Northwest Forest PlaN THE FIRST 10 YEARS (1994?2003) Pacific Nor thwest Research Station Forest Ser vice United States Depar tment of A griculture General Technical Repor t PNW- GTR- 649 Vol. I April 2006 socioeconomic Monitoring results Volume I: Key Findings Susan Charnley, Ellen M. Donoghue, Claudia Stuart, Candace Dillingham, Lita P. Buttolph, William Kay, Rebecca J. McLain, Cassandra Moseley, Richard H. Phillips, and Lisa Tobe Authors Susan Charnley and Ellen M. Donoghue are research social scientists, U.S. Department of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation, P.O. Box 3890, Por tland, OR 97208; Claudia Stuart is a com mu nit y plan ner, Mendoci no National Forest, U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Genetic Resou rce Center, 2741 Cramer Lane, Chico, CA 95928; Candace Dillingham is a forester and social scientist, U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, K lamath National Forest, 1312 Fai rlane Rd., Yreka, CA 96097; Lita P. Buttolph is a social scientist and research associate, William Kay is a community and regional planner and project associate, and Rebecca J. McLain is a cult u ral geog rapher and prog ram di rector, I nstit ute for Cult u re and Ecolog y, P.O. Box 6688, Por tland, OR 97228- 6688; Cassandra Moseley is a political scientist and Director of the Ecosystem Work force Prog ram, I nstit ute for a Sust ai nable Envi ron ment, 5247 Universit y of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403-5247; Richard H. Phillips is a regional econo- mist, Resou rce Plan ni ng and Monitor i ng St aff, U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Region, 333 SW Fi rst Avenue, Por tland, OR 97204; Lisa Tobe is Di rector, Sier ra Resou rces, P.O. Box 798, Qui ncy, CA 95971. The Forest Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture is dedicated to the principle of multiple use management of the Nations forest resources for sustained yields of wood, water, forage, wildlife, and recreation. Through forestry research, cooperation with the States and private forest owners, and management of the national forests and national grasslands, it strivess directed by Congresso provide increasingly greater service to a growing Nation. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individuals income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDAs TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Socioeconomic Monitoring Results Volume I: Key Findings Susan Charnley, Ellen M. Donoghue, Claudia Stuart, Candace Dillingham, Lita P. Buttolph, William Kay, Rebecca J. McLain, Cassandra Moseley, Richard H. Phillips, and Lisa Tobe Northwest Forest PlanThe First 10 Years (19942003): Socioeconomic Monitoring Results Susan Charnley, Technical Coordinator U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Pacific Nor thwest Research Station Por tland, Oregon General Technical Report PNW-GTR-649 Vol. I April 2006 ii Abstract Charnley, Susan; Donoghue, Ellen M.; Stuart, Claudia; Dillingham, Candace; Buttolph, Lita P.; Kay, William; McLain, Rebecca J.; Moseley, Cassandra; Phillips, Richard H.; Tobe, Lisa. 2006. Socioeconomic monitoring results. Volu me I: Key fi ndi ngs. I n: Char nley, S., tech. coord. Nor thwest Forest Plan ? the fi rst 10 years (1994 ?2003): s ocioeconomic monitoring results. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 649. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 26 p. T he socioeconomic monitor i ng repor t add resses t wo evaluation questions posed i n the Nor thwest Forest Plan (the Plan) Record of Decision and assesses prog ress i n meeti ng five Plan socioeconomic goals. Volu me I of the repor t cont ai ns key fi ndi ngs. Volu me II add resses the question, A re predict able levels of timber and nontimber resou rces avail - able and bei ng produced? It also evaluates prog ress i n meeti ng the goal of produci ng a predict able level of timber sales, special forest products, livestock g razi ng, mi ner - als, and recreation oppor t u nities. T he focus of volu me III is the evaluation question, A re local com mu nities and economies exper ienci ng positive or negative changes that may be associated with federal forest management? Two Plan goals are also assessed i n volu me III: (1) to mai nt ai n the st abilit y of local and regional economies on a pre - dict able, long-ter m basis and, (2) to assist with long-ter m economic development and diversification to mi nimize adverse impacts associated with the loss of timber jobs. Prog ress i n meeti ng another Plan goal?to promote agency- citizen collaboration i n forest management?is evaluated i n volu me I V. Volu me V repor ts on t rends i n public values regardi ng forest management i n the Pacific Nor thwest over the past decade, com mu nit y views of how well the forest values and envi ron ment al qualities associ - ated with late-successional, old-g row th, and aquatic ecosystems have been protected u nder the Plan (a fif th Plan goal), and issues and concer ns relati ng to forest manage - ment u nder the Plan expressed by com mu nit y members. Volu me V I provides a histor y of the Nor thwest Forest Plan socioeconomic monitor i ng prog ram and a discussion of potential directions for the program. Key words: Nor thwest Forest Plan, socioeconomic monitor i ng, timber and nontimber resou rces, r u ral com mu nities and economies, collaboration, social values and forest management. iii Preface T his repor t is one of a set of repor ts produced on this 10 -year an niversar y of the Nor thwest Forest Plan (the Plan). T he collection of repor ts at tempts to answer questions about the effectiveness of the Plan based on new monitor i ng and research results. T he set i ncludes a series of status and trends reports, a synthesis of all regional monitoring and research results, a report on interagency information management, and a summary report. T he st at us and t rends repor ts focus on est ablishi ng baseli nes of i nfor mation f rom 1994, when the Plan was approved, and repor ti ng change over the 10 -year per iod. T he st at us and t rends ser ies i ncludes repor ts on late-successional and old-g row th forests, nor ther n spot ted owl population and habit at, marbled mu r relet population and habit at, watershed condition, gover n ment-to -gover n ment t r ibal relationships, socioeconomic conditions, and monitor i ng of project implementation under Plan standards and guidelines. T he sy nthesis repor t add resses questions about the effectiveness of the Plan by usi ng the st at us and t rends results and new research. It focuses on the validit y of the Plan as - su mptions, differences bet ween expect ations and what act ually happened, the cer t ai nt y of these fi ndi ngs, and fi nally, considerations for the f ut u re. T he sy nthesis repor t is organized i n t wo par ts: Par t I?i nt roduction, context, sy nthesis, and su m mar y? and Par t II? socioeconomic implications, older forests, species conser vation, the aquatic conser vation strategy, and adaptive management and monitoring. T he repor t on i nteragency i nfor mation management identifies issues and recom mends solutions for resolvi ng dat a and mappi ng problems encou ntered du r i ng the preparation of the set of monitor i ng repor ts. I nfor mation issues i nevit ably su r face du r i ng analyses that requi re dat a f rom multiple agencies cover i ng large geog raphic areas. T he goal of this set of repor ts is to improve the i nteg ration and acquisition of i nteragency dat a for the next comprehensive report. T he socioeconomic st at us and t rends repor t is published i n six volu mes. Volu me I (this volu me) of the repor t cont ai ns key fi ndi ngs. Volu me II add resses the evaluation question, A re predict able levels of timber and nontimber resou rces available and bei ng produced? T he focus of Volu me III is the evaluation question, A re local com mu nities and economies exper ienci ng positive or negative changes that may be associated with federal forest management? Volu me I V assesses the Plan goal of promoti ng agency- citizen collaboration i n forest management. Volu me V repor ts on public values regardi ng federal forest management i n the Pacific Nor thwest. Volu me V I provides a histor y of the Nor thwest Forest Plan socioeconomic monitoring program, and a discussion of potential directions for the program. iv Contents 1 Chapter 1: Introduction 2 Socioeconomic Monitoring: Introduction and Report Overview 7 Chapter 2: Methods 11 Chapter 3: Key Findings 11 Predictable Levels of Timber and Nontimber Resources 12 Effects of Forest Management Policy on Local Communities 12 Maintaining the Stability of Local and Regional Economies 12 Jobs and I ncome From Resou rces and Recreation on Federal Forests 14 Agency Jobs and Of fices 14 Agency Budgets 15 Procu rement Cont racti ng for Ecosystem Management Work 15 Community Effects of Plan Implementation 16 Assistance With Long-Term Economic Development and Diversi ficat ion 16 Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative 18 Pay ments to Cou nties 18 Plan Effects on Community Well-Being 19 Collaboration 21 Forest Management Values and Issues of Concern 22 Institutional Capacity 23 Future Monitoring 24 Acknowledgments 24 Metric Equivalents 24 References 1 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume I: Key Findings I n the early 1990s, cont roversy over har vest of old-g row th forests led to sweepi ng changes i n management of federal forests i n wester n Washi ng ton, Oregon, and nor thwest Cali - for nia. T hese changes were prompted by a ser ies of lawsuits i n the late 1980s and early 1990s that effectively shut dow n federal timber har vest i n the Pacific Nor thwest. I n response, a Presidential su m mit was held i n Por tland, Oregon, i n 1993. T his su m mit led to issuance by President Cli nton of a mandate for federal land management and regulatory agencies to work together to develop a plan to resolve the con flict. T he President?s g uidi ng pr i nciples followed shor tly after the summit in his Forest Plan for a Sustainable Econ- omy and Sustainable Environment (Cli nton and Gore 1996), now called the Nor thwest Forest Plan (the Plan). Immediately after the summit, a team of scientists and tech nical exper ts were convened to conduct an assessment of options (FEM AT 1993). T his assessment provided the scientific basis for the envi ron ment al impact st atement and record of decision (ROD) ( USDA and USDI 1994) to amend Forest Ser vice and Bu reau of Land Management plan ni ng docu ments withi n the range of the nor ther n spot ted owl ( Strix occidentalis caurina). T he ROD, to be implemented across 24 million federal acres (9.7 million hect ares), put i n place a whole new ap - proach to federal land management. Key components of the ROD i ncluded a new map of land use allocations ?late- successional reser ves, mat r ix, r ipar ian reser ves, adaptive management areas, and key watersheds. Plan st andards and g uideli nes provided the specific management di rection re - gardi ng how these land use allocations were to be managed. In addition, the Plan put in place a variety of strategies and processes to be implemented. T hese i ncluded adaptive man - agement, an aquatic conser vation st rateg y, late-successional reser ve and watershed assessments, su r vey and manage pro - cedu res, an i nteragency organization, social and economic mitigation initiatives, and monitoring. Monitoring provides a means to address the uncertainty of ou r predictions and compliance with forest management laws and policy. T he ROD clearly st ates that monitor i ng is essential and requi red: Monitoring is an essential component of the select- ed alternative. It ensures that management actions meet the prescr ibed st andards and g uideli nes and that they comply with applicable laws and policies. Monitor i ng will provide i nfor mation to deter mi ne if the st andards and g uideli nes are bei ng followed, verify if they are achieving the desired results, and determine if underlying assumptions are sound. Fi nally, Judge Dw yer reiterated the impor t ance of monitor i ng i n his 1994 decision declar i ng the Plan legally accept able (Dw yer 1994): Monitor i ng is cent ral to the [ Nor thwest Forest Plan?s] validit y. If it is not f u nded, or done for any reason, the plan will have to be reconsidered . T he ROD monitor i ng plan provided a ver y general f ramework to begi n development of an i nteragency moni - tor i ng prog ram. It identified key areas to monitor, i nitial sets of questions, t y pes and scope of monitor i ng, the need for com mon protocols and qualit y assu rance, and the need to develop a com mon desig n f ramework. I n 1995, the effec - tiveness monitor i ng prog ram plan (Mulder et al. 1995) and i nitial protocols for implement ation monitor i ng (Aleg r ia et al. 1995) were approved by the Regional I nteragency Executive Com mit tee (R IEC) 1. Approval of the effective- ness monitoring plan led to the formation of technical teams to develop the overall prog ram st rateg y and desig n (Mulder et al. 1999) and monitor i ng protocols for late-successional and old-g row th forests (older forests) (Hemst rom et al. 1998), nor ther n spot ted owls (Li nt et al. 1999), marbled mu r relets ( Brachyramphus marmoratus) (Madsen et al. 1999), t r ibal ( USDA and USDI 2002), and watershed condition (Reeves et al. 2004). Socioeconomic monitor i ng protocols conti nue to be tested. Periodic analysis and interpretation of monitoring data is essential to completing the monitoring task. This impor- t ant step was descr ibed i n the overall monitor i ng st rateg y Chapter 1: Introduction 4 T he R I EC is respon sible for en su r i ng t he prompt, coord i nated , a nd successf u l i mplement at ion of t he Nor t hwest Forest Pla n at t he reg ional level, a nd also over sees t he Nor t hwest Forest Pla n monitoring program and adaptive management process. An inter- gover n ment al a dv isor y com m it tee a dv ises t he R I EC. 2 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. I (Mulder et al. 1999) and the regional i nteragency executive com mit tee approved a 5-year i nter pretive repor ti ng cycle. T his 10 -year repor t is the fi rst comprehensive analysis and i nter pret ation of monitor i ng dat a si nce the ROD. Socioeconomic Monitoring: Introduction and Report Overview T he socioeconomic monitor i ng repor t add resses t wo evaluation questions posed i n the Plan ROD. T he fi rst question per t ai ns to use of nat u ral resou rces: A re predict - able levels of timber and nontimber resou rces available and bei ng produced? ( USDA and USDI 1994: E-9). Volu me II of the socioeconomic monitor i ng repor t analyzes t rends i n Forest Ser vice (FS) and Bu reau of Land Management (BLM) dat a for timber har vest, special forest products, livestock g razi ng, mi neral ext raction, and recreation to respond to this monitor i ng question. T he second evaluation question concer ns r u ral economies and com mu nities: A re local com mu nities and economies exper ienci ng positive or negative changes that may be associated with federal forest management? ( USDA and USDI 1994: E-9). Volu me III of the socioeconomic monitoring report focuses on this evaluation question. T hese questions are rooted i n concer ns that prevailed i n the early 1990s about how cutbacks i n federal timber har vesti ng u nder the Plan would affect local forest com mu - nities i n the Pacific Nor thwest. 2 Many of these communities had residents who worked i n the timber i ndust r y as loggers, mill workers, secondar y wood products manufact u rers, and t ranspor ters of wood and wood products. I n the early 1970s, timber i ndust r y employ ment i n the Plan area (fig. 1) stood at about 6 percent of tot al employ ment i n Washi ng ton, al most 12 percent i n Oregon, and 31 percent i n Califor nia (FEM AT 1993: V II-53). By the late 1980s, the relative impor t ance of timber employ ment i n each of these regions had decli ned by 50 percent (FEM AT 1993: V I-25). A ny reduction i n federal timber har vest volu mes had the potential to incur additional social and economic im- pacts on timber workers and thei r families i n the region, especially on those depending on federal forest lands.3 T hese workers were al ready bei ng squeezed by global competition for wood and wood products markets, labor- savi ng tech nologies leadi ng to i ncreased mechanization i n mills, and the economic recession that occurred in the early 1980s. Not only were jobs at st ake; timber workers were an impor t ant par t of many r u ral forest com mu nities, cont r ibut - ing to their social and economic vitality. Logging, milling, and timber work for med the basis for a way of life i n some com mu nities. T his way of life, and the cult u ral values and practices associated with it, were also th reatened. 4 Given the need for forest habit at and the need for forest products, President Cli nton requested ?a balanced and com - prehensive strategy for the conservation and management of forest ecosystems, while maximizi ng economic and social benefits f rom the forests? ( USDA and USDI 1994: E-1). T he Plan sought to provide ??a sust ai nable level of hu man use of the forest resou rce while still meeti ng the need to mai nt ai n and restore the late-successional and old-g row th forest ecosystem? ( USDA and USDI 1994: 26 ?27). T hus, one socioeconomic goal of the Plan was to ?produce a pre - dict able and sust ai nable level of timber sales and nontimber resou rces that will not deg rade or dest roy the envi ron ment ? ( USDA and USDI 1994: 3). Volu me II of this repor t evalu - ates prog ress i n achievi ng this Plan goal du r i ng the fi rst 10 years. One assu mption of the Plan was that by produci ng a predict able level of timber sales and nontimber resou rces, a second socioeconomic goal would be met: to mai nt ai n the st abilit y of local and regional economies on a predict able, long-ter m basis (Hay nes and Perez 2001, Mulder et al. 1999: 4, Tuch man n et al. 1996, USDA and USDI 1994: 26). The need for forest products from forest ecosys- tems is the need for a sust ai nable supply of timber and other forest products that will help mai nt ai n the st abilit y of local and regional economies, and 3 O n aver age, 30 percent of t he t i mber produced i n wester n O regon a nd Wa sh i ng ton each yea r bet ween 1970 a nd 1990 ca me f rom Forest Ser v ice a nd BLM la nd s ( Wa r ren 20 03). 4 See Hay nes a nd G r i n spoon (i n press) for a more t horoug h d iscu ssion of cha nges i n t he Pacif ic Nor t hwest forest r y sector si nce t he 1940 s a nd how it af fected r u r al com mu n it ies. 2 We follow Da n k s (20 03) i n def i n i ng forest com mu n it ies a s t hose hav i ng econom ic, social, a nd cu lt u r al t ies to nea rby forest s. 3 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume I: Key Findings WA S H I N G T O N O R E G O N C A L I F O R N I A Northwest Forest Plan region States Fig u re 1?T he ra nge of t he nor t her n spot ted owl a nd t he Nor t hwest Forest Pla n a rea. cont r ibute valuable resou rces to the national econ - omy, on a predict able and long-ter m basis [ USDA and USDI 1994: 26]. Volume III of this report evaluates progress in meeting this Plan goal. I n identif yi ng pr i nciples that would g uide development of a management plan to protect old-g row th ecosystems and produce a sust ai nable level of timber, President Cli nton said, ?W here sou nd management policies can preser ve the health of forest lands, sales should go for ward. W here this requi rement can not be met, we need to do ou r best to offer new economic oppor t u ni - ties for year-rou nd, high-wage, high-sk ill jobs? ( USDA and USDI 1994: 3). A thi rd socioeconomic goal of the Plan was: where timber sales can not proceed, assist with long-ter m economic development and di - versification to mi nimize adverse impacts associated with job loss (Mulder et al. 1999: 4, Tuch man n et al. 1996, USDA and USDI 1994: 3). Volu me III of the socio - economic monitoring report also evaluates progress in meeting this goal during the fi rst 10 years of the Plan. T he Plan aimed to usher i n a new collaborative approach to federal forest management. In particular, federal agen- cies would coordi nate and collaborate with one another in managing federal forests i n the Pacific Nor thwest (Tuch man n et al. 1996: 6, 44 ? 48). I nteragency collabora - tion was expected to i ncrease ef ficiency, improve communication and informa- tion shar i ng, elimi nate duplication, build t r ust, and reduce con flict bet ween agencies (Tuch man n et al. 1996: 6 ?7). T here would also be g reater collaboration i n forest management bet ween agencies and citizens (Dan ks and Hay nes 2001: 54, Tuch man n et al. 1996: 41, 60 ? 61). Two for mal i nstit u - tions est ablished u nder the Plan promoted agency- citizen collaboration i n forest management: provi n - cial advisory committees and adaptive management areas. A more collaborative approach to forest management was expected to improve relationships bet ween agencies and the public, bet ter li n k the Plan?s economic and envi ron ment al objectives by i nteg rati ng forest r y and economic assist ance, and reduce con flict over forest management. T hus, a fou r th socioeconomic goal of the Plan was to promote i nteragency collaboration and agency- citizen collaboration i n forest management. The socioeconomic monitoring team did not monitor i nteragency coordi nation and collaboration because 4 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. I of a lack of resou rces. I nstead, we focused on agency- citi - zen collaboration. Ou r evaluation of prog ress toward meet - ing this goal is contained in Volume IV of this monitoring report. T he Plan codified a shif t i n forest management away f rom the i ntensive timber management practices of the 1970s and 1980s toward ecosystem management. One of the goals i n doi ng so was to protect the forest values and envi ron ment al qualities associated with late-successional, old-g row th, and aquatic ecosystems. T hese forest values i nclude amenit y values (such as scenic qualit y, lifest yle), envi ron ment al qualit y values (such as clean ai r and water), ecological values (such as sust ai nabilit y, biodiversit y), pub - lic use values (recreation), and spi r it ual and religious values (Donoghue 2003: 334, St an key and Clark 1992). Other Plan monitor i ng is desig ned to collect and analyze biophysi - cal dat a that will be used to assess how well the Plan has achieved the goals and expect ations associated with protect - i ng older forest habit at, associated species (nor ther n spot ted owls and marbled mu r relets), and aquatic and r ipar ian eco - systems. The socioeconomic monitoring team addressed the topic of forest protection from the social perspective. Protecti ng forest values and envi ron ment al qualities associated with older forest and aquatic ecosystems is a social value. Changi ng societ al values are among the thi ngs that can t r igger the adaptive management process ( USDA and USDI 1994: E2). It is impor t ant to monitor how pub - lic at tit udes, beliefs, and values relati ng to forest manage - ment change over time so that managers can be responsive. Volume V of the socioeconomic monitoring report contains a literat u re review that evaluates t rends i n public values regardi ng forest management i n the Pacific Nor thwest be - t ween the early 1990s and the early 2000s. People?s perceptions of whether or not agencies are managi ng federal forests i n ways that are consistent with their values, and of the effectiveness of agency management policies, can i n fluence thei r behavior and thei r at tit udes toward the agencies. Although public perceptions may not always be ?accu rate? f rom the scientific st andpoi nt, they mat ter. T he monitor i ng team i nter viewed com mu nit y members f rom 12 case-st udy com mu nities and agency employees f rom 4 case-st udy forests and docu mented thei r perceptions of how well the Plan had protected forest values and envi ron ment al qualities associated with older forests and aquatic ecosystems on federal forest lands. T he team also docu mented com mu nit y residents? issues and concerns relating to forest management under the Plan. The results of these i nter views are cont ai ned i n Volu me V of this report. T he socioeconomic monitor i ng 10 -year repor t is based on monitor i ng work that was conducted du r i ng 2003 and 2004 i n the thi rd phase of the module?s development (which began i n 1999). Phase III is considered a pilot phase of the socioeconomic monitor i ng prog ram. T he Regional I nter - agency Executive Com mit tee has not of ficially i ncor porat - ed socioeconomic monitor i ng i nto the Pacific Nor thwest I nteragency Regional Monitor i ng Prog ram. Nor is there a for mal, published protocol for socioeconomic monitor i ng. As st ated i n the ROD, ?T he monitor i ng plan will be per iodically evaluated to ascer t ai n whether the monitor i ng questions and st andards are still relevant, and will be adjusted as appropr iate. Some monitor i ng items may be disconti nued and others added as k nowledge and issues change with implement ation.? ( USDA and USDI 1994: E- 1). Volu me V I of this repor t evaluates the socioeconomic monitor i ng plan i n the ROD; evaluates whether the questions, goals, and monitor i ng items are still relevant 10 years later; and assesses f ut u re options for the module to ensure that agencies have the socioeconomic information they need to support adaptive management in the Plan area. It is desig ned to help the R IEC decide the f ut u re of Plan- related socioeconomic monitoring. T he followi ng t abulation su m mar izes the evaluation questions and Plan goals that are the topic of the socio - economic monitor i ng 10 -year repor t and the repor t vol - u mes that present and discuss the monitor i ng questions, expect ations, dat a, and conclusions associated with each of them. Volu me I does not cont ai n any monitor i ng dat a; rather, it su m mar izes the monitor i ng team?s fi ndi ngs and conclusions. 5 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume I: Key Findings ROD evaluation question/Plan goal Report volume Q1: A re predict able levels of timber and nontimber resou rces available Volu me II and bei ng produced? Q2: A re local com mu nities and economies exper ienci ng positive or Volu me III negative changes that may be associated with federal forest management? Goal 1: Produce a predict able and sust ai nable level of timber sales and Volu me II nontimber resou rces that will not deg rade or dest roy the envi ron ment. Goal 2: Mai nt ai n the st abilit y of local and regional economies on a Volu me III predict able, long-ter m basis. Goal 3: W here timber sales can not proceed, assist with long-ter m Volu me III economic development and diversification to mi nimize adverse impacts associated with job loss. Goal 4: Promote i nteragency collaboration and agency- citizen Volu me I V collaboration i n forest management. Goal 5: Protect the forest values and envi ron ment al qualities associated Volu me V with late-successional, old-g row th, and aquatic ecosystems. New question: A re the socioeconomic evaluation questions, goals, and Volu me V I monitor i ng items still relevant? 6 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. I 7 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume I: Key Findings Chapter 2: Methods Table 1Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management units included in calculations of resource and recreation outputs State Unit Forest Service Washi ng ton Okanogan a Wenatchee a Mou nt Baker-Snoqual mie Gifford Pinchot Oly mpic Oregon Mou nt Hood Willamet te Siuslaw Deschutesa Umpqua Wi nema a Rog ue R iver Siskiyou Califor nia K lamath Six R ivers Shast a-Tr i nit y Mendocino Bu reau of Land Management Oregon Medford Rosebu rg Salem Eugene Coos Bay a A lt houg h t hese forest s a re on ly pa r t ially w it h i n t he r a nge of t he nor t her n spot ted owl, d at a f rom t he ent i re forest a re a nalyzed i n t h is re por t, u n less ot her w ise i nd icated. The information in this interpretive report is largely the result of ret rospective monitor i ng. No socioeconomic moni - tor i ng prog ram was est ablished early i n the Nor thwest For - est Plan (the Plan) per iod. T hus, there was no oppor t u nit y to for mulate monitor i ng questions, identif y appropr iate i ndica - tors for answer i ng those questions, and gather monitor i ng dat a associated with the i ndicators over the cou rse of a de - cade, to compile and evaluate in this interpretive report. To a large extent, the monitor i ng team had to rely on existi ng dat a f rom secondar y sou rces to answer the evaluation ques - tions i n the record of decision (ROD) and to evaluate suc - cess in meeting Plan socioeconomic goals. These data and thei r associated i ndicators were not always adequate for the t ask; dat a limit ations are discussed i n each repor t volu me. T he monitor i ng team used a combi nation of quanti - t ative and qualit ative methods. T he baseli ne year for the socioeconomic monitor i ng prog ram was 1990. We chose 1990 as the baseli ne for several reasons. Fi rst, we use social and economic indicators from the U.S. census to assess com mu nit y-scale socioeconomic change over time. T he census happens once ever y 10 years (1990 and 2000). Second, although the Plan was implemented i n 1994, the spot ted owl ( Strix occidentalis caurina) listi ng occu r red i n 1990, and was quick ly followed by cou r t i nju nctions agai nst har vesti ng federal timber. T hus, the impacts of reduced federal timber har vesti ng began arou nd 1991; the Plan was an at tempt to restore the flow of federal timber. Fi nally, to evaluate the effects of the Plan on Pacific Nor thwest com - mu nities, it is helpf ul to compare what conditions were li ke before and af ter the Plan was implemented. It was not pos - sible to obt ai n dat a as far back as 1990 for some i ndicators, however, so not all of the analyses begi n with that year. To answer the fi rst evaluation question (A re predict - able levels of timber and nontimber resou rces available and bei ng produced?), we obt ai ned dat a on timber sales, special forest products, g razi ng, mi ni ng, and recreation f rom Forest Ser vice (FS) and Bu reau of Land Management (BLM) dat a - bases and resou rce specialists. All of the monitor i ng teams associated with the Pacific Nor thwest I nteragency Regional Monitor i ng Prog ram were di rected to obt ai n agency dat a f rom cor porate dat abases, publications, or other sou rces available f rom agency national, regional, or st ate of fices, rather than request dat a f rom i ndividual FS and BLM field u nits (u nless war ranted by special ci rcu mst ances). T his approach imposed a set of limit ations associated with dat a availabilit y and dat a qualit y. Ou r team obt ai ned most of the regional-scale resou rce and recreation dat a f rom FS re - gional and BLM st ate of fice specialists. Ou r team asked for i ndicator dat a for 22 forest u nits i n the Plan area (t able 1). We agg regated the u nit-scale dat a to obt ai n regionwide t rends. Combi ni ng FS and BLM dat a was of ten impossible at the regional scale either because the agencies t rack different var iables (i ndicators) for each re - sou rce, because dat a were not available for the same years, or both. T hus, most of the regional-scale i ndicator dat a are presented and analyzed by agency. 8 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. I T he analy tical f ramework adopted by this module calls for showi ng that changes reflected by the t rend dat a were caused by management actions u nder the Plan, or for providi ng alter native theor ies that could explai n the changes obser ved. T he team i nvestigated li n ks bet ween trends in resource and recreation outputs, management actions u nder the Plan, and other explanator y var iables by usi ng a case-st udy approach. We selected fou r forests f rom four planning provinces in the Plan area for detailed study: the Oly mpic National Forest, the Mou nt Hood National Forest, the K lamath National Forest, and the Coos Bay BLM Dist r ict (fig. 2). Case-st udy forests were chosen to represent one national forest in each of the three states that lie withi n the Nor thwest Forest Plan area, and one BLM u nit i n Oregon. T hey were also chosen to represent different provi nces (the Plan area is broken up i nto 12 plan ni ng prov - i nces). Because the monitor i ng effor t was considered a pilot prog ram, we wanted to conduct it on forests that were i nter - ested in participating and making use of the resultant infor- mation, so we used a non random selection process. Two of the fou r case-st udy national forests volu nteered to par tici - pate, and we approached the thi rd because it was previously a high timber-produci ng forest. T he Coos Bay Dist r ict was chosen because the BLM Oregon St ate of fice recom mended it. Team members i nter viewed a tot al of 78 agency employ - ees from the four case forests and discussed trends in the in- dicator dat a for each resou rce area with prog ram specialists, ask i ng thei r perspectives on the reasons behi nd the t rends obser ved, and the role of the Plan i n i n fluenci ng them. T he second evaluation question has t wo components: A re local com mu nities and economies exper ienci ng positive or negative changes, and are these changes associated with federal forest management? To assess whether local com - mu nities and economies were exper ienci ng positive or nega - tive changes, the team deli neated 1,314 com mu nities i n the Plan area and used social and economic indicators from the U.S. census to analyze change i n the com mu nities bet ween 1990 and 2000. T he team also developed a com mu nit y socioeconomic well-bei ng i ndex and analyzed differences i n well-bei ng bet ween 1990 and 2000 and bet ween com mu - nities located withi n 5 miles of a federal forest and far ther than 5 miles away. Fi ndi ng di rect con nections bet ween changes i n forest management policy and socioeconomic change is dif ficult. To assess whether social and economic change i n local com mu nities and economies was associated with the Plan, the team exami ned t rends i n socioeconomic benefits f rom federal forests that potentially affect the well-bei ng of forest com mu nities. T hese benefits i ncluded jobs and i ncome associated with forest resou rces and recreation, agency jobs, and procu rement cont racti ng oppor t u nities. We exami ned regional-scale t rends i n these forest benefits for the per iod 1990 ?2003 by usi ng quantit ative dat a f rom agency dat abases and other secondar y sou rces. We also exami ned local-scale t rends i n these benefits i n fou r sample case-st udy areas. Other benefits f rom federal forests that cont r ibute to the well-bei ng of local com mu nities i nclude ecosystem ser vices (such as clean ai r and water) and amenit y values (such as scenic qualit y and wildlife). T he team did not monitor this set of benefits because i ndicator dat a were not available at the requi red scale or because methods for quantif yi ng and monitor i ng i ndicators of these values and services are poorly developed. I n addition, we evaluated the success of Plan mitiga - tion measures designed to support rural communities and economies dependent on jobs i n the wood products industry during a period of economic transition. These mitigation measu res i ncluded (1) i nteg rati ng forest r y and economic development goals by creati ng new jobs i n ecosystem restoration; (2) providi ng economic assist ance to workers and thei r families, busi nesses, and com mu nities th rough the Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative; and (3) providi ng safet y net pay ments to cou nties to help compensate for the loss of revenue shar i ng based on timber receipts. To supplement the quantit ative monitor i ng dat a, the team employed a com mu nit y case-st udy approach to gather and analyze qualit ative dat a that provide a more det ailed u nderst andi ng of (1) the social and economic conditions and t rends descr ibed by the quantit ative dat a, (2) how changes i n the flow of forest benefits had cont r ibuted to change i n local com mu nities, and (3) how the Plan had affected the flow of socioeconomic benefits f rom federal forests. I nter views with 223 members of 12 com mu nities 9 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume I: Key Findings Case study?Bureau of Land Management districts Case study?national forests Case study?community boundaries Northwest Forest Plan area States Major lakes and rivers Major roads Bureau of Land Management Forest Service Major cities Olympic National Forest Olympic National Forest 0 25 50 100 Miles Mount Hood National Forest Mount Hood National Forest Klamath National Forest Klamath National Forest Coos Bay District o Fig u re 2 ? Case -st udy forests a nd associated com mu n it ies. T he case -st udy com mu n it ies were t he followi ng: Oly mpic Nat ional Forest? Q ui nault I nd ia n Nat ion, La ke Q ui nault A rea , Q uilcene. Mou nt Hood Nat ional Forest? Upper Hood R iver Valley, Villages of Mou nt Hood bet ween Br ig hton a nd R hododend ron, G reater Est acad a. K lamat h Nat ional Forest? But te Valley, Scot t Valley, Mid-K lamat h.Coos Bay Dist r ict? G reater Reedspor t, G reater My r tle Poi nt, G reater Coos Bay. 10 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. I associated with the sample forests, and 82 agency employ - ees work i ng on the fou r forests were the sou rce of these qualit ative dat a. T h ree com mu nities withi n 10 miles of each forest were randomly selected for monitor i ng. T hese dat a descr ibe the social and economic effects of the Plan on local com mu nities, and how agency effor ts to mitigate Plan effects did or did not help com mu nities adapt to change. We identify key patterns, themes, and insights that emerge from the cases and use them to advance our understanding of how federal forest management policy is li n ked to socio - economic well-bei ng i n forest com mu nities. T hese i nter - views are also the mai n sou rce of dat a for evaluati ng prog ress i n agency- citizen collaboration u nder the Plan, and evaluati ng how effective the Plan has been i n protecti ng forest values and envi ron ment al qualities associated with older forest and aquatic ecosystems. 11 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume I: Key Findings Predictable Levels of Timber and Nontimber Resources Were predict able levels of timber and nontimber resou rces produced du r i ng the fi rst decade of the Nor thwest Forest Plan (the Plan)? T he answer to the evaluation question dif - fers by resou rce area. T he amou nt of timber produced did not meet the probable sale quantit y (PSQ) volu mes antici - pated du r i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan, nor were timber sales offered at predict able levels. T he average an nual PSQ estimate for the fi rst 9 years of the Plan (1995 ?2003) was 776 million board feet, t ak i ng i nto accou nt the dow nward adjust ments made to PSQ du r i ng that per iod, and the expect ation that production would be u nder PSQ i n the fi rst 2 years. On average, about 526 million board feet of timber was offered for sale each year bet ween 1995 and 2003. T he average an nual PSQ volu me produced was about 421 million board feet. Timber sale levels were reasonably predict able bet ween 1995 and 1998; bet ween 1999 and 2003 they were not. T he PSQ estimates were based on the ex - pect ation that most of the har vest volu me would come f rom regeneration har vest of old forest st ands i n mat r ix and some adaptive management areas. T his har vest expect ation was not met. T he Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team (FEM AT 1993) repor t ack nowledged that it would be dif ficult to produce a predict able supply of timber u nder the Plan. T he best i ndicator for which agency dat a were available for assessi ng whether predict able levels of special forest products were produced was the quantit y of products sold. T his i ndicator is i nadequate for answer i ng the evaluation question because, for most products, the extent to which the quantit y of products sold was deter mi ned by supply or by har vester demand is u n k now n. Moreover, the i ndicator reflects per mit ted har vest only. T he quantit y of conver tible (can be conver ted to board feet) special forest products sold decli ned for both agencies, except for poles and posts on Bu reau of Land Management (BLM) lands. Trends for non - conver tible products were mixed, and differed by agency. T he decli nes that occu r red i n the quantit y of f uelwood and some nonconver tible products sold were expected because of har vest rest r ictions i n the reser ves, and decreased timber harvesting. G razi ng decli ned on Forest Ser vice (FS) lands du r - i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan. Dat a i ndicate that g razi ng also decli ned on BLM lands du r i ng the per iod, but to what extent this decli ne was real, or an ar tifact of changes i n agency reporting practices, is uncertain. Some decline in g razi ng was expected u nder the Plan because of manage - ment constraints in the reserves. The Plan is only one of several factors li kely to be responsible for reduced g razi ng on federal forests, however. Although the Plan caused some restrictions in riparian areas, other causes unrelated to the Plan (such as d rought and the Endangered Species Act) repor tedly had a bigger effect on g razi ng activit y. Mi nerals production was analyzed separately for leasables, locat ables, and saleables, and for the FS only. No leasable mi nerals were produced du r i ng the fi rst 10 years of the Plan, and the nu mber of mi neral leases was st able. T he agencies do not t rack locat able mi nerals pro - duction, so we do not k now whether predict able levels of locat able mi nerals were produced. Other i ndicators associ - ated with locat able mi nerals show a decli ne i n activit y on the national forests du r i ng the decade, which was expected. T he volu me of salable mi nerals produced on National For - est System lands d ropped, which was not expected. We do not k now to what extent production t rends were the result of the Plan or factors related to demand. T he Plan was not believed to have been much of a const rai nt on mi nerals pro - duction du r i ng the fi rst decade. Ou r abilit y to deter mi ne whether predict able levels of recreation oppor t u nities were reached du r i ng the monitor - i ng per iod was limited by the shor t age of regional-scale agency recreation dat a for the years before 1999. T he dat a that are available i ndicate that some k i nds of recreation oppor t u nities decreased, some remai ned st able, and some i ncreased. O ppor t u nities to exper ience desig nated wilder - ness areas, to maintain a recreation residence, and to go dow n hill sk ii ng appear to have remai ned st able or i ncreased si nce the early 1990s. O ppor t u nities to par ticipate i n roaded recreation and to access FS and BLM lands by passenger car decreased. O ppor t u nities to exper ience u n roaded and non motor ized recreation set ti ngs i ncreased. Regional-scale FS dat a for nu mber of developed recreation sites i ndicate cu r rent st at us only. T he nu mber of developed recreation Chapter 3: Key Findings 12 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. I sites on BLM lands has been st able si nce 1999. Dat a for sk i area visit ation, visit ation on BLM lands, and nu mber of out fit ter and g uide per mits i ndicate that demand for recreation on Plan-area forests g rew du r i ng the decade. T he monitor i ng results show that prog ress toward meet - i ng the Plan goal of produci ng predict able levels of timber sales and nontimber resou rces has been mixed. For some resou rces, the existi ng dat a are i nadequate for evaluati ng the goal. For some resou rces, production remai ned st able or increased. Production levels declined for other resources, and some decli nes were expected. Plan-related causes were the mai n reason that predict able levels of timber sales were not produced. T he Plan was only one of several factors i n fluenci ng t rends for other resou rces. Effects of Forest Management Policy on Local Communities Did local com mu nities and economies exper ience positive or negative changes that may be associated with federal forest management? W hat prog ress was made i n mai nt ai ni ng the st abilit y of local and regional economies on a predict able, long-ter m basis and i n assisti ng with long-ter m economic development and diversification i n com mu nities affected by cutbacks i n federal timber har vests? T he monitor i ng team exami ned t rends i n socioeconomic benefits f rom federal forest lands bet ween the early 1990s and the early 2000s, and the ways i n which the Plan may have cont r ibuted to these t rends. T he team also exami ned socioeconomic mitigation measures designed to offset some of the adverse effects of cutbacks i n federal timber har vest, how effective they were, and why they were not effective i n some cases. I n addition, we exami ned social and economic change i n Plan-area com mu nities at the regional scale and i n a sample of 12 forest com mu nities to identif y li n ks bet ween Plan implementation, the mitigation measures, and commu- nit y change. Ou r mai n conclusions follow. We began by t ak i ng a regional look at social and eco - nomic change i n 1,314 com mu nities i n the Plan area. We analyzed 12 social and economic i ndicators f rom the U.S. census for the years 1990 and 2000, and also used U.S. cen - sus dat a to develop a com mu nit y socioeconomic well-bei ng measu re that would help us evaluate change i n com mu nit y socioeconomic well-bei ng over time. Ou r analysis of the census data found that communities in the Plan area are changi ng. T he population is g rowi ng, educational at t ai n ment and household income are increasing, and poverty is de- creasing. At the same time, the manufacturing sector of the economy is declining in many communities. Socioeconomic well-bei ng i ncreased for more than a thi rd of the com mu ni - ties i n the region, and decreased for about the same nu mber bet ween 1990 and 2000. Al most 5 million people lived i n com mu nities i n the Plan area i n 2000, and just over 2 million of these lived withi n 5 miles of federal forest lands. Usi ng a socio - economic well-bei ng i ndex we developed, we fou nd that 40 percent of the com mu nities withi n 5 miles of FS- or BLM-managed lands had decreases i n socioeconomic well- bei ng bet ween 1990 and 2000, compared with a 33-percent decrease for com mu nities far ther than 5 miles f rom federal forest lands. Generally, Plan-area com mu nities with lower socioeconomic well-bei ng tended to be those withi n 5 miles of FS and BLM lands, composi ng 71 percent of all com mu - nities that scored low or ver y low i n socioeconomic well- bei ng i n 2000. For t y-th ree percent of the com mu nities that received high or ver y high scores, however, were also withi n 5 miles of federal forest lands. Although some com mu nities withi n 5 miles had relatively high socioeconomic well-be - i ng, i ncome i nequalit y also has i ncreased there. Dr ivers of socioeconomic change, such as i ncreasi ng i ncome i nequal - ity, migration, shifts in dominant industry sectors, and aging populations all affect com mu nit y socioeconomic well-bei ng. Maintaining the Stability of Local and Regional Economies Jobs and Income From Resources and Recreation on Federal Forests I n the early 1990s, residents of forest-based com mu nities expressed concer n over the u ncer t ai nt y arou nd the timi ng and quantit y of federal timber sales (FEM AT 1993: V II-70). Com mu nities wanted st abilit y, predict abilit y, and cer t ai nt y i n timber supplies (FEM AT 1993: V II-77). Many people believed that if federal agencies produced a st able, even flow of timber, social and economic st abilit y i n r u ral forest com - mu nities would be assu red (see sou rces cited i n R ichardson 13 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume I: Key Findings 1996). T he Plan socioeconomic goal of mai nt ai ni ng the st abilit y of local and regional economies on a predict able, long-ter m basis by produci ng predict able levels of timber sales, nontimber resou rces, and recreation oppor t u nities reflects this thi n k i ng. Volu me II, chapter 2 of this repor t st ates that predict - able levels of timber sales were not produced du r i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan. Trends in special forest products sold, mi ni ng, and recreation oppor t u nities were mixed, and g raz - i ng decli ned. I n chapter 3 Volu me III, we repor t that it was not possible to measu re jobs and i ncome associated with g razi ng, mi ni ng, and har vesti ng special forest products on federal forest lands i n the Plan area because of lack of dat a. It was possible to measu re jobs and i ncome associated with timber har vest and recreation; however, for recreation the only available dat a per t ai ned to cu r rent st at us on FS lands. I n the early 2000s, recreation oppor t u nities provided by FS lands i n the Plan area suppor ted about 17,500 di rect jobs, and 25,500 tot al jobs. The main adverse social and economic effects of the Plan were expected to be associated with the loss of jobs and i ncome f rom reduced federal timber har vests. Federal timber supplies d ropped over the cou rse of the 1990s, and federal agencies did not produce anticipated PSQ volu mes. T hi r t y thousand di rect timber i ndust r y jobs were lost bet ween 1990 and 2000 i n the Plan area (compared to Plan expect ations of 25,000 jobs lost). Most of this job loss was i n non met ropolit an cou nties, with Oregon bei ng the hardest hit of the th ree st ates. About 19,000 of these jobs were lost bet ween 1990 and 1994, and the mai n cause was reduced timber supplies across ow nerships. Roughly 11,400 of the lost jobs can be at t r ibuted to cutbacks i n federal har vests t r iggered by the listi ng of the nor ther n spot ted owl and subsequent i nju nctions on timber sales. Timber supplies across all ow nerships i n the Pacific Nor thwest were relatively st able du r i ng the last half of the 1990s. Never the - less, about 11,000 of the 30,000 timber i ndust r y jobs lost du r i ng the 1990s were lost i n the last half of the decade. About 400 of the 11,000 jobs lost si nce 1994 can be at t r ib - uted to a net reduction i n federal timber har vesti ng. T he remai ni ng 10,600 job losses occu r red du r i ng a per iod of i ncreased log availabilit y to local mills, and are the result of less ef ficient mills closi ng, and mills conti nui ng to i nvest i n labor-savi ng tech nologies. T his timber i ndust r y rest r uct u r - i ng was i n response to reductions i n timber log supplies from the levels at the start of the decade and the shift to har vesti ng smaller diameter t rees. T he cont r ibution of federal timber to the tot al timber supply d ropped i n the Plan area f rom about 25 percent i n 1990 to 10 percent i n 1995 to less than 5 percent by 2000. Although st able timber supplies may cont r ibute to eco - nomic st abilit y, they do not ensu re it. T his fi ndi ng is consis - tent with research u nder t aken i n the 1990s that shows how assu mi ng com mu nit y st abilit y depends on nondecli ni ng, even flows of timber f rom federal forests can be misleadi ng (see sou rces cited i n Kusel 1996, R ichardson 1996). Many factors can i n fluence the st abilit y of forest-based com mu ni - ties ( USDA FS 2000: 3-326 ?3-329). Demand for wood and com modit y pr ices fluct uates; alter native sou rces of sup - ply are available; some fi r ms prefer locati ng close to large labor markets rather than i n geog raphically isolated areas; mills compete for timber supply; com mu nities compete for jobs; wood products manufact u r i ng tech nolog y changes; and other federal and st ate policies affecti ng the busi ness climate change. All of these forces can affect jobs i n the timber i ndust r y, and neither agencies nor com mu nities have much i n fluence over them. Consequently, the concept of com mu nit y st abilit y has come to be replaced by the concept of com mu nit y resiliency?the abilit y of com mu nities to respond and adapt to change i n positive, const r uctive ways to mitigate the effects of change on the com mu nit y (Har r is et al. 2000: 6). T he expect ation that the Plan would provide predict - able levels of resou rce out puts and recreation oppor t u nities, which would i n t u r n provide predict able levels of employ - ment, was not achieved with respect to timber supply. T he timber projections for FS and BLM lands i n the Plan area were not realized and there was a lot of var iation across the years si nce the Plan was implemented. However, i ncreased har vests f rom other ow nerships and the redi rection of logs f rom the expor t market to local processi ng i ndust r ies have mitigated some of these impacts. 14 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. I Agency Jobs and Of fices Agency jobs can also affect com mu nit y st abilit y. T he five wester n Oregon BLM dist r icts lost 166 f ull-time equiva - lents (FTEs) bet ween 1993 and 2002, or 13 percent of thei r work force. No BLM dist r ict or resou rce area of fices closed du r i ng this per iod, however, meani ng that there was a continued presence of agency decisionmakers in local com mu nities. National forests i n the Plan area lost 3,066 FTEs bet ween 1993 and 2002, representi ng a 36 -percent decli ne i n the work force. T his loss was more than expected, and it led to a consolidation of field of fices. T he nu mber of FS of fices cont ai ni ng forest super visors decli ned by t wo, and the nu mber of of fices cont ai ni ng dist r ict rangers d ropped by 20 du r i ng the per iod, representi ng a 23-percent reduction i n the nu mber of com mu nities housi ng FS of fices that cont ai ned a li ne of ficer. Some of these of fices closed completely; others persisted, but with g reatly reduced st aff - i ng. T he FS job loss was most severe among u nits i n Oregon and Washi ng ton. T he FS and BLM are of ten t wo of the few sou rces of qualit y jobs i n forest-based com mu nities, and thei r employ - ees of ten make an impor t ant cont r ibution to com mu nit y well-bei ng. Agency jobs help to mai nt ai n the presence of com mu nit y members who cont r ibute leadership sk ills, i n - vest i n improvi ng thei r com mu nities, and subst antially en - hance com mu nit y capacit y. T he FEM AT repor t recog nized that the presence of FS and BLM of fices i n small, isolated com mu nities en hances com mu nit y capacit y, and that of fice closu res could devast ate some of these com mu nities. Not only displaced timber workers, but FS employees moved out of thei r com mu nities i n the 1990s as they reti red or went to work elsewhere, cont r ibuti ng to the loss of productive com - mu nit y members. T he negative effects of these changes are descr ibed for some of the case-st udy com mu nities ( Volu me III, chapter 8). T he loss of agency jobs was largely tied to decli nes i n agency budgets associated with reduced timber harvesting under the Plan. Agency Budgets Bet ween 1993 and 2003, wester n Oregon BLM u nit tot al budgets rose by 22 percent. I n cont rast, Plan-area FS u nit budgets decli ned by 35 percent. T hese t rends can be compared to national-scale t rends i n agency budget appropr iations. Bet ween 1993 and 2003, tot al FS agency appropr iations g rew by 41 percent, and tot al BLM agency appropr iations g rew by 79 percent. T he 35-percent decli ne i n FS u nit budgets occu r red at the same time that FS field-u nit budget allocations for fi re and f uels management rose f rom 7 to 29 percent of the tot al. Excludi ng fi re and f uel management f u ndi ng, FS budgets for all other activities d ropped 50 percent du r i ng the decade. This meant that the FS had much less funding for conduct- i ng non-f uel-related forest management activities i n 2003 than i n 1993. We were u nable to obt ai n dat a for earlier years; however, agency budget specialists i nter viewed st ated that budget decli nes began arou nd 1990. T he BLM field u nits received a smaller propor tion of fi re and f uel management dollars. Never theless, excludi ng fi re rehabilit ation and f uel management money, BLM u nit budgets still rose by 12 percent, providing additional money for accomplishing non-fi re-related forest management work. T he decli ne i n FS budgets bet ween 1993 and 2003 can largely be at t r ibuted to the decli ne i n timber receipts du r i ng the per iod. Although BLM timber sales also decreased du r - i ng the decade, BLM f u ndi ng was not as heavily dependent on trust and permanent operating accounts derived from timber receipts. T he BLM u nits lost st aff despite budget i n - creases, but r isi ng f u ndi ng levels allowed them g reater flex - ibilit y i n selecti ng among potential means of accomplishi ng needed work (such as par t nerships, Jobs-i n-the-Woods, cont racti ng). T he BLM managers also had relatively wide latit ude i n di recti ng i nvest ments among prog rams withi n the Oregon and Califor nia rail road lands (O&C) alloca - tion, which composed the major it y of the BLM Plan-area u nit budgets. I n the early 1990s, BLM realig ned about 20 percent of the O&C f u ndi ng away f rom timber management activities and toward other forest management activities more consistent with Plan goals (Pr iebe 2004). Although O&C f u ndi ng decli ned slightly du r i ng the per iod, BLM f u ndi ng was not as sensitive to t r ust and per manent operat - i ng accou nts der ived f rom timber receipts as FS allocations were. Although O&C f u ndi ng decli ned du r i ng the per iod, allocations to all other BLM prog ram accou nts g rew. T hese i ncreases were mostly at t r ibut able to additional f u ndi ng 15 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume I: Key Findings for the timber and recreation pipeli nes, for the forest health i nitiative, for fi re rehabilit ation and f uel management, and for the management of land and resources. Procurement Contracting for Ecosystem Management Work Procu rement cont racti ng is another way i n which agencies create jobs that local com mu nities potentially benefit f rom. Although cont ract work associated with i ntensive timber management (forest r y ser vices) was expected to decrease u nder the Plan, cont ract work i n ecosystem restoration was expected to i ncrease, helpi ng to offset job loss i n both the forest r y ser vices and timber sectors. T his expect ation was not met. Although there was a propor tional shif t i n work t y pes away f rom labor-i nten - sive cont racti ng associated with i ntensive timber manage - ment and toward tech nical and equipment-i ntensive work associated with ecosystem restoration, this shif t occu r red i n the context of an overall decli ne i n cont ract spendi ng. T his decli ne can be at t r ibuted to a reduction i n FS procu re - ment cont racti ng. T he BLM cont ract spendi ng remai ned fai rly const ant bet ween the early 1990s and the early 2000s, averagi ng just u nder $20 million per year. Forest Ser vice spending declined throughout the period, dropping from $103 million i n 1991 to $33 million i n 2002. We at t r ibute these differences i n agency cont ract spendi ng pr imar ily to the differences i n agency budget trends during this period. The FS did not have the money to invest in procurement contracting, and local manag- ers sometimes chose to accomplish work i n-house to keep people employed, rather than to invest in contract- ing. Thus, FS procurement contracting did not help offset economic decli ne i n the Plan area du r i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan. Added to this problem, the Plan did not cont ai n adequate provisions for t argeti ng local com mu nit y resi - dents with procu rement cont racti ng oppor t u nities. Only about one- quar ter of the agencies? cont ract value i n the early 1990s and the early 2000s was awarded to cont rac - tors f rom r u ral com mu nities (com mu nities havi ng popu - lations u nder 5,000), though the value awarded by the BLM i ncreased to one-thi rd of the tot al by the 2000s. From the local perspective, com mu nit y case-st udy re - sults i ndicate that anticipated jobs i n forest restoration never really mater ialized. Procu rement cont ract spendi ng for eco - system management on the four case forests varied annually and was d r iven i n par t by nat u ral disasters. T here was an overall decli ne i n cont ract spendi ng bet ween 1990 and 2002 on all fou r case forests, rangi ng f rom 15 to 78 percent. Only a handf ul of case-st udy com mu nit y residents repor ted that they or people they k new had obt ai ned agency cont racts to do forest restoration work. T hose that had, viewed them as a supplement al, rather than a st able, for m of i ncome owi ng to thei r sporadic nat u re and the shor t season of work ent ailed. Ou r fi ndi ngs i ndicate that to date, there have not been suf - ficient resou rces to provide f ull-time, year-rou nd employ - ment i n forest restoration work on the case-st udy forests for more than a few people. Moreover, cont ract work is of ten li n ked to nat u ral disasters such as fi res and floods, which are u npredict able. Community Effects of Plan Implementation W hat were the effects of this decli ni ng flow of socioeco - nomic benefits f rom federal forests on r u ral com mu nities and economies? Ou r analysis of U.S. census i ndicators re - vealed that 40 percent of the com mu nities withi n 5 miles of federal forest lands decreased i n socioeconomic well- bei ng bet ween 1990 and 2000, 37 percent i ncreased, and 23 percent showed lit tle change. T he census dat a do not reveal why, however. We monitored a sample of case-st udy com mu nities, and i nter viewed com mu nit y members i n order to identif y these effects. Socioeconomic well-bei ng scores rose i n t wo, d ropped i n fou r, and showed lit tle change i n six of the com mu nities bet ween 1990 and 2000. As was expected, not all com mu nities were affected the same way, or to the same extent, by the Plan. All of the case-st udy com mu nities we monitored showed changes over the last t wo decades. Although timber was one of the major economic sectors i n all of these com mu nities i n the 1970s and 1980s, the timber sector had become mi nor or negligible i n many of these com mu nities by 2003. Federal forest management policy was just one 16 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. I of many var iables shapi ng the nat u re of change i n these com mu nities, and the extent of its effects var ied consider - ably. T hese effects depended on the relative st reng th of the timber sector i n each com mu nit y arou nd 1990, the extent to which wood products har vested on federal forest lands suppor ted that sector, and the deg ree to which local resi - dents depended on FS employ ment. For example, the timber sector was an impor t ant component of the economy i n the Qui nault I ndian Nation i n 1990, but t r ibal and pr ivate forest lands largely suppor ted that sector. Hence i nter viewees from that community did not report any major effects from changes in federal forest management policy. In contrast, com mu nities such as Quilcene, Upper Hood R iver Valley, and the Mid-K lamath par ticipated heavily i n the wood products i ndust r y u ntil the late 1980s. Loggers worked mai nly on national forest lands, and local mills obt ai ned most of thei r wood f rom federal forests. T hese com mu nities were hard hit by the reduced federal timber supplies. Although the timber i ndust r y was of secondar y impor t ance i n the Villages of Mou nt Hood i n 1990, many FS employees lived there. T he decli ne i n agency jobs associated with reductions i n FS timber prog rams st rongly affected the Villages of Mou nt Hood and several other case com mu ni - ties, just as the loss of timber sector jobs did. T he Plan was not the only var iable causi ng the Pacific Nor thwest timber economy to change. T he timber sector i n some com mu nities ? such as G reater Coos Bay?had been decli ni ng si nce the early 1980s because of an economic re - cession, domestic and international competition, changes in market demand for wood products, i ndust r y rest r uct u r i ng, mechanization and tech nological advances, and envi ron - ment al reg ulations ? and the Plan added to these pressu res. Other case-st udy com mu nities, such as the Mid-K lamath, seemed to be relatively buffered f rom the changes that af - fected the i ndust r y du r i ng the 1980s. I nter viewees there perceived the halt of federal timber production arou nd 1990 as the begi n ni ng of the end. Some com mu nities were sust ai ned th rough the t ransi - tional per iod of the 1990s by havi ng a subst antial ag r icul - t u ral sector, bei ng near a major t ranspor t ation cor r idor, or bei ng close to a popular recreation and tou r ism desti nation. Other com mu nities exper ienced an i n flu x of reti rees, com - muters, mobile or self- employed workers, second-home ow ners, im mig rants, or low- and fi xed-i ncome populations. Some that had been goods and ser vices centers expanded thei r role as regional centers. A nd t r ibes, where present, played an impor t ant role i n cont r ibuti ng to com mu nit y development th rough the g row th of t r ibal busi nesses, administration, and social and environmental services. Tr ibal forest lands also helped sust ai n local timber economies in some areas. Assistance With Long-Term Economic Development and Diversification Did Plan mitigation measu res assist with the t ransition, and promote long-ter m economic development and diver - sification i n com mu nities affected by cutbacks i n federal timber har vests? Procu rement cont racti ng for forest res - toration was not an effective mitigation measu re at the re - gional scale, as discussed above. T he Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative and safet y-net pay ments to cou nt y gover n ments were the pr imar y mitigation measu res i n - tended to help with the economic t ransition. Northwest Economic Adjustment Initiative T he Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative ( N EA I) had five objectives: provide im mediate relief for dist ressed timber com mu nities; create an envi ron ment for long-ter m economic development; develop new mechanisms for de - liver i ng assist ance; emphasize par t nerships with st ates and the cr itical role of local gover n ments; and emphasize the use of per for mance-based st andards for f u ndi ng. T he BLM and the FS had three primary community economic assis- t ance prog rams desig ned to provide shor t-ter m relief and long-ter m economic diversification th rough the I nitiative: Jobs-i n-the-Woods (J ITW ), Ru ral Com mu nit y Assist ance (RCA), and the Old- G row th Diversification Fu nd (OGDF). T hese prog rams were relatively small i n ter ms of tot al i ni - tiative dollars. Regardi ng shor t-ter m mitigations, many view the i ni - tiative prog rams as too lit tle, too late. Timber i ndust r y re - st r uct u r i ng and timber supply changes were occu r r i ng, to a large deg ree, before the i nitiative dollars became available 17 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume I: Key Findings i n 1994. T he OGDF provided loans to ret ai n existi ng busi - nesses, and was viewed as successf ul. Local jobs for eco - system management activities were t argeted th rough J ITW, and some shor t-ter m jobs were created. T he RCA prog ram provided grants to the private sector for projects related to forest management, which helped. T he i nitiative did not deliver on agency and public expect ations to provide im - mediate help to displaced timber workers and thei r families, however, and many believe that the dollars that were avail - able were out of propor tion to the mag nit ude of the effects. Regardi ng long-ter m mitigations, it can be arg ued that it is too soon to assess the success of the i nitiative?s long-ter m economic diversification projects. T he OGDF, a revolving loan fund providing grants and loans to small busi nesses to promote expansion and diversification, still provides a long-ter m sust ai nable sou rce of capit al for re - sou rce-related busi nesses and is considered highly success - f ul. Com mu nit y-based plan ni ng was a focus of the RCA prog ram. Projects to improve com mu nit y capacit y? such as leadership development, com mu nit y-based plan ni ng, and tech nical assist ance to help com mu nities w r ite g rants ? were aimed at helpi ng com mu nities help themselves. I n reviews of the i nitiative these ?sof t i nf rast r uct u re? projects were considered vit al to the success of i nitiative projects. T he RCA prog ram also suppor ted economic diversification, f u ndi ng projects such as market and feasibilit y st udies and busi ness plans; whether these were generally successf ul is debat able. T he i nitiative also helped com mu nities and busi nesses by f u ndi ng hard i nf rast r uct u re development projects (such as busi ness parks and water and sewer systems). Although many com mu nities have improved thei r i nf rast r uct u re and are bet ter poised for economic development opportunities, these opportunities had yet to mater ialize i n most of the com mu nities we st udied. Jobs-i n-the-Woods has been character ized as the most complex component of the i nitiative because it re - qui res ?simult aneous and i n novative consideration of forest ecosystem management, work force development and employment, community economic needs, interagency coordi nation (withi n the federal gover n ment), and federal- nonfederal collaboration with relevant par t ners? (Tuch man n et al. 1996: 201). T he BLM J ITW prog ram met with such success that it persisted as an an nual budget appropr iation. Although BLM f u ndi ng for com mu nit y economic assist ance th rough J ITW d ropped somewhat when the N EA I ended, it has been st able si nce 1999. Despite the BLM?s successes, to many, J ITW has been the g reatest disappoi nt ment of all of the components of the i nitiative because public expect a - tions regardi ng the qualit y and nu mber of jobs that would be created to offset job losses i n the timber i ndust r y were never realized. A nother objective of the i nitiative was to desig n new ways for federal agencies to conduct busi ness i n collabora - tion with nonfederal and com mu nit y par t ners. T he Com - mu nit y Economic Revit alization Teams (CERTs) developed organizational g rou nd r ules and i ncor porated ?one-stop - shop? and ?lead agency? tech niques to st reamli ne prog ram deliver y. Collaborative g roups identified, pr ior itized, and g reatly leveraged available f u nds. T he RCA prog ram pro - vided technical assistance to small, remote, unincorporated com mu nities to enable them to organize and compete for f u ndi ng. T he prog ram also had the flexibilit y for managers to provide ?gap? f u ndi ng for identified cr itical projects to fill i n where other agencies could n?t. Cr iter ia for prog ram f u ndi ng emphasized new and sust ai nable resou rce-based busi nesses and jobs i n resou rce- dependent com mu nities. T he J ITW and RCA prog ram managers developed exper - tise withi n the agencies to coordi nate and i nteg rate com - plex com mu nit y and agency needs and com mu nit y-based programs. Assessments of the innovative aspects of these prog rams i n promoti ng collaboration bet ween agencies and partners to deliver assistance rate them as highly successful. T he 12 case-st udy com mu nities we monitored received vastly different amounts of initiative money. Many of the case com mu nities repor ted benefiti ng f rom i nitiative- supported projects, particularly those involving physical in- f rast r uct u re development. T hese did not always succeed i n at t racti ng new busi nesses or i ndust r ies, however. It is too soon to tell what the long-ter m benefits of some of these projects will be. Other successes were repor ted i n the areas of com mu nit y plan ni ng and small busi ness loans. I nitiative- suppor ted effor ts to develop alter nate wood products sectors that use federal timber have largely failed to mater ialize yet. A nd, the major it y of com mu nit y members we i nter viewed 18 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. I believed the i nitiative had done lit tle to help displaced timber workers. One exception was the Coos Bay J ITW prog ram, which was viewed as a success, though it created only a few jobs. W hat the i nitiative largely failed to do was to create sust ai nable local jobs du r i ng the fi rst 10 years of the Plan comparable to the nu mber and qualit y of those lost be - cause of reductions i n federal timber har vest. Economic shif ts evolve over long per iods, and expecti ng new jobs to be created i nst antly is u n reasonable. Moreover, many r u ral resou rce-based com mu nities have relatively slow g row th and are subject to fluct uations owi ng to national and i nter - national economic forces beyond thei r cont rol. Although the transition is not over, the initiative is. A focus on local job creation as a long-ter m goal is still needed i n the con - text of new prog rams and sou rces of money. Forest Ser vice funding for community economic assistance has returned to about what it was before the Plan. T he J ITW and RCA prog rams are no longer f u nded by Cong ress, the ad mi n - ist ration, or the agency. A nu mber of new prog rams are emergi ng, however, with many of the same long-ter m objec - tives and com mu nit y-based, collaborative desig ns cont ai ned i n i nitiative-suppor ted prog rams. Exper ience implementi ng the N EA I resulted i n lessons that can be applied to f ut u re effor ts by federal gover n ment agencies to provide com mu - nity economic assistance. Payments to Counties T he Om nibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 and the Secu re Ru ral Schools and Com mu nit y Self-Deter mi nation Act of 2000 ? desig ned to st abilize pay ments to cou nt y gov - er n ments i n the face of decli ni ng revenues f rom the timber receipts generated by federal forest lands ?have generally mitigated the effects of decli ni ng timber receipts. T he i ni - tial pay ments-to - cou nties legislation (the Om nibus Budget Reconciliation Act) generally mitigated Plan effects for the 48 cou nties covered by the legislation. T he cou nties i n other par ts of the Plan area (i n easter n Washi ng ton, Oregon, and other par ts of Califor nia) did not fare as well u ntil the Secu re Ru ral Schools Act extended these pay ments to all of the eligible cou nties i n the region and across the United States. Some of the i ntent behi nd the Om nibus Budget Recon - ciliation Act of 1993 was to provide a t ransition to a lower rate of assist ance. T he t ransitional path dow nward was re - placed by a much higher rate of revenue suppor t u nder the Secu re Ru ral Schools Act. T he goal of the pay ments to cou nties legislation was clearly met. The legislation has replaced past dependence on timber-har vest revenues and has generally mitigated the lost revenues associated with the decli nes i n federal timber har vest i n the region. It is not k now n how the owl safet y- net pay ments have affected overall cou nt y fi nanci ng. I n the shor t ter m, a g uaranteed amou nt is li kely to have a st abiliz - i ng effect. T he Secu re Ru ral Schools legislation, however, su nsets on September 30, 2006. T he long-ter m st abilit y of the payments is uncertain. Without new cong ressional action, cou nties i n the Plan area will need to add ress a projected $270 million i n rev - enue shor tfall. Cong ressional hear i ngs are expected i n 2005 to add ress the possibilit y of reauthor ization of the Secu re Ru ral Schools legislation. Ru ral com mu nities conti nue to rely on st abilized pay ments to cou nties. T he lack of secu re funding for schools, transportation, and other social servic- es produces a great deal of uncertainty in communities that depend on this income, especially given a climate of declin- ing revenues from other sources. Land management agen- cies do not have decisionmaking authority over legislation on pay ments to cou nties. Long-ter m legislation to add ress the issue would be a major cont r ibution, however; the Forest Cou nties Pay ment Com mit tee has developed recom menda - tions for what such legislation might cont ai n (ht t p://w w w. cou nt y pay ments.gov/ ). Plan Effects on Community Well-Being Ru ral com mu nities and economies u nder went both posi - tive and negative changes du r i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan. T he Plan cont r ibuted to negative changes i n some com mu nities, pr imar ily because of reduced federal tim - ber har vests and the loss of associated jobs and i ncome, subst antial decreases i n the nu mber of agency jobs, and declines in procurement contract spending. The Plan may have cont r ibuted to positive changes i n some com mu nities by en hanci ng nat u ral amenit y values on federal forest lands 19 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume I: Key Findings such as nat u ral-look i ng landscapes, recreation oppor t u - nities, older forest habit at, fish, and clean water. Nat u ral amenities at t ract tou r ists, new residents, and busi nesses that stimulate local economic development. We do not have enough evidence to assess the Plan?s cont r ibutions to posi - tive change, however. Nor could we evaluate to what extent recreation was sust ai ni ng com mu nities that were for merly timber based. I nter view results i ndicated that recreation and amenit y values played a role i n d rawi ng new residents to com mu nities arou nd federal forests that lost timber workers and FS employees i n the 1990s. Recreation and tou r ism also played an impor t ant and evolvi ng role i n cont r ibuti ng to the economies of some com mu nities. Several i nter viewees f rom the case com mu nities viewed recreation and nat u re-based tou r ism as the nat u ral-resou rce-based sectors holdi ng the greatest potential for local economic development, and several com mu nities are work i ng with the agencies to promote recreation and tourism locally. One Plan-related change made apparent f rom the local- scale monitor i ng results was that com mu nities are fi ndi ng it i ncreasi ngly dif ficult to sust ai n themselves i n a man ner that links their local economy and culture to the natural resources that surround them, and to federal forest lands i n par ticular. Although some com mu nities still had a wood products i ndust r y, federal timber played a mi nor, if any, role i n suppor ti ng that i ndust r y. Many i nter viewees repor ted that the lack of forest-based, family-wage jobs i n thei r com - mu nities was one of the biggest issues of concer n relati ng to federal forest management. And the fact that a declining nu mber of com mu nit y members make a livi ng f rom federal forest lands means that relations bet ween local residents and FS and BLM person nel are becomi ng more dist ant. Some local people have been less i nterested i n forest management issues. Collaboration T he monitor i ng team i nvestigated whether relations bet ween federal land management agencies and local com mu nities, and agency- citizen collaboration i n forest management improved u nder the Plan. We reviewed the literat u re on collaboration i n adaptive management areas (A M As) and provi ncial advisor y com mit tees (PACs). We also i nter viewed forest employees and com mu nit y mem - bers i n the case-st udy areas about collaborative relations bet ween the FS, the BLM, and the public. Adaptive management areas represent a sig nificant agency i nvest ment i n collaborative i n novation, mak i ng up 6 percent of the Plan area i n subregions k now n to be social - ly and economically affected by decli ni ng timber har vest. A pr imar y social objective of the A M As was to provide oppor t u nities for the agencies, citizens, com mu nities, landow ners, and other local g roups to work together and develop innovative approaches to forest management that would help sust ai n forest com mu nities ( USDA and USDI 1994: D - 4). Timber har vest u nder the Plan is expected only i n the mat r ix land allocation and some A M As. T he litera - ture reports that most of the AMAs have failed to meet Plan expect ations for collaboration. I nitial collaboration with local com mu nities showed promise. T he potential for success was dimi nished early i n the per iod, however, when adjudication and the Federal Advisor y Com mit tee Act (FACA) char ter i ng forced federal par ticipants to withd raw temporar ily, severely affecti ng lo - cal t r ust i n this new for m of collaboration. I n some cases, con flict among polar ized i nterests also caused collaboration to collapse, forci ng federal of ficials to work with disparate g roups rather than i n a u nified par t nership. I nter nal agency issues f u r ther impai red the abilit y of A M A managers to collaborate effectively, i ncludi ng a lack of demonst rated, long-ter m agency com mit ment to A M A st af fi ng and f u ndi ng; a lack of i ncentives to g uide and suppor t local A M A managers i n shoulder i ng r isk; and an u nwilli ng ness or i nabilit y among the reg ulator y agencies to consider localized adaptive management? and its potential for small-scale exper iment al failu res ? as a legitimate ap - proach for improvi ng larger-scale conser vation k nowledge and tech niques. Despite the cu mbersome membership requi rements also imposed upon them by FACA, PACs have been more successf ul i n engagi ng local com mu nities. Because of this success, these com mit tees were rechar tered i n 2003 and continue to operate. They have provided a forum for ongoing, multiparty discussion of forest management is- sues among decisionmakers and local stakeholders. In this 20 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. I capacit y, they represent an impor t ant step for ward over project-scale ?scopi ng? as defi ned u nder the 1969 National Envi ron ment al Policy Act ( N EPA). T hey have also been successf ul i n completi ng regionwide, multipar t y compli - ance monitoring. Provincial advisory committee monitor- i ng effor ts have f ul filled requi rements for implement ation monitoring under the Plan. Prog ress toward achievi ng the collaboration goal i n less for mal i nstit utional set ti ngs across all case-st udy forests and com mu nities was mixed. T he Plan has had di rect and i ndi rect, positive and negative effects on collaborative for - est stewardship on the case-st udy forests and com mu nities. T he Plan?s ecosystem focus and emphasis on i nteragency collaboration encou raged i nteractions among public and pr ivate landow ners and broadened the range of st akeholders and oppor t u nities for collaborative processes. A var iet y of g roups, together with forest agencies, are pooli ng resou rc - es ? such as time, labor, fi nances, and ideas ?to achieve mut ually held forest stewardship objectives. Faced with challenges of decreased budgets and st affs, the forests have been able to mai nt ai n viable, productive, and multibenefi - cial collaborative projects and prog rams. T he volu nteer prog rams are good examples of prog rams that are evolvi ng and seek i ng new collaborative oppor t u nities i n the face of ad mi nist rative and budget ar y const rai nts. Lower timber har vest rates and lower budgets and st aff, which have both di rect and i ndi rect ties to the Plan, have i n fluenced t rends i n collaboration i n t wo key yet paradoxi - cal ways. With decreasi ng hu man and fi nancial resou rces for forest management activities, the forests have expanded and developed par t nerships with g roups that share similar resou rce management goals. T he paradox is that, as budget decli nes ser ve as an i ncentive for i n novation and expansion of collaborative processes to achieve forest stewardship ob - jectives, they simultaneously constrain and potentially jeop- ardize collaborative effor ts. Agency i nter viewees expressed concern that reducing staff and resources has made manag- i ng collaborative processes more dif ficult. I ncreased diversit y and i n novation i n collaboration, however, has coi ncided with a decrease i n com mu nication and collaboration with a once-promi nent forest st akeholder, namely the timber com mu nit y. T he discon nect bet ween timber-based com mu nities and forest managers and how that would affect collaborative relations were u nanticipated consequences of reduci ng timber har vests u nder the Plan. I n general, collaborative activities with members of the case- st udy com mu nities were mi nimal, with some exceptions, such as t r ibal collaboratives. New con nections have yet to replace old timber ties i n some com mu nities. I nter viewees f rom for mer timber-based com mu nities tended to feel disassociated f rom, or u naware of, current forest policies and practices or they had little di rect concer n with forest management. A nd yet, some for mer timber-i ndust r y employees who remai ned i n thei r com mu nities felt that thei r sk ills, k nowledge, and exper i - ence in forest management could serve contemporary forest management practices but were not bei ng used. Other fac - tors that affected the participation of community residents i n collaborative resou rce management beyond the necessit y of a shared mutual interest or stake included shortages of residents with sk ills to do the work, residents with the time to participate, consistent players and participation, orga- nized g roups with resou rces, and residents who are st r ug - gling to make ends meet. Forest units appear to rely increasingly on partnerships, volu nteers, and collaborative forest stewardship effor ts to get thei r work done because they lack the budgets and st aff to accomplish the work themselves. T he success of these efforts depends on the capacity of communities to engage in them. Com mu nit y capacit y, i n t u r n, is par tially a f u nction of the presence of organized and active civic g roups, people with leadership sk ills, and so on. By providi ng local com - mu nities with forest benefits, agencies are buildi ng com - mu nit y capacit y. I n ret u r n, one payoff will be com mu nities that are more able and motivated to engage with forests to conduct forest stewardship activities and collaborative for - est management. If local residents see federal forests as a sou rce of com mu nit y benefit, ties will more li kely develop that can help communities and forests sustain one another. Some new collaborative mechanisms are achievi ng impor t ant successes and providi ng good models. A well- defi ned avenue for givi ng i nput related to decision mak i ng is a st rong i ncentive for com mu nit y members to begi n to ac - tively engage i n collaborative forest management and forest 21 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume I: Key Findings stewardship activities. Some models of collaboration that provide members of the public with resou rces (li ke money) and a decision mak i ng role (such as how to spend that mon - ey) to promote both forest and com mu nit y benefits seem to have st rong public suppor t and ser ve as good models for collaboration. Although they are relatively new, resou rce advisor y com mit tees provide one such model. Resou rce advisory committees receive money through Title II of the Secu re Ru ral Schools and Com mu nit y Self-Deter mi na - tion Act. As time and exper ience provide i nsight i nto thei r success, perhaps some lessons can be lear ned f rom them as to how to bet ter engage i n agency- citizen collaboration. Multipar t y monitor i ng, as conducted by PACs, is another potential model. Forest Management Values and Issues of Concern The forest management paradigm that prevailed in the Pacific Nor thwest followi ng World War II emphasized high-yield timber production by usi ng tech niques such as clearcut ti ng, removal of logs and snags, slash bu r ni ng, thi n - ni ng, and planti ng si ngle-species st ands on har vested areas (FEM AT 1993: II-2-3). T he agencies assu med that forests managed i n this way could be har vested on a sust ai ned- yield basis at 40 - to 80 -year i nter vals without negatively af - fecti ng other resou rces such as water qualit y, fish, soils, and wildlife. St udies conducted i n the 1970s and 1980s made it apparent that this approach to forest management was not goi ng to adequately protect the biodiversit y of late-succes - sional forests and associated aquatic ecosystems (FEM AT 1993: II-2-3). T he forest management paradig m embraced i n the 1990s u nder the Plan focuses on ecosystem management objectives that aim to sust ai n the u nderlyi ng ecological processes of the forest (Joh nson et al. 1993). Agencies are placing more emphasis on managing for forest restoration, recreation, and other noncom modit y values. Was this para - dig m shif t suppor ted by public at tit udes, beliefs, and values regardi ng forest management i n the Pacific Nor thwest, and do members of the public still suppor t this management approach today? A literat u re review we conducted of st udies that docu ment public views of forest management i n the Pacific Nor thwest bet ween 1990 and 2002 showed that the answer to both questions is ? yes.? Bet ween 1990 and 2002 there has been su r pr isi ngly lit tle change i n Pacific Nor thwest residents? views of how Pacific Nor thwest forests should be managed. T h roughout this per iod, research fi ndi ngs indicate that people support forest management to provide a broad set of multiple uses and both economic and envi ron - ment al benefits. Never theless, there has consistently been a pro - envi ron ment leani ng, with the major it y favor i ng envi ron ment al over economic management objectives when asked to make a choice bet ween them. Conti nued suppor t for timber production f rom federal forests has li kely been tied to a belief that the wood products i ndust r y is impor t ant to the regional economy and to concern for the health of r u ral com mu nities. W hereas place of residence was not fou nd to be a sig nificant factor i n fluenci ng people?s at ti - t udes, beliefs, and values about forest management pr ior to the Nor thwest Forest Plan, recent st udies fi nd that u rban residents tend to be pro - envi ron ment, with r u ral residents havi ng more evenly split views on forest management issues. T h roughout the st udy per iod, the belief that active forest management improves forest health has predominat- ed. However, clearcut ti ng has consistently been u npopular, and the major it y have favored old-g row th protection. For - est r y tech niques that are not i ntensive (such as thi n ni ng and selective har vesti ng) are favored by most people su r veyed. Have federal land managers been doi ng a good job of protecti ng the forest values and envi ron ment al qualities people care about u nder the Plan? Ou r literat u re review did not provide extensive evidence for answer i ng this question. T he evidence that does exist suggests that opi nion is fai rly evenly divided. Some people have favorable views of the job forest managers are doi ng, and others believe that forest managers need to improve their performance. We i nter viewed com mu nit y residents i n the 12 case- st udy com mu nities and asked them whether they believed the Plan had protected forest values and environmental qualities associated with late-successional, old-g row th, and aquatic ecosystems. T hese i nter views showed that many local residents had sophisticated perceptions of complex ecological processes and relations. I nter views also showed 22 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. I that most com mu nit y members care deeply about nearby forests and thei r ecological i nteg r it y. Members of the public i nter viewed perceived that the Plan had had mixed results to date for forest protection. T he most positive Plan effects were believed to be as - sociated with the protection of aquatic ecosystems. Many i nter viewees com mented that decreases i n loggi ng, road decom missioni ng, the provisions of the aquatic conser va - tion strategy, the riparian reserve system, and the emphasis placed on watershed management and restoration u nder the Plan had protected and improved water qualit y. Some also perceived that fish populations had i ncreased. Most i nter viewees did not disti ng uish Plan effects on older forests from those on forest ecosystems more gen- erally. Although the Plan brought an end to earlier forest management practices that many considered ecologically dest r uctive, most people i nter viewed did not believe federal forests were cu r rently healthy. Li ke many Pacific Nor thwest residents su r veyed i n other st udies, they believed silvicul - t u ral activit y was necessar y for keepi ng forests healthy, and that not enough had occu r red du r i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan. T his led to concer ns about fi re, i nsects, and disease and to f r ust ration that needed forest work was not creati ng local jobs. Timber har vest, forest health, and forest-based jobs were among the biggest issues of concer n to community i nter viewees. T he other mai n issues of concer n were recreation and forest access, also tied to the issue of jobs. I nter viewees over whel mi ngly believed that the Plan had emphasized forest protection over com mu nit y well-bei ng. Yet most also believed that healthy forest ecosystems and healthy com mu nit y economies can and should be li n ked and that those li n ks are cu r rently weak. One of the foremost issues of concer n relati ng to forest management expressed by com mu nit y members i nter - viewed for this st udy was the lack of family-wage jobs i n thei r com mu nities, especially jobs that are tied to forest resources. Ou r monitor i ng results show that local com mu nities are i n some ways becomi ng less ?forest-based? as thei r economic ties to nearby forests change. Rather than bei ng a place of work for com mu nit y members, federal forests are evolving into places that attract tourists, recreationists, and amenit y mig rants, and passers-th rough who local residents hope will spend money i n thei r com mu nities. T he com mu - nities we monitored were becomi ng places of residence for people seek i ng the amenit y values they offer, but who com - mute or live elsewhere to make a livi ng, who no longer need to work, or who don?t work. You ng people were fi ndi ng it dif ficult to live i n the r u ral com mu nities they were raised i n because employ ment options were lack i ng. T hus, federal forest lands are becomi ng more backd rops to life i n r u ral communities and places to recreate around them, rather than sou rces of sust ai nable r u ral livelihoods ? and the character of these communities is changing. These changes are consistent with a broader t rend i n the A mer ican West, where r u ral loggi ng, ranchi ng, and far mi ng com mu nities are struggling to make a living off the land and to persist as a par t of sust ai nable, work i ng landscapes. Federal forest management policy was only one of several var iables that cont r ibuted to job loss i n the nat u ral-resou rce-based sectors of the st udy com mu nities. Never theless, ou r monitor i ng results i ndicate that i ncreas - i ng federal-forest-based employ ment oppor t u nities would make an impor t ant cont r ibution to com mu nit y well-bei ng. T he desi re for forest-based, family-wage jobs remai ns a top pr ior it y i n the case-st udy com mu nities, especially those not located near regional centers or u rban areas that provide commuting options. T he Plan aimed to provide ?? a sust ai nable level of hu man use of the forest resou rce while still meeti ng the need to mai nt ai n and restore the late-successional and old- g row th forest ecosystem? ( USDA and USDI 1994: 26). Ou r fi ndi ngs suggest that this goal has not been met f rom the hu man-use perspective, and that it remai ns one of the most important challenges of federal forest management today in the Plan area. Institutional Capacity T he FEM AT (1993) repor t recom mended that the u nits implementi ng the Plan be suppor ted with st able st af fi ng and budgets to suppor t the new approach to ecosystem management: 23 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume I: Key Findings Pendi ng additional fiscal analysis, we emphasize that the options selected should not be hastily coupled with reductions i n f u ndi ng and person - nel based on the i nappropr iate assu mption that ecosystem management is somehow cheaper than t raditional com modit y production-focused Plans (FEM AT 1993: V III- 41). T his recom mendation was not met for the FS. T hat BLM f u ndi ng rose and st af fi ng d ropped slightly du r i ng the fi rst decade, while FS f u ndi ng and st af fi ng d ropped by more than one-thi rd, provides an oppor t u nit y to exami ne differ - ences i n the i nstit utional capacit y of the agencies to be effective i n achievi ng the Plan?s socioeconomic goals. Regardi ng resou rce and recreation out puts, no im - portant differences emerged from the data regarding the production of predict able levels of timber, nontimber forest products, and recreation by the agencies, although the case- st udy results fou nd that the BLM was more successf ul than the FS i n developi ng new recreation oppor t u nities. Tim - ber sales and associated jobs and i ncome decli ned for both agencies. Other wise, the BLM was generally more effective than the FS i n providi ng socioeconomic benefits du r i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan. As descr ibed i n this volu me, agency job loss was much more severe for the FS than for the BLM (36 percent for the FS, 13 percent for the BLM). Nearly one- quar ter of the FS of fices i n the Plan area closed or sh ran k i n size with the loss of Forest Super visors and Dist r ict Rangers, while no BLM of fices closed or lost li ne of ficers. T he BLM procu rement cont racti ng held steady while FS cont racti ng decli ned 68 percent. T he BLM still mai nt ai ns a J ITW prog ram, while FS com mu nit y economic assist ance f u nds have ret u r ned to pre-Plan levels. Although many factors have li kely cont r ibuted to these differences, a d r ivi ng force behi nd these changes was dif - ferences i n agency budget t rends. T he BLM Plan-area u nit budgets i ncreased by 22 percent bet ween 1993 and 2003 (while tot al agency appropr iations for BLM rose 79 percent at the national scale). Meanwhile, FS Plan-area u nit budgets decreased 35 percent (while tot al FS appropr iations rose 41 percent at the national scale). T he Pacific Nor thwest Region (Region 6) had shar per decli nes i n both budget and st aff - i ng than did the Pacific Southwest Region (Region 5), with several Region 6 u nits losi ng 50 to 60 percent of thei r bud - gets and FTEs du r i ng this 10 -year per iod. T hese differences played an impor t ant role i n i n fluenci ng agency capacit y to provide com mu nit y benefits u nder the Plan. T his reduction in agency capacity occurred at the same time that the Plan added new and sometimes complicated procedu ral and ana - ly tical requi rements that both agencies had to comply with i n u nder t ak i ng projects on the forests. T hese new requi re - ments used resources that the agencies might have invested i n other ways. Local-scale monitor i ng fou nd that the BLM dist r ict i n ou r sample ? Coos Bay?was able to i nvest i n ecosystem management activities alig ned with Plan goals (such as habit at restoration, recreation, fish and wildlife, and envi - ron ment al education), while the timber and roads prog rams decli ned. If the other fou r u nits are similar, BLM u nits were prepared to undertake ecosystem management activities consistent with Plan goals and to i nvest i n prog rams and collaborative effor ts that would help provide local com mu - nities with socioeconomic benefits. I n cont rast, the FS u nits we sampled had t rouble ac - complishing routine forest management activities and infrastructure maintenance under the Plan, much less providi ng socioeconomic benefits to com mu nities. I nter - viewees com monly identified budget and st af fi ng shor tfalls as cr itical factors limiti ng thei r abilit y to meet Plan objec - tives. Although FS managers t r ied to implement the Plan?s measu res and to achieve Plan goals with thei r subst antially reduced resources, they had limited success. Many commu- nit y i nter viewees ack nowledged the FS effor ts to meet Plan goals and recog nized that they were u nable to do so because of institutional constraints. Future Monitoring We fi nd that the Plan goals are still relevant and are con - sistent with the broader missions and st rategic goals of the FS and the BLM, although some could be reworded. We also fi nd that the ROD evaluation question that has received most of the socioeconomic monitor i ng prog ram?s at tention 24 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. I to date ?A re local com mu nities and economies exper ienc - i ng positive or negative changes that may be associated with federal forest management?? could be revised. We recom mend focusi ng monitor i ng on the li n ks bet ween land management agencies, federal forests, and rural communi- ties and economies that produce positive outcomes for com mu nit y well-bei ng and forest ecosystem health. Acknowledgments Many i ndividuals cont r ibuted to the development and implement ation of this monitor i ng prog ram and to analyz - i ng and w r iti ng up the results. Most impor t ant have been the members of the core monitor i ng team. One member not listed as an author on this report is Lynnae Sutton (Resou rce I nfor mation Specialist, USDA Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation, Por tland, OR). A nu mber of people also cont r ibuted by helpi ng us obt ai n the quantit ative dat a that for m the basis of the Par t II analysis. Fay Shon ( USDA Forest Ser vice Region 6) st ands out among them; the many others are ack nowledged by chapter. We would li ke to than k Dale Hom (Forest Super visor, Oly mpic National Forest), Gar y Larsen (Forest Super visor, Mou nt Hood National Forest), Peg Boland (Forest Super vi - sor, K lamath National Forest), and Sue R ichardson (Dist r ict Manager, Coos Bay BLM Dist r ict) for thei r per mission and support to conduct monitoring on and around the forests they manage. We would also li ke to than k the many em - ployees that work on these forests who cont r ibuted thei r time and thoughts by par ticipati ng i n i nter views and who helped us collect forest-level dat a. I n addition, we than k the com mu nit y members of the Qui nault I ndian Nation, Quilcene, the Lake Qui nault A rea, the Upper Hood R iver Valley, G reater Est acada, the Villages of Mou nt Hood f rom Br ighton to R hododend ron, G reater Reedspor t, G reater Coos Bay, G reater My r tle Poi nt, the Mid-K lamath, Scot t Valley, and But te Valley com mu nities who welcomed us and par ticipated i n i nter views to share thei r perspectives on the impacts of the Nor thwest Forest Plan on thei r com - munities. Members of the Nor thwest Forest Plan I nteragency Regional Monitor i ng Team, and Jon Mar ti n, Team Leader, provided i nvaluable moral suppor t, tech nical suppor t, and camaraderie throughout the process of monitoring and w r iti ng up this i nter pretive repor t. R ichard Hay nes ( USDA Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation) also provided full support in every aspect of the monitoring pro- g ram, as well as a g reat deal of i nsight regardi ng the histor y of the Nor thwest Forest Plan and socioeconomic processes i n the Pacific Nor thwest. Mar tha Brookes did a thorough and excellent job of editi ng earlier d raf ts of this docu ment. Ly n n St ar r also provided excellent editor ial assist ance i n prepar i ng the docu ment for fi nal publication. We are ex - t remely g ratef ul to Judy Mi kowsk i ( USDA Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation), who i nvested a g reat deal of time and care i n prepar i ng the fi nal product; and to R honda Mazza, who helped make fi nal editor ial changes. We than k nu merous Forest Ser vice and Bu reau of Land Management reviewers, and fou r exter nal peer reviewers for their thoughtful and constructive comments on earlier versions of this repor t. T hei r com ments sig nificantly helped improve the document. Metric Equivalents W hen you k now: Mult iply by: To find: Miles 1.609 K ilometers Acres .405 Hect ares Board feet, log scale .0045 Cubic meters Board feet, lu mber scale .0024 Cubic meters References Alegria, J.; Hyzer, M.; Mulder, B.; Schnoes, B.; Tolle, T. 1995. Guidance for implementation monitoring for management of habit at for late-successional and old- g row th-related species withi n the range of the nor ther n spot ted owl. Draf t. On file with: Regional Ecosystem Of fice, 333 SW Fi rst Avenue, Por tland, OR 97204. 25 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume I: Key Findings Clinton, W.J.; Gore, A., Jr. 1996. The Forest Plan for a sust ai nable economy and a sust ai nable envi ron ment. I n: Tuch man n, E.T.; Con naughton, K.P.; Freed man, L.E.; Mor iwak i, C.B. 1996. T he Nor thwest Forest Plan: a repor t to the President and Cong ress. Washi ng ton, DC: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Of fice of Forest r y and Economic Assist ance. 231?238. App. A. Danks, C. 2003. Com mu nit y-based stewardship: rei nvesti ng i n public forests and forest com mu nities. I n: Boyce, J.K.; Shelley, B.G., eds. Nat u ral assets: democratizi ng envi ron ment al ow nership. Covelo, CA: Island Press: 243 ?260. Danks, C.; Haynes, R.W. 2001. Socioeconomic research. I n: Hay nes, R.W.; Perez, G.E., tech. eds. Nor thwest Forest Plan research sy nthesis. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 498. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation: 52? 62. Donoghue, E.M. 2003. Delimiting communities in the Pacific Nor thwest. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR-570. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 51 p. Dwyer, W.L. 1994. Seat tle Audubon Societ y, et al. v. James Lyons, Assist ant Secret ar y of Ag r icult u re, et al. Order on motions for Su m mar y Judg ment R E 1994 Forest Plan. Seat tle, WA: U.S. Dist r ict Cou r t, Wester n Dist r ict of Washi ng ton. Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team [FEMAT]. 1993. Forest ecosystem management: an ecological, economic, and social assessment. Portland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re; U.S. Depar t ment of the I nter ior [et al.]. [I r reg ular pagi nation]. Harris, C.; McLaughlin, W.; Brown, G.; Becker, D.R. 2000. Ru ral com mu nities i n the i nland Nor thwest: an assessment of small rural communities in the interior and upper Colu mbia R iver basi ns. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 477. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 120 p. Haynes, R.W.; Grinspoon, E. [In press]. The socioeconomic implications of the Nor thwest Forest Plan. I n: Hay nes, R.W.; Bor man n, B.T.; Lee, D.C.; Mar ti n, J.R., tech. eds. Nor thwest Forest Plan ?the fi rst 10 years (1994 ?2003): sy nthesis of monitor i ng and research results. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 651. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. Chapter 5. Haynes, R.W.; Perez, G.E., tech. eds. 2001. Nor thwest Forest Plan research sy nthesis. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 498. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 130 p. Hemstrom, M.; Spies, T.; Palmer, C.; Kiester, R.; Teply, J.; McDonald, P.; Warbington, R. 1998. Late-successional and old-g row th forest effectiveness monitor i ng plan for the Nor thwest Forest Plan. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 438. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 37 p. Johnson, N.K.; Crim, S.; Barber, K.; Howell, M.; Cadwell, C. 1993. Sust ai nable har vest levels and shor t- ter m timber sale options. Repor t of the Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team. 96 p. On file with: Susan Char nley, Por tland Forest r y Sciences Laborator y, P.O. Box 3890, Por tland, OR 97208. Kusel, J. 1996. Well-bei ng i n forest- dependent com mu nities. Par t I: A new approach. I n: Sier ra Nevada Ecosystem Project: fi nal repor t to Cong ress ? assessments and scientific basis for management options. Davis, CA: Universit y of Califor nia, Centers for Water and Wildland Resou rces: 361?374. Vol. 2. Lint, J.; Noon, B.; Anthony, R.; Forsman, E.; Raphael, M.; Collopy, M.; Starkey, E. 1999. Nor ther n spot ted owl effectiveness monitor i ng plan for the Nor thwest Forest Plan. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 440. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 43 p. 26 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. I Madsen, S.; Evans, D.; Hamer, T.; Henson, P.; Miller, S.; Nelson, S.K.; Roby, D.; Stapanian, M. 1999. Marbled mu r relet effectiveness monitor i ng plan for the Nor thwest Forest Plan. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 439. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 51 p. Mulder, B.; Alegria, J.; Czaplewski, R.; Ringold, P; Tolle, T. 1995. Effectiveness monitor i ng: an i nteragency prog ram for the Nor thwest Forest Plan with an emphasis on late-successional forest, nor ther n spot ted owl, marbled mu r relet, su r vey and manage, and r ipar ian and aquatic. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Service and U.S. Department of the Interior, Bu reau of Land Management [et al.]; repor t; Monitor i ng Desig n G roup, I ntergover n ment al Advisor y Com mit tee. 51 p. + appendices. Mulder, B.; Noon, B.; Spies, T.; Raphael, M.; Palmer, C.; Olsen, A.; Reeves, G.; Welsh, H. 1999. The strategy and design of the effectiveness monitoring program for the Nor thwest Forest Plan. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 437. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 138 p. Priebe, D. 2004. Personal com mu nication. Budget of ficer, BLM Oregon St ate Of fice, 1515 SW Fif th, P.O. Box 2965, Por tland, OR 97208. Reeves, G.; Hohler, D.; Larsen, D.; Busch, D.; Kratz, K.; Reynolds, K.; Stein, K.; Atzet, T.; Hays, P.; Tehan, M. 2004. Effectiveness monitor i ng for the aquatic and r ipar ian component of the Nor thwest Forest Plan: concept ual f ramework and options. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR-577. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 71 p. Richardson, C.W. 1996. St abilit y and change i n forest- based com mu nities: a selected bibliog raphy. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR-366. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 36 p. Stankey, G.H.; Clark, R.N. 1992. Social aspects of new perspectives i n forest r y: a problem analysis. Milford, PA: G rey Towers Press. 33 p. Tuchmann, E.T.; Connaughton, K.P.; Freedman, L.E.; Moriwaki, C.B. 1996. T he Nor thwest Forest Plan: a repor t to the President and Cong ress. Washi ng ton, DC: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Of fice of Forest r y and Economic Assist ance. 253 p. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA FS]. 2000. Forest Service roadless area conservation fi nal envi ron ment al impact st atement. Washi ng ton, DC. 407 p. Vol. 1. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management [USDA and USDI]. 1994. Record of decision for amend ments to Forest Ser vice and Bu reau of Land Management plan ni ng docu ments withi n the range of the nor ther n spot ted owl. [Place of publication u n k now n]. 74 p. [ plus at t ach ment A: st andards and g uideli nes]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management [USDA and USDI]. 2002. Tr ibal monitor i ng u nder the Nor thwest Forest Plan. I nteragency executive let ter. ht t p://w w w.reo.gov/. Warren, D.D. 2003. Production, prices, employment, and t rade i n Nor thwest forest i ndust r ies, all quar ters 2001. Resou r. Bull. PN W-R B-239. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 171 p. Pacific Northwest Research Station Web site http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw Telephone (503) 808-2592 Publication requests (503) 808-2138 FAX (503) 808-2130 E-mail pnw_pnwpubs@fs.fed.us Mailing address Publications Distribution Pacific Northwest Research Station P.O. Box 3890 Portland, OR 97208-3890 U.S. Depar tment of A griculture Pacific Nor thwest Research Station 333 SW First Avenue P.O. Box 3890 Por tland, OR 97208 -3890 Of ficial Busines s Penalt y for Private Use, $300 Northwest Forest PlaN THE FIRST 10 YEARS (1994?2003) Pacific Nor thwest Research Station Forest Ser vice United States Depar tment of A griculture General Technical Repor t PNW- GTR- 649 Vol. II April 2006 socioeconomic Monitoring results Volume II: timber and Nontimber resources Susan Charnley Author Susan Charnley is a research social scientist, Forestry Sciences Laboratory, P.O. Box 3890, Portland, OR 97208. Cover photographs: (left) Bob Szaro; (upper right) Erika Mark McFarlane, (lower right) USDA Forest Service. The Forest Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture is dedicated to the principle of multiple use management of the Nations forest resources for sustained yields of wood, water, forage, wildlife, and recreation. Through forestry research, cooperation with the States and private forest owners, and management of the national forests and national grasslands, it strivess directed by Congresso provide increasingly greater service to a growing Nation. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individuals income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDAs TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Socioeconomic Monitoring Results Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources Susan Charnley Northwest Forest PlanThe First 10 Years (19942003): Socioeconomic Monitoring Results Susan Charnley, Technical Coordinator U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Pacific Nor thwest Research Station Por tland, Oregon General Technical Report PNW-GTR-649 Vol. II April 2006 ii Abstract Charnley, Susan. 2006. Socioeconomic monitoring results. Vol. II: Timber and non- timber resou rces. I n: Char nley, S., tech. coord. Nor thwest Forest Plan ?the fi rst 10 years (1994 ?2003): Socioeconomic monitor i ng results. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 649. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 74 p. One of the evaluation questions posed in the Northwest Forest Plan (the Plan) record of decision (ROD) concerns use levels of natural resources: Are predictable levels of timber and nontimber resources available and being produced? To answer this question, Vol- ume II of the socioeconomic monitoring report analyzes trends in Forest Service (FS) and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) data for timber harvest, special forest prod- ucts, livestock g razi ng, mi neral ext raction, and recreation, as specified i n the ROD. T he answer to the evaluation question differs by resource area. The level of timber produced did not meet the probable sale quantit y volu mes anticipated du r i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan, nor were timber sales produced at predictable levels. Trends for special forest products were mixed, and differed by agency. G razi ng decli ned on FS land du r i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan, and dat a i ndicate that g razi ng also decli ned on BLM land du r i ng the period. For the FS, the number of mineral leases was stable; there was a decline in locatable minerals activity; and the volume of salable minerals produced dropped. Some kinds of recreation opportunities decreased, some remained stable, and some increased. Keywords: Northwest Forest Plan, socioeconomic monitoring, timber, special forest products, grazing, minerals, recreation. iii Preface T his repor t is one of a set of repor ts produced on this 10 -year an niversar y of the Nor thwest Forest Plan (the Plan). The collection of reports attempts to answer questions about the effectiveness of the Plan based on new monitoring and research results. The set includes a series of status and trends reports, a synthesis of all regional monitoring and research results, a report on interagency information management, and a summary report. T he st at us and t rends repor ts focus on est ablishi ng baseli nes of i nfor mation f rom 1994, when the Plan was approved, and repor ti ng change over the 10 -year per iod. T he st at us and trends series includes reports on late-successional and old-growth forests, northern spotted owl population and habitat, marbled murrelet population and habitat, watershed condition, government-to-government tribal relationships, socioeconomic conditions, and monitoring of project implementation under Plan standards and guidelines. The synthesis report addresses questions about the effectiveness of the Plan by using the status and trends results and new research. It focuses on the validity of the Plan as- sumptions, differences between expectations and what actually happened, the certainty of these fi ndi ngs, and fi nally, considerations for the f ut u re. T he sy nthesis repor t is organized in two parts: Part Iintroduction, context, synthesis, and summaryand Part II socioeconomic implications, older forests, species conservation, the aquatic conservation strategy, and adaptive management and monitoring. T he repor t on i nteragency i nfor mation management identifies issues and recom mends solutions for resolving data and mapping problems encountered during the preparation of the set of monitoring reports. Information management issues inevitably surface during analyses that require data from multiple agencies covering large geographic areas. The goal of that report is to improve the integration and acquisition of interagency data for the next comprehensive report. The socioeconomic status and trends report is published in six volumes. Volume I of the repor t cont ai ns key fi ndi ngs. Volu me II (this volu me) add resses the evaluation question, Are predictable levels of timber and nontimber resources available and being produced? The focus of Volume III is the evaluation question, Are local communities and econo- mies experiencing positive or negative changes that may be associated with federal forest management? Volume IV assesses the Plan goal of promoting agency-citizen collaboration in forest management. Volume V reports on public values regarding federal forest man- agement i n the Pacific Nor thwest. Volu me V I provides a histor y of the Nor thwest Forest Plan socioeconomic monitoring program, and a discussion of potential directions for the program. iv Summary One of the evaluation questions posed in the Northwest Forest Plan (the Plan) record of decision (ROD) concerns use levels of natural resources: Are predictable levels of timber and nontimber resou rces available and bei ng produced? ( USDA and USDI 1994b: E-9). To answer this question, Volume II of the socioeconomic monitoring report analyzes trends in Forest Service (FS) and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) data for timber harvest, special forest products, livestock grazing, mineral extraction, and recreation, as specified i n the ROD. Volu me II also cont ai ns an evaluation of agency prog ress toward meeting one of the Plans socioeconomic goals. As stated by President Clinton, this goal was to produce a predictable and sustainable level of timber sales and nontimber re- sou rces that will not deg rade or dest roy the envi ron ment ? ( USDA and USDI 1994b: 3). The monitoring questions and indicators monitored for each resource were the following: Resource Monitoring question Indicators monitored Timber (1) Du r i ng the fi rst decade of the Volu me of timber offered for sale Plan, did the agencies produce the probable sale quantity PSQ volume offered for sale (PSQ) volumes anticipated? (2) Have predictable levels of timber sales been produced under the Plan? Special forest Have predictable levels of Quantity of special forest products sold products special forest products been produced under the Plan? G razi ng Have predict able levels of Forest Ser vice: livestock grazing been No. of active allotments produced under the Plan? No. of active allotment acres No. of grazing permittees No. of authorized animal unit months (AUMs) Bureau of Land Management: No. of grazing leases No. of AUMs Minerals Have predictable levels of Forest Service: minerals been produced Leasables under the Plan? No. of leases of record Locatables No. of new mining claims located No. of new plans of operation approved Salables Volume removed Recreation Have predictable levels of Forest Service: recreation opportunities been Acres of wilderness produced under the Plan? Miles of roads Number of recreation residences v Ski area visitation Nu mber of out fit ter and g uide per mits Developed sites Visitor use Bureau of Land Management: Acres of wilderness Miles of roads Trail miles Developed sites Number of out fit ter and g uide per mits Visitation The monitoring team used quantitative monitoring data obtained mainly from agency databases to compare expected and actual trends in the production of resource and recre- ation oppor t u nities by the agencies du r i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan. T he team gathered qualitative monitoring data to investigate the role of the Plan in contributing to the observed t rends. T he fi ndi ngs are su m mar ized below. Plan Expectations Timber Du r i ng the fi rst 2 years of the Plan, timber sale volu mes would be less than PSQ. Af ter that, for the FS, the average annual timber volume offered for sale from matrix lands and adaptive management areas (AMAs) over the period of a decade would be consistent with PSQs. For the BLM, annual volume offered for sale from matrix and AMAs would be consistent with PSQs. Late-succesional forest in the matrix and the AMAs was expected to cont r ibute about 90 percent of the tot al PSQ volu me i n the fi rst th ree to five decades of the Plan. I n the fi rst decade, about 50 percent of the har vest was expected to come f rom forest over 200 years old. Regeneration harvest was expected to be the main harvest method used in the matrix. Partial removal techniques were expected to be the main harvest methods in the reserves. Special forest products Harvest opportunities would continue, consistent with management goals of the differ- ent land use allocations. Resource values, special status plants and animals, and resource sustainability would be protected. Harvest restrictions in late-successional reserves (LSRs) could occur to prevent adverse effects. Fuelwood gathering was highly restricted in LSRs and managed late-successional areas. Fuelwood cutting in riparian reserves was prohibited, unless required to attain aquatic conservation strategy objectives. Grazing G razi ng would conti nue, consistent with land use allocation management objectives. Modification of g razi ng practices i n r ipar ian reser ves was expected. Some sites would be protected f rom g razi ng if specific plant and animal species occu r red there. G razi ng could be adjusted or eliminated in reserves if it would retard or prevent attaining management objectives. New livestock handling and management facilities would be located outside of vi riparian reserves. Existing facilities could be relocated if they prevented attaining aquatic conser vation st rateg y (ACS) or LSR objectives. Modifications to g razi ng practices were expected to have consequences for individual ranchers. Minerals Mi ni ng would conti nue, with modifications to ensu re consistency with land use allocation management objectives. Effects on minerals would be linked to development constraints and mitigation measures designed to protect late-successional and old-growth ecosystems and riparian reserves. No effects were expected for salable minerals. The cost of extracting minerals from the reserves could increase, causing a decrease in mining there. Recreation Recreation use would continue, consistent with land use allocation management objectives. Recreation areas would be managed to minimize disturbance to species protected by the survey and manage program. Some recreation activities could be adjusted to permit attain- ment of LSR and ACS objectives. New recreation developments in reserves would be ap- proved if adverse effects could be minimized and mitigated. Ski area expansions would be reviewed for effects on late-successional and riparian habitat. Primitive and semiprimitive recreation opportunities could improve with the elimination of roads for watershed restora- tion. The Plan would foster natural-looking landscapes. Monitoring Results Timber The total volume of timber offered for sale from all land use allocations met Plan expecta- tions bet ween 1994 and 1998. Af ter Plan st ar t up, a fai rly predict able supply of timber was produced. A large d rop i n volu me offered occu r red i n 1999, and si nce then, sale volu mes have not been predictable. Overall, the volume of timber offered for sale by the FS and BLM decli ned du r i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan. T his decli ne was not expected. T he average an nual PSQ estimate for the fi rst 9 years of the Plan was 776 million board feet. On average, the agencies offered about 421 million board feet of PSQ volu me for sale each year during this period. The PSQ volume produced did not meet Plan expectations. The PSQ estimates were based on the expectation that most of the harvest volume would come from regeneration harvest of late-successional and old-growth stands in matrix and A M As. T his har vest expect ation was not met. Har vest methods defi ned as par tial remov - al? not regeneration har vest?were the pr imar y har vest tech niques du r i ng the fi rst 9 years of the Plan, contrary to expectations. Agency interviewees gave many reasons for the fail- ure to meet timber harvest expectations, and most were related to Plan implementation. Special forest products The quantity of special forest products soldthough currently the best indicator for which data are availableis inadequate for assessing whether predictable levels of special forest products were produced u nder the Plan. T his i ndicator reflects some combi nation of har - vester demand for the product, harvester behavior, and opportunities to harvest products vii provided by the agencies. T he Plan is only one factor that i n fluences har vest oppor t u ni - ties on federal forestsothers being weather, harvest pressure, and physical access to the resource. The quantity of convertible products sold (fuelwood, Christmas trees, poles and posts) declined except for poles and posts on BLM lands. This was expected for fuelwood because of Plan restrictions and reduced timber harvesting. Trends for nonconvertibles were mixed, differing by product and agency. Harvest restrictions for some products (such as mushrooms, moss, Christmas trees) exist in reserves on some forests, as expected. Plan- related changes in forest habitat (less early-seral-stage forest and more late-successional forest) will likely alter product availability over the long term. Grazing Monitoring data indicate that declines in grazing activity occurred on FS lands since the Plan was adopted. Declines also appear to have occurred on BLM lands, although the avail- able data are less reliable. A drop in grazing activity on Plan-area forests was expected based on ROD standards and guidelines. The Plan was only one of several factors contrib- uting to the decline, however, and was not considered the main factor by agency grazing specialists interviewed. Minerals The analysis is for the FS only. No production of leasable minerals occurred and the number of leases remained stable. The available indicator data for locatable minerals are inadequate for answering the monitoring question. Locatable minerals activity declined, but it is unknown whether the decline was associated with a decrease in production. A de- cline in production was expected in the reserves. The volume of salable minerals produced declined. This decline was not expected. Interview data suggest that to date, the Plan has played a mi nor role i n i n fluenci ng mi nerals production on Plan-area forests. Recreation The available data limit our ability to answer the monitoring question because for most recreation i ndicators, dat a were not available at the regional scale for the years before 1999 (BLM) or 2000 (FS). The only indicators for which reliable data were available starting i n 1994 were desig nated wilder ness acres, nu mber of recreation residences, and an nual nu mber of dow n hill sk ier days (reflecti ng demand, not supply). O ppor t u nities to exper ience wilderness, to maintain a recreation residence, and to go downhill skiing remained stable or increased under the Plan. Opportunities to participate in roaded recreation and to access FS and BLM lands by passenger car decreased bet ween 1998 and 2003, and a dow nward t rend i n system road miles si nce 1994 is li kely. T he decli ne i n road miles was expected. Opportunities to experience unroaded and nonmotorized recreation settings increased. For the other indicators, data were only available for current status or for recent years. Demand for recreation opportunities on Plan-area forests appears to be growing. Some restrictions on recreation activities were reported in riparian areas and environmentally sensitive areas. Ski area expansions have become more complicated, costly, and cumbersome under the Plan, as was expected. viii Contents 1 Chapter 1: Introduction 1 Methods 4 Organization 5 Chapter 2: Timber 6 Monitoring Questions 6 Expectations 7 Data Analysis 8 Results 8 Volume Offered for Sale 9 The Probable Sale Quantity Volume 9 Discussion 11 K lamath National Forest 13 Oly mpic National Forest 14 Mou nt Hood National Forest 15 Coos Bay BLM Dist r ict 16 Conclusions 19 Chapter 3: Special Forest Products 19 Monitoring Question 19 Expectations 19 Data Analysis 19 Forest Ser vice 20 Bureau of Land Management 20 Results 24 Discussion 24 Fuelwood 25 Ch r ist mas Trees 25 Limbs and Boughs 26 Transplants 26 Moss 27 Mushrooms and Other Fungi 27 Conclusions 29 Chapter 4: Grazing 29 Monitoring Question 29 Expectations 29 Data Analysis 30 Results 30 Discussion 31 Forest Ser vice 32 Bureau of Land Management 33 Conclusions 35 Chapter 5: Minerals 35 Monitoring Question 35 Expectations 35 Data Analysis ix 35 Leasable Mi nerals 36 Locatable Minerals 36 Salable Minerals 36 Results 36 Leasable Minerals 36 Locatable Minerals 37 Salable Minerals 37 Discussion 38 Leasable Minerals 38 Locatable Minerals 39 Salable Minerals 39 Conclusions 41 Chapter 6: Recreation 41 Monitoring Question 41 Expectations 41 Data Analysis 42 Results 42 Wilder ness 42 Roads 43 Additional BLM Recreation Dat a 44 Additional FS Recreation Dat a 45 Sk i A reas 46 Out fit ter and Guide Per mits 46 Developed Sites 46 Visitor Use 49 Discussion 52 Conclusions 55 Chapter 7: Overall Conclusions 56 Acknowledgments 56 Metric Equivalents 56 References 61 Appendix A: Resources Not Monitored 62 Appendix B: Agency Resource and Recreation DataSupplemental Information Regarding Indicator Choices and Quality 68 Appendix C: Methods for Choosing Case-Study Forests 69 Appendix D: Forest Interviewees and Interview Guide x 1 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources Chapter 1: Introduction One of the evaluation questions posed in the Northwest Forest Plan (the Plan) record of decision (ROD) concerns use levels of natural resources: Are predictable levels of timber and nontimber resources available and being pro- duced? ( USDA and USDI 1994b: E-9). To answer this ques - tion, the ROD specifies that timber har vest, special forest products, livestock grazing, mineral extraction, recreation, scenic qualit y, and com mercial fishi ng be monitored. Vol - ume II of the socioeconomic monitoring report analyzes trends in Forest Service (FS) and Bureau of Land Manage- ment (BLM) dat a for five of these resou rce areas to respond to this monitoring question. The socioeconomic monitoring team (the team) did not monitor scenic quality or commer- cial fishi ng; appendix A explai ns why. The results of this analysis also make it possible to evaluate agency progress toward meeting one of the Plans socioeconomic goals. As stated by President Clinton, this goal was to produce a predictable and sustainable level of timber sales and nontimber resources that will not degrade or dest roy the envi ron ment ? ( USDA and USDI 1994b: 3). The ROD, the Forest Ecosystem Management Assess- ment Team (FEM AT) repor t (FEM AT 1993), and the fi nal supplemental environmental impact statement for the Plan (FSEIS) ( USDA and USDI 1994a) do not defi ne what is meant by predictable.They do, however, contain expecta - tions associated with timber sales and producing nontimber resou rces. T hese expect ations were expressed as specific quantitative outputs for timber sales only. Without a defi nition of predict abilit y and without ex - plicit quantitative measures for resources other than timber, I interpreted President Clintons intent as that of producing a steady supply of timber sales, nontimber forest resources, and recreation opportunities from federal forests that could be sust ai ned over the long ter m ( USDA and USDI 1994b: 3- 4). T his i nter pret ation is suppor ted by the followi ng st ate - ment f rom the ROD ( USDA and USDI 1994b: 26): The need for forest products from forest ecosys- tems is the need for a sustainable supply of timber and other forest products that will help maintain the stability of local and regional economies, and contribute valuable resources to the national economy, on a predictable and long-term basis. At the Forest Conference President Clinton spoke of the human and the economic dimensionsof the problem, and asked for a plan that would produce a predictable and sustainable level of timber sales and nontimber resources. The approach adopted in this volume is to use the monitoring data to compare actual and expected trends in resource and recreation outputs under the Plan, and to evaluate how predictable these outputs have been. Assess- ments of whether predictable levels of timber, nontimber resources, and recreation opportunities were available on federal forest lands, and whether they were produced sustainably (at rates that do not degrade or destroy the environment) were beyond the scope of the socioeconomic monitoring program.1 Methods T he Plan was adopted i n 1994, but no effor t was made to address the ROD evaluation question regarding use of natu- ral resources until late 2002. For purposes of this interpre- tive report, the team had to rely on existing agency data pertaining to timber, nontimber, and recreation resources. Thus, our ability to answer the monitoring question (Are predictable levels of timber and nontimber resources avail- able and being produced?) and to evaluate the Plan goal (produce a predictable and sustainable level of timber sales and nontimber resources) was limited by the availability and quality of agency data. These limitations are discussed by chapter for each data set, and are explained in more detail in appendix B. For some resource indicators (such as much of the recreation data), we could obtain status but not t rend dat a. We repor t the st at us dat a to provide a baseli ne for future monitoring. In some cases (such as minerals and special forest products), the resource data tracked by the 1 The monitoring team was composed of social scientists rather than subject matter experts from agency timber, special forest products, grazing, minerals, and recreation programs. The team determined that it did not have the expertise or the time to thor- oughly evaluate whether predictable amounts of resources and recreation opportunities were available on FS and BLM lands, and whether they were being produced sustainably. This determination should be made by agency subject matter experts. 2 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II agencies did not serve as adequate indicators for answering the monitor i ng question di rectly. We believe that providi ng some information about trends in these resource areas is better than providing no information at all. Thus, we made the most of the available data, assessing what we could learn related to the monitoring question and goal. The team obtained data on timber sales, special for- est products, grazing, mining, and recreation from FS and BLM databases and resource specialists. All of the monitor- i ng teams associated with the Pacific Nor thwest I nteragency Regional Monitoring Program were directed to obtain agency data from corporate databases, publications, or other sources available from agency national, regional, or state of fices, rather than requesti ng dat a f rom i ndividual FS and BLM field u nits (u nless war ranted by special ci rcu mst anc - es). This approach imposed a set of limitations associated with data availability and data quality. Our team obtained most of the regional-scale resource and recreation data f rom FS regional and BLM st ate of fice specialists. Our team asked for indicator data for 22 forest units in the Plan area (unless otherwise indicated in the following chapters) (t able 1). We agg regated the u nit dat a to obt ai n regionwide trends. Combining FS and BLM data was often impossible at the regional scale either because the agencies track different variables (indicators) for each resource, be- cause data were not available for the same years, or both. I n some cases, agg regati ng FS dat a f rom Regions 5 and 6 (Pacific Southwest and Pacific Nor thwest Regions, respec - tively) was also impossible for the same reasons. Thus most of the regional-scale indicator data are presented and ana- lyzed by agency. The baseline year for the socioeconomic monitor i ng prog ram is 1990; however, it was not possible to obtain indicator data for some resources as far back as 1990. I show timber t rends si nce the 1970s to illust rate the effects of the spotted owl listing and the Plan on federal timber production. The analytical framework adopted by this mod- ule ent ails showi ng that changes reflected by the t rend data were caused by management actions under the Plan or providing alternative theories that could explain the changes observed. The team investigated links between trends in resource and recreation outputs, management actions under the Plan, and other explanatory variables by usi ng a case-st udy approach. We selected fou r for - ests from four different planning provinces in the Plan area for detailed study: the Olympic National Forest, the Mount Hood National Forest, the Klamath National For- est, and the Coos Bay BLM Dist r ict (fig. 1). T he forests were not chosen randomly. See appendix C for an expla- nation of the methods used to choose case-study forests. Team members interviewed a total of 82 agency em- ployees from the four case forests. These included special- ists work i ng i n the five resou rce areas of concer n. Many of these specialists had worked on their units since at least 1994. Team members discussed t rends i n the i ndicator data for each resource area with resource specialists. They asked the specialists to provide their own perspectives on Table 1Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management units included in calculations of resource and recreation outputs State Unit Forest Service Washi ng ton Okanogan a Wenatchee a Mount Baker-Snoqualmie Gifford Pi nchot Olympic Oregon Mount Hood Willamet te Siuslaw Deschutesa Umpqua Wi nema a Rogue River Siskiyou California Klamath Six Rivers Shasta-Trinity Mendocino Bureau of Land Management Oregon Medford Roseburg Salem Eugene Coos Bay a Although these forests are only partially within the range of the northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina), data from the entire forest are included in this volume, unless otherwise indicated. 3 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources Fig u re 1? Case -st udy forests. 0 25 50 100 Miles Olympic National Forest Olympic National Forest Case study?Bureau of Land Management districts Case study?national forests Northwest Forest Plan area States Major lakes and rivers Major roads Bureau of Land Management Forest Service Major cities Mount Hood National Forest Mount Hood National Forest Klamath National Forest Klamath National Forest Coos Bay District o 4 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II the reasons behind the trends observed and the role of the Plan i n i n fluenci ng them. Appendix D lists the people i n - terviewed on each forest and contains the interview guide used in discussions with them. Some regional FS and BLM resource specialists were also asked to provide their views on how the Plan had contributed to the trends. The results of these interviews are summarized for each resource area.2 Fully researching the causes of trends in resource and recreation outputs from federal forest lands since the Plan was adopted was beyond the scope of our monitoring pro- gram. But the interview results provide a starting point for developing and testing hypotheses about how the Plan has affected the ability of the FS and BLM to produce predict- able quantities of timber sales and nontimber resources. Our team believes that understanding how the Plan has contributed to the observed trends is necessary for making informed policy decisions that address undesirable trends. We obt ai ned some resou rce and recreation dat a f rom the fou r case-st udy forests. We sometimes fou nd differ - ences between these data and that obtained from corporate databases. In these instances, we used the data from forest units for our analysis, assuming they were correct. This volume also provides an inventory of agency data on timber sales, special forest products, grazing, minerals, and recreation for the Plan area available from FS and BLM cor porate dat abases, and the Region 5, Region 6, and BLM Oregon st ate of fices. I n addition, it evaluates whether the agencies have the data to answer the evaluation question posed in the ROD. This evaluation will help agencies decide what actions are needed to improve socioeconomic monitor- i ng over the next 10 years. 3 I do not provide explicit recommendations about the indicators that should be monitored to adequately determine whether predictable levels of timber and nontimber resources are available and being produced, because the socioeconomic monitoring module has not been formally adopted by the agencies, and its future is uncertain. Organization T he next five chapters of this volu me discuss timber, special forest products, grazing, minerals, and recreation. Each chapter poses a monitoring question(s) that was developed by the team and is directly tied to the ROD evaluation question that is the focus of this volume. The monitoring question is followed by a statement of expectations from the ROD, FSEIS, and FEMAT report about how the Plan would affect each resource area. Next, I discuss the indicator data I used to address the monitoring question, and their limita- tions. I then present and discuss the regional-scale results. This is followed by a discussion of monitoring results from the four case-study forests, which provides insight into potential links between the Plan and the monitoring trends. I conclude by answering the monitoring question posed at the start of the chapter. The concluding chapter of this volume uses the infor- mation presented i n chapters 2 th rough 5 to add ress the question, Are predictable levels of timber and nontimber resources available and being produced? It also assesses whether progress in meeting the Plan goal of producing a predictable and sustainable level of timber sales and non- timber resources was consistent with expectations. 2 For a more detailed discussion of resource trends for the case-study forests, see the following: Buttolph et al. (in press). McLain et al. (in press). Charnley, S.; Dillingham, C.; Stuart, C.; Moseley, C.; Donoghue, E.M. Manuscript in preparation. Northwest Forest Pla n ? t he f i r st 10 yea r s (1994 ?20 03): socioeconom ic monitoring of Klamath National Forest and three local communities. On file with: S. Charnley, Forestry Sciences Labor ator y, 620 SW Mai n, Su ite 40 0, Por tla nd , OR 97205. K ay, W.; Donog hue, E.M.; Cha r n ley, S.; Moseley, C. Manuscript in preparation. Northwest Forest Planthe f i r st 10 yea r s (1994 ?20 03): socioeconom ic mon itor i ng of Mount Hood National Forest and three local communities. On file with: S. Charnley, Forestry Sciences Laboratory, 620 SW Mai n, Su ite 40 0, Por tla nd , OR 97205. 3 See Palmer et al. (in press) for additional discussion of data issues. 5 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources Chapter 2: Timber Much of the discussion about whether the Northwest Forest Plan (the Plan) has met its socioeconomic goals has fo- cused on the issue of timber production. Du r i ng the 1980s, the probable sale quantity (PSQ) from the national forests and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) districts in the Plan area averaged 4.5 billion board feet of timber an nually ( USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -264). I n cont rast, the Plan?s fi nal supplement al envi ron ment al impact st atement estimat - ed an average an nual PSQ of 958 million board feet ( USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -265). 1 The agencies have revised this estimate several times since 1994 to reflect more accu rate site-specific infor mation. It d ropped to 868 million board feet i n 1995; 811 million board feet i n 1999; and to 805 million board feet i n 2001, where it stood i n 2004 (Baker et al., in press). The Plan aimed to address the need for a sustainable supply of timber and other forest products that will help maintain the stability of local and regional economies, and contribute valuable resources to the national economy, on a predict able and long-ter m basis? ( USDA and USDI 1994b: 26). Timber production under the Plan was to be sustain- able: the Plan should produce a predictable and sustain- able level of timber sales and nontimber resources that will not degrade or destroy the environment(USDA and USDI 1994b: 3). T he Plan identified mat r ix lands and adaptive management areas as containing lands suitable for produc- ing a predictable and sustainable supply of timber. Predict- ability in supply would be achieved by offering timber sales at the estimated PSQs. This chapter focuses on the question of whether predictable timber supplies were produced dur- i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan; see Baker et al. (i n press) for a discussion of whether sustainable timber volumes were available and produced. A second objective for timber harvest under the Plan was to use it as a tool for managing vegetation to achieve ecosystem management objectives, such as promoting de- velopment of late-successional and old-growth (older forest) habitat in late-successional and riparian reserves. The Plan did not quantify the amount of timber harvest that would result from treatments undertaken to achieve these objec- tives in the reserves. Agencies have completed many late- successional reserve assessments that examine reserve conditions, however, and they can now better estimate the acreage in which harvesting would play a role in promoting late-successional forest habit at. Scientific research produced over the past decade can also be used to determine how best to accelerate late-successional forest development by using harvest treatments. Timber volume produced through treatments in the reserves would not constitute a long-term, sustainable supply of timber, however, and timber harvested in the reserves does not count toward PSQ volume (USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -263). But it does cont r ibute to the total volume of timber offered for sale by the agencies, and is therefore important from a socioeconomic standpoint. See Baker et al. (in press) for more discussion of timber harvest outside of matrix and adaptive management areas. The concept of predictability, as it applies to timber production on federal forest lands, has both a long- and a short-term perspective. Long-term predictability is linked to produci ng a sust ai nable timber flow, which, i n t u r n, is tied to the concept of a ?reg ulated forest ? (Cr im 2004). T hat is, given a set of management prescriptions and a stable timber base, it is possible to predict with some con fidence that the amou nt of timber produced f rom the forest will flow i n a predictable and sustainable way in perpetuity. If the pre- scriptions change, or the timber base is altered, then the harvest level will also change. The PSQ estimates represent the anticipated flow of timber f rom this reg ulated forest as a decadal average. For the Forest Service (FS), the annual offer i ng of PSQ volu me may fluct uate, as long as the decadal average does not exceed it (Cr im 2004). In cont rast, the BLM is required to meet an nual PSQ estimates (Cadwell 2004). A shorter term perspective on predictability in timber supply focuses on annual accomplishments, which is relevant from the socioeconomic perspective because it is linked to the concept of com mu nit y st abilit y. W hat mat ters to people employed in the wood-products industry is whether an even flow of timber would come f rom federal forests an nually to 1 Probable sale quantity = an estimate of timber sale levels likely to be achieved. It represents neither a minimum harvest level that must be met, nor a maximum level that cannot be exceeded, but rather, a rough approximation of average annual timber sales over a decade (Baker et al., in press). 6 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II support stable employment. From this perspective, whether the volume of timber offered for sale by the agencies repre- sents PSQ volume or volume produced from a treatment in a late-successional reserve would be less important. Although the source of the volume may not matter to most people, the source affects whether the volume can be sustained on a short-term versus a long-term basis. For example, thinning in reserves may produce volume over the short term, but it will not sustain long-term production. In this chapter, I evaluate whether predictable levels of timber sales were produced du r i ng the fi rst 10 years of the Plan from both perspectives. That is, I look at trends in the total volume of timber offered for sale by the agencies, and at trends in the PSQ volume produced. I also investigate some of the reasons for the observed trends. The monitoring team did not have the resou rces to monitor specific feat u res of timber sales that are also relevant to predictability from the community perspectivesuch as size of sales, type of sales, and who qualified to bid on them ?for pu r poses of this monitoring report. Monitoring Questions ? Du r i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan, did the agencies produce the PSQ volumes anticipated? Have predictable levels of timber sales been produced under the Plan? Expectations Du r i ng the fi rst 2 years of the Plan, the volu me of timber sales from Plan-area forests would differ from the PSQ be- cause the agencies needed time to complete the surveys and assessments required by the Plan, and to prepare new sales consistent with Plan standards and guidelines (USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -269). I n 1995, agencies were expected to offer for sale 60 percent of the estimated PSQ (USDA and USDI 2004: 221). I n 1996, agencies were expected to offer for sale 80 percent of the estimated PSQ. After that, the average annual timber volume offered for sale from matrix lands and adaptive management areas on FS lands over the period of a decade would be consistent with PSQ levels. For the BLM, the annual volume offered for sale from matrix lands and adaptive management areas would be consistent with the PSQs. This volume was expected to come from timber-suited lands in matrix and adaptive management areas (Joh nson et al. 1993). If the st andards and g uideli nes in a forests land management plan for matrix lands were more restrictive than those of the Northwest Forest Plan for matrix lands, the forests plan would apply. In the matrix and the adaptive management areas there are 1.1 million acres of late-succesional forest (14 percent of the tot al) ( USDA and USDI 2004: 220). 2 These acres were expected to be the main source of harvest to support PSQ in the fi rst th ree to five decades of the Plan, cont r ibuti ng about 90 percent of the tot al ( USDA and USDI 2004: 220). Close to 50 percent of the har vest was expected to come f rom forest more than 200 years old i n the fi rst decade (Joh nson et al. 1993: 22). Regeneration har vest was expected to be the main harvest method in the matrix (Baker et al., in press). Partial removal techniques were expected to be the main harvest methods in the reserves.3 I n the Pacific Nor thwest Region (Region 6), most of the PSQ volume was expected to come f rom fou r forests: the Gifford-Pi nchot, the Mou nt Hood, the Umpqua, and the Willamet te (Joh nson et al. 1993: 22). The Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team (FEMAT) noted that achieving predictable and sustain- able timber sales from federal forests under the Plan would be dif ficult, if not impossible (Joh nson et al. 1993: 23). I n the past, a main objective of forest management in the owl region was to offer a similar level of timber sales each year, assuming that sustained yields of timber would sustain un- derlying forest processes. That assumption was questioned 2 Late-successional forests = forest stands that exhibit increasing stand diversity, patchy multilayered canopy, trees of several age classes, large standing dead trees, large woody debris, and species that represent the potential natural community. These forest stands consist of trees and structural attributes, and support biological communities and processes, that are associated with old growth a nd mat u re forest s ( USDA a nd USDI 20 0 4: 256). 3 Partial-removal techniques include density management, selection cut, improvement cut, sanitation cut, and special cut. 7 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources i n the early 1990s, and the goal of forest management shif t - ed to one of sustaining the underlying ecological processes of the forest, largely measured through protecting habitat for late-succesional species and fish. Given this change, uncertainty will cloud the preparation of timber sales prepared under the direction of the FEMAT Report for the foreseeable f ut u re? (Joh nson et al. 1993: 23). New plan ni ng processes, extensive project su r veys, and modification or abandonment of sales in response to the presence of spe- cies would make dif ficult achievi ng predict able supplies of timber from federal forest lands in the Plan area. Moreover, achieving PSQ volumes depended mainly on harvesting older forest. How publicly acceptable this policy will be remai ns to be seen? (Joh nson et al. 1993: 22). Data Analysis The FS and BLM create corporate timber-volume reports in three ways: volume of timber offered for sale, volume of timber sold, and volume of timber harvested.4 Volume offered is the amount of timber that the federal agencies make available for sale i n a given fiscal year. Not all timber sales that agencies offer are purchased; volume of timber sold represents the timber that actually receives a bid from a qualified pu rchaser. I n the Pacific Nor thwest, most of the volume offered for sale has sold, historically (Haynes 2004). A back log of sales now exists, however, that have not been awarded because of litigation ( Wer ner 2004). Once sales are awarded, they generally take 2 to 3 years to harvest. As a result, the volumes sold and harvested in a given year are rarely the same. Volume harvested is the measure generally used in socioeconomic analyses, because it represents the actual timber-related value that enters the economy. In this chapter, I use volume of timber offered for sale as an indicator of production by the agencies. Volume offered measures all volume made available for sale by the agencies, including volume offered from late-successional and riparian reserves, and volume not meeting forest utilization standards. The PSQ volume refers to the timber offered for sale only from matrix lands and adaptive management areas. To calculate the PSQ volume, the volume offered for sale must be known by land use allocation, but the FS Pacific Nor thwest Region (Region 6) of fice does not usu - ally report volume offered by land use allocation (Baker et al., i n press). T he FS Pacific Southwest Region (Region 5) of fice repor ted volu me offered by land use allocation be - t ween 1995 and 2000. T he BLM Dist r ict A n nual Prog ram Summaries do report volume sold by land use allocation (Baker et al., in press). To determine what proportion of volume offered was PSQ volume, I used estimates provided by FS and BLM timber-program specialists. The FS data on the volume of timber offered for sale, sold, and harvested have been tracked in corporate data- bases by forest si nce the mid-1970s. Volu mes har vested and sold are published in the FS cut and sold reports. Ob- t ai ni ng dat a by forest for the years before the mid-1970s was too dif ficult, but I i nclude timber dat a for the years be - fore 1990 to show t rends i n agency timber prog rams i n the years leading up to the Plan. These data also demonstrate the striking contrast between timber harvest activity before and af ter the ROD. T he volu me fig u res are expressed i n terms of long logs.5 The BLM timber data for the years prior to the Plan are not available f rom the Oregon st ate of fice by dist r ict (although they are available from individual district of- fices). T hey are available f rom the st ate of fice i n agg regate form for the western Oregon districts, beginning in the year 1950. T he BLM dat a are for volu me of timber sold, which was the same as the volume of timber offered for sale ( Wer ner 2004). T hey are expressed as shor t logs. 6 I refer to these data as volume offered in the rest of this chapter. 4 The FS stores timber data in the Automated Timber Sale Accounting System. The BLM stores timber data in the Timber Sale Information System. 5 Long log = logs scaled to 32 feet for timber volume measurement. Conver sion factor = 0.825 t i mes t he BLM 16 -foot shor t-log volu me. 6 Shor t log = logs scaled to 16 feet for t i mber-volu me mea su rement. 8 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II Results Volume Of fered for Sale The total volume of timber harvested and sold by national forests i n the Plan area si nce fis - cal year 1978 is show n i n fig u re 2. 7 The total volume of timber offered for sale on western Oregon BLM dist r icts si nce fiscal year 1970 is show n i n fig u re 3. Timber volu mes sold d ropped d ramatically af ter 1990, followi ng the Endangered Species Act listing of the northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina), when injunctions against timber sales on federal forests in the owls range were issued. Volume harvested tapered off more gradually in the early 1990s because timber that had al ready been sold could be harvested over the follow- ing years. The volume of timber offered for sale by both agencies si nce October 1994, 6 months after the Plan went into effect, is shown in fig u re 4 and compared with PSQ. A fai rly predictable supply of just over 800 million board feet was produced on average f rom 1996 th rough 1998 af ter Plan st ar t up, as was expect - ed. A large drop in volume offered occurred in 1999, with a low for the per iod at 148 million board feet in 2000. Since then, sale volumes have gradually increased, but they have not yet ret u r ned to 1996 ?98 volu mes. T he volu me of timber offered for sale by both the FS and the BLM decli ned du r i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan (fig. 5). Were timber sales du r i ng the fi rst 9 years of the Plan more or less predictable than they were in the decade leading up to the Plan? The volume of timber sold by the FS bet ween 1980 and 1989 averaged 4.448 billion board feet per year, with a coef ficient of var ia - tion of 17.87 percent (st andard deviation [SD] = 795 million 7 I do not show historical volumes of timber offered for sale by national forests because I was unable to obtain those data from the Pacific Southwest Region. 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 Fiscal year Timber harve sted and sold (million board feet) Cut Sold Fig u re 2 ?Ti mber ha r vested a nd sold on Pla n a rea nat ional forests, fiscal yea r 1978 ?20 02 (long log). Sou rce: Forest Ser vice cut a nd sold repor ts. 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 1970 1972197419761978198019821984198619881990199219941996199820002002 Fiscal year Timber offered (million board feet) Figure 3Timber offered for sale on western Oregon Bureau of Land Manage- ment ( BLM ) d ist r icts, fiscal yea rs 1970 ?20 02 (shor t log). I ncludes K lamat h Falls por t ion of t he La keview Dist r ict. Sou rce: BLM Facts (1970 ?97), Ti mber sale i n for mat ion system repor ts (1998 ?20 02). board feet). The volume of timber sold by the BLM between 1980 and 1989 averaged 1.097 billion board feet, with a coef ficient of var iation of 19.12 percent (SD = 210 million board feet). Bet ween 1995 and 2003, the average an nual volu me offered for sale by the FS was 404 million board feet, with a coef ficient of var iation of 53.94 percent (SD = 218 million board feet). For the BLM, the an nual average was 122 million board feet, with a coef ficient of var iation 9 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources of 47.77 percent (SD = 58 million board feet). Differences i n the coef ficients of var iation be - tween the two periods indicate that timber sale volu mes i n the 1980s were more predict able than they were following Plan implementation. The Probable Sale Quantity Volume Bet ween 1995 and 2003, the PSQ was adjusted f rom 958 million board feet to 805 million board feet. This adjustment, together with expectations that agencies would only offer a percent age of PSQ i n the fi rst 2 years of the Plan, meant that the average annual PSQ esti- mate for the fi rst 9 years of the Plan was 776 million board feet (Baker et al., in press). The total volume of timber offered for sale by the agencies bet ween 1995 and 2003 was about 4.736 billion board feet; 3.633 billion board feet by the FS and 1.103 billion board feet by the BLM. On average, about 526 million board feet of timber was offered for sale each year. Eighty percent of this volume offered was esti- mated to have come from matrix and adaptive management area lands, and can therefore be counted toward PSQ volume. The remaining 20 percent is estimated to have come from timber sales in the reserves. Thus, the aver- age annual PSQ volume produced between 1995 and 2003 was about 421 million board feet (Baker et al., in press). The agencies did not produce the anticipated PSQ volumes dur- i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan, although they came close to meeting timber sale objectives bet ween 1995 and 1998 (fig. 4). Discussion W hat accou nts for the i nabilit y of the agencies to meet estimated PSQ volumes and to produce a predictable level of timber sales? Shortfalls in timber-sale volumes offered since 1998 are believed to be related pr imar ily to 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Fiscal year Timber (million board feet) Offered for sale PSQ Fig u re 4 ?Ti mber of fered for sale vs. probable sale qu a nt it y ( PSQ), Forest Ser vice ( FS) a nd Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement ( BLM ), 1995 ?20 03 (long logs). For t he BLM, t h is fig u re i ncludes d at a f rom t he Califor n ia BLM d ist r icts a nd t he K lamat h Falls, O regon Field Of fice of t he La keview Dist r ict. For t he FS, t h is fig u re i ncludes d at a f rom all nat ional forests ent i rely wit h i n t he Nor t hwest Forest Pla n a rea , a nd for t hose por t ions of t he Deschutes, Wi nema , a nd Oka noga n- Wenatchee wit h i n t he Pla n a rea. Sou rce: Ba ker et al., i n press. 0 50 100 150 200 250 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Fiscal year Timber offere d (million board feet) Timber offere d (million board feet) 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Fiscal year A B Fig u re 5 ?Ti mber of fered for sale by (A) t he Forest Ser vice, a nd ( B) t he Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement, fiscal yea rs 1995 ?20 02 (long logs). St raig ht li ne is t he linear regression. 10 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II (1) implementi ng the su r vey and manage species st andards and guidelines after a lawsuit brought by the Oregon Nat u ral Resou rces Cou ncil; (2) the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermens Associations et al. v. National Marine Fisheries Service lawsuit, which constrained timber sales that required biological opinions and limited harvest in watersheds with Endangered Species Act?listed anad ro - mous fish; and (3) protests and appeals on i ndividual timber sales ( USDA and USDI 2004: 221?222). Both lawsuits caused numerous timber sales to be enjoined. And the contentious issue of logging old growth has caused appeals and litigation over proposed sales that include old growth (Dombeck and Thomas 2003, Thomas 2003). Lawsuits, the implementing of survey and manage species standards and guidelines, protests, and appeals led to a major drop in regeneration harvest timber sales in late- successional st ands begi n ni ng i n 1999 ( USDA and USDI 2004: 223). Har vest methods defi ned as par tial removal were used on 84.5 percent of the acres har vested du r i ng Fig u re 6 ?Ti mber of fered for sale, case -st udy forests, 1995 ?20 03. Note: Coos Bay d at a a re shor t log. the fi rst 9 years of the Plan (Baker et al., i n press), cont rar y to expectations. Avoidance behavior has also contributed to the drop. W hen predist u rbance su r veys i ndicated the presence of numerous survey and manage species sites, potential timber-sale areas were often abandoned in favor of sites less likely to contain survey and manage species (younger stands) because of the added costs in time and money of t r yi ng to complete a sale ( USDA and USDI 2004: 223 ?224). The monitoring team conducted interviews with timber prog ram specialists and li ne of ficers on fou r case-st udy forests (the Olympic, Mount Hood, and Klamath National Forests, and Coos Bay BLM District) (see app. C) to gain insight into what had caused shortfalls in timber production on those forests. The annual volume of timber offered for sale on these forests was also highly var iable du r i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan (fig. 6). T he team asked i nter viewees the following questions pertaining to the volume of timber offered for sale on the forests where they work: 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Fiscal year 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Timber offered (million board feet) Mount Hood National Forest 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Fiscal year 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Olympic National Forest Timber offered (million board feet) Klamath National Forest Coos Bay District, Bureau of Land Management Fiscal year 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Timber offered (million board feet) Timber offered (million board feet) Fiscal year 11 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources Please explain why you think these trends have been going up or going down over time. To what extent do you believe implementing the Plan is responsible for these t rends? W hy? W hat other factors might be causing them? One of the goals of the Plan was to produce a pre- dictable and sustainable supply of timber.Do you believe this goal has been met on your forest since the Plan was implemented? If so, how have you been able to achieve this goal? If not, why not? W hat has prevented this from happening? We fou nd that the i nter viewees had a var iet y of per - spectives, and that the reasons they gave differed somewhat by case-study forest. Their explanations are detailed below, by forest. These cases contribute to an understanding of how factors both related and unrelated to the Plan affected the agenciesabilities to produce timber over the last decade on specific forests. Although the explanations per t ai n to four forests only, they provide insights that can be used to develop and test hypotheses about what kept the agencies from meeting PSQ estimates and offering a predictable level of timber sales regionwide. At the time the team conducted fieldwork, su r vey and manage species considerations were still in place, as were the original provisions of the aquatic conservation strategy. Survey and manage guidelines were removed from the Plan i n 2004, i n par t because they were preventi ng the agencies from producing predictable and sustainable levels of timber sales ( USDA and USDI 2004: 6). T he BLM Special St at us Species policies and the FS Sensitive Species policies conti nue to apply ( USDA and USDI 2004: 45 ? 46). For mer survey and manage species that were eligible to be included in these special status species programs are now managed under each agencys policies. The agencies expect that removing survey and manage guidelines will help restore their ability to achieve the timber outputs established under the Plan ( USDA and USDI 2004: 6). I n 2005, however, the removal of survey and manage guidelines was found by the U.S. Dist r ict Cou r t, i n Seat tle, Washi ng ton, to be i n con flict with the National Envi ron ment al Policy Act. T he 2004 ROD regarding survey and manage has been set aside; as of this writing, Plan-area forests are again required to conduct survey and manage procedures for all logging and other ground-disturbing activities, including those planned and approved si nce the 2004 ROD was issued. I n 2004, the wordi ng of the aquatic conser vation st rat - egy was amended to clarify language pertaining to how it should be interpreted in the context of proposed projects. Agencies also expect this action to make land managers more successful in planning and implementing projects u nder the Plan ( USDA and USDI 2003: 51). Klamath National Forest8 Commercial timber production on the Klamath is a central management objective on mat r ix lands and i n the Goose- nest Adaptive Management Area, which together comprise 423,500 acres, or about 20 percent of the forest. Com mer - cial timber harvest in other land use allocations may be a byproduct of forest management activities to promote ecosystem health objectives. Currently, most commercial timber sales on the forest are thinning projects. Availability The land-use allocation system established under the Plan reduced the forest land base that could be managed for com- mercial timber production because of the late-successional and riparian-reserve system. Of the matrix lands initially available for commercial timber harvest, many were subject to subsequent executive, legislative, and judicial constraints (such as roadless areas). These additional constraints affected the land base available for commercial timber production. Harvest methods The Northwest Forest Plan and the Klamath Forest Plan call for most commercial timber production on the forest to use regeneration harvests with green-tree retention on small areas as a tool to achieve several multiple-use goals. These goals include promoting healthy ecosystems, provisions for resilience to fi re and disease, as well as wildlife and scenery. Focusing intensive harvest practices in small areas minimizes ground disturbance, and therefore minimizes the 8 The Klamath Land and Resource Management Plan adopted the for- ests PSQ as its ASQ (allowable sale quantity). I use the term PSQ in this discussion for the sake of consistency with the rest of the section. 12 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II area subject to survey and manage species needs and other procedural requirements. Some interest groups, however, view regeneration harvesting negatively because it is simi- lar to clearcutting. They have appealed or litigated timber sales that included this method. Consequently, most tim- ber production on the forest has been the result of thin- ning, which is extensive rather than intensive. Thinning only produces 10 to 30 percent of the yield per acre that regeneration har vest does (Barber 2004). Consequently, more acres had to be treated for the same volume, mean- ing that more area had to be examined for survey and manage species, leading to lower relative outputs. Survey and manage The Plan had several requirements that called for new procedural processes associated with ground-disturbing activities, including timber harvest. These needs added to an already existing set of requirements that had to be followed when timber sales are undertaken. One of the most onerous of these on the Klamath National Forest was for the survey and manage species. The Klamath is the second most biodiverse national forest in the United St ates ( USDA FS 1994). Su r vey and manage began to be implemented on the K lamath i n 1996 and, by 1998, up to 60 species had to be surveyed for and managed. The cost and timing requirements of the surveys and the amount of time required to meet the procedural requirements were a deterrent to producing timely timber sales. Furthermore, the presence of survey and manage species on the forest imposed harvest restrictions in some areas, further reduc- ing the land base available for timber sales. Survey and manage needs also added dif ficult y to produci ng timber f rom areas of the forest affected by fi re, blowdow n, and d rought-related mor t alit y. Get ti ng th rough the procedu ral requirements associated with timber sales took so long that once completed, the products no longer had commer- cial value. One of the reasons that timber harvest from the forest shifted from the west to the east side was that fewer survey and manage species lived there. Economics Most commercial timber sales on the Klamath were originally expected to be in matrix lands. Instead, most commercial timber production on the forest occurred to promote ecosystem management objectives. The timber produced usually had relatively low economic value. Timber sales were expensive to prepare because of the analytical and procedural requirements the forest had to follow. It cost f rom $35 to $115 per acre to su r vey for su r vey and manage species, raising the unit cost of the timber program substan- tially. Sometimes the result was uneconomical sales that timber industry purchasers would not buy; imported wood was often cheaper. Added to this, the number of buyers has dwindled because of the dramatic loss of timber-industry i nf rast r uct u re i n Sisk iyou Cou nt y si nce 1990. T hose who remained developed suppliers of wood more reliable than the national forests. Because these buyers no longer depend on federal forests for their supply, they only buy timber sales offered for a good price. Interviewees stated that before the Plan was adopted, 35 percent of the cost of a timber sale was associated with its plan ni ng, and 65 percent was related to timber-sale preparation. Since the Plan was adopted, 70 percent of the costs have been for planning, and 30 percent for timber-sale preparation. As described above, the heavy burden of pro- cedural requirements resulted in decreased outputs, making the per-unit cost of timber output on the Klamath National Forest higher than on Plan-area forests in California. The Klamath National Forest timber-sale program has been costi ng more than the revenue si nce 1999. T his shor tcomi ng i n economic ef ficiency, combi ned with a regional climate of tightening budgets and a change in administration, has in recent years caused the FS to redirect timber-program money that once went to the Klamath National Forest to other, non-Plan-area forests where it can get more bang for the buck.Declines in both the forest budget and staff numbers add to this problem. Having a smaller timber program budget on the forest makes it harder to produce the expected volumes. Appeals and litigation Because the Plan has so many procedural requirements associated with timber harvest, many opportunities exist for those who do not suppor t proposed sales to file appeals or lawsuits. People can fi nd ways of opposi ng sales be - cause many grounds are available on which to do so, given 13 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources the extensive and complex requirements of the Plan. Local environmental groups are particularly opposed to sales that include old-growth trees, that are in key watersheds, or that are on steep slopes. Appeals and lawsuits have stopped several timber sales on the forest. Risk aversion Under the Plan, commercial timber harvest on the forest has been more highly scrutinized by some stakeholders, and become more politically sensitive. Because the procedural requirements associated with timber sales are so expensive and time consuming, decisionmakers have been reluctant to propose sales with a high risk of appeal. Interviewees also cited other factors unrelated to the Plan that had prevented the forest from offering more vol- u me: some members of the public fi nd com mercial loggi ng, regeneration harvesting, and harvesting old-growth on fed- eral lands unacceptable, leading to litigation and appeals; and requirements imposed by other legislation, such as the Endangered Species Act and the Clean Water Act. Olympic National Forest The Olympic National Forest has no matrixlands (the Plan land use allocation that allows commercial timber harvest, regeneration harvest, and the harvest of late-suc- cessional stands). Matrix lands were not assigned to the forest because of the highly fragmented status of older forests on the Olympic Peninsula. Much of the Olympic Peninsulaincluding the Olympic National Forest and private, state, and Indian reservation landshas been clearcut over the past 80 years (FEM AT 1993). I n addition, the rapidly growing urban population in the Puget Sound area further separated and isolated northern spotted owl populations in the Cascade Range. As a result, a high prior- ity was placed on protecting what remained of owl habitat on the Olympic National Forest under the Plan. Although commercial timber harvest, regeneration harvest, and har- vest in late-successional stands is permitted in the adaptive management areas, the Olympic must keep the intent of these areas in mind when planning harvest activities. About 66 percent of the forest is in late-successional reser ves (420,000 acres), about 20 percent is i n adaptive management areas (125,000 acres), and the remai ni ng 14 percent (90,000 acres) is in Congressionally withdrawn areas (wilderness areas and the Quinault Research Natu- ral A rea). Of the 125,000 acres of adaptive management area land, only about 51,000 acres is available for timber harvest. The remaining acreage is designated as riparian reser ves (65,000 acres), forest plan ad mi nist rative with - drawals (2,000 acres), and areas unsuitable for timber har- vests (7,000 acres) (Oly mpic National Forest Web site). T he Oly mpic?s average an nual PSQ is 10 million board feet. I n the late-successional reser ves, about 14 percent of the land was previously established under the Olympic Forest Plan as administratively withdrawn and cannot be har vested. T he remai ni ng 357,000 acres are open to com - mercial and precommercial thinning on stands less than 80 years old to promote older forest st and st r uct u re. Wood removed through commercial thinning in the reserves contributes to volume offered, but it is not part of the PSQ calculation. Although the acreage available for timber har- vests is limited in the adaptive management areas and only stands less than 80 years of age can be thinned in reserves, the forest has been relatively successful in offering volume for sale. One factor contributing to this success has been the relatively small number of appeals and lawsuits because of the forests emphasis on commercial thinning of young stands rather than regeneration harvesting. This, combined with strong efforts made by forest staff to work closely with envi ron ment al g roups, has allowed sales to flow smoothly. Despite the relative success at achieving the forests average annual volume, some factors prevented the forest from attaining desired harvest rates. Insuf ficient fund ing and staf fing? Forest budget and st af fi ng have decli ned d ramatically si nce the mid-1980s, par ticularly i n the forest?s timber prog ram. Despite the decline in workforce, the workload has in- creased for employees because of the increased complexity of work associated with implementing the Plan (USDA FS 2000). Tens of thousands of acres of precommercial- and commercial-age stands have gone untreated because of the lack of staff and funding to identify, analyze, and prepare thinning projects. The failure to conduct precommercial thinning can limit future stand-development options, 14 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II leading to overstocked, stagnant stands that halt or slow de- velopment of late-successional stand structure and features, and limit future timber production options on adaptive management area lands (USDA FS 2000). Access Another factor contributing to the lack of precommercial thinning and limiting some commercial thinning was reduced access to sites. Roads washed out by floods i n the late 1990s and early 2000s became overg row n, poorly maintained, or decommissioned. The process of repair- ing washed-out roads has been slow because Endangered Species Act requirements limit the period in which ground- disturbing activities can be done. Money to undertake road repairs has also been scarce and came mainly from the Emergency Relief for Federally Owned Roads program. Many forest roads are poorly maintained because mainte- nance dollars are lacking (the road program was tied to the timber program, which has dwindled). Poorly maintained roads are more likely to wash out during storms, exacerbat- ing the problem. The forest has decommissioned roads as a strategy for restoring watershed health, a goal emphasized by the Plan. For example, the forest is trying to reduce the number of roads in key watersheds, but reduced access means reduced ability to harvest timber. Survey and manage species The most abundant survey and manage species on the Olympic National Forest were mollusks, lichens, and bryo- phytes. Extensive survey requirements for some species prior to implementing projects caused delays with timber sales and harvests. One species in particularthe warty jumping slug (Hemphillia glandulosa)delayed several timber sales on the forest i n 1999 and 2000. T his slug was listed as a survey and manage species because it was thought to be rare on the Olympic Peninsula. After exten- sive surveying, the slug was found to be fairly abundant, and it was removed from the survey and manage list on the Oly mpic National Forest i n 2001. T his delisti ng allowed timber sales and other activities to proceed without hav- ing to protect all of the sites where the slug had been found, although management would still be done to provide habitat for these and other mollusks. Apart from the warty jumping slug, survey and man- age species requi rements did not sig nificantly affect timber harvest activity. Mount Hood National Forest About 19 percent (204,000 acres) of the Mou nt Hood Nation - al Forest is available for scheduled timber harvests, although 484,350 acres of the tot al 1,063,450 is of ficially desig nated as matrix land (USDA FS 2003a). Matrix lands contain nonfor- ested areas, as well as areas technically or administratively unavailable for commercial timber production. The Mount Hood is one of four forests in FS Region 6 that together were assig ned 68 percent of the region?s PSQ volu me (Cr im 2004). T he forest has had a dif ficult time meeti ng its average an nual PSQ estimate. Forest timber program specialists and line of- ficers i nter viewed cited several reasons for this shor tfall. Appeals and litigation Achieving the PSQ on the Mount Hood depended on re- generation har vest of late-successional st ands (Cr im 2004). Litigation and threats of litigation have been major problems on the forest, with many timber sales protested or litigated. For i nst ance, half of the volu me offered for sale i n 2004 was in litigation before the calendar year began. Cases in which a purchaser was awarded a contract and all parties thought the sale would proceed turned out to have the sale unexpect- edly caught up in litigation. As a result, fewer and fewer buyers are willing to deal with the risks, time, and energy of bidding on a sale that may be litigated. The uncertainty over whether a sale will go through affects business plan- ni ng. Moreover, some potential buyers fi nd wal k i ng th rough a g roup of protesters i nto the forest of fice a deter rent to bid - ding on sales. Sales diverted by litigation add to the forests budget problem because national leadership prefers to direct resources to the regions producing timber. Budget T he forest timber prog ram budget has been i nsuf ficient to meet harvest volume expectations. The cost of planning and preparing timber sales increased under the Plan while fund- ing for accomplishing sales decreased. Funds decreased for two reasons: a decrease in the Region 6 share of appropriated funds, and bankruptcy of the salvage-sale fund. Decisions 15 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources relating to the allocation of appropriated funds are made at the Washi ng ton of fice. T he salvage-sale f u nd decreas - es were caused by a decrease i n f u nd i n flow and by the regions increasing reliance on the fund to cover the higher costs of doing business under the Plan. Salvage sales were previously based on treatments of dead and dying trees and windthrow with high market value; under the Plan they shifted to low-value, low-volume treatments that did not yield sig nificant collections. Usi ng salvage-sale f u nds to help meet the cost of achieving PSQ at a time when col- lections had dropped led to bankruptcy of the fund. The Mou nt Hood National Forest has not been f u nded at 100 percent of its PSQ si nce 2001. T he forest was f u nded at 38 percent of its PSQ in 2002, at 30 percent in 2003, and at 28 percent i n 2004. In addition, budget procedures associated with pri- mary purposehave created confusion over which forest programs should pay for planning timber sales. For exam- ple, timber harvesting may be to improve wildlife habitat, suggesting that the wildlife program should pay for some of the planning costs. But these other forest programs are equally short on funds and cannot afford to contribute. Survey and manage species W hen su r vey and manage species requi rements were fi rst implemented, they imposed new analysis and planning requirements that increased the timing and cost of timber sales. Initially an impediment to achieving harvest vol- umes, recentlyparticularly with some species being re- moved from the listsurvey and manage species became less of an obstacle relative to other obstacles. Some spe- cies, like the Malone jumping slug (Hemphillia malonei) that had held up timber harvest projects, were removed from the survey and manage list. Thus, the survey and manage species have not been a major procedural obstacle to achieving PSQ in recent years. Aquatic Conservation Strategy The Mount Hood National Forest is highly dissected by riparian areas, which is typical in the western Cascade Range. Thus, the Plans aquatic conservation strategy pro- visions placing restrictions on timber harvest in riparian areas were widespread, mak i ng it more dif ficult to conduct timber sales than originally anticipated. Commercial timber sales in these highly-fragmented matrix lands became im- practical. The watershed analyses required by the aquatic strategy have been useful for planning at larger scales, however. Decisionmaking constraints Forest managers deciding what projects to implement on the forest consider a host of factors relating to the Plan, such as procedural requirements, and the associated costs (in time, labor, and money) of doing a project. In light of reduced budgets and st af fi ng, managers consider caref ully whether to invest in projects that may get stalled by procedural and administrative quagmires. Coos Bay BLM District Under the Plan and subsequent Coos Bay District Resource Management Plan ( USDI BLM 1995), the Coos Bay BLM District is divided into six land management allocations. Si nce 1994, roughly 80 percent of the dist r ict (248,000 acres) has been in reserve status, where timber management objectives are to promote the development of late-succes- sional forest, rather than to produce commercial timber. In comparison, 80 percent of the district was managed for timber production before the Plan. Most timber harvest is limited to the 20 percent (62,000 acres) of the district cat- egorized as general forest management areas (matrix), or connectivity or diversity blocks. Douglas-fi r ( Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco) is by far the most widespread timber species of sig nificant com mercial value on the dist r ict. I n 1994, 16 percent of Coos Bay Dist r ict land was classified as havi ng old-g row th stands. These stands were highly fragmented because of past clearcutting practices and the checkerboard landowner- ship pattern characteristic of the district. Almost half of the districts land was in early- or midseral forest conditions. Fire suppression policies also affected the district, increas- ing stand densities and fuel loading in older forest stands. Under the Plan, the timber harvest program on the Coos Bay Dist r ict aimed to produce 85 percent of the volu me harvested on matrix by using regeneration techniques, and 15 percent th rough com mercial thi n ni ng (Cadwell 2004). According to interviews with the district forester and the 16 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II dist r ict silvicult u ralist, si nce 1994, timber sales have been predominantly in general forest management areas. They noted that substantial plantations of young trees are within late-successional reserves, however, because the district had previously managed them for intensive commercial timber production. They also indicated concern that unless the dis- trict expands its density management activities in these ar- eas (such as thinning), the young stands in late-successional reserves would not develop older forest characteristics. Timber program specialists interviewed on the Coos Bay Dist r ict gave the followi ng reasons for the dif ficult y in meeting PSQ estimates: Watershed analysis and late-successional reserve assessments As anticipated, the Plans requirements that agencies con- duct watershed analysis and late-successional reserve as- sessments before planning and implementing timber sales made it dif ficult to meet the dist r ict?s PSQ i n the fi rst few years of the Plan. Timber program employees spent much of their time working on watershed analyses and late-suc- cessional reser ve assessments, and t r yi ng to fig u re out what kinds of silvicultural practices could be used in late-succes- sional and riparian reserves. Once these assessments were complete, they no longer posed an impediment to timber sales. Survey and manage species District employees reported that the Plans survey and man- age species requirements had a major and lasting effect on the districts ability to produce expected timber volumes. The district staff needed time to conduct survey protocols for listed category-two species (those for which predisturb- ance surveys were required); implementing the survey and manage species process before sales was cumbersome and greatly slowed them down; and, if a survey and man- age species was found, the planned sale had to be revised. Survey and manage species requirements thus both slowed the timber program to a near halt, and added a great deal of uncertainty to it. Aquatic Conservation Strategy Many of the employees interviewed said that the Aquatic Conservation Strategy played a major role in slowing down timber sales. They cited two primary obstacles relating to aquatic strategy requirements. First, the Plan was vague about how the agencies could meet timber project guide- lines in riparian reserves. Second, people both inside and outside the agency had a hard time accepting the notion that timber could be harvested in reserves at all. Appeals and litigation Many of the Coos Bay Districts timber sales have been ap- pealed. The district has also been sued over its implement- ing of the survey and manage species provisions, timber har vest u nder the 1995 Recissions Act, 9 and management of Port-Orford-cedar root rot (Phytophthora lateralis). This disease spread on the district in part because of the exten- sive network of log haul roads there. Litigation and appeals have had a strong effect on the districts ability to meet the PSQ. Conclusions T he PSQ volu mes anticipated du r i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan were not produced, and timber sales were less predict- able than they were du r i ng the 1980s. Plan expect ations came close to bei ng met bet ween 1995 and 1998, but did not come close after that. The agenciesabilities to achieve PSQ rested on the assumption that most of the harvest in matrix and adaptive management areas would come from older forest stands, and from using regeneration harvest techniques. Contrary to expectations, partial removal techniques, not regeneration harvest, were the main har- vest methods used. Stand age is not an attribute collected in the FS corporate databases that track volume and acres treated (Baker et al., in press). Oregon BLM regeneration- har vest timber sales sold bet ween fiscal years 1999 and 2001 represented a reduction of 89 percent, compared to 9 T he 1995 Recission s Act allowed t he d ist r ict to go for wa rd w it h sales of fered i n 1989 ?91, but not awa rded becau se of lit igat ion at the time. Under the act, the district prepared replacement volume sales for units where biologists had identified northern spotted owl or marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus) activity. 17 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources the volume of regeneration-harvest timber sales sold be- t ween fiscal years 1995 and 1999; and regeneration har vest sales of stands more than 200 years old were reduced by 88 percent bet ween the t wo per iods ( USDA and USDI 2004: 223). T he 1995 to 1998 regeneration-har vest timber sales were already 22 percent below what was expected under the Plan. And harvest in late-successional forests with require- ments for survey and manage species was largely avoided bet ween 1997 and 2003 (Baker et al., i n press). T hus, the expectations that formed the basis for agency PSQ estimates were not met. This outcome is not surprising, however; the FEM AT team noted i n 1993 that produci ng a predict able level of timber sales from Plan-area forests would be dif- ficult or impossible, given the assu mptions associated with PSQ, the prevailing social climate, and the new planning and procedural requirements associated with the Plan. 18 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II 19 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources Chapter 3: Special Forest Products More than 200 species of special forest products are har- vested on pr ivate and public lands i n the Pacific Nor thwest (Alexander and Fight 2003: 283-384). I nterest i n special forest products has g row n si nce the late 1980s because of increases in consumer demand (both at home and abroad), increases in volumes harvested, growing recognition of their ecological importance, and the decline in the timber industry with associated job loss (Lynch and McLain 2003: 5- 6). Many special forest products have long been important to tribes for subsistence, medicine, cultural uses, construc- tion, ar t, and t rade (Ly nch and McLai n 2003: 4, Weigand 2002: 57-58). Special forest products are still valued by many people for cultural, recreational, subsistence, and commercial uses. Among the most important wild and edible species i n the Pacific Nor thwest are huck leber r ies and mushrooms, particularly morels, chanterelles, boletes, and matsut ake. Pacific yew ( Taxus brevifolia Nutt.) is an important medicinal plant. Floral greens are of major eco- nomic importance, especially salal (Gaultheria shallon Pursh), evergreen huckleberry (Vaccinum ovatum Pursh), Oregon grape (Mahonia nervosa (Pursh) Nutt.), western redcedar (Thuja plicata Donn ex D. Don), western sword- fern (Polystichum munitum (Kaulfuss) K. Presl), beargrass (Nolina Michx.), pine cones, mosses, and coniferous boughs such as noble fi r ( Abies procera Rehd.) (Alexander and McLai n 2001: 61- 63, Weigand 2002). Although most com mercial har vesters i n the Pacific Northwest do not rely on special forest products for their sole source of income, these products do provide important supplemental or seasonal sources of income that contrib- ute to household economies. They also provide important economic opportunities for Southeast Asian and Latino im mig rants to the Pacific Nor thwest, whose nu mbers have i ncreased sig nificantly over the last decade, and who face limited employment opportunities (Brown and Marin- Hernandez 2000, Lynch and McLain 2003: 6). Monitoring Question Have predictable levels of special forest products been produced under the Northwest Forest Plan (the Plan)? Expectations Harvest opportunities were expected to continue under the Plan, consistent with the management goals of differ- ent land use allocations. Resource values, special status plants and animals, and resource sustainability would be protected, with use restrictions in areas designated for northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) habitat and protected areas ( USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -277). Plan standards and guidelines call for evaluating the effects of harvest activities on late-successional reserve objectives ( USDA and USDI 1994b: C-18). Har vest rest r ictions i n late-successional reserves could be implemented to prevent adverse effects. Fuelwood gathering was highly restricted in late-successional reserves and managed late-successional areas ( USDA and USDI 1994b: C-16). Fuelwood cut ti ng i n riparian reserves was prohibited, unless required to attain Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives (USDA and USDI 1994b: C-31? C-32). Data Analysis The special forest products data are reported and discussed separately for the Forest Service (FS) and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Each agency categorizes and measures individual special forest products differently, and tracks them for different periods, so the data were not com- bi ned. T he BLM dat a are for Oregon and Washi ng ton as a whole. The FS data are for Plan-area national forests. See appendix B for additional metadata relating to the special forest products data included in this report. Forest Service The FS tracks data relating to special forest products in a database called the Automated Timber Sale Accounting System. These data come from permits and contracts that the agency issues to allow members of the public to harvest special forest products on FS-managed lands. Three meas- ures are tracked in the database: quantity of product sold, value of product sold, and number of permits issued for each product. We used the quantit y of product sold as the best monitoring indicator. See appendix B for a discussion of the two indicators not chosen. 20 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II Quantity of product sold has limitations as an indicator. The quantity sold is not necessarily the same as the amount actually harvested. It refers to the maximum amount of harvest permissible under a permit and is based on agency estimates of the amount people will harvest during the life of the permit. Not all harvesters obtain permits, in spite of reg ulator y requi rements. Agency dat a do not reflect harvest activity by people without permits, which could be substantial. The FS data reported here are for those products that agency specialists considered to be the most important ones i n the Plan area: Ch r ist mas t rees, fi rewood, poles and posts, mushrooms and other fungi, mosses, limbs and boughs, fo- liage, grasses, cones (both green and dry), and transplants. Although ferns and berries are also important, the data available for these products were i nsuf ficient for analysis and reporting. Products such as fi rewood, Ch r ist mas t rees, and poles and posts that can be measured in units that relate to dimen- sion lumber (board feet, cubic feet, cords) are called con- vertible products. Those products that cannot be measured in such terms are called nonconvertible products. Before 1996, the FS did not t rack dat a relati ng to nonconver tible products by product category; they were lumped into one category: nonconvertibles. Thus, we could not track the quantity of individual nonconvertible products sold for the years before 1996. Ou r analysis of FS dat a for nonconver t - ibles begi ns i n 1996 and conti nues th rough 2002, the most recent year for which we were able to obtain data. Convert- ible products were tracked by product category prior to 1996. Ou r analysis of t rends i n fi rewood, poles and posts, and Ch r ist mas t rees sold begi ns with 1994. All of the FS data reported in this chapter are by calendar year. Bureau of Land Management The BLM tracks special forest products in the Timber Sale Information System (TSIS), and summarizes those data in a publication called BLM Facts. Data are available for several categories of convertible and nonconvertible products for 1987?2002. Although dat a are also available by dist r ict, we did not request data from districts. The data reported here are for the enti re st ates of Oregon and Washi ng ton but are believed to reflect special forest product har vest activit y mai nly f rom the five wester n Oregon BLM dist r icts i n the Plan area and on the Pr i neville Dist r ict (Roche 2004). Ver y little special forest product harvesting occurs on BLM dis- t r icts east of the Cascades. W hat is done i n easter n Oregon and Washi ng ton is li kely to be capt u red i n the categor y corral poles,which are not included in this analysis (Roche 2004). The BLM special forest products discussed here are Christmas trees, poles and posts, fuelwood, mushrooms, boughs, floral and g reener y, mosses, and cones. Dat a are available for the amount and value of the product sold, but I report only amount. The data reported here begin with the year 1994. For some products such as fer ns, g reens, bear - grass, and huckleberry brush, data are readily available f rom the early 1990s but not for 1995 onward (although they may be available in TSIS). These important products are not discussed here because I had no data for the Plan period. All of the BLM data reported in this chapter are by fiscal year. Results The volume of fuelwood and Christmas trees sold by both the BLM and the FS decli ned (figs. 7 and 8). T he poles and posts data show contrasting trends: substantial increases i n board feet sold by the BLM si nce 1998, and a slow but steady decli ne for the FS si nce 1994. T he BLM dat a could be i n fluenced by the i nclusion of activit y for Oregon and Washi ng ton as a whole, or the dat a for recent years may include other wood products not previously tracked under this categor y (Gordon 2004). The amount of greenery and foliage sold by the agen- cies has i ncreased si nce the Plan was adopted (figs. 9 and 10). T he BLM bough sales also i ncreased. T he FS limb and bough dat a f rom 1997 and 1998 are g reatly out of pro - portion to the data for the other years. This raises ques- tions of data quality, making the trend line questionable. The quantity of mushrooms sold by the BLM increased bet ween 1994 and 2002 (fig. 11). Although the quantit y of mushrooms sold by the FS declined overall, it has risen 21 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources FS Fuelwood 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 Fuelwood sold (cords) FS Christmas Trees 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 Christmas trees sold 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1999 2000 2001 2002 Year 0 200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 1,000,000 1,200,000 1,400,000 Poles and posts sold (cubic feet) FS Poles and Posts 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Year Fig u re 7? Conver t ible products sold , Forest Ser vice ( FS), 1994 ? 2002. Straight lines are the linear regressions. For fuelwood, t housa nd boa rd feet ? 2.5 = cords; cubic feet ? 80 = cords. For poles and posts, thousand board feet 200 = cubic feet; linear feet ? 0.3 = cubic feet; pieces ? 1.1 = cubic feet. BLM Fuelwood Fuelwood sold (million board feet) BLM Christmas Trees Christmas trees sold BLM Poles and Posts Poles and posts sold (million board feet) 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Year 5 4 3 2 1 0 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Year 5 4 3 2 1 0 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Year 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 Figure 8Convertible products sold, Bureau of Land Ma nagement ( BLM ), 1990 ?20 02. St raig ht li nes a re t he linear regressions. si nce 2000 (fig. 11). T he quantit y of moss sold by the FS (fig. 12) var ied by year, but was basically st able over time; moss sold by the BLM declined. The number of cones sold on FS lands rose but decli ned on BLM lands (fig. 13). Sales of t ransplants decli ned on FS lands (fig. 14) and i ncreased somewhat on BLM lands, with t wo high years i n 1999 and 2000. The amount of grass sold on FS lands rose steadily (fig. 15). 22 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 FS Foliage 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 Year Foliage sold (thousand pounds) 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 FS Limbs and Boughs 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 Year Limbs and boughs sold (thousand pounds) Fig u re 9 ? Foliage, li mbs, a nd boug hs sold , Forest Ser vice, 1996 ?20 02. St raig ht li nes a re t he li nea r reg ressions. No foliage d at a were available f rom Califor n ia forests before 20 0 0; i nclusion of t he Califor n ia d at a for 20 0 0 ?20 02 may be responsible for t he i ncrease. BLM Boughs Year Boughs sold (thousand pounds) 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 BLM Floral and Greenery Year Floral and greenery sold (thousand pounds) 1,600 1,400 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 0 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1,000 800 600 400 200 0 Fig u re 10 ? Boug hs a nd floral a nd g reener y sold , Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement ( BLM ), 1990 ?20 02. St raig ht li nes a re t he li nea r reg ressions. No floral or g reener y d at a were available for 1990 ?95. FS Mushrooms and Fungi Year Mushrooms sold (thousand pounds) 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 BLM Mushrooms Year Mushrooms and fungi sold (thousand pounds) 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Fig u re 11? Mush rooms sold , Forest Ser vice ( FS) a nd Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement ( BLM ). St raig ht li nes a re t he li nea r reg ressions. 23 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources Cones sold (bushels) 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 Cones sold (bushels) 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 FS Cones BLM Cones 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Year 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Year Fig u re 13 ? Cones sold , Forest Ser vice ( FS) a nd Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement ( BLM ). St raig ht li nes a re t he li nea r reg ressions. 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Moss sold (thousand pounds) FS Moss BLM Moss 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Year Year Moss sold (thousand pounds) 200 150 100 50 0 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Fig u re 12 ? Moss sold , Forest Ser vice ( FS) a nd Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement ( BLM ). St raig ht li nes a re t he li nea r reg ressions. T here were no FS moss data for California. Transplants sold Transplants sold FS Transplants BLM Transplants 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Year 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Year 0 4,000 8,000 12,000 16,000 20,000 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 Fig u re 14 ?Tra nspla nts sold , Forest Ser vice ( FS) a nd Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement ( BLM ). St raig ht li nes a re t he li nea r reg ressions. FS t ra nspla nt d at a were available for Califor n ia on ly for 1999 ?20 01. 24 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II Discussion The aggregate regional-scale data show a mix of trends in the quantity of special forest products sold by the agencies. Permitted harvesting of convertible special forest products declined in all cases, except for poles and posts on BLM lands. Trends in the permitted harvest of nonconvertible products differed by product and agency. Regional-scale data obscure trends at the forest scale, which may differ f rom regional t rends. Without FS per mit dat a for noncon - ver tible products for the years before 1996, compar i ng the quantity of nonconvertible special forest products sold be- fore and after the Plans adoption was not possible. Many factors i n fluence availabilit y and har vest activit y of special forest products. These factors include changes in harvest opportunities on federally managed forest lands, and changes in demand for products by harvesters. Both affect trends in sales of special forest products by the agen- cies. Changes in harvest opportunities on federal forest lands can be caused by decreases in product availability from heavy harvest pressure, weather, or both. Changing habitat conditions on forests also affect product availability. For example, fi re suppression policies may negatively affect species (like beargrass) that thrive in burned areas or are associated with early-seral-stage forests. In contrast, many com mercially valuable floral g reens prefer mid- to late- seral-stage forests and semiclosed canopies, which are favored u nder the Plan (FEM AT 1993: V I-12). Decreased product availability may also be caused by reduced for- est access from road closures or lack of road maintenance. Reduced road access to forests keeps people away from har- vest sites. Finally, harvest opportunities can be constrained by management decisions to restrict the harvest of some products on parts or all of a forest. Changes in harvester demand for special forest prod- ucts from federal forests can be caused by shifts in market demand for the product, commodity prices, the availability of alternate supplies, and changing consumer preferences (e.g., switching from wood stoves to electric or gas heaters to heat homes). Moreover, apparent changes in harvester demand may be due to increased enforcement efforts on some forests. Increasing trends in the quantity of a product sold could reflect an i ncrease i n har vester nu mbers and activit y, or an increase in the number of illegal harvesters opting to obtain permits (with little change in actual activity). Because many var iables i n fluence t rends i n the quan - tity of special forest products sold on federal forest lands, quantity soldalthough currently the best indicator for which data are availabledoes not by itself adequately reflect whether or not the agencies have been produci ng a predictable level of special forest products. All it can tell us is whether or not agencies have been selling a predictable quantity of these products. The quantity of special for- est products sold indicates some combination of harvester demand for the product, opportunities to harvest products provided by the agencies, and harvester behavior. To gain insight into how the Plan has affected special forest product harvest opportunities locally, the monitoring team interviewed special forest products specialists from the four case-study forests (the Olympic, Mount Hood, and Klamath National Forests and the Coos Bay BLM district) (see app. D). Interview results are summarized below for products about which we obtained information. Fuelwood Trends in fuelwood harvest on the four case-study forests were consistent with regional trends: downward (table 2). FS Grass 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 Grass sold (thousand pounds) 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Year Fig u re 15 ? G rass sold , Forest Ser vice ( FS). T here were no d at a for California. 25 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources Table 2Trends in convertible special forest products harvested on case-study forests, 19902002 Fuelwood Christmas trees Poles and posts Location 1990 2002 Trend 1990 2002 Trend 1990 2002 Trend - - -Cords - - - - - - Pieces - - - - - Cubic feet- - Forest Service: Oly mpic 2,792 1,571 ? 3,944 1,315 ? 13,696 278 ? Mou nt Hood 14,326 3,886 ? 56,851 4,465 ? 24,599 255 ? K lamath 7,612 4,682 ? 7,714 2,310 ? 7,670b 10,994 c ? Plan area ? ? ? Bureau of Land Management: Coos Baya ? 601 155 ? Plan area ? ? ? a Fuelwood is combined with salvage wood harvest figures in the Coos Bay District annual reports. Interviewees reported that firewood harvest ha d d ropped si nce 1990, but we do not have t he qu a nt it at ive d at a to suppor t t hat st atement. T he volu me of salvage wood a nd f uelwood ha r vested toget her d ropped f rom a n aver age of 16 4,0 0 0 cubic feet per yea r bet ween 1987 a nd 1991, to a n aver age of 42,0 0 0 cubic feet per yea r bet ween 1996 a nd 20 02. b Dat a were for 1991, not 1990. c Dat a were for 20 01, not 20 02. Notes: To see the full special forest products trend data for case forests, refer to the individual case study reports (Buttolph et al., in press; Cha r n ley et al., i n press; K ay et al., i n press; McLai n et al., i n press). W here no d at a ent r ies a re recorded for a forest, no good d at a for the product were available; this absence does not necessarily mean that the product was not harvested. According to interviewees, the Plan has probably affected fuelwood gathering more than any other special forest product harvest activity. Under the Plan, fuelwood har- vest is highly restricted in late-successional and riparian reserves. Restrictions apply to the kind of wood removed, and where and when it can be removed. These restrictions have reduced access to fuelwood in the reserves. Fuelwood gathering was historically linked to forest timber programs. It was typically from areas recently harvested through timber sales. Under the Plan, many fewer timber sales happened, reducing the availability of fuelwood. Christmas Trees Trends in Christmas tree harvesting dropped on all four case-study forests, consistent with regional trends (table 2). Under the Plan, the Coos Bay District limited the harvest of Christmas trees from late-successional reserves to areas near existing roads. On the Mount Hood National Forest, the special forest products program manager linked Christmas tree supplies to the presence of young regeneration forests, which contain trees appropriate for Christmas trees. She expects continuing declines in Christmas tree harvest as these stands age, and little timber harvest activity and replanting take place. On some national forests, access to high-elevation areas where preferred Christmas tree species such as noble fi r g row, road closu res and lack of road mai n - tenance (a partial result of the Plan) have reduced access to Ch r ist mas t rees (Du ran 2004). Limbs and Boughs The harvest of limbs and boughs dropped on the Olympic and Klamath National Forests (table 3). On the Olympic National Forest, bough harvesting had harmed trees, and theft was a problem, so the forest shut down the bough prog ram i n 2002. We did not obt ai n i nfor mation about the cause of decline on the Klamath National Forest. Under the Plan, the Coos Bay District restricted bough harvesting in late-successional reserves to areas along or close to roads. Nevertheless, harvest on the district has increased substan- tially. One interviewee stated that the reduced forest acreage in regeneration harvest under the Plan could reduce the supply of boughs available. Harvesters often gather boughs 26 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II Table 3Trends in nonconvertible special forest products harvested on case-study forests, 19962002 Mushrooms and other fung i Limbs and boughs Fol iage and floral greens Location 1996 2002 Trend 1996 2002 Trend 1996 2002 Trend - - - Pounds - - - - - - - Pounds - - - - - - - - Pounds - - - - National Forest: Oly mpic 19,642 13,800 ? 111,200 400 ? ? a Mou nt Hood 887 4,883 ? 7,115 386,985 ? 500 8,500 ? K lamath 2,278 19,505 ? 17,098 8,143 ? Plan area ? ? ? Bureau of Land Management: Coos Bay 8,600 52,000 ? 6,450 52,730 ? 46,400 129,600 ? Plan area ? ? ? from young stands in areas of regeneration harvest. As stands mature and fewer new plantings take place, opportu- nities to collect boughs are likely to decrease. Transplants Trends in the number of transplants sold differed among the case-study forests (table 3). Digging up transplants can be a sig nificant g rou nd- dist u rbi ng activit y. T he Mou nt Hood National Forest typically issued permits to remove trans- plants only from areas that had already undergone survey and manage procedures because the forest did not have the means to survey solely for the purpose of a single personal- use permit. The added coordination and communication required to identify areas suitable for transplant removal may have contributed to the downward trend in the quantity of transplants sold on the Mount Hood. Moss The data show a downward trend in amounts of moss sold on the case-study forests (table 3). The Olympic National Forest ended the legal harvest of moss for two reasons: monitoring showed that moss needed time to grow back, Moss Cones Transplants Grass Location 1996 2002 Trend 1996 2002 Trend 1996 2002 Trend 1996 2002 Trend - - Pounds - - - - Bushels - - - - Number - - - - - - Pounds - - - - National Forest: Oly mpic 35,624 b 104 ? 50 20 ? 281 190 c ? Mou nt Hood 51 0 ? 400 150 c ? 1,105 571 ? 172,300 282,790 ? K lamath 480 230 ? Plan area ? ? ? ? Bureau of Land Management: Coos Bay 2,000 0 ? 994 b 150 d ? 936e 343 Var iable Plan area ? ? ? a Olympic National Forest interviewees reported a substantial upward trend in foliage harvest, especially salal; however, we were unable to obtain data on foliage for the Olympic National Forest. b Dat a a re for 1997. c Trend was upward, but 2002 was a low year. d Dat a a re for 20 01. e Dat a a re for 1995. Notes: To see full special forest products trend data, refer to the individual case-study reports (Buttolph et al., in press; Charnley et al., in press; K ay et al., i n press; McLai n et al., i n press). W here no d at a ent r ies appea r for a forest, no reliable d at a were available; t h is absence does not necessarily mean that the product was not harvested. 27 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources and the presence of important moss-associated species, including potential species of concern under the Plan, required evaluating the effects of moss harvest on these species. Without methods and suf ficient f u ndi ng to evalu - ate them, the forest ended the moss harvest. The Coos Bay District also eliminated access to moss under the Plan. Moss on the district is mainly in riparian reserves. The districts Resource Management Plan, directly tied to the standards and guidelines of the Plan, directs managers to limit the harvest of riparian species. Mushrooms and Other Fungi T he case-st udy dat a reflect mixed t rends i n amou nts of mushrooms and other fungi sold (table 3). Interviewees attributed trends in mushroom harvesting on FS lands to weather, market demand, and pricing. For example, mat- sutake mushrooms were harvested in large quantities on FS lands du r i ng the mid-1990s, when pr ices were high (matsutake are not nearly as abundant on BLM lands in wester n Oregon) (McLai n 2004). I n the late 1990s, the price for matsutakes dropped sharply as the Japanese market declined. This drop, coupled with an increase in the price of a matsutake permit, caused many pickers to d rop out of the i ndust r y (McLai n 2004). T his shif t i n market conditions could help explain the downward trend in amounts of mushrooms and other fungi sold between 1997 and 2000. The increase in amounts of mushrooms sold on BLM lands may be linked to the issuance of BLMs handbook on special forest products i n 1994 (Gordon 2004). T he BLM handbook established procedures for the sale and harvest of mushrooms, which had been overlooked until then, and may have triggered enforcement of a more for- mal permitting process for mushrooms than had existed previously (Gordon 2004). T hus, the r ise i n mush room sales may par tially reflect per mit pu rchases by har vesters who previously harvested without them. T he Plan has also had an i n fluence on mush room har - vesti ng. Some national forests (i ncludi ng the Willamet te, the Deschutes, and the Siuslaw) prohibited commercial mushroom harvesting in at least some late-successional reser ves af ter the Plan was adopted (McLai n 2004). T his action shut down parts of these forests to legal picking, causing harvesters to shift to other areas, including BLM lands. The BLM, in contrast, did not shut down most of its late-successional reserves to mushroom harvesting. This decision, however, was subject to late-successional reserve assessments and evaluations of the effects of harvesting on the reserves. More generally, interviewees noted that changes in forest composition associated with reduced timber harvest- ing under the Plan will affect some special forest products. Species associated with disturbance and early seral-stage forests (like salal or boughs) are likely to become less com- mon, and those associated with later seral-stage forests (like matsutake, swordfern, or moss) are likely to become more available. The survey and manage procedures were apparently not a major constraint on special forest product harvesting. Instead, the land use allocation component of the Plan especially management objectives associated with late-suc- cessional and riparian reserveshas caused program man- agers to curtail the harvest of certain species on parts of the forests. The degree to which restrictions have been imple- mented on forests in the Plan area differs, depending in part on how individual forests have interpreted Plan guidelines. Finally, interviewees reported that the Plan has affected the administration of special forest products programs on federal forests. For the FS, these programs were histori- cally funded by forest timber programs. The drop in timber harvest led to a drop in forest timber-program budgets. The results were fewer staff and less funding to manage and administer special forest products programs, and to moni- tor the effects of harvest activities. The BLM special forest products programs were also funded by the agencys timber program historically. Although program budgets have re- mai ned flat, i ncreasi ng costs and decreasi ng st aff nu mbers have deterred accomplishing all of the work required to administer the program. Conclusions Have predictable levels of special forest products been pro- duced under the Plan? Convertible special forest products sold declined regionwide during the monitoring period, 28 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II except for posts and poles on BLM lands. T his fi ndi ng was expected for fuelwood because fuelwood harvest was highly restricted in the reserves under record of decision st andards and g uideli nes ( USDA and USDI 1994b). T he trends for nonconvertibles were mixed, and they differed by agency and case-study forest. Attributing trends in special forest product sales to agency management actions under the Plan versus other factors is dif ficult, mak i ng this an i nadequate i ndicator for assessing whether the agencies have produced predict- able levels of special forest products. For example, declin- i ng t rends may reflect lack of har vester demand or weather conditions unfavorable for product availability (like mush- rooms) and may have little to do with agency actions that limit harvest opportunities. Furthermore, the available data pertain to permitted activity only; we were unable to moni- tor harvest activity by people lacking permits. Nevertheless, interviews with agency special forest product specialists provided some insights into how the Plan has affected the production of special forest prod- ucts on individual forests. According to interviewees, the Plan probably affected fuelwood gathering more than any other harvest activity because of harvest restrictions in the reserves and the links between fuelwood harvest and forest timber prog rams. T his fi ndi ng was expected. Har vest re - strictions for other special forest products (like mushrooms, moss, Christmas trees, cedar) exist in late-successional reser ves and r ipar ian reser ves on some forests. T his fi ndi ng was also expected. The aging of young forest stands and the decline of regeneration harvesting under the Plan could reduce the availability of some products, such as Christmas trees and boughs. Over the long term, changes in forest habitat caused by developing older forest characteristics and decreasing early seral-stage forests are likely to alter prod- uct availability. 29 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources G razi ng on federal forests i n the Nor thwest Forest Plan (Plan) area (mostly west of the Cascade Range) is minor compared to grazing on federal lands in eastern Oregon and Washi ng ton and nor theaster n Califor nia. T he Forest Service (FS) units in the Plan area with the most grazing activit y were the Okanogan-Wenatchee, Rog ue-Sisk iyou, and Klamath National Forests. The most grazing activity on Plan-area Bureau of Land Management (BLM) districts was on the Medford Dist r ict. G razi ng on the other fou r BLM districts is minimal to nonexistent. Monitoring Question Have predictable levels of livestock grazing been produced under the Northwest Forest Plan? Expectations G razi ng was expected to conti nue with modifications to ensure consistency with the management objectives for the land use allocations. Modification of g razi ng practices i n r ipar ian reser ves was expected ( USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -276). I n all allocations, sites where k now n and newly discovered populations of 10 mollusk species or subspecies and 1 vascular plant species listed i n the record of deci - sion (ROD) were to be protected from grazing (USDA and USDI 1994b: C- 6). G razi ng could be adjusted or elimi nated in riparian and late-successional reserves if grazing would retard or prevent attaining reserve and Aquatic Conserva- tion Strategy (aquatic strategy) objectives (USDA and USDI 1994b: C-17, C-33). New livestock handli ng or manage - ment facilities would be located outside of riparian reserves ( USDA and USDI 1994b: C-33). Existi ng facilities could be relocated if they would prevent attaining aquatic strategy or reser ve objectives ( USDA and USDI 1994b: C-17, C-33). Modifications to g razi ng practices were expected to have consequences for individual permittees (USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -276). Chapter 4: Grazing Data Analysis The number of grazing allotments or leases, allotment acres, grazing permittees, and animal unit months (AUMs) are potential indicators of livestock grazing on federal for- est lands. The FS and BLM track the number and acres of active and vacant grazing allotments. The Oregon BLM also tracks the number of grazing leases but does not report the number of acres leased. For the FS, the monitoring team used number of active allotments and number of active al- lotment acres as monitoring indicators. Allotments current- ly vacant were not included as most are being phased out. For the BLM, the team monitored number of grazing leases. For the FS, the team also monitored number of grazing permittees. A grazing permittee or lessee is any entity that has a grazing permit or lease for one or more allotments, such as an individual or a cooperative with several members (Forest Ser vice Manual [FSM] 2230.5). The team also monitored animal unit months (AUMs) as an indicator of range use. One animal unit month equals the amou nt of forage a mat u re cow (of 1,000 pou nds) and calf consume in a 30-day period (about 780 pounds of dry weight) (Mitchell 2000: 64 ? 65). Both the FS and BLM t rack AU Ms. We used dat a for author ized use (as opposed to per - mitted use), which represents the amount of use authorized by the agencies for that year. Author ized use can fluct uate annually, depending on forage supply, special restrictions, and other var iables. Author ized (or active) use is specified on the annual bill of collection (FS) or grazing bill (BLM), and ver ified by a per mit tee?s or lessee?s pay ment of fees. Our grazing data came from the implementation moni- toring report (Baker et al., in press) and from two forest units.1 Data in that report came from agency databases (INFRA and RAS), annual agency accomplishment reports, and personal interviews with agency specialists. The data are for t wo per iods: one pre-Plan (1992?94) and one recent (2001? 03). Appendix B cont ai ns a discussion of dat a- quality issues and grazing indicators that the team did not monitor. 1 Data obtained from the FS regional offices for the Okanogan- Wenatchee a nd K la mat h Nat ional Forest s were eit her i ncomplete or incorrect and so were not used. 30 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II Results Regional-scale grazing data for the national forests and BLM dist r icts i n the Plan area are show n i n t ables 4 and 5. T he FS dat a (t able 4) i ndicate a d rop i n g razi ng activit y since the Plan was adopted. The number of active allot- ments, number of active allotment acres, number of permit- tees, and number of authorized AUMs all declined between 1993 and 2002. Table 4Grazing on national forest units in the Northwest Forest Plan area, 199394 and 200103a Authorized Yearb Active allotments Permittees AUMs Number Acres - - - - Number - - - - 1993 ?94 224 4,208,447 216 124,662 2001? 03 191 3,415,138 158 85,412 a Dat a for t he Ok a noga n, Deschutes, a nd Wi nema Nat ional Forest s a re for the ranger districts in the Plan area; they are not for the entire forest. b For the pre-Plan period, this chart contains Pacific Northwest Region d at a f rom 1993 combi ned w it h Pacif ic Sout hwest Reg ion d at a f rom 1994. For t he post-Pla n per iod , t he forest-scale d at a ca me f rom 20 01, 20 02, or 2003, depending on the forest. The Shasta-Trinity data used were of questionable quality. AUMS = animal unit months. Sou rce: Ba ker et al., i n press, Ok a noga n-Wenatchee Nat ional Forest, Klamath National Forest. The number of BLM grazing leases dropped by about half bet ween 1993 and 2002 (t able 5), and AU Ms decreased slightly. W hen g razi ng is measu red i n AU Ms alone, it ap - pears that grazing opportunity on BLM lands remained reasonably stable since the Plan was adopted. Nevertheless, the nu mber of author ized AU Ms does not necessar ily reflect act ual use (Mack i n non 2005). T he nu mber of animals act u - ally grazed may be well below the number authorized. The number of leases on BLM lands dropped substantially dur- ing the period. I n the FEM AT repor t (FEM AT 1993: V I-11), the BLM was reported to have provided some 23,000 AUMs, and the FS was repor ted to have provided about 213,000 AU Ms on their lands in the northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) region histor ically. If so, then recent fig u res i ndi - cate a sharp reduction in grazing on Plan-area forests. Differences in the grazing data between the two periods may partially be due to different ways of calculating and reporting the data. The BLM grazing specialists thought that the 1993 dat a may represent the nu mber of active and vacant leases combined, whereas the 2002 data may repre- sent the number of active leases only. This reporting differ- ence could account for the drop in number of BLM grazing leases reported during the period; but grazing specialists could not verify this reporting difference. Thus, we cannot say with certainty that the changes observed were entirely due to on-the-ground changes in livestock grazing. Discussion A drop in grazing activity on Plan-area forests was predicted in the Plans environmental impact statement (USDA and USDI 1994a), and expected based on ROD st andards and guidelines. The ROD directs managers to adjust or elimi- nate grazing in reserves to meet the objectives of the aquatic strategy and late-successional reserves. Nationwide, the number of grazing permittees and AUMs on FS- and BLM- managed lands also decreased du r i ng the 1990s (Char nley and Lang ner 2001: 31, Mack i n non 2005). T hus, decli nes i n grazing trends likely cannot be attributed to the Plan alone. The monitoring team interviewed grazing program specialists on three of the four case-study forests where forest-scale monitoring was conducted2 (the Mount Hood and Klamath National Forests and the Coos Bay BLM Dis- trict) to investigate how the Plan may have contributed to declines in grazing locally (see app. D). Interview results are reported by agency in the following discussion. 2 G r a z i ng on t he Oly mpic Nat ional Forest over t he pa st deca de wa s neglig ible, i nvolv i ng one per m it tee a nd , at most, 12 cat tle. I n 20 03, the forest discontinued this permit. Table 5Grazing on Bureau of Land Management units in the Northwest Forest Plan area, fiscal years 1993 and 2002 Year Leases AUMs FY 1993 114 10,645 FY 2002 54 9,944 AUMs = animal unit months. Source: Baker et al., in press. 31 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources Forest Service G razi ng on the Mou nt Hood and Klamath National Forests remained reasonably stable bet ween 1993 and 2002 (t able 6). Program managers reported little change in their grazing programs and minor effects from the Plan. The drop in the number of permittees on the Klamath could be due to a consolidation of per mits. W hen allotments and their associated permits become open, other existing permittees often take over the permits. As a result, the number of allotments re- mains the same, but the number of permittees decreases. Both forests noted greater attention to grazing effects in riparian reserves to meet aquatic strategy objectives. For example, on the Mount Hood, permittees have been asked to change some of their grazing practices in riparian areas, and to move their cattle more frequently to prevent over- grazing. Managers on the Klamath National Forest attributed the 15-percent decli ne i n author ized AU Ms pr imar ily to the prolonged drought the area has experienced on the west side of the forest. The Plan has had some effects, however. Un- der the Plan, grazing practices must be consistent with the Aquatic Conservation Strategy. This has meant reviewing and sometimes imposing restrictions on grazing in riparian areas. For example, cattle may not be allowed to enter ripar- ian areas until the ground has fully dried in late spring, and must be removed before they overgraze, which shortens the use period. The Plan also reportedly caused the NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) analysis associated with permit renewal to become more rigorous. In short, since the Plan went into effect, the forest has increased its scrutiny over the impact of livestock on the forest, particu- larly in riparian areas, and made some adjustments. The drought has been a big factor, with shrinking water sources that require increasing protection and cattle management. The overall effects are small, incremental declines in forage availability and increased requirements for permittees. Survey and manage requirements associated with the renewal of grazing permits under the Plan was not seen as having an effect on grazing, but the Endangered Species Act was viewed as having the potential to affect grazing. G razi ng i n late-successional reser ves still occu rs, but has been adjusted for location and timing so as to minimize ecological impacts, also shortening the season and reducing the number of animals. After drought, the second largest factor that managers reported as contributing to reduced forage availability on the Klamath National Forest was the dramatic reduction in timber program activity incorporated into policy with the Plan. This has resulted in much less early-seral-stage forest habitat that is productive for grazing. All of these forces have contributed to a small decline in the grazing program on the Klamath National Forest si nce 1994. Overall, the prog ram is viewed as relatively stable with little turnover in permittees and good relations Table 6Grazing on the case-study forests, 19932004 Active Authorized Unit Year allotments/leases Allotment Permittees AUMsa Number Acres - - - - Number - - - - National Forest: Oly mpic 1993 1 644 1 193 2004 0 0 0 0 Mou nt Hood 1993 5 159,787 8 5,282 2002 5 152,564 8 5,052 K lamath 1994 51 707,369 52 29,134 2002 55 759,330 42 24,630 Bureau of Land Management: Coos Bay 1994 7 439 270 2002 6 No dat a 124 b a AUMs = animal unit months. b I ncon sistent re por t i ng: t he sou rce text also re por ted a f ig u re of 496; we ma de a n educated g uess t hat t he nu mber 124 wa s more accu r ate. Sou rces: T he 1993 d at a for t he nat ional forest s ca me f rom Ba ker et al. (i n press), a s d id t he 20 02 d at a for the Klamath. Mount Hood data came from the Mount Hood National Forest grazing specialist. T he 20 0 4 d at a f rom t he Oly mpic Nat ional Forest ca me f rom t he forest pla n ner. T he 1994 d at a for the Klamath National Forest are from the Implementation Monitoring module, except the number of permittees is an estimate based on information provided by the forest grazing-program specialist. For Coos Bay, 1994 d at a a re f rom USDI BLM 1994: 3 ?111, a nd 20 02 d at a a re f rom USDI BLM 20 03: 85. 32 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II between managers and ranchers. Interviewees from both forests said grazing outside the reserves does not currently con flict with management objectives, so lit tle has changed there. Bureau of Land Management Cattle were grazing on the Medford, Coos Bay, Roseburg, and Eugene BLM Dist r icts i n 1993. By 2002, only the Med - ford and Coos Bay Districts still had grazing leases, and only 6 of the 54 were on Coos Bay Dist r ict land. The regional decline in the number of leases on BLM lands could reflect a consolidation of leases (Mi nor 2004), or it could reflect a phasi ng out of many small leases on BLM dist r icts af ter the Plan was adopted (Baker 2004, Li nt 2004). T he Medford Dist r ict, which has larger blocks of land where grazing can occur, did not phase out small leases (Mi nor 2004). I n cont rast, many of the other wester n Oregon BLM lands are checkerboards, with mile-square sections of BLM land alternating with mile-square sections of private land. Riparian corridors continually cut across ownerships, impeding aquatic conservation practices (such as fencing streams). Efforts to meet Aquatic Conserva- tion Strategy objectives on these districts would likely be ineffective if adjacent landowners did not adopt the same practices. T he dif ficult y i n managi ng g razi ng i n compliance with the aquatic strategys objectives given such constraints may have led the BLM to cancel some of its small leases held by people who graze a small number of livestock (Baker 2004, Li nt 2004, Mack i n non 2005). A nother reason for canceling small and scattered leases was that it was not economical to manage them (Hacket t 2005, Mack i n non 2005). The change in the number of leases on the Coos Bay Dist r ict bet ween 1993 and 2002 (f rom seven to six) was due to a discontinuation of one short-term lease (McLain et al., in press). In 2003, two of the six remaining leases were converted to cooperative management agreements. These agreements were established with lessees in an at- tempt to manage grazing on the district in a manner that was consistent with the Aquatic Conservation Strategy and to protect threatened and sensitive species living in an area of critical environmental concern. The complicated land ownership pattern in the Coos Bay checkerboard makes fencing sensitive riparian and wetland habitat impractical. Cooperative management agreements enable the BLM and adjacent landowners to collaborate in addressing grazing management to achieve ecosystem health, and allow the BLM to regulate unauthorized grazing on the land it man- ages ( USDI BLM 2001). Under the ag reements, both the BLM and private landowners coordinate in fencing off sen- sitive riparian zones on their lands, and designate alterna- tive areas where grazing on BLM lands is acceptable. There are no cooperative management agreements on the Medford Dist r ict (Hacket t 2005). The Coos Bay case suggests that the Plan contributed to new ways of doing business in the grazing program that promoted collaborative resource management to achieve aquatic strategy objectives. It also suggests that the substan- tial decline in the number of grazing leases on Oregon BLM lands bet ween 1993 and 2001 might i n par t be explai ned by changes in the nature of grazing agreements between the agency and ranchers. Some former lessees may still graze livestock on BLM lands in the absence of formal leases, which could account for the small drop in AUMs. The decline in timber sales under the Plan (compared with pre-1990 levels) may affect g razi ng. Later seral-st age forest does not offer the quality and abundance of live- stock forage found in early seral-stage habitat (Mackinnon 2005, Phelps 2003). I n the absence of loggi ng, there is less transitory range, meaning less forage for livestock. Habitat change could lead to reductions in permitted AUMs, or a higher concentration of cattle in riparian areas and mead- ows (Mi nor 2004). Although the Plan may have contributed to the decline i n g razi ng on FS and BLM lands bet ween 1993 and 2002, agency grazing specialists reported that other factors unrelated to the Plan have had a greater effect. These i nclude prolonged d rought, Endangered Species Act (1973) requi rements relati ng to anad romous fish i n st reams on allotments, and the viability of ranching. Some permittees and lessees have experienced social and economic pressures that have undermined the viability of ranching, and have either reduced or discontinued their use of FS and BLM lands for grazing. 33 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources Conclusions Agency data indicate that livestock grazing on FS and BLM lands i n the Plan area decreased bet ween the early 1990s and the early 2000s. Some decreases were expected because of management constraints in late-successional and ripar- ian reserves under ROD standards and guidelines. Predict- able (stable) levels of livestock grazing were not produced on FS-managed lands under the Plan at the regional scale. W hen measu red by AU Ms alone, g razi ng levels on BLM lands were fairly stable at the regional scale, declining only slightly. However, two of four districts discontinued grazing during the Plan period, and the number of leases regionwide dropped by about half. It is unknown whether the drop in number of leases was due to a change in reporting practices between the two periods, actual change, or both. The Plan is only one of several factors likely to be re- sponsible for reduced grazing on federal forests in the owl region. The FS grazing specialists interviewed by the moni- toring team said that the Plan had little effect on grazing opportunity apart from causing some restrictions in riparian areas. Weather and Endangered Species Act requi rements per t ai ni ng to anad romous fish i n st reams on allot ments also constrained grazing activity. And, social and economic fac- tors causing the viability of grazing operations to decline meant use had dropped on some units. In addition, the BLM interviewees said that managing grazing in a manner con- sistent with the Aquatic Conservation Strategys objectives was dif ficult where dist r ict lands are i n checkerboards. T his contributed to canceling some leases and converting oth- ers to cooperative management agreements. Investigating the relative contributions of each of these variables to the decline in grazing was beyond the scope of the monitoring program. 34 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II 35 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources Mining on federal forests in the Northwest Forest Plan (the Plan) area is a minor land use. For leasable minerals (oil, gas, geother mal), the Cascade Range i n Oregon and Wash - ington and parts of the northern California forests may contain valuable geothermal resources (USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -274 -275). T here has been lit tle geother mal ex - ploration or development in the Plan area to date, and what has been done was localized. Some federal forest lands in Oregon and Washi ng ton may cont ai n oil and gas resou rces, but they have not yet been explored and developed for pro- duction. The four California forests have no oil or gas. Some parts of the Plan area have known deposits of locatable minerals (gold, silver, copper, molybdenum, chro- mium) and areas with high potential for discovery of min- eral deposits (FEM AT 1993: V I-11). Josephi ne and Jackson Counties in Oregon contain known mineral deposits. The Cascade Range has high potential for the discovery and production of locatable minerals. Salable minerals (gravel, stone, sand) occur through- out the Plan area. They are used by the managing agencies, other government and commercial entities, and private individuals mainly for construction and road building. Monitoring Question Have predictable levels of minerals been produced under the Plan? Expectations Mi ni ng was expected to conti nue, with modifications to ensure consistency with the management objectives of the land use allocations. T he Plan?s fi nal supplement al envi ron - ment al impact st atement (FSEIS) ( USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -275) predicted that Plan effects on mi nerals would be linked to development constraints and mitigation measures designed to protect late-successional and old-growth (older forest) ecosystems. No effects were expected for salable mi nerals ( USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -276). T he effects of mining in late-successional reserves and managed late- successional areas would be assessed. Restrictions and mitigation measures would be implemented to minimize negative effects on late-successional habitat (USDA and Chapter 5: Minerals USDI 1994b: C-17). T he record of decision (ROD) cont ai ns several guidelines for minerals management in riparian reser ves ( USDA and USDI 1994b: C-34 - C-35). T hese guidelines pertain to road building, support structures and facilities, and waste materials, and they are designed to ensure consistency with the objectives of the aquatic conservation strategy. The ROD also contains standards and guidelines for plans of operation, reclamation plans and bonds, inspection, and monitoring in riparian reserves. These standards and guidelines could increase the cost of extracting minerals from the reserves, and decrease mining activit y there ( USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -276). Data Analysis Minerals production only on national forest lands is assessed here, because the Bureau of Land Manage- ment (BLM) did not provide the monitoring team with minerals data. Finding good indicators for mining proved challeng- ing. The indicators differ by mineral class, as do the years for which data are available. I report locatable and salable mi nerals dat a for the Forest Ser vice (FS) Pacific Nor thwest Region (Region 6) and Pacific Southwest Region (Region 5) forests separately because they are available for different years in each region. Leasable Minerals The monitoring team used number of leases of record (leas- es) as an indicator of leasable minerals activity. The BLM is responsible for recording and issuing leases for leasable mi nerals. Leases are nor mally issued for a 10 -year per iod. It is not possible to tell how many of the existing leases are ac- tive. T he Region 6 dat a were available for fiscal years 1995 and 2000. A n nual dat a for fiscal years 1990 onward were available for the Califor nia forests. Only the 1995 and 2000 dat a are repor ted for Region 5. The Minerals Management Service tracks the produc- tion of leasable minerals. No production reports for leasable minerals are available for the Plan area because no leasable minerals were produced there during the monitoring period. 36 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II Locatable Minerals The FS does not track the volume of locatable minerals removed. This information is proprietary, and the govern- ment does not charge users any royalties or payments (other than i ncome t axes) on the basis of volu me removed (Gusey 2003). In the absence of production data, the best available indicators pertain to public participation in mining activ- ity. Number of mining sites is one such indicator. However, many mining sites are abandoned, and agency databases do not distinguish between abandoned and active sites, making this a poor indicator. Instead, the team monitored the num- ber of new mining claims located and the number of plans of operation approved each year. Total annual numbers of mining claims and plans of operation would be better moni- toring indicators, but these data were not available. A mining-claim location may indicate a persons intent to mine in a given area. A plan of operation describes how a user intends to develop the mining site. The plan of opera- tion must be approved before the user can start mining on a claim. The number of plans of operation submitted to a forest may be higher than the nu mber approved. We do not know what percentage of plans submitted actually get ap- proved. Data for the number of new mining claims located were available for the years 1990 ?2003. Dat a for the nu mber of new plans of operation approved were available for most years bet ween 1995 and 2003. Salable Minerals Volume of salable minerals removed is the indicator used for salable minerals production. The FS tracks three cat- egories of use: FS use, free use, and contract use. The FS removes salable minerals mainly for road construction and reconstruction. The agency issues free-use permits to mem- bers of the public and government agencies. Users wishing to remove salable minerals for commercial purposes obtain contracts of sale. T he Region 6 salable mi nerals dat a are for fiscal years 2000 ?2003. No dat a are available for volu me removed u n - der free-use permits or contracts of sale for Region 6 before 2000. Du r i ng the 1990s, Region 6 estimated the volu me of salable minerals removed for FS use on the basis of miles of road constructed and reconstructed, which was not considered accu rate. T he Region 5 dat a were available for the years 1990 ?1995 and 2000 ?2003. Results Leasable Minerals The number of leases of record held on Plan-area forests i n 1995 and 2000 are show n i n t able 7. T hese dat a i ndi - cate virtually no change in leasable minerals activity on FS lands since the Plan was adopted. The only California forest with leases of record was the K lamath, with 43 i n each period. Most leases in Region 6 were on the Deschutes National Forest. No leasable minerals were produced during the monitor i ng per iod (Gusey 2003). Table 7Leasable minerals activity in Northwest Forest Plan-area national forests, fiscal years (F Y ) 1995 and 2000 Number of leases of record Location FY 1995 FY 2000 Region 5 43 43 Region 6 88 87 Tot al, Plan area 131 130 Sou rces: For Reg ion 5: Forest Ser v ice a n nu al re por t; for Reg ion 6: m i ner al lea si ng re por t December 1995 a nd December 1997, Reg ion 6 Recreat ion, La nd s, a nd M i ner als st af f sprea d sheet Ja nu a r y 1999. Locatable Minerals Fig u res 16 and 17 cont ai n i ndicator dat a for locat able minerals. The number of new claims located and new plans of operation waned over time. Region 6 forests accounted for most of the new claims of record. The Okanogan-Wenatchee, Mou nt Baker-Snoqual mie, and Siskiyou National Forests had the most new mining claims located. Most of the new plans of operation came f rom t wo Region 5 forests (the K lamath and Shast a- Tr i nit y), possibly reflecti ng the high rate of recreational mi ni ng there. I n Region 6, the Okanogan-Wenatchee had the highest number of new plans of operation. 37 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources Salable Minerals T he volu me of salable mi nerals removed i n Region 6 fluc - t uated, with a dow nward t rend si nce 2000 (fig. 18). T he decline can be attributed to drops in the amount of FS and commercial use (table 8). The volume removed by the FS decli ned steadily bet ween 1990 and 2003. I n Region 5, the volu me removed u nder cont ract fluct uated, and the volu me removed under free use dropped sharply (table 8). As in Region 6, FS use declined steadily. Discussion For leasable minerals, the number of leases of record re- mained stable over the monitoring period, and production was nonexistent. We do not k now how many of the leases are currently active. For locatable minerals, we do not know whether the decline in new mining claims located and new plans of operation approved was associated with a decrease in the production of locatable minerals over time, because 1993 1994 199519961997199819992000 20012002 2003 Year Number of new claims Region 6 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 1993 1994 199519961997199819992000 20012002 2003 Year Number of new claims Region 5 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Fig u re 16 ? New m i n i ng clai ms located on Pla n-a rea nat ional forests, 1993 ?20 03. St raig ht li nes a re t he li nea r reg ressions. Source: Bureau of Land Management LR2000 report. Fiscal year Region 6 Region 5 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 1995 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Number of new plans 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Number of new plans Fiscal year Fig u re 17? New pla ns of operat ion approved , fiscal yea rs 1995 ?20 03, Forest Ser vice. St raig ht li nes a re t he li nea r reg res - sions. Sou rces: Region 5: Ma nagement at t ai n ment repor ts ( M A R). Region 6: M A R at t ai n ment FY95; FY98 M A R item 84.2; FY99 N FMG (m i nerals budget code) fi nal prog ram bud - get advice; FY00 accomplishment report and mineral material product ion repor ts; FY01- 03 M A R item MG -BN E - OP-PR (bonded, nonenergy operating plans processed to a decision). 38 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II Table 8Salable minerals removed from Northwest Forest Plan-area national forests; 1990, 1995, and 2000 Forest Service Region 5 Forest Service Region 6a Fiscal year Contracts Free use FS use Totals Contracts Free use FS use Totals Tons 1990 8,297 169,848 107,528 285,673 676,500 1995 5,328 18,410 76,245 99,983 369,520 2000 53,150 1,495 26,023 80,668 212,836 212,826 142,026 567,688 2003 32,539 10,147 18,166 60,852 48,149 383,634 113,843 545,626 a T he 1990 a nd 1995 d at a for Reg ion 6 Forest Ser v ice u se a re of quest ionable accu r acy. no production data were available. A decrease in locatable minerals production was expected in the reserves. The vol- ume of salable minerals produced declined. This decline was not anticipated in the FSEIS. To gain insight into how the Plan has affected minerals production at the forest scale, we interviewed agency specialists knowledgeable about the minerals program on four case-study forests (the Olympic, Mount Hood, and Klamath National Forests and the Coos Bay BLM District) (see app. D). The interview results are summarized below by mineral class. For a more detailed discussion of mining on these forests see Buttolph et al. (in press), Charnley et al. (in press), Kay et al. (in press) and McLain et al. (in press). Region 6 Region 5 0 100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000 500,000 600,000 19 90 19 91 19 92 19 93 19 94 19 95 19 99 20 00 20 01 20 02 20 03 Fiscal year 0 100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000 500,000 600,000 700,000 2000 2001 2002 2003 Fiscal year S a l a b l e m i n e r a l s r e m o v e d (tons) S a l a b l e m i n e r a l s r e m o v e d (tons) Fig u re 18 ? Salable m i nerals removed f rom Pla n-a rea nat ional forests, fiscal yea rs 1990 ?20 03. St raig ht li nes a re li nea r reg ressions. Sou rces: Region 5: Forest Ser vice A n nu al Product ion Repor ts; Region 6: Mi neral Mater ial Product ion Repor ts. Leasable Minerals The Coos Bay BLM District and the Klamath National Forest have some mineral leases, but they are mostly i nactive. Activit y was i n fluenced more by energ y pr ices than by the Plan. The Coos Bay District reported that Plan restrictions have kept some potential operators from bidding on mineral leases. Locatable Minerals Locatable minerals activity can be highly variable, de- pending on market demand, global supply, and prices. I n 1993, the BLM began to assess mi ners that have 10 or more claims an an nual mi ni ng claim fee of $100 per 39 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources claim. This fee may have contributed to the decline in new claims of record on FS lands; the charge could deter miners who do not intend to actively work their claims (Gusey 2004). Recreational gold mining with suction dredges occurs on the Klamath National Forest and the Coos Bay BLM District. The Klamath has experienced major growth in recreational mi ni ng si nce the late 1980s, when a recre - ational mining club established itself locally. The club has more than 60 miles of claims along the middle Klamath River and its tributaries. Instream mining activity has been curtailed over the last decade by the Endangered Species Act (1973) and st ate reg ulations that i ncreased protection for anad romous fish, shor teni ng the per iod i n which suc - tion dredge mining could take place. No Plan effects on recreational mining were reported. Salable Minerals The volume of salable minerals extracted from a forest can vary widely from year to year. Agency use declined on all four case-study forests because of a drop in road building associated with the decrease in timber sales.1 Salable min- erals are used for const r uction agg regate (Gusey 2004). Individuals remove rocks for personal use, such as land- scaping. Requests from road contractors and state trans- portation departments were sporadic. An interviewee from the Mount Hood National Forest stated that survey and manage species requirements had delayed the expansion of some rock quarries there. Because there has been little in the way of large-scale minerals extraction on the case-study forests, the Plan has not been much of a constraint on mining there. An exception is the increased scrutiny over mining activity in riparian reserves. Miners who wish to operate in riparian reserves are subject to Plan analysis requirements and mitigations before a plan of operation can be approved. These requirements increase the time and cost needed to obtain a plan of operation. One forest minerals program specialist and one miner interviewed said this increase has had a disproportionate effect on small-scale operators, deterring them from mining in reserves. Conclusions To determine whether predictable levels of minerals have been produced under the Plan, minerals production must be tracked. The Minerals Management Service tracks the pro- duction of leasable minerals. The FS tracks the removal of salable minerals. The agencies do not track locatable miner- als production. No leasable mi nerals were produced du r i ng the fi rst 10 years of the Plan, and the nu mber of mi neral leases re - mained stable. Thus, a predictable level of leasable minerals was produced. The lack of production data for locatable minerals makes it impossible to determine with certainty whether predictable levels of locatable minerals were produced. The available indicator data do show a decline in locatable min- erals activity. A decline in production was expected under Plan standards and guidelines. The reasons for the decline in activity are not fully known, but the Plan was probably a minor contributing factor. The volume of salable minerals produced during the monitoring period dropped. This drop was not expected. Interview data suggest, however, that this drop was due more to a lack of demand by users than to management constraints imposed by the Plan. The decline in volume removed by the FS reflects a decrease i n road buildi ng on FS lands. 1 See chapter 6 for a discussion of trends in forest road miles. 40 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II 41 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources Chapter 6: Recreation Demand for recreation and tourism has grown in the Pacific Nor thwest over the last decade (OTC 2003, USDA FS 2003b, WOTED 2003). Many federal forests in the Northwest Forest Plan (the Plan) area are increas- ingly used for recreation. The Forest Service (FS) is the biggest supplier of dispersed recreation in the United St ates, and a sig nificant market seg ment for dispersed recreation exists i n the Pacific Nor thwest (Slider 2004). Many communities near federal forests view forest- based recreation and tourism as providing opportuni- ties for economic development and diversification. By providing a stable or increasing supply of recreation opportunities on federal forest lands, the agencies are contributing to this development. Monitoring Question Have predictable levels of recreation opportunities been produced under the Plan? Expectations Recreational use of federal forests was expected to continue, consistent with the management objectives of the land use allocations. Recreation areas would be managed to minimize disturbance to species protected through survey and manage standards and guidelines i n all land allocations ( USDA and USDI 1994b: C- 6). Some recreation activities could be adjusted to attain late-successional reserve and Aquatic Conservation St rateg y objectives ( USDA and USDI 1994b: C-18, C- 34). New recreation developments i n the reser ves could be approved if adverse effects could be minimized or mitigated ( USDA and USDI 1994b: C-19, C-34). Sk i area expansions would be reviewed case-by-case for effects on late-successional and riparian habitat (USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -279). Pr imitive and semipr imitive recreation opportunities could improve with the elimina- tion of roads for watershed restoration. The Plan would also foster natural-looking landscapes (USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -279). Data Analysis Recreation data available from the agencies pertain to either the supply of or the demand for recreation opportunities on federal forest lands.1 The monitoring team focused on supply to assess whether predictable levels of recreation opportunities have been produced under the Plan. The team did not monitor the nature or quality of usersrecreational exper iences, or the abilit y of sites to provide specific t y pes of recreational experiences. After a thorough review of the available data, the team chose the following indica- tors to monitor: acres of wilderness, road miles, number of recreation residences, ski-area visitation, miles of trail, nu mber of out fit ter-g uide per mits, and nu mber and capacit y of developed sites (such as picnic sites and campgrounds).2 For most of these indicators, we could only obtain status as opposed to trend data, or data for recent years. I also report recreation visitation (an indicator of demand), although the dat a available only reflect st at us (FS) or recent t rends (Bu reau of Land Management [BLM]). Appendix B con - tains a more detailed discussion of the quality and availabil- ity of agency recreation data and our choice of indicators. Most of the data are presented and discussed by agency because the FS and BLM track recreation differently, and have data available for different years. The FS began keep- i ng recreation dat a i n the I N FR A dat abase i n 1999. Most recreation data for earlier years are unreliable, or must be obtained from individual forests. The exceptions are noted below. The BLM has maintained recreation data in the Rec- reation Management Information System (RMIS) in elec- t ronic for m si nce 1999. Dat a for earlier years were on paper hardcopy and were not ret ai ned by the Oregon st ate of fice. Our ability to answer the monitoring question is limited by the fact that pre-1999 recreation dat a were u navailable for most of the indicators. The following sections address data sources and limitations more fully. 1 I use demandto refer to recreation use and upplyto refer to the different types of recreation opportunities spread across the spectrum of federal forest lands. 2 Capacity refers to the number of people a site is designed to accommodate at one time, times the number of days each year a site is in operation (people at one timedays). 42 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II Results Wilderness The amount of wilderness on federal forest lands increased slightly du r i ng the monitor i ng per iod, f rom 4,715,000 acres i n 1994 to 4,735,000 i n 2004 (t able 9). T he 20,000 acres of wilder ness added i n the Pacific Nor thwest Region (Region 6) bet ween 1994 and 2004 resulted f rom the desig nation of O pal Creek i n Oregon as wilder ness (Con nelly 2004). were once under permit or other authorization and were not decommissioned on the termination of the authorization. We did not monitor u nclassified roads because they are not intended for public use. T he FS and BLM mai nt ai n system roads at five levels. Level 1 i ncludes roads closed to t raf fic year-rou nd. Level 2 roads are maintained for high-clearance vehicles. Level 3, 4, and 5 roads are mai nt ai ned for passenger car access, although they provide different amounts of convenience and passenger comfort. For the FS, we obtained road accomplishment reports for Pacific Southwest Region (Region 5) and Region 6 for fiscal years (FY ) 1998 th rough 2002. Bet ween FY 1998 and FY 2002, the FS road system on Plan-area forests decreased by 821 miles (t able 10), f rom 71,068 to 70,247 miles (a de - crease of 1 percent of tot al system road miles). T he bul k of this decrease (790 miles) was on the Region 6 forests. Level 1 and 2 roads i ncreased i n mileage over time, while miles of level 3 th rough 5 roads decli ned. T hese t rends are consistent with those i n Region 6 as a whole. Bet ween FY 1990 and FY 2003, tot al road mileage i n Region 6 decreased by 1,943 miles. At the same time, level 1 roads (which are closed to the public) i ncreased by 7,241 miles, and level 3 th rough 5 roads decreased f rom 21.7 percent of the system to 15.8 percent (Erker t 2004). To what extent are these changes a result of inventory adjustments versus new road construc- tion, reconstruction, or decommissioning? Road accomplishment reports indicate that between FY 1998 and FY 2002, Plan-area national forests i n Region 6 const r ucted 128 miles of new roads, reconst r ucted 2,471 miles of roads, and decommissioned 909 miles of roads. Decom missioni ng is t y pically of level 1 and 2 roads (Freel 2004). However, level 1 and 2 roads on Region 6 forests i ncreased by 1,080 miles du r i ng this same per iod (t able 10). This increase implies that, to some extent, changes in the road-system inventories are due to factors other than road work performed on the ground. Bet ween FY 1998 and FY 2002, the FS changed its methods of i nventor yi ng roads (Freel 2004). T he newer, geog raphic i nfor mation system ? based methods are more accurate and may have caused adjustments to the earlier in- ventor ies. T he agency also cleaned up and clar ified its roads Table 9Designated wilderness in the Northwest Forest Plan area Location 1994 2004 Acres BLM (Oregon and Washi ng ton) 14,000 14,000 FS Region 5 1,136,000 1,136,000 FS Region 6 3,565,000 3,585,000 Tot als 4,715,000 4,735,000 These numbers do not include other congressionally designated areas such as national monuments and national recreation areas. Sou rces: For Reg ion 5 ? Reg ional Ecosystem Of f ice i nter nal f iles; for Reg ion 6 ? R6 GIS f iles; for Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement ( BLM ) O regon a nd Wa sh i ng ton ? O regon St ate of f ice i nter nal f iles. Roads Roads provide access to national forests and BLM districts. According to the National Survey on Recreation and the En- vironment (USDA FS 2003b), driving for pleasure through natural scenery is one of the most popular outdoor recre- ation activities in the United States. Agency road systems have many uses, and they are key to providing recreation opportunities for the public. The presence or absence of roads is one of the most critical aspects of a landscape that affects peoplesrecreation experience(USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -278). The team monitored total systemroad miles on FS and BLM lands. System road miles are those that the agen- cies include in their inventories and are responsible for mai nt ai ni ng. National forests also have ? u nclassified? roads, which are not managed as a part of the forest transporta- tion system (36 Code of Federal Reg ulation [CFR] 212.1). They include unplanned roads, abandoned travel ways, and off-road vehicle tracks that the agency has not designated and managed as a trail. They also include those roads that 43 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources data during this period as it started to put them into the INFRA database. These changes in inventory methods may account for some of the changes in road mileage. Roads also get reclassified over time. For example, a forest may decide to drop a level 3 road down to a level 2 road so that it does not have to be maintained to Highway Safety Act standards for passenger cars, which is very ex- pensive (Ecker t 2004). T his changes the nu mber of miles i n levels 1 and 2 versus levels 3 th rough 5 mai ntenance catego - ries. In general, the FS is adding very few new miles to its road system. More roads are being reconstructed than are being built. Road decommissioning is ongoing and proceeds as funds become available. Over time, road mileage on na- tional forest lands has decreased; more miles of road are de- com missioned than are built. Level 1 and 2 road miles have i ncreased with an associated decrease i n level 3 th rough 5 road miles, so fewer miles are accessible to passenger cars. T he i ncrease i n level 1 and 2 miles occu r red because the loss of funding from appropriated sources and the loss of work done by timber-sale operators mean the agency does not have the budget to maintain as many of its roads to high- er st andards (Ecker t 2004). Resou rce const rai nts relati ng to fish and wildlife may also be a cont r ibuti ng factor. The BLM roads data came from the Oregon BLM state of fice. T hey are stored i n the FI M MS dat abase. T he dat a begi n i n FY 1999, because no reliable dat a for earlier years were accessible at the state level owing to a database revi- sion (Bergen 2004). Roads on BLM dist r icts decreased by 3,107 miles bet ween FY 1999 and FY 2003, f rom 17,783 to 14,676 miles (t able 10). T his 17.5-percent decrease districtwide represents a much more rapid drop than oc- cu r red on the national forests. As with FS lands, level 1 and 2 roads i ncreased i n mileage while level 3 th rough 5 roads decreased in mileage. The major factors contribut- ing to the reduction of roads on BLM lands were declining road maintenance budgets, Plan standards and guidelines for species protection, and Plan management objectives for late-successional and riparian reserves (including the Aquatic Conser vation St rateg y) (Dowlan 2004). Additional BLM Recreation Data The number of trail miles, developed recreation sites, out fit ter-g uide per mits, and visitors on the five Oregon BLM dist r icts i n the Plan area for FY 1999 and FY 2002 are show n i n t able 11. I n FY 2002, the five Oregon BLM dist r icts i n the Plan area repor ted more than 4.9 million visits, 60 developed recreation sites, 277 miles of trails, and 162 out fit ter and g uide per mits issued. Bet ween FY 1999 and FY 2002, the nu mber of t rail miles and devel - oped recreation sites remained constant, while visits and out fit ter and g uide per mits i ncreased. I ncreasi ng visit ation and commercial recreation use on BLM lands appears to Table 10Total Northwest Forest Plan-area Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management system road miles Plan area Fiscal year Levels 12 Levels 35 Total Miles Forest Servicea Pacific Southwest Region 1998 12,259 3,890 16,149 2002 12,735 3,383 16,118 Pacific Nor thwest Region 1998 43,172 11,747 54,919 2002 44,252 9,877 54,129 Tot als 1998 55,431 15,637 71,068 2002 56,987 13,260 70,247 Bureau of Land Managementb 1999 6,011 11,772 17,783 Oregon 2003 7,760 6,916 14,676 a Source: Road Accomplishment Reports and Management Attainment Report target reporting. b Source: Dick Bergen, Bureau of Land Management Oregon State office. Note: Data represent miles of system roads as of the end of the fiscal year. 44 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II be consistent with the general growth in demand for rec- reation oppor t u nities i n the Pacific Nor thwest. T hese dat a show that recreation opportunities on BLM lands remained st able or i ncreased bet ween FY 1999 and FY 2002. W heth - er recreation opportunities on BLM lands have increased, decreased, or remai ned the same si nce 1994 is impossible to say without gathering data from individual districts. Additional FS Recreation Data Additional FS recreation data were obtained for recreation residences, sk i areas, out fit ter and g uide per mits, nu mber of developed sites, and recreation visitation. Recreation residences The BLM has no recreation residences. The monitoring team obt ai ned dat a on FS recreation residences for FY 1991 th rough 1994 f rom FLU R (forest land use repor t dat abase), which were only available in hardcopy. The team obtained data for FY 2000 through FY 2002 from INFRA. Because very little variation in the data was found within periods, I only report on 2 yearsone pre-Plan and one recent. The INFRA data are available by forest, making it possible to calculate the number of recreation residences in the Plan area. The earlier FLUR data, however, are available at the regional scale only, so it is not possible to compare change in the number of recreation residences in the Plan area over time. I repor t FS Region 5 and Region 6 tot als for FY 1992 and FY 2002, and the number of recreation residences in the Plan area for FY 2002 only. There was a slight increase in the number of recreation residence author izations i n FS Regions 5 and 6 as a whole bet ween FY 1992 and FY 2002 (t able 12). I n FY 2002, recreation residences on Plan-area forests in Region 6 ac- counted for most of the Region 6 total. Plan-area forests in Region 5 composed a mi nor par t of that region?s tot al. T he Wenatchee and the Mou nt Hood National Forests had the most recreation residences in the Plan area, together ac- counting for roughly half of all authorizations in FY 2002. Table 11Recreation indicators, Bureau of Land Management (BLM), fiscal years (F Y ) 1999 and 2002 Indicator FY 1999 FY 2002 Miles of maintained trails 277 277 Out fit ter and g uide per mits 139 162 Developed recreation sites 60 60 Recreation visits 4,119,000 4,908,000 M iles of mai nt ai ned t r ails = tot al t r ail m iles on BLM la nd ( Wolf 20 0 4). T hese d at a a re for t he f ive wester n O regon u n it s a nd do not include Lakeview. Source: BLM Recreation Management Information System database for t r ails, per m it s, a nd sites d at a; for v isit at ion d at a ( Wolf 20 03). Table 12Recreation residence authorizations, Forest Ser vice Pacific Southwest Region (Region 5) and Pacific Nor thwest Region (Region 6), F Y 1992 and F Y 2002 Location FY 1992 FY 2002 Region 5 6,452 6,542 Region 6 2,725 2,816 Tot al (Regions 5 and 6) 9,177 9,358 Plan area Region 5 107 Plan area Region 6 2,533 Tot al Plan area forests 2,640 One authorization generally equals one recreation residence, but not always. The authorization is the number of recreation residences administered at one time, which does not necessarily represent the actual number of residences. Authorizations are closed when a residence is sold, and pending when the agency works to issue a new authorization to a new holderthe num- bers here represent the number of authorizations in the database the day that the data were pulled. Sou rce: 1992 ? FLU R d at aba se; 20 02 ? I N FR A d at aba se. Although it is not possible to determine whether the number of recreation residence authorizations for Plan-area forests actually increased, an increase is likely given that most recreation residences in Region 6 are in the Plan area. However, new recreation residence tracts were not cre- ated, and the national t rend reflects a slight decrease i n the nu mber of recreation residences (Hearst 2004). Existi ng residences are sometimes destroyed by catastrophic events such as fi res and floods and not rebuilt, or are i ncluded i n land exchanges. Thus, it is questionable whether an increase in the number of recreation residences really occurred. As FLUR data were entered into the INFRA database, 45 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources the records may have been validated and cleaned up, which could have increased the number of authorizations.3 Alternatively, the earlier data may represent the number of authorizations actually in place, and the later data may represent the number of au- thorizations being administered (including issued, pending, and closed) within a given year (Hearst 2004). Given concer ns about data accuracy, I conclude that the number of recreation residences remained stable rather than increased during the monitor- ing period. Ski areas Ski areas draw many winter recreation visitors to FS-managed lands. In the Plan area, 17 major sk i areas occupy roughly 0.15 percent of FS land (Lowe 1996). All are in Region 6, and most of them are in the Cascade Range. The number of ski areas remai ned the same bet ween 1990 and 2002, although at least one of the areas expanded the number of lifts and runs it offered during the study period. The BLM has no ski areas on lands it manages in the Plan area. The monitoring team also tried to obtain data on ski- area capacity as a measure of recreation opportunity, but never received it despite requests. The data the team did re- ceive were for number of visitors only (a demand measure). Appendix B lists the ski areas included in the data set. The number of skier days on Plan-area forests in- creased bet ween 1989 and 2002 (fig. 19) f rom 2,446,763 i n the 1989 ?90 season to 3,452,550 du r i ng the 2001? 02 season, an i ncrease of 41 percent. Low snow years reduce the number of visitors and probably explain dips in the trend. An increase in the popularity of snowboarding over the last decade may have contributed to growth. In the years right after the signing of the Plans record of decision (ROD), the ski industry expressed concern about the effects the Plan would have on ski-area operations. Spe- cific concer ns per t ai ned to long-ter m special use per mits and investments by the industry in operating, developing, and expandi ng sk i area facilities (Lowe 1996). T he ROD as - sumed that existing and permitted ski areas would continue under their existing permit terms and that development in existing permit boundaries would be possible. The agen- cies, however, expected that more time would be needed to respond to proposals for improving, developing, and ex- panding ski areas and to bring projects to fruition because of the additional analysis requirements of the Plan (Lowe 1996). I n addition, sk i-area expansion i nto late-successional reserves could be hampered if the expansion was deemed to adversely affect management objectives. We did not monitor sk i-area expansions. T he upward trend in the number of skier days during the decade, com- bined with no change in the number of ski areas, indicate that opportunities to ski likely remained stable or increased. We did not monitor how the nat u re of the sk ii ng oppor t u - nity (the recreation experience) may have changed. 3 For example, a recreation specialist on the Mount Hood National Forest, which has one of the highest numbers of recreation resi- dences in the Plan area, stated that our data for Mount Hood were incorrect. These data show that the number of recreation residenc- es i ncrea sed f rom 54 4 to 589 bet ween 20 0 0 a nd 20 02. Accord i ng to her, there was no increase. 0 500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 2,500,000 3,000,000 3,500,000 4,000,000 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Winter season beginning in year Skier days Fig u re 19 ? Sk ier d ays at Pla n a rea nat ional forest sk i a reas, 1989 ?20 02. St raig ht line is the linear regression. The number of visits reported in this table represent the number of people who bought lift tickets. It underestimates use because some people buy season passes and make numerous visits, but their season pass is only counted as one visit. A sig n i fica nt nu mber of people visit as nonsk iers but a re not recorded i n these numbers. The data do not include ski areas that explicitly have snowcat skiing or heli-skiing. Source: Records kept by individual ski resorts. 46 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II Out fit ter and guide permits ? T he nu mber of out fit ter and g uide per mits author ized by the FS rose over time, f rom 793 i n FY 2000 to 947 i n FY 2002 (t able 13). Out fit ter and g uide per mits reflect oppor t u nities on FS-managed lands for organized recreational activities led or facilitated by experienced and trained guides. Such recreational experiences might not be possible in the ab- sence of an out fit ter or g uide, who accompanies par ticipants and provides any necessary recreational equipment. The g row th i n out fit ter and g uide per mits author ized by both the FS and BLM reflects i ncreased demand and oppor t u nities for organized recreational experiences. Refer to those documents for more detailed information by forest. The visitor use monitoring program has completed one round of recreation monitoring to date. Thus, I report only current-status information for visitor use. Earlier FS recreation-visit data are available but unreliable because they were not gathered by usi ng a defi ned scientific process, and are therefore not reported here. The National Visitor Use Monitoring program was intended to produce forest visitation estimates that could be aggregated into regional and national visit ation estimates (English 2005). Sampli ng was designed to achieve a sample size where the width of the 80 -percent con fidence i nter val was equal to about 15 percent of the forests total visitation estimate. For some forests, this target was not achieved and for others, it was exceeded. More than 26 million visits were made annually to the 17 national forests i n the Plan area i n the early 2000s (t able 15). T he most visited forest was the Mou nt Baker- Snoqual mie, with slightly more than 5 million an nual visits, followed by the Mou nt Hood, with just over 4 million visits per year. T he Mendoci no and the Wi nema National Forests each had fewer than 300,000 annual visits. Each national forest visit consists of one or more site visits. In total, Plan-area forests had nearly 33 million site visits per year. Regionally, almost half of the site visits were to general forest areas (t able 16). About 9 million were i n developed, day-use sites, mostly in downhill ski areas. Wilder ness areas were the least-visited recreation sites. Dat a f rom the forests su r veyed i n the fi rst 2 sample years (8 of 17) showed that local users (those whose home ZI P codes lie withi n 35 st raight-li ne miles of the forest) accou nted for about 40 percent of all visits. T he average leng th of a visit by local users was 11.2 hou rs; for nonlocals, the average was about 22.6 hou rs. Roughly 65 percent of the visitors were male, and 35 percent were female. About 90 percent were white. The most popular recreation activities forest visitors engaged in were nature and wildlife viewing, hiking or wal k i ng, and general relaxation (t able 17). Dow n hill skiing and snowboarding were also very popular. Table 13 ? Out fit ter and guide per mit s authorized by the Forest Ser vice, F Y 2000 and F Y 2002 Authorizations Region 5 Region 6 Total FY 2000 282 511 793 FY 2002 325 622 947 Source: Forest Service INFRA database. Developed sites Only current-status information was available for developed recreation sites on Plan-area national forests. The FS tracks the number of developed sites by site type. The number of developed sites by FS region in FY 2003 is shown in table 14. T he t able does not i nclude a complete i nventor y of de - veloped site types for which data were available, but only the ones the team believed were most used. It also includes capacity measures, a measure of recreation opportunity. Family campgrounds and trailheads are the most abundant developed sites, and they have the highest capacit y. We did not monitor changes in the spatial distribution of developed sites, which may have been affected by the Plan. Visitor use The recreation visit data were generated by the National Visitor Use Monitoring program between 2000 and 2003, and are f rom English (2003) and Kocis et al. (2004a, 2004b). The program produced individual reports documenting recreation visits on every national forest in the Plan area. 47 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources Table 14 ? Developed sites on Plan- area national forest s, F Y 2003 a Region 5 Region 6 Total Sites PAOT days Sites PAOT days Sites PAOT days Unidentified 4 89,425 1 5 89,425 Boati ng sites 27 1,703,740 84 1,248,379 111 2,952,119 Family campg rou nds 173 3,912,564.5 644 17,798,094 817 21,710,658.5 Family picnic sites 30 452,825 103 1,825,902.5 133 2,278,727.5 G roup campg rou nds 12 299,270 41 914,405 53 1,213,675 G roup picnic sites 2 1,825 2 1,825 Horse camps 3 17,175 26 353,339 29 370,514 Trail heads 41 59,021.5 1,242 13,044,747.5 1,283 13,703,769 Miles of trailb 3,470 17,071 20,541 Ad mi nist rative i nter pretive sites 12 134,812 12 134,812 I nter pretive sites, major 2 15,330 13 1,641,635 15 1,656,965 I nter pretive sites, mi nor 3 24,455 68 633,556.5 71 658,011.5 Tot al PAOT days 44,770,502 Notes: PAOT (people at one time) days = the capacity of a site (how many people it is designed to accommodate at one time, times the number of d ays each yea r a site is i n oper at ion). Reg ion 5 = Pacif ic Sout hwest Reg ion, Reg ion 6 = Pacif ic Nor t hwest Reg ion. a The FS also tracks other categories of developed sites that are not included here. b M iles of t r ail d at a for Reg ion 6 a re f rom F Y 20 0 4. T hey have not yet been m ig r ated i nto I N FR A a nd were obt ai ned f rom Reg ional Of f ice Recreat ion P rog r a m sprea d sheet s. T he Reg ion 5 t r ails d at a were der ived f rom compet it ive sou rci ng st ud ies a nd obt ai ned f rom t he Reg ional Office. Source: INFRA. Table 15 ? Recreation visit s on national forest s and 80 - percent confidence inter val, early 2000s National forest visits Site visits Forest Total Confidence inter val Total Confidence inter val Thousands Percent Thousands Percent Deschutes 2,784.7 8.9 3,793.4 10.3 Gifford Pi nchot 1,810.2 14.8 2,978.7 13.5 K lamath 415.4 23.4 519.6 25.5 Mendoci no 257.1 10.9 342.1 9.7 Mou nt Baker-Snoqual mie 5,006.8 19.1 5,379.4 17.6 Mou nt Hood 4,076.1 4,981.3 Okanogan 399.0 29.0 460.9 25.6 Oly mpic 455.9 17.9 512.8 16.3 Rog ue R iver 508.3 34.2 617.4 28.2 Shast a-Tr i nit y 2,213.4 11.7 2,969.4 10.9 Sisk iyou 648.6 20.2 764.8 20.4 Siuslaw 2,013.4 21.9 2,633.2 21.2 Six R ivers 415.4 504.7 Umpqua 738.0 21.8 1,172.2 21.5 Wenatchee 2,532.6 14.0 2,726.7 12.9 Willamet te 1,494.8 12.8 2,142.2 15.9 Wi nema 297.2 13.2 331.3 12.5 Tot al 26,067.0 5.8 32,830.2 5.2 48 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II Table 16Site visits on national forests in the Northwest Forest Plan area, early 2000s Developed Developed General Forest day-use sites overnight sites forest areas Wilderness Thousands Deschutes 1,288 537 1,879 85 Gifford Pi nchot 1,328 118 1,497 16 K lamath 53 27 416 24 Mendoci no 62 39 211 4 Mou nt Baker-Snoqual mie 3,681 167 830 701 Okanogan 73 54 293 33 Oly mpic 156 96 219 42 Rog ue R iver 272 61 278 3 Shast a-Tr i nit y 447 261 2,198 56 Sisk iyou 54 99 607 5 Siuslaw 540 166 1,887 26 Umpqua 231 267 652 21 Wenatchee 578 504 1,312 301 Willamet te 519 218 1,342 45 Wi nema 8 50 176 8 Tot al 9,291 2,662 13,799 1,367 Note: Does not include the Six Rivers or the Mount Hood National Forests. Table 17Recreation activity participation on national forests, early 2000s Survey respondents who: Participated Chose this as their Activity in activity primary activitya Percent Campi ng i n developed sites (family or g roup) 14.3 5.4 Pr imitive campi ng 5.7 1.1 Back pack i ng, campi ng i n u n roaded areas 5.5 3.2 Resor ts, cabi ns, and other accom mod ations on Forest Ser vice lands 4.1 .9 (private or operated by Forest Service) Picnick i ng and family d ay gather i ngs i n developed sites (family or g roup) 11.4 1.9 Viewi ng wildlife, bi rds, fish, etc. on National Forest System lands b 44.2 2.2 Viewi ng nat u ral feat u res such as scener y, flowers, etc. on National Forest System lands b 50.5 9.2 Visiti ng histor ic and prehistor ic sites/area 5.8 1.2 Visiti ng a nat u re center, nat u re t rail, or visitor i nfor mation ser vices 8.7 1.2 Nat u re st udy 5.5 .3 General /other ? relaxi ng, hangi ng out, escapi ng noise and heat, etc. 41.9 8.2 Fishi ng? all t y pes 15.0 8.7 Hu nti ng? all t y pes 5.7 4.8 Off-highway vehicle t ravel (fou r wheelers, di r t bi kes, etc.) 5.6 3.8 Dr ivi ng for pleasu re on roads 19.0 4.6 Snow mobile t ravel 2.4 1.8 Motor ized water t ravel ( boats, sk i sleds, etc.) 5.3 2.0 Other motor ized land /ai r activities ( plane, other) .4 .1 Hi k i ng or wal k i ng 34.9 12.2 Horseback r idi ng .8 .5 Bicycli ng, i ncludi ng mou nt ai n bi kes 3.7 1.5 Non motor ized water t ravel (canoe, raf t, etc.) 3.0 1.2 Dow n hill sk ii ng or snowboardi ng 23.5 22.8 Cross- cou nt r y sk ii ng, snow shoei ng 5.7 4.8 Other nonmotorized activities (swimming, games, and sports) 7.8 2.3 Gather i ng mush rooms, ber r ies, fi rewood, or other nat u ral products 5.0 1.5 a T h is colu m n tot als over 10 0 percent becau se some v isitor s selected more t ha n one act iv it y. b Does not include data from the Mount Hood and Six Rivers National Forests. 49 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources Discussion T he shor t age of cor porate recreation dat a f rom before 1999 makes it dif ficult to assess recreation t rends at the regional scale for the fi rst decade of the Plan. Obt ai ni ng histor ical data at the forest scale from individual forest units is easier. To gain a better understanding of how recreation opportu- nities have changed since the Plan was adopted and how the Plan contributed to that change, the monitoring team in- vestigated recreation trends on four case-study forests (the Olympic, Mount Hood, and Klamath National Forests and the Coos Bay BLM District). The team also interviewed recreation specialists on the case-study forests about the effects of the Plan on forest recreation opportunities (see app. D). I summarize the case-study results here because they provide information not available by looking at the regional-scale data.4 The recreation programs on the four case-study forests were quite different. The Mount Hood is the second-most- visited national forest in the Plan area because it is so close to Por tland, Oregon, and has five sk i areas. It also has by far the most recreation residences in the region. In contrast, the K lamath National Forest is remote, bei ng a 5-hou r d r ive from the major metropolitan areas of Portland and San Francisco. As a result, it is one of the less-visited forests in the Plan area. The Olympic National Forest is somewhere in between; it has a high potential for drawing recreation visitors and tourists because it surrounds Olympic National Park, and it is withi n 1 to 2 hou rs of the Seat tle met ro - politan area. The Coos Bay District, although somewhat remote, has made a major investment in recreation and tourism development over the last decade. Recreation programs on all but the Mount Hood were small and received mi nor at tention du r i ng the 1980s when the agencies focused their management activities on timber production. By the late 1980s, change was clearly on the horizon. The Plan embodied a shift in emphasis away from timber and toward multiple-use values, with recreation playing an increased role. At the same time, many forest- based communities seeking to diversify their natural- resou rce-related economies identified recreation and tou r ism as an avenue for economic diversification and development. The Coos Bay District responded by engaging with local communities and actively helping them build a nature-based recreation and tourism economy on Oregons south coast. I n the early 1990s, the dist r ict worked with local stakeholders to develop a vision of what infrastructure development was needed to realize that goal. T he 1990s saw the Coos Bay Districts recreation program grow from managi ng a few campg rou nds to becomi ng a f ull-fledged program and a key player in regional community-based tourism and environmental education. This shift was supported by the districts upper-level management, who encouraged adapting management pri- orities to changing economic conditions, and who wished to help com mu nities create a diversified nat u ral-resou rce- based economy. The district improved the existing, and developed new, special recreation management areas (those that receive the most use); acquired four new environmen- t ally and cult u rally sig nificant proper ties; took a lead role in regional recreation and tourism planning; built a 30-mile network of hiking, mountain biking, and interpretive trails; and created an interpretive and environmental program st affed by professionals. Some of these changes are reflect - ed i n t able 18. The districts capacity to expand its recreational facili- ties was enhanced also by the emergence of several new sou rces of f u ndi ng for the recreation prog ram. Si nce 1998, special recreation pipelinefunding associated with guid - ance i n the 1996 Om nibus Consolidated Recission and Ap - propriations Act has been available to the BLMs western Oregon districts. This funding and other special funds, such as Job -i n-the-Woods, helped f u nd recreation projects on the Coos Bay District. Access to these special funding oppor- tunities may explain some of the differences in conditions between the Coos Bay District and the three Forest Service case studies. 4 See Buttolph et al. (in press), Charnley et al. (in press), Kay et al. (in press) and McLain et al. (in press) for a more detailed discussion of the case-study forest recreation programs. 50 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II In addition, the districts cultural resources program played an important role in developing interpretive sites, collaborating with local tribes to help manage cultural re- sources and develop a museum, and enhancing education and understanding about historical and prehistoric cultural lifeways i n the region. G reater emphasis on recreation and cultural resource programs has been possible in part because of a reduction in the workload associated with recreation and cultural staff support to the districts timber program. The Coos Bay District has encountered some local op- position to its recreation development plans from residents who are afraid these plans could change their quality of life as more tourists visit the area. But the program has met with great success. Key to this success has been the districts ex- tensive reliance on community volunteers and partnerships. The case-study national forests did not invest in rec- reation the way the Coos Bay District did. On the Olympic National Forest, many trails and developed recreation sites deteriorated because of a shortage of funding and employ- ees. The forest, however, made an effort to build trails, improve campsites, and maintain facilities in the areas that draw the most visitors, for example around Lake Quinault. T his g row th is reflected i n t able 19. I mprovements were made possible by funds collected through the Northwest Forest Pass fee demonstration program, with support from volunteers, and through partnerships. The Olympic National Table 18Recreation, Coos Bay District Recreational Recreation Maintained Estimated Managed Year visits use fees Permits trails trail visits sites System road Dollars Miles Miles Pre-1995 673,900 0.5 11 1995 11 1996 11 1997 10 a 1998 702,570 9.0 12 1999 691,351 114,941 11,217 18.3 5,377 12 2,986 2000 1,018,163 106,220 10,467 26.3 8,388 15 2,988 2001 832,159 120,240 12,739 26.3 9,293 15 1,923 2002 824,750 126,557 13,043 22.3 9,477 15 2,114 a One campground closed for repairs owing to storm damage. Sou rces: Coos Bay Dist r ict a n nu al prog r a m re por t s; USDI Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement ( BLM ) Coos Bay Dist r ict 1994; Roa d s d at a f rom Dick Bergen, BLM Oregon state office. Forest has a strong base of volunteers and partners that help maintain trails and build recreation facilities. The Mount Hood receives a diversity of recreation uses and has far more recreation developments than the other case-study forests (table 20). It has also seen steadily in- creasi ng wi nter recreation visits at its sk i areas (fig. 20). T he recreation infrastructure on the Mount Hood was for the most part already in place before the Plan, and little recre- ation development has occurred since the Plan was adopted. Si nce 1990, the Mou nt Hood National Forest has shif t - ed away from directly providing recreation services to the public in favor of delivering these services via other entities such as concessionaires and permittees. For example, con- cessionai res cu r rently operate 75 to 90 percent of all camp - grounds on the forest. The reason for this change is lack of personnel and funds to undertake recreation management activities. Nor can the forest afford to improve its recreation i nf rast r uct u re. T he recreation budget has been flat, and an increasing proportion of that budget covers forest overhead costs because of the decline of the timber program. The Mount Hood has one of the largest volunteer programs in the Nation, however. Volunteers and partners come mainly from the Portland metropolitan area. They ac- complish work that would otherwise remain undone for lack of recreation staff. Volunteers do trail work, act as wilder- ness stewards, and educate recreationists about management rules and practices. They also provide interpretation. 51 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources Table 19Recreation, Olympic National Forest 1990a 20002003b Recreation indicator Number Daily capacity Number Daily capacity A n nual forest visits 456,000 c Campg rou nds 20 2,285 25 2,730 Picnic sitesd 1 15 2 45 Trails (1990), t rail heads (2003) 81 88 Miles of trails 226.7 270.6e Miles of roads 2,600 2,254 f Recreation residences 68 68g Hotel /resor ts 1 416 1 416 Acres of wilder ness 88,265 88,265 a Data taken from Olympic National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement. b Data taken from INFRA for the year 2003, unless otherwise noted. c National Visitor Use Monitoring Data, 2000. d Does not include picnic sites located within campgrounds. e Northwest Forest Pass Fee Demo Program FY 2002 Accomplishments Report. f Olympic National Forest Final Access and Travel Management Plan Summary Report, 2003. g Olympic National Forest Facts (http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/olympic/aboutonf/onf_facts.htm). Table 20Recreation, Mount Hood National Forest Recreation indicator 198990 (unless otherwise noted) 20012003 A n nual forest visits 4,076,119 a (2003) Developed campgroundsb T here are over 100 developed 95 c (2003) campgrounds and picnic sites Picnic sites 18 c (2003) Nu mber of t rail heads 131 c (2003) Miles of t rails 1,200 b Miles of system roadsd 3,858 (1989) 3,430 (2001) Recreation residencesc 544 (2000) 589 (2002) Acres of wilder ness 186,200 b 189,200 e Nu mber of out fit ter/g uide per mits c 53 (2000) 89 (2002) Nu mber of dow n hill sk i areas 5 b 5 f Lodges/hotels 3c (2003) a Sou rce: Kocis et al. 20 0 4a. b Sou rce: USDA Forest Ser v ice ( FS) Mou nt Hood Nat ional Forest 1990. c Source: FS INFRA database. The Mount Hood recreation program officer stated that the recreation residence data reported here are inaccurate, and that the number of recreation residences did not change between 2000 and 2002. d Sou rce: Erker t 20 0 4. e Source: http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/mthood/. f Source: Records kept by individual ski resorts. 52 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II The Klamath National Forest, being remote and in an area where population growth is static, experienced little change in demand for recreation over the last decade. Thus, it has invested little in recreation development, working instead to maintain existing recreation sites and facili- ties. A small increase in recreation facilities but a decrease i n t rail miles is show n i n t able 21. T he K lamath has had little money to invest in recreation because the program budget has been flat and the st aff decreased. Com mu nit y recreation stakeholders interviewed reported deteriorating trails, campgrounds needing improvements, and too few employees on the ground to address recreation management problems. The forest did develop snowmobile trails and facili- ties on the east side with funding from the California State G reen Sticker prog ram. Other wise, the forest has focused on expanding accessibility opportunities for people with mobilit y impai r ments. With national and regional di rec - tion, emphasis, and funding, this effort focuses on ensuring that at least one fully accessible recreation opportunity is available for each of the Klamaths major recreation activi- ties. Bet ween 1994 and 2004, the forest made nu merous improvements on existing sites to meet this goal. Accessi- bility enhancements provide greater access and recreational opportunity for people with disabilities, and families with elders and child ren, sig nificantly extendi ng recreational services and experiences on the forest. Conclusions Our ability to determine whether predictable levels of recreation opportunities were pro- duced on federal forest lands du r i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan is limited by the lack of regional-scale agency recreation data for the years before 1999. T he only i ndicators for which reliable dat a were available f rom 1994 onward were number of designated wilder- ness acres, number of Forest Service recre- ation residences, and number of skier days. Opportunities to experience wilderness, to maintain a recreation residence, and to go downhill skiing remained stable or increased u nder the Plan. We did not monitor whether and how the quality of the recreation experience changed. Opportunities to participate in roaded recreation de- creased bet ween 1998 and 2003, as did oppor t u nities to access FS and BLM lands by passenger car. A downward 1,000,000 900,000 800,000 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 Winter season beginning in year SKier days 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Figure 20Ski area visitation, Mount Hood National Forest. Straight line is the linear regression. Table 21Recreation, Klamath National Forest Recreation indicator 1994a 20012003 A n nual forest visits 415,400 b (2001) Developed campgrounds 30 32c (2003) Picnic sites 2 3d (2003) Nu mber of t rail heads 9 14 d (2003) Miles of t rails 1,330 (west 1,129.5 d side only) (2002 east and west sides ) Miles of system roadse 4,685 (end of 4,177 (end of FY 1997) FY 2002) Recreation residences 21 22 d (2002) Miles of wild and 152 152 f (2003) scenic river Acres of wilder ness 381,000 381,000 Nu mber of out fit ter/ 64 (whitewater g uide per mits g uides only) 106 d (2002) a Sou rce: USDA Forest Ser v ice ( FS) 1994. b Source: English 2003. c Sou rce: FS I N FR A d at aba se. Note: K la mat h N F Web site says t here are 28 developed campgrounds. d Source: FS INFRA database. e Source: FS Annual Forest Road Accomplishment Reports. f Sou rce: ht t p://w w w.fs.fed.u s/r5/ k la mat h /. Notes: Data include the Ukonom District. 53 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources t rend i n tot al system road miles si nce 1994 is li kely. All fou r case-study forests reduced their system road mileage during the study period. These declines were expected. Fewer road miles decreases access to federal forests for recreation by members of the public. It increases recreation opportunities for some people, however, such as mountain bikers, who enjoy biking on old roads or on roads closed to vehicles. It also increases opportunities for users who prefer unroaded and nonmotorized recreation settings. Interviewees from the case-study forests said that the Plan had contributed to reduced road mileage on Plan-area forests. Contributing factors included a lack of dollars for road construction, reconstruction, and maintenance, which previously came from the timber program; a lack of demand for roads associated with timber sales; the Plans emphasis on watershed restoration; and restrictions on road construc- tion, reconstruction, and maintenance in late-successional and riparian reserves. Declining road mileage is a national trend on national forest lands consistent with the FS Transportation Policy, and it is not solely a result of the Plan. The BLM manages its Northwest forest transportation system in accordance with the Plan, which calls for reducing road mileage in key watersheds. Other BLM roads are managed to minimize ad- verse effects to natural resources, which includes reducing road miles when feasible. The regional-scale data available for developed recre- ation sites indicate status rather than trends on FS lands. For the FS, the case-study data show a small amount of growth in developed sites. The FS recreation specialists interviewed said some new recreation sites had been developed, particu- larly in high-use areas that attract the most visitors. But for the most part, the FS has done little in the way of new rec- reation development si nce 1994 because of flat or decli ni ng recreation budgets and st af fi ng. The BLM regional-scale data for developed sites go back to the year 1999. T he nu mber of developed recreation sites and trail miles on BLM lands remained constant be- t ween FY 1999 and FY 2002, i ndicati ng predict able levels of developed recreation oppor t u nities si nce 1999. T he team conducted fieldwork on only one of the five BLM dist r icts i n the Plan area, so determining whether Coos Bay is typical of all BLM recreation programs is not possible. The Coos Bay District recreation program underwent a major expan- sion in the decade after the Plan. The district developed new recreation sites, built new trails, upgraded existing facili- ties, and engaged with local communities to help build a re- gional recreation and tou r ism sector. T his fi ndi ng suggests that developed recreation opportunities on BLM lands have i ncreased si nce 1994. T he dat a for sk i areas, out fit ter-g uide per mits, and visi - tation on BLM lands suggest that demand for recreation on Plan-area forests g rew du r i ng the decade. General FS visit a - tion data indicate current status only. The Plan was reported to have had some effects on recreation opportunities. Some recreation specialists inter- viewed said that Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives have resulted in greater restrictions on new and existing recreational activities and facilities in riparian areas, which was expected. The FS closed some dispersed campsites in riparian areas or moved them elsewhere. Plan standards and guidelines have also limited or excluded recreation activi- ties in environmentally sensitive areas. People whose recre- ation residences are in riparian reserves will have to comply with Aquatic Conservation Strategy requirements to renew their permits, which could be controversial. Otherwise, recreation specialists interviewed indicated that the Plan has not been a major constraint on FS recre- ation programs because few major developments that would trigger plan requirements and procedures have been pro- posed. One exception is the ski area expansions, which have reportedly become more complicated, costly, and cumber- some under the Plan, as was expected. 54 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II 55 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources Volume II of the socioeconomic monitoring report address- es the record of decision evaluation question, Are predict- able levels of timber and nontimber resources available and being produced? It also evaluates the Plan goal of produc- ing a predictable and sustainable level of timber sales and nontimber resources that will not degrade or destroy the envi ron ment.? Monitor i ng results for five resou rce areas are reported: timber, special forest products, grazing, miner- als, and recreation. I focus on whether predictable levels of resources were produced from federal forest lands during the fi rst decade of the Plan, and do not add ress the topics of availability or sustainability. The answer to the evaluation question differs by re- source area. The level of timber produced did not meet the probable sale quantity (PSQ) volumes anticipated during the fi rst decade of the Plan, nor were timber sales produced at predictable levels. The average annual PSQ estimate for the fi rst 9 years of the Plan (1995-2003) was 776 million board feet, taking into account the downward adjustments made to PSQ during that period, and the expectation that production would be lower i n the fi rst 2 years. On average, a tot al of about 526 million board feet of timber were offered for sale each year bet ween 1995 and 2003, of which about 421 mil - lion board feet fell in the categories predicted by PSQ. The remai nder (105 million board feet) came f rom t reat ments i n reserve areas. Timber sale levels were reasonably predict- able bet ween 1995 and 1998; bet ween 1999 and 2003, they were not. The PSQ estimates were based on the expectation that most of the harvest volume would come from regenera- tion harvest of late-successional and old-growth (older for- ests) stands in matrix and some adaptive management areas. This harvest expectation was not met. The Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team (FEMAT) report acknowl- edged that it would be dif ficult to produce a predict able sup - ply of timber under the Plan. The best indicator for which agency data were available for assessing whether predictable levels of special forest products were produced was the quantity of products sold. This indicator is inadequate for answering the evaluation question because, for most products, the extent to which the quantity of products sold was determined by supply or by harvester demand is unknown. Moreover, the indicator reflects per mit ted har vest only. T he quantit y of conver tible special forest products sold declined for both agencies, ex- cept for poles and posts on BLM lands. Trends for noncon- vertible products were mixed, and differed by agency. The declines in the quantity of fuelwood and some nonconvert- ible products sold were expected because of harvest restric- tions in the reserves and decreased timber harvesting. G razi ng decli ned on Forest Ser vice (FS) land du r - i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan. Dat a i ndicate that g razi ng also declined on Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land during the period, but to what extent this decline was real or an artifact of changes in agency reporting practices was uncertain. Some declines in grazing were expected under the Plan because of management constraints in the reserves. The Plan is only one of several factors likely to be respon- sible for reduced grazing on federal forests, however. Al- though the Plan caused some restrictions in riparian areas, other causes unrelated to the Plan (such as drought and the Endangered Species Act) reportedly had a bigger effect on grazing activity. Minerals production was analyzed separately for leas- ables, locatables, and saleables. No leasable minerals were produced on FS-managed lands du r i ng the fi rst 10 years of the Plan, and the number of mineral leases was stable. The agencies do not track locatable minerals production, so we do not know whether predictable levels of locat- able minerals were produced. Other indicators associated with locatable minerals showed a decline in activity on the national forests during the decade, which was expected. The volume of salable minerals produced on national forest lands dropped, which was not expected. It is unknown to what extent production trends were the result of the Plan or factors related to demand. The specialists interviewed did not think the Plan was much of a constraint on minerals production during the decade. Our ability to determine whether predictable levels of recreation opportunities were produced during the moni- toring period was limited by the shortage of regional-scale agency recreation dat a for the years before 1999. T he dat a that are available indicated that some kinds of recreation Chapter 7: Overall Conclusions 56 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II opportunities decreased, some remained stable, and some increased. Opportunities to experience designated wilder- ness areas, to maintain a recreation residence, and to go downhill skiing appear to have remained stable or increased si nce the early 1990s. O ppor t u nities to par ticipate i n roaded recreation and to access FS and BLM land by passenger car decreased. Opportunities to experience unroaded and non- motorized recreation settings increased. Regional-scale FS data for number of developed recreation sites indicate cur- rent status only. The number of developed recreation sites on BLM land has been st able si nce 1999. Dat a for sk i area visit ation, visit ation on BLM land, and nu mber of out fit ter and guide permits indicate that demand for recreation on Plan-area forests grew during the decade. The monitoring results show that progress toward meet- ing the Plan goal of producing predictable levels of timber sales and nontimber resources has been mixed. For some resources, the existing data are inadequate for evaluating the goal. For other resources, production remained stable or increased. Production declined for other resources, and some declines were expected. Plan-related causes were the main reason that predictable levels of timber sales were not produced. T he Plan was only one of several factors i n flu - encing trends for other resources. Acknowledgments I am grateful to Klaus Barber, Chris Cadwell, and Sarah Crim for their comments on earlier drafts of chapter 2. Thanks to Fay Shon, Susan Alexander, Judy Mikowski, Betty Anderson, David Roche, and Frank Duran for their assistance in obtaining and analyzing the data contained in chapter 3. I am grateful to Sue Alexander, Frank Duran, Jeff Gordon, and Rebecca McLai n for thei r com ments on an earlier d raf t of chapter 3. For chapter 5 many than ks to Dar yl Gusey for providi ng the FS Pacific Nor thwest Region data, and for guidance in developing the chapter. Thanks also to Tracy Parker for providi ng the FS Pacific Southwest Region minerals data. Fay Shon also worked hard to obtain and help analyze the dat a presented i n chapter 5. Many than ks to Fay Shon, Jim W hite (I N FR A dat a), Margaret Wolf (BLM dat a), Peter Eld red and Dick Bergen (roads data), Mike Heilman (ski area data), Melissa Hearst (recre- ation residence data), Don English (NVUM data) and Bill Connelly and Dick Harmon (wilderness data) for their help in providing and compiling the information used in chapter 6. Thanks also to Terry Slider for providing helpful com- ments on an earlier version of chapter 6. Metric Equivalents W hen you k now: Mult iply by: To find: Feet 0.305 Meters Miles 1.609 K ilometers Cubic feet .028 Cubic meters Acres .405 Hect ares Board feet, log scale .0045 Cubic meters Pou nds .454 K ilog rams Tons .907 Megagrams References Alexander, S.J.; Fight, R.D. 2003. Managing access to nontimber forest products. In: Monserud, R.A.; Hay nes, R.W.; Joh nson, A.C., eds. Compatible forest management. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic P ublishers: 383 ? 400. Chapter 13. Alexander, S.J.; McLain, R.J. 2001. An overview of non-timber forest products in the United States today. In: Emery, M.R.; McLain, R.J., eds. Non-timber forest products: medicinal herbs, fungi, edible fruits and nuts, and other natural products from the forest. New York: T he Hawor th Press, I nc.: 59 ? 66. Baker, D. 2004. Personal communication. Leader, Northwest Forest Plan Implementation Monitoring Module, Bu reau of Land Management, 777 N W Garden Valley Blvd., Rosebu rg, OR 97470. Baker, D.; Palmer, C.; Tolle, T. [In press]. Northwest Forest Plan ?the fi rst 10 years (1994 ?2003): implementation monitoring: accomplishments and compliance with Plan requi rements. [ U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice], Por tland, OR: Pacific Northwest Region. 57 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources Barber, K. 2004. Personal communication. Regional analyst, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Southwest Region, 1323 Club Dr ive, Vallejo, CA 94592. Bergen, D. 2004. Personal communication and data. Engineering Staff, Bureau of Land Management, Oregon St ate Of fice, 333 SW Fi rst, Por tland, OR 97204. Brown, B.A.; Marin-Hernandez, A. 2000. Voices from the woods: lives and experiences of non-timber forest workers. Wolf Creek, OR: Jefferson Center for Education and Research. 52 p. Buttolph, L.P.; Kay, W.; Charnley, S.; Moseley, C.; Donoghue, E.M. [In press]. Northwest Forest Plan the fi rst 10 years (1994 ?2003): socioeconomic monitoring of Olympic National Forest and three local com mu nities. Gen. Tech. Rep. Por tland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. Cadwell, C. 2004. Personal communication. Forester, Bu reau of Land Management, Oregon St ate Of fice, 333 SW Fi rst Avenue, Por tland, OR 97204. Charnley, S.; Langner, L. 2001. Forest Service roadless area conservation. Final environmental impact st atement. Socioeconomic specialist repor t. Washi ng ton, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 136 p. Connelly, W. 2004. Personal communication. Program analyst, Resource, Planning and Monitoring, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Region, 333 SW Fi rst Avenue, Por tland, OR 97204 -3440. Crim, S. 2004. Personal communication. Analyst/ Economist, Forest Products/Vegetation Management/ Ecolog y, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Region, 333 SW Fi rst Avenue, Por tland, OR 97204 -3440. Dombeck, M.; Thomas, J.W. 2003. Declare harvest of old- growth off limits and move on. Seattle Post-Intelligencer, editor ial, Aug ust 24. Dowlan, L. 2004. Personal communication. Outdoor recreation plan ner, BLM Salem Dist r ict, 1717 Fabr y Road SE, Salem, Oregon 97306. Duran, F. 2004. Personal communication. Natural Resou rces, Forest Products, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Region, 333 SW Fi rst Avenue, Por tland, OR 97204 -3440. Endangered Species Act of 1973 [ESA]; 16 U.S.C. 531?1536, 1538 ?1540. English, D.B.K. 2003. Recreation visitation to national forests in the northwestern United States: a special analysis in support of the Northwest Forest Plan. Athens, GA: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Souther n Research St ation. 19 p. English, D.B.K. 2005. Personal communication. Visitor use monitoring program manager, USDA Forest Service, 1400 I ndependence Avenue SW, Washi ng ton, DC 20250 - 1125 (March 2005). English, D.B.K.; Kocis, S.M.; Zarnoch, S.J.; Arnold, J.R. 2001. Forest Service national visitor use monitoring process: research method documentation. Athens, GA: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Souther n Research St ation. 41 p. ht t p://w w w. fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/nvum. Erkert, T. 2004. Personal communication and data. Travel management analyst, Engineering Staff, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Region, 333 SW Fi rst Avenue, Por tland, OR 97204 -3440. Forest Ecosystem Management Team [FEMAT]. 1993. Forest ecosystem management: an ecological, economic, and social assessment. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Ag r icult u re; U.S. Depar t ment of the I nter ior [and others]. [I r reg ular pagi nation]. Freel, G. 2004. Personal communication. Civil engineer, Engi neer i ng St aff, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Region, 333 SW Fi rst Avenue, Por tland, OR 97204 -3440. 58 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II Gallo, K.; Lanigan, S.H.; Eldred, P.; Gordon, S.N.; Moyer, C. 2005. Nor thwest Forest Plan ?the fi rst 10 years (1994 ?2003): prelimi nar y assessment of the condition of watersheds. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 647. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 133 p. Gordon, J. 2004. District forester and BLM national technical expert for special forest products, Bureau of Land Management, 1717 Fabr y Rd. SE, Salem, OR 97306. Gusey, D. 2003, 2004. Personal communication. Regional geologist, Recreation, Lands and Mineral Resources, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Region, 333 SW Fi rst Avenue, Por tland, OR 97204 -3440. Hackett, K. 2005. Personal communication. Rangeland management specialist, BLM Medford Dist r ict, 3040 Biddle Rd., Medford, OR 97504. Har tman, D.A .; Atk inson, W.A .; Br yant , B. S.; Woodfin, R.O. 1975. Conversion factors. Seat tle, WA: I nstit ute of Forest Products, Universit y of Washi ng ton. 112 p. Haynes, R.W. 2004. Personal communication. Research forester, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research Station, P.O. Box 3890, Portland, OR 97208. Hearst, M. 2003, 2004. Personal communication. Special use area specialist, Lands Staff, Forest Service, Yates Buildi ng, 201 14th St reet, SW, Washi ng ton, DC 20250. Johnson, K.N.; Crim, S.; Barber, K.; Howell, M.; Cadwell, C. 1993. Sustainable harvest levels and short- term timber sales for options considered in the report of the Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team: methods, results and i nter pret ations. On file with: Susan Char nley, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation, Forest r y Sciences Laboratory, P.O. Box 3890, Portland, OR 97208. 96 p. Kocis, S.M.; English, D.B.K.; Zarnoch, S.J.; Arnold, R.; Warren, L.; Ruka, C. 2004a. National visitor use monitoring results, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Ser vice Region 5 [Pacific Southwest Region], Six R ivers National Forest. Athens, GA: National Visitor Use Monitoring Project, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station. 23 p. Kocis, S.M.; English, D.B.K.; Zarnoch, S.J.; Arnold, R.; Warren, L.; Ruka, C. 2004b. National visitor use monitoring results, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Ser vice, Region 6 [Pacific Nor thwest Region], Mou nt Hood National Forest. Athens, GA: National Visitor Use Monitoring Project, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station. 25 p. Lint, J. 2004. Personal communication. Leader, Northwest Forest Plan northern spotted owl monitoring module, Bu reau of Land Management, 777 N W Garden Valley Blvd., Rosebu rg, OR 97470. Lowe, J. 1996 (Feb. 12). Letter from Regional Forester to Doug Campbell, President, Pacific Nor thwest Sk i A reas Association. On file with: Susan Char nley, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation, Forest r y Sciences Laboratory, P.O. Box 3890, Portland, OR 97208. Lynch, K.A.; McLain, R.J. 2003. Access, labor, and wild floral g reens management i n wester n Washi ng ton?s forests. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR-585. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 61 p. Mackinnon, C. 2005. Personal communication. Rangeland management specialist, Bureau of Land Management, Oregon St ate Of fice, 333 SW Fi rst Avenue, Por tland, OR 97204. McLain, R.J. 2004. Personal communication. Institute for Culture and Ecology, P.O. Box 6688, Portland, OR 97228. 59 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources McLain, R.J.; Tobe, L.; Charnley, S.; Moseley, C.; Donoghue, E.M. [In press]. Northwest Forest Plan the fi rst 10 years (1994 ?2003): socioeconomic monitoring of Coos Bay District and three local com mu nities. Gen. Tech. Rep. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Northwest Research Station. Minor, K. 2004. Personal communication. Planner, BLM Medford Dist r ict, 3040 Biddle Rd., Medford, OR 97504. Mitchell, J.E. 2000. Rangeland resource trends in the United States: a technical document supporting the 2000 USDA Forest Ser vice R PA assessment. Gen. Tech. Rep. R M RS- GTR- 68. For t Colli ns, CO: U.S. Depar t ment of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research St ation. 84 p. Oregon Tourism Commission [OTC]. 2003. Oregon travel impacts, 1991?2002. Salem, OR. 58 p. Palmer, C.J.; Morganti, R.; Bingham, B. [In press]. Interagency resource information management: issues, vision and st rategies. Por tland, OR: [ U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice], Pacific Nor thwest Region. Phelps, N. 2003. Personal communication. Rangeland management specialist, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Region, 333 SW Fi rst Avenue, Por tland, OR 97204 -3440. Preece, S. 2004. Personal communication. INFRA coordi nator and GIS specialist, I nfor mation Resou rces Management, Forest Ser vice, Yates Buildi ng, 201 14 th St reet, SW, Washi ng ton, DC 20250. Roche, D. 2004. Personal communication. District forester, Timber Sales, BLM Medford Dist r ict, 3040 Biddle Road, Medford, OR 97504. Slider, T. 2004. Personal communication. Regional landscape architect, landscape planner; Recreation, Lands, Mi neral Resou rces; Forest Ser vice; Pacific Nor thwest Region; 333 SW Fi rst Avenue; Por tland, OR 97204 -3440. Thomas, J.W. 2003. Sustainability of the Northwest Forest Plandynamic vs. static management. 23 p. Draf t repor t for Forest Ser vice, Pacific Southwest Region N W FP review. On file with: Susan Char nley, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation, Forest r y Sciences Laboratory, P.O. Box 3890, Portland, OR 97208. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA FS]. 1982. ROS [Recreation oppor t u nit y spect r u m] users g uide (FSM 2311). Recreation, Her it age, and Wilder ness Resou rces. Washi ng ton, DC. 38 p. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA FS]. 1994. K lamath National Forest fi nal envi ron ment al impact statement, land and resource management plan. Yreka, CA: K lamath National Forest. [I r reg ular pagi nation]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA FS]. 2000. Olympic National Forest monitoring report 2000. Oly mpia, WA: Oly mpic National Forest: 2?17. Chapter 2. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA FS]. 2003a. Monitoring and evaluation report FY 2002: Mt. Hood National Forest land and resource management plan. Sandy, OR: Mou nt Hood National Forest. 123 p. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA FS]. 2003b. National survey on recreation and the environment. http://www.srs.fs.usda.gov/ t rends/ Nsre/nsre2.ht ml. (July 2004). U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management [USDA and USDI]. 1994a. Final supplemental environmental impact statement on management of habitat for late-successional and old-growth forest related species within the range of the nor ther n spot ted owl. Por tland, OR: Vol. 1. [I r reg ular pagi nation]. 60 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management [USDA and USDI]. 1994b. Record of decision for amendments to Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management planning documents within the range of the nor ther n spot ted owl. [Place of publication u n k now n]. 74 p. [ plus at t ach ment A: st andards and g uideli nes]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management [USDA and USDI]. 2003. Final supplemental environmental impact statement. Clar ification of lang uage i n the 1994 record of decision for the Northwest Forest Plan national forests and Bureau of Land Management districts within the range of the spotted owl. Proposal to amend wording about the Aquatic Conser vation St rateg y. Por tland, OR: 91 p. [Plus appendices]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management [USDA and USDI]. 2004. Final supplemental environmental impact statement. To remove or modify the survey and manage mitigation measure standards and guidelines. Portland, OR. 332 p. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management [USDI BLM]. 1994. Coos Bay District proposed resource management plan envi ron ment al impact st atement. Volu me 1. BLM /OR / WA / ES-94/30+1792. Nor th Bend, OR. [I r reg ular pagi nation]. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management [USDI BLM]. 1995. Coos Bay District record of decision and resource management plan. BLM /OR / WA / PL -95- 016+1792. Nor th Bend, OR. 99 p. [Plus appendices]. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management [USDI BLM]. 2001. New River ACEC livestock grazing environmental assessment. EA OR 128- 01-11. Nor th Bend, OR: Coos Bay Dist r ict. [Pages u n k now n]. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management [USDI BLM]. 2003. 2002 annual program su m mar y for the BLM Coos Bay Dist r ict. BLM /OR / WA / PL - 03/038+1792. Nor th Bend, OR. 171 p. Washing ton Of fice of Trade and Economic Development [WOTED]. 2003. Travel impacts and visitor volume 1991?2002. Oly mpia, WA: Busi ness and Tou r ism Development. 39 p. Weigand, J. 2002. Case study. Overview of cultural traditions, economic trends, and key species in nontimber forest products of the Pacific Nor thwest. I n: Jones, E.T.; McLai n, R. J.; Weigand, J., eds. Nontimber forest products in the United States. Lawrence, KS: Universit y Press of Kansas: 57? 64. Werner, L. 2004. Personal communication. Timber staff, Bu reau of Land Management, Oregon St ate Of fice, 333 SW Fi rst Avenue, Por tland, OR 97204. Wolf, M. 2003, 2004. Personal communication. Outdoor Recreation Program Manager for Oregon and Washi ng ton, Bu reau of Land Management, Oregon St ate Of fice, 333 SW Fi rst Avenue, Por tland, OR 97204. 61 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources Scenic Quality The socioeconomic monitoring team did not monitor scenic qualit y or com mercial fishi ng, as called for i n the Nor th - west Forest Plan (the Plan) Record of Decision. It did not monitor scenic quality because the available data were limited. W hen national forests fi rst developed forest land and resource management plans, they conducted one-time scenery inventories following the guidelines of the Forest Service Visual Management System (VMS). Forests inven- toried various aspects of landscape character such as visual condition, quality, and amount of disturbance. It is pos- sible to obtain these data for the years prior to the North- west Forest Plan. However, these data must be gathered forest by forest, because there is no corporate database that makes them accessible at the regional level. The monitor- ing program had a policy of not making data requests from individual forest units. The scenic quality inventories will be repeated and updated when national forests revise their management plans by using the Scenery Management System (the new version of VMS). A few national forests in the Plan area have begun the Plan revision process. However there are not yet recent regionwide data regarding scenic quality that can be used to assess change in landscape character on the national forests over time. Because of the effort required to collect data at the forest level, and because there are no cur- rent data that make it possible to compare change over time, the module did not monitor status or trends in scenic qual- ity for purposes of this interpretive report. Once the new inventories are complete, data from the two periods can be compared to monitor change in scenic quality. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) also conducts visual inventories of scenic quality following the guidelines of its Visual Resou rce Management classification system. Districts undertake these inventories as a part of the land use planning process. The inventory data must be obtained from individual districts, as they are not input into a central Appendix A: Resources Not Monitored database that is accessible at the state level. Because of the time investment required to obtain these data district by district, the policy of not making data requests from indi- vidual forest units, and because the module did not monitor scenic quality on Forest Service (FS) lands, it did not moni- tor scenic quality on BLM lands. Commercial Fishing Com mercial fishi ng does not t ake place on federal forest lands except by tribes having off-reservation treaty rights. However, federal forest lands provide important spawning habit at for com mercially valuable anad romous fish species such as salmon and steelhead (Oncorhynchus spp.) that have great commercial value. Thus federal forest management practices i n fluence fish populations and com mercial fisher - ies. So do a number of other factors that are outside the control of the FS and BLM, such as dams, ocean conditions, com mercial fishi ng reg ulations and practices, and forest r y practices on private lands. It is possible to monitor com mercial fishi ng activit y. But because com mercial fishi ng is affected by a broad range of factors, the socioeconomic monitoring team determined that it was not possible to meaningfully evaluate how the Plan has influenced commercial fishing. Rather, we defer to the Aquatic and Riparian Effectiveness Monitoring Pro- g ram (A R EM P), another par t of the Pacific Nor thwest Interagency Regional Monitoring Program, to address this issue (Gallo et al. 2005). T he A R EM P module is monitor i ng watershed conditions, upslope processes that affect water- shed health, riparian processes, and inchannel processes on federal forest lands. These data will be used to evaluate whether the Aquatic Conservation Strategy is achieving the goal of providi ng high- qualit y water and habit at for fish species on federal forest lands. The AREMP module is not monitor i ng com mercial fishi ng. Never theless, its fi ndi ngs will provide insight into how FS and BLM land manage- ment practices may be contributing to trends in commercial fisher ies. 62 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II Appendix B: Agency Resource and Recreation Data Supplemental Information Regarding Indicator Choices and Quality Special Forest Products The Forest Service (FS) and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) document the number of permits and contracts is- sued for several categories of special forest products, the dollar value of the permits and contracts issued, and the amount of product sold, on an annual basis by administra- tive unit. The monitoring team gathered data on these three indicators for a number of special forest products that are important in the Northwest Forest Plan (Plan) area. The FS data for monitoring special forest products dur- ing the life of the Plan came from the Automated Timber Sale Accou nti ng System (ATSA). We obt ai ned records gen - erated electronically through several searches from the na- tional FS database in Fort Collins, Colorado, and hard-copy records f rom the Pacific Nor thwest Region (Region 6) of fice in Portland, Oregon. The BLM data were extracted from the TSIS (Timber Sale Information System), which tracks timber sales and special forest product sales for BLM. The TSIS data are summarized in BLM Facts (a publication in which an nual prog ram i nfor mation is su m mar ized). We obtained the BLM special forest products data from David Roche, District Forester, BLM Medford District. After assessing the relevance of the indicators to the monitoring question, the team decided to use quantity of product sold as a monitoring indicator. Product value (the amount of money the agency charges for issuing a collection permit or a contract) is based on fair market value for the product, and generally represents 10 percent of the whole - sale value of the product. Because fair market value for for- est products is subject to an nual fluct uation (dependi ng on market conditions), product value is an unreliable indicator of supply. T he nu mber of per mits issued may reflect t rends i n de - mand and in use, but is also an unreliable indicator of sup- ply because sometimes, permits are batchedfor reporting purposes. For example, if a vendor is selling Christmas tree tags on behalf of the agency, the agency representative may only periodically collect the tag receipts from the vendor. All of the tags from that period could be transferred into the reporting system under one permit entry, rather than as one permit entry for each tag/tree sold. The permit data are therefore unreliable indicators of actual activity. Furthermore, the FS Timber Sale Preparation Hand- book (Forest Ser vice Handbook [FSH] 2409.18) provides specifications for when a cont ract vs. a per mit may be used. With the exception of large complex timber sales, 1 smaller contracts, permits, or free use are allowed at the discretion of the u nit (FSH 2409.18, ex hibit 53- 01), provided cer - tain caveats are observed (e.g., value is not over $300.00, or does not exceed a per iod of 1 year, etc.) (FSH 2409.18, 53.5.3). T hus, some u nits may per mit special forest prod - ucts, whereas others may prepare contracts or provide for f ree use. Withi n any si ngle ranger dist r ict or forest, per mit vs. contract vs. free use patterns of administration may have changed from year to year. Because contract/permit/free use may change over time, a more accurate unit of measure is the standardized ATSA reporting unit (e.g., pounds or tons). Receipts from the administration of all permits are ret u r ned back to the respective agency (see FSH 2409.18, 53.5). Conver tible and nonconver tible products can not be included on the same permit. If the use is to be by permit, both the FS and BLM may use the same permit system for a joint venture. For both contracts and permits, the data (buy- er, quantity, etc.) are entered into TIM (Timber Information Manager), which generates the contract or permit. Withi n the FS, Ch r ist mas t ree or f uelwood per mits may also be summarized and entered into the system as one per- mit, rather than as i ndividual per mits (FSH 2409.18, 53.53). As noted above, consolidation of these permits may lead to some discrepancy when the number of permits is used as a measure of units collected/sold. There is less summariza- tion of permits for commercial products (because TSIS is an accounting system) and more summarization for free uses. 1 Contract form does not provide for a standard or special provision for nonconvertible forest products. 63 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources Pr ior to 1996, all nonconver tible products were lu mped into a single category, which was subdivided only by tree species in accordance with the ATSA accounting system categor ies (FSH 6509.17, Ch 20). Begi n ni ng i n 1996, the ATSA repor ti ng system began to defi ne subcategor ies of special forest products and defi ned st andardized u nits of measure. However, these categories have been further re- fi ned si nce 1996. Although the categor ies were listed and given names and codes, there was no defi nitive descr iption of what products were included in each category. To deter mi ne which categor y a specific product should be classified as, the r ule of com mon sense was applied. T he correct category was selected by the process of elimination, based on biological properties. Thus, bear grasswould be considered a grass but not a limb or bough.Limited overlap might have occurred between the two categories mushroomsand fungi,with mushrooms possibly being recorded as fungi. However, it is less likely that fungi (e.g., conks collected for artistic or medicinal purposes) would have been recorded as mushrooms, limiting the possible sources of confusion. For the BLM TSIS system, categories of nontimber for- est products have also evolved. Data on bear grass were not collected u ntil approximately 1993. A rou nd 1996, catego - ries were changed to consolidate some former categories i nto the categor y ?floral and g reener y.? With the exception of these few changes, BLM has collected more categories of special forest products data than the FS, for a longer period. I n approximately 1996, the ATSA system expanded from a simpler convertible/nonconvertible system (with nonconvertibles listed only by tree species) to a more com- plex system, tracking nonconvertible forest products in new and more specific categor ies (e.g., mush rooms). Compar ison bet ween the pre-1996 dat a and the post-1996 dat a is dif ficult because the categories are not the same. This is not the case for BLM data, where the TSIS system has tracked consis- tent categories across time and the data both pre- and post- Plan are comparable. Mushrooms may have been recorded under mushrooms or fungi. However, a consolidated count of both mush- rooms and fungi added together should approximate the total amount for both categories, since mushrooms were not li kely to have been recorded i n any other categor y. Sig nifi - cant overlap between categories is not expected to occur elsewhere. Because a defi nitive descr iption of what products are included in each category tracked has not been established for the ATSA system, some national forests developed their ow n defi nitions of what should be i ncluded i n these cat - egories. These categories may not be consistent between forests, but they are not expected to con flict with ATSA categories because all forests must report data by using the standardized national ATSA system. Using these individual forest categories would not be more reliable for Plan moni- toring, except when monitoring a single forest (e.g., a case- study forest). The quality of data from both the BLM TSIS and FS ATSA system are considered complete and reliable for the categories of products collected, as both systems are ac- counting systems as well as program management systems. The data are consistent with national standards, except where the categories themselves have changed over time. The TSIS and ATSA are used nationally, standardized, automated, and are both administratively supported at all levels of the agencies to ensure consistent data collection and entry. They existed in some form for at least 20 years prior to the Plan. Nevertheless, there were clearly some anomalous data points in the FS data set. And some special forest products program specialists from the case-study forests questioned the data we obtained for their forest from the national database. The anomalous data points may be due to mis- takes made in the data entry process. However, we did not know the real cause of the questionable data points. Those that we judged to be completely unrealistic we dropped f rom the analysis. W here we were u ncer t ai n, we i ncluded them i n ou r analysis. W hen forest specialists questioned the accuracy of the national data and gave us unit-scale data to replace it, we used those data instead. In some cases, agencies measured the quantity of spe- cial forest products sold by using different units in different years. To compare trends across time when different units 64 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II of measure were recorded for a single product, we used the conversion factors below. These conversion factors were provided by R ichard Hay nes, USDA Forest Ser vice, Pacific Northwest Research Station, and are based on Hartman et al. (1975). 1,000 board feet = 200 cubic feet 2 cu nits (1 cu nit = 100 cubic feet) = 1,000 board feet 1 cord = 80 cubic feet = 4 feet by 4 feet by 8 feet st ack of wood 1 cord = 4,500 pou nds or 2.25 tons 2.5 cords = 1,000 board feet 1 post or pole, averagi ng 20 feet i n leng th = 6 cubic feet 1 li near foot = 0.3 cubic feet 1 piece = 1.1 cubic feet 1 Ch r ist mas t ree = 7 li near feet or 1.5 board feet or 0.3 cubic feet or 16.9 pou nds Grazing Forest Service (FS) grazing data are stored in the INFRA database. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) grazing data have been stored in the Rangeland Administration System since the early 2000s; they were previously stored in the G razi ng Author ization and Billi ng System (Mack i n non 2005). T he monitor i ng team requested dat a on the nu mber of grazing allotments, area of grazing allotments, number of grazing permittees, and number of animal unit months (AUMs) for each FS unit in the Plan area for the years 1990 ?2002. T he team also requested dat a on the nu mber of grazing leases and number of AUMs for each Oregon BLM unit in the Northwest Forest Plan (the Plan) area for the years 1990 ?2002. T he BLM does not repor t acres of active allotments or number of permittees. It proved dif ficult to obt ai n these dat a. Prog ram spe - cialists believed the historical data, in particular, were of poor qualit y. T he FS regional of fice specialists i n range management reviewed the grazing records and found that they often contained estimates based on data from previous years, making them unreliable. Therefore, they constructed a data set for one pre-Plan and one recent period by using data they believed were based on actual measures. Data sources included agency databases, annual agency accom- plishment reports, and personal interviews conducted by Tim Tolle from the Implementation Monitoring program. Activity levels based on agency records for individual forest units were aggregated up to the regional scale, by agency. T he Socioeconomic Monitor i ng team obt ai ned the fi nal grazing indicator data from the Implementation Monitoring program. The data quality problem prevented the team from monitoring annual trends in grazing indicators. Instead, we compare indicators from the two periods. The pre-Plan data for field u nits came f rom one of th ree years (1992?94). T he post-Plan dat a also come f rom one of th ree years (2001? 03). W hen the monitor i ng team showed g razi ng specialists on individual case-study forests the grazing data for their forest that were obtained from the Implementation Moni- toring module, they found that these data were not always the same as those maintained by the case forests. In this report, I use grazing data obtained from the Implementa- tion Monitoring module for the regional-scale analysis to be consistent with that module (t ables 4 and 5). However, when I report grazing data for individual case-study forests (table 6), I use data provided by those forest units, assuming that they are correct. The agencies maintain grazing data that the monitoring team chose not to use for monitoring purposes. The agen- cies track AUMs, and the FS also tracks head months as measures of range use. One AUM equals the amount of forage a mat u re cow (of 1,000 pou nds) and calf consu me in a 30-day period (about 780 pounds of dry weight) (Mitchell 2000: 64 ? 65). Head months are the equivalent of one months use and occupancy of the range by one animal (a cow, bull, steer, heifer, horse, mule, or burro), or by five goats or sheep (Forest Ser vice Manual [FSM] 2230.5). T he Forest Ser vice t racks head months for billi ng purposes. The monitoring team used AUMs as a measure of range use on federal forest lands. The FS tracks AUMs and head months in terms of authorized (active) use and permitted use. The BLM tracks only permitted use. Permitted use is the number of AUMs 65 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources or head months specified on the g razi ng per mit or lease as being allowed to graze for the duration of the permit or lease (FSM 2230.5). T his nu mber is allocated with g uidance from applicable land use plans. A permit or lease is usually valid for 10 years (FSM 2231.03). Author ized (or active) use is the use specified on the an nual bill of collection (FS) or g razi ng bill (BLM), and ver ified by a per mit tee?s pay ment of fees. It represents the level of use that is authorized each year. Authorized or active use and permitted use are not always the same. Author ized use can fluct uate an nually, depending on forage supply, special restrictions, and other variables. Although authorized use can be more or less than permitted use, in general it is less. Authorized AUMs is the best indicator of grazing opportunity on federal forest lands (Preece 2004). Recreation Bureau of Land Management (BLM) The BLM recreation data in this report came from a cor- porate database called the Recreation Management Infor- mation System (R MIS). Si nce 1984, R MIS has been the of ficial record for outdoor recreation i nfor mation on BLM lands. Pr ior to 1984 and R MIS, all BLM recreation records were paper based and it is unlikely that comprehensive records still exist anywhere. The Public Lands Statistics, which has summarized state and national totals for each fiscal year si nce the mid-1960s, is the best record of BLM recreation st atistics pr ior to 1984. Until September 1999, R MIS dat a were ret ai ned i n the form of paper records. The most recent version of the data- base (R MIS 3.0) was deployed i n September 1999, replac - i ng R MIS 2.4. R MIS 3.0 is a Web -based elect ronic system, making the data more standardized and consistent than they were previously. Access to RMIS is currently on the BLM i nt ranet. Pre-1999 R MIS records i n hardcopy may exist at the district level; they have not been retained at the State level i n any of the Wester n St ates. Only 50 percent or fewer of the dist r ict of fices are li kely to have ret ai ned these hard - copy records, according to an informal estimate. Because dat a pr ior to 1999 are dif ficult to obt ai n and not as accu rate, the BLM recreation data we used for monitoring begin with the year 1999. Forest Service Developed sites The FS began keeping recreation data pertaining to devel- oped sites i n the I N FR A dat abase i n 1999. It is dif ficult to obtain these data for earlier years. The FS historically kept developed-site information in the Recreation Information Management (RIM) system. The agency stopped using RIM i n about 1984 ? 85. T he records were hardcopy. I n the Pacific Northwest Region (Region 6), these records have reportedly been retained as paper records, which were subsequently disposed of du r i ng a move of of fices. T he records were 5 to 10 years old at that poi nt. T he R I M system was replaced by the Recreation Resource Information System (RRIS) in about 1993 ?94. T he R R IS was a Dat a General-based sys - tem with st andardized fields for enter i ng i nventor y dat a for developed sites. The RRIS was the precursor for INFRA. Units did an inconsistent job of entering data, but where the data were complete, they should be reliable. In the late 1990s, R R IS was mig rated f rom the Dat a General system to an I BM wi ndows envi ron ment. I n about 2001, cost dat a from the old Applix software were migrated to INFRA, but much of the data were lost in the migration. Concurrent with the development of RRIS, the agency implemented Meaningful Measures,a system for integrat - ing performance inventories, standards, and costs, includ- ing the cost of managing the inventory, and of determining the distribution of budget allocations to meet standards. Monitoring to determine what actually happened was also required. The system used Applix spreadsheets for inven- tories, and standardized formulas to determine the cost of meaningful measures. In 2000, the developed-sites information from RRIS and the inventory and formulas from Meaningful Measures were to be migrated to INFRA. Legacy data from RIM and RRIS may have been migrated to INFRA, or may still be ret ai ned for f ut u re mig ration to I N FR A i n the Washi ng ton of fice. Both R I M and R R IS i nfor mation for Region 6 were disposed of i n the move to a new of fice buildi ng. T he R I M and RRIS data existed in hardcopy only at that point. The Capital Improvement Program tracked projects funded in a given year, but not the total number of sites. It 66 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II cannot be used as an indicator of the number of developed sites because not all sites had projects in any given year. INFRA has a column called Year Established.This column may be used to record the date that a data record was established, rather than the date a recreation facility was established. Almost all of the sites were established before the year indicated in the database. Thus INFRA data cannot be used to obtain any historical information. The FLUR reports cannot be used to estimate facilities because they track facilities with permits or concessions but not those both owned and operated by the FS. T he 1984 ? 85 dat a f rom R I M could be used to provide a baseline for the number of recreation facilities on Plan area forests, as little change occurred in the number of developed sites between the death of RIM and the birth of RRIS. How- ever, as indicated above, the RIM data cannot be located and may have been disposed. Visitor use RIM data are not likely to provide a good measure of visitor use because the FS estimated the number of visitors and did not base the estimate on real data. For example, according to the fi rst year?s dat a, an nual visit ation to national forests nationwide was estimated at 852 million when the popula - tion of the United States was about 300 million. The FS began monitoring national forest visitation by usi ng a scientifically defensible protocol i n 2000 to obt ai n reliable measures of recreation visitation to support forest planning (the National Visitor Use Monitoring, or NVUM prog ram). Twent y-five percent of the national forests will be monitored each year, with monitoring on each individual forest t ak i ng place on a 4 -year rot ation cycle. T he N V U M program staff aggregated NVUM data for the national for- ests in the Plan area in response to a special request by the socioeconomic monitor i ng team. See English et al. (2001) for full documentation of the methods used to obtain the NVUM data. Ski areas Data regarding the number of ski areas and ski area visita- tion in the Plan area came from hardcopy, hand-written records kept by individual ski resorts, which maintain them in order to report to ski associations. The ski area visitation data reported in chapter 6 are for the following: Forest Ski area Mount Hood Cooper Spur Mount Hood Meadows Mount Hood Ski Bowl Summit Timberline Willamet te Hoodoo Willamet te Pass Deschutes Mount Bachelor Rogue River Mount Ashland Mount Baker-Snoqualamie The Summit at Snoqualmie Crystal Mountain Mount Baker Stevens Pass Okanogan-Wenatchee Leavenwor th Loup Loup Mission Ridge Gifford Pi nchot W hite Pass Indicators Not Monitored Recreation opportunity spectrum The FS uses the Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) to classify national forest lands in terms of the outdoor rec- reation environment or setting, activities, and experiences that are likely to occur there. There are six categories that describe the ROS: primitive, semiprimitive nonmotorized, semiprimitive motorized, roaded natural, rural, and urban ( USDA FS 1982). T he ROS provides a way of monitor i ng the supply of different portions of the recreation spectrum that FS lands provide over time. The national forests inven- toried how much land they had in each ROS category when they prepared forest plans. The agency recently drafted a national protocol for undertaking ROS class inventories on 67 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources National Forest System lands. As forests revise their forest plans, they will update their ROS inventories. This has yet to take place on forests within the Plan area. Because the only ROS data currently available regionwide are from the fi rst rou nd of forest plan ni ng that occu r red pr ior to the Plan, and because there is no corporate database that contains these data (they have to be collected individually at the for- est level), we decided not to monitor ROS at this time. Once new ROS inventories have been completed, it will be pos- sible to compare results from the two periods for monitor- ing purposes. Total trail miles Historical data were obtained for the BLM but not the FS. Data regarding the total miles of existing trails on each national forest have not yet been migrated to a corporate database. In Region 6 these data are available for the years 2000 ?2004 f rom spreadsheets. I n the Pacific Southwest Region, these data are available for 2003. It was possible to obtain miles of trails maintained each year (i.e., the number of miles of trails on which maintenance was performed in a given year), but we did not consider this to be a good indica- tor of recreation opportunity, so did not include it. 68 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II Appendix C: Methods for Choosing Case-Study Forests Case-study forests were chosen to represent one national forest in each of the three states that lie within the North- west Forest Plan area, and one Bureau of Land Manage- ment (BLM) unit in Oregon, the only place that the BLM manages sig nificant land holdi ngs i nside the Nor thwest Forest Plan area. They were also chosen to represent dif- ferent provi nces (the Plan area is broken up i nto 12 plan - ning provinces). The monitoring program sent a letter to all of the national forests and BLM districts in the Plan area asking for volunteers to participate in socioeconomic monitor i ng. We took this approach because the monitor - ing effort was considered a pilot program, and we wanted to conduct it on forests that were interested in participat- ing and making use of the resultant information. Two of the four case-study forests volunteered to participate, and were chosen for that reason (the Olympic and the Mount Hood National Forests). The Klamath National Forest was chosen because it was previously a high timber-producing forest, and the forest supervisor was supportive of social science work. The Coos Bay District was chosen because the BLM Oregon St ate Of fice recom mended it. 69 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources Appendix D: Forest Interviewees and Interview Guide Forest Interviewees Olympic National Forest Respondents position Engineering Program Representative (3) Forest r y Prog ram Represent ative (4) District Ranger (2) Economic Development Representative Public Service Representative Forest Planning Representative Forest Supervisor Aquatics Program Representative Ecosystems/Natural Resources Program Representative Wildlife Biolog y Prog ram Represent ative Fire and Aviation Program Representative Operations Staff Representative Timber Contracting Representative Botany/Forest Ecology Program Representative Recreation Program Representative Information Specialist Tribal Relations Representative Computer/mapping specialist Mount Hood National Forest Respondents position Forest recreation, plan ni ng, public affai rs st aff of ficer Forest planner, forest hydrologist Forest geologist Range program manager Forest Youth Conservation Corps and hosted and senior volunteer coordinator Forest volunteer program coordinator Fire and aviation management program manager Forest silviculturist Forest supervisor Zigzag district ranger Forest nat u ral resou rces st aff of ficer Forest special forest products coordinator P ublic affai rs of ficer, r u ral com mu nit y assist ance coordi nator Forest engineer Vegetation management specialist Dist r ict and forest recreation prog ram managers (g roup i nter view) (5) Clackamas River district ranger 70 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II Klamath National Forest Respondents position Forest landscape architect Forest resou rce st aff of ficer (fisher ies, noxious weeds, ear th sciences, timber, wildlife) District ranger, Scott/Salmon Ranger Districts Deputy forest supervisor Forest silviculturist District resource staff (recreation, range, noxious weeds, archaeology, minerals) District archaeologist Forest timber management of ficer and cont racti ng of ficer, Shast a Tr i nit y National Forest Forest ear th science and fisher ies prog ram manager Forest ad mi nist rative st aff of ficer (cont racti ng, com mu nit y assist ance prog ram, volu nteer prog rams) Forest environmental coordinator District recreation, lands/minerals staff Forest fi re management st aff of ficer Forest assistant engineer Wildlife biologist Coos Bay District Respondents position District manager Resource area managerUmpqua Resource Area Resource area managerMyrtlewood Resource Area Noxious weeds program coordinator Timber sales administrator Silviculturalist Watershed analysis coordi nator Small sales administratorMyrtlewood Resource Area Small sales administratorUmpqua Resource Area Volunteer coordinator Cultural resources program manager Recreation specialist Recreation specialist Fish biologist Wildlife biologist Fire program manager District geologist Watershed restoration coordi nator P ublic affai rs of ficer Road engineerUmpqua Resource Area Road engineerMyrtlewood Resource Area Interpretive specialist 71 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources Interview Guide for Forest Service/ Bureau of Land Management Employees PROGR AM SPECIALISTS 1 July 3, 2003 Interviewer __________________________________ Forest ______________________________________ Date _______________________________________ Name of Interviewee ___________________________ Title _______________________________________ Unit/Location ________________________________ How long in present position ____________________ How long working on this forest __________________ Notes: If one of the interviewees is new in their position, and their predecessor is an old timer who is still accessible, you may want to interview both. Or you may want to interview peo- ple from the same program but on different ranger districts/ resource areas together. You may want to have a map of the forest laid out dur- i ng the i nter view i n case they want to reference specific places with regard to resource activities. I use the term foresthere but in most cases if youre working on a BLM district, substitute the term district. Section I Northwest Forest Plan Implementation: X = the name of a program/resource area Y = the name of a forest or district Intro: The Northwest Forest Plan called for a number of changes in forest management, including land use allocations into late-successional and riparian reserves, matrix areas, and adaptive management areas; a host of standards and guidelines regarding forest management; and a number of new procedural requirements, such as survey and manage, watershed analysis, and late-successional reserve assess- ments. I?m i nterested i n u nderst andi ng how the N W FP has been implemented on (Forest Y ) si nce 1994, and the ways in which the management of Forest Y has changed under the N W FP. Please answer the followi ng questions as they per t ai n to the specific resou rce or prog ram area that you manage. Questions: (1) Fi rst, would you please descr ibe the overall nat u re of your program on Forest Y. How has the program evolved over the last decade or so? (2) How has the N W FP changed the way i n which program X on this forest is managed, overall? Specifically: a. How did the creation of different land use alloca- tions (late-successional reserves, riparian reserves, matrix, adaptive management areas) affect the management of (X) on your forest? For example, have some areas been closed to this use; has this use been restricted or altered in some way; has habitat for this use improved or deteriorated; etc. b. Did the N W FP St andards and Guideli nes per t ai ni ng to (X) bring about a change in its management here? How so? (cite what the S&Gs said about manage - ment of the resource area you are discussing) c. Have the new procedural requirementssurvey and manage, watershed analysis, LSR assess- mentshad an effect on the way in which (X) is managed or carried out here? How so? d. A re there any other aspects of the N W FP and its implementation on Forest Y that brought about changes in the way X is managed on Forest Y? (3) (If not adequately covered in the responses to the above), How has the N W FP changed public access to the forest and specific use areas for (X)? Please comment on whether and how changes in forest management u nder the N W FP have affected: a. Peoplesphysical ability to get to use areas (i.e., access routes); b. Their ability to use forest areas for (X) from the regulatory standpoint (have some places been opened or closed for use, are people still allowed to go there, have uses been modified?); 1 Three different questionnaire guides were used with agency employees, depending on their position. The one included here was used with program specialists, who were the main source of the interview information contained in volume II. Some of the inter- view information contained in volume II came from line officers. Although we used a different questionnaire guide for line officers, the questions we asked about trends in resource production on the forest were essentially the same as those contained in this guide. 72 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II c. Ecological conditions in use areas, making them either more or less productive for (X); d. The economic feasibility of conducting (X); e. The presence of facilities or infrastructure for conducting (X). Section 2 Trends in Resource Outputs From Forests Intro: Ou r team obt ai ned dat a on t rends for specific i ndicators re - lati ng to (Prog ram A rea X) f rom you r forest bet ween 1990 and 2002 (or whatever years are available). These data came from (database Z). Id like to show you the results of our trend analysis for (X) and discuss them. (You will probably need to walk them through the charts and summarize what they show, so its clear what they mean). Id like to under- stand what accounts for the trends in these indicators on (Forest Y ) si nce 1990. Note: Some of this may be available in annual monitoring reports! The following questions relate to this/these chart(s). (1) A re the t rends show n for these i ndicators consistent with your own perception of what has been happen- ing in program (X) over the last decade or so? If not, how do you perceive it differently? How would you account for the differences between your percep- tions and the data? (2) Please explain why you think trends in these indica- tors are going up/going down/staying the same over time. (3) To what extent to you believe implementation of the Northwest Forest Plan is responsible for these t rends? W hy? W hat other factors might be causi ng these trends? (4) One of the goals of the N W FP was to ?produce a predictable and sustainable supply of timber and non-timber forest products and recreation opportuni- ties.Do you believe this goal has been met on your forest with regard to (X) since the plan was imple- mented? If so, how have you been able to achieve this goal? If not, why not? W hat has prevented this from happening? (5) W hat do you anticipate will be the t rends i n the out - put of /oppor t u nities for (X) over the next 5 years? Will they i ncrease, decrease, or st ay the same? W hy? Does the N W FP have any thi ng to do with it? Section 3 Impacts of Forest Management on People Intro: Youve now described changes in forest management under the N W FP with regard to you r prog ram area, and explai ned trends in (X indicators). Id like to discuss how you think changes i n forest management u nder the N W FP, and the production of (X) over time, have affected the public. Questions: (1) Please tell me how you thi n k changes i n the man - agement of, and production/availability of (X) have affected people who use (Forest Y ) for (X). W hat do you think have been the economic impacts, social impacts, cultural impacts on these user groups? (2) Please tell me how you think changes in the manage- ment and production/availability of (X) have affect- ed residents of communities surrounding the forest. W hat do you thi n k have been the economic impacts, social impacts, cultural impacts on local residents (understanding that local community residents may also be forest users, but not necessarily), if any? (3) Are there any other stakeholder groups that you think have been affected by changes in the manage- ment and production/availability of (X) that have not al ready been mentioned? W ho? W hat do you thi n k have been the economic impacts, social impacts, cultural impacts on these stakeholders? Section 4 Forest Budgets, Staf fing, and Organi zat ion Intro: Because the FS and BLM can be an important source of quality jobs in rural communities, and because forest budgets and st af fi ng levels affect you r abilit y to manage the forest, and to interact with the public, we are interested i n u nderst andi ng whether or not the N W FP has had an impact on forest budgets, st af fi ng levels, and organizational structure. 73 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume II: Timber and Nontimber Resources Show the interviewee the trend analysis we have per- formed for the total annual budget and number of employees on thei r forest si nce 1990, and focus on the budget for thei r program area if we have the data. Questions: (1) On budgets (refer to the t rend char t): a. How has your program area been affected by the t rends i n an nual forest budgets si nce 1990? A re certain activities receiving more or less funding than they did a decade ago? b. W hat do you believe has caused the t rends obser ved in your annual program budget over the last decade or so? Would you at t r ibute these t rends to N W FP implementation at all, and if so, whats the connec- tion? (2) On st af fi ng levels (refer to the t rend char t): a. How have jobs in your program area been affected by the t rends i n FTEs si nce 1990? b. W hat do you believe has caused the t rends obser ved in the number of forest employees over the last decade or so? Would you at t r ibute these t rends to N W FP implement ation at all, and if so, what?s the connection? (3) Effects on management: a. How have trends in your program budgets and staff- ing levels affected your ability to manage and carry out your program? b. How have they affected your relations with the pub- lic, if at all? c. Has there been any impact on local communities? Section 5 Contracting (Unfortunately, we wont have the results of the contracting study in by the time we interview folks, so wont know what the contracting trends are.) Intro: Contracting and procurement to achieve ecosystem manage- ment objectives provide forest-based employment opportu- nities. One expect ation of the N W FP was that although jobs in the timber sector would be lost due to declining federal timber harvests, new opportunities for forest work relating to ecological restoration, scientific su r veys, f uels reduction, road decommissioning, etc. would emerge. Researchers have found that agency contracting to achieve ecosystem management on forests represents an important potential source of jobs for local communities. Id like to discuss trends in contracting and procurement for ecosystem man- agement purposes on forest Y with respect to your program area. Questions: (1) To what extent do you rely on cont racti ng and pro - curement actions to accomplish ecosystem manage- ment objectives relati ng to you r prog ram area? W hat kinds of work activities do you most often contract out to accomplish? Can you estimate what percent- age of work in your program area gets done this way? (2) Do you think the trend in contracting to achieve eco- system management objectives within your program area has been increasing or decreasing over the last decade or so? ( We?ll k now once we get the t rend data!) Please explain trends in contracting and pro- curementwhy are you doing more/less contracting over time? (3) Does contracting/procurement represent an effective way to get work on the forest done? W hat are the benefits (i ncentives) /the d rawbacks (disi ncentives) of contracting for forest stewardship activities in your program? (4) Do you believe that residents of local com mu nities are receivi ng employ ment benefits f rom you r con - tracting practices, and does your program make any special efforts to target local contractors/local work- ers to do work on the forest? If not, why not? W hat are the barriers? Do you view it as being important to try to promote local contracting? (5) One of the goals of the N W FP was to cont r ibute to socioeconomic well-being in forest-based communi- ties. Do you think your program area, as it has been managed si nce the N W FP has been doi ng this? How so? Please explain. 74 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. II Section 6 Collaboration with Communities in Forest Stewardship Activities Intro: We are i nterested i n how you r prog ram area engages the public in discussions about resource management. In par- ticular, we are interested in how your program collaborates with communities and local groups in on-the-ground forest stewardship activities, and how these types of collaborations have changed over the past decade. I want to t al k specifically to collaborative forest stew - ardship activities between the forest/your district/your program and groups or communities. These would be activities that stem from a pooling of resources (e.g., money, labor, information) by your forest/district/program and other groups to achieve mutual objectives from which all par ties will benefit. T he g roups might i nclude com mu nit y groups, volunteers, and other types of groups or organi- zations. Thus, I am not referring to standard public input processes, but instead projects that are designed and imple- mented in collaboration between the Forest Service and a group, and that have tangible on-the-ground outputs that benefit all par ticipants i n the collaborative. Questions: (1) W hat t y pes of on-the-g rou nd collaborative forest stewardship activities does your Program engage in with community groups or other groups? (2) W ho do these g roups tend to be, and where are they from generally (local vs. nonlocal)? (3) In what ways, if at all, do collaborative forest stewardship activities help you r prog ram f ul fill its forest management objectives? (4) W hat other motivations are there for collaboration? (5) How has the way you r prog ram engaged g roups or communities in on-the-ground forest stewardship activities changed si nce the early 1990s? (6) To what do you attribute these changes? (7) Can you thi n k of ways i n which the N W FP has i n fluenced these changes i n collaborative activities? (8) Has the leadershipon your forest/district pertain - ing to collaborative forest stewardship changed in the past decade? By leadership,we mean the ways in which leaders create vision, enable, and empower employees, deliver messages, demonstrate com- mitment, learn from past experiences, and pass on knowledge related to collaborative forest steward- ship. a. How? (9) Are employees in your program who engage in collaborative forest stewardship activities ac- knowledged, rewarded, or promoted by upper man- agement? How? (10) W hat are the biggest bar r iers to collaborative forest stewardship activities that your program faces, if any? (i nclude here budget, st af fi ng, sk ills, other?) (11) One of the goals of the N W FP was to improve rela - tionships between federal land management agencies and local communities, and promote collaborative forest management and joint forest stewardship activities. a. Do you believe progress in meeting this goal has been made with respect to Forest Y and local com mu nities arou nd the forest si nce the N W FP was implemented? b. W hy or why not? To Conclude: Do you have any fi nal thoughts, poi nts you want to emphasize, summary remarks, or things you want to add now regardi ng the impact of the N W FP on you r program area, and associated effects on forest users and local communities? Are there any questions you would like to ask me? Thank you so much for your time and thoughts! Program Specialists: Could be forest/district or district/ resource area level Range Minerals Timber Silviculture Heritage Scenery Nontimber forest products Fire Roads Fisheries (with a focus on links to recreational and com mercial fishi ng activities) Wildlife (with a focus on li n ks to hu nti ng and wildlife viewing activities) Recreation Pacific Northwest Research Station Web site http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw Telephone (503) 808-2592 Publication requests (503) 808-2138 FAX (503) 808-2130 E-mail pnw_pnwpubs@fs.fed.us Mailing address Publications Distribution Pacific Northwest Research Station P.O. Box 3890 Portland, OR 97208-3890 U.S. Depar tment of A griculture Pacific Nor thwest Research Station 333 SW First Avenue P.O. Box 3890 Por tland, OR 97208 -3890 Of ficial Busines s Penalt y for Private Use, $300 Northwest Forest PlaN THE FIRST 10 YEARS (1994?2003) Socioeconomic Monitoring Results Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Susan Charnley, Ellen M. Donoghue, Claudia Stuart, Candace Dillingham, Lita P. Buttolph, William Kay, Rebecca J. McLain, Cassandra Moseley, Richard H. Phillips, and Lisa Tobe Pacific Nor thwest Research Station Forest Ser vice United States Depar tment of A griculture General Technical Repor t PNW- GTR- 649 Vol. III April 2006 Authors Susan Charnley and Ellen M. Donoghue are research social scientists, U.S. Department of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation, P.O. Box 3890, Por tland, OR 97208; Claudia Stuart is a com mu nit y plan ner, Mendoci no National Forest, U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Genetic Resou rce Center, 2741 Cramer Lane, Chico, CA 95928; Candace Dillingham is a forester and social scientist, Klamath National Forest, 1312 Fai rlane Rd., Yreka, CA 96097; Lita P. Buttolph is a social scien- tist and research associate; William Kay is a community and regional planner and proj- ect associate, and Rebecca J. McLain is a cultural geographer and program director, I nstit ute for Cult u re and Ecolog y, P.O. Box 6688, Por tland, OR 97228- 6688; Cassandra Moseley is a political scientist and Di rector of the Ecosystem Work force Prog ram, I nstit ute for a Sust ai nable Envi ron ment, 5247 Universit y of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403-5247; Richard H. Phillips is a regional economist, Resou rce Plan ni ng and Monitor i ng St aff, U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Region, 333 SW Fi rst Avenue, Por tland, OR 97204; Lisa Tobe is Di rector, Sier ra Resou rces, Qui ncy, CA 95971. The Forest Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture is dedicated to the principle of multiple use management of the Nations forest resources for sustained yields of wood, water, forage, wildlife, and recreation. Through forestry research, cooperation with the States and private forest owners, and management of the national forests and national grasslands, it strivess directed by Congresso provide increasingly greater service to a growing Nation. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individuals income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDAs TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250- 9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Socioeconomic Monitoring Results Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Susan Charnley, Ellen M. Donoghue, Claudia Stuart, Candace Dillingham, Lita P. Buttolph, William Kay, Rebecca J. McLain, Cassandra Moseley, Richard H. Phillips, and Lisa Tobe Nor thwest Forest Plan ?The First 10 Years (1994 ?2003): Socioeconomic Monitoring Results Susan Charnley, Technical Coordinator U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Pacific Nor thwest Research Station Portland, Oregon General Technical Repor t PNW- GTR- 649 Vol. III April 2006 ii Abstract Charnley, Susan; Donoghue, Ellen M.; Stuart, Claudia; Dillingham, Candace; Buttolph, Lita P.; Kay, William; McLain, Rebecca J.; Moseley, Cassandra; Phillips, Richard H.; Tobe, Lisa. 2006. Socioeconomic monitoring results. Volu me III: r u ral com mu nities and economies. I n: Char nley, S., tech. coord. Nor thwest Forest Plan ?the fi rst 10 years (1994 ?2003): Socioeconomic monitor i ng results. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 649. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 206 p. T his volu me focuses on the Nor thwest Forest Plan (the Plan) record of decision (ROD) evaluation question, A re local com mu nities and economies exper ienci ng positive or nega - tive changes that may be associated with federal forest management? It also assesses how well t wo of the Plan?s socioeconomic goals were met du r i ng the fi rst decade: (1) to mai nt ai n the st abilit y of local and regional economies on a predict able, long-ter m basis; and, (2) where timber sales can not proceed, to assist with long-ter m economic development and diversification to mi nimize adverse effects associated with job loss. T he monitor i ng team exami ned t rends i n socioeconomic benefits f rom federal forest lands bet ween the early 1990s and the early 2000s, and the ways i n which the Plan may have cont r ibuted to these t rends. T he team also exami ned socioeconomic mitigation measu res desig ned to offset some of the adverse effects of cutbacks i n federal timber har vest, how effective they were, and why they sometimes were not. I n addition, we exami ned social and economic change i n Plan-area com mu nities at the regional scale and i n a sample of 12 forest-based com mu nities to identif y li n ks bet ween Plan implement ation, the mitigation measu res, and com mu nit y change. Some key fi ndi ngs f rom this volu me are: ? In the 72 cou nties within the Plan area, about one-fif th of the population (2 million people) lives withi n 5 miles of a federal forest. Based on a socioeconomic well- bei ng score developed f rom U.S. Census i ndicators, socioeconomic well-bei ng bet ween 1990 and 2000 d ropped for about 40 percent of the com mu nities withi n 5 miles of a forest, i ncreased for 37 percent, and st ayed about the same for the remai n - i ng 23 percent. T he extent to which the Nor thwest Forest Plan cont r ibuted to these changes is dif ficult to quantif y, because other var iables were also at play. Plan ef - fects on communities varied, depending on the strength of the timber sector there in 1990, the extent to which timber f rom federal forest lands suppor ted that sector, and the number of agency employees resident there. ? T hi r t y thousand di rect timber i ndust r y jobs were lost bet ween 1990 and 2000 i n the Plan area. About 19,000 of these jobs were lost bet ween 1990 and 1994, and the mai n cause was reduced timber supplies across ow nerships. Roughly 11,400 of the lost jobs can be at t r ibuted to cutbacks i n federal har vests t r iggered by the listi ng of the Nor ther n Spot ted Owl and subsequent i nju nctions on timber sales. About 11,000 of the 30,000 timber i ndust r y jobs lost du r i ng the 1990s were lost i n the last half of the decade. About 400 of the 11,000 jobs lost si nce 1994 can be at t r ibuted to a net iii reduction i n federal timber har vesti ng. T he remai ni ng 10,600 job losses occu r red during a period of increased log availability to local mills, and are the result of less ef ficient mills closi ng, and mills conti nui ng to i nvest i n labor-savi ng tech nologies. ? Forest Ser vice field u nits i n the Plan area lost over one-thi rd of thei r budgets and thei r work force over the decade, and about one- quar ter of the field of fices closed or consolidated. I n cont rast, the BLM field u nits i n the Plan area did not exper ience similar declines. ? Forest Ser vice spendi ng on cont racts for ecosystem management work, which can create local jobs, d ropped nearly 70 percent. BLM cont ract spendi ng for ecosystem management work held steady. ? T he Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative was largely u nsuccessf ul i n creating sustainable, forest-related local jobs comparable to the number and quality of those lost. Payments-to-counties legislation, adopted to mitigate the decline in timber receipts to cou nt y gover n ments, was largely successf ul. ? Social and economic ties bet ween com mu nities and forests changed du r i ng the decade as timber workers and agency employees moved out, and new residents at - t racted to the amenit y values associated with federal forests moved i n. Com mu nities are adapti ng to change i n many ways, i ncludi ng focusi ng on ag r icult u re, i nvesti ng in recreation and tourism, using nearby major transportation corridors to attract busi ness and to com mute where possible, expandi ng as regional centers, and de - pendi ng on the g row th of t r ibal busi ness, ad mi nist ration, and ser vices. ? Many com mu nit y members i nter viewed for this st udy hope there will be f ut u re oppor t u nities to li n k the biophysical and socioeconomic goals of the Plan by creati ng local jobs associated with mai nt ai ni ng and restor i ng forest ecosystems. iv Preface T his repor t is one of a set of repor ts produced on this 10 -year an niversar y of the Nor th- west Forest Plan (the Plan). T he collection of repor ts at tempts to answer questions about the effectiveness of the Plan based on new monitor i ng and research results. T he set includes a series of status and trends reports, a synthesis of all regional monitoring and research results, a report on interagency information management, and a summary report. The status and trends reports focus on establishing baselines of information from 1994, when the Plan was approved, and repor ti ng change over the 10 -year per iod. T he st at us and t rends ser ies i ncludes repor ts on late-successional and old-g row th forests, nor ther n spot ted owl population and habit at, marbled mu r relet population and habit at, watershed condition, gover n ment-to -gover n ment t r ibal relationships, socioeconomic con - ditions, and monitoring of project implementation under Plan standards and guidelines. The synthesis report addresses questions about the effectiveness of the Plan by usi ng the st at us and t rends results and new research. It focuses on the validit y of the Plan assu mptions, differences bet ween expect ations and what act ually happened, the cer t ai nt y of these fi ndi ngs, and fi nally, considerations for the f ut u re. T he sy nthesis repor t is organized i n t wo par ts: Par t I?i nt roduction, context, sy nthesis, and su m mar y? and Par t II? socioeconomic implications, older forests, species conser vation, the aquatic conservation strategy, and adaptive management and monitoring. T he repor t on i nteragency i nfor mation management identifies issues and recom - mends solutions for resolving data and mapping problems encountered during the preparation of the set of monitoring reports. Information issues inevitably surface during analyses that require data from multiple agencies covering large geographic areas. The goal of that report is to improve the integration and acquisition of interagency data for the next comprehensive repor t. T he socioeconomic st at us and t rends repor t is published i n six volu mes. Volu me I of the repor t cont ai ns key fi ndi ngs. Volu me II add resses the evaluation question, A re predict able levels of timber and nontimber resou rces available and bei ng produced? T he focus of Volu me III (this volu me) is the evaluation question, A re local com mu nities and economies exper ienci ng positive or negative changes that may be associated with federal forest management? Volu me I V assesses the Plan goal of promoti ng agency- citizen collaboration i n forest management. Volu me V repor ts on public values regardi ng federal forest management i n the Pacific Nor thwest. Volu me V I provides a histor y of the Nor thwest Forest Plan socioeconomic monitor i ng prog ram, and a discussion of potential directions for the program. v Summary T he Volu me III monitor i ng questions, i ndicators monitored, Nor thwest Forest Plan expect ations, and monitor i ng results are su m mar ized i n the t ables below, by chapter. Chapter 2: Socioeconomic Conditions and Trends for Communities Monitoring question Indicators monitored How did social and economic conditions change i n Plan-area com mu nities bet ween 1990 and 2000? Total population Population change Population density Age ? Race School enrollment ? Educational at t ai n ment ? Employ ment by i ndust r y Median household income Income distribution Percentage of unemployment Percentage of poverty ? Socioeconomic well-bei ng 1 Plan expectations Not all com mu nities would be affected the same way or to the same extent by the Plan. Some com mu nities would exper ience severe adverse effects; some would be relatively u naffected; others could benefit. Ru ral and timber- dependent com mu nities would exper ience the g reatest social and economic effects. Monitoring results We analyzed 12 social and economic i ndicators f rom the U.S. Census for the years 1990 and 2000 and also used U.S. census dat a to develop a com mu nit y socioeconomic well-bei ng measu re that would help us evaluate change i n com mu nit y socioeconomic well-bei ng over time. Ou r analysis of the census dat a showed that com mu nities i n the Plan area are changi ng. T he population is g rowi ng, educational at t ai n ment and household i ncome are i ncreasi ng, and poverty is decreasing. At the same time, the manufacturing sector of the economy is decli ni ng i n many com mu nities. Socioeconomic well-bei ng i ncreased for more than a thi rd of the com mu nities i n the region, and decreased for about the same nu mber bet ween 1990 and 2000. Al most 5 million people lived i n com mu nities i n the Plan area i n 2000, and more than 2 million lived withi n 5 miles of federal forest land. Usi ng a socioeconomic well-bei ng i ndex we developed, we fou nd that 40 percent of the com mu nities withi n 5 miles of federal forest land decreased i n socioeconomic well-bei ng bet ween 1990 and 2000, compared 1 Socioeconom ic well-bei ng is composed of si x i nd icator s: d iver sit y of employ ment by i ndu st r y, percent age of popu lat ion w it h bachelor?s deg ree or h ig her, percent age of u nemploy ment, percent age of pover t y, hou sehold i ncome i nequ alit y, a nd aver age t r avel t i me to work. vi with a 33 percent decrease for com mu nities far ther than 5 miles f rom federal forests. Generally, Plan-area com mu nities with lower socioeconomic well-bei ng tended to be those withi n 5 miles, compr isi ng 71 percent of all com mu nities that scored low or ver y low i n socioeconomic well-bei ng i n 2000. For t y-th ree percent of the com mu nities that received high or ver y high scores, however, were also withi n 5 miles of federal forest land. Although some of these com mu nities had relatively high socioeconomic well-bei ng, income inequality has also increased there. Drivers of socioeconomic change, such as increasing income inequality, migration, shifts in dominant industry sectors, and aging populations, affect com mu nit y socioeconomic well-bei ng. Chapter 3: Jobs and Income Monitoring question Indicators monitored How did levels of federal timber and nontimber resource outputs, and recreation opportunities, affect jobs and income i n the Plan area? ? Pr imar y solid wood products employ ment Primary pulp and paper processing employment ? I ncome f rom pr imar y solid wood products manufact u r i ng Income from primary pulp and paper manufacturing ? Timber har vest by ow nership ? Employ ment i n forest r y products ? Employ ment i n range-fed cat tle ? Employ ment i n com mercial fishi ng ? Employ ment i n ag r icult u re, forest r y, and fishi ng ser vices ? Employ ment i n mi nerals mi ni ng and processi ng Jobs and income from recreation Plan expectations Predict able levels of resou rce out puts and recreation oppor t u nities f rom Forest Ser vice (FS) and Bu reau of Land Management (BLM) lands would provide predict able levels of employ - ment. T he per manent reduction i n timber supply would cause an i nitial loss of about 25,000 di rect jobs i n the timber i ndust r y compared to 1980s levels. Af ter adjusti ng to this change, Plan implement ation would provide a st able flow of timber, suppor ti ng predict able rates of timber i ndust r y employ ment. T here were no expect ations for jobs and i ncome associated with nontimber resou rces or recreation. Monitoring results Over the per iod 1990 to 2000, pr imar y-wood-products employ ment i n the Plan area decreased by 30,000 jobs. T his loss i ncludes 5,000 jobs lost owi ng to lower levels of FS and BLM timber supply than or igi nally projected. About 19,000 of these 30,000 jobs were lost bet ween 1990 and 1994, and the mai n cause was reduced timber supplies across ow ner - ships. Roughly 11,400 of the lost jobs can be at t r ibuted to cutbacks i n federal har vests t r iggered by the listi ng of the nor ther n spot ted owl and subsequent i nju nctions on timber sales. About 11,000 of the 30,000 jobs were lost af ter 1994. About 400 of the 11,000 jobs lost si nce 1994 can be at t r ibuted to a net reduction i n timber har vesti ng on federal lands. vii T he remai ni ng 10,600 job losses occu r red du r i ng a per iod of i ncreased log supply, and are the result of less ef ficient mills closi ng and mills conti nui ng to i nvest i n labor-savi ng tech nologies. T his analysis fou nd the or igi nal Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team (FEM AT) estimates of employ ment loss to be reasonably accu rate. The contribution of federal timber to the total timber supply dropped in the Plan area f rom about 25 percent i n 1990 to 10 percent i n 1995 to less than 5 percent by 2000. T he expect ation that the Plan would provide predict able levels of resou rce out puts and recreation oppor t u nities, which would i n t u r n provide predict able levels of employ ment, was not achieved with respect to timber supply. T he timber projection for FS and BLM lands i n the Plan area were not realized and there was a lot of var iation across the years si nce the Plan was implemented. However, i ncreased har vests f rom other ow nerships and the redi rection of logs f rom the expor t market to local processi ng i ndust r ies have mitigated some of these impacts. T he Plan?s effect on jobs and i ncome associated with nontimber resou rces and recreation oppor t u nities was either mi nimal or not readily discer nable. Chapter 4: Agency Jobs, Unit Reorganizations, and Budgets Monitoring questions Indicators monitored (1) How has the nu mber and t y pe of FS and BLM jobs changed on Plan-area forest u nits si nce the Plan was adopted? (2) How did the nu mber and geog raphic dist r ibution of agency of fices cont ai ni ng u nit-level decision makers change bet ween 1990 and 2004? (3) How did tot al budget allocations to Plan u nits change du r i ng the Plan per iod? ? Nu mber of per manent and other ( par t-time, temporar y) FS and BLM f ull-time- equivalent (FTE) positions ? Nu mber of agency of fices cont ai ni ng li ne of ficers (agency decision makers) ? Budget allocations to Plan-area forests Plan expectations (1) Com mu nities i n the Plan area could lose up to 2,000 Forest Ser vice jobs. No estimates of job loss were made for the BLM. (2) T here were no expect ations for Plan effects on the nu mber and dist r ibution of agency of fices. (3) T he budget process was expected to change to facilit ate i nteg rated resource management. Monitoring results T he five wester n Oregon BLM dist r icts lost 166 FTEs bet ween 1993 and 2002, or 13 per - cent of thei r work force. No BLM dist r ict or resou rce area of fices closed du r i ng this per iod, however, providi ng a conti nued presence of agency decision makers i n local com mu nities. National forests i n the Plan area lost 3,066 FTEs bet ween 1993 and 2002, representi ng a 36 -percent decli ne i n the work force. T his loss was more than expected, and it led to a consolidation of field of fices. T he nu mber of FS of fices with forest super visors decli ned by t wo, and the nu mber of of fices with dist r ict rangers d ropped by 20 du r i ng the per iod, viii representi ng a 23-percent reduction i n the nu mber of com mu nities housi ng FS of fices with a li ne of ficer. Some of these of fices closed completely; others persisted, but with g reatly reduced st af fi ng. T he FS job loss was most severe among u nits i n Oregon and Washi ng ton. T he loss of agency jobs was tied to decli nes i n agency budgets associated with reduced timber harvest under the Plan. Bet ween 1993 and 2003, wester n Oregon BLM u nit tot al budgets rose by 22 percent. I n cont rast, Plan-area FS u nit budgets decli ned by 35 percent. T hese t rends can be compared to national-scale t rends i n agency budget appropr iations. Bet ween 1993 and 2003, tot al FS agency appropr iations g rew by 41 percent, and tot al BLM agency appropr iations g rew by 79 percent. T he decli ne i n FS budgets bet ween 1993 and 2003 can largely be at t r ibuted to the decli ne i n timber receipts generated du r i ng the per iod. Although BLM timber sales also decreased du r i ng the decade, BLM f u ndi ng was not as heavily dependent on t r ust and permanent operating accounts derived from timber receipts. Chapter 5: Procurement Contracting Monitoring questions Indicators monitored (1) How much and what k i nd of ecosystem management work did the FS and BLM cont ract bet ween 1990 and 2002? (2) W ho received economic benefits f rom FS and BLM cont racti ng? Total procurement spending ? Nu mber and value of cont racts ? Procu rement spendi ng by work t y pe Location of contractors ? Cont ract awards to r u ral com mu nities and affected counties Plan expectations Work i n the forest r y ser vices sector would decli ne. Work i n ecosystem restoration, su r veys, assessments, and i nventor ies would i ncrease, creati ng about 7,000 jobs per year du r i ng the fi rst 3 years of the Plan. Jobs i n ecosystem restoration would help offset job loss i n the timber sector. Monitoring results T he expect ation that cont ract work i n ecosystem restoration would i ncrease, helpi ng to offset job loss i n both the forest r y ser vices and timber sectors, was not met. Although a propor tional shif t i n work t y pes t u r ned away f rom labor-i ntensive cont racti ng associated with i ntensive timber management and toward tech nical and equipment-i ntensive work associated with ecosystem restoration, this shif t was i n the context of a general decli ne in contract spending. This decline can be attributed to a reduction in FS procurement cont racti ng. T he BLM cont ract spendi ng remai ned fai rly const ant bet ween the early 1990s and the early 2000s, averagi ng just u nder $20 million per year. T he FS spendi ng decli ned th roughout the per iod, d roppi ng f rom $103 million i n 1991 to $33 million i n 2002. We at t r ibute these differences i n agency cont ract spendi ng pr imar ily to the differences in agency budget trends during this period. i x Chapter 6: Community Economic Assistance Monitoring questions Indicators monitored How did agencies assist with long-ter m economic development and diversification i n r u ral com - mu nities affected by cutbacks i n timber har vest on federal forest lands and what were the outcomes? ? BLM Jobs i n the Woods ? FS Ru ral Com mu nit y Assist ance ? FS Old- G row th Diversification Fu nd Plan expectations T he agencies expected the Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative to accomplish five specific objectives: (1) Provide im mediate relief for dist ressed timber com mu nities. (2) Create an envi ron ment for long-ter m economic development consistent with and respectful of the character of communities and their natural resources. (3) Develop new mechanisms for deliver i ng assist ance. (4) Emphasize equal par t nership with the st ates and the cr itical role of local governments in economic development. (5) Emphasize the use of per for mance-based st andards for f u ndi ng (outcomes based on creati ng new oppor t u nities and sust ai nable jobs) over t raditional st andards for f u nd - i ng, which were based on prog ram matic eligibilit y. Monitoring results Many people view the shor t-ter m mitigations of the Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment Initiative programs as too little, too late. Timber industry restructuring and timber supply changes were al ready goi ng on, to a large deg ree, before the i nitiative dollars became avail - able i n 1994. T he i nitiative did not deliver on agency and public expect ations to provide im mediate help to displaced timber workers and thei r families, and many believe that the dollars available were out of propor tion to the mag nit ude of the effects. Some people arg ue that it is too soon to assess the success of the i nitiative?s long-ter m economic diversification projects. T he Old- G row th Diversification Fu nd, a revolvi ng loan f u nd providi ng g rants and loans to small busi nesses to promote expansion and diversifica - tion, still provides a long-term sustainable source of capital for resource-related businesses, and it is considered highly successf ul. Com mu nit y-based plan ni ng was a focus of the Ru ral Com mu nit y Assist ance prog ram. Projects to improve com mu nit y capacit y? such as leadership development, community-based planning, and technical assistance to help com- mu nities w r ite g rants ?were aimed at helpi ng com mu nities help themselves. I n reviews of the i nitiative, these ?sof t i nf rast r uct u re? projects were considered vit al to the success of i nitiative projects. T he prog ram also suppor ted economic diversification, f u ndi ng projects such as market and feasibilit y st udies and busi ness plans; whether these projects were generally successful is debatable. The initiative also helped communities and businesses by f u ndi ng hard i nf rast r uct u re development projects (such as busi ness parks and water and sewer systems). Although many com mu nities have improved thei r i nf rast r uct u re and are better poised for economic development, these oppor t u nities had yet to mater ialize i n most of the com mu nities we st udied. x T he BLM Jobs-i n-the-Woods prog ram met with such success that it persisted as an an nual budget appropr iation. Despite the BLM?s successes, to many, Jobs-i n-the-Woods has been the greatest disappointment of all of the initiatives components because public expect ations for the qualit y and nu mber of jobs created to offset job losses i n the timber i ndust r y were never realized. A nother objective of the i nitiative was to desig n new ways for federal agencies to conduct busi ness i n collaboration with nonfederal and com mu nit y par t ners. Assessments of the i n novative aspects of these prog rams i n promoti ng collaboration bet ween agencies and par t ners to deliver assist ance view them as highly successf ul. Chapter 7: Payments to States Monitoring question Indicators monitored Did payments to states legislation st abilize pay ments to cou nt y governments and compensate for payments traditionally tied to timber receipts? ? Pay ments to cou nties without legislative mitigations ? Pay ments to cou nties with legislative mitigations ? Pay ments i n lieu of t axes Plan expectations Pay ments to st ates mitigation measu res were expected to offset the effects of reduced federal timber-harvest receipts on county governments through a transition period. Monitoring results The initial payments-to-counties legislation has generally mitigated the effects of declining timber receipts for the 48 cou nties covered by the legislation. The cou nties in other par ts of the Plan area (in easter n Washing ton, Oregon, and other par ts of Califor nia) did not fare as well u ntil the Secu re Ru ral Schools Act extended these pay ments to all of the eligible counties in the region and across the United States. Some of the i ntent behi nd the Om nibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 was to pro - vide a t ransition to a lower rate of assist ance. T he t ransitional path dow nward was replaced by a much higher rate of revenue suppor t u nder the Secu re Ru ral Schools Act. The goal of the pay ments to cou nties legislation was clearly met. The legislation has replaced past dependence on timber-harvest revenues and has generally mitigated the lost revenues associated with the declines in federal timber har vest in the region. It is not k now n how the owl safet y net pay ments have affected overall cou nt y financing. In the shor t ter m, a g uaranteed amou nt is li kely to have a st abilizing effect. The Secu re Ru ral Schools legisla - tion, however, su nsets on September 30, 2006. The long-ter m st abilit y of the pay ments is u ncer t ain. Without new cong ressional action, cou nties in the Plan area will need to add ress a projected $270 million in revenue shor tfall. Cong ressional hear ings are expected in 2005 to add ress the possibilit y of reauthor ization of the Secu re Ru ral Schools legislation. xi Chapter 8: Plan Ef fects on Forest- Based Communities Monitoring questions Indicators monitored (1) A re local com mu nities and economies exper ienci ng positive or negative changes that may be associated with federal forest management? (2) Have the FS and BLM helped mai nt ai n the stability of local and regional economies on a predict able, long-ter m basis? (3) Have the agencies assisted with long-ter m economic development and diversification to mi nimize adverse impacts associated with job loss? ? Census i ndicators relati ng to population, employment, education ? Socioeconomic well-bei ng scores Agency jobs Procurement contracting opportunities ? Com mu nit y economic assist ance Payments to county governments Plan expectations T he mai n adverse social and economic effects of the Plan would be associated with the loss of jobs and i ncome caused by reduced federal timber har vests. T hese cutbacks were predicted to threaten the economic vitality of many communities that had depended on them i n the past. Not all com mu nities were expected to be affected the same way, or to the same extent. Loggers, mill ow ners and workers, small busi nesses, and thei r families were expected to exper ience sig nificant, long-lasti ng effects that would be dif ficult to overcome. I n some com mu nities, the impacts of the Plan would be ver y noticeable; i n others, they would not be visible. T he com mu nities most negatively affected would be the relatively small and isolated com mu nities that were closest to federal forest land, lacked economic diversit y, were dependent on public timber har vests, and had low leadership capacit y. Com mu nities with the highest capacit y to adapt to Plan-related change would be those havi ng good access to t ranspor t ation, markets, and raw mater ials, a high deg ree of eco - nomic diversification, and qualit y leadership. Com mu nities dependent on amenit y, recreation, or other envi ron ment al qualit y resou rces could be positively affected by the Plan. Never theless, nonconsu mptive forest activities and recreation were not expected to sust ai n those com mu nities whose economies had been timber based Some r u ral com mu nities would exper ience the effects of reductions i n Forest Ser vice employ ment. T he envi ron ment al impact st atement forecast the loss of up to 2,000 FS jobs. Pay ments to cou nt y gover n ments i n lieu of t axes would d rop as timber sale receipts d ropped. Employ ment i n the ?forest r y ser vices? sector (such as reforest ation, timber st and improvement) would also decli ne. T he negative effects of the Plan on forest-based com mu nities and economies were expected to be par tially offset by Plan-related mitigations. A nu mber of ecosystem restora - tion activities on federal forests could create 7,000 jobs per year bet ween 1994 and 1997. xii So - called ?owl g uarantee pay ments,? which began i n 1991, would provide a safet y net for cou nt y gover n ments and make up for some lost timber revenues. I n addition, a com mu nit y economic assist ance prog ram was proposed that would provide $1.2 billion to help workers and thei r families, busi nesses and i ndust r ies, and com mu nities cope with change i nduced by the Plan. Monitoring results Twelve case-st udy com mu nities were monitored to assess whether social and economic change there si nce 1990 was associated with federal forest management. All of the case- st udy com mu nities showed changes over the last t wo decades. Although timber was one of the major economic sectors i n all of these com mu nities i n the 1970s and 1980s, the timber sector had become mi nor or negligible i n many of them by 2003. Federal forest manage - ment policy was just one of many var iables shapi ng the changes i n these com mu nities, however, and the extent of its effects var ied considerably. T hese effects depended on the relative st reng th of the timber sector i n each com mu nit y arou nd 1990, the extent to which wood products har vested on federal forest lands suppor ted that sector, and the deg ree to which local residents depended on FS jobs. T he decli ne i n agency jobs associated with reductions in FS timber programs strongly affected several case communities, just as the loss of timber sector jobs did. T he Plan was not the only var iable causi ng the Pacific Nor thwest timber economy to change. T he timber sector i n some com mu nities had been decli ni ng si nce the early 1980s because of an economic recession, domestic and international competition, changes in market demand for wood products, i ndust r y rest r uct u r i ng, mechanization and tech nological advances, and envi ron ment al reg ulations ? and the Plan added to these pressu res. Other case-study communities seemed to be relatively buffered from the changes that affected the i ndust r y du r i ng the 1980s. I nter viewees there perceived the halt of federal timber produc - tion arou nd 1990 as the begi n ni ng of the end. Some com mu nities were sust ained th rough the t ransitional per iod of the 1990s by having a substantial agricultural sector, being near a major transportation corridor, or being close to a popular recreation and tou r ism destination. Other com mu nities had an in flu x of retirees, com muters, mobile or self-employed workers, second-home ow ners, im mig rants, or low- and fixed-income populations. Some com mu nities that had been goods and ser - vices centers expanded their role as regional centers. A nd t r ibes, where present, played an impor t ant role in cont r ibuting to com mu nit y development th rough the g row th of t r ibal businesses, administration, and social and environmental services. Tribal forest lands also helped sustain local timber economies in some areas. xiii Contents 1 Chapter 1: Introduction 3 Monitoring Approach 6 References 7 Chapter 2: Socioeconomic Conditions and Trends for Communities in the Northwest Forest Plan Region, 1990 to 2000 7 Approach 7 Defining Communit ies in the Plan Reg ion 9 Socioeconomic Conditions and Trends for Communities 9 Nor thwest Forest Plan Region 18 Community Socioeconomic Well-Being 19 Measu r ing Socioeconomic Well-Being for Com mu nities in the Plan Region 21 Com mu nit y Socioeconomic Well-Bei ng at the Regional Scale 27 Population and Com mu nit y Socioeconomic Well-Bei ng 28 Proximity to Public Forest Lands and Community Socioeconomic Well-Being 28 Evolvi ng Concept of Forest-Based Com mu nities 29 Socioeconomic Well-Bei ng and Proximit y to FS and BLM Lands for the Plan Region 31 Summary 32 Conclusions 33 Metric Equivalents 33 Acknowledgments 33 Literature Cited 37 Chapter 3: Jobs and Income Associated with Resource and Recreation Outputs 38 Monitoring Question 38 Expectations 38 Methods 40 Results 40 Timber-Related Jobs and I ncome 43 Forest Ser vice and BLM Effects 48 Nontimber and Recreation-Related Jobs and I ncome 49 Conclusions 50 Metric Equivalent 50 References 53 Chapter 4: Agency Jobs, Unit Reorganizations, and Budgets 54 Agency Jobs 54 Monitor i ng Question 54 Expect ations 54 Methods 54 Results 57 Discussion 57 Unit Reorganizations 57 Monitor i ng Question 57 Expect ations 57 Methods 57 Results 62 Discussion xiv 62 Budgets 62 Monitor i ng Question 62 Expect ations 63 Methods 64 Results 73 Conclusions 75 Acknowledgments 75 References 77 Chapter 5: Procurement Contracting 77 Monitoring Questions 77 Expectations 78 Data Analysis 78 Results and Discussion 78 Procu rement spendi ng 80 Procu rement by Ty pe of Work 82 Location of Cont ractors 85 Chal lenges to Creat ing Communit y Benefit 86 Conclusions 87 Acknowledgments 87 References 89 Chapter 6: Community Economic Assistance Programs 89 Monitoring Question 89 Expectations 90 The Northwest Economic Adjustment Initiative 91 Methods 91 Results 91 Monitor i ng FS and BLM Com mu nit y Assist ance Prog rams 96 Assessment of Other Initiative Components 97 Assessing the Effectiveness of the Initiative 98 Conclusions 99 References 101 Chapter 7: Payments to County Governments 102 Monitoring Question 102 Expectation 102 Method 102 Results 104 Conclusions 104 References 105 Chapter 8: The Effects of the Northwest Forest Plan on Forest-Based Communities 105 Monitoring Questions 105 Expectations 106 Methods 107 Results 107 Olympic National Forest and Case-Study Communities 110 Qui nault I ndian Nation xv 112 Lake Qui nault A rea 113 Quilcene 114 Role of Federal Forest Management Policy i n I n fluenci ng Change 116 T he FS Role i n Mitigati ng Plan Effects 118 Su m mar y 119 M`ount Hood National Forest and Case-Study Communities 119 Upper Hood R iver Valley 121 G reater Est acada 122 Villages of Mou nt Hood From Br ight wood to R hododend ron 123 Role of Federal Forest Management Policy i n I n fluenci ng Change 124 FS Role i n Mitigati ng Plan Effects 126 Su m mar y 127 Klamath National Forest and Case-Study Communities 127 Scot t Valley 129 But te Valley 131 Mid-K lamath 133 Role of Federal Forest Management Policy i n I n fluenci ng Change 134 FS Role i n Mitigati ng Plan Effects 137 Su m mar y 138 Coos Bay District and Case-Study Communities 138 G reater Reedspor t 140 G reater My r tle Poi nt 141 G reater Coos Bay 143 Role of Federal Forest Management Policy i n I n fluenci ng Change 144 Role of the BLM i n Mitigati ng Plan Effects 148 Discussion and Conclusions 152 Ack nowledg ments 152 Met r ic Equivalent 152 References 155 Chapter 9: What We Have Learned 156 Maintaining the Stability of Local and Regional Communities 156 Jobs and I ncome From Resou rces and Recreation on Federal Forests 157 Agency Jobs and Of fices 157 Agency Budgets 158 Procu rement Cont racti ng for Ecosystem Management Work 159 Com mu nit y Effects of Plan I mplement ation 160 Assist ance With Long-Ter m Economic Development and Diversification 160 Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative 161 Pay ments to Cou nties 162 Plan Effects on Community Well-Being 163 References 164 Appendix A: Record of Decision Indicators Monitored 165 Appendix B: Methods for Choosing Case Studies 166 Appendix C: Supplemental Methods Used in Chapter Analyses 173 Appendix D: People Interviewed and Interview Questionnaires 195 Appendix E: Case-Study Community Descriptions xvi 1 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Chapter 1: Introduction Susan Charnley One of the evaluation questions i n the Nor thwest Forest Plan (the Plan) record of decision (ROD) concer ns r u ral economies and communities: Are local communities and economies exper ienci ng positive or negative changes that may be associated with federal forest management? ( USDA and USDI 1994b: E-9). T he ROD lists key items to monitor: demographics, employment, government revenues, facilities and infrastructure, social service burden, federal assistance prog rams, busi ness t rends, and t axes. 1 Volume III of the socioeconomic monitoring report focuses on this evaluation question. The question is rooted in concerns that prevailed in the early 1990s about how cutbacks i n federal timber har vesti ng u nder the Plan would affect local, forest-based com mu nities i n the Pacific Nor thwest. 2 Many of these communities had residents who worked i n the timber i ndust r y as loggers, mill workers, secondar y wood-products manufact u rers, and t ranspor ters of wood and wood products. I n the early 1970s, timber industry employment in the Plan area stood at about 6 percent of tot al employ ment i n Washi ng ton, al most 12 percent i n Oregon, and 31 percent i n Califor nia (FEM AT 1993: V II-53). By the late 1980s, the relative impor t ance of timber employment in each of these regions had declined by 50 percent (FEM AT 1993: V I-25). Any reduction in federal timber harvest volumes could incur additional negative social and economic effects on timber workers and thei r families i n the region, especially on those depending on federal forest lands.3 T hese work - ers were al ready bei ng squeezed by global competition for wood and wood-products markets, labor-savi ng tech nolo - gies leadi ng to i ncreased mechanization i n mills, and the economic recession i n the early 1980s. Not only were jobs at st ake, but timber workers were an impor t ant par t of many rural, forest-based communities, contributing to their social and economic vitality. Logging, milling, and timber ser vices for med the basis for a way of life i n some com mu - nities. T his way of life, and the cult u ral values and practices associated with it, were also th reatened. 4 Thus, President Cli nton requested ?a balanced and comprehensive st rateg y for the conservation and management of forest ecosystems, while maximizi ng economic and social benefits f rom the forests? ( USDA and USDI 1994a: E-1). T he fi nal supplement al envi ron ment al impact st atement (FSEIS) associated with the Plan ( USDA and USDI 1994a) cont ai ned several expect ations about the effects of the Plan on rural communities and economies.5 The major adverse social and economic effects were expected to be associated with the loss of jobs and i ncome caused by reduced federal timber har vests ( USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -320). T hese cutbacks were predicted to th reaten the economic vit alit y of many communities that had depended on them in the past. Not all com mu nities were expected to be affected the same way, however, or to the same extent. T he FSEIS predicted that the Plan?s effects would be i ntense and debilitating for some forest-based communities and some people employed i n the wood-products i ndust r y, and would provide a challenge and an opportunity for change to others ( USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -310). Unli ke temporar y, histor ical dow nt u r ns i n the timber i ndust r y, these effects would last longer than a fi r m?s or worker?s abilit y to ? wait it out ? ( USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -311). T hus, loggers, mill ow ners and workers, small busi nesses, and thei r families were expected to exper ience sig nificant, long-lasti ng effects that would be dif ficult to overcome. I n some com mu nities, the effects of the Plan would be ver y noticeable; i n others, they would be i nvisible ( USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -308). T he FSEIS predicted that the com mu nities most nega - tively affected would be the relatively small and isolated ones closest to federal forest lands that lacked economic diversit y, depended on public timber har vests, and had low leadership capacit y (FEM AT 1993: V II-9, USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -301). 1 Append i x A explai n s wh ich of t hese i nd icator s were mon itored , a nd why ot her s were not. 2 We follow Da n k s (20 03) i n defi n i ng forest-ba sed com mu n it ies a s those having economic, social, and cultural ties to nearby forests. 3 O n aver age, 30 percent of t he t i mber produced i n wester n O regon a nd Wa sh i ng ton each yea r bet ween 1970 a nd 1990 ca me f rom FS a nd BLM la nd s ( Wa r ren 20 03). 4 See Hay nes a nd G r i n spoon (i n press) for a more t horoug h d iscu s - sion of cha nges i n t he Paci fic Nor t hwest forest r y sector si nce t he 1940 s a nd how it af fected r u r al com mu n it ies. 5 T he ef fect s of alter nat ive 9 (t he prefer red alter nat ive a dopted by t he Pla n) were not a nalyzed i n det ail. 2 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Com mu nities with the highest capacit y to adapt to Plan-related change would be those with good access to t ranspor t ation, markets, and raw mater ials; a high deg ree of economic diversification; and high- qualit y leadership. For example, coast al com mu nities were predicted to adapt bet ter and exper ience fewer negative consequences f rom the Plan (FEM AT 1993: II- 68). The agencies also predicted that communities depend- ing on amenity, recreation, or other environmental quality resou rces could be positively affected by the Plan (FEM AT 1993: V II-9). For example, recreation-related employ ment i n coast al com mu nities could expand as a result of improved sal mon and t rout r u ns associated with watershed restoration ( USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -288). Never theless, noncon - su mptive forest activities and recreation were not expected to sust ai n those com mu nities whose economies had been timber based ( USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -309). Additional negative effects of the Plan were also pre - dicted. Some r u ral com mu nities would exper ience the ef - fects of reductions i n Forest Ser vice (FS) employ ment. T he FSEIS forecast the loss of up to 2,000 FS jobs ( USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -311). Pay ments to cou nt y gover n ments i n lieu of t axes would d rop as timber sale receipts d ropped ( USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -309). Employ ment i n the ?forest r y ser vices? sector (such as reforest ation, timber st and improvement) would also decli ne ( USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -291). I n evaluati ng whether local com mu nities exper ienced positive or negative changes associated with federal forest management du r i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan, we compare ou r fi ndi ngs with this set of expect ations f rom the FSEIS and the Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team (FEM AT) repor t. The negative effects of the Plan on forest-based com- mu nities and economies were expected to be par tially offset by Plan-related mitigations. For example, several ecosystem restoration activities on federal forests were expected u nder the Plan ( USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -308). I nvest ments would be made i n assessments, su r veys (such as nor ther n spot ted owl [ Strix occidentalis caurina], marbled murrelet [ Brachyramphus marmoratus], and survey and manage species), i nventor ies, and watershed restoration on Plan-area forests that could create 7,000 jobs per year bet ween 1994 and 1997 ( USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -291). So - called ?owl g uarantee pay ments,? which began i n 1991, would provide a safet y net for cou nt y gover n ments and make up for some lost timber revenues ( USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -298). I n addition, a com mu nit y and economic assis - t ance prog ram was proposed to provide $1.2 billion to help workers and thei r families, busi nesses and i ndust r ies, and com mu nities cope with change i nduced by the Plan ( USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -313 ?314). We evaluate how effective these mitigation measu res were at the local and regional scales in this volume. I n volu me III we also evaluate t wo of the Plan?s socioeconomic goals: to maintain the stability of local and regional economies on a predictable, long-term basis (Hay nes and Perez 2001; Mulder et al. 1999: 4; Tuch man n et al. 1996; USDA and USDI 1994a, 1994b: 26); and, where timber sales can not proceed, to assist with long-ter m economic development and diversification to mi nimize adverse effects associated with job loss (Mulder et al. 1999: 4, Tuch man n et al. 1996, USDA and USDI 1994b: 3). T hese goals were based on President Cli nton?s desi re for the Plan to address the human and economic dimensions of forest management i n the Pacific Nor thwest ( USDA and USDI 1994b: 26): The need for forest products from forest ecosystems is the need for a sustainable supply of timber and other forest products that will help mai nt ai n the stability of local and regional economies, and con- tribute valuable resources to the national economy, on a predictable and long-term basis. W here timber sales could not go for ward, President Cli nton sought to provide new economic oppor t u nities for year-rou nd, high-wage, high-sk ill jobs that would mitigate job loss i n the timber sector associated with reductions i n federal timber har vest ( USDA and USDI 1994b: 3). Ou r focus is explicitly on r u ral com mu nities havi ng ties to nearby federal forest lands, as di rected by the ROD ( USDA and USDI 1994b: E-9), and consistent with the Plan assessment repor t (FEM AT 1993) and EIS ( USDA 3 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies and USDI 1994a). Ru ral and timber- dependent com mu ni- ties were expected to exper ience the g reatest social and economic effects f rom Plan implement ation ( USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4: 306). T he team did not evaluate the effects of the Plan on all forest users, on nonlocal com mu nities with few, if any, ties to federal forest lands, or on st akeholders f rom met ropolit an areas. Monitoring Approach T he baseli ne year for monitor i ng i n this repor t is 1990. We chose 1990 as the baseli ne for several reasons. Fi rst, we use social and economic i ndicators f rom the U.S. Census to assess community-scale socioeconomic change over time. T he census happens once ever y 10 years (1990 and 2000). Second, although the Plan was implemented i n 1994, the spot ted owl listi ng occu r red i n 1990, quick ly followed by court injunctions against harvesting federal timber. Thus, the impacts of reduced federal timber harvesting began in 1991; the Plan was an at tempt to restore the flow of federal timber. Finally, in order to evaluate the effects of the Plan on Pacific Nor thwest com mu nities, it is helpf ul to compare what conditions were li ke before and af ter the Plan was implemented. It was not possible to obt ai n dat a as far back as 1990 for some i ndicators, however, so not all of the chapter analyses begi n with that year. We discuss data issues in each chapter. T he ROD evaluation question has t wo components. Fi rst, are local com mu nities and economies exper ienci ng positive or negative changes? Chapter 2 provides a broad over view of com mu nit y-scale change i n the 1,314 com - munities the team delineated in the Plan area. The period of analysis is 1990 ?2000. T he methods used to deli neate communities and assess socioeconomic change there are descr ibed i n det ail i n chapter 2. T he second component of the evaluation question asks whether the changes i n r u ral com mu nities and economies are associated with federal forest management. Add ressi ng this question requi res an u nderst andi ng of how socio - economic conditions i n r u ral com mu nities are li n ked to federal forests and their management. Federal forests and the agencies that manage them provide several benefits that can cont r ibute to socioeconomic well-bei ng i n local com - mu nities. T hese benefits i nclude jobs and i ncome associ - ated with produci ng forest resou rces (timber, special forest products, livestock forage, mi nerals) and recreation; jobs work i ng for the FS and the Bu reau of Land Management (BLM) ( per manent, seasonal, and temporar y); agency procu rement cont racts for ecosystem management work; community economic assistance programs that provide f u ndi ng for local economic development and diversifica - tion projects; and revenues to cou nt y gover n ments that support roads, schools, and other general purposes. Chapters 3 th rough 7 of this volu me exami ne t rends i n the production of these socioeconomic benefits f rom lands managed by the FS and BLM bet ween the early 1990s and the early 2000s for the Plan area as a whole. Most of the results are reported by agency.6 In addition to document- i ng regional-scale t rends, we i nvestigate how the Plan has i n fluenced those t rends. Ou r methods are descr ibed i n each chapter. As Cronon (2004: xii?xiii) obser ves, laws fi nd thei r ultimate expression when they are enforced locally. T he complexit y of thei r effects can not be u nderstood f rom a ?bi rd?s- eye view?; i nstead, what mat ters is thei r effects on the ground. Similarly, understanding the seemingly abstract effects of larger systems and processes, requires g rou ndi ng them i n local places where they become real (Cronon 2004: xii-xiii). T hus, to u nderst and how the Plan as a management policy affected rural communities and economies i n the Pacific Nor thwest, we had to look at how it was implemented on specific national forests and BLM dist r icts; at how Plan implement ation affected the flow of socioeconomic benefits f rom federal forests to local com mu nities; and at how this changi ng flow of benefits affected specific local com mu nities. T he team selected four case-study forests and three communities associated with each forest to i nvestigate these relations at the local scale (fig. 1-1). 6 T he FS a nd BLM of ten t r acked d if ferent mea su res related to t he sa me i nd icator, or ha d d at a available for d if ferent yea r s, ma k i ng it hard to combine data sets. 4 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Fig u re 1-1? Case -st udy forests a nd com mu n it ies. C A L I F O R N I A Case study?Bureau of Land Management districts Case study?national forests Case study?community boundaries Northwest Forest Plan area States Bureau of Land Management Forest Service Major lakes and rivers Major cities Major roads Olympic National Forest Olympic National Forest 0 25 50 100 Miles Mount Hood National Forest Mount Hood National Forest Klamath National Forest Klamath National Forest Coos Bay District o O R E G O N W A S H I N G T O N O R E G O N C A L I F O R N I A 5 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Case-study forests and communities Oly mpic National Forest Quinault Indian Nation Lake Quinault A rea Quilcene Mou nt Hood National Forest Upper Hood R iver Valley Villages of Mount Hood from Brightwood to R hododendron Estacada K lamath National Forest Scott Valley But te Valley Mid-Klamath Coos Bay BLM Dist r ict G reater Coos Bay G reater Reedspor t Myrtle Point The methods used to choose the case-study forests and com mu nities are descr ibed i n chapter 8 and appendix B. T he results of the case-st udy analysis are presented and discussed i n chapter 8. T he ROD st ates that the complexit y of relations and the number of factors involved in socioeconomic monitoring mean that set ti ng specific or defi nite th resholds or values, which would cause a reevaluation of Plan goals, st rategies, st andards, and g uides is impossible ( USDA and USDI 1994b: E-9). Neither the ROD, the FSEIS, nor the FEM AT repor t provide any measu res agai nst which to judge ?success? or lack thereof i n achievi ng Plan socioeconomic goals. Alternatively, success may be measured against the st andard of a desi red condition ( USDA and USDI 1994b: E- 6). T he desi red condition i n the ROD is the same as the Plan goals: to maintain the stability of local and regional economies ( USDA and USDI 1994b: 26) and to assist with long-ter m economic development and diversification by offer i ng new economic oppor t u nities for year-rou nd, high- wage, high-sk ill jobs ( USDA and USDI 1994b: 3). I n chapter 9 we use the results of the analyses f rom the precedi ng chapters to respond to the ROD evaluation question to the best of ou r abilit y. We repor t t rends i n socioeconomic conditions and forest benefits and how the Plan may have cont r ibuted to those t rends. We compare the monitor i ng t rends with the expect ations set out i n the FSEIS and FEM AT repor t. We also evaluate how effective Plan- associated mitigation measu res were, and how well Plan goals were met. The team used a combination of qualitative and quantitative research methods in monitoring to address the evaluation question. We obt ai ned quantit ative dat a f rom existi ng secondar y sou rces; we did not collect any pr imar y quantitative data. These data enabled us to measure change, make compar isons, and agg regate i nfor mation to produce broad, generalizable results for the Plan area as a whole. As Alber t Ei nstei n obser ved, however, ? Not ever y thi ng that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be cou nted? (Pat ton 2002: 12). T he limit ations of the quantit ative dat a were that readily available socioeconomic dat a f rom secondar y sou rces were of ten u navailable at the com mu nit y scale (an impor t ant u nit of analysis for socioeconomic monitor i ng), the readily available dat a were of ten not relevant for answer i ng the evaluation question, and quantit ative dat a only i ndicate st at us and t rends ?they do not explai n them. Without u nderst andi ng what the st at us and t rends mean and thei r causes, u nder t ak i ng adaptive management actions is dif ficult. To supplement the quantitative monitoring data, the team used a community case-study approach to gather and analyze qualit ative dat a relevant for answer i ng the evalua - tion question. T he 12 case st udies do not ser ve the pu r pose of generalizabilit y to the Plan area as a whole; rather, they are i nst r uctive for the way i n which they illust rate how the Plan affected some rural communities around federal forest lands, and the ways i n which agency effor ts to mitigate Plan effects did or did not help communities adapt to change. Much can be learned from them. These qualitative data provide a more detailed understanding of the social and economic conditions and trends described by the quantita- tive dat a, the meani ngs people associate with the t rends i n the quantit ative dat a, and i nsights i nto what caused them. I n short, they describe the social and economic effects of the Plan on a sample of com mu nities. We identif y key pat ter ns, themes, and insights that emerge from the cases and use them to advance ou r u nderst andi ng of how federal forest management policy is li n ked to socioeconomic well-bei ng in communities, the subject of the evaluation question. 6 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III References Cronon, W. 2004. Foreword: still searchi ng for Eden at the end of the Oregon Trail. I n: Robbi ns, W.G. Landscapes of con flict: the Oregon stor y, 1940 ?2000. Seat tle, WA: Universit y of Washi ng ton Press: xi?xvi. Danks, C. 2003. Com mu nit y-based stewardship: reinvesting in public forests and forest communities. I n: Boyce, J.K.; Shelley, B.G., eds. Nat u ral assets: democratizi ng envi ron ment al ow nership. Covelo, CA: Island Press: 243 ?260. Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team [FEMAT]. 1993. Forest ecosystem management: an ecological, economic, and social assessment. Portland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re; U.S. Depar t ment of the I nter ior [and others]. [I r reg ular pagi nation]. Haynes, R.W.; Grinspooon, E. [In press]. The socio- economic implications of the Nor thwest Forest Plan. I n: Hay nes, R.W.; Bor man n, B.T.; Lee, D.C.; Mar ti n, J.R., tech eds. Nor thwest Forest Plan ?the fi rst 10 years (1994 ?2003): sy nthesis of monitor i ng and research results. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 651. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. Chapter 5. Haynes, R.W.; Perez, G.E., tech. eds. 2001. Nor thwest Forest Plan research sy nthesis. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 498. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 130 p. Mulder, B.S.; Noon, B.R.; Spies, T.A.; Raphael, M.G.; Palmer, C.J.; Olsen, A.R.; Reeves, G.H.; Welsh, H.H. 1999. The strategy and design of the effectiveness monitor i ng prog ram for the Nor thwest Forest Plan. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 437. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 138 p. Patton, M.Q. 2002. Qualit ative research and evaluation methods. 3 rd ed. T housand Oaks, CA: Sage P ublications, I nc. 127 p. Tuchmann, E.T.; Connaughton, K.P.; Freedman, L.E.; Moriwaki, C.B. 1996. T he Nor thwest Forest Plan: a repor t to the President and Cong ress. Washi ng ton, DC: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Of fice of Forest r y and Economic Assist ance. 253 p. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management [USDA and USDI]. 1994a. Final supplemental environmental impact statement on management of habitat for late-successional and old- g row th forest related species withi n the range of the nor ther n spot ted owl. Por tland, OR: 2 vols. [I r reg ular pagination]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management [USDA and USDI]. 1994b. Record of decision for amend ments to Forest Ser vice and Bu reau of Land Management plan ni ng docu ments withi n the range of the nor ther n spot ted owl. [Place of publication u n k now n]. 74 p. [ plus at t ach ment A: st andards and guidelines]. Warren, D.D. 2003. Production, prices, employment, and t rade i n Nor thwest forest i ndust r ies, all quar ters 2001. Resou r. Bull. PN W-R B-239. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 171 p.  Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Ellen M. Donoghue and N. Lynnae Sutton1 This chapter assesses the status and change of socioeco- nomic conditions for com mu nities i n the Nor thwest Forest Plan (the Plan) area bet ween 1990 and 2000. We exami ne community socioeconomic status and change from a regional perspective to add ress the question: How did social and economic conditions change in communities in the Plan region bet ween 1990 and 2000? To speak to the com mu nit y level, we fi rst defi ne ?com mu nities? i n the Plan area. We then provide information on community socioeconomic conditions and trends for communities in the Plan region. We also i nt roduce a composite measu re of socioeconomic well-bei ng and present results on this measu re for the Plan region and for t wo t y pes of com mu nities, character ized by proximit y to Forest Ser vice (FS) and Bu reau of Land Management (BLM) lands. Approach T he fi rst step i n conducti ng a regional analysis of com - mu nit y conditions is to defi ne the u nit of analysis, the community. The concept of community is a sociological phenomenon that continues to be shaped by differing inter- pretations of social structures, processes, relations, actions, and change related to human groupings. Understanding the relational and territorial dimensions of community life (Gusfield 1975) as par t of defi ni ng the com mu nit y u nit of analysis may be important, but it rarely is used in large social assessments because resou rces are lack i ng. Social i nteractions cont r ibute to defi ni ng a com mu nit y as much as, or arg uably more than, the place itself (Kauf man 1959, Luloff 1998, Wil k i nson 1991), but such i nteractions are dif - ficult to measu re i n a si ngle com mu nit y case st udy let alone hundreds of communities in a regional assessment. Thus, broad-scale social assessments often rely on secondary data sou rces with predefi ned bou ndar ies of com mu nities and limited socioeconomic measurements. Chapter 2: Socioeconomic Conditions and Trends for Communities in the Nor thwest Forest Plan Region, 1990 to 2000 We defi ned place-based com mu nities, rather than com mu nities of i nterest (g roups of li ke-mi nded people who gai n st reng th f rom thei r relations and associations). We recog nize that place-based com mu nities are not the only form of community affected by changes in resource management, but agree it may be an appropriate unit of analysis for assessing the effects of landscape-scale resou rce management on local people (Force and Machlis 1997). Assessments that add ress the conditions and t rends of other forms of community, such as mobile communities and other communities of interest, are important but are beyond the scope of this part of the report. In the United States, social science research at the small scale is i n fluenced by the availabilit y of census and other secondar y dat a. Secondar y dat a i n fluence how the geog raphic bou ndar y of the u nit of analysis is defi ned and what i ndicators and measu res are used to assess socioeconomic conditions and processes. One of the most commonly used designations of communities in social assessments is a census place. Census places i nclude i ncor porated places and census- desig nated places, which are u ni ncor porated com mu nities that meet cr iter ia defi ned by the U.S. census. Census places only represent a por tion of the population, however. Although this limit ation may not be problematic for some social science research, it may be problematic for socioeconomic monitoring, particu- larly when the objective is to bet ter u nderst and relations bet ween r u ral com mu nities and the management of public lands. The high population of rural residents in the Plan region who do not live i n census places, but live close to public lands prompted us to develop ou r ow n delimit ation of com mu nities i n the region (Donoghue 2003). Defining Communities in the Plan Region Many people in the Plan region live in unincorporated localities near public forest lands. Large-scale monitoring and social assessment projects that exami ne the relations bet ween forest management and com mu nities may need to pay par ticular at tention to defi ni ng the u nit of analysis so that people livi ng i n r u ral, u ni ncor porated places with 1 N. Lynnae Sutton is a geographic information specialist, U.S. De pa r t ment of Ag r icu lt u re, Forest Ser v ice, Paci fic Nor t hwest Resea rch St at ion, P.O. Box 3890, Por tla nd , OR 97208. 8 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III close con nections to public lands are represented. Had we chosen a frequently used designation of community for our analysis, namely census places, many communities in rural areas would have been lef t out of the analysis. T hus, we developed ou r ow n defi nition of com mu ni - ties to represent all communities and all people in the Plan region. To agg regate the census block g roups i nto com mu nities, we modified an approach used i n the social assessment for the Sier ra Nevada Ecosystem Project (Doak and Kusel 1996). We developed a process for agg regati ng 7,776 block g roups f rom the 1990 census i nto 1,314 com mu - nities and 10 met ropolit an areas i n the region. A n expanded discussion of the methods and procedures for aggregating the census block g roups can be fou nd i n appendix C and Donoghue (2003), although a br ief over view is presented here. To agg regate the census block g roups, we combi ned geog raphic i nfor mation system analyses with a considerable amou nt of visual ver ification to agg regate the census block g roups i nto meani ngf ul u nits of analysis. T his ver ification included information about roads, school districts, popula- tion size, public lands, census desig nations, and other spatial and demographic features, including a geographic names information system list of populated places. Some disti nct advant ages accr ue f rom usi ng census block g roups as buildi ng blocks for defi ni ng com mu nities. T hey are the smallest unit for all census summary statistics, including shor t-for m dat a (100 percent of the population) on popula - tion and housi ng character istics, as well as long-for m dat a (sample of population) that i ncludes social character istics, such as education and ancestry, and economic character- istics, such as i ncome, employ ment, place of work, and public assist ance. Block-g roup bou ndar ies, par ticularly i n r u ral areas, follow along roads, telephone li nes, fences, streams, and other geographic features and do not neces- sar ily coi ncide with socially meani ngf ul geog raphic places. For t u nately, block g roups are small enough that they can be aggregated into something more representative of a com- munity, but not so small that aggregating them creates an u n r uly dat a management t ask. I n general, when the cr iter ia to agg regate did not poi nt to an obvious agg regation of block g roups, we tended not to aggregate.2 Thus, numerous, relatively small communities are in this analysis. The boundaries of the communities were not ?g rou nd t r uthed? by com mu nit y residents. Such a process was beyond the scope of this work, given the size of the region. Fieldwork related to the Plan socio - economic monitor i ng project (see other volu mes of this repor t) revealed that, for some com mu nities, local residents perceived their community to have different boundaries than those provided th rough the block g roup agg regation. Local residents and of ficials of the 12 case-st udy com mu ni - ties concluded that fou r com mu nities coi ncided with the or igi nal block g roup agg regation, seven requi red additional agg regation to bet ter reflect the bou ndar y of the com - mu nit y, and one requi red dividi ng the or igi nal block g roup agg regation i nto t wo com mu nities. Although this fieldwork suggests that further aggregation may have more accurately reflected some com mu nities, we believe that usi ng the or igi - nal 1,314 com mu nities i n a regional analysis will provide an adequate perspective of socioeconomic change for a large and diverse set of populations and may reveal differences among smaller localities that other wise would be masked if additional agg regation was done. Throughout this chapter, the descriptor communities i n the Plan region? refers to the 1,314 com mu nities that exist i n 72 cou nties of wester n Washi ng ton, wester n Oregon, and nor ther n Califor nia, as defi ned th rough a process of agg re - gati ng census block g roups. T he region i ncludes the lands i n the range of the nor ther n spot ted owl ( Strix occidentalis caurina) and cou nties that were eligible for economic assist ance th rough the Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative. We do not assess change i n the 10 met ropolit an areas identified th rough the agg regation process because the di rection f rom the Record of Decision was on r u ral com mu nities ( USDA and USDI 1994). 3 2 Given t he applicat ion of t h is work for ot her social science re - sea rch, we deter m i ned t hat it wou ld be ea sier to f u r t her agg regate block g roups r at her t ha n d isagg regate com mu n it ies. 3 T he 10 met ropolit a n a rea s i nclude Sa n Fr a ncisco, Sa nt a Rosa , a nd West Sacr a mento, Califor n ia; Por tla nd , Eugene, a nd Salem, O regon; a nd , Bremer ton, R ich la nd-Ken new ick-Pa sco, Seat tle, a nd Tacoma , Wa sh i ng ton.  Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Dat a f rom the 1990 and 2000 censuses were used to exami ne socioeconomic change at the com mu nit y scale, as defi ned by the agg regations of census block g roups. T he dat a f rom 1990 and 2000 were not im mediately comparable, however. T he U.S. census modified the 1990 block g roup bou ndar ies for the 2000 census to reflect changes i n popula - tion and boundary revisions resulting from local input. For i nst ance, the 53 com mu nit y block g roup agg regations that we identified i n the Oly mpic Peni nsula area i n Washi ng ton cont ai ned 124 block g roups i n 1990. T he bou ndar ies for about 33 percent of those block g roups changed i n the 2000 census. To make com mu nit y socioeconomic dat a compa - rable f rom one year to the next, we developed an approach that approximated the spatial allocation of population and housing by estimating the proportion of population in the 2000 block g roups that overlapped with the 1990 block g roups. Propor tions were calculated for each of the 2000 census block g roups that overlapped the 1,314 com mu nit y agg regations. T hey were developed by calculati ng the propor tion of the population or housi ng of each 2000 block (the smallest census geog raphy cont ai ni ng on average 100 people) fou nd i n each com mu nit y. T he 2000 com mu nit y block populations were g rouped and tot aled by block g roup, produci ng 2000 block g roup populations withi n the com mu nities. T he com mu nit y populations were divided by the tot al block g roup populations, produci ng the propor - tion of the 2000 population i n each com mu nit y. A similar procedu re was completed for households and house u nits to produce housi ng propor tions. T hese propor tions were used as multipliers for 2000 socioeconomic dat a so that these dat a approximated the same 1,314 com mu nit y bou ndar ies defi ned by agg regati ng the 1990 block g roups. For analytical purposes, each community has been spatially represented as a polygon and a point. The commu- nit y polygons are contig uous and span the enti re region (fig. 2-1). As such, the bou ndar ies of many com mu nities cont ai n public lands. Some communities relatively small in popula- tion may appear geographically large. Also, many polygons contain several centers of populations or small localities. One com mu nit y poi nt was located i n each polygon to reflect the largest population center, but it should not be interpreted to reflect the only location of population i n a com mu nit y. Block g roup agg regation allowed us to exami ne socio - economic data for all residents in the region. To illustrate, i n 1990, 517 census places (non met ropolit an) existed i n the Plan area, compr isi ng approximately 2.5 million people. By compar ison, because we agg regated census block g roups i nto meani ngf ul com mu nities, we were able to reflect the socioeconomic conditions of more than 4.0 million people (1,314 com mu nities) i n the Plan region. Socioeconomic Conditions and Trends for Communities This section describes socioeconomic conditions and t rends for the com mu nities i n the Plan region by exami ni ng aggregate community data. The socioeconomic indicators discussed i n this repor t were der ived f rom 1990 and 2000 census dat a and reflect population, education, employ ment, i ncome, and other sociodemog raphic i ndicators. Dat a were der ived f rom the long-for m census su r vey, which went to a sample of about one i n six households du r i ng each census. 4 The U.S. census uses data from the sample to produce esti- mates for different u nits of analysis, such as block g roups. To ar r ive at one measu re for the region, averages were t aken of the socioeconomic data at the community scale. Northwest Forest Plan Region Population Total population for the entire United States increased bet ween 1990 and 2000 by 13.2 percent, with the highest i ncrease i n the West (20 percent) and South (17 percent) and the lowest i ncreases i n the Midwest (8 percent) and Nor theast (6 percent). Combi ni ng the com mu nities i n the Plan region with the 10 met ropolit an areas i n the region, the tot al population i n the Plan area went f rom 8.57 mil - lion i n 1990 to 10.26 million i n 2000, an i ncrease of 19.8 percent. The total population of communities in the Plan region ?the 1,314 com mu nities ?went f rom 4.13 million i n 1990 to 4.98 million i n 2000, an i ncrease of 20.6 percent. The population of communities in the Plan region ranged 4 Each per son whose u su al residence is i n t he Un ited St ates is i ncluded i n t he deca d al cen su s, rega rd less of t he per son?s legal st at u s or cit i zen sh ip. M ig r a nt ag r icu lt u r al worker s who d id not re por t a u su al residence elsewhere were cou nted a s resident s of t he place where t hey were on cen su s d ay ( U.S. Cen su s Bu reau 20 0 4). 10 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III I ? 205 Population centers Community boundaries Northwest Forest Plan area States Bureau of Land Management Forest Service Metropolitan area Major lakes and rivers Major roads 0 25 50 100 Miles San Francisco Portland Seattle I-90 I-84 I-82 I-5 I-84 I-82 I-5 I-5 o Fig u re 2-1? Com mu n it y bou nd a r ies a nd com mu n it y populat ion centers for t he Pla n region. 11 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies f rom 75 to 114,806 i n 1990, and 88 to 144,306 i n 2000, with the major it y of com mu nities havi ng bet ween 501 and 2,000 people (fig. 2-2). T he average population i n the com mu nities i n 1990 was 3,141 and i n 2000 was 3,790. T he population for the 1,314 com mu nities i n 2000, usi ng the poi nt associ - ated with each com mu nit y polygon as a reference, is show n i n fig u re 2-3. Population change Changes i n population and population densit y are impor t ant because of the possible effects on land use planning and quality of life. Although population is increasing in the region, about one-fif th of the com mu nities (21 percent) had a negative change i n population (up to -74 percent) bet ween 1990 and 2000 (fig. 2- 4). T he com mu nities that lost popu - lation i n 2000 tended to be fai rly small, 16 percent with 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 25 1? 50 0 50 1? 2,0 00 2,0 01 ?5 ,00 0 5,0 01 ?5 0,0 00 50 ,00 0? 14 4,3 06 Total population category, 2000 N u m b e r o f c o m m u n i t i e s 88 ?250 0.8% 6.4% 54.0% 24.0% 14.0% 0.8% Fig u re 2-2 ? Nu mber of com mu n it ies by tot al populat ion categor ies, 20 0 0. populations bet ween 88 and 500 people, 68 percent with populations bet ween 500 and 2,000 people, and 14 percent with bet ween 2,001 and 5,000 people. About 40 percent of the com mu nities had population i ncreases at lower rates than the region as a whole ( bet ween 0.01 and 20 percent). T he range of population sizes for com mu nities with a lower than average population i ncrease is consistent with the dist r ibution of com mu nit y sizes for the region. T he remai n - i ng 40 percent of com mu nities had population i ncreases f rom 20 to over 200 percent bet ween 1990 and 2000. T his group had proportionately more communities in the larger population-size categor ies, namely the 2,000 ?5,000 and 5,001?50,000 categor ies. T hus, the bigger com mu nities tended to have faster rates of population increase, and the communities losing population tended to be relatively smaller. Population density Population densit y for 2000 is show n i n fig u re 2-5. Popula - tion density is calculated as the total community population divided by the area of the community polygon not including acres of public lands. P ublic lands are FS, National Park Ser vice, BLM, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Ser vice, st ate lands, and military lands. Population density measures, such as those for the cou nties, of ten i nclude public lands, however. Such measures provide a sense of rurality that an area might have, but do not provide i nfor mation about limits to g row th in rural areas. The contribution of public open spaces to a sense of rurality is important, and can be interpreted from land ow nerships displayed on the map. Ou r measu re of densit y does not i nclude public lands. Com mu nit y bou ndar y polygons reflect the census protocol to make block g roup boundaries contiguous and thus include both public and pr ivate lands. However, com mu nit y development does not occu r on public lands. Removi ng public lands f rom ou r measu re of population densit y reflects how much a com - mu nit y can g row withi n the bou ndar ies of pr ivate lands. For instance, some communities may have high percentages of public lands and only limited developable lands, but they may be near met ropolit an areas and exper ienci ng high population g row th, resulti ng i n a higher population densit y than areas with more developable land. 12 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Seattle Portland San Francisco Population, 2000 88?500 501?2000 2,001?5,000 5,001?50,000 50,001?144,306 Metropolitan areas Northwest Forest Plan region States Major lakes and rivers Major roads 0 25 50 100 Miles o Fig u re 2-3 ? Com mu n it y populat ion, 20 0 0. 13 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Fig u re 2- 4 ? Cha nge i n com mu n it y populat ion, 1999 ?20 0 0. Seattle Portland San Francisco Percent change in population, 1990?2000 Decreased population (-74?0) Population increased, below regional average (1?20) High increase in population (21?75) Very high increase in population (75?200+) Metropolitan areas Northwest Forest Plan region States Major lakes and rivers Major roads 0 25 50 100 Miles o 14 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Fig u re 2-5 ? Com mu n it y populat ion densit y on nonpublic la nds, 20 0 0. 0 25 50 100 Miles Number of people per square mile on nonpublic lands, 2000 1?100 101?500 501?1,500 1,501+ Bureau of Land Management Forest Service Tribal lands National Park Service State lands U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Metropolitan areas Northwest Forest Plan region States Major lakes and rivers Major roads Seattle Portland San Francisco o 15 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies T he major it y of com mu nities i n the region (58.9 percent) had bet ween 1 and 100 people per square mile on nonpublic lands. About one-thi rd of the com mu nities (30.9 percent) had bet ween 101 and 500 people per square mile. A nd 8.9 percent had bet ween 501 and 1,500 people, and 1.3 percent of the com mu nities had bet ween 1,501 and 5,381 people per square mile. The smaller communities tended to have lower population densities, although there were some com mu nities i n the 505 ?2,000 people per square mile category that had relatively high population densities. Most of the larger com mu nities (>5,000 people) also had higher population densities, though exceptions were fou nd. How - ever, of the com mu nities with a population i ncrease g reater than 20 percent bet ween 1990 and 2000 (20 percent to more than 200 percent), half (49.5 percent) had the lowest popula - tion densit y i n 2000 (1 to 100 people per square mile). More than one-thi rd (36.3 percent) had densities i n 2000 bet ween 101 and 500 people per square mile. Although the fast-g rowi ng com mu nities tended to have higher population densities than the slower-g rowi ng com mu nities, the densit y dat a suggest that some of the fast-g rowi ng com mu nities had relatively lower densities (<500 people per square mile) and were relatively small (501?2,000 people). Although no not able st atistical cor relation was fou nd bet ween the per - cent age change i n population and population densit y (year 2000), a positive cor relation was fou nd bet ween population densit y (year 2000) and com mu nit y population i n 2000 (Pearson r = 0.51, p < 0.0001). T his cor relation suggests that larger communities tended to have higher densities. Compar ison of the th ree population maps shows relations bet ween location of public lands and changes i n population. For instance, some communities adjacent to large areas of public lands had high percentage increases in population and had relatively high density. Age distribution As is true throughout the United States, the aging of the population i n the 1,314 com mu nities i n the region reflects the aging of the baby-boomer generation. The average median age for all com mu nities i n the Plan region i n 1990 was 36.4 years, but rose i n 2000 to 40.0 years, 5 putting it higher than the median age for the United St ates, which rose f rom 32.9 years i n 1990 to 35.3 years i n 2000. Trends i n age distribution are also similar for the Plan region and for the entire United States. For instance, in the Plan region, the 45-to - 64 -year- old cohor t i ncreased by 53 percent, on aver - age, for all com mu nities bet ween 1990 and 2000, which was by far the largest percent age i ncrease (fig u re 2- 6). An aging population has implications on the demand for the health care and other social services, social security benefits, and employ ment oppor t u nities for older workers. 5 Data throughout this chapter are reported as an average of all com mu n it ies i n a d at a categor y, u n less ot her w ise noted. Fig u re 2- 6 ? Com mu n it y age d ist r ibut ion, 1990 a nd 20 0 0. 228 702 413 766 600 432 242 856 447 825 920 500 0?4 5?19 20?29 30?44 45?64 65 and up Age range, years A v e r a g e s i z e o f a g e g r o u p p e r c o m m u n i t y 1,000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 1990 2000 Race Change i n eth nicit y can not be repor ted f rom census dat a because i nfor mation on race was collected differently i n the 1990 and 2000 censuses. Race i n the Plan region for 2000 was based on averages of all com mu nities i n the Plan region (fig u re 2-7). Compared to the Nation, com mu nities i n the Plan region have higher percent ages of W hite (86.04 per - cent) and A mer ican I ndian people (2.08 percent), and lower 16 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III percent ages of Black (0.88 percent) and Asian and Pacific Islands (2.08 percent) people. T he percent ages among races for the United St ates i n 2000 were W hite 75.10 percent, Black 12.21 percent, Native A mer ican 0.87 percent, Asian and Pacific Islands 3.75 percent, other 5.49 percent, and t wo or more races 2.58 percent. T he census asked similar questions per t ai ni ng to Spanish, Hispanic, and Lati no or igi n i n 1990 and 2000, thus compar isons can be made. On average, for all com - munities in the Plan region, the population of Hispanic or Lati no or igi n was 5.8 percent i n 1990 and 9.0 percent i n 2000, an i ncrease of 46 percent. For the United St ates, the percentage of the population of Hispanic or Latino or igi n was 9.0 percent i n 1990 and 12.5 percent i n 2000, an i ncrease of 38 percent. Educational attainment and school enrollment Dat a on th ree education i ndicators are show n i n t able 2-1. Although school districts and counties may have more accurate and periodic data on indicators of education, the census asked about school en roll ment and educational at t ai n ment i n comparable ways f rom one decade to the next. On average for com mu nities i n the region, there was a moderate i ncrease i n the percent age of the population 25 years and older who had completed high school and a more sizable i ncrease i n the percent age of the population that had bachelor?s deg rees or higher. T hese dat a also reflect that school en roll ment i n the region went up by 31 percent bet ween 1990 and 2000, which is higher than the national i ncrease i n school en roll ment of 26 percent. T his i ncrease i n en roll ment is consistent with the higher than average increase in population in the region. Employment by industry Employ ment by i ndust r y is a measu re that shows the k i nd of busi ness conducted by the organization where the person t ak i ng the census is employed, but does not necessar ily rep - resent the k i nd of work a person per for ms. For example, a person could be an accountant for a clothing manufacturer, and this measu re would denote clothi ng manufact u r i ng not accounting. Also, the actual place of employment may be outside the community. The measure provides a sense of the t y pes and diversit y of k nowledge, sk ills, and abilities of the members of a community, based on the type of businesses where they work, as well as the t y pes of oppor t u nities that may be available for i ndividuals to use thei r sk ills and make a living. The average percentage for communities in the Plan region of employ ment, by i ndust r y, for 11 i ndust r y sectors bet ween 1990 and 2000 is show n i n fig u re 2-8. T he enti re work i ng population is represented i n the 11 sectors provided by the census. Two or more races, 3.30 Asian and Pacific Islands, 2.08 Native American, 2.07 White, 86.04 Other, 5.63 Black, 0.88 Fig u re 2-7? Percent age of t he populat ion by race i n com mu n it ies i n t he Pla n region, 20 0 0. Table 2-1? Communit y averages for educational achievement and school enrollment Percentage Educational indicator 1990 2000 change Completed high school 77.6 82.8 6.7 ( percent) Bachelor?s deg ree or higher 15.4 19.3 25.3 ( percent) School en roll ment ( persons) 621 811 30.6 17 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies T he census modified the sector categor ies i n 2000 to be consistent with economic classifications used by the Nor th A mer ican I ndust r y Classification System, which replaced the U.S. St andard I ndust r ial Classification system to provide comparability in statistics about busi- ness activit y across Nor th A mer ica. For i nst ance, i n 1990 the subcategor y of loggi ng was u nder the manufact u r i ng sector, but it was u nder the ag r icult u re, forest r y, fisher ies, and mi ni ng sector i n 2000. Although categor y names are similar, act ual compar ison of categor ies bet ween 1990 and 2000 is only possible if a propor tions crosswal k program provided by the census is applied to the data. T he result of applyi ng the propor tions crosswal k to the 1990 dat a and produci ng employ ment by i ndust r y dat a that are comparable f rom 1990 to 2000 is show n i n fig u re 2-8. T hus, loggi ng appears u nder the ag r icult u re, forest r y, fishi ng, hu nti ng, and mi ni ng sector for both years. Wood product manufact u r i ng, i ncludi ng saw mills and other millwork, falls u nder the manufact u r i ng sector. T he fou r i ndust r y sectors with the highest percent age of people employed on average across the Plan region commu- nities for 1990 and 2000 were education, health, and social ser vices; professional and other ser vices; manufact u r i ng; and ret ail t rade. T he manufact u r i ng sector, however, which i ncludes mills and millwork, had the highest percent age de - crease of any sector: a 25-percent decrease f rom 16 percent to 12 percent. A nd education, health, and social ser vices had the g reatest i ncrease of any sector: an i ncrease of 17 percent f rom 18 percent to 21 percent of the employed labor force in a sector. All other employment by industry sectors remai ned largely the same bet ween 1990 and 2000. Ag r icul - t u re, forest r y, fishi ng, hu nti ng, and mi ni ng?the sector that i ncludes loggi ng? decreased f rom 6 to 5 percent. Income, poverty, and unemployment Dat a on i ncome, pover t y, and u nemploy ment are show n i n t able 2-2. I ncome dat a provided by the census are of ten cr iticized because of suspected u nder repor ti ng of i ncome 6 7 16 4 12 5 5 18 8 5 15 5 8 12 4 12 5 5 21 8 6 15 0 5 10 15 20 25 Agriculture, forestry, fishing, hunting, and mining ConstructionManufacturing Wholesale trade Retail trade Transportation, warehousing, and utilities Finance, insurance, real estate and rental, and leasing Education, health, and social services Arts, recreation, accommodation, and food services Public administration Professional and other services Employment by industry P e r c e n t a g e o f l a b o r f o r c e 1990 2000 Fig u re 2-8 ? Employ ment by i ndust r y, 1990 a nd 20 0 0. 18 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III by census t akers. Nonetheless, the census asks several questions that encourage people to account for their many for ms of i ncome when they repor t thei r tot al household i ncome. T he average median household i ncome (adjusted for i n flation to 2000 dollars) for com mu nities i n the region went up 20.3 percent, f rom $35,214 to $42,351. T his change is higher than the change in national median household i ncome that was $37,300 i n 1990 and $41,994 i n 2000, an i ncrease of 12.6 percent. Average u nemploy ment for com - mu nities was about the same i n 1990 as i n 2000, although this lack of change does not reflect the li kely yearly fluct ua - tions. The percentage of the population in a community livi ng i n pover t y decreased f rom 12.9 percent i n 1990 to 11.8 percent i n 2000, a decrease of 8.5 percent. T he United St ates had slightly higher pover t y rates (13.1 percent i n 1990 and 12.4 percent i n 2000) and a slightly lower percent age decrease i n pover t y (5.3 percent). Changes i n i ncome dist r ibution bet ween 1990 and 2000 are dif ficult to repor t because, af ter the changes are adjusted for i n flation, the i ncome categor ies can not be compared f rom one decade to the next. Although lower- i ncome brackets changed slightly (?2 percent) bet ween 1990 and 2000 for the Plan region, the most not able changes are i n the higher i ncome brackets. I n 1990, 13 percent of the population i n com mu nities repor ted i ncomes bet ween $62,051 and $93,077 (adjusted to 2000 dollars), but, i n 2000, 20.5 percent of the population repor ted i ncomes bet ween $60,000 and $99,000. Similarly, i n 1990, 6.3 percent of the population reported adjusted incomes of greater than $93,077, but, i n 2000, 9.8 percent repor ted i ncomes g reater than $100,000. Communit y Socioeconomic Well- Being One of the overarchi ng goals of the Plan was to balance the need for forest protection with the need to provide a steady and sustainable supply of timber and nontimber resources to benefit r u ral com mu nities and economies. T his broad-scale, multifaceted goal does not lend itself to convenient methods for measu r i ng prog ress toward achievi ng it. One way to add ress the goal is to assess how social and economic conditions have been changing in communities under the Plan. A re com mu nities bet ter or worse off ? T his section offers a regional perspective on how socioeconomic condi - tions for Plan-region communities have been changing. We developed a composite measu re to ser ve as a proxy for com mu nit y socioeconomic well-bei ng. We then exami ned this composite measure at the regional level and also based on the proximit y of com mu nities to FS and BLM lands. T he notion of ? well-bei ng? has been widely discussed by social scientists, but it has not been r igorously defi ned at either concept ual or operational levels. Well-bei ng is a nor mative concept based on how ? the good life? is defi ned. It of ten reflects the general conditions of people?s lives, or the state of a social system that may include many dimen- sions of com mu nit y life. Well-bei ng has been defi ned on the basis of capabilities and achievements of individuals (Sen 1985) and on the social, cult u ral, and psychological needs of people and com mu nities ( Wil k i nson 1991). Well- bei ng is of ten used to represent general com mu nit y welfare (R ichardson and Ch r istensen 1997) and has been assessed through measures of socioeconomic status and community capacit y (Doak and Kusel 1996). St udies of com mu nit y well-bei ng have focused on u nderst andi ng the cont r ibution of the economic, social, cultural, and political components of a com mu nit y i n mai nt ai ni ng itself and f ul filli ng the var ious needs of local residents (Ch r ist akopoulou et al. 2001, Kusel and For t man n 1991). How to measu re complex sociological const r ucts, such as socioeconomic well-bei ng, is of ten debated. Although no defi nitive concept ual or operational defi nition of com - mu nit y socioeconomic well-bei ng exists, it is an accepted notion that measu res of socioeconomic well-bei ng should represent multiple dimensions of the human community, Table 2-2? Communit y economic indicators Economic indicator 1990 2000 Change 2000 dollars Percent Median household i ncome 35,214 42,351 20.3 Percent Unemploy ment 7.3 7.3 0.0 Pover t y 12.9 11.8 -8.5 19 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies such as social, economic, and hu man concer ns (Force and Machlis 1997). Also, social scientists i ncreasi ngly empha - size the need to combi ne secondar y dat a with pr imar y dat a f rom fieldwork i n com mu nities to f ully u nderst and the relations bet ween socioeconomic i ndicators and com mu nit y well-bei ng (Beck ley 1995, Kusel 1996, Park i ns 1999). We ag ree with the impor t ance of a multimethod approach for u nderst andi ng complex processes at the com mu nit y scale. We suggest that this regional perspective on com mu nit y socioeconomic well-bei ng complement dat a and fi ndi ngs provided in the community case studies and other parts of this repor t i n assessi ng the prog ress toward achievi ng the Plan?s socioeconomic goals. Measuring Socioeconomic Well- Being for Communities in the Plan Region Because we wanted to exami ne change i n com mu nit y socioeconomic well-bei ng for hu nd reds of com mu nities i n a large region where collecti ng pr imar y dat a was not feasible, we relied on census dat a to develop a composite measu re (i ndex) that ser ved as a proxy for com mu nit y socioeconomic well-bei ng, and was comparable bet ween the 1990 and 2000 censuses. Developi ng an i ndex enabled us to reduce a large data set of socioeconomic indicators to a convenient si ngle nu mer ic score, while still ret ai ni ng the meaning of underlying variables. We conducted pr i ncipal component analysis on about 50 socioeconomic var iables to reduce the dat a set to factors and variables that contributed to high variation in the data set. We then exami ned a list of about a dozen var iables and looked for those that not only reflected the economic health of community members, such as unemployment, pover t y, and i ncome, but also i ndicators that reflected other dimensions of com mu nit y life. I n par ticular, we wanted to i nclude var iables that might provide some i nsight i nto how equipped the com mu nities were to deal with social and economic change. T he i ntent was to identif y measu res that reflect dimensions of a social const r uct com monly refer red to as community capacity. Social, human, and physical capital are dimensions of com mu nit y capacit y that are dif ficult to approximate by usi ng secondar y dat a, such as f rom the census. Census dat a do not provide usef ul approximations for the amou nt of physical capit al i n a com mu nit y, for example. But some i ndicators may approximate some dimensions of hu man capit al, such as the sk ills and abilities of residents of a community. For instance, employment diversity may re- flect the diversit y of work force sk ills i n a com mu nit y. T he assu mption is that a more diverse work force will be bet ter able to deal with changes i n the economy. Other i ndicators, such as pover t y and education, may also reflect amou nts of hu man capit al i n a com mu nit y. Diverse sk ills i n a com mu nit y may also cont r ibute to social capit al, which includes the ability of a community to come together, solve problems, and make decisions. I n cont rast, residents who spend a lot of time commuting may have less time to com- mit to civic activities, thus reducing the social capital of a community. An income inequality ratio provides insight i nto com mu nit y well-bei ng that a si ngle measu re, such as median household income, does not. The assumption of the income inequality measure is that social equality cont r ibutes to com mu nit y well-bei ng. W hen i ncome is concentrated among a small proportion of residents, issues of equalit y and the dist r ibution of benefits det ract f rom general well-bei ng (Beck ley and Bu rkosk y 1999, Park i ns and Beck ley 2001). Ou r basic assu mption of the concept and measu re of com mu nit y socioeconomic well-bei ng is that it can be enhanced or reduced. Thus, indicators must clearly cont r ibute i n a positive or negative way to com mu nit y socioeconomic well-bei ng. Although secondar y dat a are sometimes perceived as useful in social science research because they are generally easy to collect, not based on perception, and generally understandable, secondary data also have many limit ations (Diener and Su h 1997). For census data, many indicators are not measured in the same way f rom one census to the next, and complex procedu res to make dat a comparable are only available for some i ndi - cators. Also, some census dat a may reflect character istics of com mu nit y life, such as age or eth nicit y, that would help us differentiate among communities, but changes in such indicators may not clearly indicate enhanced or reduced com mu nit y socioeconomic well-bei ng. 20 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III T he i ndex of com mu nit y socioeconomic well-bei ng was calculated for each of the 1,314 com mu nities i n the Plan region. T he i ndex consists of six i ndicators der ived f rom U.S. Census dat a: diversit y of employ ment by i ndust r y, percent age of population 25 years and older with bachelor?s degree or higher, percentage unemployed, percentage of persons livi ng below the pover t y level, household i ncome i nequalit y, and the average t ravel time to work. T he com mu nit y socioeconomic well-bei ng (SEW B) i ndex is the su m mation of st andardized and nor malized equally weighted socioeconomic i ndicators and was calculated as SEW B = Em D + Ed - PUn - PP - I n I n - ATT (see t able 2-3 for defi nitions). Two i ndicators, diversit y of employment by industry and percentage of the population with bachelor?s deg ree or higher, positively cont r ibute to the socioeconomic well-bei ng i ndex. T he other fou r i ndicators, percentage unemployed, percentage in poverty, household i ncome i nequalit y, and average t ravel time to work, are thought of as negatively contributing to the socioeconomic well-bei ng i ndex. T he assu mption is that higher amou nts Table 2- 3 ? Indicators included in socioeconomic well- being index Indicator Indicator name Description Em D Diversit y of employ ment Employ ment by i ndust r y relates to the k i nd of busi ness conducted by the by industry organization where the person is employed. Diversit y of employ ment by industry is a single measure of diversity, or variety, of industries that employ people f rom the com mu nit y (the act ual place of employ ment may be outside the com mu nit y). T his measu re was generated for each com mu nit y by usi ng a Shan non-Weaver i ndex. T he diversit y i ndex var ies f rom a value of 0 (least diverse) for com mu nities with only a si ngle employ ment i ndust r y to 1 (most diverse) for com mu nities havi ng equal employ ment among all of the repor ted employment industries. Ed Percent age of population Persons with a bachelor?s deg ree or higher are those who have received a 25 years and older havi ng bachelor?s deg ree f rom a college or u niversit y, or a master?s, professional, bachelor?s deg ree or higher or doctorate deg ree. T hese dat a i nclude only persons 25 years old and over. PUn Percent age of the All civilians 16 years old and over are classified as u nemployed if they (1) were population unemployed neither ?at work? nor ? with a job but not at work? du r i ng the reference week, and (2) were look i ng for work du r i ng the last 4 weeks, and (3) were available to st ar t a job. Also i ncluded as u nemployed are civilians who did not work at all du r i ng the reference week but were waiti ng to be called back to a job f rom which they had been laid off and were available for work except for temporar y ill ness. (For more i nfor mation on census u nemploy ment dat a, see ht t p://w w w.census.gov.) PP Percent age of persons livi ng Nu mber of persons below pover t y th reshold divided by tot al population for below the pover t y level whom pover t y st at us is deter mi ned. Tot al population for whom pover t y status is determined does not include people in institutions, military group quar ters, or college dor mitor ies, and u n related i ndividuals u nder 15 years old. (For more infor mation on census pover ty data, see htt p://w w w.census.gov.) I n I n Household i ncome i nequalit y Ratio of tot al household i ncome of the 50 percent of households ear ni ng the highest i ncome to tot al household i ncome of the 50 percent of households ear ni ng the lowest i ncome. Higher ratios i ndicates g reater i ncome i nequalit y. Calculations used g roup dat a. ATT Average t ravel time to work Average t ravel time to work (i n mi nutes) for workers ages 16 years and older. Calculations used g roup dat a. 21 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies of education and employment diversity in a commu- nit y i ndicate higher socioeconomic well-bei ng, but higher unemployment, poverty, income inequality, and com mute time i ndicate lower socioeconomic well-bei ng. To assess change in community socioeconomic well-bei ng, we categor ized the 1990 well-bei ng dat a and t reated them as a baseli ne. We t ransfor med the raw dat a for both years to a range of 0 to 100. Usi ng the bou ndar ies for the 1990 categor ies, we fit ted the 2000 dat a i nto them, allowi ng us to see, on a scale of 0 to 100, how com mu nities i ncreased or decreased relative to each other i n socioeconomic well-bei ng bet ween the t wo decades. To create the baseline categories, the socioeco- nomic well-bei ng scores for all com mu nities i n 1990 were st andardized and g raphed as a histog ram. Based on the dist r ibution of the dat a, the scores were divided i nto five categor ies that reflect levels of com mu nit y socioeconomic well-bei ng. T he categor ies are based on st andard deviations f rom the 1990 baseli ne mean (t able 2- 4). Because the 1990 socioeconomic scores used i n creati ng the categor ies are st andardized by usi ng z-scores and normally distributed, roughly the same number of com mu nities were i n the ver y low and ver y high categor ies, and the low and high categor ies for both years. T he mediu m category contains the largest number of communities, reflecti ng that most of the com mu nit y scores fall some - where near the mean. 6 For additional information on methods, see appendix A. Community Socioeconomic Well- Being at the Regional Scale Socioeconomic well-bei ng has changed for many com mu ni - ties i n the Plan region bet ween 1990 and 2000, with a few com mu nities changi ng scores by more than 40 poi nts Table 2- 4 ? Communit y socioeconomic well- being categories, 1990 and 2000 Community Socioeconomic socioeconomic Standard deviations well-being well-being categories from the mean (67.2) score range Ver y low <-1.5 0 to 48.72 Low -1.5 to - 0.51 48.73 to 61.07 Mediu m - 0.5 to 0.49 61.08 to 73.36 High 0.5 to 1.49 73.37 to 85.58 Ver y high ?1.5 85.59 to 100.00 (agai n, scores are on a 0 to 100 scale) (t able 2-5). T he locations of communities and their respective socioeco- nomic well-bei ng scores for 1990 are show n i n fig u re 2-9. T he ver y low and low categor ies were combi ned, as well as the high and ver y high categor ies. T he 2000 socioeconomic well-bei ng scores and whether the scores i ncreased, decreased, or stayed roughly the same are mapped for wester n Washi ng ton (fig. 2-10), wester n Oregon (fig. 2-11), and nor ther n Califor nia (fig. 2-12). 7 The number of com- mu nities i n each of the socioeconomic well-bei ng categor ies for 1990 and 2000 are show n i n t able 2- 6. A Stewar t Maxwell st atistical test for overall margi nal homogeneit y was not sig nificant ( p = 0.0520), suggesti ng that the propor - tion of communities in each category did not change from one year to the next, which li kely reflects the use of st and- ardized z-scores to defi ne the categor ies. Table 2- 5 ? Change in communit y socioeconomic well- being score bet ween 1990 and 2000 Community socioeconomic Change in score well-being change (scale of 0 to 100) Communities Number Percent Decrease -51 to <-3 484 37 Lit tle change -3 to 3 353 27 I ncrease >3 to 44 477 36 6 See also Donog hue, E.M.; Sut ton, N.L. [I n pre p.]. St r ateg ies a nd met hod s for mea su r i ng socioeconom ic well-bei ng at mu lt iple spatial and temporal scales as part of socioeconomic monitoring of t he Nor t hwest Forest Pla n. Gen. Tech. Re p. Por tla nd , OR: U.S. De pa r t ment of Ag r icu lt u re, Forest Ser v ice, Paci fic Nor t hwest Resea rch St at ion. 7 A n a nalysis of a h istog r a m of cha nge i n well-bei ng scores shows t hat sever al com mu n it ies (27 percent) ha d on ly slig ht cha nges i n scores bet ween 1990 a nd 20 0 0 (?3 percent). We a dded t h is cha r ac - ter i zat ion ? com mu n it ies w it h lit tle cha nge ? to ou r a nalysis a nd spat ial d isplays. O t her com mu n it ies were cla ssi fied a s decrea si ng by more t ha n 3 percent or i ncrea si ng by more t ha n 3 percent. 22 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Socioeconomic well-being categories, 1990 Very low, low Medium Very high, high Bureau of Land Management Forest Service Metropolitan areas Northwest Forest Plan region States Major lakes and rivers Major roads Seattle Portland San Francisco 0 25 50 100 Miles o Fig u re 2-9 ? Com mu n it y socioeconom ic well-bei ng, 1990. 23 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Figure 2-10?Change in community socioeconomic well-being, western Washington. H H H H H H H H H H H M H H H H H H H M M L H H L H H H H M M M M M M M L L L M M L L L M H H M M M H H M M M L M L H H M M M L L M L M M L M M H M M H L L H M M H H M M H H H H H M M M M L M H H H H H M M M M M L H M H M H H M H H M H H M H H M H M M H H H H M L H H H H H H H H M H H H M L H M H H H M H H M H H H M H H M M H H H M M M H M H M H M M M L H L H H M L M L L M M M L M M M H L M L H H M M H M H H L L M L M M M M M H H H H H M M M M H H H H H H H H H M H H H H H H H H H L M L M M L M M H H M M H H L M H M M M L M L L M M M H L L M M L M L M M L H M L H M M L L M M H M L L L L L M L L M L H L H M L M L M M M L H H L H M L M M L M H H H H H M H M M M H M M H L L L M L L H H M H H H M H M M M H H M H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H L H L H M H H H H H H M H H H H H M H H M M M M L L M L H M M H L L L L L L L L M L L M M M H M M M H M H H H M H L L M L L L L L L M L L L H M M M M L M L M L L M M H L L L M H L M L L L L L L L L L L M L M M L L L L L M H M M M M L L M L M M M M M M H M M M M H H H H H M M L L L H L H M M M M L L H H H H M H H H H M L M M L L M L H M M H H M H H H H M L L M L H H M H H H M M M H L M M M H H H M M M H M M L H L L M M L L M H H H H H H M L H M H M L M H M M L M H L M M L M H H L M H M M H M H L M H H M L H M H M H H H H M H H H H L M M L H H H L H L L L L L M M L M L L L L L H H H H L L H H M H H H H M M M L M H Change in socioeconomic well-being from 1990 to 2000 Decrease (<-3) Little change (-3 to 3) Increase (>3) Status socioeconomic well-being, 2000 Low, very low Medium High, very high Bureau of Land Management Forest Service Metropolitan areas Northwest Forest Plan region States Major lakes and rivers Major roads 0 25 50 Miles o 24 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Figure 2-11?Change in community socioeconomic well-being, western Oregon. L L M H H H H H H H H M M H H H H H H H H H H H H M H H H H H H H M M L H H L H H H H M M M M M M M L L L M M L L L M H H M M M H H M M M L M L H H M M M L L M L M M L M M H M M H L M M L H M M L M M M L L M H L M M L M M M M L L M L L L H M H L L M L H H H H H M H M M H H H H H H H M H H H H L L L L L L L L M M M L M L M H H H H H M M H M M H M M M M L M M L L M L M L M L L H M M H H M M M M H H L L M H M M H H M L M M M M M L M M M M M M H H L M M H M L L M L M M M M L L M L L M L L L L L L H L L L L L L L M L L M L H H M L H H H H L M H H M H H H M H M L M M M H M L M H M H M M M H M M H M M M M L M M M M L H H H M L M M H M H M M M M M L M M H H M M M M M M H M M L L M M M M H M M H H L H M M H H H H H H H H M H H H H M M M M L M H H L L M M H M M H H M H H H H H H H H H H M H L H H M M M M M M M L H M H M H H M H H M H H M H H M H M M H H H H M M L H H H H H H H H M H H H M L H M H H H M H H M H H H M H H M M H H H M M M H M H H M L M L L M M M H H H H H H H H H M H H H H H H H H H L M L M M L M M H H M M H H H M L L L L L L L L M L L M M M M M H M L L M L M L M H H M H M M L L M H H M M L M H Change in socioeconomic well-being from 1990 to 2000 Decrease (<-3) Little change (-3 to 3) Increase (>3) Status socioeconomic well-being, 2000 Low, very low Medium High, very high Bureau of Land Management Forest Service Metropolitan areas Northwest Forest Plan region States Major lakes and rivers Major roads 0 25 50 Miles o 25 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies L M L M L L L L L L L L L L M L L M L L M L L M L H M L L L L H M H M M H M M M M M L L M H M M M L L L M M H M L L L L L L L L L L L L M M L M L L L L L H H L L M L M M L L L H M H H M L H H H H L L L L M L L M L M M M M M H H L M M H H M M M L H M L M M H L M L L L L M L L L M H H H H H H H H M M H H M H M H L L L M L M H L M M L M H L L L M L L M M L L L L L M L L L L M L L L L L L M M M L L M L M M L L H M M H H H H H H H M M H H H L L M H H H H H H M H H M H M M M L L M L L L M L M M L L L L M L L M H L M H M L L L M L M L L M M L L L L L L L L L L M L L L H H H H H H H L L M M L M M L H M H L L M L H L M H Change in socioeconomic well-being from 1990 to 2000 Decrease (<-3) Little change (-3 to 3) Increase (>3) Status socioeconomic well-being, 2000 Low, very low Medium High, very high Bureau of Land Management Forest Service Metropolitan areas Northwest Forest Plan region States Major lakes and rivers Major roads 0 25 50 100 Miles o Figure 2-12?Change in community socioeconomic well-being, northern California. 26 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Movement of individual communities across catego- r ies was considerable, however. About 50 percent of the com mu nities i ncreased thei r socioeconomic well-bei ng scores bet ween 1990 and 2000, and 50 percent decreased. Specifically, 42 com mu nities went f rom low to ver y low, 26 com mu nities went f rom mediu m to ver y low, 121 com mu nities went f rom mediu m to low, 6 com mu nities went f rom high to ver y low, 10 com mu nities went f rom high to low, 111 com mu nities went f rom high to mediu m, 4 went f rom ver y high to mediu m, and 28 went f rom ver y high to high. On the positive side, 34 com mu nities moved f rom ver y low to low, 17 moved f rom ver y low to mediu m, 7 moved f rom ver y low to high, 2 moved f rom ver y low to ver y high, 91 moved f rom low to mediu m, and 16 moved f rom low to high, 115 com mu nities went f rom mediu m to high, 9 went f rom mediu m to ver y high, and 39 went f rom high to very high. A t-test was per for med to com - pare means for the overall regional average socioeconomic well-bei ng scores for com mu nities i n 1990 and 2000; it showed no st atisti - cally sig nificant difference bet ween the means. T his fi ndi ng was to be expected, given that the i ndex consisted of nor malized values of the distance of each community score from the mean community score. St atistically sig nificant differences are evident, however, when we consider how the com mu nities i n each of the five 1990 socioeconomic well-bei ng categor ies changed bet ween 1990 and 2000 (t able 2-7). Socioeconomic scores for the 350 com mu nities that i n 1990 had ver y low or low scores i ncreased bet ween 1990 and 2000 ( p < 0.001), and socioeco - nomic well-bei ng for the 964 com mu nities that had mediu m, high, and ver y high scores i n 1990 decreased bet ween 1990 and 2000. Additionally, t-tests for compar i ng means bet ween 1990 and 2000 for each of the six i ndicators of the socioeco - nomic i ndex were st atistically sig nificant ( p < 0.001) for all i ndicators except u nemploy ment. T he tests showed that, at a regional scale, the percentage of the population in communi- ties with bachelor?s deg ree or higher went up, the percent age of the population i n pover t y went dow n, and employ ment diversity increased slightly. Income inequality and average com mute time to work i ncreased, however. Table 2- 6 ? Communities in socioeconomic well- being categories, 1990 and 2000 Socioeconomic 2000 well-being category Very low Low Medium High Very high Total Percent 1990 Ver y low 40 34 17 7 2 100 7.6 Low 42 100 91 16 1 250 19.1 Mediu m 26 121 272 115 9 543 41.3 High 6 10 111 202 39 368 28.0 Ver y high 0 0 4 28 21 53 4.0 Tot al 114 265 495 368 72 1,314 Percent 8.7 20.1 37.7 28.0 5.5 100 100 Table 2-7? Communities organized by 1990 socioeconomic well- being categories and their change in average socioeconomic well- being score bet ween 1990 and 2000 1990 socioeconomic Well-being score well-being category Number of communities 1990 2000 Difference Ver y low 100 40.5 53.0 12.5* Low 250 55.9 58.8 2.9* Mediu m 543 67.7 66.2 -1.5* High 368 78.3 75.8 -2.5* Ver y high 53 89.5 84.3 -5.2* * Sig n i fica nt at p <0.05 level. 2 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Population and Community Socioeconomic Well- Being Empi r ical and theoretical work i n r u ral sociolog y suggest that complex, i nterdependent factors shape com mu ni - ties, and that interactions among residents, not just the physical place, defi ne a com mu nit y ( Car roll 1995, Machlis and Force 1988, Wil k i nson 1979). Nonetheless, the size of a community is often considered an important factor i n fluenci ng whether a com mu nit y has the i nstit utional st r uct u re to meet the needs of its residents ( Wil k i nson 1991). Population and population densit y have been used as proxies for civic i nf rast r uct u re and have been i ncluded i n composite measures of socioeconomic resiliency, viability, and adapt abilit y ( Hay nes 2003, Hor ne and Hay nes 1999). Recent regional social assessments have concluded that the higher the population in a rural community, the greater the infrastructure and the higher the socioeconomic resilience (Har r is et al. 2000). I n the Plan region, the average population size for com - mu nities i n the ver y low and low socioeconomic well-bei ng categor ies was less than those i n the mediu m, high, and ver y high categor ies for 1990 and 2000 (fig. 2-13). W hat is not able, however, is that com mu nities i n the ver y high categor y were not com mu nities with the highest average population, suggesti ng that population size may not be the best proxy for socioeconomic well-bei ng or other related constructs, such as community resiliency. The number of people living in communities in the ver y low or low categor ies al most doubled bet ween 1990 and 2000, an i ncrease well above the average 20.6 percent i ncrease i n population for the region (t able 2-8). I n 1990 and 2000, about 80 percent of the population was livi ng i n communities that had medium, high, or very high socio- economic scores. Consider i ng only those people livi ng i n Plan-area com mu nities (i.e., not cou nti ng the met ropolit an population), i n 1990, 13.1 percent of the population was i n com mu nities with ver y low and low well-bei ng scores, and 39.4 percent of the population lived i n com mu nities with high and ver y high scores. I n 2000, 21.0 percent of the population was i n the ver y low and low categor ies, and 37.5 percent of the population lived i n com mu nities i n the high and very high categories. 2,064 4,118 3,614 1,637 1,312 3,128 4,461 4,171 3,145 1,888 5,000 4,500 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 Very low Low Medium High Very high Socioeconomic well-being P o p u l a t i o n 1990 2000 Fig u re 2-13 ?Average si ze of com mu n it y populat ion by socioeconom ic well-bei ng categor y, 1990 a nd 20 0 0. 28 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Proximit y to Public Forest Lands and Communit y Socioeconomic Well- Being Evolving Concept of Forest-Based Communities We were i nterested i n how socioeconomic well-bei ng of communities in the Plan region differed for those communi- ties that were close to public forest land compared to those com mu nities that were far ther away. We begi n by br iefly discussing the concept of forest-based communities. The past t wo decades have seen an evolution of ter ms used to depict communities that have distinct connections to forest resources: community stability, forest dependence, forest based, community capacity, community resiliency, and the recent emphasis on sustainable forest management (Mont r?al Process Work i ng G roup 1998), com mu nit y viabilit y and adapt abilit y. T his evolution of ter ms shows a g rowi ng emphasis on the complex, dy namic, and i nter re - lated aspects of rural communities and the natural resources that su r rou nd them. T he earliest ter ms dealt with the limits bet ween forest management and st able com mu nities achieved th rough st able employ ment i n the forest sector. By the late 1980s, however, the notion of com mu nit y st abilit y as reflecti ng sust ai ned-yield timber management was bei ng called i nto question ( Lee 1990, Schallau 1989). Although the use of the term stabilitycontinued to endure in policy debates, concer n was raised about the lack of a clear defi ni - tion of st abilit y and how it might be measu red ( Fortmann et al. 1989, Lee 1989, Machlis and Force 1988, R ichardson 1996). Some researchers began look i ng beyond employ - ment indicators to other aspects of community life to assess com mu nit y well-bei ng ( Doak and Kusel 1996, Kusel and For t man n 1991). I n addition to economic measures, indicators for poverty, education, crime, and other sociodemographic measures have been used to assess conditions in com- munities. Concu r rent with discussions about st abil - it y and com mu nit y well-bei ng were discus - sions about the term forest dependence. Forest and timber dependence were i nitially defi ned i n ter ms of com modit y production as well. Research has suggested, however, that com mu nities are more complex than t raditional measu res of timber dependency would imply (Hay nes et al. 1996). Most com mu nities have mixed economies, and thei r vit alit y is of ten li n ked to other factors besides com modit y production. Some communities thought of as timber dependent have been conf ronted with economically sig nificant challenges, such as mill closures, and displayed resilient behavior as they have dealt with change. T he ter m ?forest dependence? has since evolved in recognition that some economic ties that com mu nities have to forests are not wood-product based, but result from recreation and other amenities (FEM AT 1993, Kusel 1996). A nd the ter m has also evolved to reflect the noneconomic con nections to forests, such as the sy mbolic livi ng t raditions that people have with the forested places i n which they live ?the sense of place (Hiss 1990, Kusel 1996, Sted man 2003, Tuan 1993 ). Although com monly used, the word ?dependence? may not suf ficiently reflect all con nections bet ween com mu nities and forests, suggesting that the term forest dependence may not be appropriate. Dependence tends to be unidirec- tional? a com mu nit y depends on a forest? but does not reflect ways that forests depend on nearby com mu nities. For example, i n fi re-prone areas, forests may depend on fi re-wise behavior and prepared ness by local residents. Thus, the term forest-basedcommunity is increasingly bei ng accepted as reflecti ng the complex, multidimensional, and multidi rectional con nections bet ween com mu nities and forests. A com mu nit y may be forest based, but will have social and economic li n ks to geog raphic scales larger than the com mu nit y. Because of the scale of this project, we were limited i n how we could character ize the con nections that Table 2- 8 ? Regional population in socioeconomic well- being categories, 1990 and 2000 Socioeconomic well-being category 1990 population 2000 population Number Percent Number Percent Ver y low 131,211 3.2 215,191 4.3 Low 409,336 9.9 833,340 16.7 Mediu m 1,962,201 47.5 2,064,668 41.5 High 1,515,526 36.7 1,641,515 33.0 Ver y high 109,385 2.7 225,197 4.5 Tot al 4,127,659 100 4,979,911 100 2 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies com mu nities have to nearby forests. We concu r with the perspective that many communities in the region maintain diverse, dynamic, and multiscale connections to nearby forests. Socioeconomic Well- Being and Proximity to FS and BLM Lands for the Plan Region Recog nizi ng that com mu nities not im mediately adjacent to public forest lands may have con nections to the forests, we thought it would be i nfor mative to character ize the 1,314 com mu nities based on proximit y to FS and BLM lands and compare socioeconomic well-bei ng scores. We chose prox - imit y as a means to character ize the com mu nities because census dat a that reflect con nections bet ween com mu nit y members and forests were limited and because collecti ng and analyzi ng pr imar y dat a to assess the relations all com - mu nities i n the region had to forests was beyond the scope of the project. Proximit y to FS and BLM lands i n the plan region was one way to exami ne, at a regional scale, some of the relations that communities have to forests. Accepti ng that we were limited to spatial analysis, we defi ned proximit y to FS and BLM lands by creati ng 5-mile buffers arou nd the lands. Com mu nit y poi nts that fell withi n the 5-mile buffer were considered close to FS and BLM lands. Com mu nit y poi nts that fell outside the 5-mile buffer were considered far ther away f rom FS and BLM lands. We t r ied many different buffer sizes. Five miles was chosen be - cause du r i ng discussions with FS managers, i n preparation for the case-study component of this project, the managers concluded that com mu nities 10 miles away f rom a par ticular FS or BLM u nit, i n general, were not considered as havi ng pr imar y con - nections to a particular forest. Some commu- nities g reater than 5 miles f rom FS and BLM lands have connections to the forest, such as th rough watersheds, or regional recreation or forest-product economies. However, because of the high percentage of public lands in the Plan region, buffers much larger than 5 miles captured a high percentage of communities i n the region, which limited ou r abilit y to use proximit y as a way to character ize com mu nities i n the region.8 Thus, this analysis of community socioeconomic well-bei ng is based on t wo t y pes of com mu nities, deter - mi ned by the proximit y to FS and BLM lands (?5 miles, <5 miles). Of the 1,314 com mu nities i n the Plan region, 750 of them ? or about 2.26 million people i n 2000 ?were withi n 5 miles of FS or BLM lands, which is just u nder half the population of com mu nities i n the Plan region (48 percent i n 1990, and 47 percent i n 2000). Of these com mu - nities close to public forest lands, 71 percent had relatively low population densit y (0 to 100 people per square mile on nonpublic lands). I ndeed, many of the com mu nities i n the Plan region (59 percent) were i n this low-population- densit y category. In general across the region, smaller communities (less than 2,000 people) tended to have lower densities, and tended to have lower than average i ncreases i n population or declines. T he socioeconomic well-bei ng scores i n 2000 for com mu nities that were close to public forest lands (withi n 5 miles of FS and BLM lands) and far ther away ( ? 5 miles) are show n i n t able 2-9. A g reater percent age of com mu nities close to these public lands had scores i n the ver y low or low categor ies (36 percent) compared to the com mu nities that were far ther away f rom the public lands (19.3 percent). I n cont rast, a g reater percent age of com mu nities far ther away 8 W hen a bu f fer of 10 m iles wa s placed a rou nd FS a nd BLM la nd s, 963 com mu n it ies, or 66 percent of t he popu lat ion of com mu n it ies i n t he Pla n reg ion i n 20 0 0, were w it h i n 10 m iles of FS a nd BLM la nd s. Table 2- 9 ? Communit y socioeconomic well- being and proximit y to Forest Ser vice (FS) and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) lands, 2000 Socioeconomic Communities within Communities farther well-being 5 miles of than 5 miles category, 2000 FS or BLM land from FS or BLM land Number Percent Number Percent Ver y low 87 11.6 27 4.8 Low 183 24.4 82 14.5 Mediu m 291 38.8 204 36.2 High 156 20.8 212 37.6 Ver y high 33 4.4 39 6.9 Tot al 750 100 564 100 30 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III f rom FS and BLM lands had scores i n the high or ver y high categor y (44.5 percent) compared to com mu nities close to FS and BLM lands (25.2 percent). Of the com mu nities that had high or ver y high scores i n 2000, 43 percent (189 of 440) were located far ther than 5 miles f rom FS and BLM lands. I n cont rast, of the com mu ni - ties with ver y low or low socioeconomic well-bei ng scores i n 2000, 71 percent (270 of 379) were close to FS or BLM lands. With respect to population, of the 1 million people i n com mu nities i n the Plan region that had ver y low or low socioeconomic well-bei ng scores i n 2000, 61 percent were livi ng close to FS and BLM lands. Similar to the regional comparison of average com- mu nit y socioeconomic well-bei ng scores bet ween 1990 and 2000, no st atistical difference was fou nd bet ween years for average socioeconomic well-bei ng scores for either com mu nities close to FS and BLM lands or com mu nities far ther away. I ndividual com mu nit y scores i ncreased and decreased bet ween the years, however, and there was a difference i n how the t wo t y pes of com mu nities changed. For i nst ance, 40 percent of com mu nities close to FS and BLM lands (withi n 5 miles) decreased i n socioeconomic well-bei ng, compared to 33 percent of the com mu nities far ther away. A closer exami nation of the five socioeconomic well-bei ng categor ies (ver y low, low, mediu m, high, and ver y high) reveals other differences bet ween the t wo types of communities. For both community types, average socioeconomic scores for com mu nities i n the ver y low and low categor ies i ncreased bet ween 1990 and 2000, but the scores of communities in the medium, high, and very high categor ies decreased. However, although the t rends are similar for both types of communities, in all categories, com mu nities close to FS and BLM lands consistently had lower socioeconomic scores across the five categor ies than com mu nities far ther away. Although the average score for the ver y low and low com mu nities, i n both com mu nit y t y pes, i ncreased bet ween the years, some com mu nities had decreased scores. In particular, of the communities close to FS and BLM lands i n the ver y low and low categor ies i n 1990, 22 percent decreased i n socioeconomic well-bei ng scores, but only 11 percent of the com mu nities far ther away (i n the same categor y) had decreases i n scores. Conversely, most of the communities in high and very high categories i n 1990, for both com mu nit y t y pes, decreased, although a small percent age i ncreased. Of the com mu nities close to FS and BLM lands i n ver y high and high categor ies i n 1990, 16 percent i ncreased, whereas 21 percent of the com mu nities far ther away had i ncreases i n these categor ies. Exami nation of the six i ndicators composi ng the socioeconomic well-bei ng i ndex showed that changes were similar for com mu nities close to and far ther way f rom FS and BLM lands, with one exception. Both t y pes of com - mu nities had i ncreases i n the percent age of population with bachelor?s deg rees or higher, decreased pover t y, i ncreased employment diversity, and an increase in travel time to work (t-test, p < 0.05) bet ween 1990 and 2000 (change i n the u nemploy ment i ndicator was not st atistically sig nificant). Change i n i ncome i nequalit y, however, was not st atistically sig nificant for com mu nities g reater than 5 miles away. I n contrast, income inequality increased for communities close to FS and BLM lands ( p < 0.001). T his fi ndi ng suggests that the regional increase in income inequality appears to be driven by increases in income inequality in communities close to public forest lands. Several differences emerge bet ween the t wo t y pes of com mu nities when socioeconomic scores are compared withi n a si ngle year. Two -sample t-tests for compar i ng means (assu mi ng u nequal var iance) were per for med to assess socioeconomic well-bei ng scores for com mu nities close to FS and BLM lands compared to com mu nities far ther away. For both 1990 and 2000 dat a, the difference i n the means was st atistically sig nificant ( p < 0.001). On average, com mu nities far ther away had higher socioeco - nomic well-bei ng scores than did com mu nities close to FS and BLM lands. Also, means were compared for each of the six i ndica - tors for both com mu nit y t y pes. Means were st atistically different ( p < 0.001) for all i ndicators for both 1990 and 2000 dat a, except for diversit y of employ ment by i ndust r y i n 2000, suggesti ng that, on average, com mu nities that were far ther away had a higher percent age of the population with bachelor?s deg rees or more, less pover t y, less u nemploy - ment, less i ncome i nequalit y, and higher 1990 diversit y of 31 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies employ ment by i ndust r y. Com mu nities far ther away f rom FS and BLM lands also had higher com mute times. How - ever, for all com mu nities, we fou nd a positive cor relation bet ween average t ravel time and median household i ncome i n both 1990 and 2000 (r = 0.26 i n 1990, r = 0.32 i n 2000, p < 0.0001), i ndicati ng that the higher the average t ravel time, the higher the median i ncome. We also fou nd that the lower the average t ravel time i n a com mu nit y, the higher the percent age i n pover t y (r = - 0.23 i n 1990, r = - 0.28 i n 2000, p < 0.0001). Summary I n general, com mu nities i n the Plan region exper ienced change i n socioeconomic conditions bet ween 1990 and 2000. Tot al population i n the region g rew at a faster rate than i n the rest of the United St ates (20.6 percent i n 2000). Al most 5 million people lived i n com mu nities i n the Plan region i n 2000. 9 A nd many of these com mu nities were relatively small. I n 2000, more than 60 percent of the 1,314 com mu nities identified th rough the block g roup -agg rega - tion process had bet ween 250 and 2,000 people, for a tot al of 857,000 people, or 17.2 percent of the tot al population of communities in the Plan region. Although the population is i ncreasi ng i n the region as a whole, about one-fif th of the com mu nities lost population bet ween 1990 and 2000. T hese com mu nities tended to be fai rly small, about 80 percent of them havi ng populations bet ween 250 and 2,000 i n 2000. Almost a half million people in the region live in these communities. Smaller communities, in general, also tended to have lower population densities. Com mu nities with the highest percent age i ncrease i n population bet ween 1990 and 2000 span the spect r u m of small and large com mu nities, and low and high densities. T he population i n the Plan region is agi ng i n ways similar to the rest of the United St ates, with the baby- boomer cohor t ( bor n 1946 to 1964) showi ng the g reatest percentage increase in age. Although the racial composition of Plan com mu nities can not be compared bet ween 1990 and 2000, the census does collect i nfor mation on Hispanic or Latino origin that can be compared: the percentage of Hispanics and Latinos in Plan region communities in- creased f rom 5.8 percent to 8.5 percent, although the overall percent age remai ns less than i n the United St ates as a whole (12.5 percent i n 2000). Plan com mu nities have had sizable i ncreases i n the per - cent age of the population with bachelor?s deg rees or higher bet ween 1990 and 2000. Pover t y has decreased at a higher rate than the rest of the United St ates, with a lower percent - age of the population i n pover t y (11.8 percent i n 2000 for the Plan region and 12.4 percent for the United St ates). T he lower pover t y measu res i n the region are consistent with the increase in median household income and the increases in the percentage of the population in the highest income brackets. Median household i ncome i ncreased 20.3 percent bet ween 1990 and 2000 to $42,351, just above the national median household i ncome of $41,994 i n 2000. T he fou r i ndust r y sectors that remai n domi nant i n 1990 and 2000 among com mu nit y residents i n the Plan region were education, health, and social ser vices; professional and other ser vices; manufact u r i ng; and ret ail t rade. T he manufact u r i ng sector, however, had the highest percent age decrease of any sector, and the education, health, and social services sector had the greatest increase. Twent y-seven percent of the com mu nities i n the region had lit tle change i n socioeconomic well-bei ng, but 37 percent i ncreased and 36 percent decreased. T he i ndicators mak i ng up the socioeconomic well-bei ng i ndex showed that, for the communities in the region, the percentage of the com mu nit y population with a bachelor?s deg ree or more increased, the percentage of the population in poverty decreased, and employment diversity increased slightly. I ncome i nequalit y and average com mute time to work i ncreased, however. Although smaller com mu nities i n the Plan region tended not to be doi ng as well as before, based on the socioeconomic well-bei ng i ndex, some relatively small com mu nities were doi ng quite well. Twent y- one percent of the population of communities in the Plan region (1.05 million people) lived i n com mu nities with ver y low or low socioeconomic well-bei ng i n 2000, compared to 13 percent of the population (0.54 million people) i n 1990. 9 Agai n, ?com mu n it ies i n t he Pla n reg ion? refer s to t he 1,314 com mu n it ies ident i fied t h roug h t he cen su s block g roup agg rega - t ion process a nd t hat ex ist i n 72 cou nt ies of wester n Wa sh i ng ton, wester n O regon, a nd nor t her n Califor n ia. T he re por t does not focu s on t he 10 met ropolit a n a rea s (listed elsewhere) i n t he reg ion. 32 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III T his 94 percent i ncrease is 4.6 times the regional aver - age i ncrease i n population of 20.6 percent. I n cont rast, 37 percent of the population (1.8 million people) lived i n com mu nities with relatively high socioeconomic well-be - i ng i n 2000. Com mu nities with ver y high socioeconomic scores were not, on average, com mu nities with the highest average population. T he low cor relation bet ween population size and socioeconomic well-bei ng scores suggests that population may not be a usef ul proxy for socioeconomic well-bei ng or for related const r ucts such as resiliency and adaptability. Because of the high percent age of FS and BLM lands in the Plan region, it is not surprising that many people live close to public lands. W hat may be less apparent, however, is that about 2 million people, or just u nder half of the tot al population of com mu nities i n the Plan region (47 percent) i n 2000, live i n com mu nities withi n 5 miles of FS and BLM lands. Most of the com mu nities (70 percent i n 1990, 71 percent i n 2000) with ver y low or low socioeconomic well- bei ng scores i n 1990 and 2000 were com mu nities withi n 5 miles of FS and BLM lands. With respect to population, of the 1.05 million people livi ng i n Plan-area com mu nities with ver y low or low socioeconomic well-bei ng scores i n 2000, about 61 percent were livi ng close to public forest lands. Forty-three percent of the communities that received high or ver y high socioeconomic well-bei ng scores, however, were also close to FS and BLM lands. T hus, some com mu nities close to public forest lands were doi ng ver y well relative to other com mu nities i n the region. Although the specific social and economic con nections that these com mu nities have with nearby forests (recreation, tou r ism, wood products, reti rement amenities) were not deter mi ned for this report, understanding the social and economic con- nections of these communities to the forests may provide useful information for other forest-based communities. Socioeconomic well-bei ng measu res are limited, however, and do not adequately address the abilities of a community to t ake advant age of social and economic development opportunities and meet the needs of residents. In general, com mu nities far ther away f rom FS and BLM lands had higher socioeconomic well-bei ng. Conclusions A re com mu nities i n the Plan region doi ng bet ter or worse si nce the Plan was implemented? Although fi ndi ng di rect con nections bet ween changes i n forest policy and changes i n socioeconomic conditions is dif ficult, we have provided information on status and change of a variety of indicators at several scales, i ncludi ng one that focuses specifically on proximit y to FS and BLM lands. T he socioeconomic dat a con fi r m that com mu nities i n the Plan region are changi ng. At a regional scale, the population is g rowi ng, educational attainment and household income are increasing, and poverty is decreasing. At the same time, the manufacturing sector of the economy is declining in many communities in the Plan region. Socioeconomic well-bei ng i ncreased for more than a third of the communities in the Plan region and decreased for about the same percent age. Bet ween 1990 and 2000, however, 40 percent of com mu nities withi n 5 miles of FS and BLM lands decreased i n socioeconomic well-bei ng, whereas only 33 percent of com mu nities far ther away decreased i n well-bei ng. Generally, com mu nities with lower socioeconomic well-bei ng tended to be close to public forest lands. Some com mu nities close to FS and BLM lands had relatively high socioeconomic well-bei ng, but i ncome inequality also increased for many of these communities. Drivers of socioeconomic change, such as increasing income inequality, inmigration, shifts in dominant industry sectors, and aging populations, affect community socioeco- nomic well-bei ng. From the dat a available to us, we were u nable to deter mi ne how much public forests cont r ibute to these d r ivers of socioeconomic change. W hat we k now f rom this repor t is that over 2 million people live i n com mu - nities close to FS and BLM lands i n the Plan region. Many of these communities maintain unique social, economic, cultural, environmental health, aesthetic, and other connec- tions to the forests that su r rou nd them. Changes i n forest policy and changes i n ways that people relate to forests li kely i nteract with other forces of change to affect the socioeconomic well-bei ng of forest-based com mu nities. 33 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Metric Equivalents W hen you k now: Mult iply by: To find: Miles 1.609 K ilometers Square miles 2.59 Square k ilometers Acknowledgments We than k A n ne Sch neider and Gosia Br yja for dat a compilation and consult ation related to the block g roup agg regation methods for the 1990 census dat a. Literature Cited Beckley, T.M. 1995. Com mu nit y st abilit y and the relationship bet ween economic and social well-bei ng i n forest- dependent com mu nities. Societ y and Nat u ral Resou rces. 8(3): 261?266. Beckley, T.M.; Burkosky, T.M. 1999. Social indicator approaches to assessing and monitoring forest com mu nit y sust ai nabilit y. I nfor mation Rep. NOR-X-360. Ed monton, A B: Nat u ral Resou rces Canada, Canadian Forest Ser vice, Nor ther n Forest r y Cent re. 13 p. Carroll, M.S. 1995. Com mu nit y and the Nor thwest logger: conti nuities and changes i n the era of the spot ted owl. Boulder, CO: West view Press. 177 p. Christakopoulou, S.; Dawson, J.; Gari, A. 2001. The com mu nit y well-bei ng question nai re: theoretical context and initial assessment of its reliability and validity. Social I ndicators Research. 56: 321?351. Diener, E.; Suh, E. 1997. Measuring quality of life: economic, social, and subjective indicators. Social I ndicators Research. 40: 189 ?216. Doak, S.; Kusel, J. 1996. Well-bei ng i n forest- dependent com mu nities. Par t 2: A social assessment. I n: Sier ra Nevada Ecosystem Project: fi nal repor t to Cong ress ? assessments and scientific basis for management options. Davis, CA: Universit y of Califor nia, Center for Water and Wildland Resou rces: 375 ? 402. Vol. 2. Donoghue, E.M. 2003. Delimiting communities in the Pacific Nor thwest. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR-570. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 51 p. Force, J.E.; Machlis, G.E. 1997. The human ecosystem. Part II: Social indicators in ecosystem management. Societ y and Nat u ral Resou rces. 10: 369 ?382. Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team [FEMAT]. 1993. Forest ecosystem management: an ecological, economic, and social assessment. Portland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re; U.S. Depar t ment of the I nter ior [and others]. [I r reg ular pagi nation]. Fortmann, L.; Kusel, J.; Fairfax, S. 1989. Com mu nit y st abilit y: the foresters? fig leaf. I n: LeMaster, D.C.; Beuter, J.H., eds. Com mu nit y st abilit y i n forest-based economies: proceedi ngs of a conference. Por tland, OR: Timber Press: 44 ?50. Gusfield, J.R . 1975. Com mu nit y: a cr itical response. New York: Har per and Row. 120 p. Harris, C.C.; McLaughlin, W.; Brown, G.; Becker, D. 2000. Ru ral com mu nities i n the i nland Nor thwest: an assessment of small communities in the interior and upper Colu mbia R iver basi ns. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 477. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 120 p. Haynes, R.W. 2003. Assessing the viability and adaptability of forest-dependent communities in the United St ates. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR-567. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 33 p. Haynes, R .W.; McCool, S.; Horne, A .; Birchfield, J. 1996. Nat u ral resou rce management and com mu nit y well-bei ng. Wildlife Societ y Bulleti n. 24(2): 222?226. Hiss, T. 1990. T he exper ience of place. New York: Alf red A. K nopf. 233 p. 3 4 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Horne, A.L.; Haynes, R.W. 1999. Developing measures of socioeconomic resiliency i n the i nter ior Colu mbia basi n. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 453. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 41 p. (Quigley, T.M., ed.; I nter ior Colu mbia Basi n Ecosystem Management Project: scientific assessment). Kaufman, H. 1959. Towards an i nteractional conception of com mu nit y. Social Forces. 38(1): 8 ?17. Kusel, J. 1996. Well-being in forest dependent communities. Par t 1: A new approach. I n: Sier ra Nevada Ecosystem Project. St at us of the Sier ra Nevada: Fi nal repor t to Cong ress. Davis, CA: Universit y of Califor nia, Wildland Resou rces Center: 361?374. Vol. II. Kusel, J.; Fortmann, L. 1991. Well-bei ng i n forest- dependent com mu nities. Sacramento, CA: Califor nia Depar t ment of Forest r y, Forest and Rangeland Protection Prog ram. 245 p. Lee, R.G. 1989. Com mu nit y st abilit y: Sy mbol or social realit y? I n: LeMaster, D.C.; Beuter, J.H., eds. Com mu nit y stability in forest-based economies: proceedings of a conference. Por tland, OR: Timber Press: 36 ? 43. Lee, R.G. 1990. Sustained yield and social order. In: Lee, R.G.; Field, D.R.; Bu rch, W. J., eds. Com mu nit y and forestry: continuities in the sociology of natural resou rces. Boulder, CO: West view Press: 83 ?94. Luloff, A.E. 1998. W hat makes a place a com mu nit y? T he fif th Si r Joh n Quick Bendigo lect u re. Bendigo, Aust ralia: La Trobe Universit y. 23 p. Machlis, G.E.; Force, J.E. 1988. Com mu nit y st abilit y and timber- dependent com mu nities. Ru ral Sociolog y. 53: 220 ?234. Montral Process Working Group. 1998. T he Mont r?al Process. ht t p://w w w.mpci.org. (Januar y 9, 2002). Parkins, J. 1999. En hanci ng social i ndicators research i n a forest- dependent com mu nit y. T he Forest r y Ch ronicle. 75(5): 771?780. Parkins, J.; Beckley, T. 2001. Monitoring community sustainability in the Foothills Model Forest: a social i ndicators approach. I nfor mation Rep. M-X-211E. Freder icton, New Br u nswick: Atlantic Forest r y Cent re. 148 p. Richardson, C.W. 1996. Stability and change in forest- based communities: a selected bibliography. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR-366. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 36 p. Richardson, C.W.; Christensen, H. 1997. From rhetoric to realit y: research on the well-bei ng of forest-based com mu nities. I n: Cordell, H.K., ed. I nteg rati ng social science and ecosystem management: a national challenge: proceedings of a conference on integrating social sciences and ecosystem management. Gen. Tech. Rep. GTR-SRS-17. Asheville, NC: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Souther n Research St ation: 195 ?201. Schallau, C.H. 1989. Sustained yield versus community st abilit y: A n u nfor t u nate weddi ng? Jou r nal of Forest r y. 87(9): 16 ?23. Sen, A. 1985. Com modities and capabilities. New York: Nor th Holland. 130 p. Stedman, R.C. 2003. Sense of place and forest science: toward a prog ram of quantit ative research. Forest Science. 49(6): 822? 829. Tuan, Y. 1993. Passi ng st range and wonder f ul: aesthetics, nat u re, and cult u re. Covelo, CA: Island Press. 288 p. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management [USDA and USDI]. 1994. Record of decision for amend ments to Forest Ser vice and Bu reau of Land Management plan ni ng docu ments withi n the range of the nor ther n spot ted owl. [Place of publication u n k now n]. 74 p. [ plus at t ach ment A: st andards and guidelines]. 35 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau. 2004. Census 2000: plans and r ules for t ak i ng the census. ht t p://w w w.census.gov/population /w w w/censusdat a / resid _ r ules.ht ml. (Apr il 22). Wilkinson, K.P. 1979. Social well-bei ng and com mu nit y. Jou r nal of the Com mu nit y Development Societ y. 10(1): 5 ?16. Wilkinson, K.P. 1991. The community in rural America. New York: G reenwood Press. 152 p. 36 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III 37 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Richard Phillips T he Pacific Nor thwest is nat u rally endowed with vast forest resources. Federal public lands are an important part of this forest base, providing a variety of commodities, uses, and services. Forest resources support consumptive and non- consumptive, and commercial and noncommercial uses that also provide for a mix of employ ment oppor t u nities. From the perspective of regional economic development, timber production has been one of the largest economic drivers in the Pacific Nor thwest over the past cent u r y, and it remai ns an important economic component in many parts of the Nor thwest Forest Plan (the Plan) area. The relative importance of forest resource-related employ ment and i ncome i n the Plan area?s economy has changed over time, as has the contribution of forest products f rom the Forest Ser vice (FS) and Bu reau of Land Manage - ment (BLM) lands to this mix. Bet ween 1990 and 2000, employ ment g rew by 29 percent i n the 72 cou nties i n the Plan area. Du r i ng the same per iod, manufact u r i ng g rew by 3 percent, compared to 56 percent employ ment g row th in the services sector. Most of the other major i ndust r ies g rew at rates var yi ng bet ween 23 and 32 percent (fig. 3-1). Exceptions were mi ni ng (16 percent) and ag r icult u re (4 percent). T he low g row th i n manufact u r i ng meant that this sector went f rom providi ng 13 percent of tot al employ - ment i n 1990 to 11 percent i n 2000. Meanwhile, the ser vices i ndust r y i ncreased f rom 25 to 30 percent of total employment during this same period. The employment shift from manufactur- i ng to ser vices was consistent with nationwide shifts. I ncome changes bet ween 1990 and 2000 followed a similar pat ter n. Manufact u r i ng wage i ncome made up 20 percent of all i ncome i n 1990 and d ropped to 15 percent by 2000. Wage i ncome i n the ser vices sector was 26 percent i n 1990, and g rew to 29 percent by 2000. I n 2000, average an nual wages i n manufact u r i ng were $55,000 compared to $37,000 i n ser vices. Chapter 3: Jobs and Income Associated with Resource and Recreation Outputs Factors that affect the region?s i ndust r ial makeup and associated rates of employment and income over time include technological change in industries, industry diversification and g row th, regional competitiveness, changes i n product demand, and the supply of raw mater i - als. T he land management agencies di rectly i n fluence one of these factors: the supply of raw mater ials, i ncludi ng timber, recreation oppor t u nities, forage, mi nerals, wildlife, fish, water, and other nontimber forest products. T he supply and use of these resources have direct effects on the industries involved in their primary production and conversion, and i ndi rect effects on the busi nesses and workers that suppor t these industries. In the years leading up to the Plan, discussions about the effects of ecosystem protection and restoration on socioeconomic well-bei ng was of ten presented as a simple choice bet ween owls and jobs. Although the supply of timber and employ ment i n the wood products i ndust r y are di rectly related, such over-simplification of the issues masks the complex social and economic changes i n the 2,000 1,600 1,200 800 400 0 Agriculture Mining ConstructionManufacturing TCPU Trade FIRE Services Government Other Employment (thousands) Industry 1990 2000 Fig u re 3-1? Employ ment by major i ndust r y, 1990 a nd 20 0 0. TCPU = t rade, com mu n icat ions, a nd public utlit ies; FI R E = fi na nce, i nsu ra nce, a nd real est ate. 38 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Pacific Nor thwest over the last th ree decades. High rates of population g row th i n the region, especially i n the u rban areas along the I nterst ate 5 cor r idor, brought new people to the Pacific Nor thwest who had different value sets about the appropriate uses of federal lands. At the same time, existi ng residents along with the rest of the Nation began to question whether public forest lands should be managed for i ntensive timber production (FEM AT 1993). Federal forests were becomi ng highly valued for recreation, visual qualit y, and the protection of water, wildlife, and fish. T he regional economy was also mat u r i ng. Ag r icult u re and i ndust r ies based on the ext raction of forest resou rces showed lit tle g row th. T he percent age of people i n the region whose liveli - hood was based on the ext raction of goods and ser vices f rom federal lands sh ran k. New busi ness and employ ment oppor t u nities f ueled by the needs of the expandi ng popula - tion were pr imar ily i n the t rade and ser vices sectors. I n the next section, I look at the role that forest resou rc - es f rom FS and BLM lands have played i n the economy of the Plan area. Because of dat a limit ations, I focus mai nly on changes bet ween 1990 and 2000. Monitoring Question How did levels of federal timber and nontimber resou rce outputs, and recreation opportunities, affect jobs and i ncome i n the Plan area? Expectations Predictable levels of resource outputs and recreation oppor- t u nities f rom FS and BLM lands were expected to provide predictable levels of employment. T he Plan fi xed average an nual plan ned har vest levels to 1.1 billion board feet. T his amou nt was adjusted dow n - ward du r i ng the fi rst few years of the Plan to 0.8 billion board feet. Compared agai nst FS and BLM plan ned an nual har vest levels of 4.5 billion board feet du r i ng the 1980s, the new plan ned har vest levels were over 80 percent less. I nitial projections docu mented by the Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team (FEM AT 1993) i ndicated that the per manent reduction i n timber supply would result i n an i nitial loss of about 25,000 di rect jobs or 17 percent of total timber industry employment. After adjusting to this change, Plan implement ation was expected to provide a st able flow of timber f rom federal lands and suppor t predictable rates of employment in the timber industry. Dat a associated with nontimber resou rces and recreation out puts were scarce. Du r i ng the development of the Plan, the agencies did not k now the effect of the Plan standards and guideliness on nontimber commodity and noncommodity products, uses, and services derived from the region?s forests. T hey needed to clar if y the shor t- and long-ter m effects expected on mu nicipal and nonfederal water systems, g razi ng, mi nerals, special forest products, recreation residences, and recreation facilities (Tuch man n et al. 1996). Methods Employ ment and i ncome dat a are available f rom a var iet y of sources and at different levels of aggregation. The employ ment and i ncome dat a used here were developed by the Mi n nesot a I mplan G roup (ht t p://w w w.implan.com / ) and cover the years 1990 th rough 2000. T he I mplan dat a are organized by i ndust r y or i ndust r y g roup and use the St andard I ndust r ial Classification (SIC) system. More recent I mplan dat a are not used owi ng to a conversion to the Nor th A mer ican I ndust r ial Classification System i n 2001, and the lag i n dat a development. I selected this dat a set because it interprets data from a variety of published government sources to fully disclose employment and income for individual counties to identify primary and secondar y processi ng sectors i n the Plan area?s 72 cou nties (t able 3 -1). T he I mplan dat a also i nclude estimates for the self- employed, which are especially impor t ant i n the log - gi ng i ndust r y. I used Ch r istensen et al. (2000) to identif y whether the cou nties are met ropolit an or non met ropolit an. T hese 72 cou nties together constit ute the u nit of analysis for the discussions in this chapter. The amounts of resource outputs and uses for esti- mati ng employ ment and i ncome associated with FS and BLM resou rces i n this chapter are t aken f rom volu me II of this repor t except for timber. T he timber har vest dat a used here are t aken di rectly f rom st ate har vest repor ts that identif y timber har vest by cou nt y and by ow nership class. The timber data from the state reports are used because 39 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies they provide a consistent data source for timber harvest amou nts f rom all ow nerships and i ncor porate other ow ner responses to the changing timber supply from federal lands. T hese repor ts are available f rom the Oregon Depar t ment of Forest r y publications section (ht t p://w w w.odf.st ate.or.us/ ), the Washi ng ton Depar t ment of Nat u ral Resou rces publica - tions section (ht t p://w w w.d n r.wa.gov/ ), and the Califor nia Board of Equalization proper t y-t ax section (ht t p://w w w. boe.ca.gov/ ). Califor nia dat a identif y only one categor y for gover n ment, which i ncludes federal, st ate, and local; I used the gover n ment component as a proxy for federal har vests. Califor nia dat a for all ow nerships for 1990 th rough 1992 are not available. I used the 1993 values for nongover n ment har vests for 1990 th rough 1992, and I modified the gover n - ment har vest amou nts to reflect FS and BLM har vest dat a for those years. Trends in timber-industry employment and income in the Plan area are generated directly from Implan data sets Table 3 -1? Counties in the Nor thwest Forest Plan area State, county, designation State, county, designation Califor nia, Colusa Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Oregon, Pol k Cou nt y (met ropolit an) Califor nia, Del Nor te Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Oregon, Sher man Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Califor nia, Glen n Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Oregon, Tillamook Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Califor nia, Hu mboldt Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Oregon, Wasco Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Califor nia, Lake Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Oregon, Washi ng ton Cou nt y (met ropolit an) Califor nia, Lassen Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Oregon, Yam hill Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Califor nia, Mar i n Cou nt y (met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, Adams Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Califor nia, Mendoci no Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, Benton Cou nt y (met ropolit an) Califor nia, Modoc Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, Chelan Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Califor nia, Napa Cou nt y (met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, Clallam Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Califor nia, Shast a Cou nt y (met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, Clark Cou nt y (met ropolit an) Califor nia, Sisk iyou Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, Cowlitz Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Califor nia, Sonoma Cou nt y (met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, Douglas Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Califor nia, Sut ter Cou nt y (met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, Fran k li n Cou nt y (met ropolit an) Califor nia, Tehama Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, G rant Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Califor nia, Tr i nit y Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, G rays Harbor Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Califor nia, Yolo Cou nt y (met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, Island Cou nt y (met ropolit an) Oregon, Benton Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, Jefferson Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Oregon, Clackamas Cou nt y (met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, K i ng Cou nt y (met ropolit an) Oregon, Clatsop Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, K itsap Cou nt y (met ropolit an) Oregon, Colu mbia Cou nt y (met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, K it tit as Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Oregon, Coos Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, K lick it at Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Oregon, Crook Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, Lewis Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Oregon, Cu r r y Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, Mason Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Oregon, Deschutes Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, Okanogan Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Oregon, Douglas Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, Pacific Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Oregon, Hood R iver Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, Pierce Cou nt y (met ropolit an) Oregon, Jackson Cou nt y (met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, San Juan Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Oregon, Jefferson Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, Skagit Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Oregon, Josephi ne Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, Skamania Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Oregon, K lamath Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, Snohomish Cou nt y (met ropolit an) Oregon, Lane Cou nt y (met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, T hu rston Cou nt y (met ropolit an) Oregon, Li ncol n Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, Wah k iak u m Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Oregon, Li n n Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, Walla Walla Cou nt y (non met ropolit an) Oregon, Mar ion Cou nt y (met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, W hatcom Cou nt y (met ropolit an) Oregon, Mult nomah Cou nt y (met ropolit an) Washi ng ton, Yak ima Cou nt y (met ropolit an) 40 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III for 1990 th rough 2000 for the 72 cou nties. T he agg regated data for the region are compared to the trends in timber har vest f rom all ow nerships i n the Plan area. T he division of timber industry employment and income by the volume of logs consumed by those industries provides an estimate of the direct employment response to timber harvest. The amou nt of FS- and BLM-suppor ted timber i ndust r y di rect employment is a ratio based on the amount of the agen- cies? timber har vest to the tot al amou nt of logs consu med by mills. Drawi ng conclusions about timber har vest and employment data for individual counties is inappropriate and not considered because of economic leakages (Som mers 2001). One of the most impor t ant leakages is log flows to timber mills across county boundaries. A change in timber industry output generates changes i n pu rchases f rom suppor ti ng i ndust r ies and expendit u res by employees, k now n as i ndi rect and i nduced effects. To estimate timber-related indirect and induced employment and income, I built Implan impact models for the region to produce employment and income multipliers based on the effects of a fi nal demand change i n the timber i ndust r y du r i ng 1994 and 2000. Recreation-related employ ment and i ncome can not be defi ned as a u nique tou r ism i ndust r y. I nstead, I gener - ated employment and income rates by building Implan impact models for the year 2000 and identif yi ng the di rect, indirect, and induced employment and income associated with the tot al expendit u res by the recreation users. T he expendit u re pat ter ns are based on dat a identified i n the National Visitor-Use Monitor i ng prog ram. T he methods to derive these data are presented in the Spending Profiles of National Forest Visitors, 2002 Update (St y nes and W hite 2004). T he followi ng sections discuss results for timber, other forest products, and recreation. T he FS and BLM employ - ment impacts are add ressed i n chapter 4. T he timber section is the most developed because the data identifying the st at us and t rends i n timber flows are readily available and the relationships bet ween timber flows and employ ment are generally k now n. Lit tle or no comparable dat a are available for nontimber forest products. Data for recreation use is mai nly available for 1998 th rough 2000. Results Timber- Related Jobs and Income Timber-related jobs and i ncome can be divided i nto t wo manufact u r i ng sectors. T he fi rst sector i ncludes i ndust r ies that manufact u re solid wood products. T hese i ndust r ies are i ncluded i n the St andard I ndust r ial Classification u nder SIC 24. T he second sector i ncludes pulp and paper i ndust r ies i n - cluded i n SIC 26. T hese t wo sectors can also be subdivided into primary and secondary manufacturing industries. T he pr imar y-processi ng i ndust r ies i n the solid-wood products sector are loggi ng and loggi ng cont ractors; saw mill, veneer and ply wood mills; hardwood dimension and floor i ng mills; and special-product saw mills. Secondar y manufact u r i ng i n solid-wood products i ncludes i ndust r ies such as millwork and cabi net r y. The primary-processing pulp and paper industries include pulp, paper, and paperboard mills. Secondary manufact u r i ng i n pulp and paper i ncludes i ndust r ies li ke production of paper bags and envelopes. This chapter concentrates on the primary-processing industries closely tied to the supply of logs, because changes in employment and income in the secondary-processing industries are more strongly affected by shifts in consumer demand and technology than by changes in local harvest. Jobs and income in the secondary-processing components of these t wo i ndust r ies have been i ncreasi ng as a result of an expandi ng economy and population i n the Pacific Nor thwest region. T he possible exception to this t rend i n secondar y processi ng is the millwork i ndust r y. Millwork depends on high- qualit y solid wood delivered at competitive pr ices, and it of ten operates li ke a pr imar y-processi ng saw mill. Histor ically, employ ment i n solid-wood products manu - fact u r i ng (SIC 24) has been volatile. To provide a time se - ries picture of the magnitude of change in these industries, I use Oregon and Washi ng ton st atewide employ ment dat a for 1965 th rough 2000 (fig. 3-2). Similar dat a for cou nties to por t ray only the Plan area were not available. T he dat a are t aken f rom repor ts by Dar r (1970), Ruder man (1982), and War ren (1992, 2004). From the high of 136,000 jobs i n 1978, employ ment d ropped to 95,000 jobs 4 years later, a loss of 41,000 jobs or 30 percent. Over the enti re per iod of 41 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies 1965 th rough 2000, employ ment positively or negatively changed more than 5 percent 13 times bet ween successive years. Si nce 1991, changes i n employ ment bet ween years have generally var ied bet ween 1 and 2 percent, with a high of a 4 -percent decli ne i n 1996. I n the Plan area du r i ng 1990, the solid-wood products pr imar y processors made up about 73 percent of all SIC 24 employ ment. T he rest was at t r ibut able to secondar y manufact u r i ng. I n 2000, the pr imar y-processi ng i ndust r ies conti nued to make up the largest share of employ ment i n the solid-wood products i ndust r ies, although thei r cont r ibu - tion decreased to 65 percent of all SIC 24 employ ment. The reduced employment share for the primary-processing i ndust r ies was due to employ ment losses i n these i ndust r ies rather than large gains in secondary manufacturing employ- ment. Pr imar y solid-wood-products employ ment decli ned by 28 percent or 25,600 jobs du r i ng the decade (fig. 3-3). T he secondar y i ndust r ies expanded by 3 percent bet ween 1990 and 2000 and now make up 35 percent of SIC 24 employment. T he pr imar y pulp and paper i ndust r ies made up 67 percent of SIC 26 employ ment du r i ng the fi rst par t of the 1990s i n the Plan area, and d ropped to 64 percent du r i ng the rest of the decade. Primary pulp-and-paper processing employ ment decli ned by 22 percent or 4,400 jobs (fig. 3-3). T he tot al decli ne of 30,000 jobs i n the pr imar y process - i ng i ndust r ies (SIC 24 and SIC 26) is cont rasted to changes in total employment across all industries in the Plan area. Du r i ng the 1990s, there was an i ncrease i n tot al employ - ment of 1.4 million jobs. Pr imar y wood-products processi ng accou nted for 2 percent of all jobs i n the Plan area i n 1990 and d ropped to 1 percent by 2000. 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 19 65 19 69 19 75 19 77 19 85 19 89 19 95 1999 J o b s ( t h o u s a n d s ) Oregon Washington Total Year 19 67 19 73 19 71 19 81 19 83 19 79 19 87 19 93 19 91 19 97 Fig u re 3-2 ? Lu mber a nd wood products employ ment i n O regon a nd Wash i ng ton, 1965 ?20 0 0. 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 1990 1991 199219931994 19951996 19971998 19992000 Full- and part-time jobs Primary solid-wood products Primary pulp and paper Year Fig u re 3-3 ?Ti mber i ndust r y employ ment, Nor t hwest Forest Pla n a rea , 1990 ?20 0 0. 42 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III I ncome f rom the pr imar y solid-wood-product and pulp - and-paper manufact u r i ng sectors follows t rends similar to the changes i n employ ment. Pr imar y solid-wood-products i ndust r ies (SIC 24) real tot al i ncome decli ned by 17 percent i n the Plan area bet ween 1990 and 2000 (fig. 3- 4). Real tot al i ncome f rom pr imar y pulp -and-paper manufact u r i ng (SIC 26) for the same per iod decli ned 24 percent (fig. 3- 4). Real i ncome is adjusted for i n flation and uses 2000 as the base year. Total income includes both the effects of changi ng wage rates and the nu mber of jobs. How average wage rates adjusted for i n flation have changed over time i n the Plan area is show n i n fig u re 3-5. Real wage rates across all i ndust r ies i n the Plan area showed general improvement over the decade, af ter the sig nificant wage adjust ments i n the economy caused by the recession of 1990. Exclud - i ng 1990, real wages i ncreased by 21 percent i n pr imar y wood-products du r i ng the decade. Excludi ng 1991 and 1992, i n the pr imar y pulp -and-paper processi ng i ndust r ies, wages were nearly flat du r i ng the decade. A n nual wage rates i n the pr imar y wood-products i ndust r ies (SIC 24 and SIC 26) exceeded the average wage rates for all i ndust r ies. But, wage rates across all i ndust r ies changed more rapidly du r i ng the 1990s than timber-i ndust r y wages did, with a 32 percent i ncrease. The change in timber-related employment differed across the Plan area by location. To exami ne these differ - ences, I analyzed change i n the subregions of the Plan area as defi ned by st ate bou ndar ies and by met ropolit an and non met ropolit an cou nt y desig nations (t able 3-1). T hese deli neations allow us to identif y which st ates were most affected by the Plan and any urban and rural differences in the st ates (fig. 3- 6 and t able 3-2). From 1990 to 2000, about 50 percent of pr imar y solid-wood-products employ ment i n the Plan area was i n Oregon, 35 percent was i n Washi ng ton, and the remai ni ng 15 percent was i n nor ther n Califor nia. Du r i ng this per iod, 61 percent of the 25,600 decli ne i n jobs i n the solid-wood- products i ndust r ies occu r red i n Oregon. Washi ng ton lost 27 percent and nor ther n Califor nia, 11 percent. 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 1990 1991 199219931994 19951996 19971998 19992000 Primary solid-wood products Primary pulp and paper Year Wages and proprietor real income (million dollars) Fig u re 3- 4 ?Tot al i ncome f rom t he pr i ma r y wood-products processi ng sectors, Nor t hwest Forest Pla n a rea , 1990 ?20 0 0. Base yea r is 20 0 0. 1990 1991 199219931994 19951996 19971998 19992000 Primary solid-wood products Primary pulp and paper All industries Year Wages and proprietor income (dollars) 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 Fig u re 3-5 ?Average a n nu al i ncome per job f rom pr i ma r y wood- products sectors a nd all i ndust r ies i n t he Nor t hwest Forest Pla n a rea , 1990 ?20 0 0. Base yea r is 20 0 0. 43 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies T he pr imar y pulp -and-paper i ndust r y employ ment was dist r ibuted with about 65 percent i n Washi ng ton, 30 percent i n Oregon, and 5 percent i n Califor nia du r i ng the 1990s. I n the pr imar y pulp -and-paper i ndust r ies, 65 percent of the job decli nes were i n Washi ng ton, 21 percent i n Oregon, and 14 percent i n Califor nia. 1990 1991 199219931994 19951996 19971998 19992000 Year 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 E m p l o y m e n t Oregon nonmetro Oregon metro Washington nonmetro Washington metro California nonmetro California metro Fig u re 3- 6 ? Met ropolit a n a nd non met ropolit a n pr i ma r y wood-products employ ment by st ate. Table 3 -2? Employment in primar y solid- wood products, by state and metropolitan and nonmetro - politan counties in the Nor thwest Forest Plan area Employment change Area 1990 to 2000 1995 to 2000 Number Percent Number Percent Oregon non met ro -9,306 -35 -1,551 -8 Oregon met ro - 6,427 -30 -1,957 -12 Washi ng ton non met ro - 4,575 -28 -1,784 -13 Washi ng ton met ro -2,407 -18 -2,283 -17 Califor nia non met ro -2,070 -20 -1,041 -11 Califor nia met ro -828 -27 -102 - 4 Tot al -25,613 -28 -8,718 -12 The change in jobs also differed by metropolitan and non met ropolit an classification. Most of the decli ne i n jobs took place i n non met ropolit an cou nties where there were fewer employ ment oppor t u nities. T he rate of decli ne i n non met ropolit an cou nties slowed af ter the Plan was imple - mented. Two -thi rds of the solid-wood-products job decli nes i n non met ropolit an areas were before 1995. Job decli nes i n met ropolit an cou nties were more evenly dist r ibuted across the decade than in nonmetropolitan counties. Forest Service and BLM Effects To provide a histor ical context for broad timber supply changes and variability in the region, I evaluated data from 1965 th rough 1989. T he dat a for this histor ical analysis only i ncludes i nfor mation f rom Oregon and Washi ng ton. Histor i - cal Califor nia dat a for the Plan area were not available du r i ng the earlier years. T here was also a lack of dat a i n 1979 for all st ates. All other analyses i n this chapter i nclude dat a for Califor nia. Annual timber harvest amounts from national forest and BLM lands i n the Plan area excludi ng Califor nia aver - aged about 4.7 billion board feet for 1965 th rough 1989 (fig. 3-7). Other ow nership har vests averaged about 8.5 billion board feet, and the tot al across all ow nerships was about 13.2 billion board feet. T he FS and BLM cont r ibution was about 36 percent of tot al timber har vest. Large var iations were fou nd i n har vest rates du r i ng this period. The slumps are typical of national economic dow nt u r ns such as the large recession of the early 1980s. Excludi ng the 1980s recession, FS and BLM har vests i n the Plan areas of Oregon and Washi ng ton ranged bet ween 4 and 6 billion board feet u ntil 1990. T he other ow nership har - vests ranged bet ween 8 and 10 billion board feet. Because economic recessions and recover ies affect all ow ners, the har vest level peaks and valleys generally coi ncided across all ow nerships. T he result was that tot al har vest levels var ied bet ween 12 and 16 billion board feet. With the st ar t of the 1990s, FS and BLM har vesti ng showed an overall decreasi ng t rend. Du r i ng 1990 th rough 1994, FS and BLM har vests decreased by 2.5 billion board feet f rom a level of about 3.3 billion board feet i n 1990 i n the Plan area i ncludi ng Califor nia. At the same time, 4 4 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III har vests on other ow nerships also decreased by 1.5 billion board feet. T he decrease i n har vest f rom other ow nerships was due pr imar ily to reg ulation u nder st ate forest practices acts, the availability of harvestable volume, and restrictions on st ate land har vesti ng. T he combi ned result was a tot al loss of 4.0 billion board feet i n timber har vest over the fi rst par t of the decade f rom a level of 12.8 billion board feet. From 1995 th rough 2000, the FS and BLM log supply decli ned another 0.5 billion board feet. I n cont rast, other ow nerships i ncreased log supply by al most 0.3 billion board feet. T his resulted i n a net decrease of 0.2 billion board feet over the 6 -year per iod. Bet ween 1990 and 2000, timber har vest f rom FS and BLM lands decli ned 89 percent or about 3.0 billion board feet. T he decrease i n timber production across all ow ner - ships tot aled 33 percent or slightly over 4.2 billion board feet. Most of the declines occurred early in the decade (fig. 3-8). 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 19 65 19 67 19 69 19 71 19 73 19 75 19 77 19 79 19 81 19 83 19 85 19 87 19 89 19 91 19 93 19 95 19 97 19 99 T i m b e r h a r v e s t ( b i l l i o n b o a r d f e e t ) Plan Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management Plan other Plan total Year Fig u re 3-7?Ti mber ha r vest by general ow nersh ip class i n O regon a nd Wash i ng ton of t he Pla n a rea , 1965 ?20 0 0. Sou rce: O regon Depa r t ment of Forest r y, Wash i ng ton Depa r t ment of Nat u ral Resou rces. Timber harvest (billion board feet) Plan Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management Plan other 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Year 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Fig u re 3-8 ?Ti mber ha r vest by general ow nersh ip class, 1990 ? 20 0 0. Sou rce: O regon Depa r t ment of Forest r y, Wash i ng ton De - pa r t ment of Nat u ral Resou rces, Califor n ia Boa rd of Equ ali zat ion. 45 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Although there is a strong direct cause-and-effect relationship bet ween timber har vest levels and the nu mber of timber i ndust r y jobs and i ncome, this relationship was affected by industry restructuring that included adjusting the amou nt of logs expor ted and impor ted, the closu re of less ef ficient mills that were u nable to compete u nder new log supply market conditions, and tech nological change. T he reduction i n timber har vest across all ow nerships i ncreased the pr ices local timber i ndust r y was willi ng to pay for logs mak i ng local i ndust r y competitive i n the i nter national market. T he i nfor mation on shif ts i n log expor ts and impor ts is based on dat a f rom the Seat tle and Snake- Colu mbia Customs Dist r icts ( War ren 2004). Because the expor t and impor t dat a generally cover the enti re Pacific Nor thwest, I reduced the values by 10 percent, which is the ratio of east-side har vests i n Oregon and Washi ng ton to total harvest in these states. The results are displayed in fig u re 3-9. Over the decade, sof t wood log expor ts d ropped f rom 2.7 billion board feet i n 1990 to 0.7 billion board feet by 2000. At the same time and at a much smaller scale, impor ts i ncreased f rom about 7 million board feet to al most 250 million board feet. T he result was an overall shif t i n expor ts and impor ts providi ng about 2.3 billion board feet more to local timber processi ng i ndust r ies i n 2000 than i n 1990. T he redi rection of logs f rom the expor t market helped timber manufacturing industries, but it negatively impacted the timber expor t i ndust r y. Because timber i ndust r y employ ment and i ncome is based on the amount of logs processed, I subtracted the net expor ts f rom timber har vest amou nts to approximate the volume of logs available for processing by local primary wood products i ndust r ies i n the Plan area (fig. 3-10). I n addition to the increased harvests on private lands, decreas- i ng expor ts have mitigated effects of the federal har vest reductions. From 1994 th rough 2000, overall log supplies to timber processing industries in the Plan area increased by about 730 million board feet offset ti ng some of the 4.0 billion board feet loss that occurred early in the decade. Over the per iod 1990 to 2000, pr imar y-wood-products employ ment (SIC 24 and SIC 26) decreased by 30,000 jobs. About 11,000 of these jobs were lost si nce 1994. A loss i n timber industry employment during a period of increasing Timber imports and exports (billion board feet) 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Year 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0 Export Import Fig u re 3-9 ?Ti mber expor ts a nd i mpor ts i n Pla n a rea , 1990 ?20 0 0. 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Year Timber (billion board feet) 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Harvest Export less import Processed in region Fig u re 3-10 ?Ti mber ha r vest, net expor t, a nd volu me processed i n Pla n a rea , 1990 ?20 0 0. log volume to timber processing industries indicates ad- ditional industry restructuring and technological change. To identify these cause-and-effect relationships, I compared the employ ment i n the pr imar y wood products industries to the volume available to these industries. This required identifying the logging industry separately because this work is done whether or not the logs are expor ted. 46 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Employ ment i n the remai ni ng pr imar y wood products i ndust r ies was compared to the volu me available to these i ndust r ies. T hese dat a are presented i n t able 3-3 and displayed i n fig u re 3-11. The comparison of direct jobs per million board feet masks sig nificant changes i n the pr imar y wood products i ndust r y. T he logs bei ng har vested and processed i n 2000 were much smaller i n diameter than those processed i n Table 3 - 3 ? Employment for the logging and other primar y wood products industries, 1990 ?2000 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Employ ment Loggi ng i ndust r y 24,786 21,562 21,971 21,126 20,048 20,103 19,964 20,069 18,475 18,261 17,292 Other pr i ma r y wood i ndust r ies 85,735 77,339 72,997 70,422 71,658 66,262 69,131 68,659 65,011 63,602 63,219 Tot al employ ment 110,521 98,901 94,968 91,548 91,706 86,365 89,095 88,728 83,485 81,863 80,510 Har vest (m illion boa rd feet) Tot al har vest 12,799 11,744 11,245 10,160 8,752 9,057 8,872 8,993 8,134 8,689 8,533 Har vest not expor ted 10,091 9,458 9,306 8,686 7,370 7,624 7,536 8,070 7,425 8,154 8,097 Jobs per million board feet Loggi ng i ndust r y 1.9 1.8 2.0 2.1 2.3 2.2 2.3 2.2 2.3 2.1 2.0 Other pr i ma r y wood i ndust r ies 8.5 8.2 7.8 8.1 9.7 8.7 9.2 8.5 8.8 7.8 7.8 Jobs per million board feet 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Year 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Logging industry Other primary wood industries Fig u re 3-11?Jobs per m illion boa rd feet, 1990 ?20 0 0. 1990. T he equipment used to har vest and process these smaller logs was also different as were the job sk ills required to operate the equipment. The input and output production relationships in the timber industry have changed, but it is beyond the scope of this report to address the sig nificance of these changes on the di rect jobs-per- million-board-feet ratio. During each year throughout the decade, direct jobs per million board feet processed by other pr imar y wood i ndus - t r ies ranged f rom about 9 jobs i n 1990, to a high of 10 jobs i n 1994, and to a low of 8 jobs i n 2000. T he decade average for these industries is about eight jobs per million board feet. T his range is consistent with estimates for Oregon State reported in Utilization of Oregon?s Timber Har vest and Associated Direct Economic Ef fects, 1998 (Geber t et al. 2002) and with estimates made du r i ng the development of the Plan (FEM AT 1993). T he loggi ng i ndust r y employ - ment per million board feet was relatively const ant var yi ng arou nd t wo jobs. T he reduction i n jobs per million board feet i n the pr imar y wood i ndust r ies si nce 1994 i ndicates additional industry restructuring and changes in technol- og y. About 400 of the 11,000 jobs lost i n the timber i ndust r y si nce 1994 were based on reductions i n timber har vesti ng on federal lands. T he remai ni ng 10,600 job losses occu r red du r i ng a per iod of an i ncreased log supply and were the result of less ef ficient mills closi ng and mills conti nui ng to i nvest i n labor-savi ng tech nologies. It is li kely that the tim - ber i ndust r y delayed mak i ng several changes u ntil af ter the 47 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Plan was fi nalized. T he fixed lower supply of timber forced the timber i ndust r y to make per manent adjust ments, but many of the jobs losses occurring after Plan implementation were set i n motion by earlier decli nes i n timber har vest. By 2000, FS and BLM lands provided less than 5 per - cent of the total timber supply. This also means that FS and BLM timber har vests suppor ted less than 5 percent of the 80,500 jobs i n the di rect pr imar y-wood-products i ndust r ies (SIC 24 and SIC 26) i n the Plan area. I developed an indirect and induced multiplier of about 2.5 resulti ng f rom pu rchases by the pr imar y wood- products i ndust r ies, and expendit u res by people employed i n these i ndust r ies, for the year 2000. T hus, ever y di rect job suppor ts an additional 1.5 jobs. T his multiplier is consistent with estimates made du r i ng the development of the Plan (FEM AT 1993). Over the per iod 1990 th rough 2000, approximately 45,000 di rect, i ndi rect, and i nduced jobs were affected by reduced timber har vesti ng across all ow nerships. Many, but not all, of the busi nesses that ser ve the timber i ndust r y and thei r employees will ser ve other busi nesses and workers i n an expandi ng economy. T he tot al loss of 30,000 di rect timber jobs si nce 1990 due to reductions i n timber supplies f rom all ow nerships and i ndust r y rest r uct u r i ng can be compared to the 6.3 million tot al jobs that were i n the Plan area i n 2000. T his loss can also be compared to the average annual increase of roughly 130,000 jobs across the region du r i ng the 1990s. But g row th i n employ ment oppor t u nities and losses i n em - ploy ment are usually not i n the same places, and workers? sk ills were not necessar ily t ransferable across i ndust r ies. This broad regional assessment of the effects of the Plan on timber-industry employment does not capture associated changes i n well-bei ng at the subregional, com mu nit y, and i ndividual scales. Chapter 8 add resses how these effects have played out i n specific com mu nities. Estimates of job losses made previously du r i ng the Plan?s development predicted that the Plan would suppor t about 25,000 fewer di rect jobs i n the wood-products- manufact u r i ng i ndust r ies (SIC 24 and SIC 26) u nder the selected alter native, alter native 9 (FEM AT 1993). T his projection was based on predicted har vest changes across all ow nerships. Although the area and dat a used to calculate employ ment effects i n the FEM AT repor t and i n this repor t are not equivalent, they are similar. The major difference is the FEM AT analysis estimated that har vest levels f rom FS and BLM lands i n the Plan area would st abilize at about 1.0 billion board feet i nstead of the act ual level of 0.4 billion board feet. T his difference is equal to about 6,000 di rect timber jobs. This difference plus the original estimate of 25,000 di rect timber jobs losses would br i ng the tot al i nitial estimate to about 31,000 jobs. T his new look at act ual changes bet ween 1990 and 2000 docu mented i n this repor t fou nd that about 30,000 timber i ndust r y jobs were lost i n the Plan area du r i ng the past decade because of har vest changes across all ow ner - ships and i ndust r y rest r uct u r i ng. T his loss i ncludes 5,000 jobs lost owi ng to levels of FS and BLM timber supply lower than those or igi nally projected. T his analysis fou nd the or igi nal FEM AT estimates of employ ment loss to be reasonably accurate. The Plan goal to provide predictable levels of employ- ment resulting from predictable supplies of timber from federal lands was not met. Federal timber har vests conti n - ued to decli ne u nder the Plan, clearly resulti ng i n fewer jobs associated with the federal timber har vests i n the region. T hese decli nes were offset by i ncreased har vests f rom other ow nerships est ablishi ng a new lower timber har vest level. T he redi rection of log expor ts to Plan area mills mitigated somewhat the effects of the loss i n har vesti ng to these mills. But the timber i ndust r y response to expect ations of a per manent lower timber supply conti nues to result i n restructuring and a loss of employment opportunities. The contribution of federal timber to the total timber supply d ropped i n the Plan area f rom about 25 percent i n 1990 to 10 percent i n 1995 to less than 5 percent by 2000. T he FS and BLM no longer play sig nificant roles i n the supply of timber i n the Plan area as a whole. However, this does not mean federal timber is not important to individual mills and communities, levels not addressed in this assess- ment at the Plan-area scale. 48 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Nontimber and Recreation-Related Jobs and Income T he region?s forests cont r ibute to employ ment and i ncome in several industries based on both commodity and noncom- modity products, uses, and services. Dispersed and devel- oped recreation, com mercial fishi ng, hu nti ng, special forest products, mi ni ng, and g razi ng all cont r ibute to the region?s economic health, and they are all affected by changes in federal forest management. Nontimber forest industries Several other forest-based i ndust r ies are sig nificant to employ ment i n the Pacific Nor thwest. T hese i ndust r ies and thei r associated employ ment were discussed i n the FEM AT repor t (1993), and they are add ressed here to identif y potential t rends that may be associated with Plan implemen - t ation. T he FEM AT repor t estimated that the com mercial fishi ng i ndust r y employed about 5,000 workers i n the region i n the early 1990s. I n addition, more than 18,000 workers were employed i n mi ni ng and mi nerals processi ng st atewide i n Oregon and Washi ng ton at that time. Floral g reens, Ch r ist mas or nament als, and mush room har vesti ng provided at least seasonal employ ment for some 28,000 to 30,000 workers (FEM AT 1993), and the forest r y ser vices sector, which car r ies out forest management activities li ke t ree planti ng, suppor ted about 6,000 jobs i n the region. Substantial job opportunities could be created in pruning and other timber-stand-improvement activities, reforesta- tion, wildlife i nventor y and monitor i ng, watershed restora - tion, and tech nical su r veys and assessments on the region?s federal forest lands (FEM AT 1993). Wages, benefits, and employ ment conditions differ g reatly bet ween and withi n these industries. Compar i ng jobs and i ncome associated with the non - timber-related i ndust r ies to the earlier estimates identified i n the FEM AT repor t is impossible because of differences i n repor ti ng tech niques and u n k now n assu mptions about f ull-time job equivalents. For example, many forest r y- related activities li ke gather i ng floral g reens and mush - rooms are seasonal and of short duration, so estimating comparable job fig u res is dif ficult. Dat a availabilit y is also a problem, because identifying the proportion of these industries supported by federal lands is impossible. Instead of trying to estimate actual employment op- portunities supported by federal forests in these industries, I analyzed t rends i n employ ment by usi ng I mplan dat a for 1994 th rough 2000. T hese dat a show the impor t ance and status of these industries in the region. The data are displayed i n fig u re 3-12. T he sector ?range-fed cat tle? approximates t rends i n the livestock i ndust r y associated with open-range g razi ng of which public-land g razi ng is a component. Although this sector showed an average an nual i ncrease of 3 percent bet ween 1994 and 2000, the public-land g razi ng t rends have been dow nward (volu me II chapter 4). T here are multiple reasons for this dow nward trend, including Plan implementation. The forestry products sector includes timber tracts and gathering forest products. It showed no g row th du r i ng this same per iod. Calculations to estimate jobs i n the forest products sector i n 2000 were 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Employment (thousands) Range-fed cattle Commercial fishing Minerals mining and processing Forestry products Agricultural, forestry, fishery services Year Fig u re 3-12 ? Employ ment t rends i n nont i mber forest i ndust r ies, 1994 ?20 0 0. 49 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies not consistent with previous years and are not i ncluded. T he com mercial fishi ng sector decli ned by an average an nual amou nt of 3 percent. Forest r y ser vices activities such as restoration, thinning, and planting are included in the ag r icult u re, forest r y, and fishi ng ser vices sector, which g rew by an average an nual rate of 2 percent du r i ng 1994 to 2000. T he mi ni ng and mi neral processi ng i ndust r ies g rew by 1 percent. All of these i ndust r ies combi ned represented about 1 percent of tot al employ ment i n the Plan area i n 2000. Only a por tion of these jobs are associated with federal lands. Based on these dat a and the lack of di rect ties to goods and services affected by implementing the Plan, conclusions about changes in employment relating to the Plan are not possible. Recreation Swanson and Loomis (1993) estimated that forest-based recreation associated with the national forest and BLM lands u nder the Plan stood at 132.8 million visits i n 1990. These visits included activities such as off-road vehicle use, sightseei ng, hi k i ng, campi ng, hu nti ng, fishi ng, boati ng, raf ti ng, bicycli ng, and wi nter spor ts. Measu r i ng the nu mber of people employed i n association with these activities is not easy. But Radtke and Davis (1993) estimated that 17,000 to 23,000 f ull-time jobs were associated with the coast al tou r ism i ndust r y, and bet ween 50,000 and 80,000 f ull-time- equivalent jobs were associated with recreation on federal forest lands i n the region i n the early 1990s. Because of the land-allocation strategies in the Plan, employment gai ns were expected i n some of the recreation and tou r - ism i ndust r ies. Tuch man et al. (1996) concluded that not enough is k now n to reliably estimate the effects of Plan implement ation on jobs and i ncome associated with forest- based recreation. T he fi ndi ng is t r ue today, but an analysis of current recreation data provides an indication about the importance and status of this industry in the region and a potential bench mark for f ut u re use. T he fi rst rou nd of visitor use monitor i ng on FS lands took place bet ween 2000 and 2003. T his i nventor y fou nd that the average annual number of visits to Plan-area forests is 26.5 million visits (see volu me II, chapter 6). Recent dat a for average an nual recreation use associated with BLM lands i n the Plan area tot aled about 4.9 million visits i n 2002. I conver ted FS visits to par t y t r ips and used these to approximate the job and i ncome effects of expendit u res associated with recreation use (St y nes and W hite 2004). Cu r rently, recreation oppor t u nities provided by national forest lands i n the Plan area suppor t about 17.5 thousand di rect jobs, and 25.5 thousand tot al jobs. T he recreation- use-associated di rect jobs make up less than 1 percent of all employ ment i n the Plan area. T he wage i ncome generated f rom recreation expendit u res was $357.4 million di rect, and $629.6 million tot al. I was not able to estimate the job and i ncome associated with BLM recreation use; BLM dat a are not provided in a format necessary for these calculations. Compar isons with previous estimates of recreation use, jobs, and income are not possible. The dramatic differences i n the nu mber of visits repor ted i n 1990 and 2000 are pr i - marily because previous recreation use monitoring methods were i nconsistently implemented and produced u n reliable results. Some components of recreation use have been ac- cu rately repor ted i n the past, however, li ke developed uses such as dow n hill sk ii ng. Al most 40 percent of all federal land recreation visitors participate in developed use activities in the Plan area. The Plan has had lit tle, if any, effect on the existi ng capacit y of developed uses, but f ut u re expansion i n some areas has been limited, and new development i n others is prevented. Changes i n recreation use have been affected mostly by changes in total population and population demographics such as age and changi ng societ al values (Cordell et al. 1999). Conclusions T he expect ation that the Plan would provide predict able lev - els of resou rce out puts and recreation oppor t u nities, which would i n t u r n provide predict able levels of employ ment, was not achieved with respect to timber supply. T he timber projection for FS and BLM lands i n the Plan area was not realized and timber har vest var ied a lot over the years si nce the Plan was implemented. However, i ncreased har vests f rom other ow nerships and the redi rection of logs f rom the expor t market to local processi ng i ndust r ies have mitigated 50 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III some of these impacts. T he Plan?s effect on nontimber resou rces and recreation oppor t u nities was either mi nimal or not readily discernable. Federal public lands continue to be an important part of the forest base i n the Pacific Nor thwest, but the amou nt of forest resou rces, specifically timber, that suppor t con - su mptive and com mercial uses has lessened along with the relative importance of federal forest resource-related employ ment and i ncome. Timber out puts f rom FS and BLM lands var y arou nd a much lower level than before the Plan. Initial projections in the loss of timber-related employment were realized. Recreation uses of these lands will li kely i ncrease as will recreation-related employ ment. Dat a associated with nontimber resou rces and recre - ation out puts were scarce du r i ng plan development. At that time, the agencies could not predict the effect of the Plan standards and guidelines on nontimber commodity and non- com modit y products, uses, and ser vices f rom the region?s forests. The data are still not available, and information on relationships are generally not k now n. T here has been lit tle clar ification of the shor t- and long-ter m economic effects expected on mu nicipal and nonfederal water systems, g raz - ing, minerals, special forest products, recreation residences, and recreation facilities. Because the economic cont r ibution of all forest re - sou rces to the regional economy of the Plan area i n 2000 is small, conti nued implement ation of the Plan will not li kely change existi ng economic conditions and t rends i n the Plan area overall. But as noted earlier, resou rces and effects of the Plan are not evenly distributed. Subregions, individual businesses, and individuals are not affected equally. Metric Equivalent Board feet log scale ? 0.00453 = cubic meters References Christensen, H.H.; McGinnis, W.J.; Raettig, T.L.; Donoghue, E. 2000. Atlas of human adaptation to environmental change, challenge and opportunity: nor ther n Califor nia, wester n Oregon, and wester n Washi ng ton. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 478. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 66 p. and companion CD -ROM. Cordell, H.K.; McDonald, B.L.; Teasley, R.J.; Bergstrom, J.C.; Martin, J.; Bason, J.; Leeworthy, V.R. 1999. Outdoor recreation i n A mer ican life: a national assessment of demand and supply trends. Champaig n, IL: Sagamore P ublishi ng: 219 ?321. Darr, D. 1970. Production, prices, employment, and trade i n Nor thwest forest i ndust r ies, fou r th quar ter 1970. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Forest and Range Exper iment St ation. 57 p. Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team [FEMAT]. 1993. Forest ecosystem management: an ecological, economic, and social assessment. Portland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re; U.S. Depar t ment of the I nter ior [and others]. [I r reg ular pagi nation]. Gebert, K.M.; Keegan, C.E, III; Willits, S.; Chase, A. 2002. Utilization of Oregon?s timber har vest and associated di rect economic effects, 1998. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR-532. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 22 p. Radtke, H.D.; Davis, S.W. 1993. Economic descr iption of coast al fisher ies i n the Pacific Nor thwest. 36 p. Unpublished repor t. Prepared for the Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team. On file with: St rategic Plan ni ng, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Region, 333 SW Fi rst Avenue, Por tland, OR 97204. 51 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Ruderman, F. 1982. Production, prices, employment, and t rade i n Nor thwest forest i ndust r ies, fou r th quar ter 1981. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Forest and Range Exper iment St ation. 49 p. Sommers, P. 2001. Monitoring socioeconomic trends in the nor ther n spot ted owl region: f ramework, t rends update, and community level monitoring recommendations. Tech. Rep. Seat tle, WA: U.S. Geological Ser vice, Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center, Cascadia Field St ation College of Forest Resou rces. 48 p. Stynes, D.J.; White, E.M. 2004. Spendi ng profiles of national forest visitors, 2002 update. 46 p. Unpublished report. Special report under the joint venture agreement bet ween the USDA Forest Ser vice I nventor y and Monitoring Institute and Michigan State University. Swanson, C.; Loomis, J. 1993. Role of non market economic values i n benefit- cost analysis of public forest management options. 46 p. Unpublished report. Prepared for the Forest Ecosystem Management Team. On file with: St rategic Plan ni ng, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Region, 333 SW Fi rst Avenue, Por tland, OR 97204. Tuchmann, E.T.; Connaughton, K.P.; Freedman, L.E.; Moriwaki, C.B. 1996. T he Nor thwest Forest Plan: a repor t to the President and Cong ress. Washi ng ton, DC: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Of fice of Forest r y and Economic Assist ance. 253 p. Warren, D. 1992. Production, prices, employment, and t rade i n Nor thwest forest i ndust r ies, fou r th quar ter 1991. Resou r. Bull. PN W-R B-192. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 112 p. Warren, D. 2004. Production, prices, employment, and t rade i n Nor thwest forest i ndust r ies, all quar ters 2002. Resou r. Bull. PN W-R B-241. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 171 p. 52 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III 53 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Claudia Stuart T he Forest Ser vice (FS) and Bu reau of Land Management (BLM) may be among the few sou rces of qualit y jobs i n rural, forest-based communities. Agency jobs are an impor- t ant socioeconomic benefit associated with federal forests. Agency employees contribute substantially to community capacit y i n the forest-based com mu nities where they reside. T he presence of agency employees and decision makers plays a key role i n i n fluenci ng com mu nit y-agency collabo - rative relations. Agency st af fi ng and budgets deter mi ne how effectively forests are managed and policies are imple - mented. And agencies and their employees spend money in local communities, supporting local businesses. Agency jobs generally pay well, offer benefits, have opportunities for training and advancement, and are con- ducted i n safe work i ng envi ron ments. T he FS and BLM have historically offered many permanent full-time and seasonal or part-time jobs in local communities. Part-time jobs are especially impor t ant for you ng people look i ng for su m mer work, and people who engage i n a nu mber of different pursuits, providing a stable component of a broader livelihood strategy. Thus, agency jobs are an important socioeconomic benefit associated with federal forest lands i n the Nor thwest Forest Plan (the Plan) area. Not only are federal jobs highly valued, but federal employees and thei r spouses are of ten well educated and active in their communities. They may be volunteers in local schools, fi re depar t ments, and civic g roups and ser ve as local political leaders. They contribute substantial human capital that enhances the capacity of forest communities. Agency st af fi ng levels play a cr itical role i n shapi ng organizational effectiveness. T he Forest Ecosystem Manage - ment Assessment Team (FEM AT) recog nized this cent ral role in formulating the Plan by stating The greatest impact on the implementation of any plan is the availability of adequate resou rces (st aff and budget) to car r y out the expected t asks? (FEM AT 1993: V III- 40). I mprovi ng collaborative relations with local com mu ni - ties was an impor t ant Plan goal. Meani ngf ul collaboration bet ween federal agencies and local com mu nities requi res that community members have ongoing access to federal Chapter 4: Agency Jobs, Unit Reorganizations, and Budgets decision makers. I nteractions bet ween local people and agency employees also help build trust. Thus, local agency st af fi ng levels, as well as the presence of local agency of fices and decision makers, affect relationships bet ween agencies and community members. This chapter evaluates trends in agency jobs and agency of fice dist r ibution du r i ng the fi rst 10 years of the Plan. We identified agency budget allocations as a potential explanator y factor affecti ng the nu mber of agency jobs and of fices. To bet ter u nderst and the role played by budgets, I evaluate budget trends at several scales across the study period. I assess the role of the Plan in contributing to these t rends. Table 4 -1 identifies the Plan-area u nits i ncluded i n these analyses. Appendix C cont ai ns additional i nfor mation on methods used in the analyses. Table 4 -1? Nor thwest Forest Plan units included in this analysis National forests/ Agency and state BLM districts Forest Service: Washi ng ton Gifford Pi nchot N F Mou nt Baker- Snoqual mie N F Okanogan N F Oly mpic N F Wenatchee N F Oregon Deschutes N F Mou nt Hood N F Rog ue R iver N F Sisk iyou N F Siuslaw N F Umpqua N F Willamet te N F Wi nema N F Califor nia K lamath N F Mendoci no N F Shast a-Tr i nit y N F Six R ivers N F Bu reau of Land Management (BLM): Oregon Coos Bay Dist r ict Eugene Dist r ict Medford District Rosebu rg Dist r ict Salem District 5 4 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Agency Jobs Monitoring Question How did the nu mber and t y pe of FS and BLM jobs change on Plan-area forest u nits af ter the Plan was adopted? Expectations T he fi nal supplement al envi ron ment al impact st atement (FSEIS) for the Plan estimated that r u ral com mu nities i n the Plan area would lose fewer than 2,000 FS jobs u nder the prefer red alter native (alter native 9) or the other more timber-i ntensive alter natives. It estimated that bet ween 2,000 and 3,000 FS jobs would be lost u nder alter natives produci ng less timber ( USDA and USDI 1994: 3&4 -311). Potential st af fi ng changes were not estimated for the BLM. Methods Dat a descr ibi ng st af fi ng of FS Plan-area u nits i n Oregon and Washi ng ton were readily available f rom the Pacific Nor thwest Region (Region 6) Of fice of Budget and Fi nan - cial Management i n Por tland, Oregon. Dat a descr ibi ng st af fi ng of FS Plan-area u nits i n Califor nia were obt ai ned f rom the FS Pacific Southwest Region (Region 5) Of fice of Hu man Resou rces i n Vallejo, Califor nia. Dat a descr ib - i ng st af fi ng among BLM Plan-area u nits i n Oregon were obt ai ned f rom the Budget Depar t ment of the BLM Oregon St ate Of fice i n Por tland, Oregon. T he prelimi nar y st af fi ng analysis was ret u r ned to these of fices for review. St af fi ng is enu merated i n f ull-time equivalents (FTEs). Dat a descr ibi ng FTEs were available for all u nits st udied for 1993 ?2002. T he available dat a class FTEs as per manent f ull-time (PFT) or ?other.? ?Other? positions i nclude f ull- and part-time, temporary and seasonal positions. I assessed st af fi ng at both the Plan-area and local u nit scales. Results Regional scale Trends i n agg regate st af fi ng differed bet ween the FS and BLM u nits i n the Plan area, with FS u nits exper ienci ng shar per agg regate decli nes than BLM u nits (fig. 4 -1). T he FS u nits lost 3,066 FTEs, with u nit-level st af fi ng decli ni ng f rom 8,431 i n 1993 to 5,365 i n 2002. T his loss represented more than a thi rd (36 percent) of the tot al st af fi ng at the st ar t of the per iod. By far the largest st af fi ng losses were i n 1993 and 1994, with 49 percent (1,516) of the decade?s losses. A gai n i n FS u nit agg regate st af fi ng i n 2001 was mostly lost the next year. Although tot al FTEs also fell on BLM Plan-area u nits, st af fi ng was cyclical, with some i nter im gai ns f rom 1996 th rough 1998. Tot al st af fi ng losses were much less severe than on FS u nits, with a decrease of 166 FTEs (13 percent) over the per iod. With these losses, BLM Plan-area u nits went f rom 1,236 st aff i n 1993 to 1,070 i n 2002. St af fi ng dat a classified i nto PFT versus ?other? were available for all FS u nits for FY 1995 to 2002 only (fig. 4 -2). Trends i n st af fi ng losses for these years were less severe than i n the previous 2 years. Although tot al PFT positions decli ned i n all years, the propor tion of tot al st af fi ng i n these positions i ncreased slightly, f rom 65 to 67 percent. T he absence of dat a before 1995 makes it impossible to deter - mi ne whether a higher percent age of ?other? positions were i n the work force before the Plan was adopted. Fig u re 4 -1? Pla n-a rea agg regate u n it st af fi ng by agency, 1993 ?20 02. Sou rce: Forest Ser vice Paci fic Sout hwest a nd Paci fic Nor t hwest regional of fices, Bu reau of La nd Ma nage - ment ( BLM ) O regon St ate Of fice. 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 19 93 19 94 19 95 19 96 19 97 19 98 19 99 20 00 20 01 20 02 Fiscal year F u l l - t i m e e q u i v a l e n t s Forest Service Northwest Forest Plan units BLM Northwest Forest Plan units 55 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies ?Other? positions lost fewer FTEs, but decli ned relatively more rapidly (-30 percent), decreasi ng f rom 35 percent of positions i n 1995 to 32 percent of FTEs i n 2002. ?Other? positions i ncreased by 13 percent i n 2001, but lost more than half of this gai n the followi ng year. Dat a st ratif yi ng Oregon BLM u nit positions i nto PFT versus ?other? were available for 1993 th rough 2002 (fig. 4 -3). Both classes of positions saw losses du r i ng the per iod: 12 percent of PFT positions were lost, and ?other? positions decli ned by 18 percent. T he relative propor tion of st af fi ng constituted by each class remained almost unchanged, however, with PFT positions mak i ng up 81 percent of all FTEs i n 1993 and 82 percent of all positions i n 2002. Local scale Unit st af fi ng dat a are available for FS and BLM Plan-area u nits for 1993 th rough 2002. T he dat a descr ibi ng st af fi ng on FS u nits that consolidated du r i ng this per iod (the Fremont with the Wi nema, the Rog ue R iver with the Sisk iyou, and the Okanogan with the Wenatchee National Forests) were combi ned for the enti re per iod (fig. 4 - 4). St af fi ng fell on ever y u nconsolidated FS Plan-area u nit. Decli nes were most severe on u nits i n Oregon and Washi ng ton. With the exception of the Deschutes, st af fi ng declines on these units ranged from more than one-third to more than one-half. T he Gifford Pi nchot saw the largest propor tional decrease i n st af fi ng, with a loss of 356 FTEs (57 percent). T he Mou nt Hood saw the largest decli ne i n absolute nu mbers, with 363 FTEs (55 percent) lost. Similar decli nes affected the region?s smallest st affs, with the Oly mpic and Siuslaw u nits decli ni ng by 54 and 52 percent. St af fi ng decli nes on the Mou nt Baker-Snoqual mie, Wil - lamet te, and Umpqua were also shar p, at 48, 43, and 38 percent, respectively. I n cont rast, the Deschutes National Forest lost 17 percent of its st aff. Although i nter im st af fi ng i ncreases were made on some of the region?s u nits du r i ng the st udy per iod, this gai n was mai nt ai ned th rough 2003 only on the Deschutes. T he fou r Califor nia forests exper ienced st af fi ng de - cli nes of less than one-thi rd, rangi ng f rom 4 to 31 percent. Of these fou r u nits, the K lamath had the largest absolute and propor tional decli ne i n st af fi ng, with a loss of 195 Fig u re 4 -2 ? Forest Ser vice agg regate Pla n-a rea u n it st af fi ng composit ion, 1993 ?20 02. Sou rce: Forest Ser vice Paci fic Sout h - west a nd Paci fic Nor t hwest regional of fices. Fig u re 4 -3 ? O regon Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement agg regate Pla n-a rea u n it st af fi ng composit ion, 1993 ?20 02. Sou rce: Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement ( BLM ) O regon St ate Of fice. 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 F u l l - t i m e e q u i v a l e n t s 19 93 19 94 19 95 19 96 19 97 19 98 19 99 20 00 20 01 20 02 Fiscal year Total FTEs Permanent full-time Other 1,400 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 0 F u l l - t i m e e q u i v a l e n t s 19 93 19 94 19 95 19 96 19 97 19 98 19 99 20 00 20 01 20 02 Fiscal year Permanent full-time Other 56 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III FTEs. T he Shast a-Tr i nit y had the smallest st af fi ng decli ne of any Plan-area u nit (4 percent), with all but the i nitial 2 years of losses offset by later gai ns i n FTEs. On the K lam - ath, Mendoci no, and Six R ivers u nits, gai ns i n st af fi ng were made i n each of the last 2 years, pushi ng fi nal st af fi ng back to 1998 or 1999 levels. Decli nes i n st af fi ng among fou r of the five BLM u nits (fig. 4 -5) were comparable to those on FS Califor nia u nits. T hese BLM u nits had net decli nes over the per iod. Tot al st aff size and changes were similar among the Eugene, Rosebu rg, and Coos Bay Dist r icts, and the larger Salem Dist r ict reflected a similar cyclical t rend. T he Eugene Dist r ict had the largest st af fi ng loss, with 24 percent of positions (56 FTEs) lost. T he Coos Bay Dist r ict had the smallest decrease, with 15 percent (30 FTEs) lost. T he much larger Medford Dist r ict st aff was an excep - tion. Af ter losi ng positions f rom 1993 to 1995, Medford gai ned FTEs i n 1996 th rough 1999 and mai nt ai ned a net i ncrease of 2 percent (5 FTEs) over the per iod. With its al most u nchanged st af fi ng levels i n the context of decli nes on other BLM u nits, the Medford st aff g rew f rom bei ng 25 percent larger than the next-largest dist r ict i n 1993, to bei ng 54 percent larger than any other BLM Plan-area st aff i n 2002. Fig u re 4 - 4 ? Forest Ser vice i nd ividu al Pla n-a rea u n it st af fi ng, 1993 ?20 02. Sou rce: Forest Ser vice Paci fic Sout hwest a nd Paci fic Nor t hwest Regional Of fices. 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Fiscal year Full-time equivalents National forests Klamath Mendocino Shasta-Trinity Six Rivers Deschutes Fremont-Winema Gifford Pinchot Mount Baker-Snoqualmie Mount Hood Olympic Rouge River-Siskiyou Siuslaw Umpqua Okanagon-Wenatchee Willamette 57 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Discussion I n the context of st af fi ng losses, st af fi ng composition bet ween the t wo position classes st udied (PFT and ?other?) changed little across the period. The FS human resources st aff believes, however, that many positions classed as otherin the latter half of the period represent seasonal fi re employ ment, par ticularly i n Region 5. A mong FS u nits, all but one Region 6 national forest lost more than a thi rd of st af fi ng. T he Califor nia and Des- chutes National Forests lost less than a thi rd of thei r st affs. St af fi ng decli nes on fou r BLM u nits were similar to those on Califor nia national forests, while the larger Medford u nit i ncreased its st af fi ng over the per iod. Unit Reorganizations One potential effect of reductions i n agency st af fi ng levels is of fice closu res. I analyzed how the nu mber of agency of fices housi ng decision makers changed du r i ng the st udy per iod, to see whether reductions i n agency st af fi ng also affected the level and type of agency presence in local communities. Monitoring Question How did the tot al presence and geog raphic dist r ibution of agency of fices cont ai ni ng u nit-scale decision makers change bet ween 1990 and 2004? Expectations Although the Plan projected st af fi ng losses for the FS, it did not i nclude expect ations for a f ut u re dist r ibution of agency of fices given the forecasted dow nsizi ng. T he FEM AT did, however, identif y the potential for impacts f rom local agency of fice closu res among r u ral com mu ni - ties (FEM AT1993: V II-72): Workshop panels f rom all th ree st ates i ndicated that the community capacity of some isolated, small communities is enhanced by a Forest Service or Bu reau of Land Management Dist r ict of fice i n thei r com mu nit y. Removal of these of fices might devastate some of these dependentcommunities. Methods I selected the dist r ibution of of fices housi ng field-u nit li ne of ficers as an i ndicator to measu re the presence of empowered agency of ficials, agency employees, and job opportunities in Plan-area communities. I solicited data for 1990 and 2004 f rom each national forest and BLM dist r ict public affai rs of fice withi n the Plan area. T he assembled results were ret u r ned to these of fices for con fi r mation and review. Results I n the Plan area there were 17 FS super visor of fices and 79 dist r ict ranger of fices i n 1990 (fig. 4 - 6). By 2004, these nu mbers had decreased to 15 forest super visor of fices and 59 dist r ict ranger of fices (fig. 4 -7, t able 4 -2). T his change represented a 23 percent decrease i n the nu mber of Pacific Nor thwest com mu nities with FS li ne of ficers. I n 1990, 24 li ne of ficers led local BLM Plan-area u nits, excludi ng associate dist r ict managers. I n 2004, 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 Fiscal year Full-time equivalents 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Districts Salem Eugene Roseburg Medford Coos Bay Fig u re 4 -5 ? Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement i nd ividu al Pla n-a rea u n it st af fi ng, 1993 ?20 02. Sou rce: Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement O regon St ate Of fice. 58 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III I - 5 I-8 2 I- 5 I - 5 I-80 I-9 0 I-84 I-8 4 I - 5 I-90 Seattle Portland San Francisco 1990 regional Bureau of Land Management offices 1990 local Bureau of Land Management offices 1990 regional Forest Service offices 1990 local Forest Service offices Metropolitan areas Northwest Forest Plan region States Major lakes and rivers Major roads 0 25 50 100 Miles o Fig u re 4 - 6 ? Locat ions of Forest Ser vice a nd Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement li ne of ficers, 1990. 59 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Fig u re 4 -7? Locat ion of Forest Ser vice a nd Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement li ne of ficers, 20 04. I - 5 I-8 2 I- 5 I - 5 I-80 I-9 0 I-84 I-8 4 I - 5 I-90 Seattle Portland San Francisco 2004 regional Bureau of Land Management offices 2004 local Bureau of Land Management offices 2004 regional Forest Service offices 2004 local Forest Service offices Metropolitan areas Northwest Forest Plan region States Major lakes and rivers Major roads 0 25 50 100 Miles o 60 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Table 4 -2? Locations of Forest Ser vice and Bureau of Land Management of fices with line of ficers, 1990 and 2004 a State 1990 2004 Forest Service:b Wash i ng ton Vancouverc (Gifford Pinchot SO) Vancouver (Gifford Pinchot SO) Ra ndle Ra ndle (Cowlit z Valley R D) Trout La ke ( Mou nt Ad ams R D) Trout La ke ( Mou nt Ad ams R D) A mboy ( Mou nt St. Helens N M ) A mboy ( Mou nt St. Helens N M ) Pack wood Ca rson ( Wi nd R iver R D) Mountlake Terrace (Mount Baker-Snoqualmie SO) Mountlake Terrace (Mount Baker-Snoqualmie SO) Sed ro Woolley ( Mou nt Ba ker R D) Sed ro Woolley ( Mou nt Ba ker R D) Darrington Darrington Sk ykom ish Sk ykom ish Nor t h Bend Nor t h Bend (Snoqu al m ie R D) Enu mclaw ( W h ite R iver R D) Wenatchee (Wenatchee SO) Wenatchee (Okanogan and Wenatchee SO) Chela n Chela n Cle Elu m Cle Elu m Ent iat Ent iat La ke Wenatchee Leavenwor t h Leavenwor t h ( La ke Wenatchee/ Leavenwor t h R D) Naches Naches Okanogan (Okanogan SO) Wi nt h rop Wi nt h rop ( Met how Valley R D) Twisp Tonasket Tonasket Olympia (Olympic SO) Olympia (Olympic SO) Hoodspor t ( Hood Ca nal R D) Hoodspor t ( Hood Ca nal R D) Q uilcene Q ui nault Fork s (Soleduck R D) Fork s (Soleduck R D) O regon Bend (Deschutes SO) Bend (Deschutes SO) Bend Bend Crescent Crescent Sisters Sisters Medford (Rogue River SO) Medford (Rogue River and Siskiyou SO) Jack sonville (Applegate R D) Jack sonville (Applegate R D) Ashland Ashland But te Falls But te Falls Prospect Prospect Grants Pass (Siskiyou SO) Brook i ngs (Chetco R D) Brook i ngs (Chetco R D) G ra nts Pass (Galice R D) G ra nts Pass (Galice R D) Gold Beach Gold Beach Cave Ju nct ion (Illi nois Valley R D) Cave Ju nct ion (Illi nois Valley R D) Powers Powers Corvallis (Siuslaw SO) Corvallis (Siuslaw SO) Alsea Waldpor t (A lsea / Waldpor t R D) Hebo Hebo 61 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Table 4 -2? Locations of Forest Ser vice and Bureau of Land Management of fices with line of ficers, 1990 and 2004 a (continued) State 1990 2004 Mapleton Florence (Sout h Zone R D) Reedspor t (O regon D u nes N R A) Reedspor t (O regon D u nes N R A) Rosebu rg ( Umpqu a SO) Rosebu rg ( Umpqu a SO) Cot t age G rove Cot t age G rove Tiller Tiller Toketee ( Diamond La ke R D) Toketee ( Diamond La ke R D) Glide ( Nor t h Umpqu a R D) Glide ( Nor t h Umpqu a R D) Eugene (Willamette SO) Eugene (Willamette SO) West fi r (Oa k R idge R D) West fi r ( Middle Fork R D) Oa k r idge ( R igdon R D) Lowell Blue R iver McKen zie Br idge ( McKen zie R D) McKen zie Br idge ( McKen zie R iver R D) Sweet Home Sweet Home Mill Cit y/ Det roit ( Det roit R D) Mill Cit y/ Det roit ( Det roit R D) Sandy (Mount Hood SO) Sandy (Mount Hood SO) D uf u r ( Ba rlow R D) D uf u r ( Ba rlow R D) Maupi n ( Bea r Spr i ngs R D) Est acad a (Clackamas R D) Est acad a (Clackamas R D) Troutd ale (Colu mbia Gorge R D) Mou nt Hood-Pa rkd ale ( Hood R iver R D) Mou nt Hood-Pa rkd ale ( Hood R iver R D) Zigzag Zigzag Klamath Falls (Winema SO) Klamath Falls (Winema SO) Chemult Chemult Ch ilqui n Ch ilqui n K lamat h Falls ( K lamat h R D) K lamat h Falls ( K lamat h R D) Califor n ia Yreka (Klamath SO) Yreka (Klamath SO) K lamat h R iver (Oa k K noll R D) Happy Camp Happy Camp Et na (Sal mon R iver R D) Mou nt Hebron (Goosenest R D) Mou nt Hebron (Goosenest R D) O rlea ns ( U konom R D) d For t Jones (Scot t R iver R D) For t Jones (2 d ist r icts ? Sal mon R iver a nd Scot t R iver R Ds) Willows (Mendocino SO) Willows (Mendocino SO) Covelo Upper La ke Upper La ke (Covelo a nd Upper La ke R Ds) Stony ford Willows (G r i ndstone R D) Cor n i ng Redding (Shasta-Trinity SO) Redding (Shasta-Trinity SO) Big Ba r Hay fork ( Yolla Bolla a nd Hay fork R Ds) Hay fork ( Hay fork a nd Yolla Bolly R Ds) Weaver ville ( Weaver ville a nd Redd i ng R Ds) Weaver ville ( Big Ba r a nd Weaver ville R Ds) Mou nt ai n Gate/ Redd i ng (Shast a La ke R D) Mou nt ai n Gate/ Redd i ng (Shast a La ke R D) Mou nt Shast a ( Mou nt Shast a a nd McCloud R Ds) McCloud ( Mou nt Shast a a nd McCloud R Ds) Eureka (Six Rivers SO) Eureka (Six Rivers SO) O rlea ns (O rlea ns R D) O rlea ns (O rlea ns R D) Willow Creek ( Lower Tr i n it y R D) Willow Creek ( Lower Tr i n it y R D) Br idgeville ( Mad R iver R D) Br idgeville ( Mad R iver R D) Gasquet (Sm it h R iver N R A) Gasquet (Sm it h R iver N R A) 62 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Table 4 -2? Locations of Forest Ser vice and Bureau of Land Management of fices with line of ficers, 1990 and 2004 a (continued) State 1990 2004 Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement: O regon North Bend (Coos Bay Dist r ict Ma nager a nd North Bend (Coos Bay Dist r ict Ma nager a nd 3 resou rce a rea ma nagers) 2 field ma nagers) Eugene ( Dist r ict Ma nager a nd 3 resou rce a rea Eugene ( Dist r ict Ma nager a nd 2 field ma nagers ) ma nagers) Salem ( Dist r ict Ma nager a nd 4 resou rce a rea Salem ( Dist r ict Ma nager a nd 1 field ma nager) ma nagers) Tillamook (resou rce a rea ma nager) Tillamook (field ma nager) Medford ( Dist r ict Ma nager a nd 4 resou rce a rea Medford ( Dist r ict Ma nager a nd 4 field ma nagers) ma nagers) Roseburg ( Dist r ict Ma nager a nd 4 field ma nagers) Roseburg ( Dist r ict Ma nager a nd 2 field ma nagers) Note: SO = super v isor?s of fice, R D = r a nger d ist r ict of fice, N M = nat ional monu ment of fice, N R A = nat ional recreat ion a rea of fice. a L ocat ion s of Forest Ser v ice super v isor s? of fices a nd Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement d ist r ict of fices a re d ist i ng u ished by bold face. b Forest Service data omit deputy forest supervisors and assistant district rangers. c Place na mes a re show n. W here place na me a nd r a nger d ist r ict na me d if fer, bot h a re prov ided. d Ad m i n ist r at ion of t he U konom R D moved f rom t he K la mat h N F to t he Si x R iver s N F i n 1999. although more than one-quarter of these positions had been lost (t able 4 -2), the nu mber and location of of fices housi ng li ne of ficers remai ned u nchanged. Discussion Although the nu mber of local li ne of ficers sh ran k by rough - ly one-fif th to one- quar ter for both agencies, consolidations were st r uct u red differently. T he nu mber of com mu nities hosti ng FS li ne of ficers decreased sig nificantly. I n some i n - st ances, a FS of fice persists i n these com mu nities, although with fewer employees. I n other cases, of fices closed and no FS employees are work i ng i n the com mu nities. I n general, BLM of fices are i n larger cities i n wester n Oregon, with several li ne of ficers (resou rce area managers) at each of fice. Although some resou rce areas were consoli - dated or elimi nated, there was no change i n the nu mber of com mu nities hosti ng BLM li ne of ficers. Budgets I exami ne budget allocations as a potential explanator y fac - tor for the st af fi ng and of fice consolidation t rends identified by the monitor i ng effor t. To u nderst and whether the Plan was related to t rends i n u nit budgets, I compare Plan-area allocations to agency allocations at the national scale. To u nderst and var iation i n management effectiveness bet ween the t wo land management agencies, among local u nits, and among programs, I compare budget trends for each of these strata. Monitoring Question How did budget allocations to Plan-area u nits change du r i ng the Plan per iod? Expectations T he FEM AT expected changi ng budget ar y processes to accompany the Plan (FEM AT 1993: V III- 40): The current budget process may not be compatible with i nteg rated resou rce management, par ticularly one such as proposed here. The magnitude of the changes will requi re a change i n the way Cong ress allocates budgets, particularly for the land-managing agencies who previously received f u nds based on an assessment of commodity and other resource-based output. Neither FEM AT (1993) nor the FSEIS ( USDA and USDI 1994) provided estimates of the f u ndi ng needed by agency field u nits or prog rams to accomplish ecosystem management as envisioned under the Plan. 63 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Methods I assessed agency budgets at the national, Plan region, and local unit scales. Total spending authority for both the FS and BLM was t aken f rom the budget of the United St ates for fiscal years 1996 th rough 2005 (GPO 1996 ?2005). I requested dat a descr ibi ng fi nal, tot al an nual allocations to Plan u nits f rom agency regional of fices. T his i nfor ma - tion was available for 1993 th rough 2003. Dat a descr ibi ng allocations to FS u nits i n Washi ng ton and Oregon are based on the an nual Fi nal I nter ior Appropr iations Bill, as allocated to Region 6 by the FS Washi ng ton Of fice Prog ram and Budget Advice. T hese dat a were made available by the FS Region 6 Of fice of Budget and Fi nancial Management i n Por tland, Oregon. Dat a descr ibi ng allocations to FS u nits i n Califor nia were compiled for this project by the Region 5 Of fice of Prog ram Development and Budget i n Vallejo, Califor nia, to be comparable with the available Region 6 dat a. Dat a descr ibi ng allocations to BLM u nits i n Oregon were obt ai ned f rom the Budget Depar t ment of the BLM Oregon St ate Of fice i n Por tland, Oregon. T he prelimi nar y analysis was ret u r ned to these of fices for review. Unit-scale data describe budget allocations to individ- ual u nits by prog ram area, budget li ne item, and expanded budget line item. I present these data by total allocations to individual units. I also use the data to describe aggregate allocations to each agency?s Plan u nits, as well as agg regate allocations to Plan units by selected program. Available dat a differed among FS regions, and bet ween the FS and the BLM. T he analysis of FS budgets excludes federal highway emergency relief and ad mi nist ration f u nds, as these dat a were not readily available for Region 6. T he dat a were available for Region 5, however, and i ndicated that emergency highway f u ndi ng has had a sig nificant, although intermittent, effect on some unit budgets during the per iod. T he case st udies su m mar ized i n volu me III, chapter 8 fou nd that this t y pe of f u ndi ng also affected budgets among Region 6 u nits. Regional BLM dat a i nclude emergency highway relief f u nds, as well as li ne items u nder which other large su ms of f u ndi ng were i nter mit tently allocated for items such as construction or land acquisition. Such large, intermit- tent bu rsts of one-time- only or emergency f u nds were isolated i n the analysis on the advice of BLM budget st aff, as potentially skewi ng the dat a toward u nusual expenses. Although the FS data include comparable types of funding, FS allocations for u nusual or i nter mit tent expenses did not appear to be large enough to skew results. For these reasons, although fi re and f uel management is isolated i n both the FS and BLM budget analyses, other u nusual, i nter mit tent, or emergency f u nds are isolated only withi n the BLM budget analysis. Fu nds allocated to BLM u nits u nder the Secu re Ru ral Schools and Com mu nit y Self-Deter mi nation Act, show n i n BLM records for FY 2003 only, were also isolated du r i ng analysis, to en hance compar ison to FS dat a. Overall, these exclusions affect the way f u ndi ng is analyzed i n t wo BLM prog ram areas: ?Oregon and Califor nia? allocations, and allocations under otherappropriations. Prog ram scope also differs bet ween the FS and the BLM. National Forest System activities are one component of FS budgets. National Forest System f u nds are author ized to suppor t a wide range of ecosystem management pro - grams implemented under the Plan. Several other budget components, i ncludi ng Research, St ate and Pr ivate Forest r y, and Capit al I mprovements and Mai ntenance, are i ncluded i n agg regate f u ndi ng fig u res but not add ressed separately. Fi re and f uel management, a major agency prog ram, has g row n rapidly si nce the mid-1990s, i ndicati ng a potential change i n investment priorities among the agencies and forests. In ad- dition to National Forest System and fi re f u ndi ng, I exami ne change i n FS per manent and t r ust f u nds, which are based in part on the assessment of timber and other commodity outputs. Permanent and trust funding levels affected, and were affected by, implement ation of the Plan. T he BLM budgets are st r uct u red differently. Manage - ment of BLM land i n the Plan area of wester n Oregon is pr imar ily f u nded th rough the Oregon and Califor nia G rant Lands (O&C) appropr iation. T hese f u nds are appropr iated for expenses necessar y for managi ng, protecti ng, and devel - opi ng resou rces; and for buildi ng, operati ng, and mai nt ai n - ing access roads, reforestation, and other improvements on the revested O&C g rant lands, on other federal lands i n the O&C land-g rant cou nties of Oregon, and on adjacent r ights- of-way. T he O&C appropr iations also f u nd acquisition of land, i ncludi ng existi ng con necti ng roads on or adjacent to 6 4 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III O&C g rant land. As with the FS, BLM also receives f u nds author ized by Cong ress for fi re and f uel management. To a lesser deg ree, BLM also receives some f u ndi ng f rom the management of land and resou rces appropr iation, as well as f u ndi ng f rom a few per manent and t r ust f u nds. I exami ne the role of BLM?s var ious f u ndi ng sou rces as they suppor t Plan implementation. All budget data presented here have been adjusted to const ant dollars by usi ng 2003 as the base year. G ross domestic product (GDP) deflators were provided by the FS Washi ng ton Of fice. Results National scale National-scale agency budget t rends provide an agency- wide context for assessi ng change i n Plan-area u nit budget allocations. Dat a descr ibi ng agency budget author izations were readily available for 1994 th rough 2003 (fig. 4 -8). T he FS and BLM agency f u ndi ng author izations g rew rapidly du r i ng this per iod. Tot al FS budget expanded by 41 percent, f rom $4.2 billion to $5.9 billion. Although smaller, BLM budgets escalated more rapidly, g rowi ng f rom $1.4 billion i n 1994 to $2.4 billion i n 2003, an i ncrease of 79 percent. Most of these i ncreases were due to escalati ng f u nds for fi re and f uel management. Net fi re and f uel appropr iations for the FS g rew by more than $1.4 billion (212 percent). I n 1994, net fi re and f uel management appropr iations of $665 million were 16 percent of the agency tot al. By 2003, fi re and f uel appropr iations had g row n to $2.1 billion, and were 35 percent of the agency?s tot al budget author ization. Net appropr iations for BLM fi re and f uel management, although smaller, g rew even more quick ly. I n 1994, net fi re and f uel management appropr iations of $137 million were 10 percent of the BLM tot al budget. By 2003, fi re and f uel appropr iations had g row n to $849 million, and, as i n the FS, were 35 percent of the tot al agency budget. Other budget author izations g rew more slowly, par ticu - larly withi n the FS. Excludi ng fi re and f uel management, FS f u ndi ng rose by 9 percent. T he BLM non fi re f u ndi ng g rew by 29 percent. 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Fiscal year Budget ( m i l l i o n dollars) Total Forest Service Forest Service excluding fire and fuel management Total BLM BLM excluding fire and fuel management Fig u re 4 -8 ? Forest Ser vice a nd Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement ( BLM ) agency budget aut hor it y, 1994 -20 03. Base yea r is 20 03. Sou rce: Gover n ment Pr i nt i ng Of fice, Budget of t he Un ited St ates 1996 ?20 05. Regional scale Dat a descr ibi ng forest u nit allocations were readily available for 1993 ?2003 (fig. 4 -9). Trends i n agg regate allocations to Plan u nits du r i ng this per iod showed i ncreas - i ng fi re and f uel costs outst r ippi ng other allocations for both agencies. Other wise, budget t rends differed widely bet ween agencies. Tot al allocations to FS field u nits fell by 35 percent bet ween 1993 and 2003, f rom $539 million to $349 million. I n cont rast, tot al allocations to BLM field u nits rose by 22 percent du r i ng this same per iod, f rom $85 million to $104 million. I n both the FS and BLM, most of the cong ressional author izations for fi re and f uel management expendit u res are spent at the national and regional scales on cost-sharing ar rangements, cont racts, regionally based agency fi refight - i ng teams, and other i nvest ments related to fi re suppression. 65 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies T hus, a relatively small propor tion of tot al fi re f u ndi ng reaches field u nits. T he BLM Oregon St ate Of fice com mits nearly all the region?s fi re suppression dollars to a cont ract th rough which the St ate of Oregon handles the region?s needs for protection assist ance, suppression, and fi re preparedness. Fire and fuel management dollars delivered to local BLM u nits du r i ng the per iod were rest r icted to rehabilit ati ng bu r ned areas, reduci ng hazardous f uel, and managi ng i n the wildland-u rban i nter face. Although FS funds for suppression are also spent at national or regional scales, fi re and f uel management f u ndi ng plays a more sig nificant role i n allocations to FS field u nits. It has been dedicated to a wider ar ray of field-u nit activities: presup - pression, emergency fi refighti ng, and fi re protection, as well as f uel reduction and management. Allocations to manage fi re and f uel on FS Plan-area field u nits g rew by 156 percent, f rom $40 million to $102 million. Although fi re and f uel allocations were 7 percent of agg regate u nit budgets i n 1993, they g rew to 29 percent of agg regate Plan u nit budgets i n 2003. Excludi ng allocations for fi re and f uel management, agg regate budgets for FS Plan-area field u nits d ropped by 50 percent du r i ng the st udy per iod, falli ng f rom $499 million to $248 million. Although relatively small, allocations to manage bu r ned areas and f uel on BLM Plan-area u nits expanded more than 700 percent, f rom $1.6 million to $13 million. T his change represented an i ncrease f rom 2 percent of agg regate field u nit budgets i n 1993 to 13 percent i n 2003. No f u nds were allocated to Plan-area BLM field u nits for f uel management bet ween 1994 and 1997. Excludi ng fi re rehabilitation and fuel management funds, aggregate alloca- tions to BLM field u nits g rew 12 percent, f rom $83 million to $93 million. Allocations by program area?T he FS regional records of f u ndi ng to Plan field u nits generally divide allocations i nto six or more prog ram areas. Fi re and f uel management, National Forest System management, and per manent appro - pr iations and t r ust f u nds were the th ree largest prog rams i n const ant dollars bet ween 1993 and 2003 (fig. 4 -10). Budgets for these prog ram areas are exami ned here. In the Plan area, aggregate allocations to FS units for fi re and f uel management i ncreased by 156 percent. Fi re and f uel management costs su rged upward while f u ndi ng to other programs declined. Agg regate National Forest System prog ram allocations, derived from discretionary appropriations to support inven- tor y and monitor i ng, recreation and wilder ness manage - ment, management of veget ation, watersheds, wildlife, and fisher ies, and an ar ray of other ecosystem management activities, fell by 44 percent, f rom $233 million to $131 mil - lion. Given the general decli ne i n u nit allocations, however, the relative proportion of aggregate budgets composed of National Forest System f u nds decli ned only slightly, f rom 43 percent to 37 percent. 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Fiscal year Budget ( m i l l i o n dollars) Forest Service Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) units Forest Service NWFP units excluding fire and fuel management BLM NWFP units BLM NWFP units excluding fire and fuel management Fig u re 4 -9 ? Forest Ser vice a nd O regon Bu reau of La nd Ma nage - ment ( BLM ) Pla n-a rea u n it budget allocat ions, 1993 ?20 03. Base yea r is 20 03. Sou rce: Forest Ser vice Paci fic Sout hwest a nd Paci fic Nor t hwest regional of fices, BLM O regon St ate Of fice. 66 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Eleven per manent appropr iations and th ree t r ust f u nds are also sou rces of f u ndi ng to local FS u nits ( USDA FS 2004). Allocations f rom these sou rces have been used primarily to fund a range of activities related to timber har vest. Budget author it y for these appropr iations depends on receipts ? pr imar ily timber receipts ?generated and passed th rough by the agency. I n the Plan area, FS u nits ex - per ienced a sig nificant decrease i n agg regate f u ndi ng f rom per manent appropr iations and t r ust f u nds bet ween 1993 and 2003, mi r ror i ng the region?s d rop i n timber-generated revenues. (See volu me II, chapter 2 for discussion of t rends i n timber har vesti ng on federal lands.) At the st ar t of the per iod, allocations f rom these sou rces composed 41 percent of aggregate budgets, comparable to the relative proportion of National Forest System f u nds. Per manent and t r ust f u nds fell faster than National Forest System f u nds, however, d roppi ng 72 percent f rom $222 million to $63 million. By 2003, per manent and t r ust f u nds composed just 18 percent of aggregate unit funding. Allocations to BLM Oregon field u nits i n the Plan area are classed i nto fou r prog ram areas (fig. 4 -11), all of which are exami ned here. Allocations i n th ree of fou r prog ram cat - egor ies i ncreased bet ween 1993 and 2003. T he most rapid i ncrease was i n allocations to manage bu r ned areas and f uel on BLM u nits, which rose by more than 600 percent, f rom $1.6 million to $11 million. Never theless, tot al allocations for fuel management remained relatively small, rising from 2 percent of agg regate field u nit budgets i n 1993 to only 11 percent i n 2003. Appropr iations for management of BLM land and resou rces are i ntended to suppor t a wide ar ray of activities u nder the Plan. T hey i nclude managi ng wildlife and fisher - ies, threatened and endangered species, and recreation, as well as f u nctions such as mi ni ng, ad mi nister i ng com mu ni - cations sites, and ad mi nist rative suppor t of the work force and organization. Although agg regate f u nds delivered to field u nits for these pu r poses more than doubled, i ncreasi ng 250 200 150 100 50 0 B u d g e t ( million d o l l a r s ) 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Fiscal year National Forest System Fire and fuel management Permanent and trust funds Fig u re 4 -10 ? Forest Ser vice Pla n-a rea u n its, la rgest agg regate prog ram accou nts, 1993 ?20 03. Base yea r is 20 03. Sou rce: Forest Ser vice Paci fic Sout hwest a nd Paci fic Nor t hwest regional of fices. 6 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies by $4.6 million, they played a mi nor role i n overall f u nd - i ng, g rowi ng f rom 3 percent of agg regate BLM Plan u nit budgets i n 1993 to 7 percent i n 2003. Fu ndi ng u nder the O&C Land G rants Act made up most of BLM field-u nit f u ndi ng th roughout the per iod. T his f u ndi ng decreased f rom $70 million to $64 million but decli ned more relative to other allocations, f rom 83 percent of agg regate allocations i n 1993 to 61 percent of allocations i n 2003. From 1996 to 1998, however, O&C f u ndi ng was 94 percent of agg regate u nit allocations, when more than $30 million of O&C const r uction f u ndi ng was allocated and car r ied over for several years to make emergency road repairs after an unusually large storm. ?Other? allocations to BLM Oregon u nits doubled f rom $11 million to $22 million, g rowi ng f rom 12 to 21 percent of aggregate unit budgets during the period. Funds for buildi ng, land acquisition, emergency road relief, and ?i n 2003 only?the Secu re Ru ral Schools Act? are i ncluded in this account. These unusual, intermittent, stop-gap, or emergency funds constituted an increasing proportion of the f u ndi ng available u nder this prog ram area. With this f u ndi ng excluded (fig. 4 -12), ?other? allocations to BLM u nits were negligible early i n the per iod, su rged to $17 million i n 1999, and d ropped to $7 million by 2003. Most of the su rge i n ?other? allocations was for the timber and recreation pipelines, or the forest health initiative.1 Local scale T he Okanogan, Wenatchee, Rog ue R iver, Sisk iyou, and Wi nema National Forests consolidated with other field u nits du r i ng the per iod of st udy: the Okanogan with the Wenatchee, and the Wi nema with the Fremont (outside the Nor thwest Forest Plan area) i n 2002, and the Rog ue R iver with the Sisk iyou i n 2003. Results for these forests focus on the period before consolidation. 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 B u d g e t ( million d o l l a r s ) 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Fiscal year Regular MLR Fire rehabilitation and fuel management Regular Oregon and California grant land Other Fig u re 4 -11? O regon Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement Pla n-a rea u n its, agg regate budget allocat ions by prog ram accou nt, 1993 ?20 03. Base yea r is 20 03. M LR = ma nagement of la nd a nd resou rces appropr iat ion. Sou rce: Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement O regon St ate Of fice. 1 T he t i mber a nd recreat ion pipeli nes were f u nd i ng allocated to rest a r t t he flow of pla n n i ng for t i mber sales a nd recreat ion project s af ter t i mber sale receipt s dw i nd led on Pla n-a rea forest s i n t he ea rly 1990 s. 68 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Fig u re 4 -12 ? O regon Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement Pla n-a rea u n its, agg regate budget allocat ions by prog ram accou nt, wit h selected exclusions, 1993 ?20 03. Base yea r is 20 03. M LR = ma nagement of la nd a nd resou rces appropr iat ion. Sou rce: Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement O regon St ate Of fice. Tot al i ndividual u nit allocations fell bet ween 1993 and 2003 for ever y u nconsolidated FS u nit i n the Plan area (fig. 4 -13). With t wo exceptions, decli nes were most severe for FS u nits i n Oregon and Washi ng ton. T hese u nits saw budget decli nes rangi ng f rom 41 to 60 percent over the decade. I n cont rast, tot al allocations to i ndividual Califor nia national forests decli ned more slowly, falli ng f rom 18 to 22 percent. T he Deschutes National Forest saw the smallest decrease of any u nconsolidated forest, with tot al alloca - tions dimi nishi ng by just 2 percent. Average an nual budget decli nes among all Plan-area u nits ranged f rom 0.2 percent on the Deschutes, to u nder 2 percent on the Wenatchee, Mendoci no, and K lamath u nits, to nearly 6 percent or more on the Gifford Pi nchot, Mou nt Hood, and Wi nema u nits (t able 4 -3). Allocations for fi re and f uel management were excluded f rom the forest u nit budget dat a i n fig u re 4 -14. T he dat a show that non fi re allocations d ropped even more rapidly than total allocations. Among forests that did not consolidate, the Gifford Pinchot and Mount Hood units saw the g reatest relative decrease i n non fi re budgets (- 63 percent), while the Deschutes exper ienced the smallest rela - tive decli ne (-30 percent). Non fi re budgets fell withi n this range for Califor nia u nits, where budgets other than fi re and f uel f u nds decreased bet ween 40 and 50 percent. A mong all u nits, the Deschutes, Wenatchee, and Shast a-Tr i nit y National Forests exper ienced the smallest an nual decli ne i n f u nds excludi ng fi re and f uels (-3.0, -3.9, and - 4.0 percent, respectively), while the Sisk iyou, Wi nema, Gifford Pi nchot, and Mou nt Hood u nits saw the most rapid an nual decli nes i n these f u nds (- 6.7, - 6.6, - 6.3, and - 6.3 percent) (t able 4 -3). I ndividual BLM Plan-area u nits exper ienced var y - i ng budget t rends (fig. 4 -15) Tot al budgets for these u nits i ncreased bet ween 1 and 65 percent. T he Medford Dist r ict budget saw par ticularly large g row th, pr imar ily associated with f uel t reat ment work, expandi ng f rom $23 million to 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 B u d g e t ( million d o l l a r s ) Fiscal year Regular MLR Fire rehabilitation and fuel management 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Regular Oregon and California grant land Other 6 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Fig u re 4 -13 ? Forest Ser vice i nd ividu al Pla n-a rea u n it budget allocat ions, 1993 ?20 03. Base yea r is 20 03. Sou rce: Forest Ser vice Paci fic Sout hwest a nd Paci fic Nor t hwest Regional Of fices. $37 million du r i ng the per iod. Fu ndi ng to the Rosebu rg Dist r ict g rew by 23 percent. Fu ndi ng to the Salem Dist r ict g rew by 5 percent, but bulged i n the middle of the per iod when a large amou nt of O&C const r uction f u ndi ng was allocated to the unit and carried over for several years to repai r roads af ter a major stor m. Fu ndi ng for the Eugene and Rosebu rg Dist r icts g rew the least, at 4 and 1 percent, respectively. Cont rolli ng for u nusual, i nf requent, or emergency costs, as well as for f uel management, reduces BLM u nit budget sizes th roughout the per iod and has a var yi ng effect on budget t rends (fig. 4 -16). I ncreases i n nonf uel f u ndi ng for ordi nar y expenses ranged f rom 5 percent on the Coos Bay Dist r ict to 13 percent on the Medford Dist r ict. T his t y pe of f u ndi ng fell by 4 percent on one u nit, the Salem District. A comparison of total average annual unit alloca- tions to nonfuel, ordinary funding reveals varying trends among BLM u nits (t able 4 -3). On the Rosebu rg and Medford Dist r icts, tot al f u ndi ng g rew more than t wo and three times as fast as increases in ordinary nonfuel f u nds, i ndicati ng overall g row th concent rated i n f u ndi ng for fi re-area rehabilit ation, f uel management, or u nusual costs. The Salem District also had average annual budget 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Fiscal year Budget (million dollars) National forests Deschutes Gifford Pinchot Mount Baker- Snoqualmie Mount Hood Okanagon Olympic Rogue River Siskiyou Siuslaw Umpqua Wenatchee Willamette Winema Fremont- Winema Okanagon- Wenatchee Rogue River- Siskiyou Klamath Mendocino Shasta-Trinity Six Rivers 2003 0 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III i ncreases concent rated i n f uel or u nusual expenses, but its nonfuel, ordinary budgets declined. In contrast, ordinary, nonf uel f u ndi ng g rew slowly, but more than t wice as fast as tot al budgets, on the Eugene and Coos Bay Dist r icts, indicating a declining role played by funding for fuel or ext raordi nar y expenses. Discussion Although tot al FS agency appropr iations g rew by 41 per- cent, increases in allocations to FS Plan-area units late in the period failed to lift aggregate budgets beyond the signif- icant decli nes they had al ready exper ienced, par ticularly i n 1993 and 1994. Agg regate FS Plan-area budgets decli ned by 35 percent f rom 1993 to 2003. Agg regate non fi re, nonf uel f u ndi ng to FS Plan-area u nits fell by 50 percent. I ndividual u nit budgets fell for ever y FS Plan-area u nit, with non fi re funding declining even more sharply for every unit. I n cont rast, tot al BLM agency appropr iations g rew by 79 percent, and agg regate allocations to the Plan-area u nits st udied also i ncreased, by 22 percent. Agg regate nonf uel, ordi nar y budgets for Plan-area BLM u nits g rew by 12 percent. I ndividual u nit budgets i ncreased for ever y BLM dist r ict st udied. Fuel management and u nusual costs increased more rapidly than ordinary costs on three units, while on t wo others ordi nar y and nonf uel expendit u res i ncreased faster. Ordi nar y, non fi re budgets decli ned slightly on only one BLM u nit. Table 4 - 3 ? Change in annual allocations to Plan- area units, 1993 ?2003 Average annual change Average annual change in Agency Unit in total allocationsa ordinary, nonf_ire allocations - - - - - - - - - - - Percent - - - - - - - - - - - Forest Service: Washi ng ton Gifford Pi nchot - 6.05 - 6.30 Mou nt Baker ? Snoqual mie - 4.12 - 4.58 Okanogan -3.65 - 4.77 Oly mpic - 4.89 -5.41 Wenatchee -1.86 -3.92 Oregon Deschutes - 0.17 -3.03 Mou nt Hood -5.85 - 6.30 Rog ue R iver -2.98 - 4.51 Sisk iyou -5.33 - 6.65 Siuslaw -5.27 -5.60 Umpqua - 4.18 -5.39 Willamet te - 4.81 -5.55 Wi nema -5.78 - 6.60 Califor nia K lamath -1.84 - 4.36 Mendoci no -1.78 - 4.29 Shast a-Tr i nit y -2.07 -3.97 Six R ivers -2.15 - 4.96 Bu reau of Land Management: Oregon Salem 0.46 - 0.36 Eugene 0.38 0.81 Rosebu rg 2.27 0.89 Medford 6.45 1.32 Coos Bay 0.10 0.54 a Fig u res show n descr ibe u n it allocat ion s before con solid at ion for t he Ok a noga n, Wenatchee, Rog ue R iver, Sisk iyou , a nd Wi nema Nat ional Forest s. 71 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Fig u re 4 -14 ? Forest Ser vice i nd ividu al Pla n-a rea u n it allocat ions, exclud i ng fi re a nd f uel ma nagement, 1993 ?20 03. Base yea r is 20 03. Sou rce: Forest Ser vice Paci fic Sout hwest a nd Paci fic Nor t hwest regional of fices. Although National Forest System allocations for ecosystem management on FS u nits decli ned by 44 percent, because of the rapid drop in total unit budgets, and particu- larly in permanent and trust funds, the relative proportion of u nit budgets made up by N FS ecosystem management funds declined only slightly. Allocations for managing land and resou rces on BLM u nits doubled, but played a mi nor role i n BLM-u nit budgets th roughout the per iod. Because ecosystem management activities can be funded through several sources, aggregate funding among programs is equally, if not more, important to evaluate. Among FS units, permanent and trust funds fell even faster than National Forest System f u nds. I ncreases i n fi re and f uel f u ndi ng, par ticularly i n the last 2 years of the per iod, were not suf ficient to offset these combi ned decli nes, par ticularly for most Region 6 u nits. Given these changes, most FS units simply had much less funding for conducting ecosystem management activities other than fuel treatments i n 2003 than i n 1993. T his is par ticularly t r ue for Region 6 u nits other than the Deschutes. T his result is consistent with the fi ndi ngs of the case st udies for the Mou nt Hood and K lamath National Forests, where many i nter viewees perceived a greatly reduced agency presence in land management (see volu me III, chapter 8). 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Budget (million dollars) 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Fiscal year National forests Deschutes Gifford Pinchot Mount Baker- Snoqualmie Mount Hood Okanagon Olympic Rogue River Siskiyou Siuslaw Umpqua Wenatchee Willamette Winema Fremont- Winema Okanagon- Wenatchee Rogue River- Siskiyou Klamath Mendocino Shasta-Trinity Six Rivers 2 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III I n cont rast, O&C dollars provided most of the BLM Plan-area unit funding throughout the study period. Al- though O&C f u ndi ng fell across the decade, the mag nit ude and relative st abilit y of O&C f u nds across the per iod were important contributors to stable or increasing aggregate budgets. Accordi ng to Oregon st ate of fice budget st aff, early i n the Plan implement ation, BLM realig ned the balance among the activities i n the O&C appropr iation to reflect the changi ng work associated with implementi ng the Plan. Roughly $17 million, or about 20 percent of the accou nt, was shif ted f rom reforest ation and forest development i nto other forest management activities to reflect a more bal - anced approach to managi ng u nder the Plan. Cong ress also appropr iated for BLM some new dollars associated with new work li ke Jobs-I n-the-Woods restoration, and su r vey- and-manage work (see volu me III, chapter 6 for discussion of differences bet ween agencies i n the f u ndi ng of com mu - nit y economic assist ance prog rams). Given these shif ts and the context of budget i ncreases, BLM u nits were bet ter posi - tioned than FS units to accomplish management activities. T his result is consistent with the result of the Coos Bay case st udy, where many i nter viewees perceived the dist r ict as havi ng been relatively effective u nder the Plan (see volu me III, chapter 8). Note that t rack i ng prog ram matic appropr iations and u nit allocations u nderst ates the act ual effects of fi re costs on the abilit y of field u nits to complete plan ned activities in the later years of the period, particularly for FS units. Agency wide withd rawal of f u nds f rom the field to suppor t FS fi re suppression activities was an an nual event af ter 1998. Transfers were d raw n only f rom FS reforest ation (K nutson-Vandenbu rg) accou nts i n 1999 and 2000, but Fig u re 4 -15 ?I nd ividu al O regon Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement Pla n-a rea u n it allocat ions, 1993 ?20 03. Base yea r is 20 03. Sou rce: Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement O regon St ate Of fice. Fig u re 4 -16 ?I nd ividu al O regon Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement Pla n-a rea u n it allocat ions, wit h selected exclusions, 1993 ?20 03. Base yea r is 20 03. Sou rce: Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement O regon St ate Of fice. 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Fiscal year Budget (million dollars) 19931994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Districts Salem Eugene Roseburg Medford Coos Bay 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Fiscal year Budget (million dollars) 19931994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Districts Salem Eugene Roseburg Medford Coos Bay 73 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies f rom all nonsuppression prog rams i n followi ng years. I n 2002, the year with the largest t ransfers, the shif t removed nearly $1 billion f rom the FS nonsuppression budget authority. Although I did not attempt to quantify the effects of suppression transfers on individual Plan-area field u nits, these shif ts affected 8.9 percent of the tot al Region 5 budget, and 16.5 percent of the Region 6 budget (GAO 2004, USDA FS 2003). Available dat a for the BLM are not detailed by region, but suggest less severe effects, with approximately $15 million t ransfer red agency wide i n 2002, only f rom the const r uction, land acquisition, and fi re programs. ?Fi re bor rowi ng? disr upted and of ten ter mi nated field projects and activities. For example, although about 80 percent of f u nds t ransfer red were later repaid among all the agencies, reimbu rsement was handled differently bet ween agencies. T he FS of ten used reimbu rsements to fund different projects than those affected by the transfers, whereas BLM reimbu rsed affected projects. T he General Accou nti ng Of fice fou nd that the f u ndi ng t ransfers to sup - por t fi re suppression had ?caused nu merous project delays and cancellations, st rai ned relationships with st ate and local agency partners, and disrupted program management effor ts? (GAO 2004: 3). Conclusions How did the nu mber and t y pe of FS and BLM jobs change on Plan-area forest u nits af ter the Plan was adopted? How did the total presence and geographic distribution of agency of fices cont ai ni ng u nit-scale decision makers change? T he st af fi ng and u nit reorganization analyses fou nd sig nificant changes, some of which were i nconsistent with plan ni ng expect ations. T he FS Plan-area u nits lost 3,066 FTEs, over one-thi rd of the 1993 Plan-area st aff, and sig nificantly more than the 2,000 or fewer projected by the Plan?s alter native 9. T he presence of local FS decision - makers was also sig nificantly dimi nished, by 23 percent, despite the FEM AT war ni ng that of fice closu res might ?devast ate? small com mu nities. I n cont rast, BLM Plan- area u nits, for which the Plan had provided no st af fi ng expect ations, lost 13 percent of thei r st af fi ng, with no local of fice closu res and a conti nued presence of agency decision makers i n local com mu nities. How did budget allocations to Plan-area u nits change du r i ng the Plan per iod? T he FS u nits saw thei r tot al agg regate budgets decli ne by 35 percent f rom 1993 to 2003. T his closely mi r rored the 36 -percent d rop i n FTEs among Plan u nits bet ween 1993 and 2002. 2 These similar decreases suggest that budgets were an impor t ant deter mi nant behi nd FS st af fi ng decli nes. The analysis also suggests that over the period studied, most FS funding may have been invested in retaining remaining FS st aff. T he dat a f u r ther show that budget t rends may have played an important role in the level of FS investments in partnerships, contracts, and procurement over the decade3 (see volu me III, chapter 5 for a discussion of t rends i n forest cont racti ng). T he analysis f u r ther con fi r ms and helps explai n the case-st udy fi ndi ng of a g reatly reduced agency presence, both in the community and on the ground, for some national forests. It also helps explai n why at least one BLM u nit was relatively successf ul i n implementi ng the Plan (see volu me III, chapter 8 for case-st udy results). T he budget dat a show a sig nificant change i n the t y pes of i nvest ment (fi re and f uel management, National Forest System management, and permanent and trust f u nds) among FS Plan-area u nits. Fu ndi ng for fi re and f uel management i ncreased sig nificantly to al most one-thi rd of agg regate budgets. Other f u ndi ng d ropped by half. Budgets for National Forest System management decli ned shar ply, but i n the context of overall budget decli nes conti nued to make up a similar propor tion of tot al budgets. Fu ndi ng from permanent and trust funds, primarily used for timber- related forest management, declined precipitously to less than one-fif th of agg regate f u ndi ng. Although i ncreased fi re f u ndi ng mitigated budget de - cli nes on the more fi re-prone Califor nia national forests and t wo east-side Region 6 forests, the i ncrease i n agency wide fi re f u ndi ng did not st rongly affect other Plan-area national 2 Note t he 1-yea r d if ference i n t he leng t hs of t he budget a nd st af f - i ng a nalyses: t he u n it budget a nalysis extend s f rom 1993 t h roug h 20 03, but t he st af fi ng a nalysis extend s f rom 1993 t h roug h 20 02. 3 This analysis does not fully account for annual increases in the cost of employee benefit s, wh ich have f u r t her eroded t he abilit y of the national forests to fund remaining staff. 74 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III forests. Fi re bor rowi ng f u r ther eroded the flexibilit y avail - able to many local FS managers in directing and timing fiscal obligations, i n completi ng plan ned projects, and i n honor i ng com mit ments to par t ners (GAO 2004). Decli n - i ng f u ndi ng, st af fi ng, management flexibilit y, and f u ndi ng reliabilit y were accompanied by a decreasi ng presence of FS decision mak i ng of ficials among Pacific Nor thwest com - munities, a decrease in local customer service, and a drop in the local job base. These changes suggest declines in unit and employee spending, and in indirect support of the local economy. I n compliance with federal policy for mai nt ai ni ng records, the budget and st af fi ng dat a ret ai ned by agency re - gions i n 2003 extended back only to 1993. T he FS regional st aff and local com mu nit y i nter viewees noted, however, that the most ext reme decli nes i n Plan-area u nit budgets and st af fi ng took place i n the years im mediately precedi ng Plan implement ation. (See volu me III, chapter 8 for a su m mar y of case st udy results). T hese changes are not accou nted for in this analysis, but they played a major role among the impacts felt by local agency units and communities during those years. I n cont rast, BLM Plan-area agg regate budgets rose by 22 percent over the per iod st udied. T he BLM agg re - gate st af fi ng d ropped, but by much less than FS st af fi ng. Although BLM managers lost st aff, thei r st able or r isi ng f u ndi ng levels allowed them g reater flexibilit y i n select - i ng among potential means to accomplish needed work. Unli ke thei r FS cou nter par ts, most BLM u nit managers saw nonfuel funding rise. T he BLM f u ndi ng for f uel and bu r ned-area manage - ment i ncreased sig nificantly over the per iod but conti nued to be a minor portion of Plan-area aggregate budgets. Funds for the management of BLM land and resou rces g rew but were less than 10 percent of agg regate Plan-area allocations th roughout the per iod. ?Other? allocations, much of them for the timber and recreation pipeli nes, g rew to 21 percent of agg regate Plan-area budgets. Fu ndi ng u nder the O&C Act declined, but made up the great majority of aggregate BLM u nit budgets th roughout the per iod. T he BLM manag - ers had relatively wide latit ude i n di recti ng i nvest ments among prog rams withi n the O&C allocation. T he available dat a do not allow us to specif y the impact of fi re bor rowi ng on BLM Plan-area u nits (GAO 2004), but do suggest that such transfers had less effect than among FS u nits. At the same time, although the nu mber of BLM li ne of ficers sh ran k by 25 percent, no change occu r red i n the nu mber and dist r ibution of BLM of fices housi ng li ne of ficers. T his suggests that there was not as st rong a change i n local oppor t u nities for i nteraction bet ween Pacific Nor thwest com mu nities and BLM decision mak i ng of ficials, in local customer service, in the local job base, or in local employee or unit spending. T he FEM AT recom mended that the u nits implement - i ng the Plan be suppor ted with st able st af fi ng and budgets to suppor t the new approach of ecosystem management (FEM AT 1993: V III- 41): Pendi ng additional fiscal analysis, we emphasize that the options selected should not be hastily coupled with reductions i n f u ndi ng and person nel based on the inappropriate assumption that ecosystem management is somehow cheaper than t raditional commodity production-focused plans. T he monitor i ng and evaluation results show that the FEM AT recom mendation was not met, at least for the FS. The FS unit budgets are supported in part by the receipts generated by forest timber programs. After the signing of the Plan, trends in FS Plan-area unit budgets continued to be strongly determined by the level of timber receipts generated. As show n i n volu me II, chapter 2, the volu me of FS Plan-area timber harvested declined precipitously before the Plan was implemented, and conti nued to decli ne across the study period. The major reductions in FS timber harvest receipts u nder the Plan were coupled with decreases i n al - locations f rom other appropr iations, such as National Forest System funds, resulting in greatly reduced unit budgets. I ncreases i n FS fi re and f uel management allocations i n the second half of the decade were t argeted toward the area?s more fi re-prone u nits, reflecti ng a shif t i n management pr ior ities for these national forests. Even for these u nits, however, the i ncrease i n fi re and f uel management f u ndi ng was not suf ficient to offset budget decli nes over the decade. 75 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies T he Plan appears not to have affected BLM f u ndi ng to the same deg ree. T he BLM timber volu me offered also decreased over the decade st udied. Bu reau of Land Management f u ndi ng was not as sensitive to t r ust and permanent operating accounts derived from timber re- ceipts, however. Although O&C f u ndi ng decli ned du r i ng the per iod, allocations to all other prog ram accou nts g rew. T hese i ncreases were mostly at t r ibut able to additional funding for the timber and recreation pipelines, for the forest health i nitiative, for fi re rehabilit ation and f uel man - agement, and for the management of land and resources. Acknowledgments Susan Char nley (FS Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation), Jon Mar ti n, and Dick Phillips (FS Pacific Nor thwest Region 6) made suggestions that cont r ibuted subst an - tially to this section. Dar wi n Pr iebe (BLM Oregon St ate Of fice); Mark Pauley, Lenise Lago, and Pat O?Day (FS Pacific Nor thwest Region 6); and Wendy Rook (FS Pacific Southwest Region 5); responded rapidly and ef ficiently to requests for information, as did the public affairs of ficers of Plan-area national forests and BLM Oregon Plan-area dist r icts. Mark P. Ng (A ngeles National Forest and FS Pacific Southwest Region 5) compiled a large dat a set for the project. Ch r isti na McEl roy (BLM Oregon St ate Of fice), Rob Nauer t (BLM Califor nia St ate Of fice), Brenda Joh nson (BLM Oregon St ate Of fice), and Michael Br ionez (FS Pacific Southwest Region 5) suppor ted the i nfor mation- collection effor t. Ly n nae Sut ton (FS Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation) developed the maps for this chapter. References Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team [FEMAT]. 1993. Forest ecosystem management: an ecological, economic, and social assessment. Portland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re; U.S. Depar t ment of the I nter ior [and others]. [I r reg ular pagi nation]. Government Pr int ing Of fice [GPO]. 1996 ?20 05. Budget of the United St ates Gover n ment: analy tical perspectives. A n nual. ht t p://w w w.g poaccess.gov/ usbudget / browse.ht ml. (July 11, 2005). U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA FS]. 2004. Over view of FY 2004 President?s Budget. w w w.fs.fed.us/ budget _ 2004/appropr iations. sht ml. (March 2004). U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA FS]. 2003. Over view of the FY 2004 President?s Budget. Appendix H, FY 2002 Forest Ser vice: f u nds withd raw n f rom field for t ransfer to suppression. w w w.fs.fed.us/ budget _ 2004/docu ments/ Appendix _ H_ Fi reTransfers.pdf. (March 2004). U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management [USDA and USDI]. 1994. Final supplemental environmental impact statement on management of habitat for late-successional and old-g row th forest-related species withi n the range of the nor ther n spot ted owl: volu me I. Por tland, OR. ht t p://w w w.or.bl m.gov/nwf pnepa / FSEIS-1994/ FSEIS-1994 -I.pdf. (July 11, 2005). U. S. General Account ing Of fice [GAO]. 20 04. Wild fi re suppression: f u ndi ng t ransfers cause project cancellations and delays, strained relationships, and management disr uptions. General Accou nti ng Of fice repor t to cong ressional requesters GAO - 04 - 612. Washi ng ton, DC. 62 p. ht t p://w w w.gao.gov/new. items/d04612.pdf. (July 11, 2005). 6 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III  Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Cassandra Moseley and Susan Charnley To mitigate the loss of timber jobs, the Nor thwest Forest Plan (the Plan) i ncluded a goal to cont r ibute to the well- bei ng of r u ral com mu nities by assisti ng them with long- ter m economic development and diversification. T he Forest Ser vice (FS) and Bu reau of Land Management (BLM) were expected to create new jobs i n the woods associated with ecosystem management. T he Plan called for restor i ng late-successional and old-g row th (older forest) habit at and watershed health. It also cont ai ned su r vey and monitor i ng requi rements that called for agencies to u nder t ake new k i nds of activities rangi ng f rom su r veyi ng for nor ther n spot ted owls ( Strix occidentalis caurina), to thi n ni ng plant ations to restore old-g row th character istics. I n addi - tion, because the Plan called for sharply reducing intensive timber management, the road building, maintenance, and decom missioni ng that was a par t of timber sales would now have to be done through other mechanisms. Procurement cont racti ng?the pu rchase of goods and ser vices ?is one way the FS and BLM could restore forests and u nder t ake other work on the g rou nd (such as work associated with recreation, restoration, or monitor i ng) while cont r ibuti ng to local economic development. I n the early 1990s, agencies accomplished much of thei r forest r y ser vices work (such as reforest ation and timber st and improvement) th rough procu rement cont racts. T his work, and new jobs related to ecosystem management consistent with Plan goals, would continue to be accomplished mainly through procurement cont racts (although some occu r red i n-house or th rough g rants and ag reements). The Plan changed management priorities for the federal land-management agencies. At the same time, President Cli nton created the Jobs-i n-the-Woods prog ram, which sought to create job oppor t u nities for people who had been displaced by the new management pr ior ities that focused on endangered species protection and ecosystem manage- ment (see chapter 6). Procu rement cont racti ng was one of the ways the federal land management agencies i ntended to implement the Jobs-i n-the-Woods prog ram. T he FS and BLM were exempted f rom f ree and open competition Chapter 5: Procurement Contracting procu rement requi rements and allowed to set aside Jobs-i n- the-Woods cont racts for cont ractors i n the Plan?s affected counties. Af ter the Jobs-i n-the-Woods prog ram dwi ndled, several other administrative and congressional programs sought to create economic benefits for r u ral, forest-based com mu ni - ties by using procurement contracting. A memorandum of u nderst andi ng bet ween the FS Pacific Nor thwest Region (Region 6), the BLM i n Oregon and Washi ng ton, the Gov - er nor of Oregon, the National Fi re Plan, the Secu re Ru ral Schools and Com mu nit y Self-Deter mi nation Act of 2000, and the stewardship cont racti ng pilot prog ram all at tempted to create r u ral com mu nit y benefit by usi ng procu rement contracting as a source of jobs and business opportunities (Moseley and Toth 2004). If these prog rams were effec - tive, cont ractors i n com mu nities near federal forests would capture proportionately more of the contract dollars than in the early 1990s, because these prog rams created di rection or author it y to di rect work to local com mu nities. Monitoring Questions 1. How much and what k i nd of ecosystem management work did the FS and BLM cont ract bet ween 1990 and 2002, and how did this work change over time? 2. W ho received economic benefits f rom FS and BLM procu rement cont racti ng, and how did these benefits change over time? Expectations Work i n the forest r y ser vices sector (reforest ation, timber st and improvement) was expected to decli ne ( USDA and USDI 1994: 3&4 -291). Work i n ecosystem restoration, silvicultural activities, surveys, assessments, and invento- r ies would i ncrease, and could create about 7,000 jobs per year du r i ng the fi rst 3 years of the Plan, helpi ng to offset job loss i n the forest r y ser vices and timber sectors ( USDA and USDI 1994: 3&4 -291?292, 308). However, prog ram costs would be subst antial. Restoration th rough watershed mai n - tenance, ecosystem restoration and research, environmental monitor i ng, and forest stewardship would both improve the condition of regional ecosystems and create jobs in timber- dependent areas ( USDA and USDI 1994: 3&4 -314). 78 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Data Analysis For a full description of the methods used in this analysis, refer to Moseley (2006) 1 or to appendix C. I n br ief, to answer the monitor i ng questions, Moseley exami ned dat a d raw n f rom the Federal Procu rement Dat a Center?s dat a - base that includes information from all federal agencies compiled f rom the SF-279 for m that each federal agency must fill out for cont racts with an estimated value above $25,000. T he dat a set i ncludes cont racts f rom all FS and BLM u nits i n wester n Oregon and Washi ng ton and nor th - wester n Califor nia that were desig nated cou nties affected by the Plan, and were awarded bet ween fiscal years (FY ) 1990 and 2002. All dat a are repor ted by federal fiscal year and are i n i n flation-adjusted 2002 dollars. T he dat a set i ncludes cont racts related to forest r y and watershed management such as thinning, brush cutting, brush piling, noxious weed cont rol, biological su r veyi ng, r ipar ian res - toration, and road building and maintenance. The data set does not include activities such as building construction or copier repair, and does not include any purchases of goods. Fire suppression and prescribed burning contracts are not included because they are not accurately represented in the data set. The analysis does not include any timber-sale data. T hese dat a were used to calculate a var iet y of descr ip - tive st atistics that would provide i nsight i nto the regional cont racti ng market and the cont ractors i nvolved i n it. T hese included the value of contracts, the number of contracts, the t y pe of cont racts, and the dist ance bet ween cont ractor headquar ters and where the work would be. Even though the agencies are u nder the same procu rement laws, past studies suggest that their procurement practices are quite different and that the t wo agencies need to be analyzed separately (Moseley et al. 2002). We do so here. Results and Discussion Procurement Spending Bet ween 1990 and 2002, the FS and BLM together procu red $1.06 billion i n land-management ser vices i n the cou nties affected by Jobs-i n-the-Woods (t able 5-1). T he FS spent $750 million and the BLM $256 million. T he FS spendi ng decli ned th roughout the per iod but BLM spendi ng remai ned nearly const ant (fig. 5-1). 1 Ca ssa nd r a Moseley of t he Un iver sit y of O regon?s Ecosystem Work force P rog r a m u nder took t he procu rement cont r act i ng monitoring portion of the Socioeconomic Monitoring Program a s a se pa r ate st udy, wh ich is bei ng published by t he Paci fic Nor t hwest Resea rch St at ion. Table 5 -1? Jobs- in- the - Woods counties California Oregon Washington Del Nor te Benton Chelan Glen n Clackamas Clallam Hu mboldt Clatsop Clark Lake Colu mbia Cowlitz Mendoci no Coos Douglas Shast a Cu r r y G rays Harbor Sisk iyou Deschutes Island Tehama Douglas Jefferson Tr i nit y Hood R iver K i ng Jackson K itsap Jefferson Kittitas Josephi ne K lick it at K lamath Lewis Lake Mason Lane Okanogan Li ncol n Pacific Linn Pierce Marion San Juan Mult nomah Skagit Pol k Skamania Tillamook Snohomish Wasco T hu rston Washi ng ton Wah k iak u m Yam hill W hatcom Yak ima T he FS spendi ng peaked i n 1991 at $103 million and then decli ned al most conti nually u ntil 1998 ?when it br iefly i ncreased before decli ni ng agai n to a low of $33 million i n 2002. T he 1998 peak was li kely caused by an i n flu x of f u nds for restoration work made available af ter the Januar y 1997 flood i n wester n Oregon and nor ther n Califor nia. Bet ween 1990 and 2002, FS cont ract spendi ng i n wester n Oregon fell by 62 percent, whereas it decli ned by 56 percent i n nor ther n Califor nia and by 60 percent i n wester n Washi ng ton (fig. 5-2). T he nu mber of FS cont racts issued  Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies P r o c u r e m e n t ( million d o l l a r s ) Forest Service BLM 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 1990199119921993199419951996 1997199819992000 Fiscal year 20012002 Fig u re 5-1?Tot al a n nu al procu rement, Forest Ser vice a nd Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement ( BLM ), 1990 ?20 02. Base yea r is 20 02. St raig ht li nes represent li nea r reg ressions. Fig u re 5-2 ?Tot al cont ract spend i ng by st ate, Forest Ser vice. Base yea r is 20 02. Contract value ( million d o l l a r s ) California Oregon Washington 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1990199119921993199419951996 1997199819992000 Fiscal year 20012002 also declined, although at a slightly faster rate than the total dollar value of cont racted work did (fig. 5-3). Consequently, the average contract value increased slightly over the study per iod (fig. 5- 4). Given that past st udies have show n that larger cont racts tend to be awarded to more dist ant cont rac - tors, this t rend suggests that it would be more dif ficult for nearby cont ractors to obt ai n cont racts as cont ract size i ncreased (Moseley and Shan k le 2001). T he BLM spendi ng on procu rement cont racti ng was more consistent throughout the period, averaging just under $20 million per year. T he agency spent the most money on land-management procu rement i n 1997 ($37 million), which was also most li kely the result of f u ndi ng made available af ter the 1997 flood. T he BLM issued roughly the same nu mber of cont racts each year (fig. 5-3). Because the rate of procu rement spendi ng fluct uated slightly f rom year to year, the average value of BLM cont racts var ied over time, with average cont ract value i ncreasi ng whenever the agency spent more money procu r i ng ser vices (fig. 5- 4). W hy did FS cont ract spendi ng decli ne so subst antially du r i ng the st udy per iod, cont rar y to expect ations? T he most obvious explanation is the decli ne i n forest budgets du r i ng the st udy per iod (see chapter 4). Moseley and Reyes ( N.d.) found that the rates of decline in contracting spending, forest budgets, and st af fi ng fell at about the same rate f rom 1993 to 2003, with cont racti ng perhaps decli ni ng even more slowly than st af fi ng or budgeti ng. Cont ract spendi ng also decli ned on the th ree case- st udy national forests (see chapter 8). T he monitor i ng team conducted i nter views with case-st udy forest employees who were cont racti ng specialists, who worked i n forest prog ram areas that solicit procu rement cont racts, or who were li ne of ficers (see app. C). T he team discussed t rends i n forest-scale procu rement cont racti ng with these agency employees to obt ai n thei r perspectives and i nsight as to why the number and amount of contracts had declined during the Plan per iod. I nter viewees suggested some additional explanations for why cont racti ng decli ned. One explana - tion was that the FS chose to spend its f u nds on ret ai ni ng employees rather than contracting as its budgets declined. A second explanation was that the i ncreased plan ni ng requi re - ments associated with the Plan created a need for FS st aff to 80 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III u nder t ake sig nificant plan ni ng, which reduced the f u nds available for contracted on-the-ground activities. Finally, several i nter viewees said that thei r forests i ncreased the use of g rants and ag reements to accomplish work with partners, rather than using contracts. The Jobs-in-the- Woods t rai ni ng prog rams are one example of the use of grants and agreements to accomplish on-the-ground restoration. G rants and ag reements can be more flexible than contracts. The terms and conditions can be changed more easily, and they can be a tool for leveraging outside money to help accomplish work. It can also be easier to di rect f u ndi ng to local organizations th rough g rants and ag reements. A shif t toward usi ng g rants and ag reements may be contributing to the decline in contracting trends reflected. A systematic analysis of t rends i n spendi ng via g rants and ag reements was not possible with the available dat a, however. Procurement by Type of Work 2 T he Plan shif ted management pr ior ities away f rom i nten - sive forest management and toward ecosystem manage - ment, with i ncreased requi rements for species su r veys. A decline in labor-intensive activities such as tree planting and site preparation was expected as a result of this change, together with an i ncrease i n equipment-i ntensive activities (such as road decom missioni ng) and of tech nical activities (such as species su r veys). Forest Service Spending by the FS in all three contracting categories (labor, equipment, and tech nical) sh ran k du r i ng the 1990s (fig. 5-5). Labor-i ntensive cont racti ng dimi nished most, f rom $140 million du r i ng the 3-year per iod 1990 ?92, to $37 million du r i ng 2000 ?2002, representi ng nearly a 75-percent decrease. T his d rop i n labor-i ntensive work was largely due to a decli ne i n t ree planti ng, although other labor-i ntensive work associated with i ntensive 2 Defi n it ive a nalysis of how t he t y pe of work cont r acted by t he FS a nd BLM cha nged bet ween 1990 a nd 20 02 is d if ficu lt becau se product ser v ice codes a re gener ali zed , a nd procu rement st af f may not consistently classify contracts across units. In addition, some product ser v ice codes def y neat categor i zat ion becau se t hey include both technical activities, such as surveys, and equipment- i nten sive act iv it ies, such a s rock cr u sh i ng. Fig u re 5- 4 ?Average value of cont racts over t i me. Base yea r is 20 02. Contrract value (thousand dollars) 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 1990 199119921993 19941995 1996 1997199819992000 Fiscal year 2001 Forest Service BLM Number of contracts 1,000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 1990 199119921993 19941995 1996 1997199819992000 Fiscal year 2001 Forest Service BLM Fig u re 5-3 ? Nu mber of cont racts issued , Forest Ser vice a nd Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement ( BLM ), 1990 ?20 01. 81 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies forest management also waned (li ke thi n ni ng, produci ng and t ransplanti ng seedli ngs, land t reat ment practices). By the mid-1990s, spendi ng on equipment-i ntensive work had su r passed labor-i ntensive cont racti ng. Never theless, equip - ment-intensive and technical contracting also declined by one-thi rd bet ween 1990 ?92 and 2000 ?2002. Among the equipment-intensive activities, the FS spent considerably more procu rement dollars i n the early 1990s on road building than it did in later periods. In later years, road maintenance spending increased, although not enough to make up for the decli ne i n road-buildi ng spendi ng. I n tech nical work, the cont racti ng of endangered species su r veys was g reater i n 1995 ?97 than i n 1990 ?92, but spendi ng had fallen off by the early 2000s. Spendi ng for envi ron ment al assessments was g reatest du r i ng the early 1990s and decli ned af ter that. The patterns of decline in FS land-management- procu rement cont racti ng showed that the FS did not replace labor-i ntensive work associated with i ntensive forest management activit y (such as t ree planti ng and thi n ni ng) with cont racted work related to restoration and mai ntenance (such as road mai ntenance, wildlife man - agement, su r veyi ng) to meet Plan goals and objectives. Although some t y pes of equipment and tech nical work increased, the overall decline in contracted on-the-ground work was far g reater than the i ncreases. Bureau of Land Management Tot al BLM procu rement spendi ng remai ned fai rly const ant th roughout the 1990s except for a spi ke i n f u ndi ng i n the mid-1990s (li kely caused by the availabilit y of post flood restoration f u nds) (fig. 5- 6). Despite the mid-1990s bu mp, some longer term shifts in emphasis occurred during the study period.Labor intensive Equipment nsive Technical Total Work type C o n t r a c t v a l u e (million dollars) 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 1990?1992 1995?1997 2000?2002 Fig u re 5-5 ? Forest Ser vice cont ract dolla rs by work t y pe. Base yea r is 20 02. Fig u re 5- 6 ? Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement cont ract i ng by work t y pe. Base yea r is 20 02. Labor intensive Equipment nsive Technical Total Work type C o n t r a c t v a l u e (million dollars) 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1990?1992 1995?1997 2000?2002 82 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III As with the FS, labor-i ntensive work associated with intensive timber management declined. Thinning and site preparation had largely replaced tree planting by the early 2000s. Just as st r i k i ng, the BLM procu red lit tle road con - st r uction or mai ntenance work i n the early 1990s, probably because this sor t of work was per for med as a par t of timber sales or with i n-house crews. By the mid-1990s, however, the BLM was procu r i ng a lot of roadwork, while other equipment-i ntensive activities such as aer ial sprayi ng were decli ni ng. I n addition, the BLM i ncreased its procu rement of su r veys and envi ron ment al assessments i n the late 1990s, whereas they were rare earlier. Location of Contractors T he expect ation was that procu rement cont racti ng for ecosystem management work would help offset job loss i n the timber sector and create new economic oppor t u nities for rural communities near federal forests. It is important to u nderst and whether cont ractors i n r u ral com mu nities near federal forest lands obtained proportionately more of the contracting dollars after the Plan than before. Forest Service T h roughout the st udy per iod, cont ractors work i ng i n west - er n Oregon, wester n Washi ng ton, and nor ther n Califor nia were concent rated along the I nterst ate-5 cor r idor (fig. 5-7). Although the amount of money captured by contractors decli ned nearly ever y where, the reductions were g reatest for cont ractors with of fices i n the Willamet te Valley of wester n Oregon and the cent ral valley of Califor nia. Consequently, i n the affected cou nties, the mean dist ance that cont ractors t raveled to work on national forest lands decreased f rom 131.1 ai r miles i n 1990 ?1992 to 107.9 ai r miles i n 1999 ?2001, a st atistically sig nificant difference ( p < 0.001). A more det ailed st atistical analysis shows, however, that the decli ne i n mean dist ance t raveled is the result of the shif t i n work t y pe and the location of the work and is not li kely the result of effor ts to i ncrease local cont racti ng capt u re of par ticular t y pes of work. Af ter cont rolli ng for work t y pe, where the work was per for med, and other factors, the expected dist ance act ually i ncreased compared to the cont rol year of 1990 (Moseley and Reyes, n.d.). Essentially, the more det ailed st atistical analysis tells us that the apparent decline in the mean distance is largely the result of the relative shift from labor-intensive contract- ing to equipment-intensive contracting. Labor-intensive cont racts are t y pically awarded to more dist ant cont ractors than equipment- cont ractors. A shif t i n the t y pe of work performed, then, naturally changes the mean distance t raveled. Consequently, cont racts withi n par ticular work t y pes ? equipment, labor, or tech nical?were no more li kely to be awarded to nearby cont ractors at the end of the st udy per iod than they were a decade before. Although the ad - verse socioeconomic effects of this shif t i n work t y pe were greater in more distant communities, local communities still exper ienced a d rop i n cont racti ng oppor t u nities overall. Bureau of Land Management T he cont ractors work i ng on BLM dist r icts i n the Plan area were even more concent rated along the I nterst ate 5 cor r idor than the FS cont ractors were (fig. 5-8). Cont ractors f rom souther n Oregon per for med more work on BLM lands i n the early 2000s than i n the early 1990s. T his follows logic ?BLM procu rement spendi ng i n souther n Oregon was much higher i n the 2000s than it was a decade earlier, and souther n Oregon has long had local cont racti ng capacit y (Moseley and Shan k le 2001). Similarly, fewer cont racts were awarded to cont ractors i n the Willamet te Valley of Oregon i n the early 2000s. As with the FS, the dist ance that cont ractors t raveled to work on BLM land decreased bet ween the early 1990s and the early 2000s by 47 miles, a st atistically sig nificant dif - ference. ( p < 0.009). As with the FS, however, this decli ne can largely be explai ned by a shif t i n the t y pe of work cont racted and where the work was per for med. A n analysis analogous to that of the FS cont racts shows no st atistically sig nificant change i n the dist ance the cont ractors t raveled to work on BLM dist r icts i n the st udy area, agai n suggesti ng that the decrease that contractors appear to have traveled is a by product of a shif t i n the t y pe of work cont racted and the location of that work. 83 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Fig u re 5-7? Locat ion of Forest Ser vice cont ractors, 1990 ?92 a nd 20 0 0 ?20 02. 8 4 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Fig u re 5-8 ? Locat ion of BLM cont ractors, 1990 ?92 a nd 20 0 0 ?20 02. 85 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Contract awards to rural communities T he FS and BLM awarded cont racts to cont ractors located closer to national forests and BLM lands over time be - cause of a shif t i n the t y pe and location of work that they contracted out. This might have resulted in an increase in awards to r u ral com mu nities. For both the BLM and the FS, however, there was no overall st atistically sig nificant shif t i n the propor tion of awards by com mu nit y size. At fi rst glance, the BLM appears to have shif ted its dist r ibution of awards considerably. I n 1990 ?92, the BLM awarded 26 percent of its cont ract value to r u ral com mu ni - ties (those havi ng fewer than 5,000 people, accordi ng to the U.S. Census Bu reau defi nition), whereas, i n 2000 ?2002, the BLM awarded 33 percent of its cont ract value to cont ractors i n r u ral com mu nities. However, the percent age of cont ract value awarded to com mu nities with u n k now n populations decli ned f rom 10 percent i n 1990 ?92 to 5 percent i n 2000 - 2002. If most u n k now n com mu nities are r u ral com mu nities ( because large com mu nities are more li kely to have been identified), then the act ual shif t over the st udy per iod would be much smaller. Similarly, i n 1990 ?92, the FS awarded 24 percent of its contract value to contractors in rural communities, whereas i n 2000 ?2002 it awarded 25 percent of its cont ract value to contractors in rural communities, not a statistically sig nificant difference. At the same time, the percent age of the cont ract value awarded to cont ractors i n tow ns with populations bet ween 5,000 and 10,000 decli ned by 1 percent, also not sig nificantly different. T herefore, for cont ractors i n com mu nities of fewer than 10,000, there was no change i n the propor tional capt u re of FS procu re - ment dollars. Contract awards to affected counties From 1990 th rough 2002, the BLM awarded 93 percent of its cont ract value to cont ractors i n Jobs-i n-the-Woods affected cou nties. I n 1990 ?92, Jobs-i n-the-Woods cou nties received 89 percent of the value, and i n 2000 ?2002, they received 93 percent of the value. Awards to cont ractors f rom the affected area i ncreased du r i ng the mid-1990s (to 96 percent), which suggests that the Jobs-i n-the-Woods pro - g ram had a small impact on BLM cont ract awards. Because the BLM al ready awarded most of its cont ract value to cont ractors i n affected cou nties, however, this component of the Jobs-i n-the-Woods prog ram could have had only a small effect. T he FS awarded less cont ract value to cont ractors f rom the affected cou nties than did the BLM. T he percent age of cont ract value awarded to cont ractors f rom affected areas did not change appreciably bet ween the early and mid 1990s (it was about 82 percent). Although this i ncreased to 85 percent by 2000 ?2002, these results suggest that policies aimi ng for g reater r u ral economic benefit th rough i ncreased procurement contracting had little effect. Challenges to Creating Communit y Benefit Given that most cont racts were al ready bei ng awarded to cont ractors i n the Jobs-i n-the-Woods cou nties before the Plan, the waivers offered only a limited mechanism for creati ng new cont racti ng oppor t u nities for forest-based communities, particularly in the face of declining funds available for contracting. Some management units, such as the Coos Bay BLM Dist r ict, focused its economic develop - ment effor ts by creati ng Jobs-i n-the-Woods and Hi re-the- Fisher t rai ni ng prog rams with com mu nit y par t ners. Other management u nits, however, st r uggled to use cont racti ng as an economic development strategy. To understand the challenges to creating community benefit more f ully, employees f rom case-st udy forests were asked to t al k about some of the bar r iers to creati ng com - mu nit y benefit th rough cont racti ng. Accordi ng to i nter - views with agency cont racti ng specialists, national forests faced many institutional challenges to using contracting as an economic development opportunity for forest-based com mu nities. T he biggest bar r ier was the agencies? histor y of usi ng low-bid cont racti ng. Both FS and BLM acquisi - tion reg ulations had long been desig ned to favor ef ficiency th rough economies of scale and the lowest bidder. Until the mid-1990s, federal law requi red the agencies to use a sealed biddi ng process that awarded cont racts to the lowest bidder regardless of the qualit y of the work they per for med. I n the mid-1990s, however, federal acquisitions refor ms allowed the FS and BLM to use negotiated cont racts (also k now n as best-value cont racts) to consider factors other than pr ice 8 6 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III when awardi ng cont racts. Some forests and dist r icts, such as those i n the Willamet te Provi nce Work force Par t nership, used this author it y quick ly and deliberately to create eco - nomic oppor t u nit y (Moseley 2002). But, many management u nits were slow to move away f rom low-bid cont racti ng, and they may not have seen this option as a vehicle of rural public land economic development. More explicit lang uage to allow the agencies to use best-value cont racti ng to create r u ral com mu nit y benefit came i n 1998 with stewardship cont racti ng pilots, and i n 2000 with National Fi re Plan f u ndi ng. T hese author ities were too late to help many displaced workers i n need of new work oppor t u nities i n the early 1990s to remai n i n thei r com mu nities. Consequently, ou r i nter viewees told us that many of these workers moved away i n the early 1990s, t ak i ng thei r sk ills and i nf rast r uct u re (li ke equipment) with them. T hat the available cont racti ng work du r i ng the st udy per iod was t y pically sporadic or seasonal, especially i n par ticular t y pes of work, may also have caused potential cont ractors to move elsewhere i n search of steady, year- rou nd employ ment. Ou r i nter view subjects were concer ned that the result may be that now, when cont ract work is available, a shor t age of people with the needed sk ills and equipment to per for m it has developed. T hus, the work will either have to be done internally or by contractors from outside the local area. In addition to the challenge of structuring contracts to create com mu nit y benefit, f u ndi ng for cont racti ng and the type of activities contracted vary considerably from year to year for both the FS and the BLM. Cat ast rophic events such as fi res and floods tend to lead to i nf usions of f u nds for restoration activities that need to be spent over a short per iod. Af ter such events, too much work is needed for a forest or district to accomplish internally, so they increase thei r cont racti ng of activities associated with the emergen - cy. Such episodic events do not provide a predictable supply of work, so for cont ractors to i nvest i n t rai ni ng or capit al equipment, or to sust ai n a work force f rom year to year is ext remely dif ficult. Fi nally, as par t of a larger, nationwide rest r uct u r i ng of Forest Service procurement management, forests in the Plan area moved f rom forest-based cont racti ng to ?zone? cont racti ng i n the late 1990s. Zone cont racti ng meant that i ndividual forest cont racti ng st aff had to reorganize, causi ng cont racti ng processes to slow. Accordi ng to procu rement specialists i nter viewed, forests have t aken a long time to fig u re out how to get cont racti ng work ac - complished u nder the new organizational st r uct u re, which has diver ted at tention away f rom cont racti ng i n novation. Conclusions The shift from timber management to ecosystem manage- ment changed the procurement contracting practices of both the FS and the BLM. T he t y pe of work that both agencies procu red changed i n similar ways. Both agen - cies procu red fewer forest r y ser vices associated with intensive timber management, such as tree planting and site preparation (mostly labor-i ntensive cont racti ng work), as was expected. T hey bought propor tionately more surveying and road maintenance services. Here is where the similar ities end. Procu rement spendi ng by the BLM was nearly const ant bet ween 1990 and 2002, averagi ng just u nder $20 million per year. I n cont rast, FS spendi ng decli ned f rom a peak of $103 million i n 1991 to a low of $33 million i n 2002. T he d ramatic decli ne i n forest budgets combi ned with other factors meant that the agency had no choice but to reduce contracting, despite the need to accomplish project planning, analysis, and implementation. Although labor-i ntensive cont racti ng associated with i ntensive timber management by the BLM decli ned as expected, equipment-i ntensive and tech nical cont racti ng i ncreased, as did different t y pes of labor-i ntensive work, which may have offset job loss associated with the BLM?s shif t away f rom i ntensive timber management. Procu re - ment cont racti ng oppor t u nities offered by the BLM did not increase overall, nor did they decrease and contribute to job loss induced by reduced federal timber harvests. By cont rast, cont rar y to expect ations, FS cont racti ng op - por t u nities associated with ecosystem management work did not increase to offset job loss in the forestry services or the timber sectors. Instead, the decline in procure- ment cont racti ng by the FS li kely added to job loss i n the timber sector caused by reduced federal timber harvests. 87 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies T he BLM slightly i ncreased its awards to cont ractors f rom Jobs-i n-the-Woods areas du r i ng 1995 ?97, compared to 1990 ?92. T he FS, however, did not i ncrease its awards to affected counties during the same period. In addition, the BLM i ncreased its awards to cont ractors i n com mu nities with fewer than 5,000 people, f rom $14.4 million bet ween 1990 and 1992 to more than $32 million bet ween 1995 and 1997. T he BLM?s procu rement of land-management ser vices li kely created an economic boost to r u ral and small com mu nities i n the mid 1990s. Unfor t u nately, the effects were shor t lived; by 2000 ?2002, the BLM?s awards to r u ral cont ractors had decli ned to $16.4 million. Both the BLM and the FS i ncreased the propor tion of thei r awards to nearby cont ractors and decreased thei r awards to dist ant contractors. Much of this change is attributable to a shift in the t y pe of work that the agencies procu red and the loca - tion of that work. Despite i ncreases i n awards to r u ral and nearby cont ractors, the FS?s d ramatic decli ne i n procu re - ment spendi ng far out weighed any propor tional i ncreases in contract capture that the rural and local contractors may have exper ienced. T hus, procu rement cont racti ng for ecosystem management work did not en hance oppor t u ni - ties for economic development and diversification i n local communities. Acknowledgments We than k Adam Lake, Mi k hail Balaev, and Yolanda Reyes for thei r assist ance with the cont racti ng dat a analysis. References Moseley, C. 2006. Procurement contracting in the affected cou nties of the Nor thwest Forest Plan: 12 years of change. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 661. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 36 p. Moseley, C. 2002. A survey of innovative contracting for quality jobs and ecosystem management. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR-552. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 36 p. Moseley, C.; Reyes, Y.E. [N.d.]. Forest restoration and forest com mu nities: Have local com mu nities benefited f rom ecosystem management? Draf t manuscr ipt on file with: Cassand ra Moseley, Ecosystem Work force Prog ram, 5247 Universit y of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403. Moseley, C.; Shankle, S. 2001. W ho gets the work? National forest cont racti ng i n the Pacific Nor thwest. Jou r nal of Forest r y. 99(9): 32?37. Moseley, C.; Toth, N. 2004. Fi re hazard reduction and economic oppor t u nit y: How are the benefits of the National Fi re Plan dist r ibuted? Societ y and Nat u ral Resou rces. 17(8): 701?716. Moseley, C.; Toth, N.; Cambier, A. 2002. Busi ness and employ ment effects of the National Fi re Plan. Eugene, OR: Ecosystem Work force Prog ram, Universit y of Oregon. 32 p. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management [USDA and USDI]. 1994. Final supplemental environmental impact statement on management of habitat for late-successional and old- g row th forest related species withi n the range of the nor ther n spot ted owl. Por tland, OR: Vol. 1. [I r reg ular pagination] 88 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III 89 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Candace Dillingham One goal of the Nor thwest Forest Plan (the Plan) was to mi nimize adverse effects on jobs and to assist with long- ter m economic development and diversification i n r u ral com mu nities affected by cutbacks i n timber har vest on federal forest lands. Four major economic assistance st rategies were developed to achieve this goal: ? T he Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative (the I nitiative), which provided economic assist ance to workers and thei r families, busi nesses, and com - mu nities; ? Pay ments to st ates legislation, desig ned to st abilize payments to counties and to compensate for reduc- tions in payments traditionally tied to federal timber receipts; ? Removal of t ax i ncentives for the expor t of raw logs; and ? Assist ance to encou rage g row th of, and i nvest ment in, small businesses and secondary manufacturers i n the wood-products i ndust r y (Tuch man n et al. 1996: 141). This chapter focuses on the Initiative and treats the last of the assistance strategies as one of its components. Payments to states and counties are addressed in chapter 7. T his monitor i ng repor t does not exami ne the effects of the expor t t ax i ncentive change put i n place i n 1993. T he log expor t market has decli ned sig nificantly over the last decade, and it would be dif ficult to deter mi ne the extent to which reductions i n log expor ts were due to the removal of t ax i ncentives, the reduction i n public timber har vesti ng f rom national forests i n the Pacific Nor thwest i n response to the nor ther n spot ted owl ( Strix occidentalis caurina) cont roversy, changes i n Asian demand, or the globalization of wood markets (see Daniels 2004). T he Forest Ser vice (FS) and Bu reau of Land Manage - ment (BLM) are not economic development agencies and can not be expected to f u nction as such. Never theless, these agencies have long been committed to providing people in Chapter 6: Community Economic Assistance Programs com mu nities that su r rou nd federal forest lands with socio - economic benefits f rom the forests they manage, thereby cont r ibuti ng to socioeconomic well-bei ng. Com mu nit y economic assist ance prog rams are one way of doi ng this. T he economic assist ance package, desig ned to mitigate the effects of the Plan on people, communities, and businesses that were economically dependent on the wood products i ndust r y, was a cent ral component of the Plan. Monitoring Question How did agencies assist with long-ter m economic develop - ment and diversification i n r u ral com mu nities affected by cutbacks i n timber har vest on federal forest lands and what were the outcomes? Expectations Federal of ficials, i n consult ation with st ate and local of ficials, desig ned the I nitiative with the expect ation of accomplishi ng five specific objectives: Provide immediate relief for distressed timber communities. ? Create an envi ron ment for long-ter m economic development consistent with and respectf ul of the character of communities and their natural resources. ? Develop new mechanisms for deliver i ng assist ance. ? Emphasize equal par t nership with the st ates and the critical role of local governments in economic development. ? Emphasize the use of per for mance-based st andards for f u ndi ng (outcomes based on creati ng new oppor t u nities and sust ai nable jobs) over t raditional st andards for f u ndi ng, which were based on pro - g ram matic eligibilit y (Tuch man n et al. 1996: 156). Note that this is a ver y comprehensive approach including short-term mitigations, long-term community par t nerships, and changes i n how busi ness is to be conducted and evaluated. 0 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III The Nor thwest Economic Adjustment Initiative T he i nitiative was desig ned with fou r mai n categor ies of assist ance to meet its goals and objectives (Tuch man n et al. 1996: 157): ? Ret rai ni ng prog rams and other suppor t ser vices for dislocated workers. ? Ret ai ni ng existi ng busi nesses and helpi ng busi - nesses to diversify by increasing access to capital, providing technical assistance and support, and im- provi ng access to markets. Developing technical capacity and infrastructure (i ncludi ng public works) to ret ai n and promote the g row th of existi ng busi nesses and to recr uit new businesses. ? Ecosystem i nvest ment, pr imar ily th rough Jobs-i n- the-Woods prog rams i n federal agencies. Federal land management agencies executed prog rams i n all of these categor ies except for the fi rst. T he ret rai ni ng assist ance categor y was u nder the pu r view of the Depar t - ment of Labor. T he i nitiative?s federal fi nancial com mit ment was to make $1.2 billion available to the affected region over 5 years, begi n ni ng i n fiscal year 1994. Seven federal depar t - ments with 16 prog rams par ticipated fi nancially, and th ree additional agencies provided technical assistance and leadership (Tuch man n et al. 1996: 155). T his com mit ment supplied the t argeted f u nds to meet both the i nitiative?s short- and long-term objectives to supply assistance and im- prove socioeconomic well-bei ng. T he scope of this complex i nitiative, together with the nu mber of agencies implement - i ng it, called for changes i n the way that busi ness had been conducted to date. Two major changes f rom past practices were emphasized to meet i nitiative goals: ?subsidiar it y? i n decision mak i ng (enabli ng local organizations to per for m functions that they could carry out more effectively than a domi nant, cent ral organization), and agency coordi nation to g reatly improve ser vice deliver y (FCR 2002: 13). A revised memorandum of understanding, supported by the three states and signed by the original participating federal agen- cies, extended the i nitiative for an additional 2 years, but without the en hanced amou nts of economic and com mu nit y development money from the federal funding agencies as they had before. T he ag reement was to use i nitiative pro - cesses, institutions, and coordination to manage the normal amou nts of agency f u ndi ng i n the region (Ch r istensen et al. 1999: 85). The initiative brought about several programmatic ad- vantages relating to the provision of community assistance i n the Plan region (Tuch man n et al. 1996: 161). It enabled federal agencies to repr ior itize thei r use of f u nds, and to favor projects in places affected by changes in federal forest policy caused by the Plan. T hese assist ance prog rams were f u nded par tly or wholly f rom national sou rces, enabli ng the region to capt u re f u nds that other wise would not li kely have been available. I n addition, f u nds that were passed to st ate agencies th rough com mu nit y development block g rants and Old- G row th Diversification prog rams, for example, allowed st ates the flexibilit y to develop thei r ow n pr ior ities and uses for that money, while adjusti ng those pr ior ities and uses over time on the basis of exper ience (Tuch man n et al. 1996: 161). A n i n novative feat u re of the Plan was the i ntent to create li n kages bet ween the biophysical and socioeconomic components of the ecosystem by connecting and balancing jobs, busi nesses, and com mu nities with forest management and restoration. T he Plan?s memorandu m of u nderst andi ng, an interagency agreement that initiated the planning process under the Plan, envisioned a high level of cooperation bet ween the ecosystem management component of the Plan and the economic adjustment and community assistance components of the Plan (Pipk i n 1998: 77). For example, they expected a range of restoration activities for which dis - placed timber workers could be ret rai ned th rough prog rams f u nded th rough the i nitiative, which would offset job loss i n the timber sector (Hay nes and Perez 2001). Despite this vision of coordination, the forest management and econom- ic adjust ment prog rams were largely separated i n imple - ment ation (Pipk i n 1998: 78). Although this discon nect has been blamed for shortcomings of the initiative, implementa- tion of the objectives of the initiative led to some successes related to this vision, notably precipitation of a change in 91 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies agency and com mu nit y relations as well as some new for ms of capacity-building infrastructure and techniques for long-term success of Plan goals. Methods Several excellent and comprehensive assessments have reviewed and evaluated the complex i nitiative prog ram, and provided associated fi ndi ngs and policy recom mendations (Ch r istensen et al. 1999, FCR 2002, Pipk i n 1998, RCERT 1999, Tuch man n et al. 1996). We made no at tempt to repeat these effor ts i n this monitor i ng prog ram. I nstead, we used the fi ndi ngs of these assessments to help us evaluate how well the Plan achieved the goal of promoti ng long-ter m economic development and diversification i n Plan-area communities and mitigated job loss in the timber sector. We did monitor the FS and BLM components of the initiative for this report because our monitoring program focuses on the socioeconomic benefits to r u ral com mu nities from federal forest lands and their managing agencies in the Plan area. Com mu nit y economic assist ance provided by the FS and BLM is an impor t ant socioeconomic benefit. Although the FS and BLM por tion of the i nitiative was a relatively small piece of the overall program, these agen- cies? prog rams played a u nique role, providi ng the li n kage bet ween forest resou rce management jobs, busi nesses, and com mu nities. T he FS cont r ibutions to the i nitiative were i n th ree mai n prog ram areas: Old- G row th Diversification f u nds, Ru ral Com mu nit y Assist ance (RCA) Prog rams, and Jobs-i n-the-Woods. T he BLM cont r ibutions were mai nly th rough Jobs-i n-the-Woods. A n i ndividual agency?s disti nctive i nstit utional st r uc - tures, and policy and funding differences can affect both how com mu nit y assist ance prog rams are implemented and what com mu nit y outcomes occu r. T he i nitiative-t argeted RCA and Old- G row th Diversification (OGDF) prog ram f u nds, which did provide additional f u ndi ng over the existi ng base prog ram, ended i n 2002, extendi ng beyond the i nitial 5-year com mit ment. T he FS Jobs-i n-the-Woods money, as with most other i nitiative f u ndi ng, consisted of reprog ram med dollars, not additional new dollars. Depar t - ment of the I nter ior Watershed Restoration and Jobs-i n- the-Woods prog rams were i ncreases over and above base prog rams (Tuch man n et al. 1996: 161). Unli ke the FS, the BLM did not have author it y to use federal f u nds for projects not on public land u ntil the Wyden A mend ment, so the BLM had no equivalent RCA prog ram. Both agencies use partnership agreements for projects on public lands. Since commencement of the initiative, several com- mu nit y-focused prog rams have emerged with many of the same objectives as the initial community economic as- sist ance prog rams. Because these prog rams are conti nually changi ng, t rack i ng the character istics and evolution of these prog rams and how agency st r uct u res adjust and adapt to these changes is considered here to be an important part of socioeconomic monitoring. Although these other programs are not discussed i n det ail here, they are viewed as not only connected to the initial programs, but also potentially more power f ul and effective as they emerge and evolve. T he followi ng sections discuss the outcomes of FS and BLM com mu nit y economic assist ance prog rams to the pres - ent. In addition to providing data on dollars contributed, the discussion covers successful features of these programs withi n the i nitiative?s f ramework that emerged du r i ng this per iod. T hese feat u res, which help meet the i nitiative?s objectives and Plan?s socioeconomic goals, are candidates for incorporating into future community-focused programs, as funding mechanisms and assistance programs available to r u ral com mu nities will li kely conti nue to change over time. Results Monitoring FS and BLM Community Assistance Programs As noted i n Forest Com mu nit y Research (FCR 2002: Chapter 4), monitor i ng agency i nvest ments i n com mu nit y assistance programs is challenging because of poor record- keepi ng and dif ficult access to records that do exist. Record- keepi ng practices for the i nitiative projects differed bet ween agencies, st ates, and st ate Com mu nit y Economic Revit al - ization Teams (CERTs). Some i nfor mation is i ncomplete. Regional dat a identif y some block g rants and loans, but it is not possible to t rack thei r benefits to i ndividual com mu- nities. In spite of these limitations, lessons can be learned f rom the i nfor mation that does exist. 2 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Jobs-in-the-Woods Watershed Restoration and Jobs-i n-the-Woods had both economic and environmental objectives. This program was i ntended to provide employ ment oppor t u nities that produced ecological benefits (Tuch man n et al. 1996: 164). Federal agencies with Jobs-i n-the-Woods projects i ncluded the FS, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Ser vice, the BLM, and the Bu reau of I ndian Affai rs (Tuch man n et al. 1996: 161). I n the timeframe available to produce this monitoring report, it proved too dif ficult to obt ai n reliable and consistent quantit ative dat a f rom agencies other than the BLM to allow monitor i ng the amou nt of f u nds associated with the Jobs-i n-the-Woods program and the types of projects these funds supported. The Jobs-i n-the-Woods program has evolved differently i n the BLM and the FS si nce i nception of the Plan. P ublic land managed by the BLM withi n the Plan area is generally i nter mixed with pr ivate land; i n cont rast, FS land t y pically consists of large blocks of consolidated public ow nership. T he dispersed pat ter n character istic of BLM land requi res a g reat deal of collaboration bet ween the agency and pr ivate landow ners to accomplish effective projects across proper t y lines. Judging by the continued funding of this program past the initiative period, the provision of community assistance through Jobs-i n-the-Woods has worked well and facilit ated close collaboration bet ween the BLM and local watershed cou ncils. T he Wyden A mend ment, allowi ng the use of federal f u nds on pr ivate land, has assisted with this collaboration. Although over time the short-term job training needs for displaced timber workers have decli ned, the BLM has i nteg rated the Plan?s objective of assisti ng com mu nities while accomplishi ng watershed restoration i nto its land management activities by incorporating an ongoing separate Jobs-i n-the-Woods prog ram with an an nual budget. T he prog ram is coordi nated at the st ate level with other com - munity-focused programs and tools as they arise, includ- i ng Secu re Ru ral Schools Act projects and stewardship cont racti ng (which t argets both com mu nit y and ecosystem needs and allows retention of forest products i n exchange for veget ation management ser vices). Jobs-i n-the-Woods f u ndi ng is of ten combi ned with other restoration f u nds f rom these prog rams as a way of capit alizi ng on economies of scale and, in effect, leveraging the investments made with appropr iated f u nds. T he prog ram has now expanded its scope to i nclude veget ative t reat ment work as oppor t u ni - ties ar ise. T he BLM has i ncor porated the new stewardship cont racti ng author ities i n a regionwide coordi nated prog ram with a t arget of fou r stewardship cont racts i n 2004 (half for fi re and f uels and half for restoration projects). Fig u re 6 -1 shows t rends i n the BLM?s Plan-area Jobs-i n-the-Woods prog ram appropr iated dollars bet ween 1994 and 2003. Although f u ndi ng for the prog ram decreased i n 1999 at the end of the initiative period, it has remained stable since that time. The Jobs-i n-the-Woods program is considered a suc- cess by the BLM and conti nues to be f u nded th rough 2005. 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Appropriation (million dollars) Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Fig u re 6 -1? Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement ( BLM ) Nor t hwest Forest Pla n a rea Jobs-i n-t he -Woods prog ram appropr iated dolla rs. Base yea r is 20 03. Sou rce: BLM O regon St ate Of fice. The FS Jobs-i n-the-Woods program is no longer f u nded by Cong ress, the Ad mi nist ration, or the agency. Li ke the BLM, the FS is movi ng to t ake advant age of new stewardship cont racti ng author ities. T he FS also has a pilot prog ram for stewardship cont racti ng projects (which has separate appropr iations) to test new ways of desig ni ng and packagi ng projects that combi ne ecosystem 93 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies management with local work force considerations. Li ke the BLM, the FS also has ongoi ng com mu nit y-focused projects th rough the Secu re Ru ral Schools Act and the National Fire Plan. In addition, grant money, until recently, has been available for economic action programs. The FS regions, however, have no si ngle poi nt of cont act for coordi nati ng community-focused programs, relying instead on close coordi nation bet ween a var iet y of dispersed prog ram managers. Because no si ngle prog ram manager orchest rates com mu nit y-focused prog rams, how well the FS is achievi ng Plan socioeconomic objectives relating to economic as- sist ance will li kely be much more dif ficult to assess. T hese achievements may perhaps best be monitored through procurement contracts and grants and agreements. Jobs-i n-the-Woods has been character ized as the most complex component of the i nitiative because it requi res simultaneous and innovative consideration of forest ecosystem management, work force development and employment, community economic needs, interagency coordi nation (withi n the federal gover n ment), and federal- nonfederal collaboration with relevant par t ners? (Tuch man n et al. 1996: 201). Despite the BLM?s successes, published assessments and case studies indicate that to many, Jobs-in- the-Woods has been the g reatest disappoi nt ment of all of the components of the i nitiative because public expect ations regardi ng the qualit y and nu mber of jobs that would be created to offset job losses i n the timber i ndust r y were out of propor tion to the prog ram?s size. I n addition, many of the economic effects of reduced federal timber harvests on the timber industry happened before the initiative began. Many workers had al ready adjusted to the new sit uation out of necessit y. Only a small propor tion of displaced timber workers par ticipated i n job t rai ni ng prog rams, and lit tle work was then available i n the timber i ndust r y. Most high- payi ng cont racts were for heav y- equipment work, which created ver y few jobs. Record keepi ng and monitor i ng were poor. Most of the f u nds went di rectly to restoration projects, contributing to the biophysical goals of the Plan, but having mi nimal effect on workers. Although Jobs-i n-the-Woods created some shor t-ter m jobs, ver y few workers were able to fi nd long-ter m employ ment as a result of this prog ram (FCR 2002: chapter 3). Old- Grow th Diversi ficat ion Funds ? T he FS?s OGDF prog ram was f u nded by dollars appropr i - ated du r i ng the i nitiative per iod; it conti nued the i n flu x of dollars i nto a prog ram that began i n 1991 i n the FS Pacific Nor thwest Region (Region 6) (Oregon and Washi ng ton). A tot al of $19.8 million was appropr iated for this f u nd bet ween 1994 and 2002, compared with the $5.3 million i n f u nd dollars available f rom 1991 to 1993 that predated the Plan. I n addition, a new f u nd was est ablished i n 1994 i n the FS Pacific Southwest Region (Region 5) (Califor nia) with OGDF money that tot aled $4.0 million over the 1994 ?2002 per iod. T hese f u nds were passed th rough to st ate agencies to ad mi nister. I n Region 5, the money went i nto a revolv - i ng loan f u nd. I n Region 6, most of the Washi ng ton St ate money ($10.1 million) went i nto a revolvi ng loan f u nd, and the Oregon St ate money ($9.7 million) mostly went for RCA grants. This fund has not had additional appropriations si nce 2002. T he OGDF was one component of the assist ance directed to small businesses and secondary manufactur- i ng i n the wood products i ndust r y (the fou r th of the major economic assist ance st rategies that were a par t of the Plan). Small busi nesses can provide sig nificant employ ment oppor t u nities, but they also face challenges related to size, fi nancial capit al, and r u ral location (Tuch man n et al. 1996: chapter 6). Di rect g rants and loans f rom OGDF made millions of dollars available for busi ness expansion and com mu nit y diversification. ?Revolvi ng loan f u nds played a particularly important role in enabling very small and micro-level enterprises to obtain access to affordable credit (FCR 2002: 93). T his prog ram met the fi rst objective of the initiative by providing immediate relief. It also addressed the second objective, to create an environment for long-term development and the fou r th objective to emphasize equal par t nership with the st ates. Developi ng new forest-based enter pr ises has proved dif ficult, however, given the extent of the changes in the timber industry and regional, national, and global economies and markets. Fu ndi ng for OGDF that went i nto revolvi ng loan f u nds will conti nue to provide capital in the future as the original loans are repaid, offering a sustainable source of affordable credit over the long term. T hus OGDF proved successf ul on t wo accou nts: it played 9 4 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III an important role in providing for the needs of small resource businesses, and it is a sustainable prog ram that will play this same role i nto the future as revolving loan funds. The Forest Service Rural Community Assistance Program T he FS RCA prog ram, i n keepi ng with the fi rst objective of the initiative, provided some im- mediate relief in the form of grant money, loans, and some jobs for distressed timber communi- ties. Most impor t ant, the RCA prog ram also helped to create an environment for long-term economic development consistent with and respectful of the character of communities and thei r nat u ral resou rces (the second objective of the i nitiative). Cr iter ia for prog ram f u ndi ng emphasized new and sust ai nable resou rce-based businesses and jobs in resource-dependent com mu nities. T his met the fif th objective of the i nitiative: to emphasize the use of per for mance- based standards for funding. Appropriations for this prog ram f rom 1994 to 2002 were above base allocations to the region (Tuch man n et al. 1996: 161). T he amou nt of money dist r ibuted th rough the RCA prog ram du r i ng this per iod tot aled $12.3 million i n FS Region 5, and $63.8 million i n FS Region 6. (As noted above, this i ncludes identified Oregon OGDF that went pr imar ily to g rants, but not Washi ng ton OGDF that went pr imar ily to revolvi ng loan f u nds.) The FS initiative funds represented substantial in- creases i n the agency?s competitive (not cong ressionally ear marked) economic com mu nit y assist ance prog rams over pre-Plan f u ndi ng as show n i n fig u res 6 -2 and 6 -3. T hese fig u res also show how the f u nds were dist r ibuted over time. T he remarkable level of leveraged f u nds (cash and i n-k i nd ser vices cont r ibuted by g roups outside the FS) that this program generated demonstrates the importance that com- mu nities placed on projects f u nded th rough RCA prog ram g rants (fig. 6 - 4). T he dat a on leveraged dollars are not readily available for Region 5, but the RCA g rant prog ram requi red a 20 -percent f u ndi ng match. Fig u re 6 -2 ?Trends i n com mu n it y econom ic assist a nce f u nd i ng, Forest Ser vice Region 6. Base yea r is 20 03. Fig u re 6 -3 ?Trends i n com mu n it y econom ic assist a nce f u nd i ng, Forest Ser vice Region 5. Base yea r is 20 03. 25 20 15 10 5 0 Appropriation (million dollars) Fiscal year 199419951996 199719981999 2000 200120022003 Old-Growth Diversification Loans Rural Community Assistance Other 1990 19911992 1993 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0 Funding (million dollars) Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Old-Growth Diversification Rural Community Assistance 95 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Assessments of the initiative have pointed out that small, r u ral com mu nities with few or no paid st aff to conduct even basic community service operations often have lit tle or no capabilit y to t ake advant age of prog rams available for economic assist ance (Rey na 1996: 8; Tuch man n et al. 1996: 184,199). ?Offer i ng dollars alone is i nsuf ficient. Com mu nities needed development of the hu man sk ills and social capit al to t ake advant age of the other k i nds of assist ance. Without an emphasis on buildi ng these k i nds of resou rces and sk ills, only the most advant aged of the disadvant aged are able to respond? (FCR 2002: 90). Not only were such sk ills necessar y for t ak i ng advant age of FS programs, but soft infrastructure projects, consisting of leadership development, community-based planning and visioni ng, and buildi ng net work i ng sk ills and cult u ral capi - t al were vit al for creati ng, leveragi ng and succeedi ng with the enti re ar ray of N EA I projects? (FCR 2002: 90). Other initiative assessments also noted the varying ability of com- munities to respond to economic development opportunities, and the impor t ance of break i ng dow n the ?g rantsmanship sy nd rome? whereby the wi n ners were those who could prepare the best applications (Berbli nger 1999: 81). T he FS RCA prog ram and the Economic Development Ad mi nist ration (EDA) provided most of the i nitiative f u nd - i ng that suppor ted sof t i nf rast r uct u re development (FCR 2002: 90). Although the RCA prog ram provided most of the funding for leadership development and community-based plan ni ng and projects, the EDA cont r ibuted suppor t for the long-ter m st af fi ng of organizations, such as economic development dist r icts (FCR 2002: 43). T he RCA prog ram not only targeted these soft infrastructureprojects such as leadership development, community visioning and action plans, market and feasibilit y st udies, busi ness plans, and technical assistance, but program coordinators and manag- ers also provided outreach and assistance to communities to help ensu re the best oppor t u nit y to fi nd appropr iate assistance, and to succeed in acquiring project funding. For some communities, particularly small ones, the Forest Ser vice Com mu nit y Assist ance Coordi nator is an ambas - sador of the federal gover n ment, and provides a li n k to other federal ser vices? (Tuch man n et al. 1996: 193). T hese coordinators participated in community-based planning to provide tech nical assist ance and to assist with leader - ship development, sometimes without additional f u ndi ng from the program. They served as visible messengers and catalysts of change for community and forest relations. For these reasons, the RCA prog ram was par ticularly effective in offering economic assistance crucial to the smallest, most remote, unincorporated areas around Plan forests. The need to reach out to these highly affected com mu nities that were not well i nfor med about development oppor t u nities and that lacked suf ficient capacit y to develop proposals on thei r ow n, was noted i n most assessments of the i nitiative (Donoghue et al. 1999: 61). T here were other character istics of the RCA prog ram that assessments considered successful. The program had the flexibilit y to provide ?gap? f u ndi ng for pr ior it y projects not available through other economic assistance programs. Most importantly, the program focused on funding those projects identified by com mu nities themselves as bei ng most impor t ant to them (Berbli nger 1999: 81). T his practice of supporting and honoring local plans helped to provide access to assistance programs for priority projects for all communities, and it meets the second and fourth objectives Fig u re 6 - 4 ? Dolla rs leveraged wit h com mu n it y assist a nce f u nds, Forest Ser vice Region 6. Not adjusted for i n flat ion. 250 200 150 100 50 0 Funding (million dollars) Forest Service dollars Leveraged funds Rural Community Assistance 1994?2002 Old-Growth Diversification Loans 1991?2002 Other 1990?2002 6 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III of the initiative: to create an environment for long-term economic development consistent with and respectf ul of the character of communities and their natural resources, and to emphasize the cr itical role of local gover n ments. The FS economic assistance programs continue to be aimed at long-ter m diversification, buildi ng com mu nit y capacity, and developing natural-resource-based products, as requi red by thei r existi ng author ities. Now that the i nitia - tive has expi red, however, not enough dollars are available to support technical assistance and projects at anything other than a mi nimal level withi n the Plan area. More recent funding made available to communities through the FS and BLM has come f rom the Secu re Ru ral Schools and Com mu nit y Self Deter mi nation Act (Secu re Ru ral Schools Act) Title II Resou rce Advisor y Com mit tee projects. T he FS, BLM, and other agencies have also provided f u ndi ng to com mu nities th rough the National Fi re Plan. T hese more recent prog rams of ten do not cont ai n explicit cr iter ia for f u ndi ng qualification aimed at long-ter m economic diversification related to nat u ral resou rces and utilization of nat u ral resou rce products. Never theless, they sometimes include criteria for using local community plans to develop com mu nit y suppor t, pr ior itize projects, and leverage f u nds. The Jobs-i n-the-Woods and RCA prog ram managers have developed exper tise withi n the agencies to coordi nate and i nteg rate complex com mu nit y and agency needs and old and new com mu nit y-based prog rams, and to use ad mi nis - t rative tools i n i n novative ways to respond to local resou rce and socioeconomic situations. Assessment of Other Initiative Components I n novative approaches i n how busi ness was conducted were i ncor porated du r i ng i nitiative implement ation. T he Com - mu nit y Economic Revit alization Team (CERT) process was established as a part of the initiative to streamline service delivery. It built on previous successful models for provid- i ng economic and social assist ance to r u ral areas i n Oregon and Washi ng ton affected by decli nes i n the timber i ndust r y. I n cont rast, the Califor nia CERT was ?created f rom scratch and u nder took the economic assist ance t asks of the i nitia - tive without the benefit of st ate i nstit utions exclusively charged with the responsibilit y of deali ng with issues of r u ral development and r u ral i ndust r ial dislocation? (Tuch - man n et al. 1996: 163). St ate CERTs defi ned the affected area (the cou nties eligible for assist ance), decided on orga - nizational g rou nd r ules for how they would operate, and conducted outreach to potential funding recipients. They used a ?one-stop -shop? approach that g reatly simplified access to the different k i nds of federal and st ate assist ance that was available. T he ?lead agency? tech nique, which assigned responsibility for developing a project proposal on behalf of all federal and state agencies participating in the i nitiative, was also a successf ul method of st reamli ni ng government processes for providing community assistance. A nother g roup, the Regional CERT, ser ved as a ?for u m for exchangi ng i nfor mation and identif yi ng problems relevant to all th ree st ates? (Tuch man n et al. 1996: 186). T hese CERT g roups met the thi rd, fou r th, and fif th objectives of the i nitiative: to develop new mechanisms for deliver i ng assist ance, to emphasize the equal par t nership of st ates and the cr itical role of local gover n ments, and to emphasize the use of performance-based standards for funding over traditional standards based on programmatic eligibil- it y. T hey add ressed bar r iers, identified pr ior it y issues at different scales, and ensu red the most ef ficient agency and funding approach. Assessments of the initiative considered the CERTs ver y successf ul and i n novative i n st reamli ni ng service delivery. Some of the f u nctions of the CERTs still exist. T he Oregon CERT has been renamed the Needs and Issues process. As before, local communities develop their desired projects for the year, and send them to the cou nt y wide g roup that decides on what pr ior it y to give projects i n thei r cou nt y. Each cou nt y then for wards its list to the st ate, where the federal f u nders select which projects they could f u nd given their missions, authorities, and needs. The FS coor- di nators provide field person nel that scope each potential FS project and provide any necessary technical assistance. T hey collectively pr ior itize and select projects based on the goals of the program in a competitive process. The Washi ng ton CERT is essentially the same. However, both st ate CERTs are hampered by dimi nished st ate f u ndi ng, reduci ng thei r effectiveness somewhat. T he members of the  Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Califor nia CERT still meet but do not have the same project funding role. This body serves as a forum for discussing is- sues relevant to economic well-bei ng i n nor ther n Califor nia. Other g roups have i ncor porated var ious elements of the CERTs i n thei r desig n. I n Califor nia, the st atewide Fi re Safe Cou ncil has adopted the ?one-stop -shop? approach for fi re-related g rant f u nds f rom federal and st ate sou rces. T he Secu re Ru ral Schools and Com mu nit y Self Deter mi nation Act Title II Resou rce Advisor y Com mit tees, i nitiated i n 2001, i nclude local of ficials as par t of the cross section of represent ative constit uencies who advise federal of ficials on priorities for funding projects. The county allocates money for these funding opportunities. This structure fosters local empower ment. Cu r rently there is no equivalent g roup to the CERTs that looks across resou rce advisor y com mit tees and other programs for regional and other agency and govern- ment f u ndi ng oppor t u nities. One assessment proposed i ncor porati ng CERT f u nctions i nto existi ng regional or provi nce g roups est ablished with the Plan to i ncrease coordi nation bet ween forest management and related com mu nit y prog rams (Pipk i n 1998: 79). Assessing the Effectiveness of the Initiative Up to this poi nt I have discussed how well specific compo - nents of the i nitiative cont r ibuted to its success, with a focus on FS and BLM prog rams. Here, I present an assessment of how effective the enti re, much larger, i nitiative prog ram was i n meeti ng its goals. Forest Com mu nit y Research (FCR 2002) provided the most recent, and by far the most compre - hensive assessment of the i nitiative. T hat st udy?s conclu - sions are su m mar ized here to help evaluate how well the Plan has met its goal of mi nimizi ng adverse effects on jobs, and assisti ng with long-ter m economic development and diversification i n r u ral com mu nities affected by cutbacks i n timber harvest on federally managed forest lands. Effects on timber workers and thei r families (FCR 2002: chapter 4): ? Many of the economic effects associated with de - cli nes i n the timber i ndust r y were felt i n the 1980s, before the Plan and the i nitiative were implemented. Although the initiative aimed to mitigate the socio- economic effects of timber industry decline associ- ated with cutbacks i n federal timber har vest, many timber workers had al ready exper ienced the effects of industry decline, and either left their communities to look for new jobs or moved on to new oppor t u ni - ties locally. For these workers, reductions i n federal timber harvesting under the Plan contributed to an already declining industry affected by foreign com- petition, timber i ndust r y dow nsizi ng f rom i ncreas - i ngly ef ficient timber har vesti ng and processi ng equipment, mill concentration, and economic reces- sion. I n other words, timber workers were al ready exper ienci ng different deg rees of cr isis, and the timi ng and scope of the i nitiative were i nadequate to address this crisis. ? Many of the timber workers and thei r families who needed assist ance did not benefit f rom the i nitiative. T he needs were far g reater than what could be met through initiative programs. Although job creation around long-term, family- wage work i n the woods associated with ecosystem management and restoration was expected u nder the Plan, it never moved beyond pilot projects. The jobs workers were ret rai ned for by i nitiative job t rai ni ng prog rams never mater ialized i n r u ral com mu nities. Some exceptions were the t r ibes that had thei r ow n land base. Effects on r u ral com mu nities: ? Com mu nities and busi nesses benefited more than displaced timber workers and thei r families did. Some industrial development projects succeeded, al- though these typically require long-term investment. ? Loan prog rams allowed busi nesses to gai n access to affordable credit, and were largely successf ul. ? T he i nitiative was fai rly successf ul i n suppor ti ng investments in physical infrastructure in rural com- mu nities (e.g., water and sewer systems, com mu nit y facilities, i ndust r ial parks) that facilit ate other for ms of community and economic development. ? T he i nitiative was also successf ul i n suppor ti ng i n - vestments in human capacity-building through soft 98 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III infrastructure development, a critical component of any overall community assistance program, that should be i nteg rated with other for ms of physical and fi nancial capit al development. ?W hile focusi ng on buildi ng physical and fi nancial capit al may work in communities that already have relatively high levels of organizational capacit y and social, hu man, and cult u ral capit al, it will be relatively i neffec - tive i n com mu nities without those resou rces? (FCR 2002: 91). Finally, although the initiative provided a start, many rural communities in the Plan area still face economic challenges, and continuing assistance is needed to help them develop and diversify economi- cally over the long term. Conclusions T he Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative provided new and redi rected prog ram f u ndi ng for a t ransition per iod of adjustment to the effects of policy changes in the Plan area. Com mu nit y economic assist ance prog rams were a few among many agency initiative programs. These programs were relatively small i n ter ms of tot al i nitiative dollars. T he forest management agencies with the bul k of federal forest lands, the BLM and the FS, had th ree pr imar y prog rams to integrate forest management activities, jobs, and communi- ties and to deliver this assist ance: Jobs-i n-the-Woods, Ru ral Com mu nit y Assist ance, and the Old- G row th Diversification Fu nd. Each prog ram cont ai ned elements of i nitiative objec - tives, su m mar ized here as shor t-ter m mitigations, long-ter m economic diversification, and changes i n how busi ness was to be conducted and evaluated with agency and nonagency partners and community members. Many view the shor t-ter m mitigation aspects of these programs as too little, too late. Timber industry restructur- i ng and timber supply changes were occu r r i ng, to a large degree, before the initiative dollars became available in 1994. Each of the th ree prog rams i njected dollars i nto the com mu nit y. T he OGDF provided loans to ret ai n existi ng busi nesses. Local jobs were t argeted th rough Jobs-in-the- Woods for ecosystem management activities. T he RCA provided grants to the private sector for projects related to forest management. Many believe that the dollars that were available were i nadequate to compensate for the mag nit ude of the effects. It can be argued that it is too soon to assess the suc- cess of long-ter m economic diversification projects. Many r u ral resou rce-based com mu nities have relatively slow g row th and are subject to fluct uations owi ng to national and international economic forces beyond their control. Some aspects of i nitiative prog rams have had mixed reviews. For example, the RCA prog ram specifically t argeted economic diversification and f u nded projects of this t y pe such as mar - keti ng and busi ness plans, but whether these were generally successful is debatable. However, some components of the prog rams that t argeted long-ter m diversification were widely considered successf ul. T he OGDF, as a revolvi ng loan f u nd, still provides a long-term sustainable source of capital for resou rce-related busi ness expansion and diversification and is considered highly successf ul. I n the RCA prog ram, com mu nit y-based plan ni ng was a focus where com mu nities were f u nded to identif y and pr ior itize the value of thei r natural resources and related projects. Projects to improve community social capacity, such as leadership development, were aimed at helpi ng com mu nities to help themselves. I n reviews of the i nitiative, these ?sof t i nf rast r uct u re? projects were considered vit al to the success of i nitiative projects. A nother objective of this complex, multiagency i nitiative was to desig n new ways for federal agencies to conduct busi ness i n collaboration with nonfederal and com mu nit y par t ners. T he CERTs developed organizational ground rules and incorporated one-stop-shopand lead agencytechniques to streamline program delivery. Collaborative g roups f rom com mu nit y plans, local gover n - ment, and regional g roups identified and pr ior itized and g reatly leveraged available f u nds. T he RCA prog ram provided technical assistance to small, remote, unincorpo- rated com mu nities to enable them to organize and compete for f u ndi ng. T he prog ram had the flexibilit y for managers to provide ?gap? f u ndi ng for identified cr itical projects to fill i n where other agencies could n?t. Cr iter ia for prog ram f u ndi ng emphasized new and sust ai nable resou rce-based  Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies businesses and jobs in resource-dependent communities. The Jobs-i n-the-Woods and RCA prog ram managers have developed exper tise withi n the agencies to coordi nate and i nteg rate complex com mu nit y and agency needs and old and new com mu nit y-based prog rams, and to use ad mi nist rative tools i n i n novative ways to respond to local resource and socioeconomic situations. Assessments of the i n novative aspects of these prog rams view them as highly successful. Jobs-i n-the-Woods, character ized as the most complex component of the i nitiative, li n ked the biophysical and socioeconomic components of the Plan. It initiated a t ransition by the agencies to new ways of accomplishi ng projects with par t ners and com mu nities. Despite the BLM?s successes, to many, Jobs-i n-the-Woods has been the greatest disappointment of all of the components of the i nitiative because public expect ations regardi ng the qualit y and nu mber of jobs that would be created to offset job losses i n the timber i ndust r y were never realized. With the exception of OGDF revolvi ng loan f u nds, minimal funding remains available for programs begun u nder the i nitiative. T he i nitial Plan vision of li n k i ng the biophysical and socioeconomic components of the ecosys- tem with the goals of the Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative was perhaps so ambitious that it raised u n realistic expect ations, and thus resulted i n much disappoi nt ment. However, the i ntent of the Plan to create li n kages bet ween the biophysical and socioeconomic components of the ecosystem by connecting and balancing jobs, businesses, and com mu nities with forest management and restoration remains important to achieving Plan socioeconomic goals. T here are a nu mber of new prog rams emergi ng with many of the same long-term objectives and community-based collaborative desig n. We can lear n f rom the i nitiative per iod and use the successf ul feat u res of prog rams identified i n this repor t i n these new com mu nit y-focused prog rams as they emerge. I n su m mar y, the feat u res of the agencies? com mu nit y economic assist ance prog rams identified as impor t ant for achievi ng these goals i nclude the followi ng: Funding programs that provide opportunities for r u ral forest-based com mu nities with the lowest capacity. Funds targeted for soft infrastructureprojects. ? Out reach and assist ance to low- capacit y forest-based communities to enable their successful participation. ? Suf ficient flexibilit y for prog ram managers to di rect funding at the appropriate scale, communities, and activities. ? Use of a CERT-li ke process (one-stop -shoppi ng and lead-agency tech niques) to st reamli ne ser vice delivery for all assistance programs for all agencies and governments participating in natural resource and community-focused projects. Use of an interagency, intergovernmental, and citizen collaborative g roup at one or more st ages of the process to broaden input to decisions, and also to identif y bar r iers to prog rams, ef ficiencies of scale, and other agency, government, and private funding opportunities. ? Use of existi ng RCA cr iter ia for prog ram pr ior ities in the outreach and application process that target long-ter m economic diversification related to nat u ral resou rces, promote forest product utilization, and demonstrate project support in local community plans and through leveraging funds. To continue monitoring the effectiveness of community- focused programs in meeting Plan socioeconomic goals, it is important to evaluate program delivery features such as those above as a component of assessing program outcomes. Improvement in the reliability and consistency of basic prog ram dat a (i ncludi ng g rants, ag reements, and cont racts) will enable f u r ther evaluation of the Plan?s socioeconomic goals. References Berblinger, A.S. 1999. W hat we have accomplished and lear ned: W hat?s next? I n: Ch r istensen, H.H.; Raet tig, T.L.; Som mers, P., eds. Nor thwest Forest Plan: outcomes and lessons lear ned f rom the Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 484. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation: 76 ? 82. 10 0 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Christensen, H.H.; Raettig, T.L.; Sommers, P. 1999. Nor thwest Forest Plan: outcomes and lessons lear ned f rom the Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 484. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 98 p. Daniels, J.M. 2004. T he r ise and fall of the Pacific Nor thwest log expor t market. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 624. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 80 p. Donoghue, E.M.; Christensen, H.H.; Saranich, R. 1999. T he Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative: lessons lear ned and questions remai ni ng. I n: Ch r istensen, H.H.; Raet tig, T.L.; Som mers, P., eds. Nor thwest Forest Plan: outcomes and lessons lear ned f rom the Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 484. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation: 59 ? 64. Forest Community Research [FCR]. 2002. Assessment of the Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative. Taylorsville, CA. ht t p://w w w.sier rai nstit ute.us/neai / N EA Ii ndex.ht ml. (March 2006). Haynes, R.W.; Perez, G.E., tech. eds. 2001. Nor thwest Forest Plan research sy nthesis. PN W- GTR- 498. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 130 p. Pipkin, J. 1998. T he Nor thwest Forest Plan revisited. 117 p. Unpublished repor t. On file with: U.S. Depar t ment of the I nter ior, Of fice of Policy A nalysis. 1849 C St reet, N W, Washi ng ton, DC, 20240. Regional Community Economic Revitalization Team [RCERT]. 1999. T he Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative, 1993 ?1997 i n par t nership with the Nor thwest Forest Plan: observations and opinions from the Regional Com mu nit y Economic Revit alization Team. U.S. Gover n ment Pr i nti ng Of fice. On file with: Michael Rey na, 194 West Mai n St., Suite F, Woodland, CA 95695-2915. Reyna, M.M. 1996. A Repor t on the Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative i n Califor nia: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Ru ral Development. 104 p. On file with: Michael Rey na, 194 West Mai n St., Suite F, Woodland, CA 95695-2915. Tuchmann, E.T.; Connaughton, K.P.; Freedman, L.E.; Moriwaki, C.B. 1996. T he Nor thwest Forest Plan: a repor t to the President and Cong ress. Washi ng ton, DC: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Of fice of Forest r y and Economic Assist ance. 253 p. 101 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Richard Phillips Shared revenues generated by the sale of timber and other goods and services from federal lands are important sources of funds for local governments. Histor ically, 25 percent of g ross timber receipts f rom the sale of Forest Ser vice (FS) timber and 50 percent of timber receipts for the Oregon and Califor nia Rail road (O&C) and Coos Bay Wagon Road ( Wagon Road) lands have been returned to counties as compensation for revenues foregone because the lands and resources are not i n pr ivate ow nership. Under the Pay ments to St ates Act of 1908 (P ublic law 60 -136 as amended), FS pay ments are for public schools and local roads. State legislatures decide on the act ual division of f u nds. I n Califor nia and Washi ng ton, the split is 50:50; Oregon schools get 25 percent, and cou nt y roads get 75 percent. T he pay ments received f rom the O&C and Wagon Road lands located i n Oregon can be used for any cou nt y general pu r pose. Timber receipts, which i nclude pu rchaser road credits, K nutsen-Vandenbu rg Act (KV ) collections for sale area restoration, and salvage sale fund payments, are by far the largest sou rce of revenue. T hey exceeded 99 percent of all revenues collected du r i ng the early 1990s and d ropped to 95 percent by the end of the decade. Other revenues generated by the sale of natural resources from federal lands include collections for developed recreation, mi neral leasi ng, special uses, and g razi ng per mits. Washi ng ton, Oregon, and nor ther n Califor nia were affected by the drop in federal timber harvest and associ- ated timber revenues resulting from administrative and judicial decisions designed to protect the northern spotted owl ( Strix occidentalis caurina) and other ecosystem components. For 1991?93, Cong ress an nually i nvoked stop-gap measures to mitigate the reduction in revenue to 48 cou nties i n wester n Oregon and Washi ng ton, and nor ther n Califor nia (see t able 7-1). Cong ress passed the Om nibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 to provide a longer lasting alternative payment. All of these alternative pay ments are k now n as the ?spot ted owl safet y net ? or ?owl g uarantee? pay ments. T he 72 cou nties (see t able 3-1) i n Chapter 7: Payments to County Governments 1 T he exce pt ion is La ke Cou nt y, O regon, wh ich is i ncluded i n t he owl-g u a r a ntee leg islat ion but not i n t he Pla n?s 72- cou nt y a rea. Table 7-1? Counties receiving owl guarantee alternative payments State, county State, county Califor nia, Del Nor te Count y Oregon, Mult nomah Count y Califor nia, Glen n Count y Oregon, Polk Count y Califor nia, Humboldt Count y Oregon, Tillamook Count y Califor nia, Mendocino Count y Oregon, Wasco Count y Califor nia, Shasta Count y Oregon, Yam hill Count y Califor nia, Siskiyou Count y Washington, Chelan Count y Califor nia, Tehama Count y Washington, Clallam Count y Califor nia, Trinit y Count y Washington, Clark Count y Oregon, Benton Count y Washington, Cowlitz Count y Oregon, Clackamas Count y Washington, Grays Harbor Count y Oregon, Coos Count y Washington, Jefferson Count y Oregon, Cur r y Count y Washington, King Count y Oregon, Deschutes Count y Washington, Kit titas Count y Oregon, Douglas Count y Washington, Klickitat Count y Oregon, Hood River Count y Washington, Lewis Count y Oregon, Jackson Count y Washington, Mason Count y Oregon, Jefferson Count y Washington, Okanogan Count y Oregon, Josephine Count y Washington, Pierce Count y Oregon, Klamath Count y Washington, Skagit Count y Oregon, Lake Count y Washington, Skamania Count y Oregon, Lane Count y Washington, Snohomish Count y Oregon, Lincoln Count y Washington, Thurston Count y Oregon, Lin n Count y Washington, W hatcom Count y Oregon, Marion Count y Washington, Yakima Count y the Plan area i nclude 47 of the owl g uarantee cou nties. 1 Under the act, counties received a declining percentage of the 1986 th rough 1990 average an nual pay ment; pay ment began i n 1994 at 85 percent of the 5-year average and was to decli ne by 3 percent each year th rough 2003, when it would reach 58 percent. Bet ween 1999 and 2003, cou nties would receive either thei r percent age f rom the act, or thei r revenue-shar i ng percent age f rom g ross receipts, which - ever was higher. T he owl g uarantee pay ments u nder this act were to expi re i n 2004. I n 2000, Cong ress replaced this spot ted owl safet y net with the Secu re Ru ral Schools and Com mu nit y Self- Deter mi nation Act (P ublic law 106 -393), which expi res i n 2006. Under this act, cou nties receive an an nual pay ment equal to the average of the payments received during the 3 highest years bet ween 1986 and 1999. T his act provides 102 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III alter native pay ments to cou nties nationwide that histor ically shared revenues from goods and services sold from FS lands and f rom O&C and Wagon Road lands. T he national forest component stipulates that at least 85 percent of this money (Title I) must be used to f u nd education and t rans - por t ation projects. For the O&C and Wagon Road compo - nents, 85 percent must be used for general cou nt y pu r poses. T he remai ni ng 15 percent is used to f u nd special projects on federal lands (Title II) and general cou nt y budget needs (Title III). Resou rce advisor y com mit tees were est ablished by the act to promote collaborative relations and to advise the Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior on the use of Title II f u nds. T he advisor y com mit tees i nclude 15 members representi ng a balance bet ween the envi ron ment al com mu - nit y; i ndust r y, com modit y, and recreation i nterest g roups; and gover n ment of ficials, educators, and members of the public. T he advisor y com mit tees review and recom mend projects and associated f u ndi ng proposed by willi ng federal agencies, state and local governments, private and non- profit entities, and landow ners. T he projects must focus on en hanci ng or restor i ng forest ecosystem health (i ncludi ng water qualit y), promoti ng land stewardship, or mai nt ai ni ng or improvi ng existi ng i nf rast r uct u re. T he projects can be on national forest land, Bu reau of Land Management (BLM) O&C and Wagon Road lands, or on nonfederal land where they would benefit federal land. In addition to revenue sharing, counties receive pay ments i n lieu of t axes (PILT) based on the amou nt of eligible federal land in each county. The payment amount is determined based on a formula that includes population and the amou nt of pr ior-year revenue shar i ng. I n 1994, Cong ress passed legislation to increase the payment amounts calcu- lated i n the for mula and added an an nual i n flation i ncrease (Schuster 1996). T hese pay ments are f u nded di rectly th rough cong ressional appropr iations, but Cong ress t y pi - cally does not fully fund PILT. Funding varies year to year and is generally about 50 percent of the calculated amou nt. The PILT payments are important to county governments, and they are inversely tied to timber receipts and other revenue shar i ng. T he pay ments i n lieu of t axes were gener - ally not affected by the Plan?s implement ation that reduced timber har vest, because the owl g uarantee legislation and the Secu re Ru ral Schools Act mitigated the loss i n timber revenues. Monitoring Question Did pay ments-to - cou nties legislation st abilize pay ments to county governments and compensate for payments tradi- tionally tied to timber receipts? Expectation Payments-to-counties mitigation measu res were expected to offset the effects of reduced federal timber-harvest receipts on county governments through a transition period. Methods Data on actual payments to county governments are available for 1988 th rough 2004. T he pr imar y sou rce of FS revenue-sharing data is the annual USDA, FS All Service Receipts repor t. T he BLM revenue-shar i ng dat a are f rom the an nual USDI, BLM Facts repor ts available at the BLM Oregon St ate Of fice, Por tland, Oregon. T he pay ments u nder the Secu re Ru ral Schools Act for 2001 are f rom FS and BLM Web sites. T he pay ments repor ted for 2001 are projected to 2004 without the estimated 2-percent an nual i ncrease i n the consu mer pr ice i ndex. It is also impor t ant to k now what the pay ments to cou nt y gover n ments would have been if they were u nad - justed by safety net legislation. The unadjusted payment dat a are available by usi ng the same FS and BLM sou rces with the followi ng limit ations. T he national forest pay ments without the g uarantees were not repor ted af ter 1999, and BLM dat a without g uarantees were only repor ted u ntil 1995. Dat a for the adjusted and u nadjusted pay ments to county governments in the Plan area are presented in table 7-2 for FS dat a and t able 7-3 for BLM dat a. Results The amount of money county governments received from the FS, O&C, and Wagon Road pay ments are show n i n fig u res 7-1 and 7-2. T he lower li ne on each g raph represents the amou nt cou nt y gover n ments would have received based on revenues generated without legislative assist ance. 103 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Table 7-2? National forest payments to counties in Plan area Year Unadjusted Owl-guarantee adjusted Million dollars 1988 193.3 193.3 1989 216.8 216.8 1990 188.9 188.8 1991 155.5 184.1 1992 120.8 167.2 1993 104.5 156.0 1994 80.1 153.9 1995 54.2 147.6 1996 44.2 137.7 1997 44.9 133.5 1998 39.4 126.5 1999 25.7 120.6 2000 NA 115.0 2001 NA 205.4 2002 NA 205.4 2003 NA 205.4 2004 NA 205.4 NA = not available. Table 7- 3 ? Oregon and California Railroad and Coos Bay Wagon Road payments to counties in Plan area Year Unadjusted Owl-guarantee adjusted Million dollars 1988 69.6 69.7 1989 110.0 110.0 1990 204.8 204.9 1991 44.1 70.0 1992 NA 119.2 1993 67.4 79.3 1994 31.8 79.3 1995 22.1 76.5 1996 NA 73.6 1997 NA 70.9 1998 NA 68.1 1999 NA 65.3 2000 NA 62.5 2001 NA 109.7 2002 NA 109.7 2003 NA 109.7 2004 NA 109.7 NA = not available. 250 200 150 100 50 0 Payments (million dollars) Unadjusted Owl-guarantee adjusted 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 Year Fig u re 7-1? Nat ional forest pay ments to cou nt ies i n Pla n a rea. 250 200 150 100 50 0 Payments (million dollars) Unadjusted Owl-guarantee adjusted 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 Year Fig u re 7-2 ? O regon a nd Califor n ia Rail road a nd Coos Bay Wagon Road pay ments to cou nt ies i n Pla n a rea. 10 4 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III The upper line indicates the amount county governments received u nder the owl safet y net pay ments and the Secu re Ru ral Schools Act. T he spot ted owl safet y net measu res resulted in substantially higher payments to counties than they would have received th rough revenue shar i ng alone. T he Plan area, and specifically the 48 owl g uarantee cou n - ties, were receivi ng more than $150 million an nually i n owl g uarantee pay ments by 2000. Begi n ni ng i n 2001, the Secu re Ru ral Schools Act provided the highest rate of pay ments to the Plan counties. These payments increased each year by about 2 percent, based on 50 percent of the previous year?s change i n the consu mer pr ice i ndex. T he Secu re Ru ral Schools Act thus provided an adjusted payment totaling about $270 million to the Plan cou nties (figs. 7-1 and 7-2). T he pay ments i n lieu of t axes for the Plan cou nties i n wester n Oregon and Washi ng ton, and nor ther n Califor nia are show n i n fig u re 7-3. Across all cou nties, these pay ments tot aled more than $13 million i n 2002. T he for mula for the pay ments was revised i n 1994 to provide i ncreases to cover i n flation costs. T he peaks i n 1993 and 1995 are pr imar ily because pr ior-year pay ment i nfor mation was received f rom the states too late to put into the formula, shifting counties into a higher payment amount because part of the formula subtracts prior-year revenue-sharing from current-year pay ments i n lieu of t axes. I n 1993 and 1995, the pr ior-year amou nts were u nder repor ted. Fig u re 7-3 ? Pla n a rea pay ments i n lieu of t axes. Conclusions The initial payments-to-counties legislation has generally mitigated the effects of decli ni ng timber receipts for the 48 counties covered by the legislation. The counties in other par ts of the Plan area (i n easter n Washi ng ton, Oregon, and other par ts of Califor nia) did not fare as well u ntil the Secu re Ru ral Schools Act extended these pay ments to all of the eligible counties in the region and across the United States. Some of the i ntent behi nd the Om nibus Budget Recon - ciliation Act of 1993 was to provide a t ransition to a lower rate of assist ance. T he t ransitional path dow nward was replaced by a much higher rate of revenue support under the Secu re Ru ral Schools Act. T he goal of the pay ments-to - cou nties legislation was clearly met. The legislation has replaced past dependence on timber-harvest revenues and has generally mitigated the lost revenues associated with the decli nes i n federal timber har vest i n the region. It is not k now n how the owl safet y net pay ments have affected overall cou nt y fi nanci ng. I n the shor t ter m, a g uaranteed amou nt is li kely to have a st abiliz - i ng effect. T he Secu re Ru ral Schools legislation, however, su nsets on September 30, 2006. T he long-ter m st abilit y of the pay ments is u ncer t ai n. Without new cong ressional action, cou nties i n the Plan area will need to add ress a projected $270 million i n revenue shor tfall. Cong ressional hear i ngs are expected i n 2005 to add ress the possibilit y of reauthor ization of the Secu re Ru ral Schools legislation. References Payments to States Act. 1908. Act of May 23, 1908; 35 St at. 260, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 500, 553, 556d). Schuster, E.G. 1996. Revenue shar i ng and resou rce management i n Wester n st ates. Wester n Jou r nal of Applied Forest r y. 11(1): 20 ?24. Secure Rural Schools and Community Self- Determination Act. 2003. P.L. 106 ?393. Payments (million dollars) 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 Year 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 California Oregon Washington 105 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Susan Charnley and Ellen Donoghue1 I n Chapter 8 we do th ree thi ngs. Fi rst, we descr ibe how 12 case-st udy com mu nities associated with 4 case-st udy forests (the Oly mpic, Mou nt Hood, and K lamath National Forests and the Coos Bay Bu reau of Land Management (BLM) Dist r ict) changed bet ween the 1980s and 2003, and the strategies communities used to adapt to changes brought about by the decli ne of the wood products i ndust r y. Second, we exami ne the causes of com mu nit y-scale change and the role that the Nor thwest Forest Plan (the Plan) played i n cont r ibuti ng to it. T hi rd, we assess the roles played by the Forest Ser vice (FS) and the BLM i n mitigati ng the effects of cutbacks i n federal timber har vest by providi ng socio - economic benefits to com mu nities affected by the Plan, and assisti ng with long-ter m economic development and diversification. Monitoring Questions 1. A re local com mu nities and economies exper ienci ng positive or negative changes that may be associated with federal forest management? 2. Did the Plan help mai nt ai n the st abilit y of local and regional economies on a predictable, long-term basis? 3. Did the Plan assist with long-ter m economic development and diversification to mi nimize adverse effects associated with job loss? Chapter 8: The Ef fects of the Nor thwest Forest Plan on Forest-Based Communities Expectations It was expected that the major adverse social and economic effects of the Plan would be associated with the loss of jobs and income caused by reduced federal timber harvests ( USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -320). T hese cutbacks would threaten the economic vitality of many communities that had depended on them i n the past. Not all com mu nities would be affected the same way, or to the same extent. T he Plan?s effects would be i ntense and debilit ati ng for some forest-based communities and some people employed in the wood products i ndust r y, and would provide a challenge and an oppor t u nit y for change to others ( USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -310). T he effects would last longer than a fi r m?s or worker?s abilit y to ? wait it out ? ( USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -311). Loggers, mill ow ners and workers, small busi nesses, and thei r families were expected to exper ience sig nificant, long-lasti ng effects that would be dif ficult to overcome. In some communities, the effects of the Plan would be ver y noticeable; i n others, they would not be visible ( USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -308). T he com mu ni - ties most negatively affected would be the relatively small and isolated communities closest to federal forest lands that lacked economic diversit y, depended on public timber har vests, and had low leadership capacit y (FEM AT 1993: V II-9, USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -301). Com mu nities with the highest capacit y to adapt to Plan-related change would be those with good access to t ranspor t ation, markets, and raw mater ials, a high deg ree of economic diversification, and qualit y leadership (FEM AT 1993: II- 68). Com mu nities dependi ng on amenit y, recreation, or other environmental quality resources could be positively affected by the Plan (FEM AT 1993: V II-9). Never theless, nonconsu mptive forest activities and recreation were not expected to sust ai n com mu nities whose economies had been timber based ( USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -309). Some r u ral com mu nities would exper ience the effects of reductions i n FS employ ment ( USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -311). Employ ment i n the ?forest r y ser vices? sector 1 T he mater ial i n t h is chapter is ba sed on t he follow i ng: But tolph et al. (i n press). McLai n et al. (i n press). Cha r n ley, S.; Dilli ng ha m, C.; St u a r t, C.; Moseley, C.; Donog hue, E.M. Ma nu scr ipt i n pre pa r at ion. Nor t hwest Forest Pla n ? t he fi r st 10 yea r s (1994 ?20 03): socioeconom ic mon itor i ng of K la mat h Nat ional Forest a nd t h ree local com mu n it ies. O n file w it h: S. Cha r n ley, Forest r y Sciences Labor ator y, 620 SW Mai n, Su ite 40 0, Por tla nd , OR 97205. K ay, W.; Donog hue, E.M.; Cha r n ley, S.; Moseley, C. Ma nu scr ipt i n pre pa r at ion. Nor t hwest Forest Pla n ? t he fi r st 10 yea r s (1994 ?20 03): socioeconom ic mon itor i ng of Mou nt Hood Nat ional Forest a nd t h ree local com mu n it ies. O n file w it h: S. Cha r n ley, Forest r y Sciences Labor ator y, 620 SW Mai n, Su ite 40 0, Por tla nd , OR 97205. T he ca se -st udy resu lt s presented here a re su m ma r i zed f rom t hose docu ment s. Refer to t hem for a r icher d iscu ssion of cha nge i n t he case-study communities. 10 6 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III (such as reforest ation, timber-st and improvement) would also decli ne ( USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -291). T he negative effects of the Plan would be par tially offset by Plan-related mitigations, such as new jobs i n forest restoration, safety net payments to county governments to make up for some lost timber revenues, and the Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative ( USDA and USDI 1994a: 3&4 -291, 298, 313 ?314). Methods The information in this chapter comes primarily from i nter views with com mu nit y members and agency employ - ees f rom the case-st udy areas. Appendix B descr ibes the methods we used to choose the case-st udy com mu nities. T h ree com mu nities withi n 10 miles of each case-st udy forest were randomly selected for monitor i ng. Ou r results are based on i nter views with a tot al of 223 members of 12 com mu nities and 82 agency employees f rom 4 case-st udy forests. Com mu nit y i nter viewees represented a var iet y of st akeholder perspectives. A list of the t y pes of people i nter viewed and the i nter view g uides are located i n appen - dix D. Br ief descr iptions of each com mu nit y are fou nd i n appendix E. I nter viewi ng to obt ai n qualit ative dat a is com monly used i n social science research. I nter views are appropr iate when t r yi ng to u nderst and a specific process or phenome - non, such as the relation bet ween federal forest management and com mu nit y well-bei ng. T he team selected i nter viewees pu r posef ully, not randomly, because we wanted to i nter view local exper ts who could provide i nfor mation relevant to the monitoring questions posed in this chapter. The team also chose a sample that would represent var iation i n the populations u nder st udy; we identified specific categor ies of people to i nter view i n each com mu nit y and on each forest u nit about the monitor i ng question of i nterest, so that we could document a range of perspectives on them. After identifying categories of informants to be i nter viewed i n each com mu nit y and on each forest, we used a snowball sampli ng approach to locate i nter viewees. Snowball sampli ng is an effective method of buildi ng a sampli ng f rame where a relatively small population of people live, who k now of and come i nto cont act with one another (Ber nard 2002), as was t r ue i n most of the com - mu nities and all of the forest u nits we sampled. T he method ent ails locati ng key i ndividuals i n a com mu nit y, and ask i ng them to identif y people who would be appropr iate to i nter view about the topics u nder st udy. T he cr iter ia we used to develop ou r sample f rame i ncluded people who repre - sented one of the i nfor mant categor ies i nitially identified; people who had lived i n the case com mu nit y or worked on the case-st udy forest at least si nce 1994 when the Plan was adopted; people who were k nowledgeable about the topics u nder st udy; people who were considered able to provide a wi ndow i nto the com mu nit y or the forest u nit of i nterest; and people who were ar ticulate and willi ng to t al k with us. Ou r i nter viewees fit most, if not all, of these cr iter ia. T he team gathered names of potential i nter viewees and cont acted those people whose names were repeatedly men - tioned to set up an i nter view time and place. We conducted semist r uct u red i nter views by usi ng an i nter view g uide that contained a list of questions and topics to be covered during the i nter view. We recorded and t ranscr ibed most of the i n - ter views. We compared qualit ative dat a f rom the i nter views with quantit ative dat a obt ai ned f rom secondar y sou rces to develop a response to the monitor i ng questions. We did not, however, i nvestigate all of the det ails given i n the nar rative accou nts to check the accu racy of the ?facts.? Rather, we used peoples? u nderst andi ngs and perspectives to const r uct a more general u nderst andi ng of how the effects of the Plan and agency mitigation measu res on com mu nities were perceived. A nd, we used subsequent i nter views to cross- check poi nts and clar if y perspectives. Because the case-st udy com mu nities and the i nter - viewees were not chosen randomly, the i nter view results do not ser ve the pu r pose of generalization to the enti re universe represented by the Plan area. Instead, the approach helped us develop an indepth understanding of the effects of agency management actions, policies, and programs on forest-based communities in different locations to help us answer the monitor i ng questions. T he nu mber of cases ex - ami ned for pu r poses of this repor t was limited by the time and f u ndi ng available. We are caref ul not to over-generalize 107 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies results beyond ou r cases. T he i nter views were not con - ducted i n the context of a research project desig ned to test specific causal hy potheses relati ng to the monitor i ng t rends, or the effects of forest management policy on local commu- nities. T he results could, however, be used to develop such hy potheses to be tested i n f ut u re research projects. We view the case-st udy com mu nities as an i nitial sample that will form part of a larger community sample to be monitored in the f ut u re as par t of the Plan?s socioeconomic effectiveness monitoring program. For more information on qualitative research methods see Ragi n and Becker (1992), Den zi n and Li ncol n (1994), Miles and Huber man (1994), Ber nard (2002), and Pat ton (2002). Note that the u nit of analysis i n this chapter is the place-based com mu nit y, as defi ned i n chapter 2 of this volu me ? not com mu nities of i nterest, i ndividuals withi n com mu nities, or regional economies. Ou r focus on place- based communities is appropriate given the direction in the record of decision ( USDA and USDI 1994b), the emphasis of the Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team (FEM AT) 1993 repor t and the Plan Fi nal Supplement al Envi ron ment al I mpact St atement ( USDA and USDI 1994a), and the recom mendations that came out of phases 1 and 2 of the socioeconomic monitor i ng prog ram. Never theless, there are tradeoffs involved in selecting the place-based community as the unit of analysis for understanding Plan impacts on r u ral com mu nities and economies. One is that we overlook the differential dist r ibution of Plan effects on i ndividuals withi n forest com mu nities. For some of these individuals, the effects may have been negative and i r reversible; for others who were able to t ake advant age of new oppor t u nities, they may have been beneficial. A second t radeoff is that we overlook the differential dist r ibution of Plan effects on communities of interest. The costs and benefits of the Plan across i nterest g roups were li kely highly var iable. Fi nally, com mu nities are nested withi n larger social, political, and economic systems. Com mu nit y-scale effects from federal forest management policy may be mitigated by broader regional socioeconomic trends, and these larger systems may provide opportunities for commu- nit y members. Viewed at different scales, Plan effects might look quite different. Agai n, ou r focus here is on the place- based com mu nit y. We make no at tempt to use the results of ou r analysis to scale up or dow n and make generalizations about Plan effects at different scales; nor do we at tempt to generalize ou r results beyond ou r case-st udy com mu nities to com mu nities i n the Plan area as a whole. Results We present ou r results by case-st udy area. T he followi ng sections cont ai n det ailed fi ndi ngs f rom the case-st udy forests and com mu nities, by geog raphic location. Each section provides the data that support a general discussion relati ng to the monitor i ng question that follows. Those who do not wish to read through all of the case-study descriptions and supporting data may jump ahead to the general d iscussion of find ings that beg ins on page 148 of this chapter. A general social and economic character iza - tion of each com mu nit y, and how it changed bet ween the 1970s/1980s and 2003, is cont ai ned i n t able 8-1. Olympic National Forest and Case-Study Communities T he th ree case-st udy com mu nities associated with the Oly mpic National Forest are the Qui nault I ndian Nation, the Lake Qui nault A rea (cont ai ni ng the tow ns of Qui nault, Neilton, and A manda Park), and Quilcene (fig. 8-1). T he Qui nault I ndian Nation com mu nit y, with a population of 1,471 i n 2000, consists of the Qui nault Reser vation of 208,150 acres. T he t r ibe has its ow n land base, which makes it less dependent than the other t wo com mu nities on federal forest lands for timber and other nat u ral resou rces. Quilcene and the Lake Qui nault A rea are both small com mu nities, with populations of 375 and 622, i n 2000. T hese com mu ni - ties were highly i nvolved i n the timber i ndust r y i n the 1970s and 1980s. By the 2000s, timber had become a secondar y activit y i n both places, which diversified along different t rajector ies du r i ng the 1990s. Federal forest lands were but one sou rce of timber on the Oly mpic Peni nsula du r i ng the second half of the 20th cent u r y. T he Oly mpic National Forest cont ai ns 16.5 percent of all forest land i n Clallam, G rays Harbor, Jefferson, and 108 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Table 8 -1? Changes in communit y social and economic orientation, pre - and post- Plan Community 1970s?1980s 2003 Oly mpic National Forest: Qui nault I ndian Nation Tr ibal with land base, timber, fishi ng Tr ibal with land base, timber, fishi ng, t r ibal government administration, and businesses Lake Qui nault A rea Timber Recreation /tou r ism Secondary: recreation/tourism Secondary: timber, special forest products Quilcene Timber Reti rement, bed room com mu nit y Secondar y: fishi ng, ag r icult u re, Secondary: natural resources sectors goods and services center Mou nt Hood National Forest: Upper Hood R iver Valley Ag r icult u re (f r uit orchards), timber Ag r icult u re (f r uit orchards), mixed economic ` base (recreation /tou r ism, reti rement, small busi ness, self- employed, bed room com mu nit y) Villages of Mount Hood Second home, recreation /tou r ism, Bed room com mu nit y, second home, reti rement, f rom Br ight wood to t ranspor t ation cor r idor recreation /tou r ism, t ranspor t ation cor r idor R hododend ron Secondary: timber Est acada Timber, ag r icult u re (f r uit orchards) Ag r icult u re (Ch r ist mas t rees and specialt y goods), bed room com mu nit y Secondary: timber, recreation/tourism Secondary: timber, recreation/tourism K lamath National Forest: Scot t Valley Ag r icult u re ( beef cat tle, hay), timber Ag r icult u re ( beef cat tle, hay), reti rement, bed room com mu nit y, mobile workers, ser vices But te Valley Ag r icult u re ( beef cat tle, pot atoes, hay), Ag r icult u re ( beef cat tle, st rawber r ies, hay), timber, transportation corridor transportation corridor Mid-K lamath Timber, t r ibal (no land base) Tr ibal (no land base), public ad mi nist ration, goods and services Secondary: recreation/tourism, retirement Coos Bay Dist r ict: G reater Coos Bay Timber, shippi ng, shipbuildi ng, fishi ng Regional t rade and ser vice center, reti rement Secondary: timber, shipping, recreation/ tourism G reater Reedspor t Timber, com mercial fishi ng Reti rement Secondary: recreation Greater Myrtle Point Timber Agriculture, retirement, social services Secondary: agriculture Secondary: timber 109 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Fig u re 8-1? Case -st udy com mu n it ies, Oly mpic Nat ional Forest. Port Angeles McCleary Hoh River i Tahola McCleary Cosmopolis Hoquiam Montesano Elma Tahola Sitkum River Soleduck River Ocean Shores Westport Quinault Indian Nation Sitkum River Sekiu River Hoko River Sooes River Dickey River Bogachiel River Queets River Pysht River Soleduck River Queets River Elwha River Gray Wolf River Duckabush River Humptulips River U.S. Highway 101 U.S. Highway 101 Shelton Sequim Olympia Quinault River Olympia Tumwater Friday Harbor Tumwater Shelton Quilcene SequimPort Angeles Lake Quinault AreaQuinault River Friday Harbor Olympic National Forest Olympic National Park Clearwater River Olympic National Forest I-5 Neah Bay Skokomish Cosmopolis Hoquiam Montesano Elma Forks Sekiu River Hoko River Sooes River Dickey River Pysht River Clearwater River Elwha River Gray Wolf River Duckabush River Humptulips River U.S. Highway 101 U.S. Highway 101 Bogachiel River Case-study national forests Case-study community boundaries Northwest Forest Plan region National Park Service Major lakes and rivers 0 5 10 Mileso Olympic National Forest 110 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Mason Cou nties ( USDA Forest Ser vice Forest I nventor y and A nalysis Dat a). T he remai ni ng forest lands are i n other public and pr ivate ow nerships, with pr ivate i ndust r ial forest land accou nti ng for roughly one-thi rd of the ow nership. With the exception of Mason Cou nt y, the Oly mpic National Forest produced only bet ween 5 and 25 percent of the timber har vested i n the fou r Oly mpic Peni nsula cou nties i n the decades precedi ng the Plan (fig. 8-2). Never theless, some people were highly dependent on FS timber. Quinault Indian Nation T he Qui nault Reser vation, with its relatively large land base endowed with forests, r ivers, and coastli ne, allowed tribe members to obtain natural resources that supported many of their subsistence, cultural, and economic needs. Many com mu nit y members worked i n the timber i ndust r y Fig u re 8-2 ?Ti mber ha r vest by ow nersh ip, Oly mpic Pen i nsula , 1965 ?20 01. Timber harvest (million board feet) 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 19651968 1971 1974 198019831986 1989199219951998 Year 20011977 Timber harvest (million board feet) 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Timber harvest (million board feet) 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Timber harvest (million board feet) 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Mason County Jefferson County Grays Harbor County Clallam County 19651968 1971 1974 198019831986 1989199219951998 Year 20011977 19651968 1971 1974 198019831986 1989199219951998 Year 20011977 19651968 1971 1974 198019831986 1989199219951998 Year 20011977 Total private State National forest f rom the mid-1900s th rough the late 1970s as loggers and mill workers. Many were cont ract loggers on the Oly mpic National Forest. Others worked salvagi ng dow ned cedar wood lef t over f rom earlier loggi ng. T he cedar was used to make shakes and shi ngles. Several cedar shake mills were nearby, and many Qui nault t r ibe members worked i n the mills. Some t r ibe members also worked for the Oly mpic National Forest as seasonal fi refighters. I n the early 1980s, the regional timber economy began to decli ne. Many com mu nit y residents who worked i n the timber i ndust r y lost thei r jobs as local shake mills closed or dow nsized. Manufact u r i ng went f rom 26 percent to 6 percent of tot al employ ment i n the Qui nault I ndian Nation bet ween 1990 and 2000. I n the early 2000s, six cedar shake mills remai ned i n the area, some of which t r ibe members ow ned and operated. A few Qui nault conti nued to work i n 111 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies the remaining mills, and some ran cedar salvage operations on reser vation land, selli ng cedar to the local shake mills. I n earlier decades, many Qui nault men worked as laborers in the timber industry for companies that logged on public, pr ivate, and reser vation lands. With t r ibal self- gover nance and self- deter mi nation, decision mak i ng authority over timber harvest on tribal land transferred from the Bu reau of I ndian Affai rs to the Qui nault I ndian Nation. With management autonomy by the Qui nault, har vest volu mes have decli ned, although the Qui nault mai nt ai n an active timber program on the reservation. A main motiva- tion for logging on the reservation is a desire on the part of the t r ibe to buy back reser vation lands and place them i n t r ibal ow nership. I n 1980, the t r ibe ow ned only 2 percent of the Qui nault Reser vation; the bul k was either t r ust land ( pr ivately ow ned by t r ibe members, but held i n t r ust by the Bu reau of I ndian Affai rs), or fee lands ( pr ivately ow ned by nont r ibe members). T he t r ibe buys timber f rom ow ners of trust and fee lands on the reservation, hires subcontractors to log the land, sells the logs to mills, and uses the revenues generated to buy back land f rom those who acqui red it th rough fees. A t r ibal organization est ablished i n 1988 ? the Qui nault Land and Timber Enter pr ises ? oversees this process. By 2003, the Qui nault I ndian Nation ow ned 31 percent of the reservation land. Fishi ng has also been a mai nst ay of the Qui nault I ndian Nation economy and cult u re. Subsistence fishi ng for sal mon and steel head has always been impor t ant to the t r ibe. T he Boldt Decision, passed i n 1974, facilit ated off-reser vation com mercial fishi ng activit y. 2 Begi n ni ng i n the mid-1970s, the Qui nault became active par ticipants i n the com mercial fishi ng i ndust r y, expandi ng thei r catch to i nclude ocean fisher ies for sal mon, halibut, t u na, and crab. T hey also built thei r ow n processi ng plant and seafood enter pr ise on the reser vation. Af ter the mid-1980s, however, fishi ng i ndust r y jobs fell dramatically because of declining salmon runs, competition from farm-raised salmon, harvest restrictions, Endangered Species Act listi ngs, and a d rop i n the pr ice of salmon. Many tribe members reverted to subsistence fishi ng, although some still par ticipated i n the com mercial fisher y, and the Qui nault fisher ies enter pr ises still oper - ated. Despite decli nes i n the forest r y and fisher ies sectors, census statistics found that employment in agriculture, forest r y, fishi ng, hu nti ng, and mi ni ng i ncreased f rom 9 to 12 percent bet ween 1990 and 2000 i n the Qui nault I ndian Nation com mu nit y. The harvest of special forest products for personal, subsistence, and com mercial uses was also impor t ant histor ically. Today, the impor t ant products i nclude west - er n redcedar ( T huja plicata Don n ex D. Don), bearg rass ( Xerophyllum tenax (P u rsh) Nut t.), fer ns, salal ( Gaultheria shallon P u rsh), and huck leber r ies ( Vaccinium spp.). T he Qui nault har vest these products on reser vation lands and on the Oly mpic National Forest. Although some community members continued to be employed i n the fishi ng and forest r y i ndust r ies i n the early 2000s, the simult aneous dow nt u r n i n these i ndust r ies that began i n the 1980s caused many Qui nault I ndian Nation members to shif t away f rom nat u ral resou rce jobs. Some moved off the reser vation to fi nd jobs i n Aberdeen and Hoquiam, others ret u r ned to school, and some took ser vice i ndust r y jobs, such as at the t r ibal casi no built i n 1999. By far, the mai n force offset ti ng job loss i n the timber and fishi ng i ndust r ies du r i ng the 1990s was g row th i n t r ibal ad mi nist ration. T he Qui nault implemented t r ibal self-gover nance i n 1975. Si nce then, the t r ibal gover n ment has g row n. T he Qui nault have succeeded i n w r iti ng g rants, obtaining support for development projects, and establish- ing partnerships. In addition, the Tribal Self-Governance Act of 1993 allowed the t r ibe to receive cong ressional appropriations directly. All of these changes enabled the t r ibal gover n ment to expand, and created job oppor t u nities. T he t r ibe now has many ser vice prog rams and busi ness enter pr ises; it is the second largest employer i n G rays Harbor Cou nt y, af ter Weyerhaeuser. P ublic ad mi nist ra - tion went f rom 13 percent to 26 percent of employ ment by i ndust r y i n the Qui nault I ndian Nation bet ween 1990 and 2000. T he t r ibal gover n ment employed 50 to 75 people i n 1990; it now has 350 f ull-time employees. I n fact, the t r ibe has employed several people who once worked on the Oly mpic National Forest. 2 T he Boldt Decision r u led t hat t r ibes ha d r ig ht s to 50 percent of the harvestable catch of salmon and steelhead on their usual and accu stomed fish i ng g rou nd s. 112 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Never theless, many members of the Qui nault I ndian Nation com mu nit y conti nued to live i n poor socioeconomic conditions i n the early 2000s. T he com mu nit y scored ver y low i n socioeconomic well-bei ng i n 1990 (45.6) and remai ned ver y low i n 2000 (44.2), mak i ng it one of the lowest scor i ng com mu nities arou nd the Oly mpic National Forest. I n compar ison, the 35 com mu nities withi n 5 miles of the Oly mpic National Forest had an average socioeco - nomic well-bei ng scor i ng of 61.7 i n 1990 and 64.5 i n 2000. 3 Never theless, u nemploy ment and percent age of the popu- lation livi ng below the pover t y li ne d ropped du r i ng this per iod (u nemploy ment went f rom 19 to 13 percent, and percent age i n pover t y went f rom 32.3 to 28.2), and median i ncome rose slightly ($25,724 i n 1990, $28,171 i n 2000). T he tot al population of the Qui nault I ndian Nation d ropped bet ween 1990 and 2000 (f rom 1,542 i n 1990 to 1,471 i n 2000). T he geog raphic isolation of the reser vation and its distance from regional centers mean that local job opportunities are limited. early 1990s. About 15 cedar-shake mills were i n the area i n the mid-1980s; i n 2003, only 6 remai ned. Manufact u r i ng went f rom cont r ibuti ng 31 percent of employ ment i n 1990, to 16 percent i n 2000. Most manufact u r i ng jobs were i n the timber i ndust r y. Many timber workers and thei r families lef t the com mu nit y i n the late 1980s and early 1990s i n search of timber jobs elsewhere (such as Alaska). Some of these depar ti ng workers fou nd jobs i n other professions that requi red similar sk ills (such as buildi ng or as arbor ists i n u rban areas). Others remai ned i n the com mu nit y and conti nued to work i n the timber sector, which was sust ai ned by lower levels of production on pr ivate, st ate, and t r ibal forest lands. Still others st ayed and fou nd new jobs i n other sectors, which sometimes meant accepti ng lower wages. Many FS employees also lef t the Lake Qui nault A rea i n the 1990s because of budget cuts, dow nsizi ng, and consolidation on the Oly mpic National Forest dist r icts. One i nter viewee f rom the forest said that the Qui nault Dist r ict of fice (located i n Qui nault) had about 65 f ull-time employ - ees and 150 par t-time and seasonal employees i n the 1980s. I n 2003, only 13 people worked i n that of fice. Com mu nit y i nter viewees repor ted that the loss of FS employees f rom the Lake Qui nault A rea d ramatically affected com mu nit y capacit y. T hese workers had been active i n the schools, com mu nit y affai rs, ser vice clubs, and the fi re depar t ment, and they provided com mu nit y leadership. T hei r exodus represented to the community a loss of human capital. Recreation and tou r ism were also impor t ant i n the Lake Qui nault A rea th roughout the 1900s because of the presence of Lake Qui nault, the nat u ral beaut y of the area, and its closeness to Oly mpic National Park and the Oly mpic National Forest. Lodges and chalets are scat tered arou nd the lake. T he Qui nault Lodge, which or igi nally opened i n 1890, is the most renow ned of the lodges. With the decli ne of the timber i ndust r y, a g rowi ng percent age of com mu nit y residents have jobs i n the ser vice sector; many work at the lodge or i n local rest au rants. Others work as hu nti ng and fishi ng g uides, or sell outdoor equipment. A r ts, recreation, accom modation, and food ser vices rose f rom 8 percent of employ ment i n the com mu nit y i n 1990, to 15 percent i n 2000. Some i nter viewees believed that tou r ism had kept the com mu nit y goi ng and was the reason it still exists. 3 See chapter 2 for a descr ipt ion of t he socioeconom ic well-bei ng scor i ng system. Well-bei ng categor y scores a re a s follows: ver y low (0 ? 48.72), low (48.73 ? 61.07), med iu m (61.08 ?73.36), h ig h (73.37? 85.58) a nd ver y h ig h (85.59 ?10 0). Lake Quinault Area T he timber i ndust r y began operati ng i n the Lake Qui nault A rea i n the early 1900s. Early W hite set tlers est ablished timber claims there and were r u n ni ng small mills by 1915. Loggi ng i ncreased af ter World War II. G rays Harbor Cou nt y, where the Lake Qui nault A rea com mu nit y is, produced the most timber of the fou r Oly mpic Peni nsula cou nties bet ween 1965 and 2001, with an an nual average of 600 million board feet across all ow nerships. Most of this timber came f rom pr ivate forest land (fig. 8-2). All timber harvested from federal forest land had to be processed in the cou nt y. As a result, many of the small saw mills and cedar-shake mills i n the Lake Qui nault A rea depend on tim - ber f rom the Oly mpic National Forest. Until the late 1980s, many com mu nit y residents worked i n the timber i ndust r y. T he timber i ndust r y i n the Lake Qui nault A rea began to decli ne i n the mid-1980s, and conti nued to decli ne rapidly with the reduction i n federal timber sales i n the 113 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Tou r ism is seasonal, however, and most visitors come i n su m mer. Few visitors come i n the wi nter, li kely because the area receives 140 i nches of rai n an nually, falli ng i n fall, wi nter, and spr i ng. Recreation and tou r ism wages are low compared to timber wages, and tou r ists and local residents of ten have con flicti ng values. T he Lake Qui nault A rea has a st rong timber cult u re. Many local people want loggi ng jobs and feel that tou r ists, who want to see nat u ral beaut y rather than clearcuts, view them negatively. Never theless, the com mu nit y economic revit alization plan developed by a local com mu nit y action for u m i n the late 1980s st rongly promotes tourism. The special forest products industry has long been impor t ant on the Oly mpic Peni nsula. Du r i ng the 1990s, the i ndust r y g rew and became i ncreasi ngly dependent on outside laborers. Few long-ter m residents of the Lake Qui nault A rea worked i n the i ndust r y because the work is ext remely labor i ntensive. Several area residents and Oly mpic National Forest employees i nter viewed noted a g row th i n the Peni nsula?s Hispanic population du r i ng the 1990s, which they associated with g row th i n the floral g reens i ndust r y. Bet ween 1990 and 2000, the Hispanic population of the Lake Qui nault A rea rose f rom zero to 6 percent of the tot al population (thei r nu mbers are li kely u nder repor ted); many picked and t ranspor ted br ush, and others worked as t ree planters, doi ng forest thi n ni ng, and i n the shake i ndust r y. I n the Lake Qui nault A rea, as elsewhere on the Peni nsula, the i n flu x of Hispanic families has helped schools maintain their enrollment in light of outmigration by timber workers and thei r families. T hese families also helped mai nt ai n busi ness at local stores. Never theless, the tot al population of the Lake Qui nault A rea decli ned by 11.8 percent (f rom 705 to 622) bet ween 1990 and 2000. Apart from these natural-resource-based industries, gover n ment jobs (with the school dist r ict, the cou nt y, the Qui nault I ndian Nation, and st ate and federal gover n ments) became a mainstay of the local economy. Some people also commuted to professional jobs in Aberdeen and Hoquiam. Others pu rsued college education because they could not get work i n the woods when they g raduated f rom high school. T he Lake Qui nault A rea had not yet become a desti nation for reti rees. One of the const rai nts on development i n the community is the limited amount of private land. Federal and state governments, private timber companies, or the Qui nault Tr ibe ow n most of the land i n the area. Socioeconomic well-bei ng i n the Lake Qui nault A rea was lower than the average for the 35 com mu nities withi n 5 miles of the Oly mpic National Forest: it was low i n 1990 (59.3), and remai ned low i n 2000 (60.3). Although median i ncome rose by 30 percent (f rom $27,507 to $35,893), u nemploy ment also rose 6 percent du r i ng the decade (f rom 6.8 to 7.2 percent). T he percent age of people livi ng below the pover t y li ne decreased f rom 18.3 to 16 percent. Quilcene From the 1950s to the 1980s, Quilcene was a t raditional loggi ng tow n. Com mu nit y members logged mai nly on the Oly mpic National Forest, which is adjacent to the com mu nit y. Other com mu nit y members worked for the FS (the Hood Canal Ranger Dist r ict of fice is i n Quilcene), i n local busi nesses, or at nearby mills. Begi n ni ng i n the late 1980s, timber sector employ ment i n Quilcene decli ned dramatically, triggered mainly by the decline in timber supply f rom the Oly mpic National Forest. Many timber workers lost thei r jobs and lef t the com mu nit y with thei r families. Bet ween 1990 and 2000, manufact u r i ng jobs went f rom providi ng 27 percent to 9 percent of employ - ment locally. Many FS jobs also disappeared i n the 1990s, causi ng an exodus of FS employees, which affected local businesses, such as restaurants, stores, and gas stations that either closed or dow n-sized. It also created a supply of i nexpensive housi ng. Bet ween 1990 and 2000, the popula - tion of Quilcene d ropped by 21.6 percent, f rom 478 to 375. Some timber workers with st rong ties to the com mu nit y did st ay i n Quilcene, and either fou nd other work or shif ted to logging on private lands. Although the population decli ned, new g roups of people moved i nto Quilcene du r i ng the 1990s and early 2000s d raw n by affordable land pr ices, low housi ng costs, the nat u ral beaut y of the area, and its reasonable proximit y to u rban areas. One such g roup consisted of low-i ncome people with no visible means of suppor t who bought houses lef t by timber workers at affordable pr ices. A nother g roup was high-i ncome people buyi ng second homes, reti rement 114 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III homes, or primary residences in the community from which they com muted to jobs i n u rban areas, such as Por t Tow nsend, Bremer ton, and Silverdale. Const r uction went f rom cont r ibuti ng 3 percent to 15 percent of employ ment i n Quilcene bet ween 1990 and 2000. Although timber workers lived and worked locally and therefore shopped i n Quilcene, com muters and second-home ow ners generally shopped and used ser vices elsewhere, hu r ti ng local busi nesses. A nother g roup of new residents are ent repreneu rs and people t r yi ng to st ar t new busi nesses. Most of the newcomers are af fluent and well- educated, with the potential to help build com mu - nit y capacit y i n Quilcene. Median household i ncome i n Quilcene rose 58 percent bet ween 1990 and 2000 (f rom $25,378 to $40,094). At the same time, u nemploy ment d ropped 65 percent (f rom 20.3 to 7.1), and the percent age of the population livi ng below the pover t y li ne d ropped by 23.3 percent (f rom 19.5 to 14.9 percent). T he com mu nit y?s socioeconomic well-bei ng rati ng ju mped f rom ver y low i n 1990 (46.5) to mediu m i n 2000 (64.2), by far the largest i ncrease of any of the case-st udy com mu nities i n ou r sample. T hese st atistics mask the fact that Quilcene as a com mu nit y no longer has much of a middle class, which was once composed of timber workers. Quilcene?s population now consists of ver y r ich people and ver y poor people. Hence, com mu nit y residents i nter viewed had mixed views of how well the com mu nit y was doi ng, and whether socioeconomic conditions were improvi ng, st ag nati ng, or worseni ng. Fishing and agriculture are the other main natural- resou rce-based employ ment sectors i n Quilcene, which is on the Hood R iver Canal. It has had an active shell fish i ndust r y si nce the 1920s and is par ticularly well endowed with oyster beds. Lush past u res i n the small valleys nor th of Quilcene once sust ai ned several beef, dai r y, or poult r y farms that provided a supplemental source of income to loggers, and the farms declined in number as loggers left the community. More recently, efforts to develop organic agriculture in the area have begun. T he special forest products i ndust r y was not com - mercially impor t ant to Quilcene residents i n 2003. A br ush processi ng plant was once i n the com mu nit y, but it is no longer there and never supported many people, according to i nter viewees. Special forest products, however, did provide an additional i ncome st ream to loggers i n the past. Now, the mai n br ush har vesters arou nd Quilcene are not local residents but Hispanics who ar r ive i n vans, har vest br ush locally, and leave. Small effor ts were i ntended to promote recreation and tou r ism i n Quilcene over the last decade, with some busi - ness development i n this arena. T hese effor ts, however, were hampered by the closu re of the Dosewallips Road, the mai n local access to the Oly mpic National Forest and Oly mpic National Park. T his popular route was closed by heav y rai ns and landslides i n 2002, and it has not been repai red and reopened ? a topic of local concer n cu r rently bei ng evalu - ated by the Forest Service. A nother impediment to g row th and development i n Quilcene is the lack of physical i nf rast r uct u re. It has no sewer system and the com mu nit y water supply is f rom wells. T he Oly mpic National Forest is cu r rently plan ni ng to t ransfer par t of the Forest?s water r ights to the local P ublic Utilities Dist r ict. Quilcene is also affected by st r ict zoni ng regulations that apply to unincorporated areas under the Washi ng ton G row th Management Act of 1990 that limit subdivision and commercial and industrial development. Com mu nit y i nter viewees also repor ted a lack of com mu nit y cohesion, with no ag reement on a f ut u re vision for the com - mu nit y, and no collective will to work toward improvement. Role of Federal Forest Management Policy in Influencing Change All th ree of the case-st udy com mu nities arou nd the Oly m - pic National Forest were actively i nvolved i n the timber industry in the decades leading up to the Plan. The timber i ndust r y decli ne began i n the early to mid 1980s i n the Qui nault I ndian Nation and Lake Qui nault A rea, i n the late 1980s i n Quilcene, and conti nued i n all th ree com mu nities th roughout the 1990s. Although some people still work i n the woods or i n mills, the timber sector is no longer domi - nant in any of the three communities. I n the Qui nault I ndian Nation, most i nter viewees be - lieved that federal forest management policy played a minor role in bringing about change in the local timber economy. 115 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Accordi ng to them, change began i n the early 1980s, before the spot ted owl listi ng, cou r t i nju nctions, and the Plan. T hey believed the decli ne was t r iggered by i ncreased mechaniza - tion, the retooli ng of mills, changes i n expor t markets, a national recession, and corporate buyouts that often elimi- nated union employees. More recently, the drop in timber pr ices related to competition f rom expor ts has made it u n - economical to engage in timber production. Labor-intensive forest management jobs such as tree planting and thinning, once done by t r ibe members, are now done by Hispanic crews. T he cedar-shake i ndust r y, impor t ant as a sou rce of jobs for both the Qui nault I ndian Nation and the Lake Qui nault A rea, was hard hit by competition f rom Canadian impor ts and federal reg ulations requi r i ng fi reproofi ng shakes and shi ngles, a process that doubles the pr ice to con - su mers, reduci ng thei r market abilit y. Many t r ibe members were no longer work i ng i n the timber i ndust r y at the time the Plan was adopted because of these combi ned forces. T he Plan was not without effects to the Qui nault I ndian Nation, however. I nter viewees said that the Plan reduced the supply of cedar t rees for the shake i ndust r y, cont r ibuti ng to mill closure. They also said that the Plan reduced job oppor- t u nities on the Oly mpic National Forest. Roughly 20 t r ibe members had worked seasonal jobs on forest fi re crews, jobs that were highly valued because they provided employ ment at a time of year not overlappi ng with the fishi ng season. Accordi ng to a FS employee i nter viewed, the decli ne i n logging on the forest caused a decline in the amount of slash bu r ned, decreasi ng fi re r isk on the forest, and reduci ng the nu mber of fi re jobs. The Plan also affected revenues to the tribe from the Qui nault Special Management A rea of the Oly mpic National Forest (also k now n as Section 2 lands). T he t r ibe is entitled to receive 45 percent of the revenue generated f rom this 5,260 -acre piece of the forest as par t of an ag reement d raw n up to compensate them for an i naccu rate reser vation bou ndar y su r vey that histor ically depr ived the Qui nault of some of thei r lands. T he ag reement was made i n 1988- 89, when the t r ibe anticipated that com mercial loggi ng i n the special management area would generate subst antial revenue. Despite the fact that this land was desig nated an adaptive management area under the Plan, little timber har vest was done, and the t r ibe has not received the anticipated money. Most i nter viewees f rom the Qui nault I ndian Nation concurred that the Plan did not cause the decline of the local timber i ndust r y, but rather exacerbated al ready dete - r iorati ng conditions. I nter viewees f rom the Lake Qui nault A rea also expressed the view that the decli ne of the local timber i ndust r y began before the Plan, i n the 1980s. Li ke i nter viewees f rom the Qui nault I ndian Nation, they cited as causes i ndust r y consolidation, i ncreased mechanization, retooling of mills, competition from imports, changes in expor t markets, and the depletion of old-g row th forest on public, private, and reservation lands. The harvest of second-g row th ?which predomi nates now? requi res fewer t r ucks to haul it, and different mills to mill it. I nter viewees f rom the Lake Qui nault A rea cited Plan-related budget cuts, causing the loss of agency jobs and district consolidation, as being one of the most sig nificant effects of the Plan on the com mu nit y. T hey agreed that the Plan had decreased the supply of cedar for local shake mills. I nter viewees also st ated that the cu r t ail ment of loggi ng on the Oly mpic National Forest had a dispropor tionate effect on local small- to mediu m-sized timber companies. T hese companies and mills were highly dependent on FS timber. Large timber companies obtained thei r wood supply f rom more diverse sou rces and were not as affected by the Plan. I n cont rast, the decrease i n loggi ng on the Oly mpic National Forest?f rom Endangered Species Act listi ngs of the nor ther n spot ted owl ( Strix occidentalis caurina) and the marbled mu r relet ( Brachyramphus marmoratus), court injunctions preventing timber sales on the forest, and the Plan itself?were repor tedly the g reatest causes of change i n Quilcene bet ween the mid-1980s and the early 2000s. T he timber economy of this com mu nit y was highly dependent on Oly mpic National Forest timber. Reduced har vests on the forest t r iggered the t ransition away f rom a loggi ng com mu nit y toward what it is today. With or without the Plan, some forest i nter viewees believed that some amou nt of change was i nevit able. I n 116 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III thei r view, the Oly mpic National Forest could not realisti - cally sust ai n an out put of 200 to 300 million board feet of timber per year. The FS Role in Mitigating Plan Effects Resource and recreat ion benefits ? T he volu me of timber har vested on the Oly mpic National Forest went f rom an an nual average of 243 million board feet i n the 1980s, to an estimated average an nual probable sale quantit y (PSQ) of 10 million board feet u nder the Plan. The volume of timber offered for sale on the forest since the Plan has been so low that the associated economic benefits to local communities are limited. G razi ng and mi ni ng on the Oly mpic National Forest are negligible. Special forest products constitute a thriving i ndust r y on the Oly mpic Peni nsula, but they did not provide a livelihood for most community residents previously employed in the timber sector. Harvesting special forest products is highly labor-intensive, and these jobs have no benefits. Workers i n the special forest products i ndust r y are predominantly Hispanic immigrants. Recreation is a potential g row th area. T he Lake Qui nault A rea has become i ncreasi ngly reliant on jobs i n the recreation and tou r ism sectors. T he Oly mpic National Forest has built trails, improved campsites, and maintained recreation facilities arou nd Lake Qui nault to help suppor t this sector. Agency jobs Full-time- equivalent jobs on the Oly mpic National Forest d ropped f rom 267 i n 1993 to 115 i n 2003 (fig. 8-3). T he forest had fou r ranger dist r ict of fices i n 1990 (i ncludi ng one i n Quilcene and one i n Qui nault), and now has t wo. T he Quilcene and Qui nault of fices are still there, but dist r ict rangers split thei r time bet ween them and the other t wo dist r ict of fices, and both of fices are subst antially smaller. Dow nsizi ng on the Oly mpic National Forest has meant many fewer per manent f ull-time and par t-time or seasonal jobs for com mu nit y residents. T he Qui nault I ndian Nation has provided jobs for for mer FS employees. I nter viewees cited the loss of agency jobs on the Oly mpic National Forest as one of the most sig nificant negative effects of the Plan on local communities. 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Full-time equivalents Fiscal year 199419951996 1997199819992000200120022003 Total full-time equivalents Other Permanent full-time Fig u re 8-3 ? Oly mpic Nat ional Forest st af fi ng levels, 1993 ?20 03. 10,000 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 Contracting (thousand dollars) Fiscal year 1994 19961997 1999 20012002 Technical Equipment Labor 1991 Fig u re 8- 4 ? Oly mpic Nat ional Forest la nd ma nagement cont ract i ng by work t y pe, 1990 ?20 02. 117 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Fig u re 8-5 ? Oly mpic Nat ional Forest com mu n it y econom ic assist a nce prog ram t rends (not adjusted for i n flat ion). N EA I = Nor t hwest Econom ic Adjust ment I n it iat ive. 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0 Economic assistance (million dollars) Fiscal year Base program Noncompetitive NEAI Rural Community Assistance 1994199519961997199819992000200120022003 Contracting T he Oly mpic National Forest spent $46.7 million on land management cont racti ng bet ween 1990 and 2002. Cont ract spendi ng d ropped 28 percent over this per iod. T he nat u re of the cont racts shif ted f rom labor-i ntensive work associated with the forest timber prog ram, to equipment-i ntensive and technical contracting, such as species surveys and road- related work (fig. 8- 4). T he nu mber of cont ractors work i ng for the Oly mpic National Forest decreased by 54 percent, f rom 110 i n 1990 ?92 to 51 i n 2000 ?2002. Cont ractors f rom the I nterst ate 5 cor r idor and f rom small and mediu m-sized communities around Puget Sound captured more contract value than did cont ractors f rom the Oly mpic Peni nsula bet ween 1990 and 2002. Residents of the th ree com mu nities repor ted that the Oly mpic National Forest provided them with some cont ract - i ng oppor t u nities, but that they are few and far bet ween. Examples of cont ract work i nclude road decom missioni ng, precommercial thinning, building trail bridges, installing culver ts, and flood-repai r work. A nu mber of stor ms i n the late 1990s and early 2000s caused damage on the forest, leadi ng to cont racti ng oppor t u nities for flood-repai r work. Resou rce advisor y com mit tees, est ablished by the 2000 Secu re Ru ral Schools Act, have also been a recent sou rce of money for some cont ract work on the forest, although the amou nt is fai rly small. Many Qui nault Tr ibe cont ractors re - por tedly work on reser vation lands, but not on the Oly mpic National Forest. Most Quilcene i nter viewees were u naware of contracting opportunities on FS lands. Mak i ng a livi ng f rom FS cont racti ng is dif ficult for com mu nit y residents because of too few cont racts and too shor t a season of work. Most land management work on the Oly mpic National Forest must be done bet ween mid-July and mid- October, so as not to dist u rb nesti ng owls and mu r relets. Fish-related rest r ictions also limit the time when work can be done i n st reams. Although Lake Qui nault A rea i nter viewees st ated that some local preference is given i n cont ract hi r i ng th rough Histor ically Under utilized Busi - ness (H U B) zone cont racts, many cont ractors on the forest come f rom elsewhere on the Oly mpic Peni nsula or f rom the I nterst ate-5 cor r idor. Community economic assistance A subst antial amou nt of Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative, Ru ral Com mu nit y Assist ance Prog ram f u ndi ng went to the Oly mpic National Forest bet ween 1994 and 1999 (fig. 8-5). T he Lake Qui nault A rea and Quilcene com mu nities both received relatively lit tle. Quilcene ob - tained grant funds to assess infrastructure development and habit at restoration needs, but the i nter viewees k new lit tle about these projects, which apparently had lit tle effect. T he same was t r ue i n the Lake Qui nault A rea. T his com mu nit y received $65,000 i n Ru ral Com mu nit y Assist ance Prog ram money for infrastructure development and community land use plan ni ng. T he FS also helped com mu nit y organizations w r ite g rant proposals. Accordi ng to com mu nit y i nter - viewees, however, these projects also had lit tle effect. I n both places, any cont r ibutions made by the I nitiative were minimal compared to the economic losses sustained by the communities from reductions in federal timber sales. I n cont rast, the Qui nault I ndian Nation received more than $5 million i n I nitiative f u nds th rough the Bu reau of I ndian Affai rs Jobs-i n-the-Woods prog ram, the FS Ru ral 118 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Com mu nit y Assist ance prog ram, and the USDA Ru ral Development program. The tribe spent much of this money on infrastructure development, such as tribal administration buildings, a store, a gas station, a mini-mall, and an interpre- tive center. It also spent money on a watershed analysis and restoration prog ram for the Sal mon R iver watershed. T he I nitiative helped Qui nault t r ibal gover n ment effor ts al ready u nder way g row and develop, and made a subst antial cont r i - bution to economic diversification i n the com mu nit y. Payments to county governments Some forest i nter viewees repor ted that pay ments-to -st ates mitigations had a major st abilizi ng effect on cou nt y gover n - ments on the Oly mpic Peni nsula. Ou r dat a i ndicate that this effect was i ndeed t r ue (fig. 8- 6). Summary T he role of the Oly mpic National Forest i n helpi ng the case- study communities develop and diversify has been minor. I n some areas, recreation development on the forest helped; i n others, the lack of restor i ng and mai nt ai ni ng recreation i nf rast r uct u re has been a bar r ier. Com modit y resou rce outputs from the forest have made a negligible contribution to the com mu nities, with the exception of special forest products. Participants in the special forest products sec- tor, however, are mai nly new workers who moved to the Oly mpic Peni nsula for this pu r pose, rather than displaced timber workers. Jobs i n the FS decli ned by more than half. Cont racti ng oppor t u nities for land management work on the forest also decli ned, although not as quick ly as they did i n the Plan area as a whole. Cont racts provide seasonal work for some local residents. T he sh r i n k i ng cont racti ng oppor t u nities that do exist, however, appear to go mai nly to cont ractors who live somewhere other than the Oly mpic Peni nsula. Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative f u nds f rom the Oly mpic National Forest and other sou rces cont r ibuted subst antially to development and diversification effor ts u nder way i n the Qui nault I ndian Nation, although not i n the other t wo com mu nities. Mitigation measu res and legislation to supplement pay ments to st ates helped st abilize county budgets. On balance, however, the flow of socioeconomic benefits to com mu nities arou nd the Oly mpic National forest decli ned markedly bet ween 1990 and 2002, and st rategies implemented to mitigate the loss of those benefits have not added up. As some i nter viewees f rom Quilcene and the Oly mpic National Forest poi nted out, the forest provided subst antial economic benefits to local com mu nities i n the for m of timber and agency jobs u ntil the late 1980s. T he huge reduction i n timber and jobs du r i ng the 1990s meant that much of this benefit was lost. It would be dif ficult for the forest to compensate for this loss; much would have to happen to make up for it. T he Oly mpic National Forest budget decli ned 49 percent bet ween 1993 and 2003. T he forest has t r ied to help where it can, but it is const rai ned by lack of st aff and money. ?Owl adjusted? reflects t he i ncreased pay ments to cou nt ies made to mitigate the effects of decreased timber revenue and revenue sharing. Distribution of Payments to Counties, 2000 Clallam, 34% Grays Harbor, 10%Jefferson, 46% Thurston, 0% 0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 19 90 19 91 19 92 199319941995199619971998 999200020012002 Payments to counties (million dollars) Mason, 11% Fiscal year Not adjusted Owl adjusted 119 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Mount Hood National Forest and Case-Study Communities The three case-communities composing the sample around the Mou nt Hood National Forest are the Upper Hood R iver Valley ( population 4,288 i n 2000), the Villages of Mou nt Hood f rom Br ight wood to R hododend ron ( population 3,670 i n 2000), and G reater Est acada ( population 9,315 i n 2000) (fig. 8-7). T he Upper Hood R iver Valley was predomi nantly a timber and agricultural community in the decades leading up to the Plan, as was G reater Est acada. Both com mu ni - ties had mills, and both communities contained large fruit orchards. T he Villages of Mou nt Hood, i n cont rast, were heavily i n fluenced by bei ng along Highway 26, the mai n transportation corridor connecting the Portland metro- polit an area to easter n Oregon. Despite the com mu nit y?s bei ng vi r t ually su r rou nded by the Mou nt Hood National Forest, timber was only a mi nor par t of its economy i n the 1970s and 1980s. I nstead, the small tow ns of the Villages of Mou nt Hood were histor ically i n habited by people with second homes, and people whose goods and ser vices cater to the t ravelers, recreationists, and tou r ists who t ravel on Highway 26. By 2003, all th ree case-st udy com mu nities had changed, as descr ibed below. Upper Hood River Valley T he Upper Hood R iver Valley is high on the nor ther n and easter n slopes of Mou nt Hood, i n Hood Cou nt y. T he FS manages 72 percent of the forested land i n the cou nt y ( USDA Forest Ser vice, Forest I nventor y and A nalysis dat a). T he ag r icult u re and timber i ndust r ies took hold i n the com - mu nit y i n the mid to late 1800s. Orchardists of ten bought land that had been logged and put it into fruit production. Timber and agriculture persisted for a century or so, until timber began decli ni ng i n the late 1980s. Bet ween the 1960s and the late 1980s, th ree timber mills operated i n the Upper Hood R iver Valley. All of them closed du r i ng the 1990s, with the loss of several hu nd red jobs. Manufact u r i ng cont r ibuted 14 percent of tot al employ - ment i n the com mu nit y i n 1990, but it had d ropped to 8 percent by 2000. Many timber workers moved away, and those who st ayed adapted i n var ious ways. I n 2003, some people still worked i n forest r y on pr ivate or cou nt y lands, or outside the cou nt y. A few people had small, special - ized milli ng equipment. Others practiced forest r y or had nu rser ies on thei r ow n land. Some fou nd replacement jobs i n orchards, t r uck i ng, weldi ng, the ser vice i ndust r ies, and other odd jobs ? although none of these jobs repor tedly paid as well as timber i ndust r y jobs did. Some engaged i n cont racti ng work, such as watershed restoration. The agricultural sector remained stable through the 1990s, reflected i n U.S. census dat a that show ag r icult u re, forest r y, fishi ng, hu nti ng, and mi ni ng accou nti ng for 22 percent of tot al employ ment i n 1990, and 23 percent i n 2000. Over the last decade, however, orchardists have responded to trends in regional and international fruit markets by conver ti ng thei r orchards f rom apples to pears and more recently to cherries, and planting more variet- ies of apples and pears. Most far ms were family- ow ned. Although ag r icult u re has persisted, some i nter viewees felt it was th reatened by foreig n competition, big g rocer y-store chai ns that cont rol f r uit markets, and large companies that buy up farms. The Hispanic population of the community g rew f rom 21.5 percent of the tot al population i n 1990 to 29 percent i n 2000. I ncreasi ngly, far m workers who were for merly mig rator y are t ak i ng up residence i n the com mu - nit y and br i ngi ng thei r families to live with them, of ten i n housing provided by the orchardists. T he com mu nit y also diversified du r i ng the 1990s. Reti rees, people who are self- employed or com mute to regional centers, and people starting up small businesses moved to the community, many of them from urban areas. Although the com mu nit y?s population g rew by 14.3 percent bet ween 1990 and 2000 (f rom 3,752 to 4,288), this rate was slower than the average for non met ropolit an Plan-area communities. A g rowi ng nu mber of recreationists and tou r ists t ravel th rough the com mu nit y bet ween Mou nt Hood and the Colu mbia R iver Gorge. T his i ncrease has been good for the local service and retail sectors, although it has in- creased congestion, accident rates, and the local population. Developi ng recreation and tou r ism was a divisive issue i n the community. 120 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Fig u re 8-7? Case -st udy com mu n it ies, Mou nt Hood Nat ional Forest. State Highway 14 State Highway 35 U.S. Highway 26 Washougal River Sandy River Roaring River Clear Creek Collawash River Clackamas River Salmon River Hood River Klickitat RiverState Highway 14 State Highway 35 U.S. Highway 26 I-84 Washougal River Sandy River Roaring River Clear Creek Collawash River Sandy NorthBonneville Cascade Locks Stevenson Hood River Mosier The Dalles Idanha Detroit Estacada Carson Clackamas River Salmon River Greater Estacada Upper Hood River ValleyVillages of Mount Hood Hood River Klickitat River Portland Sandy NorthBonneville Cascade Locks Stevenson Hood River Mosier The Dalles Idanha Detroit Estacada 0 5 10 Miles o Case-study national forests Case-study community boundaries Bureau of Land Management Forest Service Major lakes and rivers Major roads Carson Mount Hood National Forest 121 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies T he socioeconomic well-bei ng measu re for the Upper Hood R iver Valley remai ned mediu m bet ween 1990 and 2000 (at 71.3 i n 1990 and 72.0 i n 2000). T his measu re was above the average for the 43 com mu nities withi n 5 miles of the Mou nt Hood National Forest, which was 67.3 i n 1990 and 66.8 i n 2000. Median i ncome rose slightly du r i ng this per iod (f rom $32,533 to $37,715). Unemploy ment and the percent age of the population livi ng below the pover t y li ne both d ropped by roughly 25 percent (f rom 10 to 7.5 percent for u nemploy ment, 17.3 to 13.2 percent for pover t y). Some i nter viewees noted that people who lost thei r jobs or could no longer afford to live i n the area moved away; thei r depar t u re may par tially explai n the differences i n these economic indicators. Greater Estacada The timber industry dominated the economy and culture of G reater Est acada f rom the 1950s th rough the late 1980s. A rail li ne built i n the early 1900s helped spu r G reater Est acada?s development as a timber com mu nit y. Federal timber f rom the Mou nt Hood and Willamet te National For - ests for med the basis of the local timber economy. Sixt y-six percent of the forest lands i n Clackamas Cou nt y (G reater Est acada?s cou nt y) are i n federal ow nership ( USDA Forest Ser vice, Forest I nventor y and A nalysis dat a). Consequently, cutbacks i n federal timber har vesti ng i n the late 1980s severely affected the community. Many loggers, mill workers, and thei r families moved away and some timber workers reti red. Others switched to jobs i n the ser vice or const r uction i ndust r ies, which did not pay as well. G reater Est acada?s const r uction sector went f rom 9 to 12 percent of tot al employ ment bet ween 1990 and 2000. Some timber workers remai ned i n G reater Est acada. T hey st ayed i n the timber i ndust r y by work i ng elsewhere seasonally, competing for logging contracts over a broad geographic area, or commuting to mill jobs in other locations. Few, if any, buy timber sales on national forest lands; local loggi ng busi nesses now rely on pr ivate timber, although only 13 percent of the forest land i n Clackamas Cou nt y is i n pr ivate i ndust r ial forest ow nership. Similarly, the local mill no longer mills wood f rom the national forests. Its timber comes from private lands or is imported f rom somewhere else. Although the mill i n Est acada has not closed, the nu mber of work shif ts has d ropped subst antially. Manufact u r i ng made up 21 percent of tot al employ ment i n 1990; it accou nted for 17 percent i n 2000. Accompanyi ng the loss of timber sector jobs was a loss of contracting opportunities and FS jobs. The Mount Hood National Forest has a dist r ict of fice i n Est acada, but the nu mber of employees there d ropped shar ply i n the 1990s. Jobs lost in the community also affected retail businesses, several of which closed dow n because of lack of demand for thei r goods and ser vices. Never theless, U.S. census dat a i ndicate that ret ail t rade made up 14 percent of tot al employ ment i n both 1990 and 2000. Ag r icult u re, est ablished i n G reater Est acada i n the 1850s, also persists. Ag r icult u re was the domi nant i ndust r y i n the area f rom the 1850s th rough the early 1900s. Today, it is much less prevalent, although still important. Agricul- t u re, forest r y, fishi ng, hu nti ng, and mi ni ng cont r ibuted 6 percent of tot al employ ment i n 1990, and 4 percent i n 2000. Li ke the Upper Hood R iver Valley, the nat u re of ag r icult u re i n G reater Est acada has changed over the years. Fr uit orchards once domi nated the i ndust r y, but Ch r ist mas t ree far ms, far ms produci ng specialt y products (such as g reen - house flowers), and nu rser ies prevailed du r i ng the 1990s. T hese crops requi re year-rou nd labor, u nli ke earlier for ms of ag r icult u re, which were seasonal. T his shif t brought about an increase in the permanent Hispanic population of the com mu nit y bet ween 1990 and 2000 (f rom 3.1 to 7.3 percent of the tot al population). Tourists and recreationists started visiting the Greater Est acada area i n the early 1900s for picnics, fishi ng, and other activities. The number of visitors passing through the community has steadily increased because Greater Est acada is one of the access routes to the Mou nt Hood National Forest. Recreation and tou r ism have always been small cont r ibutors to the local economy, however. Many commuters to the Portland metropolitan area moved i nto the com mu nit y du r i ng the 1990s, helpi ng ex - plai n the com mu nit y?s i ncrease i n population f rom 8,396 i n 1990 to 9,315 i n 2000 (an i ncrease of 11 percent). Por tland is roughly 30 miles away. Many of these com muters were middle-aged and had families with school-age child ren. 122 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Work i ng people close to reti rement, whose child ren have g row n, also moved i nto the area. Many of these people were d raw n to the com mu nit y by a desi re to have a more r u ral lifest yle and land, and many were also well off economical - ly, causi ng some ?gent r ification? of the com mu nit y. Median household i ncome i n G reater Est acada rose by 24.5 percent bet ween 1990 and 2000 (f rom $35,898 to $44,689), g reater than the i ncrease for Plan-area com mu nities as a whole. Never theless, u nemploy ment rose by 13.4 percent (f rom 8.5 to 9.6), and the percent age of the population livi ng below the pover t y li ne rose by 7.8 percent (f rom 11.5 to 12.4). T he socioeconomic well-bei ng score for G reater Est acada d ropped f rom mediu m i n 1990 (61.7) to low i n 2000 (58.4), and was below average for the 43 com mu nities withi n 5 miles of the Mou nt Hood National Forest. T he decli ne of the timber i ndust r y and the g row th of G reater Est acada as a bed room com mu nit y mean that, today, most residents no longer have local jobs. Several i nter viewees said that the major it y of the com mu nit y?s population lived and worked i n G reater Est acada th rough the late 1980s; i n 2003, most of the population com muted to jobs outside the area. One consequence of this change was that many com muters spent thei r money elsewhere. T his shif t, combi ned with the r isi ng cost of ow ni ng and r u n ni ng a business, caused turnover in local businesses during the past 15 years. Although several people have at tempted to st ar t small busi nesses i n G reater Est acada, most have not survived. One of the const rai nts on economic development and diversification i n G reater Est acada has been opposition to commercial development on the part of local government. State land use regulations have also played a role in limiting residential, commercial, and industrial development there. T he com mu nit y did upg rade its water and sewer systems and extended them i nto areas zoned for i ndust r ial develop - ment i n the hope of at t racti ng new i ndust r ial jobs. Although the infrastructure is in place, no industries have come. Com mu nit y leadership held divergent views on g row th and development issues, and competing visions for Greater Est acada?s f ut u re. As a result, decision mak i ng to suppor t the com mu nit y?s g row th and development, and com mu nit y i nvolvement and suppor t for projects, were weak. Villages of Mount Hood From Brightwood to Rhododendron T he Villages of Mou nt Hood f rom Br ighton to R hododen - d ron (herei naf ter called the Villages) are along or just off of Highway 26, roughly 45 miles east of Por tland, on the west slope of Mou nt Hood. T hey lie close to the mou nt ai n?s recreation desti nations (sk i areas, t rails, lakes, and resor ts). Some 14,000 to 20,000 vehicles t ravel th rough the com mu - nity on a busy day en route to recreation destinations or to easter n Oregon. Traf fic is g rowi ng at a rate of 3 percent per year, and the Oregon Depar t ment of Transpor t ation conti n - ues to widen Highway 26. T he Highway 26 t raf fic provides an impor t ant sou rce of i ncome to local busi nesses. W hen t raf fic is up, busi ness is bet ter. Accordi ng to several i nter viewees, the Villages did not depend heavily on timber histor ically. Loggi ng was a par t of the com mu nit y?s economy and cult u re f rom the 1940s to the 1970s, however. Some mills operated i n the area during that period. The timber industry declined in this com mu nit y du r i ng the 1970s and early 1980s, before both the owl?s listi ng and the Plan. T he local loggi ng companies and mills had lef t by the early 1980s. Ag r icult u re, forest r y, fishi ng, hu nti ng, and mi ni ng d ropped f rom 5 to 2 percent of tot al employ ment bet ween 1990 and 2000. Manufact u r - i ng d ropped f rom 9 to 8 percent, reflecti ng the mi nor role of timber i n the local economy du r i ng the 1990s. T he few timber workers who still lived i n the area i n the 1990s logged on private lands. Some small, private nonindustrial forest ow ners i n and arou nd the Villages have residential properties. They hire local residents and small contractors to log thei r land. Accordi ng to some i nter viewees, loggi ng on pr ivate noni ndust r ial forest land has been more profit able since the harvest of federal timber declined. I nter viewees repor ted that the loss of agency jobs on the Mou nt Hood National Forest du r i ng the 1990s had a much stronger effect than did the loss of timber jobs in the Villages. Bet ween 1993 and 2003, the nu mber of f ull-time- equivalent positions on the forest d ropped by 59 percent. Consequently, many local residents who had worked for the forest transferred, retired, or lost employment opportuni- ties, and many moved. T he exodus of FS employees created a supply of housing at affordable prices and contributed to 123 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies the g row th of the Villages as a bed room com mu nit y for the Por tland met ropolit an area. A major wideni ng of Highway 26 i n the mid-1980s provided another impet us for this shif t. Low-i ncome and fi rst-time home buyers willi ng to com - mute longer dist ances to afford a home, people wishi ng to live i n a more r u ral area, and people who wanted more for thei r money moved i nto the com mu nit y du r i ng the 1990s. T he population of the Villages g rew by 50 percent bet ween 1990 and 2000. T he newcomers were families with school- age children, young people, early or partial retirees, and low-i ncome people. Many com muted to jobs elsewhere. T he com mu nit y?s Hispanic population also g rew slightly, as seasonal mig rant workers set tled there and brought thei r families to joi n them. Many work at the nearby resor ts, i n residential building, and in the service sector. Recreation, tou r ism, and seasonal residents have been a feat u re of the com mu nit y?s identit y for decades. T he Mou nt Hood National Forest hosts the second largest nu mber of recreation visits among Plan-area national forests: just over 4 million an nually (Kocis et al. 2004). More than 550 recreational residences are on the Mou nt Hood National Forest, many of them in the Villages. In addition, many Por tland-area residents seek i ng recreation oppor t u nities on Mount Hood travel through the community to reach thei r desti nations. Recreational ser vices were a promi nent feature of the local service sector. Jobs in arts, recreation, accom modation, and food ser vices rose f rom 10 percent to 21 percent of tot al employ ment bet ween 1990 and 2000. T he Mou nt Hood sk i areas, i n par ticular, play an impor t ant role i n d rawi ng recreationists to the area, and have a big i n fluence on the local economy. Rapid population g row th i n the Villages (f rom 2,445 i n 1990 to 3,670 i n 2000, an i ncrease of 50 percent) helped offset the effects to local businesses caused by the departure of many FS employees. Bet ween 1990 and 2000, median household i ncome i n the com mu nit y i ncreased by 43.9 percent (f rom $35,898 to $51,639). Unemploy ment d ropped by 12.7 percent (f rom 6.9 to 6), and the percent age of the population livi ng i n pover t y d ropped by 8.2 percent (f rom 6.9 to 6.3). Never theless, the com mu nit y?s socioeconomic well-bei ng measu re d ropped f rom high (73.7) to mediu m (73.0) du r i ng this per iod. Despite this decli ne, the Villages had one of the highest socioeconomic well-bei ng scores of the com mu nities withi n 5 miles of the Mou nt Hood National Forest. Few organized effor ts have been made to for mulate community development plans in the Villages, but the com mu nit y is g rowi ng and developi ng of its ow n ac - cord. Residents were divided about whether they believed development was desi rable. No com mon vision exists for the future direction of the community. Role of Federal Forest Management Policy in Influencing Change I nter viewees f rom com mu nities arou nd the Mou nt Hood National Forest perceived the Plan as havi ng an ar ray of effects on thei r com mu nities. Several i nter viewees f rom the Upper Hood R iver Valley believed that decli ni ng timber supplies f rom the Mou nt Hood National Forest u nder the Plan was par tly responsible for the mill closu res i n the com mu nit y i n the 1990s. T hey also viewed litigation, which prevented a conti nued flow of timber f rom the Mou nt Hood National Forest u nder the Plan, as a par tial cause of mill closu res. T hey identified other var iables affecti ng the tim - ber i ndust r y, however, such as competition i n regional and i nter national markets. One of the com mu nit y?s th ree mills bu r ned dow n and did not reopen. A nother was conver ted to other i ndust r ial uses. T he thi rd went out of busi ness, although it remains standing and is reportedly operational. Many i nter viewees f rom Est acada believed that the owl listi ng, subsequent cou r t i nju nctions agai nst har vesti ng federal timber, and the Plan were the mai n causes of decli ne i n the com mu nit y?s timber economy, and the mai n impet us for community change. They associated the drop in federal timber har vesti ng with the loss of jobs for loggi ng cont rac - tors, FS dow nsizi ng, and layoffs at the mill. Simult aneous g row th i n the Por tland met ropolit an area, and the agi ng of Oregon?s population, cont r ibuted to Est acada?s t ransition to a bedroom community. By cont rast, most i nter viewees f rom the Villages viewed the Plan as not havi ng much effect on thei r com mu - nit y or as i n fluenci ng the nat u re of change there. T he effect they associated most with the Plan was the loss of FS jobs and employees f rom the com mu nit y. I nter viewees viewed 124 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III recreation and tou r ism on the Mou nt Hood National Forest as not being affected by the Plan or forest management policy, more broadly. I nstead, they believed weather, the health of the economy, and the development and marketi ng of recreation i nf rast r uct u re (such as resor ts and sk i areas) affected local recreation and tourism the most. Thus, the effects of the Plan on case-study communities associated with the Mou nt Hood National Forest were u neven. FS Role in Mitigating Plan Effects Resource and recreat ion benefits ? Trends in resource and recreation outputs from the Mount Hood National Forest are repor ted i n volu me II of the monitoring report. The Mount Hood produced an average of 350 million board feet of timber an nually du r i ng the 1980s, but its PSQ d ropped to 64 million board feet u nder the Plan. None of the people i nter viewed f rom the th ree case-st udy com mu nities arou nd the Forest said they were benefiti ng f rom Mou nt Hood timber sales i n 2003. Mi ni ng was i nsig nificant i n the case-st udy com mu ni - ties, as was g razi ng. A nd special forest products were not mentioned as bei ng impor t ant economically. I nter viewees did identify recreation as being important in helping the case-st udy com mu nities der ive economic benefits f rom the forest. Forest-based recreation was cr itical to the economy of the Villages, and it was seen as one way to stimulate busi ness i n G reater Est acada and the Upper Hood R iver Valley. Recreation expansion and tou r ism development are divisive issues i n the Upper Hood R iver Valley, however. I nter viewees f rom Est acada and the Villages said that the FS could cont r ibute to com mu nit y well-bei ng by improvi ng recreation opportunities and infrastructure on the forest, and by encouraging tourism there. Agency jobs T he Mou nt Hood National Forest work force went f rom 662 f ull-time equivalent positions to 274 bet ween 1993 and 2003, mak i ng it one of the hardest hit of all Plan-area national forests (fig. 8-8). T he forest closed t wo of its six ranger dist r ict of fices bet ween 1990 and 2004 (i n Maupi n and Troutdale). I nter viewees f rom all th ree com mu nities reported that the FS had been one of the main local em- ployers, if not the mai n employer, before the 1990s. Si nce then, both per manent and seasonal jobs with the Mou nt Hood National Forest have decli ned steadily, st rongly af - fecting all three communities. According to several inter- viewees, the loss of agency jobs represented a loss of some of the best jobs available in their communities. Moreover, they viewed the loss of FS employees f rom thei r com - munities as causing a local brain drain.These employees were t y pically well educated and active i n local schools, chu rches, and gover n ment. W hen they lef t, the com mu ni - ties felt a noticeable loss of human capital. Seasonal jobs on the Mou nt Hood National Forest were also impor t ant to some residents. They provided summer jobs for youth, gave them valuable exper ience, t aught responsibilit y, and created a connection to the forest and its management. The Mount Hood once used employees to run its campgrounds and recreation sites, but i n 2003, it was outsou rci ng most of this work to concessionai res. T he concessionai res repor t - edly contribute little to local job creation, because most of their employees are from outside the area. 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Full-time equivalents Fiscal year 199419951996 1997199819992000200120022003 Total full-time equivalents Permanent full-time Other Fig u re 8-8 ? Mou nt Hood Nat ional Forest st af fi ng levels, 1993 ?20 03. 125 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Contracting T he Mou nt Hood National Forest spent $76.2 million on land management cont racti ng bet ween 1990 and 2002. Con - t ract spendi ng decli ned by 15 percent bet ween 1990 ?92 and 2000 ?2002, compared to the 56 percent d rop on Plan-area national forests as a whole. Most of this decrease happened af ter 1998, although 2001 was a good year for cont racti ng (fig. 8-9). T he amou nt of money spent on equipment-i nten - sive and technical contracting increased during the study per iod, especially for road-related work and su r veys. Labor i ntensive cont racti ng?for t ree planti ng i n par ticular ? de - cli ned af ter 1997. I n 1990 ?92, 178 cont ractors worked for the forest. By 2000 ?2002, this nu mber had d ropped to 109. T h roughout the per iod, about 20 percent of the forest?s con - t ract value went to r u ral cont ractors (i n com mu nities with fewer than 5,000 people), and one-thi rd to one-half went to u rban cont ractors (i n cities of more than 50,000 people). Many of the cont ractors work i ng on the Mou nt Hood came f rom the Willamet te Valley. I nter viewees f rom the Villages st ated that most of the local small cont ractors moved away i n the 1970s and 1980s. Few were aware that any FS cont racti ng oppor t u nities were available. A few small mill operators i n the Upper Hood R iver Valley said they would welcome oppor t u nities to engage i n cont racti ng work with the Forest to achieve forest health objectives and gain access to small amounts of timber. I nter viewees f rom Est acada st ated that a few cont racti ng oppor t u nities were available locally to do road- related work on the Mou nt Hood National Forest and to fight fi res. None of the work created th rough restoration or land management contracting came close to compensating for the loss of timber industry and agency jobs during the 1990s, however. Community economic assistance T he Mou nt Hood cont r ibuted roughly $1 million i n Ru ral Com mu nit y Assist ance Prog ram f u nds as par t of the Nor th - west Economic Adjust ment I nitiative (fig. 8-10). T his money supported community planning efforts and infrastructure development, com mu nit y livabilit y, and dow ntow n im - provement projects consistent with com mu nit y plans. T he forest also provided technical assistance to communities. 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Contracts (million dollars) Fiscal year 1994 19961997 1999 20012002 Technical Equipment Labor 1991 Fig u re 8-9 ? Mou nt Hood Nat ional Forest la nd ma nagement cont ract i ng by work t y pe, 1990 ?20 02. 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 Economic assistance (million dollars) Fiscal year Base program Noncompetitive NEAI Rural Community Assistance 1994199519961997199819992000200120022003 Fig u re 8-10 ? Mou nt Hood Nat ional Forest com mu n it y econom ic assist a nce prog ram t rends. N EA I = Nor t hwest Econom ic Adjust - ment Initiative. 126 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Some forest i nter viewees believed that these effor ts had brought about some local improvements. Because the FS?s Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative f u nds were ad - mi nistered th rough the agency?s St ate and Pr ivate Forest r y program, some also felt that the forest had missed oppor- t u nities to reach out and work with com mu nities th rough the I nitiative process, which could have helped mend and build relations with com mu nit y members. T he forest once had someone on each district coordinating its community economic assist ance prog rams; only one prog ram coordi na - tor ser ved the whole forest i n 2003. To ou r k nowledge, the Villages did not receive any grants under the Initiative, although other communities in Clackamas Cou nt y did. Hood R iver Cou nt y received about $15 million i n I nitiative f u nds. T he Upper Hood R iver Valley received lit tle, if any, of this money. Com mu nit y members prefer red suppor ti ng i nf rast r uct u re development projects th rough t ax measu res and bonds, rather than g rant w r iti ng. T he com - munity did obtain Title II money for infrastructure develop- ment projects from the local resource advisory committee. Some skepticism was expressed about whether such projects would stimulate the local economy. I n cont rast, Est acada received over $5 million i n g rant and loan money through the Initiative from various agen- cies. T his money suppor ted the extension of the water and sewer i nf rast r uct u re that has yet to at t ract i ndust r y. It also provided business loans and development, and supported community planning activities. Unfortunately, funded projects did not yield the desired results because commu- nit y suppor t was lack i ng, as were com mit ment and follow th rough. Few i nter viewees perceived a con nection bet ween the Plan and the grants and loans that supported these projects. Payments to states Payments-to-states mitigation measures substantially offset declines in forest collection receipts and funding to coun- ties that would have occu r red i n the absence of mitigation (fig. 8-11). Not u ntil af ter the Secu re Ru ral Schools Act of 2000, however, did these pay ments compare with pre-1990 amounts. Summary T he consensus among i nter viewees f rom all th ree case- st udy com mu nities and the Mou nt Hood National Forest was that the forest cont r ibuted lit tle to economic develop - ment and diversification and com mu nit y well-bei ng i n the Upper Hood R iver Valley, G reater Est acada, and the Villages of Mou nt Hood af ter Plan adoption. Excep - tions were some projects f u nded th rough the Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative, and pay ments-to -st ates mitigation. A ny benefits created did not offset the effects of declining timber harvests and agency jobs. Several inter- viewees f rom Est acada and the Upper Hood R iver Valley expressed the view that the FS could not assist com mu nities with economic development and diversification, and they Fig u re 8-11? Mou nt Hood Nat ional Forest pay ments to cou nt ies. ?Owl adjusted? reflects t he i ncreased pay ments to cou nt ies made to mitigate the effects of decreased timber revenue and revenue sharing. Distribution of Payments to Counties, 2000 Clackamas, 47% Hood River, 19% Jefferson, 0% Wasco, 20% 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 19 90 19 91 19 92 199319941995199619971998 999200020012002 Payments to counties (million dollars) Multnomah, 7% Fiscal year Not adjusted Owl adjusted Marion, 6% 127 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies did not expect it to. Not only did the nu mber of people work i ng on the forest d rop by 59 percent bet ween 1993 and 2003, but the forest budget also decreased 59 percent du r i ng the same per iod. A couple of i nter viewees f rom the forest and f rom the Upper Hood R iver Valley noted that any progress local communities had made in developing and diversif yi ng was the result of thei r ow n effor ts, not the result of agency management actions, policy initiatives, or assistance programs. Klamath National Forest and Case-Study Communities The case-study communities surrounding the Klamath National Forest were Scot t Valley ( population 5,126 i n 2000), But te Valley ( population 1,883 i n 2000), and Mid-K lamath ( population 1,660 i n 2000) (fig. 8-12), all i n Sisk iyou Cou nt y. Federal forest land accou nts for 72 per - cent of all forest land i n the cou nt y ( USDA Forest Ser vice Forest I nventor y and A nalysis dat a). T hus, federal forest management policy can subst antially affect the cou nt y?s timber sector. Ag r icult u re and timber were st rong com - ponents of the But te Valley and Scot t Valley economies historically. The Mid-Klamath primarily depended on timber in the decades leading up to the Plan. As a result, the Plan affected the community strongly. Scott Valley Historically, gold mining, farming, ranching, and logging were mai nst ays of the Scot t Valley economy. Gold mi ni ng has been i nsig nificant i n recent decades, however. Timber workers began leavi ng the area i n the 1970s and 1980s, when the dow nt u r n i n the timber economy began. By 1990, roughly half of them were gone. Decli nes i n timber production on the K lamath National Forest i n the years immediately preceding the Plan dramatically affected the com mu nit y?s remai ni ng timber workers, causi ng most of those who still lived i n the com mu nit y to leave with thei r families i n the early 1990s. Bet ween 1994 and 2002, t wo of the remai ni ng mills that employed Scot t Valley residents closed dow n, with some 145 jobs lost as a result. Manufact u r i ng jobs d ropped f rom 14 percent to 4 percent of tot al employ ment i n the com mu nit y bet ween 1990 and 2000. Not all timber workers lef t the area, however. Some reti red, some got lower payi ng jobs i n the ser vice sector, and some conti nued to work i n the i ndust r y, com muti ng long dist ances to fi nd work or work i ng i nter mit tently. Although private industrial timberlands are on the mou nt ai n slopes above the valley floor, the companies that ow n them did not provide a meani ngf ul alter native sou rce of employ ment for Scot t Valley timber workers. Only 18 percent of the forest land i n Sisk iyou Cou nt y is ow ned by the pr ivate forest i ndust r y ( USDA Forest Ser vice Forest I nventor y and A nalysis dat a). Pr ivate i ndust r ial timberland ow ners i n nor ther n Califor nia have dif ficult y conti nui ng to operate there because of the loss of timber industry i nf rast r uct u re and Califor nia st ate reg ulations that put a bu rden on thei r busi nesses, mak i ng it costly to operate. Several companies have moved across the border to Oregon, where the busi ness climate is more favorable to the timber i ndust r y. T his move has exacerbated the effects of job loss on r u ral com mu nities i n nor ther n Califor nia. Many welfare recipients (another long-ter m seg ment of the local population) and people livi ng on u nemploy ment also moved away f rom the Scot t Valley i n the mid-1990s, when thei r benefits apparently ran out. T he exodus of these residents and thei r families, along with most of the remai ni ng timber workers, caused some schools to close or consolidate, and caused a loss of support to the service and busi ness sectors of the com mu nit y. W hen timber workers and thei r families moved away, housi ng pr ices slu mped br iefly, at t racti ng the at tention of you ng reti rees f rom u rban areas, and older, mobile, high- ear ni ng work - ers. These people began to move into the Scott Valley, and housing prices have since risen dramatically. Median age in the com mu nit y rose 33.6 percent bet ween 1990 and 2000, reflecti ng the exodus of families and the i n flu x of older people. Although the com mu nit y?s population changed i n composition bet ween 1990 and 2000, its tot al population remai ned at about 5,100. Ranchers i n the Scot t Valley com mu nit y, whose families have been ranching for generations, have also exper ienced st ress over the last decade and have a dif ficult time mai nt ai ni ng thei r way of life. T he pressu res come f rom 128 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III 0 5 10 Miles Klamath River o Case-study national forests Case-study community boundaries Bureau of Land Management Forest Service Major lakes and rivers Major roads Klamath River Butte Valley Weed Mount Shasta Dunsmuir McCloud Montague Yreka Dorris Merrill Malin Tulelake Etna Fort Jones Phoenix Talent Ashland Cave Junction Bonanza Altamont Klamath Falls Weed Mount Shasta Dunsmuir McCloud Montague Yreka Dorris Merrill Malin Tulelake Etna Fort Jones Phoenix Talent Ashland Cave Junction Bonanza Altamont Klamath Falls T Sacramento River Salmon River Scott River Shasta River Clear Creek Klamath River U.S. Highway 97 State Highway 3 State Highway 96 U.S. Highway 199 I-5 Scott Valley Mid-Klamath T Sacramento River Salmon River Scott River Shasta River Clear Creek Klamath River U.S. Highway 97 State Highway 3 State Highway 96 U.S. Highway 199 O C I-5 I-5 K N F K N F Figure 8-12?Case-study communities, Klamath National Forest. 129 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies many sides: flat beef pr ices i n the face of r isi ng labor costs, r isi ng production costs, d rought, and the 1997 listi ng of the coho sal mon ( Oncorhynchus k isutch ) as a th reatened spe - cies. T he coho listi ng may affect local water management and could th reaten the use of water by ranchers who i r r igate past u re on thei r pr ivate ranches and g row alfalfa for sale. A n estimated six Scot t Valley ranchers have allot ments on the K lamath National Forest. Changes i n forest manage - ment under the Plan have added to the other pressures they face. For these permittees, FS allotments play a critical role i n thei r livelihood st rateg y. T he i nter viewed ranchers, however, st ated that d rought, st r icter r ules regardi ng the use of r ipar ian areas u nder the Aquatic Conser vation St rateg y, and i ncreased scr uti ny of g razi ng practices u nder both the National Envi ron ment al Policy Act and the Plan have meant that g razi ng on the forest has become more labor-i ntensive, because it has to be managed more caref ully. R isi ng labor costs put a burden on household economies, causing some ranchers to shift from hired to household labor, stressing family resou rces. I ncreased scr uti ny of g razi ng practices and plans has added to the climate of uncertainty around the viabilit y of ranchi ng, and per mit tees i nter viewed felt i nsecu re about whether they will conti nue to have thei r per mits renewed. A nother concer n among per mit tees is the i ncreased r isk of cat ast rophic fi re on the K lamath National Forest over the last decade because of inadequate fuel man- agement. T his r isk has caused some ranchers to consider obt ai ni ng fi re i nsu rance for thei r cat tle, addi ng to the cost of doing business. Pressu res that th reaten the viabilit y of ranchi ng make it dif ficult for ranchi ng families to recr uit you nger genera - tions i nto this way of life. I n flated proper t y values i n the Scot t Valley resulti ng f rom the i n flu x of wealthier residents and high i n her it ance t axes are decreasi ng the li kelihood that family ranches will be passed on to the next genera - tion. I nstead, they may well be sold to r ich newcomers, or subdivided and developed. Although the nature of the Scott Valley community has changed over the last decade, the community is persisting. T he Scot t Valley?s proximit y to Yreka and the I nterst ate 5 corridor means that commuting to jobs outside the com- munity is a more viable option than it is for more remote communities around the Forest. The Scott Valley also has a relatively diversified nat u ral-resou rce-based economy. T he ranching and agricultural sectors, although under stress, are still viable, cont r ibuti ng 18 percent of tot al employ ment i n 1990 and 19 percent i n 2000. T he i n flu x of reti rees and mobile workers i nto the com mu nit y has helped suppor t the local economy, although the demand for many k i nds of busi - nesses and services has decreased. Although median income i ncreased f rom $27,888 i n 1990 to $32,013 (14.8 percent), u nemploy ment rose f rom 7.9 to 9.3 percent (17 percent). T he com mu nit y?s socioeconomic well-bei ng score d ropped f rom mediu m (62.6) to low (56.7) bet ween 1990 and 2000. T his score was slightly lower than average for the 37 com mu ni - ties withi n 5 miles of the K lamath National Forest (63.4, mediu m, i n 1990 and 57.4, low, i n 2000). The Scott Valley has a strong constituency of residents who are highly active i n com mu nit y issues, have st rong leadership sk ills, work to promote economic development i n the area, are effective at organizi ng the com mu nit y arou nd issues of concer n, and work to protect the r u ral way of life and values that predomi nate there. I n 1997, the Scot t Valley tow ns of Et na and For t Jones were assessed as havi ng high (Et na) and mediu m com mu nit y capacit y (For t Jones) (Doak and Kusel 1997: 72). T his high com mu nit y capacit y has been a critical factor in helping the community adapt to change. Butte Valley T he But te Valley also has had a diverse nat u ral-resou rce- based economy histor ically, with timber, ranchi ng, and farming all playing important roles. The timber industry was an impor t ant employ ment sector i n the But te Valley histor ically. By 1990, But te Valley had long si nce lost its saw mill. Forest i ndust r y jobs remai ned an impor t ant component of the local economy, however. W hen loggi ng on federal forest lands was rest r icted i n the early 1990s, the local effects were big. Tr uckers, fallers, markers, and people who worked for the FS lost jobs. Loggers and t r uckers could no longer fi nd jobs that would sust ai n thei r families. Some individuals began tramplogging, going farther and farther f rom home to fi nd work. Many people moved away, disr upt - i ng close family i ntergenerational ties and est ablished ways 130 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III of life. By 2003, the bigger t r uck operators were i n cities, and t raveled g reater dist ances to work. Some people st ayed i n But te Valley and com muted to work i n the mills i n K lamath Falls, Oregon. Others st ayed and switched to lower payi ng jobs i n the ser vice sector, sometimes commuting to Klamath Falls. Pay reductions caused a reduced standard of living and often required both husband and wife to work to suppor t thei r household. Some i nter viewees repor ted an i ncrease i n d r ugs, cr ime, and other social problems i n the com mu nit y si nce 1990 that they associated with job loss i n the timber sector. Two small mills remai n i n the area i n the tow n of Dor r is. One is a moldi ng mill, i n operation si nce 1924, now an industry leader in the United States. The other operation went th rough t wo i ncar nations as a moldi ng busi ness before the cu r rent peeler core busi ness st ar ted i n 1997. T hese and other successf ul busi nesses persisted by developi ng markets outside the local area. T he mills shif ted thei r supply of raw mater ials f rom expensive, locally produced wood to cheap, impor ted wood f rom New Zealand and peeler cores f rom Oregon mills. T hey also st ayed viable by respondi ng to orders quick ly. Apar t f rom these t wo small wood-related busi nesses and FS employees at the local ranger dist r ict of fice, i nter - viewees did not k now anybody i n But te Valley who was employed i n timber i ndust r y-related jobs i n 2003. Manu - fact u r i ng jobs d ropped f rom 12 percent to 9 percent of tot al employ ment i n the com mu nit y bet ween 1990 and 2000. W hile the timber i ndust r y was decli ni ng i n But te Valley, the pot ato i ndust r y was th r ivi ng. Pot ato far m - i ng was a year-rou nd sou rce of employ ment, so workers bought houses and settled in the community. Agriculture, forest r y, fishi ng, hu nti ng, and mi ni ng were 26 percent of tot al employ ment i n 1990, and g rew to 33 percent by 2000. Si nce 2000, however, pot ato far mi ng i n But te Valley has largely disappeared because of international trade practices, changes i n A mer ican eati ng habits, and the expensive cost of pu mpi ng g rou nd water to i r r igate them. Pot ato far mers sold out to st rawber r y far mers, who g row st rawber r y plants i n But te Valley and ship them elsewhere to be replanted and produce ber r ies. Work on the st rawber r y far ms is seasonal, and is per for med mai nly by mig rant workers. I nter viewees did not perceive st rawber r y g rowers as cont r ibuti ng much to the community or the local economy because of their seasonal presence and practice of hiring mostly nonlocal workers. Trends i n But te Valley?s far mi ng sector were not viewed as bei ng tied to federal forest management policy. Ranchers were another impor t ant component of the But te Valley ag r icult u ral sector. Ranchers who had FS allotments relied on them heavily because most of them did not ow n enough acreage to keep cat tle on thei r ow n property year-round. Typical permittees ran cattle on their ow n land for par t of the year, on the K lamath National Forest for part of the year, and on pasture rented from other pr ivate landow ners for par t of the year. I n general, ranchers moved their cattle to the Klamath allotments in late spring or early su m mer, where they remai ned u ntil late su m mer or early fall. I n recent years, the water cr isis i n the K lamath Basi n and the d rought i n souther n Califor nia have caused far mers to come to the But te Valley i n search of far mland and water for irrigation. This search has created competition among ranchers for land and has driven up the cost of renting seasonal past u re. Ranchers who can not afford to rent past u re locally must t ake thei r cat tle far ther away to fi nd available pasture, increasing the cost of production. Production costs associated with r u n ni ng cat tle on the K lamath National Forest have repor tedly i ncreased si nce the Plan was adopted. T he Plan was perceived as i ncreasi ng agency scr uti ny over g razi ng practices. Some i nter viewees said that ranchers had to monitor their animals more closely on allot ments to be su re that they did not overg raze. T hey also had to do more mitigation work to comply with the Aquatic Conser vation St rateg y, such as mai nt ai ni ng more miles of fences to keep cat tle out of r ipar ian areas. Both of the requirements increased labor demands. Greater scrutiny over g razi ng and reduced access to water meant that allot - ment days and animal unit months had gradually declined each year. T his decli ne i ncreased ranchers? needs for access to pr ivate past u re land, which was becomi ng i ncreasi ngly scarce and costly to use. Some i nter viewees mentioned that the heightened r isk of fi re on the K lamath might cause ranchers to want fi re i nsu rance for thei r cat tle to protect them from catastrophic loss, further increasing production 131 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies costs. Despite these pressu res, ranchers i nter viewed i n But te Valley felt that thei r FS allot ments were secu re relative to the pr ivate land component of thei r g razi ng st rateg y. T hey felt squeezed, however, by r isi ng produc - tion costs in the face of unstable beef prices. According to i nter viewees, the only ranchi ng families li kely to persist were those who had enough past u re and water on land they ow ned to suppor t thei r herds year-rou nd. One seg ment of the But te Valley population that repor tedly has i ncreased si nce 1990 are the people on fi xed or low i ncomes, i ncludi ng reti rees, who fi nd the cost of liv - i ng, nat u ral amenities, and proximit y to ser vices i n But te Valley attractive. Another segment of the local population com muted to jobs across the border i n Oregon, mai nly i n K lamath Falls, a large regional center about 20 miles away. Some thi ngs i n the But te Valley changed lit tle si nce 1990. For example, land values and the cost of livi ng remai ned low. T he population st ayed at arou nd 1,900 residents. Services remained about the same. The socio- economic well-bei ng score of the com mu nit y was low i n 1990 (52.4) and was still low i n 2000 (50.7), subst antially lower than average for the 37 com mu nities withi n 5 miles of the forest. Never theless, median household i ncome rose slightly (f rom $21,594 to $23,826), u nemploy ment decreased (f rom 13 to 9.7 percent), and the percent age of the population livi ng i n pover t y also decreased (f rom 26.8 to 21.9) bet ween 1990 and 2000. Highway 97? an alter native to I nterst ate 5 that many t r uckers prefer ? r u ns th rough the But te Valley and br i ngs t raf fic that has helped sust ai n the busi ness sector there, which could not be suppor ted by the local population alone. Ret ail t rade g rew f rom 4 percent of tot al employ - ment i n 1990 to 11 percent i n 2000. T he Dor r is cit y cou ncil has also worked to at t ract busi ness to the But te Valley by improvi ng the cit y?s i nf rast r uct u re and clean - i ng up the tow n. T he com mu nit y?s proximit y to K lamath Falls, however, limits its abilit y to compete for busi ness (Doak and Kusel 1997: 48). T he loss of timber workers, FS employees, and far mi ng families f rom the But te Valley caused a loss of people who were willi ng to engage i n civic affairs and promote community development. The core nucleus of i ndividuals who played this role i n 2003 was small. In a study of community capacity in the Klamath region, But te Valley received the lowest possible com mu - nit y capacit y score (Doak and Kusel 1997: 6). Local residents i nter viewed viewed the But te Valley as potentially at t racti ng tou r ists. I n 2003, the section of Highway 97 that goes th rough But te Valley was i ncluded as par t of the Volcanic Legacy Scenic By way. T he com - munity and agencies are promoting bird-related tourism in the area. T he cit y of Dor r is recently built the t allest flag pole west of the Mississippi R iver. I n the last 2 years, Dor r is also sponsored a Fourth of July celebration, and an Art i n the Park? event. All of these activities were desig ned to at t ract tou r ists, who the com mu nit y hopes will cont r ibute to the local economy. Residents were divided i n thei r suppor t of recreation and tou r ism development, however, and ack nowledged that it is not li kely to be a solution to the area?s economic problems. T he But te Valley is more a pass-through area than a destination. Mid- Klamath Bet ween the 1960s and the early 1990s, the economy of the Mid-K lamath com mu nit y was d r iven by timber. T he local timber economy, i n t u r n, al most wholly depended on federal timber because the community is surrounded by vast t racts of the K lamath National Forest. Com mu nit y i nter viewees said that du r i ng the 1970s and 1980s, get ti ng loggi ng and mill jobs locally was easy. Five mills operated i n the area. W hen the federal timber supply d ropped off i n the early 1990s, mills closed and jobs became scarce. Not just loggers and mill workers were affected; the FS, which had been the other major employer in the community, had to dow nsize because many of its employees suppor ted the forest?s timber prog ram. Many mill workers, loggers, and FS employees moved away i n search of work elsewhere, t ak i ng thei r families with them. As a consequence, housi ng prices dropped, stores and service centers that supported these workers shut dow n, and school en roll ment decli ned precipitously. Manufact u r i ng went f rom cont r ibuti ng 30 percent of tot al employ ment i n 1990 to just 4 percent i n 2000. Not only did the com mu nit y lose its economic base, but it also lost productive people who were hard-work i ng and cont r ibuted much to the com mu nit y. T he exodus of 132 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III timber workers f rom the Mid-K lamath com mu nit y was accompanied by the loss of a way of life and local cult u re. By the mid-1990s, most of this cult u re was gone, although some loggers have remained in the area. Com mu nit y residents i nter viewed said that si nce the decli ne of the local timber economy, new people have moved into the Mid-Klamath community, especially people on fi xed i ncomes. One such g roup was character ized by i nter viewees as bei ng low-i ncome people on welfare, who are d raw n to the area i n par t because of the low cost of livi ng there. A nother g roup of newcomers consists of people i n the early phase of reti rement, who do not yet requi re the health and transportation infrastructure that more elderly reti rees do, amenities cu r rently lack i ng i n the Mid-K lamath. A small nu mber of ? u rban escapees,? who telecom mute or other wise work remotely f rom thei r place of employ ment, have also set tled i n the Mid-K lamath area. Never theless, tot al population i n the com mu nit y d ropped 21.6 percent bet ween 1990 and 2000, f rom 2,117 to 1,660. T he out mig ration of families with child ren, the i n - ability of young people to remain in the community because jobs are lack i ng, and the i n mig ration of reti rees and others greatly altered the social and economic structure of the Mid-K lamath com mu nit y. Median age rose by 36.6 percent bet ween 1990 and 2000, and school en roll ment d ropped by 41.8 percent. Median household i ncome san k 29 percent, u nemploy ment rose 21.1 percent, and the percent age of the population livi ng i n pover t y rose 64.7 percent. T he socioeconomic well-bei ng score d ropped f rom low (51.7) to ver y low (42.3), mak i ng the Mid-K lamath one of the lowest scor i ng com mu nities withi n 5 miles of the K lamath National Forest. Other local consequences are associated with rest r ic - tions on timber har vest u nder the Plan. St akeholders asserted that survey and manage species, and other Plan requirements have almost made it impossible to implement f uel management projects for the K lamath National Forest. T he fi re r isk posed by accu mulati ng f uel i n the vast national forest lands surrounding the Mid-Klamath community is of g reat concer n to residents and local of ficials. T he Plan has had a negligible effect on other forest resource uses. Ver y few local g razi ng per mit tees exist. T he one per mit - tee i nter viewed st ated that the Plan had no effect on his practices because his allot ment is at a high elevation with no r ivers or creeks, and hence no associated r ipar ian constraints. Mid-K lamath residents who remai ned i n the com - munity did so out of a commitment to place, and a deter- mi nation to fi nd alter nate means of su r vival there. I n some cases, one family member (t y pically the husband) worked outside the area and came home on weekends, while the spouse and child ren remai ned i n the com mu nit y. Other residents diversified and engaged i n a mix of pu rsuits, with both spouses work i ng to suppor t the family. Some loggers ow ni ng equipment did cont ract work on the forest, such as road decom missioni ng. Other nat u ral-resou rce-based jobs were limited. Unli ke the Scot t Valley and the But te Valley, far mi ng and ranchi ng were not viable livelihood st rategies in the heavily forested, steeply mountainous Mid-Klamath area. The shortage of private land has also limited develop- ment opportunities in the community. Some people found adjusti ng to change ver y dif ficult, cont r ibuti ng to d r ug abuse, domestic violence, and divorce. The forest did provide recreation-related opportuni- ties, and some residents were hopi ng that recreation would provide new economic vit alit y to the com mu nit y. T he Happy Camp Chamber of Com merce believed that the K lamath R iver and the local scener y were the Mid- K lamath?s biggest assets, and were explor i ng ways to br i ng visitors to the com mu nit y by marketi ng these resou rces. T he Chamber st ar ted an an nual Fou r th of July motorcycle event 3 years ago, which d raws many visitors. Two recreational activities predomi nated i n 2003: gold mi ni ng and r iver raf ti ng. I n 1986, t wo local residents st ar ted a recreational mi ni ng club. I n 2003, this club had more than 60 miles of mi ni ng claims along the Mid- K lamath R iver and its t r ibut ar ies, and club membership stood at about 800. Members come to the Mid-K lamath bet ween Ju ne and September and d redge for gold. Most i nter viewees viewed them as major cont r ibutors to the local economy, although concer n was expressed about the environmental effects of their behavior. Similarly, river raf ti ng was u ncom mon on the middle K lamath R iver i n 133 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies 1990. I n 2003, 75 out fit ter-g uides were repor tedly r u n ni ng raf ti ng t r ips there bet ween spr i ng and fall. Raf ters cont r ib - ute to the local economy by staying in local motels, eating at rest au rants, and buyi ng supplies there. Never theless, some com mu nit y members were skeptical that recreation will cont r ibute much to the economic development and diversifi - cation of the community. Several i nter viewees com mented on the role of nat u ral disasters i n suppor ti ng the local economy. T he 1997 flood brought nearly $8.8 million i n emergency f u ndi ng to the K lamath National Forest and other agencies, which t rans - lated into local jobs such as repairing and decommissioning roads. Fi re suppression on the forest i n 1999 added another $3.5 million to the K lamath National Forest budget, which also contributed jobs and income to the local economy (Dilli ngham 1999: 1). Many i nter viewees viewed fi re as a g row th area f rom the economic st andpoi nt. I nter viewees consistently said that the Kar u k Tr ibe was the mai n d r ivi ng force behi nd the su r vival of the Mid- Klamath community after the timber decline. Many of the t r ibe?s 3,200 members live i n the Mid-K lamath com mu nit y. Although the community includes their ancestral territory, they do not have a reser vation. T he Kar u k were federally recog nized i n 1979 (Tobe et al. 2002: 2). Many t r ibe mem - bers participated in the local timber industry as loggers or mill workers. T he disappearance of those jobs provided an impet us for the Kar u k to organize and seek ways of promot - ing economic development in the community. They have been ext remely successf ul over the last decade at obt ai ni ng grant money to fund projects such as a museum, housing development, education program, and natural resources depar t ment. T he t r ibe and the FS were the t wo biggest employers i n the area i n 2003. P ublic ad mi nist ration rose f rom 2 to 9 percent of tot al employ ment bet ween 1990 and 2000. T he t r ibe?s an nual operati ng budget stood at roughly $12 million i n 2001 (Tobe et al. 2002). T he t r ibe had fewer than 20 employees i n the early 1990s, but it had over 100 employees i n 2003. T he t r ibe also took over managi ng some local businesses and service centers in the Mid-Klamath that might not have remai ned viable other wise, such as a hardware store and a health cli nic. Tr ibal represent atives i nter viewed felt a sense of responsibilit y i n helpi ng the com mu nit y su r vive. T he t r ibe, not the FS, was viewed as the major contributor to community stability and socio- economic well-bei ng i n the area. Concer n was expressed, however, over the long-ter m sust ai nabilit y of the t r ibal economy, which depended on sof t money. Role of Federal Forest Management Policy in Influencing Change Many Mid-K lamath i nter viewees viewed the listi ng of the owl u nder the Endangered Species Act and the Plan as caus - ing the demise of the timber economy and culture in their com mu nit y. I n the 1970s and 1980s, local mills repor tedly obtained most of their timber from national forest lands. W hen the timber stopped flowi ng, the mills were forced to close, and loggers and mill workers lost thei r jobs. One log - ger i nter viewed st ated that the Plan made operati ng dif ficult for small loggers who remai ned i n the com mu nit y. Small, independent loggers once made a living by buying small timber sales they could afford. Plan requirements increased the cost of timber-sale preparation, so that new sales u nder the Plan had to be large to be cost-effective. Small logging operators could not always afford to bid on these large sales, and therefore felt squeezed out of the market. But te Valley was also affected by changes i n federal forest management policy, although it lost its main mill decades before the Plan. The curtailment of timber harvest on the K lamath caused job loss i n the com mu nit y?s timber sector, which has vi r t ually disappeared except for t wo small mills that persist but do not use federal timber. The Scott Valley?s timber sector st ar ted to decli ne i n the 1970s, and conti nued to decli ne th rough the 1980s. Cutbacks i n federal timber har vesti ng exacerbated this t rend, and repor tedly cont r ibuted to the vi r t ual disappearance of the com mu nit y?s timber economy. Califor nia st ate reg ulations creati ng an u nfavorable business climate for private timber companies, combined with the loss of local wood-products i ndust r y i nf rast r uc - ture, caused some of these companies to move their opera- tions to Oregon and Washi ng ton. T his move added to the decline of timber jobs in the area. T he Plan affected more than timber workers i n com mu - nities arou nd the K lamath National Forest. Lack of adequate 13 4 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III f uel t reat ment on the forest, i n par t because of the dif ficult y of implementing surveys for survey and manage species and other Plan requi rements, i ncreased the r isk that local com mu nities face f rom fi re. G rowi ng fi re r isk is a cr iti - cal concer n to adjacent proper t y ow ners and residents of adjacent or nearby com mu nities. R isi ng fi re r isk also affects local and regional fi re-fighti ng organizations, and is of g reat concern to local and county governments. Ranchers i nter viewed repor ted many factors that were mak i ng dif ficult thei r mai nt ai ni ng a viable ranchi ng business and lifestyle. The drought resulted in less forage and decli ni ng water sou rces that requi re i ncreasi ng protec - tion and cattle management. The Plan incorporated and strengthened requirements for riparian areas during the 1990s. I ncrement al costs to production when requi rements change add to all of the other pressures ranchers face. From the per mit tees? poi nt of view, thei r operations become increasingly marginal as costs rise. Apparently most ranch- ers were able to mai nt ai n thei r busi nesses du r i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan by absorbing the added costs, but they do not see a sustainable future in the ranching business for their children. The FS Role in Mitigating Plan Effects Resource and recreation outputs A n average of 200 million board feet of timber was har - vested an nually on the K lamath National Forest du r i ng the 1980s. Under the Plan, the forest?s estimated an nual average PSQ is 51 million board feet. I nter viewees f rom all th ree com mu nities repor ted that the K lamath National Forest does not cont r ibute to socioeconomic well-bei ng i n thei r communities by providing timber as it once did. The small mills that remai n i n But te Valley do not use national forest timber. T he Scot t Valley has few remai ni ng timber work - ers. T hose Mid-K lamath residents who are still t r yi ng to make par t of thei r livi ng i n the wood-products i ndust r y are f r ust rated by the lack of reliable supplies of federal timber, so mak i ng a livi ng is dif ficult for them. T he K lamath National Forest plays an impor t ant role i n providi ng local ranchers with the g razi ng allot ments cr itical to their viability. Plan standards and guidelines for riparian reser ves added to the g rowi ng requi rements for r ipar ian protection on national forest lands in place before the Plan, i ncreasi ng ranchers? operati ng costs. Mi ni ng is negligible, except for recreational mi ni ng. Special forest products are important to tribes, but the Plan has hampered the ability of the forest to manage for some tribal cultural products that g row well i n bu r ned areas. Matsut ake mush rooms have com mercial impor t ance, but provide lit tle i n the way of economic benefit to local residents because most har vesters and buyers come from outside the area. These people do suppor t local busi nesses when they are i n tow n, however. I nter viewees had mixed views about the K lamath National Forest?s cont r ibutions to recreation and tou r ism development. T he But te Valley com mu nit y recog nized the forest as a tou r ist at t raction and wanted to see the forest develop interpretive programs to help attract more visi- tors. I nter viewees f rom the com mu nit y viewed the forest?s effor ts to develop east-side snow mobili ng oppor t u nities in a positive light. This development has brought more recreationists to the area. T he K lamath National Forest also worked with the com mu nit y to promote a Volcanic By way desig nation, and the FS i n Oregon helped develop a bro - chure on local birding opportunities. I n the Scot t Valley, people expected that reductions i n federal timber har vest would be par tly offset by i ncreased investment in developed recreation and tourism. These expect ations have not been met. Accordi ng to several i nter viewees, not only had the forest failed to work with the community to develop recreation and tourism options, but it could not mai nt ai n the existi ng recreation oppor t u nities. For example, the forest had yet to clear and open a large nu mber of wilder ness t rails i n the Scot t Valley area closed by a timber blowdow n that occu r red du r i ng a stor m i n 1997. Local out fit ters said the K lamath National Forest could not respond to their requests to address problems relating to recreation use on the forest because it did not have the staff. I n the Mid-K lamath, the Chamber of Com merce was work i ng with the Happy Camp Ranger Dist r ict to desig n and build a visitor center to be housed i n the FS of fice, and to develop visitor mater ials and resou rces. T hey were also work i ng together to identif y mou nt ai n bi ke t rails on the forest, and to at t ract professional bi kers to the area, i n the hope that one day it will become a desti nation for mou nt ai n 135 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies bi kers. Some i nter viewees felt that the FS was not doi ng much to help facilit ate recreation development; they st ated that lack of campg rou nd mai ntenance, boat lau nches, mai nt ai ned t rails, and road closu res were deter rents. Agency jobs T he decli ne i n the K lamath National Forest?s timber pro - g ram t r iggered decli nes i n the forest?s budget and jobs. T he forest went f rom havi ng 636 employees i n 1993, to 441 i n 2003, a loss of 31 percent (fig. 8-13). Although this decli ne was not as severe as on the other t wo case-st udy forests, it strongly affected local job opportunities, particularly in the Mid-K lamath, where a ranger dist r ict of fice closed i n 1997. Permanent full-time Other 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Full-time equivalents Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Fig u re 8-13 ? K lamat h Nat ional Forest st af fi ng levels, 1993 ?20 03. Contracting Bet ween 1990 and 2002, the K lamath National Forest spent $44.5 million procu r i ng land management ser vices. Most of this spendi ng (64 percent) was bet ween 1990 and 1993 (fig. 8-14). Af ter 1993, cont ract spendi ng on the K lamath d ropped shar ply. Bet ween 1990 ?92 and 2000 ?2002, cont ract spendi ng decli ned 78 percent. T he K lamath?s rate of reduction i n procu rement spendi ng was considerably Fig u re 8-14 ? K lamat h Nat ional Forest la nd ma nagement cont ract - i ng by work t y pe, 1990 ?20 02. 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Contracting (million dollars) Fiscal year 1994 19961997 1999 20012002 Technical Equipment Labor 1991 g reater than for the Plan area as a whole, but it was compa - rable to the decline in contract spending on other northern Califor nia forests (see Moseley et al. 2003). T he relatively high cont ract spendi ng i n the early 1990s can li kely be explai ned i n par t by salvage and restoration work goi ng on at that time af ter a cat ast rophic fi re i n 1987. I n 1997, the forest had a major flood. T he K lamath received $8.8 million of emergency federal highway repai r money i n 1998 ?99 for stor m-related repai r and restoration work. T he r ise i n cont ract spendi ng i n 2000 and 2001 reflects the su rge i n restoration work resulti ng f rom the flood money. As with other national forests in the Plan area, the Klamath substan- tially reduced its spending on labor-intensive contracting over the course of the study period. The Klamath also reduced its spending on equipment-intensive and technical cont racti ng. Du r i ng 1990 ?92, 101 cont ractors worked for the K lamath National Forest, a nu mber that fell to 58 by 2000 ?2002, a 43 percent decli ne. I n 1990 ?92, cont ractors work i ng on the K lamath came f rom up and dow n I nterst ate 5. Over time, cont ractors were i ncreasi ngly concent rated i n nor ther n Califor nia and souther n Oregon, and then fi nally i n nor ther n Califor nia. 136 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III I nter viewees f rom the case-st udy com mu nities viewed contracting on the Klamath as having contributed some lo- cal oppor t u nities for residents. I n But te Valley, cont racti ng work on the forest was not sig nificant; once timber workers moved away, few local people had the needed sk ills and equipment. More recently, a few seasonal cont racti ng job opportunities have become available in the community th rough the National Fi re Plan to reduce hazardous f uels. In the Scott Valley, survey and manage species require- ments provided some opportunities for local residents. The forest was praised for suppor ti ng t rai ni ng and economic development opportunities in the area of technical con- t racti ng. Much of this work was accomplished th rough suppor t for a local nonprofit organization whose t rai nees worked on the K lamath doi ng su r veys, restoration work, geog raphic-i nfor mation-system (GIS) analysis, and other analyses. In the Mid-Klamath, a small number of individu- als do cont ract work on the forest, such as road decom mis - sioni ng and restoration work. T he availabilit y of cont ract work fluct uates dependi ng on nat u ral disasters (stor ms, floods, fi re). Of ten, the season of work is rest r icted to a few months du r i ng su m mer, and cont racts are sporadic, so relyi ng on them as a steady sou rce of work is dif ficult. Community economic assistance T he Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative brought nearly $2 million i n g rant money to the K lamath National Forest over 9 years. Du r i ng this per iod, the forest averaged $217,000 per year i n g rant money, with a high of $478,000 i n 1994, and a low of $50,000 i n 1999 and 2000 (fig. 8-15). T he bul k of the i nitiative money became available du r i ng the fi rst 4 years of the Plan. Ru ral com mu nit y assist ance g rants composed the major it y of this f u ndi ng. Com mu ni - ties of ten used Ru ral Com mu nit y Assist ance g rants to le - verage money from other sources through matching grants and other means, so that the tot al benefit they provided was far beyond thei r face value. Not only did the i nitiative provide economic assist ance to com mu nities, but the way i n which it was ad mi nistered caused new collaborative relations to for m bet ween the agency and com mu nities, where previous relations focused on the timber busi ness. I n the But te Valley, federal g rant money to suppor t economic and community development, and small business loans ? some of which came th rough the i nitiative ?were critical for helping local businesses survive. In Scott Valley, the effectiveness of i nitiative f u ndi ng and Ru ral Com mu nit y Assist ance g rants received mixed reviews. T hey were believed to be helpf ul i n f u ndi ng specific proj - ects and infrastructure developments, but their long-term success was believed to be limited by i nconsistent com mit - ment and follow-up on the agency?s par t. I nitiative money was not viewed as helpi ng for mer timber workers adapt to changi ng job markets because most of the workers had lost their jobs and left by the time the funding arrived. The Mid-Klamath community received a substantial amou nt of i nitiative f u ndi ng i n the mid-1990s. Tobe et al. (2002) st udied how effective that f u ndi ng was. T he Kar u k were able to secu re $1.86 million i n i nitiative f u nds, and the community secured additional funds through other mechanisms. Nu merous plan ni ng activities took place, 600 500 400 300 200 100 0Economic assistance (thousand dollars) Fiscal year Rural Community Assistance Other 1994199519961997199819992000200120022003 Fig u re 8-15 ? K lamat h Nat ional Forest com mu n it y econom ic assist a nce prog ram t rends. Not adjusted for i n flat ion. 137 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies and several projects were i nitiated, roughly one-thi rd of which were nat u ral-resou rce-based (such as a small hardwood mill and a f u r nit u re busi ness). Tobe et al. (2002) fou nd that the i nitiative did i ncrease the physical i nf rast r uct u re and fi nancial capit al of the com mu nit y. T he i nitiative also provided job t rai ni ng and sk ills development, but it did not lead to creati ng sig nificant local jobs. I nstead, ret rai ned workers had to move away to fi nd new jobs. Nor did it build leadership capacity in the community to replace what was lost when timber workers moved away. W hat new busi nesses were created could not absorb displaced timber workers, who benefited lit tle f rom the i nitiative prog rams. The FS did not create the job opportunities hoped for, or provide the raw mater ials requi red to make new value- added wood-products busi nesses successf ul. T he mai n cr iticism of the i nitiative repor ted by i nter viewees was that it provided one-time funding for projects, but these projects were not li n ked together to create long-ter m, sust ai nable jobs for local residents. A nd the f u ndi ng ran out too quick ly to be effective. Payments to county governments T he spot ted owl safet y net measu res resulted i n subst an - tially higher pay ments to cou nties than would have been received through forest-revenue sharing alone, given dimi nishi ng timber har vests (fig. 8-16). T he Secu re Ru ral Schools Act provided the highest rate of payments to coun- ties si nce 1990. I n addition to bei ng an impor t ant sou rce of revenue to suppor t roads and schools cou nt y wide, those pay ments cont r ibuted a sig nificant amou nt of money to support local resource-related projects on and around the K lamath National Forest. Title II of the act has made more than $1.7 million available for resou rce-related projects on both private and national forest lands in the county since 2001. Many i nter viewees expressed concer n that the Secu re Ru ral Schools Act provisions expi re i n 2006. Summary T he pict u re of changi ng socioeconomic benefits f rom the K lamath National Forest si nce the Plan was adopted is one of decli ne. G razi ng, recreation, mi ni ng, and special forest products activity remained more or less stable overall, but timber harvest activity, by far the most economically impor- t ant activit y on the forest u ntil the early 1990s, d ropped substantially, as did agency jobs and contracting dollars. Managi ng fi re r isk to com mu nities became more dif ficult. Pay ments to cou nt y gover n ments have st abilized, at least for the near ter m. Com mu nit y economic assist ance money i ncreased subst antially du r i ng the mid-1990s, but this f u nd - i ng has now ret u r ned to pre-Plan amou nts. I nter viewees f rom the But te Valley viewed the K lam - ath National Forest as not havi ng played much of a role i n helpi ng the com mu nit y adapt to change. Although a few small contracting opportunities, some recreation develop- ments, and some economic assistance have happened, no new for ms of resou rce-related work on the K lamath have Fig u re 8-16 ? K lamat h Nat ional Forest pay ments to cou nt ies. ?Owl adjusted? reflects t he i ncreased pay ments to cou nt ies made to mitigate the effects of decreased timber revenue and revenue sharing. Distribution of Payments to Counties, 2000 Siskiyou, California, 99% Jackson, Oregon, 1% 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 19 90 19 91 19 92 199319941995199619971998 999200020012002 Payments to counties (million dollars) Fiscal year Not adjusted Owl adjusted 138 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III emerged to contribute meaningfully to the local economy of But te Valley. T he same was t r ue i n the Scot t Valley, although i nter viewees there viewed the K lamath as havi ng made some small contributions through contracting opportunities and initiative funds. The consensus among Mid-K lamath i nter viewees was that the forest had done little to help the community recover from the loss of timber-related benefits. Many i nter viewees recog nized the impor t ance of pay ments to cou nt y gover n ments, however, stating that their communities depended on those funds for supporting schools and other services. Coos Bay District and Case- Study Communities T he Coos Bay Dist r ict lands, dist r ibuted up and dow n the souther n Oregon coast, are bordered by the Sisk iyou and Siuslaw National Forests i n some places. T hus, the effects of the Plan on the case-st udy com mu nities (fig. 8-17) were li kely the result of implementi ng the Plan on both the BLM?s Coos Bay Dist r ict and the su r rou ndi ng national forests. T he G reater Reedspor t com mu nit y, on Oregon?s cent ral coast at the mouth of the Umpqua and Smith R iv - ers and arou nd Wi nchester Bay, had a population of 5,545 i n 2000. It lies at the nor ther n extent of Coos Bay Dist r ict land. Greater Myrtle Point is at the southern end of the Coquille Valley, roughly 20 miles i nland f rom the mai n coast al highway. It had 4,927 residents i n 2000. G reater Coos Bay was the largest of the case-st udy com mu ni - ties associated with the BLM Coos Bay Dist r ict. It had a population of 28,596 i n 2000. Coast al com mu nities, both the G reater Reedspor t and G reater Coos Bay com mu nit y economies revolved arou nd timber and com mercial fishi ng i n the 1970s and 1980s. Shippi ng and ship buildi ng were also impor t ant i n G reater Coos Bay. Lyi ng i nland, the G reater My r tle Poi nt com mu nit y was or iented toward timber and ag r icult u re. All th ree com mu nities exper ienced social and economic change du r i ng the 1990s, i n par t the result of changes in federal forest management policy. Greater Reedsport G reater Reedspor t was economically or iented toward timber and com mercial fishi ng i n the decades that preceded the Plan. Two I nter national Paper Company busi nesses ? a paper mill and a saw mill?were the economic backbone of G reater Reedspor t for th ree to fou r decades. T he saw mill, est ablished i n 1964, closed i n 1991; at the height of opera - tions, it employed 400 people. T he paper mill, est ablished i n 1956, was havi ng t rouble by the early 1990s and went out of busi ness i n 1999, displaci ng some 350 workers. Several other small mills i n the area also closed du r i ng the 1980s and 1990s. Cu r rently, only t wo small mills conti nue to oper - ate in the area. These mill closures hugely affected job opportunities i n the G reater Reedspor t area. Manufact u r i ng went f rom 25 percent to 6 percent of tot al employ ment bet ween 1990 and 2000. Many middle-i ncome, work i ng- class families lef t the area, causing school enrollment to drop and some secondary suppor t busi nesses to close. G reater Reedspor t?s population d ropped 11 percent bet ween 1990 and 2000 (f rom 6,246 to 5,545), and school en roll ment d ropped 14 percent du r i ng the same per iod, causi ng the area?s middle school to close. A sig nificant effect of these changes has been the loss of the com mu nit y?s timber cult u re. Work i ng i n the timber i ndus - t r y is no longer a way of life that families can pass dow n across generations. T he com mu nit y?s timber i nf rast r uct u re has decli ned with the loss of timber workers and thei r sk ills. Moreover, local youth can no longer graduate from high school and go st raight to qualit y, family-wage jobs. At the same time, the com mercial fishi ng i ndust r y suffered a dow nt u r n, addi ng to the job loss i n the G reater Reedspor t com mu nit y. Du r i ng the 1980s and 1990s, all 30 char ter-boat busi nesses also closed, causi ng Wi nchester Bay?s mar i na to lose boats and busi ness. T he exodus of timber workers f rom G reater Reedspor t created a housi ng glut, which reduced proper t y values and attracted retirees. Many retirees have moved into the com mu nit y over the last decade, reflected by a change i n the median age of com mu nit y residents f rom 38 to 48 bet ween 1990 and 2000 (a 26 percent i ncrease). Although the loss of work i ng- class timber families caused a d rai n on the com mu nit y?s capacit y and leadership sk ills, many reti rees 139 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Fig u re 8-17? Case -st udy com mu n it ies, Coos Bay Dist r ict. 0 5 10 Miles o Case-study Bureau of Land Management districts Case-study community boundaries Bureau of Land Management Forest Service Major lakes and rivers Major roads Coos Bay District, Bureau of Land Management Lakeside Dunes City Florence Reedsport Bandon Coquille Myrtle Point Drain Yoncalla Sutherlin Roseburg Riddle Winston MyrtleCreek EugeneVeneta Elkton Port Orford U.S. Highway 101 U.S. Highway 101 Sixes River U.S. Highway 99 Coquille River Coos Bay Umpqua River Siuslaw River Siuslaw River Smith River State Highway 38 I-5 I-5 Charleston Coos Bay North Bend Greater Reedsport Greater Myrtle Point Greater Coos Bay Lakeside Dunes City Florence Reedsport Bandon Coquille Myrtle Point Drain Yoncalla Sutherlin Roseburg Riddle Winston MyrtleCreek EugeneVeneta Elkton Port Orford U.S. Highway 101 U.S. Highway 101 Sixes River U.S. Highway 99 Coquille River Coos Bay Umpqua River Siuslaw River Siuslaw River Smith River State Highway 38 I-5 I-5 Charleston Coos Bay North Bend Powers 140 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III br i ng with them sk ills and a willi ng ness to volu nteer, which has helped fill the void. I n 2003, many G reater Reedspor t residents still identified thei r com mu nit y as a timber and fishi ng com - mu nit y, although many also realized that timber was not li kely to come back and that new st rategies for economic development and diversification were necessar y. I n 1993, an economic development st rategic plan was created that placed a pr ior it y on creati ng jobs, revit alizi ng dow ntow n, t rai ni ng workers i n emergi ng tech nologies, developi ng and maintaining infrastructure, and improving the quality of life through developing housing, recreation, and cultural oppor t u nities. T he plan was updated i n 2003. A local Eco - nomic Development For u m is t ak i ng the lead on implement - i ng this vision. To date, development and diversification efforts have focused on tourism and attracting alternate nontimber industries. Projects to revit alize dow ntow n and r iver f ront areas are intended to embrace tourism. The community has also been developi ng its tou r ism i nf rast r uct u re, for example by creating a recreational vehicle campground in the Salmon Harbor Marina area, and encouraging tourism-oriented busi nesses. T hey have also built a Discover y Center and Museum. In terms of alternative industries, most notable is the com mu nit y?s success i n at t racti ng a For t u ne 500 company called A mer ican Br idge that manufact u res steel. T he community bought land and developed infrastructure to facilit ate locati ng the company?s plant. T his effor t has cre - ated some jobs, although not as many as anticipated because of the weak economy. Despite these successes, the community is competing with many other r u ral com mu nities affected by dow nt u r ns in the timber industry to attract businesses that offer family- wage jobs. It is also relatively remote, and limited land is available for industrial use. Moreover, residents are reluc- t ant to move away f rom a nat u ral resou rce-based economy, given a history of resource use and that they are surrounded by forests, r ivers, and the sea. T hese factors make it chal - lengi ng to move for ward. Although u nemploy ment decli ned bet ween 1990 and 2000 (f rom 14.1 to 11.8 percent), median household i ncome decreased 7.6 percent (f rom $30,022 to $27,727), and pover t y rates i ncreased al most 10 percent (f rom 15.2 to 16.6 percent of the population). T he com mu ni - t y?s socioeconomic well-bei ng score was low i n 1990 (53.9) and remai ned low i n 2000 (54.4), well below the average of 61.8 or mediu m (1990) and 62.4, also mediu m (2000) for the 62 com mu nities withi n 5 miles of Coos Bay Dist r ict land. Greater Myrtle Point Bet ween 1945 and the early 1990s, G reater My r tle Poi nt depended heavily on the forest products industry. People worked i n small local mills, com muted to jobs i n large mills, logged, hauled logs, or built timber-related roads. Timber employ ment began to decli ne i n the early 1980s, when large mills i n Coos Bay and smaller local mills st ar ted closi ng. I n the early 1990s, many of the smaller local mills that had relied heavily on federal timber supplies went out of busi ness. Only one large and a few small mills conti nue to operate i n the Coquille Valley. Most of thei r timber is f rom pr ivate landow ners. Although some residents conti nue to work i n the timber i ndust r y, the nat u re of the work has changed g reatly f rom three decades ago. Industrial and nonindustrial private forest ow ners now har vest smaller diameter t rees, g row n on shor ter rot ations. T he lack of mill capacit y for processi ng large- diameter wood has cont r ibuted to market disi ncen - tives for landow ners to g row timber on longer rot ations. Most woods workers are now hi red as cont ractors rather than bei ng company employees. Much of the wood process - i ng t akes place i n the Willamet te Valley rather than locally. A nd, because of tech nological advances and mechanization, fewer workers are needed to deliver the same amou nt of product. T he changes i n the demand for wood-products employees is reflected i n these st atistics: i n 1990, manufac - t u r i ng provided 28 percent of local employ ment compared to only 12 percent i n 2000. As the timber i ndust r y waned, many of G reater My r tle Poi nt?s core work i ng class families moved away. T he local population decli ned by 8.5 percent bet ween 1990 and 2000 (f rom 5,383 to 4,927), and school en roll ment decli ned 7 per - cent, cont r ibuti ng to school closu res (although they might have closed any way because of st atewide school budget problems that had nothi ng to do with the timber i ndust r y). 141 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Many families and individuals suffered social and economic stress. Manufacturing and equipment-repair enterprises, retail stores, and restaurants that strongly depended on the forest-products customer base fared poorly i n the 1990s, and many went out of busi ness. My r tle Poi nt?s t ax revenues declined to the detriment of the community infrastructure. The decline of the forest products industry reduced oppor- tunities for young people in Greater Myrtle Point to get jobs without completi ng high school, creati ng an i ncentive for more teenagers to fi nish high school. T he decrease i n local jobs, however, reduced the i ncentives for high school graduates to remain in the community. Many of the dis- placed timber workers who st ayed i n G reater My r tle Poi nt either reti red, changed jobs, went i nto busi ness on thei r ow n, or began com muti ng to work outside the com mu nit y. Despite the population decli ne, newcomers conti nued to move to the G reater My r tle Poi nt area i n the 1990s. Many more reti rees now live i n the com mu nit y. Two economic sectors that have persisted i n G reater Myrtle Point are the agricultural sector and the nontimber forest-products sector. Beef, dai r y, and sheep ranchi ng have been a way of ear ni ng i ncome si nce the late 1800s. My r tle Poi nt still has one creamer y. Nontimber forest products have provided a supplemental source of income for some people. People work either pick i ng and selli ng products, such as fer ns, salal, and boughs, or i n br ush sheds processi ng floral g reens and boughs. Although the Coquille R iver once sup - por ted an active sal mon fisher y, decli nes i n sal mon stocks had made the fisher y negligible by the 1990s. Most jobs i n Greater Myrtle Point currently are in the health, education, social, professional, recreation, and other services sectors. Many residents were concer ned, however, that ser vice jobs do not pay well. The Greater Myrtle Point community responded to the timber i ndust r y dow nt u r n by developi ng st rategic action plans i n 1994 and, later, a com mu nit y action plan i n 2000. Effor ts to develop and diversif y the local economy have focused on the agricultural, tourism, and health-care sectors. Agricultural development strategies have included en hanci ng the con nections bet ween local far mers and the st ate ag r icult u ral extension prog ram, improvi ng the cou nt y fai rg rou nds, marketi ng the com mu nit y?s ag r icul - tural heritage as a tourist attraction, and investigating the potential for developing a biogas facility that uses cattle manure. In addition, a small but thriving organic farming sector had developed by the 1990s. G reater My r tle Poi nt also developed a system of mou nt ai n bi ke t rails and cit y wal k i ng t rails, u nder took dow ntow n area improvements, marketed the Coos Cou nt y Loggi ng Museu m, and worked to develop regional nature-based tourism. Greater Myrtle Poi nt suffers f rom bei ng off the tou r ist t rack, however, and inland from coastal scenery. Health care development i ncluded the openi ng of a ger iat r ic care facilit y, a benefit for the reti ree population. O ppor t u nities for i ndust r ial develop - ment in the community are limited because much of the land base has i nadequate highway access, and the water and sewer system is outdated. I nter viewees expressed mixed views about how these economic development projects had benefited the com mu nit y. I nter viewees also expressed an over-r idi ng concer n with how to create family-wage jobs in the community. Unemployment in Greater Myrtle Point dropped from 14 percent i n 1990 to 9 percent i n 2000. Median household i ncome i ncreased by 10.2 percent (f rom $25,868 to $28,509) during this same period, but the percentage of the popula- tion livi ng below the pover t y li ne st ayed at about 18.5 percent. G reater My r tle Poi nt?s socioeconomic well-bei ng score climbed f rom ver y low (46.7) i n 1990 to low (54.4) i n 2000, both lower than average for the 62 com mu nities withi n 5 miles of the Coos Bay Dist r ict. Greater Coos Bay G reater Coos Bay is the regional center for Coos Cou nt y and Oregon?s south coast. T he Por t of Coos Bay is the deepest mar i ne por t bet ween San Francisco and Astor ia, mak i ng it a shippi ng center for the region. Loggi ng, milli ng, shipbuildi ng, wood products expor ts, and ?to a lesser extent? com mercial fishi ng for med the backbone of the com mu nit y?s economy th rough the late 1980s. Loggi ng was on both public and pr ivate forest lands. G reater Coos Bay?s wood-products i ndust r y has histor ically been diverse. Logging and milling operations ranged from small, locally ow ned busi nesses to large companies ow ned by multi na - tional cor porations. Wood products expor ted f rom the area 142 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III i ncluded raw logs, lu mber, ply wood, veneer, pulp, and wood chips. T he timber economy of G reater Coos Bay began to change i n the early 1980s. Cutbacks i n federal timber har vesti ng du r i ng the 1990s cont r ibuted to the region?s economic dif ficulties. By 2003, only a handf ul of mills, one log-sorting and shipping center, and one alder-sorting and processing facility still operated in the area. Manufac- t u r i ng went f rom providi ng 14 percent of the com mu nit y?s jobs i n 1990, to 6 percent i n 2000. Older, smaller mills that lacked the equipment for processi ng small- diameter wood and lacked thei r ow n timber lands, and thus depended pr imar ily on federal timber, were hit hardest by the cut - backs. Larger companies with thei r ow n land holdi ngs, the capacity to acquire logs from other public and private forest lands, or with retooled mills for processi ng small- diameter wood, persisted. T he local mills now mostly process wood f rom Washi ng ton and Canada, because lit tle federal timber is available, and pr ivate i ndust r ial forestland ow ners gener - ally sell thei r wood to mills outside the area. Pr ivate noni ndust r ial forestland ow ners i nitially bene- fited f rom d rops i n federal timber production because of i ncreased demand and higher pr ices. Once mills shut dow n, local competition for raw logs decreased, causi ng timber pr ices to d rop. Many forest landow ners have thus opted to sell thei r logs i n areas such as the Willamet te Valley where competition is g reater and pr ices for raw logs are higher. T he added t ranspor t ation costs decrease the log seller?s profits, however, resulti ng i n lower ret u r n relative to sales i n the early 1990s. T he Coquille Tr ibe has also suffered f rom const rai nts imposed by the Plan. T he Coquille acqui red par t of the Coos Bay BLM Dist r ict i n 1996. T he law creati ng the Coquille Tr ibal Forest stipulated that the t r ibe manage the land according to the standards and guidelines pertaining to adjacent BLM land. Although the st andards and g uide - li nes of the Plan itself have const rai ned the t r ibe?s abilit y to har vest t rees, appeals by envi ron ment al organizations have effectively blocked the t r ibe?s effor ts to implement plan ned timber sales. Many of these appeals were based on Plan-related issues, such as survey and manage species requirements and aquatic conservation strategy guidelines. Envi ron ment al g roups have used the Plan as a tool to block tribal timber sales. As a result, the tribe has not yet obtained the revenues it had hoped for from its forest land. I n addition to changes i n Coos Bay?s role as a supplier of timber, Coos Bay has also lost its position as a major supplier of wood chips. T he chips produced f rom t rees g row n on shor ter rot ations are different i n thei r proper ties than chips produced f rom t rees g row n on longer rot ations. Consequently, wood chips f rom the Coos Bay area are no longer competitive i n wood chip markets. T he dow nt u r n i n the timber i ndust r y had secondar y effects on the G reater Coos Bay economy. Local nu rser ies that once provided seedlings for replanting federal forests have closed. T he mar itime com merce sector, which was based largely on the expor t of logs, wood chips, and lu mber, has declined. The number of shipping vessels using the Port of Coos Bay d ropped f rom 200 i n 1992, to 46 i n 2003. A declining county budget has made providing basic services, such as law enforcement, health care, and road mai ntenance, more dif ficult. Although other factors have cont r ibuted to some of these t rends, cutbacks i n federal timber supply played a role. Changes i n the forest products i ndust r y also brought about social changes i n the G reater Coos Bay com mu nit y. Begi n ni ng i n the early 1980s, many you nger, blue- collar mill workers and thei r families lef t the area. Cutbacks i n federal timber har vest i n the 1990s hit hard on wood- products har vesters, log t ranspor ters, mill workers, and reforest ation workers. Competition bet ween workers for jobs caused people to ti re of thei r work and quit. Out mig ration by people u nable to fi nd jobs locally cont r ibuted to decli nes in school enrollment and school closures. Substance abuse, domestic violence, and mental health disorders increased. Some workers, however, remai ned i n the com mu nit y and t ransfer red thei r sk ills to replacement jobs, such as i n the g rowi ng buildi ng i ndust r y. Others conti nued to focus on wood processi ng by produci ng for niche markets. Some people shif ted to har vesti ng alder i n response to the g rowi ng market for hardwoods. Nonetheless, many com mu nit y mem - bers expressed concer n about the out mig ration of you ng people because of the scarcity of jobs in the area, affecting both family and community stability. 143 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies T he Coos Bay fishi ng i ndust r y also decli ned du r i ng the 1980s and 1990s when sal mon, steel head ( Oncorhyn - chus spp.), and g rou nd fish stocks dwi ndled, and fish pr ices d ropped. I n 2001, several of the area?s fish-processi ng plants closed. These changes added to the hardships the community faced from timber industry declines. Today, the G reater Coos Bay com mu nit y has evolved i nto a more ser vices- or iented com mu nit y, with a higher propor tion of reti rees. Its ser vices sector g rew th rough the 1990s. Education, health, and social ser vices provided 26 percent of the area?s employ ment i n 2000, compared with 19 percent a decade earlier. Professional ser vice workers and older, often retired, people have moved into the com- mu nit y. G reater Coos Bay al ready had the i nf rast r uct u re needed to at t ract new ret ail and ser vice enter pr ises du r i ng the 1990s. T he availabilit y of good medical facilities, ser vices, and ret ail stores make the area especially at t rac - tive to reti rees. T he population g rew slightly bet ween 1990 and 2000, f rom 27,851 to 28,596. T he Coquille Tr ibe and the Confederated Tr ibes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw also i nvested heavily i n the com mu nit y du r i ng the 1990s. T he t r ibes built hous - i ng developments, ad mi nist rative of fices, and busi nesses, i ncludi ng a casi no. T hese developments, together with the passage of self-gover nance legislation i n the early 1990s, have d raw n t r ibe members back to the area. G reater Coos Bay?s relatively large and diverse econ - omy compared to other, smaller communities surrounding the Coos Bay BLM Dist r ict, and the diversit y i n its wood- products sector, have cont r ibuted to this com mu nit y?s relatively strong resilience in the face of timber industry declines. Shopping, medical services, a community college, and theater and fi ne-ar ts facilities existed i n G reater Coos Bay well before the Plan. Economic diversification effor ts du r i ng the 1990s, f u nded i n par t th rough the Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative, have cont r ibuted to the expansion of al ready- existi ng i nf rast r uct u re. T he com mu nit y?s socioeconomic well-bei ng score was mediu m (71.8) i n 1990 and mediu m (66.2) i n 2000, but it was bet ter off than many communities in the area. Unemployment and the percentage of the population living in poverty changed lit tle bet ween 1990 and 2000 (u nemploy ment was about 9 percent, pover t y was about 16.5 percent), and median household i ncome rose 7.7 percent (f rom $28,918 to $31,143). The community has tried unsuccessfully to attract new, large-scale shippi ng and manufact u r i ng busi nesses. Accordi ng to a Por t employee, G reater Coos Bay lacks the three things necessary for becoming a major shipping port: ready access to a railroad line, easy access to an i nterst ate highway, and a large local consu mer base. Com - mu nit y members have also encou ntered dif ficulties i n thei r effor ts to expand the area?s recreation and tou r ism sectors. G reater Coos Bay is fai rly remote f rom large population centers, and once had a reputation as an unattractive, noisy mill tow n. I n addition, local proponents of recre - ation and tourism development have faced considerable i nter nal opposition f rom some of thei r fellow citizens who view recreation and tou r ism jobs as low-payi ng, seasonal, and u ndesi rable. T he buildi ng of a pr ivately fi nanced, world- class golf cou rse i n the nearby tow n of Bandon, the openi ng of the Coquille Tr ibe?s casi no i n Nor th Bend, and a concer ted effor t by local organizations and public agen - cies to develop and market the area?s nat u re-based tou r ism oppor t u nities, have helped to d raw visitors to Coos Bay. Com mu nit y members still express hope that jobs based on natural resources could again become viable. For example, i ncreases i n federal timber har vest u nder the Healthy Forests Restoration Act, on O&C lands, or with less stringent Plan guidelines could help stimulate the local economy. Watershed restoration work could also help to restore local fisher ies. Role of Federal Forest Management Policy in Influencing Change I nter viewees f rom all th ree com mu nities cited multiple factors that had cont r ibuted to the dow nt u r n i n the region - al timber i ndust r y du r i ng the 1980s and 1990s. T he mix of federal, state, county, tribal, and private forest lands i n the Coos Bay Dist r ict area, together with the dist r ict?s checkerboard ow nership pat ter n, made disti ng uishi ng bet ween the effects of changes i n forest management on the Coos Bay Dist r ict versus other forest lands dif ficult for some i nter viewees. 14 4 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Accordi ng to i nter viewees i n these th ree com mu nities, timber industry declines caused by forces other than the Plan i ncluded mechanization and tech nological advances in milling, harvesting, and transportation processes, all of which reduced the demand for labor; the globalization of the i ndust r y, which opened up new sou rces of supply, mak - i ng the region?s products less competitive i nter nationally; domestic competition with Souther n st ates; economic reces - sions i n the United St ates i n the early 1980s and i n Japan i n the early 1990s; changes i n the k i nds of wood products desi red by the wood-processi ng and buildi ng i ndust r ies; the Endangered Species Act and other envi ron ment al reg ula - tions; g row th i n the political i n fluence of envi ron ment al organizations; the t ransfer of large timberland holdi ngs f rom timber companies to real est ate i nvest ment t r usts; possible over-har vesti ng, with the potential for the lack of a sust ai nable wood supply i n the shor t r u n and possibly i n the long r u n; and a shif t to the use of the met r ic system for global marketi ng, meani ng U.S. companies could not compete as effectively as in the past. I n the view of i nter viewees, the reduction i n federal timber supplies caused by the spot ted owl listi ng, the Dw yer i nju nctions 4, the Plan, and subsequent lawsuits over timber sales added to all of these pressu res. By the 1980s, federal forest lands had become the mai n sou rce of old g row th i n the region because the old g row th on most private forest lands had already been harvested, and many private landholders had shifted to managing their forests on 40 - to 60 -year rot ations. Mills that were tooled to process large- diameter wood no longer had a suf ficient supply of raw mater ial available at affordable pr ices. Additionally, the cost of large-diameter logs increased once the supply dimi nished. Accordi ng to i nter viewees actively i nvolved in the forest products industry, uncertainty about the availability of federal timber and increasing costs associ- ated with milli ng large- diameter timber caused local mills to disi nvest i n wood-processi ng i nf rast r uct u re for large- diameter logs. Accordi ng to i nter viewees, mills that could afford to retool to process small- diameter wood, or that had retooled i n the 1980s, su r vived. T hese mills were t y pically ow ned by the large companies. T hose that could not retool mostly shut dow n. T his shif t, i n t u r n, i n fluenced other forest landow ners ? such as Coos Cou nt y?to g row t rees on shorter rotations, so that they could produce timber that the mills could handle. Demand for large- diameter wood has now repor tedly d ropped, and large t rees have lost value. I nter viewees did not li n k changes i n the area?s fishi ng industry to federal forest management policy. Instead, they at t r ibuted dow nt u r ns i n fishi ng du r i ng the 1990s to decli n - i ng stocks and har vest quot as and at t r ibuted i ncreases i n fish stocks i n 2003 to changes i n ocean conditions. Role of the BLM in Mitigating Plan Effects Resource and recreation outputs Timber har vests on the Coos Bay Dist r ict reached an an nual average of 200 million board feet i n the 1980s. Under the Plan, the dist r ict has a PSQ of 27 million board feet (shor t logs). Several i nter viewees felt that the Coos Bay Dist r ict timber prog ram was providi ng thei r com mu nities with socioeconomic benefits, but not at the level that it could ? or should. Some G reater Coos Bay i nter viewees expressed f r ust ration and resent ment that the gover n ment?which i n thei r view had at least some cont rol over federal timber production ?had allowed a reduction i n timber har vesti ng, thereby adding to the problems communities already faced, rather than helping them. Mi ni ng and g razi ng on the Coos Bay Dist r ict are small programs, and the data suggest that the Plan had little effect on the public?s access to mi neral and g razi ng resou rces on the district. The special forest products program is also small. T he st atistical and i nter view dat a gathered du r i ng this st udy provide a mixed pict u re of the deg ree to which the Plan has affected public access to various products. The dat a st rongly suggest that the Plan sig nificantly decreased the amou nts of fi rewood and small-scale salvage mater ials available to the public. T he Dist r ict?s limited capacit y to t rack the act ual amou nts of other special forest products removed f rom its holdi ngs prevents sayi ng, with any deg ree of cer t ai nt y, how the Plan has affected access to most other special forest products. 4 I n 1989, 1991, a nd 1992, U.S. Dist r ict Cou r t Judge D w yer issued injunctions against the FS that prevented timber sales throughout spot ted owl habit at. 145 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Recreation oppor t u nities have clearly expanded si nce the Plan was implemented. T he Coos Bay Dist r ict actively engaged with local com mu nities to help build a nat u re- based recreation and tou r ism economy on Oregon?s south coast. T he 1990s saw the Coos Bay Dist r ict?s recreation prog ram go f rom managi ng a few scat tered campg rou nds to becomi ng a f ull-fledged prog ram, and a key player i n devel - oping regional, community-based tourism and environmen- tal education. Upper-level district management thought that adapting their management priorities to changing economic conditions was impor t ant, as was i nvesti ng i n nat u re-based tou r ism and envi ron ment al education to cont r ibute toward the joi nt buildi ng of a diversified nat u ral-resou rce-based economy. Although the Coos Bay Dist r ict encou ntered some local opposition to its recreation development plans, the prog ram has generally met with g reat success. Many i nter viewees believed that the dist r ict?s i nvest ments i n recreation u nder the Plan had provided not able benefits. For example, the dist r ict helped promote tou r ism by creati ng an el k-viewi ng area, suppor ti ng an i nter n at the Discover y Center museu m i n Reedspor t, helpi ng with local festivals, and improving recreation and tourism opportunities on district lands. Agency jobs T he Coos Bay BLM Dist r ict had 206 employees i n 1993 and 175 employees i n 2002 (fig. 8-18). Although agency jobs d ropped by 15 percent du r i ng this per iod, the decli ne was much smaller than was the decrease i n FS u nits. T he Coos Bay Dist r ict made a conscious effor t to avoid lay - i ng off workers no longer needed i n its timber and roads prog rams by shif ti ng them to the dist r ict?s g row th areas, such as recreation, fish and wildlife, and watershed restora - tion. None of the i nter viewees f rom the Coos Bay Dist r ict case-study communities complained about the loss of BLM jobs and employees f rom thei r com mu nities. I ndeed, several timber-i ndust r y st akeholders f rom G reater My r tle Poi nt com mented that the Coos Bay Dist r ict had too many employees, given the reduced work load relati ng to timber sales. T hey perceived the dist r ict?s shif t i n focus to recre - ation and biological monitor i ng, for example, as a way of protecting employees from job loss. 250 200 150 100 50 0 Full-time equivalents Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Permanent full-time Other Fig u re 8-18 ? Coos Bay Dist r ict st af fi ng levels, 1993 ?20 02. Contracting T he Coos Bay Dist r ict spent at least $39.7 million on land management cont racti ng i n Coos and Cu r r y Cou nties bet ween 1990 and 2002. T he amou nt of money spent each year var ied considerably, with peaks i n the mid-1990s, and a t aper i ng off si nce 1998 (fig. 8-19). Bet ween 1990 ?92 and 2000 ?2002, cont ract spendi ng decli ned 56 percent, f rom $9.29 million to $5.22 million. As elsewhere, the emphasis of cont racti ng work shif ted away f rom labor-i ntensive work toward equipment-i ntensive and tech nical work (such as su r veys and restoration) du r i ng the per iod. I n 1990 ?92, the dist r ict awarded cont racts to 28 cont ractors. By 2000 ?2002, this nu mber had i ncreased to 42. T he decrease i n procu re - ment spending during this period meant that more contrac- tors were bei ng awarded less cont ract value i n 2000 ?2002, compared with a decade earlier. Although cont ractors f rom coastal communities captured a considerable proportion of cont ract value, much of the dist r ict?s cont ract value was awarded to cont ractors f rom the I nterst ate 5 cor r idor, par ticularly the Willamet te Valley. 146 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Some dist r ict i nter viewees noted that t argeti ng cont rac - tors i n nearby com mu nities was easier when Jobs-i n-the- Woods and resou rce advisor y com mit tee money was used to f u nd them. T he dist r ict is mak i ng an effor t to provide jobs locally with its watershed restoration and f uel-related work. T he dist r ict cont racts much of its watershed restora - tion work th rough local watershed associations, which provides a small nu mber of family-wage jobs. Some local cont ractors i nter viewed i n G reater Reedspor t st ated that BLM cont racti ng oppor t u nities there had been negligible du r i ng the last decade, however. Although some oppor t u- nities to do watershed restoration work were offered, this work was shor t i n du ration, the cont racts were small, and the work was not plentif ul enough to war rant i nvest ment i n personnel and equipment. In addition, the need for capital to invest in equipment, bonding, and liability concerns were additional bar r iers to becomi ng cont ractors. Similarly, i n G reater My r tle Poi nt, BLM cont racti ng was generally viewed as a sou rce of supplement al i ncome rather than as an economic backbone. Community economic assistance Unli ke the FS, the BLM is not author ized to provide g rants to communities in the form of community economic as- sist ance. It did have a Jobs-i n-the-Woods prog ram f u nded th rough the Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative f rom 1994 on, however (fig. 8-20). T his prog ram provided the f u ndi ng, labor, and par t ners needed to u nder t ake water - shed restoration work on the dist r ict. Much of this money was chan neled to local watershed cou ncils, i ncludi ng the Coquille and Coos Watershed Associations, which have become t wo of the most successf ul watershed organizations i n Oregon. I n addition to f u ndi ng, the Coos Bay Dist r ict provided tech nical exper tise and of fice space, equipment, and other for ms of project suppor t. Jobs-i n-the-Woods f u ndi ng generated the equivalent of roughly six f ull-time jobs per year bet ween 1998 and 2002. Although the Coos Bay Dist r ict was com mit ted to the prog ram and viewed it as successf ul, the prog ram lacked the f u nds to accomplish all of the restoration work needed, and it does not provide as much year-round employment as community members would li ke. Most com mu nit y i nter viewees st ated that the prog ram had helped to provide some displaced workers with jobs, and had helped con nect the timber har vesti ng Fig u re 8-20 ? Coos Bay Dist r ict Job -i n-t he -Woods f u nd i ng, 1994 ?20 02. 1,600,000 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 0 Funding (dollars) Fiscal year 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Fig u re 8-19 ? Coos Bay Dist r ict la nd ma nagement cont ract i ng by work t y pe, 1990 ?20 02. 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0 Contracting (million dollars) Fiscal year 1994 19961997 1999 2001 Technical Equipment Labor 1991 147 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies com mu nit y with the watershed restoration com mu nit y. T hey felt that the size of the prog ram was g rossly i nade- quate to compensate for the scale of layoffs that took place i n thei r com mu nities, however. T he case-st udy com mu nities arou nd the Coos Bay Dist r ict are i n cou nties that also cont ai n Siuslaw and Sisk iyou National Forest lands. Hence, they also benefited f rom other sou rces of i nitiative f u ndi ng. Bet ween 1994 and 2003, coast al Douglas Cou nt y received $7.7 million i n i nitiative money. I n G reater Reedspor t, most of this money was used to develop i nf rast r uct u re to suppor t tou r ism, non - timber manufacturing industries, and the Port of Umpqua. In Greater Myrtle Point, initiative funding supported devel- oping community strategic action plans and infrastructure related to ag r icult u re and tou r ism. G reater Coos Bay received nearly $20 million bet ween 1994 and 2003, more than half of which was Jobs-i n-the-Woods f u ndi ng. T he remai nder (an estimated $8.7 million) suppor ted economic development and capacity-building projects, such as small- busi ness loans, worker-ret rai ni ng prog rams, i nf rast r uct u re improvement, recreation and tourism planning, and a busi ness park. I nter viewees considered i nitiative f u ndi ng to have made a sig nificant cont r ibution to helpi ng thei r communities build a foundation for future development and diversification. I nter viewees viewed the projects related to recreation and tourism as particularly successful, although some felt these projects would not lead to high-payi ng jobs. For many projects, it is too soon to tell what the long-ter m benefits will be. Payments to county governments Before the Plan was implemented, the Coos Bay Dist r ict made th ree t y pes of pay ments to cou nties an nually: Oregon and Califor nia Rail road (O&C) pay ments, Coos Bay Wagon Road ( Wagon Road) pay ments, and pay ments i n lieu of t axes. T he O&C and Wagon Road pay ments were li n ked to timber revenues. Owl-g uarantee pay ments and pay ments associated with the Secu re Ru ral Schools and Com mu nit y Self-Deter mi nation Act of 2000 aimed to mitigate for falling county revenues stemming from declines in pay- ments based on timber revenues. These mitigations did i ndeed have a st abilizi ng effect on pay ments to cou nties, although pay ments were subst antially below 1990 rates (fig. 8-21). Local cou nties relied heavily on these pay ments du r i ng the 1980s. Although the mitigations helped offset the loss of revenue to county governments from declining federal timber harvests, they did not compensate for the loss of busi ness and job oppor t u nities associated with the cu r t ail ment of timber har vest on BLM land. As one dist r ict i nter viewee put it, cou nt y residents get ser vices, but they do not have jobs. T he lack of jobs and associated problems Fig u re 8-21? Coos Bay Dist r ict O regon a nd Califor n ia Rail road La nd a nd Coos Bay Wagon Road d ist r ibut ions, 1990 ?20 01. ?Owl adjusted? reflects t he i ncreased pay ments to cou nt ies made to mitigate the effects of decreased timber revenue and revenue sharing. Not adjusted 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 19 90 19 91 19 92 199319941995199619971998 Fiscal year Coos Curry Douglas Lane Payments to counties (million dollars) Owl adjusted 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Fiscal year Coos Curry Douglas Lane Payments to counties (million dollars) 199920002001 148 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III i ncreased the demand for cou nt y ser vices, which become dif ficult to provide because of limited cou nt y revenues. Summary T he reduced timber har vesti ng on Coos Bay Dist r ict land u nder the Plan was subst antial, addi ng to the multiple forces affecti ng the area?s wood-products i ndust r y si nce the early 1980s. To compensate, the dist r ict i nvested heavily in its recreation program to help local communities build a nature-based recreation and tourism industry on the central Oregon coast. T his effor t has met with many successes, al - though deter mi ni ng thei r economic cont r ibutions is dif ficult because of the lack of adequate t rack i ng mechanisms. Although agency jobs decli ned over the 10 -year per iod, the decli ne was mai nly due to at t r ition, rather than layoffs, and it did not cause the negative effects in communities that FS job losses did. Cont ract spendi ng decli ned somewhat bet ween 1990 and 2002, although the nu mber of cont ractors work i ng on the dist r ict i ncreased, spreadi ng the benefit. T he Jobs-i n-the-Woods prog ram was viewed as bei ng largely successful, and it helped to contribute a small number of jobs to local communities. Projects supported by initiative f u ndi ng were also for the most par t viewed positively, and as mak i ng impor t ant cont r ibutions to com mu nit y develop - ment and diversification. Mitigation measu res to st abilize pay ments to cou nties were seen as essential. Discussion and Conclusions Are local communities and economies experiencing positive or negative changes that may be associated with federal forest management? Change has affected all of the case-st udy com mu nities bet ween 1990 and 2003 (t able 8-1). But social and economic changes i n com mu nities are inevitable. Federal forest management policy is just one of many variables that can shape the nature of that change. T he Endangered Species Act listi ng of the nor ther n spot ted owl i n 1990 and cou r t i nju nctions halti ng the flow of federal timber were the t u r ni ng poi nts that reduced federal timber production, not the Plan. T he Plan, which was i ntended to restore the production of timber from federal forest land came later, formally codifying a shift in forest management that had already happened. The role of these events in contributing to change in the case-st udy com mu nities var ied considerably. As was expected, not all com mu nities were affected the same way, or to the same extent, and Plan effects were much more noticeable in some communities than in others. For the case-study communities, the effects depended on the relative strength of the timber sector in each community arou nd 1990, the extent to which wood products har vested on federal forest lands supported that sector, and the degree to which local residents depended on FS jobs. Com mu ni - ties such as Quilcene, Upper Hood R iver Valley, and the Mid-K lamath par ticipated heavily i n the wood products i ndust r y u ntil the late 1980s. Loggers worked mai nly on national forests lands, and local mills obtained most of thei r wood f rom federal forests. T hese com mu nities were hit hard by the reduction in federal timber supplies. In cont rast, although timber was impor t ant to the economy i n the Qui nault I ndian Nation i n 1990, t r ibal and pr ivate forest lands largely suppor ted that sector. I nter viewees f rom that community did not report any major effects from changes in federal forest management policy. Although the timber i ndust r y was of secondar y impor t ance i n the Villages of Mou nt Hood i n 1990, many FS employees lived there. T he decli ne i n agency jobs associated with reductions i n FS timber programs had negative effects in the Villages of Mount Hood and other case-study communities, just as the loss of timber sector jobs did. The major adverse social and economic effects of the Plan were expected to be associated with job and i ncome losses f rom reduced federal timber har vests. But the Plan was not the only var iable causi ng the Pacific Nor thwest timber economy to change. The timber sector in some com- mu nities ? such as G reater Coos Bay?had been decli ni ng si nce the early 1980s f rom economic recession, domestic and i nter national competition, changes i n market demand for wood products, i ndust r y rest r uct u r i ng, mechanization and technological advances, and environmental regulations. T he Plan added to these pressu res. Other case-st udy com - munities, such as the Mid-Klamath, seemed to be relatively buffered from the changes affecting the industry during the 1980s. I nter viewees there perceived the halt of federal timber production arou nd 1990 as bei ng the begi n ni ng 149 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies of the end. But some i nter viewees believed that the Plan simply brought on changes that would li kely have happened i n time any way. Many i nter viewees perceived that loggi ng on federal forests du r i ng the mid-1980s was u nsust ai nable. T hey obser ved that old-g row th t rees were mostly gone f rom pr ivate i ndust r ial forest lands, and they were becomi ng depleted on the federal forests as well. T he Plan?s envi ron ment al impact st atement predicted that some com mu nities would feel the effects of agency job losses. T he FS cut its work force by 57 percent on the Oly mpic National Forest, 59 percent on the Mou nt Hood National Forest, and 31 percent on the K lamath National Forest bet ween 1993 and 2003. Although the FS made ever y effor t to add ress the problem th rough at t r ition, some work - ers had to move to obt ai n agency jobs elsewhere. Others reti red and remai ned i n thei r com mu nities or moved away. Employee cutbacks dispropor tionately affected the tempo - rar y work force. T he Coos Bay Dist r ict also lost 15 percent of its employees bet ween 1993 and 2002, mai nly th rough at t r ition. T he effects on local residents arou nd the Coos Bay Dist r ict were not as severe as arou nd the national forests. Never theless, com mu nit y residents have fewer oppor t u ni - ties for agency jobs. The environmental impact statement also predicted that workers i n the wood-products i ndust r y and thei r families would feel sig nificant, long-lasti ng effects that would be dif ficult to overcome. One of the shor tcomi ngs of usi ng ? the communityas the unit of analysis in this study is that it obscu res, and could devalue, the exper ience of i ndividual com mu nit y members. But as the i nter view results descr ibe, timber workers and FS employees were among the com - munity members most affected by declines in federal timber harvesting. Many of these people moved out of their com mu nities i n the 1990s, causi ng a loss of work i ng- class families, young people, human capital, and community capacit y. We were u nable to monitor what became of them. The communities persist, but changes in forest management policy had dramatic and disruptive effects on the lives of many people. Seven of the t welve case-st udy com mu nities lost population bet ween 1990 and 2000, whereas population g rew by 20.6 percent i n Plan-area non met ropolit an com - mu nities du r i ng this per iod. Only the Villages of Mou nt Hood ?fai rly close to the Por tland met ropolit an area ? g rew i n population by more than 20.6 percent bet ween 1990 and 2000. I n coast al com mu nities, the fishi ng i ndust r y decli ned at the same time that the timber industry did, adding to local hardships. T he special forest products i ndust r y, which has g row n i n the Pacific Nor thwest si nce 1990, was an impor t ant sou rce of employ ment for mobile workers and immigrants. It did not provide an alternative source of family-wage jobs for displaced timber workers or agency employees, however. Ag r icult u re ?which persists i n several case-st udy com mu nities ?has been changi ng; ranchi ng, i n par ticular, was u nder st ress as a viable livelihood st rateg y. Li ke special forest products, ag r icult u re did not appear to offer a new sou rce of jobs for displaced workers. Many agricultural laborers are migrants, although increasingly mig rant workers are t ak i ng up residence, as i n com mu nities li ke the Upper Hood R iver Valley. Ou r sample size was not large enough to adequately test the hypothesis that the communities most negatively affected by the Plan would be the relatively small and isolated ones su r rou nded by federal forest lands, lack - ing economic diversity, most dependent on public timber har vest, and with low leadership capacit y and that the com mu nities with good access to t ranspor t ation, markets, and raw mater ials, with high economic diversit y and qualit y leadership, would best adapt to change. Socioeconomic well-bei ng scores rose i n t wo, d ropped i n fou r, and showed lit tle change i n six of the case-st udy com mu nities bet ween 1990 and 2000. 5 The largest and most economically diverse community in our sample ? G reater Coos Bay? decreased i n socioeconomic well-bei ng bet ween 1990 and 2000, as did the Mid-K lamath community, one of the smallest, most remote, and formerly most dependent on federal timber communities in the sample. Quilcene ? also small, remote, heavily dependent on federal timber har vests i n the 1980s, and lack i ng st rong 5 If a com mu n it y socioeconom ic well-bei ng score cha nged by more t ha n 3 percent ( plu s or m i nu s), we con sidered it s socioeconom ic well-bei ng to have i ncrea sed or decrea sed. If t he score cha nged by less t ha n 3 percent, we con sidered t hat to mea n lit tle cha nge i n socioeconom ic well-bei ng. 150 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III leadership ? showed the highest i ncrease i n socioeconomic well-bei ng. Socioeconomic well-bei ng i n G reater My r tle Poi nt also i ncreased ? another small, isolated, and not ver y economically diverse com mu nit y where federal timber har vests were impor t ant i n the 1980s. T hese fi nd - i ngs, combi ned with ou r small sample size, make dif ficult identif yi ng cor relations bet ween the effects of federal forest management policy, community characteristics, and change i n socioeconomic well-bei ng du r i ng the st udy per iod. I n 2000, t wo com mu nities scored ver y low, six scored low, and fou r scored mediu m i n socioeconomic well-bei ng; none scored high or ver y high. T his fi ndi ng suggests that the communities in our sample are still struggling to develop and diversify. Some communities have sustained themselves by having a substantial agricultural sector, being on a ma- jor transportation corridor, or being close to a popular recreation and tou r ism desti nation. Other com mu nities exper ienced an i n flu x of reti rees, com muters, mobile or self- employed workers, or second-home ow ners. Some that had been centers for goods and ser vices expanded thei r role as regional centers. A nd t r ibes, where present, played an important role in contributing to community development th rough the g row th of t r ibal busi nesses, ad mi nist ration, and social and environmental services. Tribal forest lands also helped sust ai n local timber economies i n some areas (u nless subject to Plan rest r ictions, as i n the Coquille case). Of the 12 U.S. census social and economic i ndicators we t racked, only t wo showed consistent t rends across all 12 com mu nities: median age and educational at t ai n ment, both of which i ncreased. Median age rose i n ever y com - mu nit y by any where f rom 6.1 to 36.6 percent. Median age for all nonmetropolitan communities in the Plan region rose 10 percent, f rom 36.4 to 40, bet ween 1990 and 2000 (compared to 7 percent for the Nation as a whole). I n 11 of the 12 case-st udy com mu nities, median age rose more than the average for the Plan area as a whole. Although this t rend i n par t reflects the agi ng of the baby boomers, i nter viewees consistently repor ted that over time, families and young people had left their communities because of the shor t age of jobs. Meanwhile, reti rees had moved i n, par tly because of the low cost of livi ng. T he i n flu x of reti rees may be partly responsible for the increase in the percentage of the population over 25 that completed high school i n each com mu nit y, and havi ng a B.A. deg ree or higher (only i n the Mid-K lamath did the percent age of people with a B.A. deg ree or higher d rop). Some i nter viewees also at t r ibuted rising educational attainment to the fact that young people could no longer leave high school and ear n good wages by getting jobs in the timber industry. It had become more important to complete high school and obtain a higher deg ree i n order to fi nd family-wage jobs. Some i nter viewees viewed the g row th i n the nu mber of reti rees i n thei r com - munities as helping to replace some of the human capital and com mu nit y capacit y that was lost when work i ng- class families depar ted. Some i nter viewees viewed reti rees and older telecom muti ng populations as br i ngi ng i n new and sometimes con flicti ng values about r u ral life. We did not have enough evidence to deter mi ne how communities that depend on amenity, recreation, and other envi ron ment al benefits of federal forests were affected by the Plan. Nor did we evaluate to what extent recreation was sust ai ni ng for merly timber-based com mu nities. I nter view results showed that recreation and amenit y values played a role i n d rawi ng new residents to com mu nities arou nd federal forests that lost timber workers and FS employees i n the 1990s. Recreation and tou r ism also played an impor t ant and evolving role in contributing to the economies of the Upper Hood R iver Valley, the Villages of Mou nt Hood, and the Lake Qui nault A rea. Several i nter viewees f rom the case-st udy com mu nities viewed recreation and nat u re- based tourism as the natural-resource-based sectors holding the greatest potential for local economic development. Yet developed recreation and tou r ism were of ten cont ro - versial, and many i nter viewees st ated that they do not provide many family-wage jobs. Never theless, several of the case-st udy com mu nities were at tempti ng to promote recreation and tou r ism locally. T hei r success will depend on the popularity of local attractions, the seasonal availability of recreation opportunities, the supply of forest-based rec- reation oppor t u nities and the agencies? abilities to manage recreation demand, the accessibility of the communities, the availability of recreation and tourism infrastructure, and the competition with other com mu nities for tou r ists. T he 151 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies agencies were actively work i ng with many com mu nities to assist with developi ng recreation and tou r ism. Did the Plan help maintain the stability of local and regional economies and assist with long-term economic development and d iversi ficat ion to minimi ze adverse effects associated with job loss? The anticipated forest-res- toration economy never really developed on the case-study forests. Procurement-contract spending for ecosystem management on the fou r forests var ied an nually and was driven in part by natural disasters. The decline in contract spendi ng bet ween 1990 and 2002 on all fou r forests ranged f rom 15 to 78 percent. T he nu mber of cont ractors work - i ng on the Oly mpic, Mou nt Hood, and K lamath National Forests d ropped by roughly half bet ween 1990 and 2002. In contrast, the number of contractors increased by about one-thi rd on the Coos Bay Dist r ict. Only a handf ul of case- study community residents reported that they or people they k new had obt ai ned agency cont racts to do forest restoration work. People that had cont racts viewed them as supplemen - tal rather than as a stable form of income because the jobs were sporadic and the work season was shor t. T he Coos Bay Jobs-i n-the-Woods prog ram came the closest to sust ai ni ng a restoration-based work force on that dist r ict. T he money for the prog ram was not enough to suppor t more than a few jobs, however, and f ut u re f u ndi ng is questionable. Ou r fi ndi ngs showed that to date, resou rces to provide f ull-time, year-round jobs in forest restoration on the case-study forests are suf ficient for only a few people. A nd cont ract work is of ten li n ked to u npredict able nat u ral disasters such as fi res and floods. The unit budgets of the case-study national forests d ropped by 49 percent on the Oly mpic, 59 percent on the Mou nt Hood, and 18 percent on the K lamath bet ween 1993 and 2003. With steeply decli ni ng budgets, the FS did not have the resources to invest in procurement contracting. In cont rast, the Coos Bay Dist r ict budget remai ned relatively flat, g rowi ng only 1 percent du r i ng this same per iod. 6 T he Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative was an important strategy for helping some communities affected by the loss of timber jobs develop and diversify. The case-study communities received vastly different amounts of initiative money. Many of the case-study communities repor ted benefiti ng f rom i nitiative-suppor ted projects, par - ticularly those for developing infrastructure. These projects did not always succeed i n at t racti ng new busi nesses or i ndust r ies, however. W hat the long-ter m benefits of some of these projects will be is u n k now n. Other successes repor ted were i n com mu nit y plan ni ng and small busi ness loans. I nitiative-suppor ted effor ts to develop alter nate wood- products sectors that use federal timber have largely failed to mater ialize as yet. For example, the i nitiative suppor ted est ablishi ng a small hardwood mill and a small f u r nit u re busi ness i n the Mid-K lamath. New markets and busi ness sectors are ver y dif ficult to develop, however, especially i n remote com mu nities. A nd buildi ng a busi ness is dif ficult where the supply of wood to suppor t it is small and u n reli - able, as was fou nd on the K lamath u nder the Plan. W hat the i nitiative money mostly failed to do was to create sust ai n - able local jobs comparable to the quantity and quality of those lost. Most i nter viewees believed the i nitiative had done lit tle to help displaced timber workers. One excep - tion was the Coos Bay Jobs-i n-the-Woods prog ram, which was viewed as a success, although it created only a small nu mber of jobs. I n some com mu nities, the li n ks bet ween i nitiative-f u nded projects and the local BLM and FS of fices were not readily apparent to most i nter viewees. T hus, opportunities to mend local community-agency relations that had deter iorated when timber har vests decli ned were sometimes missed. Other impor t ant and largely successf ul mitigations were the owl-g uarantee pay ments associated with the Budget Reconciliation Act, and the Secu re Ru ral Schools and Com mu nit y Self-Deter mi nation Act monies. T hese f u nds helped st abilize pay ments to cou nt y gover n ments, and provided some f u nds (th rough the Secu re Ru ral Schools Act, Title II) for local ecosystem management work. Many com mu nit y i nter viewees com mented on the impor t ance of these f u nds to thei r com mu nities, and expressed concer n 6 A lt houg h t he tot al budget for Coos Bay rose ju st 1 percent f rom 1993 to 20 03, non f uel a nd ?ord i na r y? budget s g rew fa ster for Coos Bay t ha n d id it s over all budget. It s ord i na r y budget s i ncrea sed 5.4 percent. We i nter pret t hese ?ord i na r y? f u nd s a s i mpor t a nt to achieving sustained ecosystem management. 152 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III over what will happen i n 2006, when the Secu re Ru ral Schools Act pay ments expi re. One Plan-related change apparent f rom the i nter views was that the case-st udy com mu nities fou nd i ncreasi ng dif ficult y i n sust ai ni ng themselves i n a way that li n ked their local economy and culture to the natural resources that surround them and to federal forest lands, in particular. Although some com mu nities still had a wood-products industry, federal timber played a minor, if any, role in sup- por ti ng that i ndust r y. Many i nter viewees repor ted that the lack of forest-based, family-wage jobs i n thei r com mu nities was one of the biggest issues of concer n relati ng to federal forest management. That a declining number of community members now made a livi ng f rom federal forest land meant that relations bet ween local residents and FS and BLM person nel were becomi ng more dist ant, and local people were less i nterested i n forest management issues. Recre - ation is replaci ng timber as an arena for i nteraction bet ween community residents, federal forests, and the agencies that manage them. Little evidence from the case-study commu- nities suggested that the Plan had been successf ul i n li n k i ng its socioeconomic and biophysical goals by providing local, family-wage jobs that promote forest stewardship on federal forest lands. Acknowledgments We are g ratef ul to the Sier ra I nstit ute for Com mu nit y and Envi ron ment for shar i ng its dat abase on Nor thwest Eco - nomic Adjust ment I nitiative f u ndi ng and projects, which we used to obt ai n i nfor mation per t ai ni ng to com mu nit y economic assistance in the case-study communities. Metric Equivalent Million board feet (log scale) ? 4530 = cubic meters References Bernard, H.R. 2002. Research methods i n anth ropolog y: qualit ative and quantit ative approaches. Wal nut Creek, CA: Alt ami ra Press. 753 p. Buttolph, L.P.; Kay, W.; Charnley, S.; Moseley, C.; Donoghue, E.M. [In press]. Nor thwest Forest Plan ? the fi rst 10 years (1994 ?2003): socioeconomic monitor i ng of Oly mpic National Forest and th ree local com mu nities. Gen. Tech. Rep. Por tland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. Denzin, N.K.; Lincoln, Y.S. 1994. Handbook of qualit ative research. T housand Oaks, CA: Sage P ublications. 643 p. Dillingham, C. 1999. K lamath National Forest economic monitor i ng repor t. Yreka, CA: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, K lamath National Forest. Doak, S.C.; Kusel, J. 1997. Well-bei ng assessment of com mu nities i n the K lamath Region. Taylorsville, CA: Forest Com mu nit y Research. Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team [FEMAT]. 1993. Forest ecosystem management: an ecological, economic, and social assessment. Portland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of the I nter ior [and others]. [I r reg ular pagi nation]. Kocis, S.M.; English, D.B.K.; Zarnoch, S.J.; Arnold, R.; Warren, L.; Ruka, C. 2004. National visitor use monitoring results, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Ser vice, Region 6 [Pacific Nor thwest Region], Mou nt Hood National Forest. Athens, GA: National Visitor Use Monitoring Project, U.S. Department of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Souther n Research St ation. 25 p. McLain, R.J.; Tobe, L.; Charnley, S.; Moseley, C.; Donoghue, E.M. [In press]. Nor thwest Forest Plan ? the fi rst 10 years (1994 ?2003): socioeconomic monitoring of Coos Bay Dist r ict and th ree local com mu nities. Gen. Tech. Rep. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. Miles, M.B.; Huberman, A.M. 1994. Qualit ative dat a analysis: an expanded sou rcebook. T housand Oaks, CA: Sage P ublications. 338 p. 153 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Moseley, C.; Balaev, M.; Lake, A. 2003. Long term t rends i n cont racti ng and the impact of the National Fi re Plan i n nor ther n Califor nia. Ecosystem Work force Prog ram Work i ng Paper No. 7. Eugene, OR: Ecosystem Work force Prog ram, Universit y of Oregon. 31 p. Patton, M.Q. 2002. Qualit ative research and evaluation methods. T housand Oaks: Sage P ublications. 598 p. Ragin, C.C.; Becker, H.S. 1992. W hat is a case? Explor i ng the fou ndations of social i nqui r y. Cambr idge, U K: Cambr idge Universit y Press. 242 p. Tobe, L.; Kusel, J.; Neimann, E. 2002. Happy Camp, Califor nia com mu nit y case st udy. I n: Assessment of the Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative. Taylorsville, CA: Forest Com mu nit y Research. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management [USDA and USDI]. 1994a. Final supplemental environmental impact statement on management of habitat for late-successional and old- g row th forest related species withi n the range of the nor ther n spot ted owl. Vol. 2? appendices. [Place of publication u n k now n]. [I r reg ular pagi nation]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management [USDA and USDI]. 1994b. Record of decision for amend ments to Forest Ser vice and Bu reau of Land Management plan ni ng docu ments withi n the range of the nor ther n spot ted owl. [Place of publication u n k now n]. 74 p. [ plus at t ach ment A: st andards and guidelines]. 15 4 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III 155 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Susan Charnley T his volu me focuses on the Nor thwest Forest Plan (the Plan) record of decision evaluation question, A re local com mu nities and economies exper ienci ng positive or negative changes that may be associated with federal forest management? It also assesses how well t wo of the Plan?s socioeconomic goals were met du r i ng the fi rst decade: to maintain the stability of local and regional economies on a predict able, long-ter m basis; and, where timber sales can not proceed, to assist with long-ter m economic development and diversification to mi nimize adverse effects associated with job loss. T he monitor i ng team exami ned t rends i n socioeconomic benefits f rom federal forest lands bet ween the early 1990s and the early 2000s, and the ways i n which the Plan may have contributed to these trends. The team also exami ned socioeconomic mitigation measu res desig ned to offset some of the adverse effects of cutbacks i n federal timber har vest, how effective they were, and why they sometimes were not. I n addition, we exami ned social and economic change in Plan-area communities at the regional scale and i n a sample of 12 forest-based com mu nities to identif y li n ks bet ween Plan implement ation, the mitigation measu res, and com mu nit y change. Ou r mai n conclusions follow. We began this volu me (chapter 2) by t ak i ng a regional look at social and economic change i n 1,314 com mu nities i n the Plan area. We analyzed 12 social and economic i ndica - tors f rom the U.S. census for the years 1990 and 2000, and also used U.S. census data to develop a community socio- economic well-bei ng measu re that would help us evaluate change i n com mu nit y socioeconomic well-bei ng over time. Ou r analysis of the census dat a showed that com - munities in the Plan area are changing. The population is g rowi ng, educational at t ai n ment and household i ncome are increasing, and poverty is decreasing. At the same time, the manufacturing sector of the economy is declining in many com mu nities. Socioeconomic well-bei ng i ncreased for more than a third of the communities in the region, and decreased for about the same nu mber bet ween 1990 and 2000. Chapter 9: What We Have Learned Al most 5 million people lived i n com mu nities i n the Plan area i n 2000, and more than 2 million lived withi n 5 miles of federal forest land. Usi ng a socioeconomic well- bei ng i ndex we developed, we fou nd that 40 percent of the com mu nities withi n 5 miles of federal forest land decreased i n socioeconomic well-bei ng bet ween 1990 and 2000, com - pared with a 33 percent decrease for com mu nities far ther than 5 miles f rom federal forests. Generally, Plan-area com mu nities with lower socioeconomic well-bei ng tended to be those withi n 5 miles, compr isi ng 71 percent of all com mu nities that scored low or ver y low i n socioeconomic well-bei ng i n 2000. For t y-th ree percent of the com mu nities that received high or ver y high scores, however, were also withi n 5 miles of federal forest lands. Although some of these com mu nities had relatively high socioeconomic well- being, income inequality has also increased there. Drivers of socioeconomic change, such as increasing income inequality, migration, shifts in dominant industry sectors, and aging populations, affect community socioeconomic well-bei ng. How much do federal forests cont r ibute to socio - economic change i n r u ral com mu nities and economies? Fi ndi ng di rect con nections bet ween changes i n forest man - agement policy and socioeconomic change is dif ficult. T he way we approached this challenge was to exami ne t rends i n socioeconomic benefits f rom federal forests that could affect the well-bei ng of forest-based com mu nities. T hese benefits i ncluded jobs and i ncome associated with resou rces and recreation, agency jobs, and procurement contracting oppor t u nities. We exami ned regional-scale t rends i n these forest benefits for 1990 to 2003, and we exami ned local- scale t rends i n fou r sample case-st udy areas. I nter views with 223 members of 12 case-st udy com mu nities and 82 agency employees who work on fou r case-st udy forests pro - vided i nsight i nto how changes i n the flow of these benefits had contributed to change in local communities, and helped explai n the ways i n which the Plan had affected the flow of socioeconomic benefits f rom the forests and thei r managi ng agencies. 156 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Maintaining the Stabilit y of Local and Regional Economies Jobs and Income From Resources and Recreation on Federal Forests I n the early 1990s, residents of forest com mu nities ex - pressed concern about the uncertainty around the timing and quantit y of federal timber sales (FEM AT 1993: V II-70). Com mu nities wanted st abilit y, predict abilit y, and cer t ai nt y i n timber supplies (FEM AT 1993: V II-77). Many people believed that if federal agencies produced a stable, even flow of timber, social and economic st abilit y i n r u ral, forest-based com mu nities would be assu red (see sou rces cited i n R ichardson 1996). T he Plan?s socioeconomic goal of maintaining the stability of local and regional economies on a predictable, long-term basis by producing predictable levels of timber sales, nontimber resources, and recreation oppor t u nities reflects this thi n k i ng. However, Absolute predict abilit y is impossible. Nat u re, soci - et y, and hu man economies are ext remely complex systems. Cause and effect relationships follow many pathways i n each system?. W hile predict abilit y is dif ficult for nat u ral systems, the same can be said about economic and social systems. W hen econom - ic, social and natural systems interact, uncertainty d ramatically i ncreases, mak i ng reliable prediction of outcomes most dif ficult [MacCleer y and Le Master 1999: 522]. I n volu me II of this repor t we fou nd that the levels of timber sales du r i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan did not meet expect ations. Trends i n special forest products sold, mi ni ng activit y, and recreation oppor t u nities were mixed, and g razi ng decli ned. I n chapter 3 of volu me III, we fou nd that measu r i ng jobs and i ncome associated with g razi ng, mi n - ing, and harvesting special forest products on federal forest lands i n the Plan area was not possible because of lack of dat a. But we could measu re jobs and i ncome associated with timber har vest and recreation. For recreation, the only available data pertained to current status on Forest Service (FS) lands. I n the early 2000s, recreation oppor t u nities provided by FS lands in the Plan area supported about 17,500 di rect jobs and 25,500 tot al jobs. The main adverse social and economic effects of the Plan were expected to be associated with the loss of jobs and income from reduced federal timber harvests. Federal timber supplies d ropped over the cou rse of the 1990s, and federal agencies did not produce anticipated probable sale quantit y (PSQ) volu mes (volu me II, chapter 2). T hi r t y thou - sand di rect timber i ndust r y jobs were lost bet ween 1990 and 2000 i n the Plan area (compared to Plan expect ations of 25,000 jobs lost). Most of this job loss was i n non met ro - polit an cou nties, with Oregon bei ng the hardest hit of the th ree st ates. Yet timber supplies across all ow nerships i n the Pacific Nor thwest were relatively st able du r i ng the last half of the 1990s. Never theless, about 11,000 of the 30,000 tim - ber i ndust r y jobs lost du r i ng the 1990s were lost i n the last half of the decade. About 400 of the 11,000 jobs lost si nce 1994 can be at t r ibuted to a net reduction i n timber har vest - i ng on federal forest lands. T he remai ni ng 10,600 job losses occurred during a period of increased log supply, and are the result of less ef ficient mills closi ng, and mills conti nui ng to invest in labor-saving technologies. The contribution of federal timber to the total timber supply dropped in the Plan area f rom about 25 percent i n 1990 to 10 percent i n 1995 to less than 5 percent by 2000. Although stable timber supplies may contribute to eco- nomic st abilit y, they do not ensu re it. T his fi ndi ng is consis - tent with research u nder t aken i n the 1990s that shows how assuming community stability depends on nondeclining, even flows of timber f rom federal forests can be misleadi ng (see sou rces cited i n Kusel 1996, R ichardson 1996). Many factors can i n fluence the st abilit y of forest-based com mu ni - ties ( USDA FS 2000: 3-326 ?3-329). Demand for wood and com modit y pr ices fluct uates; alter native sou rces of supply are available; some fi r ms prefer locati ng close to large labor markets rather than i n geog raphically isolated areas; mills compete for timber supply; com mu nities compete for jobs; wood products manufact u r i ng tech nolog y changes; and other federal and state policies affecting the business climate change. All of these forces can affect jobs in the timber industry, and neither agencies nor communities have much i n fluence over them. Consequently, the concept of community stability has come to be replaced by the concept of com mu nit y resiliency?the abilit y of com mu nities to 157 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies respond and adapt to change i n positive, const r uctive ways to mitigate the effects of change on the com mu nit y (Har r is et al. 2000: 6). T he expect ation that the Plan would provide predict able levels of resource outputs and recreation opportunities, which would i n t u r n provide predict able levels of employ - ment, was not achieved with respect to timber supply. T he timber projections for FS and Bu reau of Land Management (BLM) lands i n the Plan area were not realized, and there was a lot of var iation across the years si nce the Plan was implemented. However, i ncreased har vests f rom other ow nerships and the redi rection of logs f rom the expor t market to local processi ng i ndust r ies have mitigated some of these impacts. T he Plan?s effect on nontimber resou rces and recreation oppor t u nities was either mi nimal or not readily discernable. Agency Jobs and Of fices The loss of agency jobs also affected community stability. T he five wester n Oregon BLM dist r icts lost 166 f ull-time equivalents (FTEs) bet ween 1993 and 2002, or 13 percent of thei r work force. No BLM dist r ict or resou rce area of fices closed du r i ng this per iod, however, providi ng a conti nued presence of agency decision makers i n local com mu nities. National forests i n the Plan area lost 3,066 FTEs bet ween 1993 and 2002, representi ng a 36 -percent decli ne i n the work force. T his loss was more than expected, and it led to a consolidation of field of fices. T he nu mber of FS of fices with forest super visors decli ned by 2, and the nu mber of of fices with dist r ict rangers d ropped by 20 du r i ng the per iod, representi ng a 23-percent reduction i n the nu mber of com mu nities housi ng FS of fices with a li ne of ficer. Some of these of fices closed completely; others persisted, but with g reatly reduced st af fi ng. T he FS job loss was most severe among u nits i n Oregon and Washi ng ton. T he FS and BLM are of ten t wo of the few sou rces of quality jobs in forest communities, and their employees of ten make impor t ant cont r ibutions to com mu nit y well- being. Agency jobs help to maintain the presence of com- mu nit y members who cont r ibute leadership sk ills, i nvest in improving their communities, and substantially enhance com mu nit y capacit y. T he repor t by the Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team (FEM AT) recog nized that the presence of FS and BLM of fices i n small, isolated com mu nities en hances com mu nit y capacit y, and that of fice closu res could devast ate some of these com mu nities. Not only displaced timber workers, but FS employees moved out of thei r com mu nities i n the 1990s as they reti red or went to work elsewhere, cont r ibuti ng to the loss of productive community members. The negative effects of these changes were descr ibed for some of the case-st udy com mu nities (chapter 8). T he loss of agency jobs was tied to decli nes i n agency budgets associated with reduced timber har vest under the Plan. Agency Budgets Bet ween 1993 and 2003, wester n Oregon BLM u nit tot al budgets rose by 22 percent. I n cont rast, Plan-area FS u nit budgets decli ned by 35 percent. T hese t rends can be compared to national-scale trends in agency budget appropr iations. Bet ween 1993 and 2003, tot al FS agency appropr iations g rew by 41 percent, and tot al BLM agency appropr iations g rew by 79 percent. T he 35-percent decli ne i n FS u nit budgets occu r red at the same time FS field-u nit budget allocations for fi re and f uel management rose f rom 7 to 29 percent of the tot al. Ex - cludi ng fi re and f uel management f u ndi ng, FS budgets for all other activities d ropped 50 percent du r i ng the decade. This drop meant that the FS had much less funding for non- f uel-related forest management activities i n 2003 than i n 1993. We were u nable to obt ai n dat a for earlier years; however, agency budget specialists i nter viewed said that budget decli nes began arou nd 1990. T he BLM field u nits received a smaller propor tion of fi re and f uel management dollars than the FS did. Never theless, excludi ng fi re reha - bilit ation and f uel management money, BLM u nit budgets still rose by 12 percent, providi ng additional money for non-fi re-related forest management work. T he decli ne i n FS budgets bet ween 1993 and 2003 can largely be attributed to the decline in timber receipts generated du r i ng the per iod. Although BLM timber sales also decreased du r i ng the decade, BLM f u ndi ng was not as heavily dependent on trust and permanent operating accou nts der ived f rom timber receipts. T he BLM u nits lost 158 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III st aff despite budget i ncreases, but r isi ng f u ndi ng allowed them g reater flexibilit y i n selecti ng among potential means of doi ng needed work (such as par t nerships, Jobs-i n-the- Woods, cont racti ng). T he BLM managers also had relatively wide latit ude i n di recti ng i nvest ments among prog rams i n the Oregon and Califor nia Rail road (O&C) allocation, which composed the major it y of the BLM budget. I n the early 1990s, BLM realig ned about 20 percent of the O&C f u ndi ng away f rom timber management activities and toward other forest management activities more consistent with Plan goals (Pr iebe 2004). Although O&C f u ndi ng de - cli ned slightly du r i ng the per iod, BLM f u ndi ng was not as sensitive to trust and permanent operating accounts derived f rom timber receipts as FS allocations were. Although O&C f u ndi ng decli ned du r i ng the per iod, allocations to all other BLM prog ram accou nts g rew. T hese i ncreases were mostly attributable to additional funding for the timber and recreation pipeli nes, for the forest health i nitiative, for fi re rehabilitation and fuel management, and for the manage- ment of land and resources. With regard to the alter natives bei ng considered for the Plan, the FEM AT repor t st ated: ?we emphasize that the options selected should not be hastily coupled with reductions i n f u ndi ng and personnel based on the inappropriate assumption that ecosystem management is somehow cheaper than traditional commodity production-focused Plans [FEM AT 1993: V II- 41]. T hat BLM f u ndi ng rose and st af fi ng d ropped slightly du r i ng the fi rst decade while FS f u ndi ng and st af fi ng dropped by more than one-third provides an opportunity to exami ne differences i n the i nstit utional capacit y of the agencies to be effective in achieving Plan goals. Procurement Contracting for Ecosystem Management Work Procu rement cont racti ng is another way i n which agencies create jobs that could benefit local com mu nities. Although cont ract work associated with i ntensive timber manage - ment (forest r y ser vices) was expected to decrease u nder the Plan, cont ract work i n ecosystem restoration was expected to increase, helping to offset job loss in both the forestry services and timber sectors. T his expect ation was not met. Although a propor tional shif t i n work t y pes t u r ned away f rom labor-i ntensive con - t racti ng associated with i ntensive timber management and toward tech nical and equipment-i ntensive work associated with ecosystem restoration, this shif t was i n the context of a general decline in contract spending. This decline can be attributed to a reduction in FS procurement contract- i ng. T he BLM cont ract spendi ng remai ned fai rly const ant bet ween the early 1990s and the early 2000s, averagi ng just u nder $20 million per year. T he FS spendi ng decli ned th roughout the per iod, d roppi ng f rom $103 million i n 1991 to $33 million i n 2002. We at t r ibute these differences i n agency cont ract spending primarily to the differences in agency budget trends during this period. The FS did not have the money to invest in procurement contracting, and local managers sometimes chose to accomplish work i n-house to keep people employed, rather than to invest in contracting. Thus, FS procurement contracting did not help offset economic decli ne i n the Plan area du r i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan. Added to this problem, the Plan did not contain adequate provisions for t argeti ng local com mu nit y residents with procu rement cont racti ng oppor t u nities. Only about one- quar ter of the agencies? cont ract value i n the early 1990s and the early 2000s was awarded to cont ractors f rom r u ral com mu nities (com mu nities with populations u nder 5,000), though the value awarded by the BLM i ncreased to one- thi rd of the tot al by the 2000s. Available cont racts of ten went to cont ractors f rom far away because of i nstit utional barriers that impeded Plan goals. From the local perspective, community case-study results indicated that anticipated jobs in forest restoration never really mater ialized. Procu rement cont ract spendi ng for ecosystem management on the four case-study forests var ied an nually and was d r iven i n par t by nat u ral disasters. A general decli ne i n cont ract spendi ng bet ween 1990 and 2002 on all fou r case-st udy forests ranged f rom 15 to 78 percent. Only a handf ul of case-st udy com mu nit y residents repor ted that they or people they k new had received agency 159 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies cont racts to do forest restoration work. T hose people who had, viewed the jobs as a supplement al, rather than a stable, form of income because of their sporadic nature and the shor t season of work. Ou r fi ndi ngs showed that, to date, suf ficient resou rces to provide f ull-time, year-rou nd employ ment i n forest restoration work on the case-st udy forests are not available for more than a few people. More - over, cont ract work is of ten li n ked to u npredict able nat u ral disasters such as fi res and floods. Declines in agency jobs and jobs created through procurement contracting added to the climate of instability affecting local and regional economies under the Plan. These declines provide additional evidence to suggest that the Plan goal of maintaining the stability of local and regional economies on a predictable, long-term basis has not yet been achieved. Community Ef fects of Plan Implementation W hat were the effects of this decli ni ng flow of socioeco - nomic benefits f rom federal forests on r u ral com mu nities and economies? Ou r analysis of U.S. census i ndicators showed that 40 percent of the com mu nities withi n 5 miles of federal forest lands decreased i n socioeconomic well- bei ng bet ween 1990 and 2000, 37 percent i ncreased, and 23 percent showed lit tle change. T he census dat a do not tell us why, however. We monitored a sample of case-st udy com mu nities, and i nter viewed com mu nit y members to identif y these effects. As was expected, not all com mu ni - ties were affected the same way, or to the same extent, by the Plan. All of the case-st udy com mu nities we monitored showed changes over the last t wo decades. Although timber was one of the major economic sectors i n all of these com mu nities i n the 1970s and 1980s, the timber sector had become minor or negligible in many of them by 2003. Federal forest management policy was just one of many variables shaping the changes in these communities, however, and the extent of its effects var ied considerably. These effects depended on the relative strength of the tim- ber sector i n each com mu nit y arou nd 1990, the extent to which wood products har vested on federal forest land sup - por ted that sector, and the deg ree to which local residents depended on FS jobs. For example, the timber sector was an impor t ant component of the economy i n the Qui nault I ndian Nation i n 1990, but t r ibal and pr ivate forest lands largely suppor ted that sector. Hence i nter viewees f rom that community did not report any major effects from changes in federal forest management policy. In contrast, communities such as Quilcene, Upper Hood R iver Valley, and the Mid- K lamath par ticipated heavily i n the wood-products i ndust r y u ntil the late 1980s. Loggers worked mai nly on national forest lands, and local mills obt ai ned most of thei r wood f rom federally managed forests. T hese com mu nities were hit hard by the reduced federal timber supplies. Although the timber i ndust r y was of secondar y impor t ance i n the Villages of Mou nt Hood i n 1990, many FS employees lived there. T he decli ne i n agency jobs associated with reductions in FS timber programs strongly affected the Villages of Mount Hood and several other case-study communities, just as the loss of timber sector jobs did. T he Plan was not the only var iable causi ng the Pacific Nor thwest timber economy to change. T he timber sector i n some com mu nities ? such as G reater Coos Bay?had been decli ni ng si nce the early 1980s because of an economic re - cession, domestic and international competition, changes in market demand for wood products, i ndust r y rest r uct u r i ng, mechanization and tech nological advances, and envi ron - ment al reg ulations ? and the Plan added to these pressu res. Other case-st udy com mu nities, such as the Mid-K lamath, seemed to be relatively buffered from the changes that affected the i ndust r y du r i ng the 1980s. I nter viewees there perceived the halt of federal timber production arou nd 1990 as the beginning of the end. Some com mu nities were sust ai ned th rough the t ransitional per iod of the 1990s by havi ng a subst antial agricultural sector, being near a major transportation corridor, or being close to a popular recreation and tourism desti nation. Other com mu nities had an i n flu x of reti rees, com muters, mobile or self- employed workers, second-home ow ners, im mig rants, or low- and fi xed-i ncome popula - tions. Some communities that had been goods and services centers expanded thei r role as regional centers. A nd t r ibes, where present, played an impor t ant role i n cont r ibuti ng to com mu nit y development th rough the g row th of t r ibal 16 0 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III businesses, administration, and social and environmental services. Tribal forest lands also helped sustain local timber economies in some areas. Assistance With Long-Term Economic Development and Diversification Did Plan mitigation measu res assist with the t ransition, and promote long-ter m economic development and diversifica - tion i n com mu nities affected by cutbacks i n federal timber har vests? Procu rement cont racti ng for forest restoration was not an effective mitigation measure at the regional scale, as discussed above. T he Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment Initiative and safety net payments to county governments were the pr imar y mitigation measu res i ntended to help with the economic transition. Nor thwest Economic Adjustment Initiative T he Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative was one of the pr imar y mitigation st rategies desig ned to mi nimize adverse effects associated with job loss. It had five objec - tives: to provide immediate relief for distressed timber com mu nities; to create an envi ron ment for long-ter m economic development; to develop new mechanisms for deliver i ng assist ance; to emphasize par t nerships with st ates and the cr itical role of local gover n ments; and, to emphasize the use of performance-based standards for funding. The BLM and the FS had th ree pr imar y com mu nit y economic assistance programs designed to provide short-term relief and long-ter m economic diversification th rough the i nitia - tive: Jobs-i n-the-Woods, Ru ral Com mu nit y Assist ance, and the Old- G row th Diversification Fu nd. T hese prog rams were relatively small in terms of total initiative dollars. Many people view the shor t-ter m mitigations of the initiative programs as too little, too late. Timber industry rest r uct u r i ng and timber supply changes were al ready going on, to a large degree, before the initiative dollars became available i n 1994. T he Old- G row th Diversification Fu nd provided loans to ret ai n existi ng busi nesses, and was viewed as successf ul. Local jobs for ecosystem management activities were t argeted th rough Jobs-i n-the-Woods, and some shor t-ter m jobs were created. T he Ru ral Com mu nit y Assistance program provided grants to the private sector for projects related to forest management, which helped. T he i nitiative did not deliver on agency and public expect ations to provide im mediate help to displaced timber workers and thei r families, however, and many believe that the dollars available were i nadequate to compensate for the mag nit ude of the effects. Some people argue that it is too soon to assess the success of the i nitiative?s long-ter m economic diversifica - tion projects. T he Old- G row th Diversification Fu nd, a revolving loan fund providing grants and loans to small busi nesses to promote expansion and diversification, still provides a long-term sustainable source of capital for resource-related businesses, and it is considered highly successf ul. Com mu nit y-based plan ni ng was a focus of the Ru ral Com mu nit y Assist ance prog ram. Projects to improve com mu nit y capacit y? such as leadership development, community-based planning, and technical assistance to help com mu nities w r ite g rants ?were aimed at helpi ng com - mu nities help themselves. I n reviews of the i nitiative, these ?sof t i nf rast r uct u re? projects were considered vit al to the success of initiative projects. The program also supported economic diversification, f u ndi ng projects such as market and feasibilit y st udies and busi ness plans; whether these projects were generally successf ul is debat able. T he i nitia - tive also helped communities and businesses by funding hard i nf rast r uct u re development projects (such as busi ness parks and water and sewer systems). Although many com - munities have improved their infrastructure and are better poised for economic development, these opportunities had yet to mater ialize i n most of the com mu nities we st udied. Jobs-i n-the-Woods has been character ized as the most complex component of the i nitiative because it requi res simultaneous and innovative consideration of forest ecosystem management, work force development and employment, community economic needs, interagency coordi nation (withi n the federal gover n ment), and federal- nonfederal collaboration with relevant par t ners? (Tuch man n et al. 1996: 201). T he BLM Jobs-i n-the-Woods prog ram met with such success that it persisted as an an nual budget appropr iation. Although the BLM f u ndi ng for com mu nit y economic assist ance th rough Jobs-i n-the-Woods d ropped somewhat when the i nitiative ended, it has been st able si nce 161 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies 1999. Despite the BLM?s successes, to many, Jobs-i n-the- Woods has been the g reatest disappoi nt ment of all of the i nitiative?s components because public expect ations for the quality and number of jobs created to offset job losses in the timber i ndust r y were never realized. A nother objective of the i nitiative was to desig n new ways for federal agencies to conduct busi ness i n col - laboration with nonfederal and com mu nit y par t ners. T he Com mu nit y Economic Revit alization Teams developed organizational g rou nd r ules and i ncor porated ?one-stop - shopand lead agencytechniques to streamline program deliver y. Collaborative g roups identified, pr ior itized, and g reatly leveraged available f u nds. T he Ru ral Com mu nit y Assistance program provided technical assistance to small, remote, unincorporated communities to enable them to organize and compete for f u ndi ng. T he prog ram also had the flexibilit y for managers to provide ?gap? f u ndi ng for identified cr itical projects to fill i n where other agencies could not. Cr iter ia for prog ram f u ndi ng emphasized new and sustainable resource-based businesses and jobs in re- sou rce- dependent com mu nities. T he Jobs-i n-the-Woods and Ru ral Com mu nit y Assist ance prog ram managers developed exper tise i n the agencies to coordi nate and i nteg rate com - plex com mu nit y and agency needs and com mu nit y-based programs. Assessments of the innovative aspects of these prog rams i n promoti ng collaboration bet ween agencies and par t ners to deliver assist ance view them as highly success - ful. T he 12 case-st udy com mu nities we monitored received vastly different amounts of initiative money. Many of the case-st udy com mu nities repor ted benefiti ng f rom i nitiative- supported projects, particularly those involving physical i nf rast r uct u re development. T hese projects did not always succeed i n at t racti ng new busi nesses or i ndust r ies, however. W hat the long-ter m benefits of some of these projects will be can not, as yet, be predicted. Other successes were re - ported in the areas of community planning and small-busi- ness loans. Initiative-supported efforts to develop alternate wood-products sectors that use federal timber have largely failed to mater ialize. A nd the major it y of com mu nit y mem - bers we i nter viewed believed the i nitiative had done lit tle to help displaced timber workers. One exception was the Coos Bay Jobs-i n-the-Woods prog ram, which was viewed as a success, although it created only a small number of jobs. W hat the i nitiative largely failed to do was to cre - ate sust ai nable local jobs du r i ng the fi rst 10 years of the Plan comparable to the number and quality of those lost because of reductions i n federal timber har vest. Economic shif ts evolve over long per iods, and expecti ng new jobs to be created instantly is unreasonable. Moreover, many r u ral resou rce-based com mu nities g row relatively slowly, and are subject to fluct uations f rom national and i nter na - tional economic forces beyond their control. Although the transition is not over, the initiative is. A focus on local job creation as a long-ter m goal is still needed i n the context of new prog rams and sou rces of money. T he FS f u ndi ng for community economic assistance has returned to about what it was before the Plan. T he Jobs-i n-the-Woods and Ru ral Com mu nit y Assist ance prog ram are no longer f u nded by Cong ress, the ad mi nist ration, or the agency. Several new prog rams are emergi ng, however, with many of the i nitiative?s same long-ter m objectives and com mu nit y- based, collaborative desig ns. Exper ience implementi ng the initiative resulted in lessons that can be applied to future efforts by federal government agencies to provide commu- nity economic assistance. Payments to Counties T he Om nibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 and the Secu re Ru ral Schools and Com mu nit y Self-Deter mi nation Act of 2000 ? desig ned to st abilize pay ments to cou nt y governments in the face of declining revenues from the timber receipts generated by federal forest lands ?have generally mitigated the effects of declining timber receipts. T he i nitial pay ments-to - cou nties legislation (the Om nibus Budget Reconciliation Act) generally mitigated Plan effects for the 48 cou nties covered by the legislation. T he cou n - ties i n other par ts of the Plan area (i n easter n Washi ng ton, Oregon, and other par ts of Califor nia) did not fare as well u ntil the Secu re Ru ral Schools Act extended these pay ments to all of the eligible counties in the region and across the United States. 162 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Some of the i ntent behi nd the Om nibus Budget Recon - ciliation Act of 1993 was to provide a t ransition to a lower rate of assist ance. T he t ransitional path dow nward was replaced by a much higher rate of revenue support under the Secu re Ru ral Schools Act. T he goal of the pay ments-to - cou nties legislation was clearly met. The legislation has replaced past dependence on timber-harvest revenues and has generally mitigated the lost revenues associated with the decli nes i n federal timber har vest i n the region. It is not k now n how the owl safet y net pay ments have affected overall cou nt y fi nanci ng. I n the shor t ter m, a g uaranteed amou nt is li kely to have a st abiliz - i ng effect. T he Secu re Ru ral Schools legislation, however, su nsets on September 30, 2006. T he long-ter m st abilit y of the payments is uncertain. Without new cong ressional action, cou nties i n the Plan area will need to add ress a projected $270 million i n revenue shor tfall. Cong ressional hear i ngs are expected i n 2005 to add ress the possibilit y of reauthor ization of the Secu re Ru ral Schools legislation. Ru ral com mu nities con - ti nue to rely on st abilized pay ments to cou nties. T he lack of secure funding for schools, transportation, and other social services produces a great deal of uncertainty in communi- ties that depend on this income, especially given a climate of declining revenues from other sources. Land manage- ment agencies do not have decision mak i ng author it y over legislation on payments to counties. Long-term legislation to add ress the issue would be a major cont r ibution, how - ever; for example, the Forest Cou nties Pay ment Com mit tee has developed recom mendations for what such legislation might cont ai n (ht t p://w w w.cou nt y pay ments.gov/ ). T he Plan?s cont r ibutions toward long-ter m economic development and diversification were mixed. Pay ments-to - cou nties mitigations were successf ul. Loan prog rams, hard infrastructure development projects, and soft infrastructure development projects were largely successf ul, although the long-ter m outcomes of some of these projects is u n k now n. T he i nitiative did not deliver on expect ations to provide im mediate help to displaced timber workers and thei r families. Nor did it create more than a handf ul of sust ai n - able, local jobs. Plan Ef fects on Communit y Well- Being Ru ral com mu nities and economies u nder went both positive and negative changes du r i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan. The Plan contributed to negative changes in some commu- nities, primarily because of reduced federal timber harvests and the loss of associated jobs and i ncome; subst antial decreases i n the nu mber of agency jobs; and decli nes i n procu rement cont ract spendi ng. We do not have enough evidence to assess the Plan?s cont r ibutions to positive change, for example, to assess how com mu nities dependi ng on amenit y, recreation, and other envi ron ment al benefits as - sociated with federal forests were affected by the Plan. Nor did we evaluate to what extent recreation was sust ai ni ng com mu nities that were for merly timber based. I nter view results showed that recreation and amenit y values played a role i n d rawi ng new residents to com mu nities arou nd federal forests that lost timber workers and FS employees i n the 1990s. Recreation and tou r ism also played an impor t ant and evolving role in contributing to the economies of some com mu nities, such as the Upper Hood R iver Valley, the Villages of Mou nt Hood, and the Lake Qui nault A rea. Several i nter viewees f rom the case-st udy com mu nities viewed recreation and nat u re-based tou r ism as the nat u ral- resource-based sectors holding the greatest potential for local economic development, and several communities are work i ng with the agencies to promote recreation and tourism locally. One Plan-related change made apparent f rom the local-scale monitor i ng results was that com mu nities are havi ng i ncreasi ng dif ficult y i n sust ai ni ng themselves i n a man ner that li n ks thei r local economy and cult u re to the natural resources that surround them, and to federal forest land in particular. Although some communities still had a wood products i ndust r y, federal timber played a mi nor, if any, role i n suppor ti ng that i ndust r y. Many i nter viewees repor ted that the lack of forest-based, family-wage jobs i n thei r com mu nities was one of the biggest issues of concer n relating to federal forest management. And the fact that a decli ni ng nu mber of com mu nit y members make a livi ng f rom federal forest land means that relations bet ween local 163 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies residents and FS and BLM person nel are becomi ng more distant. Some local people have become less interested in forest management issues. T he Plan aimed to provide ?? a sust ai nable level of hu man use of the forest resou rce while still meeti ng the need to maintain and restore the late-successional and old-g row th forest ecosystem? ( USDA and USDI 1994: 26). Ou r fi ndi ngs show this goal has not been met f rom the human-use perspective and that it remains one of the most important challenges of federal forest management today in the Plan area. References Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team [FEMAT]. 1993. Forest ecosystem management: an ecological, economic, and social assessment. Portland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re; U.S. Depar t ment of the I nter ior [and others]. [I r reg ular pagi nation]. Harris, C.; McLaughlin, W.; Brown, G.; Becker, D.R. 2000. Ru ral com mu nities i n the i nland Nor thwest: an assessment of small rural communities in the interior and upper Colu mbia R iver Basi ns. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 477. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 120 p. Kusel, J. 1996. Well-bei ng i n forest- dependent com mu nities. Par t I: A new approach. I n: Sier ra Nevada ecosystem project: fi nal repor t to Cong ress ? assessments and scientific basis for management options. Davis, CA: Universit y of Califor nia, Centers for Water and Wildland Resou rces: 361-374. Vol. 2. MacCleery, D.W.; Le Master, D.C. 1999. The historical fou ndation and evolvi ng context for nat u ral resou rce management on federal lands. I n: Szaro, R.C.; Joh nson, N.C.; Sexton, W.T.; Mal k, A. J., eds. Ecological stewardship: a com mon reference for ecosystem management volu me II. Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd.: 517-556. Priebe, D. 2004. Personal com mu nication. Budget specialist, Bu reau of Land Management Oregon St ate of fice, 333 SW Fi rst Avenue, Por tland, OR 97204. Richardson, C.W. 1996. Stability and change in forest- based communities: a selected bibliography. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR-366. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 36 p. Tuchmann, E.T.; Connaughton, K.P.; Freedman, L.E.; Moriwaki, C.B. 1996. T he Nor thwest Forest Plan: a repor t to the President and Cong ress. Washi ng ton, DC: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Of fice of Forest r y and Economic Assist ance. 253 p. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA FS]. 2000. Forest Service roadless area conservation fi nal envi ron ment al impact st atement. Washi ng ton, DC. 407 p. Vol. 1. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management [USDA and USDI]. 1994. Record of decision for amend ments to Forest Ser vice and Bu reau of Land Management plan ni ng docu ments withi n the range of the nor ther n spot ted owl. [Place of publication u n k now n]. 74 p. [ plus at t ach ment A: st andards and guidelines]. 16 4 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III T he Nor thwest Forest Plan (the Plan) record of decision (ROD) specified a set of i ndicators to be monitored to answer the question, A re local com mu nities and economies exper ienci ng positive or negative changes that may be associated with federal forest management? T he ROD lists the key items to monitor as bei ng demog raphics, employ - ment, government revenues, facilities and infrastructure, social service burden, federal assistance programs, business t rends, and t axes ( USDA and USDI 1994: E-9). Phases I and II of the socioeconomic monitoring program attempted to assess these i ndicators, with mixed results (see Som mers 2001, Som mers et al. 2002). Phase III of the monitor i ng prog ram upon which this interpretive report is based monitored demographics, employ ment, and federal assist ance prog rams (the Nor th - west Economic Adjust ment I nitiative). It did not, however, monitor the other indicators. The social service burden refers to items such as welfare roll changes, aid to dependent child ren, pover t y rates, food st amps, subsidized cou nseli ng, school lu nches, alcoholism, and domestic violence. The team did monitor pover t y rates. However, monitor i ng the other i ndicators requires obtaining data from different sources in different states, counties, and/or communities, raising problems of i nconsistency bet ween geog raphic areas. Fu r ther more, these data did not often pertain to the communitiesthat we had deli neated, which were based on census block-g roup agg regates, creati ng problems of scale. We used the U.S. census as our primary source of social and economic indi- cator data, and the census does not contain data on many of the social service burden indicators. Indicator data for the other variables listed are avail- able, and are potentially good indicators of socioeconomic well-bei ng. However, most of the readily available dat a are Appendix A: Record of Decision Indicators Monitored available only at the cou nt y, st ate, or federal scales ? not at the com mu nit y scale, which is the pr imar y u nit of analysis in volume III and is pertinent for addressing the monitor- ing question. To understand socioeconomic change at the local, com mu nit y scale and how it is li n ked to federal forest management, the indicator data that only can be used to portray broader-scale trends are not useful. References Sommers, P. 2001. Monitoring socioeconomic trends in the nor ther n spot ted owl region: f ramework, t rends update, and community level monitoring recommendations. Seat tle, WA: U.S. Geological Su r vey, Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center, Cascadia Field St ation, College of Forest Resou rces, Universit y of Washi ng ton. 56 p. ht t p://w w w.reo.gov/monitor i ng /socio/ ph1fi nal-body.pdf. Sommers, P.; Lee, R.G.; Jackson, E. 2002. Monitoring economic and social change i n the nor ther n spot ted owl region: Phase II?Developi ng and testi ng an i ndicators approach. 40 p. Draf t tech nical repor t. On file with: U.S. Geologic Su r vey Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center, Cascadia Field St ation, College of Forest Resou rces, Box 352100, Seat tle, WA 98195-2800. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management [USDA and USDI]. 1994. Final supplemental environmental impact statement on management of habitat for late-successional and old- g row th forest related species withi n the range of the nor ther n spot ted owl. Por tland, OR: Vol. 1. [I r reg ular pagination]. 165 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Methods for Choosing Case-Study Forests Case-st udy forests were chosen to represent one national forest i n each of the th ree st ates that lie withi n the Nor th - west Forest Plan (the Plan) area, and one Bu reau of Land Management (BLM) u nit i n Oregon, the only place that the BLM has sig nificant land holdi ngs i nside the Plan area. T hey were also chosen to represent different provi nces (the Plan area is broken up i nto 12 plan ni ng provi nces). T he monitoring program sent a letter to all of the national forests and BLM dist r icts i n the Plan area ask i ng for volu nteers to par ticipate i n socioeconomic monitor i ng. We took this ap - proach because the monitor i ng effor t was considered a pilot prog ram, and we wanted to conduct it on forests that were i nterested i n par ticipati ng and mak i ng use of the result ant i nfor mation. Two of the fou r case-st udy forests volu nteered to par ticipate, and were chosen for that reason (the Oly m - pic and the Mou nt Hood National Forests). T he K lamath National Forest was chosen because it was previously a high timber-produci ng forest, and the forest super visor was suppor tive of social science work. T he Coos Bay Dist r ict was chosen because the BLM Oregon St ate of fice recom - mended it. Methods for Choosing Case-Study Communities Case-st udy com mu nities associated with each forest were chosen on the basis of a number of criteria. First, the team identified a sampli ng f rame of com mu nities that i ncluded all of the com mu nit y block-g roup agg regates (BGAs) whose polygons lay, at least par tially, withi n a 10 -mile radius of the case-study forest boundaries. The team chose this dist ance because it wanted to focus the monitor i ng work in forest-based communities, and assumed that communi- ties close to federal forests would have social, economic, or cult u ral ties to those forests. We then met with agency employees f rom each case-st udy forest and showed them ou r sample f rame. We discussed which of the com mu nities withi n ou r sample f rame cu r rently or histor ically mai n - t ai ned some k i nd of relations with the case-st udy forest Appendix B: Methods for Choosing Case Studies and the managi ng agency, and which did not ex hibit any relationship with the forest. T his process nar rowed ou r sample frame. We selected th ree com mu nities associated with each case-study forest from the sample frame for monitoring because time and budget const rai nts did not allow for a larger com mu nit y sample. We recog nize, however, that i n choosi ng only th ree com mu nities arou nd each forest, we did not capture all of the variation in community types,or in com mu nit y-forest relations i n each case-st udy area. Case- st udy com mu nities were chosen randomly f rom a st ratified sample. We st ratified com mu nities withi n the sample f rame on the basis of thei r socioeconomic well-bei ng score i n 1990, by usi ng th ree categor ies: high, mediu m, and low. We randomly chose one com mu nit y f rom each st rat u m, u nless there were no com mu nities i n one of the st rat a (one case-study forest did not have any communities that measu red high i n socioeconomic well-bei ng i n 1990). I n this case, we randomly chose t wo com mu nities f rom the stratum that contained the largest number of communities, which generally was the middle categor y. Once we selected the case-st udy com mu nities randomly, we visited them and t al ked with com mu nit y members to deter mi ne whether the com mu nit y did i ndeed have historical and present ties to the case-study forest. We also used the i nter view process to deter mi ne how the com mu nities should be defi ned for case-st udy pu r poses. T he com mu nit y BGA deli neations were used for i nitially selecti ng case com mu nities on a random basis; however, the model we used did not necessar ily cor respond geog raphi - cally to the place that community members considered to be their community.Thus the BGA community delinea- tions were st ar ti ng poi nts for defi ni ng st udy com mu nities, but we adjusted those defi nitions accordi ng to how local residents concept ualized thei r com mu nit y. I n many cases, we f u r ther agg regated the or igi nal randomly chosen BGA with su r rou ndi ng BGA s i n response to feedback f rom local residents to ultimately defi ne the case-st udy com mu nit y boundaries. 16 6 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Methods Used in Chapter 2, Socioeconomic Trends in Nor thwest Forest Plan Area Communities T he methods used to u nder t ake the analysis i n chapter 2 are det ailed enough to war rant bei ng published separately as a Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation Research Note (Donoghue and Sut ton, n.d.). We br iefly su m mar ize these methods below. Agg regations of census block g roups were used to de - fi ne ?com mu nities? i n the Nor thwest Forest Plan (the Plan) region. T he block-g roup agg regations (BGAs) were exam - ined at a number of scales as part of a regional analysis and the case-st udy analysis fou nd elsewhere i n the repor t. T he scales i nclude all BGAs, BGAs representi ng case-st udy com mu nities, and BGAs near the case-st udy public forests. To develop the BGA u nit of analysis that would deli neate com mu nit y bou ndar ies i n the Plan region, 1990 census block g roups were agg regated by usi ng a geog raphic i nfor mation system (GIS) and visual review (Donoghue 2003). Note that the 2000 block-g roup bou ndar ies differ f rom the 1990 block-g roup bou ndar ies, pr imar ily because of changes in population. To conduct a temporal analysis, we fi rst had to make the 1990 and 2000 dat a compatible. We used a method based on population propor tions. Because a census block is the smallest geog raphic u nit for which census data are tabulated, it is the unit that most accurately shows the dist r ibution of population withi n a given area. T he calculation of the percent age of a block fou nd withi n a BGA assu mes that the population is evenly dist r ibuted withi n a block, although this is not the case. However, blocks represent the closest census desig nation to the act ual distribution of population on the ground. To calculate the propor tion of each 2000 block-g roup population fou nd withi n each 1990 BGA bou ndar y, we (1) calculated the propor tion of each 2000 block fou nd withi n BGA bou ndar ies; (2) usi ng this propor tion, calculated the population of each 2000 block fou nd withi n BGA bou ndar - ies; (3) calculated the tot al 2000 block-g roup population fou nd withi n each BGA; and (4) deter mi ned the propor tion of 2000 block-g roup population fou nd withi n a BGA by compar i ng it to each tot al 2000 block-g roup population. Appendix C: Methods Used in Chapter Analyses A similar procedu re was completed to deter mi ne the propor tion of 2000 block-g roup households fou nd withi n a BGA because some census i ndicators are based on house - holds, rather than population. T he propor tions were used to develop many socioeco - nomic i ndicators and measu res for 1990 and 2000. T his allowed researchers to evaluate changes i n com mu nities at several scales. Some of the indicators and measures generat- ed included total population, school enrollment, percentage that completed high school, percent age with a Bachelor?s degree or higher, percentage unemployed, employment by industry, household income distribution, median household income, percentage in poverty, age distribution, median age, and race and ethnicity. Unfortunately, some census var iables are defi ned differently for each census. For i n - st ance, race was collected differently i n 1990 and 2000, and employ ment by i ndust r y was classified differently i n these years. For some i ndicators li ke these, dat a preprocessi ng was requi red i n order to use the dat a i n the analysis. I n addition, a socioeconomic well-bei ng i ndex was developed and analyzed locally and regionally. It combi ned several measures to monitor community socioeconomic well-bei ng based on cu r rent conditions and change. See volu me III, chapter 2, t able 2-3 for descr iptions of the six var iables that make up the i ndex. Several regional social assessments have exami ned com mu nit y socioeconomic st at us and i ncluded measu res that we did not i nclude i n ou r com mu nit y socioeconomic well-bei ng i ndex (Doak and Ku - sel 1996, 1997). For i nst ance, we did not use the educational attainment and poverty intensity measures developed for the socioeconomic i ndex i n the Sier ra Nevada Ecosystem Project social assessment (Doak and Kusel 1996) because i n the Plan region, educational at t ai n ment was highly cor re - lated with percent age of population with a bachelor?s deg ree or higher (Pearson r = 0.906, p < 0.0001). Similarly, pover t y i ntensit y (Doak and Kusel 1996) was highly cor related with percent age of the population livi ng i n pover t y (Pearson r = 0.87, p < 0.0002). We also did not use an i ndicator reflecti ng children in homes receiving public assistance, used in the Sier ra Nevada Ecosystem Project assessment (Doak and Kusel 1996), because supplement al i ncome was repor ted 167 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies differently i n 1990 and 2000 censuses. A nd we did not use an i ndicator for housi ng tenu re (Doak and Kusel 1996) because we were not con fident that home ow nership i n some areas cont r ibuted positively to well-bei ng, par ticularly if home ow nership affected job mobilit y. Although we recog nized that census dat a on i ncome might be problem - atic because of underreporting of interest, dividends, and public assist ance i ncome, we believe u nder repor ti ng would be less of an issue for a measu re that was based on how com mu nities were doi ng relative to each other. T hus, we developed a measure for community income inequality based on census data for household income. The values for each i ndicator that make up ou r socioeconomic well-bei ng i ndex were st andardized by usi ng z-scores (the nu mber of st andard deviations a value is above or below the mean). Af ter st andardization, each i ndicator was nor malized to a base of 100 to reduce the effect of outliers. Some of the i ndicators we used i n ou r analysis are descr ibed i n det ail i n the repor t or elsewhere (Donoghue and Sut ton, n.d.). Descr iptions of several i ndicators are provided here as reference. For the 2000 census, popula - tion by race was the tot al nu mber of people withi n each of the followi ng mut ually exclusive categor ies: W hite, Black, A mer ican I ndian, Esk imo or Aleut, Asian or Pacific Islander, ?other? race, and t wo or more races. Race as used by the census reflects self-identification and i ncludes racial, national origin, or sociocultural groups. For tot al population, we used the su m mar y st atistics f rom the long for m. T he sample dat a were weighted to rep - resent the total population. Median age of the community was calculated by usi ng a median calculation for g rouped data based on age categories provided by the census. School en roll ment was the nu mber of persons en rolled i n prepr i - mary school, elementary, or high school at the time of the census. Percentage graduated high school is the percentage of the population 25 years and older that have g raduated from high school. Age dist r ibution is the nu mber of people withi n the age dist r ibution categor ies. We g rouped the census categor ies to produce six classes for both 1990 and 2000. For each census, age was repor ted based on the age of the person at the time of the census. T he followi ng were ou r six age classes: ages 0 to 4 years, ages 5 to 19 years, ages 20 to 29 years, ages 30 to 44 years, ages 45 to 64 years, ages 65 years and up. For household income, information on income received du r i ng the year pr ior to the census was requested f rom persons 15 years old and over. Tot al i ncome is the su m of the wage or salar y; net nonfar m self- employ ment i ncome; net far m self- employ ment i ncome; i nterest; dividend, or net rent al or royalt y i ncome; Social Secu r it y; public assist ance or welfare; reti rement or disabilit y; and all other i ncome. I ncomes for each member of a household were agg regated, resulti ng i n the tot al i ncome per household. One household i ncludes all persons who occupy one housi ng u nit (i.e., a house, apartment, mobile home, a group of rooms, or a si ngle room). T he nu mber of households withi n each i ncome dist r ibution categor y was repor ted based on the followi ng categor ies: less than $10,000, 10,000 to $14,999, $15,000 to $24,999, $25,000 to $34,999, $35,000 to $49,999, $50,000 to $74,999, $75,000 to $99,999, $100,000 to $149,999, and $150,000 or more. For the 1990 census, median household i ncome was based on i ncome i n 1989 that was adjusted for i n flation to 2000 dollars. For the 2000 census, median household i ncome was the median f rom 1999 i n 2000 dollars. We wanted to assess changes i n socioeconomic well- bei ng based on the proximit y of com mu nities i n the Plan region to Forest Ser vice (FS) and Bu reau of Land Manage - ment (BLM) lands. To character ize proximit y, we used feedback f rom forest managers that was gathered as we built the sample frame for community case-study selection for each of the fou r case-st udy forests. We deter mi ned that most com mu nities withi n 5 miles of FS and BLM lands had st rong con nections (i.e., recreation, timber, aesthetics, watersheds) to nearby forests. Although con nections to forests for com mu nities g reater than 5 miles exist, they were not as st rong for many com mu nities, or the com mu ni - ties were so diverse that the con nection to forest resou rces were not domi nant. Given the scale of the analysis (1,314 com mu nities i n 72 cou nties), we had to decide on a buf - fer size that would allow us to character ize com mu nities 168 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III i n a reasonable fashion. We used GIS to d raw a 5-mile buffer arou nd each of the FS and BLM lands to deter mi ne which com mu nities were i n proximit y. T he com mu nities were represented by poi nts located at the major popula - tion centers for each BGA. We did not use the com mu nit y polygons i n this analysis because the population withi n a BGA is not evenly dist r ibuted over the enti re com mu nit y. T herefore, overlayi ng the com mu nit y poi nts with the 5-mile buffer capt u red those com mu nities with a major it y of the population withi n the buffer. T he com mu nit y population centers that fell withi n the buffer were the com mu nities i n proximit y (?5 miles); the com mu nities outside the buffer were character ized as com mu nities relatively far ther away f rom FS and BLM lands. We generated t-tests, cor relations, and f requency t ables for the socioeconomic well-bei ng i ndex and the other socioeconomic i ndicators by region, proximit y to forests, and time. Additionally, we generated maps to spatio - temporally evaluate the dat a. One of ou r maps uses poi nts to represent moments or time stamps of socioeconomic well-bei ng st at us at the major population centers of the communities. It also uses the points to represent the static locations of conti nui ng events and ar rows to illust rate the temporal aspects and directions of change in the values of com mu nit y socioeconomic well-bei ng. Methods Used in Chapter 4, Agency Jobs, Unit Reorganizations, and Budgets Raw dat a used as the basis for the analysis have been ar - chived as part of the interagency regional monitoring effort. Limitations to the S taf fing D ata and A nalysis Dat a classif yi ng f ull-time equivalents (FTEs) i nto per ma - nent f ull-time (PFT) and ?other? positions were not readily available for FS Pacific Nor thwest Region (Region 6) for 1993 and 1994. Agg regate st af fi ng for FS Plan-area u nits for these years is therefore enu merated only as FTEs. Dat a enu merati ng positions by ser ies (e.g., wildlife biologist, budget specialist) and g rade level /pay scale (e.g., GS-9) were not readily available. T his limit ation precluded a more det ailed evaluation of work force composi - tion, or an analysis of the economic benefits of local agency employment to individual communities. Li ke the budget dat a, agencies and regions differ i n thei r handli ng of st af fi ng and dat a. For example, i n 2003, the FS began t rack i ng field-u nit positions i n i nfor mation resou rces management u nder regional st af fi ng. T he effect of this change on the st af fi ng dat a descr ibed here is u n k now n. Fi nally, regional st af fi ng records i ncor porate f ractional positions. St af fi ng positions enu merated i n this analysis have been rou nded to the nearest whole nu mber. Limitations to the Unit Reorganization Data and Analysis Dat a for this par t of the analysis were obt ai ned f rom Plan- area public affai rs of fices. Dat a were requested f rom each u nit; the results were compiled and ret u r ned for con fi r ma - tion. The data collected understate the actual presence among local com mu nities of of ficials with decision mak i ng authority delegated by the agencies. Deputy and associ- ate of ficials ? deput y forest super visors, assist ant dist r ict rangers, and associate dist r ict managers ? are not i ncluded for either agency. National forest subu nits other than ranger dist r icts, such as work st ations and t ree nu rser ies, are also omitted. T he BLM dist r icts are more cent ralized than national forests. A si ngle dist r ict of fice usually houses a dist r ict manager and several field managers. T he lat ter manage field areas dispersed across the dist r ict. Li ke Forest Ser vice dis - t r ict rangers, BLM field managers f requently work outside the com mu nit y hosti ng thei r of fice. Limitations to the Budget Data and Analysis All budget fig u res discussed i n the analysis have been ad - justed for i n flation to the base year of 2003. G ross domestic product (GDP) deflators show n here were obt ai ned f rom the Forest Ser vice Washi ng ton Of fice. 169 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies GDP deflators for 1993 ?20 03 Year Factor 1993 1.1946 1994 1.1693 1995 1.1445 1996 1.1221 1997 1.1006 1998 1.0853 1999 1.0710 2000 1.0508 2001 1.0257 2002 1.0127 2003 1.0000 Readily available agency budget dat a are subject to nu merous limit ations. Accou nti ng st r uct u res differ bet ween the FS and BLM. I adopted the prog ram areas used i n the agency budgetary processes. In doing so, I have assumed that the operating scope and objectives of each program area have remained roughly consistent over the decade. In fact, withi n each agency prog ram, accou nti ng st r uct u res var y across time. For example, the objectives and scope of FS field-u nit fi re and f uel management prog rams has evolved during the period of study from presuppression and emergency fi refighti ng, toward an approach i nteg rati ng f uel management. Suppression is increasingly handled at the regional and national levels. Other changes have occu r red i n agency prog rams. T he BLM management of lands and resou rces (M LR) prog ram was elaborated i n fiscal year (FY ) 1997 to i nclude a number of additional budget lines. The FS appropriations st r uct u re was also sig nificantly revised and simplified i n FY 2001. Det ailed dat a isolati ng the fiscal impact of these and other changes to agency budget st r uct u res were not readily available. I n another st r uct u ral change, i n 2000 the BLM shif ted its leave surcharge account from the regional to the unit level. To adjust for this change, for 2000 and later years, the BLM u nit budgets are reduced by a factor of 0.14 to represent a 20 percent i ncrease i n the estimated 70 percent of total allocations devoted to labor costs. I n another st r uct u ral change, i n 2003 FS Region 6 began accounting for unit-level indirect costs by using a regional cost pool. Adjusti ng the 2003 dat a to i nclude i ndi - rect costs i ncreases tot al agg regate Region 6 Plan-area u nit f u ndi ng by $3.5 million. Dat a descr ibi ng this adjust ment were available at the agg regate Region 6 Plan-area prog ram scale, but not at the individual unit scale. Further, adjust- ment for the Region 6 cost pool has a negligible effect on the t rend for agg regated Pacific Southwest Region (Region 5) and Region 6 FS Plan-area u nit budgets. Given this context, I used the more det ailed dat a f rom Region 6, which describe trends in individual units and their programs, but do not reflect adjust ment to i nclude the i ndi rect cost pool. The scope and objectives of program areas also differ across agency regions. Several expanded budget li ne items (EBLIs) f u nded for FS Region 5 u nits are not represented i n u nit budgets for Region 6, suggesti ng differ i ng scope withi n the same program. Variations in regional agency budget structures and administration further complicate compari- son across time and agency regions. For example, i n the late 1990s, FS Region 5 g rouped its fou r Plan-area forests into one province, consolidating a number of functions previously distributed among the four units. Time limita- tions precluded an analysis of the impact of these changes on u nit and prog ram allocations over the per iod. Nor, given the available dat a and time for analysis, was it possible to accou nt for the effect of ear marked f u nds on the abilit y of Plan-area field u nits to accomplish work. A nalysis of i ndividual u nit budgets across time was also complicated by the consolidation of several Plan-area national forests during the period. Time constraints preclud- ed a thorough analysis of budgetary trends among national forests after consolidation. Data and Analysis Associated with Figure 4 - 8 (Budgets) Tot al spendi ng author it y for both the FS and BLM was t aken f rom the ?A naly tical Perspectives? section of the Budget of the United St ates for FYs 1996 th rough 2005. 1 1 Gover n ment P r i nt i ng Of fice. 1996 ?20 05. Budget of the United States Government: Analytical Perspectives. ht t p://w w w.g poaccess.gov/u sbudget / browse.ht m l. A n nu al. ( Febr u a r y 20 05). 170 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Total agency budget authority is represented by the sum of total agency appropriated funds and total trust funds. A mou nts for BLM fi re and f uel management are based on net appropr iations for fi re protection (1994 ?95) and wildland fi re management (1995 ?2003). A mou nts for FS fi re and f uel management are based on net appropr iations for fi re protection (1994 ?95), emergency fi refighti ng f u nd (1994 ?95), and wildland fi re management (1996 ?2003). Data and Analysis Associated with Figure 4 - 9 (Budgets Excluding Fire and Fuel) To represent u nit budgets excludi ng fi re and f uel manage - ment, fig u re 4 -9 excludes allocations u nder the fi re and f uel appropr iations listed for fig u re 4 -8. Data and Analysis Associated with Figure 4 -12 (BLM Budget) A mou nts show n represent tot al fi nal an nual allocations to i ndividual BLM- Oregon Plan-area u nits, excludi ng alloca - tions for fi re rehabilit ation and f uel management, as well as the followi ng budget items: Oregon and Califor nia Rail road (O&C) const r uction ( budget item 6110), const r uction ( budget item 2100), and land acquisition ( budget item 3100). T hese exclusions were based on advice f rom regional st aff concerning the composition of unusual or one-time-only costs large enough to affect overall budget trends. Methods Used in Chapter 5, Procurement Contracting To u nderst and the regional cont racti ng market and the con - t ractors i nvolved i n it, we calculated a var iet y of descr iptive statistics by using the value of contracts, the number of cont racts, and the dist ance bet ween cont ractor headquar ters and the location where the work occu r red. T he dat a for the regional analysis are d raw n f rom the Federal Procu rement Dat a Center?s dat abase that i ncludes information from all federal agencies compiled from the SF-279 for m that each federal agency must fill out for cont racts with an estimated value above $25,000. Ou r dat a set i ncludes cont racts f rom FS and BLM i n wester n Oregon and Washi ng ton and nor thwester n Califor nia awarded bet ween FY 1990 and 2002. All dat a are repor ted by federal fiscal year. More specifically, the dat a set i ncludes cont racts i nvolvi ng land management work i n the Plan?s affected cou nties, as defi ned i n the Jobs-i n-the-Woods prog ram. T he dat a set i ncludes product ser vice codes (PSC) that were related to land management, broadly defi ned by usi ng the same cr iter ia as Moseley and Shan k le (2001) and Moseley and Toth (2004). T hat is, the dat a set i ncludes cont racts related to forest r y and watershed management such as thi n ni ng, br ush cut ti ng, br ush pili ng, noxious weed control, biological surveying, riparian restoration, and road construction and maintenance. The data set does not include activities such as building construction or copier repair and does not i nclude any pu rchases of goods. Cont racts i nvolv - i ng fi re suppression are repor ted separately because they are procu red differently than other forest r y ser vices. However, prescribed burning is reported in the same product service code as fi re suppression, and therefore can not be disti n - g uished f rom the regional por tion of the st udy. Even though the BLM and the FS follow the same procu rement laws, studies have suggested that their procurement practices are quite different and the t wo agencies needed to be analyzed separately (Moseley et al. 2002). For the case st udies, we added i nfor mation f rom forest contracting registers to the data obtained from the Federal Procu rement Dat a Center. T he cont ract registers provide some i nfor mation about cont racts valued bet ween $2,500 and $25,000, and more det ailed descr iptions of cont racts valued over $25,000. T he cont ract registers t y pically provide a project title that is more specific than the product ser vice code provided i n the dat a set descr ibed above. Con - sequently, i n the case st udies, we can, at times, separate out some activities such as prescr ibed bu r ni ng or st and exams f rom the more generalized product ser vice codes. Unfor t u nately, cont ract registers were not available for all of the years of the st udy per iod. For the Oly mpic, K lamath, and Mou nt Hood National Forests, we were able to obt ai n cont ract registers for 1990 th rough 2002. But for the Coos Bay BLM Dist r ict we were only able to obt ai n cont ract registers for 2000 th rough 2002. Consequently, we omit ted any cont ract register dat a f rom the Coos Bay analy - sis u nless it was bei ng discussed explicitly. I n addition, we had only limited i nfor mation about the Coos Bay Dist r ict 171 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies BLM for cont racts over $25,000 because par t of the Coos Bay Dist r ict is located i n Douglas Cou nt y. Other dist r icts cont rol most of the BLM land i n Douglas Cou nt y, and we could not divide cou nt y dat a i nto BLM dist r icts. Conse - quently, ou r analysis of cont racts valued above $25,000 i ncludes only Coos and Cu r r y Cou nties because those i n Douglas Cou nt y could not be disti ng uished f rom cont racts per for med on other dist r icts, which made up the major it y of the work. Fi nally, because the sample size of procu rement i n a si ngle national forest or BLM resou rce area is small, some of the analysis performed at the regional level cannot be performed at the forest or district level. T he Federal Procu rement Dat a Center records t rack dat a by t ask order. We defi ned the value of a cont ract to be the tot al amou nt of money entered i nto the dat abase with the same cont ract nu mber withi n each year. We cou nted a contract meeting these criteria as a single contract regard- less of how many t ask orders were i nvolved. T he value of the cont ract is the su m of the dollars obligated with each t ask order. We cor rected the cont ract values for i n flation, and value dat a are repor ted i n 2002 dollars. T he Federal Procu rement Dat a Center records the location of work at the cou nt y level. Consequently, we report most information about procurement at the county level rather than at the forest or BLM dist r ict level. At times we agg regate i nfor mation at the st ate or subregion level. To identif y regional var iation withi n the Plan area, we created fou r subregions: west Cascades, east Cascades, coast, and K lamath-Sisk iyou. T he subregional categor ies only i nclude affected Plan cou nties and not all of what might, more gen - erally, be considered the subregion. It was not possible to use Nor thwest Forest Plan provi nces because they were not well cor related with the cou nt y or national forest bou ndar - ies, which was how the place of per for mance was recorded. To u nderst and to what extent local cont ractors were awarded cont racts, we calculated the dist ance bet ween the cont ractors? headquar ters and the national forests where the work occu r red by usi ng an approach similar to Moseley and Shan k le (2001). We calculate this dist ance rather than defi ni ng ?local? because the defi nition of local is context specific, and a regionwide defi nition would be too arbit rar y for the pu r poses here. We calculated these dist ances by usi ng ESR I?s A rcView 8.3. 2 For the FS, we were able to impute the national forest in most cases from the county of per for mance, i nfor mation about the of fice that w rote the cont ract, as well as the cont ract nu mbers. Af ter der ivi ng the national forest, we calculated the dist ance by averagi ng the dist ance i n ai r miles bet ween the weighted center of the ZI P code, as provided by ESR I, where the cont ractor has its headquar ters, and 25 random poi nts withi n the national forest. Because the BLM cont racti ng is more cent ralized, we could not der ive the BLM dist r ict f rom the i nfor mation available. Consequently, for BLM cont racts, we measu red dist ance bet ween the cont ractors? headquar ters and 25 random poi nts on the BLM land withi n the cou nt y where the work was per for med. It is impor t ant to keep i n mi nd that these dist ances are measu red i n ai r miles, which are li kely to be considerably shor ter than road miles and to var y in travel time considerably depending on topography. For example, the dist ance i n ai r miles f rom Reddi ng, Califor nia, to Ashland, Oregon, is 120 ai r miles and 135 road miles. By cont rast, the dist ance f rom Reddi ng, Califor nia, to Cres - cent Cit y, Califor nia, is 123 ai r miles and 212 road miles (Moseley et al. 2003). I n addition to analyzi ng dist ances bet ween the cont rac - tors? headquar ters and the national forests or BLM lands as a measu re of local benefit, we also exami ned awards to contractors based on the population of the community where they were located. Followi ng Census Bu reau defi ni - tions, we defi ned a r u ral com mu nit y as havi ng less than 5,000 residents. We i ncluded u ni ncor porated com mu nities i n this categor y as well. Agai n followi ng Census Bu reau defi nitions, we defi ned u rban areas to be cities with popula - tions above 50,000. We created t wo additional categor ies: 5,000 ?9,999 and 10,000 ?50,000 to descr ibe awards to cont ractors i n mid-sized com mu nities. We divided the product ser vice codes provided by the Federal Procu rement Dat a Center i nto th ree categor ies ? labor i ntensive, equipment i ntensive, and tech nical? based on the t y pe of work that cont racts with par ticular product 2 T he u se of t r a de or fi r m na mes i n t h is publicat ion is for rea der information only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture of any product or service. 172 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III ser vice codes were li kely to i nvolve. Activities such as t ree planti ng and thi n ni ng were classified as labor i ntensive, whereas activities i nvolvi ng heav y equipment, such as road mai ntenance, were considered equipment i ntensive. Tech ni - cal work would i nclude activities such as species su r veys or envi ron ment al assessments. T his was a rough categor iza - tion because ou r conversations with FS and BLM procu re - ment technicians suggested that some product service codes i nvolve a wide var iet y of work t y pes. For example, other natural resource and conservation servicesincludes tech nical work such as species su r veys, but also i ncludes nontech nical work such as rock cr ushi ng. I n addition, the way the agencies choose product ser vice codes var ies over time and from person to person. In addition to reporting the data on an annual basis, we also chose th ree 3-year per iods for det ailed analysis: 1990 ?92, 1995 ?97, and 2000 ?2002. W hen analyzi ng dat a by usi ng this for mat, we repor t dat a i n 3-year agg regations. We did this to i ncrease ou r con fidence that we are repor ti ng trends and not the impact of random year-to-year changes, which can be considerable i n procu rement cont racti ng. We chose the fi rst 3-year per iod because it is the fi rst 3 years of the study period. It is also prior to the Plan implementation. We chose the middle 3 years based on consult ation with people who have long been obser vers of the Plan and the Jobs-i n-the-Woods prog ram. T hey believe that these 3 years were the years the FS and the BLM were most focused on the Jobs-i n-the-Woods prog ram. Fi nally, we chose 2000 ?2002 because these are the fi nal years for which dat a are available, and they represent years i n which at tention largely went to other prog rams, especially the National Fi re Plan, stewardship cont racti ng, and cou nt y pay ments. References Donoghue, E.M. 2003. Delimiting communities in the Pacific Nor thwest. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR-570. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 51 p. Donoghue, E.M.; Sutton, N.L. [N.d.]. Strategies and methods for measu r i ng socioeconomic well-bei ng at multiple spatial and temporal scales as part of socioeconomic monitor i ng of the Nor thwest Forest Plan. Manuscr ipt i n preparation. On file with: E. Donoghue, 620 SW Mai n St., Suite 400, Por tland, OR 97205. Doak, S.; Kusel, J. 1996. Well-bei ng i n forest- dependent com mu nities. Par t 2: A social assessment. I n: Sier ra Nevada Ecosystem Project: fi nal repor t to Cong ress ? assessments and scientific basis for management options. Davis, CA: Universit y of Califor nia, Centers for Water and Wildland Resou rces: 375 ? 402. Vol. 2. Doak, S.; Kusel, J. 1997. Well-bei ng assessment of com mu nities i n the K lamath region. Repor t prepared for the USDA Forest Ser vice, K lamath National Forest. Cont ract 43-91W8- 6 -7077. Taylorsville, CA: Forest Com mu nit y Research. Moseley, C.; Balaev, M.; Lake, A. 2003. Long-term trends i n cont racti ng and the impact of the National Fi re Plan i n nor ther n Califor nia. Eugene, OR: Ecosystem Work force Prog ram, Universit y of Oregon. Moseley, C.; Shankle, S. 2001. W ho gets the work? National forest cont racti ng i n the Pacific Nor thwest. Jou r nal of Forest r y. 99(9): 32?37. Moseley, C.; Toth, N. 2004. Fi re hazard reduction and economic oppor t u nit y: How are the benefits of the National Fi re Plan dist r ibuted? Societ y and Nat u ral Resou rces. 17(8): 701?716. Moseley, C.; Toth, N.; Cambier, A. 2002. Busi ness and employ ment effects of the National Fi re Plan. Eugene, OR: Ecosystem Work force Prog ram, Universit y of Oregon. 32 p. 173 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Case-Study Communities W hen conducti ng i nter views i n the case-st udy com mu nities, we at tempted to select people that represented a cross section of community leaders and st akeholder g roups. We used the followi ng categor ies to g uide ou r selection: Community leaders: Elected of ficial Civic g roup leader School district/education leader Historic preservation/cultural center leader Economic development cou ncil leader Busi ness leader/store ow ner Social service provider Fire district leader Health of ficial Religious leader Watershed cou ncil represent ative Large landow ner Planner Stakeholder group representatives: Recreation /tou r ism Envi ron ment Timber industry Special forest products Fishi ng? com mercial /recreational Cou nt y gover n ment Agriculture/ranching Minerals Tribes Low i ncome/mi nor it y g roups It was not possible to i nter view someone f rom each of the categor ies i n ever y com mu nit y, and many i nter viewees represented several categor ies at once. Descr iptions of the i nter viewees f rom each com mu nit y follow. Appendix D: People Inter viewed and Inter view Questionnaires 174 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Olympic National Forest and Local Communities Olympic National Forest Respondent?s position Engi neer i ng prog ram represent ative (3) Forest r y prog ram represent ative (4) Dist r ict ranger (2) Economic development represent ative Public service representative Forest planning representative Forest supervisor Aquatics program representative Ecosystems/nat u ral resou rces prog ram represent ative Wildlife biolog y prog ram represent ative Fire and aviation program representative O perations st aff represent ative Timber contracting representative Bot any/forest ecolog y prog ram represent ative Recreation prog ram represent ative Information specialist Tribal relations representative Computer/mappi ng specialist Quilcene Respondent?s position Quilcene resident For mer loggi ng cont ractor X For mer loggi ng cont ractor, busi ness ow ner X Loggi ng cont ractor, loggi ng cont ractors? association X Local busi nessperson, recent im mig rant (2) X Fi refighter X Pastor X School of ficial X Cou nt y plan ni ng of ficial (3) Cou nt y plan ni ng of ficial X Envi ron ment al i nterest g roup member Social ser vice provider X Social service provider Economic development agency of ficial Cou nt y health and hu man ser vices of ficial (2) Industrial timberland manager 175 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Quinault Indian Nation Respondent?s position Taholah/Queets resident Qui nault Tr ibal Cou ncil member, t r ibe member (2) X Qui nault I ndian Nation employee ?forest r y (2) Qui nault I ndian Nation employee ?forest r y, t r ibe member X Qui nault I ndian Nation employee ? cult u ral histor ian, t r ibe member X Qui nault I ndian Nation employee ? nat u ral resou rces Reti red logger, fisher, t r ibal elder X Basket weaver, t r ibal elder X School of ficial Qui nault I ndian Nation employee ? envi ron ment al protection For mer Qui nault I ndian Nation employee ? envi ron ment al protection Qui nault I ndian Nation employee ? economic development Qui nault I ndian Nation employee ?t r ibal liaison, t r ibe member X Basket weaver, Qui nault I ndian Nation employee ? cult u ral histor ian, t r ibe member X Fisher, t r ibe member X Fisher, t r ibal elder X Lake Quinault Area Respondent?s position Lake Quinault area resident For mer Park Ser vice employee, local tou r ism-based busi ness ow ner X Elected cou nt y of ficial Fi re dist r ict represent ative X School of ficial X Wait ress, school board member X Ow ner of log t r uck company, pastor, member of com mu nit y/economic X development organization President of local chapter of national recreation organization Local tou r ism-based busi ness ow ner, school board member X Reti red rancher X Shake mill ow ner X Cont ractor for ecosystem management work on the forest X Represent ative f rom regional economic development organization Store ow ner X Represent ative f rom a regional envi ron ment al organization 176 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Mount Hood National Forest and Local Communities Mount Hood National Forest Respondent?s position Forest recreation, plan ni ng, public affai rs st aff of ficer Forest planner, forest hydrologist Forest geologist Range prog ram manager Forest Youth Conser vation Cor ps host and senior volu nteer coordi nator Forest volunteer program coordinator Fire and aviation management program manager Forest silviculturist Forest supervisor Zigzag Dist r ict Ranger Forest nat u ral resou rces st aff of ficer Forest special forest products coordinator P ublic affai rs of ficer, r u ral com mu nit y assist ance coordi nator Forest engineer Vegetation management specialist Dist r ict and forest recreation prog ram managers (g roup i nter view) (5) Clackamas R iver Dist r ict Ranger Upper Hood River Valley Upper Hood River Respondent?s position Valley resident For mer logger X Volu nteer fi re depar t ment chief X Long-time orchardist (2) X Envi ron ment al activist X For mer logger X Reti red Forest Ser vice employee, now hobby orchardist X Reti red Forest Ser vice employee X For mer logger X Orchardist, ow ner pr ivate timberland X Cou nt y com missioner, family long-time residents X Local store ow ner, family long-time residents X Small mill operator, family long-time residents X Recreation i ndust r y represent ative X Prog ram manager mig rant worker social ser vices, family long-ter m mig rant workers, now residents X Regional soil and watershed association, and watershed association, represent ative Confederated Tr ibes of War m Spr i ngs employee, aquatic restoration prog ram, of fice i n case-st udy site Regional recreation i ndust r y represent ative 177 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Villages of Mount Hood Respondent?s position Villages resident Tou r ism and recreation i ndust r y rep X Tourism and recreation industry rep Developer, com mu nit y development activist X Real est ate ser vices X Busi ness person /chamber of com merce member X Watershed activists (2) X Long-time resident, com mu nit y development activist X Reti ree, ser vice organization represent ative X News media represent ative X Local busi ness ow ner X Loggi ng cont ractor X Pastor X Fi refighter X Logging contractor Cou nt y Economic Development of ficial Envi ron ment al i nterest g roup member (2) Industrial timberland manager P ublic school teachers (3) X Com mu nit y development activist, seasonal resident X Com mu nit y development activist X Estacada Respondent?s position Estacada resident For mer loggi ng cont ractors (3) X Forest ser vice employees (4) X Loggi ng supply store ow ner X Local busi nessman, tow n cou ncil man X Logging contractor Fi refighter X Local employer/ busi ness ow ner X Com mu nit y activist, recent i n mig rant X Cit y manager X Local employer/ busi ness X Wilder ness out fit ter X Cou nt y Economic Development of ficial Envi ron ment al i nterest g roup members (2) Wood products company employees (3) For mer busi ness ow ner, chamber of com merce member Pastor X Social ser vice provider X School of ficial X Industrial timberland manager 178 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Klamath National Forest and Local Communities Klamath National Forest Respondent?s position Forest landscape architect Forest resou rce st aff of ficer (fisher ies, noxious weeds, ear th sciences, timber, wildlife) Dist r ict Ranger, Scot t /Sal mon Ranger Dist r icts Deputy forest supervisor Forest silviculturist Dist r ict resou rce st aff (recreation, range, noxious weeds, archaeolog y, mi nerals) District archaeologist Forest timber management of ficer and cont racti ng of ficer, Shast a Tr i nit y National Forest Forest ear th science and fisher ies prog ram manager Forest ad mi nist rative st aff of ficer (cont racti ng, com mu nit y assist ance prog ram, volu nteer prog rams) Forest environmental coordinator District recreation, lands/minerals staff Forest fi re management st aff of ficer Forest assistant engineer Wildlife biologist Scott Valley Respondent?s position Scott Valley resident Reforest ation nu rser y ow ner X Di rector, nonprofit nat u ral resou rces consulti ng and t rai ni ng center X Local mayor X Nat u ral resou rce management i nterest g roup member For mer cou nt y super visor X Rancher, r u ral conser vation dist r ict member X Cou nt y board of education member Super i ntendent of schools (reti red) X Forester, tree farmer Cou nt y super visor X Wood products company manager (2) Wood products company employee/forester Wilder ness out fit ter, nat u ral resou rce management consult ant /cont ractor (2) X Shast a Tr ibe member, reti red timber worker X Shast a Tr ibe member X Cou nt y behavioral health specialist X St ate Depar t ment of Forest r y acti ng u nit chief X Cou nt y Economic Development Cor poration di rector Cou nt y nat u ral resou rce specialist X Envi ron ment al i nterest g roup member X Cou nt y plan ni ng di rector X U.S. Forest Ser vice dist r ict ranger (reti red) X Sal mon R iver Restoration Cou ncil represent ative, cont ractor, X Mid-K lamath Watershed Cou ncil board member 179 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Butte Valley Respondent?s position Butte Valley resident Cou nt y Super visor, K lamath Provi ncial Advisor y Com mit tee member, Ore- Cal Resou rce Conser vation and Development Di rector, rancher X Ore- Cal Resou rce Conser vation and Development employee But te Valley Saddle Co. ow ner, chamber of com merce president Dor r is Lu mber & Moldi ng X Vi nt age Woodworks ow ner X Shast a Tr ibe member, local envi ron ment alist X Shasta Tribe member, for mer timber faller X W hitsell Manufact u r i ng, I nc. (lu mber remanufact u r i ng) X TC Ranch ow ners X But te Valley Fi re Dist r ict Fi re Chief X But te Valley Health Center But te Valley Unified School Dist r ict Super i ntendent X But te Valley school dist r ict employee X Mayor of Dor r is X Mid- Klamath Respondent?s position Mid-Klamath resident Local busi ness ow ner/leader, cou nt y school board member, cont ractor, ex-mill worker X Fishi ng out fit ter/g uide, local school board member X Di rector, Happy Camp Family Resou rce Center ( provides social ser vices), X local school board member, tribal council member Reti red Happy Camp dist r ict ranger, health cli nic board member X Rancher, reti red Forest Ser vice employee X Mi ner, logger X Di rector, Kar u k Economic Development Organization; Kar u k Tr ibe member; vice president, X Happy Camp Chamber of Com merce; chai r man, Happy Camp Action Com mit tee Mid-K lamath Watershed Cou ncil represent ative, K lamath Forest Alliance represent ative Local busi ness ow ner X Regional forest manager, Fr uit G rowers Supply Company Kar u k t r ibal member, special forest products gatherer, basket maker X Logger X New 49ers recreational mi ni ng club represent ative X Forest cont ractor, ex-logger, local busi ness ow ner X Out fit ter-g uide, ow ner, local r iver raf ti ng company X President, Happy Camp Chamber of Com merce, local busi ness ow ner, Resou rce Advisor y X Com mit tee member Treasu rer, chamber of com merce, local busi ness ow ner X Chai r, Kar u k Tr ibe X Vice Chai r, Kar u k Tr ibe X Secret ar y, Kar u k Tr ibe X A nth ropologist X K lamath-Sisk iyou Wildlands G roup represent ative X K lamath-Sisk iyou Wildlands G roup represent ative 180 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Coos Bay District and Local Communities Coos Bay District Respondent?s position District manager Resou rce area manager ? Umpqua Resou rce A rea Resou rce area manager ?My r tlewood Resou rce A rea Noxious weeds prog ram coordi nator Timber sales administrator Silviculturalist Watershed analysis coordi nator Small sales ad mi nist rator ?My r tlewood Resou rce A rea Small sales ad mi nist rator ? Umpqua Resou rce A rea Volunteer coordinator Cult u ral resou rces prog ram manager Recreation specialist Recreation specialist Fish biologist Wildlife biologist Fire program manager District geologist Watershed restoration coordi nator P ublic affai rs of ficer Road engi neer ? Umpqua Resou rce A rea Road engi neer ?My r tlewood Resou rce A rea Interpretive specialist Greater Coos Bay Respondent?s position Greater Coos Bay resident Chamber of com merce employee (tou r ism focus) X Consulti ng forester/small woodland ow ners association member X Cou nt y com missioner X Cou nt y com missioner/rancher X Cou nt y forester X Health ser vices agency employee X Large timber company manager X Large timber company manager Large timber company manager, for mer local politician X Local economic development agency employee (tou r ism and i ndust r ial development focus) X Nat u re reser ve employee X Tr ibal forester X Tr ibal member/fish biologist X Watershed association employee Watershed restoration cont ractor /forest worker X 181 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Greater Myrtle Point Respondent?s position Greater Myrtle Point Resident Br ush shed operator X Busi ness development specialist Envi ron ment al educator X Envi ron ment al g roup leader Far mer/envi ron ment al educator X Fisher ies specialist with st ate educational agency Large timber company manager Mou nt ai n bi ke club member/car penter X Mu nicipal leader X P ublic works employee X Restoration cont ractor/forest worker X Reti ree, fisher ies volu nteer, long-ter m resident Reti ree, rock hou nd club member; newcomer X Small mill operator X Watershed association employee Greater Reedsport Respondent?s position Greater Reedsport resident Cult u ral her it age organization leader/envi ron ment al education focus X Economic development leader/spor tsfishi ng and tou r ism focus (2) X Economic development /el k viewi ng area i nvolvement X Forest products company employee X For mer school dist r ict leader X For mer wood products i ndust r y employee/small mill operator X I ndust r ial manufact u r i ng company employee X Local politician X Manager of mu nicipalit y X Member volu nteer fi re depar t ment X Mu nicipal plan ner X Ow ner of local media X Rancher/mill ow ner/watershed organization member X Small busi ness ow ner (timber related) X Small busi ness ow ner, el k viewi ng area i nvolvement X Social ser vices organization manager X Timber company manager Wood products i ndust r y worker X 182 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Inter view Guide, Communit y Inter viewees COMMUNITY INTERVIEW GUIDE Community and Stakeholder Representatives 15 August 2003 I nter viewer Com mu nit y Date Name of I nter viewee Title Organization W ho (i nter viewee categor y represented) Relationship to com mu nit y (resident, representative-how, ?) How long i n the area Place of residence Add ress (if applicable) Email add ress Section 1 Defining the Communit y (ask a few key communit y representatives) Purpose: The purpose of this section is to identify the bou ndar ies of ? the com mu nit y? that will become the u nit of analysis referred to in other sections. Hopefully a saturation poi nt will be achieved af ter 3 or 4 i nter views and research - ers will not have to ask these questions to subsequent i nter viewees. If that does occu r, researchers can just show i nter viewees the map of the ?com mu nit y? u nder st udy. If consensus about the com mu nit y defi nition is slow i n comi ng, perhaps the best thi ng to do would be to go wider, rather than nar rower, and ask people to speak to issues a bit more broadly than might be i ncli ned. (Consult with Susan or Ellen if this is problematic.) As the ?I nt ro? below descr ibes, explai n to i nter viewees that we are somewhat const rai ned by the use of Census block g roups to defi ne the com mu nities. Explai n that we want to t ake advant age of availabilit y of socioeconomic dat a provided by the census, however, and that we recog - nize that the bou ndar ies might not per fectly li ne up with what people thi n k of as thei r com mu nit y. I nter viewees can disagg regate the block g roup agg regations (BGAs) or f u r ther agg regate the BGAs. We cannot, however, go down to the block level. T he block-g roup level is the smallest u nit for which we can obt ai n su m mar y st atistics on socioeconomic i ndicators. Remember that block g roup and BGA bou ndar ies i nclude public land. People may thi n k that these polygons that i nclude public land are an awk ward way to depict thei r com mu nit y, but remi nd them that this is how the census does it. And, that it helps to identify those places with con nections to National Forests and BLM lands. Intro: T he Nor thwest Forest Plan ( N W FP) record of decision (ROD) requi res that we monitor the effects of the N W FP on r u ral economies and com mu nities. We are look i ng at social and economic changes that have occu r red i n com mu nities withi n the N W FP area si nce 1990, and whether and how N W FP implement ation can be li n ked to some of those changes. I n order to do this work, we need to defi ne what we mean by ?com mu nit y.? We developed a model that deli neates com mu nities i n the N W FP area on the basis of thi ngs li ke school dist r ict bou ndar ies, cou nt y lines, roads, topography, and population. The community deli neations were made by agg regati ng census block g roups ? small geog raphic u nits that ser ve as a basis for gather i ng U.S. Census dat a ?i n order to make it easy to use social and economic data from the census to monitor trends in social and economic conditions in the communities. T he com mu nit y that we are usi ng as ou r u nit of analysis i n discussions with you today we call ?X.? I?d li ke to t ake a mi nute at the begi n ni ng here to show you on a map how we have deli neated the bou ndar ies of this com mu nit y. Show them the map with mylar overlay! TOPIC: Is the case-study BGA a meaningful community? (1) Does the area that we?ve deli neated on the map and that we are refer r i ng to as ?X,? i n you r mi nd, represent what you would consider to be you r com mu nit y? Do people here thi n k of themselves as belongi ng to this one com mu nit y? (?Belongi ng? can be defi ned as area of social i nteractions, net works, how and where people con nect, or the area upon which the major it y of local decision mak i ng related to schools, r u ral development projects, etc. are made). Do people who reside withi n the area show n here thi n k of this area as constit uti ng a com mu nit y? TOPIC: Interviewees disaggregate, or further aggregate, block groups and BGAs. (2) If not: Does the area outli ned here represent more than one com mu nit y? If so, how would you break it dow n i nto i ndividual com mu nities? Please show me on a map, by usi ng the BGA or block g roup bou ndar ies as a refer - ence. W hat are the cr iter ia you are usi ng for doi ng so? or (3) If not: Does the area outli ned here represent only a par t of what most residents would thi n k of as a larger com - mu nit y that they belong to? W hat would that com mu - nit y be? Please show me on a map by usi ng block g roup or BGA bou ndar ies how you would agg regate the block g roups or BGAs (don?t have to use those ter ms) to make a more meani ngf ul com mu nit y. W hat are you r reasons for i ncludi ng it with this larger area? Note: It would be i nfor mative to see how i nter viewees d raw the bou ndar ies of thei r com mu nit y without bei ng constrained by census boundaries. This is not required. 183 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies If some people are i nterested and have time, ask them to d raw such a bou ndar y on a blan k mylar. If research - ers plan to gather this information, please label the mylar with i nter viewee name. Ly n nae will put a couple blan k mylars i n you r packet that she is sendi ng out. Section 2 Social and Economic Change in the Community (ask community reps) Purpose: The purpose of this section is to obtain communi- t y residents? perspectives on how thei r com mu nit y has been changing socially and economically over the last decade, and why. We have social and economic i ndicators f rom the U.S. census, and I M PLA N dat a, that reflect some dimen - sions of socioeconomic change i n the com mu nit y. However, we want to combi ne those dat a with residents? perceptions of the nat u re of change i n thei r com mu nit y. We also want to k now what residents thi n k is causi ng social and economic change i n thei r com mu nit y, and the extent to which they li n k this change to changes i n forest management policy vs. other factors. Intro: I?m t r yi ng to u nderst and what k i nds of economic and social changes have t aken place i n com mu nit y X over the last decade or so, and some of the forces behind that change. Fi rst I?d li ke to discuss some of the economic changes that have been occu r r i ng i n you r com mu nit y si nce 1990. I?ll be showi ng you some dat a that I?ve gathered f rom the U.S. Census regardi ng economic conditions i n com mu nit y X to facilit ate ou r discussion. Af ter that, I?d li ke to discuss some of the social changes that have occurred in your community over the last decade. Agai n, I?ll show you U.S. census dat a that reflect some of the social t rends for com mu nit y X. I?m also ver y i nterested i n discussi ng what?s been causi ng change i n the com mu nit y, and any ways that change might be li n ked to management policies and practices on Forest X. Economics Questions: TOPIC: Describe economic change and trends in the community (1) Overall, what is you r perception of how well com - mu nit y X is doi ng economically? W hat are the i ndica - tors/the thi ngs you?ve obser ved that make you thi n k the com mu nit y is doi ng well /doi ng poorly economically? Are there particular sectors that are doing especially well /especially poorly? (2) I n you r mi nd, have economic conditions i n the com mu - nit y got ten bet ter/worse/st ayed the same over the last decade? How so? (3) Please descr ibe busi ness t rends i n the com mu nit y. Over the last decade, have you seen the number of businesses i ncrease/decrease/st ay the same? W hat about the k i nds of busi nesses are here? W hat k i nds of busi nesses are on the i ncrease, are dyi ng out? TOPIC: Economic indicators. Present and discuss economic indicators from census (4) Now I?d li ke to show you some of the economic i nfor - mation that we?ve put together for you r com mu nit y f rom the U.S. Census. T hese i ndicators have to do with i ncome and employ ment, and reflect change that oc - cu r red bet ween the 1990 and 2000 Census years. T hey ser ve as one way of assessi ng the economic well-bei ng of a community. a. I ncome dat a: Show the char ts for median household income and percentage of people living in poverty. Descr ibe what each i ndicator means, and i nter pret / explai n the t rends revealed i n the char ts. T hen ask: A re these t rends consistent with you r perceptions? If not, how are you r perceptions different? b. Employ ment dat a: Show the char ts for percent - age unemployment and occupational categories. Descr ibe what each i ndicator means, and i nter - pret /explai n the t rends revealed i n the char ts. For occupational category, focus on the occupations that are nat u ral resou rce based. T hen ask: A re these t rends consistent with you r perceptions? If not, how are you r perceptions different? TOPIC: Whats causing economic trends in the com- munity (federal forest management policy/NWFP/other factors unrelated to forest management policy) (5) Do you thi n k that N FS/ BLM management policy on Forest X can be li n ked to any of these economic changes? How so? W hat about the N W FP i n par ticular? Please descr ibe any effects the N W FP has had on economic change in your community. (6) W hat factors other than federal forest management policy have cont r ibuted to changes i n economic well- bei ng i n com mu nit y X over the last decade? (7) How impor t ant do you believe that N FS/ BLM man - agement policy, and the N W FP i n par ticular, has been ? relative to other factors we?ve discussed ?i n cont r ibuti ng to economic conditions i n com mu nit y X? Social Questions TOPIC: Display and discuss demographic indicators from census, and discuss reasons for demographic trends (8) Population nu mbers ? Show the char ts on tot al population change. 18 4 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III T hese char ts show how the tot al population of you r community, and the surrounding area, has changed si nce 1990 (i nter pret t rends for them). a. Does this match with you r perception of population change i n the com mu nit y si nce 1990? If not, what?s you r perception? (9) Demog raphic composition of population Now show the char ts for median age of com mu nit y residents, and racial/ethnic composition of community residents. T hese char ts show how the composition of com mu nit y residents has changed si nce 1990 i n ter ms of age and racial /eth nic character istics. (i nter pret) a. Does this match you r perception of how the compo - sition of the community has changed over the last decade or so? b. A re there any other ways i n which the composition of community residents has changed in the last decade? T hat is, have cer t ai n k i nds of people been movi ng i n, and other k i nds of people been movi ng out? (10) How would you accou nt for the changes i n population numbers and demographic composition of people in com mu nit y X? To what extent does federal forest management policy/the N W FP cont r ibute to this t rend? W hat other factors explai n this t rend? TOPIC: Educational attainment of community residents and importance (11) Education ? Show the char ts on school en roll ment and high school graduates. T hese char ts show the propor tion of com mu nit y residents that had g raduated f rom high school i n 1990 and 2000. a. If there have been any changes ?W hy do you thi n k fewer/more people are completi ng high school now than i n 1990? b. Do you thi n k it is necessar y for people i n this community to have a high school education in order to make a livi ng here? W hy? W hat about a college deg ree? T hese char ts show school en roll ment i n 1990 and 2000. c. W hy do you thi n k there are more/fewer child ren en rolled i n local public schools now than i n 1990? TOPIC: Changes in quality of life in community and causes (12) Qualit y of life a. How has the qualit y of life i n this com mu nit y changed over the last decade? Some quality-of-life indicators: cost of living, access to housing, commute time/distance, quality of natural amenities, facilities and infrastructure. b. To what do you at t r ibute these changes? c. To what extent does the presence of the national forest, and forest management policy i n fluence the qualit y of life i n this com mu nit y? Explai n. TOPIC: Community adaptation to social and economic change (13) I n what ways has the com mu nit y been adapti ng to the social and economic changes that have occurred here over the last decade, and how successf ul has it been? W hat thi ngs have helped the com mu nit y adapt to changi ng social and economic conditions? W hat thi ngs have made it dif ficult for the com mu nit y to adapt to social and economic changes? TOPIC: Implications of community social and economic changes for forest management (14) Consider i ng the social and economic t rends we?ve discussed for com mu nit y X, what overall do you thi n k these t rends mean for Forest X? W hat are the implica - tions for the management of Forest X? Section 3 Community-Forest and Stakeholder-Forest Relations (ask of st akeholder g roup represent atives and com mu nit y members who engage i n use activities on forest) You could ask some of these questions to com mu nit y reps, but they are time consu mi ng? so consider comi ng back to these if there is time i n the i nter view Note: The term communityhere refers to both commu - nit y of place and com mu nit y of i nterest? adapt for t y pe of person you?re i nter viewi ng. Purpose: The purpose of this section is to investigate the nat u re of the relationship bet ween people i n the com mu nit y (of i nterest, of place) and the case-st udy forest. We want to descr ibe the ways i n which the forest is impor t ant to the economy, lifest yle, and cult u re of com mu nit y members. We also want to docu ment how com mu nit y members use the forest for timber harvest, gathering nontimber forest prod- ucts, g razi ng, mi nerals, and recreation, and how they have been affected by any changes in forest management policy regardi ng these uses. We also want to lear n what issues com mu nit y members are most concer ned about with regard to forest management, and how well the forest is doi ng at providing for the uses and values community members care about. 185 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Intro: I?d li ke to get an u nderst andi ng of the relationship bet ween Forest X and com mu nit y members. Specifically, I?d li ke to discuss how com mu nit y members use and value Forest X, how they have been affected by forest manage - ment policy, and what issues relati ng to forest management are of most concern to members. TOPIC: Orientation toward case-study forest (1) How would you character ize the relationship bet ween com mu nit y members and Forest X? How st rong is the or ient ation of the com mu nit y toward the forest? I n other words, would you consider this com mu nit y to be a ?forest-based? com mu nit y with respect to Forest X, and if so, i n what sense? (2) A re there other public forest lands i n the area (federal, st ate, cou nt y) that com mu nit y residents have a st rong relationship with and or ient ation toward? If so, what forest lands are they; please descr ibe nat u re of the relationship. TOPIC: Key issues of concern relating to forest management (3) W hat are the t wo or th ree issues that com mu nit y residents are currently most interested in or concerned about with regard to the management of forest X? (4) Have these been the mai n issues of i nterest /concer n for the last decade? If not, how have the issues been shif ti ng over the last decade, and why? TOPIC: Ask stakeholder group representatives to describe their community of interest and organization (5) How would you character ize the com mu nit y of i nterest that you represent? T hat is, how big is the constit uency, where do people come f rom, what character istics do these people share i n com mon, if any? (6) If you represent an organization, please descr ibe for me the mission of that organization, and how that mission relates to Forest X. Resource - specific questions Questions are for either communit y resident engaged in the activit y, or stakeholder g roup representative ? choose the question(s) appropriate to the inter vie wee?s area of interest. TOPIC: Effects of reduced timber harvests and adaptation (7) Si nce the late 1980s, timber sales on Forest X and su r rou ndi ng federal forest lands have decli ned sig nifi - cantly. a. To what extent have com mu nit y members been af - fected by decli nes i n federal timber har vests? Please descr ibe the key social, cult u ral, and economic impacts of declining timber harvests on the commu- nity, including an estimate of number of community members affected. b. How have people been adjusti ng to these reductions i n timber har vests? TOPIC: Role of nontimber forest products in commu- nity economy and culture, and management concerns (8) Most federal forests i n the Pacific Nor thwest have seen i ncreasi ng use of nontimber forest products ( NTFPs). a. W hat NTFPs are most com monly gathered by community members for economic, social, or cult u ral uses? b. How impor t ant are NTFPs to the economic and sociocult u ral well-bei ng of com mu nit y members? Explai n. c. Is the supply and availabilit y of NTFP species f rom Forest X considered to be adequate? If not, why not? d. Has access to Forest X for obt ai ni ng NTFPs changed over the last decade? How so? ( access to resources = physical abilit y to get to them, ecological avail - ability of resources, rules and regulations affecting thei r use) e. To what do you at t r ibute any changes i n access to NTFPs on Forest X? f. W hat has been the impact of these changes on com mu nit y residents? TOPIC: Grazing importance and effects of changing management (9) Is keepi ng livestock an impor t ant socioeconomic activ - it y to com mu nit y members? Please descr ibe, i ncludi ng the role of ranching in supporting the social, cultural, and economic well-bei ng of com mu nit y members. If no, continue to question 10. a. If yes: Do any ranchers i n this com mu nit y g raze livestock on Forest X? b. If yes: Has there been any change in access to land and resou rces for livestock on Forest X over the last decade? Please descr ibe these changes, and how they have affected ranchers (changes i n ecological conditions, physical accessibilit y, r ules/reg ulations). c. To what do you at t r ibute these changes? d. W hat has been the impact (social, cult u ral, eco - nomic) of changes i n access to g razi ng on Forest X on ranchers i n the com mu nit y? 18 6 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III TOPIC: Minerals importance and effects of changing management (10) Do com mu nit y residents consider Forest X to be an impor t ant sou rce of rocks, g ravel, or mi nerals for thei r ow n com mercial, recreational, or personal uses? a. If yes, what mater ials are most valued, and for what? b. Has access to Forest X for obt ai ni ng these rocks/ mi nerals changed over the last decade? How so? ( physical, reg ulator y, ecological) c. To what do you at t r ibute these changes? d. W hat has been the impact (social, cult u ral, eco - nomic) of these changes on com mu nit y members? TOPIC: Recreation use by community residents (11) I ndicators suggest that i n general, recreation oppor t u ni - ties on Forest X have been consistently available, and recreational uses of federal forests are on the rise. a. Do com mu nit y members use and value Forest X for the recreational oppor t u nities it offers? Descr ibe. b. Do you thi n k that com mu nit y members feel they have suf ficient recreation oppor t u nities on Forest X? If not, why not? W hat?s lack i ng? c. Has access to Forest X ( physical, ecological, reg ulator y) for engagi ng i n recreation oppor t u nities changed over the last decade? How so? d. To what do you at t r ibute these changes? e. W hat has been the impact of these changes on com mu nit y residents? TOPIC: Recreation/tourism trends by the public on the case-study forest and impacts on community f. In your perception, have recreation and tourism on Forest X been i ncreasi ng, decreasi ng, or st ayi ng the same over the last decade? g. To what do you at t r ibute these t rends? h. W hat have been the impacts of recreation and tou r ism t rends on Forest X on Com mu nit y X? Specifically, 1. Has it affected the way i n which com mu nit y residents use the forest? Descr ibe. 2. Has it had an impact on economic or social conditions i n the com mu nit y? Descr ibe. 3. Do com mu nit y residents view recreation and tou r ism on Forest X as a way of cont r ibuti ng to economic development and diversification i n Com mu nit y X? Descr ibe. TOPIC: Other forest values and environmental qualities of importance (12) W hat other values and envi ron ment al qualities associ - ated with Forest X, u n related to com modit y production and recreation, are important to community members and why? TOPIC: How well is the Forest doing at managing for public values and how to improve (13) Do you (and the com mu nit y you represent) thi n k that Forest X has been doi ng a good job of managi ng for those forest uses, values, and environmental qualities that you care most about? (14) W hy or why not? (15) How could it do a bet ter job of providi ng for the uses, values, and environmental qualities the community cares most about? Section 4 Other Forest-based Socioeconomic Opportunities (ask of community representatives) Purpose: I nter views with forest employees and analysis of forest dat a will allow us to docu ment changes i n forest-based socioeconomic opportunities associated with com modit y production, recreation, cont racti ng, g rants, and on-forest employ ment. We discussed changes in commodity production and recreation in the preceding section. I n this section we discuss cont racti ng, g rants, and employ ment, how impor t ant they are to com mu nit y members, and how the forests could do bet ter at cont r i- buti ng to socioeconomic well-bei ng i n com mu nities. Intro: One way that Forest X cont r ibutes to socioeconomic well-bei ng i n com mu nities is by providi ng forest products and recreation oppor t u nities. Other ways of cont r ibuti ng to socioeconomic well-bei ng i n local com mu nities i nclude providing jobs, contracting opportunities, and grant money. TOPIC: Communit y benefits from contract ing opportunities (1) One way that Forest X provides jobs to local com - munities is through contracts to accomplish ecosystem management activities such as fuel reduction, habitat improvement projects, watershed restoration projects, etc. a. Are such contracts an important source of jobs for residents of Com mu nit y X? b. If yes, descr ibe the way i n which these job oppor t u - nities cont r ibute to com mu nit y well-bei ng. c. Have contracting opportunities to do forest-based work been i ncreasi ng or decreasi ng over the last decade? W hy? 187 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies d. Would com mu nit y residents li ke to par ticipate more i n cont racti ng oppor t u nities? W hat are the bar r iers to mak i ng it happen? TOPIC: Communit y benefits from grants (2) Over the last 10 years, several com mu nities have received g rant money th rough Forest X to suppor t infrastructure development, community capacity build- ing, job programs, and other economic development and diversification activities. a. A re you aware of you r com mu nit y havi ng received federal g rant assist ance th rough Forest X over the last decade? b. If so, what k i nds of projects/prog rams suppor ted by these f u nds have been especially beneficial to the com mu nit y, and how so? c. If so, what k i nds of projects/prog rams have been least effective, and why? TOPIC: Importance of Agency jobs (3) For non- Coos Bay com mu nities: T he nu mber of people employed by Forest X has dropped substantially over the last decade. Has this change had an impact on com mu nit y X? Descr ibe. (4) How impor t ant is Forest X as a sou rce of qualit y jobs for people i n this com mu nit y? TOPIC: Other forest contributions to community well- being (5) Apar t f rom the topics we have al ready discussed, are there other thi ngs that Forest X could be doi ng to bet ter cont r ibute to socioeconomic well-bei ng i n Com mu nit y X? Descr ibe. Section 5 Community Collaboration (ask both community and stakeholder group reps) Purpose: Data gathered in this section should contribute to u nderst andi ng the evolution of how and why com mu nities have par ticipated i n collaborative forest stewardship with the National Forest / BLM si nce the N W FP. Specific projects and motivations for engaging in such projects that are di rectly related to the N W FP should be identified. Projects and motivations not di rectly tied to the N W FP should be described separately in order to arrive at an overall sense of how public engagement and collaborative forest stewardship have changed. Intro: I?m i nterested i n how you r com mu nit y, or local g roups that you are i nvolved with, collaborates with Forest X i n resou rce management activities on the forest or near the forest. I?m also i nterested i n how overall engagement i n collaborative forest stewardship activities bet ween the com mu nit y, local g roups, and Forest X has changed over the past decade. More specifically, I?d li ke to discuss what types of actual on-the-ground collaborative activities occur. (Researchers: If responses to pr ior sections i ndicate that the i nter viewee is well i nfor med about the N W FP, please i n - clude reference to it when ask i ng about change over the past decade. T he questions below assu me that the i nter viewee k nows lit tle about the components of the N W FP.) TOPIC: Change in general engagement with FS/BLM (1) Has you r com mu nit y/g roup?s overall engagement with the national forest changed over the past 10 years? Has it i ncreased, decreased, or st ayed the same? (2) How and why has it evolved or st ayed the same? TOPIC: Change in on-the-ground collaborative forest stewardship (3) W hat t y pes of on-the-g rou nd collaborative forest stewardship activities does you r com mu nit y engage i n with the forest /dist r ict? (4) If none, why not? TOPIC: Objectives and motivations for collaborating (5) Please descr ibe some of the objectives of those collaborations or partnerships. (6) W hat motivates you r com mu nit y/g roup to collaborate with Forest X? W ho usually t akes the i nitiative to est ablish these collaborations? TOPIC: Benefits of col laborat ing (7) How does the com mu nit y/g roup benefit f rom the collaborations? W hat have been some of the successes? (8) Have there been any i ndi rect benefits (such as sk ills developed, i ncreased net work i ng, improved relations to forests)? TOPIC: Barriers to collaborating (community and FS/BLM) (9) W hat do you see as the biggest bar r iers, i nter nal to you r com mu nit y, to collaborati ng with the national forest i n resou rce management activities? (such as t r ust levels, community leadership/capacity, community cohesion) (10) W hat do you thi n k are the biggest bar r iers that the National Forest / BLM has to collaborati ng with you r com mu nit y (or local com mu nities) i n resou rce manage - ment activities (such willi ng ness/availabilit y of forest leadership/st aff to collaborate, lack of person nel, lack of f u nds)? 188 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III TOPIC: Future direction of collaboration (1) A re there any t y pes of collaborative activities that you would li ke to see developed or expanded? W hy? Section 6 The NWFP (ask everyone) Purpose: Presu mably, by now, people will have al ready discussed forest management and refer red to the N W FP thoughout the other discussions. However, si nce we haven?t asked explicit questions about the N W FP, here?s the oppor - t u nit y to do so if it has not been ver y explicit yet. Provide a chance for people to give some su m mar y reflections on the Plan and its impacts on their community. The purpose of this section is to solicit specific views of i nter viewees on what?s work i ng and what?s not work i ng about the N W FP; and what thei r recom mendations are for how to make it a more successful policy. These are recommendations that could be brought for ward i n the context of adaptive management. Intro: To w rap up and su m mar ize, I?d li ke to get a general perspective f rom you on what?s been work i ng and what hasn?t been work i ng with the N W FP and how it might be improved to better meet its objectives. (1) How familiar are you with the N W FP? TOPIC: Parts of NWFP working well for community/stakeholder group (2) W hat par ts of the N W FP do you thi n k have been work i ng well? How has it cont r ibuted to the well- being of this community/furthered the interests of you r st akeholder g roup? TOPIC: Parts of NWFP not working well for community/stakeholder group (3) W hat par ts of the N W FP have not been work i ng well? W hat problems has this caused for you r com mu nit y/ how has this worked agai nst the i nterests of you r st akeholder g roup? TOPIC: Recommended changes or improvements to NWFP (4) W hat would you recom mend changi ng about the N W FP, if any thi ng, so that it would bet ter ser ve the needs of your community/your interest group, and meet its goal of balancing the need for forest protection with the need to provide a steady and sust ai nable supply of timber and nontimber resou rces to benefit r u ral com mu nities and economies? Section  The NWFP Goals (ask everyone, as appropriate) Purpose: This section provides a reference to all the goals, i ncludi ng the overarchi ng goal. Ask people to reflect on specific goals or one overarchi ng goal, where appropr iate. May be an i ndividual com mu nit y member or st akeholder group perspective. USE the overarchi ng goal (7- 6) if you?re shor t on time! Intro: T he N W FP had five mai n socioeconomic goals that are being evaluated by the current monitoring program. To what extent do you thi n k prog ress has been made on the followi ng goal(s), and why or why not: TOPIC: What progress has been made on meeting NWFP socioeconomic goals and reasons (1) Produce a predict able and sust ai nable supply of timber sales, nontimber forest products, and recreational op- por t u nities; (2) Help mai nt ai n the st abilit y of local and regional economies, and cont r ibute to socioeconomic well-bei ng in local communities, on a predictable and long-term basis; (3) Mi nimize adverse impacts on jobs, and assist with long-ter m economic development and diversification i n the area; (4) Help protect nontimber values and envi ron ment al qualities associated with the forest; (5) I mprove relations bet ween federal land management agencies and local communities, and promote collab- orative forest management and joi nt forest stewardship activities. (6) A n overarchi ng goal of the N W FP was to balance the need for forest protection with the need to provide a steady and sustainable supply of timber and nontimber resou rces to benefit r u ral com mu nities and economies. Do you believe Forest /dist r ict Y has been successf ul i n achievi ng this goal? W hy or why not? Examples? 189 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Inter view Guides, Forest Inter viewees T here were th ree different i nter view g uides that the moni - tor i ng team used with forest i nter viewees, dependi ng upon thei r position. T he g uide used with forest prog ram special - ists is cont ai ned i n volu me II appendix B. T his appendix cont ai ns the i nter view g uides used with li ne of ficers (forest super visors and dist r ict rangers) and with com mu nit y out reach specialists (such as public affai rs of ficers). T here is a fai r amou nt of overlap bet ween the th ree g uides. Interview Guide for Forest Service/ Bureau of Land Management Forest Employees LINE OFFICERS July 3, 2003 I nter viewer Forest Date Name of I nter viewee Title Unit/Location How long i n present position How long work i ng on this forest Note: if one of the inter vie wees is ne w in their position, and their predecessor is an old timer who is still accessible, you ma y want to inter vie w both. Section I (1) I?d li ke to begi n with a general question. Can you please tell me what the th ree or so most bu r ni ng social issues and/or public concerns are in relation to your for- est and its management? A re these the same issues and concerns that have been dominant over the last decade, or has there been a shif t? Please descr ibe. Northwest Forest Plan Implementation Intro: T he Nor thwest Forest Plan called for a nu mber of changes in forest management, including land use alloca- tions i nto late-successional and r ipar ian reser ves, mat r ix areas, and adaptive management areas; a host of st andards and g uideli nes regardi ng forest management; and a nu m - ber of new procedu ral requi rements, such as su r vey and manage, watershed analysis, and late-successional reser ve assessments. I?m i nterested i n u nderst andi ng how the N W FP has been implemented on (Forest Y ) si nce 1994, and the ways i n which the management of forest Y has changed u nder the N W FP. Rather than ask i ng about specific resources or program areas, phrase the questions in general ter ms and see what resou rce areas they br i ng up as bei ng sig nificantly affected. Questions: (2) How has the N W FP changed the way i n which this forest is managed, overall? Specifically: a. How have the different land use allocations (late- successional reser ves, r ipar ian reser ves, mat r ix, adap - tive management areas) and associated st andards and g uideli nes affected the management of you r forest? b. Have the procedu ral requi rements associated with the N W FP? su r vey and manage, watershed analysis, LSR assessments ?had an effect on the way i n which forest management is car r ied out? Please explai n. c. How has the N W FP changed public access to the forest? Please com ment on whether and how changes i n forest management u nder the N W FP have affected 1. peoples? physical abilit y to get to use areas (i.e., access routes); 2. thei r abilit y to use forest areas for different activi - ties f rom the reg ulator y st andpoi nt (have some places been opened or closed for use, are people still allowed to go there, have uses been modified, how have r ules and regs chaned); 3. ecological conditions on the forest, mak i ng them either more or less productive for specific k i nds of public use activities; 4. the economic feasibilit y of usi ng the forest for desi red uses; 5. the presence of facilities or i nf rast r uct u re for supporting certain use activities. 6. Underst andi ng that the N W FP is not the only thi ng that g uides forest management, what other fac - tors/policies have had a major i n fluence on forest management activities over the last decade or so? Please describe. Section 2 Impacts of Forest Management on People Intro: You?ve descr ibed changes i n forest management si nce the N W FP was implemented. I?d li ke to discuss how you thi n k these changes have affected people more broadly. Questions: (1) Please tell me how you thi n k changes i n forest manage - ment and access have affected people who use the for - est, with a focus on economic impacts? social impacts? cult u ral impacts? To what extent is the N W FP, vs. other factors, responsible for these impacts? (2) Please tell me how you thi n k changes i n forest manage - ment si nce the N W FP was implemented have affected residents of communities surrounding the forest. 19 0 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III W hat do you thi n k have been the economic impacts? social impacts? cult u ral impacts? on local residents, if any? W hat other factors may be cont r ibuti ng to these impacts? (3) A re there any other st akeholder g roups that you thi n k have been affected by changes in forest management si nce the N W FP was implemented that have not al - ready been mentioned? W ho? W hat do you thi n k have been the economic impacts? social impacts? cult u ral impacts? on these st akeholders? Section 3 Forest Budgets, Staffing, and Organization Intro: Because the FS and BLM can be an impor t ant sou rce of quality jobs in rural communities, and because forest budgets and st af fi ng levels affect you r abilit y to manage the forest, and to i nteract with the public, we are i nterested i n u nderst andi ng whether or not the N W FP has had an impact on forest budgets, st af fi ng levels, and organizational structure. Show the i nter viewee the t rend analysis we have per for med for the total annual budget and number of employees on thei r forest si nce 1990. Tal k also about any ad mi nist rative reorganization that has occu r red si nce 1990 (ie., consolida - tion of dist r ict of fices, etc.) Questions: (1) On budgets (refer to the t rend char t): a. W hat do you believe has caused the t rends obser ved in your annual forest budget over the last decade or so? To what extent do you at t r ibute these t rends to N W FP implement ation, if at all, and what?s the con nection? b. Are certain activities/programs receiving more or less f u ndi ng than they did a decade ago ?what program areas have been most affected by these t rends? (2) On st af fi ng levels (refer to the t rend char t): a. W hat do you believe has caused the t rends obser ved in the number of forest employees over the last decade or so? Would you at t r ibute these t rends to N W FP implement ation at all, and if so, what?s the con nection? b. W hat job categor ies have been par ticularly affected by the t rends i n FTEs? (3) On reorganization: a. Has your forest undergone an administrative reorganization si nce the mid-1980s? Please descr ibe, refer r i ng to years i n which reorganization occu r red. b. W hat caused the reorganization? A ny relation to N W FP implement ation? (4) Effects on management: a. How have t rends i n forest budgets and st af fi ng levels, and any reorganization, affected you r abilit y to manage the forest and car r y out you r prog rams? b. How have they affected you r relations with the public, if at all? c. Has there been any impact on local com mu nities? Section 4 Contracting ( Unfor t u nately, we won?t have the results of the cont racti ng st udy i n by the time we i nter view fol ks, so won?t k now what the cont racti ng t rends are.) Intro: Cont racti ng and procu rement to achieve ecosystem management objectives provide forest-based employment oppor t u nities. One expect ation of the N W FP was that although jobs i n the timber sector would be lost due to decli ni ng federal timber har vests, new oppor t u nities for forest work relati ng to ecological restoration, scientific su r veys, f uels reduction, road decom missioni ng, etc. would emerge. Researchers have fou nd that Agency cont racti ng to achieve ecosystem management on forests represents an important potential source of jobs for local communities. I?d li ke to discuss t rends i n cont racti ng and procu rement for ecosystem management pu r poses on forest Y. Questions (1) W hat k i nds of ecosystem management activities on the forest do you most of ten cont ract out to accomplish? (2) Do you thi n k the t rend i n cont racti ng to achieve eco - system management objectives on your forest has been i ncreasi ng or decreasi ng over the last decade or so? ( We?ll k now once we get the t rend dat a!) Please explai n t rends i n cont racti ng and procu rement?why are you doi ng more/less cont racti ng over time? (3) Do you believe that residents of local com mu nities are receivi ng employ ment benefits f rom you r cont racti ng practices, and does the forest make any special effor ts to t arget local cont ractors/local workers to do ecosys - tem management work on the forest? If not, why not? W hat are the bar r iers? Does the forest view it as bei ng impor t ant to t r y to promote local cont racti ng? (4) Did the N W FP or N EA I have an impact on cont racti ng practices and oppor t u nities on this forest? Explai n. 191 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Section 5 Rural Community Assistance Intro: Federal fi nancial assist ance to r u ral com mu nities th rough g rants is one way i n which agencies cont r ibute to com mu nit y capacit y buildi ng. For example, the N W EA I provided g rants to com mu nities to help with worker ret rai n - i ng, buildi ng com mu nit y i nf rast r uct u re, jobs i n the woods, com mu nit y development and diversification activities, and so on. Questions: (1) Please descr ibe the prog rams you r forest has for offer - ing rural community assistance, and contributing to community capacity building. (2) W hat have been the t rends i n the amou nt of money and resou rces you?ve had to devote to these prog rams over the last decade? Please explai n the reasons for these trends. (3) How effective have you r prog rams been at helpi ng com mu nities build thei r capacit y? How are com mu ni - ties benefiti ng? A re we i nvesti ng i n the k i nds of com - mu nit y assist ance st rategies that are most productive? Explai n. Section 6 Collaboration with Communities in Forest Stewardship Activities Intro: We are i nterested i n how the Forests/ Dist r icts/ Programs engage the public in discussions about resource management. I n par ticular, we are i nterested i n how the Forests/ Dist r icts/ Prog rams collaborate with com mu nities and local g roups i n on-the-g rou nd forest stewardship activities, and how these t y pes of collaborations have changed over the past decade. Questions: (1) How have the ways i n which you r Forest / Dist r ict / Program engages the public in discussions about forest management changed si nce the early 1990s? (2) To what do you at t r ibute these changes? (3) Can you thi n k of any di rect or i ndi rect ways i n which the N W FP has i n fluenced these changes? W hat are they? Now I want to t al k specifically about collaborative forest stewardship activities bet ween the Forest /you r Dist r ict / you r Prog ram and g roups or com mu nities. T hese would be activities that stem f rom a pooli ng of resou rces (e.g., money, labor, i nfor mation) by you r Forest / Dist r ict / Prog ram and other g roups to achieve mut ual objectives f rom which all par ties will benefit. T he g roups might i nclude com - munity groups, volunteers, and other types of groups or organizations. T hus, I am not refer r i ng to st andard public input processes, but instead projects that are designed and implemented i n collaboration, bet ween the Forest Ser vice and a group, and that have tangible on-the-ground outputs that benefit all par ticipants i n the collaborative. (4) W hat t y pes of on-the-the g rou nd collaborative forest stewardship activities does you r Forest / Dist r ict engage i n with com mu nit y g roups or other g roups? (5) W ho do these g roups tend to be, and where are they f rom generally (local vs. non-local)? (6) I n what ways, if at all, do collaborative forest steward - ship activities help you r Forest / Dist r ict f ul fill its forest management objectives? (7) W hat other motivations are there for engagi ng i n collaborative forest stewardship? (8) How has the way you r Forest / Dist r ict engaged g roups or com mu nities i n on-the-g rou nd forest stewardship activities changed si nce the early 1990s? (9) To what do you at t r ibute these changes? (10) Can you thi n k of ways i n which the N W FP has i n fluenced these changes i n collaborative activities? (11) How, if at all, have these changes ( both N W FP i nduced and others) i n fluenced the ways i n which com mu nities and g roups seek out collaborative activities with you r Forest / Dist r ict? (12) Has the ?leadership? on you r Forest / Dist r ict per t ai ni ng to collaborative forest stewardship changed i n the past decade? By ?leadership,? we mean the ways i n which leaders create vision, enable, and empower employees, deliver messages, demonstrate commitment, learn from past exper iences, and pass on k nowledge related to collaborative forest stewardship. a. How? (13) I n what ways are employees on you r Forest / Dist r ict who engage i n collaborative forest stewardship activi - ties ack nowledged, rewarded, or promoted? a. W hat are the i ncentives for employees to par ticipate i n collaborative forest stewardship activities? b. W hat are the disi ncentives? (14) A re the cu r rent levels of resou rces i n the followi ng categories meeting the current demands/needs for collaborative forest stewardship activities: a. budget (dollars)? b. st af fi ng ( people with responsibilities or oppor t u ni - ties to engage i n collaborative forest stewardship)? c. sk ills ( people with the sk ills, or access to t rai ni ng to develop sk ills)? 192 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III (15) W hat are the biggest bar r iers to collaborative forest stewardship activities that you r Forest / Dist r ict face? Section  Achieving Plan Socioeconomic Goals Intro: I?d li ke to conclude ou r discussion by ask i ng you some general questions about the N W FP and its effective - ness. T he N W FP i nteragency regional monitor i ng prog ram focuses on effectiveness monitor i ng to assess how well the N W FP is achievi ng its goals and expect ations. T he socio - economic monitor i ng prog ram is evaluati ng how effective the Plan has been at meeting its social and economic goals and objectives. I?d li ke to get you r perspective on this. Questions: (1) T he N W FP had 5 mai n socioeconomic goals that are bei ng evaluated by the cu r rent monitor i ng prog ram. I?d li ke to discuss them i n t u r n. For each one, ask: Do you believe progress in meeting this goal has been made with respect to forest Y and local com mu nities arou nd the forest si nce the N W FP was implemented? W hy or why not? a. Produce a predictable and sustainable supply of timber sales, nontimber forest resources, and recreational oppor t u nities; b. help maintain the stability of local and regional economies, and cont r ibute to socioeconomic well- being in local communities, on a predictable and long-ter m basis; c. Mi nimize adverse impacts on jobs, and assist with long-ter m economic development and diversification i n the area; d. Help protect noncommodity values and environ- ment al qualities associated with the forest; e. I mprove relationships bet ween federal land manage - ment agencies and local communities, and promote collaborative forest management and joint forest stewardship activities. (2) More broadly/or i n su m, an overarchi ng goal of the N W FP was to balance the need for forest protection with the need to provide a steady and sust ai nable supply of timber and nontimber resou rces to benefit rural communities and economies. Do you believe Forest /dist r ict Y has been successf ul i n achievi ng this goal? W hy or why not? Examples? To Conclude: Do you have any fi nal thoughts, poi nts you want to empha - size, su m mar y remarks, or thi ngs you want to add regardi ng the impact of the N W FP on Forest Y and its management, and associated effects on forest users and local communi- ties? A re there any questions you would li ke to ask me? T han k you so much for you r time and thoughts! Interview Guide for Forest Service/ Bureau of Land Management Forest Employees COMMUNITY OUTREACH SPECIALISTS July 3, 2003 I nter viewer Forest Date Name of I nter viewee Title Unit/Location How long i n present position How long work i ng on this forest Note: if one of the i nter viewees is new i n thei r position, and thei r predecessor is an old timer who is still accessible, you may want to i nter view both (1) Fi rst, would you please descr ibe the overall nat u re of you r prog ram on Forest Y. How has the prog ram evolved over the last decade or so? Section 1 Contracting Note: T his section won?t be relevant for some fol ks such as the public affai rs of ficer. For others, li ke the volu nteer coordi nator, it should be adapted. I n this case, you could ask questions 1?5 on the followi ng page and replace ? though cont racti ng? with ? th rough volu nteers?? same questions but i n the context of the volu nteer prog ram rather than contracting. Same for partnerships. ( Unfor t u nately, we won?t have the results of the cont racti ng st udy i n by the time we i nter view fol ks, so won?t k now what the cont racti ng t rends are.) Intro: Cont racti ng and procu rement to achieve ecosystem management objectives provide forest-based employment oppor t u nities. One expect ation of the N W FP was that although jobs i n the timber sector would be lost due to decli ni ng federal timber har vests, new oppor t u nities for forest work relati ng to ecological restoration, scientific su r veys, f uels reduction, road decom missioni ng, etc. would emerge. Researchers have fou nd that agency cont racti ng to achieve ecosystem management on forests represents an important potential source of jobs for local communities. I?d li ke to discuss t rends i n cont racti ng and procu rement for ecosystem management pu r poses on Forest Y. 193 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Questions: (1) W hat k i nds of ecosystem management activities on the forest do you most of ten cont ract out to accomplish? (2) Do you thi n k the t rend i n cont racti ng to achieve eco - system management objectives on your forest has been i ncreasi ng or decreasi ng over the last decade or so? ( We?ll k now once we get the t rend dat a!) Please explai n t rends i n cont racti ng and procu rement?why are you doi ng more/less cont racti ng over time? (3) Do you believe that residents of local com mu nities are receivi ng employ ment benefits f rom you r cont racti ng practices, and does the forest make any special effor ts to t arget local cont ractors/local workers to do ecosys - tem management work on the forest? If not, why not? W hat are the bar r iers? Does the forest view it as bei ng impor t ant to t r y to promote local cont racti ng? (4) W hat, if any thi ng, is Forest Y doi ng to help build com mu nit y capacit y to successf ully obt ai n cont racts? (5) Did the N W FP or N EA I have an impact on cont racti ng practices and oppor t u nities on this forest? Explai n. Section 2 Intro: Rural Community Assistance Federal fi nancial assist ance to r u ral com mu nities th rough g rants is one way i n which agencies cont r ibute to com mu - nit y capacit y buildi ng. For example, the N W EA I provided g rants to com mu nities to help with worker ret rai ni ng, buildi ng com mu nit y i nf rast r uct u re, jobs i n the woods, com mu nit y development and diversification activities, and so on. Questions: (1) Please descr ibe the prog rams you r forest has for offer - ing rural community assistance, and contributing to community capacity building. (2) W hat have been the t rends i n the amou nt of money and resou rces you?ve had to devote to these prog rams over the last decade? Please explai n the reasons for these trends. (3) How effective have you r prog rams been at helpi ng com mu nities build thei r capacit y? How are com mu ni - ties benefiti ng? A re we i nvesti ng i n the k i nds of com - mu nit y assist ance st rategies that are most productive? Explai n. (4) How was the r u ral com mu nit y assist ance prog ram on the forest affected by implement ation of the N W FP? Section 3 Collaboration with Communities in Forest Stewardship Activities Intro: We are i nterested i n how the forests/dist r icts/ programs engage the public in discussions about resource management. I n par ticular, we are i nterested i n how the Forests/ Dist r icts/ Prog rams collaborate with com mu nities and local g roups i n on-the-g rou nd forest stewardship activities, and how these t y pes of collaborations have changed over the past decade. Questions: (1) How have the ways i n which you r forest /dist r ict / program engages the public in discussions about forest management changed si nce the early 1990s? (2) To what do you at t r ibute these changes? (3) Can you thi n k of any di rect or i ndi rect ways i n which the N W FP has i n fluenced these changes? W hat are they? Now I want to t al k specifically about collaborative forest stewardship activities bet ween the forest /you r dist r ict /you r prog ram and g roups or com mu nities. T hese would be activities that stem f rom a pooli ng of resou rces (e.g., money, labor, i nfor mation) by you r forest /dist r ict /prog ram and other g roups to achieve mut ual objectives f rom which all par ties will benefit. T he g roups might i nclude com mu nit y g roups, volu nteers, and other t y pes of g roups or organizations. Thus, I am not referring to standard public input processes, but instead projects that are designed and implemented in collaboration, bet ween the Forest Ser vice and a g roup, and that have t angible on-the-g rou nd out puts that benefit all participants in the collaborative. (4) W hat t y pes of on-the-the g rou nd collaborative forest stewardship activities does you r forest /dist r ict engage i n with com mu nit y g roups or other g roups? (5) W ho do these g roups that you engage i n joi nt forest stewardship activities tend to be, and where are they f rom generally (local vs. non-local)? (6) I n what ways, if at all, do collaborative forest steward - ship activities help you r forest /dist r ict f ul fill its forest management objectives? (7) W hat other motivations are there for engagi ng i n collaborative forest stewardship? (8) How has the way you r forest /dist r ict engaged g roups or com mu nities i n on-the-g rou nd forest stewardship activities changed si nce the early 1990s? (9) To what do you at t r ibute these changes? 19 4 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III (10) Can you thi n k of ways i n which the N W FP has i n fluenced these changes i n collaborative activities? (11) How, if at all, have these changes ( both N W FP-i nduced and others) i n fluenced the ways i n which com mu nities and g roups seek out collaborative activities with you r Forest / Dist r ict? (12) Has the ?leadership? on you r forest /dist r ict per t ai ni ng to collaborative forest stewardship changed i n the past decade? By ?leadership,? we mean the ways i n which leaders create vision, enable, and empower employees, deliver messages, demonstrate commitment, learn from past exper iences, and pass on k nowledge related to collaborative forest stewardship. a. How? (13) A re employees on you r forest /dist r ict who engage i n collaborative forest stewardship activities ack nowl - edged, rewarded, or promoted by upper management? How? (14) A re the cu r rent levels of resou rces i n the followi ng categories meeting the current demands/needs for collaborative forest stewardship activities: a. Budget (dollars)? b. St af fi ng ( people with responsibilities or oppor t u ni - ties to engage i n collaborative forest stewardship)? c. Sk ills ( people with the sk ills, or access to t rai ni ng to develop sk ills)? (15) W hat are the biggest bar r iers to collaborative forest stewardship activities that you r forest /dist r ict face? Section 4 Achieving Plan Socioeconomic Goals Intro: I?d li ke to conclude ou r discussion by ask i ng you some general questions about the N W FP and its effective - ness. T he N W FP i nteragency regional monitor i ng prog ram focuses on effectiveness monitor i ng to assess how well the N W FP is achievi ng its goals and expect ations. T he socio - economic monitor i ng prog ram is evaluati ng how effective the Plan has been at meeting its social and economic goals and objectives. I?d li ke to get you r perspective on this. Questions: (1) T he N W FP had 5 mai n socioeconomic goals that are bei ng evaluated by the cu r rent monitor i ng prog ram. I?d li ke to discuss some of these. For each one, ask: Do you believe progress in meeting this goal has been made with respect to forest Y and local com mu nities arou nd the forest si nce the N W FP was implemented? W hy or why not? a. Help maintain the stability of local and regional economies, and cont r ibute to socioeconomic well- being in local communities, on a predictable and long-ter m basis; b. Mi nimize adverse impacts on jobs, and assist with long-ter m economic development and diversification i n the area; c. I mprove relationships bet ween federal land manage - ment agencies and local communities, and promote collaborative forest management and joint forest stewardship activities. (2) More broadly/or i n su m, an overarchi ng goal of the N W FP was to balance the need for forest protection with the need to provide a steady and sust ai nable supply of timber and nontimber resou rces to benefit rural communities and economies. Do you believe Forest /dist r ict Y has been successf ul i n achievi ng this goal? W hy or why not? Examples? To Conclude Do you have any fi nal thoughts, poi nts you want to emphasize, su m mar y remarks, or thi ngs you want to add regardi ng the ways i n which Forest Y works to cont r ibute to socioeconomic well-bei ng i n local com mu nities, and to engage them with the forest i n collaborative forest stewardship activities? A ny last thoughts on the impact of the N W FP on Forest Y with regard to these k i nds of activities/relationships? A re there any questions you would li ke to ask me? Community Outreach Specialists to Be Interviewed Volu nteer Coordi nator Par t nership Coordi nator Com mu nit y Assist ance/ Development Specialist P ublic Affai rs Of ficer I nter pretive Specialist / Envi ron ment al Education Specialist Tr ibal Liaison (i n which case focus all of the questions as they relate to forest interactions and relationships with t r ibes) 195 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Olympic National Forest Case-Study Communities Quinault Indian Nation T he Qui nault I ndian Nation (QI N ) is the sovereig n nation of the Qui nault people, and six other t r ibes (Queets, Quileute, Hoh, Chehalis, Cowlitz, and Chi nook) that were relocated to the reser vation i n the mid and late 1800s. Tr ibal en roll - ment is cu r rently about 3,000 members, with half of the population livi ng on the Qui nault I ndian Reser vation (QI R). The majority of those living off of the reservation reside in the Aberdeen / Hoquiam area, but some live as far away as Alaska and Texas. T he reser vation covers 208,150 acres of land, and is the thi rd largest I ndian reser vation i n Washi ng - ton State. Most residents livi ng on the QI R reside i n the I ndian villages of Taholah and Queets, with a smaller seg ment of the population residing in the nontribal community of A manda Park. Taholah is a coast al fishi ng com mu nit y located at the mouth of the Qui nault R iver. With a popula - tion of about 871, most Qui nault Tr ibe members reside i n Taholah, and all gover n ment and ad mi nist rative of fices are there. Located at the terminus of a remote section of High- way 109 i n G rays Harbor Cou nt y, Washi ng ton, Taholah is approximately 45 miles nor th of Hoquiam. T he village of Queets is located on the nor ther n par t of the reser vation off of Highway 101 at the mouth of the Queets R iver, a few miles i nland f rom the Pacific Ocean. Queets falls just withi n the bou ndar ies of Jefferson Cou nt y, Washi ng ton, and has a population of about 149 residents. Although both com mu nities are located at or close to the Pacific Coast, no di rect route exists bet ween Taholah and Queets. I nstead, f rom Taholah, one must t ravel i nland 45 miles to Lake Qui nault and conti nue nor thwest along Highway 101 for another 30 miles to Queets. Consequently Queets has been fairly isolated from much of the employment opportunities and t r ibal activities t ak i ng place i n Taholah. A manda Park is located inland at the eastern boundary of the reservation, along Highway 101 on the wester n shores of Lake Qui nault, i n G rays Harbor Cou nt y. Appendix E: Case Study Community Descriptions The focus of this community case study is primarily on Taholah and Queets, as the major it y of t r ibe members reside in these communities. Although some tribe members reside i n A manda Park, that com mu nit y identifies itself more closely with the Qui nault-Neilton com mu nities. Qualit a - tive i nfor mation for A manda Park is thus presented i n the Lake Qui nault area case st udy. Because block g roup areas (BGAs) were used to measu re changes i n socioeconomic conditions bet ween 1990 and 2000, dat a f rom the enti re reser vation (i ncludi ng A manda Park) were combi ned. We at tempted to disagg regate the dat a i nto i ndividual block g roups; however, the block g roup bou ndar ies changed bet ween 1990 and 2000, mak i ng compar isons dif ficult. Thus, for this study, census statistics represent the entire BGA, defi ned as Taholah census desig nation place (CDP) - QI R (BGA 6101). T he QI R is west of the southwester n por tion of Oly mpic National Forest (ON F), (i.e., the for mer Qui nault Ranger Dist r ict, and cu r rently the Pacific Dist r ict). T he QI N shares many of its watersheds with ON F and Oly mpic National Park, with the headwaters located withi n the park or forest, and the lower por tions of the watersheds located withi n the reser vation. T he QI N also ow ns Lake Qui nault, and manages a fisher y on the lake. Oly mpic National Park extends to the nor th shore of Lake Qui nault, and ON F covers the south shore. Other major landow ners i n the area i nclude the Washi ng ton Depar t ment of Nat u ral Resou rces and large pr ivate i ndust r ial timberland ow ners, such as Rayonier and Weyerhaeuser. Lake Quinault Area T he Lake Qui nault area i ncludes the com mu nities of Qui nault, Neilton, and A manda Park, i n the southwester n por tion of the Oly mpic Peni nsula. T he th ree com mu nities are approximately 40 miles nor th of Hoquiam, along the wester n loop of Highway 101, and about 30 miles east of the Pacific Coast, i n G rays Harbor Cou nt y, Washi ng ton. Refer red to as the Qui nault Rai n Forest, the area receives an average of about 140 i nches of rai n a year. Addi ng to the scenic beaut y of the area is Lake Qui nault, a nat u ral lake created by glacial r u noff f rom the Oly mpic Mou nt ai ns. T he 19 6 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III tow n of Qui nault is on the south shore of Lake Qui nault; Neilton is about 5 miles south of the lake along Highway 101; and A manda Park is along the nor thwest end of the lake. A manda Park lies withi n the bou ndar ies of the QI R, although it is considered a nontribal community. All three com mu nities are u ni ncor porated, and are withi n 10 miles of one another, shar i ng ser vices and resou rces. For example, the school (k i ndergar ten th rough 12 th g rade [K-12]) is located i n A manda Park, and the health cli nic is i n Neilton. Residents consider Qui nault, Neilton, and A manda Park to be part of one community. Census dat a, collected at the level of BGAs, were used to measu re changes i n socioeconomic conditions bet ween 1990 and 2000. For this st udy, the BGA is defi ned as Qui nault-Neilton-Weather wax (BGA 6109), which i ncludes the com mu nities of Qui nault and Neilton. A manda Park, however, is located withi n the QI R (BGA 6101). Although it is possible to break the BGA dow n i nto i ndividual block g roups and look only at the A manda Park block g roup, the bou ndar ies of this block g roup were changed bet ween 1990 and 2000, mak i ng compar isons bet ween years dif ficult at this level. Thus, for the purposes of this case study, qualita- tive dat a f rom i nter views i nclude changes that have t aken place i n the area as a whole (i ncludi ng A manda Park), whereas quantit ative census st atistics will only i nclude the com mu nities of Qui nault and Neilton (BGA 6109). T he th ree com mu nities abut the southwester n por tion of ON F. Qui nault is su r rou nded by the ON F to the south, east, and west, and is bou nded by Lake Qui nault to the nor th (which is u nder the ju r isdiction of the QI N ). T he Qui nault Ranger St ation, which is now par t of the Pacific Ranger Dist r ict, is located at Qui nault. Oly mpic National Forest su r rou nds Neilton on all sides. A manda Park, as mentioned previously, lies withi n the bou ndar ies of the QI R, and borders Oly mpic National Park to the nor th. T he nor th shore of Lake Qui nault and the adjoi ni ng uplands are par t of Oly mpic National Park. Other major landow ners i n the area i nclude the QI N, which ow ns or manages land dow nst ream of Lake Qui nault; the Washi ng ton Depar t ment of Nat u ral Resou rces, which also manages timberlands; and pr ivate i ndust r ial timberland ow ners, such as Rayonier, Weyerhaueser, and Mer r ill-R i ng. Quilcene Quilcene is a small com mu nit y of 375 located along the Hood R iver Canal adjacent to the easter n bou ndar ies of the ON F, on the Oly mpic Peni nsula. Quilcene?s dow ntow n core lies on Highway 101, a well-t raveled tou r ist route, 25 miles south of the cou nt y seat, Por t Tow nsend, 73 miles nor th of the st ate capit al, Oly mpia, and less than 2 hou rs f rom Seat tle. Expandi ng out f rom the dow ntow n core are limited commercial and industrial areas, a public school, and residential development to the north, southeast, and east. For the pu r poses of this st udy, census BGA dat a are used to descr ibe Quilcene. Block G roup Agg regation 6307 i ncludes the dow ntow n com mercial core, mar i ne i ndust r ial areas along the Hood R iver Canal, and residential areas close to dow ntow n. T he BGA 6307 closely approximates the village of Quilcene bou ndar ies est ablished for plan ni ng pu r poses by the Jefferson Cou nt y Plan ni ng Depar t ment and reflects a nar row defi nition of the com mu nit y. Dependi ng on thei r af filiations or occupations, area residents var iously thi n k of Quilcene as busi ness core, fi re dist r ict, post al code, or school dist r ict bou ndar ies. Fi re dist r ict, school dist r ict, and ZI P code bou ndar ies are more expansive and i nclude por tions of BGAs 6308 and 6304. Census i nfor mation for BGAs 6304 and 6308 is not i ncluded i n this repor t; however, this case st udy repor t d raws its i nfor mation f rom and descr ibes a com mu nit y that encompasses this broader area of roughly 84 square miles that is sparsely populated. T he broader area, as defi ned by ZI P code 98376, was populated by 1,644 at the time of the 1990 census and i ncreased to 1,767 i n 2000. T he area that is BGA 6308, East Quilcene ?Dabob ? Camp Discover y? Coyle, i ncludes the people ? about 400 i n 2000 ? on the Bolton and T Peni nsulas. T his area?s small but g rowi ng population has, for the most par t, lit tle relationship with the st udy area. Block g roup area 6304, Leland, population approximately 800, is nor th and nor thwest of the dow ntow n area. Leland consists of old homesteads in pasturelands adjacent to timber lands. Histor ically, there was a tight social and economic relationship bet ween the Leland population and Quilcene. 197 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Mount Hood National Forest Case-Study Communities Upper Hood River Valley T he com mu nit y of Upper Hood R iver Valley ( U H RV ) consists of an agg regation of t wo BGAs (3602 and 2603) located i n Hood R iver Cou nt y on the nor th side of Mou nt Hood and 10 to 20 miles south of the Colu mbia R iver. T here are no census places1 i n the U H RV BGAs, and the nearest census place is the cit y of Hood R iver. T he combi ned BGAs consist of 19,968 acres of pr ivate and public lands, i ncludi ng national forest and cou nt y forest land. Roughly t wo -thi rds of the area of the combi ned BGAs is national forest. T he 2000 population for the combi ned U H RV BGAs was 4,288 people. Pr ivate land i n the U H RV consists of residential, ag r i - cult u ral (i ncludi ng orchards, forests, and some livestock), and some commercial land. Most of the commercial and gover n ment ser vices offered withi n the U H RV are located i n the tow n of Parkdale. T he pr imar y school, fi re depar t - ment, several social ser vices of fices, t wo g rocer y stores, a few rest au rants, a museu m, several shops, and a bed and break fast (B&B) are located along or withi n a couple blocks of a mai n st reet i n Parkdale. Other B&Bs, a gas st ation, convenience store, cou nt r y store, and a few rest au rants are located i n other par ts of the U H RV, i ncludi ng the hamlet of Mou nt Hood. Mou nt Hood Meadows Sk i Resor t and Cooper Spu r Mou nt ai n Resor t are located i n the high elevations of the U H RV area, above residential and ag r icult u ral areas. Lands withi n the U H RV and Hood R iver Cou nt y are withi n the ceded lands of the Confederated Tr ibes of the War m Spr i ngs. I n addition to t r ibe members comi ng to the area to engage in traditional harvesting, hunting, and fishi ng practices, the Confederated Tr ibes of the War m Spr i ngs is the lead ad mi nist rator of a Bon neville Power Ad mi nist ration (BPA) -f u nded prog ram for anad romous fish conser vation and rei nt roduction. A fish acclimation st ation and a recently relocated fisher ies of fice are located withi n the U H RV. At 533 square miles, Hood R iver Cou nt y is the second smallest cou nt y i n Oregon. Approximately 75 percent of the cou nt y is u nder some for m of public ow nership, the major - it y bei ng the Mou nt Hood National Forest ( USDA FS 1996). Residents of U H RV are 10 to 20 miles f rom the cou nt y seat i n Hood R iver. T he 2000 population of Hood R iver Cou nt y was 20,411. With a population of 5,831 ( USBC 2004), Hood R iver is the largest population center i n the cou nt y and offers com mercial ser vices, as well as medical, ban k i ng, and governmental services. The primary industries in Hood R iver Cou nt y i nclude ag r icult u re, timber, hyd roelect r ic production, and recreation. Hood R iver Cou nt y is one of the few cou nties i n Oregon that ow ns and manages for - est land as an i ncome sou rce. Some of the approximately 31,000 acres of cou nt y forest land are withi n or adjacent to the U H RV. One i nter viewee mentioned that for some time, years ago, the Hood R iver Ranger Dist r ict managed the cou nt y forest land. T he land is now u nder the management of the cou nt y forester. Based on i nfor mation f rom a cou nt y supervisor, about half of the county budget is made up of revenues from the county forest.2 The county is also in the process of pu rchasi ng forest land i n easter n Oregon cou n - ties to manage as a revenue sou rce for Hood R iver Cou nt y. I nter viewees who were asked to com ment on the delimitation of the community unit of analysis described differences among the lower, middle, and upper Hood R iver valley. Differ i ng population densities, zoni ng reg ulations, and elevations contribute to their distinction as separate com mu nities. For i nst ance, the U H RV was character ized as being at higher elevations that affected orchards differently than happens at the lower elevation. Zoni ng reg ulations i n the U H RV also set it apar t f rom the middle and lower valley because such reg ulations have tended to keep orchards relatively large and have limited housing development. 1 Cen su s places a re i ncor por ated places a nd cen su s- desig nated places. 2 A Forest Ser v ice water shed a ssessment st ated t hat t he revenue f rom cou nt y forest, i n 1996, re presented about 12.5 percent of t he cou nt y budget ( USDA FS 1996). 198 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Villages of Mount Hood From Brighton to Rhododendron T he Villages of Mou nt Hood i n Clackamas Cou nt y i nclude the populated area along St ate Highway 26, bet ween Br ight - wood and R hododend ron, begi n ni ng 41 miles east of dow n - tow n Por tland. T hi r teen miles east of Sandy, the st udy area is defi ned by BGA 2842 that i ncludes the st r i ng of com - mu nities i n the nar row Sandy R iver valley: Br ight wood, Wildwood, Wem me, Welches, Zigzag, and R hododend ron. The study area is bounded to the north, east, and south by the Mou nt Hood National Forest encompassi ng por tions of several t r ibut ar ies to the Sandy R iver i ncludi ng the Sal mon and Zigzag R ivers and Alder, Wildcat, and Boulder Creeks. T he Bull Ru n Watershed Management Unit, Mou nt Hood Wilder ness and Sal mon-Huck leber r y Wilder ness areas of the Hood National Forest are adjacent to the st udy area i n the Mou nt Hood National Forest. I n addition, there are several blocks of land u nder Bu reau of Land Management jurisdiction dispersed across the study area. The population at the time of the 2000 census was 3,670. Although residents ag reed Br ight wood for med a suit able wester n bou ndar y for the st udy area, many wanted to extend the bou ndar y west to i nclude Alder Creek and Cher r y ville. Because of census block g roup bou ndar ies this was not practical, and the areas are not i ncluded i n this st udy. On the easter n f ront, there was a divergence of opi n - ion about whether Gover n ment Camp should be i ncluded. All of the com mu nities, i ncludi ng Gover n ment Camp, are ?east cou nt y? and u nder the same u mbrella of Clackamas Cou nt y gover n ment. Fu r ther more, residents and proper ties are i n the same school and fi re dist r icts, and busi nesses have organized u nder one chamber of com merce. Busi ness i nterests, i n par ticular, see Gover n ment Camp as par t of the Villages of Mount Hood community. Movi ng west to east up the Villages of Mou nt Hood, communities transition from more strictly commuting to more strictly recreation-based communities and economies. Although many residents said Gover n ment Camp was par t of the Villages of Mount Hood community, they character- ized it as a ver y different com mu nit y with a u nique set of issues. T he con nection bet ween the Br ight wood th rough R hododend ron area with Gover n ment Camp is i ndisput able, but issues of economics and politics are unique and distinct, especially with regard to the Forest Ser vice. Key differ - ences are Gover n ment Camp?s st r ict reliance on tou r ism and recreational uses of Mount Hood and the intensive depen- dency that results from being surrounded by Forest Service land. Additionally, Gover n ment Camp for med an Urban Renewal Dist r ict i n the early 1990s and works di rectly with Clackamas Cou nt y Development Agency; this f u r ther separates it and the rest of the corridor communities. In the end, Gover n ment Camp?s character istics and its issues with the Forest Ser vice are disti nct enough to war rant excludi ng it from the Villages of Mount Hood for the purposes of this case study. T he Villages of Mou nt Hood?s development or igi nated with the i nitial A nglo -Eu ropean set tlement of Oregon. T he com mu nit y is located on what was par t of the Barlow Road near the end of the Oregon Trail. A small nu mber of individuals settled the area, and it remained a small enclave of communities on the travel route to Portland and into the Willamet te Valley. T he route th rough the Villages of Mou nt Hood later became St ate Highway 26, a major t ranspor t a - tion route over Mou nt Hood to the War m Spr i ngs Reser - vation, Mad ras, Bend, and other desti nations i n Cent ral Oregon. Additionally, Highway 26 has long ser ved as the route for visitors traveling from the Portland metropolitan area to desti nations i n the Mou nt Hood National Forest, i n - cludi ng Timberli ne Lodge or one of the nu merous sk i areas, lakes, or t rails. Although many local busi nesses consider the area merely a transportation corridor, there is a diversity of residents with var yi ng perspectives, i ncludi ng those who consider the Villages of Mount Hood a mountain commu- nit y.? From west to east the i ndividual tow ns are as follows: Brightwood is character ized by the predomi nance of riverside rural residential development. There are a small number of businesses serving the local community, includ- i ng a store, t aver n, and post of fice. Wildwood encompasses a small residential develop- ment on the nor th side of St ate Highway 26. T here are a small nu mber of busi nesses on the highway, pr imar ily ser vi ng tou r ists, i ncludi ng an RV park, rest au rant, and visitor center. 19 9 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies Wemme consists of a concentration of commercial busi nesses on the highway and a mix of residential and seasonal housi ng off the highway. Busi nesses i nclude sev - eral eati ng and d r i n k i ng est ablish ments, a fly fishi ng shop, hardware store, and a few other basic goods and ser vice businesses serving the local population and tourists. Welches also consists of a concentration of com- mercial busi nesses on the highway and several t y pes of housi ng developments. T he com mercial area, with a gas st ation, large g rocer y store, post of fice, and coffee shop, is the primary commercial hub serving area residents. The com mu nit y i ncludes a golf cou rse and resor t with a mix of housing developments ranging from year-round residences and rentals, to time shares and a hotel. Zigzag has a very limited number of services, and there are a nu mber of residential proper ties off the highway. Faubion is a residential neighborhood adjacent to Zigzag. T here is a Forest Ser vice ranger dist r ict of fice i n Zigzag. Rhododendron is character ized by a limited nu mber of tourism and recreation businesses, including a grocery store and rest au rant. Forest Ser vice lease proper ties ? seasonal housi ng? extend east ward f rom R hododend ron toward Gover n ment Camp. Greater Estacada Est acada is located on St ate Highway 211/224, 34 miles f rom dow ntow n Por tland, Oregon, at the foot of the Cascade Mou nt ai n Range. T he g reater Est acada area st raddles the ?Wild and Scenic? Clackamas R iver and is adjacent to the Mou nt Hood National Forest. Located i n Clackamas Cou nt y, the g reater Est acada area i ncludes seven BGAs ?2822, 2823, 2826, 2838, 2839, 2840, and 2846 ?with a tot al population of 9,315, i n 2000. Block g roup area 2838 i ncludes the i ncor porated cit y of Est acada and outlyi ng populated areas roughly 1 mile nor th, east, and southeast of the cit y. Two BGAs, 2823 and 2822, are nor thwest of Est acada and i nclude areas west of St ate Highway 224/211 up to Eagle Creek. T he th ree easterly BGAs, 2836, 2839, and 2846, abut the Mou nt Hood National Forest. T he BGA 2840 is al most wholly withi n the national forest and encompasses popular destinations in the Mou nt Hood National Forest, i ncludi ng Table Rock, Bull of the Woods, and por tions of the Sal mon and Huck leber r y Wilder ness A reas, as well as Timothy Lake and Bagby Hot Spr i ngs. Tens of thousands of acres are ow ned and managed by timber companies i ncludi ng Long view Fiber and Wey - erhaeuser. Several thousand acres are managed by the state, Clackamas Cou nt y, and the U.S. Depar t ment of the I nter ior Bu reau of Land Management (BLM). Unless other wise specified, Est acada refers to the g reater Est acada area. T he cit y of Est acada i ncludes a nu mber of well- est ab - lished busi nesses, i ncludi ng several ban ks, g rocer y stores, quick markets, rest au rants, chu rches, and a small nu mber of other service and retail businesses. Areas outlying the city are sparsely populated agricultural and timber lands and a limited amount of commercial and industrial development. T he cit y ser ves as the com mercial hub for the g reater Es - tacada area, and it is the last stop for goods and services for people t raveli ng east i nto the Mou nt Hood National Forest. I n 2000, the cit y of Est acada repor ted a population of 2,371; the other 75 percent of the st udy area population ? 6,944 people ?lived i n the remai ni ng por tions of BGA 2838 and the six other BGAs. Most respondents descr ibe the com mu nit y as an extensive area and the BGAs encompass most of it. This study does not include any area north and north- west of Eagle Creek, such as Bar ton, and i ncludes only a por tion of Eagle Creek. A rg uably, Eagle Creek could be i ncluded i n the st udy area; it is not a separate and disti nct com mu nit y with regard to its relationship with the Est acada economy and the national forest. Most residents and county of ficials defi ne the com mu nit y as the Est acada school dist r ict, and many people who live i n the outlyi ng areas consider themselves Est acada residents. Klamath National Forest Case-Study Communities Scott Valley T he Scot t Valley lies i n cent ral Sisk iyou Cou nt y about 35 miles south of the Oregon border. T he nor th-south- or iented valley is about 30 miles long and 7 miles wide, and is su r rou nded by mou nt ai ns. Most t raf fic i nto and out of the valley is over a mid- elevation mou nt ai n pass to Yreka, 15 miles nor th of the valley on the I nterst ate 5 cor r idor. Yreka 200 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III is the largest ser vice center i n Sisk iyou Cou nt y, and is the cou nt y seat. T he fif th-largest cou nt y i n Califor nia, Sisk iyou Cou nt y is also one of its most sparsely populated. T he cou nt y is among the Nor thwest Forest Plan locations most remote from major urban areas. Among the mountains around the Scott Valley are the Tr i nit y Alps Wilder ness, the Russian Wilder ness, and the Marble Mou nt ai n Wilder ness. T he Tr i nit y Alps Wilder ness lies across the bou ndar ies of the K lamath, Shast a, and Six R ivers National Forests beyond the valley?s souther n end. T he other t wo wilder ness areas lie withi n the wester n half of the 1.7-million-acre K lamath National Forest, which cu r ves arou nd the valley?s souther n and wester n flan ks at elevations rangi ng f rom 3,200 to over 8,000 feet ( USDA FS 1997). Sections of BLM land are scat tered across the lower, d r ier mou nt ai ns that make up the Scot t Valley?s easter n flan k. T he view across the valley is pastoral, with i r r igated past u re on the flat, g reen valley floor backed by range upon range of r ugged mou nt ai ns to the west. T he Scot t Valley com mu nit y area was identified by area residents as i ncludi ng the geog raphic extent of the valley up to the su r rou ndi ng mou nt ai n peaks. T he enti re nor th-south st r i ng of valley tow ns ?For t Jones, G reenview, Et na, and Callahan ?were seen as essential components of the valley com mu nit y. Cheeseville, although identified on the census map, effectively no longer exists. T he Quar tz Valley-Muggi nsville- Oro Fi no Valley to the west was considered by i nter viewees to be par t of the Scot t Valley com mu nit y. Residents suggested that the headwaters of the Nor th Fork of the Sal mon R iver, par ticularly the Saw yer?s Bar area, also be i ncluded, as they believed that residents i n that area sought most of thei r ser vices withi n the Scot t Val - ley. However, owi ng to the com mu nit y deli neation protocol adopted by the monitor i ng prog ram, the fi nal Scot t Valley community delineation also includes large tracts of land and census- desig nated places that were not considered by resi - dents to be par t of the com mu nit y. T hese i nclude Cecilville, Summerville, and parts of the Salmon Mountains to the south, as well as Scot t Bar and K lamath R iver com mu nities such as Horse Creek and Steel head to the nor th. For t Jones at the Scot t Valley?s nor ther n end, and Et na at its southwest edge, are the largest tow ns withi n the valley. For t Jones ( pop. 660), has several pr imar y schools, housi ng, a few rest au rants and stores, a nu mber of other busi nesses, a museu m of local histor y, and a Forest Ser vice dist r ict of fice. Et na ( pop. 781) holds histor ical homes, a small dow ntow n with a nu mber of busi nesses, a public librar y, and pr imar y and high schools. A Forest Ser vice dist r ict of fice i n Et na was closed du r i ng the st udy per iod. G reenview ( pop. 200), Muggi nsville, and Callahan are smaller villages scat tered withi n the valley. Saw yer?s Bar is a ti ny, remote com mu nit y i n the r ugged mou nt ai ns to the west, along the Nor th Fork of the Sal mon R iver. T he village of Saw yer?s Bar has no busi nesses, but ret ai ns a post of fice and a small Forest Ser vice work st ation that hosts a fi refighti ng crew. A school i n the Saw yer?s Bar area closed du r i ng the st udy per iod. T he other small tow ns withi n the BGA were not identi - fied by Scot t Valley residents as par t of thei r com mu nit y. St akeholders and residents of these areas were therefore not sought for i nter views, although they are represented i n the census statistics. The valley is part of the ancestral territory of the Shasta Tr ibe, which today i ncludes about 1,500 people. About half of the t r ibe members live withi n 100 miles of Yreka. T he other half reside i n Oregon or Washi ng ton. Most families i nclude at least one member who still lives i n ancest ral ter - ritory, and other members return often to visit or for tribal gather i ngs. Many t r ibe members conti nue lifest yles with a close connection to the land. Gold mining, agriculture, logging, and ranching have been the area?s pr imar y uses si nce W hite set tlers entered arou nd the 1830s. T his histor y remai ns alive, with descend- ents of pioneering settler families still prominent in the area. Gold brought many of the or igi nal W hite set tlers to the Scot t Valley, and was mi ned i n hard rock mi nes as well as the Scot t R iver and its t r ibut ar ies. Extensive d redger t aili ngs f rom these activities remai n at the valley?s souther n end. T he floor of the valley histor ically has been dedicated to ranchi ng, with a domi nant presence today of i r r igated ag r icult u re. Cat tle past u res and i r r igated alfalfa cover most of the valley floor. T he alfalfa hay is fed to local cat tle, or is sold and apparently t r ucked th roughout Califor nia and the West. Most of the remai ni ng bot tomland is used to 201 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies past u re cat tle, some of which are su m mered on the K lamath National Forest?s g razi ng allot ments. Sugar beets and other crops may also be far med on the valley floor. For 150 years, loggi ng also occu r red on the slopes su r rou ndi ng the valley. Pr ivately ow ned com mercial forest lands lie bet ween the valley bot tom and the national forest land along the valley?s wester n and souther n extents. Most of these lands are ow ned by t wo com mercial timber com - panies: Timber Products (for merly Sier ra Pacific) and Fr uit G rowers Supply. A large Oregon-based com mercial timber g rower (Rosebu rg Forest Products) ow ns a much smaller land base withi n the valley. Timber har vest withi n the area is supplemented by smaller pr ivate landow ners ( USDA FS 1997). Small-claim mining, ranching, and logging, all his- tor ically cent ral to the area?s economy, are occupations ent aili ng i ndividual r isk and requi r i ng personal i nitiative and hard physical labor. These are traits valued in the Scott Valley today. Inhabitants of the valley adhere to a tradition of r ugged i ndividualit y and i ndependence. I nter viewee com ments made it clear that hard work and i ndividual i ni - tiative are st rongly valued, with personal f reedom perhaps most highly pr ized. Despite the economic and political pressures associ- ated with livi ng i n a relatively remote, r u ral com mu nit y, residents say that they would much prefer to live i n the Scot t Valley than elsewhere. Ranchers and loggers cite multiple generations of thei r families closely tied to the land, with no desi re to leave the woods or the valley. Tr ibe members cite thousands of years of local residence, and of accumulating a deep understanding of and connection to its natural rhythms and processes. Residents express a feeli ng that the valley is a st rongly r u ral place, one with a power f ul and livi ng con nection to its history. They value the intergenerational traditions of the valley, and express reg ret at u rbanization and other i nt r usive changes. Most want to see thei r com mu nit y?s rural culture protected. The valley seems removed from the faster- changi ng world beyond the su r rou ndi ng mou nt ai ns, and residents want to keep it that way. Butte Valley T he But te Valley is an ag r icult u ral area i n nor theaster n Sisk iyou Cou nt y adjoi ni ng the Oregon border. T he area is bordered by forest and range lands i n mixed pr ivate and public ow nership. T he valley and su r rou ndi ng areas i nclude the But te Valley National G rassland (ad mi nistered by the K lamath National Forest), the Lower K lamath National Wildlife Ref uge, the But te Valley Wildlife A rea, BLM land (ad mi nistered by the Reddi ng u nit), and i ndust r ial timberland. T he Goosenest Ranger Dist r ict of the K lamath National Forest for ms the mou nt ai nous border of the But te Valley to the west and south. Large acquisitions of pr ivate land by the K lamath National Forest th rough exchanges or donations occu r red f rom 1937 u ntil 1951. A por tion of the But te Valley is i n the Goosenest Adaptive Management A rea, desig nated by the Nor thwest Forest Plan with objectives related to forest health, late- successional forest habitat, and commercial timber produc- tion. T he forested lands have histor ically provided g razi ng and timber-related products to the local economy. Major ag r icult u ral crops du r i ng the per iod of review, about 1990 u ntil the present, have i ncluded hay, pot atoes, and st raw - ber r ies. T he But te Valley subbasi n is a closed hyd rologic system. All water d rai ns i nto the g rou nd or to Meiss Lake, and does not flow to the K lamath R iver u nder nor mal conditions. T he Upper Dor r is Census Block G roup defi ned the But te Valley Com mu nit y for pu r poses of this st udy. T he city of Dorris is the only incorporated community in the But te Valley, and one of ni ne i ncor porated com mu nities i n Sisk iyou Cou nt y. It cont ai ns a large component of the population of the area. Dor r is is about 20 miles south of K lamath Falls, Oregon, and 50 miles nor th of Weed, Califor nia, on Highway 97. Macdoel, Mou nt Hebron, Ten nant and Bray are u ni ncor porated com mu nities withi n the But te Valley area. Ten nant and Bray are not withi n this st udy area because the bou ndar ies of the census block group, selected and validated locally as the most representa- tive of the But te Valley, does not i nclude them. Fif teen people f rom the But te Valley area were i nter viewed to obtain the information presented in this report. 202 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III As an i ncor porated cit y, Dor r is has elected of ficials and a t ax base to provide ser vices to its citizens. Macdoel and Mount Hebron are small and dispersed enough that they do not have any organized ser vices specifically for thei r area, such as a com mu nit y ser vice dist r ict for water and sewage. Fi re protection is provided by t wo volu nteer fi re depar t - ments, one serving the entire area outside of Dorris. There is a health cli nic i n Dor r is. A u nified school dist r ict ser ves the enti re area. K lamath Falls, Oregon, is the regional center for manufacturing, professional services, and shopping. T he area su r rou ndi ng the But te Valley has been logged for about 100 years. At one time there were several saw - mills operati ng i n the area. W hen long-time residents were g rowi ng up i n the area, there was a saw mill i n Dor r is; i n the 1950s and 1960s, the mill was the major employer i n tow n. Although much of the forest r y work was seasonal, the forests supplied work that suppor ted families. Workers and thei r families were resident i n the area and used local ser vices. T his mill repor tedly closed dow n about 40 years ago. Si nce then, logs have been t r ucked out of the area. Two small mills remai n i n the area. One is a moldi ng mill, i n operation si nce 1924. T his facilit y is an i ndust r y leader i n the United St ates. T he other remai ni ng mill operation went th rough t wo previous i ncar nations as a moldi ng busi ness. T he last moldi ng busi ness operated f rom 1986 u ntil 1997 before converting to the current peeler core business. Agriculture forms the largest employment sector in the But te Valley. T here is a st rong ranchi ng component, and farming has also been important historically. The potato industry thrived in the area for several decades. Most recently, st rawber r ies have replaced pot atoes. T he But te Valley is par t of the ancest ral ter r itor y of the Shast a Tr ibe. However, few t r ibe members live there today. Mid- Klamath T he Mid-K lamath com mu nit y lies i n nor thwester n Sisk iyou Cou nt y and encompasses the area bou nded by the K lamath R iver to the south, the Oregon border to the nor th, and the tow ns of K lamath R iver upst ream and Happy Camp dow nst ream (all to the west of I nterst ate 5). Although the area is large geographically, the total population is small (1,660 people i n 2000) because much of it lies across the K lamath National Forest. I n addition to the tow ns of K lamath R iver and Happy Camp, the com mu nit y i ncludes the small tow ns of Horse Creek, Hambu rg, Seiad Valley, and Scot t Bar. Scot t Bar lies on the Scot t R iver, a shor t dist ance above its i ntersection with the K lamath R iver. T he other tow ns lie along the K lamath R iver and Highway 96, the main transportation corridor through the community. Highway 96 follows the r iver f rom I nterst ate 5 to the east, to Highway 299 to the southwest where it ends roughly 25 miles inland from the coast. The Mid-Klamath community is the most remote of the three case communities discussed here. The entire area is unincorporated. Happy Camp is by far the largest tow n along the r iver, cont ai ni ng 38 percent of the Mid-K lamath popula - tion. The remainder of the population is for the most part concent rated arou nd the other small tow ns that compose the com mu nit y, each of which have a few hu nd red residents. W hat is remarkable about these tow ns is that they are completely su r rou nded by the vast wester n por tion of the K lamath National Forest. T he com mu nit y bet ween Happy Camp and Hambu rg cont ai ns roughly 95 percent public land managed by the K lamath National Forest. Bet ween Hambu rg and K lamath R iver, a checkerboard pat ter n of land ow nership prevails, with much of the pr ivate proper t y held by pr ivate i ndust r ial forest landow ners such as Fr uit G rowers Supply Company. Com mu nit y residents live i n the nar row K lamath R iver valley or along its major t r ibut ar ies (e.g., I ndian Creek, Seiad Creek). T hey are su r rou nded by the steep forested slopes of the Sisk iyou and K lamath mountain ranges. T he Mid-K lamath com mu nit y lies withi n the ances - t ral ter r itor y of the Kar u k and Shast a Tr ibes. T he Kar u k ancest ral ter r itor y i ncludes the K lamath R iver area bet ween Seiad Valley to the east and Bluff Creek to the west, and the Shasta ancestral territory includes the areas east of Seiad Valley ( USDA FS 1999: 4 -1). T he fi rst wave of W hite set - tlers entered the area arou nd 1850 i n search of gold ( USDA FS 1997: 3-23). Small mi ni ng camps sprang up along the Mid-K lamath R iver and its t r ibut ar ies. Mi ners searched for gold as well as copper and silver. By the early 1900s, mi ni ng had st ar ted to dimi nish, and by 1920 it had decli ned 203 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies sig nificantly ( USDA FS 1997: 3- 66). Today gold mi ni ng occurs on a small scale, and much of it is recreational in nature. Com mercial timber har vesti ng began i n the com mu nit y arou nd 1950 ( USDA FS 1997: 3- 66). From the 1950s u ntil 1990, timber domi nated the local economy. Much of the com mu nit y?s road system was built du r i ng this per iod ( USDA FS 1999: 4 -3). Far mi ng and ranchi ng have only been practiced on a small scale by a small number of Mid- K lamath residents owi ng to a shor t age of flat land i n the region and the dif ficult y i n clear i ng it. T he exception to this has been i n the Beaver Creek watershed above the K lamath R iver where cat tle and sheep g razi ng occu r red on a large scale along the Sisk iyou Crest st ar ti ng i n the early 1900s ( USDA FS 1996: 4 -13 ? 4 -14). Si nce the 1940s, g razi ng i n that drainage has decreased substantially. Happy Camp is the largest tow n i n the Mid-K lamath region. It cont ai ns several stores, a few rest au rants, th ree or four motels, an elementary school and a high school, a health cli nic, a small museu m focusi ng on Kar u k t r ibal cult u re, a librar y, a Forest Ser vice dist r ict of fice, and the Kar u k t r ibal gover n ment of fices. T he Kar u k Tr ibe has no land base in the form of a reservation. Coos Bay BLM District Communities Greater Reedsport For pu r poses of this st udy, G reater Reedspor t as a com mu - nit y consists of the th ree tow ns of Reedspor t, Gardi ner, and Wi nchester Bay. Reedspor t sits on the cent ral Oregon coast on the wester n edge of Douglas Cou nt y along Highway 101, about 75 miles f rom Rosebu rg, the cou nt y seat. Located at the mouth of the Umpqua and Smith R ivers, this com mu - nity is bounded by a hodgepodge of county, state, and federal forest lands such as the Siuslaw National Forest and the Coos Bay Dist r ict of the BLM. Two small, u ni ncor po - rated tow ns border Reedspor t to the nor th (Gardi ner) and the south ( Wi nchester Bay). As of 2000, these th ree com mu nities, which constit ute the g reater Reedspor t A rea, had a population of 5,545 ( U.S. Census Bu reau 2004). Disti nctly different com mu nities, these th ree tow ns have a histor ical i nterdependence, which previously helped sust ai n a certain level of economic viability. Historically, both Reedspor t and Gardi ner have been timber tow ns whose economic prosper it y has fluct uated with the whims of the lu mber market. Ser vi ng as an ent rance to the Oregon Du nes National Recreation A rea, Wi nchester Bay has shif ted f rom a com mercial fishi ng area to a tou r ist desti nation site. As one respondent said, ?We all depend on each other, or there?s no way that we could be autonomous.? I n fact, Reedspor t and Wi nchester Bay share a chamber of com - merce. Spu r red by the completion of the rail road i n 1916, War ren P. Reed fou nded Reedspor t i n 1919 and ser ved as its fi rst mayor. Du r i ng the 1920s, several can ner ies, t wo saw mills, and a creamer y anchored the tow n?s economy (Beck ham 1986). Fi nished i n 1936, the Umpqua R iver Br idge li n ked Gardi ner and Reedspor t, as well as a ser ies of bridges across coastal estuaries that increased access to the area. T he i ncrease i n demand for timber followi ng World War II facilit ated a loggi ng boom and, i n t u r n, local economic g row th. Greater Myrtle Point Located at the ju nct u re of the Middle and South Forks of the Coquille R iver, the Cit y of My r tle Poi nt ser ves as a mi - croeconomic center for the far souther n end of the Coquille Valley. Residents f rom the outlyi ng set tlements of Br idge, A rago, Dora, Fai r view, Sitk u m, and Broadbent send thei r children to school, shop, and do business in Myrtle Point. My r tle Poi nt, Powers, and Coquille for m a socioeconomic u nit i n the mi nds of many i n habit ants, who refer to that por - tion of Coos Cou nt y as ?South Cou nt y.? Some people also i nclude Bandon i n South Cou nt y, but its coast al location on the mouth of the Coquille R iver provides it with a ver y different set of economic options from those available to the inland settlements. Of the th ree case-st udy com mu nities i n the Coos Bay area, Myrtle Point is the most remote. It is situated roughly 20 miles i nland f rom Highway 101, the major t ranspor t ation cor r idor con necti ng Oregon?s coast al tow ns. Roughly 60 miles of wi ndi ng mou nt ai n road separate My r tle Poi nt f rom the I nterst ate 5 cor r idor. T he U.S. census recorded 4,927 i n habit ants i n G reater My r tle Poi nt i n 2000. Most people i n the souther n Coquille 20 4 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Valley reside i n the lowlands along the Coquille R iver and its t r ibut ar ies. T he Coquille R iver uplands are used primarily for timber production and are sparsely populated. Forests are an impor t ant feat u re of the Coquille watershed, cover i ng roughly 70 percent of its area (Oregon Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re 2002: 7). Timber companies ow n roughly 40 percent of the land i n the watershed, pr ivate noni ndust r ial landow ners ow n 30 percent, and the remai ni ng 30 percent is i n public ow nership, pr imar ily Bu reau of Land Management and Forest Ser vice. Por tions of the Coquille I ndian Nation?s t r ibal forest also fall withi n the Coquille watershed. Although people living in and around Myrtle Point have access to many basic businesses, such as retail stores, ban ks, gas st ations, and auto repai r facilities, residents do much of their shopping and business in the neighboring tow ns of Bandon, Coquille, and G reater Coos Bay. Many residents com mute to jobs i n these th ree tow ns as well. Despite its small size, My r tle Poi nt offers a range of social ser vices, i ncludi ng a fi re depar t ment, a police depar t ment, an ambulance ser vice, a medical cli nic, K-12 public school - i ng, t wo ban ks, a public librar y, and a ger iat r ic care facilit y. Eu ro -A mer icans set tled i n the area of My r tle Poi nt begi n ni ng i n the 1850s. T he cit y of My r tle Poi nt was i ncor porated i n 1887 ( USDI BLM 1998: 40). Ag r icult u re and livestock production domi nated the local economy i n the late 1800s, i ncludi ng cheese and but ter expor ts to the San Francisco area (M PCPC 2000: 8). T he i nt roduction of splash dams i n the region i n the early 1900s opened up the area to i ndust r ial-scale loggi ng operations, which domi - nated the local economy u ntil the 1990s. T he Coquille R iver suppor ted an active com mercial sal mon fisher y du r i ng the late 1800s and early 1900s. Fish landi ng dat a i ndicate that fisher men caught 120,000 coho ( Oncorhynchus k isutch) i n 1908 (Hei k k ila 1999: 5). I n cont rast, an Oregon Depar t ment of Fish and Wildlife su r vey that took place bet ween 1990 and 1996 estimated the nu mber of coho spaw ners i n the Coquille R iver at 3,000 to 15,000 (Hei k k ila 1999: 5). It would seem that the r iver has exper ienced a d ramatic d rop i n its capacit y to suppor t a coho sal mon population. T he sit uation for spr i ng chi nook sal mon ( Oncorhynchus tsha w ytscha ) is even worse, with an estimated 400 spr i ng chi nook enter i ng the watershed (Hei k k ila 1999: 5). Stocks of fall chi nook sal mon, coast al cut th roat t rout ( Salmo clark ia ), wi nter steel head ( Oncorhyn - chus myk iss ), and rai nbow t rout ( Salmo gairdneri) remai n relatively st rong, albeit li kely lower than histor ical levels (Hei k k ila 1999: 5). I n 2004, timber production and processi ng, as well as livestock and dai r y operations remai ned impor t ant elements of My r tle Poi nt?s economy. However, timber no longer domi nates the economy as it did du r i ng the 20th cent u r y. McKen zie Forest Products, a small local busi ness with 50 employees, remains one of the larger employers in the area, but many of the small family- ow ned mills, g y ppo loggi ng out fits, and associated busi nesses, shut dow n per manently i n the early 1990s. T he biggest employer i n the area is the My r tle Poi nt School Dist r ict with 130 jobs, followed by the My r tle Poi nt Care Center, which has 50 employees. T he next largest employers i nclude a local g rocer y store with 35 employees and a health cli nic with 20 employees. T he Coos Cou nt y Oregon St ate Universit y extension of fice relocated its of fice f rom Coquille to My r tle Poi nt i n 2003, br i ngi ng an additional dozen long-ter m professional-level education- related jobs to the area. Greater Coos Bay For more than a cent u r y, the t wi n cities of Coos Bay and Nor th Bend have domi nated Oregon?s south coast economy and politics. T he t wo cities are located on the shores of the protected bay for med by the Coos R iver est uar y, and thus thei r i n habit ants benefited f rom the economic activities made possible by thei r proximit y to one of the few deep - water harbors along the Pacific Nor thwest coast. For merly physically as well as politically separate entities, over the years the t wo cities have expanded to the poi nt where the geog raphic bou ndar y bet ween them is dif ficult for an out - sider to identif y. Politically the t wo cities remai n disti nct, but economically and culturally they have become indistin- guishable. For all practical purposes, the formerly outlying tow ns of Empi re and Bu n ker Hill also have become par t of Nor th Bend ? Coos Bay, for mi ng a socioeconomic u nit that we have labeled ?G reater Coos Bay.? T he nearby fishi ng village of Charleston also has st rong ties to the G reater Coos Bay area, but with its 205 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume III: Rural Communities and Economies economic or igi ns i n tou r ism and com mercial fishi ng rather than loggi ng and wood processi ng, its cult u ral and economic character is suf ficiently disti nct cult u rally and economically that we opted to exclude it when bou ndi ng the st udy site. Nonetheless, Charleston?s coast al location and position as the stepping-off point for tourists attracted to the scenic headlands of Cape A rago, the i nter nationally recog nized Shore Acres Garden, and the South Slough National Est uar i ne Reser ve, make it an impor t ant player i n G reater Coos Bay?s adapt ation to the decli ne of its forest products economy. Indeed, a number of residents of the tow ns of Coos Bay, Nor th Bend, and Charleston are i ncreas - i ngly begi n ni ng to thi n k of the th ree tow ns as components of a cohesive sociopolitical entit y k now n locally as the ?Bay Area. G reater Coos Bay is the proverbial large f rog i n a small and somewhat isolated pond. With a combi ned population of 28,596 i n 2000, G reater Coos Bay is the largest set tle - ment i n Coos Cou nt y. T he tow ns of Nor th Bend and Coos Bay ser ve as the t rade and ser vices center for Oregon?s south coast. They offer residents many of the amenities of much larger tow ns i n the Willamet te Valley and P uget Sou nd without the population nu mbers, noise, and t raf fic snarls that come with dense population centers. Residents thus have access to a large var iet y of ret ail and wholesale stores, a wide range of medical facilities, a com mu nit y col - lege and a Mar i ne Biolog y i nstit ute af filiated with Univer - sit y of Oregon, nu merous gover n ment ser vices, a range of t ranspor t ation and shippi ng facilities, a world class expor t por t, and a th r ivi ng ar ts com mu nit y. Yet at 5 hou rs dist ance by road, Coos Bay is just far enough away f rom Por tland to discou rage day and weekend tou r ists, and at 2 hou rs d r ive f rom the I nterst ate 5 cor r idor, is far enough f rom Oregon?s mai n t ranspor t ation route to make manufact u r i ng fi r ms thi n k t wice before set ti ng up shop i n Coos Bay. Much of the t raf fic that flows th rough the area is tied to the seasonal tou r ist t rade, which peaks i n July and Aug ust. G reater Coos Bay?s or igi ns are i ntimately i nter woven with the development of souther n Oregon?s timber and as - sociated shipbuildi ng and lu mber expor t i ndust r ies. Empi re, which occupies a position as the fi rst deep -water anchorage site i nward of the Coos Bay sandbar that protects the bay f rom wave action, was the fi rst per manent W hite set tlement of any size along the bay (Douthit 1999: 136). Hen r y Luse built the area?s fi rst saw mill i n 1855 i n Empi re, set ti ng the foundation for the industrial timber economy that domi- nated G reater Coos Bay u ntil the end of the 20th cent u r y (Douthit 1999: 136). A year or so later, Asa Simpson, a businessman from San Francisco set up a saw mill i n the vici nit y of moder n- day Nor th Bend to suppor t a shipbuildi ng yard where many of the vessels supplyi ng Califor nia?s demand for lu mber du r i ng the last half of the 19th cent u r y and the fi rst half of the 20th cent u r y or igi nated ( Wag ner 1986: 5). T he tow n of Marsh field, which event ually changed its name to Coos Bay, emerged i n the vici nit y of a small lu mber mill est ab - lished i n 1867 (Douthit 1999: 146). Marsh field began to r ival Nor th Bend i n population size and economic impor - t ance only af ter the C.A. Smith Lu mber Company set up the area?s fi rst really large-scale wood processi ng operation i n the early 1900s on the south edge of Marsh field i n an area k now n as Bu n ker Hill (Dithout 1999: 146). Milli ng, shipbuildi ng, and wood products expor ts ? all activities bou nd up with the har vest and processi ng of timber ? constit uted the core of the bay area economy th rough the late 1980s. From the 1850s to the 1900s, G reater Coos Bay?s timber economy was a relatively open playi ng field, character ized by the presence of both large and small operations and no single dominating lumber company. T he playi ng field sh ran k considerably i n the early 1900s with the ent r y of C.A. Smith Company and its successor company, Coos Bay Lu mber Company, which est ablished milling facilities large enough for them to dominate the local lu mber market (Douthit 1999: 146). I n the 1950s, Weyerhaeuser became the domi nant force i n G reater Coos Bay?s lu mber market. However, the Coos Bay timber economy has always ret ai ned an open flavor to it, in that it supported, and continues to support, the presence of a diverse set of logging and milling operations. T hese range i n size and scale f rom multi national compa - nies, such as Weyerhaeuser, Georgia Pacific, Plu m Creek, and Menasha, to regional companies, such as Lone Rock Timber and Rosebu rg Forest Products, to local companies, such as South Coast Lu mber. I n addition, G reater Coos 206 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. III Bay wood processi ng facilities have histor ically produced a wide var iet y of products, i ncludi ng raw logs, dimension lu mber, ply wood, veneer, pulp, and wood chips. T hus, G reater Coos Bay enjoyed a measu re of resilience to dow nt u r ns i n the timber economy that timber- dependent com mu nities with less diversit y i n ter ms of nu mbers, t y pes, and scales of wood processi ng operations did not. Literature Cited Beckham, D. 1986. Land of the Umpqua: a history of Douglas Cou nt y. Rosebu rg, OR: Douglas Cou nt y Com missioners. 285 p. Douthit, N. 1999. A g uide to Oregon south coast histor y: t raveli ng the Jedediah Smith Trail. Cor vallis, OR: Oregon St ate Universit y Press. 208 p. Heikkila, P. 1999. Add ressi ng non fishi ng th reats to habit at through public and private partnerships. American Fisher ies Societ y Sy mposiu m. 22: 1?17. Myrtle Point Community Plan Committee [MPCPC]. 2000. Myrtle Point community plan. Manuscript on file with: Susan Char nley, Por tland Forest r y Sciences Laborator y, P.O. Box 3890, Por tland, OR 97208. Oregon Department of Agriculture. 2002. Coos and Coquille area ag r icult u ral water qualit y management plan. Coos and Coquille local advisor y com mit tee; Oregon Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re. Manuscr ipt on file with: Rebecca McLai n, I nstit ute for Cult u re and Ecolog y, P.O. Box 6688, Por tland, OR 97228. ht t p://w w w.oda.st ate.or.us/n rd /water_ qualit y/areapr. ht ml#coos. (Aug ust 31, 2004). U.S. Census Bureau. 2004. Census 2000: plans and r ules for t ak i ng the census. ht t p://w w w.census.gov/population / w w w/censusdat a /resid _ r ules.ht ml. (Apr il 22, 2004). U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. [USDA FS]. 1996. East Fork Hood R iver and Middle Fork Hood R iver watershed analyses. Hood R iver, OR: Hood R iver Ranger Dist r ict. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, [USDA FS]. 1997. Callahan watershed ecosystem analysis. K lamath National Forest. ht t p://w w w.fs.fed.us/ r5/ k lamath /publications/pdfs/watershed /callahan /i ndex. sht ml. (21 November 2005). U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. [USDA FS]. 1999. Thompson/Seiad/Grider ecosystem analysis. Happy Camp, CA: K lamath National Forest. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 1998. Middle Mai n Coquille Watershed A nalysis. Coos Bay, OR: Coos Bay Dist r ict. Wagner, D. 1986. Louie Simpson?s Nor th Bend. Coos Bay, OR: Fr iends of Shore Acres. Pacific Northwest Research Station Web site http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw Telephone (503) 808-2592 Publication requests (503) 808-2138 FAX (503) 808-2130 E-mail pnw_pnwpubs@fs.fed.us Mailing address Publications Distribution Pacific Northwest Research Station P.O. Box 3890 Portland, OR 97208-3890 U.S. Depar tment of Agriculture Pacific Nor thwest Research Station 333 SW First Avenue P.O. Box 3890 Por tland, OR 97208-3890 Official Business Penalty for Private Use, $300 Northwest Forest PlaN THE FIRST TEN YEARS (1994?2003) Pacific Nor thwest Research Station Forest Ser vice United States Depar tment of A griculture General Technical Repor t PNW- GTR- 649 Vol. IV April 2006 socioeconomic Monitoring results Volume IV: Collaboration Ellen M. Donoghue, Claudia Stuart, and Susan Charnley Authors Ellen M. Donoghue and Susan Charnley are research social scientists, U.S. Department of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation, P.O. Box 3890, Por tland, OR 97208; Claudia Stuart is a community planner, U.S. Department of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Mendoci no National Forest, Genetic Resou rce Center, 2741 Cramer Lane, Chico, CA 95928. The Forest Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture is dedicated to the principle of multiple use management of the Nations forest resources for sustained yields of wood, water, forage, wildlife, and recreation. Through forestry research, cooperation with the States and private forest owners, and management of the national forests and national grasslands, it strivess directed by Congresso provide increasingly greater service to a growing Nation. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individuals income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDAs TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Socioeconomic Monitoring Results Volume IV: Collaboration Ellen M. Donoghue, Claudia Stuart, and Susan Charnley Northwest Forest PlanThe First 10 Years (19942003): Socioeconomic Monitoring Results Susan Charnley, Technical Coordinator U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Pacific Nor thwest Research Station Por tland, Oregon General Technical Report PNW-GTR-649 Vol. IV April 2006 ii Abstract Donoghue, Ellen M.; Stuart, Claudia; Charnley, Susan. 2006. Socioeconomic moni- tor i ng results. Vol. I V. Collaboration. I n: Char nley, S., tech. coord. Nor thwest Forest Plan ?the fi rst 10 years (1994 ?2003): socioeconomic monitor i ng results. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 649. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 23 p. One of the Nor thwest Forest Plan (the Plan) socioeconomic goals was to promote i nter - agency collaboration and agency- citizen collaboration i n forest management. T his volu me focuses on agency- citizen collaboration u nder the Plan. Two for mal i nstit utions were set up to promote agency- citizen collaboration i n forest management: provi ncial advisor y com mit tees (PACs) and adaptive management areas (A M As). Chapter 1 sy nthesizes the literat u re descr ibi ng the management and effectiveness of A M As and PACs du r i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan. Chapter 2 exami nes how collaborative relations and collaboration i n forest stewardship evolved on fou r case-st udy Forest Ser vice (FS) and Bu reau of Land Management (BLM) u nits and 12 associated com mu nities si nce the Plan was imple - mented. T he literat u re shows that i n thei r fi rst decade, most A M As failed to meet the Plan?s expect ations for collaboration. T he PACs have been more successf ul i n engagi ng local com mu nities. T he PACs have provided a for u m for ongoi ng, multipar t y discussion of forest management issues among decision makers and local st akeholders. T hey have also been successf ul i n completi ng regionwide, multipar t y compliance monitor i ng. T he Plan had di rect and i ndi rect, positive and negative, effects on collaborative forest stewardship on the case-study forests and communities. Key words: Nor thwest Forest Plan, socioeconomic monitor i ng, collaboration, joi nt forest stewardship, adaptive management areas, provi ncial advisor y com mit tees. iii Preface T his repor t is one of a set of repor ts produced on this 10 -year an niversar y of the Nor thwest Forest Plan (the Plan). T he collection of repor ts at tempts to answer questions about the effectiveness of the Plan based on new monitor i ng and research results. T he set i ncludes a series of status and trends reports, a synthesis of all regional monitoring and research results, a report on interagency information management, and a summary report. T he st at us and t rends repor ts focus on est ablishi ng baseli nes of i nfor mation f rom 1994, when the Plan was approved, and repor ti ng change over the 10 -year per iod. T he st at us and t rends ser ies i ncludes repor ts on late-successional and old-g row th forests, nor ther n spot ted owl population and habit at, marbled mu r relet population and habit at, watershed condition, gover n ment-to -gover n ment t r ibal relationships, socioeconomic conditions, and monitor i ng of project implement ation u nder Plan st andards and g uideli nes. T he sy nthesis repor t add resses questions about the effectiveness of the Plan by usi ng the st at us and t rends results and new research. It focuses on the validit y of the Plan assu mp - tions, differences bet ween expect ations and what act ually happened, the cer t ai nt y of these fi ndi ngs, and fi nally, considerations for the f ut u re. T he sy nthesis repor t is organized i n t wo par ts: Par t I?i nt roduction, context, sy nthesis, and su m mar y? and Par t II? socioeconomic implications, older forests, species conser vation, the aquatic conser vation st rateg y, and adaptive management and monitoring. T he repor t on i nteragency i nfor mation management identifies issues and recom mends solutions for resolvi ng dat a and mappi ng problems encou ntered du r i ng the preparation of the set of monitor i ng repor ts. I nfor mation issues i nevit ably su r face du r i ng analyses that requi re dat a f rom multiple agencies cover i ng large geog raphic areas. T he goal of this set of repor ts is to improve the i nteg ration and acquisition of i nteragency dat a for the next comprehensive report. T he socioeconomic st at us and t rends repor t is published i n six volu mes. Volu me I of the repor t cont ai ns key fi ndi ngs. Volu me II add resses the evaluation question, A re predict able levels of timber and nontimber resou rces available and bei ng produced? T he focus of Volu me III is the evaluation question, A re local com mu nities and economies exper ienci ng positive or negative changes that may be associated with federal forest management? Volu me I V (this volu me) assesses the Plan goal of promoti ng agency- citizen collaboration i n forest management. Volu me V repor ts on public values regardi ng federal forest management i n the Pacific Nor thwest. Volu me V I provides a histor y of the Nor thwest Forest Plan socioeconomic monitor i ng prog ram and a discussion of potential directions for the program. iv Summary One of the Nor thwest Forest Plan (the Plan) socioeconomic goals was to promote i nter - agency collaboration and agency- citizen collaboration i n forest management. T his volu me focuses on agency- citizen collaboration u nder the Plan. T he monitor i ng team did not monitor i nteragency coordi nation and collaboration beacuse resou rces were not available to do so. Two for mal i nstit utions were set up to promote agency- citizen collaboration i n forest management: provi ncial advisor y com mit tees (PACs) and adaptive management areas (A M As). Chapter 1 sy nthesizes the literat u re descr ibi ng the management and effectiveness of A M As and PACs du r i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan. Chapter 2 exami nes how collabora - tive relations and collaboration i n forest stewardship evolved on fou r case-st udy Forest Ser vice (FS) and Bu reau of Land Management (BLM) u nits (the Oly mpic, Mou nt Hood, and K lamath National Forests and the Coos Bay BLM Dist r ict) and 12 associated com mu - nities si nce the Plan was implemented. T he monitor i ng questions and i ndicators monitored were the followi ng: Monitoring questions Indicators monitored Chapter 1 How effective have new for ms of collaboration Su m mar ized the existi ng literat u re been i n engagi ng local com mu nities? that descr ibes the management and effectiveness of A M As and PACs. How much has collaboration with the public cont r ibuted to achievi ng the other objectives of the new collaborative mechanisms, such as effective resou rce management? How effective have the new for ms of collaboration been i n providi ng socio - economic benefits to local com mu nities? Chapter 2 Did agency and citizen collaboration i n forest Level of engagement bet ween stewardship improve u nder the Plan, and did com mu nit y (g roups) and agencies relations bet ween local com mu nities and agencies improve? Ty pes of collaborative forest stewardship activities P u r pose of collaborations and partnerships Benefits of collaboration Bar r iers to collaboration Volunteerism Plan Expectations Regarding Agency-Citizen Collaboration Some A M As were expected to be actively managed to cont r ibute to the sust ai ned sup - ply of timber expected u nder the Plan. Local A M A resou rce managers and com mu nities were expected to use thei r combi ned exper ience and i ngenuit y to identif y approaches that would achieve the conser vation objectives of the Plan, without ad her i ng r igidly to all of its v st andards and g uideli nes. Pr imar y tech nical objectives were to develop and evaluate moni - toring programs and innovative management practices integrating ecological and economic values. Specific forest management topics to be explored were identified for each A M A. T hey ranged i n emphasis f rom i ntensive timber production to si ngle-species management to par t nerships with st ate and pr ivate land managers. Adaptive management areas were i ntended to be protot y pes of how forest com mu nities might be sust ai ned. Land management and reg ulator y agencies were expected to collaborate with other gover n ment entities, nongover n ment al organizations, local g roups, landow ners, com mu nities, and citizens to achieve these goals. Under the record of decision (ROD), PACs were to ?provide or coordi nate analyses at the provi nce level that can provide the basis for amend ments to Forest and Dist r ict Plans and will provide monitor i ng repor ts for provi nces? ( USDA and USDI 1994: E-17). T he ROD also di rects that PACs are to ?encou rage and facilit ate i nfor mation exchange and complement ar y ecosystem management among federal and non-federal par t ners.? Collaborative processes, broadly speak i ng, were expected to create new ways to i nvolve local gover n ments, t r ibes, and the public i n managi ng the region?s forests, i n addition to i ncreasi ng i nteragency and i ntergover n ment al coordi nation (Tuch man n et al. 1996). I nter - agency cooperation and public par ticipation would reduce con flict over forest management (Tuch man n et al. 1996). T he Plan did not have specific expect ations related to on-the-g rou nd collaborative forest stewardship activities outside of adaptive management areas. Monitoring Results Although neither A M As nor PACs have been enti rely successf ul i n meeti ng Plan expect a - tions, both mechanisms have offered sig nificant improvements upon the g r idlock and limited collaborative oppor t u nities available i n the early 1990s. I nitial A M A collaboration with local com mu nities showed promise. Early i n the per iod, the Federal Advisor y Com mit tee Act (FACA) char ter i ng process forced federal par ticipants to temporar ily withd raw. I nter nal agency issues f u r ther impai red the abilit y of A M A manag - ers to collaborate meani ngf ully. Given these failu res, the collaborative sy nerg y envisioned i n the ROD did not mater ialize. Coordi nation with the public was not suf ficient to leverage the land management agencies? limited willi ng ness and abilit y to exper iment. Few A M As appear to have gone beyond ?busi ness as usual? u nder the land allocations and st andards imposed by the Plan. Accordi ngly, A M As have provided lit tle socioeconomic benefit to local com mu nities beyond the other provisions i n the Plan. T he PACs have been more successf ul i n engagi ng local com mu nities. T he PACs have provided a forum for ongoing, multiparty discussion of forest management issues among decisionmakers and local stakeholders. In this sense they represent an important step for- ward over project ?scopi ng? as defi ned u nder the National Envi ron ment al Policy Act. T hey also have been successf ul i n completi ng regionwide, multipar t y compliance monitor i ng. I n this capacit y the Plan?s PACs can ser ve as a basis for f ut u re effor ts. Although PACs have ser ved to improve the flow of i nfor mation and lear ni ng among provi nce i nterest g roups, they have not sig nificantly shaped decision mak i ng, and have accordi ngly been u nable to vi affect the flow of benefits to local com mu nities. Despite these faili ngs, PACs represent an impor t ant i nter im step toward developi ng new mechanisms for collaboration. T he Plan has had di rect and i ndi rect, positive and negative effects on collaborative forest stewardship on the case-st udy forests and com mu nities. T he Plan?s ecosystem focus and emphasis on i nteragency collaboration has encou raged i nteractions among public and pr ivate landow ners and broadened the range of st akeholders and oppor t u nities for collabo - ration. A var iet y of g roups, together with forest agencies, are pooli ng time, labor, fi nances, and ideas to achieve mut ually held forest stewardship objectives. Faced with decreased budgets and st affs, the forests have been able to mai nt ai n viable, productive, and multi - beneficial collaborative projects and prog rams. T he volu nteer prog rams are good examples of prog rams that are evolvi ng and seek i ng new collaborative oppor t u nities i n the face of ad mi nist rative and budget ar y const rai nts. Lower har vest rates and the resulti ng lower budgets and st aff, which have both di rect and i ndi rect ties to the Plan, have i n fluenced t rends i n collaboration i n t wo key, yet paradoxical ways. With decreasi ng hu man and fi nancial resou rces for forest management activities, the forests have expanded and developed par t nerships with g roups that share similar resou rce management goals. T he paradox is that, as budget decli nes ser ve as an i ncentive for i n novation and expansion of collaboration, they simult aneously const rai n and potentially jeopardize collaborative effor ts. Agency i nter viewees expressed concer n that reduci ng st aff and resou rces has made managi ng collaboration more dif ficult. I ncreased diversit y and i n novation i n collaboration, however, have coi ncided with a decrease i n com mu nication and collaboration with a once-promi nent forest st akeholder, namely the timber com mu nit y. T he discon nect bet ween timber-based com mu nities and forest management, and the implication it would have for collaborative relations, were u nanticipated consequences of the reduction i n timber har vests u nder the Plan. I n general, collaborative activities with members of the case-st udy com mu nities were mi nimal, with some exceptions, such as t r ibes. New con nections have yet to replace old timber ties i n some com mu nities. I nter viewees f rom for mer timber-based com mu nities tended to feel disassociated f rom, or u naware of, cu r rent forest policies and practices, or had lit tle di rect concer n with forest management. A nd yet, some for mer timber i ndust r y employees who remai ned i n thei r com mu nities felt that thei r sk ills, k nowledge, and exper ience i n forest management could ser ve contemporar y forest management but were not bei ng used. Other factors that affected the par ticipation of com mu nit y residents i n collaborative resou rce management, beyond the necessit y of a shared mut ual i nterest or st ake, i ncluded a shor t age of residents with sk ills to do the work or the time to par ticipate, a lack of consistent players and par ticipation, the local presence ? or absence ? of organized g roups with resou rces, and the need to struggle to make ends meet. vii Contents 1 Chapter 1: Federal Collaborative Efforts, by Claudia Stuart 1 Monitoring Questions 1 Adaptive Management Areas 1 Expect ations 3 Results and Discussion 5 Provincial Advisory Committees 7 Expect ations 7 Results and Discusssion 7 Conclusions 9 References 11 Chapter 2: Collaboration in Forest Stewardship, by Ellen M. Donoghue and Susan Charnley 11 Monitoring Question 11 Expectations 11 Data Analysis 11 Results and Discussion 12 Ty pes of Collaboration i n Forest Stewardship 12 General Trends i n Collaborative Forest Stewardship 13 T he Plan and Collaborative Forest Stewardship 16 Volu nteer ism 19 Challenges to Collaborative Forest Stewardship 20 Conclusions 20 Literature Cited 22 Appendix: Methods and Interview Guide viii 1 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume IV: Collaboration Chapter 1: Federal Collaborative Efforts Claudia Stuart T he Nor thwest Forest Plan (the Plan) called for federal agencies to coordi nate and collaborate with one another i n managi ng federal forests i n the Pacific Nor thwest (Tuch man n et al. 1996: 6, 44 ? 48). It also called for g reater collaboration i n forest management bet ween agencies and citizens (Dan ks and Hay nes 2001: 54). Two for mal i nstit u - tions were set up to promote agency- citizen collaboration i n forest management: provi ncial advisor y com mit tees (PACs) and adaptive management areas (A M As). A n en hanced collaborative approach to forest management was expected to improve relations bet ween agencies and the public and to reduce con flict over forest management. I n this chapter, I sy nthesize the literat u re descr ibi ng the management and effectiveness of A M As and PACs du r i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan. T he docu ments reviewed use various approaches to evaluate progress, ranging from i nter views with agency of ficials to st atistically based su r vey samples of local community residents. I do not attempt to evaluate these fi ndi ngs based on thei r tech nical or scientific mer it, but simply to su m mar ize them as they descr ibe the effectiveness of the Plan i n en hanci ng collaboration bet ween agencies and com mu nities. Monitoring Questions 1. How effective have new for ms of collaboration been i n engagi ng local com mu nities? 2. How much has collaboration with the public con - t r ibuted to achievi ng the other objectives of the new collaborative mechanisms, such as effective resou rce management? 3. How effective have the new for ms of collaboration been i n providi ng socioeconomic benefits to local com mu nities? Adaptive Management Areas T he Plan recog nizes the cr itical role played by i n novation and exper iment ation i n successf ul adaptive management. I n response, the record of decision (ROD) desig nated 10 A M As ?i ntended to provide a geog raphic focus for i n - novation and exper iment ation with the i ntent that such exper ience be widely shared? ( USDA and USDI 1994: D -3). T he A M As compr ise 1.5 million acres, about 6 percent of the Plan area. I ndividual A M As range i n size f rom 92,000 to al most 500,000 acres (t able 1-1). Several factors were considered i n selecti ng A M A locations (fig. 1-1): ? Mi nimizi ng r isk to achievi ng the conser vation ob - jectives of the Plan. ? Providi ng a mix of public and pr ivate lands, to pro - vide oppor t u nities for var ious ow ners to cooperate in land management. ? Proximit y to com mu nities subject to adverse eco - nomic effects f rom reduced federal timber har vest. Expectations T he mat r ix land (land not set aside for reser ves or other special desig nations) allocation and some A M As were expected to be actively managed to produce the sust ai ned supply of timber expected u nder the Plan. Local A M A resou rce managers and com mu nities were expected to use thei r combi ned exper ience and i ngenuit y to identif y approaches that would achieve the conser vation objectives of the Plan, without ad her i ng r igidly to all of its st andards and g uideli nes. Pr imar y tech nical objectives were to develop and evaluate monitoring programs and innovative management practices integrating ecological and economic values. Specific forest management topics to be explored were identified for each A M A. T hey ranged i n emphasis f rom i ntensive timber production (Lit tle R iver A M A) to si ngle-species management ( Nor th Coast A M A) to par t ner - ships with st ate and pr ivate land managers (Oly mpic and Snoqual mie Pass A M As) (t able 1-1). Adaptive management areas were ?i ntended to be protot y pes of how forest com mu nities might be sust ai ned? ( USDA and USDI 1994: D - 4). Land management and reg ulator y agencies were expected to collaborate with other gover n ment entities, nongover n ment al organizations, local g roups, landow ners, com mu nities, and citizens to achieve these goals. T he ROD identifies com mu nities associated with each A M A (t able 1-1). T he ROD stipulated several management elements i nvolvi ng collaboration bet ween A M A managers and the public. Each area was to develop a shared, collaborative 2 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. IV Adaptive management areas Northwest Forest Plan area States Major lakes and rivers Major roads Metropolitan areas I- 5 Olympic AMA Olympic AMA Finney AMA Finney AMA Snoqualmie Pass AMA Snoqualmie Pass AMA Cispus AMA Cispus AMA Central Cascades AMA Central Cascades AMA Northern Coast Range AMA Little River AMA Little River AMA Applegate AMA Applegate AMA GoosenestAMAGoosenestAMA Hayfork AMA Hayfork AMA 0 25 50 100 Miles Seattle Portland San Francisco o I-5 I-5 I-80 I-84 I-84 I-5 I-82 I-90 I-90 Fig u re 1-1?Ad apt ive ma nagement a reas u nder t he Pla n. 3 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume IV: Collaboration vision for the area, k nowledge suf ficient to meet operati ng objectives, an operati ng st rateg y, and a plan to educate par ticipants and st akeholders. Managers of each area were to defi ne com mu nities to be i ncluded i n the collaboration; com mu nit y resou rces and par t ners capable of advanci ng ideas for management; mechanisms for coordi nati ng with local com mu nities; a f u ndi ng plan; and a plan for i nteg rat - i ng com mu nit y objectives with agency objectives (Pipk i n 1998: 31). T he Plan recog nized that developi ng i n novative approaches would requi re com mu nities to have suf ficient political capacity, economic resources, and technical exper tise to become f ull par t ners i n the effor t. Management also needed to be coordi nated across ow nership bou ndar ies. Active management of each A M A was to begi n with the collaborative development of an assessment and a plan for the area. In addition to local land managers and communities, A M A operation was to i nclude a thi rd set of par ties: agency scientists. Agency researchers were to desig n exper iments testi ng tech niques to meet A M A management objectives u n - der the more flexible di rection provided for the areas without compromisi ng the Plan?s conser vation objectives. Results and Discussion Shi ndler et al. (1996) st udied com mu nit y at tit udes related to the Cent ral Cascades A M A only months af ter the Plan was sig ned. T he researchers based thei r work on the premise that developing a community-oriented approach for AMAs requi red an u nderst andi ng of the deg ree to which members of associated communities shared preferences for AMA management. T he authors conducted opi nion research among 744 members of th ree com mu nities close to the A M A. T hey identified t wo com mu nit y factors that cor related with divergent opi nions about A M A management: com mu nit y Table 1-1Key characteristics of the Plans adaptive management areas Associated Research and State Name Size Ownership communities development emphasis Acres Washi ng ton Cispus 143,900 USFS Randle, Pack wood, Timber production and Morton forest management Fi n ney 98,400 USFS Dar r i ng ton Late-successional and r ipar ian habit at Oly mpic 150,400 USFS Var ious cou nties Par t nership with Oly mpic State Forest Snoqual mie 212,700 USFS, Plu m Creek Cle Elu m, Rosly n Forest plan ni ng on Pass Timber Company, ?checkerboard? lands other private, state Oregon Applegate 277,500 BLM, USFS G rants Pass, Medford Forest management Cent ral 155,700 USFS, BLM Eugene, Sweet Home Ecosystem landscape processes Cascades and forest management Lit tle R iver 91,800 USFS, BLM Rosebu rg, My r tle Creek I ntensive timber production Nor ther n 250,000 USFS, BLM Tillamook, Willami na, Marbled mu r relet management Coast G rand Ronde Califor nia Goosenest 172,900 USFS Yreka, Mont ag ue, Ecosystem management, Dor r is, Hor nbrook com mercial timber production Hayfork 488,500 USFS, BLM Hayfork Forest and ecosystem- management, commercial timber production 4 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. IV dependence on the timber i ndust r y and the propor tion of reti rees among the local population. Two other factors, length of residence and income, did not affect responses. T he authors fou nd that more than 90 percent of com - mu nit y members considered themselves aware of resou rce management issues. For t y- eight percent felt i nfor med about the Plan. Respondents were suppor tive of the concept of adaptive management, believi ng that forest management was best conducted by land and resou rce agencies i n con - cer t with researchers and local citizens. Most respondents i n each com mu nit y suppor ted science and exper iment ation on selected federal lands. Respondents, par ticularly those i n the nontimber com mu nit y, believed that federal resou rce management requi red sig nificant change, and that A M As were a generally responsible approach. Note that, although Shindler et al. found that local communities supported the concept of adaptive management, a contemporary study (Povey and Sy nder 1995) fou nd that only 16 percent of local com mu nit y members were aware of the existence of the Cent ral Cascades A M A. Timber and nontimber com mu nities were divided over whether the su r vival of timber workers should be the most important goal of AMAs. Most respondents supported citizen par ticipation, even if it i ncreased gover n ment costs. Residents believed that land-management and reg ulator y agencies, along with local residents and st akeholders, were more fit to i n fluence federal forest management than outsiders. Shi ndler et al. concluded that com mu nit y members would suppor t agencies t ak i ng a lead role i n A M A man - agement, as long as local residents? i nput was t aken i nto account. In resource-dependent communities, successful collaboration would be more challengi ng because these com mu nit y members believed that agencies were not open to public feedback. T he A M A managers would need to overcome lack of trust among local and outside groups. Suc- cessf ul collaboration would requi re lead agencies to u nif y constit uent g roups. If the agencies were u nsuccessf ul, local com mu nities would be reluct ant to reli nquish cont rol, either to the agencies or to other g roups. Conti nui ng com mu nit y suppor t would be conti ngent on successf ul implement ation. T he authors hy pothesized that, should adaptive management fail to produce bet ter agency decisions, public suppor t for adaptive management might soon fail. I n assembli ng thei r repor t to Cong ress, Tuch man n et al. (1996) requested i nfor mation f rom each Plan-area land management and reg ulator y agency?s regional and field of fices. Follow up meeti ngs were held with st aff and li ne of ficers i n 30 of fices among five agencies. T he g roup fou nd that, by 1995, all A M As had implemented public-pr ivate collaborative activities. Although A M As differed i n amou nt of activit y, several par t nerships had been for med with school dist r icts, cou nties, and local i nstit utions. T he team obser ved a st rong appreciation of the value of consensus- buildi ng effor ts among both agency st aff and com mu nit y members. Compliance with the 1972 Federal Advisor y Com mit tee Act (FACA), however, had sig nificantly slowed collaborative effor ts: the act requi red federal of ficials to temporar ily withd raw du r i ng adjudication and FACA char - ter i ng. A lack of clar it y i n defi ni ng the relation bet ween fed - eral and nonfederal landow ners i n A M As f u r ther dampened collaboration and general effectiveness. T he Tuch man n repor t?s compilation of A M A accomplish ments i ndicates that early management effor ts were largely dedicated to the sig nificant work load of plan ni ng, assessi ng, and analyzi ng requi red by the Plan and other relevant di rection (Tuch man n et al. 1996: 118 ?119). T he Tuch man n team noted var ious approaches toward collaborative plan ni ng. T he public did not par ticipate early in some of the AMA planning process as envisioned in the ROD, but prefer red to wait and com ment on analyses developed by the agencies. I n one A M A, collaboration broke dow n when the large par ticipator y g roup polar ized. Managers of the A M A went on to work successf ully with smaller citizen g roups. Managers of another area allowed local com mu nit y members to lead the i nitial assessment process. T his approach was fou nd to be highly successf ul. By the time of the Tuch man n team?s assessment, a lack of flexibilit y u nder the Plan?s st andards and g uideli nes had emerged as a critical factor that limited implementing ac- tivities withi n A M As. T he abilit y of managers to i n novate and exper iment was accordi ngly ci rcu mscr ibed. Reg ulator y and land management agencies ad hered to differ i ng views about the deg ree of exper iment ation appropr iate withi n Plan 5 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume IV: Collaboration g uidance. Nor did operati ng budgets suppor t rapidly imple - menti ng projects as was envisioned i n the Plan. I nstead, other prog rams i ncreasi ngly took pr ior it y (Tuch man n et al. 1996: 121). St an key and Shi ndler (1997) exami ned the est ablish - ment of A M As, proposed a f ramework for evaluati ng prog ress, and identified keys to successf ul implement ation. T hey noted that agency and nonagency person nel had been disappoi nted i n the apparent i nabilit y of the A M As to at t ai n the objectives outli ned by the Forest Ecosystem Manage - ment Assessment Team (FEM AT 1993) and the ROD. T hey saw roadblocks i n the lack of specific A M A g uides and i nadequate organizational suppor t. T hey at t r ibuted the rela - tive success of at least one A M A (Applegate) to an effective public coalition of land-management i nterests that predated the A M A. Adaptive management areas suppor ted by the agencies i nter nally, but lack i ng effective public recog nition and suppor t, were less li kely to at t ai n the objectives i n the ROD. St an key and Shi ndler (1997) identified several key issues i n effective A M A est ablish ment and management: the need for a publicly recog nized social meani ng to A M A bou ndar ies, a sense of ?ow nership? among the public and agency managers, the abilit y to i ncor porate personal and exper iential k nowledge i nto plan ni ng and management, the need to ack nowledge diverse view poi nts, and the need for i nstit utional suppor t for r igor i n followi ng sou nd scientific cr iter ia. T hey noted the ongoi ng const rai nt posed by FACA i n implementi ng collaborative management as envisioned by FEM AT and the ROD and suggested rest r uct u r i ng the legislation to add ress the problem. T hey f u r ther noted that vag ue goals and management parameters are impediments to success: clar it y is needed i n developi ng A M A pu r pose and di rection. T hey poi nted out that it may be necessar y to develop local com mu nit y capacity to participate in such an undertaking. Finally, they mai nt ai ned that the issues of i nequit able dist r ibution of power and dist r ust among par ticipants must be faced. I n developi ng his repor t to the Plan?s I nteragency Steer i ng Com mit tee, Pipk i n (1998) collected a var iet y of mater ials f rom several sou rces and i nter viewed about 75 agency person nel. He fou nd that, although seven A M A plans had been developed and submit ted to a regional work g roup, work across the A M As conti nued to lag behi nd the expect ations set for th i n the ROD. St an key et al. (2003) provided the most recent assess - ment of prog ress. T he team conducted an extensive litera - t u re review; exami ned organizational plans and repor ts; and i nter viewed 50 agency st aff, citizens, and academics. T he authors considered A M A effectiveness pr imar ily f rom the view poi nt of scientific exper iment ation, but did provide some insights into the effectiveness of AMAs as collaborative mechanisms. Li ke the Tuch man n team, they noted a lack of agency t rai ni ng and suppor t, with the time and budgets available to A M A st aff erodi ng over time. T hey descr ibed a r isk-averse cult u re i n the land manage - ment agencies and i n flexibilit y on the par t of the reg ulator y agencies as major impediments. Despite these st u mbli ng blocks, they noted that t wo A M As, the Cent ral Cascades A M A and the Nor ther n Coast Range A M A, have succeeded in implementing structured treatments. In their focus on the research aspect of AMAs, the authors noted the need to more fully involve stakeholders as an aspect of gaining social accept abilit y for desig ned t reat ments. Provincial Advisory Committees T he ROD divided the Plan area i nto 12 plan ni ng provi nces (fig. 1-2). For each, the Plan est ablished a PAC to consist of represent atives of federal and st ate agencies, t r ibes, and others. I n act ualit y, t wo sets of provi ncial teams were est ablished to f ul fill these objectives. Provi ncial i nteragency executive com mit tees (PIECs) for each provi nce are led by the executives of par ticipati ng national forests and BLM dist r icts and consist solely of agency person nel. Leadership rot ates among par ticipati ng FS and BLM u nits. Provi ncial advisor y com mit tees are char tered u nder FACA and consist of up to 29 par ticipants f rom among a var iet y of federal, st ate, cou nt y, and t r ibal gover n ments; the timber i ndust r y; envi ron ment al g roups; recreation and tou r ism g roups; and up to five members at large. T his ar ray meets FACA stipula - tions for representi ng a broad set of i nterests while limiti ng advisor y g roups to a workable size. T he Plan?s PACs were for mally est ablished u nder FACA i n September 1994. 6 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. IV I- 5 Provinces Northwest Forest Plan area States Major lakes and rivers Major roads Bureau of Land Management Forest Service Metropolitan areas 0 25 50 100 Miles o Seattle Portland San Francisco I-5 I-82 I-5 I-5 I-80 I-90 I-84 I-84 I-5 I-90 Klamath Yakima Willamette Deschutes Southwest Oregon California Coast Northwest Sacramento Western Washington Cascades Southwest Washington Olympic Peninsula Oregon Coast Eastern Washington Cascades I-5 I-82 I-5 I-5 I-80 I-90 I-84 I-84 I-5 I-90 Klamath Yakima Willamette Deschutes Southwest Oregon California Coast Northwest Sacramento Western Washington Cascades Southwest Washington Olympic Peninsula Oregon Coast Eastern Washington Cascades Fig u re 1-2 ? Provi nce pla n n i ng a nd a nalysis a reas u nder t he Pla n. 7 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume IV: Collaboration Expectations Under the ROD, PACs were to ?provide or coordi nate analyses at the provi nce level that can provide the basis for amend ments to Forest and Dist r ict Plans and will provide monitor i ng repor ts for provi nces? ( USDA and USDI 1994: E-17). T he ROD also di rects that PACs are to ?encou rage and facilit ate i nfor mation exchange and complement ar y ecosystem management among federal and non-federal par t ners.? T he Plan mandates that the I nteragency Advisor y Com mit tee and Regional I nteragency Executive Com mit tee ? will conti nue to develop and refi ne the appropr iate role for these teams at the level of physiographic provinces, Adap- tive Management areas, or specific watersheds.? Results and Discussion T he literat u re su m mar ized here to evaluate PAC effec - tiveness is limited to t wo agency repor ts. Tuch man n et al. (1996) noted early i n the per iod that sometimes PAC char ter i ng u nder FACA split represent ation among i nterests that did not accu rately reflect local st akeholders. Provi ncial advisor y com mit tees were seen as redu ndant with existi ng bioregional cou ncils. Fu r ther, several g roups objected to the ar ray of represent ation requi red u nder FACA, contendi ng that the i nterests of Pacific Nor thwest com mu nities could more effectively be represented by smaller memberships. I n light of PAC bou ndar ies that cross land ow nerships, nonfederal PAC par ticipants objected to PAC emphasis on federal land management. Despite persisti ng concer ns about redu ndancy, Pipk i n (1998) fou nd PACs to be vit al to collaboration with st ate watershed cou ncils and biodiversit y cou ncils. Pipk i n also fou nd PACs to be effective i n en hanci ng com mu nication bet ween federal agencies and other st akeholders. He f u r ther noted that PAC members conduct project-scale compliance monitoring under the Plan. In this monitoring capacity, PACs have met the expect ations i n the ROD. Pipk i n also noted, however, the lack of a mechanism for com mu nicati ng bet ween the PACs and the region as envisioned i n the ROD, foregoi ng oppor t u nities for strengthening regional-local ties, for providing regional g uidance when necessar y, or for facilit ati ng PAC i nput i nto larger scale decisions. He poi nted out that PACs have not participated in the kind of province-scale analysis foreseen i n the ROD as cont r ibuti ng a ?basis for Forest and Dist r ict plans.? T his work was expected to be cent ral to the mission of the PACs. Lack i ng com mit ment to this objective, and without regional g uidance or responsiveness, other work of PACs has responded to local projects, par ticipant agendas, and member i nterests. Com mit tee activities have i ncluded education, identif yi ng restoration projects, and reviewi ng management activities. I n some cases, PACs have ser ved to facilit ate i nfor mation exchange bet ween federal and nonfederal i nitiatives i n the provi nce. Members f requently discuss the socioeconomic effects of Plan implementation. Pipk i n fou nd that PAC par ticipants generally want st ronger li n ks bet ween thei r com mit tees and regional agency st aff. I nteresti ngly, although he fou nd that Bu reau of Land Management person nel also want such st reng thened ties, Forest Service personnel cite no need for further guidance u ntil requested by the PAC. Conclusions How effective have new for ms of collaboration been i n engagi ng local com mu nities? How much has collaboration with the public cont r ibuted to achievi ng the other objectives of the new collaborative mechanisms, such as effective resou rce management? How effective have the new for ms of collaboration been i n providi ng socioeconomic benefits to local com mu nities? Adaptive management areas represent a sig nificant agency i nvest ment i n collaborative i n novation, compr isi ng 6 percent of the Plan area i n subregions k now n to be socially and economically affected by decli ni ng timber har vests. Fu r ther, they are one of only t wo land allocations i n which sust ai ned timber har vest is expected. I m mediately af ter the sig ni ng of the Plan, the work of Shi ndler et al. (1996) showed that at least some local com mu nities were suppor t - ive of collaborative adaptive management. Despite these conditions, the literat u re shows that i n thei r fi rst decade, most A M As failed to meet the Plan?s expect ations. I nitial collaboration with local com mu nities showed promise. T he potential for success was dimi nished early i n the per iod, however, when adjudication and the FACA chartering process forced federal participants to temporarily 8 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. IV withd raw, severely affecti ng local t r ust i n this new for m of collaboration. Con flict among some polar ized i nterests also caused collaboration to collapse, forci ng federal of ficials to work with disparate g roups rather than i n a u nified par t ner - ship. I nter nal agency issues f u r ther impai red the abilit y of A M A managers to collaborate meani ngf ully. T hese included a lack of demonstrated, long-term agency com- mit ment to A M A st af fi ng and f u ndi ng; a lack of i ncentives to guide and support local AMA managers in shouldering r isk; and an u nwilli ng ness or i nabilit y among the reg ulator y agencies to consider localized adaptive management? and its potential for small-scale exper iment al failu res ? as a legitimate approach for improving larger scale conservation k nowledge and tech niques (St an key et al. 2003, Tuch man n et al. 1996). Given these failu res, the collaborative sy nerg y envi - sioned i n the ROD has not mater ialized among A M As. Coordi nation with the public has not been suf ficient to leverage the land management agencies? limited willi ng ness and abilit y to exper iment. Few A M As appear to have gone beyond ?busi ness as usual? u nder the land allocations and st andards imposed by the Plan. Accordi ngly, A M As have provided lit tle socioeconomic benefit to local com mu nities beyond the other provisions i n the Plan. Despite the cu mbersome membership requi rements also imposed on them by FACA, PACs have been more suc - cessf ul i n engagi ng local com mu nities. Because of this suc - cess, the Plan?s PACs were rechar tered i n 2003 and conti nue to operate. T he PACs have provided a for u m for ongoi ng, multiparty discussion of forest management issues among decisionmakers and local stakeholders. In this capacity, they represent an impor t ant step for ward over project ?scopi ng? as defi ned u nder the 1969 National Envi ron ment al Policy Act ( N EPA). T hey have also been successf ul i n completi ng regionwide, multipar t y compliance monitor i ng. Provi ncial advisor y com mit tee monitor i ng effor ts have f ul filled requi rements for implement ation monitor i ng u nder the Plan. I n thei r monitor i ng capacit y, the Plan?s PACs can ser ve as a basis for f ut u re effor ts. But PACs have not delivered the f ull breadth or positive effects of participatory opportunities envisioned under the Plan. T hey have not coordi nated provi nce-scale analysis to ser ve as a basis for forest and dist r ict plans. Nor does the available literat u re i ndicate suppor t f rom the regional level i n developi ng and suppor ti ng a role for PACs i n this respect, or in developing an appropriate role related to AMAs. Although PACs have ser ved to improve the flow of i nfor ma - tion and learning among province interest groups, there is no i ndication i n the literat u re that they have sig nificantly shaped decision mak i ng or resou rce management. T hey have thus been u nable to affect the flow of benefits to local communities. Despite these faili ngs, PACs represent an impor t ant i nter im step i n developi ng new mechanisms for collabo - ration. Resou rce advisor y com mit tees, or R ACs, were est ablished by Cong ress u nder the Secu re Ru ral School and Com mu nit y Self-Deter mi nation Act of 2000. T he act broadens the scale of subregional mechanisms for collabora - tive ecosystem management, affecti ng 700 r u ral cou nties i n 41 st ates. Li ke PACs, R ACs are multicou nt y entities created to improve collaborative relations and provide advice and recom mendations to the FS and BLM. T hey are char tered u nder FACA, with membership providi ng for smaller g roups while still ad mit ti ng a range of i nterests. T he 15 members of each R AC are d raw n equally f rom among th ree g roups: organized labor, forest com modit y production, and i ntensive uses; envi ron ment al and dispersed uses; and elected of ficials, t r ibal represent atives, educators, and the public at large. T he R ACs review and recom mend road mai ntenance, watershed restoration, hazardous f uel reduction, and other projects proposed by cou nties and others for f u ndi ng u nder Title II of the act, which ret u r ns a por tion of the act?s f u nd - i ng to cou nties for this pu r pose. T he R ACs thus play a more immediate role in shaping ecosystem management decisions and i nvest ments than do PACs. Although R ACs have been i n existence for a relatively shor t time, early research among th ree com mit tees ( Wilson, n.d.) has fou nd members to be 9 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume IV: Collaboration satisfied with collaboration and outcomes among thei r com - mit tees. However, the su nset of the Secu re Ru ral Schools Act i n 2006 remai ns the sou rce of considerable concer n among members. T he literat u re shows that, although neither A M As nor PACs have been enti rely successf ul to date i n meeti ng Plan expect ations for engagi ng the public i n new for ms of collaboration, both mechanisms have offered sig nificant collaborative oppor t u nities beyond the g r idlock and limited N EPA ?scopi ng? mechanism available i n the early 1990s. Both i nitiatives have been sig nificantly hampered by FACA rest r ictions. Although the act was desig ned to prevent i nequit able i n fluence i n federal decision mak i ng, it has caused sig nificant disr uptions, imposed cu mbersome membership, and ultimately th row n a chill over federal effor ts to par ticipate i n the collaborative mechanisms desig nated by the Plan. Effective A M A management i nvolves a second factor outside the land management agencies? cont rol: a more open i nter pret ation of conser vation requi rements among the reg ulator y agencies (St an key et al. 2003, Tuch man n et al. 1996). Other factors have been beyond the cont rol of local managers responsible for day-to - day implement ation. W hether the land management agencies will revit alize the A M A prog ram remai ns to be seen. Should the at tempt be made, federal of ficials will need to add ress the li kely ero - sion of public t r ust and suppor t engendered by the faili ngs of the prog ram i n the Plan?s fi rst decade. Less rest r icted i n thei r operational scope and with broad and sometimes redu ndant par ticipation, PACs have been able to f u nction despite obst acles li ke the lack of regional g uidance and suppor t. I n collaborati ng with the public th rough the Plan?s PACs, the land-management agen - cies have been able to achieve other objectives: improved public-pr ivate com mu nication and multipar t y compliance monitor i ng. Despite these collaborative successes, the literat u re provides lit tle evidence that A M As or PACs have been effective i n en hanci ng or sust ai ni ng flows of socioeco - nomic benefits f rom federal forests to local com mu nities. References Danks, C.; Haynes, R.W. 2001. Socioeconomic research. I n: Hay nes, R.W.; Perez, G.E., tech. eds. Nor thwest Forest Plan research sy nthesis. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 498. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation: 52? 62. Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 [FACA]; Act of October 6, 1972; 86 St at. 770; 5 U.S.C. Appendix 2. Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team [FEMAT]. 1993. Forest ecosystem management: an ecological, economic, and social assessment. Portland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re; U.S. Depar t ment of the Interior [and others]. [Irregular pagination]. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 [NEPA]; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. Pipkin, J. 1998. T he Nor thwest Plan revisited. ht t p://w w w.reo.gov/librar y/repor ts/ N FP_ revisited.ht m. (Januar y 2005). Povey, D.; Snyder, J. 1995. McKen zie R iver cor r idor household su r vey fi nal results. Universit y of Oregon com mu nit y plan ni ng workshop. Unpublished repor t. On file with: George H. St an key, Forest r y Sciences Laborator y, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation, 3200 SW Jefferson Way, Cor vallis, OR 97331. Secure Rural School and Community Self- Determination (Payments to Counties) Act of 2000; Act of October 30, 2000; 114 St at. 1608 ?1628; 16 U.S.C. 5000. Shindler, B.; Steel, B.; List, P. 1996. P ublic judg ments of adaptive management: a response f rom forest com mu nities. Jou r nal of Forest r y. 94(6): 4 ?12. Stankey, G.H.; Bormann, B.T.; Ryan, C. [et al.]. 2003. Adaptive management and the Nor thwest Forest Plan: rhetor ic and realit y. Jou r nal of Forest r y. 101(1): 40 ? 46. 10 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. IV Stankey, G.H.; Shindler, B. 1997. Adaptive management areas: achievi ng the promise, avoidi ng the per il. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR-394. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 21 p. Tuchmann, E.T.; Connaughton, K.P.; Freedman, L.E.; Moriwaki, C.B. 1996. T he Nor thwest Forest Plan: a repor t to the President and Cong ress. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 253 p. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management [USDA and USDI]. 1994. Record of decision for amend ments to Forest Ser vice and Bu reau of Land Management plan ni ng docu ments withi n the range of the nor ther n spot ted owl. [Place of publication u n k now n]. 74 p. [ plus at t ach ment A: st andards and guidelines]. Wilson, L.J. [N.d.]. Decision-making and monitoring in resou rce advisor y com mit tees. Hayfork, CA: Watershed Research and Trai ni ng Center. 10 p. ht t p://w w w.cbcrc. org /2003speaker papers/ Lisa%20Wilson%20Paper.pdf. ( November 2004). 11 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume IV: Collaboration Ellen M. Donoghue and Susan Charnley One of the Nor thwest Forest Plan (the Plan) goals was to improve relations bet ween federal land management agencies and local com mu nities by promoti ng collaboration bet ween agencies and com mu nities. T he Plan?s desig ners believed that the abilit y of the agencies to meet the pr i n - cipal goal of the Plan ?to provide adequate protection for threatened and endangered speciesdepended on closer collaboration among st ate and federal land and wildlife management agencies and on developi ng bet ter and more diverse com mu nication net works bet ween the agencies and local com mu nities (Tuch man n et al. 1996). T his chapter exami nes how collaborative relations and collaboration i n forest stewardship have evolved for the fou r case-st udy For - est Ser vice (FS) and Bu reau of Land Management (BLM) forests si nce the Plan was implemented, i ncludi ng changes i n collaborati ng with the 12 case-st udy com mu nities. Collaboration i n forest stewardship comes i n many for ms and ser ves many f u nctions. We discuss several for ms of collaboration, but others were beyond the scope of the monitor i ng project. T he pr imar y focus is on u nderst andi ng the st at us and changes i n collaborative forest stewardship and on the relations bet ween com mu nit y or locally based g roups and the case-st udy forests. We defi ned collabora - tion i n forest stewardship as the pooli ng of ideas, t angible resou rces (such as i nfor mation, money, labor), or both by com mu nities of i nterest or place and federal forest- management agencies, to conduct a forest management activit y or solve a forest management problem that neither g roup can solve by itself (adapted f rom G ray 1985). T he Plan set up specific i nstit utional ar rangements to promote collaboration with gover n ment al and nongov - ernmental stakeholders in the form of provincial advisory com mit tees and adaptive management areas. T he Plan also called for a g reater deg ree of collaboration among federal agencies. We did not conduct case-st udy assessments on all these for ms of collaboration; i nstead, we decided that nar rowi ng the focus on collaborative forest stewardship would allow us to add ress changes i n one t y pe of collabora - tion, given that an assessment of all collaborative processes i n the context of the Plan was beyond the scope of the monitor i ng project. Monitoring Question Did agency and citizen collaboration i n forest stewardship improve u nder the Plan, and did relations bet ween local com mu nities and agencies improve? Expectations Collaborative processes, broadly speak i ng, were expected to create new ways to i nvolve local gover n ments, t r ibes, and the public i n managi ng the region?s forests, i n addition to increasing interagency and intergovernmental coordination (Tuch man n et al. 1996). I nteragency cooperation and public par ticipation would reduce con flict over forest management (Tuch man n et al. 1996). T he Plan did not have specific expect ations related to on-the-g rou nd collaborative forest stewardship activities, outside of adaptive management areas. Data Analysis We gathered dat a to assess collaboration t rends f rom a var iet y of sou rces. T he BLM dist r ict repor ts and a FS dat abase cont ai ned dat a on volu nteers. Much of ou r discussion on collaborative forest stewardship, however, is based on qualit ative dat a f rom i nter views with com mu nit y and agency represent atives f rom 4 case-st udy areas and 12 case-st udy com mu nities; we sy nthesized these dat a for this report.1 For a copy of ou r i nter view g uide, see volu me III, appendix D. A more det ailed discussion of ou r i nter view methods is cont ai ned i n volu me III, chapter 8; and volu me III, appendix D cont ai ns a list of people i nter viewed. Chapter 2: Collaboration in Forest Stewardship 1 More i nde pt h d iscu ssion of i nter v iew d at a ca n be fou nd i n : But tolph et al. (i n press). McLai n et al. (i n press). Cha r n ley, S.; Dilli ng ha m, C.; St u a r t, C.; Moseley, C.; Donog hue, E.M. Ma nu scr ipt i n pre pa r at ion. Nor t hwest Forest Pla n ? t he fi r st 10 yea r s (1994 ?20 03): socioeconom ic mon itor i ng of K la mat h Nat ional Forest a nd t h ree local com mu n it ies. O n file w it h: S. Cha r n ley, Forest r y Sciences Labor ator y, 620 SW Mai n, Su ite 40 0, Por tla nd , OR 97205. K ay, W.; Donog hue, E.M.; Cha r n ley, S.; Moseley, C. Ma nu scr ipt i n pre pa r at ion. Nor t hwest Forest Pla n ? t he fi r st 10 yea r s (1994 ?20 03): socioeconom ic mon itor i ng of Mou nt Hood Nat ional Forest a nd t h ree local com mu n it ies. O n file w it h: S. Cha r n ley, Forest r y Sciences Labor ator y, 620 SW Mai n, Su ite 40 0, Por tla nd , OR 97205. 12 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. IV Results and Discussion We asked com mu nit y and agency i nter viewees how col - laboration i n forest stewardship has changed u nder the Plan and whether relations bet ween federal land management agencies and local com mu nities was improvi ng. We also asked i nter viewees to descr ibe the t y pes of collaborative projects they were familiar with and the factors promot - i ng or discou ragi ng collaboration i n forest stewardship. I nter viewees i nter preted collaboration diversely, rangi ng f rom volu nteer activities cont r ibuti ng to forest stewardship, to agencies listeni ng to the concer ns expressed by members of a com mu nit y. We t r ied to keep the focus of the i nter - views on t y pes of collaborations leadi ng to on-the-g rou nd forest stewardship or those i ndi rectly cont r ibuti ng to forest stewardship, such as envi ron ment al education. Types of Collaboration in Forest Stewardship Collaboration i n forest stewardship i n the case-st udy forests had many forms and served many functions. Var ious gover ni ng g roups ?t r ibes, st ate, and local gover n - ments ?together with forest management agencies, are pooli ng resou rces ?li ke time, labor, fi nances, and ideas ?to achieve mut ually held forest management objectives. A nd there are also nongover n ment al g roups that may be locally, regionally, or even nationally based, such as watershed cou ncils, envi ron ment al organizations, economic develop - ment g roups, and nat u re or recreation clubs and associa - tions. I ndividual and cor porate landow ners also collaborate, as do i nfor mal g roups, people f rom a var iet y of places who work i n concer t on a par ticular project, such as a bi rd or fish cou nt. Some par ticipants are paid or sponsored by thei r respective organizations to par ticipate i n the collaborative activities, but many people volu nteer thei r time or cont r ib - ute some t y pe of i n-k i nd cont r ibution. I ndeed, volu nteer ism has been, and conti nues to be, an impor t ant way to achieve forest stewardship objectives on the case-st udy forests. Most forest stewardship collaboratives descr ibed by forest and com mu nit y i nter viewees related to recreation, wildlife and fisher ies conser vation, and habit at protection. Envi ron ment al education and com mu nit y development collaboratives were also mentioned. Because of the less- di rect con nection to on-the-g rou nd forest stewardship and i nsuf ficient dat a, however, we will not speak specifically of t rends i n these t y pes of collaboratives. Com mu nit y and agency i nter viewees on each of the case-st udy forests descr ibed collaborative projects bet ween agencies and t r ibes, such as restor i ng habit at and managi ng forest products. Collaborative fisher ies projects were also mentioned on each forest. I nter viewees associated with the Oly mpic, Mou nt Hood, and Coos Bay Dist r ict case st udies descr ibed a var iet y of collaborative projects i n recreation management, but on the K lamath National Forest, ecological restoration projects were the most com monly mentioned collaborative activities. Recreation collaboratives were diverse i n thei r for m and f u nction, i ncludi ng projects i nvolvi ng equest r ian associations work i ng on t rails or hi k i ng clubs conducti ng wilder ness-use education. I n conducti ng the com mu nit y case st udies, we pu r pose - f ully selected com mu nit y i nter viewees who represented a range of perspectives in order to address many dimensions of forest management and socioeconomic change (app.). A mong this diversit y of perspectives, we fou nd that ac - tive par ticipation i n collaborative forest stewardship by i nter viewees of the case-st udy com mu nities was mi nimal, with some exceptions. Although a focused evaluation of collaboration f rom the perspective of people engaged i n col - laborative projects was beyond the scope of the monitor i ng project, a general assessment of how st akeholders perceived oppor t u nities for collaborative stewardship was possible. Most of the g roups that collaborated with case-st udy forests d rew par ticipants f rom larger cities or met ropolit an areas, or people livi ng i n com mu nities near public forests, rather than f rom a specific forest-based com mu nit y. One exception is the collaboration bet ween agencies and t r ibes that appears to be i ncreasi ng withi n the case-st udy forests. A nother exception is that i n response to the multiple forces that affected the wood products i ndust r y si nce the early 1980s, the Coos Bay Dist r ict i nvested heavily i n its recre - ation prog ram i n an effor t to help local com mu nities build a nat u re-based recreation and tou r ism i ndust r y on the cent ral Oregon coast. A nd the i nterdependency resulti ng f rom the patchwork ow nership of lands arou nd the Coos Bay Dist r ict may have encou raged collaboration. 13 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume IV: Collaboration General Trends in Collaborative Forest Stewardship Most agency i nter viewees on the case-st udy forests i ndica- ted several ways that collaboration i n forest stewardship has changed si nce the late 1980s. Oly mpic National Forest i nter viewees felt that the forest was engagi ng i n more collaborative stewardship activities with the public than i n the past. Some, however, felt that collaboration had not necessar ily i ncreased, but that the people with whom the forest was collaborati ng had changed f rom timber-i ndust r y i nterests to recreation, fish and wildlife, and watershed- or iented i nterests. Collaborative effor ts on the Oly mpic National Forest have been impor t ant to leveragi ng f u nds for projects, get ti ng projects accomplished th rough volu nteer effor ts, and buildi ng long-ter m relations bet ween the forest and various forest stakeholders and communities. Over the past decade, the Mou nt Hood National Forest has increased the emphasis on the use of partners and col- laboration to ad mi nister forest policy, goods, and ser vices. I nter viewees there suggested that this management ap - proach is quite different f rom the approach and outlook of a decade or more ago. T he perception is that then forest managers not only felt they could do the work themselves, but they also tended to prefer to do the work i ndependent of other g roups. Cu r rently, par t ners make up an i nteg ral component of forest management on the Mou nt Hood National Forest. For i nst ance, concessionai res at camp - g rou nds and developed recreation sites (such as Timberli ne Lodge), out fit ters, g uides, and volu nteers (such as Mazamas wilder ness stewards) are i ncreasi ngly i nteracti ng with the public and providi ng i nfor mation about forest and recre - ation management r ules, practices, and oppor t u nities. T hey are also helpi ng conduct on-the-g rou nd forest stewardship activities. Many agency i nter viewees com mented on the high emphasis that the current forest leadership places on collaborative processes. Compared to the neighbor i ng national forests, the Coos Bay BLM Dist r ict i nvested more i nto di rect collaboration with a var iet y of com mu nit y par t ners i n the per iod im - mediately af ter the Plan was adopted. One explanation may be that the Coos Bay Dist r ict had the abilit y to par ticipate more i ntensively i n collaborative par t nerships, par ticularly du r i ng the mid-1990s, because its f u ndi ng and st af fi ng remai ned relatively const ant, while the need for timber-sale design and implementation dropped precipitously. I nter viewees on the K lamath National Forest noted an i ncreased emphasis on collaboration bet ween the forest and other federal and state regulatory agencies since the Plan was implemented. T his emphasis has meant that forest em - ployees in upper management have spent much time, effort, and money work i ng with other agencies on issues relati ng to resou rce protection. Some i nter viewees suggested that the time i nvest ment requi red for i nteracti ng with other agencies has t aken away f rom the abilit y of the forest to i nteract collaboratively with local com mu nities. T he d rops i n forest budgets and st af fi ng have motivated the forest to develop par t nerships with other organized g roups such as Ducks Unlimited and the Rock y Mou nt ai n El k Fou ndation to get work done on the g rou nd. Collaboration th rough grants and agreements helps the forest leverage resources to get work done, make com mu nit y members more aware of forest management issues, involve local residents in forest stewardship, and provide local jobs. The Plan and Collaborative Forest Stewardship Collaboration i n forest stewardship is li kely i n fluenced by a host of factors and not by a si ngle one, such as a regional change i n forest policy. Nonetheless, to the extent that we are able, we discuss the di rect and i ndi rect ways that the Plan has i n fluenced changes i n collaborative forest steward - ship on the case-study forests. Ecosystem orientation of the Plan T he ecosystem or ient ation of the Plan ? and because ecosystems cross bou ndar ies ?has broadened the range of forest st akeholders who have i nterests i n, and concer ns about, forests and forest management. T his expansion of i nterests has diversified the t y pes of organizations that work collaboratively with the forests. For i nst ance, i nter viewees on the Mou nt Hood noted that more than a decade ago the forest was mostly concer ned about resou rce management withi n the bou ndar ies of the forest and that they worked with a fai rly nar row g roup of st akeholders. Now, a diverse 14 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. IV range of par t ners, i ncludi ng clubs, local landow ners, busi - nesses, and concessionai res collaborate with the forests on on-the-g rou nd stewardship activities across ow nerships. Coos Bay Dist r ict employees i ndicated that the emphasis on watershed restoration and the need to conduct activities simult aneously on pr ivate and federal lands has expanded the use of par t nership ag reements to get work done. I nter viewees on the case-st udy forests, par ticularly the Oly mpic and K lamath National Forests, repor t that they have been i ncreasi ngly work i ng with st akeholders with spe - cific envi ron ment al and conser vation objectives. Some of these envi ron ment al g roups ack nowledge, and are pleased by, thei r i ncreased par ticipation i n forest stewardship. Yet they remai n cautious about whether such relations and com mit ments by the forests will endu re with changes i n for - est policy. Also, i nteragency and multipar t y collaborations directed under the Plan, such as in provincial advisory com- mit tees (see Volu me I V, chapter 1), appear to have helped br i ng new st akeholders to collaborative processes and build relations at watershed, multiow nership, and agency- to -agency scales. T he extent to which these new for u ms have delivered benefits to local com mu nities and i ncreased collaborative forest stewardship is u nclear, however. Effects of lower harvest rates and decreased budgets and staff Lower har vest rates and the resulti ng lower budgets and st aff, which have both di rect and i ndi rect ties to the Plan, have i n fluenced t rends i n collaboration i n t wo key yet paradoxical ways. With decreasi ng hu man and fi nancial resources for forest management activities, the forests have expanded and developed par t nerships with g roups that shared similar resource management goals. Many agency i nter viewees suggested that collaborati ng with li ke-mi nded g roups was spu r red on by the necessit y to get the work done. Collaboration and par t nerships have become a new way of doi ng busi ness. For example, the i ncreasi ng demand for recreation uses and oppor t u nities on the Mou nt Hood National Forest has not been met with an i ncreasi ng budget for recreation, which has remai ned relatively flat (decreas - i ng i n real dollars) over the past decade. T he cont r ibution of the recreation budget to overhead costs, however, has i ncreased as other large prog rams, namely timber, have decli ned. T hus, managers have t u r ned to nu merous par t ners to help implement recreation management and recreation policy on the forest. T he paradox is that, as budget decli nes ser ve as an i ncentive for i n novation and expansion of collaborative processes to achieve forest stewardship objectives, they simult aneously const rai n and potentially jeopardize collab - orative effor ts. Agency i nter viewees expressed concer n that reduci ng st aff and resou rces has made managi ng collabora - tive processes more dif ficult. Many i nter viewees spoke of the impor t ance of buildi ng relations, but they ack nowledged that time ? a key i ng redient?was g rowi ng i ncreasi ngly scarce with i ncreased work loads and the emergence of more collaboratives. Some agency i nter viewees were concer ned that the forests may not be able to live up to thei r com mit - ments and obligations i n collaborative processes and r isk losi ng the t r ust of thei r par t ners. Case-st udy FS i nter view - ees also repor ted that the forests were u nable to anticipate the di rect and i ndi rect effects of the decreasi ng timber program on other programs, such as roads, recreation, and volu nteer prog rams, and oppor t u nities for collaboration were i nitially const rai ned by these effects. Agency and community relations Although the Plan?s emphasis on i nteragency collabora - tion and public par ticipation is evident i n the i ncrease i n multiparty groups, such as the advisory committees and watershed g roups, the goal to improve com mu nication and relations with local com mu nities has been less realized. I ndeed, some com mu nit y i nter viewees felt that the i nvest - ment in agency-to-agency processes has reduced the empha- sis on work i ng with local com mu nities on local issues. Also, they mention a sense that relations have improved and collaborative oppor t u nities have expanded for g roups and organizations with i nterests similar to those of the forests: recreation, watershed, and conser vation. Relations have expanded for g roups with complement ar y i nterests, including youth employment and educational groups that view work i ng i n the woods as a way for people to build k nowledge and sk ills, while receivi ng a wage, cou rse credit, or other benefits. Of ten these g roups are not place-based groups situated in local communities. 15 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume IV: Collaboration T he i ncreased diversit y of st akeholders and col - laborative oppor t u nities on the forest has coi ncided with a decrease i n com mu nication and collaboration with a once-promi nent forest st akeholder g roup, namely the timber com mu nit y. Traditional ties to com mu nities with previ - ously st rong timber or ient ations have been largely severed. At tempts to build relations i n these com mu nities and to fi nd com mon i nterests and oppor t u nities i n forest stewardship were few i n the case-st udy com mu nities, accordi ng to both com mu nit y and agency i nter viewees. Broad-based com - mu nit y par t nerships have been dif ficult to est ablish i n the more traditional areas of forest management, such as road const r uction and mai ntenance and timber management. A nd i nter viewees still work i ng i n the timber i ndust r y said that the federal forests are no longer key players i n timber management. I n some places, a not able tension over the i nabilit y of the forests to provide a reliable supply of timber may be impedi ng the creation of collaborative oppor t u nities i n forest stewardship with for mer timber st akeholders. At the time of the Plan, some com mu nities were more economically diverse than others, or they were begi n ni ng to or ient themselves toward the forest i n new ways, such as with recreation. Some case-st udy com mu nities had not had st rong timber or ient ations for several years; collaboration i n recreation management, i n par ticular, was more evident i n these com mu nities than i n timber- or iented ones. But, for the most part, the reduction in traditional connections that local com mu nities had to timber management has not been met by comparable i ncreases i n con nections to the forests through other aspects like recreation or restoration. Agency i nter viewees ack nowledge multiple benefits of work i ng collaboratively: i ncludi ng get ti ng work done, buildi ng relations with the public, and buildi ng a sense of civic ow nership i n the public forests. But these benefits may be dif ficult to realize i n com mu nities without st rong connections to the forest. And, they are concerned that a cycle of conti nued disengagement might follow. Com - mu nit y i nter viewees poi nted out that although some forest employees, most not ably some dist r ict rangers, were active and involved in the community, this involvement had not t ranslated i nto collaborative stewardship activities. Many com mu nit y i nter viewees expressed appreciation for, and saw value i n, the shar i ng of i nfor mation about forest management. Residents, however, of ten did not see a st rong relation bet ween thei r concer ns and forest management. T his view, combi ned with dimi nished agency presence on the forestsin particular the Forest Service presenceand the decli ne of timber management activities have created a sentiment in some communities that little mutual interest i n collaborative stewardship activities is visible. Although mitigation effor ts, such as the Nor thwest Economic Adjust - ment I nitiative, provided economic development benefits to some communities around the case-study forests, the role of, and cont r ibution by, the forests i nto these effor ts were not widely publicized locally. T hus, oppor t u nities to build or mend relations and con nections th rough mitigation effor ts were not f ully realized. A perception among com mu nit y i nter viewees is that the Plan has shifted decisionmaking authority from the local forests to the regional and national scale. Some people felt that for this reason collaborative processes would not lead to timely action, and thus participation in such efforts was not wor thwhile. Other i nter viewees noted that many people in the communities are struggling economically and did not have time to get i nvolved i n collaborative processes. Collaboration with tribes under the Plan Deter mi ni ng how changes i n collaboration bet ween the case-st udy forests and neighbor i ng t r ibes relate to the Plan is dif ficult, given the many factors that may have i n fluenced change. I n recent years, recog nition by federal and st ate re - sou rce management agencies of t r ibal r ights and the u nique relations that t r ibes have with the United St ates gover n ment has i ncreased (Lesko and T hakali 2001). Appreciation of the for mal dialog ue and engagement processes with t r ibes has apparently i ncreased, as mandated i n a nu mber of federal acts, i ncludi ng the National Envi ron ment al Protec - tion Act of 1970, the National Histor ic Preser vation Act of 1966 (amended 1992), and the Native A mer ican G raves Protection and Repat r iation Act of 1990. Also, President Cli nton?s presidential memorandu m of 1994 (Cli nton 1994) and executive order of 2000 (Cli nton 2000) di rected all U.S. 16 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. IV agencies to build effective processes for gover n ment-to - gover n ment relations with A mer ican I ndian t r ibal gov - er n ments. Other factors, such as i ncreased emphasis on protecti ng anad romous fish habit at of cult u ral impor t ance to t r ibes, recent land t ransfers, and memoranda of u nder - st andi ng bet ween t r ibes and resou rce management agencies, have i n fluenced collaborative processes i n recent years. Nonetheless, the Plan?s emphasis on ecosystems, water - sheds, and species protection, coupled with the emphasis on i nter-agency and multipar t y collaboration, has li kely cont r ibuted to, rather than det racted f rom, collaborative processes bet ween most t r ibes near the FS and BLM case studies. I nter viewees on the Oly mpic National Forest repor ted that collaboration bet ween the Qui nault I ndian Nation and the forest has been high for the past decade. T he Plan?s emphasis on watershed assessments has prompted i nterac - tion and collaboration. I n addition, a recent land t ransfer and the sharing of revenues generated from another parcel of land have produced legal and ad mi nist rative ties bet ween the agency and the Qui nault I ndian Nation that conti nue to f uel collaborative relations. I n 2003, Kar u k t r ibal of ficials repor ted that the t r ibe had est ablished a work i ng relationship with the K lamath National Forest u nder the Plan and had at tempted to imple - ment a nu mber of collaborative projects with the forest. T he limit ations imposed by the Plan?s su r vey-and-manage procedures had derailed some of these. In addition, the Kar u k perceived other roadblocks, i ncludi ng a lack of coordi nation bet ween the Plan and the Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative; a lack of collaborative suppor t among some i ndividuals i n the Forest Ser vice; and a lack of agency suppor t for the Plan itself. Despite the not able cont r ibutions of some individuals in the Forest Service, the situation led to disillusion ment among t r ibe members regardi ng the will - i ng ness of the forest to collaborate with them. I n 2003 the Karuk leadership remained interested in actively engaging the K lamath National Forest i n collaborative management, but they felt they had been excluded both f rom providi ng i nput and f rom exercisi ng thei r t raditional k nowledge. Relations with the Coquille Tr ibe and the Coos Bay District have reportedly improved dramatically since the late 1990s, compared to how they were i n the early 1990s. A nd BLM employees note that they collaborate closely with the Coquille Tr ibe and the Confederated Tr ibes of the Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw. Over the past decade, protecti ng anad romous fish habi - t at has been an area of i ncreased collaboration among the Confederated Tr ibes of the War m Spr i ngs and the Mou nt Hood National Forest, as well as other st ate and federal agencies and nongovernmental entities. Volunteerism Volu nteer ism is a t y pe of collaboration i n which the pooli ng of i nterests, resou rces, and labor of ten results i n on-the-g rou nd forest stewardship activities. But, di rect ties bet ween the Plan and changes i n volu nteer ism are dif ficult to make. Changes i n budgets and st af fi ng that coi ncided with the Plan, however, coupled with the ecosystem or ient a - tion of the Plan, have affected volunteer programs on the case-st udy forests. To assess changes i n volu nteer ism, we combi ned agency dat a on volu nteers with i nter view dat a f rom the case-st udy forests. Pai nti ng an accu rate quantit a - tive pict u re of t rends i n volu nteer ism is dif ficult, given limitations of, and changes in, methods for collecting and repor ti ng dat a over the years. We compiled quantit ative dat a for the FS case-study forests for the region, although only recent years were available (t able 2-1). For the Coos Bay Dist r ict, we compiled volu nteer dat a for recent years f rom an nual repor ts provided by the Coos Bay Dist r ict Of fice (t able 2-2). Agency i nter viewees f rom the case-st udy forests i ndi - cated that the forests depend heavily on volunteers to con- t r ibute to forest stewardship activities. Volu nteer prog rams have evolved, however, with most of the case-st udy forests reporting increased emphasis on hosted volunteer programs i n which agency person nel t rai n and coordi nate projects with st aff of organized g roups. T hese g roups, i n t u r n, t rai n and super vise thei r members i n specific volu nteer activities on the forests. Budget and st aff decli nes appear to be a key cont r ibutor to changes i n volu nteer prog rams, particularly on the FS case-study forests. Although some gai ns i n prog ram matic ef ficiency th rough hosted prog rams are ack nowledged, the decli ne i n di rect i nteraction bet ween 17 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume IV: Collaboration Table 2-1Senior, youth, and volunteer programs, 2000 to 2003a Senior community Youth service employment International Conservation program Hosted volunteers Volunteers Corps Total K lamat h Nat ional Forest Person yearsb 20 0 0 11.66 16.92 6.21 1.56 36.35 20 01 6.95 15.23 0.52 7.72 3.14 33.56 20 02 4.68 8.62 6.09 19.39 20 03 11.92 4.38 1.61 17.91 Value of work (dollars) 20 0 0 251,74 4 287,396 120,258 38,081 697,479 20 01 188,168 295,567 9,554 179,107 74,618 747,014 20 02 153,524 156,796 149,942 30,867 491,129 20 03 151,875 106,249 45,622 303,746 Number of enrollees 20 0 0 26 125 128 5 284 20 01 20 97 2 55 19 193 20 02 18 84 141 5 248 20 03 94 237 12 343 Mou nt Hood Nat ional Forest Person yearsb 20 0 0 5.96 4.55 0.2 12.92 2.39 26.02 20 01 5.78 3.85 0.16 14.51 3.09 27.39 20 02 5.25 2.99 0.27 11.32 2.71 22.54 20 03 3.30 15.99 3.33 22.62 Value of work (dollars) 20 0 0 128,0 03 92,466 4,367 267,803 39,164 531,803 20 01 116,488 75,037 3,711 306,539 43,881 545,656 20 02 118,125 60,973 7,661 238,155 55,754 480,668 20 03 69,116 379,850 46,462 495,428 Number of enrollees 20 0 0 11 209 1 915 15 1,151 20 01 14 199 1 952 19 1,185 20 02 10 182 1 817 21 1,031 20 03 175 1,299 20 1,494 Oly mpic Nat ional Forest Person yearsb 20 0 0 4.69 11.51 16.2 20 01 5.90 9.19 9.55 24.64 20 02 9.47 14.06 9.62 33.15 20 03 13.66 11.66 25.32 Value of work (dollars) 20 0 0 75,059 191,523 266,582 20 01 96,886 77,986 168,209 343,081 20 02 193,716 198,868 168,221 560,805 20 03 275,879 213,786 489,665 Number of enrollees 20 0 0 67 506 573 20 01 22 105 406 533 20 02 17 97 331 4 45 20 03 64 138 202 a Hosted prog r a ms i nclude, but a re not li m ited to, t he St udent Con ser vat ion Associat ion, Nor t hwest Yout h Cor ps, Califor n ia De pa r t ment of Cor rect ion s, Califor n ia Con ser vat ion Cor ps, a nd G reater Avenues for I nde pendence. b Per son yea r is 260 d ays a nd equ als one f u ll-t i me equ ivalent. Sou rce: Sen ior, yout h, a nd volu nteer FS d at aba se. ( Monet a r y d at a were not a dju sted for i n flat ion.) 18 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. IV forest employees and citizen volu nteers is seen as negative, as is the necessit y of havi ng to t u r n dow n, or redi rect, i ndi - vidual requests to volu nteer because of a lack of capacit y to coordinate volunteer efforts. T he recreation prog rams on all forests have consistently provided opportunities for people interested in volunteering as campground hosts, maintaining recreational sites and t rails, wilder ness education, and presenti ng i nter pretive prog rams and tou rs at special sites. For i nst ance, the Elanor t rail crew on the Oly mpic National Forest has been a crew of 6 to 10 reti rees rangi ng f rom 60 to 80 years old. Other prog rams on the case-st udy forests ? such as the wildlife, fisher ies, and bot any prog rams; the soil, water, and ai r pro - g rams; the reforest ation and st and development prog rams; and her it age prog rams ?have used volu nteers to assist with inventory, monitoring, restoration, and interpretation. For i nst ance, the her it age prog ram on the Mou nt Hood National Forest does not have a budget li ne item for i nter pret ation (except as prog ram management), but relies on volu nteers to do a large amou nt of the her it age work. Many volunteers come from outside the communities adjacent to the forests. On the Mou nt Hood National Forest, for instance, most of the volunteers in the recreation pro- gram reportedly come from the Portland metropolitan area. Local residents, par ticularly those with st rong at t ach ments to specific places or events, volu nteer i n garbage cleanups, bi rd cou nts, fish cou nts, and other an nual events on the forest, but not i n high nu mbers. Com mu nit y i nter viewees mentioned few examples of volu nteer ism i n collaborative forest stewardship activities on thei r respective forests. Some i nter viewees f rom the Mid-K lamath com mu nit y i n the K lamath National Forest case st udy i ndicated that residents were st r uggli ng economically and were not i n a position to work for f ree on behalf of the forest. T he pool of residents with the capacit y and i ncli nation to get i nvolved i n civic activities are occupied with com mu nit y development activities and may not be able to add to thei r existi ng civic com mit ments. T he volu nteer coordi nator on the Coos Bay Dist r ict, however, repor ted that about 50 percent of the volunteers are local and that most of the individual volun- teers are long-ter m workers who cont r ibute 80 to 95 percent of the volu nteer hou rs. Agency i nter viewees on the Mou nt Hood National Forest and Coos Bay Dist r ict also poi nt out that cou nt y pr ison i n mates have been another sou rce of volunteers. We encou ntered some discrepancies bet ween the agency data on volunteers and perceptions from agency i nter viewees about changes i n volu nteer prog rams. Agency Table 2-2Coos Bay District volunteerism, 19962002 Year Number of volunteers Volunteer hours Estimated valuea Individuals/groupsb Dollars 1996 291,858 1997 17,000 262,383 1998 c 37,600 509,657 1999 68/2 d 19,204 267,322 2000 37/1 8,600 117,269 2001 40/1 9,600 102,054 2002 33/1 21,000 377,129 a Adju sted for i n flat ion; 20 03 dolla r s. b T he d ist r ict t r ack s volu nteer act iv it y ca r r ied out by la rge g roups, such a s Gi rl Scout s or Boy Scout s, a s g roup ef for t s r at her t ha n a s i nd iv idu al ef for t s. Cou nt y pr ison volu nteer hou r s were not i ncluded i n t hese d at a. c We a re u nable to explai n t he u nu su ally h ig h nu mber s i n 1998. d T he BLM bega n cou nt i ng couples work i ng a s ca mp host s a s one volu nteer, r at her t ha n t wo f rom F Y 20 0 0 onwa rd. Sou rce: U.S. De pa r t ment of t he I nter ior, Bu reau of La nd Ma nagement, Coos Bay Dist r ict (1996 ?20 02). 19 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume IV: Collaboration i nter viewees on the Oly mpic National Forest repor ted that the nu mber of volu nteers fluct uates f rom year to year, but has been steadily i ncreasi ng, and it is a healthy volu nteer prog ram. T he cor porate dat abase, however, shows a steady decrease i n the nu mber of volu nteers i n recent years. T his difference may be the result of cou nti ng people and projects i n different ways f rom year to year. T he perception that the volu nteer prog ram is g rowi ng is probably more relevant because it reflects day-to - day ad mi nist rative processes. For several decades, the Mount Hood National Forest has had some of the highest volu nteer nu mbers i n the Nation, which has been at t r ibuted to its high envi ron ment al and recreational amenities and its proximit y to a met ropolit an population. Volunteer coordinators reported that the peak nu mbers of volu nteers on the forest were i n the late 1980s and early 1990s. Cor porate dat a for recent years show i ncreasi ng nu mbers of volu nteers, yet fluct uations exist i n the nu mber of person-years and the dollar value of the work per for med bet ween 2000 and 2003. T hese fluct uations may be a reflection of the evolution of the volu nteer prog ram on the forest. Volunteer coordinators indicated that staff and budget decli nes have reduced the forest?s capacit y to man - age volunteer programs and that the forest cannot meet the demand for individual volunteer opportunities. As a result, some volu nteer prog rams are now emphasizi ng hosted vol - u nteers, where the forest t rai ns and coordi nates with outside g roups who then t rai n and super vise g roups of volu nteers. Accordi ng to cor porate dat a, the nu mber of volu nteers on the K lamath National Forest has fluct uated, although it has i ncreased bet ween 2000 and 2003. T he dat a suggest that more people are volunteering for shorter periods of time, and that the dollar value of the work per for med by volu nteers has been decreasi ng. I nter viewees f rom the forest stated that the volunteer program has remained fairly st able si nce the Plan was implemented. T hey also i ndicated that running volunteer programs takes a commitment of employee time that has become i ncreasi ngly scarce as forest budgets and employees decli ne i n nu mber. Although di rect compar isons are not possible, dat a for the Coos Bay Dist r ict for roughly the same per iod as the FS dat abase (2000 ?2002) show that the dist r ict exper ienced an i ncrease i n volu nteer hou rs (although it i ncreased to roughly the same peak as i n 1999), an i ncrease i n the dollar value of the work per for med, but var iable nu mbers of en rolled volu nteers. T he volu nteer coordi nator suggested that the decli ne i n volu nteer hou rs bet ween 1997 and 2001 was due i n par t to the BLM?s reluct ance to use volu nteers for su r veys of species because of the concer n that volu nteer- gathered dat a might not hold up i n cou r t. It also may be due to the i ncrease i n Jobs-i n-the-Woods prog rams and other professionalized restoration activities that histor ically may have provided volunteer opportunities. Challenges to Collaborative Forest Stewardship Although several positive and innovative aspects of col- laborative forest stewardship are work i ng on the case-st udy forests, challenges still exist. Some have had di rect or i ndi rect con nection to the Plan. T hose, and other challenges not related to the Plan, are su m mar ized below. Agency i nter viewees ack nowledge multiple benefits of work i ng i n collaborative processes, i ncludi ng get ti ng work done, buildi ng relations with the public, and buildi ng a sense of civic ow nership i n the national forests. Par ticipa - tion i n collaboratives, however, is dif ficult i n the face of i n - creasi ng work loads and decreasi ng budgets and st aff. Some prog ram managers said they feel they are just get ti ng by with the resou rces they have to do thei r prog ram of work, and engagi ng new par t ners and expandi ng the work seems i nfeasible. Com mu nit y and agency i nter viewees i ndicated that havi ng leadership i n collaboratives ?i n par ticular, agency represent atives with decision mak i ng author it y?was impor t ant to the prog ress of collaborative g roups because it demonst rates com mit ment and the willi ng ness to act. Some i nter viewees, most not ably on the Coos Bay Dist r ict, were concer ned that par ticipation i n collaborative g roups had been delegated to tech nical specialists who lack decision - making authority. Agency i nter viewees on all forests noted that lead - ers and field employees are some of the most enthusiastic suppor ters of collaborative processes. Nonetheless, several i nter viewees on the FS case forests noted that i nter nal cult u ral bar r iers to collaboration exist, stem mi ng mai nly 20 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. IV f rom an endu r i ng at tit ude that the FS can do the work best by itself. One challenge may be identif yi ng areas where collaborative approaches can achieve high ret u r ns, and other areas where more nar row, t raditional approaches are appropriate. With the broadeni ng of forest st akeholders comes the increased likelihood that perspectives on forest manage- ment issues will con flict. T h roughout the forest case st ud - ies, the formation of groups that initially set out to address a management issue or ser ies of issues is evident, but thei r i nabilit y to u nif y u nder com mon forest stewardship objec - tives has derailed some groups. For instance, community i nter viewees on the K lamath National Forest, who were i nvolved i n a collaborative g roup that for med at the onset of the Plan, said the group intended to address forest manage- ment issues but event ually a few st rong dissenti ng voices led to a st alli ng of the collaborative process. Although this exper ience became a disi ncentive for some members to par ticipate i n collaborative processes i n forest management, i nter viewees noted that they could apply k nowledge gai ned th rough that exper ience to collaboratives that add ressed other, less cont roversial objectives, such as water and fisher - ies management. Conclusions Did agency and citizen collaboration improve u nder the Plan, and did relations bet ween local com mu nities and agencies improve? T he Plan has had di rect and i ndi rect, positive and negative effects on collaborative forest stewardship on the case-st udy forests and com mu nities. T he Plan?s ecosystem focus and emphasis on i nteragency collaboration encou raged i nteractions among public and pr ivate landow ners and broadened the range of st akeholders and oppor t u nities for collaborative processes. A var iet y of g roups, together with forest agencies, are pooli ng resou rces, such as time, labor, fi nances, and ideas, to achieve mut ually held forest stewardship objectives. Faced with challenges of decreased budgets and st affs, the forests have been able to mai nt ai n viable, productive, and multibeneficial collabora - tive projects and prog rams. T he volu nteer prog rams are good examples of prog rams that are evolvi ng and seek i ng new collaborative oppor t u nities i n the face of ad mi nist ra - tive and budget ar y const rai nts. I ncreased diversit y and i n novation i n collaboration, however, has coi ncided with a decrease i n com mu nication and collaboration with a once-promi nent forest st akeholder, namely the timber com mu nit y. T he discon nect bet ween timber-based com mu nities and forest management and the implication it would have on collaborative relations were u nanticipated consequences of the reduction i n timber har vests u nder the Plan. I n general, collaborative activities, as repor ted by com mu nit y i nter viewees who represented a diversit y of perspectives, were mi nimal with some excep - tions, such as Tr ibal collaboratives. New con nections have yet to replace old timber ties i n some com mu nities. Many i nter viewees f rom for mer timber-based com mu nities tended to feel disassociated f rom, or u naware of, cu r rent forest policies and practices or had lit tle di rect concer n with forest management. A nd yet, some for mer timber i ndust r y employees who remai ned i n thei r com mu nities felt that thei r sk ills, k nowledge, and exper ience i n forest management could ser ve contemporar y forest management practices but were not bei ng used. Other factors that affected the par - ticipation of com mu nit y residents i n collaborative resou rce management, beyond the necessit y of a shared mut ual i nterest or st ake, i ncluded a shor t age of residents with sk ills to do the work, residents with the time to par ticipate, consistent players and par ticipation, organized g roups with resou rces, and residents who are not st r uggli ng to make ends meet. We focused on com mon themes that emerged f rom the fou r local cases, and do not k now if, and to what extent, the results repor ted here can be generalized to the Plan area as a whole. Literature Cited Buttolph, L.F.; Kay, W.; Charnley, S.; Moseley, C.; Donoghue, E.M. [In press]. Nor thwest Forest Plan ? the fi rst 10 years (1994 ?2003): socioeconomic monitor i ng of Oly mpic National Forest and th ree local com mu nities. Gen. Tech. Rep. Por tland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 21 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume IV: Collaboration Clinton, W.J. 1994. (Apr il 29). Executive memorandu m on gover n ment-to -gover n ment relations with Native A mer ican t r ibal gover n ments. Washi ng ton, DC: T he W hite House, Of fice of the Press Secret ar y. Clinton, W.J. 2000. ( November 6). Executive order 13175 ? Consult ation and coordi nation with I ndian t r ibal gover n ments. Washi ng ton, DC: T he W hite House, Of fice of the Press Secret ar y. Gray, B. 1985. Conditions facilit ati ng i nterorganizational collaboration. Hu man Relations. 38: 911?936. Lesko, L.M.; Thakali, R.G. 2001. Traditional k nowledge and t r ibal par t nership on the Kaibab National Forest with an emphasis on the Hopi i nteragency management. I n: Clow, R.L.; Getches, D.H; Sut ton, I., eds. Tr usteeship i n change: toward t r ibal autonomy i n resou rce management. Boulder: Universit y Press of Colorado: 281?301. McLain, R.J.; Tobe, L.; Charnley, S.; Moseley, C.; Donoghue, E.M. [In press]. Nor thwest Forest Plan ? the fi rst 10 years (1994 ?2003): socioeconomic monitoring of Coos Bay dist r ict and th ree local com mu nities. Gen. Tech. Rep. Por tland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. Tuchmann, E.T.; Connaughton, K.P.; Freedman, L.E.; Moriwaki, C.B. 1996. T he Nor thwest Forest Plan: a repor t to the President and Cong ress. Por tland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 253 p. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 19962002. Annual program summary for the Bu reau of Land Management Coos Bay Dist r ict. Nor th Bend, OR: Bu reau of Land Management. ht t p:// w w w.or.bl m.gov/coosbay. (Aug ust 31, 2004). A n nual. 22 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. IV Methods Ou r evaluation of how effective adaptive management areas (A M As) have been is based on secondar y sou rce mater ial. Refer to that mater ial for a discussion of methods used to assess A M As. Ou r discussion of how effective Provi ncial Advisor y Com mit tees (PACs) and Resou rce Advisor y Com - mit tees (R ACs) have been at promoti ng collaborative forest stewardship is based on both secondar y sou rce mater ial and i nfor mal discussions with PAC and R AC members, both during and outside of committee meetings. T he analysis of t rends i n volu nteer ism and par t nerships is based on agency dat a relati ng to volu nteers and other work prog rams, as well as par t nership ag reements (e.g., memoranda of u nderst andi ng, cooperative ag reements, joi nt vent u re ag reements). To docu ment these t rends, we fi rst updated a survey of the many volunteer and partnership dat abases that exist withi n the Forest Ser vice to deter mi ne how useable they are for monitor i ng. T his su r vey was beg u n by the Forest Ser vice Par t nership Task force. Dat a - bases su r veyed i nclude i nf rast r uct u re dat abase (I N FR A), Wildlife, Fish and Rare Plants ( W FR P), Senior, Youth, Volu nteer (SY V ), Economic Action Prog rams (EA P), and National Fi re Plan O perations and Repor ti ng System ( N FPORS). T hese dat abases have not been f ully populated with histor ical dat a and t y pically cont ai n only ver y recent dat a. T hey are not li n ked together and cont ai n redu ndant Appendix: Methods and Interview Guide and contradictory information. Additional data on trends i n collaborative forest stewardship, i n par ticular related to volu nteer ism, were gathered du r i ng case st udy i nter views with forest employees and com mu nit y represent atives and stakeholders. Once the dat a sou rces were located, we quer ied them for i nfor mation on ou r case-st udy forests. T he Mou nt Hood National Forest ser ved as a pilot test for this exercise, as that forest has an active par t nership prog ram. We refi ned ou r monitor i ng methods by usi ng the Mou nt Hood and then ap - plied them to the rest of the national forests in the plan area. We wanted to t rack t rends i n par t nership ag reements as par t of monitor i ng collaboration i n forest stewardship. However we encou ntered subst antial dat a problems that prohibited us f rom conducti ng an analysis of par t nerships withi n the time and resou rces available for the project. One of the problems associated with monitor i ng par t nership ag reements is that they are removed f rom the dat abase once they are ter mi nated. T hus, agency dat abases only cont ai n information on those partnership agreements that are active. T his makes it dif ficult, if not impossible, to obt ai n dat a regardi ng past ag reements. Hard copies of these ag reements may be stored i n Forest Ser vice warehouses, but it was impractical to t r y to ret r ieve docu ments f rom warehouses for purposes of this monitoring report. 23 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume IV: Collaboration Interview Guide Purpose: Dat a gathered i n this section should cont r ibute to u nderst andi ng the evolution, or not, of how and why com - mu nities have par ticipated i n collaborative forest steward - ship with the national forest / BLM si nce the N W FP. Specific projects and motivations for engagi ng i n such projects that are di rectly related to the N W FP should be identified. Proj - ects and motivations not di rectly tied to the N W FP should be descr ibed separately i n order to ar r ive at an overall sense of how public engagement and collaborative forest steward - ship have changed. Intro: I?m i nterested i n how you r com mu nit y, or local g roups that you are i nvolved with, collaborates with Forest X i n resource management activities on the forest or near the forest. I?m also i nterested i n how overall engagement i n collaborative forest stewardship activities bet ween the com mu nit y, local g roups, and Forest X has changed over the past decade. More specifically, I?d li ke to discuss what t y pes of act ual on-the-g rou nd collaborative activities occu r. (Researchers: If responses to pr ior sections i ndicate that the i nter viewee is well i nfor med about the N W FP, please i n - clude reference to it when ask i ng about change over the past decade. T he below questions assu me that the i nter viewee k nows lit tle about the components of the N W FP.) TOPIC: Change i n general engagement with FS/ BLM (1) Has you r com mu nit y/g roup?s overall engagement with the National Forest changed over the past ten years? Has it i ncreased, decreased, or st ayed the same? (2) How and why has it evolved or st ayed the same? TOPIC: Change i n on-the-g rou nd collaborative forest stewardship (3) W hat t y pes of on-the-g rou nd collaborative forest stewardship activities does you r com mu nit y engage i n with the Forest / Dist r ict? (4) If none, why not? TOPIC: Objectives and motivations for collaborati ng (5) Please descr ibe some of the objectives of those col - laborations or par t nerships. (6) W hat motivates you r com mu nit y/g roup to collabo - rate with Forest X? W ho usually t akes the i nitiative to est ablish these collaborations? TOPIC: Benefits of collaborati ng (7) How does the com mu nit y/g roup benefit f rom the collaborations? W hat have been some of the suc - cesses? (8) Have there been any i ndi rect benefits (such as sk ills developed, i ncreased net work i ng, improved relations to Forests)? TOPIC: Bar r iers to collaborati ng (com mu nit y and FS/ BLM) (9) W hat do you see as the biggest bar r iers, i nter nal to you r com mu nit y, to collaborati ng with the National Forest i n resou rce management activities (such as t r ust levels, com mu nit y leadership/capacit y, com - mu nit y cohesion)? (10) W hat do you thi n k are the biggest bar r iers that the National Forest / BLM has to collaborati ng with you r com mu nit y (or local com mu nities) i n resou rce man - agement activities (such willi ng ness/availabilit y of forest leadership/st aff to collaborate, lack of person - nel, lack of f u nds)? TOPIC: Fut u re di rection of collaboration (11) A re there any t y pes of collaborative activities that you would li ke to see developed or expanded? W hy? TOPIC: Plan goal (12) W hat prog ress has been made on meeti ng the Plan goal to improve relations bet ween federal land management agencies and local communities, and promote collaborative forest management and joi nt forest stewardship activities? Pacific Northwest Research Station Web site http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw Telephone (503) 808-2592 Publication requests (503) 808-2138 FAX (503) 808-2130 E-mail pnw_pnwpubs@fs.fed.us Mailing address Publications Distribution Pacific Northwest Research Station P.O. Box 3890 Portland, OR 97208-3890 U.S. Depar tment of A griculture Pacific Nor thwest Research Station 333 SW First Avenue P.O. Box 3890 Por tland, OR 97208 -3890 Of ficial Busines s Penalt y for Private Use, $300 Northwest Forest PlaN THE FIRST 10 YEARS (1994?2003) Pacific Nor thwest Research Station Forest Ser vice United States Depar tment of A griculture General Technical Repor t PNW- GTR- 649 Vol. V April 2006 socioeconomic Monitoring results Volume V: Public Values and Forest Management Susan Charnley and Ellen M. Donoghue Authors Susan Charnley and Ellen M. Donoghue are research social scientists, U.S. Department of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation, P.O. Box 3890, Por tland, OR 97208. The Forest Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture is dedicated to the principle of multiple use management of the Nations forest resources for sustained yields of wood, water, forage, wildlife, and recreation. Through forestry research, cooperation with the States and private forest owners, and management of the national forests and national grasslands, it strivess directed by Congresso provide increasingly greater service to a growing Nation. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individuals income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDAs TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Socioeconomic Monitoring Results Volume V: Public Values and Forest Management Susan Charnley and Ellen M. Donoghue Northwest Forest PlanThe First 10 Years (19942003): Socioeconomic Monitoring Results Susan Charnley, Technical Coordinator U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Pacific Nor thwest Research Station Por tland, Oregon General Technical Report PNW-GTR-649 Vol. V April 2006 ii Abstract Charnley, Susan; Donoghue, Ellen M. 2006. Socioeconomic monitoring results. Volume V: public values and forest management. In: Charnley, S., tech. coord. Nor thwest Forest Plan ?the fi rst 10 years (1994 ?2003): socioeconomic monitor i ng results. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 649. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 23 p. One of the Nor thwest Forest Plan?s socioeconomic goals was to protect the forest values and envi ron ment al qualities associated with late-successional, old-g row th, and aquatic ecosystems. I n Volu me V we add ress the topic of forest protection f rom the socioeconomic perspective. A literat u re review revealed that bet ween 1990 and 2002 there has been su r pr isi ngly lit tle change i n Pacific Nor thwest residents? views of how Pacific Nor thwest forests should be managed. T h roughout this per iod, research fi ndi ngs i ndicate that people support forest management to provide a broad set of multiple uses and both economic and envi ron ment al benefits. Never theless, there has consistently been a proenvi ron ment leani ng, with the major it y favor i ng envi ron ment al over economic management objectives when asked to make a choice bet ween them. T h roughout the st udy per iod, the belief that active forest management improves forest health has predomi nated. However, clearcut ti ng has consistently been u npopular, and the major it y have favored old-g row th protection. New forestry techniques that are not intensive are more socially acceptable. T he monitor i ng team also conducted i nter views with com mu nit y members and agency employees f rom fou r case-st udy areas to docu ment thei r perceptions of how well the Plan has protected forest values and envi ron ment al qualities associated with late-successional, old-g row th, and aquatic ecosystems on federal forest lands. T he team also docu mented i nter viewees? issues and concer ns relati ng to federal forest management. T he most posi - tive Plan effects were believed to be associated with the protection of aquatic ecosystems. Most i nter viewees did not disti ng uish Plan effects on older forests f rom those on forest ecosystems more generally. Although the Plan brought an end to earlier forest management practices that many considered ecologically dest r uctive, most people i nter viewed did not believe federal forests were cu r rently healthy. T hey believed silvicult u ral activit y was necessar y for keepi ng forests healthy and that not enough had occu r red du r i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan. T his led to concer ns about fi re, i nsects, and disease and f r ust ration that needed forest work was not creati ng local jobs. Timber har vest, forest health, and jobs were among the biggest issues of concer n to com mu nit y i nter viewees. Although i nter viewees over whel mi ngly believed that the Plan had emphasized forest protection over com mu nit y well-bei ng, thei r com ments reflect a perception that healthy forest ecosystems and healthy com mu nit y economies can and should be li n ked and that those li n ks are cu r rently weak. Key words: Nor thwest Forest Plan, socioeconomic monitor i ng, forest management values, management issues and concerns. iii Preface T his repor t is one of a set of repor ts produced on this 10 -year an niversar y of the Nor th- west Forest Plan (the Plan). T he collection of repor ts at tempts to answer questions about the effectiveness of the Plan based on new monitor i ng and research results. T he set includes a series of status and trends reports, a synthesis of all regional monitoring and research results, a report on interagency information management, and a summary report. The status and trends reports focus on establishing baselines of information from 1994, when the Plan was approved, and repor ti ng change over the 10 -year per iod. T he st a - t us and t rends ser ies i ncludes repor ts on late-successional and old-g row th forests, nor ther n spot ted owl population and habit at, marbled mu r relet population and habit at, watershed condition, gover n ment-to -gover n ment t r ibal relationships, socioeconomic conditions, and monitor i ng of project implement ation u nder Plan st andards and g uideli nes. The synthesis report addresses questions about the effectiveness of the Plan by usi ng the st at us and t rends results and new research. It focuses on the validit y of the Plan assu mptions, differences bet ween expect ations and what act ually happened, the cer t ai nt y of these fi ndi ngs, and, fi nally, considerations for the f ut u re. T he sy nthesis repor t is organized i n t wo par ts: Par t I?i nt roduction, context, sy nthesis, and su m mar y? and Par t II? socioeconomic implications, older forests, species conser vation, the aquatic conservation strategy, and adaptive management and monitoring. T he repor t on i nteragency i nfor mation management identifies issues and recom mends solutions for resolving data and mapping problems encountered during the preparation of the set of monitoring reports. Information issues inevitably surface during analyses that require data from multiple agencies covering large geographic areas. The goal of that repor t is to improve the i nteg ration and acquisition of i nteragency dat a for the next comprehensive report. T he socioeconomic st at us and t rends repor t is published i n six volu mes. Volu me I of the repor t cont ai ns key fi ndi ngs. Volu me II add resses the evaluation question, A re predict - able levels of timber and nontimber resources available and being produced? The focus of Volu me III is the evaluation question, A re local com mu nities and economies exper ienci ng positive or negative changes that may be associated with federal forest management? Volu me I V assesses the Plan goal of promoti ng agency- citizen collaboration i n forest management. Volu me V (this volu me) repor ts on public values regardi ng federal forest management i n the Pacific Nor thwest. Volu me V I provides a histor y of the Nor thwest Forest Plan socioeconomic monitoring program and a discussion of potential directions for the program. iv Summary One goal of the Nor thwest Forest Plan (the Plan) was to protect the forest values and envi ron ment al qualities associated with late-successional, old-g row th, and aquatic eco - systems. I n Volu me V we add ress the topic of forest protection f rom the socioeconomic perspective. Fi rst, we repor t the results of a literat u re review that evaluates t rends i n public values regardi ng forest management i n the Pacific Nor thwest bet ween the early 1990s and the early 2000s. Second, we su m mar ize the results of i nter views with com mu nit y members and agency employees that docu ment thei r perceptions of how well the Plan has protected forest values and envi ron ment al qualities associated with late-successional, old-g row th, and aquatic ecosystems on federal forest lands. We also discuss com mu nit y members? issues and concerns relating to forest management under the Plan. T he monitor i ng questions and i ndicators monitored were the followi ng: Monitoring questions Indicators monitored W hat forest values and envi ron ment al qualities Pacific Nor thwest residents? values, associated with federal forests are impor t ant at tit udes, and beliefs about forest to members of the public, and what is the management, based on a review of balance of values ( both com modit y and existi ng literat u re. noncom modit y) that members of the public believe federal forests should be managed for? How have public at tit udes, beliefs, and values relati ng to forest management i n the Pacific Nor thwest changed si nce 1990? From the public perspective, how well has Com mu nit y members? perceptions of federal forest management under the Plan of how well forest management u nder provided for forest values and environmental the Plan has achieved the goal of qualities associated with late-successional, forest protection and provided for old-g row th, and aquatic ecosystems? the forest uses, values, and envi ron- mental qualities they care about. W hat issues and concer ns related to federal Com mu nit y member?s issues and forest management under the Plan are concerns relating to federal forest prevalent in local communities? management. Plan Expectations Regarding Public Values T he Plan would protect the long-ter m health of forests, wildlife, and water ways while providing for the sustainable use of timber and nontimber forest resources. A system of ter rest r ial and aquatic reser ves est ablished by the Plan would protect late-successional and old-g row th forest ecosystems i nside of late-successional reser ves, and the health of aquatic systems and the species that depend on them in riparian reserves and key watersheds. Late-successional reser ves together with other Plan land use alloca - tions and st andards and g uideli nes would mai nt ai n a f u nctional older forest ecosystem. R ipar ian reser ves would help mai nt ai n and restore r ipar ian st r uct u res and f u nctions, benefit fish and non fish species dependent on r ipar ian ecosystems, and cont r ibute to habitat conservation for terrestrial organisms. v Monitoring Results Bet ween 1990 and 2002 there has been su r pr isi ngly lit tle change i n Pacific Nor thwest resi - dents? views of how Pacific Nor thwest forests should be managed. T h roughout this per iod, research fi ndi ngs i ndicate that people suppor t forest management to provide a broad set of multiple uses and both economic and envi ron ment al benefits. Never theless, there has con - sistently been a pro - envi ron ment leani ng, with the major it y favor i ng envi ron ment al over economic management objectives when asked to make a choice bet ween them. Conti nued suppor t for timber production f rom federal forests has li kely been tied to a belief that the wood products i ndust r y is impor t ant to the regional economy, and to concer n for the health of r u ral com mu nities. W hereas place of residence was not fou nd to be a sig nificant factor i n fluenci ng people?s at tit udes, beliefs, and values about forest management pr ior to the Nor thwest Forest Plan, recent st udies fi nd that u rban residents tend to be pro - envi ron ment, with r u ral residents havi ng more evenly split views on forest management issues. Throughout the study period, the belief that active forest management improves forest health has predomi nated. However, clearcut ti ng has consistently been u npopular, and the major it y have favored old-g row th protection. New forest r y tech niques that are not i ntensive are more socially acceptable. Have federal land managers been doi ng a good job of protecti ng the forest values and envi ron ment al qualities people care about u nder the Plan? T he literat u re reviewed here does not provide extensive evidence for answer i ng this question. T he evidence that does exist suggests that opi nion is fai rly evenly divided. Some people have favorable views of the job forest managers are doi ng, and others believe that forest managers need to improve their performance. I n the fou r case-st udy locations i n the Plan area where we conducted fieldwork, members of the public who were i nter viewed perceived that the Plan had had mixed results to date for forest protection. T hei r issues of concer n relati ng to forest manage- ment were to some deg ree li n ked to those perceptions. T he most positive Plan effects were believed to be associated with the protection of aquatic ecosystems. Most i nter viewees did not disti ng uish Plan effects on older forests from those on forest ecosystems more generally. Although the Plan brought an end to earlier forest management practices that many considered ecologically destructive, most people i nter viewed did not believe federal forests were cu r rently healthy. Li ke many Pacific Nor thwest residents su r veyed i n other st udies, they believed silvicult u ral activit y was necessar y for keepi ng forests healthy and that not enough had occu r red du r i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan. T his led to concer ns about fi re, i nsects, and disease and to f r ust ration that needed forest work was not creati ng local jobs. Timber har vest, forest health, and jobs were among the biggest issues of concer n to com mu nit y i nter viewees. T he others were recreation and forest access, also tied to the issue of jobs. Although i nter viewees over - whel mi ngly believed that the Plan had emphasized forest protection over com mu nit y well-bei ng, thei r com ments reflect a perception that healthy forest ecosystems and healthy com mu nit y economies can and should be li n ked, and that those li n ks are cu r rently weak. vi Contents 1 Chapter 1: Trends in Public Attitudes, Beliefs, and Values About Forest Management in the Paci fic Nor thwest , by Susan Charnley 1 Introduction 1 Monitoring Questions 1 Expectations 2 Methods 2 Results 2 1990 ?94 3 1995 ?98 4 1999 ?2002 6 Discussion and Conclusions 7 Ack nowledgments 7 References 9 Chapter 2: Local Perceptions of Forest Protection and Issues and Concerns Regarding Forest Management, by Susan Charnley and Ellen M. Donoghue 9 Introduction 9 Monitoring Questions 9 Expectations 9 Methods 10 Results 10 Local Perceptions of Forest Protection 11 Issues and Concer ns i n Relation to Forest Management 13 Conclusions 13 References 15 Append i x: People Inter v iewed for This St udy 1 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume V: Public Values and Forest Management Chapter 1: Trends in Public Attitudes, Beliefs, and Values About Forest Management in the Pacific Nor thwest Susan Charnley Introduction T he Nor thwest Forest Plan (the Plan) codified a shif t i n forest management away f rom the i ntensive timber manage - ment practices of the 1970s and 1980s toward ecosystem management. In doing so, it aimed to balance the need for forest protection with the need to provide for the sust ai nable use of timber and nontimber forest resources. Hence, one of the Plan?s socioeconomic goals was to protect the forest values and envi ron ment al qualities associated with late- successional, old-g row th, and aquatic ecosystems. T hese forest values i nclude amenit y values (such as scenic qualit y, lifest yle), envi ron ment al qualit y values (such as clean ai r and water), ecological values (such as sust ai nabilit y, biodiversit y), public use values (recreation), and spi r it ual and religious values (Donoghue 2003: 334, St an key and Clark 1992). T he st rateg y used to achieve this goal was to create a reser ve system on federal forest lands where the manage - ment emphasis would be on protecti ng late-successional and old-g row th forest (older forests), endangered species, and other noncom modit y values associated with the forest (Clark et al. 1999: 15). Although com modities might be produced f rom the reser ves, they would be by-products of forest management intended to achieve ecosystem health objectives. Late-successional reser ves were desig ned to maintain older forest ecosystems and natural ecosystem processes and to protect them from loss resulting from large-scale fi re, i nsects and diseases, and major hu man impacts ( USDA and USDI 1994b: B4 ?B5). R ipar ian reser ves were meant to protect the health of aquatic ecosys - tems and the species that depend on them and to provide habit at con nectivit y for the late-successional reser ve system ( USDA and USDI 1994b: B12?B13). T hese t wo reser ve t y pes make up roughly 41 percent of the Plan area ( USDA and USDI 1994b: 6 ?7). A nother 30 percent is desig nated as cong ressionally reser ved areas (such as wilder ness areas or wild and scenic r ivers) that mai nly suppor t noncom modit y values ( USDA and USDI 1994b: 6). Other Plan monitor i ng is desig ned to collect and analyze biophysical dat a that will be used to assess how well the Plan has achieved the goals and expect ations associated with protecti ng older forest habit at, associated species (nor ther n spot ted owls [ Strix occidentalis caurina] and marbled mu r relets [ Brachyramphus marmoratus]), and aquatic and riparian ecosystems. The socioeconomic monitoring team addressed the topic of forest protection from the social perspective. Protecting forest values and environmental qualities associated with older forests and aquatic ecosystems is a so - cial value. Changing societal values can trigger the adaptive management process ( USDA and USDI 1994a Vol. II: E 4). It is impor t ant to monitor how public at tit udes, beliefs, and values relating to forest management change over time so that managers can be responsive. Chapter 1 of this volu me evaluates trends in public values regarding forest manage- ment i n the Pacific Nor thwest bet ween the early 1990s and the early 2000s. Monitoring Questions 1. W hat forest values and envi ron ment al qualities asso - ciated with federal forests are impor t ant to members of the public, and what is the balance of values ( both com modit y and noncom modit y) that members of the public believe federal forests should be managed for? 2. How have public at tit udes, beliefs, and values relat - i ng to forest management i n the Pacific Nor thwest changed si nce 1990? Expectations T he Plan would protect the long-ter m health of forests, wildlife, and water ways while providi ng for the sust ai nable use of timber and nontimber forest resou rces ( USDA and USDI 1994b: 2?3). 2 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. V Methods Collecting primary data on changing social values relating to federal forest management in the Plan area over time at the regional scale was beyond the scope of this monitor i ng program. I relied, therefore, on secondary sources docu- menti ng public views of forest management i n the Pacific Nor thwest bet ween 1990 and 2002 to character ize these t rends. I sy nthesize this literat u re here, g roupi ng the st udy fi ndi ngs i nto th ree per iods: research conducted i n 1990 ?94, 1995 ?98, and 1999 ?2002. T he publication date of the sou rce cited was used only when the date of research was not repor ted. T his g roupi ng allows compar i ng changi ng public values before and si nce the Plan was adopted. Results 199094 A 1991 su r vey of 872 randomly selected Oregon residents elicited their attitudes about federal forest management by testi ng whether they ag reed or disag reed with several different st atements about forest management (Steel et al. 1994). T he scale used cont ai ned five response categor ies that ranged f rom 1 (st rongly disag ree) to 5 (st rongly ag ree). Respondents slightly disag reed that forests should be used pr imar ily for timber and wood products (2.23), that more trees should be harvested to meet the needs of a larger hu man population (2.14), and that the pr imar y use of forests should be to obt ai n products usef ul to people (2.53). T hey agreed that forest resources can be improved through silvicult u ral practices (4.23), that forest plants, animals, and people have an equal r ight to exist and develop (3.68), and that people should have more love, respect, and admiration for forests (4.04). T he authors concluded that Oregonians have more ?biocent r ic? values toward forests (values that are nat u re- centered) than anth ropocent r ic values (values that are hu man- centered). T hey view forests as havi ng a r ight to exist for thei r ow n sake, i ndependent of thei r utilit y to people. T hey also view the noneconomic benefits f rom forests as deserving respect and protection, even if manag- i ng for them con flicts with economic benefits. Biocent r ic values cont rast with ?anth ropocent r ic? values, which hold that the goal of natural resource management should be to produce goods and ser vices that are beneficial to people. T he st udy fou nd that u rban and r u ral residents su r veyed ex hibited lit tle difference i n thei r value or ient ation (Steel et al. 1994). However, Oregon respondents who depended on the timber i ndust r y for thei r livelihood were much more li kely to have anth ropocent r ic value or ient ations than those who did not. A nd, members of envi ron ment al organizations su r veyed were much more li kely to have biocent r ic values. T he same 1991 su r vey fou nd st rong suppor t for man - agi ng federal forests to suppor t a wide range of benefits (81 percent), rather than timber and wood products alone (Shi ndler et al. 1993). Respondents felt that noncom modit y values should be incorporated into forest management policy more strongly than they had been to date. Managing forests holistically by using an ecosystem management approach, rather than focusi ng on si ngle-species management, was st rongly suppor ted (84 percent ag reed). Most respondents fa - vored balancing environmental and economic considerations i n forest management decision mak i ng. Only 20 percent of the respondents suppor ted mi neral exploration and ext raction on federal forest lands. Roughly one-thi rd of respondents felt that forest management should emphasize timber production (32 percent), that endangered species laws should be set aside to preser ve timber jobs (37 percent), and that the su r vival of timber families was more impor t ant than preser vi ng old g row th (36 percent). Bet ween 39 and 48 percent of respon - dents disag reed with these st atements (the remai nder were neut ral). Oregonians su r veyed were essentially divided on whether the economic vit alit y of local com mu nities should be given pr ior it y when federal forest management decisions were made (46 percent ag reed, 44 percent disag reed). Finally, more than half of the respondents believed that clearcutting should be banned on federal forest lands (57 percent), that fish and wildlife habit at deser ved g reater protection (55 percent), and that more effor t should be made to protect old g row th (51 percent). (I n cont rast, 30 percent, 25 percent, and 32 percent of respondents disag reed with these st atements, respectively). Although st rong suppor t was expressed for managi ng forests for multiple uses, su r vey respondents ex hibited more of an ?ecosystem-based? or ient a - tion than a ?com modit y-based? or ient ation (Shi ndler et al. 1993). 3 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume V: Public Values and Forest Management Proctor (1998) analyzed public com ments solicited on O ption 9 of the Nor thwest Forest Plan Draf t Supplement al Envi ron ment al I mpact St atement (the prefer red alter na - tive, subsequently adopted i n the Plan?s record of decision [ USDA and USDI 1994b]). T hese com ments came f rom people residi ng i n ever y st ate i n the United St ates and 35 foreig n cou nt r ies. Proctor fou nd that an over whel mi ng ma - jor it y of the 103,000 com ments received were sy mpathetic to the position of environmental groups and supported the protection of old-g row th forests i n the Pacific Nor thwest. Of those people who com mented specifically on O ption 9, 89 percent wanted more envi ron ment al protection than O ption 9 offered, expressi ng concer ns about the effects of timber har vest on old-g row th habit at. T hese people generally felt that the national public and f ut u re generations were more impor t ant st akeholders than local timber com mu nities when it came to mak i ng forest management decisions. T he 5 percent of com ment ators who wanted less protection than O ption 9 provided expressed economic concer ns related to its impacts on timber i ndust r y jobs. Al most all of these people lived i n the Pacific Nor thwest region. I nteresti ngly, all com ments received ?whether f rom pro - envi ron ment al protection or protimber i nterests ? expressed thei r concer ns i n ter ms of what sets of hu man needs and desi res associated with Pacific Nor thwest forests they cared about, rather than in terms of their concerns for the forests themselves. In other words, biocent r ic arg u ments suppor ti ng the i nt r i nsic value of forests rarely surfaced. Instead, the debate focused on whether i ncreased protection of Pacific Nor thwest forests would suppor t or u nder mi ne those hu man needs and desi res that capt u red thei r g reatest i nterest (Proctor 1998). For t man n and Kusel (1990) su r veyed the envi ron ment al at tit udes of people livi ng arou nd the K lamath National Forest i n nor ther n Califor nia (one of the case-st udy for - ests i n this monitor i ng repor t). A random sample of 190 members of the general public residi ng withi n 20 miles of the forest fou nd that 28 percent had ?pro - envi ron ment al? attitudes, believing land should be preserved in a natural state, and commodity uses of forests such as timber and g razi ng should be limited or prevented. Twent y percent of the respondents had procommodityattitudes, supporting com modit y uses of forests. T he remai ni ng 52 percent were neut ral (For t man n and Kusel 1990: 218). T hese authors fou nd no sig nificant difference bet ween the envi ron ment al at tit udes of new r u ral residents f rom u rban areas and long- time rural residents. Summary P ublished st udies that exami ned the envi ron ment al at - tit udes, beliefs, and values of Pacific Nor thwest residents before the Plan was adopted (1990 ?94) show st rong suppor t for a balanced approach to federal forest management that would i ncor porate a range of multiple uses, and both economic and envi ron ment al forest values. Never theless, a defi nite leani ng toward the envi ron ment al and biocent r ic side of the scale was repor ted. Residential st at us (u rban vs. r u ral) was not sig nificant as an i ndicator of forest manage - ment views. Although not representi ng a random or solely local sample of Pacific Nor thwest residents, suppor t for protecting old-grow th forests under the Plan was over whel m - ing. The idea that forest health can be improved through silvicult u ral practices was generally suppor ted. Most people did not suppor t clearcut ti ng, however. 199598 Bet ween 1995 and 1997, R ibe (2002) sampled 1,035 people who were members of organized g roups i n wester n Washi ng ton and Oregon to elicit thei r views on the owl cont roversy. T hese organizations were of th ree t y pes: those favor i ng forest preser vation (350 members su r veyed), those favor i ng com modit y production on public land (357 members su r veyed), and those with more moderate views of envi ron ment al issues (328 members su r veyed). R ibe fou nd that a major it y ack nowledged that there was a th reat to the owl (56 percent versus 32 percent), and that there was a need to reduce timber har vest on public lands below 1980s levels to protect the owl (66 percent versus 21 percent). Respondents were divided i n thei r views of whether the owl should be saved at a high economic cost, however (44 percent disag reed, 38 percent ag reed). Clearcut ti ng was unpopular as a harvest method across groups. Although people broadly agreed that clearcutting should be regulated (about 86 percent), no consensus was fou nd about whether it should be ban ned (about 38 percent said yes, and 47 percent 4 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. V said no). Fi nally, ?new forest r y? tech niques ?those that i nclude g reen-t ree and dow n-wood retention, and selec - tive har vesti ng?were fou nd to have g reat potential to be socially acceptable, stable, forest management policies in the Pacific Nor thwest (R ibe 2002). A su r vey of 1,545 randomly selected u rban and r u ral residents livi ng arou nd the Gifford Pi nchot National Forest i n southwest Washi ng ton, and 343 other forest visitors and citizens with an i nterest i n the forest, focused on the social acceptability of clearcutting as a forest management practice (Hansis 1995). T his st udy fou nd that roughly 30 percent of the respondents did not believe that clearcutting should be ban ned on federal forest land; roughly 56 percent did believe that clearcutting should be banned on federal forest land; and the remai nder were neut ral. People livi ng i n r u ral Washi ng ton were the most suppor tive of clearcut ti ng (36 percent for, 46 percent agai nst); i nterested members of the public and Por tland met ro -area residents were the least suppor tive of clearcut ti ng on federal forest lands (26 percent for, 63 percent agai nst). Davis et al. (2001b) repor ted on the results of a st atewide su r vey of 608 randomly chosen members of the Oregon public u nder t aken on behalf of the Oregon Forest Resou rces I nstit ute i n 1997. T his su r vey fou nd that most Oregonians su r veyed thi n k that forest managers need to do a bet ter job of protecti ng wildlife habit at (80 percent) and fish habit at (especially for sal mon) (87 percent), biodiver - sit y (65 percent), and water qualit y (88 percent); and that they should do more to prevent soil erosion (88 percent). For t y- one percent of respondents thought that federal forest lands were bei ng managed sust ai nably, and 39 percent did not. Although most people surveyed believed that forest managers should do a bet ter job of providi ng enough timber har vest to sust ai n jobs i n the wood products i ndust r y (63 percent), widespread concer n was expressed that existi ng timber har vest practices were not sust ai nable (87 percent), and a general belief (89 percent) that fi ndi ng a compromise bet ween allowi ng adequate timber har vest and protecti ng Oregon?s forests was impossible. Summary T he results of su r veys withi n a few years of adopti ng the Plan showed that Pacific Nor thwest residents suppor ted both forest protection and forest management to produce economic benefits. St rong feeli ngs were expressed about how forests should be managed to produce those economic benefits. Most people su r veyed did not suppor t clearcut ti ng, although suppor t for this practice was st ronger among r u ral residents than among u rban residents. Widespread ag ree - ment was expressed that clearcut ti ng should be reg ulated, but there was no broad ag reement on whether it should be ban ned on federal forest lands. I n cont rast, ?new forest r y? tech niques were fou nd to be more socially accept able. Fi nally, the vast major it y of people su r veyed believed that forest managers needed to do more to protect the envi ron ment al values and qualities associated with Pacific Nor thwest forests. 19992002 T he Oregon Board of Forest r y sponsored a st udy of Oregonians? at tit udes, beliefs, and values about forest management on public and pr ivate forest lands i n Oregon (Davis et al. 2001a, 2001b). T he st udy, which took place i n 2001, i ncluded a review of the academic literat u re and public opinion research on this topic, focus groups, and a telephone su r vey of Oregon residents. T he telephone su r vey i ncluded 1,401 Oregonians chosen f rom a st ratified sample based on place of residence (Davis et al. 2001a). Forest management ran ked fif th on a list of 10 envi ron ment al issues of concern presented to respondents. The top envi ron ment al issue of concer n was protecti ng water qualit y (scor i ng 4.5). 1 The three forest management goals deemed most impor t ant by su r vey respondents were protecti ng soil and water qualit y; mai nt ai ni ng the amou nt of forest land and ensu r i ng har vest rates don?t exceed g row th rates; and protecti ng forests f rom fi re, i nsects, disease, and i nvasives. W hen asked to weigh th ree different federal forest management objectives, respondents were fai rly balanced i n what they favored ? produci ng forest products for hu man use (29 percent), protecti ng water 1 1 = not at all concer ned , 5 = ver y concer ned. 5 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume V: Public Values and Forest Management qualit y and wildlife habit at (39 percent), and meeti ng a wide range of social needs (32 percent). T hey also believed that achievi ng a balance bet ween economic, envi ron ment al, recreational, and aesthetic values was possible. Loss of forest land to development and other uses was a local issue of key concer n among respondents (75 percent were ver y or somewhat concer ned). T he relation bet ween the forest products i ndust r y and envi ron ment al g roups was also a top issue of concer n i n local areas (scor i ng 4.0, with 76 percent of respondents ver y or somewhat concer ned). T he most ser ious issue i n Oregon?s r u ral com mu nities was a lack of family-wage jobs (scor i ng 4.1), 2 followed by a per - ceived desi re on the par t of other A mer icans to shut dow n nat u ral resou rce-based economies (3.9) (Davis et al. 2001a). Residents were al most evenly split on thei r views about whether federal forest lands were bei ng managed sust ai n - ably to provide for the environmental, social, and economic needs of societ y (41 percent said yes, 39 percent said no). Some of the relevant fi ndi ngs f rom the literat u re su r vey conducted by Davis et al. (2001b) follow. ? W hereas i n 1986, 70 percent of Oregon residents su r veyed suppor ted the har vest of old g row th, 75 percent of Oregon and Washi ng ton residents su r - veyed i n 2001 believed that old g row th should be protected f rom loggi ng on national forests, with slightly more support for this position in urban than in rural counties. ? Su r veys i n 1994, 1996, 1998, and 2000 consistently fou nd that respondents believed the wood products i ndust r y was impor t ant to Oregon?s economy. T he more recent su r veys, however, i ndicated that people believe the wood products i ndust r y would not be an important employer in the state in the future. ? A 1999 su r vey fou nd that, of 15 forest management values, set ti ng aside wilder ness and clean d r i n k i ng water were the top pr ior ities for Oregonians su r - veyed. Economically healthy r u ral com mu nities was sixth, and forest i ndust r y jobs was eleventh. I n 2001, Shi ndler et al. (2002) held focus g roups i n 14 com mu nities i n Oregon and Washi ng ton and su r veyed a st ratified random sample of households th roughout Oregon and Washi ng ton to exami ne public u nderst andi ngs of the concept of ?ecosystem health? on forest lands (482 house - holds responded). T hey also i nvestigated people?s at tit udes toward different forest management practices. T he authors found that among the study participants from urban areas, 64 percent favored a balanced set of pr ior ities for forest management, with 31 percent leani ng st rongly toward envi ron ment al protection, and 5 percent leani ng toward economic management pr ior ities. Of the r u ral residents su r veyed, 69 percent favored a balanced approach, 18 percent favored envi ron ment al protection, and 14 percent favored economic management pr ior ities. T he fi ndi ngs of thei r st udy are al most identical to the fi ndi ngs of a similar st udy conducted 10 years earlier (Shi ndler et al. 1993, su m mar ized above). W hen exami ni ng thei r fi ndi ngs based on residence, they fou nd that r u ral residents were equally divided i n ter ms of suppor ti ng envi ron ment al (30 percent) versus economic (32 percent) pr ior ities, whereas u rban residents showed a st rong preference for envi ron ment al (45 percent) over economic (15 percent) pr ior ities. Two of five social cr iter ia i ncluded i n the st udy were considered by a major it y of respondents to be impor t ant indicators of forest health: opportunities for recreation (70 percent) and st able r u ral com mu nities (55 percent). Although a major it y also considered reg ular economic ret u r ns by loggi ng to be par t of a healthy forest (46 percent, versus 31 percent who did n?t), sig nificantly more r u ral than u rban respondents felt this way. I n cont rast, closi ng public access roads (53 percent versus 22 percent) and lack of hu man i nter vention (49 percent versus 26 percent) were not considered by most respondents to be indicators associ- ated with forest health. Most people su r veyed (87 percent) believed that active forest management over the long term was needed to mai nt ai n forest health. The Heritage Forests Campaign sponsored a telephone poll by state to survey public opinion about national forest management when the Forest Ser vice Roadless A rea Con - ser vation Rule was u nder development. From 800 registered voters su r veyed i n 2000 i n Califor nia, they fou nd that 58 2 1 = not at all ser iou s, 5 = ver y ser iou s. 6 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. V percent opposed any development on national forest lands (mi ni ng, loggi ng), and 34 percent favored these activities (H FC 2000). A similar poll conducted i n 2000 among Oregon residents fou nd that 45 percent opposed any de - velopment on national forest lands, and 51 percent favored development. A mong Washi ng ton residents, 49 percent opposed allowi ng development-related activities on national forest lands, and 43 percent favored them (H FC 2000). A telephone survey of randomly selected residents of Oregon, Washi ng ton, and nor ther n Califor nia cou nties was administered by the Forest Service as part of a national su r vey of values, objectives, beliefs, and at tit udes about forests and rangelands held by the A mer ican public (the VOBA su r vey) (Shields et al. 2002). T he su r vey is national by desig n. T he nu mber of people i ncluded f rom Pacific Nor thwest cou nties was 433, but fewer than 100 of them were asked to respond to each question. T he su r vey was conducted du r i ng 1998 ?99. T he forest management objectives that Pacific Nor th - west residents su r veyed generally ag reed were highly impor t ant (where 1 = not at all impor t ant and 5 = ver y impor t ant) were conser vi ng and protecti ng forests and g rasslands that are the sou rce of water resou rces (4.63), i n - forming the public about recreation concerns on forests and g rasslands (4.49), protecti ng ecosystems and wildlife habi - t ats (4.47), preser vi ng people?s abilit y to have a wilder ness exper ience (4.21), and developi ng volu nteer prog rams to improve forests and g rasslands (4.43) (Shields et al. 2002). T hei r views about how well the Forest Ser vice is managi ng for these objectives were only somewhat favorable (averag - i ng 3.68 on a scale of 1 [ poor] to 5 [well]). Management objectives that were not impor t ant to the major it y of respon - dents were those related to developed recreation: expandi ng com mercial recreation on forests and g rasslands (2.77), expandi ng access for motor ized off-highway vehicles (2.1), developing and maintaining trail systems across public and pr ivate lands for motor ized vehicles (2.51), developi ng new paved roads on forests and g rasslands (2.22), and mak i ng the permitting process for commercial recreational use and resou rce ext raction easier (2.58). Providi ng forest resou rces to support communities that depend on timber harvesting, g razi ng, and mi ni ng was of moderate impor t ance (3.58). O pi nions on how well the Forest Ser vice is f ul filli ng this objective were essentially neut ral (3.11). As to respondents? i ndividual values, people somewhat disag reed with st atements suggesti ng that more t rees should be actively harvested to meet the needs of a larger human population (2.2), that the most impor t ant role for public lands is to provide jobs and i ncome for local people (2.71), and that the primary use of forests should be to produce products people can use (2.58). 3 Only slight ag reement was found among respondents that public land managers are doi ng an adequate job of protecti ng nat u ral resou rces f rom bei ng over used (3.25). Summary T he most recent research f rom the Pacific Nor thwest on public attitudes, beliefs, and values about forest manage- ment indicates that people support a balanced set of priorities that includes both environmental and economic objectives. Envi ron ment al concer ns predomi nate, however, especially among urban residents. Support for timber pro- duction appears to revolve around concern for rural com- mu nities, the lack of family-wage jobs available there, and the belief that healthy communities are important for forest health. Active forest management is generally believed to be necessar y to mai nt ai n forest health. Most people asked did not favor har vesti ng old g row th, however. O pi nion is divided over whether federal forest managers are doi ng an adequate job of managi ng public forest lands sust ai nably. Discussion and Conclusions The forest management paradigm that prevailed in the Pacific Nor thwest followi ng World War II emphasized high timber production by using techniques such as clearcutting, removal of logs and snags, slash burning, thinning, and planti ng si ngle-species st ands on har vested areas (FEM AT 1993: II-2-3). T he agencies assu med that forests managed i n this way could be har vested on a sust ai ned-yield basis at 40 - to 80 -year i nter vals without negatively affecti ng other resou rces such as water qualit y, fish, soils, and wildlife. St udies conducted i n the 1970s and 1980s made it apparent 3 1 = st rongly d isag ree, 5 = st rongly ag ree. 7 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume V: Public Values and Forest Management that this approach to forest management was not goi ng to adequately protect the biodiversit y of late-successional forests and associated aquatic ecosystems (FEM AT 1993: II-2-3). T he forest management paradig m embraced i n the 1990s u nder the Plan focuses on ecosystem management objectives that aim to sust ai n the u nderlyi ng ecological processes of the forest (Joh nson et al. 1993). Agencies are now placi ng more emphasis on managi ng for forest restora - tion, recreation, and other noncommodity values. Was this paradig m shif t suppor ted by public at tit udes, beliefs, and values regarding forest management in the Pa- cific Nor thwest, and do members of the public still suppor t this management approach today? T his literat u re review and sy nthesis suggest that the answer to both questions is ? yes.? Bet ween 1990 and 2002 there has been su r pr isi ngly lit tle change i n Pacific Nor thwest residents? views of how Pacific Nor thwest forests should be managed. T h roughout this per iod, research fi ndi ngs i ndicate that people suppor t forest management to provide a broad set of multiple uses and both economic and envi ron ment al benefits. Never the - less, there has consistently been a pro - envi ron ment leani ng, with the major it y favor i ng envi ron ment al over economic management objectives when asked to make a choice be - t ween them. Conti nued suppor t for timber production f rom federal forests has li kely been tied to a belief that the wood products industry is important to the regional economy, and to concer n for the health of r u ral com mu nities. W hereas place of residence was not fou nd to be a sig nificant factor i n fluenci ng people?s at tit udes, beliefs, and values about for - est management pr ior to the Nor thwest Forest Plan, recent st udies fi nd that u rban residents tend to be pro - envi ron - ment, with r u ral residents havi ng more evenly split views on forest management issues. Throughout the study period, the belief that active for- est management improves forest health has predominated. However, clearcut ti ng has consistently been u npopular, and the major it y have favored old-g row th protection. New forestry techniques that are not intensive are more socially acceptable. Have federal land managers been doi ng a good job of protecting the forest values and environmental qualities people care about u nder the Plan? T he research reviewed here does not provide extensive evidence for answer i ng this question. T he evidence that does exist suggests that opi nion is fai rly evenly divided. Some people have favorable views of the job forest managers are doi ng, and others believe that forest managers need to improve their performance. This question is add ressed f rom the perspective of forest-based com mu nities i n the next chapter. Acknowledgments I am g ratef ul to Julie Schaefers for helpi ng to compile and su m mar ize the literat u re for this chapter. References Clark , R .N.; Phi lpot , C.W.; Stankey, G.H. 1999. Overarchi ng assu mptions u nderlyi ng the Nor thwest Forest Plan: imbedded implications for research at the PN W Research St ation. Seat tle, WA: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 46 p. Dav is, H ibbit ts, and McCaig, Inc. 20 01a. A forestry prog ram for Oregon: Oregonians discuss thei r opi nions on forest management and sust ai nabilit y? a quantit ative research project. 71 p. On file with: Davis, Hibbits, and McCaig, I nc., 1100 N W Glisan, Suite 300 -B, Por tland, OR 97209. Dav is, H ibbit ts, and McCaig, Inc. 20 01b. A forestry prog ram for Oregon: public opi nion about forests and forest management i n Oregon. A literat u re review. 34 p. On file with: Davis, Hibbits, and McCaig, I nc., 1100 N W Glisan, Suite 300 -B, Por tland, OR 97209. Donoghue, E.M. 2003. Social values and compatible forest management. I n: Monser ud, R.A.; Hay nes, R.W.; Joh nson, A.C., eds. Compatible forest management. Dord recht, T he Netherlands: K luwer Academic P ublishers: 323 ?344. Chapter 15. Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team [FEM AT]. 1993. Forest ecosystem management: an ecological, economic, and social assessment. Portland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of the I nter ior [and others]. [I r reg ular pagi nation]. 8 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. V For tmann, L .; Kusel, J. 1990. New voices, old beliefs: forest envi ron ment alism among new and long-st andi ng r u ral residents. Ru ral Sociolog y. 55(2): 214 ?232. Hansis, R . 1995. The social acceptability of clearcutting i n the Pacific Nor thwest. Hu man Organization. 54(1): 95 ?101. Her itage Forests Campaign [H FC]. 20 0 0. Public opinion poll on public at tit udes and opi nions toward land use issues i n national forests. Oregon su r vey, Califor nia su r vey, Washi ng ton su r vey. ht t p://w w w.ou r forests.org / i nfo/poll2000/. (May 3, 2000). Johnson, K .N.; Cr im, S.; Barber, K .; Howel l, M.; Cadwel l, C. 1993. Sust ai nable har vest levels and shor t- term timber sale options considered in the report of the Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team: methods, results and i nter pret ations. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Region. 66 p. Proctor, J.D. 1998. Envi ron ment al values and popular con flict over envi ron ment al management: a comparative analysis of public comments on the Clinton forest plan. Envi ron ment al Management. 22(3): 347?358. R ibe, R .G. 20 02. Views of old forest r y and new among reference g roups i n the Pacific Nor thwest. Wester n Jou r nal of Applied Forest r y. 17(4): 173 ?182. Shields, D. J.; Mar t in, I.M.; Mar t in, W.E .; Haefele, M.A . 2002. Su r vey results of the A mer ican public?s values, objectives, beliefs, and at tit udes regardi ng the forest and g rasslands: a tech nical docu ment suppor ti ng the 2000 USDA Forest Ser vice R PA assessment. Gen. Tech. Rep. R M RS- GTR-95. For t Colli ns, CO: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Rock y Mou nt ai n Research St ation. 111 p. Shind ler, B.; List , P.; Steel, B. S. 1993. Managing federal forests: public at tit udes i n Oregon and nationwide. Jou r nal of Forest r y. 91: 36 ? 42. Shind ler, B.; Wi lton, J.; Wr ight , A . 20 02. A social assessment of ecosystem health: public perspectives on Pacific Nor thwest forests. Cor vallis, OR: Oregon St ate Universit y, Depar t ment of Forest Resou rces. 110 p. Stankey, G.H.; Clark , R .N. 1992. Social aspects of new perspectives in forestry: a problem analysis. Milford, PA: G rey Towers Press. 33 p. Steel, B. S.; List , P.; Shind ler, B. 1994. Con flicti ng values about federal forests: a comparison of national and Oregon publics. Societ y and Nat u ral Resou rces. 7: 137?153. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management [USDA and U DSI]. 1994a. Final supplemental environmental impact statement on management of habit at for late-successional and old- g row th forest related species withi n the range of the nor ther n spot ted owl. Vol. 2? appendices. [Place of publication u n k now n]. [I r reg ular pagi nation]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management [USDA and USDI]. 1994b. Record of decision for amend ments to Forest Ser vice and Bu reau of Land Management plan ni ng docu ments withi n the range of the nor ther n spot ted owl. [Place of publication u n k now n]. 74 p. [ plus at t ach ment A: st andards and guidelines]. 9 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume V: Public Values and Forest Management Susan Charnley and Ellen M. Donoghue Introduction People?s perceptions of the effectiveness of agency man - agement policies can i n fluence thei r behavior and thei r at tit udes toward the agencies. Although public perceptions may not always be ?accu rate? f rom the scientific st andpoi nt, they matter, because these perceptions can drive appeals and lawsuits that prevent agencies f rom achievi ng thei r management objectives ? regardless of what the science says. And if members of the public believe that agency management policies are ineffective at maintaining sustain- able forest ecosystems, they may be critical and distrustful of the agencies, which can lead to a breakdow n i n relations. Socioeconomic monitoring can help managers become aware of these perceptions and complements biophysical monitoring related to the goal of forest protection. T he monitor i ng team i nter viewed com mu nit y members f rom 12 case-st udy com mu nities and agency employees f rom 4 case-st udy forests and docu mented thei r percep - tions of how well the Plan had protected forest values and envi ron ment al qualities associated with older forests and aquatic ecosystems on federal forest lands. The results of these i nter views are cont ai ned i n chapter 2. Chapter 2 also docu ments com mu nit y members? issues and concer ns relating to forest management under the Plan Monitoring Questions 1. From the public perspective, how well has federal forest management u nder the Nor thwest Forest Plan (the Plan) provided for forest values and envi ron - ment al qualities associated with late-successional, old-g row th, and aquatic ecosystems? 2. W hat issues and concer ns related to federal forest management under the Plan are prevalent in local communities? Chapter 2: Local Perceptions of Forest Protection and Issues and Concerns Regarding Forest Management Expectations A system of terrestrial and aquatic reserves established by the Plan would protect late-successional and old-g row th forest (older forest) ecosystems i nside of late-successional reserves, and the health of aquatic systems and the spe- cies that depend on them i n r ipar ian reser ves and key watersheds ( USDA and USDI 1994: 6 -7). Late-successional reser ves together with other Plan land use allocations and st andards and g uideli nes would mai nt ai n a f u nctional older forest ecosystem. R ipar ian reser ves would help mai nt ai n and restore r ipar ian st r uct u res and f u nctions, benefit fish and non fish species dependent on r ipar ian ecosystems, and contribute to habitat conservation for terrestrial organisms. Methods T he monitor i ng team fou nd no st udies that explicitly exami ned public views of how well the Plan has achieved the goal of forest protection. We conducted i nter views with a tot al of 223 com mu nit y members and 82 agency employees f rom fou r case-st udy areas (the Oly mpic, Mou nt Hood, and K lamath National Forests, and BLM Coos Bay District; and three local communities around each of these federal forests. See appendix). We asked them the followi ng questions: 1: W hat are the t wo to th ree issues that com mu nit y res - idents are currently most interested in or concerned about with regard to the management of forest x? 2: Have these been the mai n issues of i nterest /concer n for the last decade? If not, how have the issues been shif ti ng over the last decade, and why? 3: Do you (and the com mu nit y you represent) thi n k that Forest x has been doi ng a good job of manag - ing for those forest uses, values, and environmental qualities that you care most about? W hy or why not? 4: How could it do a bet ter job of providi ng for the uses, values, and environmental qualities the com- munity cares most about? 5: W hat prog ress has been made on meeti ng the Plan goal to help protect nontimber values and environ- ment al qualities associated with the forest? 10 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. V 6: A n overarchi ng goal of the Plan was to balance the need for forest protection with the need to provide a steady and sustainable supply of timber and non- timber resou rces to benefit r u ral com mu nities and economies. Do you believe Forest / Dist r ict x has been successf ul i n achievi ng this goal? W hy or why not? Examples? T he results of these i nter views are su m mar ized i n this chapter, with a focus on the key fi ndi ngs com mon to all case-st udy areas. 1 Results Local Perceptions of Forest Protection T he case-st udy results poi nt to some com mon themes about how well i nter viewees believe federal forest management under the Plan has achieved the goal of forest protection. T he g reatest successes were repor ted for aquatic ecosys - tems. I nter viewees f rom the Oly mpic, K lamath, and Coos Bay areas com mented that decreases i n loggi ng, road decommissioning, the provisions of the aquatic conserva- tion strategy, the riparian reserve system, and the emphasis placed on watershed management and restoration u nder the Plan had protected and improved water qualit y. Several i nter viewees com mented that it would t ake a long time to see the benefits of the Plan for fish and wildlife populations, and reser ved judg ment on this topic. Several forest employees i nter viewed believed that su r vey and manage species requirements had led to a much better u nderst andi ng of older-forest-associated species, thei r dist r ibution and habit at requi rements, and how to manage for them. Some com mu nit y residents were concer ned about the effects that reduced silvicult u ral activit y would have on habit at for wildlife species ? especially big game ?that prefer early seral-st age forest and habit at mosaics. Some com mu nit y residents i nter viewed arou nd the Oly mpic and K lamath National Forests and the Coos Bay Bu reau of Land Management (BLM) Dist r ict believed local fish populations had increased, and attributed the increase to the Plan. Some i nter viewees believed that the Plan emphasized managi ng forests for the benefit of i ndividual species i nstead of t ak i ng an ecosystem management approach that had the whole forest and its health i n mi nd. On the other hand, several agency employees noted that the Plan had led to a more i nteg rated approach to forest management. People were work i ng across prog ram areas and t r yi ng to manage forests i n a more holistic way. Com mu nit y i nter viewees? views of the Plan?s success at protecti ng forest habit at were not as positive, with most of them noti ng some u ndesi rable results. T here were i nter viewees f rom all fou r case-st udy areas who believed that pre-Plan timber-har vest rates were u nsust ai nable and envi ron ment ally dest r uctive, and were glad the Plan had brought an end to those practices ? a subst antial cont r ibu - tion to forest protection. It also brought a virtual halt to clearcut ti ng practices on federal forest lands, which many i nter viewees approved. Never theless, some believed the Plan had not done enough to protect old g row th because some older forest habit at was i ncluded i n mat r ix lands and subject to loggi ng pressu re (not an issue on the Oly mpic National Forest). T hey at t r ibuted this problem to shor t- comings in the original design of the Plan. T he Plan also brought new const rai nts that many i nter viewees believed had u nder mi ned forest protection goals. A widespread perception among i nter viewees was that silvicult u ral activit y was needed to promote forest health. Specifically, thi n ni ng was seen as bei ng necessar y for reduci ng the r isk of fi re and disease, which th reatened older forest habit at. T hi n ni ng was also seen as a st rateg y for expediti ng development of older forest habit at. I nter viewees 1 T he i n for mat ion i n t h is chapter is a su m ma r y of i nter v iew resu lt s d iscu ssed i n more det ail i n t he follow i ng : But tolph et al. (i n press). McLai n et al. (i n press). Charnley, S.; Dillingham, C.; Stuart, C.; Moseley, C.; Donog hue, E.M. Ma nu scr ipt i n pre pa r at ion. Nor t hwest Forest Pla n ? t he fi r st 10 yea r s (1994 ?20 03): socioeconom ic mon itor i ng of K la mat h Nat ional Forest a nd t h ree local com mu n it ies. O n file w it h: S. Cha r n ley, Forest r y Sciences Labor ator y, 620 SW Mai n, Su ite 40 0, Por tla nd , OR 97205. K ay, W.; Donog hue, E.M.; Cha r n ley, S.; Moseley, C. Ma nu scr ipt i n pre pa r at ion. Nor t hwest Forest Pla n ? t he fi r st 10 yea r s (1994 ?20 03): socioeconom ic mon itor i ng of Mou nt Hood Nat ional Forest a nd t h ree local com mu n it ies. O n file w it h: S. Cha r n ley, Forest r y Sciences Labor ator y, 620 SW Mai n, Su ite 40 0, Por tla nd , OR 97205. 11 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume V: Public Values and Forest Management f rom all fou r case-st udy areas viewed federal forests as be - i ng overly dense because of past fi re suppression practices and because of regenerating clearcuts and planted stands that were managed for timber before the Plan but had not been harvested or adequately thinned under the Plan. Thus, many i nter viewees believed that overall forest health had deter iorated because of the lack of active har vesti ng? es - pecially thinning. And some believed this condition meant forests with lit tle or no silvicult u ral t reat ments posed an im mi nent r isk of fi re danger, th reateni ng both com mu nities and older forest habitat. Issues and Concerns in Relation to Forest Management Many of the com mu nit y members i nter viewed were u nfamiliar with the specific components, forest manage - ment g uideli nes, and requi rements of the Plan, and were u nable to com ment on it di rectly (although some were well i nfor med about the Plan and its components). All, however, expressed issues and concer ns regardi ng the management of nearby federal forests which were, at least i n par t, li n ked to Plan implement ation. T hese i ndicate some of the ways i n which the Plan has affected local com mu nities. T he monitor i ng team fou nd many parallels bet ween the issues and concer ns raised by com mu nit y i nter viewees f rom the fou r case-st udy areas, although cer t ai n issues were more prevalent around some case forests than others. These centered on five topics: timber har vest, forest health and fi re r isk, forest-based jobs, recreation, and forest access and roads. A number of other issues arose that are not reported here because they were more specific to i ndividual forests (such as noxious weeds, t r ibal relations, special forest products, law enforcement, water). Timber harvest Most com mu nit y i nter viewees believed that timber har vest on federal forest lands was u nli kely to ret u r n to pre-Plan levels, and many felt those levels were u nsust ai nable or dest r uctive. Never theless, debate conti nues over the amount, frequency, location, and methods of timber harvest, and the types of trees involved. Issues under debate includ- ed the appropr iate levels of com mercial thi n ni ng, whether or not old-g row th t rees should be har vested, probable sale quantit y (PSQ) levels, and whether there should be timber sales in areas of the forest that have high environmental values (such as key watersheds), or where excessive envi - ron ment al damage could result (such as steep slopes). Many com mu nit y i nter viewees also expressed concer n that forests and dist r icts were not meeti ng average an nual PSQ estimates and providi ng a reliable supply of timber sales. Without a reliable timber supply, many buyers had dif ficult y operati ng and mai nt ai ni ng thei r i nf rast r uct u re, and many contractors found it hard to stay in business unless they could rely on timber from private lands. Many people ack nowledged that the agencies were t r yi ng to meet PSQ estimates, but perceived that the agencies? hands were tied by excessive procedu ral requi rements, appeals, and litigation. Forest health and fire ? I n chapter 1, we repor t that the major it y of people su r veyed i n the Pacific Nor thwest believe that actively managi ng for - ests by using silvicultural treatments improves forest health. A widespread perception among i nter viewees f rom the fou r case-st udy areas was that low levels of timber har vest and densit y management u nder the Plan have i ncreased fi re r isk, insects, and disease, undermining forest health. Concer ns over fi re were much more prevalent arou nd the d r ier, fi re-prone K lamath National Forest and easter n por tion of the Mou nt Hood National Forest, than arou nd the moist, lower-r isk Oly mpic National Forest and Coos Bay Dist r ict. On the K lamath National Forest, low-i ntensit y fi res nat u rally recu r ever y 8 to 12 years, and st and-replaci ng fi res recu r ever y 80 to 180 years ( USDA FS 1994: 3 ?115). On the Oly mpic National Forest, ver y large fi res are rare, with major fi res occu r r i ng at approximately 200 -year i nter vals i n prehistor ic times ( USDA FS 1990: III-85). On the Coos Bay Dist r ict, st and-replacement fi res are estimated to occu r ever y 130 to 150 years ( USDI BLM 1994: 3-131-132). Never theless, neighbor i ng forest land - ow ners, and com mu nities arou nd all fou r forests, were concer ned that fi res st ar ti ng on federal lands could spread to their lands and burn their forests and homes, resulting i n economic damage. I nter viewees also expressed concer n 12 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. V about the potential impact of fi re on scenic qualit y arou nd their communities, and on recreation and tourism. Some people were also concer ned about the spread of i nsects and disease. Others were concer ned that densely stocked forests were det r iment al to large game and other wildlife. Some i nter viewees expressed the view that the Forest Ser vice (FS) had abrogated its responsibilit y for stewardship of federal forest lands by u nder t ak i ng so lit tle silvicult u ral activit y u nder the Plan. Others believed that past timber har vest practices were bad for the forest, but that a complete lack of har vest activit y was worse. Added to these sentiments was a com mon f r ust ration that t rees ? which could produce usef ul products for people and provide jobs ?were bei ng lef t i n the forest to die and rot. Forest-based jobs I nter viewees? concer n over the perceived lack of timber har vest was based i n par t on the fact that federal forests were no longer a sou rce of wood products and jobs for most com mu nit y members. T he domi nant concer n among long- time residents of the forest-based com mu nities st udied was the lack of family-wage jobs i n thei r com mu nities. Many jobs that were available i n the timber and other nat u ral- resou rce-based i ndust r ies du r i ng the 1970s and 1980s are no longer available. Of ten you ng people and families must leave thei r com mu nities to fi nd work, break i ng i ntergenerational family ties, mak i ng it impossible to pass t rades dow n th rough generations, and causi ng a way of life to die out. Many com mu nit y members i nter viewed viewed the forest as a place to work, and they wanted to fi nd new ways i n which federal forests could provide local, family-wage jobs that would allow them to st ay i n thei r communities and maintain family ties. Increasing access to timber for small locally-based mill operators and small busi nesses produci ng value-added products was also desi red. Many com mu nit y i nter viewees com mented that the forests were u n healthy and i n need of thi n ni ng and ?cleani ng up,? which could provide local jobs. Several i nter viewees f rom the K lamath National Forest (where recreation and tou r ism are less developed than on the other case forests) viewed forest fi res and floods as the mai n sou rce of local, forest-based jobs. Local people had been successf ul i n obt ai ni ng some fi re suppression jobs and cont racts for flood damage repai r. Fi res also brought people i nto the com mu nit y who suppor ted local busi nesses. I n thei r view, nat u ral disasters were a mixed blessi ng. I n su m, many i nter viewees believed that the FS i n par ticular was overly concer ned with protecti ng forest resou rces and should do more to create jobs i n local com - mu nities. Envi ron ment al g roup represent atives i nter viewed also suppor ted forest-based job creation, as long as it occu r red i n a way that did not th reaten ecological sust ai n - abilit y and old-g row th forest ecosystems. Recreation Recreation and tou r ism development hold potential for creati ng forest-based jobs. Recreation was a cont roversial issue on the case-st udy forests, with debates over the ap - propriate types, levels, and location of different recreation activities. Recreation and tou r ism development was also a cont roversial issue i n the case-st udy com mu nities. T hose who suppor ted it were t y pically busi ness ow ners who stood to benefit. T hey cited jobs and economic development as benefits associated with forest-based recreation and tou r - ism. T hose who did not suppor t it were concer ned about its environmental impacts and effects on quality of life in thei r com mu nities and questioned whether it would br i ng family-wage jobs. Some i nter viewees were concer ned that the FS was not mai nt ai ni ng the forest recreation i nf rast r uct u re (such as campg rou nds and t rails) and forest access (roads) needed to attract visitors and promote recreation and tourism development i n thei r com mu nities. Others ? arou nd the Mou nt Hood National Forest i n par ticular ?were concer ned that the forest was not adequately managi ng for g rowi ng recreation demand. Most i nter viewees arou nd the BLM Coos Bay Dist r ict st rongly approved of the improvements the district had made to its recreation infrastructure. Many wanted to see this t rend conti nue, because they believed it would suppor t recreation and tou r ism development locally. Com mu nit y residents of ten enjoy recreati ng on su r - rounding federal forest lands themselves, and some of their issues of concern pertained to forest access for recreation oppor t u nities they enjoy. 13 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume V: Public Values and Forest Management Roads and access The issue of forest access is related to the issues of recre- ation and forest-based jobs. T he BLM and FS system road miles have decreased si nce 1994, and fewer roads are bei ng mai nt ai ned to passenger car st andards. Roads damaged by stor ms are not always repai red i n a timely man ner, and overall road repair and maintenance is declining, caus- ing road closures. These factors reduce forest access for a wide range of uses, i ncludi ng recreation, special forest products gather i ng, hu nti ng, and fishi ng. At the same time they i ncrease oppor t u nities for non motor ized recreational exper iences. Not only do roads provide forest access, they dist r ibute use and impacts. T he only case-st udy area where com mu nit y residents did not express concer n over roads and access was the Coos Bay Dist r ict, where road closu res have increased because of gating on private lands. Some com mu nit y i nter viewees were concer ned that recreation and tou r ism development would be hampered by reduced forest access. Others believed that the large su ms of money spent on road decommissioning should be spent on road mai ntenance, which they thought was less costly and created long-ter m jobs. Conclusions T he i nfor mation i n this chapter comes f rom fou r case-st udy locations i n the Plan area. We focused on com mon themes that emerged f rom the fou r local cases, and do not k now if, and to what extent, the results repor ted here can be general - ized to the Plan area as a whole. I n the places where we conducted fieldwork, members of the public i nter viewed perceived that the Plan had had mixed results to date for forest protection. Their issues of concern relating to forest management were to some deg ree li n ked to those percep - tions. T he most positive Plan effects were believed to be associated with the protection of aquatic ecosystems. Most i nter viewees did not disti ng uish Plan effects on older forests from those on forest ecosystems more generally. Although the Plan brought an end to earlier forest management practices that many considered ecologically destructive, most people i nter viewed did not believe federal forests were cu r rently healthy. Li ke many Pacific Nor thwest residents su r veyed i n other st udies (see chapter 1), they believed silvicult u ral activit y was necessar y for keepi ng forests healthy and that not enough had occu r red du r i ng the fi rst decade of the Plan. T his led to concer ns about fi re, i nsects, and disease, and f r ust ration that needed forest work was not creati ng local jobs. Timber har vest, forest health, and jobs were among the biggest issues of concer n to com mu nit y i nter viewees. T he others were recreation and forest access, also tied to the issue of jobs. Although i nter viewees over - whel mi ngly believed that the Plan had emphasized forest protection over com mu nit y well-bei ng, thei r com ments reflect a perception that healthy forest ecosystems and healthy com mu nit y economies can and should be li n ked, and that those li n ks are cu r rently weak. References But tolph, L .P.; Kay, W.; Charnley, S.; Moseley, C.; Donoghue, E.M. [In press]. Nor thwest Forest Plan ? the fi rst 10 years (1994 ?2003): socioeconomic monitor i ng of Oly mpic National Forest and th ree local com mu nities. Gen. Tech. Rep. Por tland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. McLain, R.J.; Tobe, L.; Charnley, S.; Moseley, C.; Donoghue, E.M. [In press]. Nor thwest Forest Plan ? the fi rst 10 years (1994 ?2003): socioeconomic monitoring of Coos Bay Dist r ict and th ree local com mu nities. Gen. Tech. Rep. Por tland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA FS]. 1990. Final environmental impact statement, land and resou rce management plan, Oly mpic National Forest. Oly mpia, WA: Oly mpic National Forest. [I r reg ular pagination]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA FS]. 1994. K lamath National Forest land and resou rce management plan. Yreka, CA: K lamath National Forest. [I r reg ular pagi nation]. 14 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. V U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management [USDA and USDI]. 1994. Record of decision for amend ments to Forest Ser vice and Bu reau of Land Management plan ni ng docu ments withi n the range of the nor ther n spot ted owl. [Place of publication u n k now n]. 74 p. [ plus at t ach ment A: st andards and guidelines]. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management [USDI BLM]. 1994. Coos Bay Dist r ict proposed resou rce management plan fi nal envi ron ment al impact st atement. Vol. 1. Nor th Bend, OR. [I r reg ular pagination]. 15 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume V: Public Values and Forest Management Appendix: People Interviewed for This Study Case-Study Communities W hen conducti ng i nter views i n the case-st udy com mu nities, we at tempted to select people that represented a cross section of community leaders and st akeholder g roups. We also t argeted people who had been com mu nit y members si nce the Plan was adopted (1994). We used the followi ng catego - ries to guide our selection: Community leaders Elected of ficial Civic group leader School dist r ict /education leader Histor ic preser vation /cult u ral center leader Economic development cou ncil leader Busi ness leader/store ow ner Social service provider Fire district leader Health of ficial Religious leader Watershed cou ncil represent ative Large landow ner Planner Stakeholder group representatives Recreation /tou r ism Envi ron ment Timber industry Special forest products Fishi ng? com mercial /recreational County government Ag r icult u re/ranchi ng Minerals Tribes Low i ncome/mi nor it y g roups It was not possible to i nter view someone f rom each of the categor ies i n ever y com mu nit y, and many i nter viewees represented several categor ies at once. Descr iptions of the i nter viewees f rom each com mu nit y follow, by case-st udy area. 16 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. V Olympic National Forest and Local Communities Olympic National Forest Respondents position Engi neer i ng prog ram represent ative (3) Forest r y prog ram represent ative (4) Dist r ict ranger (2) Economic development represent ative Public service representative Forest planning representative Forest supervisor Aquatics program representative Ecosystems/nat u ral resou rces prog ram represent ative Wildlife biolog y prog ram represent ative Fire and aviation program representative O perations st aff represent ative Timber contracting representative Bot any/forest ecolog y prog ram represent ative Recreation prog ram represent ative Information specialist Tribal relations representative Computer/mappi ng specialist Quilcene Respondents position Quilcene resident Former logging contractor X For mer loggi ng cont ractor, busi ness ow ner X Loggi ng cont ractor, loggi ng cont ractors? association X Local busi nessperson, recent im mig rant (2) X Fi refighter X Pastor X School of ficial X Cou nt y plan ni ng of ficial (3) Cou nt y plan ni ng of ficial X Envi ron ment al i nterest g roup member Social service provider X Social service provider Economic development agency of ficial Cou nt y health and hu man ser vices of ficial (2) Industrial timberland manager 17 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume V: Public Values and Forest Management Quinault Indian Nation Respondents position Taholah/Queets resident Qui nault Tr ibal Cou ncil member, t r ibe member (2) X Qui nault I ndian Nation employee ?forest r y (2) Qui nault I ndian Nation employee ?forest r y, t r ibe member X Qui nault I ndian Nation employee ? cult u ral histor ian, t r ibe member X Qui nault I ndian Nation employee ? nat u ral resou rces Reti red logger, fisher, t r ibal elder X Basket weaver, t r ibal elder X School of ficial Qui nault I ndian Nation employee ? envi ron ment al protection For mer Qui nault I ndian Nation employee ? envi ron ment al protection Qui nault I ndian Nation employee ? economic development Qui nault I ndian Nation employee ?t r ibal liaison, t r ibe member X Basket weaver, Qui nault I ndian Nation employee ? cult u ral histor ian, t r ibe member X Fisher, tribe member X Fisher, tribal elder X Lake Quinault Area Respondents position Lake Quinault area resident For mer Park Ser vice employee, local tou r ism-based busi ness ow ner X Elected cou nt y of ficial Fire district representative X School of ficial X Wait ress, school board member X Ow ner of log t r uck company, pastor, member of com mu nit y/economic X development organization President of local chapter of national recreation organization Local tou r ism-based busi ness ow ner, school board member X Reti red rancher X Shake mill ow ner X Cont ractor for ecosystem management work on the forest X Represent ative f rom regional economic development organization Store ow ner X Represent ative f rom a regional envi ron ment al organization 18 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. V Mount Hood National Forest and Local Communities Mount Hood National Forest Respondents position Forest recreation, plan ni ng, public affai rs st aff of ficer Forest planner, forest hydrologist Forest geologist Range prog ram manager Forest Youth Conservation Corps host and senior volunteer coordinator Forest volunteer program coordinator Fire and aviation management program manager Forest silviculturist Forest supervisor Zigzag Dist r ict Ranger Forest nat u ral resou rces st aff of ficer Forest special forest products coordinator P ublic affai rs of ficer, r u ral com mu nit y assist ance coordi nator Forest engineer Vegetation management specialist Dist r ict and forest recreation prog ram managers (g roup i nter view) (5) Clackamas R iver Dist r ict Ranger Upper Hood River Valley Upper Hood R iver Respondents position Valley resident Former logger X Volu nteer fi re depar t ment chief X Long-time orchardist (2) X Envi ron ment al activist X Former logger X Reti red Forest Ser vice employee, now hobby orchardist X Reti red Forest Ser vice employee X Former logger X Orchardist, ow ner pr ivate timberland X Cou nt y com missioner, family long-time residents X Local store ow ner, family long-time residents X Small mill operator, family long-time residents X Recreation i ndust r y represent ative X Prog ram manager mig rant worker social ser vices, family long-ter m mig rant workers, now residents X Regional soil and watershed association, and watershed association represent ative Confederated Tr ibes of War m Spr i ngs employee, aquatic restoration prog ram, of fice i n case-st udy site Regional recreation i ndust r y represent ative 19 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume V: Public Values and Forest Management Villages of Mount Hood Respondents position Villages resident Tourism and recreation industry rep X Tourism and recreation industry rep Developer, community development activist X Real est ate ser vices X Busi ness person /chamber of com merce member X Watershed activists (2) X Long-time resident, com mu nit y development activist X Reti ree, ser vice organization represent ative X News media represent ative X Local busi ness ow ner X Loggi ng cont ractor X Pastor X Fi refighter X Loggi ng cont ractor Cou nt y Economic Development of ficial Envi ron ment al i nterest g roup member (2) Industrial timberland manager P ublic school teachers (3) X Community development activist, seasonal resident X Community development activist X Estacada Respondents position Estacada resident For mer loggi ng cont ractors (3) X Forest ser vice employees (4) X Loggi ng supply store ow ner X Local busi nessman, tow n cou ncil man X Loggi ng cont ractor Fi refighter X Local employer/ busi ness ow ner X Community activist, recent inmigrant X City manager X Local employer/ busi ness X Wilder ness out fit ter X Cou nt y Economic Development of ficial Envi ron ment al i nterest g roup members (2) Wood products company employees (3) For mer busi ness ow ner, chamber of com merce member Pastor X Social service provider X School of ficial X Industrial timberland manager 20 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. V Klamath National Forest and Local Communities Klamath National Forest Respondents position Forest landscape architect Forest resou rce st aff of ficer (fisher ies, noxious weeds, ear th sciences, timber, wildlife) Dist r ict Ranger, Scot t /Sal mon Ranger Dist r icts Deputy forest supervisor Forest silviculturist Dist r ict resou rce st aff (recreation, range, noxious weeds, archaeolog y, mi nerals) District archaeologist Forest timber management of ficer and cont racti ng of ficer, Shast a Tr i nit y National Forest Forest ear th science and fisher ies prog ram manager Forest ad mi nist rative st aff of ficer (cont racti ng, com mu nit y assist ance prog ram, volu nteer prog rams) Forest environmental coordinator Dist r ict recreation, lands/mi nerals st aff Forest fi re management st aff of ficer Forest assistant engineer Wildlife biologist Scott Valley Respondents position Scott Valley resident Reforest ation nu rser y ow ner X Di rector, nonprofit nat u ral resou rces consulti ng and t rai ni ng center X Local mayor X Nat u ral resou rce management i nterest g roup member Former county supervisor X Rancher, r u ral conser vation dist r ict member X County board of education member Super i ntendent of schools (reti red) X Forester, tree farmer County supervisor X Wood products company manager (2) Wood products company employee/forester Wilder ness out fit ter, nat u ral resou rce management consult ant /cont ractor (2) X Shast a Tr ibe member, reti red timber worker X Shasta Tribe member X County behavioral health specialist X State Department of Forestry acting unit chief X County economic development corporation director County natural resource specialist X Envi ron ment al i nterest g roup member X County planning director X U.S. Forest Ser vice dist r ict ranger (reti red) X Sal mon R iver Restoration Cou ncil represent ative, cont ractor, X Mid-K lamath Watershed Cou ncil board member 21 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume V: Public Values and Forest Management Butte Valley Respondents position Butte Valley resident County Supervisor, Klamath Provincial Advisory Committee member, Ore- Cal Resou rce Conser vation and Development Di rector, rancher X Ore- Cal Resou rce Conser vation and Development employee But te Valley Saddle Co. ow ner, chamber of com merce president Dor r is Lu mber & Moldi ng X Vi nt age Woodworks ow ner X Shasta Tribe member, local environmentalist X Shasta Tribe member, former timber faller X W hitsell Manufact u r i ng, I nc. (lu mber remanufact u r i ng) X TC Ranch ow ners X But te Valley Fi re Dist r ict Fi re Chief X But te Valley Health Center But te Valley Unified School Dist r ict Super i ntendent X But te Valley school dist r ict employee X Mayor of Dorris X Mid-Klamath Respondents position Mid-Klamath resident Local busi ness ow ner/leader, cou nt y school board member, cont ractor, ex-mill worker X Fishi ng out fit ter/g uide, local school board member X Di rector, Happy Camp Family Resou rce Center ( provides social ser vices), X local school board member, tribal council member Reti red Happy Camp dist r ict ranger, health cli nic board member X Rancher, reti red Forest Ser vice employee X Miner, logger X Di rector, Kar u k Economic Development Organization; Kar u k Tr ibe member; vice president, X Happy Camp Chamber of Commerce; chairman, Happy Camp Action Committee Mid-K lamath Watershed Cou ncil represent ative, K lamath Forest Alliance represent ative Local busi ness ow ner X Regional forest manager, f r uit g rowers Kar u k t r ibal member, special forest products gatherer, basket maker X Logger X New 49ers recreational mi ni ng club represent ative X Forest cont ractor, ex-logger, local busi ness ow ner X Out fit ter-g uide, ow ner, local r iver raf ti ng company X President, Happy Camp Chamber of Com merce, local busi ness ow ner, Resou rce Advisor y X Committee member Treasurer, chamber of commerce X Chai r, Kar u k Tr ibe X Vice Chai r, Kar u k Tr ibe X Secret ar y, Kar u k Tr ibe X Anthropologist X K lamath-Sisk iyou Wildlands G roup represent ative X K lamath-Sisk iyou Wildlands G roup represent ative 22 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649, VOL. V BLM Coos Bay District and Local Communities Coos Bay District Respondents position District manager Resou rce area manager ? Umpqua Resou rce A rea Resou rce area manager ?My r tlewood Resou rce A rea Noxious weeds prog ram coordi nator Timber sales administrator Silviculturalist Watershed analysis coordi nator Small sales ad mi nist rator ?My r tlewood Resou rce A rea Small sales ad mi nist rator ? Umpqua Resou rce A rea Volunteer coordinator Cultural resources program manager Recreation specialist (2) Fish biologist Wildlife biologist Fire program manager District geologist Watershed restoration coordi nator P ublic affai rs of ficer Road engi neer ? Umpqua Resou rce A rea Road engi neer ?My r tlewood Resou rce A rea Interpretive specialist Greater Coos Bay Respondent?s posit ion Greater Coos Bay resident Chamber of com merce employee (tou r ism focus) X Consulti ng forester/small woodland ow ners association member X County commissioner X Cou nt y com missioner/rancher X County forester X Health services agency employee X Large timber company manager X Large timber company manager Large timber company manager, for mer local politician X Local economic development agency employee (tou r ism and i ndust r ial development focus) X Nat u re reser ve employee X Tribal forester X Tr ibal member/fish biologist X Watershed association employee Watershed restoration cont ractor/forest worker X 23 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume V: Public Values and Forest Management Greater Myrtle Point Respondent?s posit ion Greater Myr tle Point resident Br ush shed operator X Busi ness development specialist Envi ron ment al educator X Envi ron ment al g roup leader Far mer/envi ron ment al educator X Fisher ies specialist with st ate educational agency Large timber company manager Mou nt ai n bi ke club member/car penter X Municipal leader X P ublic works employee X Restoration cont ractor/forest worker X Reti ree, fisher ies volu nteer, long-ter m resident Reti ree, rock hou nd club member, newcomer X Small mill operator X Watershed association employee Greater Reedsport Respondent?s posit ion Greater Reedspor t resident Cult u ral her it age organization leader/envi ron ment al education focus X Economic development leader/spor tsfishi ng and tou r ism focus (2) X Economic development /el k viewi ng area i nvolvement X Forest products company employee X Former school district leader X For mer wood products i ndust r y employee/small mill operator X Industrial manufacturing company employee X Local politician X Manager of municipality X Member volu nteer fi re depar t ment X Municipal planner X Ow ner of local media X Rancher/mill ow ner/watershed organization member X Small busi ness ow ner (timber related) X Small busi ness ow ner, el k viewi ng area i nvolvement X Social ser vices organization manager X Timber company manager Wood products i ndust r y worker X Pacific Northwest Research Station Web site http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw Telephone (503) 808-2592 Publication requests (503) 808-2138 FAX (503) 808-2130 E-mail pnw_pnwpubs@fs.fed.us Mailing address Publications Distribution Pacific Northwest Research Station P.O. Box 3890 Portland, OR 97208-3890 U.S. Depar tment of Agriculture Pacific Nor thwest Research Station 333 SW First Avenue P.O. Box 3890 Por tland, OR 97208-3890 Official Business Penalty for Private Use, $300 Northwest Forest PlaN THE FIRST 10 YEARS (1994?2003) Pacific Nor thwest Research Station Forest Ser vice United States Depar tment of A griculture General Technical Repor t PNW- GTR- 649 Vol. VI April 2006 socioeconomic Monitoring results Volume VI: Program Development and Future Directions Susan Charnley and Claudia Stuart Authors Susan Charnley is a research social scientist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation, P.O. Box 3890, Por tland, OR 97208. Claudia Stuart is a com mu nit y plan ner, Mendoci no National Forest, U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icul - t u re, Forest Ser vice, Genetic Resou rce Center, 2741 Cramer Lane, Chico, CA 95928. The Forest Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture is dedicated to the principle of multiple use management of the Nations forest resources for sustained yields of wood, water, forage, wildlife, and recreation. Through forestry research, cooperation with the States and private forest owners, and management of the national forests and national grasslands, it strivess directed by Congresso provide increasingly greater service to a growing Nation. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individuals income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDAs TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Socioeconomic Monitoring Results Volume VI: Program Development and Future Directions Susan Charnley and Claudia Stuart Northwest Forest PlanThe First 10 Years (19942003): Socioeconomic Monitoring Results Susan Charnley, Technical Coordinator U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Pacific Nor thwest Research Station Por tland, Oregon General Technical Report PNW-GTR-649 Vol. VI April 2006 ii Abstract Charnley, Susan; Stuart, Claudia. 2006. Socioeconomic monitoring results. Vol. VI: Prog ram development and f ut u re di rections. I n: Char nley, S., tech. coord. Nor thwest Forest Plan ?the fi rst 10 years (1994 ?2003): socioeconomic monitor i ng results. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 649. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 18 p. T he socioeconomic monitor i ng prog ram of the Pacific Nor thwest I nteragency Regional Monitor i ng Prog ram went th rough th ree phases of development bet ween 1999 and 2005. Volu me V I provides a histor y of the socioeconomic monitor i ng prog ram, det aili ng each phase of its development and discussi ng challenges associated with socioeconomic moni - toring at the community scale. Volume VI also evaluates the socioeconomic monitoring plan i n the Nor thwest Forest Plan record of decision, and whether the questions, goals, and monitor i ng items are still relevant 10 years later. We provide recom mendations for f ut u re monitoring. Key words: Nor thwest Forest Plan, socioeconomic monitor i ng, monitor i ng prog ram history, future monitoring. iii Preface T his repor t is one of a set of repor ts produced on this 10 -year an niversar y of the Nor th - west Forest Plan (the Plan). T he collection of repor ts at tempts to answer questions about the effectiveness of the Plan based on new monitor i ng and research results. T he set i n - cludes a ser ies of st at us and t rends repor ts, a sy nthesis of all regional monitor i ng and research results, a repor t on i nteragency i nfor mation management, and a su m mar y repor t. T he st at us and t rends repor ts focus on est ablishi ng baseli nes of i nfor mation f rom 1994, when the Plan was approved, and repor ti ng change over the 10 -year per iod. T he st at us and t rends ser ies i ncludes repor ts on late-successional and old-g row th forests, nor ther n spot ted owl population and habit at, marbled mu r relet population and habit at, watershed condition, gover n ment-to -gover n ment t r ibal relationships, socioeconomic conditions, and monitor i ng of project implement ation u nder Plan st andards and g uide - lines. T he sy nthesis repor t add resses questions about the effectiveness of the Plan by usi ng the st at us and t rends results and new research. It focuses on the validit y of the Plan assu mptions, differences bet ween expect ations and what act ually happened, the cer t ai nt y of the fi ndi ngs, and, fi nally, considerations for the f ut u re. T he sy nthesis repor t is orga - nized i n t wo par ts: Par t I?i nt roduction, context, sy nthesis, and su m mar y? and Par t II? socio - economic implications, older forests, species conser vation, the aquatic conser vation st rateg y, and adaptive management and monitor i ng. T he repor t on i nteragency i nfor mation management identifies issues and recom - mends solutions for resolvi ng dat a and mappi ng problems encou ntered du r i ng the prepa - ration of the set of monitor i ng repor ts. I nfor mation management issues i nevit ably su r face du r i ng analyses that requi re dat a f rom multiple agencies cover i ng large geog raphic areas. T he goal of that repor t is to improve the i nteg ration and acquisition of i nteragency dat a for the next comprehensive repor t. T he socioeconomic st at us and t rends repor t is published i n six volu mes. Volu me I of the repor t cont ai ns key fi ndi ngs. Volu me II add resses the evaluation question, A re predict able levels of timber and nontimber resou rces available and bei ng produced? T he focus of Volu me III is the evaluation question, A re local com mu nities and economies exper ienci ng positive or negative changes that may 6+be associated with federal forest management? Volu me I V assesses the Plan goal of promoti ng agency- citizen collabora - tion i n forest management. Volu me V repor ts on public values regardi ng federal forest management i n the Pacific Nor thwest. Volu me V I (this volu me) provides a histor y of the Nor thwest Forest Plan socioeconomic monitor i ng prog ram and a discussion of potential di rections for the prog ram. iv v Summary T he socioeconomic monitor i ng prog ram of the Pacific Nor thwest I nteragency Regional Monitor i ng Prog ram has been th rough th ree phases of development. Phase 1 lasted f rom 1999 to 2000, and was desig ned to review available i nfor mation and recom mend a pilot protocol. Phase II?lasti ng f rom 2000 to 2002?tested a pilot monitor i ng protocol and re - sulted i n a set of recom mendations for how to u nder t ake socioeconomic monitor i ng related to the Nor thwest Forest Plan (the Plan). Phase III, st ar ted late i n 2002 and ended i n 2005 (also a pilot phase), produced the i nfor mation cont ai ned i n this monitor i ng repor t (volu mes I th rough V ). Volu me V I provides a histor y of the socioeconomic monitor i ng prog ram, de - t aili ng each phase of its development. T he Regional I nteragency Executive Com mit tee (R IEC) has not for mally i ncor porated socioeconomic monitor i ng i nto the Plan regional monitor i ng prog ram; nor is there a pub - lished socioeconomic monitor i ng protocol. Followi ng publication of this i nter pretive repor t, the R IEC will decide how to proceed with f ut u re Plan-related socioeconomic monitor i ng. To assist with this decision, volu me V I evaluates the socioeconomic monitor i ng plan i n the Plan record of decision (ROD) and whether the questions, goals, and monitor i ng items are still relevant 10 years later. It also provides recom mendations for f ut u re monitor i ng. We fi nd that the Plan goals are still relevant and are consistent with the broader mis - sions and st rategic goals of the Forest Ser vice (FS) and the Bu reau of Land Management (BLM), although some could be reworded. We also fi nd that the ROD evaluation question that has received most of the prog ram?s at tention to date ?A re local com mu nities and econ - omies exper ienci ng positive or negative changes that may be associated with federal forest management?? should be revised. We recom mend for mulati ng monitor i ng questions that focus on the thi ngs that li n k land management agencies, federal forests, and r u ral com mu - nities and economies i n ways that can produce positive outcomes for com mu nit y well-bei ng and forest ecosystem health. vi Contents 1 Chapter 1: Module History 1 Introduction 1 Previous Socioeconomic Monitoring of Forest-Based Communities 3 Socioeconomic Monitoring Program History 3 Phase I 4 Phase II 7 Chapter 2: Future Direction 8 Plan Goals: A re T hey Still Relevant? 8 Produce a Predict able and Sust ai nable Supply of Timber Sales, Nontimber Forest Resou rces, and Recreation O ppor t u nities 8 Mai nt ai n the St abilit y of Local and Regional Economies on a Predict able, Long-Ter m Basis 9 W here Timber Sales Can not Proceed, Assist With Long-Ter m Economic Development and Diversification to Mi nimize Adverse Effects Associated With Job Loss 9 Protect Forest Values and Envi ron ment al Qualities Associated With Late-Successional, Old- G row th, and Aquatic Ecosystems 10 Promote I nteragency Collaboration and Agency- Citizen Collaboration i n Forest Management 10 Plan Evaluation Questions: Are They the Right Ones? 10 A re Predict able Levels of Timber and Nontimber Resou rces Available and Bei ng Produced? 11 A re Local Com mu nities and Economies Exper ienci ng Positive or Negative Changes T hat May Be Associated With Federal Forest Management? 12 Additional Considerations for Future Monitoring 15 References 1 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume VI: Program Development and Future Directions Chapter 1: Module History Introduction T he socioeconomic monitor i ng prog ram of the Pacific Nor thwest I nteragency Regional Monitor i ng Prog ram has developed th rough th ree phases. T he fi rst socioeconomic monitor i ng team was for med i n 1997, but it did not begi n monitor i ng-related work u ntil 1999. Phase I was f rom 1999 to 2000, phase II f rom 2000 to 2002, and phase III began i n late 2002 and is still u nder way. T he monitor i ng results i n this repor t (volu mes I th rough V ) come f rom phase III. Phase I was desig ned to review available i nfor mation and recom mend a pilot monitor i ng protocol. Phases II and III were pilots for the monitor i ng prog ram. T he Regional I nteragency Executive Com mit tee (the R IEC ) 1 has not yet of ficially i ncor porated socioeconomic monitor i ng i nto the Regional Monitor i ng Prog ram, nor has a for mal protocol been published for socioeconomic monitor i ng. T he moni - tor i ng du r i ng phase III followed a protocol developed by the socioeconomic monitor i ng team (the team) i n late 2002. T he protocol was pilot-tested i n 2003 ? 05. If the Com mit - tee for mally adopts socioeconomic monitor i ng as par t of the Regional Monitor i ng Prog ram, the team will publish an updated monitor i ng protocol. As st ated i n the Plan record of decision (ROD), ?T he monitor i ng plan will be per iodically evaluated to ascer t ai n whether the monitor i ng questions and st andards are still rel - evant, and will be adjusted as appropr iate. Some monitor i ng items may be disconti nued and others added as k nowledge and issues change with implement ation ( USDA and USDI 1994b). Given that t wo pilot phases have occu r red and that the com mit tee must decide the f ut u re of Plan-related socioeconomic monitoring, evaluating the socioeconomic monitor i ng plan i n the ROD; judgi ng whether the questions, goals, and monitor i ng items are still relevant 10 years later; and assessi ng f ut u re options to ensu re that agencies have the socioeconomic i nfor mation they need to suppor t adap - tive management in the Plan area are timely. Chapter 1 begi ns with an over view of previous effor ts at socioeconomic monitor i ng of forest-based com mu nities, followed by a histor y of the Plan?s socioeconomic moni - tor i ng module, docu menti ng its development si nce 1997. Chapter 2 cont ai ns recom mendations and options for f ut u re socioeconomic monitor i ng associated with the Plan. Previous Socioeconomic Monitoring of Forest-Based Communities One challenge the monitor i ng team faced i n developi ng a protocol for socioeconomic monitor i ng was a lack of mod - els. T he Nor thwest Forest Plan?s (the Plan) record of decision (ROD) specifically called for monitor i ng r u ral economies and com mu nities as par t of a regional monitor i ng st rateg y. T he Forest Ser vice (FS) and the Bu reau of Land Manage - ment (BLM) had done lit tle i n the way of com mu nit y-scale socioeconomic monitoring in support of forest management before this effor t. Although the National Forest Manage - ment Act (1976) calls for monitor i ng forest plans, the focus is t y pically on implement ation monitor i ng ( Wr ight et al. 2002: 2), and it rarely i ncludes socioeconomic effectiveness monitor i ng. T he FS has been actively i nvolved i n socio - economic monitor i ng relati ng to forest sust ai nabilit y at the national scale as a par t of the Mont real Process Work i ng G roup on Cr iter ia and I ndicators for the Conser vation and Sust ai nable Management of Temperate and Boreal Forests. T he FS also reg ularly assesses t rends i n the supply of, and demand for, renewable nat u ral resou rces and recreation at the national and broad regional scales, as mandated by the 1974 Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resou rces Plan ni ng Act. T his work does not provide g uidance for com mu nit y- scale monitoring. A regional FS monitoring effor t that included a socio - cult ural module was initiated in the mid-1990s as par t of Califor nia?s Sier ra Nevada f ramework plan ni ng effor t. T his effor t i ncluded a concept ual model as a fou ndation for moni - tor i ng an ar ray of envi ron ment al, social, economic, and cul - t u ral t rends across the Sier ra Nevada (Manley et al. 2000). T he team desig ned rangewide sampli ng st rategies based on the concept ual f ramework, i ncludi ng det ailed st rategies for monitor i ng change i n cult u ral resou rces and the imple - ment ation and effectiveness of t r ibal relations prog rams. 1 T he R I EC is respon sible for en su r i ng t he prompt, coord i nated , a nd successf u l i mplement at ion of t he Nor t hwest Forest Pla n at t he reg ional scale a nd also over sees t he Pla n?s mon itor i ng pro - g r a m a nd a d apt ive ma nagement processes. T he I ntergover n men - t al Adv isor y Com m it tee a dv ises t he R I EC. 2 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. VI Fu ndi ng and implementi ng the Sier ra Nevada monitor i ng prog ram concent rated on ecological resou rces, however. I n 1999, the FS began a pilot st udy?the Local Unit Cr iter ia and I ndicators Development test?to assess how feasible monitor i ng ecosystem sust ai nabilit y at the forest scale would be ( Wr ight et al. 2002). T he st udy focused on developi ng a set of cr iter ia and i ndicators for monitor i ng sust ai nabilit y, i ncludi ng the sust ai nabilit y of socioeconomic systems, i n suppor t of adaptive ecosystem management and forest plan ni ng. T he result was a monitor i ng f ramework cont ai ni ng a core set of cr iter ia and i ndicators for sust ai n - abilit y monitor i ng. T he pilot national forests i n the st udy conducted com mu nit y-level socioeconomic monitor i ng to test the i ndicators. Some have adopted the fi nal f ramework and beg u n implementi ng monitor i ng activities i n com mu ni - ties arou nd thei r forests. Other FS monitor i ng effor ts have focused on ecological monitor i ng (e.g., the Forest I nventor y and A nalysis Prog ram, Maddox et al. 1999, Mulder et al. 1999, Tolle et al. 1999) rather than socioeconomic monitor - i ng, and they are t y pically conducted at the broad scale. T he BLM has not previously conducted socioeconomic monitor - i ng at the com mu nit y scale (McEl roy 2005). Outside the FS and BLM, a few models of com mu nit y- based socioeconomic monitor i ng relate to forest manage - ment.2 Some researchers have developed f rameworks of social and economic i ndicators that can be used for monitor - i ng sust ai nabilit y and well-bei ng i n nat u ral resou rce-based com mu nities (such as Beck ley and Bu rkosk y 1999, Force and Machlis 1997, Park i ns 1999, Park i ns et al. 2001). More of ten than not, these research effor ts conclude by identif y - i ng a set of socioeconomic i ndicators to be used i n monitor - i ng and stop shor t of applyi ng them i n monitor i ng prog rams and of repor ti ng monitor i ng results usef ul for adaptive eco - system management. Consequently, although they provide g uidance for what to monitor, they do not provide g uidance for how to monitor, nor do they demonst rate how moni - tor i ng results can be applied i n the resou rce management context. Some researchers have developed f rameworks of social and economic i ndicators that have been used i n conducti ng broad-scale assessments i n suppor t of forest plan ni ng. Several excellent examples demonst rate the use of such i ndicators i n assessi ng social and economic condi - tions and t rends, com mu nit y well-bei ng, resiliency, and capacity3 (Ch r istensen et al. 1999, Doak and Kusel 1996, FEM AT 1993, Har r is et al. 2000, St r uglia et al. 2001, St u r tevant and Hor ton 2000). Although such assessments have not been developed withi n a monitor i ng f ramework, they do provide a f rame of reference for buildi ng an ap - proach to socioeconomic monitoring. Related research focuses on how to conduct ?multi - partymonitoring 4 and ?com mu nit y-based? monitor i ng 5 i n suppor t of ecosystem management (Bliss et al. 2001, USDA 2003). For example, the FS, i n collaboration with par t ner organizations, has developed handbooks for multi - par t y monitor i ng of com mu nit y forest restoration projects (ht t p://w w w.fs.fed.us/r3/spf /cf r p/monitor i ng / ). Ou r moni - tor i ng approach does not ent ail multipar t y monitor i ng, although we consider it to be an option for the f ut u re. T he best examples we fou nd of socioeconomic moni - tor i ng relati ng to forests and com mu nities came f rom the Watershed Research and Trai ni ng Center i n Tr i nit y Cou nt y, Califor nia (Dan ks et al. 2002) and the Ecosystem Work force Prog ram at the Universit y of Oregon (Moseley and Wilson 2002). T his work was highly i n fluential i n de - velopi ng the monitor i ng approach used i n phase III. Given the scarcit y of existi ng models to d raw f rom i n developi ng a socioeconomic monitor i ng prog ram for the Plan area, the histor y of the Plan?s prog ram is one of developi ng and testi ng different approaches. 3 Com mu n it y capacit y may be def i ned a s t he collect ive abilit y of com mu n it y resident s to respond to exter nal a nd i nter nal st ress, t a ke a dva nt age of oppor t u n it ies, a d apt a nd respond to a va r iet y of ci rcu mst a nces, a nd meet t he need s of resident s ( Ku sel 20 01: 374). 4 Mu lt ipa r t y mon itor i ng con sist s of mon itor i ng by a m i xed g roup of people who a re af f iliated w it h local com mu n it ies, local, re - g ional, or nat ional i nterest g roups, a nd public agencies ( USDA 20 03: 3). 5 Com mu n it y-ba sed mon itor i ng refer s to mon itor i ng act iv it ies desig ned to produce i n for mat ion on social a nd ecolog ical factor s af fect i ng a com mu n it y t hat is needed or desi red by t he com mu n it y, a nd i n wh ich member s of t he com mu n it y pa r t icipate ( Bliss et al. 20 01: 145). 2 Some exa mples of socioeconom ic mon itor i ng a re a ssociated w it h com mu n it y su st ai nabilit y project s, con ser vat ion a nd development project s, a nd cer t if icat ion prog r a ms, however. 3 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume VI: Program Development and Future Directions Socioeconomic Monitoring Program History I n 1993, President Cli nton convened the Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team (FEM AT 1993) as par t of the effor t to develop the Plan. T he team was charged with identif yi ng management alter natives for Pacific Nor thwest federal forests that would maximize social and economic benefits f rom the forests, while complying with environmen - tal laws and regulations (FEM AT 1993: ii). T he FEM AT social assessment fou nd that many com mu nities i n the Pacific Nor thwest were u ndergoi ng economic and social t ransitions f rom timber dependence to other t y pes of economies. Time limit ations imposed on FEM AT precluded a complete i nvestigation of these and other changi ng dy - namics across Pacific Nor thwest com mu nities. Given the complex, ongoi ng changes i n the region?s forest-based com mu nities, the Forest Ser vice?s Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation i nitiated a prog ram to st udy r u ral development i n the Pacific Nor thwest. T he prog ram focused on improvi ng k nowledge of the region?s changi ng r u ral places. Researchers sought to bet ter u nderst and con - temporar y r u ral social and economic dy namics, to clar if y relations bet ween nat u ral resou rce management and r u ral com mu nities, and to i nvestigate r u ral social values (Ch r is - tensen 2003). Prog ram scientists character ized r u ral condi - tions across the Pacific Nor thwest at the cou nt y and larger scales, usi ng dat a available f rom the U.S. Bu reau of the Census, Bu reau of Economic A nalysis, st ate employ ment depar t ments, and other sou rces (Ch r istensen et al. 2000; McGi n nis et al. 1996, 1997; Raet tig 1999, Raet tig et al. 1996, 1998). T he prog ram also assessed the effec - tiveness of the Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative (Ch r istensen et al. 1999, Raet tig and Ch r istensen 1999). T hese effor ts, however, did not specifically respond to the socioeconomic monitor i ng charge cont ai ned i n the ROD. Phase I I n 1997, the Regional Ecosystem Of fice (the R EO) 6 initi- ated an effor t to respond directly to the ROD requirement for socioeconomic monitor ing. A n i nteragency team was for med to develop a monitor i ng protocol. T he team i n - cluded social scientists, economists, and others f rom the St ation, the U.S. A r my Cor ps of Engi neers, the U.S. BLM, the U.S. FS Pacific Nor thwest Region (Region 6), and the U.S. Geological Su r vey?s Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center. The team investigated options for develop - ing the monitoring program. I n 1999, the team com missioned researchers at the Universit y of Washi ng ton?s Nor thwest Policy Center and College of Forest Resou rces to u nder t ake a t wo -par t st udy. T he objectives for the fi rst phase of work were to est ab - lish a monitor i ng f ramework, u nder t ake prelimi nar y dat a collection, and estimate the feasibilit y and costs of com - pleti ng the evaluation i n a succeedi ng phase of the work. T his phase of the project focused solely on the monitor i ng question i n the ROD that per t ai ned to well-bei ng i n r u ral com mu nities and economies, and how that was li n ked to federal forest management policy. T he team also con - sidered the need to develop the monitor i ng protocol for broader or long-ter m applications. T he repor t that resulted f rom the phase I effor ts (Som - mers 2001) fou nd that the literat u re deali ng with r u ral development, socioeconomic assessment, and com mu nit y effects st udies did not offer a proven model for relati ng forest management to social and economic change. Nor did published dat a allow researchers to discer n the causes of socioeconomic change. Cou nt y dat a, such as mill em - ploy ment, was readily available but could not be used to at t r ibute the causes of change, because it descr ibed var i - ables subject to a host of i n fluences. For example, workers com mute across cou nt y li nes f rom home to work place, and fi r ms impor t and expor t products across cou nt y bou ndar - ies. Changi ng tech nolog y and busi ness conditions f u r ther complicate analysis. T hese leakages and other confou ndi ng 6 T he R EO suppor t s Pla n decision ma k i ng processes, a nd i mplement at ion of Pla n st a nd a rd s a nd g u ides. 4 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. VI factors make usi ng existi ng cou nt y dat a to at t r ibute changes i n employ ment to federal forest management impossible. A second disadvant age is that cou nt y dat a do not reflect conditions and t rends t ak i ng place at the com mu - nit y scale, which can differ g reatly withi n a si ngle cou nt y. Accordi ngly, Som mers proposed a concept ual model of local economic flows that related changi ng forest manage - ment to com mu nit y-scale socioeconomic change. Federal forest management actions were li n ked di rectly to local and nonlocal fi r ms, to local workers and thei r household i ncomes, and to local ser vices. Federal management was li n ked i ndi rectly to var iables such as i ncome t ax revenues and consu mption, health, cr ime, and social capit al. Once estimated by usi ng appropr iate dat a, such a model can est ablish whether federal actions were the probable cause of socioeconomic changes at the community scale, or whether local change was more li kely due to other factors. I n addition to validati ng (or disqualif yi ng) these relations, the dat a used to estimate the model could also descr ibe change in community socioeconomic characteristics. The approach thus responded to the dual aspects of the ROD socioeconomic monitor i ng charge: to est ablish whether local com mu nities and economies are u ndergoi ng change, and to discer n whether that change is associated with fed - eral forest management. Som mers also u nder took prelimi nar y dat a collection by usi ng cou nt y i ndicators readily available f rom secondar y sou rces to descr ibe socioeconomic t rends i n the Plan area. T he available dat a suggested that the Pacific Nor thwest?s met ropolit an economies were st ronger than its r u ral econo - mies du r i ng the 1990s. Som mers identified a complex set of issues associated with estimati ng and usi ng the local model to deter mi ne cause-and- effect relations. Estimati ng the model would requi re assembli ng a subst antial amou nt of com mu nit y dat a. Com mu nit y dat a, however, were not readily available. Accordi ngly, Som mers recom mended pr imar y dat a collec - tion by usi ng su r veys or i nter views to properly estimate the model. To cont rol the i ncreased monitor i ng costs associated with pr imar y dat a collection, he suggested a limited sample of community cases. W hich com mu nities should be sampled? More than 1,300 non met ropolit an com mu nities have been deli neated i n the Plan area (volu me III, chapter 2). Monitor i ng ever y com mu nit y is impractical; yet d rawi ng generalizations about com mu nities regionwide based on a sample is also dif ficult because the com mu nities are u nique. Som mers recom mended monitor i ng a sample of com mu nities t y ped and pai red accordi ng to population size, dist ance f rom t ranspor t ation cor r idors, and t y pe of economic base. Such an approach would allow researchers to generalize results by com mu nit y t y pe. Alter natively, monitor i ng could sample a limited set of local com mu nities before and af ter change i n federal forest management. Given this emphasis on local dat a collection, Som mers also recom mended evaluati ng available cou nt y dat a ever y 3 to 5 years to monitor region - wide conditions. Phase II T he second phase of the project was desig ned to test and evaluate the approaches outli ned i n phase I. Researchers adopted separate su r vey i nst r u ments for local busi nesses and households (Som mers et al. 2002). The business su r vey was to capt u re infor mation descr ibing economic activit y and li n kages cr itical to estimati ng the local economic model. T he household su r vey was developed to i nfor m the social components of the model and to build a pict u re of com mu nit y social capit al. W hen tested, however, the house - hold su r vey imposed a subst antial time bu rden on test sub - jects, requi r i ng more than an hou r to complete. Researchers estimated the costs of ad mi nister i ng the su r veys at over $50,000 per com mu nit y. T he need to t rack potentially large nu mbers of residents movi ng i nto or out of the com mu nit y du r i ng the st udy per iod ent ailed additional costs and chal - lenges. I ndividual and household pr ivacy were also con - cerns. I n addition to su r veys, the researchers tested a case- st udy approach usi ng available socioeconomic i ndicator dat a together with i nter views. T hey conducted i nter views with com mu nit y members and supplemented them with dat a published by the U.S. census, local ser vice providers, and others. T he economic side of the analysis relied on economic-base theor y applied at the subcou nt y scale. 5 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume VI: Program Development and Future Directions T he test was i n Forks, Washi ng ton. Peer review i ndi - cated that, although com mu nit y-scale analysis can result in more useful information than county-scale analysis, the monitor i ng methods tested presented sig nificant limit ations. Foremost were the lack of a proven basis for relati ng local economic change to change i n regional federal forest man - agement policy, and relati ng local economic change to local social change. Reviewers recom mended that the monitor i ng effor t focus i nitially on improvi ng u nderst andi ng of these relations. T hey also noted the need for a r igorous method of deli neati ng com mu nit y bou ndar ies to facilit ate com mu nit y monitor i ng, given the debate i n the literat u re about how to defi ne a ?com mu nit y? as a u nit of analysis. T he phase II repor t (Jackson et al. 2004) provided the researchers? recom mendations for Plan-related socio - economic effectiveness monitor i ng. T he repor t noted that a case-st udy approach i ncor porati ng com mu nit y-scale socioeconomic i ndicators can be adequate for local socio - economic monitor i ng. To validate causal relations bet ween forest management and local com mu nities, however, the repor t recom mended longit udi nal busi ness and household su r veys by usi ng a sampli ng st rateg y based on com mu nit y cases pai red by t y pe and deg ree of relation to the forest. T he monitor i ng challenges identified by the Universit y of Wash - i ng ton researchers and thei r key recom mendations for how to proceed followi ng phases I and II are su m mar ized here. Monitoring challenges Determining an appropriate unit of analysis for monitor i ng (such as cou nt y vs. com mu nit y). ? Defi ni ng and deli neati ng ?com mu nit y? as a u nit of analysis. ? Selecti ng sample com mu nities and generalizi ng from the sample. ? Identif yi ng relevant i ndicators for which com mu nit y-scale dat a are available. ? I nvesti ng time and money for pr imar y dat a collection. Distinguishing the effects of forest management policy on communities from the effects of other social, economic, and ecological processes. Monitoring recommendations from phases I and II ? Do not limit monitor i ng effor ts to assessi ng i ndica - tors for which dat a exist f rom secondar y sou rces. ? Conduct long-ter m com mu nit y case st udies. ? Defi ne com mu nities operationally accordi ng to geog raphic pat ter ns of employ ment and ret ail t rade. ? Monitor com mu nities most li kely to ex hibit impacts f rom land management activities. ? Su r vey i ndividuals, households, and busi nesses over time. T h rough the remai nder of 2002, the i nteragency com - mit tee responsible for developi ng the socioeconomic moni - tor i ng module considered the results of phases I and II i n the context of the literat u re and evolvi ng methods. Focal considerations were methods both to improve u nderst and - i ng of local com mu nit y-forest relations, and to descr ibe socioeconomic conditions and t rends i n r u ral com mu nities across the Pacific Nor thwest. A thi rd phase of the monitor i ng prog ram began developi ng i n late 2002. T he team?s charge expanded to i nclude evaluati ng the second question cont ai ned i n the ROD: whether predict able amou nts of timber and non- timber resou rces were available and bei ng produced. T he team also adopted new methods to add ress the question of how federal forest management policy was affecti ng r u ral economies and com mu nities. Phase III used the widely accepted approach of i nter - views as par t of rapid social assessment. I nter views were i ncor porated i nto a mixed-methods case-st udies approach that also gathered secondar y dat a (e.g., Yi n 1994). Phase III adopted specific methods used i n recent monitor i ng effor ts (Dan ks et al. 2002, Moseley and Wilson 2002), as well as emergi ng approaches to deli neati ng com mu nities (Doak and Kusel 1996, Donoghue 2003, Kusel 1996). Monitor i ng was consistent with recom mendations f rom phases I and II: Do not limit monitoring to an assessment of cou nt y-scale social and economic i ndicator dat a; these dat a do not reveal com mu nit y-scale condi- tions and changes and, although they may be readily available, they are not always relevant for answer i ng the monitor i ng question. 6 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. VI ? Adopt a forest- com mu nit y case-st udy approach to relate com mu nit y-scale social and economic change to changes i n federal forest management policy. ? Use a r igorous method of deli neati ng com mu- nit y bou ndar ies to facilit ate com mu nit y-scale monitoring. ? Combi ne com mu nit y-scale social and economic i ndicator dat a f rom secondar y sou rces with pr imar y dat a collection by usi ng su r veys or i nter views i n a sample of com mu nities. T he phase III approach and methods are outli ned i n det ail i n volu mes II th rough V of this repor t. 7 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume VI: Program Development and Future Directions The information in this interpretive report is largely the result of ret rospective monitor i ng. No socioeconomic mon - itor i ng prog ram was est ablished early i n the Nor thwest Forest Plan (the Plan) per iod. T hus there was no oppor t u - nit y to for mulate monitor i ng questions, identif y appropr i - ate i ndicators for answer i ng those questions, and gather monitor i ng dat a associated with the i ndicators over the cou rse of a decade to compile and evaluate i n this i nter - pretive repor t. To a large extent, the monitor i ng team had to rely on existi ng dat a f rom secondar y sou rces to answer the evaluation questions i n the record of decision (ROD) and to evaluate success i n meeti ng Plan socioeconomic goals. T hese dat a and thei r associated i ndicators were not always adequate for the t ask. T here is now an oppor t u nit y to est ablish a for mal socioeconomic monitor i ng prog ram that identifies relevant monitor i ng questions with appropr i - ate i ndicators and to gather monitor i ng dat a per ti nent to the i ndicators so that the questions can be answered. T his chapter cont ai ns ou r recom mendations for f ut u re socio - economic monitoring. Effectiveness monitor i ng asks, ?To what extent are the goals and objectives of the Plan bei ng achieved?? (Mulder et al. 1999: exec. su m mar y). T hese goals for m the basis for generati ng questions that the monitor i ng prog ram should answer (Mulder et al. 1999: 5). We ag ree: effectiveness monitor i ng questions should be st r uct u red arou nd Plan goals and should evaluate how well those goals are bei ng achieved by identif yi ng t rends i n associated i ndicators. However, as Noon et al. (1999: 25) poi nted out, i nfor ma - tion about changes i n the st at us of an i ndicator by itself is of limited value. Without u nderst andi ng what is causi ng monitor i ng t rends, and how management policies versus other var iables d r ive them, we don?t k now what policies and prog rams are work i ng, what aren?t, and how to effect change i n the context of adaptive management. Although monitor i ng t y pically results i n a descr iption of the st at us and t rends i n the at t r ibutes bei ng monitored, it also gen - erates i nfor mation that can be used to build hy potheses about causation that can be tested th rough research (Busch and Trexler 2003: 4 ?5). T hus, another thi ng to consider as the prog ram looks ahead is, how can research be i nteg rated i nto monitor i ng to bet ter u nderst and the cause-and- effect relations that u nderlie monitor i ng t rends? T he agencies? role, not the monitor i ng team?s, is to identif y the social and economic goals of federal forest management u nder the Plan. To help with that process, we review the Plan?s socioeconomic goals and thei r relevance 10 years later and exami ne the ROD evaluation questions i n light of these goals. To provide context, it is wor th re - viewi ng the mission and broader management goals and pr i nciples of the Forest Ser vice (FS) and Bu reau of Land Management (BLM) that are relevant to socioeconomic monitoring. A par t of the FS mission is providi ng tech nical and fi nancial assist ance to com mu nities to improve thei r nat u ral envi ron ment by car i ng for thei r forests; helpi ng com mu ni - ties use forests to promote r u ral economic development and a qualit y r u ral envi ron ment; and providi ng work, t rai ni ng, and education to the u nemployed, u nderemployed, elderly, youth, and disadvantaged in pu rsuit of the agency mission (ht t p://w w w.fs.fed.us/about us/mission.sht ml). Two of the agency?s g uidi ng pr i nciples are to for m par t nerships to achieve shared goals and to promote g rassroots par ticipa - tion i n agency decisions and activities. T he 2004 Forest Ser vice Plan ni ng Rule calls for u nderst andi ng the social and economic cont r ibutions that FS-managed lands make by evaluati ng relevant economic and social conditions and t rends du r i ng the plan ni ng process. It also st ates that national forest lands should cont r ibute to sust ai ni ng social and economic systems withi n thei r plan areas. T he FS 2004 Plan ni ng Rule identifies sust ai nabilit y as the overall goal of land management plan ni ng and recog nizes that the social, economic, and ecological components of sust ai nabilit y are i nterdependent. T he r ule also calls for a collaborative and participatory approach to planning. Two of the g uidi ng pr i nciples for achievi ng the BLM mission are to u nderst and the social and economic context i n which the agency manages its lands, i ncludi ng the ef - fects of changi ng social and envi ron ment al conditions on land uses and local com mu nities, and to work i n par t ner - ship with others to achieve a shared vision of how the land and its use will change over time ( USDI 2000: 10). One of Chapter 2: Future Direction 8 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. VI the BLM?s goals is to ser ve cu r rent and f ut u re publics, and another is to provide economic and tech nical assist ance to st ate, t r ibal, and local gover n ments ( USDI 2000: 49). A n - other BLM goal is to restore and mai nt ai n the health of the lands it manages. To u nderst and and plan for the condition and use of BLM lands, the agency recog nizes the need for i nfor mation about the sust ai nabilit y of land use activities on BLM dist r icts, and thei r cont r ibution to local and regional socioeconomic conditions ( USDI 2000: 54). Plan Goals: Are They Still Relevant? T he team identified five Plan socioeconomic goals for effectiveness monitoring: ? Produce a predict able and sust ai nable supply of timber sales, nontimber forest resou rces, and recreation opportunities. ? Mai nt ai n the st abilit y of local and regional economies on a predict able, long-ter m basis. ? W here timber sales can not proceed, assist with long-ter m economic development and diversification to mi nimize adverse effects associated with job loss. ? Protect forest values and envi ron ment al qualities associated with late-successional, old-g row th, and aquatic ecosystems. ? Promote i nteragency collaboration and agency- citizen collaboration i n forest management. A re these goals still relevant and wor th monitor i ng? Produce a Predictable and Sustainable Supply of Timber Sales, Nontimber Forest Resources, and Recreation Oppor tunities Monitor i ng resou rce and recreation out puts f rom federal forest lands is impor t ant, because timber sales, nontimber resou rces, and recreation oppor t u nities provide impor - t ant social, economic, and cult u ral benefits to forest-based com mu nities. A n impor t ant fi ndi ng of the FEM AT repor t was that com mu nities wanted st abilit y, predict abilit y, and cer t ai nt y i n timber supplies. Predict abilit y i n resou rce and recreation out puts may be dif ficult to achieve, however, given the complex and dy namic nat u re of nat u ral, social, and economic systems ? all of which i n fluence the agencies? abilities to produce a predict able supply of resou rces and recreation. Agencies may wish to assess what is a realistic goal for the production of timber and nontimber resou rces that will meet the needs of the public, and ref rame this goal accordi ngly. Timber sales, nontimber forest resou rces, and rec - reation opportunities are not the only socioeconomic benefits that federal forests and thei r managi ng agencies provide. T hey also provide a host of other benefits that the team monitored, such as jobs and i ncome associated with resou rces and recreation; agency jobs; jobs created th rough procu rement cont racti ng, g rants and ag reements; com mu nit y economic assist ance f u ndi ng; and cou nt y revenue-shar i ng prog rams. A broader view of the socio - economic benefits that forests provide could be i ncor po - rated i nto this goal st atement, for example, ?maximize the economic and social benefits f rom the forests, while conser vi ng forest ecosystems,? which was President Cli nton?s i ntent with the Plan ( USDA and USDI 1994a: volu me II E- 4). Such a goal is still relevant today. Timber and nontimber resou rces, recreation, and the other benefits listed here could be specified as monitor i ng items associ - ated with this goal. Maintain the Stability of Local and Regional Economies on a Predictable, Long-Term Basis T he pu r pose of the fi rst goal?to produce a predictable and sustainable supply of timber and nontimber resources?was to help mai nt ai n the st abilit y of local and regional econo - mies on a predict able, long-ter m basis. A fi ndi ng of this monitor i ng repor t is that, although st able timber supplies may cont r ibute to economic st abilit y, they do not ensu re it. Assu mi ng that com mu nit y st abilit y depends on non - decli ni ng, even flows of timber f rom federal forests can be misleadi ng: many factors can i n fluence the st abilit y of forest-based com mu nities. Consequently, the concept of com mu nit y st abilit y has been replaced by the concept of com mu nit y resiliency?the abilit y of com mu nities to respond and adapt to change i n positive, const r uctive ways to mitigate the effects of change on the com mu nit y (Har r is et al. 2000: 6). 9 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume VI: Program Development and Future Directions Agencies may wish to ref rame this Plan goal i n light of these fi ndi ngs. A more appropr iate goal, li n ked to the fi rst, might be ?provide social and economic benefits that cont r ibute to com mu nit y well-bei ng, and help com mu nities improve thei r capacit y to adapt to change.? Where Timber Sales Cannot Proceed, Assist With Long-Term Economic Development and Diversification to Minimize Adverse Ef fects Associated With Job Loss T he Plan sought to mitigate the effects of reduced federal timber sales by assisti ng with com mu nit y economic devel - opment and diversification th rough the Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative. T he i nitiative has ended, and the FS no longer has appropr iated f u nds to suppor t Jobs-i n-the- Woods or the Ru ral Com mu nit y Assist ance Prog ram. Com - munity assistance programs are one means of achieving this goal, but there are also other mechanisms for assisti ng com mu nities with economic development and diversifica - tion. Agency efforts to promote this goal can have positive benefits for forest stewardship. For example, one Plan objective was to i nteg rate forest r y and economic assist ance by li n k i ng ecosystem management on federal forest lands with local family-wage jobs that would cont r ibute to sust ai nable com mu nities. St rategies desig ned to achieve this objective i ncluded Jobs- i n-the-Woods, land management procu rement cont racti ng, and i nitiative projects that suppor ted recreation and tou r ism development, and sust ai nable forest r y enter pr ises, such as small busi nesses that produce value-added wood prod - ucts made f rom small- diameter wood and hardwoods f rom federal forests. T his goal remai ns as impor t ant and relevant today as it was when the Plan was developed. One of the foremost issues of concer n related to forest management expressed by com mu nit y members i nter - viewed for this st udy was the lack of family-wage jobs i n thei r com mu nities, especially jobs tied to forest resou rces. Many com mu nit y residents i nter viewed were f rom families who had a histor y of work i ng i n the woods, and who were st r uggli ng to st ay and raise thei r families i n the com mu ni - ties they considered home. Residents of forest com mu nities can potentially help forest managers meet their management objectives given the recent climate of decli ni ng agency st aff and budgets. I ncreasi ng federal forest-based employ - ment oppor t u nities would make an impor t ant cont r ibution to com mu nit y well-bei ng. T he desi re for forest-based, family-wage jobs was a top pr ior it y i n the case-st udy com mu nities monitored, especially those not located near regional centers or u rban areas that provide com muti ng options. T he impor t ance of sust ai ni ng family-wage, forest- based jobs i n r u ral com mu nities was also ack nowledged i n regional public su r veys (see volu me V ). Li n k i ng forest restoration work with local job creation to promote eco - nomic development and diversification i n com mu nities is relevant, impor t ant, and possible. Protect Forest Values and Environmental Qualities Associated With Late - Successional, Old- Grow th, and Aquatic Ecosystems Several agency managers have questioned whether the socioeconomic monitor i ng team should conduct effective - ness monitor i ng relati ng to this goal. Some view it as a biophysical goal that should be monitored only by the bio - physical modules. We assessed this goal for t wo reasons. Fi rst, protecti ng forest values and envi ron ment al quali - ties associated with late-successional, old-g row th (older forest), and aquatic ecosystems is a social value. Changes i n societ al values can t r igger the adaptive management pro - cess ( USDA and USDI 1994a Volu me II: E 4). Monitor i ng how public at tit udes, beliefs, and values relati ng to forest management change over time is important, so that manag- ers can be responsive. Second, people?s perceptions of the effectiveness of agency management policies can i n fluence thei r behavior and thei r at tit udes toward the agencies. T his i nfor mation supplements, but does not replace, biophysical monitor i ng related to this goal. I n ou r view, the monitor i ng questions that conti nue to be relevant are: ? W hat forest values and envi ron ment al qualities associated with federal forests are impor t ant to members of the public, and what is the balance of values ( both com modit y and noncom modit y) that members of the public believe federal forests should be managed for? 10 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. VI ? How well has federal forest management u nder the Plan provided for the forest values and envi ron - ment al qualities that are impor t ant to members of the public? Promote Interagency Collaboration and Agency- Citizen Collaboration in Forest Management President Cli nton wanted federal agencies to work together to achieve Plan goals ( USDA and USDI 1994b: 3). T he Plan di rected federal agencies to coordi nate and cooperate i n for - est management. A host of new i nstit utions and processes were created to improve i nteragency coordi nation and com - mu nication and to elimi nate duplication (Tuch man n 1996: 6 ?7). T he Plan also called for more collaboration bet ween agencies and members of the public i n forest management. T he socioeconomic monitor i ng team did not monitor i nteragency collaboration u nder the Plan because we did not have the resou rces. If i nteragency collaboration is viewed as an impor t ant subject for monitor i ng, it would be appro - pr iate for the team to do so, and possible if resou rces were available. T he team did some monitor i ng of agency- citizen collaboration. We believe it is impor t ant and relevant to conti nue monitor i ng agency- citizen collaboration i n forest stewardship. T he FS u nits appear to rely i ncreasi ngly on par t nerships, volu nteers, and joi nt forest stewardship effor ts to get thei r work done because they lack the budgets and st aff to accomplish all of the work themselves. T he BLM also emphasizes cooperative par t nerships for restor i ng and mai nt ai ni ng the health of the land. T he success of these ef - for ts depends i n par t on the capacit y of com mu nities to en - gage i n them. I nter views with com mu nit y members showed that many local residents have sophisticated perceptions of complex ecological processes and relations. I nter views also showed that many com mu nit y members care deeply about nearby forests and thei r ecological i nteg r it y. Although many com mu nities have limited capacit y to engage with manag - ers i n forest stewardship activities, most com mu nities have some capacit y to do so. Agency- citizen collaboration pro - vides one i ndicator of agency and com mu nit y capacit y and relations. Monitor i ng also provides i nsight i nto what k i nds of collaborative ar rangements are most successf ul, and how to bet ter engage i n agency- citizen collaboration. Adaptive management areas were an impor t ant Plan component that was not systematically monitored by the team. Fut u re monitor i ng could exami ne the role of the areas i n meeti ng Plan and u nit-level land management and socioeconomic objectives, relati ng u nit-level outcomes to approaches t aken to collaboration. T his would provide useful information for future management. Plan Evaluation Questions: Are They the Right Ones? T he socioeconomic monitor i ng team add ressed t wo evaluation questions f rom the ROD: ? A re predict able levels of timber and nontimber resou rces available and bei ng produced? ? A re local com mu nities and economies exper ienci ng positive or negative changes that may be associated with federal forest management? We discuss these i n t u r n. Are Predictable Levels of Timber and Nontimber Resources Available and Being Produced? T he question has t wo components, one havi ng to do with predict abilit y and one with availabilit y. We did not moni - tor whether predict able levels of resou rces and recreation were available because we did not have the capacit y to do so; we focused on whether predict able levels of resou rces were bei ng produced. We believe monitor i ng resou rce and recreation out puts f rom federal forests is impor t ant, but the concept of predict abilit y is problematic. Modification of this evaluation question will depend on how that goal is f ramed. Potential modifications could be: W hat were the t rends in timber sales, special forest products har vested, g razing, mining, and recreation oppor t u nities on federal forest lands? W hat amou nts of timber and nontimber resou rces are bei ng produced, and how does the Plan (vs. other factors) i n flu - ence those amou nts? A re oppor t u nities to har vest timber, use nontimber resou rces, and engage i n recreation on fed - eral forest lands predict able? 11 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume VI: Program Development and Future Directions T he ROD cu r rently st ates that timber sales, special forest products, g razi ng, mi nerals, recreation, com mercial fishi ng, and scenic qualit y should be monitored. We recom - mend d roppi ng com mercial fishi ng as a monitor i ng item because many factors affect com mercial fishi ng, and we fou nd that evaluati ng how the Plan might have i n fluenced it was impossible. T he Aquatic and R ipar ian Effectiveness Monitor i ng Prog ram is evaluati ng watershed conditions, which are relevant for com mercial fishi ng. Scenic qualit y is a relevant monitor i ng item because of its impor t ance for recreation, and because it is one of the amenit y values that d raw people and busi nesses to r u ral com mu nities. T he abilit y to monitor it will depend on dat a availabilit y (see volu me II, app. A). T he agencies might also consider whether other moni - tor i ng items should and could be added to the list, such as i ndicators of ecosystem ser vices and other amenit y values. Although monitor i ng resou rce and recreation out puts f rom federal forest lands is impor t ant, doi ng so is problem - atic, as volu me II of this repor t demonst rates. Some of the problems the team encou ntered i n evaluati ng this question were the followi ng: ? I ndicators t racked by the agencies were not always the r ight ones for answer i ng the moni- tor i ng question. ? Histor ical dat a, i n par ticular, are hard to get, because many of them are not stored i n elect ronic for mat or i n cor porate dat abases. ? T he FS regions, and the FS and BLM t rack some i ndicators differently, so agg regati ng agency dat a for the Plan area as a whole is dif ficult. ? Existi ng dat a are sometimes i ncomplete, and the nu mbers provided by regional and st ate of fices, and by local forest u nits, for the same i ndicators sometimes differ. ? T he di rection we were given i n evaluati ng this question was to obt ai n all of the monitor i ng dat a f rom the FS regional and BLM Oregon st ate of fices, rather than f rom i ndividual forest u nits. T his di rec - tion limited ou r abilit y to obt ai n dat a because some dat a are available f rom local u nits only. ? T he monitor i ng team consisted of social scientists, not agency prog ram specialists with exper tise i n the areas of timber, special forest products, recre - ation, g razi ng, and mi nerals. T he team had to rely on agency program specialists to help us retrieve, analyze, and i nter pret the dat a. Although most of the prog ram specialists i nvested a g reat deal of time and effor t assisti ng us, a few were less responsive, mak - i ng it dif ficult to obt ai n dat a and use the benefit of thei r exper tise. A nd, there were many i nst ances of reviewers questioni ng whether ou r claims about dat a availabilit y for different i ndicators were accu rate and whether ou r i nter pret ations of the dat a were correct. We recom mend that the agencies conti nue to monitor resou rce and recreation out puts f rom federal forest lands as par t of the monitor i ng prog ram. Ou r recom mendations on how to do so are as follows: ? Identif y what i ndicators need to be monitored to answer the evaluation question, and t rack dat a relevant to those i ndicators i n a systematic, coordi nated way bet ween agencies and regions. ? Collect resou rce dat a di rectly f rom field u nits, rather than f rom regional and st ate of fices. ? Charge agency specialists i n the timber, special forest products, g razi ng, mi nerals, and recreation prog rams with the responsibilit y for monitor i ng associated with this evaluation question to improve accu racy, ef ficiency, and accou nt abilit y. Are Local Communities and Economies Experiencing Positive or Negative Changes That May Be Associated With Federal Forest Management? We believe that effectiveness monitor i ng questions should be st r uct u red arou nd Plan goals and should evaluate how well those goals are bei ng achieved. T his evaluation ques - tion is ver y broad, general, and not tied to a specific Plan goal that can be evaluated for effectiveness. Moreover, it is dif ficult to measu re the extent to which federal forest management policy, versus other var iables, cont r ibutes 12 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. VI to positive or negative change in communities. Finally, the ROD gives a list of monitor i ng items associated with this question, several of which we fou nd were impractical or irrelevant to monitor. We believe the question, ?A re com mu nities exper ienc - i ng positive or negative changes that may be associated with federal forest management ? is the w rong one to be ask i ng now. T he question stem med f rom concer n i n the early 1990s about how cutbacks i n federal timber production would af - fect forest-based com mu nities. Reduced federal timber har - vests have been i n place for over 10 years, and are u nli kely to change much i n the near f ut u re. I nstead, we believe that monitor i ng should focus on those forest management poli - cies, prog rams, projects, and practices ?whether i nitiated by forest management agencies or local com mu nities ?that have al ready been identified th rough research as potentially mak i ng a positive cont r ibution to both com mu nit y well- bei ng and forest health. Monitor i ng would focus on the key li n kages bet ween forests and com mu nities that have the potential for positive outcomes for the agencies, forest land - scapes, and com mu nit y well-bei ng. Monitor i ng could help evaluate whether those li n kages are becomi ng st ronger or weaker over time; thei r socioeconomic outcomes for com - mu nities; thei r stewardship outcomes for federal forests; and the causal factors u nderlyi ng obser ved t rends. Moni - tor i ng could also t rack agency and com mu nit y capacit y to engage i n the k i nds of mut ually-beneficial relations that li n k healthy forests and healthy com mu nities. For example, a st able, predict able supply of small- diameter wood is needed to suppor t com mu nit y i nvest- ments i n tech nologies and busi nesses that utilize small- diameter wood, which can lead to reduced com mu nit y wild fi re r isk, improvements i n ecosystem health, and more jobs and i ncome for com mu nities (COPW R R 2005). T hus, it makes sense to monitor the supply of small- diameter wood comi ng off of federal forests, com mu nit y i nf ra- st r uct u re development for processi ng and manufact u r i ng that wood, and jobs and i ncome associated with removi ng, processi ng, and manufact u r i ng it. Par ticipator y monitor - i ng of forest resou rces (such as nontimber forest products) by com mu nit y members can cont r ibute to forest manag - ers? k nowledge of those resou rces and help to manage them (Ly nch et al. 2004). Par ticipator y monitor i ng also cont r ib - utes to har vester k nowledge about, and sust ai nable use of, nontimber forest products. Socioeconomic monitor i ng could look at com mu nit y engagement i n forest monitor i ng and its outcomes. A fi ndi ng of this repor t is that consistent oppor - t u nities to obt ai n family-wage jobs doi ng forest restoration work for at least par t of the year th rough agency cont racts, grants, or partnership agreements help sustain rural liveli- hoods. Monitor i ng agency cont racti ng practices is relevant to u nderst andi ng cont r ibutions to com mu nit y well-bei ng. Collaboration i n joi nt forest stewardship ? such as that which occu rs th rough resou rce advisor y com mit tees, Fi re Safe councils, volunteer programs, partnership agreements, and potentially i n adaptive management areas ?is havi ng some positive outcomes for both com mu nities and forest landscapes; it makes sense to monitor them. T hese are just some examples that illust rate the poten - tial for monitor i ng the var iables that li n k agencies, federal forests, and r u ral com mu nities and economies i n a way that promotes achieving the socioeconomic goals of the Plan: to produce a predict able and sust ai nable supply of timber, nontimber forest products, and recreation oppor t u nities; to mai nt ai n the st abilit y of local and regional economies on a predict able, long-ter m basis; to assist with long-ter m economic development and diversification; and, to promote agency- citizen collaboration i n forest management. Moni - tor i ng these items could also help assess prog ress toward achievi ng some of the biophysical goals of the Plan associat - ed with forest protection, ecological restoration, and habit at improvement. Additional Considerations for Future Monitoring 1. We identified more than 1,300 non met ropolit an communities in the Plan area. Although communi- ties share com monalities, they are also u nique. T he Plan affected local com mu nities i n different ways because of var iation i n the conditions associated with Plan implementation on forest units, variation in the 13 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume VI: Program Development and Future Directions socioeconomic conditions and ci rcu mst ances i n the com mu nities, and var iation i n the exter nal factors at play i n i n fluenci ng com mu nit y-scale change. T he monitor i ng results repor ted here do not do justice to this var iation because time and resou rces only per mit - ted us to sample 4 case forests and 12 com mu nities before prepar i ng this repor t. Nor was ou r sample size large enough to per mit evaluati ng some of the expec - t ations cont ai ned i n the ROD associated with Plan effects. Socioeconomic monitor i ng should encompass a broader range of forest- com mu nit y cases i n order to adequately capt u re these differences and to provide a bet ter evaluation of Plan effectiveness for the region as a whole. We recom mend developi ng a sample of cases to moni - tor on a rot ational basis over a 5- or 10 -year monitor - i ng per iod (dependi ng on prog ram resou rces). One forest- com mu nit y case would be selected f rom each of the 12 plan ni ng provi nces for long-ter m monitor - i ng. T he nu mber of com mu nities monitored arou nd each case-st udy forest would differ, dependi ng on how much var iation i n com mu nit y ? t y pes? and com - mu nit y-forest relations exists. 2. Ou r assessment of agency effectiveness i n meeti ng Plan goals was based on a regional-scale assessment supplemented by fou r local-scale examples. We used ou r results to d raw general conclusions i n response to the monitor i ng questions. Generalizations always have exceptions, and u ndoubtedly, examples could be fou nd that cou nter ou r general fi ndi ngs. Investigating local successes in achieving Plan socio- economic goals would be usef ul. Fut u re monitor i ng should docu ment and profile examples that illust rate how Plan socioeconomic goals are bei ng successf ully achieved. T hese examples could provide usef ul mod - els and valuable lessons to d raw on for adaptive man - agement. For example, i n 2005, monitor i ng arou nd the Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest identified successes that were u nli ke those descr ibed i n this re - por t. A g reater depth of monitor i ng will provide more complete evaluation of Plan effectiveness and clearer insights into the causes of organizational effectiveness in meeting Plan goals. Dat a descr ibi ng t rends i n st af fi ng and budgets could also be used to identif y u nits with potentially dif - ferent i nstit utional capacities. T he relations bet ween these u nits and associated com mu nities could be more closely st udied to provide bet ter i nfor mation on how institutional investments can affect local community outcomes. 3. Socioeconomic monitor i ng at the local scale would be most ef ficient and usef ul if done arou nd forest u nits u ndergoi ng land and resou rce management plan revision. T he case-st udy monitor i ng yields social and economic information that supports local planning and management needs, and can provide i nfor mation for social and economic assessments and impact st ate - ments. Nor thwest Forest Plan-related socioeconomic monitor i ng could also be coordi nated with i ndividual forest plan monitor i ng. Coordi nation will improve cost- effectiveness and ef ficiency and enable local u nits to maximize thei r use of monitor i ng results. 4. To date, the focus of the socioeconomic monitor i ng prog ram has been on r u ral com mu nities and econo - mies. T his focus excludes met ropolit an areas and broader regional st akeholder g roups and emphasizes communities of place rather than communities of i nterest. Forest managers f requently com mented that by focusi ng on r u ral com mu nities we were missi ng an important segment of their client population. In evaluating the socioeconomic monitoring program, consideration should be given to whether i ncludi ng met ropolit an areas and a wider range of forest st ake - holders and com mu nities of i nterest is impor t ant, or whether r u ral com mu nities and economies should conti nue to be the focus. T his decision will depend on the socioeconomic goals identified. 5. A possible revision of the t r ibal monitor i ng protocol is bei ng discussed. I nterest has been show n i n refocus - i ng that protocol to i nclude questions similar to some 14 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. VI of those i nvestigated by the socioeconomic monitor - i ng team. T he socioeconomic and t r ibal monitor i ng teams both worked with t r ibal com mu nities, but not i n a coordi nated way. I nteg rati ng t r ibal and socioeco - nomic monitor i ng is possible because of overlappi ng i nterests and areas of i nqui r y. T he agencies may wish to explore how t r ibal and socioeconomic monitor i ng could be i nteg rated i n the f ut u re. 6. T he methods that produced the results cont ai ned i n this monitor i ng repor t did not i nclude pr imar y dat a collection by usi ng su r veys. Su r veys can provide quantit ative monitor i ng dat a for a broader geog raphic area and population than was reached du r i ng phase III and may be an appropr iate tool for broad-scale socioeconomic monitoring relating to some of the Plan goals. One d rawback of su r veys is that it can be time- consu mi ng to obt ai n approval f rom the Of fice of Management and Budget to implement them. Never theless, the team should consider developi ng su r vey methods for f ut u re monitor i ng if the agencies desi re socioeconomic dat a f rom a larger sample popu - lation. 7. T he FS has been actively i nvolved i n socioeco - nomic monitoring at the national scale as part of the Mont real Process Work i ng G roup on Cr iter ia and I ndicators for the Conser vation and Sust ai nable Management of Temperate and Boreal Forests. It would be usef ul to alig n some of the socioeconomic monitor i ng i ndicators for the Plan area with the Mont real Process social and economic i ndicators, i n order to bet ter li n k regional- and national-scale socioeconomic monitor i ng for forest management and sust ai nabilit y. Not only would this improve national repor ti ng; it would help managers sit uate regional t rends withi n a national context. 8. T he monitor i ng results repor ted here were, for the most par t, at t wo scales: the Plan area as a whole, and the com mu nit y. We sometimes repor ted results by agency or by st ate, but for the most par t, did not pro - vide an analysis of the spatial dist r ibution of t rends at any i nter mediate scale. I nitially the team also i ntend - ed to repor t monitor i ng t rends at the provi nce scale (the Plan area is divided i nto 12 plan ni ng provi nces). However, this quick ly became problematic f rom a methodological st andpoi nt. T he major it y of ou r dat a are for i ndividual FS and BLM u nits, or are for cou n - ties (an exception bei ng the com mu nit y-scale U.S. census dat a). Plan ni ng provi nce bou ndar ies do not cor respond to national forest or BLM dist r ict bou nd - ar ies; nor do they confor m to cou nt y bou ndar ies. T he methodological complexit y of t r yi ng to agg regate cou nt y and forest-scale dat a at the provi nce scale given these i nconsistencies proved to be more than the team could add ress for this i nter pretive repor t, given time limit ations. Never theless, we recog nize the value of analyzi ng the spatial dist r ibution of socio - economic t rends and Plan effects across the Plan area, and encou rage the team to i nvestigate the potential for analyzi ng subregional (such as provi nce scale) var ia - tion i n socioeconomic monitor i ng t rends i n the f ut u re. 9. Multipar t y and com mu nit y-based monitor i ng ap - proaches are becomi ng more widespread for moni - tor i ng forest resou rces and the social and ecological benefits of forest management activities. T he advan - t ages of these approaches are that they build t r ust and relations bet ween st akeholders and management agen - cies, they raise public awareness and promote public par ticipation i n forest management and stewardship, they create an oppor t u nit y for par ticipants to cont r ib - ute thei r sk ills and k nowledge to improve the moni - tor i ng prog ram, they en hance the credibilit y of the monitor i ng effor t among com mu nit y members, and they build capacit y among par ticipants. A mong the d rawbacks are that they t ake time and energ y to set up and add organizational complexit y to the monitor i ng process. Never theless, if the socioeconomic monitor - i ng prog ram is adopted by the R IEC, the team should consider whether and how multipar t y or com mu nit y- based monitor i ng methods could be i nteg rated i nto the prog ram for agency and com mu nit y benefit. 15 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume VI: Program Development and Future Directions 10. Monitor i ng produces i nfor mation that is impor t ant for adaptive management, yet it is also a process that can play an impor t ant role i n buildi ng relations bet ween agencies and com mu nities. A com mon com ment the team received f rom com mu nit y i nter viewees was that Plan-related socioeconomic monitor i ng should have beg u n much sooner. Just as many com mu nit y residents felt that forest management u nder the Plan had failed to produce many of the i ntended socioeco - nomic benefits, so they felt that agency monitor i ng prog rams that focus on the biophysical components of the Plan have t aken precedence over socioeconomic monitor i ng. T his conti nued emphasis on the biophysi - cal dimension of forest management was perceived as a bias toward the ecological components of the Plan, i n cont rast to the or igi nal Plan i ntent of balanci ng ecological and socioeconomic needs. I nter viewees welcomed the oppor t u nit y to tell thei r stor ies and share thei r perspectives, and wanted them to be heard by the agencies. I nvesti ng i n socioeconomic monitor - i ng demonst rates that agencies are i nterested i n and care about the social and economic dimensions of forest management, and how federal forest lands can bet ter cont r ibute to com mu nit y well-bei ng, improvi ng relationships bet ween agencies and com mu nities. References Beckley, T.M.; Burkosky, T.M. 1999. Social i ndicator approaches to assessi ng and monitor i ng forest com mu nit y sust ai nabilit y. I nfor mation Rep. NOR-X-360. Ot t awa, ON: Canadian Forest Ser vice, Nor ther n Forest r y Cent re. 13 p. Bliss, J.; Aplet, G.; Hartzell, C.; Harwood, P.; Jahnige, P.; Kittredge, D.; Lewandowski, S.; Soscia, M.L. 2001. Com mu nit y-based ecosystem monitor i ng. I n: G ray, G. J.; En zer, M. J.; Kusel, J., eds. Underst andi ng com mu nit y-based forest ecosystem management. Bi nghamton, N Y: Food Products Press: 143 ?167. Busch, D.E.; Trexler, J.C. 2003. The importance of monitor i ng i n regional ecosystem i nitiatives. I n: Busch, D.E.; Trexler, J.C., eds. I nterdiscipli nar y approaches for evaluati ng ecoregional i nitiatives. Washi ng ton, DC: Island Press. 1?23. Chapter 21. Central Oregon Par tnerships for Wi ldfire R isk Reduction [COPWRR]. 2005. OR Solutions CROP I nitiative declaration of cooperation. ht t p://w w w.coic. org /copw r r/ home.ht m. (Apr il 2005). Christensen, H. 2003. Personal com mu nication. Research social scientist (reti red), Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation, 333 SW Fi rst Ave., Por tland, OR 97208-3890. Christensen, H.H.; McGinnis, W.J.; Raettig, T.L.; Donoghue, E.M. 2000. Atlas of hu man adapt ation to envi ron ment al change, challenge, and oppor t u nit y: nor ther n Califor nia, wester n Oregon, and wester n Washi ng ton. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 478. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 66 p. Christensen, H.H.; Raettig, T.L.; Sommers, P. 1999. Nor thwest Forest Plan: outcomes and lessons lear ned f rom the Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 484. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 98 p. Danks, C.; Wilson, L.J.; Jungwirth, L. 2002. Com mu nit y-based socioeconomic assessment and monitor i ng of activities related to national forest management. Work. Pap. Hayfork, CA: T he Watershed Research and Trai ni ng Center. 36 p. Par ts 1 and 2. Doak, S.C.; Kusel, J. 1996. Well-bei ng i n forest- dependent communities: a social assessment focus. In: Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project: fi nal repor t to Cong ress. Davis, CA: Universit y of Califor nia, Davis, Centers for Water and Wildland Resou rces: 375 ? 402. Par t 2. Donoghue, E.M. 2003. Delimiting communities in the Pacific Nor thwest. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR-570. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 51 p. 16 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. VI Force, J.E.; Machlis, G.E. 1997. The human ecosystem. Par t 2: social i ndicators i n ecosystem management. Societ y and Nat u ral Resou rces. 10: 369 ?382. Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team [FEMAT]. 1993. Forest ecosystem management: an ecological, economic, and social assessment. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re; U.S. Depar t ment of the I nter ior [and others]. [I r reg ular pagi nation]. Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974 [RPA]. 16 U.S.C. 1601. (note). Harris, C.; McLaughlin, W.; Brown, G.; Becker, D.R. 2000. Ru ral com mu nities i n the i nland Nor thwest: an assessment of small rural communities in the interior and upper Colu mbia R iver basi ns. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 477. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 120 p. Jackson, J.E.; Lee, R.G.; Sommers, P. 2004. Monitoring the com mu nit y impacts of the Nor thwest Forest Plan: an alter native to social i ndicators. Societ y and Nat u ral Resou rces. 17(3): 223 ?233. Kusel, J. 1996. Well-bei ng i n forest- dependent com mu nities, par t I: a new approach. I n: Sier ra Nevada Ecosystem Project: fi nal repor t to Cong ress, vol. II, assessments and scientific basis for management options. Davis, CA: Universit y of Califor nia, Centers for Water and Wildland Resou rces. Kusel, J. 2001. Assessi ng well-bei ng i n forest- dependent com mu nities. I n: G ray, G. J.; En zer, M. J.; Kusel, J., eds. Underst andi ng com mu nit y-based forest ecosystem management. Bi nghamton, N Y: Food Products Press: 359 ?384. Lynch, K.A.; Jones, E.T.; McLain, R.J. 2004. Nontimber forest product i nventor yi ng and monitor i ng i n the United St ates: rationale and recom mendations for a par ticipator y approach. Por tland, OR: I nstit ute for Cult u re and Ecolog y. 50 p. ht t p://w w w.ifcae.org. (March 2005). Maddox, D.; Poiani, K.; Unnasch, R. 1999. Evaluati ng management success: usi ng ecological models to ask the r ight monitor i ng questions. I n: Sexton, W.T.; Mal k, A. J.; Szaro, R.C.; Joh nson, N.C., eds. Ecological stewardship: a com mon reference for ecosystem management. Oxford, United K i ngdom: Elsevier Science Ltd.: 563 ?584. Vol. 2. Manley, P.N.; Zielinski, W.J.; Stuart, C.J.; Keane, J.J.; Lind, A.J.; Brown, C.; Plymale, B.L.; Napper, C.O. 2000. Monitor i ng ecosystems i n the Sier ra Nevada: the concept ual model fou ndation. Envi ron ment al Monitor i ng and Assessment. 64: 139 ?152. McElroy, C. 2005. Personal com mu nication. Regional economist, BLM Oregon St ate Of fice, 333 SW Fi rst Ave., Por tland, OR 97205. McGinnis, W.J.; Phillips, R.H.; Connaughton, K.P. 1996. Cou nt y por t raits of Oregon and nor ther n Califor nia. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR-377. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 315 p. McGinnis, W.J.; Phillips, R.H.; Raettig, T.L.; Connaughton, K.P. 1997. Cou nt y por t raits of Washi ng ton st ate. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 400. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 315 p. Moseley, C.; Wilson, L.J. 2002. Multiparty monitoring for sust ai nable nat u ral resou rce management. Eugene, OR: Universit y of Oregon, Ecosystem Work force Prog ram. 93 p. Mulder, B.S.; Noon, B.R.; Spies, T.A.; Raphael, M.G.; Palmer, C.J.; Olsen, A.R.; Reeves, G.H.; Welsh, H.H. 1999. T he st rateg y and desig n of the effectiveness monitor i ng prog ram for the Nor thwest Forest Plan. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 437. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 138 p. National Forest Management Act of 1976 [NFMA]; Act of October 22, 1976; 16 U.S.C. 1600. 17 Socioeconomic Monitoring Results. Volume VI: Program Development and Future Directions Noon, B.R.; Spies, T.A.; Raphael, M.G. 1999. Concept ual basis for evaluati ng an effectiveness monitor i ng prog ram. I n: Mulder, B.S.; Noon, B.R.; Spies, T.A.; Raphael, M.G.; Pal mer, C. J.; Olsen, A.R.; Reeves, G.H.; Welsh, H.H., tech. coords., eds. T he st rateg y and desig n of the effectiveness monitor i ng prog ram for the Nor thwest Forest Plan. Por tland, OR.: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation: 21? 48. Chapter 22. Parkins, J.R. 1999. En hanci ng social i ndicators research i n a forest- dependent com mu nit y. T he Forest r y Ch ronicle. 75(5): 771?780. Parkins, J.R.; Stedman, R.C.; Varghese, J. 2001. Movi ng toward local-level i ndicators of sust ai nabilit y i n forest-based com mu nities. Social I ndicators Research. 56: 43 ?72. Raettig, T.L. 1999. Trends i n key economic and social i ndicators for Pacific Nor thwest st ates and cou nties. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 474. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 30 p. Raettig, T.L.; Christensen, H.H. 1999. Timber har vesti ng, processi ng, and employ ment i n the N W EA I region: changes and economic assist ance. Gen. Tech. Rep. PN W- GTR- 465. Por tland, OR: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Research St ation. 16 p. Raettig, T.L.; Christensen, H.H.; Donoghue, E. 1998. T he Nor thwest Economic Adjust ment I nitiative: an assessment. 148 p. Unpublished repor t. On file with: Regional Com mu nit y Economic Revit alization Team, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Nor thwest Region, P.O. Box 3890, Por tland, OR 97208. Raettig, T.L.; Donoghue, E.; Christensen, H.H.; McGinnis, W.J. 1996. USDA r u ral development i n Oregon: an analysis. Research project repor t for Ru ral Development, Oregon St ate. 141 p. On file with: USDA Ru ral Development, 101 SW Mai n, Suite 1410, Por tland, OR 97204 -3222. Sommers, P. 2001. Monitor i ng socioeconomic t rends i n the nor ther n spot ted owl region: f ramework, t rends update, and com mu nit y level monitor i ng recom mendations. Seat tle, WA: U.S. Geological Su r vey, Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center, Cascadia Field St ation, College of Forest Resou rces, Universit y of Washi ng ton. 56 p. ht t p://w w w.reo.gov/monitor i ng /socio/ ph1fi nal-body.pdf. (Ju ne 2004). Sommers, P.; Lee, R.G.; Jackson, E. 2002. Monitoring economic and social change i n the nor ther n spot ted owl region: Phase II?Developi ng and testi ng an i ndicators approach. Draf t tech nical repor t. 40 p. On file with: U.S. Geological Su r vey, Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center, Cascadia Field St ation, College of Forest Resou rces, Box 352100, Seat tle, WA 98195-2800. Struglia, R.; Winter, P.L.; Meyer, A. 2001. Southern Califor nia socioeconomic assessment: sociodemog raphic conditions, projections, and qualit y of life i ndices. R iverside, CA: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, Pacific Southwest Research St ation, Wildland Recreation and Urban Cult u res. Sturtevant, V.; Horton, R. 2000. Revisiti ng com mu nit y capacit y: five years af ter FEM AT: i nsights f rom case st udies of Rog ue R iver National Forest com mu nities. Ashland, OR: Souther n Oregon Universit y, Depar t ment of Sociology. Tolle, T.; Powell, D.S.; Breckenridge, R.; Cone, L.; Keller, R.; Kershner, J.; Smith, K.S.; White, G.J.; Williams, G.L. 1999. Managi ng the monitor i ng and evaluation process. I n: Sexton, W.T.; Mal k, A. J.; Szaro, R.C.; Joh nson, N.C., eds. Ecological stewardship: a com mon reference for ecosystem management. Oxford, United K i ngdom: Elsevier Science Ltd.: 585 ? 602. Vol. 2. Tuchmann, E.T.; Connaughton, K.P.; Freedman, L.E.; Moriwaki, C.B. 1996. T he Nor thwest Forest Plan: a repor t to the President and Cong ress. Washi ng ton, DC: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Of fice of Forest r y and Economic Assist ance. 253 p. 18 GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-649 VOL. VI U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA]. 2003. Multipar t y monitor i ng and assessment g uideli nes for com mu nit y based forest restoration i n southwester n ponderosa pi ne forests. Albuquerque, N M: Southwester n Region. 91 p. ht t p://w w w.fs.fed.us/r3/spf /cf r p/ monitor i ng /. (July 12, 2005). U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management [USDA and USDI]. 1994a. Final supplemental environmental impact statement on management of habit at for late-successional and old- g row th forest related species withi n the range of the nor ther n spot ted owl. Vol. 1. [I r reg ular pagi nation]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management [USDA and USDI]. 1994b. Record of decision for amend ments to Forest Ser vice and Bu reau of Land Management plan ni ng docu ments withi n the range of the nor ther n spot ted owl. [Place of publication u n k now n]. 74 p. [ plus at t ach ment A: st andards and g uideli nes]. U.S. Department of the Interior [USDI]. 2000. Bu reau of Land Management st rategic plan. ht t p://w w w.bl m.gov/ n hp/i nfo/st rat plan /st rat0105. [Date accessed u n k now n]. Wright, P.A.; Colby, J.L.; Alward, G.; Hoekstra, T.; Tegler, B.; Turner, M. 2002. Monitoring for forest management u nit scale sust ai nabilit y: the local u nit cr iter ia and i ndicators development (LUCI D) test management edition. I MI Repor t No. 5. For t Colli ns, CO: U.S. Depar t ment of Ag r icult u re, Forest Ser vice, I nventor y and Monitor i ng I nstit ute. 41 p. Yin, R.K. 1994. Case st udy research: desig n and methods. T housand Oaks, Califor nia, London, and New Del hi: Sage P ublications. Pacific Northwest Research Station Web site http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw Telephone (503) 808-2592 Publication requests (503) 808-2138 FAX (503) 808-2130 E-mail pnw_pnwpubs@fs.fed.us Mailing address Publications Distribution Pacific Northwest Research Station P.O. Box 3890 Portland, OR 97208-3890 U.S. Depar tment of A griculture Pacific Nor thwest Research Station 333 SW First Avenue P.O. Box 3890 Por tland, OR 97208 -3890 Of ficial Busines s Penalt y for Private Use, $300