Pros and Cons of Salvage and Restoration Operations

February 10, 2010

John Sessions College of Forestry Oregon State University Oregon Society of American Foresters Position Statement (2008)

The OSAF supports the well planned, timely and careful use of salvage harvesting after uncontrollable events have killed or damaged large numbers of trees in a forest. Salvage harvesting can mitigate economic losses due to the event, recover useful wood products, reduce fire and safety hazards, and create the desired environmental conditions for successful reforestation.

fuels)

effective) aerial (chemicals,cost manual (costly,dangerous,creates Prescribed burning, future suppression Vegetation control - - Carbon sequestration, bioenergy Habitat impact, erosion, aesthetics Worker and visitor safety Short and long term fuels Defensible fuel profile zone (fuel break) Habitat creation (increase down wood) Revenue for govt/counties, restoration Impact on natural regeneration Insect risk reduction Future management options

The Timber Salvage Decision • • • • • • • • • • Post-Wildfire Activity Policy Choices

• Why do anything? • What are the goals? • How should priorities be set? • Where do resources come from? Common to many Decisions

1. Are there alternative ways to reach goals? 2. Are some alternatives more reliable than others? 3. Are some alternatives more costly than others? 4. Who gains and who loses? Post-fire Considerations • Although a big tree can be killed instantly, it cannot be replaced instantly

• Small snags do not grow into large snags

• Natural regeneration happens, but timing and outcomes are uncertain 545 Year Drought Reconstruction for Central Oregon Eight year running average 1.0 represents average tree growth http://www.willamette.edu/~karabas/research/Pohletal2002.pdf

$1200/acre

$400/acre

1994 Hull Mountain Burn in 2002 Why Hasten Forest Regrowth? Snag Dynamics: Study 26 Fires on WA Eastside

Conclusions: • Existing snags will not likely bridge gap until future large dead wood arrives

Recommendations: • Plant • Vegetation Control • Induce Mortality (kill some trees)

See Everett et al. (1999) Int. J. of Wildfire Sci. 290 years old

66 years old Temporal dynamics Habitat for fire-associated species

Period of minimal snag resources Number of snags regenerating stand resulting from fire Recruitment of snags from Time Recruitment of new snag resources with no restoration (Hayes, 2003) Temporal dynamics Habitat for fire-associated species

Period of minimal snag resources Number of snags regenerating stand resulting from fire Recruitment of snags from Time Recruitment of new snag resources WITH restoration (Hayes, 2003) Cost Per Ac total to age 21 $700-1300 Plant 200-400 Fuel Reduction/Site Prep $200-300 Vegetation Control 200-400 Prune (manual or Rx burn) 100-200 Direct Fire Control $350-1500

Accelerated Restoration is Expensive and gets more expensive with time Re-establishment Effects of Vegetation Control Coast Range, Oregon 70 60 No Weed 50 Control 1 yr Weed 40 Control 2 yr Weed 30 Control

Mbf/acre 20 10 0 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 Stand Age Fountain Fire. See Zhang et al. Journal of Forestry (2008) What does the Investment Buy? Higher Survival Rate Taller tree Larger diameter (bark thickness) Shorter flame length

toast Factors Affecting Timber Value Recovery:

Harvest System Distance From Road Volume Per Acre Silvicultural Prescription Time Since Death Species, Size, Age Net Value: 24-inch DBH Douglas Fir ($/tree, 2003)

Helicopter Yarding Distance From Road 0.25 0.75 1.25 1.75 Year mi mi mi mi

0 174 138 102 68

1 109 73 37 24

2 48 33 14 7

3 13 10 0 0

4 5 0 0 0 Net Value: 24-inch DBH Douglas Fir ($/tree, 2003)

Ground-Based Skidding Distance From Road 0.25 0.75 1.25 1.75 Year mi mi mi mi

0 264 248 231 215

1 195 187 179 164

2 150 135 120 104

3 88 73 66 45

4 54 41 29 18 Timber Salvage: Economic Gainers and Losers

Benefit to Consumers (lower product prices)

Benefit to Govt/Counties (revenue)

Undamaged Producers (lower log prices and lower product prices)

See Prestemon et al. (2006) Wildfire, timber salvage, and the economics of expediency. J. of For. Econ.

Timber Salvage: Effects on Disturbance and Erosion Potential

Example from Klock (1975)

Severe Disturbance as % of Logged Area

Helicopter 0.7%, Skyline 2.8% Tractor on Snow, 9.9%

See Klock (1975) Impact of five postfire salvage logging systems on soils and vegetation. J. of Soil and Water

Conservation Timber Salvage: Effects on Wildlife Habitat

Reduces Habitat for Cavity Nesters (studies, many)

Reduces Habitat for Bark Beetles (no brainer)

Can Increase Habitat for Rodents Such as Wood Rats (anecdotal observation)

May Accelerate Return of Bats and Birds that prefer lower snag densities (hypothesis) Timber Salvage: Effects on Natural Regeneration Observation: “Timber salvage will impact natural regeneration”

Conclusion: “Salvage promptly”

See D.F. Roy, Salvage logging may destroy Douglas-fir reproduction. USFS California For. and Range Exp. Stn. Research Note 107, 1956. Helicopter Yarding

Not• SelectiveSalvaged Salvage

Selective Salvage

Apple Fire Salvage Davis Fire – Late Successional Reserve- After Salvage

Skid Trail Biscuit Fire - Grouped Retention in Wide Riparian Zone

Aggregated Snag Retention – 100 ac Units

Harvest Unit

Cost Savings 15-20% Avoiding Partial Cut 15-20% on Shorter Distance Grouped Snag Retention (Conway, 1976)

Other Benefits

Snag Longevity

Easier to Control Competing Vegetation

Defensible Space

Road Concluding Comments:

• The Salvage decision is linked to GOALS. • The Salvage decision is time sensitive. • The Salvage decision is not ALL or NOTHING. • The Salvage decision is primarily about economics, but other considerations should not be discounted. Thank You B

Burning Snag Metolius Basin