■i

Northwest Forest Plan 

Research Synthesis

Richard W. Haynes and Gloria E. Perez, Technical Editors

Published by:

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service

Pacific Northwest Research Station

Portland, Oregon

General Technical Report PNW-GTR-498

January 2001
■ii
ABSTRACT

Haynes, Richard W.; Perez, Gloria E., tech. eds. 2000. Northwest Forest Plan research

synthesis. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-498. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 130 p.

This document synthesizes research accomplishments initiated and funded under the

Northwest Forest Plan or the President’s Forest Plan (hereafter referred to as the Forest Plan)

since its inception in 1994. Three major parts in this document cover, the context for this

effort, eight Forest Plan research accomplishments, and a synthesis. The eight accomplishments described in part two, chapter 4 are as follows:

• Wildlife conservation and population variability issues

• Aquatic conservation strategy

• Adaptive management concepts and decision support

• Adaptive management areas: synthesis of an ongoing experiment

• Socioeconomic research

• Ecological processes and function

• The struggle to deal with landscapes 

• Developing new stand-management strategies for the Douglas-fir region

These accomplishments and the ongoing work are synthesized around 

the following converging themes:

• Conserving biological diversity

• Science support for implementing the plan

• Cross-disciplinary science

• Science and policy issues

Much of our research success has rested on a merging of several separate, largely functional

research efforts that built incrementally on past work. Our legacy of post-Forest Plan work

differs in that it has many successful development and application efforts, and early efforts at

larger scale and more integrative work. Although there are many findings in the various

Forest Plan research areas, the ecosystem management framework of the Forest Plan has 

created an impetus toward greater integration, systems approaches, and holistic perspectives.

Keywords: Northwest Forest Plan, ecosystem management, conservation, land management,

alternative silviculture, landscape ecology, adaptive management.

■iii

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
PREFACE AND

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Five years have passed since the inception of the Northwest Forest Plan (Forest Plan).

Although it is too brief a period to fairly assess the results of a 100-year plan, enough money

has been spent and work completed to warrant looking at what has been learned, what

insight this new information offers, and how this insight affects or should affect the direction

of Forest Plan research. This document summarizes and reviews the research carried out over

the last 5 years for the Forest Plan. Richard Haynes and Gloria Perez compiled, organized,

and edited the document. Richard Haynes, Gloria Perez, Laura Bergstrom, Kate Snow, and

Garland Mason wrote the context. Bruce Marcot, David Hohler, James R. Sedell, Bernard T.

Bormann, Martha H. Brookes, Keith M. Reynolds, George H. Stankey, Roger N. Clark,

Cecilia Danks, Frederick J. Swanson, Randy Molina, Thomas Spies, Dean DeBell, Bradley St.

Clair, and Robert O. Curtis wrote the research summaries. Tom Spies and Fred Swanson

helped develop and organize chapter 5. Kate Snow wrote chapter 6, and Richard Haynes

prepared chapter 7. Many people such as Thomas Mills, Charles W. Philpot, Danny Lee,

Hermann Gucinski, William Oliver, Michael Unsworth, Steve Zack, Robert Alverts,

Connie Harrington, Michael Lennartz, Janet Ohmann, Marty Raphael, James R. Sedell,

Nan Vance, Fred Stormer, Kathy Geyer, and Charles Peterson contributed to the content

of this work through panel and meeting discussions. Pete Bisson, Russell Graham, Herman

Gucinski, and Garland Mason peer-reviewed the document. In addition, several iterations

of drafts were reviewed and revised by the authors and contributors noted above, along

with Nancy Rappaport, Yvonne Everett, and Thomas E. Lisle. Fred Swanson helped extensively with the legacy figures and discussions in chapters 1 and 7. He, David Hohler,

Thomas Spies, and Dean DeBell met with the technical editors to help create a more

cohesive and clear portrayal of what has happened over the last 5 years with Forest Plan

research and what needs to happen in the future. Laura Bergstrom collected the images

used in the synthesis, and Judy Mikowski helped assemble all the final drafts.

■iv

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
CONTENTS

ix Northwest Forest Plan Research Synthesis Summary

Kate Snow and Gloria E. Perez

ix Executive Summary

ix Research Results 

xii Integrating Themes in Forest Plan Research 

xiv Integration of Science and Management 

xv Closing

PART ONE

2 Chapter 1: Overview

Richard W. Haynes

2 Introduction

2 A Brief History

4 The 1993 Forest Conference

5 The Team’s Efforts

6 The Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

6 The Forest Plan is Implemented Through the 

Record of Decision

7 The Team and the Science Community

8 The Questions Driving the Team

8 Research Direction After the FEMAT Report

9 The Clients of Research

10 Chapter 2: The Team Approach

Richard Haynes and George Stankey

10 Introduction

10 A Connected Reserve System

10 Adaptive Management Areas

11 The Vision of the Adaptive Management Areas

11 Science and the Adaptive Management Areas

12 Funding Adaptive Management Area Research

13 Challenges of the FEMAT Report

13 Linked Spatial and Temporal Scales

14 The Planning Framework

15 Closing

16 Chapter 3: The Administrative Context

Laura Bergstrom, Kate Snow, Garland Mason, and Gloria E. Perez

16 Introduction

16 The Roles of Research

16 Organizing Forest Plan Research

16 Program Management and Coordination

17 Funding

17 Research Project Selection

18 Interagency Coordination

18 The Role of Partnerships

18 The Regional Ecosystem Office, “ Survey and Manage”

Team, and Research Monitoring Committee

20 Monitoring

21 Other Efforts

PART TWO

24 Chapter 4: Research Results to Date

24 Wildlife Conservation and Population Viability Issues

Bruce Marcot

24 Significant Findings

25 Implications

25 Management

25 Environments

25 Disciplines

25 Organisms

26 Results and Interpretations

26 FEMAT Report Assumptions and Forest Plan Directions

27 Research Priorities of the 

Pacific Northwest Research Station

27 New Research Topics

29 Key Ecological Functions of Species and the Ecological 

Roles of Functional Groups

29 Links Among Disciplines

29 Embracing Development Science

29 Cross-Discipline and Cross-Thematic Implications

30 Aquatic Conservation Strategy 

David Hohler, James Sedell, and Deanna Olson

30 Studies and Significant Findings

30 Implications

32 FEMAT Report Assumptions: Validated or Not?

34 Spatial and Temporal Scales

35 Planning and Implementation

38 New Research Topics

39 Cross-Disciplinary Implications

39 Related Topics Not Addressed and Order 

of Importance

40 Adaptive-Management Concepts and Decision Support

Bernard T Bormann, Martha H. Brookes, and Keith Reynolds

40 Studies and Significant Findings

41 Studies

44 Synthesis Findings

45 Implications for Implementing the Forest Plan

45 Adaptive Management and Decision-Support Topics 

Still to be Addressed

46 Adaptive Management Areas: Synthesis 

of an Ongoing Experiment

George H. Stankey and Roger N. Clark

46 Studies and Significant Findings

49 Implications

49 FEMAT Report Assumptions: Validated or Not?

50 Cross-Disciplinary Implications

51 Conclusion

52 Socioeconomic Research

Cecilia Danks and Richard W. Haynes

52 Studies and Significant Findings

■v

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
53 Implications

53 FEMAT Report Assumptions: Validated or Not?

56 Spatial and Temporal Scale

57 Planning and Implementation

58 New Research Topics

59 Cross-Disciplinary Implications

60 Related Topics Not Addressed and Order 

of Importance

60 How Can Small-Diameter Wood Products Be 

Harvested and Used?

61 What Happened to Forest Communities 

in the Forest Plan Area?

61 What Skills and Employment are Needed for 

Implementing the Forest Plan?

62 How Have Native American Tribes Been Affected 

by the Forest Plan?

62 Ecological Processes and Functions

Frederick J. Swanson and Randy Molina

62 Studies and Significant Findings

62 Forest Succession Processes

63 Mycology Studies

64 Ecological Functions of Retained Live Trees 

in Harvest Units

65 Historical and Current Disturbance Regimes

67 Implications

67 FEMAT Report Assumptions: Validated or Not?

67 Spatial and Temporal Scale

67 Planning and Implementation

67 New Research Topics

67 Cross-Disciplinary Implications

67 Related Topics Not Addressed

68 The Struggle to Deal with Landscapes

Thomas Spies and Frederick J. Swanson

68 Introduction

68 The Problem of Scale and Spatial Variation

69 What Has Been Learned So Far?

69 The Problem of Integration

What Has Been Learned So Far?

70 The Problem of Information

69 What Has Been Learned So Far?

72 Landscape Studies and Findings

72 Implications 

72 FEMAT Report Assumptions: Validated or Not?

74 Spatial and Temporal Scale

74 Planning and Implementation

74 New Research Topics

75 Cross-Disciplinary Implications

75 Related Topics Not Addressed

76 Developing New Stand-Management Strategies for the 

Douglas-Fir Region

Dean S. DeBell, Bradley St. Clair, and Robert O. Curtis

76 Introduction

76 Fundamental Questions

77 Studies and Significant Findings 

77 Rotation Length as Related to Production of Wood 

and Other Forest Values

78 The Role of Genetic Selection of Douglas-Fir in 

Alternative Management Regimes 

78 Syntheses of Silvicultural Options for Multipurpose 

Forest Management

79 New Integrated Trials of Silvicultural Options

80 Implications

80 Rotation Length as Related to Production of Wood 

and Other Forest Values

80 The Role of Genetic Selection of Douglas-Fir in 

Alternative Management Regimes

80 Syntheses of Silvicultural Options for Multipurpose 

Forest Management

81 New Integrated Trials of Silvicultural Options

81 Further Thoughts and Considerations

81 Contributions of Other Programs

81 Obstacles to Conducting Large-Scale Silvicultural Trials 

on Federal Forest Lands

PART THREE

84 Chapter 5: Major Integrating Science Themes

Richard W. Haynes and Gloria E. Perez

84 Introduction

84 Conserving Biological Diversity

85 Ecosystem Level

86 Natural Disturbances

88 Landscape Ecology and Planning

88 Science Support for Implementing the Forest Plan

88 Adaptive Management

90 Cross-Disciplinary Science 

90 Scale

92 Integration 

92 Science and Policy Issues

93 Chapter 6: Integrating Science and Management

Kate Snow

93 Introduction

93 Changes in Management and Science Interactions 

94 Use of Science Findings

94 Successful Tools for Integration and Communication

94 Process Versus Substance

94 Is Just Being Legal Enough?

95 Success of Science Transfers

95 Quality of Science and Advising Managers

■vi

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
96 Chapter 7: Closing

Richard W. Haynes

96 The Role of Research and Application

98 Potential Effects on Scientific Understanding

98 Effects of Forest Plan Research on the Science 

Community

98 It Changed Our Science

99 It Focused on Broad-Scale Issues

100 Successes in the Science Support of Management

101 It Provided Development Opportunities

101 Our Legacy

101 Potential Effects on Management 

102 The Science Legacy

102 Conclusion

106 References

114 Metric and English Units of Measure

115 Appendix 1: The Structure of the Northwest 

Forest Plan

115 Introduction

115 Forest Management

115 Economic Development

116 Interagency Coordination

117 Appendix 2: Budget History of Northwest Forest 

Plan Research

117 Fiscal Year Budget 1994-99

118 Appendix 3: Terrestrial Wildlife Plan Assumptions 

and Directions 

118 Introduction

118 Forest Ecosystem Management 

Assessment Team Report

118 Survey and Manage

118 Monitoring

118 Research

118 Managed Late-Successional Areas

118 Stand Management

118 Ecosystems and Their Management

118 Adaptive Management

118 Biological Diversity, Late-Successional and Old-Growth 

Forest Ecosystems

119 Riparian Microclimate

119 Technical Objectives

119 Watershed Scale

120 Evaluation and Adjustment

120 Conservation Areas [for Spotted Owls]

120 Northwest Forest Plan Record of Decision

120 Application to Research Activities

120 Monitoring

120 Invertebrates and Plants

120 Protection Buffers

120 Survey and Manage

120 Northwest Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines

120 Research

120 Fire and Fuels Management

120 Monitoring

120 Effectiveness Monitoring

120 Validation Monitoring

121 Protection Buffers

121 Birds

121 Education

122 Appendix 4: Brief Description of the Coastal 

Landscape Analysis and Modeling Study, H.J. 

Andrews, The Augusta Creek Study, and “Survey 

and Manage” Species

122 Coastal Landscape Analysis and Modeling Study 

122 H.J. Andrews Experimental Forest 

122 The Augusta Creek Study

123 “Survey and Manage” Species

124 Appendix 5: Northwest Forest Plan Research Projects

127 Glossary

■vii

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
■viii

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
Northwest

Forest Plan

Research Synthesis

Summary

Kate Snow1 and Gloria E. Perez 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In 1993, President Clinton directed the U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service and U.S. Department of the Interior,

Bureau of Land Management to develop a balanced and comprehensive long-term policy for managing 24 million acres of Federal

lands in the range of the northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis

caurina). The Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team

(the team) prepared a report (the FEMAT report) that became

the basis for the Northwest Forest Plan (the Forest Plan), which

was ultimately approved in February 1994. The Forest Plan set in

place a connected reserve system with both terrestrial and aquatic components. The land base was allocated among late-successional and riparian reserves, matrix lands, and adaptive management areas (AMAs). The AMAs were included as part of the

strategy to use adaptive management to assist in the evolutionary

nature of the Forest Plan. Lastly, working on the team, information needs for implementation, and the need to assist land managers in implementation have altered the research agendas for a

generation of scientists working for and with Federal natural

resource agencies.

This document is an attempt to summarize the accomplishments of the scientists and professionals who assumed various roles

as the Forest Plan was implemented. They worked with the AMAs

to develop scientifically driven management experiments that

tested predictions and assumptions in management plans. The

context for the work of some scientists was changed by the need

to collect or develop new information to support management.

Many researchers helped develop protocols for effectiveness monitoring, “survey and manage” guidelines for specific species, and

coordination of research agendas with other agencies. Much time

was spent providing technical assistance to managers and transferring new knowledge to on-the-ground application.

RESEARCH RESULTS

The questions underlying the

FEMAT report resulted in development

of eight thematic areas for research under the

Forest Plan. These thematic areas are (1) wildlife

conservation and population viability issues, (2) aquatic

conservation strategy, (3) adaptive management concepts and

decision support, (4) adaptive management areas, (5) socioeconomic research, (6) ecological processes and function, (7) the

struggle to deal with landscapes, and (8) developing new stand

development strategies for the Douglas-fir region. The followings

are summarized in the tabulation below:

Wildlife conservation and population viability issues

Study Significant findings 

Application of coarse-filter Focus on individual species

and fine-filter assessment (fine filter) is still important for

approaches selected species conservation issues, 

and can be integrated with a broader

focus on functional species groups, 

communities, and ecosystem dynamics and processes (coarse filter). 

Species viability Continuing refinement of sundry 

approaches to modeling and evaluating species viability can be applied 

to many species-specific issues and 

questions. 

Functional analysis Plants, invertebrates, and vertebrates all play key ecological roles 

that can influence the diversity, productivity, and sustainability of their 

ecosystems. Such functional roles 

across taxonomic classes or organisms cannot be understood or fully 

addressed by focusing on only rare 

or threatened terrestrial vertebrates 

of viability concern. 

Evolutionary capacity The current and recent historical 

ranges of natural conditions may 

depict conditions under which 

species have recently persisted but 

do not necessarily depict conditions

under which species have evolved. 

Providing for long-term evolutionary

capacity is in addition to providing 

for shorter term population viability.

There are specific ways to map and 

evaluate components of species 

ranges to evaluate evolutionary 

potential.

■ix

1 Kate Snow (retired) was public affairs officer and Learning Center Coordinator, U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Olympic National Forest, Quilcene Ranger

District, Quilcene, WA 98376.

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
Aquatic conservation strategy studies and significant findings 

Study Significant findings

Cummins Creek study Importance of intermittent streams 

in providing large woody debris to 

larger streams.

Riparian buffer study Examination of microclimate gradients in riparian areas and the effects

on aquatic species, especially 

amphibians. 

Retrospective riparian study Importance of disturbance legacies 

in determining the stream-associated

communities (amphibians, fish, 

birds, and small mammals. 

Sediment routing studies Importance of intermittent streams 

in routing pulses of sediment and the

effects of sediment pulses on 

aquatic species. 

Adaptive management concepts and decision-support studies 

and significant findings 

Study Significant findings 

The Adaptive Management Process Practical concepts of adaptive 

Working Group, sponsored by the management develop from 

Interagency Implementation Team collaboration of managers,

researchers, and citizens—and cannot be determined by any single 

group. 

Pilot adaptive management study Adaptive management cannot

be implemented by creating standards and guidelines.

Adaptive management must be 

institutionalized to be successful.

Learning to fish is better than being 

given a day’s catch. 

Ecosystem management Decision-support systems need to

decision-support system connect decisions to underlying 

evidence. 

Adaptive management areas studies and significant findings

Study Significant findings

Little River and North Coast Significant differences exist between 

AMAs studies on role of propor- Coast Range and Cascade Range

tional thinning and burning old-growth forests in terms of ages,

prescriptions in fostering old-growth development history comcomposition and structure position, and structure.

Snoqualmie Pass AMAs studies The interaction of habitat fragmentation and the barrier effects of the 

Interstate 90 corridor combine to 

create significant effects on the longterm viability of several threatened 

and endangered species.

Plant association, which integrates 

many physiographic and topographic

variables, has a strong potential for 

predicting the concurrence of fire, 

insect, and disease disturbance. 

Central Cascades, Snoqualmie Pass, Road location in the landscape 

and Hayfork AMAs (the role and strongly affects responses, 

influence of natural disturbances are including sediment movement 

being studied) and accumulation to flooding. 

Strong evidence shows old-growth 

forest sustainability is associated 

with decreasing distance from the 

Cascade crest, reflecting both a temperature moisture gradient and associated changes in disturbance 

regime. 

Socioeconomic research studies and significant findings 

Study Significant findings 

Socioeconomic monitoring of How timber sales and forest work 

ecosystem management are contracted can be more 

important in determining the potential benefits to local forest communities than how much timber is 

harvested. 

Community-based socioeconomic Socioeconomic conditions differ

assessment greatly among communities, even

within a small timber-dependent 

county. County-level data can 

obscure effects at the community 

level. 

Nontimber forest products harvesting Permits issued to harvest nontimber 

forest products have increased significantly in recent years. Involving 

harvesters and Forest Service managers improves focus of research and

dissemination of results.

■x

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
Ecological processes and function—findings 

from various studies 

Study Significant findings 

Forest succession processes leading Important functions of disturbances

to old-growth conditions and processes of initial stand 

establishment in developing modern

old-growth forests.

Scaling up in mycology studies— First-year results support the null

by examining (testing hypotheses hypothesis that fungi are not 

about) factors controlling “old-growth dependent” and can

distribution of fungal species at live in young (20- to 30-year-old)

various scales—ranging from forests with large amounts of

individual rotten logs to the region coarse woody debris (old-growth 

legacies). 

Ecological functions and growth The need to improve understanding

of retained live trees in harvest units of interactions among various

components of multistoried forest 

stands. 

Scale and spatial variation, integration, and information 

studies and findings 

Study Significant findings 

Scale and spatial variations:

Historical old-growth dynamics Historical variation in old growth

Coastal landscape analysis and differs with spatial scale.

modeling study (CLAMS)

Integration studies: 

CLAMS— Integration is difficult and requires

conceptual models, prototypes, and

simplification of subsystem processes.

Few ecological measures and indicators exist at most scales.

Little work exists on direct measures

of the socioeconomic value of

biodiversity. 

Information studies:

Comparison of remote sensing Different remote sensing methods 

methods for mapping habitat at provide different types and qualities 

multiple spatial scales of forest structure information. 

New stand development strategies studies and findings 

Study Significant findings 

Rotation length as related to Mean annual increment of Douglas-fir

production of wood and other culminates at older ages than 

forest values commonly believed. Repeated 

thinning could delay culmination, 

thereby extending rotation lengths 

beyond those used on most forest 

lands in the region. This would 

increase timber production and 

value over the long term, and concurrently benefit aesthetic, wildlife,

and watershed values. 

The role of genetic selection of Seedlings from families selected in

Douglas-fir in alternative an open light environment are

management regimes also appropriate for use under the

lower light environments of alternative management regimes. 

General syntheses of silvicultural Six general syntheses of existing 

options for multipurpose forest silvicultural knowledge describe how

management existing information and practices

can be used to provide diverse 

values in managed forests.

• • •

Wildlife conservation and population viability—Research

showed that plants, invertebrates, and vertebrates all play key

ecological roles that can influence the diversity, productivity, and

sustainability of ecosystems. Such functional roles across taxonomic classes or organisms cannot be understood or fully

addressed by focusing only on rare or threatened terrestrial vertebrates of viability concern. Research also showed how the current

and recent historical ranges of natural conditions may depict conditions under which species have recently persisted but do not

necessarily depict conditions under which species have evolved.

This argues for management strategies that provide for both evolutionary capacity as well as shorter term population viability. 

Aquatic conservation strategy—Research has supported some

assumptions in the Forest Plan such as size requirements for large

wood, but has also indicated other assumptions that may need

adjusting, such as the width of riparian buffers. Scientists have

provided analysis tools for assessing and managing riparian

reserves and have played an integral role in developing the watershed analysis process. Research also has supported the value and

need for protecting intermittent and ephemeral stream channels.

Current research in disturbance regimes including flooding, landslides, and fire has been applied to design and evaluation of

strategies for restoring watersheds.

■xi

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
Adaptive management concepts and decision support—

Adaptive management was a unique element of the Forest Plan.

Research in this area has highlighted the need to incorporate this

approach into our institutional structures. Work done in this area

has resulted in using learning as objectives in environmental

assessments and in setting up multiple management pathways to

speed the learning process.

Adaptive management areas—These areas were established to fill

gaps in knowledge and to test Forest Plan assumptions and standards and guidelines. Although limited progress can be cited in

validation of the assumptions, much research has been concentrated in these areas over the past 5 years. The AMAs are the site

of much social research now occurring and are focus areas for collaborative learning. 

Socioeconomic research—Socioeconomic impacts resulting from

changes in land management mostly have affected communities

that rely on forest resources (both commodity and noncommodity) for various aspects of their well-being. Socioeconomic conditions differ greatly among communities, even within a small timber-dependent county. Yet, the economic well-being of these

communities does not depend exclusively on timber outputs, and

many have the capacity to adapt to change. Participation is a key

determinant of change and for effective collaboration among

groups.

Ecological processes and function—New findings about ecological processes and functions have significant implications for management and research. For example, the Pacific Northwest is

much more dynamic than previously considered. In the southern

part of the region, frequent low-intensity fires have been common

in the past, and old growth likely persisted through multiple disturbances. Great variability exists throughout the region, thereby

implying that a single prescription for the developing future oldgrowth stands will not be suitable or successful. Research also has

shown that old growth developed at much lower densities, thereby supporting the concept of wide thinnings as an important tool

in stand development. Another example that studies of fungi

have revealed is that coarse woody debris levels may be more

important than stand age in supporting fungi production. 

The struggle to deal with landscapes—The movement of

both management and research away from dealing with stands,

projects, and administrative units to dealing with large ecological areas such as landscapes, watersheds, and provinces has

been one of the significant changes initiated by the Forest

Plan. Problems peculiar to landscape scales include variability

of patterns and processes, integration of ecological and socioeconomic forces, and the difficulty of information acquisition,

analysis, and display. 

Research has provided useful models to address habitat diversity and biological stability across landscapes. Key findings for

wildlife indicate that amount of habitat may be more critical than

the spatial pattern of habitat in some cases. Research also has provided examples of using large-scale and long-term natural disturbance patterns as a basis for designing management regimes.

Developing new stand development strategies for the Douglas-fir

region—New approaches to silviculture were a hallmark of the Forest

Plan. Research in stand-level dynamics has revealed more flexibility

in Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco) growth patterns

than commonly thought. Ongoing studies also are providing information on growth and regeneration under leave-tree canopies and on

managing older stands for old-growth characteristics.

There are significant research areas identified in the FEMAT

report and the Forest Plan that have not been fully explored.

These include basic systematics, populations and habitat needs of

soil organisms, fungi, and invertebrates; synthesizing risk-assessment techniques; integrating social, economic, and ecological

disciplines; utilizing the potential of management experiments in

AMAs; learning how to synthesize management inferences from

broad-scale experimental studies; effectiveness of fire as an ecosystem restoration tool; effectiveness of riparian buffers for protecting nonvascular plants and amphibians; effectiveness of snag and

down wood guidelines; and the effectiveness (in terms of costs

and benefits) of different approaches for restoring biotic communities and ecosystem processes.

INTEGRATING THEMES IN FOREST

PLAN RESEARCH

Although the research supporting the Forest Plan is varied,

several broad subject areas provide a framework for viewing past

and future work: conserving biological diversity, science support

for implementing the Forest Plan, cross-disciplinary science, and

the science and policy interface.

Conserving biological diversity includes ecosystems and

species-habitats, aquatic-terrestrial links, natural disturbances,

stand-level processes, site productivity, and reserve matrix areas.

Concerns about individual species protected by the Endangered

Species Act are what catalyzed the Forest Plan and initially drove

Forest Plan scientific research. More recently, however, the

research emphasis has shifted to ecosystems and understanding

species-habitat relations. Although research continues for spotted

owl demographics, marbled murrelets (Brachyromphus marmoratus), amphibians and reptiles, selected plants, and vertebrate carnivores (fisher (Martes pennanti) and marten (Martes americana));

biological diversity is gaining importance, and emphasis is shift-

■xii

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
ing toward considering larger ecosystems. Extensive work has

focused on both aquatic and terrestrial systems and the links

among all species. Conserving biological diversity includes learning about natural disturbances: fires, floods, and landslides. Issues

include the role of fire in developing and destroying late-successional habitat, risk of losing reserves because of fire and other disturbances, role of floods and landslides in the dynamics and pattern of aquatic habitat, and the role of fine-scale disturbances in

developing multistoried forests. Understanding of natural disturbances has led to greater understanding of the landscape patterns

in the Pacific Northwest, and a paradigm shift toward a dynamic

view of nature that encompasses multiple spatial and temporal

scales. Several studies have focused on stand-level processes, such

as the links among silvicultural prescriptions that accelerate oldgrowth conditions. Other studies by the long-term ecosystem

productivity program have examined long-term effects of management practices and ecosystem processes on the development

and productivity of entire ecosystems. Reserve matrix areas provide essential habitat for species dependent on multistoried latesuccessional habitat. They also pose a challenge for research over

ambiguous expectations of which long-term conditions should be

used as the baseline reference. Public sentiment over “cathedrallike” stands and the traditional “static” view of nature influences

contemporary public expectations for Federal land management.

Science support for implementing the Forest Plan includes

adaptive management, institutional restructuring, collaborative

learning and teaching, and monitoring. Some institutional

restructuring has been spurred by the impact of the Forest Plan on

the context for information needed to support land management.

In addition, it also has provided a framework for linking information from several land management agencies and research organizations. Restructuring also is being spurred by the acceptance of

institutional structures and processes to practice adaptive management. Part of that legacy is a great need for collaborative

learning—a two-way learning process in which scientists work

with managers and local stakeholders to both share and gain

information about natural processes and local values and uses. All

of this is complicated by a need for better communication with

the various managers, stakeholders, and the public. Improved

communication is valid if scientists and land managers want to

avoid being accused of dealing in science fiction by a public poorly informed about recent changes in science information. 

The broad issue of monitoring has been a major area of science support. Researchers have worked closely with managers to

develop conceptual scientific models and a set of questions to

drive monitoring. Questions developed to drive monitoring range

from basic inventory questions such as, “What are the distribution and amount of forest classes, including down logs at large

■xiii

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

Scientists are increasingly focusing on

understanding links between the forests

and human dimensions as well as species

and habitats including threatened, 

endangered, and sensitive species.
landscape scales?” to highly complex questions such as, “Is the

relation of forest structure and composition to ecological processes and biological diversity assumed in the FEMAT report accurate?” Researchers also have an influence in validation monitoring where the emphasis is on determining the degree to which

assumptions, methods, and models used in developing the Forest

Plan are correct. From a broader science perspective, unique

opportunities exist to make substantial contributions to the

nature and content of monitoring in relatively large-scale biophysical systems. 

The management and planning questions emerging from

implementation of the Forest Plan are leading to greater emphasis of cross-disciplinary science. This change is leading to discussions within the science community about scale, cross-boundary

issues, and integration. The discussions about scale suggest two

focal spatial scales, each with different concerns about integration. First, there are the traditional questions asked at the stand

level and across contiguous sets of stands making up a landscape.

The issues with integration here often deal with interrelations.

Second, there are questions largely strategic in that they involve

broad policy choices, at higher spatial scales where the dynamic

effects of managing can be measured across broad landscapes. For

example, projects such as the coastal landscape analysis and modeling study (CLAMS) attempt to explain how at the province

level landscapes can evolve across multiple ownerships. This work

has improved our understanding of ecological process and links at

the watershed, landscape, and province scales. It also has shown

that integration is difficult and requires conceptual models, prototypes, and simplification of subsystem processes. It also has shown

that few ecological measures and indicators exist at most scales,

thereby suggesting that it is difficult without broad-scale measures

to discuss tradeoffs between social and biophysical concerns.

Increased interest in frameworks that integrate social, economic, and ecological systems has been an outcome of increased

interaction among scientists from different disciplines. But research

has been slow to develop on the process for integration. The complexity and multidisciplinary scope of many of the questions evolving from the forest plan have challenged the science community

about how to share information about complex functions in a way

that allows evaluation of relations and consequences across whole

ecosystems. An early step has been the development of conceptual

models of system components that show how parts interrelate.

Another step has been development or expansion of empirical and

analytical efforts that explore multifunctional relations.

There are several implications for how the Forest Plan redefined the role of science in policy and specific land management

decisions. First, the roles of scientists have changed to include

altered scopes of research problems—that is, policy-relevant

research with greater emphasis on communicating research results

both effectively and timely. Second, the scope and complexity of

the research problems have changed from being relatively narrow

in scope but complex to broader in scope but with less complexity.

Third, scientists often now work in different contexts—from dealing with linked (and various) spatial scales to working in integrated teams. Fourth, the clients for research are changing to include

individuals and organizations that are not traditional land management clients. Finally, continued commitments to long-term projects will help prepare for future ecoregion assessment efforts. 

INTEGRATION OF SCIENCE AND 

MANAGEMENT

From the management perspective, the Forest Plan considerably changed the amount of contact and integration with the

research community and created expectations for more extensive

and rapid transfer of new knowledge. Application and use of new

information is occurring widely on the ground in several arenas,

including disturbance and fire ecology, alternative silviculture

techniques, large woody debris management, soils, and adaptive

management processes. Other areas where research was identified

as lacking or not available in usable forms included social science

research and decision-support frameworks.

One-on-one contact and the subsequent development of relations between managers and scientists is the most effective tool for

transferring new information to the ground. Joint participation in

project design is critical to later acceptance of and interest in science

findings. Once relations and networks are in place, publications and

other materials can more effectively transfer knowledge.

The different cultures and training of the research and management branches create many difficulties. The long timeframes

required by some types of research may not be responsive to policy and decisionmaking needs. Politics often will dictate a decision

■xiv

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

Scientists working with managers in providing science information to 

support land management practices.
before final findings are made available for consideration. Much

Forest Plan research also has been focused on meeting interpretations of current laws such as the issue of species viability under the

National Forest Management Act (NFMA). In the end, however,

just meeting the law is not enough: research also needs to address

broader issues of ecological processes and the social acceptability

of management practices. The different ways in which information is validated in the two cultures and the expanded use of scientists as purveyors of “expert opinions” has created tension. The

greater demand for scientists to consult with field managers on

project design and implementation has created time and workload

conflicts with accomplishing fundamental research.

CLOSING

The Forest Plan had two main focuses: expanding the understanding of natural processes and developing practical applications

for management from existing knowledge. In the beginning years

of Forest Plan implementation, emphasis was placed on applying

existing research to management issues. Over time, priorities were

expected to shift from application back to fundamental research.

Researchers generally have been able to support progress in both

arenas with some exceptions. These exceptions include decisionsupport systems, monitoring, socioeconomic research, restoration

research, and spotted owl demographic research. Different thematic areas show differing patterns of movement between fundamental and applied research. 

Overall, the Forest Plan research program has produced significant findings in areas of landscape ecology, wildlife biology,

fire and vegetative ecology, soil science, mycology, bryology,

lichenology, botany, and silviculture. In the research community,

the Forest Plan has involved scientists in the policy process,

thereby leading to more policy-relevant research, improved

■xv

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

Understanding ecosystem processes and developing

practical applications for management is a major focus 

of the Forest Plan.
contextual relevancy, and increased awareness of integration

needs. It also allows science to play a leadership role in developing conceptual frameworks to guide future research. A new level

of partnership and interagency coordination was generated in

both the research and the management communities. On the

negative side, however, the Forest Plan also tended to provide

greater focus on some applied aspects to the detriment of fundamental research. The intense focus of the Forest Plan on singlespecies conservation strategies also detracted from accomplishments on broader issues. The overall legacy of the Forest Plan

includes significant development in many thematic research

areas, as well as a new definition of the role of science and scientists in forest management policy.

■xvi

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

Federal land allocations within the range 

of the northern spotted owl.
Part One consists of chapters 1-3, which describe various

aspects of the context for the “Northwest Forest Plan

Research Synthesis.” Chapter 1, the “Overview,”

describes the purpose of the document and the 

circumstances surrounding inception of the

Northwest Forest Plan (Forest Plan). Chapter 2, 

the “Team Approach,” gets into more detail about

the various components of the Forest Plan; and

Chapter 3, the “Administrative Context,” describes

how the research portion of the Forest Plan was

funded, organized, and implemented. Readers well

acquainted with these topics may wish to go directly

to “Part Two” for “Research Results to Date.”

■1

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
C HAPTER 1 :

OVERVIEW

Richard W. Haynes

INTRODUCTION

In 1993, President Clinton announced a new plan for the

forests on Federal lands in the Pacific Northwest. This plan had

three parts: a program for managing the forests to achieve both

sustainable timber production and protection of biological diversity, a system for coordinating Federal agency implementation

of the forest management effort, and a program of incentives for providing economic assistance to displaced

timber workers, communities, and others who were

adversely affected by reductions in the size of

the timber program. Even today, the

Northwest Forest Plan remains controversial. At issue are policy judgements about

whether the right balance was struck

between economic and ecological

considerations as well as legal concerns about what is necessary to satisfy statutory mandates (Pipken

1998).

Pipken (1998) judged the Forest

Plan as one of the singular achievements of the Clinton administration in the natural resource field.

It was the product of a massive

effort by the executive branch of

the Federal Government to meet

legal and scientific needs of forest

management. It represented the first

systematic broad-scale attempt to

apply an ecosystem approach to resolve

a natural resource management issue and

attempted to seek a balance between

ecological considerations and economic

and social needs. It also provided regulatory

and economic stability for owners of state and

private lands by shifting the “impacts of protection

and recovery of threatened and endangered species” to

Federal lands. The third major achievement was the initiation of a fundamental change in how the Federal agencies

in the Pacific Northwest relate to each other and how they relate

to states, tribes, and the public. The Forest Plan established a

common vision for managing Federal lands within the range of

the northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina). Pipken

(1998) described these latter changes as the single greatest

accomplishment of the Forest Plan in its first 5 years.

The Forest Plan is an ecosystem-based approach to

managing Federal lands and is based on scientific knowledge of structure and functions of ecosystems, assessing

species viability, the role of hierarchical scales, and the

nature and extent of tradeoffs between biophysical and

socioeconomic systems. It attempts to integrate science

with management and to incorporate adaptive management

based on scientific monitoring information. As such, it is a

bold departure from past approaches to land management.

In addition, the implementation of the Forest Plan included both formal adaptive management areas (AMAs) to

allow experimentation, an Interagency Research and

Monitoring Committee, and a Research Committee to coordinate interagency efforts.

To begin implementing the Forest Plan, the USDA Forest

Service expanded several of its research efforts. This document

presents a synthesis of the research conducted from 1993 to 1998

under the Forest Plan. This synthesis consolidates what was

learned from various Forest Plan research projects and attempts to

answer the following questions: 

• What have we done?

• What did we find?

• What does it mean?

• Where are the links?

• Are we going in the right direction, or do we need to 

change course?

Before answering these questions, we provide the background

and sequence of events that have brought us to this point. For a

refresher on the Forest Plan, see a summary in appendix 1.

A BRIEF HISTORY

Timber management has not always been the dominant management model for National Forests. Until 1944, the National

Forests—including those in the Pacific Northwest—were largely

managed with the goal of resource conservation while integrating

the needs of specific user groups. At the end of World War II, leaders of the Forest Service rapidly increased harvest rates to support

lumber and plywood production. Public lands were recognized as

the major remaining source of timber, and timber management the

primary goal of National Forests (fig. 1). Increased harvest rates

during the 1950s in the Pacific Northwest equaled the harvest for

all prior years. Expansion continued until the early 1960s, when

increasingly complex and contentious demands on public lands led

to countervailing pressures on Forest Service leaders.

■2
The seeds for the gridlock over public forest management in

the Pacific Northwest were sown early in the 1960s by three distinct but converging forces. First, professional knowledge in

forestry had evolved to

the point where the use of

stand growth and development models for forest

management had become

institutionalized. Second,

the broad consensus of

public values about conservation (in the Pinchot

sense of wise use, sustainability)1 collapsed and

was replaced by growing

controversy among various interest groups with

divergent agendas. Third,

the growing prominence

of science after World

War II offered hope of science-based solutions to

land management policy

questions. The first of these three forces led to a revolution in forest regulation focused on the hotly debated conversion of largely

mature stands to younger “thrifty” stands on public lands. The

debates were intense and polarizing, giving rise to studies on ecological, recreational, and cultural values of older stands. By 1973,

these debates led to the Forest Service policy of “nondeclining

even flow,” slowing the conversion of older stands. Some of the

same controversies were part of the debate over the National

Forest Management Act (NFMA) of 1976, which led to widespread adoption of a specific approach to volume regulation on all

National Forests. (FORPLAN—a computer model—was the analytical tool used for the forest planning required by NFMA).

As consensus regarding public land management eroded in

the 1970s, the modern environmental movement gained momentum, and public land management goals began to change as

reflected in the laws governing land management agencies. These

new goals reflected shifting human values on the role of natural

places, the growing importance of national interest groups, and

diversification of the U.S. economy that reduced the role of

resource-based manufacturing industries.

The third force was the emergence of science as a force for

improved social and economic well-being. As World War II

ended, many people recognized that science could serve a broad

and useful role in society by providing solutions to perplexing

problems. The implication for the National Forests was that the

emphasis would shift from “technological fixes” and utilitarian

goals for National Forest management to scientific management. Inherent in this shift are

conflicting scientific

opinions about poorly

understood processes

and concerns about the

role of science in land

management decisions. 

In the 1970s and

1980s, ecology studies of

late-successional forests

proliferated and showed

that a simplistic approach to forest management based on highyield and short-rotation

forestry would not adequately protect the considerable biodiversity in late-successional forests and their associated aquatic ecosystems. The northern spotted owl was the first

Northwest species recognized as being in danger of becoming

extinct, followed closely by the marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus

marmoratus), anadromous fish, and many other species closely

associated with old forests (Thomas and others 1993). More

recently, ecologists, foresters, and the public have begun to

believe that the old forests remaining in the Pacific Northwest

are unique ecosystems, which developed under climatic and disturbance regimes that may never be duplicated.

■3

CHAPTER 1: OVERVIEW

Clearcutting by staggered settings in 1953 old-growth Douglas-fir.

Figure 1—Harvest data for the Pacific Northwest Region, National 

Forests, and total harvest.

1 See Brown and Harris (1998) for discussion about changes in professional attitudes about

resource management. 
During the same period, changes in public perceptions and

expectations about managing Federal lands in the Pacific

Northwest and elsewhere led to gradual increases in protection of

unique ecosystems and species, and increased concern about riparian areas. These changes led to experiments with methods of “new

forestry” designed to retain some of the structural features found in

old forests and to imitate natural disturbance regimes more closely. With these changes, timber harvest rates on Federal lands

declined (see fig. 1) generating heated controversy. A series of lawsuits eventually led to the impasse described in the next section.

The most important of these lawsuits occurred in 1991 when

Federal District Judge William Dwyer shut down virtually the

entire timber sale program on nine National Forests in

Washington and Oregon2 until the Forest Service would demonstrate compliance with various environmental laws. Other

injunctions extended curtailment of timber harvests because of

spotted owl preservation issues to cover other Federal lands and

protected species.

The 1993 Forest Conference

On April 2, 1993, President Clinton convened a forest conference in Portland, Oregon, to address the human and environmental needs served by the Federal forests in the spotted owl

region of the Pacific Northwest and northern California (fig. 2).

The conference was intended to break the impasse that had

brought Federal timber sales to a standstill after the injunction

issued by Judge Dwyer in 1991.

■4

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

A large log being brought through Roseburg, Oregon, in the 1940s.

Forest conference.

2 Seattle Audubon Society and others v. John L. Evans, Washington Contract Loggers

Association, and others.
The President set forth five principles to guide the Federal

interagency effort:

• First, we must never forget the human and the

economic dimensions of these problems. Where

sound management policies can preserve the

health of forest lands, sales should go forward.

Where this requirement cannot be met, we need

to do our best to offer new economic opportunities for year-round, high-wage, high-skill jobs.

• Second, as we craft a plan, we need to protect

the long-term health of our forests, our

wildlife, and our waterways. They are a ...gift

from God, and we hold them in trust for future

generations.

• Third, our efforts must be, insofar as we are

wise enough to know it, scientifically sound,

ecologically credible, and legally responsible.

• Fourth, the plan should produce a predictable

and sustainable level of timber sales and nontimber resources that will not degrade or

destroy the environment.

• Fifth, to achieve these goals, we will do our best, as

I said, to make the Federal Government work

together and work for you. We may make mistakes,

but we will try to end the gridlock within the

Federal Government, and we will insist on collaboration not confrontation.

The Team’s Efforts

The Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team

(hereafter called the team) produced a report “Forest

Ecosystem Management: An Ecological, Economic, and

Social Assessment Report of the Forest Ecosystem

Management Assessment Team (FEMAT)” (hereafter called

the FEMAT Report). The FEMAT Report assessed 10

detailed options for managing Federal forests within the

range of the spotted owl. The effort drew from many different lines of research already underway.

The forest conference resulted in direction from the

President to craft a balanced and comprehensive long-term

policy for managing over 24 million acres of public land. The

President created three interagency working groups: The

team, the Labor and Community Assessment Team, and the

Agency Coordination Team. These groups were given the

following mission (summarized from the “Statement of

Mission Letter from the President” [FEMAT 1993]):

Together, we are working to fulfill President

Clinton’s mandate to produce a plan to

break the gridlock over Federal forest management that has created so much confusion

and controversy in the Pacific Northwest

and northern California. As well, that mandate means providing for economic diversification and new economic opportunities in

the region. As you enter into the critical

phase of your work reviewing options and

policy, this mission statement should be used

to focus and coordinate your efforts. It

includes overall guidance and specific guidance for each team.

The team comprised an interagency, interdisciplinary team

of scientists, economists, sociologists, and others. They were

given 3 months to complete the difficult assignment of shifting

the management of the Pacific Northwest and northern

California forests from a commodity-based to an ecosystem

management approach. The team developed a three-phase

process, parts of which are still ongoing.

■5

CHAPTER 1: OVERVIEW

Figure 2—Northwest Forest Plan area (FEMAT 1993).
1. Establish a network of late-successional and old-growth forest

reserves and a prescription for managing the intervening forested land (called “matrix”)—developing options for meeting the

administration’s directives of achieving biological diversity

while attaining economic and social goals including compliance with the law; completing procedures required by the

National Environmental Policy Act (that is, writing an environmental impact statement); and selecting an option. 

2. Reinstitute forest planning—a process that includes Federal,

state, and local government, and private interests to achieve

ecosystem management.

3. Implement, monitor, and use adaptive management.

The team was instructed to develop alternatives for longterm management that would maintain and restore:

• Habitat conditions for the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet that will provide population viability for each

species. For the owl, the habitat must be well-distributed across

its current range on Federal lands; for the murrelet, nesting

habitat must be provided

• Habitat conditions needed to support viable populations, well

distributed across their current range, of other species known (or

reasonably expected) to be associated with old-growth forest

• Spawning and rearing habitat on Forest Service, Bureau of

Land Management, National Park Service, and other Federal

lands to support recovery and maintenance of viable populations of anadromous fish species and stocks and other fish

species and stocks considered “sensitive” or “at risk” by land

management agencies, or listed under the Endangered

Species Act

• Create, a connected (or interactive) old-growth forest ecosystem on Federal lands in the Pacific Northwest

They also were instructed to “include alternatives ranging

from a medium to a very high probability of ensuring the viability of species” and that the analysis “should include an assessment

of current agency programs . . . .”

The Draft Supplemental Environmental

Impact Statement 

On July 1, 1993, President Clinton announced the selected

option, Alternative 9, consisting of strategies for forest management, economic development, and agency coordination as the

“Forest Plan for a Sustainable Economy and a Sustainable

Environment.” The forest management and implementation portion of the strategy was analyzed in a draft supplemental environmental impact statement (draft SEIS), of which the final EIS and

the record of decision (ROD) were published in February 1994.

The ROD amended the planning documents of 19 National

Forests and 7 Bureau of Land Management Districts, the first time

two of the largest Federal land management agencies had developed and adopted a common approach to managing the lands

they administer.

The Forest Plan is Implemented Through the

Record of Decision

Alternative 9, the selected alternative, is described in

the ROD as follows: 

Alternative 9 builds on a number of elements

from previous attempts to conserve late-successional and old-growth forests and protect

associated species. Like a number of other

alternatives, it provides for designation of a

system of well-distributed reserves to protect

large blocks of old-growth forests. However,

under Alternative 9, the emphasis is on locating late-successional reserves in key watersheds, in order to serve the dual objectives of

efficiency and resource protection. This alternative uses four principal components as the

basis of its riparian protection scheme: key

watersheds, riparian reserves, watershed analysis, and watershed restoration. The riparian

reserve system will conserve aquatic resources

as well as provide dispersal habitat for spotted

owls and suitable habitat for numerous species.

Alternative 9 designates ‘Adaptive Management Areas’ to encourage testing of technical and social approaches to achieving ecological, social, and economic objectives.

• Congressionally reserved areas: 7,320,600 acres

• Lands in late-successional reserves:

7,430,800 acres

• Lands in managed late-successional areas:

102,200 acres

• Lands administratively withdrawn:

1,477,100 acres

• Adaptive management areas: 1,521,800 acres

• Lands in riparian reserves: 2,627,500 acres

• Lands in matrix: 3,975,300 acres

Estimated annual probable sale quantity: 1.1

billion board feet

Anticipated regional timber employment:

115,900 jobs

■6

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
The ROD also states:

An important component of this decision is

the facilitation of research activities to gather

information and test hypotheses in a range of

environmental conditions. Although research

activities are among the primary purposes of

Adaptive Management Areas and experimental forests, this decision does not intend to

limit research activities to these land allocations. Where appropriate, some research

activities may be exempted from the standards

and guidelines of this decision. However,

every effort should be made to locate nonconforming activities in land allocations where

they will have the least adverse effect upon

the objectives of the applicable standards and

guidelines. All research activities must meet

the requirements of applicable Federal laws,

including the Endangered Species Act.

Although it is mostly a traditional approach to management,

this ROD differs greatly from others by requiring adaptive management as a built-in self-evaluation mechanism for changing the

standards and guidelines—and potentially the strategy itself, over

time. Adaptive management was chosen because of the complexity of the Forest Plan goals. Not only is planning needed to meet

the traditional goals of commodity production and resource protection, but many new objectives including the habitat needs of

various species, new concern for human values, sustainability

through time, and increased collaboration among the agencies of

the Federal Government. Common sense dictates—because of

increased complexity and little or no experience in fundamentally new strategies—that an adaptive approach is needed.

THE TEAM AND THE

SCIENCE COMMUNITY

The team used a significant legacy of several decades of

research on ecological processes and functions in older stands, as

well as rapidly expanding information about the relation between

■7

CHAPTER 1: OVERVIEW

Figure 3—Summary of the pre-FEMAT science legacy.
aquatic and riparian systems, and between old-growth habitat and

associated terrestrial species. This legacy allowed the rapid development of significant cross-discipline links that led eventually to

the connected reserve system as the selected approach to ecosystem management on Federal lands in the region of the northern

spotted owl (fig. 3). But the legacy also had a downside: many scientists had personal stakes in particular approaches that quickly

led to advocacy positions within the science community.

Seven science areas supported development of the FEMAT

report. Those with the longest legacy were watershed, stream, and

riparian studies; forest stand management productivity; wildlife

studies; and economics (including community stability). These

studies have been prominent in the period after World War II and

are associated with multiple-use forest management as it evolved

in the Douglas-fir region. During the mid-1970s, research and

management partnerships, such as those associated with the H.J.

Andrews Experimental Forest (see appendix 4) developed.

Potentially endangered species were emphasized, planning models

for social and economic effects of land management increased, and

strategic planning for natural resource management evolved as did

public participation as part of forest planning. By 1980, most of the

science used in the FEMAT report was largely underway.

Figure 3 illustrates four general science issues: 

• First, it illustrates the continuity of how research is conducted,

and how understandings and information accumulate over time

both directly and indirectly as lines of inquiry evolve. 

• Second, it illustrates how dominant science themes emerge and

change every decade or so. These changes are a function of both

cycles in funding and the nature of the maturation process

among scientists. 

• Third, the types of research reflect a broad diversity among disciplines, thereby suggesting a long-held respect for multidiscipline

approaches. What has changed in that latter sense is the scale at

which these integrated questions are asked. For example, in the

late 1980s, more focus was being placed on larger definitions of

ecosystems, whereas the focus in the 1960s was at the stand level.

• Fourth, the various studies reveal a balance between long-term

data collection and the development of science processes. The

science community fears a weakening of commitment to data

collection on slow changing processes. As the various lines of

inquiry proceed, the nature of information keeps evolving over

time, but much of it builds on long-term data.

THE QUESTIONS DRIVING THE TEAM

The team’s mandate was, “How can we achieve a balanced

and comprehensive policy that recognizes the importance of the

forests and timber to the economy and jobs in this region, and

how can we preserve our precious old-growth forests, which are

part of our national heritage and that, once destroyed, can never

be replaced?” (FEMAT 1993).

The ecosystem management goals attached to the mandate were:

• Maintain and restore biodiversity, particularly of the late-successional and old-growth forest ecosystems

• Maintain long-term site productivity of forest ecosystems

• Maintain sustainable rates of using renewable natural resources,

including timber, other forest products, and other forest values

• Maintain rural economies and communities

RESEARCH DIRECTION

AFTER THE FEMAT REPORT

The ROD and the various standards and guidelines provided

initial guidance for Forest Plan-related research around two primary thrusts: ecological principles for managing late-successional

forests, and the aquatic conservation strategy. Subtopics in each

are shown below:

Ecological basis for managing late-successional forests:

• Structure and composition

• Ecological processes

• Ecosystem functions

• Late-successional reserves

• Role of silviculture

• Stand management

• Managing disturbance risks

• Managing after disturbance risks

■8

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

The Record of

Decision is the

legal document

that implements

the Northwest

Forest Plan.
Aquatic conservation strategy:

• Riparian reserves

• Riparian reserve widths

• Intermittent streams

• Wetlands

These topic areas, along with a commitment to AMAs,

evolved into the initial Forest Plan research program, which has

continued to transform itself. This direction did not provide

clearly defined research topics or priorities among them.

THE CLIENTS OF RESEARCH

National Forest System and Bureau of Land Management

managers are the most closely identified clients for research under

the auspices of the Forest Plan. Management clients also include

other agencies such as National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Environmental Protection

Agency; partners such as nonprofit organizations, advisory councils, and ecotech training programs; citizens and citizen groups;

interest groups; and Congress. The Pacific Northwest has become

a testing ground for one approach to ecosystem management.

Although it meets court challenges, this approach is held up as

extremely conservative (in that it does not encourage risk taking). The forestry community and those that hold divergent values for the goods and services produced in forests are watching

how the Forest Plan is being implemented. Another audience

consists of the science community members who briefly believed

that they were setting the future agenda for land management

and now watch with fascination the evolution of the approach of

the Forest Plan to ecosystem management. Such a transformation

poses further research questions and the involvement of different

sets of clients.

■9

CHAPTER 1: OVERVIEW

Many Federal agencies are clients of Northwest Forest Plan research.
■10

C HAPTER 2 :

THE TEAM 

APPROACH

Richard W. Haynes and George Stankey 1

INTRODUCTION

The Northwest Forest Plan (Forest Plan) represents a comprehensive, innovative, and we believe balanced approach to economic, environmental, and social challenges facing the region. It

is the result of extensive research, analysis, and cooperation

among Federal agencies and extensive discussions with a wide

range of people including those from business, labor, environmental groups, tribes, community groups, and members of

Congress. Chapter 2 provides an overview of the Forest Ecosystem

Management Assessment Team (the team) strategy.

A CONNECTED RESERVE SYSTEM

An implicit land management strategy is embedded in the

team’s approach. In addition to the various needs for sciencebased information, the strategy is based on two interrelated

aspects that set the context for how proposed research in support of the Forest Plan is coordinated. These two aspects are a

growing recognition of the importance of hierarchical scales and

how ecosystem2 management can be implemented.

The team’s effort was conceived as the first part of a multiphased approach to ecosystem management based largely on

approaches from conservation biology literature. Its backbone

was a network of late-successional forests and a long-term

scheme for protecting aquatic and associated riparian habitats.

The approach, which has become known as a connected

reserve system (fig. 4), was expected to maintain well-distributed habitat on the Federal lands for threatened marbled murrelets (Brachyramus marmoratus) and northern spotted owls

(Strix occidentalis caurina) and likely to reverse habitat degradation for at-risk fish species or stocks. It considered the relations

between plant and animal species thought to be closely associated with late-successional forests. The design of the connected reserve system also considered its likelihood of long-term

persistence. 

The Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team

report (FEMAT report) included estimates of the annual sale

quantities associated with changes in land management strategies. These estimates were used to predict socioeconomic effects,

and as a basis for extensive public debate about the consequences to various human communities. Matrix lands outside

reserves and withdrawn areas (such as wilderness areas) were

made available for timber harvest. The report also included 10

adaptive management areas (AMAs) intended for testing innovative land management and collaborative approaches.

ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT AREAS

As described in the 1994 record of decision (ROD), 10

AMAs were created to encourage the development and testing

of technical and social approaches to achieving desired ecological, economic, and social objectives. In these AMAs, citizens,

managers, and scientists have the opportunity to implement

ecosystem management and are encouraged to learn how to

learn. Localized, idiosyncratic, and particularistic approaches as

opposed to uniform, institutionalized standards and guidelines

provide opportunities for flexibility, discretion, and adaptation

in light of local conditions, context, and knowledge.

1 George Stankey is a research social scientist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest

Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Foresty Sciences Laboratory, 3200 SW Jefferson

Way, Corvallis, OR 97331.

2 Here we consider that ecosystems are communities of organisms working together with their

environments as integrated units. They are places where all plants, animals, soils, waters, climate, people, and processes of life interact as a whole (Salwasser and others 1993).

Figure 4—A connected reserve system.

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
The concept of adaptive management has attracted much

attention recently. The synthesis paper by Bormann and others

(1994b) discusses the concept in detail, but in short, adaptive

management embraces an apparent contradiction in that it

explicitly requires one to anticipate the unanticipated. This

requirement, however, runs counter to traditional beliefs in,

and reliance on, positivist science and the strategies and structures of bureaucratic organizations. The failure to anticipate

surprise is often seen as a failure in competence rather than the

consequence of trying to understand a complex world. Yet, a

recurring outcome of regional assessments is that our capacity

to understand, let alone predict, is limited. Thus, an adaptive

management approach might represent the inevitable rather

than the exception.

The Vision of the Adaptive Management Areas

The vision of adaptive management and AMAs outlined in

the FEMAT report provides the base from which any evaluation

of their role and utility should be made. The following points are

essential to understanding the intent of the AMAs and their role

vis-a-vis research:

• Establishing AMAs is a way to ensure that science is focused on

management needs in both the short and long run, to overcome gaps in knowledge, and to ensure timely use of new scientific findings.

• The AMAs provide opportunities for organizational innovation to promote new approaches to ecological and social learning and to research, management, and public consultation.

• The AMAs represent settings where assumptions underlying

Forest Plan standards and guidelines can be tested, validated,

and modified.

• Although the ROD defined a focus for each AMA, these foci

were not intended to limit or constrain the projects undertaken in any area.

• The individual AMAs are also components of a system. They provide diverse ecological, social, and organizational conditions.

Learning is intended to occur both within and among the AMAs.

• The AMAs present research with an opportunity to ensure that

scientific knowledge is used appropriately and efficiently in

developing responsive, state-of-the-art management strategies

and techniques, to minimize gaps between research knowledge

and management practices, and to test innovative science

structures and processes.

• The AMAs represent places to demonstrate adaptive management in action through experimentation driven by formal

research questions and hypotheses, protocols, and analytical

procedures.

Science and the Adaptive Management Areas

Experience in the AMAs to date highlights the challenges to

realizing the opportunities embodied in the vision described previously. Scientists, research administrators, and managers struggle

with the new roles and responsibilities that adaptive management

imposes. This struggle highlights the importance of developing

new structures and processes for conducting research, and it calls

for a new perspective on the interface of science with policy management. For example, scientists are responsible for ensuring that

their work is used appropriately, that appropriate safeguards and

processes are used in the design of management experiments, and

that appropriate caveats are associated with conclusions derived

from experiments. At the same time, scientists need to understand the constraints under which those who apply their findings

operate. Tensions exist between formal research projects and

management applications in the AMAs and will continue.

Although not all projects undertaken in the AMAs need be formally designed research, if we are to promote learning in the

■11

CHAPTER 2: THE TEAM APPROACH

Adaptive management areas within the 

Northwest Forest Plan area.
AMAs, all activities need to be grounded in improved documentation; formal statements of assumptions, purposes, and expected

outcomes; and appropriate monitoring and evaluation to facilitate learning and possibly modify management practices.

Such a formal, documented approach to thinking is central

to scientific inquiry. Adaptive management areas in Oregon and

Washington were each designated a lead scientist. The Pacific

Southwest Research Station has chosen not to assign a specific

scientist to either the Hayfork or Goosenest AMAs in California,

but Station scientists are involved with research in these two

AMAs, and contract scientists have maintained close contact

with AMA managers and local citizens.

The roles of Pacific Northwest (PNW) Research Station lead

scientists are emergent and evolving, but the following roles are key:

• They serve as a conduit among Bureau of Land

Management and Forest Service managers, AMA coordinators, and the research community. In this capacity, they

provide a point of contact for managers and others who

have questions about research.

• They provide leadership in implementing the AMA concept across both disciplinary and organizational boundaries. They champion the AMA concept and take a leadership role in encouraging and supporting research

involvement in the AMAs.

• They help coordinate the PNW Research Station’s science

program for the AMAs. They work to link AMA research

to PNW Research Station priorities and initiatives. They

seek opportunities that build on or extend ongoing

research in the Station.

• They provide a link to local communities and other interested publics in scientific activities in the AMAs. A key

role is to build understanding of the importance of science

to AMA management and also to ways in which citizens

can participate in research activities.

• They are a principal means to ensure quality control

through appropriate technical review of research plans

and results. They help ensure that management plans are

grounded in sound interpretations of current knowledge.

• They serve as sources of expertise and knowledge within

and across the AMAs and within the PNW Research

Station. Lead scientists contribute knowledge and skills to

problems in other AMAs and take leadership in seeking

the input of others in management and research issues in

the specific AMA for which they are responsible.

• They conduct research as the principal scientist or team

member.

Although lead scientists are not extension agents, technology

transfer specialists, or staff to local managers, they do occasionally engage in such activities. They are responsible and accountable

to the Station, and their performance is judged against research

evaluation guidelines.

Funding Adaptive Management Area Research

Budget allocations for AMA research are contained in the

larger Forest Plan budget. Over the past 3 years, AMA funding

has remained relatively constant at about $645,000 per year;

about half derives from research dollars and half from National

Forest Systems. The decision has been made to retain a discrete

identity to the AMA budgeting process, rather than including it

in the Forest Plan allocation process, based on a belief that treating the AMA as a critical element of the Forest Plan and flexibility in making decisions about the relative priority and direction

of research within the AMA is important.

Efforts to develop a more rigorous, explicit, and criterionbased budgeting process continue. General questions guiding allocation include:

• Given a limited amount of support, is providing some support

to each AMA or concentrating it on only a few areas better?

• What should be the relative balance to strive for in terms of

short- versus long-term research?

• Are other funding sources available, appropriate, or both?

Lead scientists are asked to provide proposals for research

each year. Several multiyear projects are currently in place, however, and the annual proposals serve largely as updates and

progress reports on the research. This procedure is especially

important in the context of adaptive management, where interim

results serve as the basis for modifications and changes for future

research. The proposals contain the basic information requested

for all Forest Plan-funded projects. Criteria to facilitate evaluating the proposals are emerging from discussions with lead scientists and include the following:

• How is the research related to Station priorities?

• Does the proposed research provide an opportunity to test

assumptions underlying the Forest Plan and its standards

and guidelines?

• Does the research foster social and ecological innovation

and learning?

• What are the consequences of delaying, reducing, or terminating the research?

• Does the proposed research depend on an AMA setting, or

could it be undertaken elsewhere?

• Can the proposed research be phased in over multiple

funding cycles?

■12

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
• Does the proposal involve issues that can be addressed with

less than a “full-scale” research project; for example, a synthesis of existing knowledge?

• Does the proposal offer opportunities for efficiencies; for

example, can projects examining riparian buffers be concentrated in one or two AMAs, or must such work be undertaken

across all areas?

There are five key considerations in applying these criteria.

First, research must fit within the vision of adaptive management

as framed in the FEMAT report and the Forest Plan. Second,

research in the AMAs should be consistent with the capabilities,

resources, and priorities of the Station. Third, the research should

reflect the judgments of need and priority of those doing the work

as well as those for whom the work is undertaken. Fourth,

research should be concerned with learning across the full AMA

system. Fifth, research outputs (lessons, principles) need to be

applicable across the wider landscape.

CHALLENGES OF THE FEMAT REPORT

Two aspects of the FEMAT report have challenged the

research community. The first is that ecosystem planning has to

be done at multiple spatial scales. The second is

that ecosystem management on public lands is

implemented through formal planning processes

that lead to land management decisions. This

planning process is complex and extensive; it

has been in place for the last two decades. Both

aspects raise questions about the interface of science and management and the extent to which

Federal land management is truly science based.

Linked Spatial and Temporal Scales

In the past 4 years, a revolution has occurred

in the understanding of the importance of spatially and temporally linked information. This has

especially been the case of land management

questions where now there is greater recognition

that each question implicitly addresses a specific

spatial and temporal scale. Further, the identification of a specific scale also simultaneously establishes both the broader (for understanding context) and finer (for understanding process) scales

as well as the hierarchical links. Information

developed in the context of hierarchical links supports decisions and efficient land management.

Treating issues independently within their unique

spatial and temporal scales has resulted in fragmenting socioeconomic and ecological landscape

patterns.

As an ecosystem management principle (Haynes and others

1996), ecosystem processes and functions can be viewed in terms

of a hierarchy in both space and time. The context that sets the

need for understanding comes from relatively larger scales, but

our knowledge of how processes function are developed at smaller scales. For example, recognition of the loss of a species (such as

the spotted owl) is at the broad scale but relies on studies of individual relations between the species and its habitat for building

the knowledge base to address the issue more effectively. The

emphasis on spatial scales reflects the nature of current concerns

and the recognition that many issues sharing the same spatial

scale also share similar temporal scales. How the geographic

extent, the name of the scale, and the general focus of the issues

at that geographic extent are aligned is shown in table 1. The

team considered only four scales from province to site, but this

focus downplays many of the broad-scale issues. Events since the

report was published have demonstrated the importance of considering these scales in terms of their effects on setting the context for questions and issues at lower scales.

The science challenge is to develop information for a limited subset of spatial and temporal scales. The management

■13

CHAPTER 2: THE TEAM APPROACH

Table 1—Delineation and names of various geographic scales

Delineation Scale Assessment focus Decision focus

Nation Broad National conditions and values Policy and manual direction

Basin(s) Broad Condition trends and integrated Ecoregion assessments,

risk and opportunity among EISs, regional guides, state

subbasins guides

Province Broad Similarities of socioeconomic Multiowner-agency 

and ecological relations collaboration and 

among subbasins cooperation agreements

Subbasin(s) Mid Context to basin and province, Forest and resource plan(s)

connectivity to adjacent amendment-revision

subbasins; risks and opportunities or AMAa project plan

among watersheds or (such as access management,

subwatersheds; and biological species conservation,

assessments and evaluation or wildland fire plan) 

strategies

Watershed or Fine Watershed analysis-same AMA project plan (such as

subwatershed process as for subbasin, landscape restoration

with context to subbasin, pattern, access management,

adjacent watersheds and allotment management plan)

risks and opportunities

of finer scale

Drainage, Fine Effects on function Site-specific project plan

stand, and 

stream site

a AMA = adaptive management area.
challenge is to design a set of actions hierarchically, to achieve

both socioeconomic and ecological ecosystem management

objectives within landscape limitations (Haynes and others

1996). In ecosystem management, the process is implementing

broad-scale decision direction (based on broad-scale science findings) stepped down to finer scale geographic areas. In this way,

efficiencies of scale help focus work at lower spatial scales. For

watershed analysis, reviews at the subbasin scale can focus further

analysis on watersheds with selected attributes. Specific fine-scale

projects can be designed to analyze the variation of specific sites

or watersheds with a midscale context that has translated the

broad-scale decision direction and science findings.

In the FEMAT report, the watershed scale has received the

most attention. Watershed analysis was intended to gather information on ecological processes to help characterize and meet

management and social objectives. But, in practice, the National

Forests have come to rely primarily on watershed analysis to provide fine-scale direction. Thus, most analyses will fail to recognize

the importance of midscale information. If the critical ecological

processes and socioeconomic concerns affecting ecosystems at this

scale are to be recognized, subbasin analysis will require more than

a brief validation of the broad-scale information. 

The Planning Framework

The issue for scientists is not a need to understand the details

of the Federal planning process but the need for dialogue about

contemporary land management strategies in the context of the

planning frameworks used to assess land stewardship actions.

These planning frameworks (Bormann and others 1994a, Haynes

and others 1996) have grown more complex as ecosystems

become the focus of land management. A framework is a description of steps and components necessary to achieve some desired

goals; it seeks to place planning in a broad, forward-looking

process that considers the social, economic, and biophysical components of ecosystems at the earliest stages of policy design. The

generalized planning framework (fig. 5) describes the various

components of a general planning model that has four iterative

steps: monitoring, assessment, decisionmaking, and implementation. When applied to ecosystem management, the framework

suggests six activities: 

• Setting goals to establish a direction and purpose

• Assessing resources at multiple resolutions 

and geographic extents

• Selecting decision variables and decisions 

• Developing a strategy for implementing those decisions

• Designing a monitoring program to evaluate the outcomes 

of those decisions

• Using adaptive management approaches

Each step has considerable room for complexity, integration,

and participation.

Monitoring—Monitoring is founded on experimental designs of

collecting and evaluating information to determine baseline conditions, if planned activities have been accomplished, if assumptions are correct, and whether management objectives have been

met. Four types of monitoring have been identified (Noss and

Cooperrider 1994): 

• Implementation monitoring is used to determine if a planned

activity was accomplished.

• Effectiveness monitoring is used to determine if the activity

achieved its objective or goal.

• Validation monitoring is used to determine to what degree

assumptions and models used in developing the plan or 

assessment are correct.

• Baseline monitoring measures a process or element that may

be affected by management activities.

Assessments—Assessments represent a synthesis of our current

scientific knowledge including a description of uncertainties and

assumptions. Thus they explicitly depict and model ecosystem

components and their interactions. 

Decisions—Decisions in the general planning model are choices

among alternatives. The decision step in the model develops various management paths toward goals and objectives that can help

decisionmakers and stakeholders (all parties interested in natural

■14

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

Figure 5—General planning model.
resource use and management) understand the management

options available to them. The alternatives often are compared

via predicting the effects of each alternative in terms of previously set criteria.

Implementation—Implementation turns plans and decisions

into projects and practices on the ground. Adaptive management is often necessary during this stage and includes linked,

not single actions; feedback, including monitoring; and

information synthesis. Actions that integrate management

and research would then generate information that guides

future decisions about adjusting management actions.

This planning framework also can be used in risk

assessments where “risk” means outcomes are not certain

but the likelihood of alternative outcomes are known or

can be estimated. Risk assessments, which help managers

develop a sense of the likely outcomes of various management strategies, have been used to rate the susceptibility of forest stands to insect and disease or fire.

Assessing risks can be broadened to estimate the scientific and management uncertainty about ecosystem

responses to forest, grassland, or shrubland management

(Marcot 1992). Risk assessment is a three-step process: 

• Problem formulation—Identifying the nature and array of

management needs, identifying and specifying the elements 

of the system, and describing the desired futures. 

• Analysis and risk characterization—Analyzing how a disturb-ance (natural or management) interacts with the

various elements of an ecosystem, and characterizing how

the disturb-ance or process causes adverse effects under

particular circumstances. 

• Evaluation—Evaluating various outcomes associated with

alternative management activities in light of the analysis and

risk-characterization results.

When decisionmakers choose a course of action, they are

engaged in risk management because they balance often-disparate

objectives by choosing among different types and amounts of risks. 

CLOSING

The team laid out a context for ecosystem management and

provided an overarching strategy. Scientists working on the Forest

Plan experienced a heightened awareness of their roles and contributions to the debate about contemporary land management issues.

This led to a comparative analysis of several bioregional assessments

in which a common theme has been crisis orientation and the

expectation that a science-based approach would help navigate

beyond the crisis (Johnson and others 1999). It also increased

awareness of the interface between science and policy including

impacts on natural resource systems, society, and science. Since

development of the Forest Plan, the role of frameworks in helping

explain the relation of science to management and providing a basis

for integrating various science findings is better understood. The

Forest Plan defines one role of science in ecosystem management as

providing information to support land management decisions. This

scientific information helps clarify practical boundaries, options

within the boundaries, consequences of those options, and tradeoffs

between options. The information helps decisionmakers understand

the relative risks of alternative management approaches so they can

develop reasonable methods for managing risks in biologically and

socially acceptable ways. Current scientific understanding of forest,

grassland, and related ecosystems influences but does not determine

management policies. Choosing among options is not the role of

science, but the domain of decisionmakers. Fundamental to decisionmaking is the recognition that managing natural and human

processes is—and always will be—based on imperfect knowledge.

The challenge for resource managers is to balance the implications

of biological with social science and with how society values renewable and nonrenewable natural resources.

■15

CHAPTER 2: THE TEAM APPROACH
C HAPTER 3 :

THE

ADMINISTRATIVE

CONTEXT

Laura Bergstrom,1 Kate Snow, Garland Mason,2

and Gloria E. Perez

INTRODUCTION

This chapter covers the roles of the Pacific Northwest

(PNW) and Pacific Southwest (PSW) Research Stations in the

Northwest Forest Plan (Forest Plan), providing an overview of

the structural and budgetary frameworks in which they operated

for the period 1993-98. 

THE ROLES OF RESEARCH

The Forest Plan is structured under three main components:

forest management, economic development, and interagency

coordination (appendix 1). Roles for research were defined in the

first two components. Under forest management, the role of

research is to ensure the development and analysis of scientific

data to provide an information basis for considering different

management regimes. In the second component, the role of

research was to help develop and evaluate an efficient program for

economic development. Furthermore, the first “Northwest Forest

Plan Accomplishment Highlights, FY 1994” said that the role of

the PNW and PSW Research Stations was to “develop and provide the knowledge needed for environmentally sound management of the complex and varied ecological systems within the range of

the northern spotted owl.” These

roles have involved the research community in three main areas: developing new knowledge, transferring existing and new knowledge to managers, and coordinating

with other research, management, and regulatory agencies. The

complex variables involved in making sound management decisions drive a diverse range of research needs in areas such as social

and economic systems, species viability, timber production, and

sustainable ecosystem management.

ORGANIZING FOREST PLAN RESEARCH

Program Management and Coordination

The two Stations took different approaches to managing and

coordinating Forest Plan research. These differences reflected different philosophies between them about research management,

the science policy interface, long-term relations with local

National Forests, involvement in the issues leading to the Forest

Plan, and differences in the diversity and extent of the science

communities at each Station.

Research management, coordination, and support for the

Forest Plan in the PSW Research Station were the responsibility of the Assistant Director for research programs in northern

California. The Assistant Director worked closely with project

leaders and scientists in the PSW Research Station and managers at the PNW Research Station on overall planning, priority setting, and coordination. His role included maintaining frequent contact with representatives of public interest groups and

land managers to gain a better understanding of issues, needs,

and priorities. 

At the PNW Research Station, the approach to management and coordination of Forest Plan-related work shifted several times during the past 5 years in response to changing strategies

for dealing with the Forest Plan (for more details see appendix 2).

In 1997, the PNW Research Station separated the oversight and

coordination of Forest Plan activities by shifting the coordination

to a full-time issue coordinator. The role of the issue coordinator

also includes coordinating integrated research activities with

other land management and regulatory agencies.

■16

1 Laura Bergstrom is the assistant NWFP issue coordinator, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, P.O. Box 3890, Portland, OR

97208-3890.

2 Garland Mason is an Assistant Station Director, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest

Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station, 800 Buchanan Street, West Building, Albany,

CA 94710-0011.

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
Funding

Budget allocations for the Forest Plan began in fiscal year

1994 with administrative redirection of National Forest Systems

funds to PNW and PSW Research Stations. Subsequent funding

has been received each year through congressional appropriations.

A PNW and PSW Research Stations research plan, “Forest

Service Research Support for Implementing Ecosystem

Management on Public Lands of the Pacific Northwest (FEMAT

Support)” was completed January 1, 1994. This plan described

the research and funding needed to implement the record of decision (ROD) as envisioned. Original budget allocations for

research activities fell far short of projected needs for implementing the Forest Plan. Early in the planning stages, budget estimates

ranged from $15 million for a basic program to $27 million per

year for full implementation. About $7 million per year has been

allocated to the Stations over the last 5 years as shown in table 2.

Included in the $7 million is about $1.1 million of existing

Station funding used to support Forest Plan activities. Another

half a million from the PNW Research Station appropriated

funds has been assigned in the budget for congressional-directed

work by University of Washington (see appendix 2 for a detailed

history of budget changes).

The PSW Research Station maintains clear separation of

Forest Plan funds from other research appropriations to assure

that these funds are directed to the highest priority research and

science-support needs for Forest Plan implementation. The

Station also has a policy that no permanent salaries will be paid

from Forest Plan funds in order to channel as much funds as possible to research activities. An Assistant Director serves as

Project Manager of these funds. Additional smaller quantities of

funds are appropriated directly to several research units in northern California. All funds supporting Forest Plan activities

through the PSW Research Station are research appropriations;

the PSW Research Station receives no funds from the National

Forest System in the Pacific Southwest Region for this purpose.

The PNW Research Station distinguishes Forest Plan funds

from other research appropriations to assure that these funds are

directed to the highest priority research and science-support

needs. These funds support both permanent salaries as well as

salaries for temporary employees and funds for external agreements with various cooperators. Financial accountability is primarily through the Program Managers in conjunction with the

Forest Plan coordinator. Special efforts are made to ensure that

the different types of appropriated funds (research and National

Forest System funds) are spent in ways consistent with Forest

Service policies and legal directions.

Research Project Selection

Pacific Southwest Research Station scientists are involved in

many research-support projects, both associated with the larger

scale needs defined by the Regional Ecosystem Office (REO) in

Portland, and in local projects working with local land managers.

Participation in these projects is largely at the initiative of individual scientists responding to direct requests for their expertise,

or their personal concerns for the issue. Money for these activities comes directly from the scientists’ research funds or with

■17

CHAPTER 3: THE ADMINISTRATIVE CONTEXT

Table 2—Fiscal year (FY) 1994-99 Northwest Forest Plan budget

Budget

Organization FY94 FY95 FY96 FY97 FY98 FY99

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Millions of dollars - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

PNW a appropriated funds 3.975 3.975 4.225 4.402 4.402

PNW a redirected funds 1.125 .875 .875 1.373 1.373

PSW b appropriated funds 1.700 1.500 1.600 1.825 1.825

National Forest System funds 4.620 2.350 2.000 1.800 1.700 1.300

Less: recission .856-

Total 4.620 8.294 8.350 8.500 9.300 8.900

a PNW = Pacific Northwest Research Station.

b PSW = Pacific Southwest Research Station.
assistance from requesting organizations. No fund is established at

the PSW Research Station for support activities.

At the PNW Research Station, the original vision included

coordinating, planning, and developing the Forest Plan research

effort by the Ecological Framework for Management Program,

which developed a proposed program of work to meet the criteria

set forth in the ROD. Five components each assigned to a lead

Program Manager made up this program of work: watershed

analysis, adaptive management areas (AMAs), ecosystem restoration, planning and monitoring, and research. The first four components had strongly emphasized development and application

efforts like developing the protocol for watershed analysis, whereas the fifth component emphasized long-term research needed to

produce underlying understanding of biophysical and social systems needed for managing the ecosystem. The component

Program Managers and other vested Program Managers determined work priorities, made difficult funding decisions, and

were responsible for the cross-program integration and selection of projects. In 1997, the process changed to a modified

proposal process where Station scientists could compete for

funds in the context of Forest Plan research needs and the

research priorities adopted by the PNW Research Station. As

part of the priority-setting process, wood production and other

values were emphasized, as were protocols for “survey and manage” species (see appendix 4). This change led to greater

reliance on the dual criteria of meeting the management needs

of the National Forest System and while also using the Station’s

overall research priorities.

The National Forest System provided substantial funding

that helped offset salary and some operating costs for Forest Plan

research (table 3). Research has provided technical assistance and

information essential to providing land managers critical tools

and protocols for implementing new techniques of ecosystem

management on the ground. Much of the work funded by the

National Forest System has focused on specific management questions such as effectiveness monitoring methods, northern spotted

owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) assessments, protocols to identify,

“survey and manage” species (see appendix 4), and adaptive management studies.

INTERAGENCY COORDINATION

The Forest Plan initiated a new focus on interagency coordination at the Federal level. It created a REO to coalesce all

Federal land management and oversight agencies into an interagency entity responsible for coordinating Forest Plan activities. In

addition to the Forest Service, these include the Bureau of Land

Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service—Biological

Research Division, National Marines Fisheries, National Park

Service, and the Environmental Protection Agency.

One role of REO is to coordinate research among the several participating land management and regulatory agencies, which

is being carried out through the Research and Monitoring Group.

An interagency Strategic Research Plan will guide each agency’s

research planning efforts in the short term (about 5 years). This is

the first interagency effort of its kind.

The Role of Partnerships

The Forest Plan research effort has both built on and facilitated developing partnerships to conduct both research and application efforts. Three broad types of partnerships have evolved for

research efforts: traditional research community, such as academic and Forest Service research; broader research community, such

as facilitated by the Research and Monitoring Group; and engaging indigenous knowledge around specific issues or sites, such as

in some of the AMAs. Partnerships related to application are

more numerous and difficult to describe, but examples are scientists working with managers to develop protocols for watershed

analysis and “survey and manage” species (see appendix 4).

The Regional Ecosystem Office, “Survey and

Manage” Team, and Research Monitoring Committee

The Regional Ecosystem Office serves as the staff and advisory office to the Regional Interagency Executive Committee

(RIEC) and the Intergovernmental Advisory Committee (see

Tuchmann and others 1996 for a comprehensive listing of Forest

Plan committees). It provides support for their efforts and provides independent scientific, technical, and other review and support to help resolve differences in implementing the Forest Plan.

Staff from the office are brought in from Federal agencies in the

region responsible for forest management and environmental protection.

One of the office ad hoc teams is a “survey and manage” core

team comprising representatives from different research and management agencies. Two major objectives of the team are to provide information to management on species viability, as well as

input to research agency executives for new research that assesses

species viability in the Forest Plan area. This team’s focus originates from the “survey and manage” section in the Forest Plan

ROD, which explains required tasks, priorities, and timelines (see

appendix 4). One task, for example, is developing survey design

and protocols for taxa listed in table C-3 of the ROD. The PNW

and PSW Research Station scientists participate with the “survey

and manage” activities through the core team or associated

research.

The research and monitoring group provides scientific and

research information to the RIEC and are responsible for scientific oversight, as well as coordination of the research and monitoring agendas. The group consists of scientists and managers from

■18

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
■19

CHAPTER 3: THE ADMINISTRATIVE CONTEXT

Table 3—Research topics not addressed in Pacific Northwest (PNW) Research Station reports

Topic Sourcea Specific research not addressed

Population trends and habitat FEMAT report Studies of basic systematics, taxonomy, and distribution

orientations of selected species groups of soil micro-organisms, mollusks,

arthropods, and microfungi and macrofungi. Studies of the habitat 

orientations, basic life-history ecologies and, in selected cases, population extent, size, and possible trend of rare or potentially declining

species, particularly those in scarce or declining environments on 

Federal public lands.

(Rationale: FEMAT reported these taxonomic groups as poorly 

known scientifically and needing much basic study of taxonomy, 

presence, distribution, and trend).

Training of field personnel FEMAT report Researchers to train field personnel in inventory or monitoring 

protocols and procedures.

Risk-assessment procedures FEMAT report Compilation and synthesis of risk assessment procedures and tools 

to aid in implementing the Forest Plan standards and guidelines. 

(Rationale: although much good work has been reported on concepts and approaches to ecosystem management, adaptive management, and decision support, a comprehensive synthesis of 

approaches and tools, with recommendations for their specific use 

has not yet been completed).

Integration across disciplines FEMAT report PNW priorities Develop, test, and help institute new frameworks and tools for truly 

integrating disciplines, particularly the social and economic 

sciences with ecology. (Rationale: Many of the FEMAT report 

assessment results and Forest Plan directives were couched in 

terms of strict, zero-sum tradeoffs between social or economic 

gains, and resource conservation. But newer frameworks for 

ecosystem management, such as those published by the Interior 

Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project science team, suggest that closer alignments can be fostered to better meet seemingly

disparate or contradictory goals. What is needed are new tools and

approaches to foster and aid interdisciplinary decisions).

Research on AMAs—conducting FEMAT report Conduct land management activities on AMAs in the strict context of

management activities as Forest Plan RODb scientific hypothesis-testing, with due attention to placement and 

research hypotheses Forest Plan standards replications of treatments and controls. Integrate studies across

and guidelines multiple spatial scales spanning landscapes, local watersheds, and 

Tuchmann and others 1996 stands. (Rationale: To date, many of the areas continue to function

PNW priorities (multiple more as traditional agency planning units instead of large research 

scales) areas. Or, at best, they serve to integrate multiple public and agency

interests, or include only a research effort such as the 

Demonstration of Ecosystem Management Options project. The 

Forest Plan called for new "experimentation." Much can be done to 

guide AMA management activities to adhere strictly to adaptive 

management concepts and research protocols, for providing more 

reliable knowledge to managers and policymakers. This change 

might include expanding the Long-Term Ecosystem Project studies to

AMAs as well). 

Effects of fire Forest Plan standards Study the efficacy of using fire as a management tool, particularly 

and guidelines in terms of how well it serves to affect, create, or restore 

specific habitat conditions for old-forest plants and animals. 

(Rationale: Fire was identified as a needed management tool by the 

FEMAT report, and was so identified in the Forest Plan standards 

and guidelines).
research agencies representing various research disciplines. A

research subgroup of the Research and Monitoring

Committee has been developing a Strategic Research Plan.

The primary objective is to present a framework for interagency coordination of Forest Plan research. The plan

describes high-priority research needs and is intended to stimulate involvement of resource managers and stakeholders in

planning research and disseminating research results. This

plan is directed at Federal research agencies in the region

operating on lands covered by the Forest Plan (see the draft

by Benson and Owston 1998). The Strategic Research Plan

contains a list of seven research study topics based on the

information need sources provided by resource managers, scientists, and other interested groups.

Major topic areas are:

• Understanding ecosystems

• Individual species research

• Developing and evaluating alternative management systems

• Resource restoration and enhancement

• Economic and social dimensions of cultural and natural resources

• Research to support monitoring and inventory systems

• Decision support

Monitoring

In addition, the Resource Monitoring Group is responsible

for developing a monitoring plan for the Forest Plan. Monitoring

is an essential and long-term Forest Plan component. Developing

the monitoring plan continues to be an interagency research and

■20

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

Table 3—Research topics not addressed in Pacific Northwest (PNW) Research Station reports (continued)

Topic Sourcea Specific research not addressed

Efficacy of protection buffers Forest Plan standards Conduct validation-monitoring research on the efficacy of protective

and guidelines buffers on a range of plants and animals, particularly 

nonvascular plants and amphibians.

(Rationale: The Forest Plan standards and guidelines call for such study).

Efficacy of snag guidelines Forest Plan standards Conduct validation-monitoring research to determine how

and guidelines Forest Plan snag guidelines affect populations of pygmy nuthatches

and flammulated owls along the eastern fringe of the planning area. 

(Rationale: The Forest Plan standards and guidelines call for such study).

Restoration FEMAT report Study the efficacy of alternative approaches to restoring terrestrial

systems, including riparian and upland old forests and speciesspecific responses.

(Rationale: One of the major assumptions of the Team was that 

ecological communities and vegetation conditions such as old 

forests could be restored through judicious use of new management

tools. The verity of this assumption, and the species-specific 

responses, need testing).

Key ecological functions of species (New) Determine the ecological roles that selected individual species 

and the ecological roles of PNW priorities and species groups play in fostering productivity of ecosystems

functional groups (promising breakthroughs) and sustainability of resources. Determine the environmental 

conditions necessary to maintain such key ecological functions, and

the effects of management activities on those functions.

(Rationale: As identified in the Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem 

Management Project science reports, forest ecosystems—and the

productivity and sustainability of resources and desired environmen

tal conditions—are greatly affected by key ecological functions 

and roles of plant and animal species. Our understanding of such 

roles and effects from management activities is at best rudimentary).

a Sources of research topics are: FEMAT—Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team. ROD—record of decision of the Northwest Forest Plan. PNW—Pacific Northwest Research Station

priorities. Standards and guidelines from the Northwest Forest Plan. Tuchmann and others 1996.

b ROD = record of decision.
■21

management effort. It provides information for determining

whether the standards and guides are being followed, verifies if

they are achieving the desired results, and helps determine

whether the underlying assumptions are sound. Validation monitoring is the area most closely affiliated with research because it

scrutinizes whether the underlying principles and assumptions,

which are the basis for the Forest Plan, are correct.

Other Efforts

The economic adjustment initiative managed by the Office

of Forestry and Economic Assistance provided both a stimulus

and funding for socioeconomic research. The objective of this

research was to develop understanding about how workers and

their families, businesses, counties, and communities affected by

changes in Federal forest policies dealt with the opportunity to

adjust and prepare themselves for a prosperous and sustainable

future (Tuchmann and others 1996). Like some of the Forest Plan

research, the emphasis of the research was on developing applications of existing knowledge and synthesizing the effects of

implementing the economic adjustment initiative. The resulting

synthesis focused on assessing program effectiveness, the extent

that partnerships for collaboration and coordination were developed and the extent that adaptive processes provide feedback for

some of the innovative policies and processes.

CHAPTER 3: THE ADMINISTRATIVE CONTEXT
■22

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
■23

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

Part Two consists of one large chapter—Chapter 4: Research

Results to Date.” Since the Northwest Forest Plan

(the Forest Plan) was instituted, the Pacific

Northwest (PNW) and Pacific Southwest (PSW)

Research Stations have conducted specialized research

on wildlife, water, and ecosystems. This research is

related to key assumptions in the Forest Ecosystem

Management Assessment Team report (FEMAT

report) and key directives in the Forest Plan’s 

record of decision and standards and guidelines.

Many topics identified in the FEMAT report and Forest Plan documents and addressed in

PNW and PSW Research Station research are separated into seven designated thematic

research areas, and an additional “findings” category (Ecological Processes and Function) in

this chapter: 

• Wildlife conservation and population viability issues

• Aquatic conservation strategy

• Adaptive management processes and decision-support sciences

• Adaptive management areas: synthesis of an ongoing experiment

• Socioeconomic research

• Ecological processes and function

• The struggle to deal with landscapes

• Developing new stand management strategies in the Douglas-fir region

A summary of each thematic area is presented. Each summary provides a sampling of studies, significant findings, and a discussion of implications relevant to the thematic area. See

appendix 5 for Forest Plan studies including project leaders.
C HAPTER 4 :

RESEARCH

RESULTS TO DATE 

WILDLIFE CONSERVATION AND

POPULATION VIABILITY ISSUES

Bruce Marcot1

SIGNIFICANT FINDINGS

The main wildlife and viability findings from recent

research conducted in the Pacific Northwest can be grouped

around four themes:

• It is necessary to understand both individual species and functional roles and groups of species to understand the basic “building blocks” of ecosystems and to address species of singular

concern, such as threatened or endangered species. 

• The species focus is inadequate for addressing

questions of biotic community structure and ecological processes, and for interpreting the forces

that sculpt the ranges of natural conditions and

responses of ecosystems to management.

• Wildlife studies need to include the ecological functional roles of plants and animals, including invertebrates and vertebrates, specifically in how they influence the diversity, productivity, and

sustainability of the ecosystems they

inhabit. 

• The current and recent historical

ranges of natural conditions may

depict conditions under which

species have recently persisted but do

not necessarily depict conditions

under which species have evolved.

Providing for long-term evolutionary

capacity is in addition to providing for

shorter term population viability.

There are specific ways to map and

evaluate components of species ranges

to evaluate evolutionary potential.

Research on terrestrial wildlife species, communities, and

ecosystems addresses wildlife conservation and population viability issues. This section serves the following purposes:

• Summarizes the assumptions about, and directives for, research on

terrestrial wildlife in the FEMAT report and the Forest Plan’s

record of decision (ROD), and its standards and guidelines 

• Summarizes the kinds of research conducted by or through the

Station on terrestrial wildlife in the Forest Plan area 

• Determines research topics not yet addressed or poorly

addressed by research

• Evaluates the PNW Research Station research priorities in

light of the above information

• Provides a vision for Forest Plan research to fill the information

needs in the near future

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

1 Bruce Marcot is a research wildlife biologist, U.S. Department

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research

Station, P.O. Box 3890, Portland, OR 97208. Research includes studies of individual species, groups of species, and

functional roles of plants and animals.

■24
Specifically, in this section I first list the research topics I

reviewed. Then I present results and interpretations, including a

summary of the assumptions in the FEMAT report and Forest

Plan directions in the ROD. I next compare these assumptions

and directions to PNW Research Station research priorities and

Station publications. From this comparison, I identify (1)

research topics not addressed in PNW Research Station reports,

(2) ongoing PNW Research Station research topics that could be

continued or enhanced to test key FEMAT report assumptions

and plan directions, and (3) key unknowns and potential new

research directions. Appendix 3 presents a summary of assumptions in the FEMAT report and directions. 

In this section, “wildlife” means plants, animals, and other

organisms; that is, it includes fungi, lichens, bryophytes, other

nonvascular plants, vascular plants, and invertebrates, and all

vertebrates except fish. This broad interpretation follows the

ecosystem analysis and management framework used by the

Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team (the team) and

those interpretations developed for the Interior Columbia Basin

Ecosystem Management Project and other assessments in the

Forest Plan region.

Synthesis questions about terrestrial wildlife species, communities, and ecosystems in the context of the Forest Plan are,

How has research from fiscal year 1994 to fiscal year 1997, conducted or hosted by the Station, helped to respond to the major

assumptions and directives from all of the relevant assessments

and planning documents that guide the Forest Plan research

efforts? How well has the Station addressed each of the major

research themes (listed later in this section)? What topics and

themes are not yet fully addressed, or addressed at all? and What

kinds of studies can be done to ensure that all assumptions and

directives from all of the relevant documents be addressed by

appropriate research?

IMPLICATIONS

Implications can be summarized corresponding to section

headings in the FEMAT report and the Forest Plan.

Management

Research has been conducted in the following six management areas:

• Silviculture—Studies on testing new silvicultural prescriptions

designed to restore or accelerate developing specific forest conditions for terrestrial wildlife.

• Ecosystem management—Publications on conceptual frameworks, synthesis or explanation of ecological theory, and guidelines for assessing ecosystems or species in an ecosystem context.

• Adaptive management and adaptive management areas

(AMAs)—Publications on research in an adaptive management context, or explaining concepts of adaptive management.

And publications on research direction or findings on specific

AMAs. 

• Restoration—Studies on restoring, or testing methods for

restoring, specific aspects of wildlife habitat.

• Inventory and monitoring—Publications on developing or

testing methods for inventory or monitoring of wildlife and

their habitats.

• Decision-support systems—Publications on database management, or developing knowledge-based systems or models and

about or useful for assessing or managing terrestrial wildlife.

Environments

There are five areas dealing with different environments

where research has been conducted:

• Riparian—Publications on riparian environments for terrestrial wildlife.

• Old growth—Publications on old-growth forest ecology related

to terrestrial wildlife. Also see “canopy” below.

• Fire—Publications on effects of fire and fire management on

terrestrial wildlife.

• Canopy—Publications on ecology of forest canopies as pertinent to terrestrial wildlife.

• Soil and micro-organisms—Publications on soil ecology and

productivity, particularly as potentially influencing soil environments for wildlife.

Disciplines

Research carried out as part of the Forest Plan has addressed

various scientific disciplines including:

• Social—Publications exploring the interface between social

science and wildlife ecology or management.

• Landscape ecology—Publications furthering the concepts or

methods of landscape ecology for wildlife.

• Links—Publications specifically aimed at linking major disciplines, such as economics and ecology, in an ecosystem management framework.

Organisms

Research carried out as part of the Forest Plan dealt with various organisms including:

• Fungi—Publications on mushrooms, microfungi or soil fungi,

and other fungi.

• Lichens—Publications on surveys and ecology of lichens.

• Bryophytes—Publications on surveys and ecology of mosses

and their allies.

• Vascular plants—Publications on epiphytes, herbs, shrubs, and

trees, from the botanical perspectives rather than timber or forest-product production perspectives.

■25

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS TO DATE
• Invertebrates—Publications on mollusks, arthropods, and other

mesoinvertebrates or macroinvertebrates, particularly nonpest

organisms.

• Amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals—Publications on

species ecology and effects of environmental conditions or

changes.

• Sensitive species—Publications on concepts of managing for

species in an ecosystem context.

• Nontimber forest products—Publications on mushrooms, mosses, lichens, grasses, and other harvestable forest resources other

than timber.

• Note that the subject of “survey and manage” species (from the

research perspective) is largely included in the various, more

specific topics under “Organisms.”

RESULTS AND INTERPRETATIONS

FEMAT Report Assumptions and Forest Plan Directions

The FEMAT report presented a review of ecological literature and listed various assumptions, interpretations, and potential

management directions. Among the topics addressed were species

(see appendix 3), monitoring, research, managed late-successional areas, stand management, ecosystems and their management,

adaptive management, biological diversity, late-successional and

old-growth forest ecosystems, riparian microclimate, technical

objectives, watershed-scale assessments, evaluation and adjustment, and conservation areas for spotted owls (Strix occidentalis

caurina). Doubtless, additional topics could be extracted from the

report, but this list covers most of the major subjects related to

terrestrial species, communities, and ecosystems. 

In general, the report provided assumptions and interpretations on: 

• Population trends, responses to management activities, ecology

and habitat orientation of individual species and species groups 

• The need for monitoring and research to refine the understanding of species and old-forest ecosystems 

• The need for developing analytic tools including risk-assessment procedures

• The need for new silvicultural approaches to managing young

and old forests to foster, accelerate developing, or maintain oldgrowth forest characteristics for plants and animals

• Better integrating the social and economic sciences with biophysical sciences 

• Better integrating research into adaptive management by fostering a “managing to learn” approach

• Better integrating management and scientific understanding of

aquatic, riparian, and upland terrestrial systems by using a multispatial-scale approach

The Forest Plan ROD provided directions related to terrestrial research topics on:

• Application to research activities

• Monitoring, invertebrates and plants

• Protection buffers 

• “Survey and manage” species (see appendix 4)

The ROD urged experimenting across a range of environmental conditions; developing and implementing new monitoring protocols; researching the efficacy of mitigation measures and

protective buffers on a range of plants and animals; and having

research aid in activities for surveying rare “survey and manage”

designated organisms.

The Forest Plan standards and guidelines further specified

directions for research, fire and fuels management, effectiveness

and validation monitoring, protection buffers, birds, and education. They suggested or directed research activity on:

• Coordinating with monitoring activities for scientifically testing research hypotheses

• Experimenting with use of fire management for helping meet

ecosystem management objectives 

• Monitoring at multiple geographic locations and spatial scales,

as in testing the effectiveness of maintaining or restoring latesuccessional forest environments for associated species

• Furthering knowledge of the relations between habitats and

populations, particularly for northern spotted owls and marbled

murrelets (Brachyramphus marmoratus)

• Studying the efficacy of protection buffers on nonvascular

plants and amphibians, and of snag guidelines for pygmy

nuthatches (Sitta pygmaea) and flammulated owls (Otus flammeolus) along the eastern fringe of the Forest Plan area 

• Engaging researchers in technical and scientific training of

local workforces for monitoring

The report by Tuchmann and others (1996) echoed some of

these themes in their review of progress on implementing the

Plan. For example, among other suggestions, they highlighted the

opportunities remaining for 

. . . restoring the original intent of [Adaptive

Management] Areas as experimental, with the flexibility to look beyond the boundaries established by

the Plan’s standards and guidelines; conducting an

analysis of the effects that increased flexibility in

managing these Areas would have on viability ratings

for listed species and clarifying policy accordingly;

conducting an analysis of the effects that increased

flexibility would have on the extirpation and other

standards of the Endangered Species Act and clarifying policy accordingly; and encouraging the greatest

■26

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
amount of experimentation possible in the Areas

to identify innovative management techniques.”

(p. 122). 

Many of their recommendations, however, focused on threatened, endangered, or sensitive species, although perhaps “experimentation” could be interpreted as allowing research on other

species and ecosystem dynamics and processes as well. They presented no specific recommendations for validation monitoring.

RESEARCH PRIORITIES OF THE PACIFIC

NORTHWEST RESEARCH STATION

The research priorities for the PNW Research Station

(USDA Forest Service 1997 and associated summary documents)

highlighted several key areas for ongoing or new research related

to terrestrial species, communities, and ecology, including those

in the Forest Plan area. Research priorities specifically for western

Oregon and Washington (USDA Forest Service 1997:14)

include the following:

• Enhance the sustainability of ecosystems, particularly increasing compatibility among joint resource outputs while sustaining ecological integrity

• Better understand ecosystem productivity, including how to

identify desired forest conditions, and develop means to measure resources and monitor ecosystem conditions and dynamics

• Link independent bodies of knowledge into a holistic framework, including better linking scientific disciplines and science

with management 

• Conduct research across multiple scales of space and time 

• Focus on areas of promising breakthroughs

To be consistent with the FEMAT report and the Forest

Plan, priorities for research on natural disturbance regimes should

focus on maintaining ecological integrity at multiple scales and

determining effects and patterns of fire, insects, disease, climate

change, wind, flooding, and other disturbances. Although many

of these disturbances are more common to east-side environments, including the eastern slope of the Cascade Range in the

Forest Plan area, both localized and broad-scale disturbances

operate on the west side. 

Further direction on research priorities are about determining habitat requirements and “limiting factors” for threatened,

endangered, and sensitive species, and for integrating single- and

multiple-species management with an ecosystem approach.

Information is needed from the ground at species, community,

and stand scales with links to landscape-scale information for spatial analysis. Information synthesis also can provide new insights

for broad-area planning and should play a legitimate role in

research activities. 

Two new PNW Research Station research initiatives focus

on improving forest health and productivity by managing forest

fire, insects, and disease as natural ecosystem disturbance processes, and on compatibilities between wood production and other

forest values and uses on Federal lands. Because these two

research initiatives have only recently been instituted, reports

and results were not available for this synthesis. One of the stated issues of the former initiative, however, explicitly aims at

improving flows of forest products while protecting and sustaining ecosystem integrity. This issue aligns well with at least some

of the FEMAT report and Forest Plan assumptions and directions

on restoring or maintaining ecosystem integrity in a multiple-use

agency environment. The compatibility initiative specifies,

among other topics developing silvicultural regimes to jointly

meet ecological, economic, and social objectives; accelerating

existing experiments to produce wood and to create or restore

wildlife habitat, biodiversity, watershed, and aesthetic values;

linking research with management, monitoring, and adaptive

management; and improving understanding of ecological functions. These directions also align well with some of the FEMAT

report and Forest Plan assumptions and directions, particularly on

devising and testing new silvicultural approaches and integrating

disciplines. They could be expanded to include ecological functions of individual wildlife (plant and animal) species and functional groups of species.

NEW RESEARCH TOPICS

The studies conducted to date can be interpreted, in

light of the assumptions and direction for scientific knowledge and research, to suggest areas needing further or new

research (table 3). Table 4 lists key wildlife research topics

addressed by ongoing Station studies. Station research conducted and reported to date covers many topics in silviculture,

ecosystem management, adaptive management, decision-support systems, concepts and approaches to analyzing risk to

species viability, and studies of selected plants and animals.

Many of these studies could be continued or enhanced, as

noted, to help meet the major FEMAT report assumptions and

Forest Plan directives. 

Many of the studies in these thematic areas could be continued or enhanced, and they serve well, in part, to meet stated

research priorities. At the same time, topics identified in the

FEMAT report and Forest Plan documents not being systematically addressed include the following: 

• Population trends, habitat orientations, and basic systematics

of soil organisms, fungi, and invertebrates 

• Field-personnel training in new ecological concepts and

inventory and monitoring methods

• Synthesis of risk-assessment procedures

■27

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS TO DATE
■28

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

• Improved integration across socioeconomic and ecological

disciplines

• Efficacy of using fire as a management tool for restoring plant

and animal species and communities 

• Efficacy of protection buffers for conserving nonvascular

plants and amphibians

• Efficacy of snag guidelines for secondary cavity-using wildlife

species, and of down wood guidelines for associated plants

and animals

• Restoration of biotic communities and ecosystem processes

New research topics that could be addressed include key ecological functions of species and the ecological roles of functional

groups of species. These topics would be studied with a focus on

maintaining the productivity, diversity, and sustainability of

ecosystems and resources. The studies also would be used to develop a conceptual framework and set of operating guidelines for

truly integrating research disciplines and linking research to management. The PSW Research Station has formally embraced

team projects and interdisciplinary research as legitimate roles of

researchers, but neither Station is engaged in personnel training. 

Table 4—Ongoing research topics of the Pacific Northwest Research Station that could be continued or enhanceda

Research topic Source

Species research: FEMAT report 1993

Species-specific research, particularly of old-forest associates, includes listed species

of threatened, endangered, candidate, or agency sensitive status. Such research includes:

• Population distribution of, population and habitat trends of, and effects of land 

management activities on northern spotted owls

• Population distribution of, population and habitat trends of, and effects of land 

management activities on marbled murrelets

• Distribution and status of amphibians and some reptiles

• Distribution and status of selected plants and allies

• Population, status, and effects of land management activities on vertebrate carnivores, 

including mustelids (fisher and marten).

Effects of management guidelines: Tuchmann and others 1996

Determine the effect of Forest Plan management guidelines on old-forest-associated species 

presence, distribution, and abundance (including those for late-successional reserves, AMAs 

planning, and matrix land management). Research on "increased flexibility" could be 

conducted in AMAs.

Inventory and monitoring: Team report

Coordination with management on inventory and monitoring of selected plant and animal species PNW priorities

and their habitats, particularly in old-forest environments. This includes identifying useful and 

cost-effective bioindicators, and devising and testing new protocols for inventory of species' 

presence and distribution, and for monitoring their abundance and trends. Ongoing research 

on this topic for bats and amphibians, and use of lichens as indicators of air quality, are 

excellent examples.

Silviculture: FEMAT report

Devising and testing new silvicultural approaches to managing young and old forests to foster, Tuchmann and others 1996

accelerate, maintain, or restore old-growth forest characteristics for plants and animals. 

This should include studies specifically aimed at validating population response by the plants 

and animals of interest. (The PSW Research Station is addressing this topic on the 

Goosenest AMA).

Other ecological topics: FEMAT report

Studies on canopy ecology, landscape ecology, and fire ecology. These are particularly pertinent 

to understanding dynamic patterns and underlying processes that shape plant and animal 

communities.

a These are topics related to terrestrial species, communities, and ecosystems identified by the FEMAT report, Forest Plan record of decision and standards and guidelines 1994, Tuchmann and

others (1996, and Pacific Northwest Research Station priorities (U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service), being addressed in completed (fiscal year 1994-present) or ongoing research.
■29

New research areas that could aid in implementing and testing

the Forest Plan include:

Key Ecological Functions of Species and the Ecological

Roles of Functional Groups

The Science Integration Team of the Interior Columbia

Basin Ecosystem Management Project recognized that this new

area of study was lacking in the FEMAT report assessment and

developed an approach for cataloguing and projecting ecological

functions of individual species and species groups. The aim is to

determine how the ecological roles of plants and animals affect

the productivity, diversity, and sustainability of ecosystems and

their resources, and the ecological interdependencies among

organisms, such as for pollination of rare plants or dispersal of

fungi. This approach is now being used by other agencies for guiding species database development, research, and management,

including within the Forest Plan area (by the OregonWashington Species-Habitat Project). Station research could

help describe the ecological roles of plants and animals as they

influence ecosystem productivity and resource sustainability. 

Links Among Disciplines

The assumptions and directions from the FEMAT report and

the Forest Plan strongly suggest that much further work is needed on developing and testing links among science disciplines and

between science and management. In working on links among

disciplines, researchers could better develop concepts and procedures for truly integrating methods and interpreting research

results among scientific and management areas of terrestrial ecology, fisheries and aquatic ecology, riparian management, and

social and economic processes. Greater integration of disciplines

in both conducting field studies and interpreting study results is

needed. One example is the need for greater integration among

the domains of aquatic and terrestrial ecology. Aquatic studies

and, particularly, watershed analysis, remain largely the singletopic domain of fish managers, leaving out vital aspects of landscape dynamics, effects on and roles of terrestrial species and

communities, and riparian and aquatic link to them. 

Embracing Development Science

Finally, the PNW Research Station needs to take on several

important roles in filling Forest Plan needs. These roles include

training managers in ecological concepts, tools, and inventory

and monitoring procedures; serving on assessment-team projects

to aid managers in designing procedures and interpreting results;

and engaging in synthesis and cross-over, interdisciplinary

research. The Station has yet to value these needed activities as

legitimate research roles and accomplishments, particularly for

individual career-advancement opportunities. With such legitimacy, PNW Research Station could play major roles well beyond

the more traditional, reductionist studies, in fostering new syntheses across disciplines and between researchers and managers.

CROSS-DISCIPLINE AND CROSS-THEMATIC IMPLICATIONS

Most of the PNW Research Station reports on wildlife after

the Forest Plan implementation have focused on discipline-specific topics. Many themes are ripe for integration across disciplines—

such as themes of soil function and productivity, nontimber forest

products, and concepts and procedures for risk assessment. The

largely untouched topic of ecological restoration—aside from

aquatic environments—also can provide a platform on which to

integrate social, economic, and ecological studies, as well as actual management activities. More than by simply collating discipline-specific studies into one document, PNW Research Station

has access to one of the most unique land-allocation systems in the

country—with its AMAs, research natural areas, experimental

forests, long-term ecological research sites, and other such sites—

for developing and implementing interdisciplinary science. In one

sense, the 1976 National Forest Management Act (amended

1982) for multiple-resource management could be matched by a

multiple-disciplinary approach to scientific inquiry. 

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS TO DATE
■30

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

AQUATIC

CONSERVATION STRATEGY

David Hohler, James Sedell, and Deanna Olson1

STUDIES AND SIGNIFICANT FINDINGS

While the Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team

report (FEMAT report) was being prepared, a strategy for restoring and maintaining the ecological health of aquatic and riparian

ecosystems was developed. Four basic components of this process,

along with the late-successional reserves, comprised the aquatic

conservation strategy. The components of the strategy are riparian reserves, key watersheds, watershed analysis, and watershed

restoration.

Research funded by the Northwest Forest Plan (Forest Plan)

for the strategy has covered the gamut from basic species-specific studies and developing resource evaluation procedures, to

overarching compendia addressing riparian function and sustainability (for example, Naiman and Decamps 1997). Scientists

from both the Pacific Northwest (PNW) and Pacific Southwest

(PSW) Research Stations, cooperators from universities, and

independent researchers have made significant contributions.

Whether through individual or team efforts, Forest Plan research

has helped articulate the complexities of regional aquatic and

riparian ecosystems and their ties to biophysical and social landscapes. Synergistic effects among research studies and assessment

efforts have stimulated discourse among scientists and resource

managers with various interests and ideologies, thereby resulting

in jointly conceived advances for resource management. From

these interactions, standards have developed for the adaptive

processes of forest ecosystem management under the Forest Plan.

The resulting research is shown in table 5 and discussed in the

following sections.

IMPLICATIONS

Research and development under the Forest Plan has

reshaped forest management across the region. Research—and

the work of researchers with land managers—has been the stimulus for applying adaptive management to strategy objectives.

Research efforts have: 

• Compiled, synthesized, and applied existing information in

innovative ways to resolve management issues 

1 David Hohler is a research hydrologist, James Sedell is a research ecologist, and Deanna

Olson is a research fishery biologist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific

Northwest Research Station, 3200 SW Jefferson Way, Corvallis, OR 97331. Hohler currently

is Branch Chief, User Interface Tools, USDA Forest Service, Natural Resource Information

System. He is located at the USDA Forest Service, Siuslaw National Forest, P.O. Box 1148,

Corvallis, OR 97339. Sedell currently is Inter Deputy Water Coordinator, State and Private

Forestry, P.O. Box 96090, Washington, DC 20090-6090.
■31

• Increased knowledge about how systems work and added specificity to

strategy elements that require protection and restoration 

• Provided new tools for multiple resource analysis and land use planning

• Provided strategies for monitoring of the new systems to allow for future

course corrections

Managers and researchers are tightly coordinated across the region, and

many managers immediately use the results of research projects. Results of current research, such as the coastal landscape analysis and modeling study

(CLAMS) project, are eagerly anticipated with an intent toward upgrading all

the planning and analysis processes currently in use.

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS TO DATE

RIPARIAN RESERVES are lands along streams

and unstable and potentially unstable areas

where riparian-dependent resources receive

primary emphasis and where special standards and guidelines direct land use. A big

issue that developed in implementing riparian reserves was that the percentage of

landscape that intermittent streams covered was greater than anticipated.

KEY WATERSHEDS are a system of large refugia comprising watersheds that are crucial

to at-risk fish species and stocks and provide high-quality water. A network of 143 

(called Tier 1)2 watersheds were designated

to ensure that refugia are widely distributed

across the landscape, whereas 21 (Tier 2)

watersheds were designated to serve as

important sources of high-water quality.

Key watershed determinations were based

on professional judgments as to historical

fish utilization, existing habitat condition,

and restoration potential. Key watersheds

with lower quality habitat were judged to

have high potential for restoration and

were intended to be restored first.

WATERSHED ANALYSIS is a systematic procedure for characterizing and evaluating

geomorphic and ecological processes operating in specific watersheds. It is designed

to guide development of management practices that achieve attainment of the strategy objectives. 

WATERSHED RESTORATION is a comprehensive, long-term program to restore watershed and aquatic ecosystem health, including the habitats supporting fish and other

aquatic and riparian-dependent organisms.

It has three primary elements: control and

prevention of road related runoff and sediment production; restoration of riparian

vegetation; and restoration of instream

habitat complexity. 

Table 5—Aquatic conservation strategy studies and significant findings

Study Investigator Significant fndings

Cummins Creek study Reeves Importance of intermittent

streams in providing large 

wood debris to larger streams

Riparian buffer study Olson and Chan Examination of microclimate

gradients in riparian areas and

the effects on aquatic 

species, especially amphibians

Retrospective riparian study Bisson and others Importance of disturbance

legacies in determining the

stream-associated 

communities (amphibians, fish,

birds, and small mammals)

Sediment routing studies Lisle Importance of intermittent

streams in routing pulses of

sediment and the effects

of sediment pulses on

aquatic species

Coastal landscape analysis Spies and others Effects of alternative

modeling system (CLAMS) management on various

land ownerships

Augusta Creek Cissel and others Alternative pathways to

ecosystem management

Large woody debris Abbe and Importance of large

Montgomery wood in stream systems

of varying sizes

Watershed analysis guide Hohler and Burnett Procedures for conducting

ecosystem analysis

at the watershed scale

Riparian reserve module Hohler and others Procedures for evaluating

Riparian reserves

in the Forest Plan

2 Tier 1 key watersheds were selected for directly contributing to anadromous

salmonid and bull trout conservation. Tier 2 key watersheds were selected as

sources of high-quality water and may not contain at-risk fish stocks. 
■32

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

FEMAT Report Assumptions: Validated or Not?

Standards and guidelines for aquatic resource assessment and

management, as described in the FEMAT report and the Forest

Plan, were developed from a combination of known factors stemming from earlier research, and likely assumptions as those

research results were extended to new circumstances (Sedell and

others 1994). Plan-funded efforts intended to validate or refute

assumptions used in the FEMAT report and the Forest Plan

include the refinement or validation of microclimate, stream

adjacent stand size, and disturbance process work on floods and

landslides.

Microclimate—Streamside and upslope forest affect microclimate and thereby habitat in the riparian environment. The Forest

Ecosystem Management Assessment Team (the team) was not aware

of any reported field observation of microclimate within riparian

zones. They used a study by Chen (1991), who documented change

in soil and air temperature, soil moisture, relative humidity, wind

speed, and radiation as a function of distance from a clearcut edge

into upslope forest in two Cascade Range study sites.

Since the publication of the FEMAT report and inception of

the Forest Plan, a few studies have been completed and published

that examine microclimate from stream channels into the adjacent

forest (for example, Brosofske and others 1997). Figure 6 presents

the results of several of these studies as well as the information used

in the FEMAT report. Although the studies all differed in distance

measured from the active channel to the uplands, relative humidity

dropped below 50 percent outside one tree height (or stayed high

within 60 meters) from the active channel. The curves published by

the team, based on this newer research, are generally correct and can

be refined by moving the curve for relative humidity to parallel air

temperature. In addition, in geomorphically constrained stream

reaches, microclimate functions of streamside forest occurred within 20 meters, as opposed to unconstrained reaches, which might

need wider riparian reserves to maintain microclimate (Chan 1998).

This refinement is not trivial when one considers that most streams

in Federal land in forests lands inhabited by the owl are constrained

by steep side slopes. In general, the assumptions have been upheld;

however, the number of studies are small, and ecological consequences of many of these apparently important microclimate gradients and processes remain to be discussed and quantified.

Figure 6—Comparison of relative humidity gradients

of different studies.

Understanding the natural variation in microhabitats (climate and site) and aquatic-dependent vertebrates is crucial to addressing issues of protecting 

riparian areas and the roles of management.
Stream adjacent stand size—One of the basic sets of assumptions adopted by the team concerned large wood. They can be

summarized as:

• Stream systems needed large wood to provide structure

• Much of the stream system wood had been lost or removed

• Replacement wood would most likely come from stream-adjacent stands

• To recover the streams of the Pacific Northwest, therefore,

riparian reserves needed to be large and undisturbed long

enough to provide these large trees 

Work by Abbe and Montgomery (1996b) on the few relatively unmanaged streams in the Pacific Northwest indicates that

these assumptions were essentially correct and have resulted in

quantification of the size of material required to provide stable log

jams in different size rivers. This work is redefining much of the

restoration underway in the rivers and streams of the region and

will frame the most difficult challenges of restoring large rivers.

One of the assumptions made by the team was that the size,

amount, and species of large woody debris in channels reflect the

condition of the adjacent riparian areas and that a conservative

approach would be to manage streamside forests for mature or

late-successional ages and sizes. This assumption was important

because evaluation of commercial forest land in western Oregon

and Washington indicated that most riparian areas are in an

early-succession condition (<60 years), many with an overstory of

hardwoods—primarily the pioneer species red alder (Alnus rubra

Bong.) (Carlson 1991, Rot 1995). Wood inputs came from adjacent lands and steep side drainages from landslides. Research has

shown that 70 to 90 percent of the input of large woody debris

occurs within 30 meters of the channel (Abbe and Montgomery

1996a, 1996b; Montgomery and others 1996). 

What had not been demonstrated well was how pool and

gravel entrapment in small streams is related to the size of wood.

Flow obstructions can force specific channel morphologies on

steeper slopes than is typical of analogous free-formed alluvial

morphologies. In particular, large woody debris may force poolriffle formation in otherwise plane-bed or bedrock reaches

(Montgomery and others 1995, 1996). Consequently, plane-bed

reaches are rare in undisturbed forested environments, where the

debris dominates formation of pool and gravel bars. Large woody

debris also may force step-pool morphologies in otherwise cascade

or bedrock reaches. These reach types predominate on Forest

Service- and Bureau of Land Management (BLM)-managed lands

within the range of the northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis

caurina). Montgomery and others (1996) also found that trees

over 30 inches diameter at breast height formed the key piece(s)

that form and hold log accumulations. This study provided a key

link between pools and gravel retention and size of streamside

forest trees. The objective in the strategy was to restore streamside forests to mature or late-successional status. Studies indicate

that this is a technically founded objective and standard.

Importance of intermittent streams in providing material

to larger streams—Intermittent streams are an important, and

often overlooked, component of aquatic ecosystems. The team

defined intermittent streams as any nonpermanently flowing

drainage features having a definable channel and evidence of

annual scour or deposition. The record of decision provided

buffers the size of one site potential tree height (150 to 200 feet)

on each side of an intermittent stream to protect from stream and

surface erosion, pinnacle large wood to downstream fish-bearing

waters, maintain sound productivity, and provide habitat for

riparian-dependent species. The riparian reserves encompass 40

to 90 percent of a watershed depending on how dissected the land

is and the amount of precipitation. Requiring undisturbed buffers

of this magnitude virtually precludes any form of active management. Determining size and nature of buffers actually needed is

critical to watershed analysis. The scientists on the team felt that

not all intermittent streams needed large buffers. Until a watershed analysis or riparian reserve analysis was conducted, one

would not know where or how large the buffers should be to protect ecological values. Intermittent streams seem to play an

important role in providing materials such as sediment, wood,

and organic material to larger stream systems (Reeves and others

1995). Reeves and others (1995) and Benda and Dunne (1997a,

1997b) are characterizing watersheds using combined geomorphic and biological criteria, relative to provision of structure

material for instream habitat complexity and building on Forest

Plan research of basic geomorphic function. Their work validates

many of the assumptions used in designing the riparian reserves

system of the FEMAT report.

A three-pronged research program was initiated to

determine:

• What intermittent streams were important in initiating landslides that would either accelerate erosion and provide large

boulders or wood that would create fish habitat for several years

• Whether biological communities, primarily amphibians, could

be used to determine physical characteristics of intermittent

streams that land managers, in turn, could use to distinguish

differences in ecological values

• Whether intermittent streams have an onsite ecological role in

the aquatic ecosystem

Research by Montgomery and Dietrich (1994), Benda and

Dunne (1997a), and Benda and others (1998) has helped to

define the catchment size and slope necessary to initiate a landslide. Furthermore, they have placed these landslides from intermittent streams into a context of the landscape of a watershed

■33

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS TO DATE
■34

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

(Benda and others 1998). These studies indicated that about onethird or less of the intermittent streams in the landscape have a

high potential to initiate a landslide and even fewer have the

location and runout characteristics to reach larger streams, which

provide fish habitat for several years or decades. These techniques

for evaluating risk and opportunity from landslides are map based

and can easily be used to identify potential risks and gains.

Researchers from the PSW Research Station and their university

cooperators are building an understanding of how large sediment

inputs are transmitted downstream and affect fish communities

(Lisle 1997, Lisle and others 1997).

Another approach (riparian buffer study described later) identified several types of intermittent streams and discovered different fish

and amphibian communities used them. In this study of headwaters,

intermittent streams were the most frequent channel types encountered. Preliminary results of the buffer study indicate more diverse

communities and unique species occurred in intermittent streams in

comparison to downstream perennial channels in headwaters. Only

2 taxa dominated perennial streams (fig. 7 pie chart a), whereas 12

species were found in intermittent stream types (fig. 7 pie charts b, c,

and d). Species presence and abundance allow discrimination among

intermittent stream types. One of the species apparently restricted to

intermittent streams is taxonomically unique to the Pacific

Northwest and is currently a candidate for Federal listing as threatened and endangered (Olson 1998).

The significance of this research is that field crews can easily identify the types of intermittent streams and obtain a good

idea of the biodiversity in and around them. If maximizing biodiversity is a goal, more protection can be provided certain streams

and less for others, thereby allowing managers to better work with

the variability and dynamics of the landscape.

The third area of research was fundamental research on the

intermittent streams themselves. This included studying the role

they play in providing aquatic insect and organic material to fishbearing streams, and whether they have a refugia role that provides larger streams with colonists after floods or season events

and protection from predators during droughts. Wipfli (1997) and

Dietrich and Anderson (1998) both showed the importance of

these two mechanisms to larger streams. This research increased

our fundamental understanding of how stream networks operate

from the smallest streams to the larger ones.

Spatial and Temporal Scales

Watershed scale—The Augusta Creek Watershed analysis

(Cissel and others 1998) has become of pivotal importance for

regional-to-national resource management (for description, see

appendix 4). Using the same underlying objectives, principles,

and approaches as those that resulted in the Forest Plan, this

study illustrates a management scenario tiered specifically to an

Oregon Cascade Range watershed. It demonstrates that given

Figure 7—The hydrologic stream types found in research studies of fish and amphibian community utilization.
the strategic direction of the Forest Plan and the completion of

watershed analysis (here augmented by site-specific research),

land managers can have the discretion to change site-specific

application of the strategy according to the unique features of

local watersheds. In this example, timber harvest frequency and

intensity is matched to natural fire disturbance regimes (100- to

300-year rotations), and aquatic protection is offered by long forest-harvest rotations, large reserve blocks encompassing

subdrainages, and a backbone of riparian buffers along large fishbearing streams. This project united researchers and resource

managers during its development, and has promoted developing

adaptive ecosystem management among forest and aquatic

resource managers nationwide. The Augusta Creek project

channeled momentum toward implementing and testing the

conceptual Augusta Creek landscape design in a neighboring

AMA watershed in the central Oregon Cascades Range, the

Blue River watershed of the Willamette National Forest. Many

Forest Service and university researchers are still working with

land managers to incorporate new data relative to aquatic conservation strategy elements and fine tune the watershed management plan. 

Province-scale integration of socioeconomic and ecological

domains—The large-scale integration of ecological information

and research to provide an integrated view of current conditions,

potential trajectories, and the resultant landscapes from pursuing

various management strategies is the logical next step in the

framework of adaptive ecosystem management. The CLAMS

project is making great strides in this area as it applies broad-scale

ecological modeling research and provincial-scale planning to

coastal Oregon. The project incorporates spatial databases for a

large multiownership province, including vegetation cover from

satellite imagery, streams, roads, fire history, riparian forest condition, climate, geology, and land ownership and allocation patterns. From this multilayered foundation, models that consider

the entire landscape and the cumulative effect of all land management policies will be developed. In particular, a specific objective in this province includes the protection or recovery of

anadromous salmonid stocks. Findings reinforce the role of

Federal lands in recovery of species, the usefulness of models linking geomorphic processes and fish habitat, and the association of

upslope conditions and instream habitat. This project may have

the greatest potential to shift agency policy and direction, including changing the way National Forest planning and landscape

analyses are conducted. In addition, this project points out the

need for greater understanding of integrated research, and the

need for people and environments that are effective and productive for coordinated team-research efforts.

Planning and Implementation

Watershed analysis—Research has played an integral role in

developing watershed analysis. Since its conception by the team,

it was formalized through pilot-procedures completed in fiscal

year 1994, and subsequently finalized as the “Federal guide for

ecosystem analysis at the watershed scale” (RIEC 1995 and

1997). It incorporates advanced modeling techniques for resource

assessments across watersheds and landscapes, thereby providing

■35

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS TO DATE

Fred Swanson explains how watershed analysis can include 

landscape considerations.

CLAMS team leader Tom Spies describes the large-scale coastal 

landscape analysis modeling system.
approaches for synthesizing multiple ecological values and functions with social and economic endpoints. Research efforts of

Forest Service scientists have provided information on links

between aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems within watersheds; protocols for compiling and integrating watershed-scale resource

assessments; and procedures for incorporating resource assessments

and ecological values and processes into watershed-scale planning.

The “Federal Guide” is increasingly accepted as an effective procedure by various management agencies across the Western United

States and is being translated into several languages. 

Implementation of watershed analysis by Federal land managers has not had wholesale success. Fundamentally, a watershed

analysis is required before specific land management activities are

proposed; meanwhile the pressure on land management units to

sustain timber quotas continues. Hence, watershed analysis often

is seen as a management barrier to meeting expected wood volumes, rather than the opportunity for ecosystem management

envisioned originally. Incomplete and inconsistent watershed

analysis across the region has been a problem. Balancing wood production and long-term management of other resources has been

difficult for some field units. Some examples, such as Augusta

Creek, have shown that watershed analysis can work effectively.

Another example, the Winoochee Headwaters watershed analysis

on the Olympic Peninsula, has incorporated both Federal and

Timber, Fish, and Wildlife3 watershed analyses and shown the benefits of both. The process fails to provide consistent contextual

information to managers on how best to guide managing particular landscapes toward a preferred trajectory or group of trajectories

(Montgomery and others 1995). To effectively manage diverse

highly dynamic landscapes, it is necessary to provide an accurate

context from which projects can be undertaken, which requires

improving in describing and analyzing landscapes. To improve, the

learning curve needs to be formally incorporated into the process.

Riparian reserves—Riparian management scenarios have

not been examined in the context of alternative silviculture such

as density management, which is designed to grow large trees

more quickly. Once interim riparian reserves are in place, they

will have many incidental benefits for terrestrial species and

processes that may not have been intended for protection.

Resolution of aquatic and terrestrial protection mechanisms is

needed. In addition, an acceptable process is needed to evaluate

acceptable risk from managing for various values, site conditions,

and management scenarios. A related issue is that elements of

strategy objectives are vague, and research is needed to characterize values and processes requiring riparian protection and then

matching protection to site conditions.

The riparian-reserve module (RIEC 1997) demonstrates an

analysis procedure to define and attain strategy objectives with

adaptive riparian management. Specifically, this module provides

field units a mechanism for changing interim riparian reserves,

and delineating final reserves as described in the Forest Plan. It

also clarifies the connection between aquatic-riparian and terrestrial-upslope systems and their joint management, which came

out of the Forest Plan. This convention was particularly significant because many of the scientists that originally crafted the

concepts of the riparian reserves and strategy were not involved

in the subsequent development of the Forest Plan. It took

research-sponsored workshops attended by both terrestrial and

aquatic scientists who worked in the various stages of the Forest

Plan to understand how substantially the original vision of the

aquatic scientists had been altered. Lost was the idea that these

interim riparian reserves could be changed in response to more

complete on-the-ground stream network information. The task of

changing riparian reserves had moved from a site-specific adjustment based on limited information, such as fish distributions and

knowledge of landslide potential to a broader understanding of

the ecological needs of more than 1,400 species for which the

interim riparian reserves could provide benefits. In developing

the riparian-reserve module, a procedure for species and habitat

evaluations within watersheds was provided to guide management

toward potential species and habitats at risk in the area. Scientists

provided and synthesized basic information on the many species

that occupy or were intended to benefit from riparian reserves.

They also were involved in providing guidance on how to

thoughtfully evaluate alternatives to interim riparian reserves and

develop new tools and protocols for collecting field data used in

assessing, monitoring, and conducting general surveys. Analogous

information was compiled from physical scientists—for example,

on geological and hydrological values of concern relative to riparian areas. This module has thus made great progress in creating

specificity to elements of strategy objectives.

Several riparian management studies are currently underway

in the PNW and PSW Research Stations to test the various

assumptions in the FEMAT report and in the Forest Plan.

Riparian management studies focusing on species-assemblage

associations with stream types could redefine the way stream form

and function are viewed.

Intermittent streams seem to play an important role in providing large wood, boulders, and sediment, which are sources of

material providing instream structure to larger stream systems

(Reeves and others 1995). Reeves and Benda are characterizing

watersheds by combining geomorphic and biological criteria relative to provision of structural material for instream habitat complexity. Also, they are building Forest Plan research into basic

geomorphic function (Benda and Dunne 1997a, 1997b). Their

■36

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

3 Timber, Fish, and Wildlife refers to an interagency group formed in the State of Washington

to agree on analyses protocols for timber, fish, and wildlife that comply with the State Forest

Practices Act across ownerships. 
work validates many of the assumptions used by the team in

designing the riparian reserves system.

Various researchers are examining size and width of riparian

buffers. Common study objectives include understanding riparian

values (for example, species, habitats, and species and habitat

relations) and processes and functions; the responses of these elements to various management scenarios; and the application of

riparian management for sustainable riparian resources. 

The riparian buffer study in northwestern Oregon and northern California examines four stream-buffer widths in headwater

subdrainages implemented with a forest-density management

study. Integrated companion projects include:

• Riparian microsite and microclimate conditions perpendicular

to stream channels (Principal investigator—S. Chan)

• Aquatic-dependent vertebrates (fishes, amphibians) and their

habitats (Principal investigator—D. Olson) 

• Forest stand development from thinning treatments (Principal

investigator—J. Tappeiner, USGS, OSU)

• Silvicultural, engineering, economic, and social analyses

(Principal investigator—nine BLM administrative units, C.

Thompson, Project Coordinator, BLM, Portland)

• Aquatic insect assemblages before and after harvest (Principal

investigator—A. Moldenke and R. Progar, OSU)

• Lichen and moss responses to combined riparian and upslope

treatments (Principal investigator—P. Muir, OSU)

To date, unique habitats and assemblages have been characterized

in headwaters, validating the need for riparian protection in intermittent and ephemeral channels, and within inner gorge habitats.

This study also is advancing our techniques for multipleresource management at the watershed-to-site scales. Study sites

often have been the first units managed for timber harvest since

the Forest Plan was implemented; they are on several land allocations (late-successional reserves, matrix, and AMAs). This study

helped the Interagency Research and Monitoring Committee to

develop standards for reviewing adaptive management proposals

and their compatibility with strategy objectives. Sites were chosen

based on criteria developed from watershed analysis issues. At the

watershed and site scales, an evaluation procedure analogous to

the riparian-reserve module was conducted to evaluate management options. Scientists developed this procedure coincidentally

with the riparian-reserve module, and information from each was

used to guide the development of the other. For example, issues

considered during site selection include:

• Stand condition and potential harvest trajectories of the site

and neighboring harvest units (for example, industrial lands)

• Known sites of rare species

• Maintenance or restoration of owl connectivity corridors

At the site scale, the mosaic approach to density management used in this study includes patch clearcuts and reserve

islands. The placement of these clearcuts or islands promotes sitespecific protection or management of various elements. These

elements have included species protection (fungi, lichens, and

mollusks), disease control (root rot), and cost-effective timber

harvest (proximity to roads and yarding corridors). Many of the

species and habitat elements evaluated relate directly to strategy

objectives. This research is becoming heralded as an example of

how alternative silviculture can be compatible with other forest

resources. Multiple field units involved in this study are using

procedures from this study to develop sound rationale to manage

other lands. Examples include various timber harvest proposals

on matrix lands and restoration management through density

management in riparian reserves and late-successional reserves.

Retrospective studies of riparian buffers with past timber harvest practices are evaluating protection and restoration techniques in northwestern Washington. Restoring riparian ecosystems is an essential element of the strategy. Preliminary findings

show the importance of riparian management strategies that

incorporate key features of natural disturbance regimes at the

landscape scale (Bisson and others 1997). For example, in smallstream and headwater basins, streams and their riparian areas

have lower species diversity in managed landscapes than in latesuccessional forest control sites.

Historical and current vegetative structure and composition,

amounts of down woody debris, and use by vertebrate fauna in

riparian and adjacent terrestrial ecosystems are being studied in

various landforms in central Washington. Key to this research is

placing the observed patterns in the context of disturbance

regimes for aquatic and terrestrial landscapes (Lehmkuhl 1998).

The results of this project are expected to help frame the desired

patterns and processes in landforms of the eastern Washington

Cascades Range.

In northern California, researchers are studying ecological

processes that influence the distribution and abundance patterns

of small vertebrate species (amphibians, birds, and small mammals) along intermittent streams in the Pilot Creek drainage.

Preliminary analyses indicate strong associations among distribution and abundance patterns of arthropod and vertebrate species,

hydrologic condition, and vegetation composition and structure.

Disturbance regimes as foundations for ecosystem management—Disturbance process research has indicated a need for

midscale (subbasin-to-landscape) analyses for spatial and temporal context setting. In particular, research examined large-scale

disturbance processes and regimes that operate between, among,

and within watersheds (Reeves and others 1995). This research

points out how dynamic ecosystems containing various species

are affected and may be controlled by complex and heteroge-

■37

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS TO DATE
neous natural disturbance processes (Swanson and others 1998).

Understanding natural disturbance processes that create and

maintain habitats for individuals or assemblages of species is

essential for managing ecosystems sustainably (Benda and Dunne

1997a, 1997b; Benda and others 1998; Montgomery and

Buffington 1993; Tang and others 1996). This research has resulted in conceptual papers on how to approach the problem in longterm recovery plans as well as applications of the principles in

broad-scale planning and monitoring exercises (Bisson and others

1997, Landres and others 1998). Conceptual ties to watershed

analysis and options for riparian management have been made

(for example, Cissel and others 1998, Raphael and others 1998). 

Clarification of watershed restoration targets or criteria—

Research has a key role in outlining the processes to restore system integrity or health. The design and evaluation of restoration

strategies across the range of the Forest Plan has involved extensive research by both the PNW and PSW Research Stations. In

particular, the flood events of late 1995 and early 1996 probably

generated more innovative approaches to watershed restoration

than any other event in the past 30 years. Effective and ineffective management designs related to many strategy objectives

became apparent as flood events resulted in torrents and landslides across the region. According to Grant (1998), these flood

events were the first real test of Forest Plan strategies. Since their

occurrence, managers and collaborating scientists have been

working within a framework of natural disturbance processes to

storm-proof roads and management facilities at watershed scales.

Disturbance process research has provided the template for much

of the restoration (Swanson and others 1998, Wemple and others

1996). Assessments for flood effects are now being designed to use

more structured adaptive management exercises based on the

context of natural watershed disturbance processes (Harris and

others 1997).

Overall, research over the past few years has emphasized

restoration techniques and efficacy, and this new knowledge is

being brought to bear on the watersheds in the Forest Plan area

(Abbe and others 1997, Entry and Vance 2000, Swanson and

others 1998, Vance and Mikowski 1998, Vance and Whittal

1995). Watershed analyses identify restoration needs in basins.

Many ongoing projects are being implemented in riparian

reserves to manage young stands for structural and species diversity and to promote developing late-successional characteristics to

restore and attain strategy objectives. This restoration research is

linked to several topics already discussed—for example, riparian

management studies.

Future research needs to take an indepth look at the categories of restoration practices implemented in various locations to

help assess which have been the most effective in bringing about

watershed restoration and under what conditions. Two specific

needs are the effectiveness of upslope versus instream restoration

relative to various strategy elements, and restoring road systems

for hydrologic recovery.

Effectiveness monitoring for the aquatic-riparian component—Determining the effectiveness of the strategy and its various components (watershed analysis, watershed restoration, riparian reserves, and key watersheds) is the task of the current effort

headed by Thomas Mills, PNW Research Station Director, to

develop the Aquatic-Riparian Effectiveness Monitoring Plan.

Research personnel are key players in the work group and have a

large role in the pilot tests to help make the plan implementable.

Station scientists have conducted research to develop, test, and

refine protocols for sampling methods that will track species and

systems. The monitoring plan will assess the ecological condition

and trend of the watersheds within the range of the northern

spotted owl. The hypothesis is that over time, a shift in the frequency distribution of watershed condition classes—with more

watersheds classified as “good”— would occur as a result of implementing the strategy. The monitoring strategy will focus primarily on habitat and physical processes with biological information

added as available. Condition classes will be assigned by using a

decision-support framework to evaluate and work with various

biotic, physical, and chemical indicators. Ultimately, developing

predictive models based on an understanding of the key upslope

indicators associated with biotic, riparian, and channel conditions will make this process more efficient. The approach rests

heavily on Forest Plan related research—especially on the watershed analysis, CLAMS—and disturbance-process research to

design a cost-effective, integrated strategy. 

New Research Topics

Two areas stand out in terms of future aquatic research priorities:

Researcher-manager liaison has become critically important to

effectively implementing the Forest Plan. Information exchange

is paramount in adaptive forest-ecosystem management, including exchanges between management units and agencies, among

researchers, and—most importantly—between researchers and

managers. The rate of exchange through historical means of technology transfer, such as publications, is too slow for the current

pace of management. Collective “corporate knowledge” needs

rapid transfer to management units for field application. Because

of the complexity of the issues, the needed adaptations to a new

management climate, and the diffuse nature of both research and

management groups, the effectiveness of information exchange

has been mixed. Some of the exchange has been direct, clear, and

iterative, promoting an adaptive approach forwarding Forest Plan

implementation. For example, when researchers are involved in

collaborative studies with management units, avenues of communication and mutual trust and respect are established. In contrast,

■38

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
■39

much of the information exchange has been incomplete, thereby

resulting in stagnation of management, and sequences of miscommunications causing time, effort, and economic losses. Managers

are forced to become entrepreneurs, gathering ad hoc information

on which to base their management decisions; incomplete information can result in poor decisions and inconsistent decisions in

comparison to neighboring areas with similar issues. In turn,

researchers are forced to become consultants, roles that are

increasingly consuming their time and efforts (and for which they

receive little recognition) and accompanied by a reluctance to

advise without full knowledge of circumstances. Pacific Northwest

Research Station scientists participate in many consultations on

aquatic strategy elements every week, on issues as diverse as road

decommissioning and hydroelectric dam relicensing. Although

some processes are being developed for information exchange, few

people are available to carry on this rapidly expanding mission. A

research-management liaison at the regional scale is imperative to

recognizing and defining the responsibilities of both researchers

and managers for information exchange.

Cross-institutional development of management options is

accelerating. As discussions of species at risk spread from the

Federal lands to other land ownerships, the audience of the

FEMAT report and the Forest Plan has broadened. The research

and knowledge that went into the FEMAT report and the Forest

Plan are being used by state agencies and other organizations to

enter new phases of describing management alternatives and

their trajectories that cross ownership boundaries. Examples of

cross-institutional efforts include: 

• Work with the Oregon Department of Forestry and

Washington Department of Natural Resources on riparian

area function

• The Aquatic-Riparian Effectiveness Monitoring Plan 

coordinated with state and tribal agencies

• The Applegate partnership research

• National Forest Management Act litigation in northern

California and southern Oregon

• The incorporation of Federal scientists land management

contexts into the habitat conservation plans of industrial

forestry

As integrated cross-institutional management plans are discussed, the forest management landscape changes. The role of

Federal lands under the Forest Plan for regional resource management and conservation is becoming better defined—and it is

changing. This trend dictates that Station scientists play a role in

conceiving and implementing cross-institutional research and

applications in the years to come.

Cross-Disciplinary Implications

Cross-disciplinary integration is a theme permeating both

research and management environments under the Forest Plan.

All the above research topics are cross-disciplinary efforts. The

magnitude of the interdisciplinary approaches taken by watershed analysis and CLAMS are immense. To be effective, future

research needs to be integrated from the beginning, and incentive systems must be altered to encourage this integration among

organizations, research stations, disciplines, and themes.

Strategies for integration need to be formulated and implemented at each level of the organization. Researchers and managers

need to be more consistently coordinated and briefed on results

and implications of both completed and proposed research.

Efforts like CLAMS and Augusta Creek (appendix 4) provide

context and illustrate the effects of management decisions to a

degree that transcends jurisdiction and ownership. These projects are difficult to start and require intense management to

complete. The world may indeed be more complex than we can

comprehend, but we must attempt to encompass more of its complexity in the ways that we conceive and implement natural

resources research.

RELATED TOPICS NOT ADDRESSED

AND ORDER OF IMPORTANCE

Two areas not pursued by research that may be critical to the

strategy are the promise of key watersheds in restoring aquatic systems, and experimental management of riparian function and sustainability in AMAs. These topics deserve a strategic review with

an emphasis on solutions for moving forward with future research

proposals.

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS TO DATE
ADAPTIVE-MANAGEMENT CONCEPTS

AND DECISION SUPPORT

Bernard T. Bormann, Martha H. Brookes,

and Keith M. Reynolds1

STUDIES AND SIGNIFICANT FINDINGS

Table 6 summarizes studies and findings related to adaptive

management concepts and decision support. The pilot adaptive

management study is a collaboration between researchers and

managers to develop the concepts of adaptive management and

implement them on the ground. The purpose of putting concepts

on the ground is to see how practical they are and to refine them.

Once the on-the-ground examples are installed, other managers

can decide whether to adopt or adapt the concepts in their own

situations. The study seeks to implement adaptive management at

both stand and landscape scales.

The ecosystem management decision-support system

(EMDSS) study is developing a computer program for evaluating

information at landscape scales to feed into an adaptive management system. The architecture of the system is general enough

that it can be applied to any assessment problem at any geographic scale and region (for example, watershed, province, or

regional analysis). Assessments, facilitated by the program, provide a basis for subsequent planning and can equally well be used

to evaluate monitoring results, thus completing the cycle.

Adaptive management concepts and decision-support

research and development have generated new ideas about how

Federal forest lands might be better managed. These ideas focus

on building new partnerships among researchers, managers, and

citizens based on their common need to learn how to achieve sustainable ecosystems. Learning is needed because sustainability

goals are new, and proven approaches to achieve them are

unavailable. And the need to increase the rate of learning

becomes obvious when the complexity and uncertainty underlying sustainability goals are understood. The speed of learning is

unlikely to increase unless managers consider it a part of everyday

management. Studies combining research and management at

operational and landscape scales can provide rigorous, immediately applicable knowledge, and new links between researchers

and managers can foster an environment that would increase the

rate and quality of communication of new information in both

directions. These ideas, now being pilot tested, are expected to

develop important new options for managers that, taken together, represent an entirely new approach to managing Federal lands,

as called for in the Northwest Forest Plan (Forest Plan). The new

approach is focused on learning and adapting to help build the

trust of researchers and citizens in management decisions. The

exchanges among managers, researchers, and citizens of information

needed to build and to begin testing these hypotheses has been

direct and intensely mutual. Successes are based on ongoing

■40

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

1 Bernard T. Bormann is a research plant physiologist, Martha H. Brookes is a technical publications editor, and Keith M. Reynolds is a research forester, U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, 3200 SW Jefferson Way,

Corvallis, OR 97331.

Table 6—Adaptive management and decision-supportstudies and significant findings

Studies Significant findings

The Adaptive Management Practical concepts of

Process Working Group, adaptive management 

sponsored by the Interagency develop from collaboration 

Implementation Team of managers, researchers,

and citizens—and cannot be 

determined by any single 

group.

Pilot adaptive management study Adaptive management cannot

be implemented by creating

standards and guidelines.

Adaptive management must 

be institutionalized to be 

successful.

Learning to fish is better than 

being given a day's catch.

Ecosystem management decision- Decision-support systems

support system need to connect decisions

to underlying evidence.

National workshop on ecosystem Rapid, systematic learning

management (working groups on is essential to achieving 

adaptive management and sustainability. 

decision support) Working together, managers

and researchers make 

possible large-scale studies 

with scientific rigor.
debate among managers and researchers, and the sustained

collaboration with managers and citizens in implementing

the ideas.

The following sections have been written in the first person

by the authors to more effectively convey the evolution of adaptive management concepts.

Studies

We first encountered the concepts of adaptive management

during the Eastside Forest Health Assessment2 (Everett and others 1994). The framework team realized that sustainable-ecosystem management requires much more knowledge—and at a

much quicker pace—than the research community was able to

produce (Bormann and others 1994a). Traditional technology

transfer was not working well, and the most likely means of

acquiring and sharing new knowledge seemed to be for managers, collaborating with scientists and citizens, to actively produce knowledge in the normal course of managing. Concepts for

implementing the adaptive management requirements of the

Forest Plan, based on this finding, were first developed by collaborating managers and scientists, serving on an interagency

team charged with defining an adaptive-management process

(Birch and others 1993, Bormann and others 1994b). Forest

Service Chief Jack Ward Thomas reviewed this team’s report

and agreed with much of it, but said that it would not mean anything until the concepts were implemented on the ground. His

suggestion prompted the interagency team to look for a manager partner at the province scale. The Siuslaw National Forest

Supervisor, Jim Furnish, was recommended for the job. We have

collaborated with him—and many other Siuslaw and other

managers and citizens—since then to develop and implement

these ideas. Our writings, especially the chapter for the Chief’s

book (Bormann and others 1999), are a synthesis of existing and

new ideas on adaptive management. They also reflect changes

to our original ideas, arising from frequent interactions and dialogue with Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management

managers.

The concept of learning to achieve sustainable ecosystems

as common ground to support and maintain new partnerships

among managers, scientists, and citizens is being tried in several

partnership learning exercises. Momentum from the current

organizational separation of learning (research) and doing (management) has been a difficult barrier to overcome, but recognition of efficiencies in simultaneously learning and doing is

beginning to emerge.

Learning partnerships and multiple-pathway comparisons—The concept of multiple-pathway comparisons—in

which managers simultaneously implement two or more strategies

on initially similar areas to meet the same goal—rather than relying on a single strategy—is one of the most important ideas from

these syntheses. By first accepting that more than one pathway

can likely achieve a given goal and then by comparing the chosen pathways, managers are seeking to learn, to expand their

decision options over time. Comparing different pathways by

rearranging practices across the landscape is likely to have somewhat higher planning costs than would implementing a single

pathway. Any additional costs, however, likely will be offset by a

lower cost of, and greater incentive to continue, monitoring.

When multiple pathways all achieve the goal, managers can

choose among them to meet additional objectives; for example,

one path may improve elk habitat or mushroom production more

than another. Pathway comparisons also present a new opportunity to connect with diverse societal values, when individual

paths are connected with the actual values of specific groups. 

Learning partnerships and multiple-pathway comparisons

have emerged as especially powerful concepts being adopted even

outside of the Pacific Northwest (Bormann and others 1999).

One barrier to partnerships and multiple pathways, however, is

that people often show little tolerance toward the values of other

people, as expressed in alternative pathways. Overcoming this

barrier means that individuals in a group must temporarily suspend their opposition to alternative views to allow the comparison. Discomfort in including “nonexperts” in the structuredlearning experience is another form of intolerance. Some scientists believe that only scientists have sufficient training and lack

of bias to examine physical evidence and draw conclusions about

■41

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS TO DATE

2 The Eastside Forest Ecosystem Health Assessment was an assessment of the effects of Forest

Service management practices on the sustainability of eastern Oregon and Washington

ecosystems. It recommended methods and practices that could be used to restore stressed

ecosystems.

Managers and stakeholders discussing consequences of alternative 

stand management practices.
the relative success and failure of alternative paths. This point of

view would relegate official learning to researchers and would

continue to apply technology transfer as a one-way transfer of

information from scientists to managers. Multiple pathways are

best built from the bottom up to include diverse societal values;

this approach naturally clashes with the commonly used topdown approaches of most Federal agencies, supported by laws, regulations, and self-imposed limits, such as handbooks and internal

policies. Cross-disciplinary work with collaborating social scientists is helping us to develop strategies to overcome these barriers.

Although many managers have little training or experience

in statistics, they generally value decision-supporting information

and want confidence in interpretations and conclusions. The

most frequent barrier we encountered to applying multiple-pathway comparisons was concern about site-specificity, especially at

watershed and larger scales. Only after developing the concept of

a landscape-similarity analysis did we begin to convince managers

and citizens that initially similar areas could be found at different

scales that could reasonably be treated as replicates in a researchstudy sense. Random allocation of treatments to initially similar

areas is gaining acceptance because of its role in increasing confidence in management-pathway comparisons. 

The Mount Hebo restoration-pathways comparison was created in part to explore adaptive management possibilities at the

project scale. The Cedar-Pollard environmental assessment

(1996)—which includes learning objectives in its purpose and

need statement—was not challenged, and the project has been

installed. It has already influenced design of landscape projects

and helped convince managers that random allocation of treatments (here, stand-scale prescriptions) can work. Research goals

are being addressed simultaneously, including the role of deciduous plants and woody debris in maintaining soil organic matter,

effects of woody debris on bark beetle, and effects of alder and

Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco) on primarymineral weathering, partly for traditional research products and

partly to see how research can help evaluate and understand complex prescriptions. This project cost more than many managers

would have liked, mainly to meet stringent research guidelines for

pretreatment measurements and to pay for associated research,

which emphasizes the need for new low-cost designs. For example, much could be learned from multiple-pathway comparisons

even without monitoring, if managers documented what they did

and where, and if researchers decided later to analyze the comparison retrospectively.

Much of our effort has been in developing and creating

opportunities for adaptive management at scales larger than projects like Mount Hebo because large scales offer high potential for

learning, and manager participation is more economical when the

effort is spread across a large area. No models exist for this scale

yet. We collaborated with the Oregon Coast Adaptive

Management Area (AMA) provincial advisory committee to

develop a “learning design” for a large-scale study in the AMA

(Cunningham 1997). The design process was accepted by the

provincial committee, has been strongly championed by all key

Federal decisionmakers (Forest Service and Bureau of Land

Management) associated with the AMA, and became official on

March 18, 1998. The design will be analyzed in the coastal landscape analysis and modeling study (CLAMS) project.

We started a parallel learning-design project in mid-1997

with Jon Martin, now Ranger of the consolidated Orleans and

Ukanom Districts on the Six Rivers and Klamath National

Forests. The concept for this landscape design began with the

question, “Is biological diversity related to cultural diversity?”

Many culturally diverse groups want a say in how these Forests are

managed: the local Karuk tribe is interested in managing for traditional values (acorns, medicinal plants, willows for baskets, and

as a way to restore their tribal culture); the World Wildlife Fund

has identified this area as one of the most species-rich in North

America and are working with local environmental groups; and

another group is interested in managing hardwoods. The emerging policy study would compare four pathways, each based on different cultural values, but all designed to achieve the goals of the

Forest Plan. Pathways would be randomly assigned to replicate

watersheds, and differences in resulting biodiversity and economic and cultural development would be assessed. Any of these projects, if fully implemented, is likely to contribute to changes in

how decisions will be made for Federal lands. 

Institutionalizing adaptive management—We recognized

that adaptive management would work only if it was quickly institutionalized by management agencies. A citizen collaborator

(Brown 1998) suggested a way to make rapid learning a part of the

everyday lives of agency managers: require that learning objectives

be included in purpose-and-need statements of environmental

documents. The power of this idea is that it puts producing knowledge next to traditional resource objectives, where tradeoffs must

be assessed and balanced. Also, meeting a learning objective

requires that monitoring be tied to a specific question for which

monitoring strategies would be determined when the proposed

action is implemented. The Siuslaw National Forest’s leadership

team adopted our proposal, and their interdisciplinary teams are

now including learning objectives in environmental documents. 

We have begun to explore new roles that may be required for

researchers. Some roles would call for collaboration with managers

and citizens to contribute rigor to how managers’ questions are

framed, to help in designing multiple-pathway comparisons, and to

increase understanding of the role of uncertainty. One emerging

vision is for researchers to develop theories that can be tested at

least in part in multiple-pathway comparisons conducted by

■42

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
managers to produce new learning at a scale relevant to managers. Such comparisons may be less rigorous than traditional

applied-research experiments in that attributing effects to specific practices will be difficult. But rigor likely will apply to comparisons of groups of practices (practice interactions) that make up

different pathways. Rigor also would increase if scientists, officially or unofficially, signed off on statements of learning objectives and the monitoring plans to meet them. Small-scale,

extreme research experiments still would be needed to test narrowly defined questions, and research to develop hypotheses that

can be tested will remain important. Pathway comparisons and

associated research—which seek to integrate rigor and relevance

by defining and testing some new roles and responsibilities for

both scientists and managers—differ from traditional research

and technology transfer. This integration, we argue, is central to

achieving most, if not all, research-agency priorities. When managers pay for large-scale studies and research resources are focused

on components of the manipulations (or future anticipated

manipulations) that can be addressed in more controlled studies,

everybody wins. The net results of such an adaptive-management

system would be to increase both rigor and relevance, and that

manager and citizen participants would gain increased appreciation for rigor.

Although we consciously decided to focus initially on developing real examples before trying to market our ideas widely, the

ideas have spread quickly and are in considerable demand. Our

Canadian counterparts seem especially interested; they have

developed programs that closely parallel ours in British Columbia

and Ontario. Progress now permits us to begin communicating

our ideas to a broader U.S. audience this year. We first envisioned

institutionalizing adaptive management by designing and writing

environmental documents. We observed that managers consider

environmental documents as a hurdle to getting projects underway, and that legality of approaches being used is somewhat

shaky, although they are not yet being appealed. Managers have

shown great interest in designing and writing these documents

with a different focus, to clearly and simply explain decisions to a

broad citizen audience, to build a stronger connection between

the evidence they supply and the line officer’s decision, to include

learning objectives to direct monitoring, and eventually, to produce documents at little or no additional cost. We are working

with them on these broader goals.

Ecosystem management decision-support systems—

Effective environmental assessment requires integrated analysis of the many and diverse conditions that apply to a geographic region. Because a formal framework for constructing

such analyses for landscapes has been lacking, the EMDSS

program (Reynolds and others 1996) was developed.

Although mathematical models exist for some conditions of

interest in an assessment, many conditions are only understood

qualitatively. Because its knowledge-based component is based on

logic, the program allows reasoning about problems in the

absence of precise mathematical models. Even when many mathematical models exist to evaluate biophysical conditions, integrating results is difficult. The program provides a logical framework in which many different quantitative and qualitative analyses can be meaningfully integrated. The logical formalism of the

program also provides a basis for computing the influence of missing information, which can be used to greatly streamline data

acquisition. 

The EMDSS program is a framework for evaluating information at landscape scales to feed into an adaptive management system. The architecture of the system is general enough that it can

be applied to almost any assessment problem at any geographic

scale and in any geographic region (for example, watershed,

provincial, or regional analyses). Assessments, facilitated by the

program, provide a basis for subsequent planning and can equally

well be used to evaluate monitoring results, thus completing the

cycle. The EMDSS program is being tested at three scales:

Scale

Project Watershed Province

Tree species Coho salmon Wood production

site suitability (Oncorhynchus kisutch) compatibility with

habitat suitability other resource values

Summer-run steelhead Disturbance

(Oncorhynchus mykiss management 

[salmo garrdneri 

Richardson]) habitat 

suitability 

Northern spotted owl Reserve system design

(Strix occidentalis for conservation

caurina) habitat of biodiversity

suitability 

■43

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS TO DATE

Decision-support technology aids land managers in choosing 

between many complex scenarios.
Future directions for applying knowledge-based reasoning technology to inform those making future assessments and decisions

may include revising the program to help manager-researcher-citizen partnerships design multiple-pathway comparisons, record

expected outcomes, write decision and National Environmental

Policy Act (NEPA) documents, and plan and organize monitoring to address learning objectives.

Synthesis Findings

Adaptive management cannot be implemented by creating

standards and guidelines—The team of managers and scientists

assigned to implement adaptive management concluded that

adaptive management means learning and then adapting based

on what was learned, which is impossible under a cookbook

approach (Bormann and others 1994b). Because the Bureau of

Land Management, state, and Forest Service Regional Offices

normally change practices by developing new standards and

guidelines, they cannot easily apply adaptive management.

Practitioners must deal with local realities, but management

actions have been controlled and limited by standards and guidelines. Effective learning is likely when researchers work with onthe-ground decisionmakers. For these reasons, catalyzed by the

Chief’s comment, the adaptive-management process team decided to collaborate with Forest Service supervisors and rangers,

Bureau of Land Management District and Resource Area managers, and their staffs. North Coast Province managers, demonstrably open to change, have joined us in these efforts.

Evidence to support this finding can be found in the history

of actions in the management agencies. Although the Forest

Service Regional and Bureau of Land Management State Offices

accepted the framework for adaptive management developed by

the implementation team, few of their decisions or actions can be

attributed to the framework. Creating and maintaining separate

committees to implement adaptive management and monitoring

reflects either a dominant view—that simply by monitoring, they

are doing adaptive management—or a fundamental misunderstanding of the need for monitoring to be part of a larger adaptivemanagement system. In contrast, some of the provinces and

AMAs are making progress, including learning in everyday management actions.

Adaptive management must be institutionalized to be successful—Institutions usually have internal mechanisms for

change, and understanding those mechanisms is required to catalyze it. Researchers recognized, based on Brown’s (1998) suggestion, that adding learning objectives to purpose-and-need statements in decision and NEPA documents would instantly institutionalize adaptive management. In effect, learning would then be

considered along with traditional management objectives in the

normal course of implementing projects. Evidence to support this

finding can be found in the achievements in the North Coast

Province and AMA, which can partly be attributed to an official

decision by the Siuslaw National Forest to require learning objectives in most new decision documents. And the development of

landscape learning designs (Cunningham 1997) also can be

directly attributed to the contributions of researchers to planning

for the North Coast AMA.

Learning to fish is better than being given a day’s catch—

The role of research in learning in an adaptive management system is not yet clear. What is clear is that management goals have

become more complex. Not only is planning needed to meet traditional commodity production and resource protection goals, but

many new objectives have been identified, such as ensuring sustainability, meeting habitat needs of many species, increasing

concern for the needs and wants of local communities, and collaborating among Federal agencies. Research, with stable or

declining funds, will be hard pressed to supply the knowledge

managers will require to achieve sustainable ecosystems.

Managers and citizens are needed to help learn, and allocating

some research resources to helping others learn and learn more

effectively likely is required to meet the societal goal of sustainable ecosystems. The learning-to-fish statement is more of a

hypothesis than a finding. Questions that need answers include: 

• Can blocks of landscape be found that are sufficiently similar

for comparing alternative pathways?

• Can these landscape comparisons be made rigorous?

• Can researchers help by reviewing the quality of the learning

designs managers propose?

Decision-support systems need to connect decisions to

underlying evidence—Supporting decisions by Forest Service

and Bureau of Land Management line officers begins with an

appreciation for the legal requirements these decisionmakers must

meet. The Administrative Procedures Act of 1946, supported by

case law from the Supreme Court, states that decisions by executive-agency decisionmakers must demonstrate a clear rationale

connecting the decision with underlying evidence.

Decisionmakers cannot legally rely on “black-box” models to give

them answers; they need to understand the supporting evidence

to be fully prepared to defend the decision. They also cannot rely

on fragmented, unsynthesized research results; they need to know

how the results fit together, their tradeoffs, and their inconsistencies. Decisionmakers need to understand the uncertainties of current understandings. Historically, forestry decision-support systems were developed to fit the “black-box” model. The widely

used model FORPLAN, for example, predicted allowable sale

quantities for individual Forests. The workings of the linear-programming model were generally poorly understood by the specialists who used the model, some of whom are reported to have made

■44

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
repeated runs to produce allowable sale quantities that fit with

the political expectation. Because the workings of the model were

so obscure, especially to the decisionmakers, they seem to have

been used more as a blanket justification than as a means to legally explain decision rationale. The EMDSS program and new

approaches to writing decision and NEPA documents being

developed with Forest Plan funds represent an approach to avoid

the “black-box” pitfall. 

A systematic approach to adaptive management recognizes

the importance of learning through assessments and evaluation

based on what is known at that time. Assessments at the landscape scale, as called for in the Forest Plan’s record of decision, are

often limited by methods to integrate the many and diverse biological, physiographic, social, and economic conditions.

Knowledge-based decision-support systems are needed to conduct

these assessments. 

IMPLICATIONS FOR IMPLEMENTING

THE FOREST PLAN

What have we learned about Forest Plan assumptions?

• Adaptive management direction in the Forest Plan was 

not well defined, and managers, scientists, and citizens have

struggled to adopt this new way of doing business. 

• Many benefits are beginning to emerge, some of which were

not envisioned in the Forest Plan. For example, timber sales

that included research objectives have been challenged less

frequently than those without them. 

What are the implications for managing at large spatial 

and long temporal scales?

• Adaptive management probably represents the only 

mechanism for learning at scales appropriate to management.

Research agencies do not have the resources to conduct

experiments at landscape or larger scales.

• Adaptive management has proved much easier to implement

at stand than at landscape scales. Managers already were

accustomed to managing and implementing research studies

at stand scales

• Geographical information system, modeling, and decisionsupport technologies are essential to managing at large spatial

and long temporal scales.

Are new approaches to planning and implementing required?

• Learning while managing requires that actions be designed to

produce new knowledge. Planning therefore needs new

emphasis on creating comparisons of alternative management

pathways to speed learning.

• Adding learning objectives to NEPA documents is a way to

jump-start efforts to speed learning by integrating it into a

familiar planning process already part of the job of agency

managers. 

What new research questions have emerged?

• To what extent is learning in an adaptive management 

framework required to achieve ecosystem sustainability, as 

suggested by the emerging understanding of the magnitude 

of uncertainty?

• What institutional barriers slow Federal agencies from 

becoming learning organizations? How can these barriers 

be lowered?

Is the need for integrating disciplines apparent in adaptive

management?

• Science disciplines have not been integrated to the extent

envisioned in the Forest Plan, partly because of disciplinary

barriers inherent to the science community; the interconnectedness of ecosystem functions argues for increased focus on

overcoming these barriers. The disciplines need to be integrated at the outset, when research is being planned, not 

after it is done.

• Adaptive management asks integrated questions; refining

questions and designing management comparisons, as part 

of adaptive management, is a powerful mechanism to make

integration happen.

• Decision-support programs represent an important application of technology to overcome natural barriers to integration.

ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT 

AND DECISION-SUPPORT TOPICS 

STILL TO BE ADDRESSED

There are several topics that still need to be addressed.

These include:

• Researchers and managers need more experience working

together, and they need to further define their roles,

which could include an official role for researchers in

reviewing and approving learning designs.

• Researchers and managers need to learn more about the

diversity of successful learning strategies that may exist in the

Pacific Northwest and beyond.

■45

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS TO DATE
■46

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

• Attempts at creating new adaptive management concepts and

physical models should be continued; administrators need to

be patient in letting these ideas mature.

• The EMDSS program is being tested at project, watershed,

and regional scales, but few definitive results on its usefulness

are available as yet. Effective application is expected to reduce

data acquisition costs by as much as 50 percent per assessment

and to improve the quality by increasing the integration of

analytical results.

• Management and research institutions currently fail to meet

criteria for learning organizations (Senge 1990); studies are

needed to test ways administrators could improve the agency

environment for learning, and support rather than hinder creative leaders and “early adopters.”

❧

ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT AREAS:

SYNTHESIS OF AN ONGOING

EXPERIMENT1

George H. Stankey and Roger N. Clark2

STUDIES AND SIGNIFICANT FINDINGS

In both the Pacific Northwest (PNW) and Pacific

Southwest (PSW) Research Stations, research within the adaptive management areas (AMAs) largely can be grouped into five

basic categories: 

• Improve understanding of, and processes for, developing latesuccessional forest conditions. 

• Develop innovative approaches to validation monitoring 

at the operational scale. 

• Develop alternative strategies and approaches for managing

riparian buffers. 

• Improve understanding of natural disturbance regimes as 

the basis for landscape design. 

• Study social acceptability of various forest management 

conditions and prescriptions.

In addition, in the Pacific Southwest, scientists working in

the Hayfork AMA have given considerable attention to studies of

how local community benefits are affected by differing timber sale

and contracting mechanisms. They also have directed research

attention at developing economically and ecologically viable

methods for small-diameter wood harvesting, yarding, sorting,

processing, and marketing and have studied several issues pertinent to developing nontimber forest products in association with

various forest management prescriptions. Specific studies and

findings include those shown in table 7.

Although research in the AMAs is still in its early stages,

important insights are emerging.

• In the Little River and North Coast AMAs work, studies focus

on estimating the role of proportional thinning and burning

prescriptions in fostering old-growth composition and structure. A hypothesis being tested is that the primary mechanism

for developing old-growth from mature forests is overstory mor1 This synthesis is adopted from Stankey and Clark, in prep.

2 Roger N. Clark is a program manager, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Pacific Northwest Research Station, 4043 Roosevelt Way NW, Seattle, WA 98105.

The Hayfork community adapts to changing social, economic, 

and ecological considerations.
tality and canopy gap formation. The work shows significant

differences between Coast Range and Cascade Range oldgrowth forests in terms of ages, development histories, composition, and structure. Understanding such differences is key to

defining desired future conditions of current stands.

• In the Snoqualmie Pass AMA, the interaction of habitat fragmentation and the barrier effects of the Interstate 90 corridor

combine to create significant effects on the long-term viability

of several threatened, endangered, or sensitive species, including the northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina), lynx

(Lynx canadensis), and grizzly bear (Ursus americanus). Other

research indicates that plant association, which integrates

many physiographic and topographic variables, has a strong

potential for predicting the concurrence of fire, insect, and disease disturbance.

• In the Central Cascades, Snoqualmie Pass, and Hayfork AMAs,

the role and influence of natural disturbance processes is being

studied. In the Central Cascades AMA, the historical role of

agents such as fires and floods have been integrated into

■47

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS TO DATE

Scientist appraises ground after area was thinned and burned.

Interstate acts as a barrier to

migration of some species,

and poses visual management

challenges.

Table 7—Adaptive management areas studies and

significant findings

Studies Significant findings

Little River and North Coast The work reveals significant

AMAs studies on role of differences between Coast Range

proportional thinning and and Cascade old-growth 

burning prescriptions in forests in terms of ages,

fostering old-growth development histories

composition and structure. composition, and structure.

Snoqualmie Pass The interaction of habitat

AMA studies. fragmentation and the barrier

effects of the Interstate 90

corridor combine to create 

significant effects on the longterm viability of several threatened and endangered species.

Plant association, which integrates many physiographic and

topographic variables, has a 

strong potential for predicting 

the occurrence of fire, insect, 

and disease disturbance.

Central Cascades, Snoqualmie Road location in the landscape

Pass, and Hayfork AMAs, the strongly affects responses,

role and influence of natural including sediment movedisturbances are being studied. ment and accumulation,

to flooding.

Strong evidence shows oldgrowth forest sustainability is 

associated with decreasing 

distance from the Cascade 

crest, reflecting both a temperature moisture gradient and 

associated changes in disturbance regime.

Cispus AMA Sampling techniques have been

developed to permit more

accurate monitoring of 

vegetation occurring in abnormal distributions (such as 

clumpy and many mushrooms).
landscape management

design processes. A key

finding is that road

location in the landscape strongly affects

responses, including

sediment movement

and accumulation, to

flooding. In the Snoqualmie Pass AMA,

strong evidence associates old-growth forest

sustainability with decreasing distance from

the Cascade crest, reflecting both a temperature and moisture gradient and associated

changes in disturbance

regime. In the Hayfork

AMA, the economic

aspects of thinning as a

means of achieving fuels reduction to permit reintroduction of

fire is being studied, with a particular focus on how markets to

make thinning a profitable practice might be created. This latter

work is noteworthy as it has involved close collaborative working

and funding relations involving not only the PSW Research

Station, but the Forest Service Pacific Southwest Region and the

Watershed Research and Training Center as well.

• In the Olympic AMA, a way to measure efforts to accelerate

developing late-seral forest conditions in second-growth managed forests is being examined. These studies focus on whether

measures of biotic integrity in various vertebrate, plant, and

fungal communities, and soil food webs can be used as indices

of success. In addition, the link among small mammals,

amphibians, and late-successional forest conditions is being

explored. In the Goosenest AMA, accelerating development of

late-seral characteristics in young-growth stands is the research

emphasis. An interdisciplinary team is studying the response of

vegetation, small mammals, birds, and insects to four silvicultural treatments in a rigorous, statistically valid field design.

One specific treatment involves prescribed fire and its effects

not only on late-seral development but also on wildlife and

vegetation.

• In the Cispus and Applegate AMAs, the underlying validity and

appropriateness of the standards and guidelines for riparian

management are being studied. Collaborative efforts between

the Cispus AMA and the Central Cascades AMA are evaluating the economics of alternative systems of meeting the Aquatic

Conservation Strategy other than ones in the Standard and

Guide. In the Cispus AMA, the efficacy of uniform riparian

buffers and the potential for silvicultural treatments within

buffers to develop late-successional structure are being tested. In

the Applegate AMA, studies are testing how standards and

guidelines for buffer widths apply to the environmental conditions found in southwestern Oregon, in particular their role in

providing critical refuge and dispersal habitat.

• In the Little River AMA, work has been proposed, but the listing of the Umpqua cutthroat trout (Salmo clarki Richardson)

has resulted in a virtual prohibition of activities that might

jeopardize it or result in incidental “take” of the fish. The

changing context within which the Little River area is managed challenges us to rethink traditionally used silvicultural and

logging systems and to consider new multiscaled approaches to

■48

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

Landslide due to heavy rains clogs 

stream with logs and debris.

Measuring trees.

Riparian buffer widths are tested on the Blue River in Oregon.
management. The events on the Little River AMA are

reminders of the effect of the sociopolitical context within

which all forest management activities, including research,

operate and how we need to remain sensitive to such changes,

lest all human activity be banned.

• In the North Coast and Cispus AMA, developing monitoring

protocols is the research emphasis. Monitoring is a key element

of the Forest Plan and of Judge Dwyer’s decision on its adequacy. In the North Coast AMA, research focuses on developing

improved prediction of the long-term effects of alternative silvicultural prescriptions. Emphasis is being given to developing

simple field protocols and digitized air photos for characterizing

horizontal and vertical complexity at the stand scale. In the

Cispus AMA, sampling techniques have been developed to

permit more accurate monitoring of vegetation in abnormal

distributions (for example, clumpy), such as many mushrooms.

• In the Central Cascades, Hayfork, and Olympic AMAs, developing innovative approaches to improving understanding,

communicating findings, and fostering a collaborative

approach to management and research is the focus. In the

Central Cascades, scientists have applied these approaches

with research on natural disturbances, including landslides,

road drainage problems, stream and riparian changes, and the

response of aquatic biota to the February 1996 floods. In the

Hayfork AMA, the contract social scientist has regularly distributed results of her research to local managers, the public,

and contractors with whom the Forest Service is working. She

also has distributed research findings through the local newspaper and libraries, and to the local Board of Supervisors to

ensure they are aware of her work and its implications for local

citizens. The Olympic AMA lead scientist has undertaken

efforts to create a learning environment, using conventional

approaches, such as field trips and seminars, but also experimenting with a reverse technology transfer workshop model,

involving the documentation and synthesis of knowledge held

by long-term, on-the-ground managers. 

• In the Hayfork AMA, various participatory techniques have

been used in testing harvest levels that would be ecologically

sustainable for species jointly agreed on as priorities by harvesters of nontimber forest products, agency management

staffs, and researchers. Efforts to effectively communicate and

disseminate research results have been combined with harvester training and public education workshops, and driven by

a central concern to improve understanding about the nontimber forest products industry.

IMPLICATIONS

The body of research undertaken within the AMAs, indicates several generalizations. The following remarks are organized

around the five topics contained in the other sections of this

chapter: (1) validation of assumptions in the FEMAT report, (2)

spatial and temporal scale, (3) planning and implementation, (4)

new research topics, and (5) cross-disciplinary implications.

Concluding remarks about the future of adaptive management

and the AMAs follows.

FEMAT Report Assumptions: Validated or Not?

Limited progress in validation of assumptions can be cited.

Although some work has been undertaken, particularly in the

efficacy of riparian area buffers and of alternative silvicultural

pathways to old growth, the work is limited in its extent and in

its potential applicability outside individual AMAs. Reasons for

this limited progress range from the relatively small commitment

of research support to AMA work, to the risk aversive nature of

management; a telling shortfall of the AMA experiment. A large

potential effect is that the design of the Forest Plan as a “phased”

program, with shifts driven by evolving knowledge derived from

an adaptive management approach, led by work in the AMAs,

will not come about, and that current allocations and prescriptive

guidelines will remain largely unchanged.

Spatial and temporal scale—Both the spatial and temporal

scale of work in the AMAs is bounded by its distribution.

Concentrated in the western portions of Oregon and

Washington, the spatial variability of the AMA system is limited,

and the application of any results across, for example, all the

provinces would be constrained by geographic variables. In addition, much of the research is short term (1 to 2 years). No major

long-term studies are currently underway.

Planning and implementation—The direct application of

results from AMA research and the involvement of AMA scientists in planning and implementation is most noticeable in the

Applegate and Central Cascades AMAs. In the Central Cascades

AMA, the extensive collaboration among scientists from the

PNW Research Station and Oregon State University and area

managers has been instrumental in developing and implementing

the Augusta Creek landscape management plan (appendix 4).

Based on an improved understanding of disturbance events and

processes, the plan represents an exciting example of adaptive

management in action. In the Applegate AMA, the history of

close interaction among local citizens, area managers, and scientists has produced novel levels of involvement among these

stakeholders and has had significant impacts on improving the

understanding of and support for science in land management.

The Applegate AMA probably represents the most effective

demonstration of learning that has occurred in the AMA system,

■49

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS TO DATE
a product of the long-term, continuing interaction among key

local participants—citizens, managers, and scientists.

New research topics—Research undertaken within the

AMAs has not led to major identification of new research topics or directions. The various projects have had the effect, however, of further clarifying and strengthening recognition for the

following: 

• The need for a stronger social science emphasis, focused on

how learning can better be achieved

• Improved understanding of institutional barriers to, and alternatives for, incorporating various forms of knowledge into

decisionmaking processes

• Improved understanding of how public judgments are formed

and of the social acceptability of alternative forest management prescriptions and conditions

Cross-Disciplinary Implications

Progress or the lack thereof, regarding this last topic, flows

directly from the above paragraph. The body of AMA research

currently underway remains almost exclusively focused on biophysical issues; moreover, much of the work remains fundamentally functional at its core. For example, work on modified silvicultural prescriptions is missing a component dealing with

wildlife effects. At the same time, major opportunities for crossdisciplinary links could be better seized with both an extended

timeframe and improved levels of support. 

In addition to these standardized topics, we want to close

with some additional comments on the future of the AMAs and

adaptive management. These remarks derive from the nearly 5

years of involvement with the AMAs, the AMA coordinators,

and the AMA lead scientists.

Learning how to learn in the AMAs—Although learning

how to learn is essential to the concept of adaptive management,

it is easier said than done. Learning requires forethought, planning, and specific actions. We also need to acknowledge that

learning occurs in many ways and these differing ways are appropriate in different contexts.

A certain tension can produce insight about the relation of

science and the policy process. On the one hand, scientists, citizens, and managers need freedom to try new ways of doing business, and opportunities for such experimentation often require

rapid response, where the deliberative planning that characterizes scientific studies is not possible. On the other hand, monitoring and learning why formal documentation is absent are difficult, particularly where possible modification of standards and

guidelines is involved. In studies sponsored by the PNW

Research Station to test the Forest Plan standards and guidelines,

a peer-reviewed, formal experimental design (including an

approved study plan) should be in place before a study is initiated and funded. Opportunities exist to conduct projects that need

not conform to such rigorous, scientific standards. Although

opportunities are available for scientists to contribute ideas, theories, and methods, flexibility for informal exploration of new

ideas and approaches also is needed; results from such work could

lead to both improved management practices and new and challenging research questions.

Are we making progress?—The extent to which the

AMA system has fully achieved the vision, objectives, and

purposes described in the FEMAT report and the Forest Plan is

problematic. Concern remains, both in professional ranks and

outside, that despite the challenging, lofty rhetoric underlying

the AMAs, in practice, little is new or changed. Serious questions remain about the relation of citizens, managers, and scientists and about their respective roles and responsibilities.

On the other hand, expecting dramatic advances is probably unrealistic: we are exploring new ground where structures and processes are emerging, tentative, and formative.

Presuming that the AMAs are a failure, that nothing has

been learned, or that no progress has occurred is a mistake,

however. Four fundamental lessons have emerged:

Beginning is hard—Across the 10 AMAs, various conditions, histories, and experiences exist in how well prepared the

AMAs are to take on a new approach to management. For

example, the Applegate AMA has benefited from the strong

sense of social coherence, meaning, and purpose of the

Applegate Partnership, created 2 years before the AMA was

designated. The Central Cascades AMA took form within a

long history of collaboration between local managers and

researchers from the PNW Research Station and Oregon State

University. But in areas such as the Little River or Finney

AMAs, new structures, processes, and relations need time to

develop. An important lesson is how new forms of collaboration develop across the AMA system. Another lesson is that it

will take time to allow the AMA experiment adequate opportunity to find success. Premature closure, driven by bureaucratic or political pressures for immediate results, needs to be

resisted.

Adaptive management requires a change in culture—By

definition, adaptive management requires operating in the

face of ambiguity, risk, and uncertainty. Given the need to

forge new relations among managers, researchers, and citizens,

we are likely to need to develop new structures, processes, and

institutions. The experience we gain as time passes will provide indications of what these new features will look like.

Although the tensions among various players developed during

this period often are seen as a source of conflict, they also can

lead to productive interactions because of the new perspectives

and cultural outlooks they introduce.

■50

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
■51

The capacity of current institutional structures and

processes to practice adaptive management needs to be evaluated—Current natural resource management institutions are

grounded in bureaucratic structures, a belief in science, objectivity, quantification, and a conception of problems as subject to resolution through rational analysis. Adaptive management, to be

successful, apparently needs to combine these strengths with

innovative, often unconventional structures and processes.

Growing interest in models of ecosystem and adaptive management place unprecedented strains on current institutions.

Structures and processes that take into account multiple values,

longer timeframes, broader spatial scales over multiple tenures, a

concern with underlying ecological and socioeconomic processes,

and a more inclusive approach to decisionmaking are all necessary components.

Significant barriers remain to be overcome—The future of

the AMAs remains problematic. A critical determinant of the

future of AMAs lies in a more explicit expression of organizational support and recognition of the key role they play in the

evolution of the Forest Plan. The lack of such an understanding

could prove fatal to the AMA concept, fostering a view of them

as a minor, separable bureaucratic component of the Forest

Plan—another source of competition for limited funds—rather

than an essential venue where learning about the practices and

processes necessary to implement ecosystem management across

the region can happen. In the vision outlined in the FEMAT

report and reaffirmed in the Forest Plan, AMAs represent an

allocation where key processes of the Forest Plan—”survey and

manage” and inventory and monitoring protocols (see appendix

4), standards and guidelines, innovative links with managers and

communities—could be developed and, in the longer run, implemented across the matrix and reserves. Adaptive management

areas also were envisioned as the venue for initiating the search

for innovative and creative alternatives to the generally conservative management strategy of the Forest Plan, grounded in the

precautionary principle, and implemented through a set of prescriptive standards and guidelines. These alternatives were to be

grounded in carefully documented and rigorously conducted

research, but the AMAs were explicitly identified as the setting

in which such experimentation was to be encouraged and which

would serve as the basis from which modifications to prescriptive

management across the region could be undertaken. Thus, creative

exploration of scientifically sound practices in the AMAs would

catalyze the progressive implementation of subsequent phases of

the Forest Plan. Unless these barriers are overcome, the likelihood

is low that the AMAs can achieve the vision and potential

ascribed to them in the FEMAT report and the Forest Plan.

Although such challenges are real and important, the AMAs

represent opportunities for which we have been given license and

latitude to think and behave innovatively and creatively.

Nowhere is this creativity more important than in exploring new

institutional arrangements to respond to the challenges

described. Risk is inevitable, and the irony of adaptive management is that the most significant learning often derives from failures; that is, experiments that did not turn out as expected.

Again, this source of learning highlights the importance of adequate documentation of what was expected, what happened, and

what factors likely affected the outcome.

CONCLUSION

The policy experiment that AMAs represent is a major

opportunity for both research and management. The vision of

AMAs empowers us to experiment, to test and challenge, and to

be creative and innovative. If we fail to seize the moment, a grand

opportunity will be lost, perhaps foreshadowing further reliance

on statutory prescriptions in land management.

The idea of learning from actions is central to adaptive management. But learning requires attention, forethought, and reflection. If attention is not devoted to these qualities—specifying

assumptions and rationale, identifying causal factors, documenting actions, monitoring and recording outcomes—learning will

be lost.

The search for new ways to work in research institutions and

across legal, organizational, and disciplinary boundaries is challenging. Commentators on the future of ecosystem management

point to the lack of institutional capacity as the most serious constraint before us. Their conclusion seems equally appropriate to

the future of adaptive management.

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS TO DATE
SOCIOECONOMIC RESEARCH

Cecilia Danks1 and Richard W. Haynes

STUDIES AND SIGNIFICANT FINDINGS

Changing public values as well as new understandings of

late-successional ecosystems drove events leading to the

Northwest Forest Plan (Forest Plan). These changing public values include concerns about the changing mix of goods and services produced from Federal lands, as well as concerns about who

gains and loses from changes in land management. These concerns led to including social scientists on the Forest Ecosystem

Management Assessment Team (the team): both economists

focusing on resource outputs and valuation and on employment,

and sociologists focusing on the potential impacts of reduced timber outputs on communities. The Forest Plan emphasized

enhanced public participation, and the accompanying Economic

Adjustment Initiative addressed the anticipated decline in economic benefits caused by declining timber harvests.

Socioeconomic research for the Forest Plan has addressed four

main areas: benefits, participation, values, and well-being. The

resulting research is shown in table 8 and discussed in the following sections.

Much of it has focused on better understanding the relation

among the people, processes, economies, and businesses of forest communities and Forest Service management. This focus on

forest communities is merited for several reasons. Both the economic and social assessments in the FEMAT report identified

forest communities, rather than regional and national

economies, as bearing the greatest socioeconomic impacts of the

Forest Plan. The Forest Plan acknowledged the relation

between National Forests and nearby forest communities by

encouraging planning and implementation that address local

needs. The record of decision (ROD) specified that “Adaptive

Management Areas (AMAs) are intended to be prototypes of

how forest communities might be sustained.” And “one reason

for locating Adaptive Management Areas adjacent to communities experiencing adverse economic impacts is to provide

opportunity for social and economic benefits to these areas.”

Despite this focus, research analyses also have included issues

and information that go beyond community borders.

Socioeconomic research has sought to provide Forest Service

managers information that can assist them with providing social

and economic benefits to affected communities and promoting

public participation. 

Several lessons about the economic aspects of land management planning for ecosystem management have emerged from

Forest Plan-supported and other coincidental research. Much of

the discussion about jobs, for example, is a debate over political

choices. The actual economic impacts measured across whole

economies are modest. The potential social impacts (including

retraining, further commutes, and altered community infrastructure) are additional considerations in the policy process. An

emerging issue is how to better identify those economies with less

ability to deal with changes in their economic bases. Avoiding

impacts in these areas is a more definitive goal than the traditional economic goals that focus on the loss of a specific number

of jobs in a specific community. This approach also recognizes the

propensity of humans to adapt to economic changes and opportunities. Another issue is the extent that forestry is a driver of economic growth. Given that recreation opportunities are often

cited as a determinant of migration to the Pacific Northwest, it is

possible that the central role of forestry has shifted from commodities to noncommodities. This is not to say that wood-products employment is not important in specific areas, only that

growth in other economic sectors has exceeded reductions in the

forest products industry (despite reductions in the forest sector,

job growth in the Pacific Northwest is averaging 2 percent per

year [Warren 1998]). 

■52

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

1 Cecilia Dands is director of socioeconomic research, Watershed Research and Training

Center, P.O. Box 356, Hayfork, CA 96041.

People

Forest

products

(business)

Institutions Socioeconomic

research

Economy Forest

products

Social and economic research has focused on better understanding 

of the relation among people, processes, economies, and businesses

of forest communities and the Forest Service.
IMPLICATIONS

The forest plan has reshaped Federal forest management

across the region and changed much of the agenda for socioeconomic research. 

FEMAT Report Assumptions: Validated or Not?

The significant Forest Plan related socioeconomic research

findings can be grouped into those around: community characterization, monitoring, community adaptation, economic

adjustment, public involvement, nontimber forest products, and

restoration. For the most part, many of these findings amplify

the assumptions made in the team’s report, but in the cases of

economic adjustment and broad-scale impacts, they suggest

modification.

Community characterization—The FEMAT report

described the diverse composition of forest communities and

their unique relations with Federal forests. It assessed potential

impacts of different levels of resource outputs and argued for

greater public participation. Although using the best available

information and science, all of these efforts made assumptions

that merit testing, and each has led to further research needs.

Several research projects addressed assumptions made in the

team’s analyses.

Broadly, Forest Plan-funded research found that socioeconomic impacts on forest communities do not depend exclusively on timber outputs. The only information that the social

assessment scientists on the team used for their impact assessment was the board feet of timber output associated with each

option. The implicit assumption that community impact

depended exclusively on the quantity of resource outputs, gave

managers few tools with which to address significant social and

economic impacts. Research has found that local employment

can be affected by such factors as how work is packaged, rather

than by simple output levels. It also has documented how rapid

economic and associated social change has diversified some

communities.

For example, a review of 6 years of timber sales and service

contracts for the Trinity National Forest showed that Trinity

businesses got a small percentage of the work (Danks and

Jungwirth 1998, McDermott and Danks 1997). This suggests

that how timber sales and forest work are contracted can be more

important in determining the potential benefits to local forest

communities than how much timber is harvested. Several factors, such as the size of contract or sale, bid procedure and consistency of work opportunities, affected the proportion of timber

sales and service contracts that go to businesses based in local

communities. Recent trends toward larger service contracts and

more complicated bidding procedures inadvertently act to

exclude local contractors. 

■53

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS TO DATE

Table 8—Socioeconomic research and significant findings 

Studies Significant findings

Socioeconomic monitoring How timber sales and forest

of ecosystem management work are contracted can 

be more important in determining the potential benefits to local

forest communities than how 

much timber is harvested.

Community-based Socioeconomic conditions differ

socioeconomic assessment greatly between communities,

even within a small 

timber-dependent county. 

County-level data can obscure 

effects at the community level.

Nontimber forest products Permits issued to harvest

harvesting nontimber forest products 

have increased significantly

in recent years. Involving 

harvesters and Forest Service managers improves focus 

of research and dissemination 

of results.

Applegate partnership Several factors are 

case study important for collaborative

groups, including creating

a vision statement, building 

trust, airing conflict, creating 

inclusive forums, building leadership, and coping with constituent expectations.

Individual adaptation to Family history, occupational

changes in forest policy and identity, adaptability, and

the timber industry attachment to place

were all found to play

an important role in displaced 

timber workers' success in 

adapting. Most interviewees 

are continuing to work in the 

woods, earning less money, 

and willingly using more 

"lighter touch" methods of 

timber harvesting.

Where are the jobs? Estimates of job losses are

a poor proxy for changes

in economic well-being.

Benefits of restoring habitat The benefits appear

in Fish Creek greater than the costs.

Watershed restoration efforts Conflicts between economic

"Jobs-in-the- Woods" and ecological objectives

program. are inherent to watershed

restoration, thus decisions 

need to explicitly weigh the 

objectives.
Exceptionally low income, high poverty, and high unemployment are found in the communities of Trinity County (one of

the two most timber-dependent counties in the Forest Plan

region, according to the team’s economic assessment). At the

county level, poverty is not correlated with timber harvest levels,

and employment is somewhat correlated with timber harvest only

until 1992. Two years after a sawmill closed, assessment data show

an increase in poverty at the community level and a decrease in

population at the county level attributed to the mill closure

(Danks and Jungwirth 1998).

Monitoring—Several efforts have attempted to look at how to

monitor for changes in social and economic conditions. At the

broad scale, an atlas was developed for the spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) region that illustrates the dimensions, location,

magnitude, and direction of social and economic change during the

period 1989-95 (Christensen and others 2000). It synthesizes the

diversity and the social and economic health of the spotted owl

region by examining fundamental attributes of the region,

provinces, and communities including information about the people, their settlements, and the natural resources. Such data sets the

stage for dialogue, debate, and developing a set of indicators to

monitor the dimensions of well-being for sustainable development.

At the finer scale, some limited community level monitoring

support the prediction that the socioeconomic impacts of declining timber harvest would be felt most strongly in timber-dependent communities. Due in part to the difficulty of collecting reliable and comparable community-level data, however, effects to

communities throughout the Forest Plan area have not been comprehensively studied.

Community adaptability—Work is underway to develop and

understand measures of community capacity and to better understand the link between community capacity and resource management actions in rural areas.

In terms of individual adaptation to changes in forest policy

and the timber industry, exploratory case studies in two small timber communities in southwest Oregon found that family history,

occupational identity, adaptability, and attachment to place all

play an important role in the success of displaced timber workers

at adjusting to changes in their communities brought about by

industrial reorganization and policy changes in timber management. Most interviewees are continuing to work in the woods,

earning less money, and willingly using more “lighter touch” methods of timber harvesting (Williams and Sturtevant 1999).

Economic adjustment—The implementation of the Forest

plan assumed there would be positive economic adjustments that

would offset many of the social and economic consequences of

reduced Federal timber flows. Much of this was tied to the

assumed effectiveness of the Economic Adjustment Initiative.

Studies of the initiative found that it resulted in enough positive

employment, business, and community capacity effects to offset

adverse changes in timber-dependent communities (Raettig and

Christensen 1999; Raettig and others 1998). These studies like

others found that the impacts of declining timber harvests were

most important at the county and community level and that the

economy of the owl region outperformed the national economy.

Although the plan itself recognized the localized nature of

economic impacts, it used job losses to set the context for economic impacts. Since the Forest Plan has been completed and

implemented, few impacts on the economies in the Pacific

Northwest have been observed despite the loss of what was politically deemed a large number of jobs in the wood products industry.2 This raises questions about the assumed importance and

power of jobs as a proxy for economic well-being. Haynes and

others (1997, 1998) explored the limitations of job measures and

suggested an approach for identifying economies that might be

affected by changes in land management, which has several steps.

The first step is to characterize functioning economies in the

Douglas-fir region (western Oregon and Washington). The next

step uses county data to understand differences within the functioning economies both from an economics perspective and from

a broad social perspective. The last step combines economic and

social data to identify counties whose economies might be

impacted by changes in Federal timber flows (these areas account

for only 13 percent of the regional population and 32 percent of

the area in the Douglas-fir region (Haynes and others 1998).

Public participation in forest planning—The Forest Plan

calls for forest management that is both ecosystem based and

community oriented. This approach assumes collaboration of forest managers and local stakeholder groups. 

The FEMAT report called for greater public participation

and citizen and agency collaboration. An underlying assumption

was that such enhanced participation would reduce conflict and

lead to better resource and social outcomes. Some case studies of

successful collaborations suggest this assumption is valid,

although more extensive comparative studies are needed to better

understand the costs and benefits of collaboration. Studies of collaborative processes related to the Forest Plan were complicated

by other policies, such as the Salvage Rider, which affected conflict and collaborative efforts. Forest Plan-funded surveys have

shown that the public continues to want a strong voice in

National Forest management (Schindler and Neburka 1997).

One such case study was the Applegate Partnership Case

Study. This study, based on participant observation, concluded

that several factors are important for collaborative groups, including creating a vision statement, building trust, airing conflict,

■54

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

2 Employment in Washington and Oregon in the forest products industries fell from 135,600 jobs

in 1988 to 116,100 jobs in 1995 (Warren 1998).
creating inclusive forums, building leadership, and coping with

constituent expectations. The study describes the community

context and highlights the importance of social capital, particularly tolerance for diversity, informal and organizational networks,

and mobilization of resources (Sturtevant and Lange 1995). 

Special forest products—In the FEMAT report, economic

and social assessments both noted the significant and growing

importance of special forest products and brought up questions of

the sustainability of harvests. Forest Plan-funded research on permits for special forest products confirmed this rapidly growing

trend. Related research efforts are contributing to developing sustainable harvesting practices.

In the Trinity National Forest, the number of permits issued

to harvest nontimber forest products has risen significantly in the

1990s. These forest products can be prioritized for research based

on factors such as sensitivity to harvest, cultural concerns, and

market demand. Field trials show regrowth after harvesting

depends on intensity of harvest and local ecological conditions.

Involving harvesters and Forest Service managers improves focus

of research and dissemination of results.

Restoration—The implementation of the forest plan

assumed that various types of restoration would mitigate many

of the adverse impacts of reduced timber harvest flows. These

assumptions stimulated several studies. In general, the decision

to restore ecosystems are ultimately economic as society assesses whether restoration would provide greater value than other

management alternatives, such as mitigation or no action

(Weigand and Haynes 1996). Economic and political goals

should not be confused in these decisions. One study focused

on estimating benefits of restoring habitat for at-risk fish

species in Fish Creek, a tributary of the Clackamas River. In

spite of poorly documented restoration costs, Simpson and

Bishop (1998) found that the benefits appear greater than the

costs. Another study described lessons learned about “Jobs-inthe-Woods” programs from watershed restoration efforts undertaken as part of the Redwood National Park expansion (starting in 1978). The primary lesson is that conflicts between economic and ecological objectives are inherent when undertaking watershed restoration, thus decisions need to explicitly

weigh the objectives (DeForest 1999).

■55

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS TO DATE

Fish habitat restoration project on Still Creek, tributary to the Clackamas River.
Spatial and Temporal Scale

Socioeconomic studies related to forest management have

struggled with issues of spatial and temporal scale. As in ecological work, different issues and impacts are salient at different scales. A persistent problem is the lack of easily obtained

community-scale data. Many large-scale socioeconomic assessments therefore are done by using county-scale data—which

poorly represents impacts on small forest communities. Other

work focuses on national and regional (multistate) levels,

which allows the treatment of national and regional tradeoffs

(Haynes and others 1995). The focus on communities masks

the severity of impacts on specific business sectors and families

within communities. Likewise, studies of public participation and values show different patterns at different spatial

scales.

Spatial analysis (using geographic information systems) of

the businesses that get Forest Service timber sales and service

contracts show that much of the work done in the Trinity

National Forest is not done by businesses located in communities nearest the Forest. This analysis also showed that different

types of work draw on different geographic areas. For example,

this study found that logging and roadwork is done predominantly by companies from towns nearest the National Forest,

whereas companies located in distant towns and cities do most

of the reforestation and professional services. Forest industry

economies are regional—and the relevant region changes by

sector and over time. This finding has implications for estimating socioeconomic impacts as well as for economic readjustment efforts. Just because work or timber is offered in a

given place does not mean workers in that place will benefit.

The FEMAT report did not specify the timeframe over

which to expect the anticipated socioeconomic effects of the

Forest Plan. Even many communities judged to have good

long-term prospects could still expect short-term displacement. Time lags and threshold levels apply to the effects of

everything from mill closures and retraining programs to internal reorganizations and collaborative efforts. Evaluation is

complicated by the fact that the same process or program considered a failure in one year can look like a success in another

year. Temporal variability calls for long-term studies and caution in drawing conclusions from short-term data. The desire

for long-term data, however, is countered by the need for timely findings from monitoring and research that can be useful for

adaptive management. Some socioeconomic research has

addressed the problem of temporal variability by collecting and

analyzing the historical data of activities that may have predated the Forest Plan. These data contribute to understanding patterns and trends relevant to Forest Plan implementation and

provide indications of what could be monitored in the future.

Expanding the spatial scale of analysis may require collaboration among a network of field researchers. Biologists learn more

about ecological functioning as they spend more time in the field.

Similarly, social scientists learn more about social and economic

processes and players as they spend more time in the communities

and with the agencies of the Forest Plan area. Repeated interactions with people result in better questions, yield better information, and allow for better interpretation of data. Comparative

socioeconomic studies across geographical areas can benefit when

conducted as collaborations among scientists that draw on the

field strengths of researchers with site-specific knowledge and

access to information.

Capturing the patterns and trends evident at different spatial

and temporal scales requires a combination of research methods.

As in other disciplines, longitudinal data, comparative analyses,

and case studies can complement each other in socioeconomic

studies. The most difficult task, given spatial and temporal variability, is defining short-term, site-specific monitoring protocols

that provide information useful for management decisions.

The atlas and digital users guide by the Pacific Northwest

(PNW) Research Station is a reference that illustrates the dimensions, location, magnitude, and direction of social and economic

change in western Washington, Oregon, and northwest

California since 1989 (Christensen and others 2000). Through

this reference, the diversity and social and economic health of the

Forest Plan region is synthesized by examining the fundamental

attributes of our region, provinces, and communities including

our settlements, our natural resources, and ourselves. This sets the

stage for dialogue, debate, and developing a set of indicators to

monitor the dimensions of well-being for sustainable development. The atlas is a useful tool for decisionmakers, civic leaders,

economic development practitioners, researchers, and others

interested in understanding change, easing transition, and finding

and pursuing opportunities to enrich society. 

The issues leading to and resulting from the Forest Plan have

changed the nature of the forest policy debate in that much of the

focus is now on broad notions of communities and economies.

That the jobs versus environment debates have been both professionally and politically counter-productive and have probably

prevented finding workable solutions is now widely accepted. The

Forest Plan used traditional approaches in determining social and

economic impacts from changes in the forest sector while holding

all else constant. Recent work, both as a part of Forest Plan efforts

and stimulated by other ecoregion assessments, takes a different

approach in showing how changes in land management might

play out within more dynamic notions of economies. 

These new approaches are still evolving, but three lessons

relative to the questions of jobs related to natural resources are

as follows. First, the indirect and induced job and associated

■56

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
economic impacts estimated as part of forest policy discussions

generally cannot be verified by looking at how regional

economies actually changed. In the Pacific Northwest, this has

largely been the result of growth in total regional employment,

which maintained these indirect and induced jobs. Second, there

is a common misunderstanding of what is an economy. In forest

policy debates, there is a common tendency to assume that communities and economies are the same. They are not the same.

Most economies cover broader geographic areas and are defined

by commuting and shopping patterns. Communities on the other

hand are defined both by a sense of place (Kruger 1996) and a

sense of organization or structure. A third lesson learned is that

county data and aggregates thereof are commonly used to characterize economic systems.3 Two reasons are as follows: pragmatically, this is the lowest geographic scale for which we have consistent data linked to natural resource industries, and second it is

the geographic scale with relatively permanent administrative and

government boundaries. The limitations of county data are that

economic systems are influenced by topography and transportation

corridors maybe not reflected in county boundaries, and county

data do not answer the other question—What are the effects on

communities?—though it has been used as a proxy to do so.

Planning and Implementation

If community groups, advisory committees, businesses, nonprofits, and tribes are to collaborate with the Forest Service and

other agencies in forest management—as called for in the Forest

Plan—they must develop a common understanding of conditions, issues, and options. The public and collaborating partners,

as well as Forest Service managers, therefore, are clients of Forest

Service research. Successful information transfers needed for

integrating science and management will be two-way exchanges

between these clients and scientists. Diverse methods are needed

to reach all these clients and allow them to reach Forest Service

scientists. The socioeconomic research projects have been especially effective in reaching a diverse clientele because of a combination of their collaborative methods, outreach efforts, and

public interest in these topics.

The best example of collaborative process is the participatory research carried out on nontimber forest products. A combination of Forest Service managers, scientists, nontimber forest product harvesters, local herbalists, and concerned Native Americans

explored previous research findings and future options in setting

research priorities. Venues for information exchange included

special workshops cosponsored by Forest Service management

(Hayfork AMA), presentations at meetings, and informal conversations. Several species were chosen for study based on commercial markets and vulnerability to harvest. The researcher then

hired local harvesters to help collect data to determine effects of

different harvesting techniques. This extensive multiparty

involvement in research design and implementation created

increased access to and interest in research results. 

The socioeconomic monitoring and assessment projects also

had extensive involvement of concerned clients and outside scientists. These research projects were typically a joint collaboration among Forest Service researchers, Forest Service managers at

District and Forest levels, University cooperators, and community-based organizations. Each partner contributed to the research

plan and reviewed draft results—thus achieving a two-way flow of

information in the course of conducting research. In the Hayfork

AMA where this approach was tried, the Forest Service managers

saw how they could directly use this information to address the

socioeconomic directives in the Forest Plan. Their feedback has

helped refine data analysis and conclusions.

Outreach efforts to disseminate socioeconomic research

findings to a broad clientele include distributing reports, including data in newsletters and mailings, presenting findings at

Provincial Advisory Committee meetings and California State

Community Economic Revitalization Team meetings, and displaying them at the County Fair. The AMA coordinator, the

local library, the Board of Supervisors, the local newspaper, and

community economic development groups all received working

papers summarizing project research and findings. Written outputs from the nontimber forest product research have included a

handbook for harvesters and a color identification book placed in

district offices.

Information also is exchanged outside of the research

process, especially when scientists participate in Forest Service

management activities. Examples of this kind of dialogue include

the work of lead scientists with AMA committees, participation

of scientists on Hayfork AMA Tech Team, and involvement of

scientists in monitoring committees (for example, the Grassy

Flats Stewardship Project Monitoring and Evaluation Team).

Specific cases in which Forest Plan socioeconomic research

has affected local management efforts include the following:

• Contracting practices (Shasta-Trinity NF)—After reviewing

the findings of the sale and contracting research project, the

District Ranger offered a set of small contracts designed to better match the local contracting capacity.

• Contracting information (Shasta-Trinity NF)—Due in part to

project findings showing that no Trinity contractors had gotten

a contract bid as a Request for Proposals, the provincial contracting officer offered special workshops on this format in

Trinity County. 

■57

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS TO DATE

3 Since 1990, the Forest Service has had a legislative mandate to assist economically dependent

rural communities located in or near National Forests. McGinnis and others (1996) have used

county data to develop indicator maps to support this rural development role.
• Stewardship contracting (Shasta-Trinity NF)—The project

also has contributed to the design and monitoring parameters

for the Grassy Flats Stewardship Project.

• Permits for special forest products (Shasta-Trinity NF, Six

Rivers NF)— research funded by the Pacific Southwest (PSW)

Research Station has highlighted the role of special forest products and has influenced permitting for gathering them.

• Social and economic assessment of forest communities

(Hayfork AMA)—Data collected through this project were

directly incorporated into the draft Hayfork AMA guide.

New Research Topics

A core of the social scientists that worked on the team

moved on to the other ecoregion assessments. There they developed approaches to both the economics and social assessments

that attempted to resolve comments made on the FEMAT report.

Part of those efforts was a greater focus on the evolving definitions

of community and stability, well-being, and resiliency, and the

relation between them and natural resource management

(Haynes and others 1996). Although not a deliberate part of the

Forest Plan effort, one of the FEMAT report legacies has been to

drive the evolution of broad-scale social and economic assessments to be both more comprehensive and integrative. Social scientists now talk about how Federal agencies can affect stakeholder groups, the socioeconomic resiliency of communities or

economies, and the effectiveness of different mitigation strategies

for easing the transition of selected communities or economies.

In the past, studies of social and economic impacts generally

have tried to quantify impacts. New research efforts must not only

quantify impacts, but also ask, What can managers do to steer the

effects in different directions? Most socioeconomic research has

proposed explanations and sometimes predictions based on

observed patterns. Where possible, some projects should move

beyond observation to experimentation that tests explanations

and predictions. This is especially important when focusing on

the factors that mediate change. Experimentation involving people and institutions is a difficult task. Scientists will therefore

have to take advantage of “natural experiments” and work with

Forest Service management in designing sets of activities that test

specific topics. “Natural experiments” occur when the researcher

can find paired or multiple situations where only the variable of

concern happens to be significantly different. Comparative studies of this kind are often problematic because of the number of

variables that can change from site to site or year to year, but they

are generally easier to implement than true experiments and can

still yield important information.

Some of the past and current socioeconomic research would

benefit by expanding the spatial and temporal scope of the work.

Several studies have made important findings in specific places.

The next question is how widespread are these patterns? For

example, a study in southern Oregon found specific factors and

strategies important in worker adaptation to changes in the timber industry. To what extent are these factors important elsewhere? In the Trinity National Forest, research found specific geographic patterns of the distribution of timber sales and service

contracts related to size and type of contract. Is this pattern evident elsewhere? What variables determine differences in findings

among different locales? (Note that expanding the geographic

study area does not necessarily mean “scaling up”; as noted earlier, community and subcommunity data are not directly comparable to county, state, or regional data.)

Specific topics indicated by current research and outreach

efforts include the following:

Monitoring: 

• The PNW Research Station is embarking on a social and economic monitoring system that monitors selected social and

economic aspects that contribute to better understanding of

adaptive management strategies and ecosystem management.

• Monitor selected socioeconomic components of ecosystem

management that contribute to well-being and sustainability—negative and positive.

• Monitor across geographic scales—community, subregional,

county, province, and region.

• Test indicators for their effectiveness; for example, are they

monitoring what they were intended to measure?

• Need to determine finer scale indicators to monitor relevant

socioeconomic parameters for both specific projects and for

programs of work at the district and forest scales. Managers

and communities need to be involved in determining those

parameters.

• Need to study and recommend models and protocols for allparty monitoring.

Contracting: 

• Need to study contracting and sale mechanisms appropriate

for ecosystem management. Several ecosystem management

treatments fall between timber sales and service contracts, and

local districts are struggling with how to get the work done.

What are the administrative options? How did they work elsewhere? What worked cost-effectively? What are the implications for businesses, workers, forest communities, and Forest

Service administration?

• In particular, need to study experiments in stewardship contracting efforts—their effectiveness in achieving multiple

goals and ways they could be improved in the future. 

• Contracting officers have suggested more research on contractors—their capabilities and constraints.

• Need to follow up on current trends in contracting and timber

■58

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
sales—what are the effects on forest industry and forest 

communities? What capacity-building measures can mitigate

the impacts?

• Need to examine biases, barriers, and benefits inherent in

different contracting mechanisms.

Collaborative processes: 

• Continued studies of community and Forest Service collaboration are important—particularly comparative studies that

might develop an understanding of the process elements and

community factors that can determine success.

• What did the collaboration accomplish? How does that affect

what happens on the ground? Many of these efforts have been

studied in and outside the Forest Plan area. Enough time has now

passed to move from studying just the process to its products.

• What has been the effect of agency downsizing, consolidation

of Ranger Districts, and movement of personnel on these

efforts?

• How have collaborative relations differed by agency? Why?

With what results?

Sustainable special forest products harvesting:

• How would additional commercial species respond to 

harvesting throughout their ranges?

• How can collecting of special forest products be integrated

with ecosystem management projects, such as combining 

harvest opportunities with timber sales?

• How can cultural conflicts in gathering special forest 

products be addressed?

Timber workers:

• Need to study the 60 percent of the sample from previous 

case studies in Oregon who have left their communities. 

• Need to compare findings of case studies to findings in 

other areas.

Forest communities as emphasis for socioeconomic research:

• What criteria define a “forest community”?

• What is lost and what is gained by focusing on forest communities as a level of analysis?

• How does forest community well-being compare to regional

well-being?

Cross-Disciplinary Implications

Most socioeconomic work has focused on the effects of

Forest Plan implementation on socioeconomic conditions. Still

needed is research on how social, institutional, and economic factors affect the implementation of ecosystem management. For

example, many Ranger Districts in and outside of the Forest Plan

area are currently struggling with how to put together “viable

timber sales” that meet ecosystem management goals and have

sufficient profitability to attract bidders. Unfortunately, some

vegetative treatments needed to achieve desired stand conditions

are not being done, and in some cases, prescriptions are altered to

make sales or contracts viable. The factors that determine viability are institutional and economic—such as the available markets, technology, budgets, and contracting mechanisms. In this

way, socioeconomic factors are affecting ecological conditions on

the ground. Research that identifies these factors and evaluates

alternatives can potentially help Forest Service managers achieve

desired ecological outcomes.

Acknowledging the role of socioeconomic factors in project

implementation emphasizes the need for integrated analyses of

management options. Integrated analyses can identify and quantify socioeconomic factors associated with alternative silvicultural treatments (or wildlife habitat improvements, erosion control

measures, and more) that affect both local benefits and viability

of implementation. Studies of alternative prescriptions provide

golden opportunities to gather data on the economics of implementation—for example, associated jobs and wage levels, kind of

skills, types of equipment, contracting options, costs of preparation, administration and implementation, match with existing

contracting capacity and labor force, markets, processing, valueadded opportunities—as well as impacts on resource objectives.

Collecting such data may seem to complicate other research that

might just be trying to determine, for example, the effects of silvicultural treatments on certain wildlife species, or the effect of

road decommissioning on water quality, or the effectiveness of

fuels treatments. Because institutional and economic factors likely will determine which and if the studied treatments are implemented, however, such socioeconomic factors are also important

in determining the ecological outcomes of alternatives. Examples

of integrated analysis (although not part of PNW and PSW

Research Stations Plan research) include the PNW-funded

Limber Jim project in the La Grande Ranger District in Oregon

and the Chopsticks Administrative Study in the Hayfork Ranger

District in California. 

The nontimber forest products research conducted in the

Hayfork AMA is an example of truly interdisciplinary research as

well as an inclusive collaborative effort. This project could be discussed at equal length under the ecology or management themes

in this document. Nontimber forest product research was discussed here with socioeconomic research because of its focus on

commodity species, extensive public involvement, and the economic implications of the outcomes. Data collected in such

diverse areas as regrowth after harvesting, harvesting pressure,

cultural concerns, permitting practices, and marketing and processing have provided a body of multidisciplinary information

■59

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS TO DATE
that is directly useful to Forest Service managers, harvesters, and

other scientists. 

Findings of Forest Plan socioeconomic research have had

implications for interdisciplinary modeling efforts. For example,

the timber sale and contracting study and the timber worker

study suggest that employment and community impacts do not

depend exclusively on timber output rates. One important

implication is that models that derive social and economic outcomes based on resource outputs are inadequate because the

same resource output can have different social and economic

effects depending on how management is implemented. Also,

the small-diameter material harvested under the Forest Plan is

associated with different employment outcomes per board foot

than traditional sawlogs. Board feet alone, therefore, are insufficient to estimate employment impacts. Additional interdisciplinary work is needed to determine the variables that would better model employment and community outcomes of resource

management.

RELATED TOPICS NOT ADDRESSED

AND ORDER OF IMPORTANCE

Some of the most compelling socioeconomic research issues

are not based on the team’s assumptions or past research, but

rather on the barriers and opportunities encountered in the

course of implementing the Forest Plan.

Future research needs must be set in the context of work

done by entities other than PNW and PSW Research Stations or

work done outside the Forest Plan program of research.

Universities, private consultants, government agencies, and independent organizations have conducted many socioeconomic studies related to Forest Plan issues. For example, social assessments of

forest communities have been conducted through the Sierra

Nevada Ecosystem Project and the Klamath National Forest. The

Labor and Education Resource Center at the University of

Oregon have conducted useful analyses of retraining programs,

and so have individual training organizations, such as Trinity

Occupational Training. Other researchers may have addressed the

topics listed below to some extent; however, they merit further or

more comprehensive study by the Forest Service. 

Forest Service Plan research effort is perhaps best focused

on issues that help managers implement the Forest Plan. In

addition to addressing immediate management concerns,

Forest Service research strengths are in long-term projects and

issues, and in building on and building up links with management and lands. Although “pure” research is still an important

activity of the research stations, researchers also should highlight the implications of their findings for policy and practice.

Important topics for future socioeconomic research include the

following.

How Can Small-Diameter Wood Products Be

Harvested and Used?

The Forest Plan called for a different kind of land management that implied different kinds of outputs. How the products

and byproducts of ecosystem management are harvested and used

affects both the viability of treatment and the economic benefit

to communities. Efforts to enhance late-successional characteristics and to reduce the threat of catastrophic fire mean that many

National Forests are attempting to harvest more small-diameter

material in natural stand thinnings, fuels reduction, and fuel

break projects. Some managers feel that project prescription and

implementation can depend on the price of chips. Some community members feel their economic future depends on finding

high-end uses for the products of thinnings. Both managers and

community leaders need help in understanding the institutional

and economic factors affecting small-diameter timber harvest

and utilization.

Research is needed on the cost-effective treatment of smalldiameter timber material. Specific topics of study include harvesting technologies, markets, barriers to treatment, and analysis

of successful and failed efforts (as well as contracting and sale

mechanisms mentioned above). Research on primary processing

and value-added activities also are needed, including work on

wood products characteristics, processing technologies, market

analyses, capital requirements, and analysis of successful and

failed enterprises.

Collaborative experiments in the Hayfork AMA between

Forest Service managers and a local nonprofit organization suggest that both appropriate processing and high-value markets are

■60

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

Small-diameter timber is harvested as part of a thinning project.
needed for small-diameter timber material to pay for treating that

material and to provide local economic benefit. Integrated analysis, such as the Limber Jim and Chopsticks analyses discussed earlier, may be an effective way to study harvesting, processing, and

marketing issues so essential to effective implementation of

ecosystem management. Different experiments are being tried

throughout the Forest Plan area. Comparative studies that examine these issues under different institutional situations—administrative, market, and industrial—can provide managers with new

options.

What Happened to Forest Communities 

in the Forest Plan Area?

Many assumptions and predictions were made by the team

about the impact of Forest Plan implementation on forest communities. Likewise, the Economic Adjustment Initiative made

assumptions about what was needed and enacted programs to

diversify economies and ease the transition to lower harvest levels. Both the assumptions and implementation of these programs

should be examined to improve the effectiveness of similar efforts

in the future. Research on this topic will be more useful and effective if forest communities are involved in developing the research

agenda and the design of specific projects. The topics recommended below reflect concerns articulated by community members and organizations.

Implementation and outcomes of the Economic Adjustment Initiative—Specific programs that merit study are Jobs-inthe-Woods, Community Economic Revitalization Team funding

(outreach efforts and projects funded), worker retraining programs, and general Rural Community Assistance-funded efforts.

Reports that summarize the amount of funding dispersed or the

number of jobs created have been issued for some of these programs for some administrative units. Attempts to revisit the various programs to determine the impacts and legacies for forest

communities in general and timber workers in particular, however, have been few. And beyond merely quantifying the impacts,

emphases should be placed on what can be learned from the experience and what could be done differently in the future.

Outcomes in team-assessed communities—The social

assessment team evaluated 286 forest communities for community capacity and potential impact of reduced harvest levels. This

assessment sets the stage for several important research questions.

How did those communities fare under the Forest Plan? How did

their capacity rating relate to their actual ability to respond to the

economic transition precipitated by Forest Plan implementation?

How well did the various economic readjustment efforts reach

high- and low-capacity communities? What are the implications

for economic transition efforts in general? How might social

assessment efforts be improved in the future? 

Effects of mill closures on communities and workers—The

closure of a sawmill in a community in which the sawmill was a

large part of the local economy is considered a “worst-case-scenario” impact resulting from a decline in timber harvests. Many,

if not most, of the communities evaluated in the FEMAT report

are, or were recently, mill towns. Several sawmills have closed

since the Forest Plan was enacted. What are the effects of a

sawmill closure? What happened to the workers? What happened

to the community? How and why did the impacts of and response

to mill closures differ among communities? How were the closures

related to the Forest Plan? Did the Economic Readjustment

Initiative moderate the impact of the closure? What lessons can

be learned?

What Skills and Employment Are Needed 

For Implementing the Forest Plan?

Ecosystem management under the Forest Plan implies a new

way of doing work in the forest. Many community leaders, training institutions, and government agencies of the Forest Plan area

believed that different work in the woods called for different skills

in woods workers. With funding from the Economic Adjustment

Initiative, several training programs were established to train

unemployed persons and displaced timber workers to be ecosystem management technicians. These “ecotech” programs sought

to give trainees a broad understanding of ecosystem functioning

as well as experience in technical and field skills—such as inventory, global positioning systems, wildlife habitat improvement,

and thinning techniques—that would be in demand as the Forest

■61

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS TO DATE

Manufacturing small logs into posts and rails for fencing at the Jefferson

State forest products mill in Hayfork, California.
Service implemented the Forest Plan. After 5 years, however,

some of the training agencies are concerned that the ecotech

work opportunities did not materialize. They feel it is time to

again ask: What are the skills and workforce needed to implement

ecosystem management? Is there a mismatch between the current

workforce and the work to be done? If so, what steps can be taken

to narrow the gap and thereby get needed work done cost effectively and improve job opportunities in forest communities?

How Have Native American Tribes 

Been Affected by the Forest Plan?

The FEMAT report noted that “the options may lead to

many consequences for Native American people and cultures”

but could not predict specific impacts because of limited information available at that time. After 5 years, it should be possible to

begin to assess the effects the Forest Plan may have had on Native

Americans. The FEMAT report noted the region’s tribes depend

on public forests “for employment, subsistence and cultural identity”—which are core issues for any group of people. A research

agenda regarding the impacts and opportunities resulting from the

Forest Plan should be developed in consultation with the tribes.

❧

ECOLOGICAL PROCESSES

AND FUNCTIONS

Frederick J. Swanson and Randy Molina1

STUDIES AND SIGNIFICANT FINDINGS

Northwest Forest Plan (Forest Plan) research funding has

emphasized providing land managers with the tools they need to

implement the Forest Plan. Research projects have titles that

convey these objectives; in the course of this work, however,

important new research into ecological processes and functions is

underway. This research is leading to new insights about how terrestrial and stream ecosystems function at broad scales and in the

face of disturbances by natural processes. Science-based understanding of the structure, composition, and function of forest

ecosystems and watersheds is a foundation for sustainable development and for protecting those natural resource systems. This

information is finding wide application in implementing and

modifying the Forest Plan to meet its objectives. Several examples

of Forest Plan-funded research with both strong potential for new

science findings and important implications for management and

policy are shown in table 9.

Forest Succession Processes

Understanding the ecological history of Pacific Northwest

old-growth forests took shape in the 1970s and 1980s through

studies of Cascade Range forests. The studies concentrated on the

chronology of stand development after stand-replacing wildfire.

The resulting concept of succession leading to old-growth conditions was thought rather straightforward (Franklin and others

1981, Franklin and Spies 1991, Spies and Franklin 1991). Now,

several lines of research have led to new thinking about oldgrowth forests and prospects for fostering development of those

characteristics through silvicultural practices in plantations and

young, postwildfire forests.

Fire history studies in the southern and eastern parts of the

Forest Plan area have revealed historical fire regimes that included frequent burning of low to moderate severity before fires were

suppressed (for example, Morrison and Swanson 1990, van

Norman 1998, Weisberg 1998). This history suggests that some

amount of old-growth forest conditions may have persisted on

sites in these forests through multiple disturbance events for many

centuries and perhaps millennia. Also, the types of structural and

compositional old-growth forest conditions observed in natural

forests differed somewhat by broad regional and local topographic settings. So a single, simple prescription for developing oldgrowth forest in areas such as late-successional reserves may not

be suitable or successful. Setting management objectives consistent with the ecological capacity of sites is important.

Stand reconstruction studies provide new information on

developing old-growth stands. Tappeiner and others (1997)

observed that old-growth forests in parts of the Oregon Coast

Range were established over longer periods and with much lower

tree densities than is common in contemporary, young plantations. Lower tree densities apparently contributed to higher rates

of diameter growth and rapid development of old-growth characteristics. The implication for management is that for sites where

developing old-growth characteristics is a primary objective, thinning prescriptions may be most beneficial if set at much lower

stocking than used traditionally. 

Studies of transitions from single-story, mature stands to multistory, old-growth stands indicate that seed dispersal may limit

the rate of developing western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla Raf.

Sarg.) and Douglas-fir forests (Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.)

Franco) (Schrader 1998). This limitation suggests that managing

tree density alone may not accelerate old-growth forest development, if seed sources of late-successional species, such as western

hemlock, are absent.

■62

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

1 Frederick J. Swanson is a supervisory research geologist and Randy Molina is a supervisory

botanist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station,

SW Jefferson Way, Corvallis, OR 97331.
Long-term data from forest inventory and ecology plots initiated as early as 1910 have been examined in terms of developing old-growth structure and timber-volume growth in maturing,

unmanaged Douglas-fir stands ranging in age up to 150 years.

Acker and others (1998a) observed that the transition from

young-to old-growth forest structure was rapid up to stand age 80

years, and then it slowed. They found that extended rotation

lengths would not cause major declines in timber growth. Early

control of stem density may serve to hasten developing oldgrowth structure (Acker and others 1998b, p. 265). This work is

unusual because the extensive records of direct observations permit detailed analysis not possible with other techniques, such as

historical studies examining stands of different ages.

These studies of forest succession processes and their relation

to disturbance regimes provide scientific insights into difficult-toobserve, long-term ecological processes. Forest ecologists are

revising their views of developing forest structure, composition,

and function. This revision includes developing roles such as

long-term habitat for vertebrates and invertebrates. For example,

the finding that large trees commonly survived large fires helps

explain how slow-dispersing species, such as some lichen and

small-mammal species, can find refuge during disturbances and

afterward repopulate disturbed areas.

These findings are also useful to land managers charged with

preparing silvicultural prescriptions to accelerate developing oldgrowth conditions to meet Forest Plan objectives, particularly for

plantations in late-successional reserves. Results and implications

of these findings have been communicated directly to land managers by workshops, field tours, publications, and other media.

Mycology Studies

The Forest Plan has changed the nature of mycological

research in the Pacific Northwest (PNW) Research Station and

globally, by changing the scale at which fungi are studied. For

■63

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS TO DATE

Table 9—Ecological processes and function—findings from various studies

Study Management objective Significant findings

Forest succession processes leading Aid in developing silvicultural prescriptions Important functions exist of disturbances

to old-growth conditions that accelerate old-growth conditions, and processes of initial stand establishment

particularly in late-successional reserves in developing modern old-growth forests

Scaling up in mycology studies by Support the Forest Plan's “survey and manage” First-year results support the null hypothesis

examining (testing hypotheses about) program (see appendix 4) that fungi are not "old-growth dependent" 

factors controlling distribution of fungal and can live in young (20- to 30-year-old)

species at various scales—ranging forests with large amounts of coarse

from individual rotten logs to the region woody debris (old-growth legacies)

Ecological functions and growth of Test assumptions in the silvicultural Improving understanding of interactions

retained live trees in harvest units prescriptions in the Forest Plan among various components of multistoried

forest stands

Historical and current disturbance Support preparing landscape Important functions exist of climate variability,

regimes by fire and flood management plans in AMAs landscape structure, and disturbance

regimes in maintaining the health and

complexity of forest landscape and streamnetwork patterns, complexity that seems

to allow many forest and stream ecosystems 

to respond resiliently to fire, floods, wind, and 

other disturbances

King bolete (Boletus edulis), an edible mushroom.
more than 25 years, the Station engaged in fundamental research

on the taxonomy, biological diversity, community structure, disturbance ecology, and ecosystem function of forest fungi. Much of

this research has been conducted at the organisms and microsites

scale. Station scientists collected fungi from throughout the

Pacific Northwest region during those years and built a vast foundation of knowledge. With this knowledge, Station scientists

were able to address the Forest Plan’s implications for fungi, particularly the protective measures of the “survey and manage”

guidelines (see appendix 4). The guidelines listed 234 fungal

species, the largest of all biological groups cited under the Forest

Plan. A challenge in pursuing these new policy, management, and research

directives was scaling from

organism-microsite scale to

landscapes and the regional scale. This scaling-up of

mycology research has led

to unprecedented approaches in science.

Although the intent

of Forest Plan mycology

research is to provide managers with the information

necessary to carry out “survey and manage” protocols,

the work is conducted as

scientific studies. Hypotheses about factors controlling distributions of

fungal species at various

scales—from the individual rotten logs to the whole region—

are being tested. The studies include:

• A regional analysis of fungi distributions using the known-site

database will provide information on species distribution and a

means to efficiently choose where to conduct intensive surveys

(for example, in parts of the region with suitable habitat compared to unsuitable habitat)

• A new study in the Oregon Coast Range using the Siuslaw

National Forest current vegetation survey plots, addresses

the hypothesis that “survey and manage” fungi depend on

old-growth.

This work is in its early stages, but a key finding is that

first-year results support the null hypothesis that some fungi

are not old-growth dependent and can grow in young (20- to

30-year-old) forests with large amounts of coarse woody

debris (old-growth legacies). If more extensive sampling confirms these results, an implication for management is that

some fungal species of concern may be sustained in managed

forests by attention to the woody debris habitat component.

More broadly, this new work on fungi is forging new links

between mycologists and scientists studying biogeography

and ecology of vascular plants. Both disciplines share a common system of field plots and environmental data used to

interpret patterns of occurrence. Furthermore, fungi and vascular plants interact so strongly, ecologically, that understanding of these relations is critical for managing long-term

ecosystem productivity.

A more recent line of

research focuses on sustainable productivity of

valuable, commercially

harvested edible forest

mushrooms (special forest

products). This research

has implications for

human economies, and

forest management, as well

as for science concerned

with limits on distributions and productivity.

The Mycology Team has a

long and strong history of

cooperating and communicating with land-manager and public groups about

the ecological—and the

culinary—significance of

fungi (Hosford and others

1997, Molina and others 1997, Pilz and Molina 1996, Schowalter

and others 1997). This background and continuing use of

direct contacts through workshops and other forums result in

quick communications of findings to users.

Ecological Functions of Retained Live Trees 

in Harvest Units

Clearcutting and broadcast burning were standard silvicultural practices in Douglas-fir forests of the Pacific Northwest for

many decades. Several social and ecological factors led to adoption of “green-tree retention”—leaving living trees in harvest

units to provide desired ecological functions (Franklin and others

1997). The Forest Plan prescribes green-tree retention in harvest

areas, but the ecological functioning of those trees is poorly

understood. Studies of green-tree retention, therefore, have been

undertaken under the Forest Plan and other funding to better

understand the implications of these new silvicultural practices.

■64

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

Matsutake mushrooms are among the most popular and highly valued fungi harvested.

Research is investigating the fingi’s diversity, structure, disturbance, and ecosystems.
Although, these studies have been directed at management

questions, they also reveal basic ecological interactions among

components of complex forest stands. Some examples of interacting elements are large, scattered, older trees interacting with a

younger generation of trees establishing on the site; live trees

interacting with belowground biota, such as fungi; and forest

structure of older retained trees interacting with bird and lichen

communities using it as habitat. These interactions are particularly important after partial stand disturbances, which happen

because of natural disturbances or management activities.

This study addresses a broad range of topics (Acker and

others 1996): 

• Effects of overstory trees on growth in the regenerating

stand (Acker and others 1998b, Rose and Muir 1997,

Zenner and others 1998) 

• Effects of residual, aboveground structure on bird (Hansen

and others 1995a, 1995b), invertebrate (Schowalter 1995),

and lichen (Peck and McCune 1997) communities 

• Response of belowground communities including soil

invertebrates, edible fungi, and mycorrhizal mats (Griffiths

and others 1996) 

• Blowdown of residual trees

• Carbon sequestration in stands with various rates of

green-tree retention

A distinctive science contribution of this work is the consideration of various interacting components of the ecosystem.

The work is highly interdisciplinary and uses both retrospective,

long-term monitoring and modeling techniques.

Many of these studies observed greater similarity to mature

and old-growth forest in plantations or naturally regenerated

stands with residual green trees than in such stands without large

trees. This similarity was true for nitrogen-fixing cyanolichens

(Peck and McCune 1997), predatory and needle-consuming

canopy insects (Schowalter 1995), and certain bird species

(Hansen and others 1995b). The growth of young forests may be

reduced by the presence of larger trees, however, which compete

for nutrients, water, and sunlight (Acker and others 1998a,

Zenner and others 1998). Completion of studies underway will

help display tradeoffs between wood fiber and ecological values

for various management alternatives.

Results of these studies have been conveyed to land managers through many workshops, field tours, and publications

specifically directed to the manager audience (Hunter 1995), as

well as in scientific publications.

Historical and Current Disturbance Regimes

Pacific Northwest landscapes are noted for their highly

dynamic character. Heavy rainfall and rapid snowmelt trigger

floods, dry summers and high fuel loads set the stage for forest

fires, and steep slopes and weak rocks foster landslides. Native

species and ecological processes have adapted to these disturbances. Land use practices interact with these and other natural

disturbance processes producing a great variety of positive and

negative feedback interactions. Studying the natural disturbance

regime of landscapes furthers scientific understanding of ecosystems and watersheds, and aids developing management practices

that capitalize on natural processes.

Many studies focus on disturbance processes and their interactions with landscape conditions under natural and managed regimes.

This work includes analysis of both current events (for example, the

major flood of 1996) and historical reconstructions using tree-ring,

paleoecological (pollen and charcoal in lake sediments), archival,

and aerial photographic records (Long and others 1998).

Studies of historical wildfire disturbance regimes support

preparation of landscape management plans in adaptive management areas (AMAs). The studies have identified areas with historical tendencies for higher and lower frequency and severity of

wildfire. Landscape management plans have been developed to

integrate this information with reserve systems to protect critical

species. These plans substantially modify the interim plan (prewatershed analysis based on the Forest Plan). Landscape plans

emulate historical conditions in various ways, including more

natural riparian zones and extent of the mature forest age class.

In addition, these studies have revealed important functions

of climatic variability, topography and other geophysical factors,

and disturbance regimes in maintaining the complexity of forest

landscape patterns. For example, in the southern part of the

Forest Plan area west of the crest of the Cascade Range, moderate and low-severity fires historically may have maintained substantial old-growth character across the forest landscape over

long periods and through multiple disturbance events. That is,

extensive stand-replacement fires may have been rare, unlike in

areas to the north where fire severity appears to have typically

been higher. This information provides an important template

for interpreting variation in old-growth forest structure, composition, and function across the Forest Plan region.

How floods and watershed conditions interact is critical to

understanding effects of natural flooding in stream and riparian

ecosystems and the cumulative watershed effects of forest land

use. Analysis of geophysical and ecological effects of a major flood

in February 1996 commenced during the flood to support ecosystem science, watershed analyses, restoration planning, and AMA

programs. Study topics include climate, that is, events leading to

flooding; flood hydrology; landslides; river channel changes;

response of in-stream habitat-improvement structures; flood

effects of and on roads; and response of vertebrate, invertebrate,

and riparian vegetation communities. This work has provided

■65

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS TO DATE
new insights into flood and woody debris interaction. It also offers

insights into the resilience of aquatic systems in the face of

extreme floods—the ultimate test of watershed condition

(Swanson and others 1998).

Researchers from the PNW and PSW Research Stations

have made many, findings important to land managers and policymakers. Roads and clearcuts can increase the rate of sliding relative to forested areas, but these increases decrease through time

after the initial management action. This information is useful in

assessing watershed response to future floods. The landscape position of roads greatly influences the frequency and type of interactions of roads with floods and landslides. This information is used

in redesigning roads (including road material) to reduce the

degree to which roads can aggregate flood effects and the effects

of floods on road networks. Despite major flood modification of

stream and riparian systems, most species examined seem to have

survived the flood with little risk of local extirpation. Refuges

from damaging floodwaters appear to have been many and widespread.

Researchers from the PNW and PSW Research Stations and

managers in the Pacific Southwest and Pacific Northwest Regions

have communicated results of these flood studies widely to the

public, land managers, and policymakers through print and electronic media, field tours, briefings for policymakers, workshops,

professional meetings, and other outlets. Interest of all these audiences has been exceptionally keen because policy issues are

diverse and prominent; for example, public safety (five people

were killed by landslides), quality of municipal water supplies, and

ecological effects of floods influenced by forestry practices.

Several General Accounting Office studies are underway on these

topics. These studies focus on adequacy of the Forest Plan to provide sufficient watershed protection given its emphasis on protecting species. Flood science in the PNW and PSW Research

Stations squarely addresses this issue.

■66

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

1996 Still Creek flood.
IMPLICATIONS

FEMAT Report Assumptions: Validated or Not?

Results emerging from these studies of ecological processes and functions extend knowledge used by the team, but do

not represent invalidation of any FEMAT report assumptions.

Management response to these findings should be course corrections and not radical change in direction. With the passage

of time since the Forest Plan went into effect, disturbances

such as the February 1996 flood will occur, triggering a flurry of

unscheduled studies and questioning of the adequacy of Forest

Plan-managed landscape to deal with such events.

Spatial and Temporal Scale

These studies represent the multispatial scale and extended time scale aspects of ecological thinking incorporated in the

Forest Plan. Disturbance processes and forest succession leading to developing old-growth conditions operate at the local

level, but there are important variations across landscapes and

the region as a whole. Broad regional gradients in environmental conditions, such as moisture and temperature, create a

significant variation that must be recognized in management

practices. These studies are providing the information to do so.

Planning and Implementation

As indicated previously, findings from these studies have

been widely discussed with land managers, policymakers, and

the public. The work on disturbance ecology is already incorporated in landscape planning and management activities (for

example, Cissel and others 1998; Cissel and others 1999).

Further modeling and field studies are underway to extend the

findings concerning early development of old-growth forests to

thinning in plantations.

New Research Topics

These studies are leading research efforts in new directions commonly characterized by expansion of geographic,

temporal, and interdisciplinary scope of the work. The work

on disturbance regimes and early development of old-growth

forests, for example, needs to be extended to better quantify

regional patterns of variation and to understand how historical climate variability may have contributed to distinctive

attributes of modern old growth. Such information can be used

to guide management objectives and approaches across the

Forest Plan region.

Cross-Disciplinary Implications

Several of the studies considered here are highly interdisciplinary and set the stage for further expansion to link with

additional disciplines, including social and economic sciences.

The disturbance regime work, for example, concerns interaction of physical processes, landforms, and biota. Incorporation

of disturbance regime perspectives into landscape planning

necessitates conceptually and operationally merging with conservation biology and commodity extraction emphases in planning. Studies of ecological functions and growth of live trees

retained in harvest units require consideration of ecological,

silvicultural, growth and yield, human perception, and other

factors.

RELATED TOPICS NOT ADDRESSED

Forest Plan funding does not support much of the PNW

and PSW Research Stations’ programs of more basic work on

ecological processes and functions. Given the broad scope of

the Forest Plan, however, this other work is potentially highly

relevant to future development of the Forest Plan through

adaptive management processes. Furthermore, many important

topics are not addressed significantly by researchers in the

Forest Plan region. These topics include the basic biology and

habitat requirements of many species on the “survey and manage” list (see appendix 4), effects of biological diversity on

ecosystem function and stability, effects of landscape structure

on function, and ecological processes regulating long-term site

productivity.

■67

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS TO DATE
THE STRUGGLE TO DEAL WITH

LANDSCAPES

Thomas A. Spies and Frederick J. Swanson1

INTRODUCTION

The Northwest Forest Plan (Forest Plan) initiated a new era

in Federal land management and research. In the past, managers

and researchers focused their planning and management primarily at stand, project, and administrative unit scales. Under the

Forest Plan, the scale and scope of management and research has

shifted to include larger, more ecologically defined units—such as

landscapes, watersheds, provinces, and regions. In addition to the

expansion of geographic scope, the disciplinary scope has expanded to include both ecological and social components of ecosystems and their integration. These changes have occurred because

managers and scientists now recognize that traditional natural

resource problems such as multiple uses of forests, maintaining

biological diversity, and forest planning cannot be solved or dealt

with at traditional spatial scales and within narrow disciplines. 

The struggle to deal with landscapes in management and

research is really a struggle to deal with assumptions of the Forest

Plan related to three main problems:

• The problem of scale and spatial variation—The Forest Plan

assumes that ecological and socioeconomic patterns and

processes differ by location and spatial scales, some (landscapes,

provinces, and regions) much larger than traditional management and planning units.

• The problem of integration—The Forest Plan assumes that

an ecosystem management approach is taken in which

late-successional and old-growth species and ecosystems

are maintained and restored, and sustainable levels of

renewable natural resources are provided for. This assumes

that ecological and socioeconomic dimensions of ecosystems can be integrated to find the appropriate balance for

producing values, goods, and services.

• The problem of information—The Forest Plan assumes

that tools and information are available to monitor the

outcomes of the Forest Plan at different spatial scales and

for different levels of ecological and socioeconomic hierarchies.

Important findings related to these and other assumptions of

the Forest Plan and their implications to management are

addressed in the following discussions.

THE PROBLEM OF SCALE 

AND SPATIAL VARIATION

Most progress on this problem has come in the form of

developing landscape- and regional-scale habitat models. The

general questions addressed in this research are:

• What is the relation of physical environment and 

vegetation to species habitat and ecosystems at landscape

and larger scales?

■68

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

1 Thomas A. Spies is a research forester, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Pacific Northwest Research Station, 3200 SW Jefferson Way, Corvallis, OR 97331.

A landscape view of historical management practices.
• How does the spatial pattern of habitat, expressed as measures

of fragmentation, affect occurrence and abundance of species?

• How can processes that operate over large spatial scales or long

temporal scales be incorporated into management?

• How do land management activities outside Federal lands

influence conditions within them?

What Has Been Learned So Far?

What is the relation of physical environment and vegetation to species habitat and ecosystems at landscape and

larger scales? Pabst and Spies’ (1998) herbs and shrubs study

supports the assumption that riparian zones are distinct

ecosystems, strongly controlled by landform patterns, and

may require different management and conservation strategies than uplands. Brooks (1997) study on bird-habitat

demonstrates that satellite imagery can be useful in determining relations between bird abundance and habitat.

Landscape models resulting from these studies will allow us

to evaluate how forest management activities across multiownership landscapes will affect measures of biological diversity and sustainability.

How does the spatial pattern of habitat, expressed as

measures of fragmentation, affect occurrence and abundance of species? Initial research on bird species in the

Oregon Coast Range has not found that landscape spatial

pattern explains variation in bird abundance beyond that

explained by total amount of habitat (Brooks 1997, Spies

and others 1998). Studies indicate that information about

total amount of habitat is more important in explaining

bird habitat relations than spatial pattern. Spatial pattern

of bird habitat was not related to fecundity and survival in

a preliminary study of northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) demographics (Raphael 1998). A preliminary

study of stream habitat structure suggests that overall measures of small watershed conditions may be adequate to

model expected habitat conditions.

How can processes that operate over large spatial scales

or long temporal scales be incorporated into management?

Most progress on this front has been made in conceptualizing and evaluating the natural fire disturbance patterns and

frequencies of landscapes and developing examples of how

Forest Plan goals could be achieved by using disturbance

history as a model. Historical ecosystem conditions and disturb-ance regimes could be used in prescribing frequency,

severity, and spatial arrangement of harvest areas (Cissel

and others 1994, 1998, 1999; Landres and others 1999).

Studies of fire history provide an important reference point

for developing landscape management plans to sustain

species and ecosystems.

THE PROBLEM OF INTEGRATION

Progress in this area has been slow. Most efforts have focused

on developing conceptual models and tools and identifying challenges to integrating disciplines. In its most basic form, integration research brings together parts to evaluate the patterns and

behavior of the whole. Integration links components of whole

systems in ways that allow us to understand how the parts relate

to one another and how they can affect the entire system.

Integration research consists of analyses and models that examine

the parts that underlie the Forest Plan, including ecological, economic, and social components. Research to integrate biophysical

and social processes and functions has occurred primarily in the

coastal landscape analysis and modeling study (CLAMS), which

has the goal of developing information and tools to project the

future ecological and socioeconomic consequences of the Forest

Plan at the province scale.

What Has Been Learned So Far?

The process of integration among multiple disciplines is

slow, nonlinear, and highly empirical. Communications among

disciplines require considerable time and team-building to break

down language barriers and develop respect for different disciplines. The process has been characterized by many false starts,

requiring frequent modification of the original plans. Little guidance and few theories are available to orient the effort. A small

subset of scientists on the team (1 to 3) conducts most of the

integration; the remaining scientists contribute from within

their specialties. Much of the integration process consists of

identifying the outputs, inputs, spatial scale, and kind of information needed. Lead scientists must continually ensure that

information passing among different components of the study is

timely and compatible.

Integration requires conceptual models of the subsystems

and their links, as well as identifying the spatial scale, timeframe,

and policies relevant to the questions of interest. Time spent on

the conceptual model is worthwhile when more quantitative

processes begin. 

Prototype models of real landscapes or watersheds are highly

valuable in building full-scale models and for revising the conceptual model.

The central scale in the province-scale-planning model is a

large landscape or watershed. Pattern and behavior of the

province-scale system consists of aggregate behavior of the landscapes and watersheds. Patches, stands, or small watersheds,

which form the smallest spatial units, are nested in the landscapes

and watersheds.

Different ecological and social processes often operate at different spatial and temporal scales. For example, watershed

processes typically operate at the scale of small landslides and

■69

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS TO DATE
debris flows that originate in first-order2 stream drainages. These

processes may require fine-scale data and models to establish the

link between forest management activities and stream-habitat

quality and dynamics. Scaling these processes up to the scale of

provinces may require either large complex multiscale hydrology

models or simplified watershed-scale risk models based on watershed physiography and landowner management regimes (or

both). By contrast, economic models to estimate employment and

income operate at county and larger spatial scales. Such models

need to be disaggregated to characterize the economic outputs of

watersheds smaller than counties or that span parts of several

counties. 

Different ecological and social-process models do not necessarily use or produce information that can allow translation

between models. For example, for most species of plants or animals, credible population or production models are currently

lacking. Without this type of information, estimating economic

effects related to human consumption of or encounters with

organisms is difficult. Some components of biological diversity,

such as genetic diversity or ecosystem diversity, may never be

translated into population numbers. Consequently, new ways of

measuring the value of biological diversity must be developed to

establish the economic links between forest practices, ecological

values, and economic and social systems. One method used in

CLAMS to establish these links is contingent valuation to estimate the price people would be willing to pay for different components of biological diversity. 

Putting together a complex integrated model or concept of

an entire system often requires use of relatively simple component

models that do not necessarily represent the most advanced or

sophisticated models within a discipline. Consequently, some specialists in component disciplines may be critical of interdisciplinary models as lacking scientific rigor. 

THE PROBLEM OF INFORMATION

How does the science community learn about landscapes,

watersheds, provinces, and regions? How can they put together

information from complex systems to evaluate relations and consequences across disciplines? Collecting and evaluating information at large spatial scales is difficult, as well as costly, and no

methods and tools exist to do the work. Managers and researchers

require an information base on which to plan, make decisions,

evaluate relations, and test hypotheses. These information bases

and tools must be spatial and cover large areas. Progress has been

made on several fronts: 

• Applying remote sensing to development of spatial vegetation

databases at large spatial scales 

• Integrating extensive plot networks with geographical information system (GIS) and remote sensing

• Using GIS models to characterize watersheds and streams at

large spatial scales

• Developing models to evaluate relations between components

of the Forest Plan

• Using methods to monitor effectiveness and validate assumptions of the Forest Plan at landscape and regional scales 

What Has Been Learned So Far?

Using large-scale vegetation databases for planning, monitoring management, and research is cost effective and helps to

provide seamless digital vegetation maps at province scales.

Cohen and others (1995) have developed a method to use

Landsat Thematic Mapper satellite imagery to characterize

vegetation cover type and conifer size that meets most of the

Interagency Vegetation Strike Team standards for the Pacific

Northwest Region. This method, used primarily in the Pacific

Northwest, is currently being adapted to help produce a map of

forest vegetation on all ownerships in western Washington and

Oregon (interagency vegetation mapping project).

Remote sensing cover-type classes are frequently too

coarse for many management applications. New methods use

plot-level information combined with GIS and remote sensing

to evaluate patterns of forest structure and composition at

landscape and regional scales (Ohmann and Spies 1998). 

Although some high-quality stream and watershed GIS

layers exist for individual National Forests, similar information is lacking for all provinces in the Forest Plan area.

Burnett and others have adapted and developed a method

using digital elevation models to map 6th-field (small, roughly 5,000-acre) watersheds and streams for use in all lands in

most provinces.

The ecosystem management decision support (EMDS) project (Reynolds 1997) provides a logical framework for linking

many different quantitative and qualitative analyses in meaningful ways. It integrates analysis of many and diverse biological,

physiographic, social, and economic conditions. In addition, it

integrates formal logical reasoning ability into a GIS environment to support integrated environmental assessment at landscape scales.

The (interagency) Effectiveness Monitoring Team has developed a plan and a method for monitoring at province and regional scales. They require developing models of ecosystem dynamics,

stressors, and management to guide collection and evaluation of

data. The monitoring plan contains specific questions and methods for managers to use in monitoring Forest Plan implementation.

■70

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

2 A first-order stream is a stream segment with no tributaries feeding into it. A second-order

stream is one with at least two first-order streams feeding into it. Stream orders range from 1

for small streams at the upper end of a drainage to 6 or more for a large river at the lower end

of a drainage basin.
■71

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS TO DATE

Table 10—Scale and spatial variation, integration, and information studies and findings

Studies Investigator Significant findings

Historical old-growth dynamics Wimberly and Spies Historical variation in old-growth varies

coastal landscape analysis and with spatial scale 

modeling study (CLAMS)

Landscape pattern at province Spies and Nesje Patterns of fragmentation differ across

scales (CLAMS) ownerships

Simulation of landscape dynamics Johnson, Bettinger, and Spies Highly contrasting landscape conditions will 

across ownerships (CLAMS) develop in Federal-private landscapes

Successional development of old-growth Spies and others Hemlock establishment is controlled by seed

forests (CLAMS) sources at stand and landscape scales

Mapping northern spotted owl habitat with Raphael and Spies First province-scale owl map based on

satellite imagery (CLAMS) satellite imagery 

Effects of landscape pattern on vertebrate McComb and others Measures of landscape fragmentation

occurrence (CLAMS) were not strongly related to bird occurrence

in managed forest landscapes

Riparian herb and shrub distribution Pabst and Spies Plant community patterns are tied to 

geomorphology along stream to upslope gradients

Effects of remnant old-growth trees and Goslin and Spies Remnant old-growth trees affect composition

stand development and pattern of stand development at

short distances

Effects of remnant old-growth trees on Sillet and Goslin Old-growth remnants act as sources for

distribution of canopy lichens colonization of “old-growth” canopy lichens

in young stands

Spatial pattern of vegetation and land Cohen and others Spatial distribution of forest conditions and

cover change at a regional scale disturbances across all ownerships in western 

Oregon

Landscape management based on natural Cissel, Swanson and others Natural disturbance regimes can provide

disturbance regimes a basis for ecosystem management at

landscape scales

Natural range of variability concept Swanson and others Implications of natural variability to

ecosystem management

Regional patterns in woody plant diversity Ohmann and Spies Factors controlling community composition

differ across regions

Fire and wind disturbance regimes in Swanson and others Complexity of disturbance regimes exhibit

western Oregon some regional patterns

Coastal landscape analysis and modeling study Spies and others Integration is difficult and requires conceptual

(CLAMS) models, prototypes, and simplification of subsystem processes

Few ecological measures and indicators exist 

at most scales

Little work exists on direct measures of the 

socioeconomic value of biodiversity
LANDSCAPE STUDIES AND FINDINGS

Landscape studies and findings are shown in table 10.

For the most part, these studies deal with improving scientific understanding of both variations in process and patterns and

how they change over time. Some of them also deal with the

determinants of landscape change including both natural and

man-caused disturbances.

IMPLICATIONS

FEMAT Report Assumptions: Validated or Not?

Implications from these studies about the assumptions of the

FEMAT report are as follows:

Of Scale and Spatial Variation Research:

• For at least one province, the Oregon Coast Range, current

amounts of old growth appear to be well below the historical

range of variation. This finding supports the general assumptions of the Forest Plan. In a related study, the concept of natural range of variability as a reference point for management

was evaluated. Although this concept was not part of the standards and guidelines in the Forest Plan, it could serve as the

basis of a more developed ecosystem management strategy in

the Forest Plan.

• Use of historical variation in amounts of old growth to guide

management may be best applied at province scales where typical minimum amounts are greater than 20 percent of the area.

This finding supports the province-scale perspective of the

Forest Plan.

• Assumptions that the Federal lands currently contain the

largest amounts and patches of late-successional old growth are

supported by several of these studies.

• The assumption that the goals of the Forest Plan can be met

without considering cumulative effects from non-Federal lands

may not hold up in watersheds where private lands occupy a significant portion of the basin.

■72

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

Table 10—Scale and spatial variation, integration, and information studies and findings (continued)

Studies Investigator Significant findings

Comparison of remote sensing methods Lefsky, Cohen, and Spies Different remote sensing methods provide 

for mapping habitat at multiple spatial scales different types and qualities of forest

structure information

Remote sensing applications Cohen and Spies Methods to map forest structure at

landscape scales using satellite imagery

Scientific basis of effectiveness monitoring Mulder, Noon, Spies, Raphael, A scientific and implementation framework

at regional scales Olsen, Palmer, Reeves, and Welsh for the effectiveness monitoring was developed

Pilot effectiveness monitoring study Spies Effectiveness monitoring plan and protocols

are tested and evaluated

Ecosystem management decision-support Reynolds A logical framework to evaluate and integrate

project dimensions of the Forest Plan was developed

and tested

Spatial model of land use change (CLAMS) Kline and Alig Method to predict land use change at

province scales

Comparison of empirical and ecological Goslin, Garman, and Spies Ecological succession simulator can provide

forest stand simulators estimate of late-successional forest 

development

Mapping marbled murrelet habitat with Nelson, Wallin, and Spies Satellite imagery can be used to map potential

satellite imagery murrelet nesting habitat

Implement and monitor Blue River landscape Cissel and Swanson Develop and implement ecosystem management

management plan at landscape scale

Modeling spatial patterns of forest structure Ohmann and Spies Valuable method for predicting variation in

and composition at landscape and regional forest structure and composition at

scales (CLAMS) regional scales
• Effects of habitat fragmentation on bird occurrences may not

be as great as assumed in the Forest Plan. Total amount of

habitat seems far more important than spatial distribution of

habitat in explaining bird occurrences in managed forest landscapes. These results may not apply to other taxonomic groups

and do not necessarily indicate lack of negative effects in the

long term.

• Research on succession in midaged (40 to 200 years) Douglasfir (Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco) forests indicates that

developing multistoried stands is partly controlled by landscape-level patterns (both natural and human made). Distance

to hemlock seed sources explains variation in regeneration patterns of western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla Raf. Sarg). This

suggests that stand-level models simulating hemlock regeneration may underestimate the development rate of multistoried

forests. This has implications for planning and monitoring in

late-successional reserves. 

• The assumption that green-tree retention, a silvicultural practice in matrix lands, can maintain some late-successional species

in young stands is supported by two retrospective studies.

• The work on northern spotted owl habitat supports the assumption that the Federal lands are the primary location of habitat

for this species.

• The assumption that a geomorphic and watershed perspective

is needed in the aquatic conservation strategy is supported by

the work on distribution of herbs and shrubs in riparian areas. 

• Work on disturbance regimes at the landscape scales suggests

that management practices at the landscape and watershed

scale can be designed in more ecologically tuned ways for

watersheds than is currently suggested by the Forest Plan. 

• Work on biodiversity differences among provinces in Oregon

indicates strong ecological differences among provinces and

suggests that provinces are reasonable ecological strata within

the Forest Plan. Research also supports the notion that standards and guidelines could be more strongly oriented to

provinces than they currently are in the Forest Plan. 

Of Integration Research:

• Efforts to monitor and evaluate the multidisciplinary effects

of the Forest Plan will be slowed by the complexity of integration across disciplines. The assumptions of the Forest Plan

about integration and ecosystem management are supported,

but the task is probably more complex than originally

thought. The scope and complexity of the Forest Plan require

considerable time and resources to conduct integrated

research, especially across ownerships.

• The assumption of the Forest Plan that integration at the

province level is an important component of planning is supported by current research, which indicates that an interdisciplinary and multiownership perspective can be a valuable component of natural resources decisionmaking and a powerful tool

for collaborative learning.

• Monitoring and planning components of the Forest Plan

require developing ecological indicators that, for the most part,

do not exist. Empirical study and professional judgement will

need to be integrated to produce province-scale indicators of

biodiversity. 

■73

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS TO DATE

Forest land ownership is highly fragmented at the province level.
• Few direct measures of the value of biodiversity to society exist.

Consequently, research is needed to develop measures of how

society values the biodiversity goals in the Forest Plan. 

Of Information Research:

• The Forest Plan assumes that a scientifically based model and

protocols can be developed and implemented. This assumption

is supported by efforts to develop a monitoring framework and

by pilot testing for northern spotted owls, marbled murrelets

(Brachyramphus marmoratus), and late-successional and oldgrowth components of the Forest Plan.

• The Forest Plan assumes that remote sensing will be an important component of the monitoring program. This assumption

has been tested, and preliminary results indicate that remote

sensing can be a valuable component of a province and regional-scale monitoring program for ecological components of the

Forest Plan.

• The monitoring plan also calls for methods that will project the

future development of stands and landscapes. Research on ecological succession models indicates that they can provide this

long-term view. 

• Assessing cumulative effects of private land activities on

Federal lands requires a method to project land use change over

large areas. A method has been developed. 

• The Forest Plan assumes that an ecosystem management framework can be developed at multiple spatial scales. The Blue

River management study validates this assumption at the landscape scale. 

Spatial and Temporal Scale

These findings apply to scales ranging from individual stands

(for example, research on remnant trees and forest succession) to

landscapes (Augusta Creek, appendix 4) to an entire province

(CLAMS, appendix 4). Spatial resolution ranges from about 0.5

acre to 5,000,000 acres. The modeling of disturbance regimes and

projections of future landscapes range from 3,000 years ago to 100

years into the future, with 5-year time steps.

The research for integration problems applies to landscape,

watershed, and province spatial scales and temporal scales of

about 100 years. The general findings should be valid for integration problems anywhere within the area of the Forest Plan. 

The scale of information research findings ranges from stand

(for example, stand simulator) to landscape (Blue River), to

province (CLAMS), to the region (effectiveness monitoring protocol). The temporal scale ranges from 100 to 200 years.

Planning and Implementation

Research results have been used in developing the effectiveness monitoring plan. For example, the pilot effectiveness

monitoring project of the Forest Service and Bureau of Land

Management has used the spatial databases and habitat models of CLAMS to evaluate the effectiveness monitoring plan

and determine the most cost-effective way of implementing it.

Coastal landscape analysis and mapping system is providing a

basis for multiownership evaluation of forest policies for the

State of Oregon. Using the CLAMS approach, the State

Department of Forestry will conduct a statewide assessment of

forestry. The CLAMS effort has great potential to serve as a

learning and decision-support tool in province-level planning. In addition, CLAMS will provide a basis for evaluating

current and alternative policies.

The results of our work on integration at the province

scale have great potential to improve Forest Plan implementation, particularly in monitoring, planning, collaborative

decisionmaking, and in research and policy efforts to evaluate

Forest Plan consequences. The practical application of these

results to policy, planning, and on the ground efforts will not

be immediate. Because of the advanced level of this research,

both in terms of novelty and risk, results will take several

years to be applied and evaluated as a practical tool.

Applications of information research have been especially abundant. For example, the application of remote sensing

to monitoring has been put into practice through the

Interagency Vegetation Mapping Project, which is using the

methods of PNW Research Station scientists to create the

first multiownership vegetation map for the Forest Plan area

in Oregon and Washington. The (EMDS) project (Reynolds

1997) has produced a tool that has been used in ecoregional

assessments. The effectiveness monitoring work has produced

a framework adopted by Federal agencies as the plan for

regional-scale monitoring. The results of Augusta Creek

ecosystem dynamics research (see appendix 4) have been

implemented in the Blue River planning area of the

Willamette National Forest. The Siuslaw National Forest has

used CLAMS databases and indicators to meet its provincescale monitoring needs. 

New Research Topics

New spatial and scale variation research questions and topics

have arisen out of these research efforts. These include:

• The effect of fire size and severity on variability in amounts

of old-growth forests

• The importance of landscape pattern of seed sources of

shade-tolerant species in developing multistoried forest

stands

■74

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
• The ecological and economic outcomes of alternative practices to achieve the goals of the Forest Plan and other management goals

• The relative values of ecosystem versus single-species level

approaches to conserving biological diversity

Integration research has led to studies of how society values biological diversity and to new research on how to develop indicators of

biological diversity that can deal with poorly known and rare species.

Information research has led to new research in several areas

including developing stream and watershed layers from digital

elevation models. An effort is underway to compare the quality of

information gained from the models at 10 and 30 meters. The

need to develop province-scale information on forest structure

has led to innovative research on integrating inventory plots with

remote sensing.

Cross-Disciplinary Implications

The cross-disciplinary implications of scale and spatial variation

research are extensive. Landscape-level approaches typically involve

multiple disciplines. The results thus far indicate that new insights can

be gained from examining forest succession, landscape ecology, and

disturbance ecology. For example, variation in the development rates

of multistoried late-successional forests can be explained in part by

examining the landscape-scale pattern of seed sources and disturbance

history. Studies of wildfire disturbance history at landscape and

province scales can provide a model for ecosystem management that

could achieve conservation goals more effectively than current

approaches. Potential links to studies and models of landslide dynamics are great, and efforts to link vegetation dynamics to geomorphic

dynamics are underway.

Integration research implications of cross-disciplinary issues

are strong. For example, the capacity to explore the link between

technical information and how society views natural resource

problems is being developed. This research will provide the

potential for evaluating how technical studies influence decisionmaking and collaborative learning. Integration research will provide the capacity to evaluate links between economics, policy,

and ecosystems.

New tools from information research have tremendous

potential to facilitate cross-disciplinary work. The ability to display multiple resources at different spatial scales improves our

ability to evaluate interdisciplinary connections and visualize

effects of forest management on different resources. The EMDS

project makes interdisciplinary connections more understandable

through its logical connections software.

RELATED TOPICS NOT ADDRESSED

Landscape topics not included in scale spatial variation work

are as follows: simulation modeling of wildfire behavior, landscape patterns of insect and disease occurrence, scaling effects to

determine the relative importance of fine- and coarse-scale information in ecological models, and climate change.

Research has not addressed the sociological and anthropological dimensions of integration. In other words, no

research is in place to link social institutions, groups, and values into the integrative model. Another area not addressed is

regional-scale integration; the current research scale is at the

province level.

Information research has not developed tools for stand-level

decisionmaking. Also, not much effort has been spent on evaluating the uncertainty and errors of the models.

■75

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS TO DATE
DEVELOPING NEW STANDMANAGEMENT STRATEGIES

FOR THE DOUGLAS-FIR

REGION

Dean S. DeBell, J. Bradley St. Clair, 

and Robert O. Curtis1

INTRODUCTION

Controversy over management approaches and harvest

rates in Northwestern National Forests culminated in the management standards and guidelines recommended in the

Northwest Forest Plan (Forest Plan) and currently implemented

on National Forests west of the Cascade Range. Opinions

among resource managers, scientists, and other members of the

region’s citizenry differ widely. Some consider the Forest Plan

measures to be reasonable first approximations of much-needed

changes; others see them as harsh overreactions with adverse

economic consequences in specific locations and unintended

negative environmental effects on non-Federal forest lands

throughout and beyond the region. Little doubt exists, however,

that extensive and uniform application of conventional industrial forest management approaches—with short rotation

lengths, reduced forest area in late-successional stages of stand

development, and few large snags for cavity-nesting wildlife—

will not provide the diverse habitats, goods, and services that

society expects from Federal forests. And, thus a need has been

established to develop alternative management strategies, evaluate their performance, and demonstrate how they can be used,

alone and in combination, to meet changing needs and desires

of American society.

Fundamental Questions

It is useful to review the underlying questions and some related matters that guide research and development of new stand

management strategy aspects:

• Given the many conditions and benefits that might be

achieved on public lands, what does society desire? What combinations and what amounts are preferred? Much of the

research effort must be directed toward determining what is 

possible, communicating the possibilities, and assessing public

opinion, given such knowledge.

• What are the characteristics of forests—landscapes and associated stands—that will provide the desired conditions and

benefits?

• How can stands be managed—in a landscape context—to

attain the essential characteristics?

Successful application of stand management regimes to

provide a mix of desired conditions and benefits will require

that:

• Several approaches and resulting stands of diverse characteristics be combined on the landscape

• Interplay with uncontrollable natural disturbances be taken

into account

• Scale and “grain” of forest patterns, as they affect the values

produced, be considered 

Some aspects of these matters are addressed in other sections

of this chapter—”Ecological Processes and Functions” and “The

Struggle to Deal with Landscapes.” The work described in this

section focuses on stand management strategies—that is, what

can be accomplished through different silvicultural regimes in

individual forest stands (for example, 20 to 100 acres or so).

■76

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

1 J. Bradley St. Clair is a research geneticist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Pacific Northwest Research Station, 3200 SW Jefferson, Corvallis, OR 97331; Dean S.

DeBell is team leader, and Robert O. Curtis is a mensurationist emeritus, U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, 3624 93rd Avenue, Olympia,

WA 98512-9193.

By the early 1980s, large old-growth logs like this were a novelty in most

log yards; and their size made them difficult to process.
STUDIES AND SIGNIFICANT FINDINGS2

Work done under the auspices of the Forest Plan on stand management strategy addresses several aspects of the questions listed previously. This work includes the projects shown in table 11. The status

and knowledge developed to date are described next for each study.

Rotation Length as Related to Production of Wood 

and Other Forest Values

Rotation length or stand age at harvest has a major influence on the characteristics of forest stands and landscapes, and

the values derived from them. Rate of wood production over

time is a significant factor considered in setting harvest age.

During the past 5 years, considerable research and much technology transfer on growth patterns in older Douglas-fir

(Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco) stands has been done.

This work includes simulation of mean annual increment patterns by using existing stand-growth simulators (Curtis 1994);

relocation, remeasurement, and further analysis of 17 long-term

thinning trials (Curtis 1995); and syntheses of the results in

terms of management options for forest lands in the Douglas-fir

region (Curtis 1997, Curtis and Marshall 1993).

The work shows that mean annual increment of Douglas-fir culminates at older ages than commonly believed and that culmination

may be delayed by repeated thinning. Maximum ages of the stands

included in the study (Curtis 1995) were 90 years on high sites and

117 years on low sites. None of these stands had clearly reached culmination, though some seemed close. The mean annual increment

curves appear to be quite flat in the region of culmination, so considerable latitude exists in choice of rotation length without serious

loss of production—perhaps up to 120 years or more in repeatedly

thinned stands, based on reasonable extrapolation of existing data. If

total merchantable yield from stands grown to culmination age is

compared to yield of stands at rotation ages now common on private

lands (much younger than the culmination age), total yield of the

latter may be 10 to 70 percent lower than it could have been. The

losses in potential production would be greater on lower than higher sites. Thus, extending rotation lengths beyond those currently

used on most forest lands in the region would, over the long term,

increase timber production and also timber value (that is, larger trees

generally cost less to harvest and process, and wood produced at older

ages has better intrinsic properties).

Many additional potential advantages accompany extended rotations and the associated thinning and regeneration options

(Curtis 1995, Curtis and Carey 1996, Curtis and Marshall 1993).

These include:

• Reduced visual impacts

• Lower regeneration costs

• Improved habitat for some wildlife species

• Increased carbon storage

• Enhanced hydrological functioning

• Possible long-term benefits to soil productivity

• Opportunities to adjust present unbalanced stand age-class distributions

• Increased flexibility to adapt to unknown future changes in

social desires, political regimes, economic situations, technology, and biological or ecological knowledge and events

Unfortunately, three major factors operate against the adoption of longer rotations on forest lands where costs of ownership

and management are not heavily subsidized by the Federal

■77

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS TO DATE

Table 11—New stand development strategies studies 

and findings

Studies Significant findings

Rotation length as related to Mean annual increment of 

production of wood and Douglas-fir culminates

other forest values at older ages than commonly

believed. Repeated thinning 

could delay culmination, thus 

extending rotation lengths 

beyond those used on most 

forest lands in the region.This 

would increase timber production and value, over the long 

term; and concurrently benefit 

aesthetic, wildlife, and watershed values

The role of genetic selection Seedlings from families selected

of Douglas-fir in alternative in an open light environment 

management regimes are also appropriate for use

under the lower light

environments of alternative 

management regimes

General syntheses of Six general syntheses of

silvicultural options for multi- existing silvicultural knowledge

purpose forest management describe how existing

information and practices

can be used to provide diverse

values in managed forests

New integrated trials of Studies are not far enough

silvicultural options along to yield experimental 

results

2

The following terms are inportant to know for this section:

Mean annual increment is average annual production per unit area, calculated as (standing volume + thinnings)/(stand age).

Total merchantable yield is the sum of standing volume plus thinnings, considering only material commercially utilizable dimensions.

Alternative silviculture—in Pacific Northwest usage—is any planned silvicultural regime other

than conventional clearcutting.
Government. One long-standing obstacle is that conventional

financial objectives commonly aim to maximize net present value

based on timber values only. These approaches and the social

institutions that encourage them rarely account for “benefits”

provided to or “costs” incurred by the population at large, nor are

landowners rewarded for providing general benefits. A second

factor is more recent and has intensified with implementation of

the Forest Plan—that is, the need to maintain a reasonable supply of wood in the face of drastic reductions in the volume contributed from the Federal land base. Throughout the region, in

areas where National Forest supplies were significant, much of the

non-Federal forest land is being harvested at even younger stand

ages than previously planned. A third factor is the fear and uncertainty of future regulatory constraints on land use and recovery of

returns from investments in forest management. Taken together,

these factors more or less force many landowners, particularly

those with significant holdings, into shorter rotations. Moreover,

the timber-supply problem—exacerbated by severe reductions in

National Forest harvests—will make any transition to longer

rotations on other lands much more difficult, even if other obstacles can be overcome.

The Role of Genetic Selection of Douglas-Fir in

Alternative Management Regimes

During the past quarter century, much progress has been

made in selecting and producing Douglas-fir seedlings that are

well adapted and more productive than standard “woods-run”

planting stock. The parents to produce the improved seedlings

were selected based on results from genetic tests in open-light

environments, given the premise that most of these seedlings

would be planted in clearcuts or burns. With growing interest in

alternative management regimes, some people have questioned

whether parents selected in the open are appropriate for use under

the lower light conditions and increased vegetative competition

commonly associated with many of the alternative regimes.

Although light intensity has been shown to affect the growth and

morphology of various species, including Douglas-fir, little information exists on genetic variation within a species in response to

different light intensities. 

St. Clair and Sniezko (in prep.) recently completed a study

that addressed concerns about the appropriateness of families

selected in open-light environments for use in alternative management regimes. Douglas-fir seedlings of 40 families from each

of two distinct geographic sources from western Oregon were

grown for 2 years in raised nursery beds; shade cloth was used to

create four different light environments. The general responses

to increased shade included decreased biomass, stem diameter

and stem volume, increased partitioning to shoots versus roots,

increased partitioning to height versus diameter, increased partitioning to branches, and delayed bud-set. In one of the two

geographic sources, a significant interaction was found between

families and shade levels for stem diameter, stem volume, and

bud-set. 

The practical implications of a differential response of families to shade levels were explored by considering the expected

performance of families grown in a light environment that differs

from the light environment in which they were selected. For traits

that did not show an interaction, selection of families in the open

resulted in genetic gains—when seedlings were grown in the

shade—equal to or greater than gains achieved from selection in

the shade. For traits that did show an interaction, genetic gains

were greatest when selection was in the same light environment

as the one in which seedlings were grown. The size of differences

in response to selection of families in different light environments

was small, however, compared to the total effects of genetic selection and response to shade. Indeed, genetic selection—whether

done in the open or in shade—may be used to mitigate some of

the reduction in growth resulting from increased shade. For example, moderate shade (36 percent of full sunlight) led to reductions

in stem volume of 12 percent to 16 percent, but after selection,

stem volume in moderate shade was equal to or slightly greater (7

percent) than growth in the open without selection. 

The conclusion of this study is that seedlings from families

selected in an open-light environment are also appropriate for use

under the lower light environments of alternative management

regimes. Furthermore, it appears that genetic selection can contribute in an important way to meeting multiple objectives,

including producing significant amounts of timber and creating

large trees, snags, and down logs needed for other forest values,

efficiently and in a timely manner. These implications, however,

must be confirmed and refined with a longer term study of family

performance in alternative management regimes. Such a test is

included in the new trial of harvest and regeneration options (see

subsequent section).

Syntheses of Silvicultural Options for Multipurpose

Forest Management

Six general syntheses of existing silvicultural knowledge were

prepared; they describe how existing information and practices

can be used to provide diverse values in managed forests. Three

were published as chapters in Kohm and Franklin (1997). These

chapters deal with silvicultural systems and regeneration methods

(Tappeiner and others 1997), cultural practices to shape stand

development, including managing dead wood (DeBell and others

1997), and extended rotations (Curtis 1997). Two papers were

prepared jointly with a wildlife biologist and were concerned with

both economic and ecological values (Carey and Curtis 1996,

Curtis and Carey 1996). The sixth synthesis effort (Curtis and

■78

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
others 1998) is more comprehensive; it expands on the above and

additional subjects and suggests options for managing for multiple

objectives in forests of the Douglas-fir region. 

These papers review the historical development of silviculture (including genetics) in the Pacific Northwest and practices

currently available to forest managers. Most past silvicultural and

genetic research and applications of practices were aimed at

enhancing the quantity or quality of wood produced. The techniques, however, can be modified to maintain, produce, or restore

wildlife habitat, diverse stand structures (including those usually

associated with old forests), and pleasing scenery while also producing wood products. Commodity production need not conflict

with aesthetic, wildlife, and other forest values and is commonly

a necessary tool in providing them; that is, economic returns from

wood harvests usually finance, directly or indirectly, the costs of

forest ownership and other values derived from forests.

Appropriate silviculture and genetic selection can markedly

reduce existing conflicts. Much of the knowledge needed in managing for multiple objectives already exists, but to apply it successfully, managers must know the goals sought in the forests and

the stand and landscape characteristics needed to attain them.

Curtis 1998b documents the history of an early attempt at

“alternative silviculture”—the selective cutting episode of the

1930s and early 1940s. Largely forgotten in the forestry profession

and nearly unknown by associated natural resource disciplines,

this bit of history has lessons for managers today. Curtis (1998b)

also discusses reasons for failure of the innovation, some subsequent misinterpretations of its original intent and outcome, and

their effects on the course of silviculture in the Pacific Northwest. 

New Integrated Trials of Silvicultural Options

The lack of clear understanding among forest owners, managers, and users about the combinations and amounts of values

obtainable in managed forests mentioned in earlier sections is

responsible at least in part for many of the current, intractable

conflicts over forest management. Another serious limitation is

inadequate information about the characteristics of forests needed to provide the conditions and benefits desired. Although some

silvicultural practices are obvious for establishing and shaping

stands (and ultimately, landscapes) to provide desired conditions,

some people argue that such effects remain to be demonstrated.

These issues are the underlying concerns that have influenced

the design of two new trials initiated to develop, evaluate, and

demonstrate a wide range of silvicultural options for managing

forests in the Douglas-fir region. Although neither study is far

enough along to yield experimental results, much has been

learned that may increase the effectiveness of such large-scale,

long-term, integrated, interdisciplinary efforts. These ideas have

been published in three invited papers that discuss the background, design, and approach in a cooperative project established by the Washington State Department of Natural

Resources (WDNR) and the Pacific Northwest (PNW)

Research Station’s Silviculture Team (Curtis 1998a; DeBell

and others 1997a).

One of the trials is testing early and intermediate stand practices to shape stand development (Harrington 1994). It was

installed in 1994 in a relatively uniform Douglas-fir stand that

had been planted in 1983 in the Clearwater Valley of Mount St.

Helens National Volcanic Monument on the Gifford Pinchot

National Forest. Resource specialists on the monument wanted to

evaluate approaches to young-stand management, including

some to enhance structural diversity and accelerate developing

late-successional stand characteristics. Some people use the term

“restoration” to denote the latter objectives in that the intent is

to emulate the features of a typical old-growth ecosystem. The

Olympia silviculture team planned and installed a study to compare five contrasting silvicultural options, each designed to foster

particular stand characteristics and management objectives. The

options included the following: control (do nothing), conventional precommercial thinning (uniformity, high timber productivity and stem quality), and three thinning and thinning plus

planting treatments intended to create greater species diversity,

greater variation in horizontal and vertical structure (high biological and structural diversity, wildlife habitat), or both. The last

three treatments include variable-density thinning, creating gaps,

and planting western redcedar (Thuga plicata Donn ex D. Don),

western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla Raf. Sarg.), and red alder

(Alnus rubra Bong.). Each treatment plot is 16 acres and is replicated in five blocks; all treatment plots have been installed. In

addition, a permanent sample plot system (including initial tree

measurements) has been established, low-level aerial photographs have been taken, and nontree vegetation has been characterized. Other ongoing work includes further assessment of vegetation and dead wood structures; in the future, some wildlife

populations, habitat, or usage will be assessed.

The other study is the WDNR and PNW Research Station

cooperative study of options for harvesting, regenerating, and

managing older Douglas-fir stands. This project was jointly

designed by the cooperators and is being installed on Capitol

Forest near Olympia, Washington. It is a highly integrated effort

designed to provide experience with contrasting silvicultural systems and to evaluate and demonstrate the biological, economic,

and visual effects associated with alternative timber harvest patterns and management regimes. Six regimes—all considered biologically, economically, and operationally feasible—are being

implemented on large cutting units (35 to 80 acres) in a randomized block design with three replications. The treatments are

clearcut, retained overstory (two-age system), small patch cutting

■79

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS TO DATE
(1.5 to 5.0 acres), group selection (openings ranging from those

created by removal of two to three trees up to 1.5- acre patches),

extended rotation with commercial thinning, and an unthinned

control. Harvesting of the first block was begun April 1998 and

was completed by October 1998. Basic evaluations include tree

growth and stand development; public response to visual characteristics of various harvesting practices using graphic simulation

and public survey techniques; harvest operation productivity; and

economic performance. Other assessments and supplementary

studies are being encouraged. One major supplementary effort

tests different densities of residual overstory (variations of the

two-age system); survival and growth of residual trees as well as

the regeneration performance of different species and genotypes

will be evaluated. The cooperative project is exceptional in three

ways: its degree of participation by both managers and scientists

from the outset, its design and implementation as part of ongoing

WDNR operations, and its design for a low-budget effort during

periods of low political interest and reduced funding. And yet it

offers the flexibility needed to accommodate additional and more

detailed assessments as appropriate and as funds become available.

Such features are important in long-term, large-scale research

needed to develop and evaluate management strategies.

IMPLICATIONS

Implications concerning such matters as the FEMAT report

assumptions, scale, and planning and implementation are summarized by the following project.

Rotation Length as Related to Production of Wood 

and Other Forest Values

Increase in rotation age received little consideration, as

management options were developed to deal with goals of the

Forest Plan. Any assumptions made in the Forest Plan about

effects of rotation length on wood yields and other values, given

recent results, would have underestimated the potential benefits

of extending rotation age. The growth pattern information was

determined in this project from stand- or plot-level measurements; it can, however, be applied and expanded to various spatial and temporal scales as appropriate. Results of the project have

been published in regional, national, and international outlets;

presented at several scientific meetings; and transferred to managers in workshops and one-on-one discussions. Given the nature

of the Forest Plan, the results have had little impact on managing

Federal lands. Some of the existing standards and guidelines limit

the opportunities for managers to apply them. The constraints on

thinning at stand ages beyond 80 years in late-successional

reserves as well as the restrictions in riparian reserves operate

against effective management and accelerated attainment of stated goals for these portions of the forest ecosystem. The implications of extending rotation length on both public and private

lands or portions of them are many, and they involve nearly all

forest-related values and disciplines. Additional research to quantify benefits to other values, such as late-successional species, is

needed. Economic research of a broad-based nature is particularly pertinent because many of the benefits and costs associated

with different rotation lengths are difficult to value. One of the

greatest obstacles to extending rotation length is the tendency to

rely heavily on net present value analyses—based on timber values only—in decisionmaking. Rotation length should be a major

consideration when the Forest Plan and its components are

assessed and reconsidered.

The Role of Genetic Selection of Douglas-Fir 

in Alternative Management Regimes

The opportunities to maintain or enhance harvest levels

through genetic manipulation were not considered in the Forest

Plan, so no assumptions were made. Years of research and millions

of dollars, however, have been invested in region-wide programs

for developing genetically improved planting stock. Work conducted in this area suggests that appropriate use of selected stock

may compensate for less desirable growing environments associated with alternative management regimes designed to enhance

values other than timber volume. These findings from controlled

experiments in nursery beds remain to be confirmed via tests in

forest environments; such tests are now planned in conjunction

with a new operational-scale trial of harvest and regeneration

options. Once determined, the growth results can be applied in

regenerated areas at the stand, watershed, and regional scales as

appropriate. Additional new, cross-disciplinary research may

involve other aspects of silviculture, plant physiology, wildlife

ecology and economics.

Syntheses of Silvicultural Options for Multipurpose

Forest Management

As options were developed to meet the assigned objectives of

the Forest Plan, the team focused primarily on approaches involving land allocations and restrictions as contrasted with silvicultural manipulations and active management. The identification

of and assumptions about silvicultural opportunities were therefore scarce. The recently prepared syntheses of silvicultural

options and particularly the comprehensive report entitled

“Silviculture for Multiple Objectives in the Douglas-Fir Region”

(Curtis and others 1998) provide information that can broaden

and enhance the values and benefits attainable in the National

Forests. These reports describe how silvicultural and genetic techniques initially developed to enhance wood production can be

modified to maintain or improve wildlife habitat, old-growth

stand characteristics, and aesthetics in addition to wood products. 

■80

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
New Integrated Trials of Silvicultural Options

These trials involve both young stands and stands at rotation age; they were installed to develop and test a broad range

of silvicultural options and to evaluate their performance in

terms of biological, social, and economic consequences. They

examine, directly or indirectly, many of the stated and unstated assumptions in the Forest Plan as well as other matters and

assumptions that received little attention in that planning

effort. The WDNR and PNW Research Station cooperative

study of harvest options was designed at the outset to link

stand- and landscape-level considerations with respect to

social, economic, and some (though not all) biological considerations. Because of its operational scale and WDNR’s

stature as an effective forest land management organization,

this study has received much interest and support among owners and managers of both private and public forest lands.

FURTHER THOUGHTS AND 

CONSIDERATIONS

Contributions of Other Programs

Work on this topic is not limited to that supported by the

Forest Plan. For example, the University of Washington in collaboration with PNW Research Station is doing significant

research; this work provides an approach to account for and

visualize simulated results of silvicultural practices on forested

landscapes. Likewise, the U.S. Department of the Interior and

Oregon State University, and university and PNW Research

Station collaborators have conducted several retrospective

studies of stand development (Hayes and others 1997,

Tappeiner and others 1997) and also have installed trials to test

different regeneration-harvest and intermediate stand management practices. In addition to the Forest Plan research

reviewed in this chapter, the PNW Research Station and the

state universities in Oregon and Washington are conducting

much other relevant work. Many of the studies are related,

directly or indirectly, to developing stand management strategies; they also expand the geographic context of the Forest

Plan research (for example, the forest ecosystem study at Fort

Lewis, the demonstration of ecosystem management options

study on the Gifford Pinchot and Umpqua National Forests,

and the habitat development study on the Olympic National

Forest). These efforts will contribute significantly to developing and evaluating new stand management options for the

Douglas-fir region.

The continuing value of many older well-designed, long-term

studies, especially those designed to evaluate a wide range of

silvicultural options or stand conditions should be noted.

Although many of the older studies were initially installed to

examine tree and stand growth response to thinning regimes,

they have contributed to a better understanding of the choices

among rotation ages and the possible advantages of extended

rotations for providing other values and reducing conflicts

among forest owners, users, and management objectives (see,

for example, Curtis and others 1997).

Obstacles to Conducting Large-Scale Silvicultural

Trials on Federal Forest Lands

It is no accident and merits comment that the largest, most

comprehensive project mentioned is being established on state

land. Although the need for developing alternative management regimes for use on National Forest lands has never been

greater, the real and perceived obstacles to efficient and successful conduct of requisite trials on National Forest lands have

likewise never been greater. Two reasons account for such difficulties: the potential for adverse public response and drawn out

appeals by those that oppose multipurpose management on

Federal lands and the inclusion of the Federal experimental

forests3 in late-successional reserves designated in the Forest

Plan. The first obstacle severely limits what National Forest

personnel consider as prudent use of limited time and financial

resources. The second obstacle imposes constraints on the kinds

of activities implemented in some Federal experimental forests

(particularly Cascade Head on the Siuslaw National Forest and

Wind River on the Gifford Pinchot National Forest). Although

there are administrative mechanisms for dealing with installation of experimental treatments on these experimental forests,

they have not been tested, owing to the availability of other

sites on National Forests. These experimental forests have

served both forest science and the evolution of management

technology over many decades before their inclusion in the

designated late-successional reserves during Forest Plan

preparation. Perhaps research on experimental forests can

become less restrictive as we learn about alternative paths to

achieve Forest Plan goals. Although the adaptive management areas might have substituted for the experimental

forests had they functioned as originally intended in the

Forest Plan, it is now clear that their potential as sites for

research is now limited by encumbrances related to the

potential for adverse public response similar to those associated with other National Forest land.

■81

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS TO DATE

3 Experimental forests were withdrawn from the National Forest land base more than a half

century ago so forestry science could develop unhindered by whatever standards and norms

are in vogue at a given time.
■82

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
Part Threeis the synthesis consisting of three chapters. 

Chapter 5, “Integrating Themes,” discusses the 

pattern of common themes interwoven through all 

of the thematic areas. Chapter 6, “Integrating

Science and Management,” describes ways research

information is communicated to managers and ways

scientists and managers coordinate efforts to 

implement new science findings on the ground.

Chapter 7, “Closing,” discusses the implications 

of what has been learned.

■83
C HAPTER 5 :

MAJOR

INTEGRATING 

SCIENCE THEMES

Richard W. Haynes and Gloria E. Perez

INTRODUCTION

Although the research done in support of the Northwest

Forest Plan (Forest Plan) is varied (see appendix 5 for a list of

projects), several broad topic areas have emerged from considering the work as a whole: conserving biological diversity, science

support for implementing the Forest Plan, cross-disciplinary science (the need to relate diverse disciplines), and the need to consider science and policy interface. These areas provide a framework for viewing past and future work. They are used to examine

how effective Forest Plan research is in delivering results to key

clients, and to identify areas with high potential for future learning. This chapter describes the nature, stature, and extent of

research conducted in these areas.

CONSERVING BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY

The intent of the approach taken in developing the Forest

Plan was application of contemporary research findings and

propositions from wildlife conservation (both aquatic and terrestrial species) and species-viability issues. But concerns about individual species protected by the Endangered Species Act are what

catalyzed the Forest Plan. These species initially drove the Forest

Plan scientific research efforts. More recently, however, the

research emphasis has shifted from single species to ecosystems

and understanding species-habitat relations of species groups.

Work is continuing, however, on spotted owl (Strix occidentalis

caurina) demographics, marbled murrelets (Brachyramphus marmoratus), amphibians and reptiles, selected plants, and

vertebrate carnivores (including fisher

(Martes pennanti) and marten

(Martes americana)).

This section discusses several sets of themes germane to

the broad topic of conserving biological diversity. The first set

of themes revolve around broad system concerns like greater

focus on habitats, the role of disturbances and their interactions with landscape conditions, understanding stand-level

processes, concerns about site productivity, and landscape ecology. Finally, the links between aquatic and terrestrial systems

are addressed, as are their inclusion in contemporary approaches to public land

management. 

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

■84

Examples of species protected under the Endangered Species Act: 

salamander, lady slipper orchid, northern spotted owl, marbled murrelet,

and a fisher.
Ecosystem Level

Habitats as indicators for species—Biological diversity is

gaining importance as a goal for land management, and we are

moving toward considering larger ecosystems. Forest Plan

research is helping us to see that concern about conserving

biological diversity is, in reality, concern about the diversity

and extent of habitats. Furthermore, growing understanding of

various ecological processes and functions that contribute to

habitat is helping us to recognize that concern about species

and concern about habitats are different points on the same

spectrum. 

Although species-specific research continues, many studies

focus on terrestrial communities and ecosystems. Significant findings related to this broader perspective include:

• Riparian buffer studies of habitats and assemblages of species

validate the need for protecting intermittent and ephemeral

streams (Pabst and Spies 1998). 

• The coastal landscape analysis and modeling study (CLAMS)

(see appendix 4) has led to better understanding of how to

quantify plant and animal habitats at the broad scale (Spies and

others 1998).

• Studies using broad-scale data, such as satellite imagery, have

revealed that total habitat may be an adequate predictor of

populations in many instances (Brooks 1997).

• Studies of soil and litter arthropods use functional assays that

integrate the combined effects of the entire faunal community

on essential ecosystem processes. 

• Use of historical information on forest landscape condition and

disturbance regimes can be incorporated into landscape management plans yielding high diversity of habitat structure at

stand and landscape scales (Cissel and others 1998).

• Simulation models based on paleoecological data on fire frequency for the

last 3,000 years, indicate that

larger, west-side ecosystems,

such as the Coast Range

province, exhibit more stable

age-class distributions over time

than smaller landscapes the size of

National Forests or late-successional reserves

(Wimberly and others 2000).

• The relative importance of environment and disturbance in

explaining variation in forest community composition differs among provinces in Oregon. Consequently, results from

studies in one province may have limited applicability in

other provinces. The study indicates that fine-scale variation in ecosystems may be controlled by coarser grained

ecological patterns at the province scale (Ohmann and

Spies 1998).

• Important fine-scale ecological features may be lost in aggregating to coarser scales of map resolution. For example, area

estimates of steep, landslide-prone slopes in a watershed are

much higher for 10-meter elevation resolution than for 30-

meter resolution (Burnett 1998). Whether it is possible to

develop scaling rules to deal with this problem when finegrained spatial information is lacking or impractical to use

remains to be seen.

Specific research not addressed includes the essential ecological functions of species and ecological roles of functional

groups.

Aquatic-terrestrial links—Much research on subjects related to the aquatic conservation strategy has led to a more thorough understanding of the link between the terrestrial and aquatic systems. Major science findings relative to the strategy and

their implications are as follows:

The role of intermittent streams in providing materials such

as sediment, wood, and organic material, to larger stream systems

(Reeves and others 1995) has been a focal point. Research by

Montgomery and Dietrich (1994), Benda and Dunne (1997a,

1997b), and Benda and others (1998) has helped place intermittent streams into a landscape context. These studies indicate that

about one third or less of the intermittent streams in the landscape have a high potential to initiate a landslide and even fewer

have the location and runout characteristics into larger streams,

which provide fish habitat for several years or decades.

Researchers from the Pacific Southwest (PSW) Research Station

are building an understanding of how large sediment inputs are

transmitted downstream and how they affect fish communities

(Lisle 1997, Lisle and others 1997).

Fundamental research also is progressing on the role of

intermittent streams in providing aquatic insects or organic

material into fish-bearing streams and the potential refugia role

of providing larger streams with colonists after floods and protection from predators during droughts (Dietrich and Anderson

1998, Wipfli 1997). 

■85

CHAPTER 5: MAJOR INTEGRATING SCIENCE THEMES

Salmon.
Riparian management studies focusing on species-assemblage

associations by stream types have the potential to redefine the

way we look at stream form and function. Biological communities, primarily amphibians, are dominant fauna in Oregon and

Washington streams and appear to be feasible indicators of riparian ecological values. Preliminary results of the riparian buffer

study (Olson and others 1999) indicate diverse communities and

unique species occur in intermittent and ephemeral streams in

comparison to downstream perennial channels in headwaters.

The significance of this research includes providing tools for managers to easily identify the types of streams and predict the riparian biodiversity. Identifying biodiversity hotspots and gradients

allows managers to tier management to persistence of significant

riparian values.

The riparian buffer study and companion projects also

examine: 

• Riparian microsite and microclimate conditions in young

stands

• The responses of aquatic-dependent vertebrates and their

habitats to alternative buffer widths 

• Forest stand development after thinning 

• Silvicultural, engineering, economic, and social analyses 

• Macroinvertebrate assemblages

• Lichen and moss responses to thinning 

Preliminary findings in retrospective studies of western

Washington riparian buffers are confirmed in small streams and

headwaters basins; for example, there is much lower species

diversity for amphibians in streams and streamside and riparian

areas within managed landscapes than in late-successional forest

control sites.

Preliminary analyses of distribution and abundance patterns

of small vertebrate (amphibians, birds, and small mammals)

species along intermittent streams indicate strong associations

among distribution and abundance patterns of species, hydrologic condition, and vegetation composition and structure.

Understanding natural disturbance processes that create and

maintain habitats for individuals or assemblages of species is

essential for managing ecosystems on a sustainable basis (Benda

and Dunne 1997a, 1997b; Benda and others 1998; Montgomery

and Buffington 1997; Tang and others 1996). 

Studies of historical and current vegetative structure and

composition; down woody debris levels; and use by vertebrate

fauna in riparian and adjacent terrestrial ecosystems are placing

observed patterns within the context of disturbance regimes for

aquatic and terrestrial landscapes. Alternative forest designs

incorporating riparian habitat and species concerns are rapidly

developing for watersheds and larger areas in the Pacific

Northwest. The disturbance-based approach proposed by Cissel

and others (1998) is being implemented in the Blue River

Adaptive Management Area (AMA). Fish and amphibian distributions are integrated into patch reserve designs and postharvest

monitoring scenarios. The Oregon Department of Forestry is

developing a Habitat Management Plan by using Olson’s anchor

concept (Hayes 1997) in its adaptive reserve design. Key stream

amphibian species are being assessed to ensure their persistence

on the landscape. A database of localities of rare stream amphibians (Nauman and Olson 1999) will contribute to the landscape

design and forest restoration proposals for the fire-impacted landscape in Tillamook County and the timber-managed areas of

Clatsop County.

The CLAMS project is making great strides in models linking geomorphic processes and fish habitat and the association of

upslope conditions and instream habitat. 

The design and evaluation of watershed restoration targets or

criteria for restoration strategies across the range of the Forest

Plan has been accelerated by the flood events of late 1995 and

early 1996. Assessments and restoration after floods have been

improved through structured adaptive management exercises in

the context of natural watershed disturbance processes (Harris

and others 1997).

Future research needs to take an indepth look at the categories of restoration practices implemented in various locations to

help assess which have been the most effective in bringing about

watershed restoration and under what conditions. This effort

should emphasize upslope versus instream restoration relative to

various aquatic conservation strategy elements, and the effectiveness of road systems restoration for hydrologic recovery (because

roads are in many areas the most direct link between the terrestrial and aquatic systems).

An effectiveness monitoring strategy for aquatic and riparian resources is being developed for the Forest Plan. It incorporates many Forest Plan-related research findings in an assessment that assigns watershed condition categories based on fish

habitat, and physical processes linked with biological information as available.

Natural Disturbances

Forest Plan research has led to new insights about how terrestrial and stream systems function at broad scales in the face of

natural disturbances. Several studies focused on disturbance

processes and their interactions with landscape conditions under

natural and managed regimes in the Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco) region. Fires, floods, and landslides are three

major areas of research emphasis. Issues include the role of fire in

developing and destroying late-successional habitat, risk of losing

reserves because of fire and other disturbances, role of floods and

landslides in the dynamics and pattern of aquatic habitat, and the

role of fine-scale disturbances (such as gaps caused by wind,

■86

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
insects, and disease) in developing multistoried forests. As understanding of natural disturbance increases, we also learn about the

landscape patterns found in the Pacific Northwest. We are moving beyond a static view and understanding of specific areas at

one point in time toward a dynamic view encompassing multiple

spatial and temporal scales. For example, as we more fully understand the role of floods in developing riparian conditions, we can

predict future floods and their effects. Part of this understanding

is that fine-scale variability in these ecosystems is a function of

disturbances at smaller scales, such as at the watershed scale.

Specific questions not resolved are as follows:

• Role of fire in developing and destroying late-successional

habitat—Better understanding of this role and the effects of a

century of fire suppression would enhance our ability to manage late-successional stand attributes.

• Risk of losing reserves because of fire and other disturbances—

The adequacy of the current reserve system to meet ecological

objectives is poorly understood.

• Role of floods and landslides in dynamics and pattern of aquatic habitat—Improved understanding of effects of management

practices on these processes and the dynamic character of

stream and riparian systems will be the foundation for adapting

future management and watershed restoration practices.

• Role of fine-scale disturbances (for example, gaps caused by

wind, insects, and disease) in developing multistoried forests.

Continuing long-term observations of stand development following natural succession and silvicultural practices is needed

to narrow the debate about the ability to accelerate developing

multistoried, late-successional habitat. 

Knowledge of the extent and nature of disturbances caused

by human activities compared to natural disturbances is still limited. As attention shifts to risk-management strategies derived

from explicit risk assessments, concerns about levels of risk from

both human and natural sources will be addressed. The issue here

is to understand the relations among natural processes that alter

ecosystems in response to human-caused events or processes.

■87

CHAPTER 5: MAJOR INTEGRATING SCIENCE THEMES

Natural disturbances such as floods, fire, and landslides affect not only

individual species of aquatic, terrestrial, and plant communities 

but the forest as a whole.
Stand-level processes—Several studies have focused on

developing better information about stand-level processes. These

studies generally are done in a linked-scale format, where they are

either dealing with the developing generalizations at the stand

level derived from finer scale studies (for example, individual

tree), or they are developing somewhat broader generalizations

that apply to landscapes made up from studies focused on individual stands. An example of these latter generalizations are several studies focused on the links among silvicultural prescriptions

that accelerate developing old-growth conditions, particularly in

late-successional reserves.

Site productivity—In recent years, the long-term ecosystem

productivity (LTEP) program has been partly supported by Forest

Plan funding. This program was initiated in 1987; a time when

long-term productivity issues still focused on producing timber.

From its inception, however, the program included studies on

long-term effects of management practices and ecosystem processes on development and productivity of entire ecosystems.

Treatment designs encompassed a wide range of practices potentially evolving in the future, rather than focusing on then current

management ideas, and were used on 15 to 25 acres each. Two

factors chosen as being the most likely to have sustained longterm effects were species composition and removing woody biomass. The program experiment tests standards and guidelines of

the Forest Plan related to woody debris, and it compares the

effects of early-seral, Douglas-fir monoculture, and late-seral

species groupings and structures on soil properties, nutrient capitals, and net primary production. On many sites, effects on “survey and manage” species (see appendix 4) are being evaluated, as

well as bird and small-mammal populations and harvestablemushroom production. Social scientists also are evaluating public

perceptions. 

A second objective of the program was to integrate basic and

applied research, which has been achieved through joint design of

the large-scale and small-plot experiments and agreement on retrospective and methods research. The program was an early

model for adaptive management concepts of how managers and

scientists can work together to jointly produce a variety of information, meeting basic science and management objectives at the

same time. 

Landscape Ecology and Planning

Reserve matrix issues—Two general biophysical arguments

exist for reserves that contain significant multistoried, late-successional forests. First, they provide essential habitat for species

dependent on multistoried, late-successional habitat. The design

of the reserve system attempts to mitigate risks of losing habitat,

but as shown in the discussion of disturbance, there are questions

about the information basis for this design in the Forest Plan. The

second argument deals with understanding the extent to which

the current structure of the forest ecosystem departs from a vague

perception of long-term conditions. It deals with understanding

the structure in terms of its departure from a historical range of

variability or from a preconceived idea of the biophysical template as the reference condition. Most research to date has

focused on the first argument and on some preliminary work for

the second. For the second argument, the next steps involve

developing broader scale measures of forest conditions, such as

forest land integrity, as was used in the Interior Columbia Basin

Ecosystem Management Project (Quigley and others 1996). 

Not often mentioned, but probably the most important argument for reserves that contain multistoried, late-successional

forests, is the high public value for “old growth.” The powerful

images of irreplaceable “cathedrallike” stands in the public mind

invoked the sentiments and therefore political pressures that led

to the Forest Plan. A static view of old-growth reserves and obliviousness of their dynamic nature influences contemporary public

expectations for Federal land management.

SCIENCE SUPPORT FOR 

IMPLEMENTING THE FOREST PLAN

Adaptive Management

Adaptive management was envisioned as the “engine” that,

over time, would drive implementation of the Forest Plan, moving it from a tightly constrained document, grounded in prescriptive allocations and standards and guidelines, to a more flexible,

“adaptive” instrument evolving in response to learning about the

processes and functions of the underlying systems. This promise of

adaptive management created substantial expectations among

managers, scientists, and citizens. These expectations were

grounded in a sense of excitement and promise about a new way

of doing business and in the opportunities for creativity, innovation, and experimentation in land management planning.

■88

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

The adaptive management process.
Some promising approaches to realizing these expectations

have begun to occur. Creating the AMA coordinator positions

within the ranks of Bureau of Land Management and National

Forest System staffs have helped establish local advocates and

champions of adaptive management. Establishing lead scientists

for each AMA has helped improve the link between management and research organizations and has been a first step in

toward developing the necessary protocols and procedures to

enhance learning, the key to successful adaptive management.

New connections with citizens are forming that offer opportunities for their involvement in problem framing, data collection,

and interpretation and implementation. Perhaps most importantly, these new developments have facilitated the inevitably longterm process of establishing new relations of mutual learning and

of coming to understand and appreciate alternative perspectives,

world views, and concerns.

Major questions remain, however, that challenge the extent

to which these promising developments will see fruition. Walters

(1997) has observed that two serious challenges to effectively

implementing adaptive management relate to a lack of long-term

organizational commitment and to inadequate budgetary support.

Less than 5 years after the record of decision (ROD) was signed,

budget support from both management and research for the

AMA program has declined significantly. Although enthusiasm,

interest, and the investment of time, energy, and resources by key

individuals have been significant at the local level, similar commitments at the regional and national level seem problematic.

And although “successful” implementation of adaptive management likely is not solely a function of more money, it seems equally apparent that some minimum and, perhaps more importantly,

predictable level of financial support is necessary as the kinds of

rigorous and systematic testing and validation of policies is

expensive. The effects of the lack of leadership and support at

higher levels in the organizations are also problematic. Although

such leadership and support are likely important, an alternative

hypothesis is that effective adaptive management must take root

at the ground level and that seeking direction and leadership

from higher organizational levels might constrain rather than

facilitate local innovation and creativity. What does seem necessary is a better understanding of the specific conditions and

features of budgeting and organizational support that are most

conducive to facilitating adaptive management in differing contexts and situations.

A second major challenge arises from the inability to experiment at appropriate scales, thereby allowing new knowledge and

learning leading to changes in practices and policies. The sources

that drive this challenge are unclear, but possibilities include the

risk-aversive nature of the management culture, ideological considerations embedded in disciplines such as conservation biology,

and limitations imposed (or at least perceived to be imposed) by

regulatory agencies. Irrespective of the source, the sum effect is a

restriction on implementing scientifically rigorous experiments

(that test the applicability of standards and guidelines in various

settings), thereby constraining the type and level of learning

envisioned in the adaptive management model.

The literature on diffusion-adoption consistently reveals

that innovations typically require at least a decade to achieve

acceptance and adoption. In thinking of the adaptive management model as a form of innovation, it is important that we

acknowledge that successful implementation will take time.

Thus, it is critical that this experiment in land management planning be allowed sufficient time to unfold, and that we not end

this effort prematurely. To do so will result in a loss of the substantial financial and resource investment made to date.

The challenge for the future has two distinct components.

First, it is essential that there be adequate long-term support,

financial as well as political, to ensure adequate evaluation of the

utility of the adaptive management concept and the specific

value of AMAs as institutional experiments to test adaptive management. Second, there needs to be increased emphasis on

embedding principles and practices that ensure that learning

accrues from management practices and policies. This implies,

among other things, that adequate criteria exist by which such

judgments can be made. Unless these two key conditions are satisfied, it seems unlikely that the adaptive management experiment will meet the expectations created by the Forest Plan.

Institutional framework—Although not resulting from

explicit research efforts, some institutional restructuring both in

the land management agencies and research organizations

engaged in Forest Plan work has taken place. Some of it was

spurred by the Forest Plan’s role as an overarching framework for

the information needed to support land management. The changing role and stature of science in land management (for example,

more emphasis on practical applications research and interagency

collaboration) also have changed land management agencies.

This change is evolutionary and seems to be going in directions

that may involve scientists more directly in land management

planning as technical advisors, reviewers of learning-based management designs and more. 

Although Forest Plan information needs and changing roles

of scientists have catalyzed restructuring to a certain extent, the

capacity of institutional structures and processes to practice adaptive management should continue to be a focus. Implementing

the Forest Plan effectively calls for structures and processes that

take into account multiple values, longer timeframes, broader

spatial scales over multiple tenures, a concern with underlying

ecological and socioeconomic processes, and a more inclusive

approach to decisionmaking.

■89

CHAPTER 5: MAJOR INTEGRATING SCIENCE THEMES
Collaborative learning and teaching—Part of the legacy of

the Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team (the team)

is a belief in the need for collaborative learning—a two-way

learning process in which scientists would work with managers

and local stakeholders to both share and gain information about

natural processes and local values and uses. Learning centers and

AMAs were to play key roles. In the last 4 years, the increasing

need for effective technology transfer has called for interactive

roles for scientists. Efforts to identify stakeholders that make a difference have been successful; however, new ways to fully engage

the various groups are still needed. We have explored new forums

for engaging various publics; where the roles of collaborative

learning are formally pursued, we have been successful. In all of

this, we have undervalued the role of teaching new science to

land managers. Formal recognition of the role of researchers in

interacting with land managers is an emerging need.

The AMAs were an innovative contribution of Forest Plan

research and have had some successes at applying science to specific

management issues, most notably through collaboration among scientists, managers, and citizens. Although the learning centers have

not been fully successful, many of the successful efforts to communicate science to land managers were ad hoc and piecemeal. Formal

efforts in the future should recognize that learning and teaching go

on in all directions among scientists, managers, and citizens, and

emphasize cordial, ongoing interactions among these groups.

Part of that teaching role is the need to educate citizens,

including those who teach children, about the rapid changes in

our understanding of how ecosystems function and interact. In this

time of rapid change in basic knowledge, we find ourselves in danger of being accused of dealing in science fiction by an audience

poorly informed about recent changes in science information.

Monitoring—The role of research in monitoring is enigmatic. Researchers clearly play a role in designing monitoring protocols and in developing ways to evaluate the effectiveness of monitoring efforts. Forest Service Research has been given the responsibility to warehouse data on inventory vegetation conditions on

all U.S. forest lands with emphasis on timberland. In addition,

Forest Plan funding has supported extensive efforts to deal with

“survey and manage” species (see appendix 4).

Researchers have worked closely with managers to develop

conceptual scientific models and a set of questions to drive monitoring. Questions developed to drive monitoring range from

basic inventory questions such as, “What are the distribution and

amount of forest classes, including down logs at large landscape

scales?” to highly complex questions such as, “Are the relations of

forest structure and composition to ecological processes and biological diversity assumed in the Forest Ecosystem Management

Assessment Team report (FEMAT report) accurate?” In addition,

some of the efforts in the AMA have focused on specific monitoring needs that go beyond species-specific questions. For example in the Hayfork AMA, the Grassy Flats stewardship monitoring and evaluation team developed questions that drove their

monitoring process, which addresses economic, ecological, social,

and administrative concerns. 

Researchers also play a role in validation monitoring where

the emphasis is on determining to what degree assumptions and

methods and models used in developing the Forest Plan are correct.

Researchers were part of the various committees engaged in

developing monitoring systems, but broad-scale management

questions that require monitoring beyond those that are species

specific remain elusive. Also the research for the Forest Plan has

not developed clear perceptions of the set of questions driving

monitoring. One challenge facing the science community is that

monitoring from a science perspective ends up being a stale datacollecting effort. Another challenge is integrating successful

monitoring efforts based on useful ad hoc approaches versus monitoring protocols rigorously developed from research methods.

From a broader science perspective, Forest Service

Research is well positioned to make substantial contributions

to the nature and content of monitoring in relatively largescale biophysical systems. In the past, monitoring often has

consisted of censusing biota in relation to disturbance factors

and habitat structure. Awareness is increasing, however, that

monitoring should be part of a rigorous approach to research

that demonstrates causal relations among indicators (whether

they are species, functional groups, or functional assays), and

the disturbance factors (both natural and human caused) or

habitat characteristics that shape them. Part of these contributions is an increased understanding of how effective specific

procedures used in monitoring are, especially in how they deal

with scale issues—both temporal and spatial.

Examples of this broader perspective are studies such as the

LTEP studies underway in Oregon and studies at the California

Goosenest AMA that are designed to reveal indicators and

answer questions of cause and effect among habitat disturbance

and biotic community, composition, and function. These studies

provide a rare opportunity to examine disturbance in a prospective way, with proper replication and controls. Inherent in these

studies is the opportunity to address questions of ecosystem function rather than simply listing species and their distributions.

CROSS-DISCIPLINARY SCIENCE

Scale

The management and planning questions driving the structure of the Forest Plan research program suggest two focal spatial

scales. First is the traditional set of questions that deal with specific outcomes of different forest management practices and most

■90

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
often asked at the stand level and across contiguous sets of stands

making up a landscape. Second are the questions largely strategic

in nature, at higher spatial scales where the dynamic effects of

managing can be measured across broad landscapes. In the Pacific

Northwest, the focus of these broad-scale questions is at the

province level. With both scales, much of the research considers

the linked-scale nature of questions and information provided by

prior research findings. With the first set of questions, research

will focus on stand-level processes but also will consider the links

to tree and landscape levels. For the second set, research will

focus at the province level and consider the links to lower scales

such as subbasins and higher scales such as ecoregions.

The Forest Plan has led to advanced work on large-scale

landscapes. Many projects, such as the CLAMS study (appendix

4), have improved our understanding of ecological processes and

links at the watershed, landscape, and province scale. The lessons

learned to date are important for future research direction.

Although we more fully understand the significance of scale,

we continue to be challenged by how to draw inferences about

various processes and functions at specific temporal and spatial

scales. Developing methods to usefully link data at the stand or

watershed scale to higher scales is clearly an area for further

exploration.

Cross-boundary issues—One consequence of the Forest

Plan has been that many in the science community are forced

to deal with the reality of studying ecosystem process and

function at larger scales that cross ownership boundaries. This

consequence has been a daunting challenge for some and a

revelation for others. It has challenged those whose work

depended on the relative homogeneity of stand conditions and

mosaics over relatively large areas. It has been a revelation to

those who are considering how diversity in landscapes changes

current views of ecosystem process and function. One early

finding from the CLAMS study suggests that differences in

ownership alone explain variations in system integrity at the

watershed level.

In a way, these crossboundary issues have been

part of the socioeconomic

approach to ecosystem management from the beginning. The public debate

over managing public lands

is thought of in terms of

tradeoffs between biophysical and socioeconomic parts

of ecosystems. In the Forest

Plan, they were described as

tradeoffs between jobs and

owls. Jobs were used as a

proxy for social well-being,

and owls as a proxy for all

ecological conditions. Land

management strategies were

portrayed as direct tradeoffs against changes in socioeconomic systems. This approach overlooks the possibility of compatible opportunities that changes in

management approaches may offer. That is, for example, the opportunity to increase some measure of ecological condition or environmental service while

holding timber harvest constant. It also ignored

interowner and interregional tradeoffs; for example,

reductions in Western Federal timber harvest are

made up by increases on private timberlands mostly in

the interior of Canada and on private timberlands in

the U.S. South. 

■91

CHAPTER 5: MAJOR INTEGRATING SCIENCE THEMES

Northwest Forest Plan

research addresses

issues ranging from

fine scale to very

broad scale.
Integration

An important area of cross-disciplinary science has been

the increased interaction among social, economic, and ecological scientists as they struggle to deal with complex intertwined systems. One outcome of this struggle has been

increased interest in frameworks that integrate social, economic, and ecological systems. These frameworks are seen as a

description of steps and components necessary to answer integrated questions in support of Federal land management.

Another outcome is a change in the perceptions of many scientists that actions in one area (for example, increased harvest

because of higher lumber prices) can have important consequences in other, seemingly distant areas (for example,

changes in wildlife habitat). This aspect will be discussed in

more detail in the last chapter.

The team’s process is sometimes held up as one example of

integrating biophysical and social sciences. In hindsight, it

seems to have integrated various discipline-specific reports to

answer questions not broadly integrative in their nature. The

initial questions dealt with species conservation coupled with

social and economic effects. The team’s approach to integration was to let it happen naturally through coordination

between different functional groups. The Forest Plan has stimulated only limited work on decision systems, improved understanding of societal questions and values, the structure of

research teams and adaptive management processes—topics

essential to integration.

Discussed in more detail in the next chapter, integration is

occurring through an interdisciplinary approach described as multidiscipline. For example, the CLAMS project uses a framework for

integrating current conditions, potential trajectories, and resultant

landscapes across multiple ownerships. This framework takes the

interdisciplinary approach to questions of land management at relatively smaller spatial scales. Just recently, work is beginning to deal

with integration at broader scales based on a framework guiding

how various disciplines and science components are combined.

The land management questions in this second approach address

the tradeoffs between management intended to improve ecological

conditions and impacts on socioeconomic systems. 

SCIENCE AND POLICY ISSUES

Many aspects of the interface of science with policy have

been discussed throughout this document. In this context, science

and especially those aspects that are publicly supported consists of

two aspects: the development of scientific knowledge and technological solutions and scientific advice to public decisionmakers.

This raises the question, How can research be organized to ensure

that the latest science findings are considered in policy and specific land management decisions?

First, the roles of scientists are changing to include altered

scopes of research problems—that is, policy-relevant research,

greater emphasis on communicating research results effectively,

and timeliness.1 Among the changes in role is the need to recognize the ability to form expert judgments based on demonstrated

research expertise—that is, when peers recognize the significance

and stature of a scientist’s past research accomplishments in a

general area of work. 

Second, scientists work in different contexts—from dealing

with linked (and various) spatial scales to working in integrated

teams. Both of these challenge today’s scientists and suggest

changes in developing tomorrow’s scientists. Some of these

changes have little to do with Forest Plan research itself but are

driven by some of the issues underlying the shift away from traditional stand-scale management.

Third, the clients for research are changing to include individuals and organizations that are not traditional land management clients. Here researchers are building collaborative relations.

These clients are seeking information about how natural and

human systems work and interact, how changing human values

affect goals for managing whole ecosystems, and about outcomes of

various stewardship actions. Some of this information suggests the

need for a greater focus on the science objectives to better inform

the debate over managing public lands and common goods. Part of

this issue is how what is learned is communicated.

Finally, there is the issue of preparing for future ecoregion

assessments. Whereas the land management part of the Forest

Plan has included a self-adjusting mechanism—adaptive management—changing social values call for another look at the Forest

Plan framework. Continued commitments to long-term projects,

however, will help to focus the next and subsequent ecoregion

assessment efforts. Whether the lessons learned from the FEMAT

report will make us respond better or not depends on how well we

learn and change our behavior where needed. Initiation of

“FEMAT II” depends in part on a convergence of science and policy issues and the belief that science can play a role in finding

solutions.

1 See Jarvis 1998 for a discussion about the role and responsibilities of scientists in public policy.

■92

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
C HAPTER 6 :

INTEGRATING

SCIENCE

AND

MANAGEMENT

Kate Snow

INTRODUCTION

One legacy of the Northwest Forest Plan (Forest Plan) has

been its focus on integrating science and management to a

greater extent than in the past. The Forest Plan focused particular attention on the interface of science and management in the

adaptive management areas (AMAs). For these AMAs, the

record of decision stated: “Agency scientists are expected to provide scientific design of monitoring and experiments . . . .” The

emphasis on interagency coordination fostered by the Forest

Plan also has influenced changes in relations between

researchers and managers. Integration includes both the flow of

information between researchers and managers, and implementing and using research findings in the field to change management practices and decisions.

CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT AND 

SCIENCE INTERACTIONS 

From the management perspective, the amount of contact

and integration between researchers in the Pacific Northwest

with those in the Pacific Southwest has increased considerably

since the Forest Plan was implemented. The degree to which

integration and communication are successful differs across the

Regions; in some areas, research information is received indirectly and managers may be unaware of the source of information. In many areas, however, the quality and quantity of interactions of Forest Service managers and researchers has changed

significantly. In the words of one manager, “we are no longer

two organizations going down separate paths—now we are really integrated at the district level.” Successful integration appears

most often in AMAs, where the role of research is clearly outlined in the Forest Plan. The decision by the PNW Research

Station to assign specific researchers to each AMA seems to

have fostered integration in most of these AMAs. Outside of the

AMAs, integration and communication differs considerably,

depending primarily on specific relations between managers and

researchers.

From the research community perspective, many of the

research results are being shared among scientific communities.

Many Station publications include chapters or proceedings of

conferences, symposia, or other scientific meetings demonstrating

the extent that Forest Plan-related findings are being disseminated to the broader scientific community. Currently, though, how

the various Station research findings are being communicated to managers in any comprehensive or systematic

way is not clear. Which and to what degree

Station publications are being provided to

and studied and used by managers also

is unclear. A survey of use might

provide some surprising and helpful insights for aiding information transfer from research to

management. Perhaps what

might aid such information transfer even

more could be an

annual or biannual

research-management symposium

of several days, in

which researchers

would present

their findings and

managers would

have direct access

to them for questions, suggestions,

and building partnerships. 

CHAPTER 6: INTEGRATING SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT

Scientists and managers work together at the field level.

■93
USE OF SCIENCE FINDINGS

Science findings in several topic areas are being actively

used in management decisions and practices. A brief informal

survey of field units on National Forests showed research in the

following areas is actively changing management practices and

decisions:

• Fire and disturbance ecology (Umpqua, Wenatchee, Siuslaw,

Rogue River, Willamette, Shasta-Trinity)

• Coarse woody debris and habitat and soil relations (Olympic,

Umpqua, Rogue River, Willamette) 

• Alternative silvicultural techniques (Umpqua, Siuslaw,

Olympic, Wenatchee, Klamath, Willamette, Rogue River)

• Soil compaction and productivity studies (Umpqua,

Willamette)

• Bioengineering and restoration techniques (Olympic,

Willamette)

• Monitoring (Siuslaw)

• Adaptive management processes (Klamath, Six Rivers,

Siuslaw, Shasta-Trinity)

• Socioeconomic and administrative (Shasta-Trinity)

In some areas, research is perceived to be lacking or not

available in forms useful to managers. Social science is most often

pointed out as an area needing additional attention, because

many of the issues managers deal with are social rather than biophysical. Examples of areas to explore include effects of various

policy and administrative procedures on local community

employment, effective communication tools in reaching desired

audiences and changing behavior (vandalism, for example), or

the impacts of changing forest uses (recreation and tourism) on

local economies.

SUCCESSFUL TOOLS FOR INTEGRATION AND COMMUNICATION

The most successful examples of integration currently arise

from one-on-one contacts and ongoing relations between managers

and researchers. These relations may be established by chance or by

formal designation such as in AMAs. Integration is most complete

where both managers and scientists participate from the beginning

of project design through implementation. 

From the management perspective, the most effective means of

transferring information is through personal contact or presentation

to a management group of a Forest or District. These contacts foster

long-term interchange and personal networking. On some units,

this interaction has evolved into shared planning of projects and

even the sharing of employees between research and management. 

Once relation and networks are established, publications are

effective in transmitting further information. Without such

preestablished connections, however, many managers do not use

publications to access current research findings. Lack of time to

sort through publication lists, read, and determine applicability of

information are often listed as sources of frustration with traditional means of information transfer. Workshops and presentations

are useful, especially in reaching people in technical or staff positions. Current research findings in technical fields often are communicated to management through biologists and other specialists

who are more likely to attend workshops and read publications

than are managers. Research findings often are transmitted to the

field through this network, with managers largely unaware of the

original sources. Modification of how publications are summarized

and made available to managers might improve usage.

Process Versus Substance

The interface between science and policy changes constantly, as various assessments, record of decisions, and lawsuits redefine it. A continuing source of difficulty has been created by the

differences between the forms and scales in which researchers

provide information compared to the scales and forms, which

managers would find operationally useful. The timeframes on

which science knowledge is produced contribute to this problem.

Managers may discount the value of science contributions not

timely enough to resolve pressing issues or not presented in a form

recognizable to managers.

Early in Forest Plan development, the timeliness issue was

recognized and addressed in selected areas. The most notable of

these was the aquatic conservation strategy, where specific efforts

attempted to implement aspects of the strategy. Attempts to

develop a better understanding of how various ecological processes work at higher spatial scales, such as provincewide, have not

yet succeeded. We are making some progress in this area through

effectiveness monitoring.

Is Just Being Legal Enough?

Much of the focus of Forest Plan research has been to support

legal interpretations of various laws and regulations bearing on

forest management. For example, much of the research on owl

demographics is targeted to improve the ability to define population viability, as demanded by the National Forest Management

Act. A potential danger in this approach is that it may reduce the

attention given to research other than what is needed to meet

legal challenges. This, in turn, leads to a loss of credibility in the

science community as research becomes a tool in various advocacy positions.

Land management actions need to be more than legal.

Concerns about species viability and the socioeconomic

acceptance of management and harvest practices were the dual

drivers of the Forest Plan. Addressing these issues in meaningful ways calls for going beyond just meeting current laws. 

■94

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
Success of Science Transfers

Expectations of how and to what extent science findings

are transferred to the management arena have been changing.

The move to integrate management and science has required

more extensive and more rapid transfer of information than is

traditional. The more conventional view is that scientists can

place summarized information on the table and managers will

then quickly adopt the information that fits their needs. Indeed,

sometimes this approach has been successful: however, only

after contact has been established and the need and use of the

information is apparent to the manager. Communication sometimes fails because of confusion over the context of the science

information. More typically, however, the information is simply

not used.

Several less traditional means of communicating are being

used with success. Examples include scientists presenting findings to advisory committees and local interest groups, as well as

sending draft findings to key managers for review. Personal contact through presentations or one-on-one dialogue remains the

most effective means of communication. In addition, some managers now use the Internet as an information source. The

Internet or Intranet may be a useful location for a central electronic clearinghouse for Forest Service and other agency

research findings.

Quality of Science and Advising Managers

Integrating science with management raises several questions on both sides. These concern the changing role of research

and researchers in the present and future forest management. 

Research roles can be grouped in three general areas:

• Developing new information

• Developing products from new information to meet 

client needs

• Applying products to specific issues

During the 1990s, the relative importance of these roles in

the research community shifted.

One difficulty that can emerge when managers and scientists

collaborate is the confusion that arises from the different ways in

which they validate information. The peer review process, often

anonymous, is used in the science community as the benchmark

for validating scientific inferences. This process focuses on plausibility of the assumptions, methods, and data behind a particular

finding, whether or not the finding itself is accepted. Peer review

is considered an assurance of the quality of the information. With

management decisions, interdisciplinary teams and consensus

processes may be used to reach a conclusion. The validity of these

conclusions is based on the teams acceptance, which can be

affected by social dynamics. Many current land management

decisions are being tested in the courts, where the logic and supportability of underlying assumptions and decision processes are

critical to their acceptance. Methods of developing and validating agreement on information and decisions are another potential area for research.

These differing approaches can sometimes make integration

uncomfortable. A common example is for scientists to be pushed

into drawing inferences and extrapolating beyond their findings.

The increasing use of scientists as coaches and advisors in developing and interpreting information creates additional concerns

for both sides. The need for scientists to maintain integrity and

credibility in the research community can create a tension

between them and managers who need immediate answers and

interpretations for day-to-day decisions. Another concern is the

availability of scientists to provide advice, given their need to

continue doing research. A strongly felt need in the management

community is for more interactions with scientists rather than

fewer. The participation of the science community in designing

administrative studies and projects would increase the scientific

validity and usefulness of their results. Monitoring method is a

second arena where science assistance often is requested.

■95

CHAPTER 6: INTEGRATING SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT
C HAPTER 7 :

CLOSING 

Richard W. Haynes

THE ROLE OF RESEARCH 

AND APPLICATION

From the beginning, Northwest Forest Plan (Forest Plan)

research has had two strong focuses: expanding understanding of

natural processes and developing practical applications to specific management needs. Figure 8 shows expectations about the

amount and priority of these two research focuses. Early in the

period after the Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team

report (the FEMAT report) was published, the priority was on

applying mostly existing research to specific management issues

rather than on expanding underlying fundamental research relative to ecosystem management. The expectation was that after

several years, the priority would change to fundamental research

activities. Although this classification of efforts is a generalization, it helps in analyzing the efforts to date and in determining

possible future changes. The temporal aspects of the mix of the

two types of research focus also are shown in figure 8; the early

period is from 1994 until 1998. The midperiod is

roughly from 1998 to 1999, and the late period is

2000 and later.

The legacy of fundamental research (shown in fig. 1)

available to Pacific Northwest (PNW) Research Station scientists

facilitated a quick response to some aspects of the questions raised

during the Forest Ecosystem Management Teams (the team’s)

effort and to developing specific applications to various management issues. For the most part, Forest Plan funding has allowed

the Station to maintain both underlying fundamental research

and the ability to respond to application issues without tradeoffs

among different lines of research. Notable exceptions were decision-support research, socioeconomic research, and owl demographic research. In other cases, such as the work on Central

Cascades Adaptive Management Area (AMA) young stand studies, plan funds augmented appropriated funds thereby enabling

more comprehensive research.

The two generalized research focuses can be summarized

relative to the eight research themes (fig. 8). Each theme differs

both in the extent of effort between near-term research and

development supporting the Forest Plan and fundamental science addressing ecosystem management, and in the timing of

the differences (see table 12).

• Population viability initially dealt with specific species issues

such as owl demography or habitat conservation issues for single species. The underlying research now places greater

emphasis on species assemblages and habitat relations. The

amount of research has been and continues to be relatively

uniform throughout this period. 

• The aquatic conservation strategy area still includes

increased effort to help develop and implement watershed

analysis. This effort is leading to expanded research on various aspects of how aquatic systems work in conjunction with

broader landscapes.

• Adaptive management is one of the few areas with a tradeoff

between current research efforts and efforts to support nearterm research and development. Early users of adaptive management helped with efforts to demonstrate its value to others. Existing work on decision-support systems, which started

under the New Perspectives program, was redirected as part of

this effort. Currently, and in the longer term, a decision will

be made as to the nature and extent of work on environmental decision processes (a more generalized name for comparative risk analysis). Whether this future work best fits here or

as one aspect of landscape perspectives, where the focus is on

policy questions at that scale, is unclear. 

■96

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

Figure 8—Diagram of Northwest Forest Plan research status.
• The work in AMAs builds on research already underway, with

the exception of expanded work on collaborative learning.

This work continues, but now with greater focus on changing

the behavior of managers in dealing with risk. 

• Socioeconomic research and applications continue to include

widely disparate topics. Much of the broad-scale monitoring

protocols are completed, and future work involves testing their

effectiveness. Research is focusing on understanding the

dynamics of and measures for community resiliency in the

Forest Plan region. Included in this effort is a retrospective

evaluation of the Forest Plan community assessment process.

• Near-term research and development aspects of work on ecological processes and functions have expanded, mostly around

the area of “survey and manage” species (see appendix 4), monitoring protocols, and riparian zones. At the same time, the

already considerable program of research in this area has been

maintained. Some of the monitoring and “survey and manage”

aspects of this work are now being phased down. 

• The challenge of dealing with linked spatial scales is

changing how landscapes are considered. In the near

term, the struggle was more about understanding individual systems from fine to mid scales, and then it was

about how to integrate biophysical and social systems

at the mid scale. The early work in this area is nearly

complete, and the longer term issue is the nature and

extent of further work in this area. Regardless of the

decision, it will require an increase in research effort,

which will become increasingly complex as it deals

with multiple landowner objectives and land use decisions across ownership boundaries.

• Developing new stand management strategies has proceeded slowly. Much silvicultural information—originally developed primarily for a timber production

objective—also applies to managing multiple objectives. Management regimes based on this information

can be designed to produce desired stand and landscape characteristics. The desired characteristics will

differ with local situations and objectives, and managers may need to use multiple regimes and strategies

to accomplish the objectives chosen for a given forest

landscape. Recently, several long-term trials have been

established that will provide concrete examples of possible alternatives and sound data on the benefits and

values that each stand condition may provide.

Substantial resources over an extended period will be

needed to complete these large-scale, interdisciplinary

trials, but they will provide essential information on

many aspects of productivity, economics, social acceptability, plant ecology, and wildlife habitat.

Three areas of research that have been treated in less detail

in the Forest Plan research effort are socioeconomic, monitoring,

and restoration. In socioeconomic research, the bias in both the

management and science communities to consider relatively narrow objectives for land management has reduced opportunities

and limited funding to understand the emerging dichotomy

between those objectives and societal expectations for forest

stewardship. Instead, existing funds have been redirected to

Forest Plan work to a greater extent than those for other disciplines. Part of the work for monitoring has involved developing

protocols to deal with various systems (such as terrestrial and

aquatic), and “survey and manage” species (see appendix 4). For

the most part, this work is winding down, but the role of research

in collecting and analyzing monitored information is still uncertain. Part of this effort is evaluating monitoring effectiveness.

Also, Forest Plan work shares the Forest Service-wide ambiguity

■97

CHAPTER 7: CLOSING

Table 12—Status and outlook for research effort by thematic area

Thematic area Focus 1994-97 1998-99 2000-04

Population viability issues Application + - -

Research 0 0 0

Aquatic conservation issues Application + + -

Research 0 + +

Adaptive management Application + - -

processes Research - +* +*

Adaptive management areas Application + + -

Research 0 0 0

Socioeconomic research Application + 0 +/0

Research 0 0 +/0

Ecological process and Application + 0 0

function Research + + +

Landscape perspectives Application + + +

Research + + +

Development of management Application 0 + +

strategies Research 0 0 +

+ = increase in effort. - = decrease in effort.

* = uncertain about the eventual thematic assignment. 0 = no change.
about how to fund longer term fundamental research essential

to refining monitoring systems and validating existing monitoring technologies. Much of what is causing uncertainty is a

lack of consensus about science and management roles. A lesser issue is the question of who will do the monitoring for areas

outside the traditional scope of land management agencies

(like socioeconomic systems). Finally, restoration has always

been low priority for research efforts in spite of its prominence

in the record of decision (ROD). Part of the disinterest lies in

the team’s focus on various inputs to land management (such as

riparian buffer widths), rather than on outputs (such as additional anadromous fish). A focus on outputs is necessary to

develop understanding of the relative merits of various types of

restoration and to demonstrate the benefits associated with

restoration.

POTENTIAL EFFECTS ON SCIENTIFIC

UNDERSTANDING 

Ongoing research already has provided valuable new

information on various wildlife and ecological topics, with

much promise for important new insights to come. One of the

major assumptions in the FEMAT report was that its current

scientific understanding, and the management guidelines

crafted from them, should be taken as interim and flexible,

subject to new research and understanding. Topics that the

team identified that would likely change over time—and these

are also topics that could be addressed by ongoing or new

research—include: 

• Species-specific habitat types, including structural composition and seral stage; and status and trends of selected plant

and animal populations, including threatened, endangered,

and sensitive species 

• The patterns and consequences of landscape dynamics on

developing ecological communities 

• The nature of soil productivity, including the ecological-function roles of belowground micro-organisms, fungi, and invertebrates, and effects of forest management activities 

• The ecological characteristics of late-successional and old-growth

forests, including forest edges and old-forest remnant patches 

• The functional roles of various plants and animals as affecting

productivity, diversity, and sustainability of ecosystems and

resources 

• The social, economic, and ecological links among aquatic,

riparian, and terrestrial ecosystems including forest canopy,

ground, and underground environments.

Ongoing or new research could greatly revise our current

understanding of how forest ecosystems work, which components

play crucial roles, how systems remain productive and diverse,

and the ecological limits for sustainable resource production.

Among disciplines and groups of researchers most

affected by recent research findings are wildlife biologists,

particularly those working with listed species; landscape

and vegetation ecologists; fire ecologists; soil scientists;

entomologists, mycologists, bryologists, lichenologists,

and botanists. Ongoing studies on new management methods are of interest to silviculturists and forest ecologists.

Social scientists and economists also should have an interest in potential, new interdisciplinary research, and in

closer partnerships with researchers in many of the listed

fields of study.

Finally, in the FEMAT report, the concept of ecological

integrity was used in a specific reference to integrity of oldforest ecosystems, specifically in reference to conservation or

restoration of particular structural characteristics of old

forests and to their spatial connectivity across the landscape.

Since the report, however, the science community has used

the concept of ecological integrity in a broader context as it

has taken more of a systems view of ecosystems (DeLeo and

Levin 1997, Watson 1997). In research conducted by the

PNW Research Station, the concept has been expanded and

treated broadly by the Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem

Management Project (for example, Quigley and others 1997). 

EFFECTS OF FOREST PLAN RESEARCH

ON THE SCIENCE COMMUNITY

Throughout discussions with the scientists writing the various thematic summaries, it became clear that participation in

Forest Plan research itself had an enduring legacy that had both

positive and negative effects. These effects can be considered

around several issues as shown in table 13.

On balance, most of these changes are positive. But the

response to them by members of the science community differs

because of individual propensities for dealing with change. Those

that adopt early see these changes as an opportunity to be free of

past constraints, whereas others see change as threatening to

long-held status. The question from a science leadership viewpoint is how to most effectively manage change. 

It Changed Our Science

The Forest Plan exposed agency scientists to policy processes leading to research with greater policy relevance, altered the

way in which some scientists selected and pursued research agendas, and altered notions of the process to ensure science quality.

In addition, it improved the quality of research by casting it in a

more relevant context, increasing awareness of the need and

■98

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
opportunities for integration, and being more definitive about

the boundaries between science and management. It challenged scientists to consider the relation between science and

science-based judgments about prospective outcomes or sets

of conditions resulting from alternative actions. It exposed

scientists to new ideas, stretching many to consider their

work in a broader and more integrative fashion. It has

revealed new perspectives on gaps in science and the implications of filling them. 

The content of the research and how it is done in supporting management actions and policies also have been changed.

The nature of the questions and who is asking them have fundamentally changed for much of the science efforts. This has been

especially true of the policy-related questions often posed by the

public. Part of the change has been that we recognize the need to

frame science at multiple scales and with greater emphasis on

understanding the dynamic aspects of ecosystems. We also need

to recognize and address, when working with a comprehensive

definition of ecosystem, the considerable increase in complexity

that the social system adds to the work.

On the negative side, some of the extensive short-term

research and development needs have resulted in scarce resources

not being available for fundamental research activities. For example, time spent ensuring that science information is applied consistently has shifted resources from fundamental research to

“gatekeeping.” Another aspect to the Forest Plan is that the

intense focus on species conservation strategies on Federal lands

has reduced potential accomplishments in the science basis for

broader scale versions of ecosystem management in the Pacific

Northwest west side. 

The Forest Plan has impeded relevant research where those

studies involve stand manipulations. Many of the current land

managers are reluctant to exercise flexibility in applying standards and guidelines from the Forest Plan. Nowhere is this truer

than in the AMAs, which were intended to promote experimentation. Given the propensity for risk averse behavior among land

managers, there has been little incentive for experimentation. 

It Focused On Broad-Scale Issues

Another aspect that has challenged scientists has been the

opportunity for spontaneous cooperation and multidiscipline

research around broader scale questions, such as how human population growth shifts land use patterns or how different approaches to land management issues affect whole ecosystems. Much of

this has been driven by informal assessments of groups of scientists about their perceptions of the questions surrounding the

implementation of the Forest Plan. On one hand, the Forest Plan

research with its limited overall central direction has fostered

grassroots efforts in the science community. Some of these efforts,

like the coastal landscape analysis and modeling study, have been

extensive, and others have been more modest. Few of these

efforts have focused on the broad-scale multidiscipline questions.

Also, few efforts have been made toward developing explicit

frameworks for integration at the broad scale.

Given strong leadership by various ecological disciplines,

this ad hoc approach has had some casualties. First, some disciplines have been left out, particularly, those dealing with utilization and forest engineering (especially logging systems). Second,

the policy focus has been on describing and characterizing ecological conditions in the belief that improving them is the goal of

■99

CHAPTER 7: CLOSING

Table 13—High points and low points of plan effects on the science community

Issue High points Low points

It changed our science It changed the science agenda It placed impediments in stand-level

and communities for many Station manipulative research projects

scientists

It focused on broad-scale issues It fostered greater integration at the It created too much reliance on ad hoc

grass roots level approaches to integration, and

it led to lack of science leadership

The science support of management Science now has greater Timeframes are compressed; managers

had successes management and policy relevance and the public need information now

It provided development It provided opportunities to scientists to It diverted limited resources away from

opportunities for scientists be leaders in developing the science basis some areas of research

of new management paradigms

Our legacy It built a foundation for the next It focused on technology transfer

generation of science to the detriment of science
contemporary land management. This attitude assumes that the

benefits of higher ecological integrity are worth whatever the

cost. This leads to problems with social acceptance, which is

often ignored until too late. We need to take into account that

broad social acceptance is based on perceptions of benefits relative to costs. This is not to say that we need to be dogmatic about

determining cost and benefit ratios, but it does mean that we need

to be cautious about claiming that various land management

strategies are accepted without recognizing their costs. This leads

to the charge of “Cadillac” forestry in an era of “Ford” budgets.

The second problem is that the science community underestimates the public’s understanding of risk management. Part of the

reason this happens is that the science community thinks that

current laws set the context, but laws themselves are only expressions of human values and therefore prone to rapid (relative to

some biological processes) change. A way to engender social

acceptance of land management policies is to discuss and display

the tradeoffs of uncertain gains (difficult to quantify and risky to

achieve) in biophysical systems relative to certain risks to socioeconomic systems.

The management of Forest Plan research has posed a contradiction. On one hand, limited oversight has allowed for the evolution of a bottom-up approach to science management. This has

advantages, but it also has limited the full use of research capabilities. Limited oversight has been a problem since the inception of

the new forestry movement in the sense that the invitation to

participate in that movement was based on informal approaches

and ad hoc governance structures. The consequence was that

some disciplines were left behind and therefore proposed solutions are less robust than they could be.

Successes in the Science Support of Management

Several areas of research and management cooperation have

succeeded, including monitoring, watershed analysis, and landscape planning. Science-based management is now more of a reality than it was 5 years ago. The science community has two concerns about what this means. First, notions of what constitutes

success are changing, and second, as the nature of science questions change and work focuses on more socially relevant issues,

answers are needed in a timely manner. 

The first concern is long standing. Scientists are frequently

challenged by science managers to judge research success by evidence that the intended clients applied the results. This challenge

makes many in the science community uneasy because their

notions of success are defined as generating publications in traditional science communities. The reality of how to judge success is

neither, but the polarized debate continues about what constitutes

success.

The second concern is that the time between initial questions and expected answers is now compressed. This time

■100

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

The link between social values and land use is an important facet of understanding ecosystems at the broader scales.
compression is probably one of the greatest frustrations to many

in the science community used to a slower and more measured

cadence of interactions with client communities. As part of this

greater social relevance in science work, demand for timely delivery of research information has intensified. In addition, scientists

are under enormous pressure not only to present results but also

to present them in nontraditional ways. One of these ways is synthesis, where results are presented and then discussed in the context of other results and implications for social concerns about

land management.

It Provided Development Opportunities

Some of the scientists participating in Forest Plan research

have become recognized as world leaders in broad-scale science.

This is particularly true in some of the ecological sciences, the

aquatic sciences, and wildlife research. Only a few places in the

world have similar efforts at this scale to advance ecosystem management or to work in conjunction with land managers. The

Forest Plan has allowed some scientists to play leadership roles in

developing conceptual frameworks that will guide future research

throughout the science community. 

The Forest Plan has hastened both the emergence and

establishment of experts in the Pacific Northwest and Pacific

Southwest science community. These experts are recognized for

their ability to communicate specialized information developed

from often-disparate data using generally replicable methods.

Recognized experts have always been a part of our science community, but not as widespread or established. The emergence of

these scientists who act as experts has raised questions both

about the behavior of individuals at the science-policy interface

and how employees can develop the skills to achieve recognition as experts.

A related concern has been that the focus on the Northwest

Plan has diverted resources away from essential research that

expands the scientific foundation. Included are questions dealing

with the type of work used to develop the scientific skills of new

employees: If this work diminishes, how will future scientists

acquire the essential knowledge and skills needed to lead the next

generation of scientists?

Our Legacy

Forest Plan research has created a rich legacy of understanding how ecosystem processes and functions operate, and

fundamental changes in research community questions and

organization. It is too early to gauge the significance of many

research findings, but two points are already apparent. First, the

combination of changes has done more to build a foundation for

the next generation of research than to develop extensive

research findings around central themes. Second, it is helping

develop a new generation of scientists with skills and values different from those in the recent past. 

Two concerns about these fundamental changes in the

research community exist. First, the science community is concerned that the extensive focus on technology transfer and

applied research has diverted attention from long-term dataintensive science. This raises concerns about the data availability for future scientific inquiries, and about the structure of the

research organizations currently built around data collecting at a

few fixed field sites. The second drawback is concern about what

defines science within the natural resources science community.

Some of these concerns hint at broad changes underway in

research communities. The focus is shifting from collecting data

to developing information from data. The trend in science communities is toward developing predictive models and systems

approaches. These models and approaches synthesize empirical

data with expert judgements to produce information used to

develop a fundamental understanding of how broad-scale systems

operate or to respond to management needs.

Potential Effects on Management

Among topics for which ongoing or new research can help

influence resource management are the following:

• Determine the conditions necessary for the recovery or

survival of listed species

• Determine the degree to which new silvicultural techniques

and use of prescribed fire can mimic natural disturbance

processes and provide for continued productivity and diversity

of forest soils and ecosystems

• Identify and use cost-effective use of bioindicators for

monitoring environmental conditions and changes

• Analyze trends in and sustainable developing of harvesting

nontimber forest products

Research can aid managers in devising scientifically sound,

new approaches to managing ecosystems, and in testing their efficacy in restoring or maintaining plant and animal species, communities, ecosystems, processes, and dynamics for multiple uses.

At a broader perspective, researchers also can provide managers with techniques for simultaneously considering and integrating social, economic, and ecological goals in forest resource

management. Aiding such perspectives would be decision-support systems, including tools and approaches to information systems and expert advisory models.

Research also can play an increasingly central or cooperative

role in developing training, in implementing statistically sound

inventory and monitoring protocols for individual species and

their habitats; and for recommending the scheduling and placing

of management activities in AMAs to meet statistically sound

research designs. 

■101

CHAPTER 7: CLOSING
To date, though, the Forest Plan ROD and standards and

guidelines are still being implemented as they were presented in

their original documents, little has been changed from recent

research findings. If adequate administrative mechanisms exist for

reviewing recent research findings and amending Forest Plan

guidelines accordingly, beginning the process may be appropriate

because much has been learned and reported on the various listed topics. Again, the intent of the team was to provide interim

solutions while understanding increases and evolve through

ongoing and new research. The effects of research were anticipated, but they have not yet been realized.

Perhaps because of naiveté on the part of scientists, a disappointment they often expressed while reviewing the evolution of

Forest planning after the team effort, was the dual issue of risk

aversion among Federal land managers and their lack of interest

in testing the assumptions underlying the standards and guides.

The disappointment of scientists with the behavior of managers

reflects differences in the world views held by these two groups.

The land managers have, for the most part, a strong planning

focus where the emphasis is on agreeing about the goodness and

appropriateness of information. In that view, expert judgement

that provides needed information is sufficient. From a scientist’s

viewpoint, such information should be questioned and possibly

refined. Consistent with that is the belief of scientists that Federal

land managers should be much more interested in testing standards and guides as part of Forest Plan research. Such research,

however, is not high on the list of needs of land managers. They

are more concerned about developing protocols for using science

information or developing new information for specific management issues evolving from legal requirements for single-species

management.

The Science Legacy

Forest Plan related research has progressed to the point where

we can assess its legacy in terms of science input to natural

resource policy issues. This legacy (fig. 9) is presented in much of

the same way as figure 1 that illustrated the legacy the team’s effort

built on. This figure does not reflect the real increase in informal

interconnectedness between the thematic areas. A more accurate

figure would show a web of interactions. Most of the thematic and

discipline areas have evolved, although not all of this evolution

was research because some deal with applications of research. For

example, the Forest Plan transformed science and management

partnerships into AMAs and much of the energy in the watershed,

stream, and riparian areas has been directed toward watershed

analysis. On the other hand, the science legacy includes:

• Greater clarity around adaptive management

• Landscape designs that include the interface between riparian

and upland systems

• Increased focus on alternative silviculture systems that consider compatible production of a range of goods and services

• Province-scale studies like the CLAMS project, which includes

notions of social well-being and collaborative stewardship

Another aspect of the legacy is the continuing redefinition of

the role of science in policy matters. An important aspect of this

role is the changing nature of policy questions and the implications for integration: merging biophysical and social sciences. 

CONCLUSION

Lee (1993) points out the crucial constraint on what he calls

civic science like the FEMAT report and Forest Plan efforts. That is,

in learning to manage large ecosystems, there must be a partnership

between the science of ecosystems and the political tasks of governing. From the perspective of the science community, the lack of clarity in the socioecological problems that lead to efforts like the Forest

Plan is frustrating. It creates a barrier to distinguishing issues reflecting different personal values among the governing partnership from

those attributable to the lack of information. Furthermore, this lack

of clarity around the questions leads to confusion about the appropriate spatial and temporal scales of our responses to various problems. In spite of this, we are making progress at providing information around several central issues in managing large ecosystems. 

First, we are coming to see that broad landscapes are dynamic rather than a collection of relatively static stand and site conditions. Although much work remains, we are coming to understand current conditions in the context of historical ranges of

variability. For example, we are starting to understand that recent

patterns of forest conditions were the consequences of centuries

■102

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

Scientists, land managers, and the public come to discuss and learn about

implications of Federal forest management policies.
of fire and other natural disturbances. Part of that includes the

notions of relative differences between agents and rates of natural and human-caused disturbance. Another part of the dynamics

is the reality of dealing with ecosystems that include multiple

ownerships—each having different objectives and goals for land

management. This growing understanding includes an appreciation for the robustness of some aspects of the ecosystem.

Second, given the highly dynamic nature of ecosystems in

the Pacific Northwest, 5 or 10 years into a changed form of managing public lands is too short a time for judging many biophysical responses. It is, however, long enough to start judging changes

in some aspects of the related social systems. Changes in the

social systems, such as in environmental conditions, will lead to

changes in the goals of ecosystem management.

Third, a large part of the science followup in Forest Planrelated work has not been helping inform the science side of the

managing partnership but is actually providing science-based

expertise expressed as professional judgements about probable outcomes needed on the governing side. The dual role of scientists

working both on the science side and on the governing side—has

been confusing and sends mixed signals to scientists. These mixed

signals, unless corrected, will have long-term impacts on the

development of scientists in the sense that responding to immediate management needs narrows the scope of scientific efforts. The

extensive needs for scientific assistance by land management

agencies impacts some disciplines more than others. 

Ambiguity about roles also raises questions about expectations on both the governing and science side of the partnership

about the extent and content of managing civic science. Within

the science community, further mixed signals are sent by strong

advocacy positions for selected solutions within different discipline or academic groups. The issue is that different expectations

for action-oriented science places agency scientists often at odds

with their academic colleagues who for seemingly professional

reasons are advocating solutions to land management problems.

Fourth, we do see emerging science themes. Three areas

have emerged in the Forest Plan research. First, we see many in

the science community focusing their work on biodiversity conservation at multiple levels of definition and scale assuming it as

the broad goal for ecosystem management. Second, the need to

validate and test various assumptions in the Forest Plan has led to

greater interest in understanding ecosystem processes including

successional dynamics, disturbance, and effects of management

actions. Third, the development and importance of the aquatic

conservation strategy have led to greater understanding of riparian and aquatic processes including the role of riparian protection,

stream productivity, and terrestrial and aquatic interactions. Also

emerging in Forest Plan research, is a greater interest in cross-disciplinary science as a tool for answering specific problems related

to these three areas, especially where those problems are both

defined from outside the science community and by scientists

themselves.

■103

CHAPTER 7: CLOSING

Figure 9—Post-FEMAT science legacy.
What we have yet to see is the development of alternative

land management strategies that modify the Forest Plan. Various

aspects are emerging, but the debate over societal acceptance of different visions of ecosystem management has not developed enough

common elements to foster alternative management strategies.

Fifth, the growing interest in explicit environmental decisionmaking has created a dilemma for the pursuit of civic science.

On one hand, scientists are following Forest Plan direction to

evaluate and reveal the risks associated with various processes and

outcomes, whereas on the other hand, land managers are displaying increasingly risk-averse behavior to avoid controversial

actions. For example, the successes of adaptive management

processes are being limited by the unwillingness of land managers

to take risks involved in large-scale experimentation.

Sixth, we in the science community are more aware that our

efforts have to be placed in the context of the needs imposed by the

managing partnership. In a practical sense, this means that the spatial and temporal scale of questions being asked of us is critically

important. We are still a long way from systematically triaging the

questions coming to the science community and our dual roles of

working both on science and management sides are still confusing.

But we are better than before, especially at determining what can

be addressed at relatively small scales. The need for placing science

efforts and knowledge in context is one of the driving forces behind

the pressures for greater integration. This drive for greater integration has stimulated many discussions within the Forest Service science community. Questions include, “What is meant by the term

integration?” “What are common expectations both about the

process of integration and the impacts of greater integration on the

science community?” “What are the best approaches to integration?” “Should we treat integration as a process or means to an

end?” Discussion also continues about the challenge of simultaneously managing bottom-up and top-down integration. 

Seventh, many of the issues we see in considering Forest

Plan-related research reflect a transformation (underway in the

past several decades) in the way that knowledge is produced and

used in society (see Gibbons and others 1994). For example, the

emphasis on producing new knowledge in the context of its relatively immediate application is one of these trends, as is greater

emphasis on “transdisciplinary” research. We also see greater skill

heterogeneity and organizational diversity in Forest Plan-related

research. Finally, given that we are engaged in civic science, there

is greater social accountability expected of the science and resulting knowledge. Part of this accountability is recognition that science not only needs to be judged by disciplinary peers, but also on

its social acceptability. All of these are issues discussed throughout this synthesis, and they remind us that we are part of a larger

community wrestling with changing roles and expectations.

■104

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

Emerging areas of research under the Northwest Forest Plan include biodiversity conservation at multiple scales, the Aquatic Conservation Strategy, 

and adapting land management to rapidly expanding urban populations.
■105
REFERENCES

Abbe, T.B.; Montgomery, D.R. 1996a. Floodplain and terrace 

formation in forested landscapes. In: Proceedings of the 92nd 

annual meeting of the Geological Society of America; 1996 

April 22-24; Portland, OR. Boulder, CO: Geological Society 

of America. 115 p.

Abbe, T.B.; Montgomery, D.R. 1996b. Large woody debris 

jams, channel hydraulics and habitat formation in large rivers.

Regulated Rivers: Research and Management. 12: 201-221.

Abbe, T.B.; Montgomery, D.R.; Petroff, C. 1997. Design of 

stable in-channel wood debris structures for bank protection 

and habitat restoration: an example from the Cowlitz River, 

WA. In: Wang, S.S.Y.; Langendoen, E.J.; Shields, F.D., Jr., eds.

Proceedings of the conference on management of landscapes 

disturbed by channel incision; 1997 May 19-23; University, 

MS. University, MS: University of Mississippi: 809-816.

Acker, S.A.; Sabin, T.E.; Ganio, L.M.; McKee, W.A. 1998a.

Development of old-growth structure and timber volume 

growth trends in maturing Douglas-fir stands. Forest Ecology 

and Management. 104: 265-280.

Acker, S.A.; Zenner, E.K.; Emmingham, W.H. 1998b.

Structure and yield of two-aged stands on the Willamette 

National Forest, Oregon: implications for green tree 

retention. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 28: 749-758.

Acker, Steven A.; Muir, Patricia S.; Bradshaw, Gay A. [and 

others]. 1996. Final report: retrospective studies of the 

effects of green-tree retention on conifer production and 

biodiversity on the Willamette National Forest. Corvallis, 

OR: Oregon State University, Department of Forest Science; 

final report; supplement agreement PNW 92-0289. [Irregular 

pagination]. 

Benda, L.; Dunne, T. 1997a. Stochastic forcing of sediment 

routing and storage in channel networks. Water Resources 

Research. 33(12): 2865-2880.

Benda, L.; Dunne, T. 1997b. Stochastic forcing of sediment 

supply to channel networks from landsliding and debris flow. 

Water Resources Research. 33(12): 2849-2863.

Benda, L.E.; Miller, D.J.; Dunne, T.; Reeves, G.H.; Agee, 

J.K. 1998. Dynamic landscape systems. In: Naiman, R.J.; 

Bilby, R.E., eds. River ecology and management, lessons from 

the Pacific coastal ecoregion. New York: Springer-Verlag, Inc.:

261-288.

Benson, Gary; Owston, Peyton. 1998. Strategic research plan 

to support implementation of the Northwest Forest Plan. 

Portland, OR: Interagency Regional Ecosystem Office. Plan in

progress. On file with: Regional Ecosystem Office, Pacific 

Northwest Region, 333 S.W. First Avenue, Portland, OR 

97208.

Birch, K.; Blair, R.; Bradley, W. [and others]. 1993. Interim 

concepts for developing an adaptive management process. 

Corvallis, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Region. Submitted to Regional 

Interagency Executive Committee from the Adaptive 

Management Process Working Group. Unpublished report. 

On file with: Forest Sciences Laboratory, 3200 SW Jefferson 

Way, Corvallis, OR 97331.

Bisson, P.A.; Raphael, M.; Jones, E. 1997. Ecology of aquatic 

and riparian ecosystems: an examination of forest management alternatives. A study proposed. On file with: Forest 

Sciences Laboratory, Aquatic and Land Interaction Program,

3625 93rd Avenue, Olympia, WA 98512-2346.

Bormann, Bernard T.; Brookes, Martha H.; Ford, David E. 

[and others]. 1994a. A framework for sustainable-ecosystem 

management. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-331. Portland, 

OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific 

Northwest Research Station. 61 p.

Bormann, B.T.; Cunningham, P.G.; Brookes, M.H. [and 

others]. 1994b. Adaptive ecosystem management in the 

Pacific Northwest. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-341. 

Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 22 p.

Bormann, B.T.; Cunningham, P.G.; Gordon, J.C. 1996. Best 

management practices, adaptive management, or both? 

Proceedings of the National Society of American Foresters 

convention; 1995 October 28-November 1; Portland, ME. 

[Place of publication unknown]: [Publisher unknown]. 6 p. 

Bormann, B.T.; Martin, J.R.; Wagner, F.H. [1999]. [In 

press]. Adaptive management. In: Johnson, N.C.; Malk, A.J.; 

Sexton, W.; Szaro, R., eds. Ecological stewardship: a common 

reference for ecosystem management. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 

The Netherlands: Elsevier: 505-534. Vol. 3.

■106

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
Brooks, J.P. 1997. Bird-habitat relationships at multiple spatial

resolutions in the Oregon Coast Range. Corvallis, OR: 

Oregon State University. 46 p. MS thesis.

Brosofske, K.D.; Chen, J.; Naiman, R.J.; Franklin, J.F. 1997.

Harvesting effects on microclimatic gradients from small 

streams to uplands in western Washington. Ecological 

Applications. 

Brown, Greg; Harris, Chuck. 1998. Professional foresters and 

the land ethic, revisited. Journal of Forestry. 96(1): 4-12.

Brown, Lisa. 1998. Personal communication. Coast Range 

Association at time of communication. She is now a student 

at Lewis and Clark Law School, 0615 SW Palatine Hill Road,

Portland, OR 97219. 

Burnett, Kelly, 1998. Personal communication. Biological 

technician, Forestry Sciences Laboratory, 3200 SW Jefferson 

Way, Corvallis, OR 97331.

Carey, A.B.; Curtis, R.O. 1996. Conservation of biodiversity: 

a useful paradigm for forest ecosystem management. Wildlife 

Society Bulletin. 24(6): 610-620.

Carlson, A. 1991. Characterization of riparian management 

zones and upland management areas with respect to wildlife 

habitat. Timber, Fish, and Wildlife Report Number TFWWLI-91-001. Olympia, WA: Washington Department of 

Natural Resources. 25 p. [plus appendices].

Chan, Sam. 1998. Personal communication. Research forester, 

Forestry Sciences Laboratory, 3200 SW Jefferson Way, 

Corvallis, OR 97331.

Chen, J. 1991. Edge effects: microclimatic pattern and biological responses in old-growth Douglas-fir forests. Seattle, WA: 

University of Washington. 174 p. Ph. D. dissertation.

Christensen, Harriet H.; McGinnis, Wendy J.; Raettig, Terry

L.; Donoghue, Ellen 2000. Atlas of human adaptation 

to environmental change, challenge, and opportunity: a reference book and digital users guide depicting social and economic change in western Oregon, California, and 

Washington with special emphasis on provinces and counties.

Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-478. Portland, OR: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest 

Research Station. 66 p.

Christensen, Harriet H.; Raettig, Terry L. 1997. Change in 

public and private forest management: social and economic 

implications. In: Proceedings, IUFRO symposium on sustainable management of small scale forestry; 1997 September 8-

13; Kyoto, Japan. [Place of publication unknown]: IUFRO 

Group 3.08.00 and IUFRO Group 6.11.01 International 

Union of Forestry Research Organizations: 5-11.

Cissel, J.H.; Swanson, F.J.; Grant, G.E. [and others]. 1998. 

A landscape plan based on historical fire regimes for a managed forest ecosystem: the Augusta Creek Study. Gen. Tech. 

Rep. PNW-GTR-422. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research 

Station. 82 p.

Cissel, J.H.; Swanson, F.J.; McKee, W.A.; Burditt, A.L. 

1994. Using the past to plan the future in the Pacific 

Northwest. Journal of Forestry. 92(8): 30-31.

Cissel, J.H.; Swanson, F.J.; Weisberg, P.J. 1999. 

Landscape management using historical fire regimes: Blue 

River, Oregon. Ecological Applications. 9 (4): 1217-1231.

Cohen, W.A.; Spies, T.A., Fiorella, M. 1995. Estimating the 

age and structures of forests in a multi-ownership landscape of

western Oregon, USA. International Journal of Remote 

Sensing. 16 (4): 721-746.

Cunningham, P. 1997. Landscape learning design. Report 

to the North Coast Provincial Advisory Committee. 

Corvallis, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Pacific 

Northwest Research Station. Unpublished report. On file 

with: Forest Sciences Laboratory, 3200 SW Jefferson Way, 

Corvallis, OR 97331.

Curtis, R.O. 1994. Some simulation estimates of mean annual 

increment of Douglas-fir: results, limitations, and implications

for management. Res. Pap. PNW-RP-471. Portland, OR: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest 

Research Station. 27 p.

Curtis, R.O. 1995. Extended rotations and culmination age of 

coast Douglas-fir: old studies speak to current issues. Res. Pap.

PNW-RP-485. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research 

Station. 49 p.

■107

REFERENCES
Curtis, R.O. 1997. The role of extended rotations. In: Kohm, 

K.A.; Franklin, J.F., eds. Creating a forestry for the 21st century: the science of ecosystem management. Washington, DC: 

Island Press. 475 p. Chapter 10.

Curtis, R.O. 1998a. Harvest options for production forests. In: 

The Co-op Correspondent, The Newsletter of the Stand 

Management Cooperative. Seattle, WA: University of 

Washington, College of Forest Resources. Spring: 6-9.

Curtis, R.O. 1998b. Selective cutting in Douglas-fir: history 

revisited. Journal of Forestry. 96(7): 40-46.

Curtis, R.O.; Carey, A.B. 1996. Timber supply in the Pacific 

Northwest: managing for economic and ecological values in 

Douglas-fir forests. Journal of Forestry. 94(9): 4-7, 35-37. 

Curtis, R.O.; DeBell, D.S.; Harrington, C.A. [and others]. 

1998. Silviculture for multiple objectives in the Douglas-fir 

region. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-435. Portland, OR: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest 

Research Station. 123 p.

Curtis, R.O.; Marshall, D.D. 1993. Douglas-fir rotations—

time for reappraisal? Western Journal of Applied Forestry. 

8(3): 81-85.

Curtis, R.O.; Marshall, D.D.; Bell, J.F. 1997. LOGS-a pioneering example of silvicultural research in coast Douglas-fir. 

Journal of Forestry. 95(7): 19-25.

Danks, Cecilia; Jungwirth, Lynn. 1998. Community-based 

socioeconomic assessment and monitoring of activities related

to National Forest management. Working Paper Series of the 

Watershed Research and Training Center. Hayfork, CA. On 

file with: Watershed Research and Training Center, P.O. Box 

356, Hayfork, CA 96041.

DeBell, D.S.; Curtis, R.O.; DeBell, J.D.; McGaughey, R.J. 

1997a. Comparing options for managing Douglas-fir 

forests. In: Proceedings of interdisciplinary uneven-aged silviculture symposium; 1997 September 15-19; Corvallis, OR. 

Corvallis, OR: International Union of Forestry Research 

Organizations, Sustainable Forestry Partnership; Oregon State

University, College of Forestry: [Pages unknown.]

DeBell, D.S.; Curtis, R.O.; Harrington, C.A.; Tappeiner, J.C. 

1997b. Shaping stand development through silvicultural 

practices. In: Kohm, K.A.; Franklin, J.F., eds. Creating a 

forestry for the 21st century: the science of ecosystem man

agement. Washington, DC: Island Press: 141-149. Chapter 8. 

DeBell, D.S.; DeBell, J.D.; Curtis, R.O.; Allison, N.K. 1997c.

Evaluating and communicating options for harvesting younggrowth Douglas-fir forests. In: Communicating the role of silviculture in managing the National Forests: Proceedings of 

the national silviculture workshop; 1997 May 19-22; Warren, 

PA. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-238. Radnor, PA: U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest 

Experiment Station: 155-162.

DeForest, C.E. 1999. Watershed restoration, jobs-in-the-woods, 

and community assistance: Redwood National Park precedents 

and the Clinton Northwest Forest Plan. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNWGTR-449. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 31 p.

DeLeo, G.A.; Levin, S. 1997. The multifaceted aspects of 

ecosystem integrity. Conservation Ecology. 1(1): 3. 

http://www.consecol.org/vol1/iss1/art3.

Dietrich, M.; Anderson, N.H. 1998. Dynamics of abiotic 

parameters, solute removal and sediment retention in summerday headwater streams of eastern Oregon. Hydrobiologia. 

379: 1-5.

Dietrich, M.; Anderson, N.H.; Anderson, T.M. 1997. 

Shredder collector interactions in temporary streams of western Oregon. Freshwater Biology. 38(2): 387-393.

Entry, J.A.; Vance, N.C. 2000. Soil properties important 

to revegetation of McDonald basement on the Siskiyou 

Mountains crest. Journal of Forest Ecology and Management.

138: 427-434

Everett, R.; Hessburg, P.; Jensen, M.; Bormann, B. 1994. 

Volume I: executive summary. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR317. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 61 p. (Everett, 

R.L., assessment team leader; Eastside forest ecosystem health 

assessment).

Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team. [FEMAT] 

1993. Forest ecosystem management: an ecological, economic, and social assessment. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture; U.S. Department of the Interior [and others]. 

[Irregular pagination]

■108

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
Franklin, Jerry F.; Berg, Dean Rae; Thornburgh, Dale A.; 

Tappeiner, John C. 1997. Alternative silvicultural approaches to timber harvesting: variable retention harvest systems. In:

Kohm, K.A.; Franklin, J.F., eds. Creating a forestry for the 

21st century: the science of ecosystem management. 

Washington, DC: Island Press: 111-139.

Franklin, Jerry F.; Cromack, Kermit, Jr.; Denison, William 

[and others]. 1981. Ecological characteristics of old-growth 

Douglas-fir forests. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-118. 

Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment 

Station. 48 p. 

Franklin, Jerry F.; Spies, Thomas A. 1991. Composition, 

function, and structure of old-growth Douglas-fir forests. In: 

Ruggiero, Leonard F.; Aubry, Keith B.; Carey, Andrew B.; 

Huff, Mark H., tech. eds. Wildlife and vegetation of unmanaged Douglas-fir forests. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-285. 

Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station: 71-80. 

Gibbons, Michael; Limoges, Camille; Nowotny, Helga [and 

others]. 1994. The new production of knowledge: the 

dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. 

London: Sage. 

Grant, Gordon. 1998. Personal communication. Research 

hydrologist, Forestry Sciences Laboratory, 3200 SW Jefferson 

Way, Corvallis, OR 97331. 

Griffiths, R.P.; Bradshaw, B.; Marks, B.; Lienkaemper, G.W. 

1996. Spatial distribution of ectomycorrhizal mats in coniferous forests of the Pacific Northwest, USA. Plant and Soil. 

180: 147-158.

Hansen, Andrew J.; Garman, Steven L.; Weigand, James F. 

[and others]. 1995a. Alternative silvicultural regimes in the 

Pacific Northwest: simulations of ecological and economic 

effects. Ecological Applications. 5(3): 535-545.

Hansen, Andrew J.; McComb, William C.; Vega, Robyn [and

others]. 1995b. Bird habitat relationships in natural and 

managed forests in the west Cascades of Oregon. Ecological 

Applications. 5(3): 555-569.

Harrington, Connie; Crisafullia, Charles. 1994. Alternative 

silviculture in young Douglas-fir plantations: effects of stand 

composition and structure on plant and animal populations 

and on the production of forest products. Olympia, WA: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest 

Research Station. Unpublished report. On file: Olympia 

Forestry Sciences Laboratory, 3625 93rd Avenue, Olympia, 

WA 98512-9193. 15 p.

Harris, R.; Lisle, T.; Ziemer, R. 1997. Aftermath of the 1997 

flood: summary of a workshop: Proceedings of a meeting; 

1997 April 8-9; [Meeting location unknown]. McKinleyville, 

CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Interagency Watershed Analysis Center. In: Watershed 

Management Council Networker 7(2): 16-22. 

http//glinda.cnrs.humboldt.edu/WMChome/news/ 

sum_97/flood_workshop.html. 

Hayes, J.P.; Chan, S.S.; Emmingham, W.H. [and others]. 

1997. Wildlife response to thinning young forests in the 

Pacific Northwest. Journal of Forestry. 95(8): 28-33. 

Haynes, Richard W. 1998. Stumpage prices, volume sold, and 

volumes harvested from the National Forests of the Pacific 

Northwest Region, 1984 to 1996. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNWGTR-423. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 91 p.

Haynes, Richard W.; Adams, Darius M.; Mills, John R. 

1995. The 1993 RPA timber assessment update. Gen. Tech. 

Rep. RM-259. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and 

Range Experiment Station. 66 p.

Haynes, Richard W.; Graham, Russell T.; Quigley, Thomas 

M., tech. eds. 1996. A framework for ecosystem management in the interior Columbia basin and portions of the 

Klamath and Great basins. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-374. 

Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 66 p.

Haynes, Richard W.; McCool, Stephen; Horne, Amy; 

Birchfield, Jim. 1996. Natural resource management and 

community well-being. Wildlife Society Bulletin. 24(2): 222-

226.

Haynes, Richard W.; McGinnis, W.J.; Horne, Amy L. 1998. 

Where are the jobs? Lessons learned about the economic 

impacts of ecosystem management. In: Calhoun, John M., ed.

Forest policy: ready for renaissance. Institute of Forest 

Resources contrib. no. 78. Seattle, WA: College of Forest 

Resources, University of Washington. 343 p.

■109

REFERENCES
Hosford, D.; Pilz, D.; Molina, R.; Amaranthus, M. 1997.

Ecology and management of the commercially harvested 

American matsutake mushroom. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNWGTR-412. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 68 p.

Hunter, Matthew G. 1995. Residual trees as biological legacies.

Corvallis, OR: Department of Forest Science, Oregon State 

University; U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Pacific Northwest Research Station; Willamette National 

Forest, Blue River Ranger District, Pacific Northwest Region. 

27 p. 

Jarvis, B. 1998. The role and responsibilities of the scientist in 

public policy. The Public Policy Forum: 2-40.

Johnson, K.N.; Swanson, F.J.; Herring, M.; Greene, S. 1999.

Bioregional assessments: science at the crossroads of management and policy. Covello, CA: Island Press. 398 p.

Johnson, Norman K.; Sessions, J. 1998. Simulating landowner

behavior and spatial landscape dynamics for multi-disciplinary

policy analysis. In: U.S. Regional meetings of the International Association for Landscape Ecology: 13th annual 

conference; 1998 March 17-21; [Meeting location unknown]. 

East Lansing, MI: Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, 

Michigan State University. 145 p.

Kohm, K.A.; Franklin, J.F., eds. 1997. Creating a forestry for 

the 21st century: the science of ecosystem management. 

Washington, DC: Island Press. 475 p. 

Kruger, Linda Everett. 1996. Understanding place as a cultural

system: implications of theory and method. Seattle, WA: 

University of Washington. 178 p. Unpublished report. On 

file with: Forest Sciences Laboratory, 4043 Roosevelt Way 

NE, Seattle, WA 98105. 

Landres, P.B.; Morgan, P.; Swanson, F.J. 1999. Evaluating 

the utility of natural variability concepts in managing ecological systems. Ecological Applications. 9(4): 1170-1188

Lee, Kai N. 1993. Compass and gyroscope: integrating science 

and politics for the environment. Washington, DC: Island 

Press. 243 p.

Lehmkuhl, John. 1998. Personal communication. Research 

wildlife biologist, Forestry Sciences Laboratory, 4043 

Roosevelt Way, N.E., Seattle, WA 98105.

Lisle, T.E. 1997. Understanding the role of sediment waves and

channel conditions over time and space. In: Sommarstrom, S.,

ed. What is watershed stability? Proceedings, 6th biennial 

watershed management conference; 1996 October 23-25; 

Lake Tahoe, CA.: Water Resources Center Report 92. Davis, 

CA: University of California, Water Resources Center.

Lisle, T.E.; Ikeda, H.F.; Kodama, Y.; Pizzuto, J.E. 1997.

Evolution of a sediment wave in an experimental channel. 

Water Resources Research. 33(8): 1971-1981.

Long, C.J.; Whitlock, C.; Bartlein, C.P.J.; Millspaugh, S.H. 

1998. A 9,000-year fire history from the Oregon Coast 

Range, based on a high-resolution charcoal study. Canadian 

Journal of Forest Research. 28: 774-787

Marcot, Bruce G. 1992. Putting data, experience, and professional judgment to work in making land management decisions. In: Nyberg, J.B.; Kessler, W.B., eds. Integrating timber 

and wildlife in forest landscapes: a matter of scale. Eatonville, 

WA: [Publisher unknown]: 140-161.

McDermott, Connie; Danks, Cecilia. 1997. Socioeconomic 

monitoring of ecosystem management activities in the Trinity 

National Forest. Unpublished document. On file with: 

Watershed Research and Training Center, P.O. Box 356, 

Hayfork, CA 96041.

McGinnis, W.J.; Schuster, E.G.; Stewart, W.L. 1996.

Economic indicator maps for rural development in the Pacific 

West. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-328. Ogden, UT: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain 

Research Station. 26 p.

Molina, R.; Vance, N.; Weigand, J. [and others]. 1997.

Special forest products: integrating social, economic, and biological considerations into adaptive ecosystem management. 

In: Kohm, K.A.; Franklin, J.F., eds. Creating a forestry for the 

21st century: the science of ecosystem management. 

Washington, DC: Island Press: 315-336.

Montgomery, D.R.; Abbe, T.B.; Buffington, J.M. [and 

others]. 1996. Distribution of bedrock and alluvial channels 

in forested mountain drainage basins. Nature. 381: 587-589.

Montgomery, D.R.; Buffington, J.M. 1993. Channel classification, prediction of channel response, and assessment of channel condition. Timber, Fish, and Wildlife Agreement Report 

TFW-SH10-93-002. Olympia, WA: Washington Department 

of Natural Resources. 

■110

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
Montgomery, D.R.; Buffington, J.M. 1997. Channel-reach 

morphology in mountain drainage basins. Geological Society 

of America Bulletin. 109(5): 596-611.

Montgomery, D.R.; Dietrich, W.E. 1994. A physically based 

model for the topographic control on shallow landsliding. 

Water Resources Research. 30(4): 1153-1171.

Montgomery, D.R.; Grant, G.E.; Sullivan, K. 1995.

Watershed analysis as a framework for implementing ecosystem management. Water Resources Bulletin. 31(3): 369-386.

Morrison, Peter H.; Swanson, Frederick J. 1990. Fire history 

and pattern in a Cascade Range landscape. Gen. Tech. Rep. 

PNW- GTR-254. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 77 p.

Mulder, B.S.; Noon, B.R.; Spies, T.A. [and others], tech. 

coords. 1999. The strategy and design of the effectiveness 

monitoring program for the Northwest Forest Plan. Gen. Tech. 

Rep. PNW-GTR-437. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research 

Station. 138 p.

Naiman, R.J.; Decamps, H. 1997. The ecology of interfaces: 

riparian zones. Annual Review of Ecological Systems. 29: 

621-658.

Nauman, R.S.; Olson, D.H. 1999. Survey and manage salamander known sites. In: Olson, D.H., ed. 1999. Chapter II: 

survey protocols for amphibians under the “Survey and 

manage” provision of the Northwest Forest Plan. Portland, 

OR: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land 

Management. 256 p. 

Noss, Reed F.; Cooperrider, Allen Y. 1994. Saving nature’s 

legacy. Washington, DC: Island Press. 416 p. 

Ohmann, J.L.; Spies, T.A. 1998. Regional gradient analysis 

and spatial pattern of woody plant communities of Oregon 

forests. Ecological Monographs. 68(2): 151-182.

Olson, Deanna. 1998. Personal communication. Research fishery biologist, Forestry Sciences Laboratory, 3200 SW Jefferson

Way, Corvallis, OR 97331.

Olson, D.; Hansen, B.; Chan, S.; Cunningham, P. 1999.

Progress report: compatibility initiative, 19 April 1999. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific 

Northwest Research Station, Corvallis, OR.37 p. [plus 4 

unpaged appendices]. Unpublished report. On file with: 

Pacific Northwest Research Station, 3200 SW Jefferson Way, 

Corvallis, OR 97331.

Pabst, R.J.; Spies, T.A. 1998. Distribution of herbs and shrubs 

in relation to landform and canopy cover in riparian forests of

coastal Oregon. Canadian Journal of Botany. 76: 298-315.

Peck, JeriLynn E.; McCune, Bruce. 1997. Remnant trees and 

canopy lichen communities in western Oregon: a retrospective approach. Ecological Applications. 7(4): 1181-1187.

Pilz, D.; Molina, R. 1996. Managing forest ecosystems to conserve fungal diversity and sustain wild mushroom harvests. 

Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-371. Portland, OR: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest 

Research Station. 104 p.

Pipken, James. 1998. The Northwest Forest Plan revisited. 

[Place of publication unknown]. U.S. Department of the 

Interior, Office of Policy Analysis. 117 p. On file with: Social 

and Economic Values Program, Forestry Sciences Laboratory, 

1221 S.W. Yamhill Street, Suite 200, Portland, OR 97208. 

http://www.doi.gov/nrl/ppa/nwforest/revisit.html.

Quigley, Thomas M.; Haynes, Richard W.; Graham, Russell 

T., tech. eds. 1996. Integrated scientific assessment for 

ecosystem management in the interior Columbia basin and 

portions of the Klamath and Great Basins. Gen. Tech. Rep. 

PNW-GTR-382. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research 

Station. 303 p. (Quigley, Thomas M., tech. ed.; the Interior 

Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project: scientific 

assessment).

Quigley, T.M.; Lee, D.C.; Haynes, R.W. [and others]. 1997.

Ecological integrity, socioeconomic resiliency, and trends in 

risk. In: Quigley, T.M.; Lee, K.M.; Arbelbide, S.J., eds. 

Evaluation of EIS alternatives by the Science Integration 

Team. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-406. Portland, OR: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1094 p. 2 vol.

Raettig, Terry L.; Christensen, Harriet H. 1999. Timber 

harvesting, processing, and employment in the NWEAI 

region: changes and economic assistance. Gen. Tech. Rep. 

PNW-GTR-465. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research 

Station. 16 p.

■111

REFERENCES
Raettig, Terry L.; Christensen, Harriet H.; Donoghue, Ellen. 

1998. The Northwest Economic Adjustment Initiative: an 

assessment. 148 p. Report prepared for U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Rural Development; Forest Service, State and 

Private Forestry in the Pacific Southwest and Northwest 

Regions; U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land 

Management, Oregon State. On file with: Forestry Sciences 

Laboratory, 4043 Roosevelt Way NE, Seattle, WA 98105.

Raphael, Marty. 1998. Personal communication. Research 

wildlife biologist, Forestry Sciences Laboratory, 3625 93rd 

Avenue, Olympia, WA 98512-9193. 

Reeves, G.H.; Benda, L.E.; Burnett, K.M. [and others]. 

1995. A disturbance-based ecosystem approach to maintaining and restoring freshwater habitats of evolutionarily significant units of anadromous salmonids in the Pacific Northwest. 

American Fisheries Society Symposium. 17: 334-349.

Regional Interagency Executive Committee [RIEC]. 1995.

Ecosystem analysis at the watershed scale: Federal guide for 

watershed analysis. Portland, OR. 26 p.

Regional Interagency Executive Committee [RIEC]. 1997.

Riparian reserve evaluation techniques and synthesis module. 

Portland, OR. 42 p.

Reynolds, K.; Cunningham, P.; Bednar, L. 1996. Knowledgebased information management for watershed analysis in the 

Pacific Northwest. Artificial Intelligence Applications. 10(2): 

9-22.

Reynolds, K.M.; Rauscher, H.M.; Worth, C.V. 1995. A 

hypermedia reference system to the FEMAT report and some 

related publications. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-357. 

Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 13 p.

Reynolds, K.; Saunders, M.; Miller, B. [and others]. 1997.

Knowledge-based decision support in environmental assessment. In: Resource technology 97 proceedings; 1997 April 7-

10; Seattle, WA. Bethesda, MD: Resource Technology 

Institute. 4: 344-352.

Rose, Coulter R.; Muir, Patricia S. 1997. Green-tree retention: consequences for timber production in forests of the 

western Cascades, Oregon. Ecological Applications. 7(1): 

209-217. 

Rot, B.W. 1995. The interaction of valley constraint, riparian 

landform, and riparian plant community size and age upon 

channel configuration of small streams of the western Cascade

mountains, Washington. Seattle, WA: College of Forest 

Resources, University of Washington. MS thesis.

Salwasser, Hal; MacCleery, Douglas W.; Snellgrove, Thomas 

A. 1993. An ecosystem perspective on sustainable forestry 

and new directions for the U.S. National Forest System. In: 

Aplet, Gregory H.; Johnson, Nels; Olson, Jeffery T.; Alaric, V.

Sample, eds. Defining sustainable forestry. Washington, DC: 

Island Press: 44-89. 

Schowalter, T.D. 1995. Canopy arthropod communities in relation to forest age and alternative harvest practices in western 

Oregon. Forest Ecology and Management. 78: 115-125.

Schowalter, T.; Hansen, E.; Molina, R.; Zhang, Y. 1997.

Integrating the ecological role of phytophagous insects, plant 

pathogens, and mycorrhizae in managed forests. In: Kohm, 

K.A.; Franklin, J.F., eds. Creating a forestry for the 21st century: the science of ecosystem management. Washington, DC: 

Island Press: 171-189.

Schrader, Barbara A. 1998. Structural development of late 

successional forests in the central Oregon Coast Range: 

abundance, dispersal, and growth to western hemlock (Tsuga 

heterophylla) regeneration. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State 

University. 175 p. Ph.D. dissertation.

Sedell, J.R.; Reeves, G.H.; Burnett, K.M. 1994.

Development and evaluation of aquatic conservation strategies. Journal of Forestry. 92(4): 28-31.

Senge, P.M. 1990. The fifth discipline: the art and practice of 

learning organizations. New York: Currency Doubleday.

Shindler, Bruce; Neburka, J. 1997. Public participation in 

forest planning: 8 attributes of success. Journal of Forestry. 

95(1): 17-19.

Simpson, J.T., Bishop, R.C. 1998. The benefits and costs of 

restoring habitat for anadromous fish. 37 p. Unpublished 

report. On file with: the Social Economic Values Program, 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forestry 

Sciences Laboratory, 1221 S.W. Yamhill, Suite 200, Portland, 

OR 97208.

■112

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
Spies, T.A.; Burnett, K.; McComb, W. [and others]. 1998. 

Fish, birds and old growth: developing measures and models 

to assess effects of forest policies at landscape and regional 

scales. In: U.S. regional meetings of the International 

Association for Landscape Ecology: 13th annual conference; 

1998 March 17-21; East Lansing, MI. East Lansing, MI: 

Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Michigan State 

University. 

Spies, Thomas A.; Franklin, Jerry F. 1991. The structure of 

natural young, mature, and old-growth Douglas-fir forests in 

Oregon and Washington. In: Ruggiero, Leonard F.; Aubry, 

Keith B.; Carey, Andrew B.; Huff, Mark H., tech. eds. 

Wildlife and vegetation of unmanaged Douglas-fir forests. 

Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-285. Portland, OR: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest 

Research Station: 91-109.

Stankey, George; Clark, Roger. [In prep.] Adaptive management areas: roles and opportunities for the PNW Research 

Station. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station.

St. Clair, J.B.; Sneizko, R.A. 1999. Genetic variation in 

response to shade in coastal Douglas-fir. Canadian Journal of 

Forest Research. 29(11): 1751-1763.

Sturtevant, Victoria E.; Lange, Jonathan I. 1995. Applegate 

partnership case study: group dynamics and community context. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station; report; cooperative agreement 94-0569.

Swanson, F.J.; Jones, J.A.; Wallin, D.O.; Cissel, J.H. 1994. 

Natural variability—implications for ecosystem management. 

In: Jensen, M.E.; Bourgeron, P.S., eds. Eastside forest ecosystem health assessment. Volume II: Ecosystem management: 

principles and applications. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-318.

Portland, Oregon: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station: 89-103.

Swanson, Frederick J.; Johnson, Sherri L.; Gregory, Stanley 

V.; Acker, Steven A. 1998. Flood disturbance in a forested 

mountain landscape. BioScience. 48(9): 681-689.

Tang, S.M.; Franklin, J.F.; Montgomery, D.R. 1996.

Landscape clearcutting patterns and disturbance processes. 

Landscape Ecology.

Tappeiner, J.C.; Huffman, D.; Marshall, D. [and others]. 

1997. Density, ages, and growth rates in old-growth and 

young-growth forests in coastal Oregon. Canadian Journal of 

Forest Research. 27: 638-648.

Tappeiner, J.C.; Lavender, D.; Walstad, J. [and others]. 1997.

Silvicultural systems and regeneration methods: current practices and new alternatives. In: Kohm, K.A.; Franklin, J.F., eds.

Creating a forestry for the 21st century: the science of ecosystem management. Washington, DC: Island Press: 151-164. 

Chapter 9.

Thomas, J.W.; Raphael, M.G.; Anthony, R.G. [and others] 

1993. Viability assessments and management considerations 

for species associated with late-successional and old-growth 

forests of the Pacific Northwest. Portland, OR: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 523 p.

Tuchmann, E.T.; Connaughton, K.P; Freedman, L.E; 

Moriwaki, C.B. 1996. The Northwest Forest Plan: a report 

to the President and Congress. Portland, OR: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest 

Research Station. 253 p.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1993. The 

principal laws relating to Forest Service activities, Agric. 

Handb. 453. Washington, DC. 359 p.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1997. 

Research priorities for entering the 21st century. Station 

Misc. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 17 p.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1998. H.J. 

Andrews Experimental Forest [Brochure]. Portland, OR: 

Pacific Northwest Research Station.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; U.S. 

Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 

1994. Record of Decision for amendments to Forest Service 

and Bureau of Land Management planning documents within

the range of the northern spotted owl. [Place of publication 

unknown]. 74 p. [plus Attachment A: standards and guidelines].

van Norman, Kelli J. 1998. Historical fire regime in the Little 

River watershed, southwestern Oregon. Corvallis, OR: 

Oregon State University. 103 p. MS. thesis.

■113

REFERENCES
Vance, N.C.; Mikowski, D. 1998. Addressing landscape variation

in effective restoration: native plant revegetation in a Shasta red 

fir barrens. In: Ecosystem restoration: turning the tide, Society 

for Ecological Restoration: Proceedings, northwest chapter conference and annual meeting; 1998 October 28-30; Tacoma, WA. 

Madison, WI: Society for Ecological Restoration.

Vance, N.C.; Whitall, D. 1995. Watershed restoration 

research: begin at the headwaters-the McDonald Basin. In: 

Proceedings, Society for Ecological Restoration international 

conference; 1995 September 14-16; Seattle, WA. Seattle, 

WA: University of Washington: 102-103.

Walters, Carl J. 1997. Challenges in adaptive management of 

riparian and coastal ecosystems. Conservation Ecology. 1: 2. 

www.consecol.org/Journal.

Warren, D.D. 1998. Production, prices, employment, and trade

in Northwest forest industries, third quarter 1997. Resour. 

Bull. PNW-RB-229. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research 

Station. 130 p.

Watson, V. 1997. Working toward operational definitions in 

ecology: putting the system back into ecosystem. Bulletin 

Ecological Society of America. 78(4): 295-297.

Weigand, J.L.; Haynes, R.W. 1996. From rhetoric to reality: 

the role of restoration in the shift to ecosystem management 

in National Forests. In: Peason, D.L.; Klimas, C.V., eds. The 

role of restoration in ecosystem management. Madison, WI: 

Society for Ecological Restoration. Omnipress: 175-182.

Weisburg, P.J. 1998. Fire history, fire regimes, and development

of forest structure in the central western Oregon Cascades. 

Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University. 288 p. Ph.D. 

dissertation.

Wemple, B.; Jones, J.A.; Grant, G.E. 1996. Hydrologic integration of forest roads with stream networks in two forested 

basins in the western Cascades of Oregon. Water Resources 

Bulletin. 32(6): 1195-1207.

Williams, Kevin L.; Sturtevant, Victoria E. 1999. Individual 

adaptation to changes in forest policy and the timber industry:

exploratory case studies in two small timber communities in 

southwest Oregon. Ashland, OR: Southern Oregon 

University, Departments of Sociology and Anthropology. 

Cooperative report. [Unpaged].

Wimberly, M.C.; Spies, T.A.; Long, C.J.; Whitlock, C. 2000.

Variability in the amount of old forests in the Oregon 

Coast Range: historic patterns and their implications for 

forest management. Conservation Biology. 14(1): 167-180.

Wipfli, M.S. 1997. Terrestrial invertebrates as salmonid prey 

and nitrogen sources in streams: contrasting old-growth and 

young-growth riparian forests in southeastern Alaska, U.S.A. 

Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. 54(6): 

1259-1269.

Zenner, E.K.; Acker, S.A.; Emmingham, W.H. 1998. Growth 

reduction in harvest-age, coniferous forests with residual trees 

in the western central Cascade range of Oregon. Forest 

Ecology and Management. 102: 75-88.

■114

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

When you know Multiply by: To find:

Centimeters (cm) 2.540 Inches

Meters (m) 3.281 Feet

Hectares (ha) 2.471 Acres

Inches (in) .393 Centimeters

Feet (ft) .305 Meters

Acres .405 Hectares

ENGLISH EQUIVALENTS
APPENDIX 1:

THE STRUCTURE

OF THE

NORTHWEST FOREST

PLAN

Gloria Perez

INTRODUCTION

This description is adapted from appendix A of “The

Northwest Forest Plan—A Report to the President and

Congress,” (Tuchmann and others 1996) and does not include

the status of each component of the Forest Plan. This document

synthesizes research conducted since inception of the Northwest

Forest Plan (Forest Plan), and this provides an overview of the

Forest Plan and shows where research fits into the overall picture.

The Forest Plan is organized under three main components: forest management, economic development, and interagency coordination. A description of each component follows.

FOREST MANAGEMENT

Under the Forest Plan, watersheds are the basis for forest

management, and adaptive management areas (AMAs) are the

context for environmental and scientific research. First, the forest management component of the Forest Plan emphasizes identifying and protecting key watersheds and old-growth forests.

Secondly, it has designated 10 AMAs to provide opportunities for

collaborative and innovative approaches to management. These

10 AMAs allow for intensive experimentation toward achieving

ecological, economic, and social objectives. The key elements for

this component include:

• Watersheds as the fundamental building block

• Reserve areas based on watershed and old growth that include

the most valuable old-growth forests and designated conservation areas to protect specific species. Only limited activities

would be permitted in the reserves, including salvage and thinning where the primary objective of that salvage and thinning

is to accelerate the development of old-growth conditions.

• Ten AMAs of 78,000 to 380,000 acres each for intensive ecological experimentation and social innovation to develop and

demonstrate new ways to integrate ecological and economic

objectives and allow for local involvement in defining the future.

• The development of the new rule from the U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service to ease restrictions on timber harvest from certain non-Federal lands (modifying what have been known as

“owl circles”), which is possible because the Forest Plan

improves management of Federal lands and encourages private

companies to commit the timber released by these changes to

processing in domestic mills.

Under this component, implementation of the Forest Plan

provides for moving timber sales forward, maintaining sustainable

timber harvest, and restoring the health of east-side forest ecosystems. The role of research under this component is defined in the

efforts put forth toward the AMAs. Within the 10 designated

AMAs, a rigorous monitoring and research program will ensure

the development and analysis of scientific data to assess the effectiveness and impact of experimental approaches.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

The Forest Plan provides substantial Federal assistance for

both economic relief to timber communities and toward longterm economic development. This component of the Forest Plan

provides for economic adjustment and diversification in the

region. This includes support for business development, economic planning, infrastructure development, value-added manufacturing, and worker retraining. Key elements of this component

include the following:

• For workers and families, increased funding under the Job

Training Partnership Act for job-search assistance, retraining,

and relocation; overall a 110-percent increase in funding from

$20.2 million to $42 million.

• A three-part strategy for business development in northern

California, including improved access to capital, expanded

technical assistance, and enhanced access to domestic and

international markets; overall, a 47-percent increase in funding

from $163 million to $239.7 million.

• For communities, established levels of financial assistance to

timber counties, replacing the roller coaster of payments tied to

timber harvests with a reliable schedule of payments, creating a

sound fiscal environment for county governments, businesses,

and financial institutions; strengthening community capacity

to plan for economic development and diversification, and

improving the infrastructure needed for such development

through Community Development Block Grant lending, Rural

Development Administration (RDA) community facilities,

and the Research Development Administration Water/-

Wastewater Program; overall, a 25-percent increase in funding

from $298.6 million to $373.6 million.

■115

APPENDICIES
• To protect the environment and create jobs, investments in

watershed maintenance, ecosystem restoration and research,

environmental monitoring and forest stewardship, all of which

will improve water quality and increase salmon stocks to avoid

listing of salmon species under the Endangered Species Act and

to improve commercial fishing; in addition, forest stewardship

will be expanded to help small landowners manage their forests;

overall, a 19-percent increase in funding from $438.2 million to

$519.8 million.

• Support for the elimination of tax incentives for the export of

raw logs, and the President is directing his Cabinet to study

effective ways to make it more difficult for companies to avoid

export limitations on raw logs.

• Directing his Cabinet to identify and implement, in a priority

manner, the best ways to strengthen small businesses and secondary manufacturing in the wood-products industry, including

a review of increasing the supply of Federal timber set aside for

small businesses and possible preferences for bidders who contract for domestic secondary processing. The President also is

directing his administration to encourage improved and effective community partnerships to bring together those with different perspectives on forest management. (Secondary manufacturing generates from 4 to 25 times more jobs per billion

board feet than primary manufacturing.)

INTERAGENCY COORDINATION

A working group was established to focus on improving

interagency coordination. As part of the Forest Plan, key Federal

agencies have learned to work together. The following list of items

was deemed or designed to improve interagency coordination.

• Creating a new focus for forest planning based on watersheds

and “physiographic provinces” that base management on the

unique ecology of each region.

• Immediately creating a new interagency geographic information system database to allow land management and resource

agencies to coordinate their efforts in the collection and development of research and data.

• Creating province-level teams that would develop analyses

for physiographic provinces and particularly watersheds.

These teams would include the relevant Federal agencies,

state officials, and tribes and, when individual watersheds are

analyzed, the objective would be to involve all affected parties in discussions on biological, timber, community, and

other needs. An Interagency Executive Committee would

coordinate and provide direction for the work of the provincial teams.

• Revising the consultation process under the Endangered

Species Act to emphasize an integrated ecosystem approach

that would include the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the

National Marine Fisheries Service early in the process. The

views of these agencies can be made known when the land

management agencies begin to develop their plans for a particular area, instead of later in the planning process as is now the

case. It also would involve the use, where appropriate, of

regional consultations.

■116

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
APPENDIX 2:

BUDGET HISTORY OF

NORTHWEST FOREST

PLAN RESEARCH

Laura Bergstrom

FISCAL YEAR BUDGET, 1994-99

Fiscal year 1994: $5.7 million was made available for

research to support implementation of ecosystem management in

the Pacific Northwest. 

Fiscal year 1995: total appropriated funding for the

Northwest Forest Plan (Forest Plan) was $6.8 million. Funding

for the Pacific Northwest Research Station’s implementation was

$5.1 million (Pacific Northwest [PNW] and Pacific Southwest

[PSW[ Research Stations split 75 percent / 25 percent, respectively). Of this, $3.975 million was added to PNW Research

Station, and existing PNW Research Station base funding of

$1.125 million was the Station’s support. Shortly after the fiscal

year 1995 appropriation bill, Congress imposed a recession on

appropriated funding. The direct impact on the Forest Plan was a

reduction of $641,000.

Fiscal year 1996: total appropriated funding for the Forest

Plan remained constant at $6.8 million. Of the $5.1 million to

the PNW Research Station, $0.3 million was congressionally

directed for the University of Washington’s landscape management decision system. Also in fiscal year 1996, the PNW

Research Station implemented an internal shift of funding and

research to better align research activities with current priorities. 

Fiscal year 1997: congressional appropriations for the Forest

Plan was increased by $0.675 million. No actual new dollars were

received. This increase covered the University of Washington

earmark; $0.3 million and a $0.375 million reprogramming of

PNW Research Station’s base funds. 

Fiscal year 1998-99: Forest Plan funding level remained constant at $5.775 million for the PNW Research Station and

$1.875 million for the PSW Research Station. 

APPENDICIES

■117
APPENDIX 3:

TERRESTRIAL

WILDLIFE PLAN

ASSUMPTIONS AND

DIRECTIONS 

Bruce Marcot

INTRODUCTION

A summary of assumptions and directions from the Forest

Ecosystem Management Team (FEMAT) report and the Northwest

Forest Plan record of decision and standards and guidelines, pertinent

to terrestrial wildlife, are listed by source and section heading. The

report topics shown here are those for which the Pacific Northwest

Research Station might play a role. Listed here are exact quotes.1 See

text for explanation of how the specific subjects were identified. 

FOREST ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT

ASSESSMENT TEAM REPORT

Survey and Manage

For many species and taxonomic groups, adequate survey techniques may not exist [for rare species of amphibians, bryophytes,

lichens, mollusks, vascular plants, fungi, and arthropods].

Monitoring

Monitoring will be conducted at multiple levels and scales, ranging

from site-specific projects to the planning area or region to allow localized information to be compiled and considered in a regional context.

Specific new monitoring protocols, criteria, goals, and

reporting formats also will be developed.

Research

Our evaluations of the use, management, and conservation of

Pacific Northwest forests have identified major gaps in our knowledge and understanding of these resources. In addition to the need

for basic information on ecosystem function and processes, research

is needed to develop and refine the analytical tools critical to

ecosystem management and to help expand the resource productivity options within Pacific Northwest forests. . . .However, society is demanding. . .programs that address specific organisms or components of ecosystems that have had limited previous study. 

In addition to the need for basic information on ecosystem

function and processes, research is needed to develop and refine

the analytical tools critical to ecosystem management and to help

expand the resource productivity options within Pacific

Northwest forests.

[These are areas that need enhanced scientific knowledge

such as:] Habitat requirements of many plant, animal, and fish

species so that viability ratings may be improved and management programs may be designed to ensure adequate habitat while

producing multiple forest values. Design of management strategies that will accelerate the production of “suitable” habitat. . . .

Long-term ecosystem productivity impacts from forest management strategies. . . .Design of cost effective multivalue resource

inventory and monitoring systems.

Research is needed to develop analytical tools: Risk assessment methods to address such issues as causes of population

decline. . .Decision support systems and analysis methods for setting priorities, assessing risks, and defining management options

at the watershed or larger scale from both a socio-economic and

biophysical standpoint. Evaluation of existing integrated monitoring of ecological condition and trends that will answer regional assessment questions. Design of regional inventory, monitoring

and evaluation databases to support adaptive management.

Development of risk assessment and restoration strategies specific

to riparian areas. . . .

Research may be able to [aid]: . . .Production of “nontraditional” alternative forest products, including harvesting methods,

management strategies, marketing assistance, and evaluation.

[Recommendations then follow that address meeting these

needs.]

Managed Late-Successional Areas

[I]nitiate silvicultural experiments that are likely to produce

stands that are similar in structure to existing old stands. . . .W]e

hypothesize that they will provide for most of the species and

processes that occur in natural stands and will be adapted to current and future climate.

Research, monitoring, and adaptive management will have

to occur simultaneously.

[T]he use of long rotations. . .is to re-create, to the extent

possible, the structural and compositional features of late-successional forests.

Stand Management

[S]ilviculture can accelerate the development of young

stands into multilayered stands with large trees and diverse plant

species and structures that may in turn maintain or enhance

species diversity. 

■118

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

1 Page numbers are not shown for the quoted passages because this information was taken from

the computer hypertext FEMAT program (Reynolds and others 1995) which does not include the

original document page numbers.
Silviculture systems for stands in the Matrix should provide

for retention of old-growth ecosystem components such as large

green trees, snags and down logs, and depending upon site and

forest type, a diversity of species.

Patches of green trees of various sizes, ages, and species will

promote species diversity and may act as refugia or centers of dispersal for many organisms including plants, fungi, lichens, small

vertebrates, and arthropods. 

Because of drier microclimates, [down] logs in the Matrix

may be occupied by species different from those found on coarse

woody debris in late-successional forests. However, these logs may

provide transitional islands in successional time for the maintenance and eventual recovery of some late-successional organisms

in the Matrix. 

[C]onsiderable research and monitoring will be required to

determine actual levels of snags required to support viable populations of various [cavity-nesting] species in different provinces. 

[T]here is much uncertainty concerning the efficacy of

killing trees to provide snags. 

[Also see the section on Thinning of Young Forest Stands

Within Late-Successional Reserves in the FEMAT report.]

Ecosystems and Their Management

To achieve the vision of ecosystem management we must

plan, achieve, and maintain not only the ecological objectives

identified for [a diverse array of conservation and management

issues that occur at the watershed, province, and regional scales],

but fully integrate the socio-economic aspects as well. Humans

are a functional and integral part of managed ecosystems and successful federal land management requires the human dimension

to be fully integrated into the process. 

Traditional research and management of wildlife populations

. . .have been species-specific and limited to a narrow range of the

biological diversity found in our forested ecosystems. Ecosystem

research and landscape ecology are similarly in an early stage of

development. . . .Research needs to be reoriented into a broader

community view and at a broader landscape scale. 

Some uncertainty regarding the viability of certain components of old-growth ecosystems stems partly from an incomplete

understanding of the species and processes than occur there. 

Adaptive Management

Examples of questions related to forest management strategies developed for the Pacific Northwest that would be addressed

by adaptive management include: When and how would it be

appropriate to alter boundaries of Late-Successional Reserves?

When would it be appropriate to change riparian habitat management strategies? What management activities will be appropriate in Late-Successional Reserves? Are the management

strategies in the Matrix meeting intended objectives? Are thinnings in Reserves producing anticipated results?

Biological Diversity, Late-Successional and OldGrowth Forest Ecosystems

Evaluation questions: Is the forest ecosystem functioning as

a productive and sustainable ecological unit? Is the use of prescribed fire or fire suppression maintaining the natural processes

of the forest ecosystem? Are desired habitat conditions for the

northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet maintained

where adequate, and restored where inadequate? Are habitat corridors for late-successional forest associated species maintained

where adequate, and restored where inadequate? . . .Is a functional, interacting late successional ecosystem maintained where adequate, and restored where inadequate? Did silvicultural treatments benefit the creation and maintenance of late-successional

conditions? Will the overall conditions of the watersheds and

provinces continue to be productive over the long term?

To address these questions, chemical, physical, and biological indicators may need to be evaluated.

Riparian Microclimate

We are aware of no reported field observations of microclimate in riparian zones.

[B]uffers may need to be wider to maintain interior microclimatic conditions than other riparian functions.

Technical Objectives

The primary technical objectives of the adaptive management areas are development, demonstration, implementation, and evaluation of monitoring programs and innovative

management practices that integrate ecological and economic values. Experiments, including some at quite a large-scale,

are likely.

Following are technical topics needing development,

demonstration, and testing of techniques: Creation and maintenance of a variety of forest structural conditions including latesuccessional forest conditions and desired riparian habitat conditions. Restoration of structural complexity and biological diversity in forests and streams that have been degraded by past management activities and natural events. Integration of wildlife welfare (particularly of sensitive and threatened species) with timber

management. . . .Design and testing of effects of forest management activities at the landscape level. 

Watershed Scale

Fully developing and implementing watershed planning as a

coherent stratum of ecosystem planning will require experimentation, learning, and the perspectives of a wide circle of individ-

■119

APPENDICIES
uals and disciplines, including planners, resource specialists, managers, sociologists, and scientists.

Evaluation and Adjustment

[“Managing to learn” requires] scientific oversight. Specific plans

need to be developed that describe actions that meet species needs

and are compatible with applicable laws and policies. . . .Scientists,

independent from management institutions, would help evaluate the

effects of the different treatments from a scientific perspective.

Conservation Areas [for Spotted Owls]

[Key assumptions include:] Habitat patches or areas capable

of supporting fewer than 15 breeding pairs have a low probability

of successfully supporting the expected numbers of pairs through

time. Fluctuations in birth and death rates or stochastic events are

more likely to cause populations in such areas to “wink out,” causing local extirpations. . . .Successful dispersal is necessary for recolonization of areas where habitat may be temporarily lost and it

provides for maintenance of genetic diversity. [To maintain spotted owl populations, Matrix lands should] provide spotted owls

with forage areas and cover from predation. 

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN 

RECORD OF DECISION

Application to Research Activities

An important component of this decision is the facilitation

of research activities to gather information and test hypotheses in

a range of environmental conditions.

Monitoring

Specific new monitoring protocols, criteria, goals, and

reporting formats also will be developed.

Invertebrates and Plants

[Lists of “possible mitigation measures” are provided for

arthropods, bryophytes, fungi, lichens, and vascular plants. These

measures could be phrased as testable, researchable hypotheses.]

Protection Buffers

[A series of nonvascular plants, amphibians, and a bird are

listed as potentially benefited by protection buffers. These measures could be phrased as testable, researchable hypotheses.]

Survey and Manage

[Activities in which research may aid include surveys of

rare organisms and especially development of adequate survey

techniques.]

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN 

STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES

Research

Close coordination and interaction between monitoring and

research are essential for the adaptive management process to succeed. Data obtained through systematic and statistically valid

monitoring can be used by scientists to develop research hypotheses related to priority issues. . . .

Fire and Fuels Management

In adaptive management areas, fire managers are encouraged

to actively explore and support opportunities to research the role

and effects of fire management on ecosystem functions. . . .

Management of adaptive management areas is intended to be

innovative and experimental. 

Monitoring

Some effectiveness and most validation monitoring will be

accomplished by formal research.

Monitoring will be conducted at multiple levels and scales.

[General categories of resources and conditions for monitoring are

then listed.]

Effectiveness Monitoring

[One example of a monitoring question whereby management success may be measured against the standard of desired

future condition or reference condition:] Does the management

of this resource maintain or restore the habitat for late-successional associated species? 

Effectiveness monitoring will be undertaken at a variety of reference sites in geographically and ecologically similar areas. These sites

will be located on a number of different scales, and will require the assistance of research statisticians to design an appropriate sampling regime.

Validation Monitoring

[One example validation monitoring question:] Do the

maintained or restored habitat conditions support stable and welldistributed populations of late-successional associated species?

Among the key set of assumptions that need to be validated

is the relationships between habitat and populations. This

requires a strong mix of inventory, monitoring, and research.

Where knowledge gaps exist, research and/or inventory may be

needed. Hypotheses can be proposed and tested through a combination of research and monitoring.

There is one primary evaluation question with regard to the

northern spotted owl [and] the marbled murrelet . . . : is the population stable or increasing?

■120

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
Key items to monitor include: Northern spotted owls by

physiographic province. Marbled murrelets within their known

nesting range. . . . Rare species. The relationship between levels

of management intervention and the health and maintenance of

late-successional and old-growth ecosystems.

Protection Buffers

[A series of nonvascular plants and amphibians are listed as

potentially benefited by protection buffers. These measures could

be phrased as testable, researchable hypotheses.]

Birds

Provision of snags for white-headed woodpeckers are

assumed to provide for the needs of pygmy nuthatch, as no

species specific guidelines for the species have been developed.

Additional information on ecology of pygmy nuthatch within

the range of the northern spotted owl is needed to develop

more precise standards and guidelines.

It is assumed that standards and guidelines for snags and

green-tree replacements for woodpeckers and other primary

cavity nesting species, as provided by existing National Forest

and BLM District Land and Resource Management Plans and

for the woodpeckers in this species group, would provide for

flammulated owls.

Education

Technical and scientific training of a local workforce should

be an educational priority of the Adaptive Management Area

Program. . .particularly in the area of monitoring.

■121

APPENDICIES
APPENDIX 4:

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF

THE COASTAL 

LANDSCAPE ANALYSIS

AND MODELING STUDY,

H.J. ANDREWS,

THE AUGUSTA CREEK

STUDY, AND “ SURVEY

AND MANAGE ” SPECIES

Gloria Perez

COASTAL LANDSCAPE ANALYSIS 

AND MODELING STUDY

The next logical step in the framework of adaptive ecosystem

management is the large-scale integration of ecological information. This includes research to provide an integrated view of current conditions, potential trajectories, and the resultant landscapes from pursuing various management strategies. The coastal

landscape analysis modeling study (CLAMS) project is making

great strides in this area. The coastal landscape analysis modeling

study applies broad-scale ecological modeling research and

province-scale planning to coastal Oregon. This project incorporates spatial databases for a large multiownership province. The

databases include vegetation cover from satellite imagery, streams,

roads, fire history, riparian forest condition, climate, geology, and

land ownership and allocation patterns. From this multilayered

foundation, models that consider the entire landscape and the

cumulative effects of all land management policies will be developed. In particular, a specific objective in this province includes

the protection or recovery of anadromous salmonid stocks.

Findings reinforce the role of Federal lands in recovery of species,

the usefulness of models linking geomorphic processes and fish

habitat, and the association of upslope conditions and instream

habitat. Another working goal of this project is to promote widespread use of those concepts and tools among people who manage,

or help make decisions about, forests in provincial ecosystems such

as the Coast Range. This project may have the greatest potential

to shift agency policy and direction, including the way Forest planning and landscape analyses are conducted. In addition, this project points out the need for greater understanding of integrated

research, and for effective and productive team research (see

“Aquatic Conservation Strategy,” Chapter 4).

H.J. ANDREWS EXPERIMENTAL FOREST

Established in 1948, the H.J. Andrews Experimental Forest is

a world-renowned center for research and education about the

ecology and management of forests and streams. It is administered

cooperatively by the USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest

Research Station, Oregon State University, and the Willamette

National Forest, and programs are funded by these and other

organizations, such as the National Science Foundation. Located

about 50 miles east of Eugene, Oregon, the Andrews Experimental

Forest lies in the Blue River Ranger District of the Willamette

National Forest. More than 100 research study projects are underway there every year, including long-term ecological research,

watershed, forest development, and growth and yield. The experimental forest is dedicated to research and to communication of

research results to land managers, policymakers, scientists, students, and the public (USDA Forest Service 1998). 

THE AUGUSTA CREEK STUDY

Society is becoming aware that to sustain human uses of an

ecosystem, the ecosystem itself must be sustained. For the public

forest lands considered here, the goal of sustaining ecosystems was

interpreted to mean maintaining native species, ecosystem

processes and structures, and long-term ecosystem productivity.

The Augusta Creek project is a landscape plan developed to

achieve these goals based on historical disturbance regimes and

landscape conditions. This study was initiated to establish and

integrate landscape and watershed objectives into a landscape

plan to guide management activities within a 7600-hectare planning area in western Oregon. Primary objectives included maintaining native species, ecosystem processes and structures, and

long-term ecosystem productivity in a federally managed landscape where substantial acreage was allocated to timber harvest.

A premise of this approach is that native species have adapted to

the range of habitat patterns resulting from historical disturbance

events, and the survival probability for these species is reduced if

their environment is maintained outside the range of historical

conditions. Similarly, ecological processes such as nutrient and

hydrologic cycles have historically functioned within a range of

conditions established by disturbance and successional patterns.

Management activities that move structures and processes outside

the range of past conditions must be integrated with this historical template to meet long-term objectives. Human uses have substantially altered conditions in the project area and in the surrounding area (Cissel and others 1998). 

■122

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
“SURVEY AND MANAGE” SPECIES

“Survey and manage” species refers to a list of taxa, Table C3 on page C-49, included in the Plan’s record of decision (ROD).

According to the ROD, land managers are required to survey and

manage for rare species of plants and animals especially amphibians, bryophytes, lichens, mollusks, vascular plants, fungi, and

arthropods. Specifically, actions include managing known sites of

rare organisms, surveying for the presence of rare organisms

before ground-disturbing activities, conducting surveys to identify locations and habitats of rare species, and conducting general

regional surveys for rare species. Where adequate survey techniques do not exist, survey design and protocols are being developed (USDA and USDI 1994).

A “survey and manage” core team comprising representatives

from different research and management agencies currently operates as one of the ad hoc teams of the Regional Ecosystem Office.

Two major objectives of the team are to help preserve species viability through recommendations to management, and to provide

input to research agency executives for new research that assesses

species viability in the Forest Plan area. The Pacific Northwest

and Pacific Southwest scientists participate with the “survey and

manage activities” through the core team or associated research. 

■123

APPENDICIES
APPENDIX 5:

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH 

PROJECTS

■124

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

Table 14–List of all Northwest Forest Plan research projects

Funding (fiscal year) 

Primary Program

Project title investigator Manager 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998

- - - - - Thousands of dollars- - - - - 

Adaptive Management Areasa McDonald McDonald 400 

Watershed Analysisa Everett Everett 1,620 

Ecosystem Restorationa Haynes Haynes 100 

Planning and Monitoringa Oswald Oswald 1,350 

Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Speciesa Gucinski Gucinski 250 

Social Impacts of Northwest Forest Plana Clark Clark 900 

Adaptive Management Areas Science Symposium AMA Scientists Clark 15 

Applegate Adaptive Management Area: Community-Based Research Amaranthus Clark 185 153 44 28

Applegate Adaptive Management Area: Late-Successional Forests Amaranthus Clark 54 51

Applegate Adaptive Management Area: Reintroduction of Fire Amaranthus Clark 23 11

Applegate Adaptive Management Area: Riparian Buffers Amaranthus Clark 48 45

Central Cascades Adaptive Management Area: Landscape Design Swanson Clark 121 135

Central Cascades Adaptive Management Area: Monitoring Swanson Clark 23 

Cispus Adaptive Management Area: Community Assessment Barbour Clark 62 153 12 

Cispus Adaptive Management Area: Recreation Sampling Barbour Clark 2 17 

Cispus Adaptive Management Area: Riparian Ecology Barbour Clark 58 32 

Cispus Adaptive Management Area: Allotropa Disease Barbour Clark 10 

Cispus Adaptive Management Area: Mushroom Monitoring Barbour Clark 22 

Cispus Adaptive Management Area: Landscape Design Barbour Clark 28 

Cispus Adaptive Management Area: Old-Growth Forest Fragments Barbour Clark 28

Finney Adaptive Management Area Gray Clark 60 28 

Little River Adaptive Management Area: Silvicultural Alternatives Huff Clark 62 54 18 

Little River Adaptive Management Area: The Zipper Method in Riparian 

Reserves Huff Clark 51 

Little River Adaptive Management Area: Late-Successional Forests

Prone to Fire Huff Clark 31 53

Little River Adaptive Management Area: Select Harvest Report Huff Clark 6 

Little River Adaptive Management Area: Understanding and Adapting 

Fire Regimes in Management and Social Ecosystems Huff Clark 33

North Coast Adaptive Management Area: Learning Designs Gray Clark 82 

North Coast Adaptive Management Area: Late-Successional Forest Gray Clark 40

Development 

North Coast Adaptive Management Area: Multi-Scale Monitoring 

Development Gray Clark 41

Olympic Adaptive Management Area: Habitat Development Study Carey Clark 62 28 75 73 

Snoqualmie Pass Adaptive Management Area: Transportation Corridors Lehmkuhl Clark 62 28 40 39 

Snoqualmie Pass Adaptive Management Area: Disturbance Regimes Lehmkuhl Clark 40 40 

Adaptative Management Pilot Project Bormann Gucinski 213 264 249 230 

Building Adaptive Management Processes Bormann Gucinski 108 

Ecosystem Monitoring-Watershed Restoration Haynes Haynes 25 

a Fiscal year 1994 funding was received in July and used for the planning and preparation phase of implementing the Northwest Forest Plan.
■125

Table 14–List of all Northwest Forest Plan research projects (continued)

Funding (fiscal year) 

Primary Program

Project title investigator Manager 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998

- - - - - Thousands of dollars- - - - - 

Case Study Demo (Aquatic and Riparian Demonstration) Olson Sedell 171 112 

Development of Watershed Restoration Guide Vance Haynes 75 

Evaluation of Stream Restoration Simpson Haynes 36 

Riparian Ecosystem Management Alternatives Raphael-Bisson Gucinski- Sedell 72 68 

Monitor Change at Provincial Scale Spies Gucinski 169 129 119 

Province-Level Ecosystem Modeling Swanson Gucinski 144 

Coastal Landscape Analysis and Modeling System (CLAMS) (large scale) Spies/Reeves Gucinski 63 329 156 141 

Aquatic Risk Assessment—Coastal Landscape Analysis and

Modeling System (CLAMS) Reeves/Spies Sedell 306 174 170 

Technical Assistance to Land Managers Hohler Sedell 95 

Pilot Ecosystem Monitoring Geyer Geyer 51 

Develop Regional Monitoring Plan Geyer Geyer 35 

Representation and Coordination Geyer Geyer 66 

Development of Interagency Monitoring Plan Czaplewski Geyer 117 

PNW Representation on the Research and Monitoring Committee Geyer Geyer 90 

Develop Monitoring Guidelines for Marbled Murrelet Portion of 

Effectiveness Monitoring Plan Stapanian Geyer 70 

Effectiveness and Validation Monitoring Lewis Other 83 

Research and Monitoring Committee Representation and Coordination Owston-Molina Geyer-IC 77 127 

Research and Monitoring Committee Research Plan Romancier Other 95 

Northern Spotted Owl Habitat—Demographic Studies Raphael Gucinski 154 

Effectiveness Monitoring Module—Spotted Owls Connelly Connelly 100 

Cascade Learning Center Cissel Miner 28 28 11 27 

Blue Mountains Learning Center Starr-Henshaw Miner 27 28 

Olympic Learning Center Snow Miner 27 28 10 

High Desert Learning Center Tyler Miner 27 28 

Columbia Learning Center Rauw Miner 27 28 10 

Restoration Studies and Training Swanson Gucinski 105 70 58 53 

Role of Native Plants Vance Peterson 84 113 141

Northwest Forest Plan Synthesis Geyer-IC Geyer-IC 50

Aerial Forestry Management Foundation (Technical Support) Martin Geyer-IC 54 

Protocol Development: Bats-Amphibians (Survey and Manage Species) Greenlee-Sedell Sedell 21 

Capitol Forest Management Alternatives (Washington State Department

of Natural Resources Lands) DeBell Peterson 124 

Gifford Pinchot National Forest Study DeBell Peterson 26 

Social Assessment Team Clark-Henshaw Clark 67 

Framework for Integrated Management Clark Clark 30 

Cooperative Agreements—Social Assessment Henshaw Geyer-IC 54 

Understanding Community Success Wondelleck Geyer-IC 54 

Develop Guidelines for Community Monitoring Christensen- Haynes 109 100 89 70 

Donaghue

Coastal Landscape Analysis and Modeling System (CLAMS)—SocialEconomic Links Ecosystem Management Alig Haynes 49 77

Develop Monitoring Protocols for Public Participation Shindler Geyer 68 

Protocol Development: Economics Fight-Kruger Clark 74 

Develop Stand Visualization Software McGaughey Peterson 27 

Remote Sensing Tools to Determine Habitat Swanson Gucinski 41 47 43 

APPENDICES
■126

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS

Table 14–List of all Northwest Forest Plan research projects (continued)

Primary Program Funding (fiscal year)

Project title investigator Manager 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998

- - - - - Thousands of dollars- - - - - 

Develop Integrated Inventory and Monitoring Systems for Uplands

and Riparian Areas Swanson Gucinski 42 

Technology Development and Testing Grant-Montgomery Gucinski 126 

Develop Prototype Decision Support System Tied to Watershed Analysis Reynolds Clark 169 120 131 98

UTOOLS-UVIEW Software Enhancements McGaughey Peterson 20 

New Tools for Watershed-Landscape Planning Grant Gucinski 70 55 53

Alternative Silviculture Methods in Old Plantations Swanson Gucinski 136 57 

North Coast Adaptive Management Area Gray Clark 62 54 

Forest Cover on Private Lands—Nontimber Benefits Kline-Alig Haynes 74 

Habitat Associations of Marbled Murrelets Raphael Gucinski 105 258 306 306 

Density Management (Aquatic—Riparian Ecological Processes) Vance-Chan Peterson 112 107 101 

Pilot Effect Monitoring—Province Monitoring Spies Gucinski 145 104 

Field Testing/Monitoring Protocols—Fungi Pilz-Molina Gucinski 31 28

Representation and Coordination on Watershed Assessment Team Hohler Sedell 270 211 173 153

Survey and Manage Species (Survey-Develop Protocols) Molina Gucinski 79 454 571 573

Application of Remote Sensing Technology to Forest Managements Spies-Cohen Gucinski 35

Riparian Buffer Study: Aquatic Habitats and Vertebrate Diversity Olson Sedell 154 147

Spotted Owl Demographics Raphael Gucinski 697 899 674 680

Silviculture Options—Evaluate Alternative Management Systems DeBell Peterson 402 703 319 508 

Central Cascades Adaptive Management Area Swanson Gucinski 185 155 225 

Population Dynamics—Habitat Relationships of Spotted Owl Prey 

Species in the Eastern Washington Cascades Lehmkuhl Quigley 93 79

Pattern Disturbance Buffer Zones in Riparian Areas Lehmkuhl Quigley 47 44

Disturbance Regimes in Late-Successional Reserves Everett Quigley 55 46 

Northern Spotted Owl Prey-Base Study Carey Gucinski 120 120 

Olympic Natural Resource Center: Biodiversity of Invertebrates—Coarse 

Woody Debris Calhoun Other 49 37 47 

Olympic Natural Resource Center: Land Use Impact on Salmon Abundance Calhoun Other 57

Olympic Natural Resource Center: Peak Summer Water Temperature—

Headwater Streams Calhoun Other 31

Olympic Natural Resource Center: Oysters to Monitor Condition of 

Willapa Bay Calhoun Other 41 

Olympic Natural Resource Center: Geologic Mapping and 

Landslide Inventory Calhoun Other 22 21 

Olympic Natural Resource Center: Fieldcam Video System Calhoun Other 10 

Olympic Natural Resource Center: Conference: Forest Policy: 

Ready for Renaissance Calhoun Other 33

Olympic Natural Resource Center: Radar to Evaluate Murrelet

Survey Protocol Calhoun Other 52 50 47 

Olympic Natural Resource Center: Ecosystem Management Alternatives-PNW Calhoun Other 47 23

Olympic Natural Resource Center: GIS Clearinghouse Calhoun Other 48 38 

Olympic Natural Resource Center: Forest Buffers Calhoun Other 9 23 

Olympic Natural Resource Center: Develop Request for Proposals—

Monitoring Riparian Areas Calhoun Other 23 

Olympic Natural Resource Center: Riparian Management Alternatives—PNW Calhoun Other 23

Olympic Natural Resource Center: Marine Productivity and Fisheries 13 

Olympic Natural Resource Center: Quantitative Monitoring on

Salmon Abundance Calhoun Other 45 

Olympic Natural Resource Center: Organic Matter Retention—Douglas-Fir Calhoun Other 11

Earmark—University of Washington—Washington Landscape

Management Project Oliver Other 300 300 

Silviculture Alternatives—Genetics Copes Peterson 317 267

Cascade Center for Ecosystem Management Swanson Gucinski 308 255 229

Total 4,620 5,684 5,975 6,107 6,102 
GLOSSARY

The terms in this glossary were taken from the Forest Ecosystem

Management AssessmentTeam report (1993).

Adaptive management—The process of implementing policy decisions as scientifically driven management experiments that test predictions and assumptions in management plans, and using the resulting

information to improve the plans. 

Adaptive management areas—Landscape units designated for development and testing of technical and social approaches to achieving

desired ecological, economic, and other social objectives.

Age class—A management classification using the age of a stand of

trees.

Alluvial—Originated through the transport by and deposition from running water.

Aquatic ecosystem—Any body of water, such as a stream, lake or

estuary, and all organisms and nonliving components within it, functioning as a natural system.

Aquatic habitat—Habitat that occurs in free water.

Associated species—A species found to be numerically more abundant in a particular forest successional stage or type compared to other

areas.

Baseline—The starting point for analysis of environmental consequences. This may be the conditions at a point in time (for example,

when inventory data are collected) or may be the average of a set of

data collected over a specified period).

Biological diversity—Various life forms and processes, including a

complexity of species, communities, gene pools, and ecological

functions.

Biomass—The total quantity (at any given time) of living organisms of

one or more species per unit of space (species biomass), or of all the

species in a biotic community (community biomass).

Blowdown—Trees felled by high winds.

Board foot—Lumber or timber measurement term. The amount of

wood contained in an unfinished board 1 inch thick, 12 inches long, and

12 inches wide.

Breast height—A standard height from ground level for recording

diameter, girth, or basal area of a tree, generally 4.5 feet.

Bureau of Land Management—A division within the U.S. Department

of the Interior.

Canopy—A layer of foliage in a forest stand. This most often refers to

the uppermost layer of foliage, but it can be used to describe lower layers in a multistoried stand.

Clearcut—A harvest in which all or almost all of the trees are removed

in one cutting.

Coarse woody debris—Portion of a tree that has fallen or been cut

and left in the woods. Usually refers to pieces at least 20 inches in

diameter.

Colonization—The establishment of a species in an area not currently

occupied by that species. Colonization often involves dispersal across

an area of unsuitable habitat. 

Community—Pertaining to plant or animal species living in close association and interacting as a unit.

Conifer—A tree belonging to the order Gymnospermae, comprising

a wide range of trees that are mostly evergreens. Conifers bear

cones (hence, coniferous) and needle-shaped or scalelike leaves.

Connectivity—A measure of the extent to which conditions among

late-stage old-growth forest areas (LSOG) provide habitat for breeding,

feeding, dispersal, and movement of LSOG-associated wildlife and fish

species (see LSOG forest).

Conservation—The process or means of achieving recovery of viable

populations.

Conservation strategy—A management plan for a species, group of

species, or ecosystem that prescribes standards and guidelines that if

implemented provide a high likelihood that the species, groups of

species, or ecosystem, with its full complement of species and processes, will continue to exist well distributed throughout a planning area,

that is, a viable population. 

Corridor—A defined tract of land, usually linear, through which a

species must travel to reach habitat suitable for reproduction and other

life-sustaining needs.

Cover—Vegetation used by wildlife protection from predators, or to

mitigate weather conditions, or to reproduce. May also refer to the

protection of the soil and the shading provided to herbs and forbs by

vegetation.

Cumulative effects—Those effects on the environment that result

from the incremental effect of the action when added to the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what

agency (Federal or non-Federal) or person undertakes such other

actions. Cumulative effects can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period.

Debris flow (debris torrent)—A rapid moving mass of rock fragments, soil, and mud, with more than half of the particles being larger

than sand size.

Demography—The quantitative analysis of population structure and

trends; population dynamics.

Desired future condition—For this report, an explicit description of

the physical and biological characteristics of aquatic and riparian environments believed necessary to meet fish, aquatic ecosystem, and

riparian ecosystem objectives.

Diameter at breast height—The diameter of a tree 4.5 feet above the

ground on the uphill side of the tree.

Dispersal—The movement, usually one way and on any time scale, of

plants or animals from their point of origin to another location where

they subsequently produce offspring.

Distribution (of a species)—The spatial arrangement of a species

within its range.

Disturbance—A force that causes significant change in structure and

composition through natural events such as fire, flood, wind, or earthquake, mortality caused by insect or disease outbreaks, or by humancaused events, for example, the harvest of forest products.

Diversity—The variety, distribution, and abundance of different plant

and animal communities and species within an area (see Biological

diversity).

Down log—Portion of a tree that has fallen or been cut and left in the

woods. Particularly important as habitat for some late-successional/oldgrowth-associated species.

Draft environmental impact statement (DEIS)—The draft statement

of environmental effects that is required for major Federal action under

Section 102 of the National Environment Policy Act, and released to the

public and other agencies for comment and review.

Drainage—An area (basin) mostly bounded by ridges or other similar topographic features, encompassing part, most, or all of a watershed and enclosing some 5,000 acres (see Subdrainage and Forest

watershed).

Ecosystem—A unit comprising interacting organisms considered

together with their environment (for example, marsh, watershed, and

lake ecosystems).

Ecosystem diversity—Various species and ecological processes that

occur in different physical settings.

Ecosystem management—A strategy or plan to manage ecosystems

to provide for all associated organisms, as opposed to a strategy or plan

for managing individual species.

Edge—Where plant communities meet or where successional stages or

vegetative conditions with plant communities come together.

Endangered species—Any species of plant or animal defined through

the Endangered Species Act as being in danger of extinction throughout

all or a significant portion of its range, and published in the Federal

Register.

Environmental assessment—A systematic analysis of site-specific

activities used to determine whether such activities have a significant

effect on the quality of the human environment and whether a formal

environmental impact statement is required; and to aid an agency's

compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act when no environmental impact statement is necessary.

Environmental impact—The positive or negative effect of any action

on a given area or resource.

■127

GLOSSARY
Environmental impact statement (EIS)—A formal document to be

filed with the Environmental Protection Agency that considers significant environmental impacts expected from implementation of a major

Federal action.

Environmental Protection Agency—An independent agency of the

U.S. Government (cabinet-level status is pending).

Ephemeral streams—Streams that contain running water only sporadically, such as during and following storm events.

Even-aged silviculture—Manipulation of a forest stand to achieve a

condition in which trees have less than a 20-year age difference.

Regeneration in a particular stand is obtained during a short period at or

near the time that a stand has reached the desired age or size for harvesting. Clearcut, shelterwood, or seed tree cutting methods produce

even-aged stands.

Experimental forests—Forest tracts, generally on National Forests,

designated as areas where research and experiments involving forestry,

wildlife, and related disciplines can be conducted.

Extirpation—The elimination of a species from a particular area.

Final environmental impact statement (FEIS)—The final report of

environmental effects of proposed action on an area of land. This is

required for major Federal actions under Section 102 of the National

Environmental Policy Act. It is a revision of the draft environmental

impact statement to include public and agency responses to the draft. 

Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team (FEMAT)—As

assigned by President Clinton, the team of scientists, researchers, and

technicians from seven Federal agencies who created this report.

Function—The flow of mineral nutrients, water, energy, or species.

Geomorphic—Pertaining to the form or shape of and those processes

that affect the surface of the earth.

Geographic information system—A computer system capable of

storing and manipulating spatial (that is, mapped) data.

Green-tree retention—A stand management practice in which live

trees as well as snags and large down wood are left as biological legacies within harvest units to provide habitat components over the next

management cycle.

Guideline—A policy statement that is not a mandatory requirement (as

opposed to a standard, which is mandatory).

Habitat—The place where a plant or animal naturally or normally lives

and grows. 

Habitat diversity—The number of different types of habitat within a

given area.

Habitat fragmentation—The breaking up of habitat into discrete

islands through modification or conversion of habitat by management

activities.

Impact—A spatial or temporal change in the environment caused by

human activity.

Interagency Scientific Committee (ISC)—A committee of scientists

that was established by the Forest Service, Bureau of Land

Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, and National Park Service to

develop a conservation strategy for northern spotted owls.

Interdisciplinary team—A group of individuals with varying areas

of specialty assembled to solve a problem or perform a task. The

team is assembled out of recognition that no one scientific discipline

is sufficiently broad enough to adequately analyze the problem and

propose action.

Intermittent stream—Any nonpermanent flowing drainage feature

having a definable channel and evidence of scour or deposition. This

includes what are sometimes referred to as ephemeral streams if they

meet these two criteria. 

Issue—A matter of controversy or dispute over resource management

activities that is well defined or topically discrete. Addressed in the

design of planning alternatives.

Key watershed—As defined by National Forest and Bureau of Land

Management District fish biologists, a watershed containing (1) habitat

for potentially threatened species or stocks of anadromous salmonids or

other potentially threatened fish, or (2) greater than 6 square miles with

high-quality water and fish habitat.

Land allocation—The specification in forest plans of where activities,

including timber harvest, can occur on a National Forest or Bureau of

Land Management District.

Landscape—A heterogeneous land area with interacting ecosystems

that are repeated in similar form throughout.

Large woody debris—Pieces of wood larger than 10 feet long and 6

inches in diameter, in a steam channel.

Late-successional old-growth habitat—A forest in its mature or oldgrowth stages.

Late-successional reserve—A forest in its mature or old-growth

stages that has been reserved under each option in this report (see Oldgrowth forest and Succession).

Low level green tree retention—A regeneration harvest designed to

retain only enough green trees and other structural components (snag,

coarse woody debris, etc.) to result in the development of stands that

meet old-growth definitions within 100 to 120 years after harvest entry,

considering overstory mortality.

Management activity—An activity undertaken for the purpose of harvesting, traversing, transporting, protecting, changing, replenishing, or

otherwise using resources.

Marbled murrelet—A small robin-sized seabird (Brachyramphus marmoratus) that nests in old-growth forests within 50 miles of marine environments. Proposed for listing as a threatened species by the U.S. Fish

and Wildlife Service.

Marbled murrelet habitat—Primarily late-successional/old growth forest with trees that are large enough and old enough to develop broad

crowns and large limbs, which provide substrates for nests. Also

includes some younger stands in which tree limbs are deformed by

dwarf mistletoe, creating broad platforms.

Matrix—Federal lands outside of reserves, withdrawn areas, and managed late-successional areas.

Mature stand—A mappable stand of trees for which the annual net

rate of growth has peaked. Stands are generally greater than 80 to

100 years old and less than 180 to 200 years old. Stand age, diameter of dominant trees, and stand structure at maturity differ by forest

cover types and local site conditions. Mature stands generally contain trees with a smaller average diameter, less age class variation,

and less structural complexity than old-growth stands of the same

forest type. Mature stages of some forest types are suitable habitat

for spotted owls. However, mature forests are not always spotted owl

habitat, and spotted owl habitat is not always mature forest.

Model—An idealized representation of reality developed to describe,

analyze, or understand the behavior of some aspect of it; a mathematical representation of the relations under study. The term model is applicable to a broad class of representations, ranging from a relatively simple qualitative description of a system or organization to a highly

abstract set of mathematical equations.

Monitoring—The process of collecting information to evaluate if objective and anticipated or assumed results of a management plan are being

realized or if implementation is proceeding as planned.

Monitoring program—The administrative program used for monitoring.

Multiple use—Management of the public lands and their various

resource values so that they are utilized in the combination that will

best meet the present and future needs of the American people.

Making the most judicious use of the land for some or all of these

resources or related services over areas large enough to provide sufficient latitude for periodic adjustments in use to conform to changing

needs and conditions. The use of some land for less than all of the

resources. A combination of balanced and diverse resource uses that

takes into account the long-term needs of future generations for

renewable and nonrenewable resources, including, but not limited to,

recreation, range, timber, minerals, watershed, wildlife and fish, and

natural scenic, scientific, and historical values. Harmonious and coordinated management of the various resources without permanent

impairment of the productivity of the land and the quality of the environment. This combination is not necessarily the one that will give the

greatest dollar return or greatest unit output.

Multistoried—Forest stands that contain trees of various heights and

diameter classes and therefore support foliage at various heights in the

vertical profile of the stand.

National Environmental Policy Act—An act passed in 1969 to

declare a national policy that encourages productive and enjoyable harmony between humankind and the environment, promotes efforts that

■128

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
will prevent or eliminate damage to the environment and biosphere

and stimulate the health and welfare of humanity, enriches the understanding of the ecological systems and natural resources important to

the nation, and establishes a Council on Environmental Quality (The

Principal Laws Relating to Forest Service Activities, Agric. Handb. 453.

USDA Forest Service 1993).

National Forest Management Act—A law passed in 1976 as an

amendment to the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources

Planning Act, requiring the preparation of forest plans and the preparation of regulations to guide that development. 

National Marine Fisheries Service—A division within the U.S.

Department of Commerce.

National Park Service—A division within the U.S. Department of the

Interior.

Northern spotted owl—One (Strix occidentalis caurina) of three subspecies of the spotted owl that ranges from southern British Columbia,

Canada, through western Washington and Oregon, and into northwestern California. Listed as a threatened species by the U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service.

Old growth—This stage constitutes the potential plant community capable of existing on a site given the frequency of natural disturbance

events. For forest communities, this stage exists from about age 200 until

when stand replacement occurs and secondary succession begins again.

Depending on fire frequency and intensity, old-growth forests may have

different structures, species composition, and age distributions. In

forests with longer periods between natural disturbance, the forest structure will be more even-aged at late mature or early old-growth stages.

Old-growth forest—A forest stand usually at least 180 to 220 years old

with moderate to high canopy closure; a multilayered, multispecies

canopy dominated by large overstory trees; high incidence of large

trees, some with broken tops and other indications of old and decaying

wood (decadence); many large snags; and heavy accumulations of

wood, including large logs on the ground.

Old-growth stand—A mappable area of old-growth forest.

Overstory—Trees that provide the uppermost layer of foliage in a forest with more than one roughly horizontal layer of foliage.

Owl region—The geographic area within the range of the northern

spotted owl.

Peak flow—The highest amount of stream or river flow occurring in a

year or from a single storm event.

Perennial stream—A stream that typically has running water on a yearround basis.

Physiographic province—A geographic area having a similar set of

biophysical characteristics and processes because of the effects of climate and geology that result in patterns of soils and broad-scale plant

communities. Habitat patterns, wildlife distributions, and historical land

use patterns may differ significantly from those of adjacent provinces.

Planning area—All the lands within a Federal agency's management

boundary addressed in land management plans.

Plant association—A plant community type based on land management potential, successional patterns, and species composition.

Plant community—An association of plants of various species found

growing together in different areas with similar site characteristics.

Population—A collection of individual organisms of the same

species that potentially interbreed and share a common gene pool.

Population density refers to the number of individuals of a species

per unit area, population persistence to the capacity of the population

to maintain sufficient density to persist, well distributed, over time

(see Viable population).

Population dynamics—The aggregate of changes that occur

during the life of a population. Included are all phases of recruitment and growth, senility, mortality, seasonal fluctuation in biomass, and persistence of each year class and its relative dominance, and the effects that any or all of these factors exert on the

population.

Population viability—Probability that a population will persist for a

specified period across its range despite normal fluctuations in population and environmental conditions.

Predator—Any animal that preys externally on others by hunting,

killing, and generally feeding on a succession of hosts, that is, the prey.

Prescribed fire—A fire burning under specified conditions that will

accomplish certain planned objectives. The fire may result from planned

or unplanned ignitions.

Process—Change in state of an entity.

Range (of a species)—The area or region over which an organism

occurs.

Record of decision—A document separate from but associated with

an environmental impact statement that states the management decision, identifies all alternatives including both the environmentally

preferable and preferred alternatives, states whether all practicable

means to avoid environmental harm from the preferred alternative have

been adopted, and if not, why not.

Recovery—Action that is necessary to reduce or resolve the threats

that caused a species to be listed as threatened or endangered.

Reforestation—The natural or artificial restocking of an area with forest trees; most commonly used in reference to artificial stocking.

Refugia—Locations and habitats that support populations of organisms

that are limited to small fragments of their previous geographic range 

(that is, endemic populations).

Regeneration—The actual seedlings and saplings existing in a stand;

or the act of establishing young trees naturally or artificially.

Region—A Forest Service administrative unit. The two regions affected

by this proposed action are the Pacific Northwest (Region 6), which

includes National Forests in Oregon and Washington, and the Pacific

Southwest Region (Region 5), which includes National Forests in

California.

Regional guide—The guide developed to meet the requirements of the

Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974, as

amended (National Forest Management Act). Regional guides provide

standards and guidelines for addressing major issues and management

concerns that need to be considered at the regional level to facilitate

National Forest planning.

Riparian area—A geographic area containing an aquatic ecosystem

and adjacent upland areas that directly affect it. This includes flood plain,

woodlands, and all areas within a horizontal distance of about 100 feet

from the normal line of high water of a steam channel or from the shoreline of a standing body of water.

Riparian reserves—Designated riparian areas found outside the latesuccessional reserves.

Riparian zone—Those terrestrial areas where the vegetation complex

and microclimate conditions are products of the combined presence

and influence of perennial and intermittent water, associated high water

tables, and soils that exhibit some wetness characteristics. Normally

used to refer to the zone within which plants grow rooted in the water

table of these rivers, streams, lakes, ponds, reservoirs, springs, marshes, seeps, bogs, and wet meadows.

Risk analysis—A qualitative assessment of the probability of persistence of wildlife species and ecological systems under various alternatives and management options; generally also accounts for scientific

uncertainties.

Rotation—The planned number of years between regeneration of

a forest stand and its final harvest (regeneration cut or harvest). The

age of a forest at final harvest is referred to as rotation age. In this

report, an extended rotation is 120 to 180 years, a long rotation 180

years.

Sensitive species—Those species that (1) have appeared in the

Federal Register as proposed for classification and are under consideration for official listing as endangered or threatened species or (2) are on

an official state list or (3) are recognized by the USDA Forest Service or

other management agency as needing special management to prevent

their being placed on Federal or state lists.

Shade-tolerant species—Plant species that have evolved to grow well

in shade.

Silvicultural practices (or treatments or system)—The set of field

techniques and general methods used to modify and manage a forest

stand over time to meet desired conditions and objectives.

Silvicultural prescription—A professional plan for controlling the

establishment, composition, constitution, and growth of forests.

Silviculture—The science and practice of controlling the establishment, composition, and growth of the vegetation of forest stands. It

■129

GLOSSARY
includes the control or production of stand structures such as snags and

down logs, in addition to live vegetation.

Simulation—The use of a computer or mathematical model to predict

effects from a management option given different sets of assumptions

about population vital rates.

Site productivity—The ability of a geographic area to produce biomass, as determined by conditions (for example, soil type and depth,

rainfall, temperature) in that area.

Snag—Any standing dead, partially dead, or defective (cull) tree at least

10 inches in diameter at breast height and at least 6 feet tall. A hard snag

is composed primarily of sound wood, generally merchantable. A soft

snag is composed primarily of wood in advanced stages of decay and

deterioration, generally not merchantable.

Socioeconomic—Pertaining to, or signifying the combination or interaction of, social and economic factors.

Soil compaction—An increase in bulk density (weight per unit volume)

and a decrease in soil porosity resulting from applied loads, vibration, or

pressure.

Soil productivity—Capacity or suitability of a soil, for establishment

and growth of a specified crop or plant species, primarily through nutrient availability.

Species—(1) A group of individuals that have their major characteristics

in common and are potentially interfertile. (2) The Endangered Species

Act defines species as including any species or subspecies of plant or

animal. Distinct populations of vertebrates also are considered to be

species under the act.

Species diversity—The number, different kinds, and relative abundance of species.

Stand (tree stand)—An aggregation of trees occupying a specific area

and sufficiently uniform in composition, age, arrangement, and condition so that it is distinguishable from the forest in adjoining areas.

Stand condition—A description of the physical properties of a stand

such as crown closure or diameters.

Stand-replacing event—A disturbance that is severe enough over a

large enough area (for example, 10 acres) to virtually eliminate an existing stand of trees and initiate a new stand.

Standards and guidelines—The primary instructions for land manager. Standards address mandatory actions, while guidelines are recommended actions necessary to a land management decision.

Stochastic—Random, uncertain; involving a random variable.

Stocked-stocking—The degree an area of land is occupied by trees as

measured by basal area or number of trees.

Stream order—A hydrologic system of stream classification. Each

small unbranched tributary is a first-order stream. Two first-order

streams join to make a second-order stream. A third-order stream has

only first-and second-order tributaries, and so forth.

Stream reach—An individual first-order stream or a segment of another stream that has beginning and ending points at a stream confluence.

Reach end points are normally designated where a tributary confluence

changes the channel character or order. Although reaches identified by

the Bureau of Land Management are variable in length, they normally

have a range of 0.5 to 1.5 miles in length unless channel character, confluence distribution, or management considerations require variance.

Successional stage—A stage or recognizable condition of a plant

community that occurs during its development from bare ground to climax. For example, coniferous forests in the Blue Mountains progress

through six recognized stages: grass-forb, shrub-seedling, pole-sapling,

young, mature, and old growth.

Structure—The various horizontal and vertical physical elements of the

forest.

Stumpage—The value of standing timber.

Succession—A series of dynamic changes by which one group of organisms succeeds another through stages leading to potential natural community or climax. An example is the development of series of plant communities (called seral stages) following a major disturbance.

Suppression—The action of extinguishing or confining a fire.

Surface erosion—A group of processes whereby soil materials are

removed by running water, waves and currents, moving ice, or wind.

Sustainable harvest—A harvest volume that can be maintained

through time without decline.

Take—Under the Endangered Species Act, take means to harass, harm,

pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect an animal, or to

attempt to engage in any such conduct.

Threatened species—Those plant or animal species likely to become

endangered species throughout all or a significant portion of their range

within the foreseeable future. A plant or animal identified and defined in

accordance with the 1973 Endangered Species Act and published in the

Federal Register.

Timber production—The purposeful growing, tending, harvesting,

and regeneration of regulated crops of trees to be cut into logs, bolts,

or other round sections for industrial or consumer use other than for

fuelwood.

Unique ecosystems—Ecosystems embracing special habitat features

such as beaches and dunes, talus slopes, meadows, and wetlands.

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)—Federal land management agency whose main mission is multiple use of lands under its

jurisdiction.

U.S. Department of the Interior (USDI)—Federal land management agency whose main mission is multiple use of lands under its

jurisdiction.

Viability—The ability of a wildlife or plant population to maintain sufficient size so that it persists over time in spite of normal fluctuations in

numbers; usually expressed as a probability of maintaining a specific

population for a specified period.

Viable population—A wildlife or plant population that contains an adequate number of reproductive individuals appropriately distributed on

the planning area to ensure the long-term existence of the species.

Water quality—The chemical, physical, and biological characteristics of

water.

Watershed—The drainage basin contributing water, organic matter,

dissolved nutrients, and sediments to a stream or lake.

Watershed analysis—A systematic procedure for characterizing watershed and ecological processes to meet specific management and social

objectives. Watershed analysis is a stratum of ecosystem management

planning applied to watersheds of about 20 to 200 square miles.

Watershed restoration—Improving current conditions of watersheds

to restore degraded fish habitat and provide long-term protection to

aquatic and riparian resources.

Well distributed—A geographic distribution of habitats that maintains

a population throughout a planning area and allows for interaction of

individuals through periodic interbreeding and colonization of unoccupied habitats.

Wetlands—Areas that are inundated by surface water or ground water

with a frequency sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances

do or would support, a prevalence of vegetative or aquatic life that

require saturated or seasonally saturated soil conditions for growth and

reproduction (Executive Order 11990). Wetlands generally include, but

are not limited to, swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas.

Wilderness—Areas designated by Congressional action under the 1964

Wilderness Act. Wilderness is defined as undeveloped Federal land

retaining its primeval character and influence without permanent

improvements or human habitation. Wilderness areas are protected and

managed to preserve their natural conditions, which generally appear to

have been affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprint of

human activity substantially unnoticeable; have outstanding opportunities for solitude or for a primitive and confined type of recreation;

include at least 5,000 acres or are of sufficient size to make practical their

preservation, enjoyment, and use in an unimpaired condition; and may

contain features of scientific, education, scenic, or historical value as

well as ecologic and geologic interest.

Wildfire—Any wildland fire that is not a prescribed fire.

Windfall—Trees or parts of trees felled by high winds (see also

Blowdown and Windthrow).

Windthrow—Synonymous with windfall, blowdown.

Young stands—Forest stands not yet mature, generally, less than 50 to

80 years old; typically 20 to 40 years old.

■130

NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN RESEARCH SYNTHESIS
United States Department of Agriculture

Forest Service

Pacific Northwest Research Station

General Technical Report

PNW-GTR-498

January 2001