assessment of sustainability of our forests

Southern Forest Resource Assessment

 Below is the original wording of one of the preliminary questions and public suggestions or concerns submitted about it--for details see our Public Input or Methods pages
 
 

"What are the implementation rates and effectiveness of BMP's in the South?"
  1. How does increased logging affect temperatures of streams, and how does this affect stream health and species diversity. How does increased cutting change affect peak flow (flooding), and what are the ecological and economic costs?
  2. What are the effects of increased cutting on fish, macroinvertabrates, mussels, water fowl?
  3. How is aquatic diversity impacted by increased sedimentation?
  4. What are the effects of increased cutting on aquatic Threatened or Endangered species?
  5. What have been the effects of water quality of various forest management techniques? How might water quality be effected by predicted future harvesting levels?
  6. Surveys in the southern forest need to include aquatic faunal surveys as well as terrestrial.
  7. Besides causing tremendous erosion in the streams, there is degradation in aquatic habitat and spawning areas for fish and other aquatic life.
  8. CLEAN worries about the mud that runs off from the now-common clearcuts and what that mud is doing to our other renewable resources such as the fisheries in the estuary and the recreational boating industry.
  9. What are the loopholes in current regulations, policies, etc. relating to forest management that allow for degradation of aquatic systems?
  10. Monitor chemicals commonly used in management (e.g. Rotenone).
  11. Concern about an indirect effect of such discharges for toxic chlorocarbons such as the PCBs, hexachlorobenzene, and hexachlorobutadiene. Even though such molecules (and their relatives, the dioxins and furans, for which there may eventually also be regional advisories) are water insoluble, turbid water contains clay particles to which the toxic substances attach electrostatically. That mechanism allows poisons which would otherwise be sequestered in the bottom sediments, to instead be kept resuspended in the water column where swimmers and seafood can come into direct contact with them, exacerbating the exposure hazards.
  12. The direct and indirect impacts of logging must explicitly address aquatic ecosystems.
  13. Assessment should document the high water quality and diversity of aquatic species associated with forested watersheds, relative to other land uses. Research and management programs underway by public agencies and the private sector designed to further improve water quality should be highlighted.
  14. Assessment should document that water quality and wetlands can best be protected by retaining forest land in forest cover. Forest lands will need to be actively managed for forest products and recreation that provide an economic return, or landowners will be pressured to convert those lands to higher economic uses that are less protective of water quality and aquatic habitats.
  15. We encourage a particular focus on the effects of timber management activities on the aquatic resources of our region.
  16. We are interested in the potential participation of industrial and private landowners in the restoration and reforestation of the alluvial floodplain.
  17. In terms of their sustainability, what are the history, status, and potential future conditions of aquatic habitats and aquatic species?
  18. Assessment should document the high water quality and diversity of aquatic species associated with forested watersheds, relative to other land uses. Research and management programs underway by public agencies and the private sector designed to further improve water quality should be highlighted.
  19. We would like to see the Assessment compare and contrast water quality studies from forest landscapes, rowcrop agriculture, livestock agriculture (including mass production swine and poultry operations), urban runoff, and other non-forest non-point sources of pollution.
  20. Document the high water quality and diversity of aquatic species associated with forested wetlands.
  21. The Assessment Report should document that water quality and wetlands can best be protected by retaining forest land in forest cover. Forest lands will need to be actively managed for forest products and recreation that provide an economic return, or landowners will be pressured to convert those lands to higher economic uses that are less protective of water quality and aquatic habitats.
  22. To adequately assess the full impacts of timber cutting on landscapes and water systems, the study will need information about the impacts of not just siltation, but of the commonly applied herbicides in forest "management".
  23. What effect does clearcutting have on the siltation of streams, especially in the mountainous areas of the Southeastern mountains? How long does it take a stream to recover from the siltation of a clearcut and what is the impact to the stream, the wildlife, aquatic life, and human life in the time that is takes to recover?
  24. What are impacts or potential impacts on effectiveness of hydrological functions of forests, I.e. regulation of water supply and volume, from increased industrial logging?
  25. Where have water quality and aquatic habitats been effected by sedimentation from logging operations?
  26. How have changes in forest type (hardwood conversions, cutting older stands) effected water quality and aquatic ecology? Which past and current forestry operations have effected 303d listed streams? Which may be effected by future operations?
  27. Do current management practices consider effect of massive clearcutting on water quality? Have aquatic species in areas of vast clearcutting been affected?
  28. We are naturally concerned about forested wetlands in Louisiana's coastal zone. In the most southern parts of the state, some areas of forested wetlands have already been impacted by salt water intrusion as a result of coastal land loss and sea-level rise. Other areas stand to be impacted if projections of continued land loss come to pass. We are also cognizant of the risk of accelerated sea-level rise from climate change, and the projected effects this would have. Projections about the future of forested areas in Louisiana's coastal zone therefore seem somewhat uncertain, since the extent of future land loss, climatic and human impacts, and protection and restoration efforts all have to be factored in. Forested wetlands areas are being affected by urbanization on a large scale.
  29. We are also concerned about the health of coastal river systems, and the downstream effects of upstream activities.
  30. The impact of past and present timber practices and management regimes on biodiversity in southeastern watersheds, including the conservation potential for aquatic species throughout the southeast.
  31. Examination of state lists, prepared pursuant to Section 319 of the Clean Water Act, in order to identify the sources of nonpoint source pollution in southeastern states. This information should then be used to determine the nature and extent of nonpoint source pollution attributable to forestry practices in those states.
  32. The impact of various timber harvest and management scenarios on water quality and watershed health. The impact on water quality and watershed health, including human health and the health of aquatic and terrestrial species, of the increased use of fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides associated with intensive forest management. The impact of deforestation and attendant increases in the speed and rate of runoff on aquifer recharge. The cumulative environmental impact, including water quality degradation, increased siltation, and the like, of intensive clearcutting or other intensive harvest regimes on downriver ecosystems, such as the Gulf of Mexico.
  33. The landscape effect of timber harvest practices such as simplification of forest system, soil compaction and treatment with herbicides, and effects on aquatic ecosystems and waterways.
  34. What are the consequences of forestry related soil erosion on water quality?
  35. The Assessment Report should document that water quality and wetlands can best be protected by retaining forest land in forest cover. Forest lands will need to be actively managed for forest products and recreation that provide an economic return, or landowners will be pressured to convert those lands to higher economic uses that are less protective of water quality and aquatic habitats.
  36. Document effectiveness of in-place voluntary BMPs in the South using data already collected by state agencies.
  37. Many permits for wetlands disruption are given to riverside demanding industries who then proceed with their activities to adversely affect wetlands off site by their cutting and landscape manipulation practices. Though this is reasonable foreseeable in the permitting process, why are these impacts ignored by the permitting and consulting agencies?
  38. Address the impacts of deforestation, pine conversion, and other landscape changes in increasing flood levels and frequencies? What are the implications of these increased flood levels and frequencies on re suspension of sediments and toxins buried in sediments in affected rivers? Please address the change in water temperatures from upstream impacted waters flowing into the main river systems. What effect do those increased water temperatures have on the aquatic life of the main streams and the feeder streams themselves?
  39. Address the loss to fisheries and coastal aquatic ecosystems from ballast water discharges of exotic aquatic species into US waters, associated with the global trade in forests and chips occurring out of southeastern and southern export terminals. Did they call them "terminals" on purpose? Red tide is one of the more heavily traded exotics causing the greatest damage to fisheries. What percentage of red tide algae are imported through exporting vessels associated with chip and pulp trade?
  40. Big timber companies could care less about how aquatic systems are affected by their
    management practices. Scraping the ground bare like they do, when it rains, tons of silt flows into streams, marshes, and ponds, causing death of aquatic life due to siltation. Not to mention all the erosion on the uplands. I think a minimum of several acres should be left as a buffer along every streamside in any timber or ag lands, commercial or private
  41. Just go to any city and get in a canoe and go down any river and you will see the problems. We need to put a tax on businesses whose products pollute. The tax should cover the cost of cleanup. For example, Coke and Pepsi cans and bottles are all over our rivers. This is a cost that rich companies, like coke and pepsi, should pick up. Why let companies make profits by polluting and shifting the costs to the taxpayer.
  42. Variations in enforcement of voluntary BMPs: state-by-state and region.
  43. Document effectiveness of voluntary BMP’s that are currently in place in the south.
  44. Current laws are reactionary. BMPs are a response to a problem rather than a solution.
  45. Voluntary BMPs are ineffective and destructive. (Make speed limits voluntary).
  46. Compare water pollution levels where BMPs are strictly enforced vs. where voluntary. Also the cost of cleanup.
  47. Use a cost-benefit analysis to compare voluntary vs. mandatory BMPs.
  48. How do these reduce or increase the incentive to practice forestry (e.g., timber harvesting bonds)?
  49. Relate historical forest management activities (or lack thereof) to present conditions and include historical conversion of forests to agricultural use. Compare cotton fields to forests from a sustainability aspect.
  50. How does private ownership affect habitat/habitat requirements for aquatics?
  51. What are the impacts of different forest management activities (clearcut vs. selective cut) on water quality?
  52. What are the differences in impacts to water quality from recreation vs.forestry use?
  53. Can source of contaminants be described?
  54. How do you anticipate land-use changes from forest to non-forest and how do these changes affect forest resources? Interstate 69 proposal was mentioned as example.
  55. Relate this question to Sodbuster, Swampbuster and other reforestation programs and mandates since agriculture incentive programs such as WRP, CRP, CREP, EQUIP, etc., affected water quality.
  56. Concern: Currently, only forestry agencies at state level are cooperating. To answer this question, we must involve non-forestry agencies. (I.e., water quality, wildlife commissions and programs.)
  57. Issue: Compare impacts of various land uses on habitats with forest use impacts.
  58. How do lands managed for forestry differ in effects on water quality from other management purposes? Aquatic habitat?
  59. What are all land use effects on water quality throughout the forested watershed?
  60. Consider maintaining and increasing biodiversity in streams and wetlands, i.e., concern for T&E.
  61. Consider spatial relationships between kinds of aquatic habitats and types of terrestrial habitats.
  62. Consult Oxford Hydro Lab in this assessment.
  63. More research needed in water quality and aquatic habitat. (We know so little about this subject.)
  64. Need increased public education on importance of watersheds to water quality and aquatic habitats.
  65. Urbanization impacts on coastal areas (ridge to top to coastline).
  66. What are costs benefits or effectiveness of regulation vs. non-regulation (punishment vs. rewards) in achieving water quality/aquatic habitat/forested wetlands protection and/or enhancement?
  67. Greater forest harvest pressure (clear cutting) is adversely impacting water quality.
  68. The biggest problem now with forest in Eastern North Carolina is size of clear-cuts with inadequate S. & E. controls and over-sized haul roads with canals. The miles and miles of old farm drainage canals are what caused the swamp-buster laws to be written. These canals are sometimes now in forested land and probably should be recovered as wetlands. This is going to take a case-by-case study for some of these canals are over 200 years old and is the only means of egress.
  69. How has natural to managed stands affected water quality and aquatic habitat?
  70. What is ‘baseline’ for “natural” stand?
  71. What land use has least negative impact on water quality and aquatic habitat?
  72. What are benefits of forested wetlands (economic, ecological)?
  73. Compare and contrast forest management on water quality by prescription by geophysical region, by land uses.
  74. Document affect of herbicide spraying on forested wetlands and water quality.
  75. [Consider] other introduced anthropogenic chemicals.

red oak leaf as separator

Question as revised in response to these comments

Previous Question | Next Question

Public Input Home | Methods | Assessment Home

 
  modified: 1-MAR-2000
  webmaster: John M. Pye