Pacific Coast Forest Carbon: Forest Inventory Results from California, Oregon, and Washington

Glenn Christensen, Forest Inventory Analyst PNW Research Station. Portland, Oregon • Forest Service’s Forest Inventory & Analysis Program • Forest carbon analysis at the PNW Research Station • Pacific Coast results Overview • Latest results and next steps What is FIA? • National Forest Inventory Program • Congress authorized the program with the McSweeney-McNary Forest Research Act of 1928 • Initially started as a marketable timber survey • Data collected as funding and interest allowed • 1998 Farm Bill - Annualized inventory for all forest resources • Annual inventory to provide data on status and trends • Inventory all forest lands, on all ownerships • Consistent sampling protocol, compilation, database, reporting requirements • FIA at PNW Research Station: Led the first comprehensive timber survey of the Douglas-fir Region, 1930 FIA: Sampling & Plot Design • Multi-year measurement cycle (PNW=10-year cycle) • Plots are permanently located to measure change • Consistent across PNW states since 2001: AK, CA, OR, WA • Hawaii and Pacific Islands implemented later • Data confidentiality protecting landowners and data integrity • Provides a statistically unbiased annual estimate of forest land conditions and trends FIA in Washington State Field measured plots permanently located on a base grid of 1 plot per 6,000 acres • National Forest: 1 plot per 1,850 ac. outside wilderness

Annual field measurements began 2002: 6,112 field plots installed FIA National Program: Carbon Assessments

• US EPA Inventory • National Climate Assessment • National Forests Carbon Assessments • FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment • UN Land use, Land change and Forestry Assessment Forest Carbon Reporting at PNW-FIA • California • 2008: PNW-FIA completed initial baseline carbon estimates for California Air Resources Board in response to California AB32: 2006 Global Warming Solutions Act. • 2014: CAL FIRE funded annual carbon reporting began. • Oregon • 2019: Oregon Department of Forestry funded Oregon Forest Ecosystem Carbon Inventory: 2001-2016. Carbon in harvested wood products report completed 2020. • Washington • 2019: Washington Department of Natural Resources funded Washington Forest Ecosystem Carbon Inventory: 2002-2016. Carbon in harvested wood products report completed 2020. Forest Carbon Stocks Forest land area by Ownership

California: 31.7 million ac. • 61% Public, 48% Forest Service • 39% Private, 17% Corporate

Oregon: 29.6 million ac. • 64% Public, 47% Forest Service • 36% Private, 22% Corporate

Washington: 22.1 million ac. • 57% Public, 37% Forest Service • 43% Private, 22% Corporate

Forest Carbon Flux Forest Carbon Flux Forest Carbon Flux: Estimates of Change • Every pool of forest carbon has a rate of carbon input and rate of carbon output. • Flux represents the amount of carbon going into a pool minus the amount going out. • Net increase =

• Net loss = transfer out of pool or carbon emission as CO2

• Flux is reported in units of CO2 equivalents. • Annual forest carbon flux is estimated from actual measurements of growth, removals, and mortality. • Carbon removed as harvested wood products are not included but is accounted for in a separate analysis. Annual Net flux (CO2eMMT/yr) California: 29.16 Oregon: 30.91 Washington: 16.14

Growth on live trees represents California: 58% Oregon: 69% Washington: 50%

Note: Values greater than zero represent an annual increase in CO2e for a pool, values below zero represent an annual reduction in CO2e for a pool. Oregon and Washington: Live Tree Carbon Flux (CO2e) by Ownership

Oregon: 2001-2006 to 2011-2016 Washington: 2002-2006 to 2012-2016 California: Live Tree Carbon Flux (CO2e) by Ownership, 2019 Update Disturbance Impacts on Forest Carbon

Note: Values greater than zero represent an annual increase in CO2e for a pool, values below zero represent an annual reduction in CO2e for a pool. 2019 Data Update: Changing Live Tree Carbon Sequestration (Forest land remaining forest land)

California

Report year: 2017* 2018 2019

(change, MMT CO2 Live Tree Carbon Pool equivalent/year) Mortality -39.0 -41.5 -42.5 Harvest -13.8 -12.3 -13.4 Growth 71.0 69.5 69.0 Net change 18.2 15.7 13.1

* Unadjusted to updated ownership stratification 2019 Data Update: Changing Live Tree Carbon Sequestration (Forest land remaining forest land)

California Oregon

Report year: 2017* 2018 2019 2016* 2019**

Live Tree Carbon Pool (change, MMT CO2 equivalent/year) Mortality -39.0 -41.5 -42.5 -25.3 -26.5 Harvest -13.8 -12.3 -13.4 -34.8 -36.9 Growth 71.0 69.5 69.0 90.2 88.2 Net change 18.2 15.7 13.1 30.1 24.8

* Unadjusted to updated ownership stratification ** Preliminary estimate 2019 Data Update: Changing Live Tree Carbon Sequestration (Forest land remaining forest land)

California Oregon Washington

Report year: 2017* 2018 2019 2016* 2019** 2016* 2019**

Live Tree Carbon Pool (change, MMT CO2 equivalent/year) Mortality -39.0 -41.5 -42.5 -25.3 -26.5 -32.9 -34.2 Harvest -13.8 -12.3 -13.4 -34.8 -36.9 -31.2 -31.9 Growth 71.0 69.5 69.0 90.2 88.2 78.4 75.7 Net change 18.2 15.7 13.1 30.1 24.8 14.3 9.6

* Unadjusted to updated ownership stratification ** Preliminary estimate Thank you [email protected]

www.fia.fs.fed.us American Forest Resource Council Annual Meeting, Skamania Lodge, WA August 3, 2021

Talking Points for the Forest Sector Wood products as a critical element of US climate mitigation efforts

by Elaine Oneil PhD Director of Science and Sustainability CORRIM

Consortium for Research on Renewable Industrial Materials A non-profit corporation formed by 20 research institutions to conduct cradle to grave environmental studies of wood products Member Research Institutions Consortium for Research on Renewable Industrial Materials - CORRIM Wood as a Climate Mitigation Tool Controversies and Arguments Four Camps 1. Don’t cut any trees – leave them grow to sequester carbon and get your building materials somewhere else 2. Manage less intensively – a single tree here and another there for continuous cover and cropping 3. Manage on longer rotations to maximize carbon sequestration in each tree you harvest 4. Manage more intensively to reduce the amount of time and focus site resources on the trees 1st Argument Against “Don’t cut any trees – leave them grow to sequester carbon and get your building materials somewhere else”

Figure 1 from Lippke et al, 2021, The Plant a Trillion Trees Campaign to Reduce Global Warming – Fleshing Out the Concept, Journal of Sustainable Forestry, Berlyn Reviews, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi /full/10.1080/10549811.2021.1894 951 2nd Argument Against “Don’t cut any trees – leave them grow to sequester carbon and get your building materials somewhere else”

Figure 6 from Lippke et al, 2021, The Plant a Trillion Trees Campaign to Reduce Global Warming – Fleshing Out the Concept, Journal of Sustainable Forestry, Berlyn Reviews, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.10 80/10549811.2021.1894951 Intensive Management Model Confusion about Carbon Debt arises

because of scale Mason et al 2019: Graphic representation of the spatial and temporal dynamics of C storage for a typical PNW forest managed on 45-year rotations presented as: the growth and harvest cycles of one forest stand (in turquoise), an average per ha for 10 forest stands harvested in sequential intervals (in teal), and an average for 100 stands harvested sustainably as part of a “normal” forest (in brown). Adapted from McKinley et al. 2011 and Janowiak et al. 2017. Alternative Silvicultural Pathways on Federal Lands

Douglas-fir Forest Types – USFS – Western WA - forest + products + offsets carbon Accounting for Potential Fire Emissions

Total Carbon Storage over time for various management practices (black) compared to baseline management practices (red) for US Forest Service lands located in Western Washington State. Dimensions of Forest Carbon Sequestration

Time and amount of carbon sequestered

Most effective Carbon sequestered drawdown scenario Dimensions of Forest Carbon Sequestration

Increasing drawdown by increasing forest area US Regional Timberland Acreage Trends

US Timberland

PNW Region Southern Pine Region NE Region Rest of United States Average Volume/Ac by age class based on real inventory data in PNW

avg vol/inventory age

30,000

25,000

20,000

15,000 MBF/ac MBF/ac

10,000

5,000

- 22 27 32 37 42 47 52 Inventory Age Midpoint

Thank You

For More Information www.corrim.org Elaine Oneil, PhD Director of Science and Sustainability [email protected]

Carbon Carrying Capacity PNW Douglas-fir Forests Carbon in Standing Inventory by Age Class for Western Washington Federal Lands 500 Harmon et al 1990 – 1 site - OGDF – Oregon 432 t C/ha 450 Smith 1994: coastal BC – fully stocked OG – 230 t C/ha Smith 1994: coastal BC 146 OG stands – 133 t C/ha 400

350

300

250

200 150 Maximum Tree Carbon

100 Carbon Carbon tonnes in C/hectare 50

0

Age in Decades Carbon in Standing Tree Inventory Forest and Wood Product System relative to unharvested, unmanaged Range of Carbon Storage for unmanaged, unharvested forest PNW Douglas-Fir forest • Sustained trend of 2.3 t C/ha/year • 1.9 times the no- harvest maximum by Range of Carbon Storage for unmanaged, unharvested PNW year 135 Douglas-Fir forest • Sustained trend of 5.9 t C/ha/year • Exceeds no- harvest maximum at year 45 • Seismic code Range of Carbon Storage for unmanaged, unharvested PNW Douglas-Fir forest standards Image courtesy of Alan Organschi, Gray Organschi Architecture and Senior Critic, Yale School of Architecture, Forest Policy, Carbon, and People 2021 AFRC Annual Meeting

August 03, 2021 Terry Baker, CEO Society of American Foresters Connecting science to policy makers

• Determining the best available science to put forward is a multidisciplinary effort that requires the extensive collaboration of stakeholders and demands an adequate investment into research, education, and outreach. • SAF supports investments in basic and applied research as a critical step in enhancing the long- term productivity, health, utilization, and sustainability of the nation’s forest resources. • Getting this science in front of the policy makers requires collaboration and strategic coordination between research, grant funding, industry, and end-users in setting research priorities and objectives. o Also needed: direct monetary support to private landowners and public agencies to explore and implement the technologies and practices that can be used to mitigate carbon emissions and adapt to changing climate conditions, and associated assistance programs for local communities to implement the necessary changes. Working forests are a climate solution

• With the myriad of forestry-related bills being introduced this session in Congress, it’s nice to see forests getting the attention they deserve. • More legislation from both sides of the aisle includes some form of management. • Democrats seem to really be embracing prescribed fire as a management tool and wood innovations like CLT and nanocellulose.

• The need for stronger coalition/collective voices beating the drum of forest management – management being the key word – as a versatile and powerful natural climate solution. Working forests are a climate solution

• Focus on private lands and promoting the benefits of working forests.

• Based on preliminary reports, the 30x30 initiative will incorporate and account for private lands and their benefits as well. This will be a great opportunity to highlight how forest management not only helps maximize climate benefits by improving health and resiliency but also keeps those forests as forests and prevents land use change.

• As the availability and awareness of carbon markets expands, we need to keep on top of the narrative to reiterate that even these forests need management to maximize and optimize the benefits they can provide. Challenging perceptions of active forest management

• In an era heavily saturated by messaging, the prospect of trees being cut in any capacity can seem unsettling and counterproductive. • A lack of education on the benefits of active forest management, especially when used by skilled natural resource professionals, feeds into fears of mismanagement. • When people think of logging (or even when they hear “forest management”), they often jump to images of clearcutting. • For us to be more effective advocates, we need to be able to show case studies with imagery and stories. • We also must be willing to frame our messages in terminology that resonates outside of forestry professionals. Carbon policy supporting rural communities

• Rural Forest Markets Act • Grants the USDA authority to issue up to $150 million in guarantees for loans and bonds that help create carbon markets for small and family forest owners. The act also incentivizes small family landowners to adopt climate-friendly forest practices that can result in verifiable carbon sequestration and storage.

• Growing Climate Solutions Act • The US Senate recently passed the Growing Climate Solutions Act (S. 1251), which will help farmers, ranchers, and forest landowners understand and access carbon markets. • Specifically, the bill authorizes USDA to establish a voluntary Greenhouse Gas Technical Assistance Provider and Third-Party Verifier Certification Program to help reduce entry barriers into voluntary environmental credit markets for farmers, ranchers, and private forest landowners. Main Takeaways

• While the basic and applied research itself is fundamentally important, often decisionmakers are looking for – and are much more persuaded by – a showing of broad and diverse stakeholder support for scientific principles and specific proposals. • We can’t lose sight of the power of consensus building around scientific principles and specific management proposals. • Collectively, we’ll have much more success versus individually arguing about the best science. • Current and future coalition efforts should focus on identifying key research, building consensus around key takeaways, and developing strategies and resources for sharing among partners and with decisionmakers. • Be willing to engage new players with growing interests in forest health and sustainability. • Visuals and metrics to help tell a story and help others tell the story are key. Thank You!