Four Challenges for the Future

While the focus of National Forest management has shifted dramatically over the past 20 years, the public debate over national forest management has changed very little. We often hear that National Forests are endangered or threatened by current management activities like logging and grazing.

Times have changed. Today, the focus has shifted to stewardship for the long-term desired future condition of the land. We have learned that what we leave on the land is more important than what we take away.

In one hundred years we may very well be measured by how well we met these challenges.

Fire and Fuels

The Problem:

The prolonged absence of periodic, low-intensity surface burning in fire-dependent ecosystems in the West has resulted in forest conditions that have been significantly altered. The changes in vegetative structure, species composition, and accumulated fuels have predisposed extensive areas to insect infestations, disease, and high-intensity wildfires that threaten nearby communities, watershed values, and key ecological components.

• Changes as a result of catastrophic wildfire ripple throughout a watershed… loss of soil, increased run-off, flash flood danger, siltation of reservoirs, aquatic ecosystem impacts (fish kills, insect populations), water chemistry and treatment costs.

• Catastrophic wildfires do more than burn trees. The intense heat often bakes soil, limiting the ability of water to soak into the soil. Instead, this water runs off into streams, lakes, and reservoirs, carrying valuable soil with it.
• Without the sponge-like layer of needles and other organic matter on the forest floor, more water from summer rainstorms flows into streams; so much so that lands below severely burned areas are subject to flash floods with all the devastation they can bring. Road culverts often need to be enlarged to accommodate the additional water.
• Run off from burned areas often carries large quantities of ash and silt. This material is ultimately deposited in streams and carried to ponds, lakes, and reservoirs.

• Many forests are healthy, and many forest types are historically dense. Some forest types are well adapted to stand-replacing fires. However, many forests have become far denser than they were historically, making them more susceptible to catastrophic fire.

• The problems are concentrated in forest types such as ponderosa pine on dry sites at lower elevations, where most people live, work, and play. These areas are at the highest risk from wildland fires that could compromise human safety and ecological integrity. Historically, most ponderosa pine forests were relatively open, with a few dozen trees per acre. Today, they might have hundreds or even thousands of trees per acre. In a drought, all those trees can fuel a catastrophic fire.
• 2002 was the second biggest fire season since the1950s. Four states had record fires. The underlying issue is that so many of our forests have become overgrown and unhealthy. Not all forests, but on the national forests alone, 73 million acres adapted to frequent fire are at risk from wildland fires that could compromise human safety and ecosystem health.
• Americans must decide: We can remove some of the trees and lower the risk of catastrophic fire; or we can do nothing and watch them burn. In a good part of the West—where forests are overgrown—we must return forests to the way they were historically, then get fire back into the ecosystem when it’s safe.

• Restoration treatments must focus on the areas at highest social, economic, and ecological risk. Some 73 million acres of national forest land are in high-priority treatment areas.
  •  Fire is an integral part of nature and needs to be carefully restored to fire-adapted ecosystems. We allow natural fires to burn, if appropriate under fire management plans, where they will benefit and improve land health.
  • Today, we know that what we leave on the land is more important than what we take away. Federal land-management agencies are practicing active forest management to maintain or improve the health of the land. This management policy includes reducing fuels build-up where it will do the most good and be the most cost-effectiv
  • Treatments must be strategically targeted. Not every acre in high-priority treatment areas can or should be treated. Maintenance treatments are also needed to prevent conditions from worsening where the risk is not yet high.
    • Costs are high. Some proposed treatment schedules have estimated costs at $12 billion or more over a 15-year period.
    • Some areas are too steep or inaccessible for feasible treatment.
    • A reasonable 5-year goal is to treat 11 million acres nationally
• Local communities have a high stake in the stewardship of surrounding forests and rangelands and play a central role in determining the long-term social, economic, and environmental well being of their citizens
• Fire doesn’t differentiate between property owners so all landowners need to be responsible for reducing the fuels hazard.

Invasive Species

The Problem:

The threat of non-native invasive species has become one of the most significant environmental and economic issues facing the nation, with exponential increases in the number of infestations and respective ecosystem impacts occurring annually. Concerns over the invasive species problem have reached global proportions.

• Invasive species have a negative impact on water quality and supply.

• In the plant world, many invasive species are successful because they developed adaptations to out-compete native species for water. As the invasive species utilize water more effectively, they displace native plants to less favorable habitats or eliminate them entirely from some sites.
• Tamarisk is a shrubby tree introduced to the Southwest in the 1800’s from southern Eurasia and is now pervasive along stream banks throughout the Southwest. Tamarisk has a number of undesirable characteristics. It dries up springs, wetlands, riparian areas and small streams by lowering surface water tables, robbing water from downstream uses. In addition, it crowds out native stands of riparian and wetland vegetation, increasing the impact of its water consumption.

• We’re losing our national treasures. Traditionally, noxious weeds were generally viewed as plants that could adversely affect agriculture, livestock, or human health. The definition has broadened to include adverse ecological impacts of all kinds of species of pests.

• Invasive species include both native and nonnative forest and rangeland pests that are likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human health. They usually spread unchecked by environmental controls such as native predators, displacing native species through competition, predation, parasitism, or by other means.
• About 70 million acres of forest in all ownerships are at serious risk of mortality from 26 different insects and diseases, including nonnatives such as gypsy moth, hemlock woolly adelgid, dogwood anthracnose, beech bark disease, Asian longhorned beetle, white pine blister rust, sudden oak death, and Port Orford cedar root disease.

• With the globalization of commercial exchanges, the number of new invasive species is growing. In five western states, for example, the number of new weeds has been steadily rising in every decade since the 1960s.

• Invasive species spread across borders and boundaries. Prevention and control require extraordinary coordination on a landscape level.

• Socially, we are losing part of our national heritage. For example, invasives have already greatly reduced or eliminated a major urban tree—American elm (Dutch elm disease) and two major forest trees—American chestnut (chestnut blight) and western white pine (white pine blister rust).
• Economically, invasive weeds cost the U.S. about $13 billion per year. For all invasives combined, it comes to about $138 billion per year in total economic damages and associated control costs.
• Ecologically, we are losing our native species. Of 43 fish species native to the Southwest, 23 are listed as endangered, partly due to competition from nonnative species. Currently, the West Nile virus alone affects 140 species of birds. Decades of recovery for birds like the bald eagle could be reversed.

• The United States has about 2,000 nonnative plants, about 400 of which are invasive. Invasive weeds now cover about 133 million acres in all ownerships nationwide. They are expanding at the rate of about 1.7 million acres per year.

• Public lands—especially federal lands—have become the last refuge for endangered species—the last place where they can find the habitat they need to survive. If invasives take over, these imperiled animals and plants will have nowhere else to go.
• About 3.5 million acres of national forest land are infested. Leafy spurge, knapweeds and starthistles, saltcedar, nonnative thistles, purple loosestrife, and cheatgrass are the biggest problems. Areas infested with weeds like leafy spurge lose almost all their forage value for both livestock and wildlife

Loss of Open Space

The problem:

Rural land urbanization in and around NFS lands and elsewhere, has been expanding dramatically in the last two decades. It has significantly affected national forest management . Fragmentation occurs when ecosystem habitats are divided into isolated patches--large areas of land are converted to smaller parcels. Fragmentation of private lands adjacent to NFS lands occurs when larger private tracts are sold in multiple smaller parcels. When this occurs, private lands that historically had been habitat for a variety of wildlife are no longer suitable due to inevitable development by multiple owners. In addition, access across those private lands onto public lands often ceases to exist.

• Habitat fragmentation is the division of habitat in both forest and rangeland ecosystems into smaller, more isolated patches. It is of concern because it poses a threat to the health and sustainability of ecosystems and the viability of rural communities alike.
• Habitat fragmentation is related to both ownership fragmentation (or parcelization), the conversion of large ownerships into smaller ones; and use fragmentation, the transformation of large tracts with a single predominant use into smaller ones with many different uses
• The conversion of private working lands—farm, ranch, and forest—to development has accelerated in recent years. The long-term trend is for large working forests to be sold and developed into small woodlots. Similarly, many working ranches are being converted to ranchettes and condomin

• Historically, multiple ownerships have been linked by their proximity on the landscape and by generations of intertwined social and economic considerations, especially in the West.
• When ranchers settled the West, they homesteaded wetter bottomlands but left drier uplands in the public domain. Species all across the landscape, including the cattle, need both types of habitat. The public/private interface protected open space and critical wildlife habitat.
• As large tracts of private land are subdivided into smaller and smaller parcels, human density and the artifacts of development, roads, buildings, and fences, limit access to the water and associated vegetation of the lowlands for a wide range of animal species. Without adequate, year-round habitat, animal populations won’t survive.
• The five fastest growing states are all in the West. Well-watered private lands are some of the most highly sought-after lands for development. As bottomlands are developed, landscape-level ecological ties are threatened.

• Fragmentation affects adjacent national forest land.
• Water quality and quantity are affected as development and fragmentation contribute to siltation, runoff, and reduced infiltration.
• Biodiversity is affected as fragmentation diminishes habitat size, reduces forest interior habitat, isolates existing populations, and modifies microclimates.
• Elk, deer, and their predators require winter range on western bottomlands at risk from conversion to developed land. Without it, they cannot survive, no matter how good the upland habitat is on surrounding public land.
• Americans should focus on how to buffer the national forests by protecting open land—by keeping ranches and working forests in operation

Unmanaged Recreation

The Problem:

Increased pressure from growing numbers of people, coupled with advances in recreation technology, challenge public land management agencies, state and local governments, and private land owners to address needs and conflicting expectations of millions of people who use and enjoy national forests while protecting the health and integrity of the land.

• Huge increases in recreation on national forest resulting in destruction of fragile soils and vegetation are requiring an increasing need for managing the impacts.
• The Forest Service welcomes all Americans to use their national forests and grasslands in multiple ways, including outdoor recreation in all its forms.
• The number of visitors to the National Forest System grew by 15 to 20 times from 1946 to 2000. In 2001, 214 million people visited the National Forest System. As the number of Americans more than doubles in the next century, so will the number of visitors.
• Rising use can trigger the need for management to protect natural resources.

• National policy encourages the use of designated roads and trails rather than permitting cross-country travel by OHV.
• One of the fastest growing forms of outdoor recreation involves the use of off-highway vehicles (OHVs). The number of OHV owners has risen sevenfold in less than three decades—from about 5 million in 1972 to 36 million in 2002. They account for about 5 percent of the visitors to the national forests and grasslands.
• Only a tiny fraction of OHV users leave lasting traces on the land by going cross-country. However, even a small percentage of tens of millions of users can have an enormous impact, and it is only going to grow.
• Each year hundreds miles of unplanned roads and trails appear on the National Forest System. One of the great impacts of unmanaged recreation is damage to soils and aquatic systems. Where there used to be one trail or road in an area, now there are many in the same location, most improperly constructed, exposing soil to the forces of water. These roads and trails often erode rapidly, damaging the landscape and adding additional sediment to nearby surface waters.
• The magnitude of the effects depends on such factors as terrain, susceptibility to erosion, and vegetation type. Depending on the site, unmanaged OHV can have various adverse impacts, including (but not limited to):
  • Conflict with other users
  • Damage to cultural sites
  • Violation of sites sacred to American Indians
  • Damage to riparian areas and species
  • Severe soil erosion
  • Spread of invasive weeds, such as knapweeds
  • Disturbance to wildlife