Klamath Tribes—Managing Their Homeland Forests in Partnership with the USDA Forest Service

J. For. 114(❚):000–000 PRACTICE OF FORESTRY http://dx.doi.org/10.5849/jof.2016-027 Copyright © 2016 Society of American Foresters policy Klamath Tribes—Managing their Homeland Forests in Partnership with the USDA Forest Service

Will Hatcher, Steven Rondeau, Debora L. Johnson, K. Norman Johnson, and Jerry F. Franklin

The Klamath Tribes were “terminated” during the Eisenhower administration in the 1950s as part of a national nus brevicomis) outbreaks, Tribal members’ program to force assimilation of tribes into the larger culture of the United States. Most of their Reservation income needs, and the demands of the local went into federal ownership and became the Winema National Forest. In 1986, the Klamath Tribes regained forest industry. BIA foresters used seed tree federal recognition. By the late 1990s, Klamath Tribal natural resource professionals, guided by a Memorandum silviculture in the pine and mixed conifer of Agreement with the Forest Service, increased their participation in interdisciplinary planning on projects within stands, which evolved into a selection system the Reservation. The Klamath Tribes also continued to seek return of their homeland. In the early 2000s, they that retained the forests uneven-aged char- developed a Restoration Strategy for their Reservation and commissioned development of a forest plan that acter (Mezger 2013). guides their recommendations to the Fremont-Winema National Forest on management of their Reservation. In 1953, during the Eisenhower ad- Through a Master Stewardship Agreement with the Forest Service, the Klamath Tribes now share implementation ministration, the US Congress adopted an responsibilities, including prescription writing, sale layout, tree marking, and forest inventory. ofﬁcial policy of “terminating” Indian tribes, ending the Trust relationship between those tribes and the US Government, he Klamath Tribes (Klamath, to a private company in 1906 [Stern 1965. which had existed when their reservations Modoc, and Yahooskin) ceded 15 Klamath and Moadoc Tribes et al. v. United were formed, under the guise of speeding million acres of their homeland in States 296 U.S. 244 (56 S.Ct.212, 80 L.Ed. T assimilation of tribes into the broader Amer- 1864 while reserving 2.8 million acres for 202)] (Figure 1). After the transfer of ican society (Burt 1982). The Klamath their exclusive use as the Klamath Reserva- 248,000 acres to Tribal members under the tion. Because of differences in interpretation Dawes Allotment Act, which was completed Tribes lost their federal recognition on Aug. by the Klamath Tribes and the US Govern- in 1910, the Klamath Tribes retained title to 13, 1954, when Public Law 83-587 (68 Stat. ment of the treaty’s boundary description about 865,000 acres (Stern 1965, Kicking- 718) was signed. The act was amended 4 and errors made by government surveyors, bird and Ducheneaux 1973). Of these re- years later (72 Stat. 816) to authorize sale of the Reservation was reduced to 1.2 million maining lands, 683,000 forested acres, with most of the Klamath Reservation to private acres in 1901. Two months after the 1864 extensive areas of old-growth ponderosa purchasers in large blocks subject to man- treaty was signed, the US Congress autho- pine (Pinus ponderosa), became the basis of a agement under the principles of sustained rized transfer of public land along the route harvest plan prepared by the US Indian Ser- yield, whereas the remainder would be man- of a proposed road from Eugene, Oregon, to vice (which became the Bureau of Indian aged by a private trustee for Tribal members Silver City, Idaho, which ran through the Affairs [BIA]) for their management of the who wished to retain common ownership. Reservation. Over the objections of Tribal Klamath Reservation forests (Muck 1926). One private timber company purchased a leaders and after litigation, 87,000 acres This plan guided management from the block of 92,000 acres, and 84 miscellaneous within the Reservation boundary were re- early 1920s until the 1950s as the BIA nav- “fringe units” that totaled 84,000 acres were moved from Tribal ownership and conveyed igated western pine bark beetle (Dendrocto- sold to private buyers (Bilka 2008). When

Received March 1, 2016; accepted July 26, 2016; published online December 15, 2016. Afﬁliations: Will Hatcher ([email protected]), The Klamath Tribes. Steven Rondeau ([email protected]), The Klamath Tribes. Debora L. Johnson ([email protected]), Applegate Forestry LLC, Corvallis, OR. K. Norman Johnson ([email protected]), Oregon State University, College of Forestry. Jerry F. Franklin ([email protected]), University of Washington, College of the Environment.

Journal of Forestry • MONTH 2016 1 Table 1. Themes in the vision statement.

Theme Vision

Permanence We will think and plan generationally. Collaboration We will work collaboratively with our neighbors to bring the forest back to its fullest potential. Sense of place Forests and water will again be the underpinning of Tribal identity. Ecological Forests will again be living mosaics of health healthy and abundant plant and animal communities. Balance We will protect our resource while generating a sound economy and commerce. Healing When we heal the land, we also heal people.

From Interforest (2000, p. 14).

ment of an economic self-sufficiency plan under which trust lands could be returned. Approximately half of the 5,000 members enrolled in the Klamath Tribes live near the Reservation, and economic development has long been a Tribal priority. In 1999, the Klamath Tribes commissioned Interforest Figure 1. Klamath Tribes’ homeland (ceded lands), Reservation boundary in Treaty and LLC to suggest a sustainability strategy to ultimate Reservation boundary. guide management of reestablished trust lands. Toward that end, Interforest helped Tribal members construct a guiding vision other private buyers did not materialize, Tribes, which resulted in Tribal opposition through Tribal surveys and focus groups 525,000 forested acres were purchased by to many projects. In 1994, the adoption of with input from the community (Table 1). the US Government in 1959 (Hood 1972), the “eastside screens” (USDA Forest Service A part of the resulting Tribal vision for the of which 419,000 acres, together with the 1994), which strictly limited logging live Reservation forests states that Klamath Ranger District of the Rogue River trees greater than 21 in. dbh, shifted man- National Forest and small areas from the agement goals for the forests of eastern Or- …the Klamath [Reservation] Forest will move toward higher wildlife and fish pop- Deschutes and Fremont National Forests, egon from timber production to maintain- ulations, larger areas with a higher propor- became the Winema National Forest, and the ing large trees and protecting biodiversity. tion of older trees, restoration of mule deer, other 106,000 acres were added to the Fre- fish and other habitat, and will move away mont National Forest. Approximately a de- Development of a Sustainability from practices such as clearcutting and the maintenance of high road densities. More cade later, the remaining Klamath Reservation Strategy and a Tribal Forest of the forest, in time, will visually resemble was sold to the US Government, with 16,400 Plan the largely remembered forests dominated wetland acres going into the Klamath Marsh by large pines with a variety of pine age Federal recognition of the Klamath classes on each acre, and an abundance of National Wildlife Refuge and 134,000 for- Tribes was restored in 1986 and, although bitterbrush and other important browse ested acres passing into federal (Winema Na- their Reservation was not returned, the species. More careful attention will be given tional Forest) ownership (Mezger 2013, Cat- to the maintenance of species of medicinal Klamath Indian Tribe Restoration Act and spiritual importance to the Tribes (In- ton 2016). (Public Law 99-398) called for the develop- terforest 2000, p. 12). By the late 1960s, forest management in the Klamath Basin began a shift from sin- gle tree selection under an extensive management regime reliant on natural regeneration Management and Policy Implications to intensive management with clearcutting and planting. Weyerhaeuser Corporation Indian tribes across the United States have knowledge and experience managing forests for multiple led the way and the US Department of benefits, and restoration efforts on the national forests lag behind needs. Thus, engaging tribes to help Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service soon fol- manage our national forests may assist both the tribes and the US Department of Agriculture Forest lowed. Service. The Klamath Tribes provide an example of how tribes can help accelerate forest restoration efforts By the 1980s, increasing amounts of on the national forests. Their partnership with the Forest Service is building Tribal capacity to manage the clearcutting followed by creation of pon- natural resources of their homeland and may provide a new model of collaborative stewardship in project derosa pine plantations on the Reservation planning and implementation. became controversial with the Klamath

2 Journal of Forestry • MONTH 2016 With the assistance of Interforest, the reconstructions suggested that the historical growth” map developed in the early 1990s Klamath Tribes considered the following forest had the majority of its basal area in for the Winema and Fremont National For- three alternatives for achieving this vision: large pine trees at relatively low density ests through a cooperative effort of the Restoration emphasized moving the forest across the landscape. Historic forest type Audubon Society and the Forest Service, toward pretermination forest structure and maps (US Department of Interior Geologi- and cover less than 20% of the Reservation complexity; Key Species focused on the most cal Survey 1921, USDA Forest Service forest area. Simplified with remnant forests rapid path to the creation of additional hab- 1936), along with other early reports and are the most common condition on the Res- itat for wildlife species important to the surveys that covered the Klamath Reserva- ervation forest as a result of harvests from Tribes; and Current Trajectory represented tion forest, showed a complex, ponderosa 1920 to 1955, which generally left an over- current practices at that time. The Tribes pine-dominated forest with wet meadows, story of two or more residual trees per acre. selected Restoration as the preferred alterna- dry meadows, grassy glades, frosty flats, Most of these lands today contain 2–8 resid- tive for achieving their goals. Restoration fo- streamsides with lodgepole pine (Pinus con- ual trees per acre over 21 in. dbh. cuses on the most rapid path to the forest the torta) (often with occasional ponderosa • Emphasizing forest restoration rather Tribes envision in the long run. It should pine), and patches of quaking aspen (Popu- than fuel treatments. The contemporary forest provide the most rapid and sure approach to lus tremuloides) and willows (Salix spp.) in on the Reservation is quite different from the the diverse forest and wildlife populations the uplands and along streams. General de- historical with much of its basal area in small that were the pretermination spiritual and scriptions of the historical forest were also and medium sized trees as well as much more physical subsistence base for the Tribes and provided by Youngblood et al. (2004), white fir (Abies concolor) and lodgepole pine also provide a future base of timber produc- Fitzgerald (2005), Hessburg et al. (2005), and a more homogeneous distribution of trees tion (Interforest 2000). and Spies et al. (2006). Recently, Hagmann across the landscape (Johnson et al. 2008, In 2001, the Klamath Tribes asked et al. (2013) retrieved an archived, detailed Hagmann et al. 2013). Many harvest prescrip- Norm Johnson, Jerry Franklin, and Debora BIA inventory taken between 1916 and tions carried out on the Fremont-Winema Na- Johnson, working cooperatively with the 1924 and transferred the records to a data- tional Forests in the early 2000s emphasized Klamath Tribes’ Natural Resource Depart- base. Their in-depth analysis of this data set fuel treatments that simplified the forest by ment, to construct a management plan to confirms a low-density historical forest thinning from below on a spacing grid (leaving implement the Restoration Alternative dominated by old-growth ponderosa pine mostly big trees). The Klamath Plan at- (Johnson et al. 2008). The principle man- trees on both climax ponderosa pine and tempted to restore the spatial complexity of agement goal under this alternative is “to mixed-conifer sites. these forests using the historical complexity move as much of the forest as possible to- • Using plant associations to classify forest (Franklin and Van Pelt 2004) as a guide, into ward a structurally complex ponderosa and site potentials. “Habitat types” provided the which fire-safe principles (Agee and Skinner mixed-conifer dominated forest as rapidly as ecological basis for stratifying the Klamath 2005) were embedded. possible…” (Interforest 2000, p. 43). These Reservation Forest into areas with different • Protecting old trees and increasing their complex forests are defined as those that re- site potentials, and, consequently, different survivability as the first step in all forest resto- tain much of their premanagement forest responses to management regimes. The hab- ration. The orange-barked old trees are the structure including the following: itat types are named after the plant associa- ecological backbone of the ecosystem being, tions that identify and characterize these among other things, the most fire-resistant 1. A large-diameter tree component. sites: Forest Service area ecology plant asso- tree component and source of persistent 2. A spatially complex pattern of patches ciation guides are the primary source of this snags and down wood. These trees are also (e.g., large tree groves and open areas of information (Hopkins 1979a, 1979b, Vol- the most iconic—those of primary interest dense regeneration). land 1985). Understory shrubs, herbs, and to stakeholder groups, because of the char- 3. Coarse wood habitats (snags and logs). grasses are especially important to the classi- acter that they provide to the forest. Hence, 4. Well-developed understory communi- fication. These plant associations integrate retaining old trees (defined as greater than ties of herbs and shrubs. soil, microclimate, and other conditions 150 years) was viewed as essential from both 5. Moderate tree stocking levels (Interforest and, as such, are useful guides to productiv- ecological and social perspectives; prescrip- 2000). ity, species that are likely to be successful on tions not only retained old trees but also en- the site, and potential regeneration prob- hanced their survival by removing adjacent In addition, restoration of a complex forest lems. To simplify the stratification, similar fuels and competing vegetation and pro- ecosystem also would address the suite of habitat types were consolidated into plant vided eventual replacements. Old tree reten- vegetation types and landforms that comple- association groups (Figure 2). tion replaced the 21-in. dbh screen, which ment the complex forests described above. • Recognizing different stand structures in had been problematic because of the need to They include the interspersed riparian areas, the pine and mixed-conifer forests as a result of remove young, but fast growing trees over meadows, draws, and hardwood patches. past harvest. Within each plant association 21 in. dbh (particularly young white fir and group, stands were grouped into three struc- Douglas-fir [Pseudotsuga menziesii] func- Key Planning Principles tural categories based on the number of trees tioning as ladder fuels). Key planning principles include the fol- over 21 in. dbh: Complex (more than 10 • Prioritizing restoration of complex lowing: trees/acre over 21 in.); Simplified (less than 2 mixed-conifer stands. The decision was made • Basing desired future forest composition trees per acre over 21 in.); and Simplified to prioritize the stands that had values that and structure on a consideration of historical with remnants (2–10 trees/acre over 21 in.). were at greatest risk. This turned out to be information. Both the historical record and Complex forests were identified with an “old- the complex (i.e., containing substantial

Journal of Forestry • MONTH 2016 3 Figure 2. Habitat types provided the ecological basis for the restoration plan.

Figure 3. Complex mixed-conifer stands with ladder fuels from fire exclusion are the highest priority for restoration. old-growth) mixed-conifer stands, which Mule deer have long been important to the harvest scheduling analysis was seen as coun- had responded vigorously to wildfire re- Klamath Tribes for sustenance and as part of terproductive because it was based on an illu- moval due to their productivity; current their cultural heritage. Restoration treat- sion of certainty that did not exist. Consider- stands on these sites also had a high percent- ments retain hiding and foraging cover, and ing 80- or 100-year projections of forest age of white fir, which produces an extraor- prescribed fire is used judiciously to create a conditions seemed neither helpful nor credi- dinary fuel ladder because of its shade- mosaic of bitterbrush and small patches of ble, given the risk of wildfire and drought, par- tolerant character and the deep crown that it trees throughout restoration units. ticularly in a warming climate. Rather, the retains. Basically, the productivity of the • Emphasizing what could be accom- plan focused on restoring the character and re- mixed-conifer sites was much more impor- plished in the near-term (20 years) rather than silience of Klamath Reservation forests in the tant than the number of fire cycles that had long-term (80- or 100-year) goals. The em- next 20 years to reduce risks and increase op- been missed (Figure 3). phasis in the plan was on restoring as much of tions for the Klamath Tribes and society at • Providing mule deer (Odocoileus the forest as possible to a more resilient condi- large beyond that period. Achieving this goal hemionus) habitat as part of forest restoration. tion in the next 20 years. Classical long-term did not necessitate entering all stands during

4 Journal of Forestry • MONTH 2016 that period; rather, actions would address the Landscape Planning to-government process (Feb. 19, 1999 as major problems in each area based on land- The Tribes’ forest plan divided the Res- amended Feb. 17, 2005) between the Klam- scape plans. ervation forest into large landscape-level ath Tribes and the Forest Service, Tribal nat- treatment areas, varying from 15,000 to ural resource professionals and Tribal con- Silvicultural Prescriptions 40,000 acres, and called for treating one or sultants participate on the interdisciplinary All restoration treatments are partial two of them each year to achieve the goal of teams, using the Tribal Forest Plan to repre- harvests to reduce overall stand densities and moving over the forest in 20 years. When a sent Tribal views on management. Key con- restore spatial heterogeneity. Restoring the restoration unit is treated, all major resource tributions to project planning through this dominance of old and mature fire- and issues, including stand density reduction, involvement include the following: drought-tolerant trees is fundamental to hardwood restoration, riparian bank stabili- these prescriptions, since this will move zation, and other problems are addressed. 1. On-the ground knowledge that the the forest back toward historical reference The large treatment areas help ensure that Tribal Natural Resources staff brings to conditions and increase resilience in the landscape-level management considerations the process through their extensive field face of climate change. Desired basal area come into effect, such as retaining dense experience. levels vary across the gradient of habitat patches for particular species and maintain- 2. Additional support to landscape level types and the current densities of large ing forage/cover ratios for others. They also planning that Tribal data and analysis ex- (over 21 in. dbh) early seral trees. The enable stands where restoration treatments pertise provides. goals of the plan’s silvicultural prescrip- produce a net income to offset those where 3. A focus on retaining old trees and increasing their survivability, regardless of tions are to do the following: treatments incur a net cost. their size, as well as reducing stand den- • Significantly reduce stand densities Adoption and Use of the Forest Plan sities in complex (old-growth) mixed- and fuel loadings across the forested area, The Klamath Tribes adopted the forest conifer stands. while increasing mean tree diameter. plan described in Johnson et al. (2008) as 4. A shift from fuel treatments and spacing • Retain old trees (generally over 150 their Tribal Forest Plan. Since then, the plan guides to restoration strategies that em- years of age) and increase their survivability has provided guidance in interdisciplinary phasize the clumpy nature of ponderosa by removing fuels and competing vegetation project planning and in project implemen- pine forests, which has been aided by the within twice the canopy drip line. tation as described below. development of quantitative guides to • Shift species composition toward In addition, the Tribes’ Forest Plan, in a heterogeneity (Churchill et al. 2013). more fire- and drought-tolerant species, draft stage, was summarized in a popular 5. An emphasis on maintaining and restor- such as ponderosa pine and sugar pine (Pi- field guide supported by Ecotrust (Wolf ing habitat for plants and animals impor- nus lambertiana). 2004), which makes the concepts in the plan tant to the Tribes. • Recover the patchy spatial distribu- accessible to a broad audience. Also, all tech- 6. A push to consider larger project areas. tion of these forests by retaining small un- nical elements of the plan were incorporated treated patches (skips) and creating or en- into a field guide for the restoration of dry Acceptance of Tribal Vision, Plans, hancing openings: structural complexity is forests in eastern Oregon (Franklin et al. and Assistance achieved through a fine-scale mosaic of skips 2013), which has been widely distributed While many Indian tribes participate in and openings along with scattered large and used on other national forests. Finally, the management of federal forests, often to trees, snags, and down logs. Small, untreated many of the dry forest restoration strategies ensure that traditional cultural uses and patches should total about 10–15% of the developed for the Plan provide the founda- practices are considered (e.g., Bussey et al. stand area. tion of recommendations for restoring the 2016), it is certainly unusual for an Indian tribe to construct a forest plan with detailed • Protect and restore understory plant federal forests of the Pacific Northwest pub- prescriptions for 670,000 acres of a national communities that play an important role as lished in the Journal of Forestry (Franklin and forest. After all, the Forest Service is the forage for mule deer and other wildlife and Johnson 2012). agency responsible for managing these lands as surface fuels. Use mechanical treatments Tribal Involvement in Project and waters, considering the interests of the or cool patchy prescribed fires to rejuvenate Planning and Implementation Tribes and the other citizens of the United decadent shrubs and improve understory States. conditions. Interdisciplinary Project Planning How easy was it to integrate this Forest • In the portion of the forest that lies Most of the Reservation forest is on the Plan into project planning on the Fremont- within the range of the northern spotted owl Chiloquin District of the Fremont-Winema Winema National Forest? In many ways the (Strix occidentalis caurina), create a resistant National Forest, located in Chiloquin, Ore- Tribes’ desire for increased involvement and resilient landscape within which ap- gon, just down the road from Tribal Head- came at a fortunate time in that, at the re- proximately one-third of the forested area is quarters. The District’s interdisciplinary gional level, the Forest Service was shifting retained in scattered dense, untreated team develops projects and evaluates their to a more open and inclusive planning patches where owl core habitat can be cred- environmental impacts as part of their Na- process: ibly conserved. In addition to core habitat tional Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) • The agency’s new emphasis on collab- areas these 300- to 500-acre patches should planning process. Grounded by procedures oration matched the Tribes’ interest as a par- include denser forest at suitable elevations that are outlined in a Memorandum of ticipant in constructing projects rather than and favorable exposures. Agreement that establishes a government- as a critic of agency efforts.

Journal of Forestry • MONTH 2016 5 • The agency was shifting from fuel and the Klamath Tribes occurs through the most innovative part of their involvement in treatments to broader restoration goals. day-to-day informal interactions of the national forest management. On Sept. 22, • The agency realized that it does not natural resource professionals in both orga- 2011, the Klamath Tribes and their partners have the resources to adequately plan large nizations. The balance between formal and (Lomakatsi Restoration Project and The areas. informal relations remains a challenging dy- Nature Conservancy) entered into a Master • The agency desired support for reduc- namic in the relationship between the two Stewardship Agreement (MSA) with the ing densities in old-growth areas, among the groups. Forest Service that encompasses about 1.7 most controversial of agency restoration ac- Fifth, the Tribes’ historical claims to million acres. This strategic alliance brings tions. these lands and their status as a recognized together organizations that have experience • The agency was attempting to move tribe, gives them a special “place at the table” in planning, design, administration, and to larger project areas after demonstrating to in planning and management of these lands, implementation of restoration projects. the public, in smaller areas, that they could as recognized in the Memorandum of Agree- Through the MSA the partners hope to (1) be trusted to manage these forests. ment. In addition, the role of the Tribes in reduce fuel hazards and the risk of high-se- • The Fremont-Winema National For- planning and management continues to verity wildfire, (2) restore forest and water- est’s own analysis showed that the Klamath evolve as they gain capacity and personnel. shed health, (3) train and employ a Klamath Reservation Forests were a high priority for Explaining and highlighting this special gov- Tribal workforce, and (4) enhance local restoration (Markus et al. 2014). ernment-to-government relationship, by wood product processing and capacity. Still a number of issues have arisen. First, the both the Forest Service and the Tribes, re- The MSA defines the broad geographic Tribes’ approach to forest management fo- mains an important element in achieving a area where projects will occur and outlines cused more on fieldwork and an intimate successful and productive relationship. specific partner roles. Supplemental Project knowledge of the forest, derived from living Sixth, the Forest Service must consider Agreements (SPAs) tier to the MSA and are in these forests for many, many generations Tribal requests in the context of the laws, developed collaboratively by the partners for and less on documentation and analysis. regulations, and other considerations and specific projects. Currently the Klamath Thus, the two groups approached planning demands under which the national forests Tribes and their partners have 29,000 acres differently. Fortunately, that has largely operate. Thus, this partnership proceeds of SPAs that are in different stages of imple- sorted itself out with Tribal staff fine-tuning within a very complicated policy environ- mentation. All of the SPAs are on the Reser- Forest Service proposals based on detailed ment. vation and are parts of landscape level proj- site-specific knowledge and field visits that ects that the Tribes have helped plan. then contribute to the agency’s planning and Results So Far documentation. The Klamath Tribes have been in- The Red Knight Project: An Example Second, the Forest Service has consid- volved in project planning for the last three of Tribal Involvement in Project erable silvicultural expertise, and the ideas in decades, but this effort has greatly increased Planning and Implementation the Klamath Tribal Plan differed somewhat in the last few years. The Accelerated Red Knight is a 30,000-acre project on from those of the Forest Service. As an ex- Restoration and Priority Landscapes Plan the Chemult District of the Fremont- ample, the Tribal plan focuses on protecting (Markus et al. 2014) that the Fremont- Winema National Forest that focuses on re- all old trees (regardless of their size) rather Winema National Forest adopted recently taining and improving the survivability of than protecting large trees. In addition, the acknowledges the need to increase the pace the remaining old trees (by clearing out notion that there should be no “thinning” in and scale of restoration because of the threat competing vegetation around them), reduc- clumps of older trees has been especially to degraded forests from fire, climate ing stand densities, favoring fire-tolerant controversial. These differences have re- change, and insect infestations and divides tree species, and creating spatial heterogene- sulted in many field trips and discussions the forest into restoration units that range ity that reflects the historical clumpy pat- and are still a work in progress. from 50,000 to 200,000 acres. In addition, terns of these forests. In addition, other goals Third, the Tribes’ Forest Plan calls for priorities for treatment are established based include protecting habitat for sensitive spe- restoration across the Reservation forest in on variables that include crown fire poten- cies and cover for big game, protecting the next 20 years. Whereas the agency has tial, proximity to the wildland-urban inter- special places such as cultural sites and rec- committed to increasing the pace of restora- face, and the current stand structure reation areas, and restoring degraded hard- tion, its many considerations, including (Markus et al. 2014) (Figure 4). The Tribes wood stands (Figure 5). habitat issues related to species of special in- have been heavily involved in the planning The Tribes actively participated in the terest, such as the northern spotted owl, re- for Red Knight (30,000 acres), Black Hills landscape design and planning process for sult in discussions about acceptable treat- (30,000), and Blue Jay (60,000 acres) proj- this project and together with their partners ment intensities. ect areas and are currently involved in the are responsible for implementing 17,500 Fourth, it is not always clear when and planning for Lobert (100,000 acres) and acres under an SPA tiered to the MSA. how the Forest Service needs to adjust its East Hills (140,000 acres) project areas (Fig- SPA areas are subdivided into phases internal planning processes to reflect the ure 4). The Red Knight effort is described of manageable acreages to promote cost- Memorandum of Agreement with the in-depth below. efficient implementation, ensure eco- Klamath Tribes. That Memorandum con- nomic viability, and target contractors of tains a number of formal steps of consulta- Project Implementation varying capacity. Each phase requires a tion, yet some of the greatest progress in in- The Klamath Tribes’ important role in technical proposal that details specific tech- tegrating the interests of the Forest Service project implementation is probably the niques, procedures, and programs, such as

6 Journal of Forestry • MONTH 2016 Figure 4. Restoration priority for the Fremont-Winema National Forest (Markus et al. 2014) with current Klamath Reservation project areas identified. plan of operations, timeline, and rationale under contract. Inventory data collection Presently they rely heavily on outsourcing to for achieving desired objectives before the has initiated planning for phases 3, 4, and 5 pursue funding and supplement or provide planned operating periods. These proposals (11,900 acres). the capacity and expertise necessary to func- are developed by the partners and submitted tion effectively. to the Forest Service for review. Once a tech- Implementation Challenges 2. Outsourcing Tribal capacity also creates nical proposal has been reviewed and ac- Implementing large projects through challenges when working with multiple cepted, on-the-ground sale layout activities this innovative partnership is not without partners consisting of private consul- can begin. challenges, but the Klamath Tribes Natural tants, nongovernmental organizations, The Klamath Tribes, as the senior part- Resources Department has worked through and government agencies that have dif- ner under the MSA, lead collaborative ef- solutions (in italics below). ferent cultures, sources of funding, and forts between the partnership and Forest skill sets. Those that live out of the area Service at all stages and levels of planning 1. The Klamath Tribes work with limited require travel and are less available than and implementation of each project, and capacity within the Natural Resources internal staff. In addition, it is difficult to each partner has a different level of involve- Department. This poses a challenge, coordinate scheduling to accommodate ment depending on the specific activity. To given the attention required on each task increased pace and scale and to help meet date, the partners, led by the Tribes, have per phase of each SPA. Inadequate inter- annual timber targets. Presently they deal finished laying out sale boundaries, collected nal capacity limits the ability to pursue with these issues by remaining in close com- inventory data, developed silvicultural pre- funding necessary to hire, educate, and munication with their partners and consul- scriptions, marked trees, and designated skip retain additional staff, reducing the op- tants and understanding the unique skill set locations on phases 1 and 2 (5,600 acres). portunity to capture expertise and fur- that each partner and consultant can bring Harvest operations for phase 1 are currently ther develop the institutional knowledge. to any given issue.

Journal of Forestry • MONTH 2016 7 their capacity with their full-time ﬁeld staff. Summary The Klamath Tribes have expressed the desire to restore their homeland forests and have begun to make a major contribution toward a restoration effort. First, they commissioned a science-based forest plan that they could use as their restoration template. Next, their Natural Resource Department brought forward recommendations from their forest plan and their knowledge of the local area by working together with the For- est Service on interdisciplinary teams for projects within the Klamath Reservation boundary. Although many other Tribes bring their local ecological knowledge to help conserve resources on public lands that they hold dear, developing a forest plan for these lands is unusual. The Klamath Tribes are now starting to undertake management responsibilities for implementing projects, contributing their own resource professionals for many of the tasks required for restoration to occur. It ap- pears that such an effort is largely unprece- dented in the history of the national forests and is a potential model for the future, mak- ing comanagement of the national forests by tribes and the US Government a reality as never before. Such an approach, as outlined here, would enable tribes to demonstrate their approach to implementing the principles of forest restoration and help ensure Figure 5. Landscape design for the Red Knight Restoration. Phases 1 through 5 are the that the details and subtleties of forest resto- Klamath Tribes’ Special Project Agreement implementation areas under their MSA. ration reﬂect tribal interests. In addition, leading project implementation would help 3. Stewardship Agreements are relatively 4. Working with advanced ecological con- build tribal capacity for management and new, which has created a level of uncer- cepts requires knowledgeable staff who could increase interest of tribal youth in pur- tainty within the Forest Service and the can train seasonal temporary workers. suing natural resource careers. Finally, these forest community. Efforts to learn and The inability to retain a full-time work- implementation responsibilities would en- develop processes associated with SPAs force results in high annual turnover and able tribes to develop a better understanding may not translate between districts the need to keep training new workers. of the realities of federal forest management within the forest. Aside from the few For- The Klamath Tribal labor crew relies on and help build an improved foundation for est Service staff with extensive Steward- timber product value from SPAs to fund Tribal-Forest Service discussions of the pos- ship experience and expertise who over- service. Because SPA projects have not sibilities and limitations of forest manage- see portions of the Agreements, district yet generated receipts through commer- ment on the national forests. staff may be inexperienced with the cial harvest, the crew is often forced to MSA. Presently they handle these issues by Literature Cited work outside of the Klamath Basin, in a working with key individuals within the AGEE, J.K., AND C.N. SKINNER. 2005. Basic prin- agency and maintaining an advanced large geographical area and on dozens of ciples of forest fuel reduction treatments. For. knowledge of agreements, project imple- projects to remain employed. They have Ecol. Manage. 211:83–96. mentation, and ecological restoration dealt with these issues by relying on experi- BILKA, M.N. 2008. The Klamath’s path after ter- enced staff, returning seasonal staff, and mination. MS thesis, University of Montana, within the partnership and through consul- Missoula, MT. 124 p. contractors/consultants to train new crew tants. Concerns, especially by stakeholders, BURT, L.W. 1982. Tribalism in crisis: Federal In- will hopefully be reduced in time through members. They also often rely on one of dian policy 1953–1961. University of New successful project implementation. their partners (Lomakatsi) to supplement Mexico Press, Albuquerque, NM. 180 p.

8 Journal of Forestry • MONTH 2016 BUSSEY, J., M.A. DAVENPORT, M.R. EMERY, AND ests in south-central Oregon. For. Ecol. Klamath Indian Reservation. Dallas, TX: Alan C. CARROLL. 2016. “A lot of it comes from the Manage. 304:492–504. Mezger (self-published). 61 p. heart”: The nature and integration of ecologi- HESSBURG, P., J. AGEE, AND J. FRANKLIN. 2005. MUCK, L. 1926. Management plan Klamath In- cal knowledge in tribal and nontribal forest Dry forests and wildland fire of the inland dian Forests. Prepared for the supervisor of the management. J. For. 114(2):97–107. Northwest USA: Contrasting the landscape Klamath Reservation, Office of Indian Affairs, CATTON, T. 2016. American Indians and national ecology of the presettlement and modern era. Klamath Agency, Chiloquin, OR. 48 p. forests. The University of Arizona Press, Tuc- For. Ecol. Manage. 211:117–139. SPIES, T., M. HEMSTROM,A.YOUNGBLOOD, AND son, AZ. 373 p. HOOD, S. 1972. Termination of the Klamath In- S. HUMMEL. 2006. Conserving old growth for- CHURCHILL, D.J., A.J. LARSON, M.C. DAHL- dian Tribe of Oregon. Ethnohistory 19(4): est diversity in disturbance-prone landscapes. GREEN, J.F. FRANKLIN, P.F. HESSBURG, AND 379–392. Conserv. Biol. 20(2):356–362. J.A. LUTZ. 2013. Restoring forest resilience: HOPKINS, W.E. 1979a. Plant associations of STERN, T. 1965. The Klamath Tribe: A people and From reference spatial patterns to silvicultural south Chiloquin and Klamath ranger districts; their reservation. University of Washington prescriptions and monitoring. For. Ecol. Man- Winema National Forest. USDA For. Serv., Press, Seattle, WA. 356 p. age. 291:442–457. PNW R6-Ecol-79-005, Pacific Northwest Re- US DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOREST SER- gion, Portland, OR. 96 p. FITZGERALD, S. 2005. Fire ecology of ponderosa VICE. 1936. Forest type map: State of Oregon pine and the rebuilding of fire-resilient pon- HOPKINS, W.E. 1979b. Plant associations of the (southwest quarter). PNW Forest Experiment derosa pine ecosystems. P. 197–225 in Proc. of Fremont National Forest. USDA Forest Ser- Station, Portland, OR. vice, PNW R6-Ecol-79-004, Pacific North- the Symposium on ponderosa pine: Issues, trends, US DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOREST SER- west Region, Portland, OR. 106 p. and management, Ritchie, M.W., D.A. Magu- VICE. 1994. Continuation of interim manage- INTERFOREST. 2000. A sustainability strategy for ire, and A. Youngblood (eds.). USDA For. ment direction establishing riparian, ecosystem the Klamath Forest in the context of the Upper Serv., Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-198, Pa- and wildlife standards for timber sales; Regional Klamath Basin. Prepared for the Klamath cific Southwest Research Station, Albany, CA. Forester’s Forest Plan Amendment #1. USDA Tribes. Available by request from the Klamath FRANKLIN, J.F., AND K.N. JOHNSON. 2012. A res- Tribes Natural Resource Director, Chiloquin, For. Serv., Pacific Northwest Region, Port- toration framework for federal forests in the OR. 105 p. land, OR. Pacific Northwest. J. For. 110(8):429–439. US DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SUR- KICKINGBIRD, K., AND K. DUCHENEAUX. 1973. FRANKLIN, J.F., K.N. JOHNSON, D.J. CHURCHILL, One hundred million acres. Macmillan Publish- VEY. 1921. Timber estimate. Unpublished survey K. HAGMANN,D.JOHNSON, AND J. JOHNSTON. ing Co., New York. 240 p. maps and data organized by township. Record 2013. Restoration of dry forests in eastern Ore- JOHNSON, K.N., J.F. FRANKLIN, AND D.L. JOHN- Group 75, National Archives, Seattle, WA. gon: A field guide. The Nature Conservancy. SON. 2008. A plan for the Klamath Tribes’ VOLLAND, L.A. 1985. Plant associations of the cen- 202 p. Available online at www.conservation management of the Klamath Reservation Forest. tral Oregon pumice zone. USDA Forest Service, gateway.org/ConservationPractices/FireLand Report prepared for the Klamath Tribes, Chi- PNW R6-Ecol-104-1985, Pacific Northwest scapes/FireLearningNetwork/NetworkProducts/ loquin, OR. 217 p. Region, Portland, OR. 138 p. Pages/Dry-Forest-Guide-2013.aspx; last ac- MARKUS, A., J. LEHMAN,B.SHULLANBERGER,B. WOLF, E.C. 2004. Klamath heartlands: A guide to cessed July 12, 2016. GOODMAN, AND C. SHUFFIELD. 2014. Acceler- the Klamath Reservation forest plan. Ecotrust, FRANKLIN, J.F., AND R. VAN PELT. 2004. Spatial ated restoration and priority landscapes: Fre- Portland, OR. 20 p. aspects of structural complexity in old-growth mont-Winema National Forest. Report pre- YOUNGBLOOD, A., T. MAX, AND K. COE. 2004. forests. J. For. 102(3):22–27. pared for the Fremont-Winema National Stand structure in east-side old-growth pon- HAGMANN, R.K., J.F. FRANKLIN, AND K.N. JOHN- Forest. Lakeview, OR. 26 p. derosa pine forests of Oregon and northern SON. 2013. Historical structure and composi- MEZGER, R.W. 2013. A forest history of the Oregon California. For. Ecol. Manage. 99(213):191– tion of ponderosa pine and mixed-conifer for- Klamath Basin 1910–1980 with a focus on the 217.

Journal of Forestry • MONTH 2016 9