.
Select the following analysis procedures as appropriate for the scope and complexity of the decision. See FSH 1909.17 for more detail.
1. Efficiency Analysis. To compare benefits and costs, use one or more of the following:
Use cost-effective, or least-cost analysis, only when all decision unit options under consideration (or all project alternatives) achieve the specified objective(s) equally or adequately well or when they produce essentially the same benefits and effects.
Use financial analysis to compare expected gross revenues to estimated Forest Service costs, resulting inanestimate of net revenues. A timber financial analysis is a comparison of direct timber benefits with direct timber costs.
Use analysis of cost efficiency to compare all costs and benefits relevant to the decision, some of which may be nontimber, non-Forest Service, or nonmonetary.
2. Impact Analysis. Conduct a socioeconomic impact analysis if an environmental impact statement is prepared (FSM 1970 and FSH 1909.17).
3. Tradeoff Analysis. If meeting a specified objective limits, reduces, or precludes achievement of some other objective(s), consider it a binding constraint. Use trade off analysis to compare what is gained with what is given up in meeting this objective or constraint. Compare the monetary and nonmonetary results of a scenario with the constraint, to the results of a scenario without the constraint.
Sensitivity Analysis. Perform a sensitivity analysis within any of the preceding methods if uncertainty about a value or underlying assumptions constitutes an issue important to the decision. Use sensitivity analysis to determine the consequences of varying the value of one input variable (or assumption) while holding all other analysis
F-4 WO AMENDMENT 2409.18-92-5 2409.18,30 EFFECTIVE 11/23/92 Page6of 12
factors constant. For example, recalculate present net value (PNV) with a 10-percent discount rate instead of4percent, keeping all other values unchanged. If sensitivity analysis is used, document and discuss the range of values tested and their implications with respect to the decision to be made.
32.2 - Analytical Standards. A .number of standards may be applicable to the economic analysis.
32.21 - Efficiency Measures. In comparing project alternatives, use present net value and benefit-cost ratio as the principal measures of cost-efficiency. If alternatives differ greatly in scale, the benefit-cost ratio provides a more valid measure of cost-efficiency than does present net value. If future management of the stand(s) is an issue at time of the timber sale, it may be appropriate to calculate a soil expectation value (SEV) to provide the decision maker with additional information.
32.22 - Time Period. Ensure that schedules of costs and benefits cover the same period of time in all project alternatives. The length of time for analyzing timber sale project alternatives must encompass sale preparation through regeneration of the stand(s). If capital investments are an important factor, consider the design life of the investment in determining the time frame. However, if the timber sale decision encompasses stand management activities beyond regeneration, the appropriate time frame includes sale preparation through one full rotation. For calculation of soil expectation value only, the time begins with the new stand(s) and extends throughaninfinite series of rotations.
32.23 - Monetary Costs. Include direct costs for all Forest Service activities encompassed by the decision to be made. Direct timber costs begin with sale preparation and administration and always include necessary regeneration and mitigation measures.
If specified roads are to be part of the sale decision, include in the analysis total costs of any planning, design, construction, reconstruction, operations, and maintenance that occur within the time frame, regardless of funding source.
Provide the following additional information, when applicable:
If road construction to a higher standard than needed for harvest and removal of timber is under consideration, identify the difference between total transportation costs and the lowest transportation costs for the immediate sale. Display this difference for each project alternative or as a fixed cost among alternatives, whichever is appropriate. Discuss the relationship of these increased costs to expected benefits and management objectives.
Reference the analysis of the transportation network in the area, when applicable (FSM7710). If road design and location choices remaining at the sale level include consideration of future uses or entries, reflect this in the time frame and included costs and benefits. However, if transportation costs are likely to increase or to vary
F-5 WO AMENDMENT 21109.18-92-5 21109.18,30 EFFECTIVE 11/23/92 Page 7 of 12 significantly among project alternatives because of future benefits that are uncertain or impossible to value monetarily, identify the cost differences and discuss their relationship to management objectives and expected or potential benefits.
3. If total costs of Forest Service activities (excluding roads) are greater than the direct costs of. timber production (excluding roads) and if these nontimber direct costs are important to the decision, identify the difference between these total costs and the lowest direct timber costs for the immediate sale (excluding roads). Display this difference for each project alternative or as a fixed cost among alternatives, whichever is appropriate. Discuss the relationship of these increased costs to management objectives and expected benefits.
I. If sale requirements would cause particularly high purchaser costs or would cause purchaser costs to vary significantly among project alternatives, incorporate logging, hauling, and other relevant purchaser costs into the analysis. This may be done implicitly by adjusting stumpage values, or explicitly, by identifying and displaying purchaser costs as a cost item separate from Forest Service costs. Document which purchaser costs, if any, were explicitly included in total costs of the project alternatives, and ensure that timber benefits are consistently valued. Discuss the relationship between increased purchaser costs and management objectives.
32.2k - Monetary Benefits. Include direct benefits from the project that occur within the time period affected by the decision to be made.
Express direct timber benefits as estimated total high bid value (estimated advertised stumpage value plus local average bid premium), or its equivalent. The bid premium shall be a 5-year average, using real dollar values. Adjust average bid premiums, if necessary, to reflect sale length, salvage and deficit sales, logging systems, and other factors that may influence bidding behavior. Recognize measurable differences in timber benefits among project alternatives that may be caused, for example, by variations in total volumes, species composition, and product size, type, or quality.
Include relevant nontimber monetary benefits when appropriate, based on the scope and complexity of the decision and in accordance with Regional direction.
In an efficiency analysis, value the costs and the benefits at the same stage of processing. The Forest Service produces stumpage, which represents a processing stage. Costs of producing stumpage are direct timber costs, which include specified roads. Use of high bids produces consistent valuation of the direct benefits of producing stumpage. If, however, costs included in the analysis differ from the costs of production of stumpage, then the benefits must differ equivalently. Consider the following, when appropriate:
F-6 WO AMENDMENT 2409.18-92-5 2409.18,30 EFFECTIVE 11/23/92 Page 8 of 12
If Forest Service costs include purchaser-built roads, use of statistical high bid (SHE) values is inconsistent and undervalues the timber because SHE does not reflect the timber value exchanged for purchaser-built roads. In effect, SHB represents an earlier stage of processing than high bid. The high bid accounts for the value added by providing access; SHE does not.
If purchaser costs are included in total costs, using high bid is inconsistent and undervalues the timber. Each logging activity represents further processing beyond stumpage and thus adds value to the product. Incorporate equivalent benefit value for each purchaser activity cost explicitly included. If all logging costs are included in the analysis, timber benefits should reflect the full value of logs delivered to the mill. Document assumptions and values used. Display both total timber benefits and total stumpage value for each project alternative, because purchaser cost variations cause stumpage values to vary also.
If nontimber outputs are monetarily valued in the analysis, ensure that these, too, are valued at the same stageof processing for which costs are incurred.
32.25 - Nonmonetary Benefits and Costs. Identify relevant benefits and costs not monetarily valued in the analysis and describe how they vary among project alternatives. Discuss the relationship between the monetary analysis and relevant nonmonetary or nonquantified resource values, environmental effects, amenities, and other qualitative considerations. Assess measurable tradeoffs when practicable and appropriate to the scope and complexity of the decision, and in accordance with Regional direction.
32.26 - Discounting. Discount all costs and benefits to an initial year. The initial (or zero) year is usually the present year or the first year of expenditures. Assume that all transactions occur at the end of the year. Use a 14-percent real discount rate (FSM 1970). Discounting make future values comparable to present values. A dollar received today is worth more than a dollar received in the future, because a dollar can earn interest.
Do not use discounting for salvage sales, because of the rapid loss of value associated with most of these sales.
32.27 - Inflation and Trends. Express all monetary values in constant real dollars for a given base year; if multiyear historical data are used, remove the effects of inflation so that all values reflect the same purchasing power of the dollar. When adjustment is necessary, use the Gross National Product Implicit Price Deflator.
Assume that prices and costs will remain constant in real terms throughout the time period; do not adjust future values for inflation. Real trends may be used if there is sufficient, supportable evidence that within the time period, some value(s) will significantly increase or decrease relative to other values used in the analysis. Document assumptions.
F7 WO AMENDMENT 2409.18-92-5 2409.18,30 EFFECTIVE 11/23/92 Page 9 of 12
32.28 - Risk and Uncertainty. Recognize uncertainty about projected future values used in the analysis (costs, benefits, and outputs). If any projected values constitute an issue important to the decision, conduct a sensitivity analysis. In addition, consider the following:
If there is some probability of regeneration failure, estimate the number of acres that are likely to need retreatment(s) to achieve adequate restocking within 5 years of final harvest (FSM 2k70). Incorporate retreatment activities and costs into the analysis. Document assumptions. Do not overestimate regeneration costs or plan for fail-safe regeneration when natural regeneration is probable.
If high costs are estimated for an activity (for instance, slash disposal) by assuming very low risk (for instance, no risk with 100-percent cleanup), consider alternative treatment methods that could reduce costs by allowing a higher (but still acceptable) degree of risk, in accordance with Regional standards and the forest plan. Regional Foresters may establish risk analysis guidelines to evaluate these tradeoffs.
If yield projections are included in the analysis, document assumptions concerning volume or value losses due to fires, insects, diseases, or storms.
32.3 - Display of Economic Analysis.
32.31 - Each Alternative. At gate 2, display the total discounted costs, the total discounted benefits, the present net value, and the benefit- cost ratio for each project alternative. Display discounted costs for each decision unit. Identify those costs that do not vary among project alternatives. Document assumptions. Display additional information as appropriate, in accordance with Regional direction and standards.
Discuss the relationship between the monetary analyses and relevant qualitative considerations.
For salvage sales, limit the economic analysis to the short term.
"32.32 - Recommended Alternative. In addition to the preceding information, include a narrative that addresses the following:
How the alternative contributes to meeting forrest plan objectives.
Which management requirements were imposed to meet other resource objectives, and the resulting trade-offs.
If it is not the most cost efficient alternative, why was it selected.
33 - TRANSPORTATION PLANNING. If transportation planning or analysis has not been completed for the sale area as part of the forest plan or a previous effort, complete it as part of the analysis for gate 2. It is usually crucial to a good economic analysis, as discussed in 32.2.
F- 8 WO AMENDMENT2409.18-92-5 2409.18,30 EFFECTIVE 11/23/92 Page 10 of 12
33.1 - Transportation Planning in Project Design. Plan integrated transportation and logging systems for the analysis area. Ensure that the requirements for construction, operation, and maintenance of roads for commercial timber sale use are consistent with harvesting procedures and with the forest plan and that they are likely to achieve resource management objectives. Apply the following rules:
Integrate the transportation planning process with other resource analyses to ensure that the road system requirements meet documented resource management objectives.
Consider alternative road systems and timber harvest methods in the transportation planning process.
Document system roads selected in planning on the National Forest transportation plan as long-term or short-term facilities.
Analyze existing forest development roads to ensure that before timber sale use, the roads meet the requirements of FSM 7720.
Justify recommendations for exclusions of commercial use of forest development roads by a statement of the reasons for exclusion, other alternatives considered and the costs involved.
Consider using low-standard or controlled temporary road construction when salvaging timber resulting from catastrophic damage.
33.2 - Planned Capacity. Plan for timber sale haul roads with the capacity to handle the scheduled traffic safely. Apply the following rules:
1. Permit no road use if the use would cause irreparable damage to the road or unacceptable impacts to adjacent resources. Damage does not include normal wear and tear correctable by maintenance activities.
2. If the additional traffic generated by an individual sale exceeds the operational limits of a road, authorize the additional use only if one or more of the following conditions apply:
Road construction occurs in advance of the sale.
Traffic management controls can be implemented within the limits of the facility. For public safety, restrict public access in situations where low-standard or temporary roads are used for quick access to salvage.
Road reconstruction occurs as a requirement of the sale.
3. Use funds other than purchaser credit to finance that portion of the reconstruction needed to accommodate the traffic on the road prior to the sale.
F-9 WO AMENDMENT2409.18-92-5 2409.18,30 EFFECTIVE11/23/92 Page 11 of12
Design roads constructed on National Forest lands to standards appropriate for the intended uses; consider safety, cost of transportation, and impacts on lands and resources. Design and construct roads as stable and durable structures to facilitate maintenance during and after use. Include necessary drainage facilities, adequate erosion control, gates or other closure devices, and resource protection devices.
33.3 -Purchaser Credit. Plan to use purchaser credit for the following:
Road requirements necessary to minimize temporary impacts on resources; especially, land, water, wildlife, and air.
Construction of a quality that permits future use without need to reaccomplish or replace work that is currently in satisfactory condition. Construction should minimize repeated impacts and avoid unacceptable risks to resources. It should not result in higher future capital expenditures, that could be required if, for example, roads had to be rebuilt or relocated for each sale.
Pavement structures, when needed for structural support to prevent erosion from traffic or natural elements, with sufficient depth for wear and maintenance during and at the termination of the sale.
Construction requirements that result in the lowest total transportation cost (construction, hauling, and maintenance) for the sale, while ensuring safety and minimizing temporary or extended resource impacts.
34 -ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS. The methods used for environmental analysis vary from situation to situation and among the various administrative units. In every case, conduct the environmental analysis so that the sale is based on field reconnaissance, meets management objectives and addresses the issues identified at gate 1, or during the analysis for gate 2 (FSH1909.15).
For salvage situations, refer to section31for direction on facilitating prompt timber sale preparation and removal to prevent additional volume and value losses.
35 -TRACKING AND REPORTING GATE 2.The sale process passes gate 2 when a decision maker selects a preferred alternative through the environmental analysis or assessment process and signs the decision notice.
35.1 -Documentation. As a minimum, requirement for the process to pass this gate, documentation must include:
A signed decision notice by official authorized to approve the project.
An analysis file documenting the analysis and the information used in the analysis.
A sale implementation plan (project plan), which provides field instruction for carrying out the selected alternative.
F-1O WO AMENDMENT 2409.18-92-5 2409.18,30 EFFECTIVE 11/23/92 Page 12 of 12
35.2 - Sale Tracking and Reporting. Update the gate accomplishment to show completion of gate 2.
Update or establish the various data elements that the Region has included in the TMIS data base. Those that are often useful as part of the sale implementation plan include:
Volume detail.
Area description.
Sale remarks.
Activity scheduling.
Engineering.
Engineering estimate.
Sale unit.
Skill code.
Fund code.
Every data element will not be equally useful in every sale, but track the critical activities. On some sales, cultural resources or endangered species may require specific activities. Tracking the activities will assist in their timely completion. Record enough information to help complete the sale implementation plan, but not so much that updating the information becomes a burden.
Document specific reasons a sale is withdrawn or delayed, such as the need for an environmental analysis or assessment.
Track activities to individual cutting units or stands within payment units or subdivisions of a timber sale area when useful. This allows activities that may have been addressed in general terms during the environment analysis to be planned for specific lqcations in the field.
F-li 31.2--i
TIMBER SALE PREPARATION HANDBOOK k._11 -SALE AREA DESIGN PROCESS
31.2 - Documentation
1. Guidelines for PreDaration of Logging Feasibility Reports
a. Objectives of Logging Feasibility ReDort.The ultimate objective of the logging feasibility report is to insure the operability of the timber sale. It is a reference document which provides direction through the planning, layout, appraisal, and harvesting operations. The document Is intended to provide guidance in the design of future 8a1e8.
The preparation of the report will span Gates 1,2,and3of the timber sale planning process. The final product will be completed prior to the 3ale appraisal. The Forests are permitted flexibility in fitting the logging feasibility report into their planning process; however, the report should satisfy the following,, objectives:
(1) Prior to the completion of Gate 1:
Assure that the Position Statement is realistic.
(2) Prior to the completion of Gate 2:
Assure that the project proposal is integrated with long-term logging and transportation needs.
Assure that the logging plan is viable and that no major changes to the Environmental Assessment (EA) will be required.
Assure land manager that resource management objectives can be met.
Provide documentation supporting environmental analysis.
Provide guidance for sale layout.
Assure cost effectiveness of the proposed logging/tran3portation system.
Provide information for road design and management.
Reduce the amount of field work that has to be redone or corrected.
(3) Prior to the completion of Gate3:
Assure that the sale is completely operable as designed.
Reassure land manager that resource objectives can be met.
Provide information for timber sale appraisal.
FSH 3 /89R-6 SUPP 9 -* F-12 31.2--3
TIMBER SALE PREPARATION HANDBOOK
*- 3. Specific Design Elements to be Included in Logging Feasibility Reports:
TO BE COM- TO BE COM- I PLETED PLETED
I PRIOR TO PRIOR TO I PASSING PASSING GATE 2 GATE 3
Cover sheet with signatures. Optional x
Table of contents. x
Vicinity map. x x
Brief narrative description of sale. x
Resource management objectives. x x
Critical elements and problem areas. x x
Results of area analysis logging and transportation x x design including maps.
a. Design elements for all settings:
(1) Aerial photo overlays and topographic OPT x maps of the proposed setting(s) showing the following:
Identified locations of all landings, cold decks, YUM decks, special processing sites (delimber-buckers), chippers, portable sawmills, and all truck roads.
Yarding directions.
Cutting unit boundaries.
Skidding and yarding boundaries reflecting yarding systems, suspension requirements and silvicultural prescriptions which affect acceptable yarding equipment.
Property boundaries and ownership.
Stream buffer strips and streamside management units.
Locations of wildlife tree management
zones. I
F-13 -FSH 3/89R-6 SUPPNO. 9 -* 31.2--S
TIMBER SALE PREPARATION HANDBOOK
TO BE COM- TO BE COM-
PLETED I PLETED
I PRIOR TO PRIOR TO PASSING PASSING GATE 2 GATE 3
(3) Log weight and silvicultural data. Include items needed for determination of yarding payloads and/or production rates.
(II) Logging system requirements and reconimended
system. Describe the recommended system I
and rationale. Where needed, include a I cost analysis or refer to sections of the environmental document where cost
comparisons show the selected system to be I the most cost efficient system which will meet management objectives. Describe alternate systems considered and reason for rejection or acceptability.
Descriptions and drawings as appropriate:
-Temporary roads. -Critical landings. -Cold deck areas. -YUM pile sites. -Special processing sites (delimber, log makers, portable chippers, portable sawmills).
Production estimates. Except for systems I covered by Agency average cost and adjustment factors, include estimates of
of hourly volume production for appraiser'sI use. A separate estimate of hours required:
for move in, move out, initial rig up and I
rig down, landing construction, and any I other fixed costs associated with the logging system component or groups of components as appropriate should be made. Production estimates may apply to
components of a mechanized logging system I such as felling, bunching, delimbing, bucking, and skidding or yarding of prebunched stems.
- FSH /89 R-6 SUPPNo. 9 -* F-14 31.2.--.7
TIMBER SALE PREPARATION HANDBOOK
TO BE COM- I TO BE COM-
PLETED I PLETED I
I PRIOR TO I PRIOR TO I
I PASSING PASSING
GATE 2 I GATE3 (UList of recommended equipment not included in Agency average costs such as forwarders, clambunk skidders skidding prebunched stems, or shovel logging machines.
Type: Make: Model: c. Additional elements for mechanized harvest
settings: (Mechanized harvest is defined as I
harvesting operations employing the use of one I
or more machines, other than chainsaws, for I
felling, delimbing, and bucking operations.) I
(1) Additions to photo overlays and maps: OPTIONAL
Representative felling or bunching pattern.
Feller-buncher or harvester travel path and minimum spacing in relationship to designated skid trails or skyline corridors.
(2) Special machine requirements or OPTIONAL limitations such as feller-buncher boom reach, and so forth.
(3) Recommended equipment:
Feller-buncher: Type , Make Model
Delimber_bucker: Type ____, Make I Model
Harvester: Type , Make Model
Other: Type Make , Model
Crew:
- FSH 3/89 R-6SUPPNo.9 -* F-15 31.2--9
TIMBER SALE PREPARATION HANDBOOK
TO BE COM- TO BE COM- LET ED PLETED PRIOR TO PRIOR TO PASSING PASSING GATE 2 GATE 3
(1k) Spar and lift tree analysis: The vertical OPTIONAL x spar guyline force analysis computer program should be used to analyze guyline tensions and compression forces for all vertical spar setups where guyllne angles approach or exceed 50 degrees from horizontal, or where spar or lift tree sizes are questionable.
(5) Plotted profiles and appropriate computer OPTIONAL x printouts or other payload analysis for all critical skyline roads coordinated with map and photo identifiers and referenced to field control points. Show source of data for each profile (topographic map, aerial photos, field survey).
Standards:
Profiles from maps or photos which develop marginal payloads should be field surveyed and reanalyzed.
To qualify as acceptable, cable spans should develop payloads equivalent to the greater of two to three average logs or one largest diameter butt log of shortest acceptable length.
Complete tabulation of skyline logging systems payload data. e. Additional elements for helicopter settings:
(1) Additions to photo overlays and maps: OPTIONAL x
Locations of fueling areas, water sources, flight hazards, and flight restricted areas.
Tagline lengths.
(2) Class of helicopter. x
- FSH 3/89 R-6 SUPPNO.9 -* F- 16 31. 2--li
TIMBER SALE PREPABATION HANDBOOK
TO BE COM- TO BE COM- PLETED PLETED PRIOR TO PRIOR TO PASSING PASSING GATE 2 GATE 3 f. Additional elements for balloon settings:
(1) Additions to photo overlays and maps OPTIONAL identify balloon bedding ground.
(2) Scale drawing of balloon bedding ground(s)
Show anchors, including hard point.
Show bedding ground gradient.
Show prevailing wind direction.
Show access to and from.
(3) Descriptions of anchors for tail blocks, corner blocks, and sucker down blocks.
(14) Describe recommended balloon logging equipment.
(5) Unit and landing elevations and expected payload capabilities.
14 Format of Logging Feasibility Reports. The Logging Feasibility Report should be a combination of maps, tables, computer analysis data, and .brief narrative descriptions. Although each Forest has flexibility in formatting the report, the use of a consistent Forest-wide format is recommended for sales with similar logging systems. Summary tables are recommended as an efficient method of displaying data for appraisers, sale administrators, and operators. See Exhibits 1 and 2 for examples of tables for anchors and payloads.
*... FSH 3/89 B-6 SUPPNO. 9 -' F-17 31.2--13 TIMBER SALE PREPARATION HANDBOOK
*.. Exhibit 1- Continued
C. Tail Trees (No.) ic' Cl ?i.ld Verified Y Species Or.
Diame tar 36i- Total Nsi9ht /90 '60 Height to Rigging Rigging Diameter /1" /6" Guyline Stumps Verified
Buckle Guys Needed (Lateral Yarding) tv iv Machine Accessible /v N Work Road Feasible Al N
10. Unit Surwiary: Guyline; Skyline Anchors; Tail Trees; Other
A. Zuylines: Multiple-Stump Anchors Needed (No.) 0 Man-Made Anchors Needed (No.)
B. Skyline Anchors:
Multiple-Stump Anchors Needed
Man-Made Anchors Needed (No.)
Tail Trees Needed (No.) /
4. Stump Anchors Needed (No.) 1
D. Other Details Not Adequately Covered Above: (Diagram if Possible) 1/ti/-I ///y2), k'.'4/1/6//,qi 'ii/)pf 7(,/q/2$iit/,t/[4,vA'o#$ /4/ N k/ cc¼.,,w7 2/ vV// ($ir Z'Y/[ /74P). ;'c 2f(? /i' 77 - 5!I'fi/' ///V/' jt'n. 'i,y-
-FSH3/89 R-6 SUPP No. 9.- . F-18 31.2
TIMBER SALE PREPARATION HANDBOOK
31 SALE AREA DESIGN PROCESS
31.2 Documentation
2. Review and Approval Process. This supplement establishes the review and approval process for Logging Feasibility Reports on the Siuslaw National Forest.
All Logging Feasibility Reports will be reviewed by a qualified individual. This review will be done by a Forest Engineering Institute (FEI) graduate other than the preparer, or by the Forest Logging Specialist.
The Forest Logging Specialist will be required to review the logging feasibility reports which contain the following sale conditions:
* Access roads over 20 % grade. * Skylines with downhill full log suspension. * Skyline load capacity below capacity to yard largest logs in 17' segments during downhill yarding. * Multi-span Yarding. * Cable Swings. * Helicopter Yarding. * Balloon Yarding. * Landings with guyline angles greater than 50 degrees. * Anchors other than stumps, deadmen, or crawler tractors. * Mechanized harvest operations where feller-bunchers, delimbers-buckers, harvesters, or in-woods chippers are planned. * Unusual landings (i.e. cribbed or tight landings). * Tailtree configurations outside the State Safety Code.
*FSH1t189Siuslaw Supplement #1*
F 19 USFS Helicopter Timber Sales Preliminary Survey (March-April1994)
Please select one or two main reasons for each helicopter unit from the following categories:
Economics, Terrain-limited, Time-limited, Equipment-limited, Soils-limited, Visual Issue, Water Quality Issue, Roads Issue, Wildlife Issue, Access-limited, Other (please explain).
Timber Sale Name HelicopterUnit Volume (MBF) Main Reason for Season/Year Harvested Unit # Acres Harvested Helicopter Logging
Example 3A 23 941 Other- Cultural Resources Summer 1992
Example 5 21 780 Access-limited Summer 1992
Example 8 31 1120 Roads Issue Summer 1992
Timber Sale Name Skyline Unit Volume (MBF) Season/Year Harvested Unit # Acres Harvested
Example 3B 12 621
Example 2B 15 718
G-1 Preliminary Survey Results (May 1994)
Twelve Forest Service forest managers were contacted (by telephone andcomputer mail) and asked to provide a sale area map, unit acres and volumes, and the mainreason for helicopter logging.
The following table lists the reasons given for 128 helicopter unitson 21 non-salvage timber sales (sold during the period from Fall 1990 to Fall 1993) in the Oregon-WashingtonCascades. The forest manager selected one or two main reasons for each helicopter unit.
REASONS GIVEN FOR HELICOPTER LOGGING Number
Access-limited 44 (27 %) Road issues 38 (23 %) Visual issues 20 (12 %) Wildlife issues 16 (10 %) Soils-limited 10 ( 6 %) Economics 9 (5 %) Cultural Resources 7 ( 4 %) Wetlands/Riparian 5 Time-limited 5 No landings 3 Purchaser's choice 3 Terrain-limited 2 Advanced regeneration 2 164
G-2 Data Collectio,,
Planning Process Documents:
Forest Plan
Management Direction, Standards & Guidelines for Harvest-Transportation (H-T) System Planning.
Information Needs and Monitoring Plans specific to H-T System Planning.
NEPA (Environmental Analysis)
What were the signJIcant issues (full description of any related to economics, harvest-transportation systems and resource mgmt. access)?
Is there a range of logging and road options in the alternatives (long term considerations?,)
Which mitigation measures are specific to logging systems & road issues?
Did the EA include a Harvest-Transportation (H-I') econoniic analysis?
Are there any monitoring plans specJIc to logging systems & road issues?
Spec/Ic wording in the Decision NOtice related to harvest systems, roads, economics, or resource nlgrnt. access.
Logging Feasibility Report - Transportation Plan
Were dfferent logging systems & road options considered?
Are there aerial photo overlays, topographic maps, or GIS maps showing the harvest method and road systems plannedfor all comniercialforest land continguous to the proposed sale area?
Are there HELIPACE, LOGGERPC, SNAP, PLANS, or network analyses? Reference to past harvest method & road system analyses?
Was there ground profile data, road location and design for helicopter units?
Does the report mention future resource management access needs within the planning area?
Rationale for the selected harvest system and/or rationale for rejecting other alternatives considered.
Was there any cost analysis?
Does the transportation maps show settings, landings, haul route, & accessibility probknzs? H-i Interview Questions:(several questions from the following list were selectedfor each interview depending on the person's involvement in the H-T planning process)
Does the selected alternative provide access for future silvicultural needs and other resourcemanagement activities within the planning area?
What % of the planning area contained stands at maximum density ('SDI)?What % of this area was not treated in the timber sale? Why not?Did the silviculture effects analysis mention the effects (direct, indirect, & cumulative) of not treating these stands?
Does helicopter logging preclude future options for other harvest systems & roading?
Did a previous helicopter sale and road decision set a precedent for the next sale's harvest method- road system?
What is the average existing road density on the Forest and in the planning area? What is the desired road density for each of the resource areas?What is the threshold?
Do the specialists monitor how resource compatible the roads are before and after closure? If so, how?
What are some of the problems with road closures?
What questions do you ask to decide whether a road should be closed or not?
Weren't watershed, recreation, visual, and wildlife issues addressed when the IDTplanned to build the road in the first place?
How important is economics? Do the activity costs include the cost of doing business (project implementation, administration, and monitoring) with fewer roads?
Have you seen any publications on methods or processes used to evaluate/balance the costs, benefits, and impacts of roads?
Do you prefer helicopter logging? Maximum road closures? Why or why not?
After a decision is made to close a road or not build a road, what are the chances that they will reopen or build a road in the future?
Was the Logging Systems person or the Transportation Planner involved early on in the Forest Plan and NEPA planning phases to identify sign/Icant issues and to develop alternatives?
What are the major bottlenecks in the timber sale planning process?
Are you optimistic that all the professionals in the different disciplines can compromise on the signi cant issues?
H-2 Which comp uter programs do you use to display the effectsor to generate alternatives?
Was the logging system, roads, and landings implementedas planned? How often are changes made?
Did you have a problem kaving snags in the helicopter units?Are the snags monitored- how long do they last?
Do you document or monitor how well the spec/Ic harvest system addressed theissues or achieved the objectives?
Could you fully describe your concern with the harvest method and roads?Do you have or could I takea picture of these issues? Which studies or data quantIes or ver/Ies the significance of thisissue?What mitigation measures are possible?
Which Forest Engineering skills (logging systems, hydrology, transportation planning)do you think the Forest Service will need in the future?
Field Data Collection:
The specialists were also asked to pin-point on a mapor aerial photo any site-spec/ic examples of road and logging effects for me to check during the field trip.Two-three days were spent in the office reviewing documents and interviewing ID team members. On the final day, 1-3 specialists accompaniedme in the field and we discussed and looked at: environmental impacts from roads and logging,economic and technical feasi bility, and the main reason for choosing 'helicopter logging andno roads'
Possible Outcomes
A critique or evaluation of the Forest Service's timber sale planning process.
Possible ways of streamlining the process (reducing the paperwork).
A list of findings from the interviews that indicate problems that needfurther research.
H-3 , Ilelo ,yJ / ',' _-: _j I 4 -V \t : / ------/ I . \
1-2 Small CC & Shelterwood SALE 3 SALE 4 Traditional Larger CC ''i' //,>!:
Cable
J..
1-4
6 SALE 5 Small Commercial Thinning (CT)
1-5 L_ i ))! (( ) I/j
I1r
- / - r7'rJ"tJ-- ' I - I- \\\\ / Ii,
- iJ//i( ) - - --,u.. \\ 4I:Il. I c i( - - -3563T I lccT L? ii/ / ( 94!4//\
- 2 "
- - r1 :-: :I1-.: i/'' I 1/111),
______"luIIUI q / ØII!lU.s-' / -'
I
,cq r ------Larger CT theandTABLE mainharvest reason 1:volume TIMBER for helicopterper acre S14LE increases logging. CHARA from CTER!S Sale 1 to TICSSale 7. - The seven timber sales in this study were selected to represent a range of typical sale patterns. These helicopter timber sales (sold in 1990-1993) are located on seven USFS Ranger Districts% inHelicopter the Cascades & Cable (Population =21). Silvicultural treatments also range from clearcuts (Sales 1-4) to commercial thinnings (Sales 5-Z). Road issues were Average unit size SALE 1 Road Const.Total Acres 78 acres Total Units 8 units Decision:52% cable; 45% 3% helo; tractor% clearcut (cc) (VQO, Avg.wildlife, Unit and Size 10 acres LoggingAvg. SystemDouglas VoL/Acre fir56.5 (DF) MBF/acre (Note: primary reason(Sale areafor helo = 8 isml. underlined) x 6 ml.; Road density4 mi./sq.mi.). = Road density issue = Road Issues small318 cc sale 0 miles Old growth 80%Implemented: cc; 20% shelterwood 100% helo VQO= watershedvisual quality reasons) objectives Sikorsky17,600Elev. Skycranelb. payload1680-3760 locationsSome units for hadthe cable. effectsinadequate Time oncorridors, factorwildlife,concern road (318& spursoils,aboutlanding sale). roads, &the fisheries. visibility & landings; of skyline and small cc 2 3.1176 milesacres 2nd growth 15 units 48% cable;Decision: 4% tractor 48% helo; (silvicultural reasons) 12 acres DF & Silver50 fir MBF/acre 0.4 mi./sq.mi.).road Cable construction(Sale logging area in= would 2wilderness, ml xrequire 1.5 ml.; and Road across density 318 sale (after fire) 75%Implemented: cc; 25% shelterwood 40%56% cable;helo; 4% tractor 10,000 lb. payloadBoeing VertolHighElev. Lead4000 critical soils, steep unstable terrain, streams,and mountain goat summer range. small cc & 3 127 acres 16 units 60% helo; 40% cable Decision: (VQO reasons) 8 acres 48 MEF/acre- DF (Sale area = 4 ml. x 2 ml.; 1.4Road mi./sq.ml.). density = Adjacent wilderness. shelterwd.318 sale 2.6 miles 2nd growth(after fire) 28% cc; 72% shelterwood76% helo; 24% cable Implemented: Standing9,900 lb. payloadSkylineBoeing VertolElev. 3400 Visuals, steeprequire dissected full benchterrain road would construction in a scenic viewshed. 4 0.4373 milesacres Old growth 11 units 53% helo; 47% cable Implemented: Decision: avg. unit sizeeleven = 25 acres9-60 acre units 34 MBF/acre-18,000 lb. payloadDF 3(Sale mi.fsq.mi.). area = 2.5 ml. x 2.5 ml.; Road density = Checkerboard parcels (isolated traditionallarger318 ccsale 80% cc; 20% comm60% thin helo; 40% cable within 40-160 ac. blocks Vertol for smaliwood) Chinook (Boeing Flev. 2200 fromtimber otheryear-round NF industry land); lands. exceptsurrounded Main during roadby hunting private is closed season.Since USFS does not control roads, road investment is avoided. C- Live Skyline Time issue- 318road sale; & USFSlanding negotiations access can fortake 2 years. TABLE 1:SALE TIMBER SALE CHARACTERISTICS, Page 2 Total Acres Total Units % Helicopter & Cable Avg. Unit Size Avg. Vol/Acre (Note: primary reason for helo is underlined) Road Issues small ct 5 Road Const. 204 acres.2 miles 2nd growth 12 units 62% helo; 38%% cable clearcut (cc) Implemented: Decision: fragmented OG reasons)(riparian, wildlife, & 17 acres Logging SystemDF & Silver Fir15 MBF/acre cultural(Sale resourcesarea = 2 1mi. (requiresmi./sq.mi.). x 1 mi.; relocating Road Time density factor road - potential for ct=comm.thinning (after fire) 10% cc; 90% comm.thin82% helo; 18% cable 6,200Elev. lb. 3200-4300 payload; Multi-spanBell 214-B Signs of soiland movement resurveying). on existing Road roads. constructiontechnicallyVisual is feasibleimpact ofbut full high bench cost. road. Road density issue for elk. 318 sale Not a 35 acres 22 MBF/acre- larger318 ctsale 6 280 acres1.0 mile 2nd growth(after fire) 8 units 82%46% helo; helo; 18% 54% cable cable Implemented: Decision: DFfHemlockf Silver Fir 5000 lb. payloadSikorsky 58T slides along(Sale theinternal area channelmapped = 2mi.strength 1 walls).as mi./sq.mi.). xS-8 1 whenmi.; soilsForest Road (deepwet Several Plan anddensity soils by major withdebris = drawslow are 18% cc; 82% comm.thin Running Skyline Elev. 2000 (S-8)(400' will long) generallystates: across "areas forbe S-8 consideredroad soils classified construction & Class unavailable as irreversible3 streamand timber soils harvest". Road would requires a bridge larger 7 Ct 541 acres3.3 miles 2nd growth 3 blocks 36% cable; 20%Decision: tractor 44% helo; avg. unit size = 54 ac. ten units within DFfHemlockf Cedar16.5 MBF/acre - (Sale area =1 2 mi./sq.mi.). ml. x 1.5 mi.; Economics Road density of specified = constructionroad and road maintenance. 318 sale Not a (to be closed) (after railroad logging) Implemented: 49%42% helo; cable; 9% tractor 100% comni.thin three 180-acre blocks Bell 214Running & Lama Skyline4,750 lb. payload;Elev. 2000 for hunting & decreasesIncreased theTheroad area steep densitymany used dissected providesbyswitchbacks deer. terrain easier in would aaccess scenic require viewshed.Roads alter hydrology on slopes. changedTABLE in 1994 2: FOREST and also shows PLAN whether DIRECTION the Forest Plan - provided any general diredion for logging systems, roads, and economics in timber sale planning. The four Forest Plans examined in this study were signed in 1990. This table shows how the land use allocations Sale # Special Emphasis WatershedLand Use Allocation Forest Plan Mostly: Land Use AllocationPresident's Plan (Information Needs) Effects of roads onForest fish & wildlife;Plan Direction site-specific related info to to evaluate logging possible systems, effects roads, of and economic analysis (standards & guidelines, management goals, & monitoring) ScenicGeneral Viewshed Forest Tier(managed 1 KeyTimberstocks Watershed to of harvest,recover fish species. at-riskincluding infornew (Monitoring)(Goal)roaded the roads benefits Providedrainages on the ofIs adjoining forroadsan including constructionefficient to all physical resources.sediment& economical and environment. maintenance control. Effectiveness transp. Methods ofsystem roadsof mitigation & providedat processes a level measures that that to responds willevaluate, to minimize preserve to display, all otherenviron.dainage. water & resources? accountquality 2 Timber Production Late Outsalvage,Succession a watershed cannot occuranalysis) with- Is the(Timber) Forest Provide Transp. a system positive responsive economic to return. land mgmt. goals and public needs? (no programmedstandsotherharvest; silv. over no treatments 80thinningtimber years of orin age) thePlan, movement design, operate, of people and and maintain materials a sale involved and economical in the use transp.and protection system providingof National efficient Forest lands.access for 3 Scenic PartialModif RetentionMiddleground Late Succession protectionForesttheRoading enjoyment development would of NF of provide sceniclands. roads accessTheyand are recreational areconstructed, for not mgmt. intended values of operated, resources, to associated meet and includingthe maintained withtransp. motorized timber needs for harvest,theof access. the administration public and would at large. andallow for (continued below in 4 & 5) 4 General Forest LateMatrix Succession characteristics,resourceForest roads mgmt. shall road objectives, be users, located, seasonenvironmental designed, of use, constructed, & needs, economics. safety, and trafficreconstructed requirements, based ontraffic the followinglevels, vehicle criteria: preparation,Theeffects selectedprimary of increasing andpublicharvest administration concerns suspendedmethod mustare sediment,of that timberbe roadpractical sales. waterconstruction and temperature, economical and timber chemicals, in terms harvest of and transportation,may bacterial result incontaminations. long harvesting, term (continued below in 5) SaleTABLE 2: FOREST PLAN DIRECTION, Page 2 Land Use Allocation Forest Plan Land Use AllocationPresident's Plan Forest Plan Direction related to logging systems, roads, and economic analysis (standards & guidelines, management goals, and monitoring) 5 High Intensive Timber Mgmt. (Mgmt.MatrixpatchesNeed objective- ofto lateretain to succession. create 15% old IsimplementedImplementationsystem(Direction) FP direction shall All be as incorporatedavailablebased designedmonitoring on resourcelogging and isinto areto projectdeterminesystems considerations,in compliance level should if planningplans, with beeconomics, consideredprescriptions, the and FP. decisions? and for technical projects,use. The feasibility. selectionand activities of a loggingare 6 DeerScenic Elk Viewshed Winter Range Late Successiongrowth where it remains) been(InformationIs the well transportation researched. Needs) systemDetermine meeting the effects the planned of vehicular resource traffic objectives? on species other than elk, which have activities.Buildcost-efficient(Direction)Determine and maintain theUtilize manner. effectiveness appropriate transportation of loggingall statedsystem systems mitigation facilities to achieve tomeasures the minimum multiple addressing usestandard and effects silviculture needed on fish to andobjectivessupport water. uses in anda Minimize adverse effects of vehicular traffic on wildlife. EconomicpriorityAsneedsThe funding goal and given of objectivesefficiency levelsroad to usermanagement vary, ofwillconvenience. theprimary be management a considerationis priorityto provide wiliareas. andin be forest managegiven and to the resourceproject road levelsystem mgmt. planning toand serve protection, and the development. long-term with secondary resource constructionAreasandImprove new classified &net emerging benefitsand as timber irreversible oftechnology. allharvest. resources soils (S-8) by reducing will generally unit costs be consideredthrough improved as unavailable management for road efficiency (continued below in 7) 7 TimberWatershed,Scenic Emphasis Viewshed& Wild Wildlife, River and Matrix EconomicofgroundLogging operation disturbance. systems efficiency if they should must Landingsanalysis be usedlocated shall should that be in meet completedbeseen located theareas. minimum beforeoutside the theobjectives decision seen areas of is timbermade or rehabilitated to harvest use commerical and within cause one the year least RiparianFisheries AreasEmphasis in Inarea.harvestMaintainthinning. timber units soilemphasis whenproductivity addedareas, accessto by the insuring lands will generally dedicatedthat the effectsbe to by system road. of displacement, roads and landings compaction, do not and exceed erosion 20% within of the effectshelicopterTABLE were logging 3: cited, ENVIRONMENTAL anddecision: whether whether any mitigation logging ASSESSMENT andor monitoring road system - This was effects table recommended listswere the quantified, issues, to resolve thewhether loggingrange supporting of system alternatives, and documentation road and issues. ID Team or site-specific make-up. examples The last ofcolumn logging examines and road the Sale # Economic issues are underlined Issues Range of Alternatives Interdisciplinary Team(Note: logging systems Logging System & Road Effects Analysis (Note: primary reason for selecting OldFishSoil growthhabitat movement habitat/ stream in unstablemorphology areas includedRangeThree EA's: of differentAlternatives logging (5-6) WildlifeFisheriesSale Prep.Forester Biologist (Leader)expertise is underlined) wasintensityWater cited; Quality, of site-specific effects Fish somewhat Habitat, examples quantified; Wildlife: of effects supporting not cited; documentation mitigation 'helicopter logging and no roads' is underlined) extent, duration, and WildlifeForage,High road hiding trees densities & thermal andprocesses& hydrologic travel cover, corridors prescriptions,sale.alternativesoptions,systems, different different andwith 1-2 nosilv. roading timber Engineer recommended;exampleswhatSoilsmeasures quantified;& Hydrology: wereof effects recommended;no supporting monitoring were extent, cited; duration,documentation mentioned.no mitigation monitoring & intensity measures and mentioned. a offew wereeffects site-specific some- VisualTimberWild quality & supply/demandScenic River EA,Timecited;supportingVisuals: it factor:mitigationis whyextent, documentation althoughthe duration, measuressale changed time & orand was intensitysite-specific frommonitoring not 45%identified of effects heloexamples not to mentioned.as not 100% an ofquantified; issue effects helo. in notthe 2 Steep,VisualAdjacentAdvanced incised,quality wilderness regeneration objectiveswethigh slopes elevation, systems,includedRange(adjacentEA covered of differentAlternativesto eachtwo timber other). roadinglogging (nine) sales HydrologistBiologistTransportationSaleSilviculturist Planner (Leader) Planner Soilsrecommended;exampleseffectsWilderness, & not Hydrology: of quantified; effectsVisual no monitoring notQuality:extent, supporting cited; duration, extent, mitigationmentioned. documentation duration,& intensitymeasures & or of intensitywere site-specific effects ofnot Benefit/costMountainAdjacent spotted goat ratio summer owl habitat range withprescrip's,options, no timberdifferent and onesale. silv. alternative supportingAdv.recommended;examplesquantified; Regen.: of documentationsupporting effects extent, no monitoring were duration, documentation cited; or site-specific mentioned. &mitigation intensity not cited;examples measuresof effects a few of werenot site-specificeffects quantified; not ofnotSpottedmentioned.cited; effects quantified; mitigation Owl not &cited; supporting Mtn. measures mitigation Goat: documentation were extent, measures recommended; duration, & or monitoring site-specific & nointensity monitoring were examples of effects monitoringexamplesquantified;Economics:recommended. not supportingmentioned. extent, cited; duration,mitigation documentation & measures intensity was were of cited; effects mentioned; site-specific somewhat no TABLE 3: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA), Page 2 Sale # 3 BigHighlyAdj game wilderness sensitivehabitat & visual roadless area area issues Rangesystems,included of Alternatives roadingdifferentRange options logging (five) of not Alternatives SilviculturistPlannerinterdisciplinarySale Planner trainee (Leader) Team exampleseffectsVisuals not & of Adjacentquantified; effects not Wilderness: supporting cited; mitigation extent,documentation measuresduration, or and& site-specific intensity monitoring of Logging System & Road Effects Analysis BlowdownFP outputsdistribution & desiredsoil stability age class prescription's,sale.alternativeanalyzed, different with and noone silv.timber IDTconsultants,Other meetings specialists attending when served as effectsquantified;Bignot mentioned.Game not cited;Habitat:supporting mitigation extent, documentation duration,measures & wereor intensity site-specific recommended; of effects examples no not of needed. ed;examplessomewhatBlowdownmonitoring no monitoring of quantified; &mentioned. effects Soil mentioned. Stability: not supporting cited; extent, mitigation documentation duration, measures & intensityor were site-specific recommend- of effects 4 AccessFragmentationFisheries - adjacent of oldprivate growth land systems,includedRange of differentAlternatives roadinglogging (five) Sale Planner(two cliff IE)T Leaders) cited;supportingFisheries: mitigation extent, documentation measures duration, orwere & site-specific intensity recommended; of examples effects no not monitoring. of quantified;effects not and shared roads noprescrip's,options, timber different sale. and one silv, alt. with meetingsconsultants,Other specialists when attending needed. served IDT as supportingOldcited;Soils: Growth: mitigationextent, documentation extent,duration, measures duration, & intensity andwere site-specific& recommended; intensity of effects ofexamples noteffects no quantified; monitoring. notof effects quantified; notwere notexampleseffectsAccesscited; mentioned. mitigation not (time of quantified; effects delays measures not for supporting cited; easements): and mitigation monitoring documentation extent, measures not duration, mentioned. and and site-specific &monitoring intensity of I-F) TABLE 3: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, Page 3 Sale # 5 Elk winter range Issues EA covered severalRange timber of Alternatives Sale PlannerInterdisciplinary (Leader) Team described;Recreation: supporting extent, documentation duration, & not intensity cited; a offew effects sitespeciflc somewhat Logging System & Road Effects Analysis FragmentedRoadsImpacts (environmental on old Recreation growth concern) roadingdifferentnativesanalysis);sales (integrated (three)options, logging range included ofdifferentresourcesystems, Alter- EngineerRecreationSoilHydrologistSilviculturist Scientist / RoadSpecialist Systems effectsquantified;Bigrecommended;examples Game not of cited;Habitat:supporting effects monitoring mitigation wereextent, documentation cited; notduration,measures mentioned.mitigation &wereor intensitysite-specific measures recommended; of wereeffects examples no not of sale.alternativesilv. prescrip's, with andno timber one Pre-saleLoggingBiologist SpecialistSystems recommended;examplessomewhatRoadsmonitoring & Soilof quantified; mentioned. effects Stability: no monitoring were supporting extent, cited; mentioned. mitigationduration, documentation &measures intensity and were site-specificof effects 6 DeerWater & elk quality habitat & fisheries habitat Rangeincluded of Alternatives different logging (three) EngineeringSilviculturist Tech. (Leader) aofTime few effects site-specificfactor: somewhat not mentioned examples described; ofas effectssupportingan issue were buts, documentation mentioned;Waterwas reason Quality, mitigation for not helo.& cited; Fisheries: extent, duration, & intensity action'tiveprescrip's,options,systems, with alternative. no anddifferent different timber one alterna-sale.silv. roading LandscapeWatershed/GeologistTransportationRecon.Wildlife Forester ArchitectBiologist Planner monitoringeffectsquantified;Wildlife:measures not andextent, cited;supportingnot monitoring mentioned. duration,mitigation documentation were & measures intensity recommended. were orof site-specificeffects recommended; somewhat examples of 7 EconomicsHydrology,Visual impact waterfish habitat quality, and Rangeoptions,systems,included of Alternatives different different silv. roadinglogging (seven) SoilRecreationSilviculturistLogging Scientist Engineer Technician (Leader) Economics:andsite-specificsome-whatVisuals monitoring & Recreation:described; extentexamples were & recommended. durationsupportingof extent, effects ofduration, were intensitydocumentation cited; & of intensitymitigation effects not ofcited;somewhat measures effects a few ImpactsBiological on diversity wildliferecreation tiveprescrip's, with no and timber one alterna-sale. Wildlife Biologist notintensityHydrology,werequantified; cited; cited; of examples mitigationeffects Water supporting somewhat Quality,of andeffects documentation monitoring & described;were Fisheries: cited; were supportingand mitigation extent, not site-specific mentioned. duration, documentation measures examples & and recommended.effectssomewhatWildlifemonitoring were & quantified; wereBiodiversity: cited; recommended. mitigation supporting extent, measures duration, documentation and & monitoring intensity and examples of were effects of ReportsTABLE (39). 4: LOGGING FEASIBILITY REPORT - In 1988, a Regional Task Force listed over 50 specific design elements to be included in LoggingThis table Feasibility shows whkh logging design elements were addressed on these sales and some of the technical problems found on-the-ground during the field review. LFR? Implemented Prey. helo sale? Transp.Plan Sale # GroundProfiles ? Analysis? Cost 29-pg.Rafionale? LFRsignificant issues? ProgramsComputer ? as Planned.DecLion?in EA and futureroading harvest options?Helo & precludes future silv.addressed needs?access Large sale area (8 miles x 6 miles) for eight sinai! units (lOacres).Technical problems with harvest-transportation(Technical decision issues refer to project implementation, physical & operational feasibility) No. No. Yes.Reviewplus 2-pg. None due(duff,asimplemented<10% planned. to units blow- No.Yes (1973, 1977,and 1979). Yes.=(transp.plan 2 pages) Helo-Since threebeencableit units difficult differentcost-effective. loggings were to small account landings costs (avg.=10 (equip. for & allmany ac.)truckloadsmove-in differentand far& (40 rigging)apart roads per (up day).would would to 10 make notmi.), have 2 No. Econ.Tn the EA. Yes.17-pg. LFR None 90%down(modified & 318) No."Once we've corn- Yes. DifficultHelo-Cable-Some too units to couldcostly reduce had have to inadequatefuelyard eliminated load umnerch. (adv. road spur regen.& and topsroads landing & (result byno usingroads). locations = heavy intm. fuelfor supports. cable. load) analysis - Yes. unit bdiy's) willmitted be tovery helo, diffi- it =(transp.plan 12 pages) Helo-Using "difficult intm. supports to leave would'veold single costsnags more (safety than issue)." high lead & spur road. . 3 Yes, on EA212 refer- entries pages, an plus28-pg.Yes. 3-pg. LFR versionOld of 70% Yesbuildcult m(1987). roads.' the future to planNo for transp. this Helo-No roadsroads-difficult to higher unitsto leave resourcemade old it single costly mgmt. snags & costs risky (safety (fire,silv.,monitoring, to reduce issue). heavy fuels. etc.). units3 cable pr;Inunaryanalysis80-yr. &econ. No.Review Helipace(HP-9000)LoggerPC boundarieschanged.)wereunit(half acres of the & Prey,was(helo decision not & analyzedno road) activities.Planhelosale. to foruse silv. Helo-needs.'No roads- one"burningtrees outside"may in one(to have unit reduceshelterwood to (15 forego fuelsmiles &pre-comm unit."away) site prep.) was thinning not killed mentioned the & otherresidual in silv. EA. 4 unitscableYes, on n1gh1gincludedYes, Reviewplus43-pg. 3-pg. LFR LoggerPCversionOld of logging(changed80% system No.No. Plan to Yes.(transp.plan, Helo- "rotor"slasholderdifficult washdoesn'ttrees to fromwithplant get dead largeknockedenough tops.helo trees down willWe perhadknock adequately, acre to cut20-3 in snagsdeep 0 making feet slash."(safety out it of issue)." landingn:)v-inedowntime ul mett No. (HP-9000) mjimctionon 42 acres; acres) future.parcelsisolatedexchange inNF thesethe networkobjroad 5, mgmt. haul= map10 pages) Cable- "wouldSection(negotiations,adjacent have318 pnvate sale taken road landhad 1-2surveys, toowners. yearsbe sold profiles, to Need inobtain 1990 to etc.) includeeasements (time in costissue)." internal analysis.from prep.costs This (econ.rates,productionskylineconstr., etc. Helo-Cable- purchaser couldthedidn't logging have had cable timesystem to payto logged obtain on$57,000 one a easements.bottom unit to compensate(34 portion acres) ofto for onecable. changing unit ($57,000 but was oneanalysis entry) - unitsHelo-slash to(contract difficultsale thereduce wasdifference specificationstoslashin counta sensitive (for in & appraisedreforestation measure forsmokeshed. wildlife). yarding all purposesdead Tops costs.) & down &were fire logsyarded prevention). in deep in some TABLE 4: LOGGING FEASiBiLiTY REPORT (LFR) Page 2 Sale # ProfilesGround Analysis? Cost significantRationale, LFR? ProgramsComputer ? Implementedas Plannedin EA and future harvestHeloPrey. & precludeshelo sale? futureTransp. silv. Planaddressed haest-fran,ortti1ion decisionTechnkal Problems with 5 Couldnot find, analysisEcon.10 pages, = No.10-pg. LFR issues? None foirth(modified70% of the oneDecision? No,No.roading when options? it's (transp.planYes.access needs? = NeedCable- a onsurvey,higher "In the the marketthan design, last avg. 4-5or & road we years,engineer put density weup roads.ahaven't helofor intensive Eithersale." had enough we timber don't time mgmt.put to anything Pen80-yearover an . No. aries,unitloggmg bound- changed system volumethecomm. bulk thinning, isof left the & trafficincluding12 mgmt. pages, road Cable-a roadlot "The of in thereality (steep, unroaded is rocky, that areasmost high areof elev.). the some road A of lOt system the of toughest the is roadsin place place in steepand to get onskylineacrescable 24 andonacres.) to 37 fromhelo roadand will in futhre. pay for worksheets) Helo- duepurchaseraccessterrainspan. to the trailrequire There ranlack to profiles of facilitatewasfull road benchno & access,change post-saleanalyzed construction." several in theactivities.two appraised unitshelo unitsrequired Such yarding for trails anmulti- arecosts. needed 6 unit.On one analysis=Econ.13 pages, No LFR Helipace (no.70% of acres No. (tramsp.planYes. = Gatespeopleandto on provide 2)roads- evento walk a 1) ifsafe "gatesroads up route the are are roadthrough gated, a longand it's steep,disturbterm still maintenancerugged anwildlife. invitation terrain. Don't problem for get me onlyprofflesareGround if done 200-yearover ased csts unithalfsamestayed bound-of but thethe anticipationinwe'llYes. the "That'sharvest future. how ourit histoxyincludingloggmg16 pages, of SYStITIS past Obliteratingfuture?amountwrong, "Veryroads-of there roads low,What are that ita areI'mlotis now oftheconcerned roads chancesin late that successionabout." of make needing sense, reserves, a roadit's just in there thethe logginginal.issystem marg- localfromsales. otheriw changed)locationsaries and et)apnraisalsmamtenance& roads, road ' Helo-Cable- oneside.cable-loggedwon't "When outside be any timber unit harvesting."(multi-span). (1 prices mile areaway, Ithigh, had 49 fuel roadsacres) costs above, could fairly below,have low, been and and on one (This unit was not mentioned in the EA)., . 7 Yes. In the EA For one18-pg. LFR LoggerPC (contractor95% andNo. (wasrailroad- clearcut findCould traisp. not Helo-Cable/swing "hadinpeoplewhen the to wood corridors; flyout yarder a of cacheproduct helo. (downhill landings of Many industriesmarking yarding)-shouldpeople paint need haveare hadto woodsatisfied therunout to topcutquick, roomofwithadditional the it's helo." (safety unit."tough trees issue)-to talk groundtwelvefornotesMap & statesoneanalysis=Econ.10 entiy, pages, for&alt'sunit, mentionedreasons reject- were other Helipace unit;multi-spanskylineused slight running on No.1930's)logged Plan toin havethe alternativemapTheplan. EAfor eachhas a Helo-Cable- "damagethecan't "If purchaser's controlthey depends didn't siwashing advantage haveon size running logs of tohelo unless rig skyline, (payload) intermediate they're it would fullyand supports.pilot." suspended.have been They to proffles tions.assunip- No.expensive)ion (more unitchangearies) bound- in thinningevery 40 entries years. construction.andexistingshowing proposed roadsthe NoRoads-Multi-span- studies Whereprobably"Culverts show "Their we've spentmore look biggest used likesnagsmore multi-span, theyhangup timeare willleft figuring with plugin the cable m-sup corridorsout & vs.is how causeless helo to areproduction." units.aavoid sluice-out."a lot multi-span.narrower." portrayTABLE the general 5: ECONOMIC altitude and concern COMMENTS regarding - The Forest Service has often been criticized for 'money-losing' timber sales and deficit spending (3). The following quotes Sale # layoutI thinkQuoted theit's risks,a commentsmistake costs, to andjump made benefits out by and ofID various Team alternatives. In this case, it would involve looking at the environmental state: 'helicopter oreconomic nothing!'. issues on these seven timber sales. members in response to one of the main interview The approach I always take, and it's the job I'm paid questions: "How important is economics?" to do, is to evaluate all the options and to It'sWhatYoucost a tremendous effectivenesssee, we're it's trying a balancingcost forto when do logging is act- you find while economicslook some middleground and we all hold our ownat opinions the investment and weigh in roads the costs and andhow benefits, we're closing it's the them line officers return on the stump. between the extreme timber interests and the extreme environmental now. People don't realize how much money is wasted. thatrisks make of different the final logging decisions.interests. system options vs. the initialneedengineersawayI first to becauselookconstruction portray will at which wesay the don't 'Whycosts-trade-offs roads have are that have wethe betterbecomes thebuildingkind highest and of money listthis problems the standard to deal ofwith them. costs of all future projects that follow and then look at costs. I can think roadof a coupleif we'll roadsprobably that have to pull it out in 5 years?' We fail Sometimes when we figure Out the standard of road needed - rehabilitation, maintenance, mitigation measures, monitoring, along with the were falling down the hillslope and we just had to walk to analyze all the actual dollar costs. to minimize sediment production, the I think we thentheAreIt's low we costing we end?wouldn't going That'smore to have make andbeen a more problem allowancesmy experience-for overhead,paying in for reviews, and our appraisal system to coveryour these true more realized expensive costs.we loggingshow them systems? on the Or, low end,them. like the cost of hand-piling. firelines, planting, all the planning process costs. And then, if one of these sales end up in court, the costs are astronomical. are we going to do what's traditional and show them and K-V projects. If we showed the actual costson roadisoriginallyThe easy. originalis a The barrier proposed decisionplanning to amphibians. for was one cable. madeone Ansale Anto existing helicopter hereeconomic road foranalysis which has was done about 4 years ago. Part of the sale was sold and logged with cable. The several reasons: 1) this is better ecosystem management; 2)was not done and no logging feasibilitygrown report up in wasalder done. goes These through type one of unitdecisions and almost to the other unit. The we cannot effectively close roads once built; and 3) the Suitable Owl Habitat portion was not. ground is genfle and road buildingbother me. It was Rightof Sincenow.Economicshelo, now, wewe willtheredon't always have arehave sotoplays roads manyforego a inpart people thethat to pre-commercial salesome valueing degree. It depends area, we'll have to depend on helicopter. Tree seedlings can be flown in. If something thinning. on the area and other values. There's a major price on amenity and scenic happens to the price of timber or the values. That's what is important costs EconomicsIn Economicsusthe pay past, more ishelicopters ofis to becomingconcern harvest were butless less notit's trees. of mosflyused an issue in the Forest Service. The value of a roadlessarea isas higher much, than mainly the valuebecausea 'below-cost' of ofhaving economics. issue. Economics But now, is the an price issue of when wood it iscosts more to extractthe the ecosystem timber as a whole. And the price of that (if it could a road. be measured) is shootingso high, up so it high doesn't that make the any difference if it's helo-logged. than what the timber is worth. The highest people will force takeforThereobjectivesvalue easements less here aretime. many thanis do Onethe notto facetsresource wayachieve show toto up put economics.values.low in costs. This sale an economics analysis.If it Itis wouldvisuals have or soils taken and us if 1-2 it demands years longer. a higher Sometimes cost logging may have been easier to log with cable but the time and effort it would've system, then we'll do it that way. It's more important the economic gain is more internal than taken to go through all the legal negotiations external.to achieve Helo WhatInside the than I'vepast, we found welog do tendedaccountability theover economics. theto look years is There's if wasmore paramount at economicsup ain sale sale than before administration. we do the now. rules The change Now pendulum we've is to plangot hasyou to itswung forspend give helo. toa most realisticthe environmentalof view of the costs, you'll come noup doubtwith in my mind about that. a pretty good answer. our time on environmental concerns because they side and we look much more at the environmentalare scrutinized. SaleTABLE # 5: ECONOMIC COMMENTS, Page 2 Quotes from ID Team members in response to interview question: "How important is economics?" 5 TheEconomically,InTheanything costthe loggers pastfor on just 4-5 willthewe anyears, marketwant tell EIS us awedocument salewhenor haven't we that aput helo is itself hadup positive salea enough helois is$60-l00,000. andeconomicallysale. time meets to survey,resource We infeasible. probably design, objectives. spent and engineermore than roads- that toplus, do thewait sale for planning,the cultural sale layout, and marking. resource and plant surveys. Either we don't put All that to put up less than '-' fournationalansetI don't miffion EA,to the thinkand forests. pointbd.ft.! all the that.where ForestThey timberthink Service's we sales have primary are timber going objective salesto be strictlysmall is to andearn to providewe money. have timber toThat's maintain tonot timber where a certain industry. we're amount coming It has of from.overheadless to The do towith administer how much these we're spending You have toSo, say- the 'where's unit costs the go economics way up. The to that?'! reason ' below-cost' sales are an issue is because there are groups that want to stop timber reason we're losing money is because the restrictions are sales, cruise them, lay them out, to do and more to do with people harvesting on the BackwantingOnehaveavailable when ofcome to the use wefor thingsout thathadone-tenth to payloadstonotthat's stop be thehard feasibletimber ofcost-per-hour about20,000 harvesting. for working helo. plus, that Thethe for somehelovalue a government expenses ofof thewood larger wereis agency so ships hightremendous. is are.now. that So, the heloBut people what is very on has the workable evolved ground is-forcan we'regetting really getting things into done. 2nd-growth There's timber see what they think will work, but such a large part of our very few sales that Fve appraised that and smaller ships are IfWhoRoadstechnicaldirection you're says are notcomesend timbera tremendousgoing of fromit sales balancedinto legislation needan investment area withto balancefor andall 20-3 tothe you justeconomics 0environmental haveyears, throw to I away.balancethink and technicallegislation.it's Decommissioning compliance a waste issues of moneywith with alegislationenvironmental roadto keep costs the with $6000-10000 road issues?what open you andIn knowperthis maintained mile; day from and road your maintenance profession. It's hard age,every the environment5-10 years. comes first. = $300 per mile every 5 years. to keep the economics and ' Economicsopportunities.ForestpriorityIt's not shouldwhether to them. was provide wealways The look question a strongbiological at economics whetheron our reserve districts. or we not andcan but recreationpayIt it'sdoesn't our ' what way meanopportunities', is gets the we intopolitics' didn't the then consider socialand I 'whatdon't values wildlife isthink theof thetheview and public.forests otherof the things.canIf public?'. the pay social Every their Having values one of that the timber sale ID way- unless we start charging for some of the recreationthe National Forest as a timber source is not a are now promoted are that 'the National Teams had a forester on the workHeloK-VWeID Team. have andwasfor environmentalwatershed.a notThe forest used economics economist as an oroption emphasis political in the just Supervisor's reasons,comesbecause from wethen Office wantedthe we forestry lean who to towarduse provided background- helo. helo. We training looked I think sessions at that's physical fora big the and part district economic of whether people factors. economicsto look Helo at economics is looked in timber sales was our last option. If all the other options won't at. and other projects like Ineededwas wasobliteration)What being trying due were pressured to to the pushto politicalhelo'complexity'.) theabout logging economic reasons?-the negativecosts. point the Well, impact Audubonof view.when of Thatyoubuildinggroups do did itwere notroads.that sit deadway, wellSo, set helohe with against instructed logging road doesn't the building. ID lookTeam so to expensive do an economic when analysis comparing specified road construction That's the kind of game that is played. Economics has very little to do with most of this staff some of the folks on the ID Team. They basically indicated they would appeal the sale. The District Ranger you throw big costs into roading. (Specified road was (and timberTABLE saleSale planning 6: TIMBER process's SALE strengths, PLANNiNG weaknesses, bottlenecks, PROCESS and COMMENTS improvement possibilities. Strengths Weaknesses - This table summarizes many of the interview comments (in quotes) regarding the A Bottleneckstotal of forty-one Interdisciplinary Team members were interviewe'L Improvements & Skills Needed ForestSpecialists Plan&study mitigation emphasizedknowledgeable. andwere monitor very measures. articulatethe road need effects toand TooRecordsNothing manyfind,direction arein issuesthe here Forest inandin logging the there,Plan EA. providessystems.not easy to "The Watershedbureaucratictheofanalyses inordinate, planning Analysis process & multiple& detailed -reviews." levels EA"Need"Forest should more Plan listforestbecause what fundsmonitoring plan effects time,for direction." monitoring." funding,planwill beshould monitored. and be comniltinent more specific hinges on Soil scientistmodelpresent)differentcompare devised called based loggingground WATSED a on spreadsheet disturbance systemsa surface (hybridized (past erosion to from and "50%"HardEA does oftoneed thenotplan mgmt. standsforemphasize for a long-termtimber directionthat needthe sale purposewhen keepstoand be objectives, changing." & forwillmartens,pileatedis peregrin requirethe longest woodpecker, etc. mgmtfalcon, Wephase. plans don't Itpine "Needvalidatehelpforwe're to specialists lookthem going hypotheses." at design problemsto to still work statistically be more guessing.on a intensively,Master's sound Providing Degreeexperiments otherwise, incentives would to LFR includedavailable.withAlthough statistics,local recommended themonitoring data it's theis not equip.,bestinformation), validated info "Thereentered2nd-growth is atreated rushdo more not to stands(to oftencloseget improve treated will forroads, intermediate need healthin many timber to be& growth) sales." thing."orhave resources the time, to money,do every- Need"Need pictureslogging to portray andincludesystems effects documentation the road(visual,tradeoffs& roading. mitigation soils, of of Economicdifferent cablehabitat and vs.maintenance degradation). logging analysishelo should costs." LFR was&contractflight reviewed.maps. statistics provisions, for each landing unit, profiles NoSale Network inTransp.thinning."was the not AnalysisEA Costimplemented and Analysis). Decision.(Logging as planned(90%& "Need moreskillsexpertisetechnical roadslawto look toenforcement and stretchand at culverts."more physical logging ecological for capabilities."road systems closures." ways to to their build EA and LFR were well organized, DecisionSaledifferent- objectives,economicwritten.) Notice another (DN) considerations. purpose EA did should not& need mention have not been "Getting the specialists' Need"Need to document transp.to diversifyresource planning rationale learning mgmt. skills for in fields." todecisions the handle college challenges." and natural to keep 2 Transp.theterm(severalconcise, Plandifferent plan; was coveredtimber& arouteslogical. thorough, sales) ain large terms and long- area comparedof RecordsFP doesaccessible. are not here loggingemphasized.provide and there, &much transp. not direction readily planning. in "Changes"Trying"Getting to the inkeep updated."inputdirection."IDT GIS to& agree."scheduling." "Need"Appraisalsmgmt.costsrecords morestrong needlawin managers one enforcement."due to place. show to longer(who higher don't walking costs beat to distances." around cover extrathe ReviewThoroughandimpacts Team comparison dispersedwildlife), (Supervisor's (soils, managementrecreation. watershed,of Alternatives Office) visual, access, No"Forest"A long-term lot of athealth recordsthe silviculturalmgmt. bottom & getgrowth direction lost."of theplan concerns list." keepsbecause are changing. "Needprovisionsareplannedbush)." to compatible ground-truth leave are treesincorporated and units andto ensure by logging ID in thatTeam the system appropriateTS to contract." ensure capabilities thatcontract LFRMixed stated loggingconstruction why& critiquedcable). systems additional was (helo, EAinfeasible, road and tractor, sale layout. Decision"Less"Appraisalsground." work Noticeeconomic getsshow did accomplished considerationslownot mentionend of costs." on the TABLESale #6: TIMBER SALE (TS) PLANNING PROCESS, Page 2 FP provides direction in logging Strengths Sale objectives, purpose & need not Weaknesses "Bottleneck in the past was Bottlenecks LFR and EA should explain why the previous Improvements & Skills Needed 3 "DistrictS.O. logging andtimberLFRsystem specialistS.O. and has sale& sale transp.an critiqued monitoring on-goinglayout. planning. program." Logging/transp."Atpotential present,orclear. S.O. Records forsincelogging cost logging/transp.problems thereanalysis not specialists, readily are lacking.no accessible.District there's a bossplannerstheOftenroading. / loggingdifferent theyhad The a waitedspecialist different priorities.transp. until "Skills"Needthis morearecapabilitiesdecision sale needed first also. (helo hand to of assure helo,& experience no longroad)that roadsspan, isto the know andare best in multi-span."all choicethe the for "Logging"District has specialisttheGIS.units, all 1930's."the Some roads, mappedold harvestrecords & logging (in date systems back to on DecisionDistrictroads)harvest.to evaluates onfall previous throughprecluded fuel saletheload many cracks."(helo after forest and no mgmt. flagged in the roads." "Mightcorrect long-termthatstandpoint"need addresses place a specific loggingfrom the FPa wildlife economic &standard transp. & &implicationssystemvisuals guideline planning." of 4 FP provides systemandGIS)direction roads the & logical intransp.for logging the logging entireplanning. district." settings ProjectDecision economicoptionsrecordcertain Notice notin reports considerations.this well(1)N) sale organized; weredid and not not in mention theeasy future. to find. 'Notw-shed sure we analysis can get done, all the "More"Needmental apublicmgmt.,roads method groups vs.involvement, fire, ofnot comparing(Elkrecreation, having Foundation, there's roads thewildlife, (inavalue lot Ducksterms of waterof environ- having ofUnlimited, quality)."veg. RoadEA emphasizedpurpose Mgmt.access(a Objective& needs,checklist needsale objectivescost-share,for Worksheets of TS each is notbut resource& clear,issues) area's "There's"The"Needpublic public aUSFS lota mindset ofdoesn't has isanalysis anthe agencyouttrust impression becausethere us." that that justthethat thinks cuts the trees." "It doesn'tmuchdepth."didn'tsomeone really analysislook will atmatter say-thatwe do,how"youpart some in "Thetheandneeds upperWildlife groundhave to level understand to Society)10-20 go(S.O. through. yearsand thatwhat up) agoTheyare we'vein butwilling our may everythinggone agency have to throughhelp been hasus." on "Transp.were(3)roposedtheyeach planner included willresource needgoes for in specialist closure)tothespecifically use EA. certain in & the asksto roadsnext if "We"There's don'thabitatsurveys,one get nomore money protocolthe nobody road critters for will for knows long-term want"doingdestroy what the the kind earth." of "Rulestoohaveseepeople keep manyany to just changing.re-dotimber times." don't our cutting." want workWe to "If thethenandactivity,changed. public what we willtheywants Ifis theynot need could theworking." spent more NFsee tomore whatlaw be enforcement atimeis national really studying going park, officers. theon ProjectA Preliminary workRecord10-20 MapReport included years." Logging & IDT was a meeting HaulFeasibilityprepared Net- notes. for the EA. "Can'tmonitoring- haveonsnags,we everytake everythingit wildlife,comes it acre- out ofoutit's rec.,(no other ofjust roads, ourlarge notappropriations, hides workable."trees,five or etc.) "Thewantkeepsis that thebottleneck us USFS,changingsociety to do. the is&It's what notCongressbottleneck just with they bd.f.tfundmoneythey(the of NPS wantthe timber designing Districts workforceresearch, ($500/mbf) long-termstewardship then is 3/4 andwe law research. canrec. fashion, enforcement). spend user Iffees a 10we lot million could of if LFRS.O. included: productionlandinglogging LFR rigging constr.,specialist rates, and downtime, equip.sale contract critiqued layout move-in, provis- "The"I've w-shed outseenThe in largepeople analysisthe info fieldscale, in write GISis to youdone seea just lot don'twhat on butisn't such getdon'tdid correct." theanot go details." efficient-Nobodythatpassedpolitical. are numerous contradictory.said Congressthe democracyalternative laws has is "Themuch." wholeSometimesseecould what ID fund Team and thisthe how should IDDistrict muchTeams go and canout expect help beto thedone andfund field realistically.promise others." and too Purchasergingcompensateions, was systemsetc. charged for (from the$57,000 changehelo toto cable).in log- Decisionworkeconomic Notice and figure did considerations. not out mention why not." "We'llPlancalledpeoplean need authoritarian adequately." for tomore indo the thetime President's surveysgov't." and "Needbillion to changebd.ft. or the bust!'" timber beast attitude- 'A TABLE 6: TIMBER SALE PLAIJNING PROCESS, Page 3 Sale # 5 EAFP providescoveredsystem adirection decade & transp. ofin timberloggingplanning. Strengths Records are heremaps)find. and arethere, on notmicrofiche. easy to Some maps (i.e. the road route Weaknesses timehelo"Biggest isframe politics reason we have."and for thehaving Bottlenecks "Photos"Need toother are document invaluable, logging the systems." effectivenessmaps are great of but helo photos and Improvements & Skills Needed EA emphasizedcumulativedisplay(32,000harvests overlays acres).forsale effects. a objectives large GIS and planning washelp and used evaluate area to Nothing"Loggers in EA willisbecausementions or telleconomically Decision us whenroads a time Notice atake infeasible."heloissue too sale (preferring much time.) helo T&ERoadsWhenculturalespecially species take you resource a waiting surveys.havelot of either time,and for "ENs"We and watershedassumptions."areneed specialist better." dependable analysis reports multi-year and should monitoring." statefunding any for LoggingRoadunitslogicalpurpose & specialist Traffic in logging the& Mgmt.need. delineatedPlanning settings Worksheets Area. the for 312 MapMany of proposed alternativesinonlydon't detailroads threeshow wereconsidered forand alternatives the 32,000 landing contour acres were butlines, (several analyzed one, theetc.culturalhavere-routed roads Those to have waitresource and costs toagain then be aren'tsurvey, foryou a "All thebeenresourcewere soils classifiedsigned onspecialists. the (agreed andDistrict verified." to) have by all the Decision"I feel weNotice timberdidn't did takesales).economicneeds not care mention (i.e. of considerations. dense all the stands)." silv. "Don't knowwithoutdo how watershedanalysis." weshown GIS." can analysisin the economic 6 IDTEAFP providesand meetingsystems.eveiything analysis direction notes file was documented well in easy logging organized, to find, NoPurpose LFRclear.didn'tenough and- "TheSale needneed years objectivesS.O. forto offigured dotimber experience an not LFR." saleweemphasized. had is that not we "I don'tever&weprocess research, thinkcan process, dois the theall andplanning ifproblem,the we use planning don't what- "I thinksomethingcanenough.but we itsbe have usednever It needs failed,more for witten reference. monitoringto document be up. reviewed Putting The it,than keyshare andit you isin toitpublished acan infileknow abelieve report,is whynot so gooditand Economictions.rationale.key discussions, analysisSale Prep. listed decisions,forester assump- used and info "The"Duplication planningbiggest downfallof levels."1) efforts data isis in collected3 various problems: but not digested 'youcanthecome publicsdiscredit haven't up with want, studied it the by theyoutcomesaying: all "I think effectslativetheavoidwe shouldwatershed effectsit analysis next stay time."analysis). analysis within the the EA's.' (whichWe ENs cart rather is improve basically than theadd just cumulative a cumu- HarvestTaglineforprices,from scheduling review-this previous profit,sale. "IDTmap. &sales overbid & todecision base estimates costs, "The cost for3)2) just reportsthere an isEIS areno document rewardnot peer for reviewed doing it." andpublished.into a written report; (interdisciplinary,"The requiresvelythewatershed effects.' intensive many interagency analysis " process,more is meetings a it "On oneWeofresearch myget, hand,need timeand we'resomeI thinkon theadministration, notemphasis we otherpaying need hand onallattention reviewing theI budgets, think research to. there's &research, weplanning. so can much I spend 90-95% made.actionmakerrequirement, beforeground-proofPrior to the makingwe final got the decisionburned thisproposed a a is few "Thewaitingareitself lifespan getting is $60-lO0,000."periods, of shorter plans & and whilerequirements documents paperwork, keep projectsof& public),GIS,cruncheddata waiting collection,all anunder timelines enormousin line, the research, pressure for amt. "One"Universities receipts,fordesigningof ourprojects downfalls have 90% studies, and Mastefsof need theis and that money to studentswriting whenwrite went reports." we reports."who intocollected are the looking general timber times." DecisionHalf of economicchangedexpanding."the Notice unit boundaries duringdid considerations. not implementation. mention in the sale Howmgnit.It scaressuchproduct can uses pressure?" me the be GIS to dataworth think maps. & much endupper under "Interdisciplinaryownthefunding-treasury. land, bailiwick' likeplants,We means needroad is animals, not users, tofiguring beinterdisciplinary." proactiveI & think outpeople. whatthey're on Protecting issources bestwilling for of toyour pay.' TABLE 6: TIMBER SALE PLANNING PROCESS, Page 4 Sale # 7 Forest PlanILogging provides systems direction and economics, for Strengths Purpose ¬ need clear for nor sale emphasized. and sale obj's were Weaknesses "I don'tnecks- think therewe have are anyto jump bottle- through Bottlenecks "We can'twe've streamline been told the from planningImprovements the Cabinet process, level & that Skills Needed IDEA Team wasiingrecordsmitigation well (includingproposed were written readilymeasures many a &organized;silviculture/ accessible.logging & monitor- "We're ingreachedNo.anymore.not ourmanaging1. It wildlife, Maximum doesn't Protecting for fisheries,bother timber SDI the me because environmentproduction & that visual a we're stand obj's. comes meet- has "The reasoncertainislaw." because the plantshoops EA we takes tobecausehave bloom so to long waitthat's at different for the "Ithatwe don't will we'llplanning manyseedo have morehow projects process,less weplanning people can as we shortcutwe &tojust did analysisdo can't in itthe with."the take andpast." on as "IDwildlife Teamplantpurchasersave time lookedsurveysadministrative andmarking; for &dollars waysbiological contractingstudy). thru:to eval.; "The"Who Themajority says thinningandgrowth- we technical ofshould the thewas specialists balancenext done issues entxy for economicwith andwildlife, is in environmental?"publics 40 years."not "Thetremendously,spottedplantstimes President's ofand owls the two-year Planyear and in hasmymurrelets."to findsurveys addedpoint threatened of for view, "We"Specialists projectspeoplesayneed that to see have looktheyto generatetheir toforcan have scheduleopportunities only revenue thicker do soand skinmuchand priorities."for waysand and tolet "ForestEconomicassumptions.worksand economist having analysis on all one the provided included timberDistricts." econ.crew that "It's prettychangesgoingissueshave pushed hardonemore & directiontoyou than usbe haveto efficient economic look and to re-doat then whenenvironmental and yoursomething you'retechnical." work.' tionalfimgis,(amphibians,moreto more surveystime etc.). planning & Allmollusks,effortof mgmt. of efforts. tothese try speciesbryophites, taketoWe address haveaddi- "Haveagreement,presentagencyuse specialists the hasrevenuefacts potentialgo bring in out theon factsto theEA. tothe payDistricts. to iffield anthere their IDT and is way."I andlookathink dis- at the "S.O.'Districtingandtraining collects report."puts has session outmonitoring an anaggressive annualfor Districts." reports monitor- "The ifexpensiveplanning weprojecttions don't under process is inmeet very order NEPA the openis to goingrequirements, andmeet to thelitigation." to all bePresident's our very obliga-then the Plan. of-dateplansto changes.""Thesome and with mainsatisfaction." documents broad bottleneck sweeping become is that out- our "A specialisttailcingofexamples opinionconcern aboutthat and andor brings picturestalkhas more moreabout to of theof ancredibility. whatwhat IDTobjective happened."theyexamples It's areportrayal less sitestheprogram public and ofother Out taking toprojects." look groups at thinning from "OnepredictedWefimdingis of that theneed webiggest to to thedon't do monitor expectedmonitoring criticisms know to all seeimpacts fromthehas how effects. not the wellin been thepublic we The EA. there. fisheries.betweenformulatethat's out vegetation, of "We'reWeall our the can't realm- interactionsgrasping do wildlife, anythingtrying for andknowledgeto "if"It specialistswouldroadresearchof what effectshelp the articlesdocument if expectedsomeoneon the on environment." theirlogging consequenceslisted observations all system the are."and "We'rethere'swantpopularRequesting still to dependenta see withlot usoffor upper accomplishingdifference monitoring on mgmt. old databases from because funds projects." one is anddistrict they not "Workingtheuntilis results long wewith know term, treesfor manyeverything." oftenand ecosystemsyears." you can't see "Oneingsayingcertainlyand way ishave toto 'some, getmake betheir more more less, itreport a emphasis performancecredibleor reviewed,probably'." onin anmonitor- evaluationit EA would than "It's veryrequirements.assumptionsmaintained.to the difficult next on All andto Ihow wantkeep wego well canfrom upto keepthatwithdo there." is databaseon allput topthe forth newof was itour but ingifeffectivenessstepcriteria you input increase didn't where on othermeet ifof you you a mitigation theprojects."don't didn't timeframe get evaluate your measure forautomatic the provid- or Decisiontimestheirverythere's Notice concernedresponsibilities to so the did much. point not about mentionMost that very the itof affects theresourceseconomics.seriously, specialists their andsome- health." takeare "I wouldbasicthatneedPublic thehighly tovalues Participation feelprocess recommend they'vewere was infringed been trainingfollowed, the dealt Consentupon." session. withand thatfairly, and People no