Accelerating Adoption of Sustainable Practices for Small Forest Producers

Accelerating Adoption of Sustainable Practices for Small Forest Producers

Summary

In the first full year of Accelerating Adoption of Sustainable Practices for Small Forest Producers, NNRG conducted 13 field visits across 1,988 acres, interviewed nine forest producers, and collected forest inventory data from five producers’ forests for modeling in Forest Planner. NNRG drafted three case studies about forest producers, management activities, and decision making. These case studies use stand-specific inventory data which NNRG has incorporated into Ecotrust’s Forest Planner to model scenarios. NNRG began to review draft case studies and scenarios with forest producers and is evaluating producers’ responses to the decision making tool.

Objectives/Performance Targets

The most critical objective for 2015 was to interview small forest producers in order to understand how they make decisions, confirm their forestry goals, and help them explore whether Forest Planner could help inform their management decisions.

Understanding Small Forest Producers Decision Making Processes
BACKGROUND
In 2015, NNRG conducted 13 field visits across 1,988 acres, interviewed nine forest producers, and collected forest inventory data for five producers’ forests for modeling in Forest Planner. The study’s small forest producers included family woodland owners and small private businesses who manage their forests for income and to enhance their forests’ environmental qualities-specifically complex structure, tree and understory plant diversity, wildlife habitat, and water quality. All producers indicated that stewarding their land using methods that improve forest health and ecosystem functions were important to them.

Ownerships were located across western Washington and Oregon, including the south Puget Sound region of Mason and Thurston Counties, Hood Canal, the Snoqualmie Valley, the Nisqually Watershed, the Chehalis Watershed, and Coos and Curry Counties in southwest Oregon. Producers’ ownerships ranged from 20 to 360 acres (mean 153 acres, mode 20 acres). Tenure on the properties ranged from new (7-10 years) to lands managed by the business or family for more than 50 years.

New forest producers, those who purchased forest land in the last 10 years, had typically acquired cutover, poorly stocked lands or even-aged Douglas fir plantations ranging from 25-40 years old. They had just started to endeavor into active management of their forests and were conducting, or considering conducting, pre-commercial thinnings, commercial thinnings, or planning for harvests in the next 5-10 years. These producers indicated they had challenges with post-harvest stand maintenance, controlling invasive species, seedling survival, and finding contractors to conduct management activities.

Producers who had been on the land for upwards of 15 years tended to manage forests with at least two age classes, multiple natives species, and more complex stand structure. These producers had experience with managing timber sales and improving wildlife habitat, and sought to optimize timber value with selective harvest techniques (e.g. individual tree selection). Some of these producers had intergenerational or intra-organizational challenges to managing their forests. Younger or new members of the producers’ decision making bodies (e.g. family, new colleagues) who were less familiar with forest ecology and management preferred a passive no-management approach to the forests as they were highly skeptical of harvest practices and feared the possibility of even-aged management.

SOURCES OF INFORMATION
None of the forest producers surveyed had technical training in forestry or a formal background in forest ecology prior to owning their woodland. A few of the producers whose families had been on the land for more than one generation had learned basic management practices and techniques from living on/working the property. All forest producers indicated they learned about forest ecology and management from three primary sources: 1) forestry consultants and public agency staff, 2) forestry workshops and seminars, 3) cross checking information and sources on the internet.

The observations and recommendations from trustworthy forestry consultants or agency foresters/technicians who had walked the producers’ property was considered to be the most important source of information. These interactions helped producers to learn directly from their forests and identify their forests’ most important needs and opportunities, such as addressing an extensive tree disease or pathogen, treating overstocked stands, improving forest diversity, or potentially to supply specialty markets (veneer, figured wood, poles). Courses by Washington State University Extension were particularly important to producers in Washington as they provided a comprehensive overview on forest ecology and forest management, and introduced producers to the local practitioners who they could contact with specific questions or resource needs. In addition, NNRG’s ecologically-based forestry courses filled a niche for producers seeking to manage their forests for diversity using uneven-aged management. No producer relied on a single internet source for information and did not note any single portal (e.g. WSU Extension’s Forestry Resources, Oregon State University Extension’s Know Your Forest) as a primary source.

DECISION MAKING
Producers indicated that they made decisions to actively manage their forests based primarily on their understanding of their forest’s health and their income needs. The most important factors guiding their decisions were their forest management plans and recommendations from forestry professionals who had reviewed their site specific issues. Producers indicated it was important to have information specific to the conditions of their forests, their management objectives, and knowledge of current markets (e.g.  timber prices and the availability of seedlings) in order to make decisions.

When improving forest health was a key objective for producers, the recommendations in their forest management plans prompted them to take actions such as inter-planting trees and shrubs, building habitat piles, removing invasive species, maintaining road systems, and pre-commercial thinning. When the decision pertained to a commercially viable practice such as a timber harvest they sought consultation with a trustworthy forestry professional about the current needs of their forest and trajectory for meeting their goals. Markets were also an important factor as all producers sought to generate sufficient revenue to cover the cost of the activities. When generating income was the primary factor, producers consulted with foresters to assess the current potential value of their stand and current status of the markets. Sometimes inquiries from specialty buyers influenced producers to practice individual tree selection or prioritize one management unit over another.

USING FOREST PLANNER
NNRG collected stand-specific inventory data from five producers’ forests to model in Forest Planner. The producers’ forests were selected as they had questions about what to do next in their forest: whether and when to do a pre-commercial thin and whether to do a commercially viable thinning operation. NNRG has used Forest Planner to model this information and is now presenting the findings to landowners. Findings will include the results of multiple scenarios of forest growth and productivity based on different ecological forestry approaches such as individual tree selection or commercial thinning every 5-10 years. Results will be presented in graphs, tables, and narrative format.

Accomplishments/Milestones

In 2015, NNRG conducted 13 field visits across 1,988 acres, interviewed nine forest producers, and collected forest inventory data from five producers’ forests for modeling in Forest Planner. NNRG drafted three case studies about forest producers, management activities, and decision making. These case studies use stand-specific inventory data NNRG incorporated into Ecotrust’s Forest Planner to model scenarios. NNRG began to review draft case studies and scenarios with forest producers and is evaluating responses to the decision making tool.

In 2014, NNRG and Ecotrust focused on preparations for developing the case studies of forest producers. NNRG confirmed case study participants, identified collection criteria for forest inventory data in consultation with Ecotrust, and developed interview questions. NNRG also developed a template for summarizing harvest data.

Impacts and Contributions/Outcomes

The next step for this project is to complete the case study reviews and interviews with forest producers and get their feedback on the results from Forest Planner. NNRG will ask producers what tool outputs from Forest Planner and other sources, are most helpful to support decision making. NNRG and Ecotrust will then design workshops to assist producers in using Forest Planner and other resources to help meet their management objectives.

The goal of the project is to empower forest producers to switch from non-management to active ecological management and remove barriers to sustainable forest management by giving producers and professionals better information about expected long-term outcomes. By collecting data on forest producers and developing case studies, this seeks to understand what information and circumstances compel producers to change from non-management to active ecological management.

Collaborators: