**Forest Restoration and Hazardous Fuel Reduction Efforts**

**in the Forests of Oregon and Washington**

**Testimony of**

**K. Norman Johnson Jerry F. Franklin**

**December 13, 2007**

**Hearing of Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests of the Senate
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources**

I am Dr. K. Norman Johnson and I am here today to give testimony for
myself and Dr. Jerry F. Franklin regarding forest restoration and
hazardous fuel reduction efforts in the forests of the Pacific
Northwest. I am a University Distinguished Professor in the College of
Forestry at Oregon State University. Jerry Franklin is Professor of
Ecosystem Sciences in the College of Forest Resources at University of
Washington. These comments represent our view and not those of our
respective institutions.

Our testimony focuses on forest restoration in the National Forests of
Oregon and Washington. Collectively, we have been studying these
magnificent forests and the amazing variety of benefits that they
provide for almost 100 years. In addition to research, we have served on
many scientific panels analyzing forest policy issues, including the
Northwest Forest Plan, and recently completed for the Klamath Tribe, a
comprehensive restoration plan for their historic tribal lands, which
are currently a part of the Winema-Fremont National Forest.

Our definition of "restoration" is the re-establishment of ecological
structures and processes on these forests where they have been degraded
and, simultaneously, restoration of economic and other social values on
these lands. One product of this restoration will be substantial
reductions in uncharacteristic fuel loadings. We emphasize restoration
activities in which ecological, economic, and other social goals are
compatible.

**Northwestern Forests Require Multiple Restoration Approaches**

***Forests of the PNW are very diverse in their characteristic
disturbance regimes and developmental patterns, and therefore
restoration policies and practices must acknowledge and accommodate
these differences.*** This diversity is obvious when one compares a
typical old-growth forest of Douglas-fir, western hemlock, and western
redcedar on the western slopes of the Cascade Range, with a typical
old-growth ponderosa pine forest found on dry sites on the eastern
slopes of the Cascade Range. The complexity of environmental conditions,
as measured by variation in macroclimate, soils, landform, elevation,
etc., and related differences in disturbance regimes make simple
stratifications of forests, such as into areas either west or east of
the Cascade Range divide, poor bases for policy or management
prescription.

***Plant associations and groupings of similar plant associations (PAGs)
provide a sound scientific basis for stratifying these forests into
different disturbance regimes*** for purposes of policy development,
management planning, and silvicultural prescription.

***Restoration needs and objectives contrast greatly between forests
representative of plant associations historically characterized by (1)
relatively frequent (\<100 year interval), low- to mixed-severity fire,
such as the ponderosa pine and dry mixed-conifer forests common east of
the Cascade Range, or (2) relatively infrequent (\>100 year interval),
high-severity disturbance regimes, such as west side
Douglas-fir---western hemlock forests.*** Although there are many plant
associations and sites that exhibit intermediate behavior, in this
presentation we will focus our discussion on types that are more at one
end or the other of the disturbance gradient.

**Restoration of Forests Characterized by Frequent, Low- and
Mixed-Severity Fire Regimes**

These forests have been grossly modified during the last century by a
variety of management actions including fire suppression, grazing by
domestic livestock, logging, and establishment of plantations.
Consequently, they differ greatly from their historical condition in
having much higher stand densities and basal areas, lower average stand
diameters, much higher percentages of drought- and fire-intolerant
species (such as white or grand fir), and many fewer (or no) old-growth
trees.

***We will lose these forests to catastrophic disturbance events unless
we undertake aggressive active management programs**.* This is not
simply an issue of fuels and fire; because of the density of these
forests, there is a high potential for drought stress and related insect
outbreaks. Surviving old-growth pine trees are now at high risk of death
to both fire and western pine beetle, the latter resulting from drought
stress and competition. Many fir-dominated stands are now at risk of
catastrophic outbreaks of insect defoliators, such as the spruce
budworm, as has occurred at many locations on the eastern slopes of the
Cascade Range in both Oregon and Washington.

***Without action, we are at high risk of losing these stands\--and the
residual old-growth trees that they contain\--to fire and insects and
the potential for these losses is greatly magnified by expected future
climate change***. Historically, much of the loss of old growth trees
and forests has come during time of drought. The expected longer and
more intense summer drought periods with climate change will put
additional stress on the forests here. The stress on old growth trees
will be especially severe where they are surrounded by dense
understories.

***We know enough to take action*** (uncertainties should not paralyze
us). Inaction is a much more risky option for a variety of ecological
values, including preservation of Northern Spotted Owls and other
old-growth related species. We need to learn as we go, but we need to
take action now. Furthermore, ***it is critical for stakeholders to
understand that active management is necessary in stands with existing
old-growth trees in order to reduce the risk that those trees will be
lost.***

***Activities at the stand level need to focus on restoring ecosystems
to sustainable composition and structure\--not simply to acceptable fuel
levels.*** Objectives of these treatments need to include: Retention of
existing old-growth tree populations; shifting stand densities, basal
areas, diameter distributions, and proportions of drought- and
fire-tolerant species (e.g., ponderosa pine and western larch) toward
historical levels; and development of spatial heterogeneity. Plant
associations provide a good basis for providing site-specific target
goals for stand parameters, such as basal areas. Finally, ***restoring
old-growth tree populations to, and maintaining them at, historical
levels should be a goal of restoration management.***

***Action is also needed to restore hardwood species, such as aspen,
willows, and alders, which have declined in these landscapes*** as a
result of lack of regeneration and overtopping by dense conifers.
Elimination of large predators is probably an additional key factor in
the changes that have occurred in hardwood representation and riparian
vegetation.

***Restoration programs must be planned and implemented at the landscape
scale to be effective; management over the last century has altered
entire landscapes and created the potential for very large wildfires and
insect outbreaks.*** Treating isolated stands within these landscapes
will not be effective.

***Creating fuel treatment patches and strips is a useful first step to
help control wildfire, but is not sufficient to save these forests or
the important array of values that they provide, including owls and
old-growth trees.*** Many of the intervening areas will eventually burn
and, even if they do not, old-growth trees will succumb to insects
during periodic drought, since they are surrounded by dense competing
vegetation.

***To conserve these forests, we need to modify stand structure (e.g.,
treat fuels) on one-half to two-thirds of the landscape.*** This level
of restoration will create a matrix of more natural and sustainable
forest, which has a greatly reduced potential for stand-replacement fire
and insect mortality, interspersed with islands of dense stands. These
interspersed dense stands will provide habitat for species like the
Northern Spotted Owl that utilize such areas. In fact, an approach that
results in restoring conditions on the majority of the dry forest
landscapes is the only way in which sustainable habitat for Northern
Spotted Owls can be provided.

***Key elements of actions to restore these forests include:***

> *Conserving old growth trees as a first priority.*
>
> *Utilizing historical conditions, such as historical densities and
> distributions of tree sizes, as an ecological guide, modified, as
> needed, by recognition of coming climate change.*
>
> *Combining conservation of old growth trees, stand density targets,
> and emphasis on drought and fire-tolerant species as an overall guide
> to action.* We suggest moving away from approaches based on diameter
> limits. Young, shade-tolerant trees of substantial size often
> contribute to the unnaturalness of many stands, as well as threatening
> old-growth trees. Also, old-growth trees may be smaller than a
> proposed diameter limit but still should be retained.
>
> *Focusing on areas with concentrations of old growth structure as a
> high priority for treatment.* Recognition that such areas should
> receive early attention is recent; there has been a tendency to think
> that stands with numerous old-growth trees should be left alone or, at
> least, be of much lower priority for treatment. The reality is the
> opposite! Forests that still retain substantial numbers of old-growth
> trees should be priorities for treatment because these are
> irreplaceable structures that are at great risk from uncharacteristic
> wildfire and bark beetle attack. Hence, *reducing the potential for
> accelerated loss of these old trees should be at the top of the
> agenda.*
>
> *Working to regain complexity*---forests have been simplified through
> harvest, fire suppression, and grazing---work for heterogeneity at all
> spatial scales.
>
> *Returning understory community composition and ground fuels to
> characteristic composition and structure.* Many areas that
> characteristically had frequent, low-frequency fire regimes no longer
> do, due to the accumulation of branches and dead trees on the forest
> floor and the loss of fine fuels (that used to carry these fires) to
> grazing. Reversing these effects will be needed.
>
> *Giving special attention to the hardwood component of the dry forest
> landscapes, both riparian and upland.* In many ways, hardwood species
> and communities are in as much difficulty as conifer-dominated stands.
>
> *Ensuring conservation of aquatic systems.* Limiting new roads,
> closing unneeded roads, improving road systems, revitalizing aspen and
> willow forests, and controlling aggregate watershed effects will all
> play a role in this effort.

***Prescribed fire is a useful tool in forest restoration but is not
sufficient alone---mechanical silvicultural activities typically will be
required.*** Difficulties exist in safely dealing with the build-up in
fuel; in many cases harvest is required to help reduce fuel loads. In
addition, the uncertainty of a burn program, due both to smoke and
safety issues, makes it difficult to base a forest management program
for a large area solely on prescribed fire.

> *Harvest can help pay for actions and provide useful economic and
> social benefits, but additional funds will be needed.* Significant
> commercial volumes need to be removed to restore these forests. They
> can provide the funds for treatment and also help maintain milling
> capacity and communities. Rarely has there been such a coming together
> of ecological, economic, and social considerations. Commercial
> harvest, though, will not pay for all that needs to be done.
>
> *Fire or other actions must follow harvest to reduce the short-term
> fuel hazards generated by mechanical treatment.* Fire, at least to
> consume activity fuels (debris and small trees left on site), is an
> ideal follow-up to harvest where it can be carried out. Without
> treatment of activity fuels, thinning has a significant probability of
> actually accentuating the fuel hazards in treated forests for at least
> a period of time. *Better yet, use this residue in biomass power
> plants.*

***Finally and most profoundly, policy makers and managers need to plan
for continued active management of these restored stands.** These
activities and others will need to be repeated through time to maintain
the sustainable structure and composition.* Sometimes, this may be
accomplished with burning but most of the time repeated silvicultural
treatment of stands and landscapes will be required in the more
productive mixed conifer types.

**Restoration of Forests Associated with Infrequent, High-Intensity Fire
Regimes**

On the west side of the Cascade Range, the primary restoration need is
for silvicultural activities to accelerate the development of structural
complexity in the plantations created following timber harvest. Tens of
thousands of acres of young stands exist which could benefit from
activities that reduce stand densities, favor biodiversity, and create
spatial heterogeneity. There is an immense opportunity and need for
restoration in these plantations that could result in significant
contributions to ecological, economic, and social goals.

***Restoration efforts can increase structural complexity in the
plantations created after clearcutting**.* These plantations usually
contain dense conifers dominated by one or two commercial species. Most
have little or no structural legacy of standing and down trees from
previous stands. Thus, these stands are much simplified from the young
naturally regenerated forests that would have developed historically.
Thinning and other activities can accelerate the development of
complexity within these stands. Also, such thinning can speed the
development of late-successional characteristics.

*Key elements of actions to increase structural complexity in
plantations:*

> *Conserving all remnant old growth trees.* There is rarely an
> ecological justification for cutting old growth trees as a part of
> restoration programs.
>
> *Utilizing silvicultural prescriptions that encourage development of
> spatial heterogeneity, such as variable density thinning.*

*Allowing plantation thinning beyond 80 years of age.*

> *Ensuring conservation of aquatic systems* Limiting new roads, closing
> unneeded roads, improving road systems, and controlling aggregate
> watershed effects will all play a role in this effort.

**Using Management Objectives and Restoration Principles to Guide
Activities Following Severe Disturbances**

Management activities following major disturbance events, such as large
intense wildfires, are among the most controversial issues in national
forest management. Such "restoration" activities should follow the same
principles previously emphasized with the goal of restoring structures
and ecological processes where they have been degraded while
simultaneously restoring economic and social values on these lands.

***Management goals should be the starting point in determining
appropriate post-disturbance activities.*** Hence, if ecological
objectives are primary objectives prior to the disturbance they should
be primary considerations in any post-disturbance restoration process.

***Comparable structural goals should guide management before and after
wildfire; these will certainly differ depending upon whether the
management focus is primarily on ecological processes or wood
production*.** Where ecological objectives are primary, proposed salvage
operations should retain structures of the same size and density as
those developed for the green forest. Old-growth trees should be
conserved, whether alive or dead. This approach provides a solid
reference for action and can eliminate intense arguments over such
issues as the probabilities that burned trees will die.

***Similarly, approaches to reforestation should reflect restoration
principles and management objectives.*** For example, attempts to
establish dense conifer plantations on ponderosa pine and dry
mixed-conifer sites are not appropriate; if successful, such efforts
simply have created, at best, stands in need of restoration thinning or,
at worst, the next generation of uncharacteristic stand-replacement
fires. Furthermore, the structurally-rich early successional communities
that exist between a severe disturbance and re-establishment of a closed
canopy of trees are very rich in biological diversity, including species
and key ecological processes. Rapid termination of this successional
stage is inappropriate where management objectives emphasize ecological
objectives.

**Trust but Verify; Third-Party Review as a Key to Forest Restoration**

Successful restoration of these forests will require large-scale actions
over space and time, as we have discussed above, and managers will need
the latitude to adapt general policies to specific situations. Public
acceptance and support will be needed and the social license for these
efforts is tenuous in many places. A key component in gaining public
support will be credible evidence that the actions are moving the
forests toward restoration goals and a mechanism for changing management
where the actions are not achieving the desired objectives.

***Monitoring is necessary but not sufficient.*** Given the
uncertainties that we face in forest restoration, keeping track of the
state of the forests and the effects of actions is a first principle of
forest management. We believe, though, that people are increasingly
skeptical of an agency keeping score on the effectiveness of its own
actions.

***Third-party review will be essential to gain and retain public
acceptance**.* We need mechanisms that provide trusted evaluations of
the linkage between actions and goals along with the ability to suggest
change as needed. Creation of third-party review as a regular part of
forest restoration would go a long way toward this goal. As an example,
a broad group of community leaders and resource managers could
periodically review the results of restoration work and publish a report
on their findings and suggestions for change. Other approaches, such as
certification, could also be used. In sum, third party review could go a
long way toward dispelling distrust in the public about the purpose and
results of forest restoration programs.