Southern Forest Resource Assessment Report - Experts Meeting to Define Questions

Session #1: Generating the Concerns this Assessment could Address Landscape/Terrestrial Ecosystems Land use changes has increased forest fragmentation. Changing forest land ownership patterns have led to increased forest fragmentation. Timber harvesting patterns have led to shifts in the distribution of various seral stages and that in turn influences habitat obligates. Changing forest management are negatively impacting bird habitat and populations through reduction of structural diversity The amount of clear-cutting is negatively impacting soils and water quality. Loss of fire in the South is negatively affecting fire-dependent species and communities. Changes in land use practices and forest management has resulted in shifts in historic forest species composition and disturbance regimes. Intensive timber management is having a negative impact on select wildlife species (through habitat loss and change). Past and future road building are having a negative affect on forest resources. Invasion of exotic species is negatively affecting some or select native vegetation and animal species. Increased recreational demands are impacting forest management options. Ecosystem/holistic management versus single focus management. What is the interface between the agencies? Forest ecosystem sustainability is impacted by: Population growth Increasing resource demand Laws and regulations Increased road construction Urbanization Landowner attitudes Public attitudes Landowner vs. non-landowner demands on resources Absenty landowner attitudes Intensive management practices intensifying Alternatives to wood use Recreation Forest insects and disease Ozone Nitrate/sulfate deposition Exotics Global economics Management agency budget constraints Landowner budget constraints Past management practices (historic land practice impacts) Natural disturbance (drought, flood, hurricane, etc.) Tax laws Social /Economic Systems What are the major concerns affecting the productivity, ecological diversity and sustainability of the social/economic aspect of southern forests? increasing population of country is driving increased demand of forest resources what role does the forest play in the local/county level economy? public agency do not adequetly consider forest land availability and accessibility in planning resource use fragmentation of forest land from urban and transportation infrastructure lack of coordinated managment among numerous public and private landowners input from public arena is strongly influenced by small groups with strong agendas lack of strategic planning regarding the retention of forest resource based jobs increased urbanization is depleting forest resource what are the impacts of changing forest management/practices on limited resource or minority land owners in the south? land owners are fearful of increased regulation and loss of private property rights social economic changes affecting demand for non-market uses, such as recreation public perceptions are causing forest health problems the majority of the population, especially in urban areas, does not have adequate information concerning natural resources to make deisions about those resources opportunities to diversify many rural forest based economies are very limited increasing wealth and leasure time of population will cause more people to recreate what are the impacts of state/local laws on practice of forestry, in the south? demographic changes and increased urbanization will shift historically public land issues to private forest ownership arena lack of land and resource planning capabilities in rural communities to address forestry issues not knowing the most effective management and policy responses to changes in landscapes eonomic support for several resource areas and thus is considered less important current direction of public opinion to take federal forests out of timber production will cause increase in timber imports and increase timber prices while this may help sustainability it will have adverse effect on inflation and balance of payments what are institutional barriers, for example legal) practices of forestry in the south we do not understand fully how the potential gains in fast growing plantations will alter the dynamics of resource demands the impacts of changes in public attitudes of what constitutes acceptable forest management practices what are the primary social and eonomic drivers/forces affecting the status, productivity, ecological diversity and sustainability of Southern forests? new forest product technology impacts on our forests are unknown we do not have a meaningful picture of what our forest areas are accessible/available for specific uses lack of data and methodology to keep up with the repidity of changes along with making it difficult to track changes increased cooperation between universities and federal agencies in sharing research information and research project forest landowners do not fully understand all their options and consequesnes of their choices for forest resource use. new technologyies that affect forest harvesting, for example chip mills. what are the economic consequences of not doing prescribed fire treatment? media coverage of these critical issues are biased and represent popular opinion rather than facts. rural concerns and needs are ignored by urban populations. Timber Markets / Forest Management Landowners should have the right to manage their forests as they see fit. Pine plantations are not perceived as real forests. Some people are concerned that forest management produces only pine plantations; perceived to be of lower value than naturally regenerated forests. Pine plantations are spreading across the landscape. Timber harvest is not the same as timber management. The rate of harvest exceeds the capacity to produce. Technology will not keep up with the utilization. The perception that rotation age of forests is decreasing (becoming younger) Pulp and paper industry will drive the sawmills out of business Reduction of timber harvest on federal lands is shifting increased harvest pressures to South. The industry knows how to sustain the timber productivity without assistance of govern. regulations. Belief that industry is not managing forest lands in a sustainable manner. Forest management reduces biodiversity. Private landowners are not managing their lands for sustainability; private lands are harvesting lands without using forest management, or being managed in a sustainable manner. There is a significant change occurring in private forest landownership, there is an increase in the number of smaller ownerships. There is a change in forest landowner patterns. Not all forest land is available for harvest, therefore the supply being protrayed is not as great as it is being portrayed. This is due to the land owner's objective is not economic motivated; due to landowner interst and attitudes. If we sustain non-timber values, we will affect the ability to meet the demand for wood products. By focusing on non-timber resources, forest product demands will not be provided. Global demands for forest products are increasing timber harvest in Southern Forests. There is too much emphasis on timber production when other resources can be substituted for the wood products. Need to recognize the inter-connectivity of wood production with other forest resources and their values; these are not recognized or fully understood. TES species are not given sufficient value by industry and NIPF in their forest management. New equipment being used is more intense, more impacting on the other forest resources. What are the forest practices on public lands as compared to the forest practices occurring on private and industry lands. Perception that intensive forest management practices are inappropriate, e.g., clearcutting, use of pesticides, discriminating against hardwoods, the kindest management is single tree selection. Ecosystem management has come to mean management for all resources except wood production. Forest industry are disposing of their forest properties; land has a higher value that what they were using the land for, plantations are a liability, etc. Public perceptions are that prescribed fire management is the same as pine management. We need to know and better disclose the "value added" economic measure of timber that is harvested and acknowledge the importance of "value added" of timber harvest local community. Govern. regulations are needed for private landowners to have forest management objectives. Need for education of NIPF landowners on how management can provide multiple benefits for them and society. Urban pressures on NFS land have been effective in reducing the opportunity to have NFS land contribute to the nations wood supply. Publics are requesting that more land be put into public ownership to protect Create the opportunity to buy the rights on how a property's forest will be managed; e.g., TNC's forest bank in southwest VA. Provide financial incentives (property tax breaks, capital gain reductions, etc.) to NIPF to better manage their forest property. Water/Aquatic Ecosystems Wetlands are becoming fragmented by a variety of activities. Accuracy of wetlands inventories is suspect. Insufficient baseline inventory data on many aquatic species do not allow determination of effects from land management practices. Global warming may be reducing the amount of water in streams (recreation, electric power and municipal reservoirs, also). Stream habitat conditions are adversely impacted by silvicultural and other (roads, recreation, etc.) activities. Silvicultural activities contribute a large portion of the total sediment load to the aquatic ecosystem. BMPs are not being practiced on private lands, and there is no incentive to follow or enforce them. Meeting projected urban water supply demand will result in building new dams on forest lands. Loss of forest land to mining (i.e. mountain top removal, valley fills, etc.) will impact energy inputs to headwater streams. Lack of forest road maintenance causes water quality degradation. Conversion of deciduous wetland forests to pine systems adversely impacts ecological diversity. Changes in landuse and land cover are adversely impacting threatened and endangered species. Mitigation for forested wetland activities is inadequate. Heavy timber harvesting within a small watershed over a short time period may result in increased water yield and channel instability. Most persons do not understand how their everyday activities impact aquatic ecosystems. Intensive agricultural practices adversely impact ecological diversity and productivity. Intensive forest management may result in more impact to aquatic ecosystems than less intensive forest management. There is a higher relative demand, and therefore, impact, on aquatic resources than on uplands (water draws people). Coastal forests are being lost to erosion, land subsidence, and salt water intrusion. Invasive plant species impact regeneration of wetland forests. Hemlock will be wiped out by adelgid and this will impact aquatic ecosystems. Changes in global markets will influence distribution of invasive species. Acid precipitation will continue to alter chemical and physical parameters of streams. Afforestation/restoration programs are not achieving objectives. Current objectives for WRP will result in understocked forests. We are not achieving biologically feasible productivity levels—we know how to manage better than we manage. Silvicultural management is increasing based on preference without scientific basis or understanding of sustainability. Impacts of sea level rise due global climate change to will have major impacts on South East/Gulf rivers, streams, floodplain forests, etc. Southern streams are wood starved. Institutional differences exist on how to address water quality issues in forests (TMDLs). Political and ownership boundaries confuse and complicate water quality improvement efforts. Recreation demands will adversely affect aquatic resources. Community (urban) watershed activism is severely underutilized in water/aquatic resources planning. There is a perception that the only way to meet water quality in forests is to keep all forest management activities completely out of ‘riparian areas.' Forest Extent, Structure, and Health Invasive non-native (exotic) species are affecting the productivity of the South's forests. Public misconceptions about the use of prescribed fire and pesticides negatively affect land manager's ability to implement management practices. Outbreaks of native pests are adversely affecting forest productivity. EPA's proposed NAAQS, regional haze, PM 2.5, and ozone will impair abilities to implement prescribed fire treatments. Rapid urbanization of wildlands are impairing land managers abilities to conduct forest management activities of fire management, pesticide use, recreation, harvesting, and silvicultural activities. The lack of professional forest management practices by some landowners degrades forest health and productivity. Current forest management practices do not adequately address soil quality and productivity. Major changes are occurring in forest composition with regard to tree and plant species, forest structure, and age distribution. Forest fragmentation due to urbanization is interrupting the integrity of large tracts of wildlands. Public misconceptions about old-growth forests and forest dynamics impact abilities of forest management activities. Trends indicate that additional exotic invasive species will pose additional threats to forest health and productivity. The public is not adequately informed about proper forest management activities. Air pollutants may be negatively affecting forest health and productivity. Some advised forest management practices are perceived by NIPFs as too intrusive and part of unnecessary government regulations, such as the Endangered Species Act and state Best Management Practices. Public misconceptions about plantation management practices and other even-aged practices inhibit forest management activities such as chip mills. Non-traditional interests in forest use are imposing new restrictions on forest management activities, such as salamanders, ginseng/mushroom hunting. The best forest management practices are sometimes not used because of potential legal and political ramifications. ...Previous Next... Table of Contents | Assessment Home | SRS Home

  modified: 17-APR-2000
  webmaster: John M. Pye