society of american foresters western … › ... › wfaprmayjune2018final.pdfguished leaders of...

BY JOHN D. BAILEY

Note: The summary from the 2018 FireSummit Report is abridged and editedby John D. Bailey.

We live with andin unprecedentedfuel conditionsthroughout much ofthe West; I equate oursituation to that of afilled reservoir wherethe pond is an accu-mulation of biomass poised to bedrained. Our land management prac-tices, for better or for worse, have cre-ated this reservoir—a fuel base that ismore contiguous and more homoge-nous than at any point in history.Furthermore, greater numbers ofhumans are more closely connected toforests in communities that have anextended area of wildland-urban inter-face, and more people seem to havedeeply held values about the foreststhey only rarely visit. Meanwhile, theclimate is warming and the forests arebecoming drier, making fire seasonslonger and stretching managementresources further. We now live with afire behavior triangle on steroids:rugged topography, unprecedentedfuels, and more extreme fire weather.

Suppressing fire has been at theheart of our forest management strategyand our profession for a century ormore. I “fought” fire for years as anundergraduate student, though some ofthose years included prescribed burningas well. And fire suppression was suc-

cessful for many decades. Recently,however, wildfires have changed. Wehave set records for severity in three ofthe past four years, and in eight of thepast ten; we have “mega-fires”—com-plex fires that burn at least 100,000acres. Our society now invests moretime, energy, and resources fighting firesthan we do taking proactive steps toreduce wildfire severity and foster theresiliency of our forested landscapes. Wefind ourselves continuously respondingto the next emergency rather than act-ing on a broader, more strategic view ofhow to coexist with fire and smoke, andto manage our forested landscapes toreduce severity when wildfires do occur(including the use of fire).

This context cries out for solutionsand policies that are adaptable to thatlong-term perspective. It took a centu-ry to create the fuel-laden conditionsin our forests, and it will take decades

of proactive management to mitigatethose conditions. Scientists and landmanagers alike tell us that we need toadopt both short- and long-term prac-tices that strategically integrate thatmanagement (across all ownershipboundaries) with the reality of fire andwildfires clearly in mind. Residents ofwestern states cannot expect a futurefree of wildfires any more than resi-dents of Florida can count on a futurefree of hurricanes—the difference isthat we can take proactive steps toreduce the severity of wildfires andminimize their adverse social impactsover time. But we must be prepared toexecute that new strategy with all itscomponent parts.

2018 Fire Summit

Oregon State University sponsored aFire Summit held in Portland, Ore., on

Fire and Fuels Management in the Future:Roles and Challenges

S O C I E T Y O F A M E R I C A N F O R E S T E R S

(CONTINUED ON PAGE 2)

April/May/June 2018 Oregon • Washington State • Inland Empire • Alaska Societies Volume 63 • Number 2

Western Forester

In This Issue: Fuels Management

PHOTO COURTESY OF JOHN D. BAILEY

The 2003 B&B Complex fire one decade later, taken near the crest of theCascades (and Three Fingered Jack).

March 1-2, 2018, at the World ForestryCenter to identify viable forest manage-ment practices that would help in miti-gating the risks and impacts of high-severity fire events. The full reportfrom the Summit is available atwww.forestry.oregonstate.edu/. It wasintended to provide elected officialsand policy administrators with recom-mended actions that, if taken, wouldmeaningfully contribute to addressingthe increasing challenges facing ourfire-prone western forest landscapes.

The report can also now serve as a plat-form for subsequent dialogue.

Approximately 30 scientists, landmanagers, and forest policy expertsparticipated in preparatory meetings inthe weeks leading up to the Summit’sDay One session. These experts repre-sented relevant areas of expertise, geo-graphical locations, and both publicand private ownership interests. Theycame from five states and BritishColumbia, and represented six univer-sities; seven federal land managementagency offices, departments, orresearch units; four private forestlandmanagement entities; and two citygovernments.

We were organized into three work-ing panels corresponding to thematicareas aligned with the NationalCohesive Wildland Fire ManagementStrategy: 1) managing for landscaperesiliency; 2) promoting fire-adaptedcommunities; and 3) developing effec-tive wildfire responses. I worked direct-ly with the first panel on resiliency.Panels were asked to discuss and thenultimately prepare policy recommen-dations building upon the foundationof work documented in the WesternGovernors’ Association (WGA) Phase IIIWestern Regional Science-Based RiskAnalysis Report (2012) and the WesternGovernors’ National Forest andRangeland Management Initiative(2017).

The panels met in person during DayOne the Summit for nine hours of alter-nating concurrent and plenary sessionsdesigned to frame and finalize recom-mendations for the next day. Then, onDay Two, approximately 150 peoplewere convened to hear experts summa-rize the work of each panel, and thenparticipate in extensive, unscripted dis-cussions with a group of university,state, federal, and private forest policyindividuals. The day began with open-ing remarks by Oregon State SenatorHerman Baertschiger, Jr. (Chair, FireCaucus of the Oregon Legislature) andclosed with an address and call to actionfrom Oregon’s Governor, Kate Brown.

Represented on stage throughoutthe Day Two sessions were forest policyexecutives from the Oregon Depart-ment of Forestry; Montana Departmentof Natural Resources and Conservation;and Office of Washington StateCommissioner of Public Lands. Theywere joined by leaders of forest policyprograms of the Universities ofWashington, Idaho, Montana, andOregon State, along with a representa-tive of private commercial forestlands.These nine were joined by two distin-guished leaders of the U.S. ForestService: Vicki Christiansen, Acting Chiefof the U.S. Forest Service (who, at thetime, was Deputy Chief, State andPrivate Forestry), and James Peña,Regional Forester, Pacific NorthwestRegion, Region 6 (before announcinghis retirement).

2 WESTERN FORESTER ◆ APRIL/MAY/JUNE 2018

Next Issue: Silviculture

Fire and FuelsManagement(CONTINUED FROM FRONT PAGE)

Western ForesterSociety of American Foresters

4033 S.W. Canyon Rd. • Portland, OR 97221 • 503-224-8046 • Fax 503-226-2515www.nwoffice.forestry.org/northwest-office/western-forester-archive

Editor: Lori Rasor, [email protected] Forester is published four times a year by the Oregon, Washington State,

Inland Empire, and Alaska Societies’ SAF Northwest Office

State Society Chairs

Oregon: Fran Cafferata Coe, 503-680-7939,[email protected]

Washington State: Paul Wagner,360-436-0089, [email protected]

Inland Empire: Phil Aune, 509-464-1409,[email protected]

Alaska: Jeremy Douse, CF, 907-452-8251,[email protected]

Northwest SAF Board Members

District 1: Tom Hanson, Forestry andArboriculture Consultant, ArborInfo LLC,206-300-9711, [email protected];www.ArborInfo.com

District 2: Mike Cloughesy, Oregon ForestResources Institute, 503-329-1014,[email protected]

Anyone is at liberty to make fair use of the material in this publication. To reprint or make multiple reproduc-tions, permission must be obtained from the editor. Proper notice of copyright and credit to the WesternForester must appear on all copies made. Permission is granted to quote from the Western Forester if thecustomary acknowledgement accompanies the quote.

Other than general editing, the articles appearing in this publication have not been peer reviewed for techni-cal accuracy. The individual authors are primarily responsible for the content and opinions expressed herein.

Please send change of address to:Society of American Foresters, 10100 Laureate Way, Bethesda, MD 20814

[email protected]

503-684-81681-800-783-6818

11825 SW Greenburg Road, Suite 200 Tigard, OR 97223

www.nwforestryservices.com

❑ Professional Forest Management ❑ Appraisals

❑ Timber Inventories and Cruising ❑ Mapping and GIS

The collective remarks of the pan-elists and speakers offered a big-pic-ture perspective of the remarkable andintertwined context for viewing fire inthe West, from the variety of jurisdic-tions, landscapes and vegetation types,and cultural experiences and expecta-tions. The individuals and entities rep-resented there collectively agreed wemust do a better job incorporating thefull range of existing science and localland management expertise into ourpolicies and decisions.

Specific Recommendations fromSummit Panels

1. Expand Strategic Use ofCommercial Thinning, PrescribedFires, and Managed Wildfire as ForestManagement Tools. More partial har-vest/thinning, prescribed fires, andstrategic management of wildfires dur-ing shoulder seasons needs to beundertaken to change the probabilityand severity of fires during the subse-quent hot, dry summer seasons. Onthis topic, panels made two clearpoints: 1) that fuel reduction bymechanical thinning is often an essen-tial part of a prescribed burning and/ormanaged wildfire strategy where thereis an overabundance of fuels; and 2)that “no smoke” in and near fire adapt-ed communities is simply not realistic.

Smoke management policies mustreflect this fact if we are to strategicallymanage the wildfire risks. Participantsnoted that much work remains if we areto build the social and political licensenecessary to support the scale of addi-tional mechanical thinning, prescribedburning, and/or use of managed wild-fire required to effectively reduce thelandscape fuel loading and subsequentlikelihood of high-severity fires. Thatsaid, panelists noted that ongoingresearch indicates public acceptancemay not be playing as big a role in lim-iting the use of prescribed fire as over-abundance of fuels, lack of contractorand market capacity, personal liabilityrules, and limited burn windows.

2. Improve Coordination AcrossJurisdictions and OwnershipBoundaries. There is a nearly uniformcall for local cross-boundary coordina-tion to more proactively address fire-prone landscapes, and to reassess andtailor the existing framework for firesuppression. Summit panelists, presen-

ters, and participants agreed that suc-cessful strategies must include ways tomanage people as well as trees. Ifresourced and provided better access tobest-in-class data and modeling, thereis virtual consensus that stakeholders ina given locality have the expertise andworking relationships to evaluate trade-offs, reach compromises, and makestrategic and effective wildfire manage-ment decisions that make sense locallyand across the landscape. Establishing“Fire Adapted Community Coordinator”positions to support planning, imple-mentation, and resourcing of suchefforts at a relevant, local scale couldserve as a major step in this direction.These individuals would be chargedwith accelerating improvements inpractices, securing technical assistance,and coordinating access to resourcesand information across jurisdictions.

3. Develop and Implement Cross-Boundary “Pre-Fire Response” Plansand Strategies. Effective fire responseduring the height of wildfire season ishighly dependent upon the planningand coordination efforts that happenwell in advance of the fire event itself.Because creating fire-resistant andresilient landscapes is a long-termproposition, panel discussions agreedthat aggressive suppression must cer-tainly continue. To be most effective,however, that suppression must bestrategic and undertaken in the contextof accepted goals for re-establishing

sustainable conditions into the future.Summit panels uniformly noted thatadditional investment in risk assess-ments that articulate the unique risk ofboth fire and resulting smoke to thelandscape and populations in eachregion is needed. Summit panels alsoaddressed the need for pre-fire strate-gies that specifically address home (or“structure”) ignitions during extremewildfire conditions, since these igni-tions are principally driven by ignitionfactors (vulnerabilities) of a home inrelation to its immediate surround-ings—the “home ignition zone.”

4. Address Inequities Associatedwith Liability for Cross-BoundaryFires. Fires frequently cross land owner-ship boundaries, and in doing so createquestions of legal liability for damagesassociated with the fire event. The cur-rent framework for imposing financialresponsibility for losses resulting fromfires that cross from federal to privateforests and vice-versa is a flash pointthat impedes progress in nearly all dis-cussions regarding fire prevention andsuppression efforts. Perceived or actualliability is thought to be a significantimpediment to expanding the scale ofprescribed burning on private lands.Summit panels discussed and recog-nized this legal construct as an obstacleto cohesive and effective pre-attackplanning, strategy development, andsuppression.

WESTERN FORESTER ◆ APRIL/MAY/JUNE 2018 3

(CONTINUED ON PAGE 23)

BY JASON PETTIGREW

eclining foresthealth, coupled

with severe wildfire,is impacting ecologi-cal, social, and eco-nomic systemsacross the westernUnited States. Aslandscapes become less resilient andthe consequences impact multiplevalues, communities and land man-agement agencies increasingly seekcollaborative approaches to manageacross traditional boundaries.

The Klamath-Lake Forest HealthPartnership (KLFHP) is implementinglandscape-scale projects in south cen-tral Oregon that leverage publicresources with local capacity for all-lands projects. Despite institutionalbarriers, the unique combination ofpartners has enabled KLFHP to garnerfunding for projects that address multi-ple resource values. The group seeks toproactively create a portfolio of man-agement options rather than allowextreme events to dictate decisions.

The complexities faced in Klamathand Lake counties are familiar acrossthe western US—mixed ownershipsoverlaid on diverse landscapes. Thesecounties face similar economic chal-lenges with undesirable forest healthconditions, controversial water issues,and increasing wildfire risk due to fuelloading and an expanding wildland-urban interface. The counties differ inland ownership—Klamath’s averagenonindustrial owner manages 10 acres,compared to 1,500 acres in LakeCounty where ranching is the predom-inant land use. Landscape manage-ment needs are similar, though differ-

ent approaches are used in each coun-ty. Large fires with mostly undesirableside effects have occurred in bothcounties—Barry Point, Oregon Gulch,Winter Rim, Toolbox, and MoccasinHills are a few that come to mind. Ineastern Oregon environments, wildfire

is the primary disturbance we seek tomoderate, and at the same time buildinto future management plans.

A simplified look at the landscapeKLFHP seeks to evaluate illustrates ahumbling reality where treatmentefforts on 4.8 million acres (2.3 millionacres on the Fremont-WinemaNational Forest) are outpaced not onlyby the annual threat of fire (historicalfire return intervals average 14 years inmany locations), but also by theencroachment of juniper and noxiousweeds, as well as progressively over-stocked forest stands. For the past cen-tury, much of this landscape has been


The Klamath-Lake Forest Health Partnership: AnEvolving Example of Planning All-Lands Restoration

D

PHOTO COURTESY OF JAKE BARNETT

Juniper thinning projects in eastern Oregon are common to reduce theencroachment of western juniper due mainly to fire exclusion in fire-dependent ecosystems. The juniper piles are burned under favorable smokeand fuels conditions and often have many tons per acre of biomass material.

PHOTO COURTESY OF JASON PETTIGREW

This photo shows the fence line from private land looking onto Forest Serviceland that is being thinned under the first Good Neighbor Authority timber salein Region 6.

devoid of stand altering or mainte-nance mechanisms. The Fremont-Winema National Forest’s AcceleratedRestoration and Landscape Strategy(2014) identifies a need to increase thepace and scale of restoration–a strate-gy that applies to most forest andrange landowners in the region.

Landscape-scale conservation thatfocuses on multiple resource valuesand ownerships has become anincreasingly important managementconcept. While there is no one-size-fits-all approach, key elements of successfulprojects include broad partnershipsamong local, state, and federal organi-zations, as well as innovative data col-lection and targeted outreach strategiesto recruit private landowners.

The Partnership’s overall vision is tocreate a portfolio of managementoptions across the landscape thatincorporate landowner needs andrebuild the resilience of forest andrange ecosystems so that large-scaledisturbances like wildfire have net pos-itive effects. The group leverages stateand federal resources with local capaci-

ty to build projects that meet social,economic, and ecological restorationgoals. To address resource needs thatcross boundaries, the KLFHP modelrelies on a shared vision between fed-eral land managers and privatelandowners, supported by a diversefunding portfolio. The group regularlysurveys an area of over 4.8 millionacres—regardless of ownership—look-ing for opportunities to pair federalNEPA-ready projects with work on pri-vately owned land to create projectsthat meet goals of the NationalCohesive Strategy. Operational efficien-cies, focused stand treatments, andsensible prescriptions become moreevident when ownership barriers areblurred or removed. Watersheds, foresttypes, and focal species such as muledeer and sage grouse habitats becomethe operational boundaries we seek tooperate within rather than tax lots.

The ability to move forward withlandscape-scale restoration inKlamath and Lake counties has beenmany years in the making. The align-ment of state and national priorities

has been critical. For example, theGood Neighbor Authority has pavedthe way for development of a FederalForest Restoration Program in Oregon,which allows the Oregon Departmentof Forestry (ODF) to assist withrestoration projects on federal lands.Additionally, ODF has a cooperativeagreement with the Natural ResourcesConservation Service that enablesODF stewardship foresters to help for-est landowners access Farm Bill pro-grams. These tools allow ODF to workwith federal and other local partners toaccess funding and create agreementsin support of a shared local vision forlandscape-scale restoration.

The North Warner Crooked MudHoney Project expanded a 60,000-acreForest Service treatment project towell over 90,000 acres by adding adja-cent private landowners using multi-ple funding sources and technical sup-port from several partners. The proj-ects provide for the removal of com-mercial timber, stream restorationactivities, forage enhancement, and


Nikon Inc. Limited Warranty Included.

©2018 Forestry Suppliers, Inc. All rights reserved.

MAKE YOUR3-POINTPLAY.The proven Nikon Forestry Pro

FREE

Sales 800-647-5368www.forestry-suppliers.com

� � � � �

(CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE)

removal of encroaching juniper andoverstocked non-merchantableconifers. The project includes activenoxious weed treatment programs,developing prescribed burn plans, andgrazing or forest management restora-tion work on all ownerships within theproject boundaries.

Project planning at a landscapescale includes identifying high poten-tial areas through analysis of currentfire risk and vegetation inventory,development of forest managementplans, and working with stakeholdersto create a shared vision for futureresource conditions. Detailed data col-lection and GIS mapping on privatelands provide information for land-owners and technical specialists todiscuss long-term management withawareness of what is planned on adja-cent federal lands. Maintenance plansinclude wildfire response, landscapemaintenance with mechanical andprescribed fire treatments, and techni-cal assistance for private landowners. Aforthcoming publication from OregonState University Extension will docu-ment the processes, relationships, andstory of recent KLFHP projects.

Key challenges to large-scale treat-ments include biomass utilization anddeveloping the institutional capacityneeded to support an emerging busi-ness model around landscape-scalecollaborative projects. The latter hasbeen particularly challenging, but theunique combination of partners and

trust built through KLFHP has enabledthe group to find innovative solutionsto these institutional barriers. Theproject funds acquired thus far areviewed as a stimulus to initiate land-scape treatments with a strong impe-tus to create free market incentives. Tocontinue this work, expand uponuntreated acres, and enable sustain-able maintenance, there is a criticalneed for the development of viablebiomass markets.

Other challenges include workforcecapacity, agency programmatic barri-ers that inhibit collaboration at thelocal level, and key players whochoose not to participate. The align-ment of empowered agency employ-ees, the right funding sources, and alocally derived desire to consider alllands treatments are necessary forsuccessful projects.

Fire has a much larger role as a toolin resource management in easternOregon than in moister westernOregon. As a tool, fire is underutilized,poorly understood, and generally notsupported. KLFHP recognizes that fewlandscapes are ready to receive fireuntil mechanical treatment can realigntheir systems. Forest land manage-

ment should seamlessly transitionfrom the mechanical to fire use andcomplement each other; however, thisis often not the case. Landscape-levelplanning takes a comprehensive viewusing all the tools available to us,applied in the right places at the righttime, to create the appropriatechanges. Land managers andlandowners must be cognizant of theoptions and make informed decisions.Forest management plans should lookbeyond individual trees.

The Klamath Lake Forest HealthPartnership realizes the biggest chal-lenge to landscape-level treatments liein our culture, our relationships, and inideas that lack forethought. Forest man-agement is a long-term endeavor.Locally, we have learned that physicallandscapes often heal sooner thanhuman relationships, though both aredamaged by the same catastrophicwildfires, poor forest management deci-sions, or other ecological disasters. Thislesson suggests project success shouldbe measured by relationships and part-nerships, rather than just acres treated.

To make a positive difference on alandscape scale we must put the bestinterest of the land and its people first,while balancing the ecological con-straints we face. We can only pull somany levers to bring about change,and finding the right combination canbe challenging. We seek to create adiverse, resilient landscape that pro-vides multiple values over time. To getthere, we have focused on partner-ships that enable us to leverage theresources, relationships, and latesttechnology to identify shared goalsand create management plans thatbalance complex (often competing)needs for generations to come. ◆

Jason Pettigrew is a stewardshipforester for the Oregon Department ofForestry on the Klamath-Lake Districtin Klamath Falls. He can be reached at541-891-7866 or [email protected].


“Watersheds, forest types, and focal species such as mule deerand sage grouse habitats become the operational boundarieswe seek to operate within rather than tax lots.”

—Jason Pettigrew, ODF Stewardship Forester

Land Management | Real Estate Services | Wildlife ManagementRecreational Leases | Technical and Data Services

Anyone can see the beauty.Our specialty is helping preserve your legacy.

Chehalis 360.740.3757 • Kirkland 425.820.3420

americanforestmanagement.com

BY GARY ELLINGSON, LUKE MACHTOFF, AND ERIC FEMREITE

orthwestManagement,

Inc. (NMI) has pro-vided forestry con-sulting services since1984 throughout theinland Northwest.NMI operates officesin Moscow, Idaho;Deer Park andColville, Washington;and Helena,Montana. Over thepast several decades,NMI and many of itsstaff of 35 naturalresource profession-als have providedwildfire hazard miti-gation services toclients throughoutits service area.

This article pro-vides a generaloverview of therange of contractedservices costs thatNMI typically encounters when com-pleting wildfire hazard mitigation proj-

ects within the Wildland UrbanInterface (WUI). Contracted servicesprimarily include activities associatedwith tree felling and slash disposal.Wildfire hazard mitigation projectscompleted in the WUI often occur insettings such as residential subdivi-sions, rural residential areas, and otherareas within or adjacent to cities andtowns. In other words, these projectstake place where human developmentintermingles with undeveloped wild-land or vegetative fuels that are at vary-ing degrees of risk from wildfire.

These projects occur in developedareas, which has an impact on costs ofcontracted services. There are oftenneighbors or community associationsinvolved or impacted by work thatrequire a higher level of project coordi-nation to ensure a successful outcome.

Slash burning can raise concernsamong neighbors as well as local fireand law enforcement agencies.Operators must often mobilize andpark equipment on paved streets orwithin residential areas. Noise associat-ed with chainsaws and operation ofmechanical equipment impacts neigh-boring properties, thus hours of opera-tion may need to be adjusted accord-ingly. Power lines, lawns, gardens,fences, septic tanks, irrigation systems,and other developments must be pro-tected or avoided. Fixed costs, such asmobilization of equipment, are allocat-ed to a smaller project size, whichdrives up costs on a per acre basis rela-tive to wildland projects.

Wildfire hazard mitigation projects


Contracted Service Rates for Common WildfireHazard Mitigation Approaches in the WUI

N

Gary Ellingson

Luke Machtoff

Eric Femreite


Restore ourfederal forests

to restore ourrural communities

Join us @HealthyForests.Org

Areas without smoke management issues.Areas inoperable to mechanical equipment.Material small enough (<6” dia.) to handle byhand and burn well in hand pile. Piles must beleft on-site at least 3-4 months to dry outproperly for good consumption and less smoke.

Stand density and stem size.Topography. Piling is very laborintensive. Burning in WUI mayrequire smoke managementcoordination and waterresources. Coordination withlocal fire and law enforcementagencies during burning.

$650-$1,300/ac(does not includeburning)

Labor: $25-$33/hr.

Approach Applications and Considerations Cost Factors Cost Range (MT, ID, E. WA)

Contracted Service Rates for Common Wildfire Hazard Mitigation Approachesin the Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI)

Hand thin, hand pile, andburn

Typically follows mechanical harvest of largetrees. Trees greater than 6” dia. are typicallymachine felled and processed. Smaller treesmay be cut by hand or with mechanical equip-ment. Areas without smoke management issues.Topography and ground conditions suitable foroperation of mechanical equipment. Largermaterial and heavy fuels are more suited tohandling with equipment. Need adequate treespacing for larger piles and equipment opera-tion. Piles must be left for at least 3-4 months todry out properly for good consumption and lesssmoke. Some coarse woody debris (logs greaterthan 6”) may be left for wildlife habitat.

Density and size of material.Topography, volume of material,rocky ground, density of residualstand. Burning in WUI mayrequire smoke managementcoordination and waterresources. Coordination withlocal fire and law enforcementagencies during burning.

$200-$550/ac(does not includeburning or treefelling)

Large excavatorrates: $90-$150/hr.

Small or mini-excavator rates:$65-$95/hr.

Excavator piling

Topography and ground conditions suitable formechanical equipment operation. Exposedrocks are undesirable. Useful where burning isnot acceptable or desired. Standing and downmaterial can be masticated. Machine reach willallow for thinning if tree spacing is adequate formachine passage. Fire hazard during dry condi-tions due to sparks. Extremely heavy fuel accu-mulations may result in a residual chip bed.

Density and size of material.Topography, volume of material,rocky ground, density of residualstand.

$450-$1,150/ac

Machine rates(excavator or fellerbuncher mountedmastication head,forwarder, etc.):$150-$225/hr.Track-mounted excavator

or feller buncher withmastication head attachment

Limited to level or moderately sloped topogra-phy (0-30% slope). Exposed rocks are undesir-able. More ground disturbance due to frequentturning and multiple passes. Most efficient withsmaller diameter material (standing or down).High level of upper soil disturbance to create avery smooth, manicured result. Can operate intighter space or residential applications withrubber tracks.

Density and size of material.Topography, volume of material,rocky ground, density of residualstand.

$450-$1,150/ac

Machine rates(skid steer orcustom mulcher):$125-225/hr.

Skid steer or trackedforestry mulching machine

Restricted to areas close to roads or very flat,operable ground a 4WD pickup can traverse.Useful in WUI settings where pile burning is notdesirable. Eliminates the need to return to proj-ect area for burning. Chipped material is gener-ally broadcast on-site. Most commercial towablechippers operated by a labor crew are inefficienthandling materials larger than 6-8” diameteralthough machine is rated for larger material.Dragging and feeding material to chipper islabor intensive.

Generally, a 2- to 4-person crewpairs well with one chipper whenchipping is underway.

$750-$1,650/ac

Labor: $25-$33/hr.

Towable chipper with3-person crew:Approx. $1,250/day.

Hand thin and chip withtowable chipper


often begin with a property assessmentconducted by a trained forestry profes-sional. Once the risk is identified, andthe property owner agrees that actionto mitigate the risk is required, adetailed project plan and map outlin-ing the migration method and locationis prepared. Project plans are generallyrequired for property owners seekingfinancial or cost-share assistance.Typically, the project plan defines thestandard to which the vegetation mustbe modified to effectively mitigate thefire risk. At this point the devil is in thedetails as there are typically severalalternative approaches that can be uti-lized to achieve the intended mitiga-tion outcome. The project plannerand/or the property owner will deter-mine which approach is best suited tothe project and obtain cost estimatesfrom qualified contractors that canperform the work with the requiredequipment. Cost quotes from contrac-tors are necessary to develop final proj-ect budgets and cost estimates.

Contractors that perform wildfirehazard mitigation work face a chal-lenging business environment. Hiringand retaining workers in a seasonalbusiness is difficult. Training isrequired for employees to operate spe-

cialized equipment in a safe and effi-cient manner. The work is often physi-cally demanding. Bidding jobs, coordi-nating work schedules, managing pay-roll and cash flow, and keeping clientshappy are continual challenges.

Most approaches to wildfire mitiga-tion work require significant labor, andtherefore labor costs have a consider-able impact on project costs and bidrates. Labor includes operating equip-ment, felling and pruning trees, buck-ing and piling slash, and dragging treesto chippers. Contractors that provideadequate insurance, tools, fuel, train-ing, transportation, and safety equip-ment generally charge between $25-33per hour or $200-260 per day (8 hours)for laborers. Specialized equipmentused in wildfire hazard mitigation worksuch as chippers, mulchers, mastica-tors, and logging equipment take abeating in forest settings, and mainte-nance costs of this equipment is typi-cally very high. Day rates for mechani-cal equipment usually exceeds $1,000per day. Production rates will varywidely depending on fuel loading andthe physical environment. Estimatingthe cost of contracted services is diffi-cult, but the Table is designed to pro-vide a starting point and describe some

general cost considerations.Property owners and foresters are

often surprised at the high costs associ-ated with contracted services. Theyoften make the mistake of under-esti-mating costs or comparing costs towildland projects that are generally larg-er, not as complex, and less intensivefrom a vegetation management per-spective. Property owners generally willrequire aesthetics to be maintained orimproved on their valuable landscapes.We hope the table provides a good start-ing point for cost estimation. ◆

Contact any of the authors, allforesters for Northwest Management,Inc., for additional information: GaryEllingson, Montana, [email protected]; Luke Machtoff, easternWashington, [email protected];Eric Femreite, Idaho, [email protected]. Gary is an SAF memberand past chair of the Montana SAF.


Can be used on steeper and inaccessibletopography that towable chipper cannot reach.Less restricted by road access. Useful in WUIsettings where pile burning is not desirable.Eliminates the need to return to project area forburning. Chipped material is generally broadcaston-site. Some chippers operated by a laborcrew are inefficient handling materials largerthan 8-12” diameter although machine is ratedfor larger material. Dragging by hand is mini-mized; the chipper comes to the slash.

Generally, 2- to 4-person crewpairs well with one chipperwhen chipping is underway.

$900-$2,200/ac

Tracked chipper with3-person crew:$1,500/day.

Hand thin and chip withtrack-mounted, self-propelled chipper

Logging machinery may be utilized in the WUIto harvest larger merchantable and non-merchantable diameter trees. In most instances,the value of merchantable trees does not offsetcosts of completing the project if the emphasisis on removal of smaller diameter trees.

There are numerous variablesassociated with costing theseprojects and use of a profession-al forester with timber harvestingexperience is required to pre-pare a project plan and budget.Sufficient space is required forlog landing and slash piles.

Costs are highlyvariable. The loggermay work on alump-sum basis, ona per-acre rate, orcharge hourly ratesfor mobilization,mechanical equip-ment, and hauling.

Use of mechanical loggingequipment

Approach Applications and Considerations Cost Factors Cost Range (MT, ID, E. WA)

Contracted Service Rates for Common Wildfire Hazard Mitigation Approachesin the Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI)

BY AMANDA STAMPER

anagement ofsmoke from

both wildfires andprescribed fires hasbecome one of thebiggest challengesfor fire managers inrecent years.

Controlled burning releases a frac-tion of wildfire emissions on average,yet remains highly regulated in manystates, particularly those with largeurban populations. Inundating com-munities for longer timeframes and athigher concentrations than in decadespast, wildfires are effectively occupy-ing the air shed, leaving little room forsmoke from prescribed fires.

Mitigation of public health impactsfrom conservation of natural resourcesusing controlled burning presentsongoing and increasing challenges.Success depends upon protectingpopulations from adverse smokeimpacts while ensuring protection offirefighter and public safety from cata-strophic wildfires through active forestmanagement, including the use of pre-scribed fire.

Just as the weather cannot be con-trolled, wildfires and the smoke theyproduce are generally regarded asuncontrolled until their behavior isbrought within some predefinedrange. The term controlled burning,synonymous with prescribed fire,implies a degree of control over smokeand where it is going, despite thatunanticipated events such as windshifts may occur. There are expecta-tions that those applying fire to the

landscape demonstrate due diligencein avoiding adverse impacts to com-munities, often while protecting themfrom the adverse impacts of wildfireusing prescribed fire.

States regulate smoke produced bycontrolled burning differently, ensur-ing compliance with each state’simplementation of the Clean Air Act.Requirements for prescribed burningair quality regulatory compliancerange from predetermined cut-offtimes for ignitions to preventovernight settling of smoke and asso-ciated impacts to populated or smokesensitive areas, to relatively little over-sight or permitting requirements inremote areas without fire protectionand populations likely to be affectedby air quality issues. Forest fuels andagricultural residues are generallytreated differently, just as the smokethey produce differs considerably.

While there are no easy solutions tomeeting the often-competing objec-tives of maintaining air quality and for-est and rangeland health, governmentagencies such as US Forest Service,Natural Resource ConservationService, and the National WildfireCoordinating Group have createdguidance to help practitioners. Basicsmoke management practices out-

lined in Table 1 provide a frameworkfor ensuring that efforts are made toprotect the public from smokeimpacts. These practices also providefor information to be delivered effec-tively based on the best available sci-ence, enabling both practitioners andimpacted populations to makeinformed decisions to protect them-selves from smoke, whether from wild-fire or prescribed fire.


PHOTO COURTESY OF AMANDA STAMPER

A participant at the AshlandPrescribed Fire Training Exchangein 2016 and 2017.

Where There’s Smoke There’s Fire

M

Tom [email protected]

206 300 9711www.arborinfo.com

Providing information about trees and forests

Table 1. Basic Smoke Management Practices

Basic Smoke Management Benefit Achieved with the When the BSMP is Applied—Practice (BSMP) BSMP Before/During/After the Burn Evaluate Smoke Dispersion Minimize smoke impacts. Before, During, After Conditions

Monitor Effects on Air Quality Awareness of where the Before, During, Aftersmoke is going and degreeit impacts air quality.

Record-Keeping/Maintain a Retain information about the Before, During, AfterBurn/Smoke Journal weather, burn, and smoke.

If air quality problems occur,documentation helps analyzeand address air regulatoryissues.

Communication— Notify neighbors and those Before, DuringPublic Notification potentially impacted by smoke,

especially sensitive receptors.

Consider Emission Reducing emissions can Before, DuringReduction Techniques reduce downwind impacts.

Share the Airshed— Coordinate multiple burns in Before, During, AfterCoordination of Area Burning the area to manage exposure

of the public to smoke.

Evaluate and anticipate smokedispersion conditions tominimize impacts

Develop a smoke managementplan before burning, based on analy-sis and evaluation of weather condi-tions most appropriate for meetingboth prescribed fire and smoke man-agement objectives. Monitor weatherconditions and forecasts during theburn, and compare them to predictedand observed to better anticipatepotential smoke dispersion. Continueto monitor and compare weatherforecasts and on-site weather obser-vations after burning to understandpossible effects of lingering smokefrom smoldering fuels.

Monitor effects of fire on airquality

Monitor regional air quality condi-tions and forecasts using onlineresources such as the NationalWeather Service, local air qualitymonitoring sites, and EPA AirNowbefore burning. If air quality is pre-dicted to be poor, consider postpon-

ing further planning and logisticsuntil air quality conditions improve.Monitor smoke impacts on air quality,particularly near smoke-sensitiveareas, towns, highways, and schoolsusing resources such as field recon-naissance and monitoring reportsduring and after burn.

Record Basic SmokeManagement Practices, firebehavior, and fire effects

Document observed weather andair quality conditions as well as cur-rent forecasts, and observe trendsbefore burning. Record practicesemployed during the burn includingemission reduction techniques suchas modified ignition patterns, on-siteweather observations, fire behavior,smoke dispersion and impacts, size ofarea burned, and fuels burned as partof the prescribed fire burn plan docu-mentation. Retain records, observa-tions, and burn plans after burningfor reference in case of an inquiry, orin the event of an adverse air qualityimpact.

Communicate with and notifyauthorities, partners, andaffected public

Notify appropriate emergencyresponse dispatch centers, air qualityregulators, fire response agencies, andneighbors and citizens of affectedsmoke-sensitive areas of anticipatedsmoke and air quality impacts beforeburning. Develop contingency plansfor potential undesirable impacts andnotify appropriate agencies of thoseplans in advance. If public transporta-tion is or may be affected, provideappropriate and timely updates toaffected authorities during the burn,paying heed to smoke impacts fromsmoldering fuels.

Utilize emission reductiontechniques

Consider available emission reduc-tion techniques before burning,including timing of ignition prior toanticipated precipitation, use of igni-tion techniques to limit large-diameter



fuel consumption, and burn unitdesign with sub-units for option ofeasily ceasing ignitions as needed. Therecently revised NWCG SmokeManagement Guide listed in theresources sidebar provides helpfulguidance on emission reduction tech-niques. Document use of techniquesemployed to reduce emissions duringthe burn and observed effects.Complete mop-up as quickly as possi-ble and ecologically appropriate, andextinguish smoldering fuels if neces-sary to address any potentially adversesmoke impacts in advance.

Collaborate with nearby firemanagers to manage smokeemissions

Agencies authorizing burns inmany states determine regional emis-sion loads as part of their permittingprocesses; however, individual burnmanagers may collaborate to helpavoid local adverse smoke impacts

regardless of regulatory requirementsbefore burning. Burn managers canestablish information sharing net-works with other burn managers tocoordinate burn days and cooperative-ly reduce acres burned when neces-sary to avoid adverse smoke impactsduring and after burning.

Employing basic smoke manage-ment practices before, during, andafter a prescribed burn should be tai-lored and adjusted to local factorsincluding tolerance and sensitivity ofthe populations affected, wildfire haz-ard, and feasibility of alternatives toburning, to name a few.

Establishment and practice of theseapproaches can serve as a solid foun-dation for building social license tohelp communities better adapt to liv-ing with wildland fire, including thesmoke it produces. ◆

Amanda Stamper, an SAF member, isOregon/Washington Fire manager forThe Nature Conservancy in Eugene,Ore. She also serves as chair of theOregon Prescribed Fire Council and isan SAF Emerald Chapter member.Contact Amanda at 541-343-1010 x308or [email protected].


Resources for BasicSmoke Management

Practices

USFS-NRCS guide to Basic SmokeManagement Practices (BSMPs) https://bit.ly/2EXFgkN

NWS Fire Weather Forecasts https://bit.ly/2HxVmXW

NWS Fire and Smoke MappingResources https://bit.ly/2HwClFf

EPA AirNow! Air QualityObservations and Forecasts https://bit.ly/1eln6uU

USFS BlueSky Playground https://bit.ly/2qIoxNn

NWCG Smoke Management Guidefor Prescribed Fire and WildlandFire https://bit.ly/2HbJMyi

USFS Intro to Prescribed Fire inSouthern Ecosystems https://bit.ly/2vpdgr1

NIFC National Smoke ManagementResources https://bit.ly/2voQBLs

NWCG Smoke Committee (SmoC) https://bit.ly/2HdfvTy

PHOTO COURTESY OF AMANDA STAMPER

Smoke from a prescribed burn for reduction of juniper on the Crooked RiverNational Grassland in 2013.

Appraisals & Consulting• Harvest Level Projections• Due Diligence• Timberland Sales• Loan Analysis & Monitoring• Wood Supply Studies• Software Support

GIS Mapping & Analyses• Mill, Public, & Large Landowner Locations• Custom Maps & GIS Data• Overlay process, View & Watershed Analysis• 3D Mapping

Cruising & Inventory• Foresters are Highly Trained with Current

Technology• Tract, Stand, & Log Volume, Stocking, &

Statistics Analysis• Reforestation• Database Development

Seminars & Training• Continuing Education Credit• ArcPad in 1 day• Professional Timber Cruising• SuperACE• Individual or Group Training Available

Beaverton, Oregon

www.atterbury.com • 503-646-5393ATTERBURY CONSULTANTS, INC.

“Professional State-of-the-Art Forestry“

Software & Products• Timber Cruising–SuperACE & Pocket SuperEASY• ESRI & MapSmart• Forestry Tools, Rangefinders, BAF Devices, Data Collectors & GPS Units

BY NICK SMITH

he ConsolidatedAppropriations

Act of 2018, alsoknown as the“omnibus” bill, deliv-ered a number oflegislative victoriesfor federal forestmanagement. Notably, the bipartisanforestry package gives federal agenciesadditional funding and new policytools to support fuels reduction workon public lands.

Chief among these victories is asolution to federal “fire borrowing”that has hamstrung federal land man-agement agencies for many years. Theprocess for setting federal wildfirebudgeting at the 10-year average ofsuppression costs has failed to keeppace with larger and increasinglysevere fires. Whenever the agencyexhausts its firefighting budget for thefiscal year, it is forced to redirectmoney from non-fire programsincluding those for fuels reduction.

The Society of American Foresters,the conservation community, forestproducts industry, and other stakehold-ers have long advocated for a solutionto fire borrowing. Some have proposedsimply allowing agencies to accessemergency disaster funds when sup-pression funds are exhausted, but theidea has faced resistance from keymembers of Congress. After four yearsof negotiations a compromise wasfinally reached, though the solution isnuanced and comes with a few caveats.

According to the Federal ForestResource Coalition, the omnibusincludes a new fire suppression fund-ing mechanism that will adjust federalspending caps to accommodate fire-fighting needs. The legislation pro-vides a new “disaster cap allocation”for wildfires starting in Fiscal Year (FY)2020 at $2.25 billion, which increasesto $2.95 billion in FY 2027. In addition,the legislation freezes the wildfire sup-pression line item at the Forest Serviceat the FY 2015 level to stop the slow

migration of non-fire funding to thefire programs at the beginning of eachfiscal year.

Importantly, the new budget capdoesn’t come into effect until FY 2020.For FY 2018 and 2019, the bill provides$1.946 billion in fire suppression fund-ing, to be allocated to the Departmentof Interior and the Forest Service. Ifthis funding, which is $500 millionabove the current 10-year average,proves insufficient, the Congress willhave to provide additional emergencyspending.

In addition to the budget fix, the$1.2 trillion omnibus increases wild-fire-related programs by nearly $550million, including an $80 millionincrease to the Forest Service’sHazardous Fuels line item. In total,hazardous fuels and fire accounts total$3.3 billion out of the $5.9 billion total(55 percent) for the Forest Service.

The omnibus bill includes severalforest management policy reforms.This includes a new 3,000-acreCategorical Exclusion (CE) under theHealthy Forests Restoration Act(HFRA) for Forest Service “WildfireResilience” projects. The CE must usea collaborative process, consider bestavailable science, and maximize reten-tion of old-growth and large trees.Projects must be located within land-scapes designated under the Farm Billas of March 23, 2018. Projects may alsobe within the Wildland UrbanInterface, or within Condition Class 2or 3, or Fire Regime Groups I, II, or IIIthat contain very high wildfire hazardpotential. Before using this CE, theForest Service is required to apply its“extraordinary circumstances” regula-tion to ensure no significant effects.

The omnibus also reforms vegeta-tion management around power linesand establishes new HFRA categoriesfor fuel breaks and fire breaks. UnderHFRA, these projects are eligible forexpedited procedures includingaction/no-action analysis and a waiverof the administrative objection process.

Further, the omnibus bill amendsfederal stewardship contracting. TheDepartments of Agriculture and

Interior can now award 20-year stew-ardship contracts, or agreements inareas where the majority of federallands are in Fire Regime Groups I, II, orIII. It permits agencies to give a prefer-ence to contractors that would, as partof a contract, promote an innovativeuse of forest products, including cross-laminated timber. The legislation alsoincludes fixes to address the cancella-tion ceiling excess value, as well as theannual reporting issues associated withstewardship contracting.

The bill also requires mapping with-in two years of wildfire risks to informevaluations of wildfire risk, prioritizefuels management needs, and showpotential for wildfire that could be dif-ficult for suppression resources to con-tain and that could cause ignitions tostructures. Finally, the omnibus billprovides a long-sought improvementto the federal Good Neighbor Authority(GNA) law that allows state agencies towork with the Forest Service to imple-ment projects on forests in need oftreatment. Specifically, it permits GNAprojects to include reconstruction,repair, or restoration of National ForestSystem roads.

Overall, the forestry package in theomnibus bill is a major accomplish-ment. It will help federal agenciesimprove management of federally-owned forests, reduce fuel loads, andmitigate the risks of catastrophicfires. ◆

Nick Smith is a member of the PortlandChapter of the Oregon Society ofAmerican Foresters. He is executivedirector of Healthy Forests, HealthyCommunities, which advocates foractive forest management on publicly-owned forests. He can be reached [email protected].


Omnibus Bill Delivers Fire FundingFix, New Fuels Reduction Tools

T

Norm MichaelsForestry LLC

Forest management tomeet your goals

• Management Plans • Reforestation• Timber inventory • Timber cruising

Over 40 years managing forests inOregon and Washington

[email protected]

BY JIM GERSBACH

oes thinningand pruning

trees help reduce therisk of catastrophicfire on forestedproperty? If you askwoodland ownerJohn Engelien ofPolk County, Oregon, the answer is aresounding yes. John almost certainlysaved forest on his property a fewyears ago by treating 30 acres ofDouglas-firs to make the grove moreresilient to wildfire.

John’s family has owned the groveand another 70 acres of forested landnorthwest of Dallas, Ore., since the1930s. John was born on the land andinherited it in 1985. He and his fatherbefore him staggered the harvesting ofDouglas-fir and some WillametteValley ponderosa pine to keep the landa patchwork of differently aged stands.

One hill was harvested around 2000and replanted with Douglas-fir. After adozen years the planted area waschoked with tall grass and invasivebrush typical of western Oregon—Scot’s broom and blackberries. The 20’to 40’ tall Douglas-firs had limbs near-ly to the ground. The dead lower limbsmade it difficult for John to walk

through andformed the per-fect ladder fuelto carry fire upinto the treecanopy. Johnknew somethingshould be doneand turned tohis local OregonDepartment ofForestry (ODF)office in Dallas.

ODF has anOregon-wideagreement withthe federalNaturalResourcesConservationService to pro-vide technicalassistance toowners of non-industrialforestland look-ing to improve their forest stands. ODFstewardship foresters can helplandowners inventory what’s on theirproperty and develop a treatmentplan. Once a plan is created, thelandowners can hire out the work, doit themselves, or do some and hire outthe rest.

After the work is completed, the

ODF stewardship forester visits theproperty to certify that the work wasdone according to the plan. Land-owners include the certification intheir application to receive reimburse-ment through the NRCS’s Environ-mental Quality Improvement Program.EQIP has been available to owners ofnonindustrial forestlands since the2008 federal Farm Bill.

Oregon is a big state with morethan 30 million acres of forestland.NRCS prioritizes different parts of thestate to meet certain strategic goals,such as reducing the risk of wildfire ina watershed a community depends onfor drinking water. Reimbursement isset at a fixed rate per acre based onwhich treatment was done. So far infiscal year 2017-18, 174 Oregonlandowners are slated to receive $6.3million in reimbursements for volun-tary forest conservation work on13,547 acres.

John worked with ODF to create hisforest stewardship plan. With plan inhand, he then hired a crew and set towork in early 2013. Over four monthsthey cut down brush and used chain-


When Fire Threatened, John Engelien andHis Forest Were Ready

D

PHOTO COURTESY OF OREGON DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY

Landowner John Engelien points out to Unit Forester JeffClassen of the Oregon Department of Forestry how high uphe limbed his Douglas-fir trees. Removing lower limbs kepta 2013 wildfire from climbing into the canopy, preventing amore intense crown fire.

We provide practical solutions for wildlifeand other natural resource management.

Our goal is to provide you with the highestlevel of service and the most effective

solution to any natural resource concern.

[email protected] • 503-680-7939

WE SPECIALIZE IN:• Developing wildlife programs for

forest certification including SFI and American Tree Farm System

• Wildlife Surveys• GIS Services

saws to cut off limbs 6 to 8feet from the ground. Using atechnique called lop andscatter, they spread the limbswidely over the ground ratherthan in tall piles. When thework was finished in April,the grove looked like a well-groomed park. ODF certifiedthe work and John applied forand received partial reim-bursement through the EQIPprogram.

John completed the workon his property just in time.The summer of 2013 wasdry in Oregon. The state hadits driest July on record, get-ting only 7% of average pre-cipitation that month. Whenfires started, dry fuels readi-ly burned, even in theWillamette Valley. Oregonsaw more state-protected landburn that summer than at anytime since the last of the fourTillamook Burn fires in 1951.By August, nine large wildfireswere burning from one end ofthe state to the other.

In the last half of thatmonth, John was harvestingstraw when he noticed smokeon a nearby hill. Sparks fromequipment being operatedon a nearby property had setgrass and brush on fire.Flames were racing easttoward his Douglas-firs,fanned by steady winds.

Responding to the firealert, the Oregon Departmentof Forestry’s Dallas Unit quickly sentfire engines and a bulldozer. They weresoon joined by engines from local firedepartments worried about the firespreading to nearby farms and homes.

ODF’s Dallas Unit Manager JeffClassen recalls the day as warm, dry,and windy. “The wind was blowing asteady 10 to 15 miles an hour withgusts over 20, pushing flames as highas 20 to 30 feet through the tall brushand some young trees. If the fire gotinto the tree canopy, it was almost cer-tain to run through the forest out ofcontrol.”

That didn’t happen. Once the firereached John’s recently treated proper-ty, there was less fuel and most of it

was scattered and low on the ground.“It just kind of died down and transi-tioned into a lower-intensity groundfire,” remembered Classen.

With trees’ lower limbs removed,flames could lick at the trunks butcouldn’t climb into the canopy. Thismade it safer and easier for firefightersto beat down the flames and create a

control line. Within an hour of the fire’s

start ODF obtained the helpof a Weyerhaeuser helicopter.Years earlier John had dug apond on his property to havewater to fight wildfire. Thepilot dropped bucket loadsfrom the pond onto the nowslower-moving fire. The coor-dinated attack allowed fire-fighters on the ground tobuild and secure controllines. They corralled the fireshortly after dark. Mop upcontinued for five days.

“Without the pruningand brush control, it’s likelythe fire would have engulfedall 30 acres of that grove andwell beyond,” said Classen.“Because of the work done,the fire penetrated only ontoseven acres. Trees along thegrove’s edge, facing anonslaught from the mostintense flames, died. In thegrove’s interior, where flameintensity diminished, mosttrees survived.

“The work John did in2010 made it possible forfire fighters to stop the fireand save nearby forestland,”said Classen. “It’s a greatexample of how landownerscan protect their own andsurrounding land.”

For more informationabout Oregon’s StrategicApproach to Conservation,visit www.or.nrcs.usda.gov or

contact your local NRCS field office. ◆

Jim Gersbach is a Public Affairs special-ist for Oregon Department of Forestryin Salem. He can be reached at 503-945-7425 or [email protected].


FOREST RESOURCES TECHNOLOGYSAF Accredited • http://cocc.edu/programs/forestry

Ron Boldenow, Ph.D., C.F., ForestryRebecca Franklin, Ph.D., DendrochronologyBret Michalski, M.S., Wildlife Science

E-mail: [email protected] (541) 383-7756

CENTRAL OREGON COMMUNITY COLLEGE Bend, Oregon

PHOTO COURTESY OF JOHN ENGELIEN

Invasive Scot’s broom and other brush created a fire haz-ard on John Engelien’s property west of Salem, Oregon.This potentially endangered his stand of Douglas-fir. Underthe EQIP program he removed the brush in 2013, whichhelped reduce the intensity of a wildfire that spread ontohis property later that same year.

PHOTO COURTESY OF OREGON DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY

Removing lower limbs and scattering the downed woodhelped western Oregon landowner John Engelien keep awildfire low to the ground so that it was easier for fire-fighters to control.

BY LISA NAYLOR

amp WootenEnvironmental

Learning Center,a gem of theWashington StatePark (WSP) systemin southeastWashington State,

was saved from a destructive wildfirethat started less than five miles fromthe facility on contracted WashingtonDepartment of Fish and Wildlife(WDFW) lands in early August 2005.

On Friday, August 5, 2005, a three-person hand crew was working clear-ing brush at Camp Wooten when alocal citizen reported a fire to theengine crew to which they respondedto a mile from the camp near School

Creek in the Tucannon Valley. Weatherconditions were hot and dry with verylow humidity. A tree had fallen over apowerline and started the fire—aproduct of nature at the worst possibletime of the year.

The crew tried in vain to extinguishthe fire, but excess tinder dry fuels andwinds were no match for the crew. TheSchool Fire erupted, severely burningthe upper Tucannon Valley with CampWooten clearly in its destructive path.The fire burned over 51,000 acresbefore being contained.

Fortunately, due to the fuel reduc-tion actions and on-going fuel reduc-tion maintenance of the WashingtonState Department of Natural Resources(DNR), WSP, and WDFW in the yearspreceding the School Fire, the campwas saved and continues to be one ofthe most popular (and profitable)learning centers in the state.

In 2000, SE Area DNR Fuels ManagerLen Riggin applied for scarce funds forfuel reduction projects. His goal was to“keep his two crews busy” during thesummer wildfire season as fire crewswere on stand-by, ready to respond tocalls for firefighters and suppressionequipment in the region.

The grant from the National FirePlan (USDA Forest Service) targetedCamp Wooten in Columbia Countyand Field Springs State Park in AsotinCounty. Riggin’s office was awarded$60,000 to complete fuel reduction inthe two state park facilities. The onlyhitch was the work was to be complet-ed by contractors and not to be usedfor fire suppression activities.


“Busy Work” for Engine Crews Save Camp Wootenfrom Catastrophic School Fire

C

12th Annual Oregon SAF Golf TournamentFriday, July 20, 2018

Join the Oregon Society ofAmerican Foresters atTrysting Tree Golf Coursein Corvallis, Oregon, for agolf tournament to benefitthe OSAF Foundation.

FOR REGISTRATION AND/OR DONATIONS, CONTACT:Jessica Fitzmorris at 541-990-7264 or [email protected]

Lots ofPrizes & Contests!

*Catered Lunchincluded after

the tournament

http://www.oregon.forestry.org/content/osaf-golf-tournament FORESTR 4ESTMGR

HOPKINS FORESTRYForest Managers performing herbicideapplication, young stand management,

harvest management, contract compliance,inventories, and forestry/natural

resources education

Dick & Paula Hopkins360-492-5441

[email protected]

Not a person to be stymied by con-tract requirements, Riggin and hiscrew worked closely with WDFW andWSP to create defensible space aroundcamp structures, create fuel breaks,and thin and prune residual trees.

Timing of the fuel reduction workwas critical to avoid conflicts withclients, user groups to the camp, androutine camp maintenance activities.The projects started in the fall of 2000,continued through 2001, and werecompleted prior to the state bienniumbudget deadline in late June 2002. TheDNR reviewed the work with WSP andWDFW and determined additionalwork was needed, including the instal-lation of a shaded fuel break.

Shaded fuel breaks were 100’ wide,with 20’ tree spacing, and limbed to 3’.All trees under 8” DBH were removedand later pruned to 6’. The shaded fuelbreak began at the camp north entrancealong the access road and aroundDonnie Lake to the toe of the slopessurrounding the camp. Clearancearound buildings was at least 30’ and15’ above the rooftops. During theSchool Fire, open space voids around

structures were wrapped in plastic–notthe entire structure, but it helped pre-vent airflow and embers from lodgingunder them.

Furthermore, the DNR recom-mended additional trees be removed,which was initially discouraged byWSP, but user groups applauded themove as clients could more easily beseen by adult leaders adjacent to campfacilities and in and around the prop-erty. The Field Springs State Park fuelreduction was completed using con-tractors, but at much higher cost withfar fewer acres treated.

Following the fire, the DNR facilitat-ed the removal of brush material usinga chipper treating brush, chipped andspread to areas requiring coveragesuch as the archery range and foot-paths in and around the camp.

Remaining chipped material wasburned in piles during the early springor after group use in the fall. Thesemaintenance activities continue today.

Former Camp Manager Tim Fullerworked with a nonprofit in the Tri-Cities area developing signage to inter-pret the School Fire and actions takenby WSP and firefighters to protect thefacility. Fuller passed away from can-cer a few short years after the event,but his legacy and love for CampWooten lives on. ◆

Lisa Naylor is a forester with the BlueMountain Resource Conservation andDevelopment Council, with offices inWaitsburg, Wash. Lisa serves as theInland Empire SAF treasurer and canbe reached at [email protected].


LORENZFORESTRYCHUCK LORENZ, CF 1770

Forest Management Planning &Operations, Inventory, Valuation

for over 40 years

[email protected]

360-951-0117

PHOTO COURTESY OF WASHINGTON STATE DNR

Land adjacent to Camp Wooten before fuel reductionactivities.

PHOTO COURTESY OF WASHINGTON STATE DNR

Camp Wooten area after the School Fire. The fire wasdevastating and the area is slowly coming back.

PHOTO COURTESY OF LISA NAYLOR

This is the author’s house that survived the catastrophic ColumbiaComplex Fire that took place a year after the School Fire and burned109,259 acres near Dayton, Wash. The photo, taken on August 22, 2016,shows the value of defensible space.

Defensible Space in Action

Ralph Duddles1940-2018

Ralph Edward Duddles passed awayFeb. 23, 2018, in Coos Bay. Ralph andCarolyn Louis Steinmetz were marriedDecember 1958 in their home state ofMichigan, and in 2008, they were proud tocelebrate their 50th wedding anniversaryin Coos Bay. Ralph started his forestrystudies at Michigan Technical Universitywhere his son Jeffrey John was born in1962. The family moved to Seattle, Wash.,to continue his studies at the University ofWashington where his second son DonaldEdward was born.

Ralph’s career as a forest practicesforester led to assignments up and downthe west coast, with stops in California,Washington, and Oregon. The familymoved in 1985 to Coos Bay, where Ralph

was the extension forester for Oregon StateUniversity where he helped local landown-ers in the management of their properties.He also participated in the school’s forestryprogram; Ralph retired in 2002.

The Duddles family has roots inOregon’s history dating from the 1800s.Ralph’s grandfather, Thomas Duddles, trav-eled from Michigan along the Oregon Trailto a land grant homestead on the coastalrange near Seaside. They labored severalyears clearing land and raising a family.The family documents and letters from thisperiod will be donated to the Oregon StateUniversity historical archives.

Ralph and Carolyn fulfilled their life-long dreams of traveling to Europe andAustralia. His passions at home includedcamping, fishing, and hunting. As a father,grandfather, and friend, he invited all tojoin in learning, and enjoying the beautyand bounty of nature.

Ralph’s life was not a poem, but a seg-ment of the movie, “A River Runs ThroughIt.” Ralph would want us all to find ourrole and join the cast; pun intended.

Ralph is survived by wife, Carolyn;sons, Jeffrey and Donald; daughter-in-law

Janis; grandchildren Melissa, Tony,Christine and John; great-grandchildren,Jaida and Avery; brother, Allen; and manynieces and nephews.

He was preceded in death by his father,Willard; his mother, Esther; and his broth-ers, Ronald and Glenn.

Charitable contributions can be madeto the scholarship fund at his Alma MaterMichigan Technical University atwww.mtu.edu/giving. If possible, pleasespecify scholarships for forestry students. ◆

WSSAF FoundationNames 2018

Scholarship Students

The Washington State Society ofAmerican Foresters (WSSAF)Foundation continues to awardscholarships to community collegeand university students excitedabout pursuing careers in forestry.Since 2011, the Foundation hasawarded scholarships totaling$22,000 to 19 bright and worthystudents.

Scholarships for the upcomingacademic year of 2018-2019 arebeing awarded to Sarah Bukhart($1,000), Chad Horky ($1,500), andMari Knutson ($1,500). Sarah is inher first year at Grays HarborCollege. Her goal is to pursue acareer in silviculture research.Chad, an Army vet, is a fourth-yearstudent enrolled in the Bachelor ofApplied Science degree program atGreen River College. Mari has a BSdegree in Botany. She is now pur-suing a BS degree in NaturalResources and Land Management.All scholarship recipients areactive SAF student members.

Thanks to the generosity ofWSSAF members and timberlandand forest products companies,the Foundation’s year-end fundbalance has grown to $54,000.

To help additional students off-set the rising cost of their forestryeducation, the Foundation is seek-ing the continued support ofWSSAF members. Donations canbe made to WSSAF, c/o ChuckLorenz, Treasurer, PO Box 4031,Tumwater, WA 98501. ◆


We Remember

Seedling Nursery Since 1974

“Serving Many of the Reforestation Needs of the World From This Location Since 1889”

We bring experience with owners that care about their product and customers.

Approximately 10 million seedlings in annual production1 container site (plugs), 2 bareroot/transplant sites (p+1, 1+1)

Contract growing and spec seedlings for forestry and Christmas tree production

LET US GROW YOUR SEEDLINGSDavid Gerdes Mike Gerdes

[email protected]

FORESTERS • NURSERYMAN • SEEDSMAN

SILVASEED COMPANYP.O. Box 118 • Roy, WA 98580 • (253) 843-2246

Connecting Forest Landowners withSeedlings, Services and Contractors

DISCOVER Our Interactive Websitewww.forestseedlingnetwork.com

BUY/SELL SEEDLINGS • FIND VENDOR SERVICES & CONTRACTORS • VALUABLE RESOURCES


Western Forest Economists annualmeeting, June 3-5, Olympia, WA. Contact:www.westernforesteconomist.org.

Firewise Educational CommunityEvent, June 5, World Forestry Center,Discovery Museum, Portland, OR. Contact:World Forestry Center.

CESCL: Certified Erosion andSediment Control Lead Training,June 5-6, Renton, WA. Contact: NWETC.

CESCL: Erosion and Sediment ControlLead Training 2-Day in Oregon,June 12-13, Salem, OR. Contact: NWETC.

Make Money Manage Hardwood,WHC Annual Symposium, June 14,Puyallup, WA. Contact: http://wahard-woodscomm.com, 360-835-1700,[email protected].

Western Mensurationists annualmeeting, June 17-19, Flagstaff, AZ.Contact: WFCA.

Northwest Seed Orchard Managersand BC Seed Orchard AssociationJoint Annual Meeting, June 19-20,Penticton, BC. Contact: BC Seed OrchardAssociation, fgcouncil.bc.ca/bcsoaor WFCA.

Oregon Small WoodlandsAssociation annual meeting,June 28-30, Springfield, OR. Contact:OSWA, www.oswa.org, 503-588-1813,[email protected].

When Small is Big II/2018, July 18,Cheatham Hall, World Forestry Center,Portland, OR. Contact: World ForestryCenter.

12th Annual OSAF Golf Tournament,July 20, Trysting Tree Golf Course, Corvallis,OR. Contact: Jessica Fitzmorris, [email protected], www.oregon.forestry.org/content/12th-annual-osaf-golf-tour-nament.

2018 WFI International FellowshipProgram—Forestry Lightning Talks,September 13, Cheatham Hall, WorldForestry Center, Portland, OR. Contact:World Forestry Center.

The Forest Products Forum, Sept. 25,World Forestry Center, Portland, OR.Contact: https://www.wwotf.org/.

Who Will Own the Forest 14? Sept. 25-27, World Forestry Center, Portland, OR.Contact: https://www.wwotf.org/.

2018 SAF National Convention,Oct. 3-7, Portland, OR. Contact:www.eforester.org/safconvention.

Road Surfacing, Oct. 10-11, Springfield,OR. Contact: WFCA.

The Hagenstein Lectures, Oct. 14,World Forestry Center, Portland, OR.Contact: Rick Zenn, 503-488-2103,[email protected], www.hagenstein-lectures.org.

Visualizing and AnalyzingEnvironmental Data with R,Oct. 16-17, Issaquah, WA. Contact: NWETC.

Cultivating Talent: WorkforceStrategies in the Forest andNatural Resource Sectors, Oct. 25,World Forestry Center, Portland, OR.Contact: Rick Zenn, 503-488-2103,[email protected].

PNW Forest VegetationManagement Conference, Dec. 4-5,Wilsonville, OR. Contact: WFCA.

Applied Early Stand Silviculture inthe Inland Northwest Conference,Dec. 12-13, Spokane, WA. Contact: WFCA.

Applied Early Stand Silviculture inthe Inland Northwest Conference,Dec. 12-13, Spokane, WA. Contact: WFCA.

2019 PNW Leadership Conference,hosted by Oregon SAF, Feb. 1-2,McMenamins Edgefield, Troutdale, OR.Contact: Meghan Tuttle, [email protected], www.forestry.org, andclick on Leadership Conference icon.

2019 Oregon SAF annual meeting,April 17-19, Boulder Falls Inn, Lebanon,OR. Contact: Jeremy Felty, [email protected].

Calendar of Events

Contact Information

NWETC: Northwest EnvironmentalTraining Center, 1445 NW Mall St., Suite4, Issaquah, WA 98027, 425-270-3274,nwetc.org.

World Forestry Center: 4033 SWCanyon Rd., Portland, OR 97221,www.worldforestry.org/event

WFCA: Western Forestry andConservation Association, 4033 SWCanyon Rd., Portland, OR 97221, 503-226-4562, [email protected],www.westernforestry.org.

Send calendar items to the editor [email protected].

www.greencrow.com

Certifiably Proudof the Washington

Tree Farm Program


BY TAMARA CUSHING

n October,foresters from

around the countrywill head to Portlandfor a week of educa-tion and fellowship.The Society ofAmerican Foresterswill hold the annual NationalConvention October 3-7 at the OregonConvention Center. This annual eventis an opportunity to highlight forestryin Oregon and the Pacific Northwest.

If you have never attended a nationalSAF convention, this is a great year toattend your first one! Approximately1,500 foresters attend from around thecountry, and amongthose in attendance arearound 400 students rep-resenting the future ofour profession!

What can you expectat this year’s convention?There will be educationalsessions spanning thefull range of topics inforestry including silvi-culture, economics,urban forestry, biomet-rics, and much more!The theme for this year’sconvention is Forest Policy and Science-Management Interactions, so you canexpect to see that theme runningthrough the plenary sessions and tours.

In addition to the classroom-styleeducational sessions, we have a greatslate of tours to show foresters all thegreat work that is being done inOregon and the PNW. Tours wereassembled to appeal to everyoneincluding those of us who live andwork in Oregon’s beautiful forests.

No one should miss the studentquiz bowl where teams from 32 of theforestry programs around the countrywill square off in a battle of forestryknowledge. It is a very impressiveshow of expertise by these future pro-fessionals.

The real hub of activity at the con-vention is the exhibit hall. We will haveexhibitors from equipment companies

and tech companies, as well as the uni-versities, US Forest Service, and organi-zations like Tree Farm and ForestHistory Society (just to name a few ofthe MANY exhibitors). Also in theexhibit hall is the SAF raffle and silentauction. There are always great items tobid on such as hard-to-find books,wood bowls, beautiful photos, trips,tools, and jewelry. And your dollars goto support the Foresters’ Fund and KurtGottschalk Science Fund.

Oregon SAF has been working onplans for this convention with staff fromthe national office. Pretty soon you willsee requests for items for the silent auc-tion or for volunteers to help duringconvention. The heavy lifting for a con-vention is really the volunteers on site.We will need friendly faces to help withthe SAF raffles and auction (both sellingtickets and helping with the winningtickets). Friendly volunteers will be

needed for registration. We all know firstimpressions are everything, so bringyour enthusiasm. If you would like tovolunteer, contact Ron Boldenow([email protected]) or Ryan Gordon([email protected]).

You’ll keep hearing more about theconvention as we get closer. If youhave any thoughts or questions aboutthe convention, let me know. I hope tosee many of you at the convention. ◆

Tamara Cushing is general chair of the2018 SAF National Convention. Shecan be reached at [email protected].

Oregon Forestry to be Showcased at Convention

I

PHOTO COURTESY OF JOSH ZYTKIEWICZ, FOCAL FLAME PHOTOGRAPHY, www.focalflame.com

Don’t forget your credit card—proceeds from the silent auction supportsforestry education and science.

PHOTO COURTESY OF JOSH ZYTKIEWICZ, FOCAL FLAME PHOTOGRAPHY,www.focalflame.com

An intense Quiz Bowl moment. PHOTO COURTESY OF JOSH ZYTKIEWICZ,FOCAL FLAME PHOTOGRAPHY, www.focalflame.com

Bid often and bid high! Join in thefun at the SAF raffle and silentauction at the national convention.WSSAF member John Walkowiakwill sell you a few tickets.

BY DICK POWELL

regon is one ofonly several

states in the countrythat offers forestry asa part of their highschool curricula. Fora time, there wereabout 20 schools inOregon with a strong forestry programthat operated under the umbrella ofthe former Associated Oregon ForestryClubs (AOFC). However, these pro-grams dwindled to only three or fouras schools faced serious funding chal-lenges, and believing all studentswould attend college, focused on mak-ing students college-ready. Schoolsand communities have come to realizethat many students do not go on tocollege and many of those who do goto college never graduate.

Many of these high school forestrystudents typically spend part of theirschool day in the woods, which helpsthem stay in school, and upon gradua-tion, gives them marketable skills.Consequently, a renewed interest incareer and technical programs andforestry is coming back into Oregon’sschools.

High school forestry programs havegrown to 20 schools (including somein Oregon’s largest cities includingPortland and Eugene) that are certifiedby the Oregon Department ofEducation as a “program of study;”another 16 schools are working towarda forestry program that will meetOregon’s program of study standards.Additionally, there are another 26schools that offer some forestry class-es. The teachers of these programs reg-ularly attend the professional develop-ment opportunities offered by theOregon Forest Resources Institute.Eleven schools have joined the FutureNatural Resources Leaders (similar toFFA and the replacement for AOFC) tocoordinate local skills competitions, aswell as the state championship contestand to provide statewide leadershipopportunities for students.

The Oregon Natural ResourcesEducation Fund (ONREF) was estab-

lished in 2001 to support high schoolforestry programs in Oregon. Under itscharter, the fund can have sub-fundsto support specific areas of interest.ONREF consists of the Main fund (tosupport forestry education throughoutOregon); Pleasant Hill Sub-fund (tosupport forestry education at PleasantHill High School); and the Terry SelbyMemorial Sub-fund (to supportforestry education in Benton Countyhigh schools). A third sub-fund, theOregon Society of American Foresters(OSAF) Sub-fund, was started in 2008because foresters are interested inhigh school forestry educationthroughout the state.

ONREF is a “field of interest” fundadministered by the Oregon Communi-ty Foundation (OCF). The OregonNatural Resources Education FundAssociation (ONREFA) manages thegrowth and direction of the fund, evalu-ates grant requests, and provides adviceto OCF on distributions. ONREFAmembership includes a Board ofDirectors and two sub-fund advisors foreach of the three sub-funds. Of the 12directors and sub-fund advisors, nineare OSAF members. Of the remainingthree advisors, one represents theOregon Department of Education;another is a school superintendent; andthe third is a former science teacher.This group evaluates each grant requestagainst criteria including teacher quali-fications and training, advisory com-mittees, and program accreditation.Grants are awarded to those that passthis review process.

When ONREFA board met in Marchto consider the grant requests from sixschools, we had $11,598 in requests forthings including common forestrytools; ventilating a greenhouse forgrowing native plants; starting a newforestry program; wildlife cameras;

and refurbishing a tractor and chipper.After review, the $10,902 available fordistribution was approved for grantrequests for high schools from Amity,Brookings Harbor Christian, ButteFalls Charter School, Neah-Kah-Nie,and Philomath.

Since its inception, ONREF hascontributed over $100,000 toward highschool forestry programs and benefit-ed over 8,000 students. The grantshave helped fund the purchase of aeri-al drones, small sawmills, chain saws,chippers, forestry tools and instru-ments, greenhouses, and a whole hostof other equipment and supplies.

The last few years, an OSAF mem-ber has gone to each community toaward the recipients of ONREF grantsin a public setting. This outreach is tolet school superintendents, schoolprincipals, school boards, and com-munity members know that forestry isalive and well in Oregon—we supportforestry education and we are willingto put our money where our mouth is!

ONREF has received significantfinancial contributions from manywithin the forest community interest-ed in promoting forestry education inOregon. Each year, the OSAF ExecutiveCommittee puts out a year-end fund-raising letter that, among other things,suggests contributing to ONREF. Arecent $10,000 contribution to ONREFcame from the estate of a small wood-land owner.

For more information on how tocontribute to ONREF, please contactSara Brandt, Senior Philanthropicadvisor, at the Oregon CommunityFoundation, 541-431-7099, or anyONREF board members: Pete Sikora([email protected]), Julie Woodward([email protected]), Jim Rombach([email protected]), Steve Cafferata([email protected]), Jennifer Beathe([email protected]), JimJames ([email protected]),Tim Keith ([email protected]), orDick Powell. ◆

Dick Powell serves as co-chair ofOregon’s ONREF Sub-Fund, along withTim Keith. Dick can be reached [email protected].


High School Forestry Programs Expand in Oregon

O

ONREF Main Fund $43,650

Pleasant Hill Sub-fund $83,675

Terry Selby Memorial Sub-fund $37,273

Oregon SAF Sub-fund $80,384

Total $244,982

ONREF Funding Levels as ofMarch 14, 2018

Editor’s Note: To keep SAF membersinformed of state society policy activities,Policy Scoreboard is a regular feature in theWestern Forester. The intent is to provide abrief explanation of the policy activity—youare encouraged to follow up with the listedcontact person for detailed information.

Oregon Uplists Marbled Murrelet.The Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commis-sion met on February 9, 2018, inPortland to decide whether to “uplist”the marbled murrelet (MAMU). Themurrelet had been listed as Threatenedunder Oregon’s Endangered Species Actsince 1995. Multiple entities presentedwritten and/or oral testimony on theproposal to the commission. OregonSAF submitted written testimony pre-pared by Chair Fran Cafferata Coe andOSAF Wildlife Society Liaison JennifferBakke. In brief, the OSAF testimonyasked the commission to make theirdecision on the best current scientificevidence, including a finding of stablepopulations along most of the Oregoncoast, and the presence of substantialsuitable, but unoccupied, habitat forMAMU. The commission decided on a4-2 vote to uplist MAMU to Endangeredstatus. While the full effect of the listingon forest management is yet to bedetermined, some forest managersexpress concern that there will likely befurther restrictions on harvesting onState of Oregon forestlands throughoutthe Oregon Coast Range and ultimately

some trickledown effects on privatelandowners. As a next step, by June,ODFW scientists must complete sur-vival guidelines, which identify criticalhabitat sites and determine if currentsuitable habitat management protocolsare sufficient. The full OSAF testimonycan be found at www.oregon.forestry.org/oregon/policy/general. Contact:Mark Buckbee, OSAF Policy co-chair,[email protected].

Oregon Legislators CreateWildfire Caucus. After the damaging2017 wildfire season in Oregon burned700,000 acres with a suppression cost of$340 million, a new bipartisan, bicam-eral Wildfire Caucus was formed byOregon state legislators. The caucus isled by Senators Betsy Johnson (D-Scappoose) and Herman Baertschiger(R-Grants Pass). A letter from OregonSAF was sent to the caucus leaders, vol-unteering its considerable expertise inthe fields of fuel and fire management.OSAF member Dan Shults, retired ODFSouthern Area director, was invited tospeak to the caucus. In his testimony,Shults outlined SAFs national positionstatement on Wildland Fire Management.From there he presented a list of recom-mendations including: 1) encouragefederal legislators to reform the existingfederal wildfire and hazardous fuelbudgeting approach; 2) support ODFefforts to work cooperatively with theForest Service to accomplish land man-agement objectives under the GoodNeighbor Authority Master Agreement;3) encourage federal line officers to bemore aggressive in initial attack; 4) usewildfire to accomplish habitat objec-tives only when and where risks to stateand locally protected lands is minimal;

and 5) support protection fundingrequests from ODF. The full testimonycan be found at www.oregon.forestry.org/oregon/policy/general. Contact:Mark Buckbee, OSAF Policy co-chair,[email protected].

Lane County Spray Ban InitiativeVoided by Court; Herbicide IssuePersists. Following the success of a2017 ballot initiative that bans aerialspraying in nearby Lincoln County, anti-spray activists in Lane County collectedthousands of signatures for a similarlocal measure, enough to secure a placeon the May 2018 county ballot. However,in early March a Lane County CircuitCourt Judge ruled that the measure can’tbe put to a vote because it covers multi-ple issues and thus violates Oregon’s“separate vote requirement.” At the timeof this writing, although the court deci-sion gives little or no chance for themeasure to appear on the May ballot,supporters plan to file an appeal, and ifthat fails, they could pursue a modifiedversion for the November ballot.

Because herbicide use on forestlandsis an ongoing, serious public issue inOregon, the recent update and revisionof OSAF’s position statement “UsingHerbicides on Forestlands in Oregon”provides an important resource asquestions and concerns arise frominterested citizens and public leaders.For example, prior to the Lane courtdecision, OSAF leaders used the newposition statement to help draftresponses that would provide local citi-zens with a professional perspective onherbicide use in forestry, based on cur-rent science and experience. All OSAFmembers are invited to review theexpanded discussion and environmen-tal references in the revised position(www.oregon.forestry.org/oregon/poli-cy/general), and similarly use thismaterial when communicating withpolicy makers and the interested publicabout this unique and important issue.Contact: Mark Buckbee, OSAF Policyco-chair, [email protected].

Forest Restoration CollaborativesMeeting Draws Crowd. Nearly 200agency professionals, industry and con-servationists representatives, and com-munity volunteers from Montana, Idaho,and Washington gathered in Coeurd’Alene on March 20-21 to discuss howto bring together different perspectivesto enhance forest health and resiliency.


Policy Scoreboard

From NEPA reform to sustaining collab-orative efforts, participants shared ideasand brainstormed ways to keep themomentum going. This meeting wassupported by a Foresters’ Fund grant.Visit https://bit.ly/2jg1EO7 for moreinformation. Contact: Dennis Becker,[email protected].

Good Neighbor Authority (GNA)gains speed. The Idaho Departmentof Lands plans to increase the pace ofGood Neighbor Authority projects in2018. Agreements are in place on fournational forests in Idaho with 11 activeGNA projects. Timber harvesting hasbegun on two timber sales in the NezPerce-Clearwater National Forests, theproceeds of which are being used toplan 10 additional projects. The IdahoState Legislature recently approvedfunding for eight new forester positionsto expedite GNA planning and imple-mentation. Contact: Dennis Becker,[email protected].

Family Forestry Study in Idaho.About eight percent of forestland inIdaho is family owned spread acrossapproximately 1.7 million acres (or 56percent of all privately-owned forestland). Up to one third of that land maychange hands in the next five yearsaccording to a recent study of familyforest owners in Idaho. The study(www.uidaho.edu/cnr/policy-analysis-group) conducted by the University ofIdaho Policy Analysis Group in conjunc-tion with the Idaho Department ofLands and University of IdahoExtension, surveyed Idaho’s family for-est owners to understand managementtrends and behaviors. The study foundthat of the nearly 36,000 Idaho familyforest owners, 60 percent or more haveengaged in active management, includ-ing improving wildlife habitat, reducingwildfire risks, harvesting trees, andother actions. Based on the findings,study recommendations are providedfor local government and agencies,including building on networks amonglandowners, families, and neighbors inhelping to manage family forests;designing extension programs thatfocus on improving forest health; andtargeting programs to new owners thatmay have less experience managingforests. Contact: Dennis Becker,[email protected]. ◆

5. Invest in Data Mapping, RiskAssessment, and Applied Research ThatDirectly Supports Cross-BoundaryManagement and Suppression. Panelsidentified the need for significantinvestment in applied research andinformation tools targeted to directlysupport pre-fire response planning,wildland fire management, and sup-pression efforts. Consensus existedacross panels, speakers, and in remarksby audience members that the level ofcurrent investment to better inform andsupport our collective efforts on publicand private lands is inadequate andillogical considering the breadth andmagnitude of the economic, social, andecological impacts of the current firereality. This is not another simple call formore research; we need to establish astructure to link, coordinate, and incentcross-disciplinary research efforts of dif-ferent public and private entities acrosswestern states to provide credible, rele-vant, and timely information in supportof planning, management, and sup-pression efforts. Given the magnitude ofthe challenges faced, information silosmust end, and proposals for coordinat-ing and leveraging institutional knowl-edge and expertise merit immediateattention and resources.

The Challenges

The Summit event and subsequentreport was neither the start nor the endof stakeholder engagement that is criti-cal to the future of the fire-prone west-ern landscape. Intending to build on2012 and 2017 initiatives of the Western

Governors Association, the Summititself was designed to develop action-able findings for consideration by elect-ed officials and policy makers. That goalwas largely, but not entirely, accom-plished by the complete set of recom-mendations contained in the report—this article is a heavily abridged version.The next step will be to present thepanel’s work in multiple forums so thatit can be folded into the work of a stag-gering number of different initiativesoccurring around the West. The OSUCollege of Forestry has committed towork with our partners from each of thestates to ensure that individuals fromthe science panels can be available forfollow-up presentations if requested.Contact the author if you are interested.

Change is never easy for individuals,societies, or professions. I feel that thistime and this issue, however, is ripe forour profession going forward. Forestersare uniquely prepared to critically thinkand solve land management problemsover large spatial areas and lengthytime spans—it is what we do. The solu-tions to our wildfire problem, rooted inunprecedented fuel conditions andovercharged fire seasons, are in ourview. Active land management that seesand treats our forested landscapes asfuels (in addition to all the other thingsthat are our forests) will be our pathforward. Let’s get to work. ◆

John D. Bailey is Maybelle ClarkeMacDonald Professor of TeachingExcellence, Silviculture and FireManagement, OSU College of Forestry,Corvallis, Ore. He can be reached at541-737-1497 or [email protected]. John is an active SAF member.


Fire and FuelsManagement(CONTINUED FROM PAGE 3)

SOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERSWestern Forester4033 S.W. Canyon RoadPortland, Oregon 97221

PRINTED ONRECYCLED PAPER

Non-Profit Org.U.S. POSTAGE

PAIDPORTLAND, ORPERMIT NO. 16

society of american foresters western … › ... › wfaprmayjune2018final.pdfguished leaders of...

Documents