society of american foresters western forester

BY JOHN P. HAYES

In recent years, concerns overwildlife conservation have shaped for-est policy and forest managementdecisions in the United States in waysthat were almost unimaginable two orthree decades ago. Species such as thenorthern spotted owl and marbledmurrelet in the Pacific Northwest, thered-cockaded woodpecker in theSoutheast, and the Indiana bat in theNortheast and Midwest were oncelargely known only to wildlife enthusi-asts, but now drive policy and man-agement decisions in many forestsbecause of their listing as threatenedor endangered under the federalEndangered Species Act.

Although the current attention towildlife and emphasis on biodiversityin forests has resulted in abruptchanges in forest management prac-tices, the seeds of change that led toour current approach to managingwildlife in forests were planted quitesome time ago, and close interactionsbetween the fields of wildlife andforestry have a rich history.

In historic and prehistoric times, itappears that American Indians andearly European cultures may havemanipulated forest structure exten-sively to promote habitat for gamespecies. More recently, wildlife issueshave played an important role inmodern forest management since theearly 20th century. Aldo Leopold, thevisionary conservationist who is oftenconsidered to be the father of modern

wildlife ecology and management,was trained as a forester and spent asubstantial portion of his careerworking for the USDA Forest Service.Leopold’s handbook on game man-agement, published in 1915 by theForest Service, articulated the founda-tion of the modern view of wildlife inforest systems. In it, Leopold arguedthat wildlife and their habitat shouldbe considered to be products of forestmanagement, and forests should bemanaged, in part, to provide forwildlife habitat.

Despite a long history of interac-tions between wildlife and forestry,until relatively recently much of theattention that forest managers gave towildlife in forests focused on manag-ing habitat for game species and onminimizing impacts of wildlife on seedproduction and forest regeneration.

The 1960s and 1970s saw the begin-ning of a transformation in our per-spectives on wildlife-forestry interac-tions, coinciding with increased publicawareness of environmental issuesand passage of key legislation such asthe Wilderness Act, the NationalEnvironmental Policy Act and theEndangered Species Act. Concurrentwith this new view was a proliferationof studies on the ecology of wildlife inforests and enhanced understandingof the importance of dead wood, ripar-ian habitat, old-growth forests andcomplex forest structure for wildlife.

A central paradigm emerging fromthis research relates to the concept ofspatial scale. A large number ofrecent studies have demonstrated

that wildlife select different habitatcharacteristics at different spatialscales, and that attention to forestcharacteristics at different scales iscritical to provide high quality habitatfor wildlife. For example, earlyattempts to provide habitat for north-ern spotted owls emphasized protec-tion of the nest tree (habitat compo-nent scale). We now understand thatthe characteristics of the stand inwhich the nest tree occurs are alsoimportant (stand scale), as is theamount, distribution and characteris-tics of stands surrounding the neststand (landscape scale) and connec-tivity among different nesting areas(regional scale). To effectively man-age for this species, attention to eachof these scales is necessary.

Within forest stands, key aspects ofhabitat to which wildlife respondinclude vertical and horizontal het-erogeneity, amount of standing andfallen dead wood, and vegetative

In This Issue: Wildlife Management

Western ForesterS 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

July/August 2004 Oregon ¥ Washington State ¥ Inland Empire ¥ Alaska Societies Volume 49 ¥ Number 4

Wildlife Considerations inModern Forest Management

PHOTO COURTESY OF USDA FOREST SERVICE

To provide critical habitat fornorthern spotted owls, managersmust consider forest characteristicsat different spatial scales.

(CONTINUED ON PAGE 2)

species diversity. Special habitat fea-tures, such as riparian areas, rockyoutcrops and unique plant associa-tions, also provide important habitatfor a number of species of wildlife.Forest management that maintains orincreases structural complexity withinstands can provide multiple nichesfor wildlife.

For many species of wildlife, stand-

ing dead wood, or snags, is particular-ly important. Woodpeckers and asuite of cavity-nesting birds, bats, for-est carnivores, arboreal rodents, andother species are dependent on orhighly associated with snags. Fewmanagement decisions influenceabundance and composition ofwildlife communities as strongly asdecisions concerning management ofsnags. Maintaining large diametersnags in a variety of stages of decay isa key management strategy to provid-ing habitat for several species.

Just as many species have beenshown to prefer the complex foreststructure found in old-growth stands,others are closely associated withstands in early stages of development.Because of the diversity of habitatneeds of different wildlife species,maintaining a wide array of stand con-ditions helps promote a diverse wildlifecommunity. A good example of anapproach to maintain a variety of struc-tural conditions through time is therecent management plan developed bythe Oregon Department of Forestry.This plan manages for different struc-

tural conditions spread across the land-scape, providing connectivity betweenkey habitat types. Appropriately, theseplans call for maintaining a minimumamount of habitat in the stem-exclu-sion stage, as this developmental stagetends to be poor quality habitat formost wildlife species.

Remote imagery, GIS and other tech-nological advances have enabled us tobegin to look at some of the conse-quences of our land management deci-sions at much larger scales. As a result,influences of fragmentation, connectiv-ity and landscape structure on wildlifepopulations have begun to shape ourmodern view of quality of habitat forwildlife as well. Although many speciesof wildlife seem to be somewhat insen-sitive to landscape characteristics andrespond more strongly to characteris-tics at smaller spatial scales, landscapecharacteristics appear to be very impor-tant for species with limited mobility orlarge home ranges.

The adage “it’s a small world” hasnever been truer than it is today. Atvery large scales, global climate changeand interregional patterns of land usewill likely influence wildlife and foreststructure as well. Such changes willinfluence wildlife within regions as wellas migratory species that travel amongregions. Globalization and globalchange has influenced forestry as it hasmany different fields and industries.Struggles to maintain global competi-tiveness will increasingly shape forestpolicy and management decisions inthe years to come. Just as industrializa-tion of agriculture resulted in a loss ofhedgerows and strongly impacted thewildlife species associated with them,increased intensity of forest manage-ment under these conditions is likely toimpact wildlife populations as well.

Recognition that it is important totake multiple spatial scales intoaccount while managing forest standshas increased our understanding ofeffective ways to manage for wildlife inforest systems. However, thisincreased understanding has not sim-plified management decisions in anyway. Each wildlife species relates tothe characteristics of each spatial scalesomewhat differently, creating chal-

2 WESTERN FORESTER u JULY/AUGUST 2004

Next Issue: The PNW Research StationÕs Focused Science Delivery Program

WildlifeConsiderations(CONTINUED FROM FRONT PAGE)

Western ForesterSociety of American Foresters

4033 S.W. Canyon Rd. ¥ Portland, OR 97221 ¥ 503-224-8046 ¥ FAX [email protected] ¥ [email protected] ¥ www.forestry.org

Editor: Lori Rasor ¥ Assistant: Aimee Sanders

Western Forester is published bimonthly by theOregon and Washington State SocietiesÕ Northwest Office

State Society ChairsOregon: John Herbst, 1610 First St.,La Grande, OR 97850; 541-663-0509;[email protected]

Washington State: Peter Heide, 2908 28thLane NE, Olympia, WA 98506; 360-357-9142;fax 360-352-4621

Inland Empire: Brett Winterowd, 270 S.Main, Colville, WA 99114; 509-684-8550;fax 509-684-2008; [email protected]

Alaska: Richard Coose, USDA ForestService, P.O. Box 9533, Ketchikan, AK 99901;phone/fax 907-247-9533; [email protected]

Northwest Council Members

District I: Ann Forest Burns, 5508-35th Ave.,NE, Suite 102, Seattle, WA 98105; 206-522-5942; fax 206-522-5392; [email protected]

District II: Darrel Kenops, 1555 HaydenBridge Rd., Springfield, OR 97477; 541-741-3466; [email protected]

Please send change of address to:Society of American Foresters

5400 Grosvenor LaneBethesda, MD 20814

(301) 897-8720

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.

lenges for managers interested inmaintaining habitat for a broad arrayof species. Use of computer modelingcan help managers predict responsesof multiple species simultaneouslyover large areas, but a strong founda-tion of field-based empirical studiescoupled with information from moni-toring activities is essential to fuel themodels. While many of these comput-er models are currently used almostexclusively by researchers, in the yearsto come it is likely that many of thesewill become more user-friendly andavailable for managers to use.

With increases in human popula-tion size and a globally shrinking for-est base, public demand for a widearray of forest amenities, includingsustainable ecological systems andhealthy wildlife populations, isunlikely to diminish in the foresee-able future. To the contrary, it isalmost certain that human demandson forests will only increase in thefuture. It is difficult to predict theways that forestry and wildlife willinteract in the years to come, butgood stewardship of forestlands willcontinue to include maintaininghabitat to support healthy popula-

tions of wildlife.Maintaining large reserves is an

important conservation strategy forspecies requiring large tracts of undis-turbed habitat, and these reserves alsofulfill a number of other importantsocial values. But while reserves areimportant elements of many conserva-tion strategies, a strategy that reliesstrictly on reserves for conservation willoften be inadequate. Incorporating keycomponents of wildlife habitat in forestmanagement plans outside of reservesis essential to maintain healthy popula-tions across the landscape. Providingthese components in a climate ofincreased economic pressure to maxi-mize economic profit from forests willbe a significant challenge, requiring awell developed and rigorous scientificbase of information. Cooperative inter-actions between scientists and man-agers, foresters and wildlife ecologists,and planners and practitioners whoshare a vision of managing forests toprovide for a diverse array of societalneeds, including ecological, economic,recreational and spiritual values, will beneeded to tackle this challenging task.

Over the years foresters havedeveloped a sophisticated set of tools

to achieve forest management goals.Just as a carpenter who uses only ahammer would be unable to accom-plish complex carpentry tasks, aforester who uses only a single silvi-cultural tool is poorly equipped tomeet the complex forest managementneeds of today. To achieve societaldemands for healthy forests, abun-dant wildlife and production of woodproducts, these forest managers willneed to use a complex set of tools,including traditional even-age prac-tices combined with establishment ofreserves and use of practices such asgreen-tree retention, variable densitythinnings and unevenage manage-ment. While providing the diversityof habitat to meet the needs ofwildlife species can be a dauntingtask, even simple steps, such as pro-viding dead wood in forest stands,managing for a variety of stand condi-tions, and protection of special habi-tat features, can result in significantbenefits for wildlife. u

John P. Hayes is professor of WildlifeEcology, Department of Forest Science,Oregon State University, Corvallis.

WESTERN FORESTER u JULY/AUGUST 2004 3

BY BRUCE G. MARCOT

A Legacy of Snags in the System

t is widely acknowledged thatstanding dead or partially dead

trees provide important habitat forwoodpeckers and other primary cavi-ty excavators, and that a wide array ofother animals use woodpeckercavities. Guidelines exist formaintaining or even creatingsnags on federal lands, stateforestlands and private forest-lands. It is also known thatlarge-diameter snags held overfrom previous, older standsconstitute one aspect of“wood legacies” that provideecological functions more fullythan small-diameter snagsproduced from understorysuppression during even-agestand management.

Snags are utilized by wildlifein many ways. For example,red squirrels use witches’brooms created by mistletoe inDouglas-fir trees. Black bearsden in hollow trees and logs innortheastern Oregon. Shredded downwood and bark piles at the base ofsnags are often used by salamandersin Douglas-fir forests of Washington.Long-eared bats use tree stumps forroosts. High-cut stumps are used bywhite-headed woodpeckers for cavi-ties. Ponderosa pine snags are used asbreeding roosts by bats.

However, it has only been morerecently acknowledged that manyother forms of wood decay—other“wood decay elements” or WDEs—than just snags also provide vital eco-logical services in forest, woodlandand riparian ecosystems. This is abrief review of the diversity and eco-logical roles of WDEs.

Beyond snags: elements andfunctions of wood decayelements

WDEs also include down wood,root wads, tree stumps, litter, duff,broomed or diseased branches, hol-low trees and partially dead trees.They also provide resources and sub-strates for many organisms that per-

form vital ecological roles of trans-forming and cycling nutrients,decomposition, respiration and otherbiological processes. Such roles ben-efit ecosystems far beyond the con-fines of the wood decay elements perse, and are a natural and vital part ofnative forests and ecosystem process-es. Providing for WDEs may seem likesacrificing growing space, but in thelong run, ecological processes ofWDEs greatly contribute to overallecosystem health, soil productivityand growth of desired tree species.

Beyond just providing wildlife habi-tat, WDEs also provide for an array ofecological roles of wildlife in forestecosystems. For example, in southwest

Oregon conifer-hardwood forests, hol-low trees are used by 24 wildlifespecies, including nine bats, five owls,two woodpeckers, a swift and others.Of these 24 species, five (two birds andthree mammals) also serve the benefi-cial function of dispersing seeds andfruits of native plants, and two (mam-mals) tunnel in soil that in turn createsburrows used by other species and canhelp improve soil structure and uptakeof organic matter. These and othersecondary beneficial ecosystem servic-es are provided by many wildlife

species associated with allWDE categories in all forests.

Down wood has a high porevolume and serves as moisturereservoirs, and in moderation,provides microsites for benefi-cial mychorrizal fungi, plantsand animals that aid in forestrecovery after prolongeddrought or fire. Large pieces ofdown wood eventually workinto the soil where they serveas long-term, time-releasesources of humus, organicmatter, phosphate and nitro-gen, and mediate soil nutrientcycles. Woody material in thesoil creates acidic soil condi-tions that favor soil microbialactivity that help fix nitrogen

for use by trees. Down wood on thesurface can help stabilize soil move-ment and deter erosion, and serve asnurse logs for spruce, hemlock, alder,Douglas-fir and other trees. Wood thatenters the soil profile tends to staythere. Some carbon dating studies inthe Inland West have shown buriedwood material to be 500 to 1,000+years old. All this means that restoringnatural levels of coarse wood in soilhorizons may be an immensely long-term process.

The paradox of health and harmSuch direct and indirect benefits of

WDEs, however, are often ignoredbecause of the fear that WDEs (espe-cially snags and down wood) increaseundesirable fire and insect hazards. Insome situations this is true, but the eco-logical benefits of WDEs contributing tohealthy, diverse, productive forests overtime could be weighed against any suchshort-term risks. The challenge to for-est managers is to provide enough


Wood Decay in Healthy Forests:The Paradox and the Promise

I

PHOTO COURTESY OF BRUCE G. MARCOT

Hollow standing and down trees are used by anarray of wildlife species, including VauxÕs swifts,pileated woodpeckers, black bears and fishers.

JACKSON & PROCHNAU, INC.Albany, Oregon Since 1954 Olympia, Washington

Feasibility Studies & Investment Analysis World Wide.Inventory, Appraisals, Engineering, Management, Log Marketing

P.O. Box 177, Albany, Oregon 541-926-3320 FAX 541-926-3917

WDEs in a variety of types and spatialpatterns for long-term soil productivity,ecosystem functions, and use and needby organisms, but at the same time toavoid undue hazards of fire, insect pestoutbreaks, and operational and recre-ational safety problems.

The promise of how much,where and how

WDEs could be provided in bothclumped and dispersed patterns, par-ticularly taking advantage of naturalpatterns such as small, isolated rootrot pockets that create local clumps ofsnags and hollow trees, or low-qualitytrees with splitting or sloughing barkgrowing on rocky soil or sites unfit forcommercial tree use. More widely dis-persing rather than clumping WDEs infire hazard zones, such as urban-forestinterfaces, may provide some measureof wood decay, but not contribute tofire and insect pest risks.

Also, managing for WDEs can beevaluated at stand, local watershedand broader landscape scales toensure that large areas are not devoidof legacy wood elements. Mostimportant, by considering WDEs inforest management, managers areplanning for the future when theyaccount for dynamics of tree growthand decay, stand rotation and distur-bance dynamics (particularly fire,insect pests and pathogens).

How much WDEs should be pro-vided? That depends, of course, onthe overall forest management objec-tives. One possible objective is toprovide a minimal amount of WDEsin more intensive tree farms to helpcomplement greater amounts ofWDEs found on adjacent nationalforests or other multiple-use forest-lands. Other possible objectives mayinclude providing greater patches ofWDEs on less productive growingsites, or rotating stand managementmethods across the landscape so thateach site gets an occasional infusionof WDE legacies and large wood intothe soil. To various degrees, the forestmanager may wish to emulate somerange of historic or unharvested con-ditions.

Studies by A.E. Harvey suggest thatin forests of the Inland West, about 30percent of organic volume of soils willmaintain peak mycorrhizae amounts

in the organic soil horizon. Thistranslates to about 10-15 tons/acre ofsurface down wood, which should berelatively large woody residue scat-tered across areas with minimal soildisturbance. Further studies havegenerally supported this recommen-dation, but found high variationamong forests, with western hemlockforests having much higher levels andgrand fir/maple forests having muchless. In forests of the Inland West, onerule of thumb is that 60 tons/acre is afire hazard. The forest manager couldreduce this hazard by providing lowerdown wood mass but still providingecological benefits of coarse wood insoils.

Studies in Wyoming suggest thatchipping of fuel wood is not an eco-logically viable solution, as rainfallleaches large amounts of toxic, water-soluble phenolics from the chips andblocks soil structure, causing mortali-ty of tree seedlings. In some cases,artificial logs could be introduced tocover greater than 25 percent of thearea in piles large enough to providedeposits of large coarse wood similarto natural levels. Snags and downwood have been inventoried acrossmany ownerships; these data areavailable on the DecAID Advisor web-site, discussed in the companion arti-cle on page 12).

Broadening the visionThe overall lesson is that the forest

ecosystem manager can view WDEs asnatural and desirable parts of the forestecosystem, and more than just provid-ing occasional snags for woodpeckers.I have not discussed the essential roleof WDEs—particularly large logs—infish-bearing streams and riparian sys-tems, but WDEs in those habitats tooshould be considered in forest ecosys-tem management. All types of WDEsprovide important functions for plants,animals and ecological processes thattogether maintain natural, diverse andself-sustaining forests. u

Bruce G. Marcot, Ph.D., is a researchwildlife ecologist for the USDA ForestService, Pacific Northwest ResearchStation, in Portland, Ore. He can bereached at 503-808-2010 [email protected].


References andFurther Reading

Marcot, B. G. 2002. Ecosystemprocesses related to wood decay.http://www.fs.fed.us/wildecology/decaid/decaid_background/decaid_home.htm.


BY GARY J. ROLOFF

he relationshipbetween

wildlife conserva-tion and forestry isnot new. In fact,conservation meas-ures to protect cer-tain wildlife speciesin the United States date back to thelate 1800s when political leaders rec-ognized the need to consider wildliferelative to commerce activities. Ofcourse, as forestry and other naturalresource management activitiesexpanded in the United Statesthroughout the 20th century, environ-mental awareness increased. Today,wildlife is a vital consideration ofmany land management activities,either through established laws andregulations or through voluntary for-est stewardship activities.

Forest stewardship certification forprivate forest landowners is a relative-ly new program in our history of natu-ral resource management. Though anenvironmental awareness existedprior to the introduction of certifica-tion programs, just within the last 25years were landowners providedstructured frameworks for measuringand benchmarking the success oftheir steward-ship programs.

These struc-tured frame-works are theforest steward-ship standardscurrently in useworld-wide.Some of themore commoncertificationprogramsinclude theSustainableForestryInitiative®,American TreeFarm System,Green Tag,ScientificCertification

System, SmartWood and the CanadianStandards Association, among others.In all of the common certification pro-grams currently available, wildlife is acritical consideration.

Early forest stewardship certifica-tion programs incorporated wildlifeobjectives in general terms. For exam-ple, simple statements that suggestedlandowners “consider” or “incorpo-rate” wildlife into timber managementactivities provided little specific direc-tion and constituted the extent ofwildlife requirements.

As forest stewardship certificationprograms evolved, more specificrequirements have ensued. Theprocess of moving from generalrequirements to specifics is a double-edged sword. There is benefit in keep-ing wildlife requirements general sothat all landowners can personalizetheir programs within their individualbudgets, expertise and ownership pat-terns. I have firsthand witnessed thepositive effects of organized wildlifestewardship and the goal should be tokeep acres enrolled in these programs,not to make the standards so complexand prescriptive that landowners can-not afford to remain involved. How-ever, specificity was also necessary ascertification programs matured. Withmost certification programs suscepti-ble to socio-economic pressures, indi-

vidual issues rise to the top and war-rant consideration for the program tobe viewed as valid. For example, manyof the certification programs are cur-rently being encouraged by outsidesources to incorporate more specificson landscape-level management andold growth.

From my perspective, this increasein specificity serves two purposes.First, it lends credibility to the certifi-cation standard by ensuring that thetopics deemed most important bysociety and the ecological sciences areconsidered. Second, the detail offers atemplate that facilitates consistentimplementation of the wildlife stan-dards across diverse ownerships.Because the wildlife standards areconsistently implemented, moreexplicit statements regarding benefitscan be made and measured across allof the enrolled acres. Thus, theconundrum is balancing generalityand specificity; it is important to keepthe certification standards generalenough to ensure operational feasibil-ity while providing the specificityrequired by stakeholders (includingcustomers and the general public) ofthe program(s).

Forest Stewardship Certification and Wildlife

T

PHOTO COURTESY OF GARY J. ROLOFF

Residual patch retained in a recent-ly harvested unit to provide wildlifehabitat on Boise land.

PHOTO COURTESY OF GARY J. ROLOFF

This patch was retained in a Boise harvest unit for aCooperÕs hawk nest.

What has certification done forwildlife?

The result of balancing generalityand specificity is that wildlife pro-grams across the country are asdiverse as the landowners that areenrolled in certification programs.This diversity is reflected in activitiesranging from stand retention of snags,green trees and downed wood, to themore theoretical consideration oflandscape context in forest planning.

Certification programs typicallyencourage wildlife training andinvolvement with some level of wildliferesearch, either individually, throughmembership to a trade association orthrough cooperative efforts. Theimportant aspect of implementingwildlife activities, regardless of certifi-cation program, is that informed forestmanagement decisions are made withrespect to wildlife.

Perhaps the greatest benefit of for-est stewardship certification programsfor wildlife has been as a communica-tions tool between wildlife and forestryprofessionals. This dialogue wasoccurring long before the beginning ofcertification standards; however, thestandards offer a consistent set ofexpectations and definitions that facil-itate communication between wildlifebiologists and foresters.

A structured stewardship standardfor wildlife has required thoseenrolled in certification programs toorganize their data, critically reviewprocesses, prioritize issues forresearch and development, and toinstitutionalize monitoring programsaimed at continuous improvement.Because of more structured commu-nication among the resource profes-sionals in an enrolled organizationand an expectation by upper-levelmanagement to meet the spirit andintent of the certification standard,enrollment in a stewardship certifica-tion program facilitates gettingwildlife practices done on the ground,where it matters the most. u

Gary J. Roloff is wildlife applicationsmanager for Timberland Resources,Boise Cascade Corporation, Mason,MI. He can be reached at 517-244-0902 or [email protected].


BY JENNIFER WEIKEL

ommercial thinning is used toachieve a variety of objectives

including improving wood yield,reducing fuel loads and improving bio-diversity values by enhancing structur-al diversity. Despite its wide use andrecent increase in public awareness,effects of thinning on many species ofwildlife are still uncertain. Recently,many new studies on effects of com-mercial thinning have been published.Most of these studies describe imme-diate to short-term impacts of thin-ning on songbirds and small mam-mals. We still know little about effectsof thinning on amphibians, uncom-mon species (e.g., forest-dwelling owls,marbled murrelet), large-bodiedspecies (e.g., cougar), and those thatrange over large areas (e.g., pileatedwoodpecker, black bear, blue grouse).In addition, we know little regardinglong-term or landscape-level impactsof thinning for any species. The intentof this article is to conceptuallydescribe how thinning works tochange forest structure for wildlife andto summarize the “state of knowledge”regarding effects of thinning onwildlife populations.

Most thinning is conducted in sin-gle-storied, structurally simple stands.Thinning usually removes suppressedand subdominant trees, resulting ingreater spacing between trees andreduced canopy cover. As a conse-quence, more light and otherresources are available to remainingoverstory trees, regenerating seedlingsand saplings, understory shrubs andherbaceous plants. The amount of sunreaching the forest floor and the dura-tion of time that the forest floor willcontinue to experience increased radi-ation depends on the amount of over-story removed. Light thinning mayresult in an initial flush of resources

that is short lived. Because few treesare removed, the canopy closes quicklyand begins to shade understory plantsin only a few years. Heavier thinningallows more light to reach the forestfloor and increases the length of timethat resources will be available beforethe overstory closes.

Larger treesFrom a wildlife perspective, thin-

ning can result in changes in habitatquality, much of which is positive.Overstory trees remaining after thin-ning grow faster, resulting in trees withlarger trunks, deeper crowns and larg-er branches. Conifer trees (and somehardwoods) develop increasingly deepfurrows in their bark as they grow.Deeply furrowed bark provides hidingspaces for spiders and insects, whichin turn provides a steady and abun-dant food source for bark-foragingbirds such as nuthatches and creepers.Trees with particularly deeply fur-rowed bark can also provide crevicesused as resting sites for bats and cool,moist hiding places for salamanders.Large branches on trees provide stablestructures on which birds can buildtheir nests. Many species of birds (e.g.,hermit warbler, golden-crownedkinglet) and one species of mammal,the red tree vole, specialize in living inthe crowns of coniferous trees in thePacific Northwest. Although some ofthese species are initially negativelyimpacted by thinning, as tree crownsdevelop, increasing the depth and vol-ume of foliage, habitat quality will like-ly improve for these species over thelong term.

Understory plantsMost single-story, closed-canopy

stands have little to no understoryvegetation. By allowing more light toreach the understory, thinning usuallybrings about a flush of growth ofherbaceous plants, grasses and

shrubs. Grasses and herbaceousspecies in the understory of thinnedstands can provide a source of high-quality forage for ungulates. Theflush of herbaceous plants and grass-es also provides an abundant and sta-ble source of food and hiding coverfor many species of small mammalsand for birds that nest or forage onthe ground. Increased growth ofshrubs provides improved protectivecover for both ground-dwelling andshrub-dwelling animals as well asimproved foraging and nesting habi-tat for many birds. In many cases, theincreased radiation to the understorytriggers production of flowers andfruits. This provides a source of foodfor hummingbirds, thrushes andmany species of small mammals thatis virtually absent in similarunthinned stands.

Multi-storied and multi-speciesstands

Thinning also promotes increasedgrowth of shrubs and regeneratingtrees. Together these structuresincrease vertical layering and plantspecies diversity, especially in west-side forests. Increased vertical layer-ing of vegetation results in greaterquantity and more varied habitat forfoliage-dwelling birds. Multi-speciesstands provide a more varied andabundant source of seeds, mast andinsects than do single-species stands.Deciduous trees within conifer forestsare “hotspots” of diversity. Somespecies (e.g., black-headed grosbeak,downy woodpecker) occur or aremost abundant only in areas contain-ing patches of hardwoods. For birds,some species selectively place theirnests in deciduous trees (e.g., duskyflycatcher, warbling vireo).

ÒOpennessÓ of the canopyFor some species, the simple act of

creating more space between treescan improve habitat. Some species offlycatchers require a combination of atall perch and open air space to feed.The Hammond’s flycatcher, westernwood-pewee and olive-sided flycatch-er are so particular in their habitatrequirements that they are typicallyabsent, very rare or restricted to edgesof most single-storied closed canopyforests. Hammond’s flycatchers are


Wildlife Responses to Thinning

C

abundant and western wood-peweesand olive-sided flycatchers some-times occur in young thinned stands.Some species of bats are more activein thinned than in unthinned stands.Open air space in thinned standsallows bats ample room to maneuverfor foraging. Some species of wildliferespond positively to thinning and arelikely responding to an increasedabundance in their insect prey. Forexample, many species of bats, hairywoodpeckers and red-breastednuthatches respond positively tothinning despite the fact that thin-ning often results in a reduction inabundance of their primarynesting/roosting sites (snags). It isbelieved that increased use of thinnedstands for these species is in responseto increases in food abundance.

Eastside forestsAs a result of years of fire suppres-

sion, dense multi-storied stands arenow more abundant in dry pine-dominated forests than they were his-torically. Thus, in contrast to westsideforests, heavy thinning is often usedto remove young understory trees toimprove conditions of the stand andto reduce fuel loading. Effects ofthinning are not well studied in east-side forests. However, species ofwildlife that occur primarily in openpine forests such as the white-headedwoodpecker are likely to benefit.

Negative effects of thinningNot all species respond positively

to thinning. As noted above, speciesthat require high canopy cover (e.g.,Hutton’s vireo, Pacific-slope flycatch-er, red-backed vole) or specialize inforaging in the forest canopy (e.g.,golden-crowned kinglet and hermitwarbler) typically decline in abun-dance immediately following thin-ning. Reductions in abundance ofthese species are likely due to a directloss of habitat or perhaps to moresubtle causes such as increased ratesof depredation or changes in micro-climate due to loss of protectivecover. Although it is suspected thathabitat quality will improve over thelong term for these species, repeatedthinning or thinning over large areasmay result in significant and longer-term declines for these species.

Because thinning reduces compe-tition between trees, tree death due tosuppression mortality is lower inthinned than in unthinned stands.Thus, natural recruitment of snagsinto thinned stands will likely be lim-ited to natural disturbances such asdisease (e.g., root rot), pests (e.g., barkbeetles) and wind. Snags are a criticalresource for most species of cavity-nesting birds and many species ofsmall mammals. Without active cre-ation of snags, species that rely onsnags are likely to be negativelyaffected by thinning in the long term.

Similarly, long-term recruitment ofdowned wood is likely to be negative-ly impacted by thinning due to thecorresponding lack of tree death.Although thinning may result in aninitial recruitment of downed wood tothe forest floor in the form of loggingdebris or due to wind throw, activemanagement may be necessary toprovide adequate amounts of downedwood for wildlife over the long term.

Long-term implications ofthinning

To date, research has been limitedto examination of the immediate tomid-term (approximately 25 yearspost thinning) effects of thinning.Overall, effects of thinning seem topersist up to at least 25 years afterthinning is completed. Some species,however, do show a change inresponse within this time frame. Forexample, red-backed voles declinedin abundance immediately after thin-ning, but were found to be equallyabundant and to have better repro-ductive success in stands thinned 7 to24 years previously than in similarunthinned stands. Long-term effectsof thinning (beyond 25 years post-harvest) or effects of repeated thin-ning entries have not been studied.

Management implicationsOverall, commercial thinning seems

to have positive to neutral effects onwildlife. Of those species respondingnegatively to thinning, many areexpected to demonstrate a recovery orreversal in response, eventuallybecoming more abundant in thinnedthan in unthinned stands. Thesespecies (e.g., Pacific-slope flycatcher,varied thrush) are often abundant inolder forests and are expected torespond positively to enhancement ofstand structure in young stands. Forspecies that utilize snags and downedwood, however, active managementmay be required to provide thesestructures in thinned stands.

All thinned stands are not equalwith regard to wildlife habitat.Degree of response of overstory trees,regenerating trees, shrubs and herba-ceous plants will depend on level ofthinning (how much is removed) andwhether multiple thinning entries areconducted over the long term. Ifthinning is very light, little change instand structure may be observed.Moderate thinning may result in achange in stand structure, but theresponse may be short-lived unlessrepeated entries are made to main-tain presence of light to understoryplants. Degree of response of wildlife,both positive and negative, will thusbe influenced by level of thinning(light to heavy) and frequency ofrepeated entries. u

Jennifer Weikel is a monitoring spe-cialist, Forest Health and Monitoring,Private and Community ForestsProgram, Oregon Department ofForestry in Salem. She can be reachedat 503-945-7394 or [email protected].


BY GARY SPRINGER

ver the years I have noticed thatwhen clearcutting or clearing

land for conifer reforestation purpos-es, most foresters and landowners cutdown their big, scattered hardwoodsand then chip or pile and burn themif they have no log value.

Twenty years ago I had some most-ly open ground with big scatteredmaples growing on it that I wanted toconvert to a conifer plantation.Instead of cutting the maple, I girdledand killed them, left them standing,and then planted my Doug-firseedlings right under them. I discov-ered that the standing dead mapletook up almost no space and didn’treally interfere with the conifergrowth because they no longer putout much shade. Also, as they beganto decay they provided great birdroosting and nesting habitat for cavityusers. A few of the maples eventuallyrotted off and fell over, mashing oneor two conifers, but most of themstood for at least 15 years and provid-ed important habitat that wouldn’totherwise be there. A few are still

standing after 20 years and the firtrees are now above them.

By looking at things a little differ-ently than I had in the past, I was ableto turn an undesirable “nuisance” treeinto a public resource at very littlecost and without impacting my owngoals. u

Gary Springer is chair of the OSAFMary’s Peak Chapter in Corvallis, aforester for Starker Forests and a fami-ly forest owner. He can be reached at541-757-9665 or [email protected].


One Good Maple

O

This is one of Gary Springer’s“good” bigleaf maples on theSpringer Tree Farm in Corvallis,Ore. It is about three feet indiameter at its base and youcan see the old axe markswhere it was girdled. Before itwas planted, the surroundingarea was understocked and hadwidely scattered bigleaf mapleand Douglas-fir trees growingon it. This maple was fullyoccupying a good quarter of anacre of ground and had nosawlog value. It would havemade about three cords of veryhard-earned firewood out of it,so it had some value there, butit had great value as a wildlifesnag. When this picture wastaken, the tree had been deadabout 15 years and was a popu-lar hawk perch and had been ahome for woodpeckers and other cavity nesters who followed them. The firgrowing next to the maple was around eight years old at the time. It tookthree years for the maple to completely die, so the fir got off to a slow startand was smaller than seedlings planted further from the maple. Today, thefir in the picture has overtopped the snag and is growing well. The oldmaple is still standing and still being used by wildlife.

PHOTO COURTESY OF GARY SPRINGER

MB&G Plot CompilerCruise compilation softwarefeaturing a choice of taper systems Ñ

¥ Behre

¥ SIS

¥ W&K / W&O (CACTOS)

¥ Eastside and WestsideFlewelling

MB&G ToolsStand-based forestinventory datamanagement softwarefeaturing a choice oftaper systems andgrowth modelsÑFVS,SPS, ORGANON,CACTOS, and CRYPTOS.

MASON, BRUCE & GIRARD, INC.

INTRODUCES

The MB&G Plot CompilerMB&G Tools

Natural Resource Consultants Since 1921

Call (503) 224-3445or visit www.masonbruce.comPlan for Tomorrow

Western ForesterPicture your ad here and reachover 2,500 potential customers

Call: 503-224-8046Email: [email protected] rates & deadlines

BY FREDERICK C. HALL

he Oregon Society of AmericanForesters held a joint symposium

with the Oregon Chapter of TheWildlife Society in Bend, Ore., February9-11, 2004. More than 150 forestersand wildlife biologists gathered to dis-cuss options for enhancing wildlifehabitat through silvicultural practices.Discussions dealt with integratingwildlife habitat objectives with forestmanagement planning, historical standconditions compared to current anddesired conditions, and the effect of sil-vicultural treatments on wildlife.

Old forests tend to have diversity intree size, age and decadence, whichenhances wildlife diversity.

As the percentage of older forests inthe Pacific Northwest has decreasedfrom about 60 percent in the late 1880sto less than 20 percent today, manywildlife biologists are concerned overloss in habitat. In addition, manystands today are relatively small indiameter, are growing slowly in diame-ter (stagnated), and are not developingas fast as the self-thinning conceptsuggests. In other words, they are notdeveloping into multi-structuredstands, a phenomenon clearly illus-trated in many talks.

It was proposed that active standmanagement is the key to enhancingwildlife habitat in these forest types.Various silvicultural treatmentsinvolving either thinning or modifiedregeneration cutting where the leavetrees are programmed for indefiniteretention as legacies were described.

Thinning was the primary topic ofdiscussion. Some thinning prescrip-tions were directly aimed at creatingtrees that could become legacies.Other treatments were directed at cre-ating snags and dead trees by topping,girdling or injecting with pathogens.

Consensus among both silvicultur-ists and wildlife biologists was not if,but how?

An array of wildlife species wasconsidered such as amphibians,birds, bats, small animals, carnivoresand ungulates. Twelve of 28 papersgiven in the silviculture section dealt

with response of wildlife to variouscutting treatments. If dense, stagnat-ed stands were treated, most wildlifespecies were reported to respond pos-itively. If more open stands werethinned, many wildlife respondedpositively and some negatively, but inno case was any species extirpateddue to treatment.

Finally, social aspects of silvicultur-al wildlife enhancement were dis-cussed in some interesting papers.Several dealt with treating stands tobe more fire resilient. For example,reducing multi-storied stands to sim-pler structure and raising the crownheight of smaller trees were felt

important to reduce fire crowningpotential, but seemed to have nega-tive effect on wildlife habitat.

Another set of social considera-tions discussed opportunities to beable to treat stands, all the way frompreventing court appeals, to steward-ship contracts, forestland certifica-tion, landowner cooperation and for-mal state-federal-private agreements.

This symposium clearly illustratedhow closely we are operating togetherin the forestry-wildlife environment. u

Frederick C. Hall Ph.D., is owner ofPlantEcol NW, LLC, in Portland, Ore. Hecan be reached at 503-285-8729 [email protected]. He is amember of SAF and The Wildlife Society.

SAF and Wildlife Meeting Held

T


‘Even MotherNature

can use a little helpfrom her friends’

Grower Solutions realizes thatforest establishment begins in a harshenvironment. ÔSurvival of the fittestÕ isthe name of the game. Variations in soilfertility, moisture availability, vegetativecompetition, and temperature mean onlyvigorous, nutritionally balanced seedlingshave the capability to adapt and flourish.ItÕs Mother NatureÕs way of biologicallyfavoring strength over weakness.However, growing conditions often existwhich challenge even her best efforts.

In forest out-plantings, nutritional products manufactured and supplied byGrower Solutions are a proven solution for enhancing conifer root

development, leaf area, and stem growth. Using products, forest managersand researchers throughout the Pacific Northwest region have realized significant, ben-eficial results in above and below ground seedling growth and development.

Regardless of ownership size, optimizing site capacity composed of desirable, healthytrees is a constant challenge confronting forest managers. Grower Solutions ispositioned ideally to provide professional expertise and nutritional products essential formeeting this challenge, just in case Mother Nature should need a helping hand.

For more information, contact the Forest Nutrition program manager at:J.R. Simplot Company – P.O. Box 198 - Halsey, Oregon 97348 - 541-369-2826


BY BRUCE G. MARCOT,GRANT GUNDERSON, KIM MELLEN

AND JANET L. OHMANN

ast tools for modeling and settingguidelines for snag and down wood

management have been based on theo-ry, professional judgment, models ofwildlife species use as habitat andempirical data. However, recent studiesreveal that guidelines for amounts ofsnags and down wood on nationalforests of Washington and Oregon mayhave been lower than the new field dataon use by wildlife. Wildlife studies alsoshow that decayed wood elements con-sist of more than just snags and downwood and that decayed wood provideshabitat and resources for a wider arrayof organisms and beneficial ecologicalprocesses than previously recognized.Thus, there is a need for a newapproach to describe and advise onappropriate sizes and amounts of wooddecay elements for forest ecosystemmanagement.

Enter DecAID Advisor, a web-basedplanning tool and advisory system thatpresents a synthesis of research dataon wildlife use of wood decay elementsand inventory data on snags and downwood in forests of Washington andOregon. DecAID means “decayedwood advisor and decision aid” and isthe result of five years of work by aninteragency team of nine specialists inwildlife, forest inventory, ecology, ento-mology and fungi.

The intended audience for DecAIDincludes forest managers, forest plan-ners, wildlife biologists and silvicultur-ists who need to either identify targetsize and amounts of snags and down

wood (andother wooddecay ele-ments) tomeetobjectivesfor wildlifeor forestecosystemmanage-ment, orwho needto deter-mine theextent towhichexistingsnag anddownwood targets will meet these objectives.Additional users of DecAID mayinclude forest entomologists andpathologists, or others interested inlearning about insects and pathogensassociated with wood decay elements.Anyone can access and freely useDecAID at http://wwwnotes.fs.fed.us:81/pnw/DecAID/DecAID.nsf.The interface is very simple andrequires little computer expertise.

DecAID is a statistical synthesis ofpublished scientific literature, researchdata and databases on wildlife, insectsand pathogens, and forest inventory.The data synthesis is presented at sever-al “tolerance” levels (akin to confidencelevels) with expert interpretation to helpforest managers assess and determineappropriate types, sizes and amounts ofwood decay elements needed to meetwildlife and forest condition objectives.

Information presented on wildlifeuse of wood decay elements is from

empirical research studies, and infor-mation on snag and down woodamounts under natural and currentconditions is based on forest invento-ries, research studies and othersources. Forest inventories used inDecAID include the Current VegetationSurvey (CVS), Forest Inventory andAnalysis (FIA) and Natural ResourceInventory (NRI). DecAID also includesmuch information on forest insectsand pathogens, based on empiricalstudies, CVS, NRI and FIA inventorydata, and expert understanding ofoccurrence and ecology of insects andpathogens by forest condition.

Using DecAID AdvisorDecAID provides information by 10

wildlife-habitat types that are combina-tions of forest vegetation types and geo-graphic distributions (e.g., westsidelowland conifer-hardwood forest in thewestern Washington cascades) andthree structural condition classes (opencanopy, small/medium trees and largertrees forest conditions). For eachwildlife-habitat type, DecAID first pres-ents a narrative summary on wildlife,forest inventory, insects and pathogens,fungi, and other aspects of wood decayelements and their management con-siderations. From there, the user can“drill down” to many further levels toview data summaries, detailed datatables and literature citations.

DecAID summarizes wildlife usedata as “cumulative species curves,”which display sizes and amounts ofsnags and down wood used or selectedby each wildlife species or speciesgroup, according to field studies. Thetolerance levels are essentially per-centages of observed wildlife popula-tion levels (see Figure 1). The invento-ry data are also presented at the sametolerance levels and describe the dis-tribution of forest area by dead woodabundance classes in unharvestedplots (a proxy for natural range of vari-ability) and in the entire landscape(both harvested and unharvestedplots). Information on forest insectsand pathogens is presented in narra-tives and tables that summarize basic

DecAID Advisor: A Tool for Managing Snags,Down Wood and Wood Decay in PNW Forests

P

PHOTO COURTESY OFBRUCE G. MARCOT

Wood decay elements inforest ecosystemsinclude more than juststanding snags anddown logs.

life history information and occur-rence in the inventory plots. Furthernarratives describe fungi and ecosys-tem processes of wood decay.

Watershed and landscapescale planning

Using DecAID for a particular for-est type is straightforward, althoughthe wildlife species lists and inventorylevels describe general conditions of aforest wildlife-habitat type and struc-tural condition class, rather than spe-cific, stand-level predictions.

Using DecAID at a watershed orlandscape scale with multiple foresttypes and structural condition classesis more involved. Maintaining (anddefining objectives for) an adequatelevel and mixture of wood decay ele-ments at these broader spatial scales,such as in watersheds, can be a chal-lenging task for any forest land man-ager. To plan for dead wood overtime, the manager may need to link toother models of stand growth and dis-turbance dynamics.

USDA Forest Service PacificNorthwest Regional Office is currentlydeveloping a procedure for usingDecAID to help with assessments ofsnags and down wood at the water-shed scale. This work in progressincludes some general guidelines:

• analyze each watershed individu-ally;

• use data from ecology plots with-in plant association groups, series orsub-series to estimate existing snagdensities;

• stratify stands and ecology plotdata by stand history and condition(e.g., old clearcuts, recent clearcuts,fires not salvaged, fires salvaged andareas of significant insect mortality);

• use the snag inventory data todevelop distribution histograms forsnag densities that can then be com-pared with those in DecAID forunharvested and all conditions todetermine how well current condi-tions meet desired wildlife-use andoverall conditions; and

• use the Forest VegetationSimulator model with the fire andfuels extension to project future snagdensity and compare these predic-tions to the DecAID inventory his-tograms to determine potentialeffects of fire on snag amounts.

Considerations beyond DecAIDDecAID does not explicitly model

stand growth or landscape dynamics.Also, it is not a snag and down wooddecay simulator or recruitment model,nor a wildlife population simulator or asubstitute for analyzing wildlife popu-lation viability. At present, DecAIDdoes not address wood decay elementsin aquatic or riparian environments.

Decision-makers can use DecAIDto learn how close they may be tomeeting specific objectives, to helpcraft specific objectives for sizes andamounts of snags and down wood,and to learn about potential implica-tions for other aspects of wood decayelements such as potential responseby forest insects and pathogens.

For example, DecAID has provideda tool to help national forest personnelmanage dead wood habitat in a man-ner that more closely mimics naturalconditions. Previous to DecAID, snagprescriptions called for an averagenumber of snags to be left across aplanning area with some allowance forclumping. Data in DecAID indicatethat snags and down wood occurred indensities that vary greatly across thelandscape. Using these data, mosaicsof varying densities that match theinventory data can be prescribed.

DecAID provides data that make

possible analyses of fires and othersnag-producing events in context oflarger scales. The relationship ofthese “pulses” of high-density snagsto overall snag densities in the largerlandscape is crucial to understandingwhere and how much timber salvageis appropriate to meet specifiedobjectives for maintaining or restor-ing wildlife habitat and natural standconditions. Recent large fires on sev-eral national forests have been ana-lyzed in this manner. u

Bruce G. Marcot, Ph.D., is a researchwildlife ecologist for USDA ForestService, Pacific Northwest ResearchStation in Portland, Ore. He can bereached at 503-808-2010 [email protected]. Grant Gundersonis Regional Wildlife Program leader,and Kim Mellen is regional wildlifeecologist, both for the PacificNorthwest Region, USDA ForestService, in Portland. Grant can bereached at 503-808-2972 or [email protected], and Kim can be reachedat 503-808-2677 or [email protected] L. Ohmann is research forestecologist, USDA Forest Service, PacificNorthwest Research Station inCorvallis, Ore. You can reach her at541-750-7487 or [email protected].


Figure 1. One example of the wildlife data summarized in DecAID Advisor.These are Òcumulative species curvesÓ that depict snag dbh used or selectedby wildlife (e.g., CBCH = Chestnut-backed Chickadee) at three tolerance levels(percentages of the wildlife population). For instance, the upper left CBCHpoint on the 30 percent tolerance curve means that about 30 percent of theobserved numbers of birds of this species, in this wildlife habitat type, wouldbe provided by snags about 70 centimeters (28 inches) dbh. Other graphs dis-play wildlife use and inventoried levels of snag (and down wood) densities.

Cumulative species curves for snag/tree dbh (cm) used for nesting or denning in rela-tion to snag size for 30%, 50%, and 80% tolerance levels in the Westside LowlandConifer-Hardwood Forest Wildlife Habitat Type, Larger trees Structural Condition Class.


BY LYLE ALMOND

itka spruce (Picea sitchensis) is anecologically vital, economically

desirable and culturally importantcomponent of the Pacific Northwest’scoastal temperate rainforest. In thisunique coastal maritime zone, Sitkaspruce’s enormous growth rate makesit the largest spruce on Earth and thethird tallest tree in the PacificNorthwest.

Sitka spruce and its primary pest,the spruce-tip weevil (Pissodes strobi),have successfully coexisted for millen-nia. However, with the advent ofintensive single-species plantationmanagement in the 20th century, thespruce-tip weevil population hasexploded to epidemic proportions,reaching such high levels of infestationthat regeneration commitments haveeven begun shifting away from Sitkaspruce production altogether.

Spruce-tip weevils require certainconditions of temperature and humidityfor feeding and oviposition. Theseactivities are inhibited when low tem-peratures prevail around spruce termi-nals growing in dense, shaded stands. ASitka spruce stand cannot sustain viableweevil populations in environmentswhere heat accumulation is insufficientfor completion of larval development.

While other means have failed toadequately control spruce-tip weevildamage, a silvicultural approach to inte-grated pest management is necessary toallow the continued use of spruce forreforestation. Using hardwood oversto-ry trees, principally red alder, in a mix-ture with Sitka spruce in the understory,will alter microclimate conditions.

I examined what effect overstoryshade might impose on spruce-tip wee-vil damage using 20 quarter-acre plotsin a stand planted with Sitka spruce in1986 at Merrill and Ring’s Pysht TreeFarm on the North Olympic Peninsula.During the intervening years, red alderseeded naturally and became a vigor-ous component in the stand.

While a statistical analysis of totalcanopy closure by all tree species with-in these research plots resulted in apoor linear relationship (r2=0.0626),compelling evidence of a conspicuous,well-defined degree of linear associa-tion emerged when all tree species wereremoved from the model except redalder. Regression analysis comparingthe amount of red alder canopy closurewith the severity of weevil damageresulted in a coefficient of determina-tion of r2= 0.7301. This means thatapproximately 75 percent of the change

in weevil infestation could be explainedsolely by the density of the red aldercanopy closure (p<0.001).

An overstory of dense red alder maysubstantially reduce levels of spruce-tip weevil infestation, but this is oftenat the cost of whiplash damage tospruce terminals by red alder branchesas spruce trees attempt to emergethrough the red alder canopy.Proposed management practicesshould maximize the growth potentialof the site by reducing spruce-tip wee-vil damage while diminishing the haz-ard of whiplash damage from red alderas Sitka spruce begins to replace thealder in the overstory. Superimposedlinear trends between the effect ofincreasing levels of canopy closure onreduction of spruce-tip weevil attackand progressive whiplash damageintersected one another at a red aldercanopy closure of 88 percent. Thismeans that an optimal level of 88 per-cent red alder canopy closure will bestminimize both weevil attack andwhiplash damage to Sitka spruce undera nurse-tree shelterwood system.

Within all proportional mixtures,the unweeviled spruce componentconsistently comprised 25 percent ofthe proportional density in theresearch plots. Using this guideline, aninitial planting density of 680 TPA (510

Silvicultural Management of Spruce-tip WeevilInfestation in Red Alder and Sitka Spruce Stands

S

PHOTO COURTESY OF LYLE ALMOND/INSET PHOTO COURTESY OF DAVE POWELL, www.insect.images.org

The classic shepherdÕs crook formed on Sitka spruce as the result of weevilattack. Inset photo: Sitka spruce weevil

red alder, 170 Sitka spruce) thinnedfrom below to a stocking level of 120TPA red alder at age 15 will maintainthe 88 percent target for canopy clo-sure. It is around this age that redalder’s rate of incremental growthbegins to significantly decline, relin-quishing resources back into the envi-ronment to be taken up by Sitkaspruce as it begins to emerge into thered alder canopy.

A higher initial density of 1,200 TPA(900 red alder, 300 Sitka spruce) willaccelerate early height growth, but willalso involve greater expense, both interms of planting costs and in addition-al thinning costs. An initial thinning ofred alder between five and seven yearswill be necessary as canopy closureexceeds the recommended 88 percentclosure value, followed by a subsequentthinning at 15 years of growth.

At an even lower density of 435 TPA(325 red alder, 110 Sitka spruce), thin-ning of red alder may not be requiredat all. Although larger volumes can beachieved on short rotations of 15-25years or less, increased deterioration ofred alder wood quality and the greaterrisk of weeviling to Sitka spruce mayimpose severe grade reductions in logquality. Timber production, however,may not be the primary objective formanaging mixed stands of Sitkaspruce and red alder.

Mixed stands are generally moreresilient than pure stands to many for-est health problems. In addition, strat-

ified mixtures such as alder and spruceare usually more productive sincegrowing space is better optimized.Mixed alder-conifer forests contain agreater diversity and biomass ofunderstory vegetation, an importantsource of deer browse. Finally, theabundance and diversity of insect andbird species in mixed-species stands issignificantly greater than in pure,monospecific stands. For the objec-tives of wildlife management andecosystem development, the benefitsgained by managing stratified mixturesof red alder and Sitka spruce may out-weigh their potential use as sources of

timber production.There is burgeoning interest in

managing even-aged stratified treemixtures such as red alder and Sitkaspruce. Small landowners, in particu-lar, are seeking innovative ways to uti-lize a smaller land base for multipleand more diverse management objec-tives. Not the least of these is to short-en the timber rotation and increase theamount of economically desirable redalder. When the red alder is removed,it leaves behind a legacy of well-devel-oped, weevil-resistant spruce trees forfurther long-term forest growth andexpansion. Under this cropping sys-tem, a third shade-tolerant species,such as western redcedar, could beinterplanted under the spruce that hasbeen released to ensure the flow ofwood on a perpetual yield.

Developing silvicultural methodsthat are congruent with the natural eco-logical compatibility between red alderand Sitka spruce will lead to increasedcommodity production in an environ-mentally beneficial manner. This willensure that Sitka spruce is once againmanaged as a highly desirable andvaluable species for reforestation. u

Lyle Almond is a forester with theWashington Department of NaturalResources stationed in Forks on theOlympic Peninsula. He can be reachedat 360-374-9433 or [email protected].


Regression trends for degrees of both weevil damage and whiplash damagesuperimposed to identify a target level of red alder canopy closure best suitedfor optimal development of Sitka spruce terminal growth.

P L E A S E C O N TAC T :

Bruce Kelpsas 503-931-4602OregonWes Wasson 253-279-5293Washington

Bill Bailey 530-524-7465CaliforniaGeorge Severson 541-840-6990S. Oregon/N. California

CHEMICAL COMPANY

• Site Preparation Herbicides

• Conifer Release Herbicides


BY MARY SMELCER

ver 150 people attended the OSAF2004 Annual Meeting hosted by

the Siskiyou Chapter at SouthernOregon University in Ashland. Thetheme of this year’s conference, ForestResearch, Practices, and Products:Strong Roots—Strong Future, featuredoutstanding presentations on past,present and future perspectives fromleading scientists, land managers andforest products experts from across thecountry.

The venue of notable speakers,including Hal Salwasser, dean, Collegeof Forestry, OSU; Mark Rey, UnderSecretary for Natural Resources and theEnvironment, USDA; John Sessions,OSU; and others attracted a lot of inter-est from students and local environ-mental interest groups. Additionally,interest in the conference speakers, thetopics and current forestry issuesattracted a high level of media atten-tion. This conference may well haveexceeded all other OSAF annual meet-ings for the amount of media coverage,including a showing of civil disobedi-ence from some individuals attemptingto disrupt the meeting!

In addition to a full agenda, theconference organizers worked withthe university and others to partici-pate and support several other educa-tional opportunities for SouthernOregon University students, commu-nity members and interest groups.Letters of appreciation and severalguest editorials were written in appre-ciation of the educational opportuni-ties provided, including a facilitateddiscussion and debate betweenDominck DelaSala, World WildlifeFund, and John Sessions, OSU profes-sor of Forest Engineering, on fireeffects, salvage and restoration.Especially appreciated was thechance for students and interestgroup members to have a speciallyarranged meeting with Mark Rey. u

Mary Smelcer is the chair of the OSAFAnnual Meeting Public RelationsCommittee. She can be reached at 541-618-2440 or [email protected].

OSAF Annual Meeting Huge Success

O

PHOTO COURTESY OF JOHN PRENDERGAST

The ForestersÕ Fund was a resounding success with over $4,605 raised. Theproceeds will be split between the national ForestersÕ Fund and the OregonSAF Foundation.

PHOTO COURTESY OF BRIAN SCHLAEFLI

District 1 Council member DarrelKenops (left) talks with SAF PresidentJohn Beuter and his wife Jill during abreak at the Oregon SAF annualmeeting.


One hundred thirty-six members (not including exhibitors, speakers andguests) attended the 2004 Oregon SAF annual meeting in Ashland.


Current Central Oregon Chair StuOtto (right) accepts the ChapterAchievement award from John Herbston behalf of chapter members.

everal awards were presented todeserving Oregon SAF members

at this year’s annual meeting inAshland. Master of Ceremonies andAwards Chair Jim Rombach andOregon SAF Chair John Herbst madethe presentations during the dinnerawards banquet.

Bill Peterson was presented with aPast Chair award for his service in 2003.

A basic foundation for SAF is sci-ence, so the OSAF Research award isespecially noteworthy. This year'saward in Research was presented toGeorge Ice of the National Council ofAir and Stream Improvement(NCASI), based in Corvallis. He wascited for his long and active involve-ment with SAF and past and currentresearch on watersheds, hydrologyand non-point sources of pollution.This includes approaches to protect-ing water quality as part of TotalMaximum Daily Load (TMDL) assess-ments under the federal Clean WaterAct. George has also been active intesting the effectiveness of forestpractices rules and Best ManagementPractices (BMPs) in protecting waterquality. He works at both the stateand national level and has providedtechnical support on policy issues forNational SAF. George is currently thesubject area representative for ForestEcology/Biology on the SAF ForestScience and Technology Board.

Receiving the Tough Tree awardwas Paul Bell of the OregonDepartment of Forestry and theCapital Chapter. Paul was nominatedby the Emerald Chapter for his out-

standing performance in effectivelycombining four county fire protectiondistricts in the last year; and providingprofessional performance in difficultand dramatic personnel situationsincluding an extreme fire year and

working with thousands of landown-ers in his area of responsibility.

Tillamook-Clatsop Chapter mem-ber John Christie was presented withthe OSAF Lifetime Achievementaward. John was recognized for hisdecades of ongoing SAF and profes-sional contributions, of which JimRombach noted is expected to contin-ue. John is a Charter member of hischapter, a leader in the Oregon SmallWoodlands Association, an active treefarmer, an educator at the local com-munity college and an energetic pro-fessional who works with the local

media. He is an outstanding citizenand SAFer.

Congratulations to the CentralOregon Chapter for being honoredwith the Chapter Achievement award.The chapter was especially noted fortheir active support of the state socie-ty, a GAIN in membership, sponsor-ship of major fire education work-shops for local governments/publicsand SAF members, support to theCentral Oregon Community Collegeand active policy/legislation/letterwriting at the local level.

Steve Armitage of the SiskiyouChapter and with the Bureau of LandManagement in Medford, was namedForester of the Year. He was recog-nized for his outstanding perform-ance in leading a “team effort” foractive forest management and fuelsreduction in the Ashland/Ruch area.His leadership resulted in over 20,000acres of thinning and 10,000 acres offuel reduction that were significant inhelping achieve a fire-resilient forestand performing federal land manage-ment goals. He was specifically citedfor his “sheer intensity and persever-ance” in working in difficult and chal-lenging situations that was essentialin achieving forest managementobjectives. In his spare time, Stevealso chaired the Siskiyou Chapter in2003 and was the general chair of the2004 state annual meeting.

Congratulations to all recipientsand thanks for contributing your tal-ents to SAF. u


PHOTO COURTESY OF BRIAN SCHLAEFLI

Forester of the Year Steve Armitageand wife Deb display his hand-craftedaward.


Tough Tree award winner Paul Bell(right) accepts award from JohnHerbst.


George Ice (right) is congratulatedby John Herbst for receiving theOSAF Research award.


Lifetime Achievement award winnerJohn Christie (left) receives a KenBrauner print from State Chair JohnHerbst for his service to SAF.

Armitage Named Forester of the YearS


ildlife and ForestManagement was the focus

of the Washington State SAFannual meeting held in PortAngeles, Wash., May 12-14.

Hosted by the Admiralty Inletand North Olympic Chapters, 89attendees, plus speakers,exhibitors and guests, listened toan excellent program on forestryand wildlife issues, includingpanel discussions about SAF’s rolein the policy decision process androles of various landowner classesand their interactions.

The field tour theme on Fridaywas “Wildlife Response to aManaged Forest,” and includedstops at sites to discuss the effectsof different stand conditions onelk, inoculation of trees to developcavity nesting sites, managementfor biodiversity and forest prod-ucts under the DNR’s HCP, andbalancing issues and outcomes.

The awards banquet was heldThursday evening, along withentertainment by photographerRoss Hamilton.

Newly elected SAF Fellowswere announced and recognized:B. Bruce Bare, South Puget SoundChapter; Pat McElroy, SouthwestWashington Chapter; and WintonWefer, North Puget SoundChapter.

This year’s new GoldenMembers were also announced:Harry Anderson, Morrie Boles,Verner Schmidt and Bill Truax of theSouthwest Washington Chapter; FrankDeckebach, North Olympic Chapter;Ted Nelson of the South Puget SoundChapter; Harold Strobel, Jr. of theNorth Puget Sound Chapter andGeorge Thomson of the AdmiraltyInlet Chapter.

Capping off the awards banquet wasthe announcement of the Forester ofthe Year award to Karen Temen. Thisaward recognizes members who havemade significant contributions to theWSSAF and to professional forestry.Karen has been an active member ofSAF since 1990. Her involvement in theSouthwest Washington Chapter inrecent years has included Foresters’

Fund chair, secretary,chair-elect, and in2003, chapter chair.For the past three yearsshe has organized theDecember chaptermeeting, whichincludes a dinner andsilent auction to benefit the Children’shospital through “Log a Load for Kids.”Last year over $2,000 was raised at thisevent. Karen also helped organize the1998 and 2004 WA/OR SAF Leadershipconferences and the 2000 annualWSSAF meeting. In each of these roles,Karen’s hard work, charisma and dedi-cation to SAF have resulted in qualityevents and enthusiastic participation

by SAF members.In addition to her involvement in

SAF, Karen volunteers locally with Hopefor Horses, which provides an opportu-nity for handicapped kids to ride hors-es. She is also active in fundraising forcancer research through events such as“Relay for Life.” She is a graduate of theWashington Agriculture and ForestryLeadership Program (Class XXII). u

Wildlife the Focus of WSSAF MeetingW

PHOTO COURTESY OF HANK KIPP

Kevin Ceder of the Rural Technology Initiative at theUW stands next to his poster, one of ten that wasdisplayed at the WSSAF annual meeting.


Longview Chapter members Patrick Allen (holdingmyrtlewood bowl), Ellie Lathrop and Eric Wischaccept the Chapter of the Year award from PeteHeide (left).


Karen Temen receives theForester of the Year awardfrom Dave Malsed, the2002 recipient of this dis-tinguished award.


WSSAF Chair Pete Heide(left) congratulates WintonWefer on being elected anSAF Fellow.


Dave Yates, Joe Heller and Winton Wefer (left to right)check out the ForestersÕ Fund items at the WSSAFannual meeting.


Calendar of Events

OTHER EVENTSFamily Forest Field Day, September18, Bob and Lynette Falkner Tree Farm,Frances, WA, National Tree Farmers of theYear. Contact: Steve Gibbs at [email protected].

Productivity of Western Forests: AForest Products Focus, September20-23, Olympia, WA. Contact: WFCA.

Who Will Own the Forest?Globalization and ConsolidationEffects on Forests, September 21-23,Portland, OR. Contact: Angie DiSalvo at503-488-2137; [email protected]; www.worldforestry.org/conferences.

Joint SAF/CIF Annual GeneralMeeting and National Convention,October 2-6, Edmonton, Alberta. Contact:SAF National Office at 301-897-8720 orwww.cif-saf-2004convention.org/natcon/.

Water Quality: WhatÕs RunningThrough Your Forest? workshop host-ed by OSAF Coos Chapter, October 13,Southwestern Oregon Community College,Coos Bay, OR. Contact: Tod Haren [email protected].

Professional Timber Cruising,October 20-21, Beaverton, OR. Contact:Atterbury Consultants.

GPS for Mobile Professionals,October 27, Beaverton, OR. Contact:Atterbury Consultants.

Threatened and Endangered and"Imperiled" Plant workshop, cospon-sored by SAF Northwest Office and WFCA,November 3, Holiday Inn, Wilsonville, OR.Contact: WFCA.

Native Plants, December 14-17, Eugene,OR. Contact: WFCA.

Joint OSAF/WSSAF LeadershipConference, January 15-16, 2005, HoodRiver Inn, Hood River, OR. Contact: SueBowers at 541-895-5549 or [email protected].

Inland Empire, Oregon andWashington State SAF Tri-stateAnnual Meeting, April 13-15, 2005,Lewiston, Idaho. Contact: Terry Shaw at208-885-7452 or [email protected].

Contact InformationOSU: OSU College of Forestry Outreach Education Office, Peavy Hall 202, Corvallis, OR97331-5707; 541-737-2329; http://outreach.cof.orst.edu/.

WSU: Extension Meeting Management and Program Support, Washington StateUniversity, P.O. Box 646230, Pullman, WA 99164-6230; 509-335-2811.

WFCA: Western Forestry & Conservation Association, 4033 SW Canyon Rd., Portland,OR 97221, 503-226-4562; [email protected]; www.westernforestry.org.

Atterbury Consultants: 3800 SW Cedar Hills Blvd., #120, Beaverton, OR 97005; 503-646-5393; [email protected]; www.atterbury.com.

UW: Rural Technology Initiative, University of Washington, Box 352100 Seattle, WA 98195;(206) 543-0827, www.ruraltech.org/training/.

Send calendar items to the editor, Western Forester, 4033 SW Canyon Rd., Portland, OR 97221; fax 503-226-2515; [email protected] deadline for the September/October 2004 issue is August 16, 2004.

UNIVERSITY-SPONSORED EVENTSCourse Dates Sponsor LocationBalancing Ecosystem Values: Innovative August 15-20 OSU Portland, OR

Experiments for Sustainable Forestry

Red Alder Management and Processing August 28 WSU Skagit/Whatcom County

Commercial Thinning Field Day September TBA WSU Island County

Introduction to ArcView 3.2 and the Use of GIS Workshop September 19-21 UW Eatonville, WA

The Basics of Accurate Forest Land Appraisal October 4-8 OSU Corvallis, OR

Ponderosa Pine: Management, Issues and Trends October 18-21 OSU Klamath Falls, OR

BEHAVEPlus, Fuel Models, and FARSITE Workshop November 16 WSU Spokane, WA

FCCS Fuel Characteristic Classification Systems Workshop November 16 WSU Spokane, WA

FRCC Fire Regime Condition Class Workshop November 16 WSU Spokane, WA

NEXUS Workshop November 16 WSU Spokane, WA

Mixed Severity Fire Regimes: Ecology and Management Symposium November 17-19 WSU Spokane, WA

How to Dry Lumber for Quality and Profit December 6-9 OSU Corvallis, OR

Fundamental Training and Applications of the LMS Workshop December 8-10 UW Mt. Vernon, WA

Professional ForestersOregon Professional Loggers

Keith and Elizabeth Coulter23526 Lewis Dr., Philomath, OR 97370Phone/Fax: (541) [email protected] us on the web: www.theyankeegroup.com

u Steep Slope CableLogging

u Cat/Shovel Loggingu Progressive Harvesting

u Management Plansu Cruisingu Timber Sale

Administration

Larry Hoffman1952-2004

Larry Hoffman, 51,long-time active SAFmember and employeeof the OregonDepartment ofForestry, passed awayJune 5 in The Dalles,Ore. He died while tak-ing the Work CapacityTest, a government fitness test for crewswho battle wildfires. He was about two-thirds of the way through the test when hecollapsed. Fellow employees trained inemergency aid rushed to his assistance,and an ambulance took him to the hospitalwithin 10 minutes, to no avail.

He is survived by his wife, KarenHoffman and his daughter, Teri.

Born in Detroit, Michigan, he was raisedand graduated high school in Detroit andthen attended Michigan TechnologicalUniversity and received his bachelor’sdegree in forest practices. He moved to

Idaho to attend the University of Idaho,graduating with a master’s in silviculture.

Larry began his career with the OregonDepartment of Forestry in May 1976 whenhe was hired as a service forester in theKlamath-Lake District. He transferred tothe Astoria District in 1978 to accept amanagement forester position. His nextassignment took him to the other side ofthe state, and in 1979 he filled a forestpractices/service forester slot in thePendleton Unit. Then in 1987 he accepteda service forester job in the Prineville Unit.Two years later he was promoted to protec-tion unit forester for The Dalles Unit, theposition he held until his passing.

Larry helped direct crews against the2002 Sheldon Ridge wildfire that threat-ened more than 200 homes in The Dalles.In 2003, he worked with multiple agenciesto put out the Herman Creek blaze thatthreatened homes in Cascade Locks.

While serving in The Dalles, Mr.Hoffman was affectionately dubbed the“Detroit Kid,” having grown up in the sub-urbs of Detroit. Fellow employees saidLarry was devoted to his family, friendsand forestry and was respected for hisexpertise in predicting the behavior ofwildfires and investigating their causes.He will be remembered by his co-workersas a conscientious, hard-working profes-sional who always went the extra mile tosafeguard the forest resource. He enjoyedthe outdoors, golf, anything to do withcomputers, reading and traveling.

Larry was very active in the OregonSociety of American Foresters. His energy,intelligence, innovation, wit and organiza-tion skills were a key to the success of the2002 annual meeting held in La Grande,where he served on the meeting’s execu-tive committee. He also served asColumbia Gorge Chapter chair. His com-mitment to professional forestry andforestry education at the chapter andstate levels were of significant service tothe Society. Because of Larry’s stronginterest in forestry education, theColumbia Gorge Chapter of OSAF has ini-tiated development of a Larry HoffmanSAF Forestry Scholarship Fund. For

details, contact chapter chair OleHelgerson at [email protected].

A memorial service for Larry was heldJune 11 and included a pipe and drumcorps from Tualatin Valley Fire andRescue, an honor guard from the state firemarshal’s office and a procession of fireengines from around the state.

Ralph Flowers1929-2004

Ralph Flowers, bear damage controlspecialist, recently died following a shortillness. Mr. Flowers had an encyclopedicknowledge and understanding of theAmerican black bear, Ursus americanus,and applied that knowledge to betterPacific Northwest wildlife and forest man-agement. The Washington State Society ofAmerican Foresters approved the followingresolution at the WSSAF annual meeting.


We Remember

SUMMER SPECIAL600XT Laser Rangefinder

A very affordable, tilt-compensated laserrangefinder. It measures horizontal orslope distance out to 1,800 feet. Great formeasuring horizontal distance to trees fortree height and for traverses. It is alsouseful for marking buffer widths alongstreams. The 600XT has simple one-button operation and runs off a singlenine-volt battery. Very accurate and canbe set to measure in feet, yards, or meters.Includes a custom water resistant caseand sells for only $359.00. For moreinformation, contact:

ResolutionRalph Flowers, the Bear Man, died

Easter Sunday 2004, aged 75 years.The forestry profession has lost a quietbut irreplaceable resource. Flowersknew more about forests and the ani-mals within them than most peoplewill ever hope to know. His career asan animal damage control specialistspanned 50 years, taking bear damagecontrol technology from leg-hold trapsand hound hunting to a sophisticateddamage identification system and tar-geted feeding program that nearlyhalted tree damage in targeted areaswithout lethal removal. The programis a model of forest and wildlife man-agement, admired and studied world-wide by forest and wildlife managers.

Ralph was more than a woods-man. He authored three books; hewas an artist, a carpenter, wood carv-er, taxidermist and more, all with ahigh school education and an insa-tiable thirst to learn. We are richer forhaving had Ralph among us; we arepoorer for his departure. Thosewhose lives he touched will miss him,personally and professionally.

Therefore be it resolved: WashingtonState Society of American Foresters rec-ognizes and honors Ralph Flowers forhis contribution to Pacific Northwestforest and wildlife management.

Be it further resolved: that RalphFlowers is hereby inducted as an hon-orary member of the Washington StateSociety of American Foresters to honorthis most humble and visionary man.

Unanimously adopted by WSSAFon the 14th day of May 2004 at PortAngeles, Washington.

Burns & WilliamsLawyersAnn Forest BurnsBruce H. Williams

Business (206) 527-5942 • Fax (206) 522-53925508-35th Ave. N.E., Suite 102 • Seattle, WA 98105

E-mail: [email protected]

Frederick Rosmond1915-2003

Fred Rosmond died July 15, 2003, inOlympia, Wash. He was raised on a dairyfarm and attended schools in Oakville andMontesano, Wash. He earned a degree inlogging engineering from the University ofWashington School of Forestry in 1939. Atthe UW he lettered in boxing. He had beena reserve officer in the Coast Artillery; how-ever, during World War II he was activatedinto the Anti Aircraft Artillery.

In 1945, Fred and his family moved toForks, Wash., where he and his two broth-ers built and operated Rosmond BrothersLumber Company until they sold thebusiness in the early 1980s.

Mr. Rosmond served on the ClallamCounty Board of Education and was thePeninsula College’s longest-serving trusteefrom 1971 through 1986. He was alsoactive in the American Legion, Society ofAmerican Foresters, Forks CongregationalChurch and Toastmasters.

Mr. Rosmond’s passion all his life wastrees, and his yard in Forks, where he liveduntil his passing, includes trees he startedfrom seeds collected while in college andin his travels. His favorite was his red-wood tree, now 125 feet tall.

Conrad Shalland, Jr.1928-2004

Conrad Shalland, a long-time memberof the SAF Central Washington Chapter,died on April 22.

Connie, as he was known to most, wasborn in Indianapolis, Indiana, in 1928. Hegraduated from Purdue University in 1948with a degree in forestry.

He married his high school sweetheartJoanne Reed in 1948. They jumped on atrain heading west for his first job as ayoung forester at the Klamath IndianReservation, working for the Bureau ofIndian Affairs. They lived at the KlamathIndian agency in Oregon for years, wherethey had two daughters. The familymoved to Toppenish, Wash., in 1961.

Mr. Shalland retired as the forest man-ager of the Yakama Indian Reservation forthe US Bureau of Indian Affairs in 1979.They continued to live in Toppenish untiltheir move to Seattle in 1988.

Robert Sward1949-2004

A memorial service was held February28 for Bob Sward of Springfield, Ore., whodied February 10 of complications fromleukemia. He was 54.

Mr. Sward was born in Kalispell,Montana, in 1949. He graduated fromFlathead High School, attended WesternMontana College and served in the ArmyReserve. He lived in Kalispell and Dillon,Mont., before settling in the Springfield,Ore., area 31 years ago.

He was employed as a land managerfor Giustina Land and Timber Co. He wasinvolved in the Boy Scouts and served as aquartermaster with the Sea Scouts, and heserved on the Oregon Trail Council.

Lawrence Gangle, Sr.1912-2003

Lawrence Gangle, 91, of Waldport, Ore.,died August 15, 2003, of age-related caus-es. He was born in 1912 in Washougal,Wash. In 1939 he graduated from what isnow Oregon State University College ofForestry. He was employed by the USDAForest Service, private timber companiesand BLM. He retired in 1975.

Following retirement, he planted andmaintained a small tree farm on the AlseaRiver. He was a regular attendee ofFernhopper’s Day. u


Coos Chapter to HostWater Quality Class

“Water quality: What’s runningthrough your forest?” is the title ofa one-day workshop sponsored bythe Oregon SAF Coos Chapter onOctober 13 at the SouthwesternOregon Community College inCoos Bay.

The workshop will focus on theimpacts of forest management onwater quality and the effects thatwater quality issues have on forestmanagement in Oregon, specifi-cally southwest Oregon. Presenta-tions on policy, strategies, prac-tices, projects and research will beincluded. Speakers will includerepresentatives from industrialand non-industrial forestry, stateand federal agencies, and OregonState University.

Both SAF CFE and OPL(Oregon Professional Logger)credits will be available.

Registration materials will bemailed out to SAF members locatedin southwestern Oregon later thissummer. For more information orto make sure you receive registra-tion information, please contact TodHaren at [email protected]. u

Summer Site Preparation Herbicides:Accord Concentrate®

Arsenal Applicators Concentrate®

Escort XP®

Chopper®

Oust XP®

Oust Extra®

Start your seedlings out right!For information on this or any other herbicides, call:

Bruce Alber or Kurt Spingath9685 Ridder Rd. S.W., Suite 190 • Wilsonville, OR 97070

Office 503-227-3525 • 1-800-452-5625Spokane Office: Joel Fields 1-800-727-9186


BY ANN FOREST BURNS

ouncil’s June4-5 meeting

at Wild Acres wasan opportunity todust off our ento-mology. Althoughthe torrential rainskept the noisedown somewhat,the sounds and sights of the 17-yearcicada outbreak will be long remem-bered. A few of us also saw fireflies forthe first time. My childhood imagin-ings of fireflies winking through thenight did not include them emergingas they do from the grass like littleflames. It is a charming sight.

We were greatly disappointed thatPresident John Beuter’s health did notallow him to travel to Maryland. VicePresident John Helms (CA) presided atthe meeting, using notes and sugges-tions sent to us by John Beuter as astrong guide to keep us on track.Darrel Kenops (District II-OR), HSDChair Nancy Peckman (WA), GaryNakamura (District III-CA and HI) andI completed the Left Coast contingent.

Both Executive Vice PresidentMichael Georgen’s report and thereports from each Council District showthat strategic planning and partner-ships with other groups play an impor-tant role as we strive to use limitedresources, particularly volunteer time,efficiently. The Community WildfireProtection Plan, available for your useand distribution, is the product of asuccessful partnership with federalagencies and associations. The futureof the forest products industry and therole of foresters in that future was thesubject of a presentation to Council byguest and long-time SAF member RichLewis, president, Forest ResourcesAssociation. The 2005 Forest ServiceCentennial promises opportunities tohelp in celebration of our history andbuild toward our future.

As part of our discussion of thisyear’s successful Leadership Academy,we talked about aspects of the forestryprofession important to foster withinSAF. Building on Lee Spradlin’s

(District VIII) use of worn work bootsto symbolize the field forester, othermembers of Council shared items thatsymbolize something important aboutforesters. Gary Nakamura offered apair of pruning shears: the forest is likea rose bush; if you want the flowers,you have to be willing to manageactively and to make hard decisions.Ann Camp, Forest Science andTechnology chair, added a Zuni bearfetish to the top of her computer mon-itor to remind us that there are a num-ber of ways of knowing a forest. JohnKotar, District V, brought his daughter’splay cell phone to remind us that theforester of tomorrow will be a master-ful user of cutting-edge technology,constantly increasing both our effi-ciency and our knowledge base. DonBell, District XI, offered an apple tosymbolize the need to take the forestrymessage into the schools at the earliestpossible age to develop appreciation offorest management and attract thebest future foresters. Marlin Johnson,District IV, used a Forest Service badgeto remind us of the continuing need tomanage our federal lands wisely andactively. Communications ChairRachel Billingham suggested that acomplex Leatherman tool she carriescan remind us that every member andevery aspect of forestry is valuable andthat the loss of any part reduces theoverall effectiveness and value of thewhole. This discussion will continueat our December meeting.

Certified Foresters® now number3,093. A study guide for both the CF®

and CFA® exams is expected to bepublished late this year. Both examswill be offered on paper at theEdmonton convention and electroni-cally at a number of sites throughoutthe country. Proctoring and the needto reliably verify exam taker identitycontinues to prevent in-home or in-office examinations via personal com-puter internet connection.

Staff reports of preparations for theEdmonton convention make us lookforward to our time there. If you havenot yet registered for the Edmontonconvention, I hope you will set thereading of this article aside and do sonow. The chance to meet jointly with

the members of the CanadianInstitute of Forestry/Institut forestierdu Canada is a once in a decadeopportunity. The educational compo-nent of the convention promises to bevery strong. Opportunities to havefun will abound, as well.

In order to reduce costs, Councilwill meet three, rather than the usualfour, times in 2005. This change is inline with the recent limitation on trav-el for such standing committees suchForest Science and Technology andForest Policy.

Our discussion of election of Fellowscontinues. Beginning in 2005, eachstate or division will be limited to onenew Fellow per year. The Committeeon Professional Recognition is beingasked to audit the Fellow electionprocess and to recommend to uswhether the current cap (5 percent ofmembers) should be retained. Darreland I invite your thoughts.

Despite the rain, we did take theopportunity to entertain congressionaland agency staff Saturday evening. Therain did let up somewhat. We enjoyedexcellent barbecue thanks to chef andPast President John Heissenbuttel.

Later that evening, at the urging ofNancy Peckman and under the ableguidance of Gary Nakamura, Darreland I joined colleagues from Missouriand West Virginia in a (long) walkingtour of the newly opened World War IImemorial, the Lincoln monument andthe Vietnam War memorial. The fel-lowship and reflection made us glad tobe Americans, as well as foresters, inour lovely national capitol.

Council’s December meeting will bein Portland, Ore. Council meetings areopen to all, so if you have always won-dered how we do what we do (or justthink our meetings sound like a lot offun), plan to be with us in PortlandDecember 3-5. We plan to show offthe Left Coast. Send me your ideas onhow best to do just that. u

Ann Forest Burns is District I Councilrepresentative, serving the WashingtonState, Inland Empire and Alaska soci-eties. She can be reached at 206-522-5942 or [email protected]. DarrelKenops is District II Council representa-tive and can be reached at 541-741-3466 or [email protected].

Symbols Offered at Council

C


Policy Scoreboard

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.

2004 Oregon Ballot InitiativePetitions Reach Deadline. The likeli-hood that two forestry related initiativeswill appear on the November 2004 Oregonballot should be clearer as the July 2 signa-ture submission deadline passes. Both arestatutory measures, which require 75,630valid signatures to qualify for the statewideballot. The 78,000 signatures for InitiativePetition #120 submitted on May 24 werenot enough to initiate signature verifica-tion, but more signatures were expected bythe July deadline. As of early June, signa-tures had not been submitted for InitiativePetition #56 and little is known about thestatus of this petition campaign.

Initiative Petition #120 has been calledthe “50-50 Plan,” as it would require 50 per-cent of the Tillamook-Clatsop State Foreststo be managed for “old-growth timberrestoration” and the balance for timber pro-duction. It would override the manage-ment plan for these forests adopted in 2001by the Board of Forestry. Instead, the initia-tive would require the heads of three stateuniversity biology departments to appointa technical team whose recommendationswould be used to craft a new plan withmeasures for permanent old-growth pre-serves on 50 percent of the land area.Initiative Petition #56 “requires, defines sus-tainable timber harvest practices andorganic pest controls on state and privateforestland.” The chief petitioner of #56 wasa co-petitioner for Measure 64, and #56retains some language and emphasis of thelatter, including major restrictions onclearcutting and chemical pesticides.

The text and status of Initiative Petitions#56 and #120 can be found at the Secretaryof State’s website at www.sos.state.or.us/elections/other.info/irr.htm. Contact: PaulAdams, OSAF Policy chair, 541-737-2946;[email protected].

OSAF Continues Work on New andRevised Position Statements. TheOSAF Policy and Legislation Committeecontinues to work on some new andupdated position statements, which willadd to the four adopted in 2003 (i.e.,

Active Management to Achieve andMaintain Healthy Forests; SalvageHarvesting; Clearcutting; Using Pesticidesin Forests). Because old-growth forestsremain an important, ongoing issue, aposition statement on this topic has beendrafted. The nature and complexity ofthis issue presents some major challenges,however, and thus the process for refiningand adopting this position is expected tospan several months. OSAF’s statementon “Fish and Riparian Forests” wasextended through December 2004, but anupdate of this 1998 statement is expectedby this date. A new topic that is beingconsidered for a position is biomass ener-gy from Oregon’s forests, given the limitedattention now given by decision makersand the public to this unique opportunity.

Members are encouraged to use OSAF’scurrent position statements to help conveytheir professional forestry views to keydecision makers and the interested public.All of these statements are on the OSAFwebsite (www.forestry.org). Contact: PaulAdams, OSAF Policy chair, 541-737-2946;[email protected].

Idaho Pilot Project Proposal Getsa Hearing. The Public Lands andForests Subcommittee of the SenateEnergy and Natural Resources Committeemet on March 24 to hear testimony onseveral bills including the ClearwaterBasin Project Act (S. 433). If passed, thebill would provide for collaborative forestmanagement on the Clearwater and NezPerce National Forests in Idaho throughthe creation of an advisory committee toassist in the development and prioritiza-tion of projects on these forests. Noaction has been taken on the companionHouse version (H.R. 835) of the bill.Contact: Jay O’Laughlin, IESAF Policychair, 208-885-5776; [email protected].

Western Governors Associationcreates Forest Health AdvisoryCommittee. The Western GovernorsAssociation (WGA) has played an instru-mental role in developing the 10-yearimplementation strategy for the National

Fire Plan. The WGA remains committedto improving the wildfire situation andhas formed an advisory committee withseveral members from each of the westernstates. The initial meeting was held inMarch in Reno, NV. Contact: JayO’Laughlin, IESAF Policy chair, 208-885-5776; [email protected].

Update: PresidentÕs HealthyForests Initiative. The U.S. ForestService website (www.fs.fed.us/projects/HFI.shtml) is a good source for keeping upto date on the many policy activities asso-ciated with the President’s Healthy ForestsInitiative, including the Healthy ForestsRestoration Act signed into law inDecember 2003. An interim field guide forimplementation of the HFI & HFRA waspublished in March 2004 and is available atwww.fs.fed.us/projects/hfi/field-guide/.Contact: Jay O’Laughlin, IESAF Policy chair,208-885-5776; [email protected].

Update: Stewardship Contracting.The Forest Service and BLM have issuedfinal guidance to their field offices on howto develop, implement and monitor stew-ardship contracts and agreements. Throughbroad-based community public and com-munity involvement, stewardship contract-ing is intended to achieve key land-manage-ment goals that improve, maintain orrestore forest or rangeland health; restore ormaintain water quality; improve fish andwildlife habitat; reestablish native plantspecies and increase their resilience toinsect and disease; and reduce hazardousfuels that pose risks to communities andecosystem values through an open, collabo-rative process. Stewardship contractingauthority includes agreements with non-profits, best-value contracts, designation bydescription, end results and goods for serv-ices. The guidance document, fact sheet,Q&As, and other information can beaccessed online at www.fs.fed.us/forestmanagement/projects/stewardship/hand-book/index.shtml. Contact: Jay O’Laughlin,IESAF Policy chair, 208-885-5776;[email protected]. u

Policy Scoreboard

SOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERS

Western Forester4033 S.W. Canyon RoadPortland, Oregon 97221

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER

Non-Profit Org.U.S. POSTAGE

PAIDPORTLAND, ORPERMIT NO. 16

REFORESTATION SERVICES, Inc.Application Services and Chemical Supplies

Stan Rogers, [email protected] email 503-391-1001 fax

503-362-8322

“Wireless Sub-Meter GPSAvailable From

Atterbury Consultants”

Atterbury Consultants, Inc. is selling anew Wireless GPS unit capable of sub-meter accuracy. The SX Blue GPS unittransmits 3D Differential GPS data to aPocket PC without any connecting wires.

• Sub-Meter Accuracy• Use WAAS under tree canopy• Very lightweight/easy to carry• Less than $2,000.00• Sends GPS data to Pocket PC

with Bluetooth wireless

Call Jon Aschenbach at 503-646-5393for more information. Download a fullsized brochure at www.atterbury.com.

ATTERBURY CONSULTANTS, INC.3800 SW Cedar Hills Blvd., #120

Beaverton, OR 97005

society of american foresters western forester

Documents