United States 

Department of 

Agriculture

Forest Service

Pacific Northwest 

Research Station

General Technical Report

PNW-GTR-831

May 2011

Socioeconomic Assessment 

of Forest Service American 

Recovery and Reinvestment 

Act Projects: Eight Case 

Studies
The Forest Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture is dedicated to the principle of 

multiple use management of the Nation’s forest resources for sustained yields of wood, 

water, forage, wildlife, and recreation. Through forestry research, cooperation with the 

States and private forest owners, and management of the national forests and national 

grasslands, it strives—as directed by Congress—to provide increasingly greater service to 

a growing Nation.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and 

activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, 

marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, 

political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any 

public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with 

disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, 

large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice 

and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 

Room 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 

(voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

Authors

Susan Charnley is a research social scientist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland Forestry Sciences Laboratory, 620 

SW Main Street, Suite 400, Portland, OR 97205. Pamela Jakes is a research forester, 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, 1992 Folwell 

Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55108. John Schelhas is a research forester, U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station, 320 Green St., Athens, GA 

30602. Sam Burns is a research director and James Dietrich is a landscape architect 

with the Office of Community Services, Fort Lewis College, 1000 Rim Drive, Durango, 

CO 81301. Their work was performed under USDA Forest Service Research joint venture 

agreement 10-JV-11260489-081. Emily Jane Davis is a faculty research assistant and 

Cassandra Moseley is Director, Ecosystem Workforce Program, Institute for a Sustainable 

Environment, University of Oregon, 130 Hendricks Hall, 5247 University of Oregon, 

Eugene, OR 97403-5247. This work was performed under USDA Forest Service Research 

joint venture agreement 10-JV-11260489-074. Jessi Kershner is an environmental scientist 

in Seattle, WA. Her work was performed under USDA Forest Service Research joint 

venture agreement 10-JV-11260489-082. Katherine Mattor is a research consultant, 904 

Pioneer Ave., Fort Collins, CO 80521. Her work was performed under USDA Forest Service 

Research joint venture agreement 10-JV-11260489-081. Wayde Morse is a social scientist 

with the School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, Auburn University, 3301 Forestry and 

Wildlife Sciences Bldg., Auburn, AL 36849. His work was performed under Recovery Act 

joint venture agreement 10-JV-11260489-083. Victoria Sturtevant is professor emeritus, 

Southern Oregon University, 1250 Siskiyou Blvd., Ashland, OR 97520. Her work was 

performed under USDA Forest Service Research joint venture agreement 10-JV-11260489-

082. Thurman Wilson is a consulting forester, 180 County Road 122A, Hesperus, CO 

81326. His work was performed under USDA Forest Service Research joint venture 

agreement 10-JV-11260489-081.

Pesticide Precautionary Statement

This publication reports research involving pesticides. It does not contain recommendations for their 

use, nor does it imply that the uses discussed here have been registered. All uses of pesticides must 

be registered by appropriate state or federal agencies, or both, before they can be recommended.

CAUTION: Pesticides can be injurious to humans, domestic animals, desirable plants, and fish or 

other wildlife—if they are not handled or applied properly. Use all pesticides selectively and carefully. Follow recommended practices for the disposal of surplus pesticides and pesticide containers.
Socioeconomic Assessment 

of Forest Service American 

Recovery and Reinvestment Act 

Projects: Eight Case Studies

Susan Charnley, Pamela Jakes, and John Schelhas,

Technical Coordinators

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service

Pacific Northwest Research Station

Portland, Oregon

General Technical Report PNW-GTR-831

May 2011
Abstract

Charnley, Susan; Jakes, Pamela; Schelhas, John, tech. coords. 2011. A socioeconomic assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment 

Act projects: eight case studies. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-831. Portland, OR: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research 

Station. 168 p.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 aimed to create jobs and 

jumpstart the economy while addressing the Nation’s social and environmental needs. 

The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, received $1.15 billion in recovery 

funding to support projects in wildland fire management, capital improvement and 

maintenance, and biomass utilization. This volume contains eight individual case-study 

reports that describe how Forest Service economic recovery projects from around the 

United States are contributing to socioeconomic well-being in rural communities and 

investigates how forest restoration, conservation, and rural community development 

goals can be linked to promote healthy forests and healthy communities. Research findings demonstrate that these projects met several goals of the act: (1) preserve and create 

jobs and stimulate economic recovery; (2) assist those most impacted by the recession; 

and (3) invest in transportation, environmental protection, and other infrastructure for 

long-term economic benefits. A companion synthesis report contains key findings and 

lessons learned by comparing the eight case studies presented here.

Keywords: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, national forests, rural 

communities, economic development, socioeconomic assessment.
Contents

1 Chapter 1: Introduction

 Susan Charnley, Pamela Jakes, and John Schelhas

5 Chapter 2: A Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service Recovery 

Act Projects: The Alabama Cogongrass Control Center

 John Schelhas

23 Chapter 3: A Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service Recovery 

Act Projects: Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest and White Mountain 

Apache Tribe, Arizona

 Sam Burns, James Dietrich, Katherine Mattor, and Thurman Wilson

43 Chapter 4: A Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service Recovery 

Act Projects on California’s North Coast

 Susan Charnley

71 Chapter 5: A Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service Recovery Act 

Projects: Evergreen Forest Products Dry Kiln and Restacker, Idaho

 Victoria Sturtevant, Jessi Kershner, and Pamela Jakes

87 Chapter 6: A Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service Recovery Act 

Projects: Huron Fuels Treatment Project, Michigan

 Pamela Jakes

105 Chapter 7: A Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service Recovery Act 

Projects: Route of the Olympian Rails to Trails, Montana

 Victoria Sturtevant, Jessi Kershner, and Pamela Jakes

125 Chapter 8: A Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service Recovery Act 

Projects: Cheoah River Nonnative Invasive Plant Control, North Carolina

 Wayde Morse

147 Chapter 9: A Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service Recovery Act 

Projects: Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, Oregon

 Emily Jane Davis and Cassandra Moseley

166 Appendix

1

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Chapter 1: Introduction

Susan Charnley, Pamela Jakes, and John Schelhas1

With the passage of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (hereafter referred to as the Recovery Act) in 

February 2009, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service was presented the opportunity to contribute to 

the act’s goals of (1) preserving and creating jobs and 

stimulating economic recovery; (2) assisting those most 

impacted by the recession; (3) increasing economic 

efficiency through technological advances in science and 

health; (4) investing in transportation, environmental 

protection, and other infrastructure for long-term economic 

benefits; and (5) stabilizing state and local government 

budgets. Much of the land managed by the Forest Service 

and many of its facilities are located near communities 

affected by the recession, and the $1.15 billion in recovery 

funds received by the agency were directed to projects 

expected to contribute to these goals while addressing needs 

related to the agency’s mission of sustaining and improving 

the health, diversity, and productivity of the Nation’s 

forests and grasslands. The eight case studies contained in 

this document describe the benefits and accomplishments 

for different types of projects implemented in different 

economic, social, and ecological contexts.

The Forest Service received funding for two types 

of projects: capital improvement and maintenance (CIM) 

projects (totaling $650 million) and wildland fire management (WFM) projects (totaling $500 million). Projects were 

developed by all branches and at all levels of the agency, 

from the district or field station to the national office, with 

public and private partners brought in to enhance project 

implementation and broaden the distribution of benefits. 

Regions and research stations submitted their priority 

projects to the agency’s national headquarters where the 

final selection for funding was made. 

The CIM and WFM projects were evaluated using different criteria. For CIM projects, the focus was on helping 

the national forests fulfill their desire to provide a place 

of refuge during challenging times. Priority CIM projects 

would enhance the visitor experience by improving roads, 

campgrounds, and trails. The CIM projects were developed 

in each of five categories: abandoned mine cleanup, road 

maintenance and improvement, watershed restoration, 

recreation facilities enhancement, and Forest Service 

administrative facilities maintenance and improvement. In 

distributing the $650 million in CIM funding, preference 

was given to projects that were located in counties with 

high economic distress, contributed to the reduction of 

deferred maintenance, and met requirements of the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). To measure economic 

distress, the Forest Service developed a composite index 

using four measures of unemployment compiled by the U.S. 

Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics. 

The Recovery Act specified that the $500 million in 

WFM funding be distributed equally between projects that 

benefited federal lands and those that benefited state and 

private lands. In addition, up to $50 million of the total was 

dedicated to wood-to-energy grants that promoted biomass 

utilization from all lands. Projects were ranked using a 

100-point scale, with the economic distress ranking of the 

county in which the project was located accounting for 50 

percent of the total, fire risk 25 percent, and insect and disease risk 25 percent. Successful projects were determined 

to fit the intent of the Recovery Act and be NEPA ready. In 

addition to the above criteria, projects that supported job 

corps and youth programs, supported tribes and improved 

tribal lands, could spend the money quickly, and enhanced 

existing stewardship contracts were encouraged. 

The Forest Service Recovery Act executives requested 

that the agency’s Pacific Northwest Research Station 

lead an evaluation of the social and economic impacts of 

agency economic recovery projects. The research team 

formed for the project identified two study objectives: 

(1) develop case studies highlighting the contributions of 

Forest Service recovery project investments to the social 

and economic well-being of rural counties experiencing 

1 Susan Charnley is a research social scientist, U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, 

Portland Forestry Sciences Laboratory, 620 SW Main Street, Suite 

400, Portland, OR 97205. Pamela Jakes is a research forester, U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research 

Station, 1992 Folwell Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55108. John Schelhas is 

a research forester, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Southern Research Station, 320 Green Street, Athens, GA 30602. 
2

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

high economic distress and (2) explore how to better link 

agency mission-related work to rural community development opportunities. The staff from the Forest Service 

Economic Recovery Team suggested several states from 

which to select case studies, based on the level of Forest 

Service economic recovery spending. The research team 

contacted the agency’s Recovery Act Points of Contact 

in each Forest Service region affiliated with these states, 

soliciting recovery projects that were making significant 

early (winter–spring 2010) progress on the ground. The 

Points of Contact for the potential projects were then 

interviewed to gather more information on project type, 

the local economic and social context (economic diversity, 

unemployment, rural nature of the county), project partners, 

and whether the contact was willing to be part of the study. 

Finally, the team selected the case studies. The locations 

of the eight case studies are shown in figure 1-1. The 

case studies covered a range of scales (individual project, 

individual county, multiple projects, multiple counties, a 

state) and project types (industrial infrastructure, hazardous fuel reduction, recreation, invasives control), different 

Forest Service branches (National Forest System, State and 

Private Forestry, Research and Development), and a variety 

of funding mechanisms (temporary direct hires, service and 

stewardship contracts, agreements, and grants). Table 1-1 

gives some background information on each case study. 

The methods used to conduct the study are detailed in 

the appendix. 

Figure 1-1—Map of the United States indicating the location of the eight case studies.

Geospatial Service and Technology Center, USDA Forest Service

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

RI

C O K S

U T

DE

N M

MD

K Y

M S

LA

F L

M T

I D

N D

S D W I NH

VT

W Y I A

N E

I L

P A

M I

N V

I N

O H

M A

C T

W V M O

N J

V A O K

T N

A R

A L

N C

S C

G A

C A

A Z

T X

O R

M N

N Y

W A

M E

G U L F O F M E X I C O

P A

C I F I C

O

C

E A N

A

T L A

N

T I C

O

C

E A N

National forests and grasslands

^ Case-study locations
3

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Table 1-1—American Recovery and Reinvestment Act case study projects

Forest Service recovery funding

 Case study location 

Statewide Case study 

Case study Counties Forest Service unit (as of 09/08/09) (as of 06/30/10) Project type

Alabama Cogongrass Statewide Region 8, State and ~$16,594,000 $6,281,000 Map and monitor cogongrass

Control Center Private Forestry (Ala. projects: infestations, raise landowner

$14,799,000; awareness, cogongrass

Ala. share of control and eradication.

multistate projects: 

~$1,795,000)

Apache-Sitgreaves Apache, Apache-Sitgreaves $53,142,000 $25,427,000 Forest restoration, fuel

National Forest and Navajo, National Forest reduction, recreation.

White Mountain Greenlee

Apache Tribe, 

Arizona

California's Del Norte, Six Rivers National ~$194,069,000 $5,765,444 Roadside brush removal, 

North Coast Humboldt, Forest, Pacific South- (Calif. projects: trail maintenance, refurbish

Siskiyou, west Research Station, $186,861,000; biomass power plant,

Trinity Region 5, State and Calif. share of construct a pole and post

Private Forestry multistate projects: mill, addition to Redwood

~$975,170) Sciences Laboratory,

 invasive plant assessment.

Evergreen Forest Adams Region 1, State and ~$99,267,770 $2,500,000 Build dry kiln and wood

Products Dry Private Forestry (Idaho projects: restacker at sawmill site.

Kiln and Restacker, $98,292,600; 

Idaho Idaho share of

multistate projects: 

~$975,170)

Huron Fuels Alcona, Huron National ~$39,382,290 $3,800,000 Construct new fuelbreaks, 

Treatment, Michigan Crawford, Forest (Mich. projects: maintain existing fuelbreaks,

Iosco, $34,557,000; reduce fuel in the wildlandOscoda Mich. share of urban interface, improve

multistate projects: health of federal forest land.

~$4,825,290)

Route of the Olympian Mineral Lolo National Forest $70,973,300 $1,064,742 Perform trestle and tunnel

Rails to Trails, repairs on abandoned

Montana railroad grades to make

new recreational trail.

Cheoah River Graham Nantahala National ~$25,411,000 $332,911 Nonnative invasive

Nonnative Invasive Forest (N.C. projects: plant control.

Plant Control, $23,616,000; 

North Carolina N.C. share of

multistate projects: 

~$1,795,000)

Rogue River- Coos, Rogue River-Siskiyou ~$177,027,200 $45,457,000 Hazardous fuel reduction, 

Siskiyou National Curry, National Forest (Ore. projects: habitat restoration, road

Forest, Oregon Jackson, $167,809,700; maintenance and

Josephine Ore. share of reconstruction, trail

multistate projects: maintenance, mine

~$9,217,500) cleanup.
4

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Case-study research was conducted in the early stages 

of most of the projects, and the full story of project benefits, 

successes, and challenges will emerge over a period of years 

as projects are completed and new facilities and healthier 

ecosystems generate further benefits. But short-term 

benefits were often identified, and the contours of likely 

future benefits apparent. We found that Forest Service 

investments in these projects are producing short- and longterm jobs and health and welfare benefits. In general the 

people we interviewed felt that investments that built longterm capacity, revitalized existing sectors, and stimulated 

new capacity were likely to have the greatest impacts. From 

an agency perspective, critical but previously unfunded 

work was accomplished, and relationships and partnerships 

were enhanced or forged. 

A companion report (Volume II) to this one summarizes key findings from the eight case studies. This volume 

(Volume 1) contains the full case-study reports and presents 

detailed information about the cases, including the communities and projects studied; the project recipients and 

partners; the economic, social, and environmental benefits 

of the projects; the effects of the projects on the agency; 

challenges to implementing the projects; key findings from 

the socioeconomic assessment of the projects; and the 

lessons learned with regard to creating local community 

benefits when undertaking Forest Service work in the 

future.
5

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Chapter 2: A Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service Recovery Act 

Projects: The Alabama Cogongrass Control Center

John Schelhas1

Summary

The economic downturn of the past 3 years has had 

widespread and serious impacts on the timber and forest 

management industries in Alabama, as demand for forest 

products has declined causing reverberations in business 

activities from consultants to landowners. At the same 

time, Alabama’s forested lands face long-term detrimental 

ecological and economic effects owing to the spread of the 

nonnative invasive plant, cogongrass (Imperata cylindrica

L. [Beauv.]), which is considered to be one of the worst 

weeds in the country and, in fact, the world. 

The Alabama Cogongrass Control Center is addressing 

these two problems simultaneously, with initial programs 

funded by a $6,281,000 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (hereafter referred to as the Recovery Act) grant 

awarded to the Alabama Forestry Commission (AFC) and 

managed by a private land management consulting firm 

(Larson and McGowin, Inc. [LMI]). This project is providing many short-term and seasonal jobs for scouts (generally 

forestry consultants) and herbicide applicators, making up 

for work that these businesses have lost during the recession. The temporary project has enabled many of them to 

continue operating by combining their remaining work 

with new work related to cogongrass. 

1 John Schelhas is a research forester, U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station, 320 Green 

Street, Athens, GA 30602. 

Total Forest Service Recovery Act Investment, 

Alabama (as of 09/08/09): ~$16,594,000 

(Alabama projects: $14,799,000; Alabama 

share of multistate projects: ~$1,795,000)

Forest Service Recovery Act Investment, 

Alabama Cogongrass Control Center: $6,281,000 

(3 years)

Case-Study Location: State of Alabama

Counties: Statewide 

Project Type: Mapping and monitoring 

cogongrass infestations and control activities, 

landowner awareness raising, cogongrass control 

and eradication, auditing of control activities, 

fundraising for future activities.

Fast Facts

At the same time, the project is building capacity in 

invasive plant control and is likely to enhance these businesses over the long term. Threatened jobs in the Alabama 

Forestry Commission have been saved, as staff serve as 

monitoring crews gauging success or failures. Education and capacity building will create a niche industry in 

invasive plant control, providing jobs and environmental 

benefits long into the future. The project is also testing 

a strategic, adaptive approach to invasive plant control 

that will lay the groundwork for controlling cogongrass 

Chris Evans, River to River CWMA, Bugwood.org

Greg Leach
6

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

and other invasive species in the future, addressing a key 

ecological threat in the Southeastern United States.

The Case

Forest-based industries represent one of the largest 

economic sectors in Alabama, and include employment 

in forest management, harvesting, processing, and 

manufacturing as well as economic returns to forest 

landowners. Timber prices have been declining since 2006 

and are near record lows. The recent economic downturn 

hit the wood processing and manufacturing industry 

hard owing to declining demand for wood products and 

mounting foreign competition. Mills have implemented 

quotas on wood purchases, shut down temporarily, or closed 

altogether. Declining demand and low prices have limited 

timber harvesting. Landowners have felt immediate effects 

from this, as timber often cannot be sold for the price they 

expected, and many have decided to hold onto their timber 

in hopes of better prices in the future. Also, necessary 

thinnings are difficult because low pulpwood prices reduce 

returns that are typically used to offset costs. The effects 

of this slowdown have reverberated far beyond landowners 

and loggers. Consulting foresters working on a commission 

basis have seen their returns dry up, and tree planters and 

herbicide applicators have been faced with reduced demand 

for their services. Mill slowdowns and shutdowns have put 

thousands of Alabamians out of work. All of these impacts 

have hit timber-dependent communities with increased 

unemployment and decreased tax revenues. 

At the same time, Alabama has been suffering environmental, social, and economic damage from cogongrass 

(fig. 2-1), an invasive perennial grass native to Asia 

(Loewenstein and Miller 2007). Cogongrass is a federally 

listed noxious weed and considered one of the top 10 most 

invasive weeds in the world. Since its accidental introduction in southwest Alabama in 1911, cogongrass has become 

epidemic in southern Alabama, Mississippi, and Florida. 

It has potential for continued spread into the Eastern 

United States and Pacific Coastal states unless a sustained 

campaign is mounted to halt its advancement. Unchecked, 

cogongrass will dominate the southern landscape, turning a dynamic and diverse ecosystem into a monoculture 

unsuitable and unproductive for multiple land use objectives 

such as recreation, wildlife habitat, hay and sod production, 

timber management, and biodiversity conservation. It is 

globally recognized as an ecosystem transformer species 

that has turned forested lands to inhospitable savannas. Furthermore, cogongrass poses a real danger in the form of a 

highly flammable fuel promoting catastrophic wildfire that 

threatens homes, structures, and habitats (fig. 2-2). Whereas 

cogongrass is unlikely to ever be eradicated from Alabama 

Figure 2-2—Cogongrass wildfire.

Figure 2-1—Cogongrass. Imperata cylindrica (L.) Beauv.

James H. Miller, USDA Forest Service, Bugwood.org

Charles T. Bryson, USDA Agricultural Research Service, 

Bugwood.org
7

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

or the Southeast United States, its potential economic and 

ecological impacts are intolerably severe in comparison to 

other invasive plants. Ongoing containment and restoration 

of infested lands are necessary to avoid catastrophic losses.

The Forest Service’s State and Private Forestry branch 

made funding available to the Alabama Forestry Commission for this American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 

project ($6,281,000 million over a 3-year period). Recovery 

Act funding started up the Alabama Cogongrass Control 

Center, a project that builds on earlier work of the State of 

Alabama’s Cogongrass Task Force and collaborative efforts 

with neighboring states. The project’s goals are:

• Create or maintain jobs (expected to be around 75).

• Use education and technology transfer to prevent 

the further spread of cogongrass.

• Use adaptive management techniques to intervene 

and quickly treat infested sites as well as restore and 

maintain treated areas.

• Create a cogongrass-free zone in the northern part of 

the state and along state borders, halting the spread 

to other states.

• Create a program that will outlive the grant’s initial 

period by obtaining further funding.

There are more than 7,500 documented cogongrass 

infestations in the AFC geographic information system 

(GIS) database. It is estimated that there are 10 to 50 times 

that amount in the entire state, with the majority in the 

southern counties (south of Montgomery). In a carefully 

planned strategy to best contain and combat cogongrass, 

the project divided Alabama into several zones and the 

project into subprograms. The project has two primary 

zones, north and south, with the demarcation line of the 

advancing invasion front approximately in the center of the 

state (Columbus-Montgomery-Tuscaloosa; subject to change 

as more is learned about actual cogongrass infestations) 

(fig. 2-3). In the northern zone, the objective is to contain 

the spread by the eradication of scattered outlying infestations. This serves many purposes. Most importantly, it will 

effectively stop the spread of cogongrass into Tennessee 

and the Mid-Atlantic States. In the southern zone, cogongrass effects will be mitigated through spraying a portion 

of infestations while educating landowners about their 

options. Control activities are limited to 10 acres on any one 

landownership and are enacted in concert with other agency 

programs such as the Natural Resource Conservation 

Service’s EQUIP Program, Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, and Alabama Department 

of Transportation. Because current funding is inadequate to 

treat every known infestation in this zone, treatments will 

be more selective. 

The ACCC project is much smaller than the scope of 

the cogongrass problem in Alabama. Estimates of the total 

cost of bringing cogongrass under control range from $40 

to $100 million. To have the greatest effect with the limited 

funds available, the project is designed to touch different 

segments of the state’s landowner population. It will enroll 

people of diverse backgrounds and those with diverse 

Figure 2-3—Alabama case study, showing counties in which 

project work began. The goal is to eliminate cogongrass north 

of the eradication line.

 Geospatial Service and Technology Center, USDA Forest Service

!

Tuscaloosa

County

Greene 

County

Montgomery

Tuscaloosa

Greene 

County

Montgomery

Eradication line

National forest
8

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

management objectives. The project has six subprograms 

that are being made available to private, nonindustrial 

landowners:

• Survey and spray. The project deploys teams across 

the northern zone to find and eradicate the relatively 

small cogongrass infestations found there.

• State borders. The project is working with agencies 

in Mississippi, Georgia, and Florida to combat 

cogongrass infestations immediately along state 

borders to effectively create a band of cogongrassfree areas.

• Underserved and limited-income landowner service. 

Central Alabama counties are among the poorest 

in the Nation. Many landowners do not have access 

to land management professionals or the funds to 

adequately take care of their land. The project is providing mapping and treatment services to enrolled 

landowners in the poor counties of Alabama’s Black 

Belt (named for its dark, fertile soil) in which the 

population is predominantly African-American.

• Stop the spread. In addition to the eradication 

zones in the north and along state borders, a small, 

narrow belt has been designated immediately along 

the eradication line where lands along roads and 

contiguous land ownerships will be treated.

• Threatened and endangered species and habitat protection. Habitats that are classified as G1 and G2, as 

defined by the Endangered Species Act, receive high 

priority for treatment.

• Landowner selection. In the southern zone where 

cogongrass is widespread, landowners may apply 

and will be accepted into the project based on 

several factors, including proximity to high-threat 

spread routes such as state highways, existence 

and history of an active cogongrass program, and 

spatial analysis of proximity to other infestations. 

A spatially weighted grade is generated for each 

landowner applicant, and those with the highest 

grade in an area will be accepted into the project. 

Of those accepted, there is a cap of 10 acres of 

cogongrass treated per landowner.

The project is organized in a way to strategically 

address cogongrass control in the long term. The project 

includes the development of a GIS database to map known 

and newly detected infestations using scout reconnaissance 

data, aerial imagery, and spatial modeling. The GIS will 

also be used to determine an applicant’s placement in the 

different subprograms, record progress, and make decisions at multiple landscape scales. Project implementation 

is designed to put into place a long-term capability for 

cogongrass management. Forestry consultants have been 

contracted as cogongrass scouts, work that supplements 

their normal business. Cogongrass treatment using herbicide is effective from June to October, with July to September being optimum, and is inherently seasonal work. Local 

herbicide applicators have been contracted across the state. 

Applicators are hiring spray crews and using this work 

to replace work lost because of the recession. All of these 

contractors will add cogongrass suppression skills to their 

portfolio as a part of the project, which will benefit future 

control efforts. Finally, the project includes a fundraising 

component to obtain the additional funds needed for a 

comprehensive cogongrass control program in the state. 

The project has operated statewide in carrying out 

educational activities, mapping, and identifying interested 

contractors and landowners. Project field work began in fall 

2009 with pilot cogongrass mapping and spraying in Greene 

County, extending to Tuscaloosa County in early 2010. 

Scouting and eradication efforts are expanding from these 

pilot counties to cover the entire eradication line. The 2010 

spraying season began in late July, timed to begin work in 

the optimum spraying period and following recruitment 

and contracting of applicators. As of August 2010, project 

accomplishments include:

• Identifying and mapping cogongrass. The project has 

mapped over 2,500 new infestations across more than 

25 counties. The scout contractors have worked mainly 

in the central tier of Alabama counties but have also 

covered southwest and northern Alabama (fig. 2-4). 

Integration of global positioning system (GPS) and 

GIS technology has enabled the project to quickly 

pinpoint newly found locations and assign work 

regions to the scouts, applicators, and inspectors.
9

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

• Educational programs. Project staff have given more 

than 40 presentations to various groups, written 

six articles for publishing in a range of magazines 

geared toward landowners, been written about by 

several newspapers including a feature story by the 

New York Times, and given a radio interview. The 

communications director of the project regularly 

participates in landowner “field days,” reaching 

out to landowners with assistance in identification, 

prevention, and treatment of cogongrass. 

• Spraying. The project has sprayed approximately 

1,000 infestations across the state totaling about 100 

acres. All of these infestations are newly found by 

this project, although the project is using the AFC 

cogongrass database to pinpoint other areas for 

treatment.

• Hiring. Three LMI staff members are coordinating 

the project. Additionally, six scouts, two herbicide 

applicator vendors, five spray crews, two inspectors, 

four GIS analysts and programmers, and three 

part-time administrative support staff are currently 

working on the project.

• New technology. Proprietary GPS and GIS technology has been customized by two private companies 

(one in Alabama, one in Georgia). This technology 

is used to manage the data from the first contact by a 

landowner to the final reports generated after treatments have been completed.

Work on this project began in earnest in 2010, and 

employment is expected to increase dramatically from this 

point on as spraying begins and the geographical work area 

is widened. Much of the employment is seasonal, but during 

spraying season, employment will be high. The project has 

been structured so that most jobs go to local consultants 

and contractors who add project work to their existing 

portfolios. This, in turn, helps them weather the economic 

downturn while at the same time preparing to modify and 

increase their work in the future in several ways. They are 

learning about the cogongrass problem, becoming able 

to identify it, learning treatment protocols, and adding 

a new type of service to their businesses. Furthermore, 

landowners are becoming more aware of cogongrass and 

invasive plants in general, and are expected to contract 

more control services in the future.

The project is not expected to eradicate cogongrass 

in Alabama, given the financial resources required to adequately address the issue head on. Continual control efforts 

will be needed. The ACCC Recovery Act project includes 

mapping, educational programs, and refining of protocols 

that provide a foundation for future work. The project 

involves sufficient cogongrass eradication and control such 

that demonstrated success will make the case for additional 

funding at the state level in the future. Furthermore, 

landowner education and skill development for applicators 

is expected to jump-start a new business opportunity in 

control of cogongrass and other invasive weeds.

Methods

This case study was conducted using both qualitative and 

quantitative social science research methods. Qualitative 

data were gathered during face-to-face, semistructured 

interviews with people involved in the Recovery Act 

project. A total of 21 individuals were interviewed for 

this case study. Interviewees included Forest Service 

employees who helped develop or implement the projects, 

Alabama Forestry Commission employees, Larson and 

McGowin, Inc. employees, contract scouts and applicators, 

and landowners. Interviews were conducted with project 

employees around the state, with a concentrated interview 

effort in Greene and Tuscaloosa Counties, the location of 

Figure 2-4—Cogongrass scout mapping an infestation.

John Schelhas
10

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

the most intensive work during the first year of the project. 

Many of these individuals represented jobs created or 

retained, and others received economic benefits from project 

activities. Additional qualitative data were obtained from 

published sources such as newspapers and local government 

publications, Forest Service documents, and federal Web 

sites. Quantitative data regarding the Recovery Act projects 

and jobs were obtained from Forest Service databases 

and federal Web sites, including Recovery.gov and 

USAspending.gov. Socioeconomic indicator data describing 

the local population and economy of the case-study area 

came from a number of sources, such as the U.S. Census, 

the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Bureau of Economic 

Analysis. For more information on study methods and data 

sources see the appendix.

Project Recipients

The Forest Service, as part of a nationwide effort to redesign its State and Private Forestry branch, had previously 

funded a four-state cogongrass project. Under this project, 

the AFC had developed a framework for identification, 

mapping, and education related to cogongrass control. The 

AFC used funding from the earlier project only for planning 

and not for actual cogongrass control, thus when the Forest 

Service put out a call for proposals for economic recovery 

funds, the earlier project provided a foundation that enabled 

the AFC to quickly propose the Alabama Cogongrass 

Control Center project (table 2-1). Because of the size and 

scope of the project, and the requirements of Recovery Act 

funding, AFC decided to contract the work. They issued 

a call for proposals to Alabama companies to coordinate 

the state’s efforts at combating cogongrass. Of several 

companies who submitted proposals, LMI, a land management and forestry consulting firm headquartered in Mobile, 

Alabama, was selected to administer the project. Larson 

and McGowin, Inc. immediately assigned a project leader 

and communications director to bring the ACCC to life, 

and later assigned another employee to coordinate spraying 

operations. Larson and McGowin, Inc. is hiring contract 

scouts and applicators from around the state, and ultimately 

project work will affect thousands of landowners and tens 

of thousands of acres in Alabama. 

Beyond the many organizations and individuals that 

are directly involved in the project, the principal collaborator is the Technical Committee of the Alabama Cogongrass 

Task Force. The task force was formed in 2008 when 22 

agencies and organizations signed a memorandum of 

understanding to work collaboratively to combat shortand long-term negative impacts of cogongrass in Alabama. 

The technical committee, in particular Jim Miller of the 

Forest Service and Stephen Enloe of Auburn University, 

has provided assistance to the project ranging from strategic 

approaches for cogongrass control to prescriptions for 

herbicide application.

Other Recovery Act Projects

The AFC has two additional statewide Recovery Act 

projects funded by Forest Service State and Private Forestry, although all projects are managed independently. The 

Alabama Prescribed Burning and Hazard Fuel Reduction 

project, funded at $5 million, reintroduces fire to forests 

on private land. Alabama is also a part of the five-state 

Regional Longleaf Pine Restoration Initiative and Fuels 

Management Project ($8,975,000), which puts people to 

work restoring what were once extensive longleaf pine 

forests in the South. This project includes restoring longleaf 

pines (Pinus palustris Mill.) and native understory plants, 

coordinating efforts across broad partnerships, and providing educational materials and training to the public and 

individuals working with longleaf pine. 

Table 2-1—Project recipient and funding

 Total funding Funding

Recipient Project name and description amount mechanism

Alabama Forestry Alabama Cogongrass Control Center, WFM-0825-02FHC. $6,281,000 Grant

Commission Funds will support efforts to eradicate cogongrass, a federally

listed invasive weed, using methods such as mechanical treatment,

prescribed burning, and herbicide application throughout Alabama.
11

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

The historical range of longleaf pine in Alabama 

coincides with the area of greatest cogongrass infestation, 

and longleaf restoration is an appropriate option following cogongrass eradication, although it can be difficult to 

manage because of residual herbicides and limited shading 

during the longleaf grass stage. But because cogongrass 

eradication takes 2 to 3 years, these two efforts cannot be 

coordinated within the short timeframe of the economic 

recovery projects. By the time that the cogongrass is 

eliminated, the longleaf project will be over. Nevertheless, 

postrecovery synergies can be expected in restoring longleaf pine in areas that are now dominated by cogongrass.

Socioeconomic Benefits

Alabama is a diverse state with its economic roots in 

agriculture and forestry. Although Alabama as a whole 

follows national trends in population, averages mask great 

diversity among counties in the state (fig. 2-5). The ACCC 

project was initiated in Greene and Tuscaloosa Counties, 

which illustrate this socioeconomic diversity. The Black 

Belt region, where rich soils once supported plantation agriculture, is now marked by poverty and declining population 

and is largely dependent on timber and agriculture. Black 

Belt counties, such as Greene County, illustrate this trend in 

population decline and economic distress. In contrast, adjacent Tuscaloosa County (home to the University of Alabama 

and a Mercedes-Benz manufacturing plant) characterizes 

Alabama’s more economically diverse counties (see figs. 

2-6 through 2-10). Forest Service economic distress rankings, which were used for Recovery Act project selection 

and designed to capture recent economic downturns and 

not persistent poverty, ranged from 3 to 10 in the state of 

Alabama (Greene County’s ranking was 6 and Tuscaloosa 

County’s was 5).2

The timber industry is a major economic player and 

employer in many counties in Alabama. Most of those 

working for the ACCC project have their employment roots 

and training in timber-related jobs, and most also live in 

timber-dependent counties that were economically weak 

even before the recession (with some suffering from mill 

closures in the textile industry as well). The timber industry 

in Alabama has been affected by the recent recession, with 

layoffs and mill closings. Low pulpwood and timber prices 

have led to much less timber harvesting, which negatively 

affects the many forestry consultants that work for landowners (including those that organize site preparation and 

replanting operations), as well as the landowners themselves, who do not receive the income from timber harvests. 

Interviewees universally talked about economic impacts 

from decline in the wood product industry. Sawtimber 

prices have been particularly impacted, with pulp doing 

relatively better in many places. Landowners have been 

holding on to their high-value timber in expectation of a 

stumpage price increase while continuing to harvest pulp 

to provide some income or to perform necessary thinning 

of their forest stands.

Figure 2-5—Change in population for the United States, 

Alabama, and each Alabama case-study county, 2000–2009 

(USDC BC 2010a).

2

 The Forest Service calculated economic distress rankings for 

every county in the United States, and used these rankings as the 

main criterion for making Recovery Act project funding decisions. 

Rankings are on a scale from 1 to 10 with 10 signifying the highest 

level of economic distress. See USDA FS (2009) for information 

on how the rankings were developed.

-12

-10

-8

-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Population change from 2000 (percent)

Year

United States

Alabama

Greene County

Tuscaloosa County
12

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Figure 2-8—Change in number of students eligible for free or 

reduced-price lunch programs in Alabama, and each Alabama 

case-study county, 1996–2008 (USDE NCES 2010). Note: 

Reduced-price lunches were made available after 1999.

Figure 2-6—Monthly unemployment rates for Alabama, and Greene and Tuscaloosa Counties, 1990–2010 (USDL BLS 2010).

Figure 2-7—Change in school enrollment for Alabama, and each 

Alabama case-study county, 1996–2008 (USDE NCES 2010).

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

1996–97

1997–98

1998–99

1999–00

2000–01

2001–02

2002–03

2003–042004–05

2005–06

2006–07

2007–08

2008–09

School enrollment change 

from 1996 (percent)

School year

Alabama

Greene County

Tuscaloosa County

50

40

30

20

10

0

-10

-20

-30

1996–97

1997–98

1998–99

1999–00

2000–01

2001–02

2002–03

2003–042004–05

2005–06

2006–07

2007–08

2008–09

Free or reduced-price lunch eligibility

change from 1996 (percent)

School year

Alabama

Greene County

Tuscaloosa County

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

Jan. 1990

Jan. 1991

Jan. 1992Jan. 1993

Jan. 1994

Jan. 1995

Jan. 1996

Jan. 1997

Jan. 1998Jan. 1999

Jan. 2000

Jan. 2001

Jan 2002Jan. 2003

Jan. 2004

Jan. 2005

Jan. 2006

Jan. 2007

Jan. 2008

Jan. 2009

Jan. 2010

Monthly unemployment (percent)

Date

Alabama

Greene County

Tuscaloosa County
13

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Figure 2-10—Percentage of population living in poverty for 

Alabama, and each Alabama case-study county, 1989–2008 

(USDC BC 2010b).

Figure 2-9—Median household income for Alabama, and 

each Alabama case-study county, in 2008 dollars, 1989–2008 

(USDC BC 2010b).

45

40

35

30

25

Median household income, adjusted

for 2008 inflation (thousand dollars)

20

Year

19901992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

Alabama

Greene County

Tuscaloosa County

Jobs 

The project is managed by the AFC and LMI, and 

management jobs were primarily filled by current 

employees to ensure effective and timely administration 

of the project. Funding from the project has helped make 

up for declining budgets and revenues and helped retain 

employees. The project is directly overseen by a high-level 

administrator at AFC who is not funded by the project. 

Funds do support one-third of the salary of an AFC 

employee who performs accounting and reporting services 

for the three Recovery Act projects for which AFC received 

funding, as well as five full-time equivalent positions for 

personnel within AFC who supplement the scouting being 

done by private sector foresters and perform verifications 

on treatment activities (table 2-2). Larson and McGowin, 

Inc. reassigned employees to the project, including a 

project director, a communication coordinator, and a spray 

supervisor. These employees have stepped back from 

their other work, some of which had declined as a result 

of the recession. Undertaking Recovery Act protects has 

diversified the LMI portfolio and built their capability to 

deal with a major threat facing many of their clients.

Table 2-2—Jobs reported by Alabama Forestry 

Commission 

Reporting period

Feb.–Sept. Oct.–Dec. Jan.–Mar. Apr.–June July–Sept.

2009 2009 2010 2010 2010

Number of jobs a

0.7 1.89 5.6 3.82 12.83

a

 Job numbers are full-time equivalents. See appendix for reporting 

method.

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

19901992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

Population in poverty (percent)

Year

Alabama

Greene County

Tuscaloosa County

Overall, the project expects to provide work to more 

than 70 contractors, which will account for the bulk of 

the job creation. The first field employees were hired as 

scouts, who have the responsibility of confirming previously mapped cogongrass spots in the field while looking 

for previously unknown infestations on surrounding lands. 

Scouts are local professionals, often independent registered 

foresters or individuals working in site treatment or herbicide application, hired to cover specific counties in their 

local region. Scouts are employed as contractors to LMI, 

and are able to work independently and schedule their 

own work. 

One scout was recently unemployed, having lost his job 

in herbicide sales (this job itself was a reassignment from 

his middle management job lost during recent downsizing). 
14

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

There were no jobs available in his field in the region in 

which he lived. The Recovery Act project came along at 

just the right time for him. He was able to get the contract 

as a cogongrass scout within a week’s time, before he was 

even able to apply for unemployment benefits. Getting the 

cogongrass contract was, he said, simply, “... a blessing.” 

Another scout indicated that his forestry consulting business had been in “pretty dire financial straits ... actually 

running in the red” for the first time ever. “We had a couple 

of technicians working for us we had to let go, we just ran 

out of work and couldn’t make payday. That always hurts.” 

The consultant added that “trees store well on the stump, 

and we’ve been advising landowners to hold back.” Cogongrass scouting has provided some cashflow to keep him in 

business until landowners start selling timber again and 

commissions are received. 

Most scouts took on the cogongrass work as an addition to their other consulting work, making up for at least 

some of the recession-driven decline in their business and 

keeping income levels close to where they had been before 

the recession. All those interviewed found this arrangement 

agreeable. One scout indicated that revenue from other 

businesses had dropped 30 to 40 percent from 2008 to 2009, 

and that the cogongrass work was filling this gap. Much of 

the cogongrass work is seasonal, and some contractors have 

been able to schedule work during what is normally their 

slow time of year, making it complementary with their 

other work and rounding out their workload. 

The cogongrass work also brings scouts in contact 

with new landowners, has stimulated development of new 

skills, and has allowed them to expand their business areas. 

One scout reported, “One thing about this project is that 

it gets you in the door with a lot of landowners, because 

you are helping them deal with something that they do 

not understand. You get a foot in the door to maybe help 

them with other things on down the line.” Another said,

 “I want to expand my business, and expand the numbers 

of landowners I communicate with, so overall this work 

will help my business in the long term.” Clearly, the 

forestry consultants working in the project appreciate 

the opportunity to build relationships and trust with 

landowners that their work for the project affords.

Contractors are also gaining new experience and 

skills in technology. The work requires the use of GPS 

units for finding and confirming known infestations and 

mapping newly found ones. The GPS points are put into 

a GIS-enabled mapper that helps locate more cogongrass 

infestations. Most of the contractors had limited experience 

with the new technology, and, although they are at times 

frustrated with learning a new technology, they understand 

and appreciate the opportunity to learn new skills and be 

more prepared for the future. One scout said, “I knew how 

this technology worked and what it was used for, but it was 

at a more theoretical level. Now I am using it a lot more, 

which I think will take me places in the future.” Another 

said, “the GPS—I was going to throw it out the window at 

first—but it’s so easy now. I’ve already used it on another 

job, and it made my work go a lot quicker than normal. And 

when we get our new units from the ACCC it will eliminate 

some paperwork and be even more useful.” 

Overall, people working on the project are very 

satisfied with the type of jobs created. If the project had 

been organized differently, one scout said:

Say by hiring five scouts to go out and find all the 

cogongrass in the state and then hiring a big applicator, maybe from out of state, to spray them all, there 

wouldn’t have been any of these spin-off benefits. 

The applicator would have just blown through, taken 

the government’s money, maybe done a good job; 

I’d like to think this will help my business ... I 

take any chance I get to be exposed to landowners. 

That’s why I’m on all these committees. That’s 

where we’ve gotten our business. ... Very few 

people go looking for a forestry consultant in the 

yellow pages. Usually they know someone who has 

timberland that has used a consultant and gotten 

good results. ... From my perspective it is so much 

better when they call me and ask for help, rather 

than me having to do a hard sell. If I get my foot in 

the door, all I have to do is do a good job after that. 

—Cogongrass scout
15

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

but not provided the landowner with the opportunity 

to put a face on a local consultant, maybe have him 

treat a spot of kudzu, too. The way they organized it, 

it is doing a lot of good.

A small amount of herbicide was applied to cogongrass 

in the Fall of 2009 in Greene County, mostly as a test and 

learning experience. Herbicide application in 2010 did 

not begin until late July to take advantage of the optimum 

window of effectiveness. Applicators are only beginning 

to receive benefits from the project as this report is being 

written, but in the long run they may be the most significant 

employment beneficiaries of this project. As the project 

ramps up, there may be as many as 70 applicators operating 

during the spraying season (fig. 2-11). As with other contractors and consultants, the increased work is expected to 

help many of them stay in business, making up for some of 

the lost work and helping them ride out the recession until 

other work increases. Perhaps more importantly, they will 

now have experience with treating extensive infestations of 

cogongrass. They will be able to market their experience 

to landowners, many of which may be paying for some 

treatment of cogongrass or other invasive species on their 

own in the future. As with the scouts, the project is helping 

applicators get their foot in the door with landowners and 

to develop capacity that will last far beyond the duration 

of the project. One contractor reported he had hired five 

applicators, from North Alabama, all of whom had been 

unemployed.

As spraying gets underway, inspectors will field check 

spray work to make sure it is being done correctly and 

having the intended results. Although the original plan was 

to contract independent inspectors, the current plan is to use 

funds to pay the salaries of field employees from the AFC 

to avoid layoffs that would have otherwise been necessary 

because of budget shortfalls.

As a final employment benefit, the project is expected 

to have a multiplier effect in communities around the state. 

Applicators and other contractors are buying new equipment and spending money in many places as they do their 

work. The ACCC is buying all herbicides from within the 

state. The project is helping many contractors stay in business, which has long-term benefits to their employees and 

the people they serve. Although these benefits are difficult 

to quantify in a dispersed, statewide project, they do exist.

Broader Socioeconomic Benefits

Cogongrass infestations have the potential to cause a 

number of deleterious socioeconomic outcomes. It often 

invades along highways, where it may increase mowing 

costs and pose safety problems because of fire and smoke 

(fig. 2-12). The intense, hot fires when cogongrass burns 

may also threaten houses and other structures. Cogongrass 

also increases hazards and introduces other complications 

during prescribed burning and fighting of wildland fires. 

For example, it is difficult and dangerous to establish 

firebreaks while fighting wildland fires because of the 

Figure 2-11—Spraying herbicide on cogongrass. 

Figure 2-12—Cogongrass infestation in highway median. 

Charles T. Bryson, USDA Agricultural 

Research Service, Bugwood.org

USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service , Bugwood.org
16

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

ease with which sparks from the volatile fires can jump 

firebreaks and endanger equipment operators when 

cogongrass is present. During prescribed burning, even 

relatively small patches of cogongrass can unexpectedly 

amplify fire intensity, damaging tree canopies, sterilizing 

soil, and making fires difficult to contain (fig. 2-13).

Cogongrass negatively affects returns from most 

common land uses in Alabama. Although not generally a 

problem in tilled agricultural fields, it can invade pastures, 

where it provides poor forage because it is unpalatable 

to grazers, i.e., cattle, sheep, horses, and goats, owing to 

silica in the leaves. Cogongrass also negatively affects 

hayfields, not only because of its poor forage quality but 

also because bailing and transport of cogongrass facilitates 

its spread (it is illegal to sell or transport as an Alabamalisted noxious weed). In pine plantations, it can decrease 

revenues (by an estimated 20 to 50 percent) from forest land 

by reducing timber growth and thereby increasing the time 

to produce saw logs. Its flammability greatly increases the 

risk of fire damage to timber, and its presence in timber 

stands forces greater management time and expense (fig. 

2-14). Cogongrass also eliminates economically important 

wildlife habitat. Whitetail deer (Odocoileus virginianus) 

will not eat it, and it destroys turkey (Meleagris gallopavo), 

dove (Zenaida macroura), and quail (Colinus virginianus) 

habitat, reducing returns from hunting leases and guided 

hunts. As one employee of the project noted, “If we don’t 

control cogongrass, much of the Southeast will become 

an ecological desert—nothing but cogongrass. It grows 

everywhere, on rocks or good dirt. Unlike other invasive 

plants, like kudzu, there’s nothing that limits it or keeps it in 

check. If we don’t control it, the land will quit producing.”

The Alabama Cogongrass Control Center project is 

helping landowners by reducing the threat cogongrass 

poses to economic and recreational uses of their land. If 

cogongrass continues to spread, many landowners will not 

be able to generate economic returns from their land and 

their land will change in undesirable ways. Most of the 

early work of the project has concentrated on establishing 

a line to halt the northward advancement of cogongrass. 

In southwestern Alabama, where cogongrass has a longer 

history, it is ubiquitous across the landscape. However, 

in central Alabama along the line of northern spread, 

cogongrass most often occurs in scattered small patches 

(from an area the size of several square meters to 1 or 2 

acres). Because of this, the economic impact of cogongrass 

in central Alabama is not presently large, but rather presents 

a significant threat to future benefits. 

Prior to the project, landowners interviewed had 

varying levels of awareness of cogongrass. Some were not 

aware they had cogongrass on their land until contacted 

by the project’s employees. Others had already identified 

cogongrass infestations on their land. Several landowners 

were aware of an unusual new grass on their land, and only 

some had identified it or sought assistance. For example, 

in Greene County in west Alabama, several landowners 

Charles T. Bryson, USDA Agricultural 

Research Service, Bugwood.org

Figure 2-13—Cogongrass burns easily, increasing potential 

fire damage to forests. 

Figure 2-14—Cogongrass poses economic threats to 

Alabama forests.

James H. Miller, USDA Forest Service, Bugwood.org
17

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

reported watching the first patches grow from small spots 

to over an acre over the past 10 years. At the same time, 

new spots emerged, sometimes increasing into hundreds of 

spots on a single person’s land. Landowners feel that their 

timber, wildlife, and native plant conservation efforts face 

long-term threats from the emergence of cogongrass. The 

most immediate threat may be fire. One landowner in Hale 

County related how he learned he had cogongrass on his 

land. He was conducting a prescribed burn, when all of a 

sudden he heard a loud “whoosh” as over an acre and a half 

of cogongrass ignited, killing all of the pine trees on that 

land. Before that, he was not aware that he had cogongrass 

on his property or the risk that it would present. Another 

landowner, from Greene County, told of trying to burn 

a patch of cogongrass to see if that would eliminate it, 

and being surprised by its flammability—she described a 

similar “whoosh” as if gasoline were igniting. Fortunately, 

the patch was small and isolated in a pasture and the fire 

did no damage. After this small patch burned, the emerging 

shoots were sprayed with herbicide, which had some effect 

in slowing down the spread. However, she did not succeed 

in stopping its spread or eradicating it from her land. 

The ability of landowners to respond via management 

operations has varied. Some have not had sufficient money 

to treat cogongrass, whereas others have adequate financial 

resources but have not addressed the issue. A number had 

tried herbicide operations, but these individuals felt they did 

not have their infestations under control and were pleased to 

receive assistance. Most did not have the range of spraying 

equipment, from tractor rigs to backpack sprayers, ideally 

required to treat all the infestations on their land. Landowners were also concerned that their individual efforts 

would not succeed in the long run because of infestations 

on their neighbors’ lands. The project helps overcome 

many obstacles or hesitancies that landowners might have 

about treating infestations, including taking the initiative 

in identifying cogongrass spots, contacting neighbors with 

infestations, arranging for licensed and insured applicators, 

and treating infestations at no cost to the landowner. Timber 

markets have been down during the recession, and many 

landowners are not selling timber or pulpwood. Thus these 

landowners have little income with which to cover management costs. Nearly all the landowners have been thankful 

to be contacted by the project and have given permission 

for cogongrass scouts and herbicide applicators to work on 

their land. Landowners also appreciate the promise of yearto-year followup, because those who have tried spraying 

feel they have not been successful in their control efforts. 

Finally, landowners were encouraged by the comprehensive 

approach, because it offers hope for a solution beyond their 

own land. As one landowner put it, “It is a good program. It 

has benefited me already. And it also benefits other landowners. We’re all in this together.”

The work of the ACCC provides a significant opportunity for outreach to forest landowners. The AFC has always 

had insufficient funds to address all landowner needs, and 

this project mobilizes a major outreach effort that (1) brings 

new landowners into the educational and extension process 

and (2) helps AFC demonstrate its concern and capabilities 

for helping private landowners. The before and after appearance of landscapes subject to cogongrass eradication is 

dramatic and noticeable, which helps spread interest among 

landowners. Similarly, cogongrass scouts and contractors 

involved in the project appreciate the opportunities the 

project provides to interface with landowners, particularly 

by being involved in a project that provides direct assistance 

to landowners and concrete positive results. This brings 

satisfying interactions with landowners, and also helps 

build future business. It is very likely that a new niche 

market will emerge in invasive plant control in Alabama as 

a direct result of the education and training managed and 

facilitated by LMI. The rapid response, data management, 

and educational outreach paradigm created by LMI will 

be scalable to other invasive species programs. There are 

many other invasive species affecting Alabama and other 

states that need to be controlled, e.g., Chinese tallow tree 

(Triadica sebifera [L.] Small), kudzu (Pueraria spp.), and 

privet (Ligustrum spp.). Even if the invasive plant control 

business grows slowly, consultants are increasing their 

business contacts with landowners through the project and 

may be able to offer landowners other services. In addition, 

landowners may be induced to give more attention to their 

land, thereby improving management and productivity. 

Many of the landowners being reached by the project are 
18

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

reportedly those that have not previously been involved in 

cost share programs, so the project is reaching a whole new 

audience.

The ACCC has emphasized raising awareness about 

cogongrass. The communication director indicated that 

meeting all the requests for presentations has been a challenge, but a welcome one. He has given presentations to 

landowner groups, associations, government agencies, city 

councils, and environmental groups. The project appears to 

have significantly raised awareness of cogongrass among 

landowners and other people. Landowners especially 

expressed appreciation for the awareness raising. One 

woman told how the last time she sold timber on her land, 

she asked the loggers to wash off their equipment after they 

harvested so they wouldn’t spread cogongrass from her 

land onto other lands, and they just laughed at her. Washing 

equipment is standard practice for stopping the spread of 

cogongrass, and the ACCC talks and other programs are 

raising awareness among loggers and road crews about 

the importance of washing equipment, which should have 

long-term impacts in limiting the spread of invasive plants. 

Cities and counties now know that cogongrass is there and 

want to treat it. County road representatives are now calling 

when they find cogongrass and asking what to do. They are 

told to avoid mowing cogongrass areas and to clean their 

equipment. As one official said, “Just that one thing can 

make a huge difference. Getting information into people’s 

hands about prevention could minimize the spread.”

Many people involved in the project reported noneconomic benefits. Forestry consultants employed as scouts 

were already familiar with cogongrass and happy to be 

making a contribution in mitigation and eradication efforts. 

Many particularly appreciated that the project was set up in 

a way that establishes a long-term capacity for cogongrass 

control. They reported that work was enjoyable, outside and 

physical but not as onerous as other management activities such as tree planting. Several scouts said looking for 

cogongrass was fun—“when you get in the truck each day 

you don’t know what you are going to find.” One said it 

was “like a treasure hunt.” Landowners reported expected 

noneconomic benefits from cogongrass control. One landowner said, “If it got in my young pine plantations it would 

just kill me [economically]. But I am just as worried about 

my pastures, where I have been trying to restore the native 

prairie plants found in the Black Belt.”

Environmental Benefits

Cogongrass is native to Asia, and is an invasive weed. It can 

invade many habitats, forming dense stands that eliminate 

native plants by competing for nutrients, space, moisture, 

and sunlight. Cogongrass affects many wildlife species 

because it provides poor forage and impedes movement. 

When native plants are eliminated, ground-nesting wildlife 

species such as turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) and bobwhite 

quail (Colinus virginianus) may be harmed. Cogongrass 

also eliminates habitat and food for a threatened species, 

gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus) (fig. 2-15). The 

project has a component to control cogongrass in areas of 

high ecological significance and sites with threatened and 

endangered species. One example of such a site is pitcher 

plant bogs, which despite being fire adapted may not be 

able to withstand the ecological changes brought about by 

cogongrass. 

Figure 2-15—Cogongrass reduces habitat and food for the 

gopher tortoise, a threatened species.

Dan Clark, National Park Service, Bugwood.org

Cogongrass infestations over time change plant 

community structure to a new fire-dominated ecosystem. 

Cogongrass is highly flammable and burns hotter than many 

other plant species. Frequent and hot fires eliminate other 

species, including native plants and wildlife, and cause 
19

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Effects on the Agency and Its Partners

The ACCC project grew out of a State and Private Forestry 

redesign project that provided funding to the AFC, which 

had been laying the groundwork for cogongrass control by 

mapping infestations and planning control activities. 

Alabama Forestry Commission employees said that they 

knew what project they would like to do when they heard 

about Recovery Act funding; the Cogongrass Control 

Center was the next natural step after the redesign project 

(fig. 2-16). As one person at AFC said, “We knew what we 

needed to do and how to do it, [with the Recovery Act 

project] now we had the money.”

mortality and inhibit the reproduction of even fire-tolerant 

pine trees such as longleaf pine. Cogongrass is a prolific 

seed producer and also propagates vegetatively through 

rhizome fragments. It is easily spread by equipment. It is 

primarily an invader of disturbed sites and bare soil, thriving on a wide variety of sites. Although cogongrass forms 

dense monocultures, its plant structure does not provide 

good ground cover protection, and some managers believe 

that areas dominated by cogongrass may produce significant 

sediment runoff during rainfall events, with implications 

for water quality. Cogongrass also uses prolific amounts of 

water during the growing season; thus, when present over 

large areas in a watershed, cogongrass may have negative impacts on water quantity. However more research is 

needed to fully understand the water quality and quantity 

impacts of cogongrass.

The ACC is implementing a strategic, landscapelevel approach to cogongrass that is designed to facilitate 

long-term control in Alabama. This approach combines a 

geographically based eradication program to reduce the 

spread of cogongrass and create cogongrass-free zones 

with an educational program to raise awareness among 

landowners, equipment operators, and the public of the 

need to control cogongrass. Through public presentations 

and landowner contacts, the project is greatly increasing 

awareness of cogongrass throughout Alabama. This is 

especially important to landowners on the advancing edge 

of cogongrass spread, because it will enable them to focus 

on smaller spots that are easier to control before significant 

infestations become established on their land. It should also 

help reduce the spread of cogongrass as more landowners 

look for and control cogongrass. Cogongrass is often spread 

as a contaminant of road construction and forestry equipment. In Tuscaloosa County, many of the infestations are 

along the rights-of-way of two recently constructed highways. In Autauga County, two spots located by scouts had 

been harvested by the same logger a few years ago. Greater 

awareness is expected to lead equipment operators to take 

more proactive steps to mitigate the spread of cogongrass.

Figure 2-16—The Alabama Cogongrass Task Force. 

James H. Miller, Alabama Forestry Commission

From the AFC perspective, the Recovery Act process 

worked well, particularly given the urgency of the effort. 

The AFC appreciated that the projects were evaluated by 

objective criteria, providing a level playing field for all 

the states to compete for funding. They were happy with 

both the process and the amount of money they received. 

Although all Recovery Act projects have stringent reporting requirements, the AFC views these as a plus because 

it ensured that everyone took the work seriously and was 

diligent. Because of the multiple partners, communication 

has been important, and people from all levels have opportunities for interaction. The AFC feels that they had to learn 

how to work smarter, and to draw on resources throughout 

the agency. Where typically a Forest Service project might 

be funded at $1 to $2 million and managed solely out of the 

state AFC office, this project involved regional and county 

AFC offices as well. Because the work was complementary 
20

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

with the AFC’s other mission areas, it did not crowd out 

other important work. Ultimately, control and eradication 

of cogongrass will make the AFC’s other work easier and 

safer. One AFC employee said that opportunities such as 

this provide the agency a chance to grow and stretch, to see 

what they can do to meet new challenges and to develop 

better processes and procedures. It helps the whole state, not 

just a portion of it, as well as the whole Southeastern United 

States. It forces greater communication and coordination, 

which have positive benefits in the long term. Various 

partners reported that communication has been excellent 

between the Forest Service, the AFC, and LMI. Communication has exceeded that necessary to do the job, and has 

created a climate of trust and mutual sense of purpose that 

will pay dividends into the future. Ultimately, the project 

will end with better educated and more aware landowners, 

with an excellent GIS system for mapping and tracking 

cogongrass, and with stronger capabilities for cogongrass 

control.

The money was awarded through a contract from the 

Southern Region of the Forest Service’s State and Private 

Forestry Office to the Alabama Forestry Commission. This 

is the usual way that the Forest Service State and Private 

Forestry branch awards money to the states. What is unique 

in this effort is that the state then contracted with LMI to 

run the project. Larson and McGowin, Inc., although hiring 

core employees to run the project, is accomplishing the 

work largely by contracting foresters and herbicide applicators. Most of these contractors are adding the cogongrass 

work to their existing portfolios, which broadens the type 

of work they do and creates invasive plant control capability 

that will last long into the future.

Challenges

The biggest challenge reported in project administration has 

been having enough time. Recovery Act projects require 

Forest Service units to provide strict oversight on projects 

with no increase in funding or personnel. Similar levels 

of additional work occur at the AFC, which has taken on 

extensive accounting and reporting work.

At the project management level, it has been hard and 

time consuming to get the work underway. The project 

was organized to strategically address the cogongrass 

problem in a way that would have lasting benefits. Work 

began with scouting and mapping to understand the spatial 

nature of infestations and to be able to approach cogongrass 

control at a statewide, landscape scale. At the same time, 

an educational campaign was mounted to raise awareness 

of cogongrass, first among landowners to encourage them 

to participate in the project—an essential ingredient for the 

landscape approach and long-term control—and second 

among loggers, road crews, and other groups to promote 

efforts to slow the spread of cogongrass. There are longterm benefits of having many local contractors involved in 

the project, but training, capacity building, and contacting, 

selecting, and hiring local forestry consultants and applicators to do the work took time and slowed job creation.

Key Findings from the Alabama 

Cogongrass Control Center Project

The ACCC project is providing immediate work that is 

helping many forestry consultants and herbicide applicators 

weather the recession. This is a significant short-term benefit that will continue for the next 2 or 3 years, after which 

employment in these sectors is expected to pick up. But 

there are also many long-term benefits of the project. The 

combination of cogongrass control capacity and landowner 

awareness of cogongrass is expected to stimulate a new 

niche industry in invasive plant control in Alabama. Funding for this project is not sufficient to do all the cogongrass 

control work that is needed in Alabama. But by developing 

a strategic approach to cogongrass control, stimulating the 

development of a cogongrass control infrastructure, and 

raising awareness of invasive plants and the harm they 

cause, the groundwork is being laid for long-term economic 

and ecological benefits. The project participants hope that 

demonstrating success in cogongrass control through this 

project will lead to more state and federal funding for 

control and will encourage landowners to control invasive 

species independently. Cogongrass control or containment 

must succeed in the long term to protect the very important 

forest products industry in Alabama, to allow landowners to 

receive important wildlife and hunting lease benefits, and to 

protect important ecosystems and environmental services. 
21

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

The assessment of the ACCC project makes it possible 

to identify several key findings about the socioeconomic 

benefits of Forest Service Recovery Act investments. They 

are summarized here.

There are tradeoffs between taking the time to develop 

a strategic approach and doing the work in a way that 

has long-term benefits, versus creating jobs and doing 

the work quickly. Although more people could have been 

employed quickly and more cogongrass sprayed in the 

short run, it would not have been effective in the long run 

to simply hire scouts and applicators and dispatch them to 

work across the state. Cogongrass would have returned to 

many sites, public awareness would not have had time to 

build, landowners would have been less receptive to project 

employees from outside the area, and the foundation for 

long-term invasive plant control capacity would not have 

been laid. Short-term economic benefits and long-term 

project effectiveness based on careful strategizing are not 

always compatible.

Part-time and seasonal jobs can be very important 

and actually increase the employment impact and job 

satisfaction. In this case, the provision of part-time work 

to contractors and consultants matched the nature of the 

required work and was beneficial in terms of short- and 

long-term economic benefits. The project work made up 

for work lost during the economic downturn, keeping 

businesses operating and enabling contractors to continue 

to work with their existing clients. Consultants and 

contractors benefited from this arrangement; most wanted 

to keep their businesses going, and newly acquired skills 

and opportunities to meet landowners are expected to 

strengthen their businesses in the future.

With good communication and a strong commitment 

to project goals, people that work across a diversity of 

institutional and organizational types can collaborate 

effectively. This project links the Forest Service, the AFC, 

a major private forestry consulting firm, and many smaller 

scale forestry consultants and herbicide applicators to 

work toward a common purpose across a large landscape 

in a strategic fashion. Perhaps most notably, the project 

shows that the private sector can play a key role in natural 

resource work that provides a large public benefit. In fact, 

the involvement of local forestry consultants and applicators 

from local communities and regions played a key role in 

generating landowner interest in and collaboration with 

the project. 

Education, increasing public awareness, and face-to-face 

contacts are key aspects of project success, both in terms 

of environmental outcomes and economic outcomes. A 

high level of public awareness is critical for both stopping 

the spread of invasive plants and getting enough landowners 

motivated to accomplish effective control at the landscape 

level. Promoting interaction among landowners, forestry 

consultants, and applicators is creating a long-term capacity 

for invasive plant control and stimulating a niche industry.

Long-term benefits and capacity building are important 

if impacts are to be long-lasting. Although rapid job 

creation was the principal goal of the Recovery Act, it is 

also important to create quality, enduring jobs for recipients. By using the project to stimulate the development of an 

invasive plant control infrastructure among consultants and 

applicators, project benefits will endure and even increase 

over time. Furthermore, much of the project’s early work 

is taking place on the advancing front where landowners 

have yet to feel severe economic impacts. But early control 

is much easier and cost effective, and this work is protecting landowners from the very severe long-term economic 

consequences that would ensue if cogongrass were to go 

unchecked and spread northward to additional states. 

Lessons Learned

Adaptive landscape-scale approaches can be implemented to address large and complex forest resource 

problems. The ACCC Recovery Act project invested a 

significant sum of money into the control of a nonnative 

invasive plant. There were several innovative aspects of this 

investment. First, it implemented a strategic, landscapescale approach to controlling a particularly noxious weed 

with the goals of containment and eventual eradication. 

Experiences gained through this project can help guide 

future efforts to control nonnative invasive plants across 

regional landscapes. The process used in this project 
22

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

began with an overall understanding of the problem at a 

landscape scale and collaboration of scientists and managers to develop an effective control strategy. The Recovery 

Act project then directed a larger than normal investment 

at containment and is expected to demonstrate that the 

plant can be effectively controlled. Although Recovery Act 

resources are not sufficient to bring cogongrass under control in Alabama, the strategic approach of the project will 

stop its spread into the northern half of the state (as well as 

states to the north), and demonstrated success at controlling 

cogongrass will make the case for further funding. This 

approach provides a model for addressing other large-scale, 

intractable problems facing our Nation’s forest resources. 

While reaping short-term benefits, it facilitates a combination of learning, capacity building, and results that can grow 

to meet the larger challenge.

When collaborative networks are used to address largescale problems, the sum may be greater than the parts. 

A second key lesson of this project relates to building 

collaborative networks across state, federal, and private 

entities to address large forest resource issues. The ACCC 

uses federal funding to coordinate the efforts of the state 

forestry agency (AFC), a large private forestry consulting 

firm (LMI), and many small forestry consultant and 

herbicide applicator firms. This is not simply another way 

of organizing work. Each of these entities brings unique 

capabilities that increase the likelihood of project success. 

For example, the state agency provides statewide coverage 

and long-term continuity, the large consulting firm brings 

critical consulting experience and new technology, and the 

consultants and applicators are familiar and enduring local 

businesses that know how to work with local landowners 

and will continue the work beyond the project’s duration. 

Ultimately the project will stimulate new capacity—and 

a new industry—in invasive plant control. This, in turn, 

will produce long-term socioeconomic and environmental 

benefits. Many forest resource problems are unfolding at a 

scale that can only be addressed by such coordinated effort 

and capacity building, and the ACCC represents a useful 

model.

Acknowledgments

Thanks to Stephen Pecot, Patrick Glass, and Joe VanDees 

for assistance in arranging interviews, as well as all the 

interviewees for their patience and participation. Jim Miller, 

Nancy Lowenstein, and Stephen Pecot provided invaluable 

comments on earlier drafts.

References

Loewenstein, N.J.; Miller, J.H. 2007. Proceedings of 

the Regional Cogongrass Conference: confronting 

the cogongrass crisis across the South. Mobile, AL: 

Alabama Cooperative Extension System, Auburn School 

of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, and USDA Forest 

Service. http://www.cogongrass.org/conference.cfm. 

(20 Oct. 2010).

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA 

FS]. 2009. Forest Service activities and the American 

Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009: estimating 

measures of economic distress. Administrative Report. 

Washington, DC. 

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census 

[USDC BC]. 2010a. Annual estimates of the resident 

population for counties: April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2009. 

http://www.census.gov/popest/counties/CO-EST2009-01.

html. (4 Oct. 2010).

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census 

[USDC BC]. 2010b. Small area income and poverty 

estimates, state and county data: 1989, 1993, 1995–2008. 

http://www.census.gov/did/www/saipe/data/statecounty/

index.html. (4 Oct. 2010).

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for 

Education Statistics [USDE NCES]. 2010. Common 

core of data. http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/. (18 Oct. 2010).

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics 

[USDL BLS]. 2010. Local Area Unemployment Statistic 

Program. http://www.bls.gov/lau. (4 Oct. 2010).
23

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Chapter 3: A Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service 

Recovery Act Projects: Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest and 

White Mountain Apache Tribe, Arizona

Sam Burns, James Dietrich, Katherine Mattor, and 

Thurman Wilson1

Summary

The Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest (ASNF), located 

in a natural-resource-dependent and economically 

depressed area of Arizona, is using American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funding to build upon existing 

rural development efforts with many partners. This case 

study reviews ASNF-associated forest restoration and fuels 

reduction, recreation and road improvement, and White 

Mountain Apache Tribal projects that received Recovery 

Act funding. The overall objectives of these projects are to 

increase and sustain local employment, increase investment 

in forest restoration and fire mitigation efforts, and build 

local capacity for long-term economic development. Many 

recovery projects were implemented quickly by using 

existing contracting mechanisms, including the White 

Mountain Stewardship Contract for forest restoration 

work and existing indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity 

(IDIQ) contracts for work on campgrounds and roads. A 

Tribal Forest Protection Act agreement facilitated forest 

1 Sam Burns is a research director and James Dietrich is a 

landscape architect with the Office of Community Services, Fort 

Lewis College, 1000 Rim Drive, Durango, CO 81301. Katherine 

Mattor is a research consultant, 904 Pioneer Ave., Fort Collins, 

CO 80521. Thurman Wilson is a consulting forester, 180 County 

Road 122A, Hesperus, CO 81326. Their work was performed 

under USDA Forest Service Research joint venture agreement 

10-JV-11260489-081.

Total Forest Service Recovery Act Investment, 

Arizona (as of 09/08/09): $53,142,000 

Recovery Act Investment, Case Study: $25,427,000 

Case-Study Location: Apache-Sitgreaves National 

Forest and Fort Apache Indian Reservation

Counties: Apache, Navajo, and Greenlee

Project Types: Forest restoration and rehabilitation, 

fuels reduction, recreation, road improvement, 

greenhouse construction. 

Fast Facts

rehabilitation and infrastructure efforts with the White 

Mountain Apache Tribe. The ASNF also provided a diverse 

mix of opportunities for potential bidders by offering 

contracts of different types and sizes.

Many of the projects supplement existing efforts to 

recover from the 2002 Rodeo-Chediski Fire that burned 

more than 460,000 acres, mostly on the White Mountain 

Apache Reservation, and to reduce the risk of other large 

fires threatening local communities. Community work over 

the last decade to increase wood processing infrastructure 

and create a forest restoration economy will enable the 

biomass from more than 15,000 acres of forest restoration 

and fuel reduction treatments funded by ARRA to be used 

productively rather than left in the woods. The recreation 

A. McCabe

Sally Campbell
24

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

and road improvement projects allow 

the ASNF to catch up with deferred 

maintenance needs that are focused in 

areas of particular economic concern to 

local communities.

The Recovery Act projects have 

built upon and strengthened existing 

local partnerships among the communities, tribe, and agency. These 

partnerships have enhanced the local 

capacity to implement these and 

subsequent projects over the long term. 

The enduring development benefits to 

the rural communities in the White 

Mountain Region will be even more 

important than the initial jobs created 

through direct Recovery Act funding. 

Infrastructure is being improved, 

economic capacity is being built, and 

relationships are being strengthened, 

all of which bode well for long-term 

benefit to the local communities, the 

tribe, and the ASNF.

The Case

The Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest 

covers more than 2 million acres across 

the White Mountain region in east-central Arizona. It is 

primarily located within Apache and Navajo Counties and 

is adjacent to the Fort Apache and the San Carlos Indian 

Reservations (fig. 3-1). The Navajo and Hopi Reservations, 

north of the ASNF, also make up a large portion of the land 

area of Apache and Navajo Counties. The region has a 

relatively small population. In 2009, the U.S. Census Bureau 

projected the combined population of Apache and Navajo 

Counties to be 183,566, roughly 1.7 percent of Arizona’s 

projected population. Despite modest population growth 

over the last decade (fig. 3-2), school enrollment in the area 

has been dwindling (fig. 3-3) suggesting an aging workforce 

and an exodus of younger families. In Apache County this 

is particularly noticeable; from 2000 to 2008 the median age 

shifted from 27 to 30 (USDC BC 2010a). A notably high 

percentage of the population in both counties is living in 

poverty; in 2008 the U.S. Census Bureau reported that in 

Apache County 33.2 percent of the population was living in 

poverty (roughly twice the poverty rate across the state), 

and in Navajo County 23.1 percent of the population was in 

poverty (fig. 3-4). Contributing to this poverty is the fact 

that median household income in both counties is $10,000 to 

$20,000 less than median household income across the state 

(fig. 3-5). From January of 2007 to January of 2010, as the 

national economy began to suffer, unemployment across 

Arizona rose from 4.2 percent to 9.7 percent. However, in 

Apache and Navajo Counties where unemployment was 

already hovering around 10 percent, unemployment spiked 

at 16 percent (fig. 3-6). The Recovery Act funding has 

helped to relieve this job loss. 

!

!

Apache-Sitgreaves

National Forest 

Navajo

County

Apache

County

Greenlee County reenlee County

Springerville

Whiteriver

Springerville

Whiteriver

Indian reservation

National forest

Case-study location/national forest

Fort Apache

Indian Reservation 

Apache-Sitgreaves

National Forest 

Figure 3-1—Case-study location and surrounding areas within Arizona.

Geospatial Service and Technology Center, USDA Forest Service
25

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

The White Mountain Region has an enduring rural 

quality, with its roots in ranching and logging still apparent 

across its small forest-dependent communities. Many of the 

towns have experienced a transition in their relationship 

Figure 3-2—Change in population for the United States, Arizona, 

and Arizona case-study counties, 2000–2009 (USDC BC 2010a).

Figure 3-3—Change in school enrollment for Arizona and Arizona case-study counties, 1986–2008 (USDE NCES 2010).

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

-5

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Population change from 2000 (percent)

Year

United States

Arizona

Apache County

Navajo County

2 For additional information on these efforts, see McClure 

Consulting LLC (2010).

with the ASNF, as recreation and tourism have become 

increasingly important to the local economies. The large 

sawmills operating in the White Mountains began to close 

in the 1960s: the McNary Mill closed in 1969, the Stone 

Mill in Eagar closed in 1998, the pulp mill in Snowflake, 

Arizona, converted from raw materials to 100 percent 

recyclables in 1999, and the Fort Apache Timber Company 

(FATCO) closed its last mill in 2009. Without numerous 

integrated efforts in collaboration, community-based 

forestry, and biomass utilization, this transition would have 

had more severe socioeconomic impacts on the local forestdependent communities. Economic and social resilience 

have been significantly increased through a variety of collaborative efforts to move toward a restoration-based forest 

products economy.2

Although government employees make up the largest 

segment of the local workforce, the timber, recreation and 

tourism, and construction industries are the economic mainstays of the White Mountain area. The communities in and 

110

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

-10

1996–97

1997–98

1998–99

1999–00

2000–01

2001–02

2002–03

2003–04

2004–05

2005–06

2006–07

2007–08

2008–09

School enrollment, change from 1986 (percent)

School year

1986–87

1987–88

1988–89

1989–90

1990–91

1991–92

1992–93

1993–94

1994–95

1995–96

Arizona

Apache County

Navajo County
26

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Figure 3-4—Population living in poverty for Arizona and Arizona 

case-study counties, 1989–2008 (USDC BC 2010b).

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

19901992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

Population in poverty (percent)

Year

Arizona

Apache County

Navajo County

55

50

45

40

35

30

Median household income, adjusted

for 2008 inflation (thousand dollars)

25

Year

19901992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

Arizona

Apache County

Navajo County

Figure 3-5—Median household income for Arizona and Arizona 

case-study counties in 2008 dollars, 1989–2008 (USDC BC 

2010b).

Figure 3-6—Monthly unemployment rates for Arizona and Arizona case-study counties, 1990–2010 (USDL BLS 2010).

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

Monthly unemployment (percent)

Jan. 1990

Jan. 1991

Jan. 1992Jan. 1993

Jan. 1994

Jan. 1995

Jan. 1996

Jan. 1997

Jan. 1998

Jan. 1999

Jan. 2000

Jan. 2001

Jan 2002

Jan. 2003

Jan. 2004

Jan. 2005

Jan. 2006

Jan. 2007

Jan. 2008

Jan. 2009

Jan. 2010

Date

Arizona

Apache County

Navajo County
27

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

around the ASNF were initially buffered from the recession 

by continued construction work at nearby powerplants 

and state highways, increased employment at a nearby 

correctional facility, and work associated with the White 

Mountain Stewardship Contract. Most of these construction 

projects ended in mid-2009, and, with declines in tourism 

and real estate sales, the recession caught up with local 

businesses. 

The natural beauty, cooler temperatures, and countless 

lakes of the ASNF attract more than 1.5 million visitors 

a year. Overnight visitor use of “developed sites” on the 

ASNF is reportedly the highest in the National Forest 

System.3 Its proximity to Phoenix makes the western side of 

the forest a weekend tourist destination, whereas the eastern 

side experiences more extended visits, with many visitors 

returning year after year to the same spots their parents and 

grandparents enjoyed. The recreation and tourism industries 

are an essential part of the state and local economy (Arizona 

Governor’s Forest Health Oversight Council 2007). Nonetheless, the ASNF campgrounds, mostly constructed in the 

1960s and 1970s, have been strapped with a large backlog 

of maintenance needs. The most critical of these occurred 

in 2008, when the popular Hoyer Campground near Greer 

was on the verge of being closed because of problems with 

its outdated wastewater treatment system. The community 

came to the Forest Service’s aid to keep it open by providing 

portable toilets at a cost of $18,000.

In 2002, the largest wildland fire in Arizona history, 

the Rodeo-Chediski, burned nearly half a million acres: 

60 percent on the White Mountain Apache Tribe’s reservation, and most of the remainder on the ASNF (Arizona 

Department of Health Services 2010). This fire resulted in 

the evacuation of 30,000 people and the loss of more than 

400 homes. Reforestation and watershed restoration work 

is ongoing. Continued concern about wildfire danger has 

led to strong community support and political pressure for 

increased thinning on national forest lands. This fire also 

set the stage for the White Mountain Stewardship Contract 

(WMSC), which was initiated in 2004 as the first 10-year 

stewardship contract undertaken by the Forest Service and 

the largest to be initiated at the time. The objective of the 

WMSC is to conduct up to 150,000 acres of fuel treatments 

while simultaneously increasing community-based industry 

capacity for processing small-diameter wood (Abrams 

and Burns 2007). Some interviewees say the local wood 

products industry weathered the recession better than that 

of other places because the local industry includes products 

not associated with finished lumber and housing, such as 

wood pellets for heating and unfinished wood beams being 

shipped to Mexico. Nonetheless, two of the local mills shut 

down for 6 months, several timber contractors left, and 

those who did stay in business slowed down considerably. 

The 1.67-million-acre Fort Apache Indian Reservation, 

home to approximately 15,000 White Mountain Apache 

Tribal members, has had two primary economic drivers: 

the timber and the recreation and tourism industries. In 

addition to losing a significant portion of their timber base 

in the Rodeo-Chediski Wildfire, the housing slump and the 

closure of two tribal mills has worsened economic conditions on the reservation even further. During the recession, 

unemployment on the reservation has reached nearly 50 

percent, with the majority of the remaining employment 

being seasonal based on casino operations, fishing and 

hunting, and winter skiing. 

Collaboration and partnerships have played a key role 

in the emergence of community development and forest 

restoration initiatives across the region over the last 15 

years. These partnerships, as well as existing mechanisms 

such as the White Mountain Stewardship Contract and the 

Tribal Forest Protection Act agreement 4 provided the ASNF 

with an outstanding opportunity to build on these initiatives 

using Recovery Act funding. 

3

 The ASNF estimated use is 473,800 visits per year. This was 

based on ASNF staff interviews and confirmed by the National 

Visitor Use Monitoring data available at http://www.fs.fed.us/

recreation/programs/nvum/.

4 The Tribal Forest Protection Act (Public Law 108-278) was 

passed in July 2004 in response to devastating wildfires that 

crossed from federal onto tribal lands the prior summer. The act 

provides a tool for tribes to propose work and enter into contracts 

and agreements with the Forest Service or Bureau of Land Management to reduce threats from federal lands adjacent to Indian 

trust land and Indian communities (USDA FS 2005).
28

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

The ASNF was very aggressive in applying for Recovery Act funding. Many ASNF staff saw this as the opportunity of a lifetime for getting work done on the ground 

and focused on projects with mechanisms to successfully 

implement the funding in a quick and efficient manner. As a 

result, 36 of the 93 recovery projects the ASNF applied for 

were granted, providing the forest and the tribe with more 

than $25 million in funding to use within counties with 

some of the highest poverty levels in the country. 

Three broad categories of Recovery Act projects are 

described in this case study: 

• Forest restoration and fuels reduction on the ASNF. 

• Recreation and related road improvements on the 

ASNF.

• Forest fire rehabilitation efforts and greenhouse construction on the Fort Apache Indian Reservation. 

Methods

This case study was primarily conducted using qualitative 

social science research methods. Qualitative data were gathered during face-to-face, semistructured interviews with 

people involved in the Recovery Act project. A total of 32 

individuals were interviewed for this case study. Interviewees included 13 Forest Service employees who developed or 

implemented the projects, 6 local business representatives 

and 6 tribal representatives who received Recovery Act 

funds, and 7 community members who benefited from jobs 

created or retained as a result of the project. 

Additional qualitative data were obtained from 

published sources such as newspapers, local government 

publications, Forest Service documents, and federal Web 

sites. Quantitative data regarding the Recovery Act projects 

and jobs were obtained from Forest Service databases and 

federal Web sites, including Recovery.gov and USAspending.gov. Socioeconomic indicator data describing the local 

population and economy of the case-study area came from 

a number of sources, such as the U.S. Census, the Bureau of 

Labor Statistics, and the Bureau of Economic Analysis. For 

more information on study methods and data sources, see 

the appendix. 

The Projects

Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest 

Restoration and Fuel Reduction 

Project recipients and partners—

Vegetation management occurring under the WMSC is the 

primary Recovery Act forest restoration and fuel reduction project on the ASNF. The bulk of the contracts were 

awarded to Future Forest, LLC, a partnership between a 

harvesting contractor, Walker Brothers Contracting, Inc., 

and a wood pellet manufacturer, Forest Energy Corporation 

(table 3-1). Stewardship contracting allows private organizations or businesses to remove forest products in return for 

performing work to restore and maintain healthy forest 

ecosystems. In this case, the value of the wood removed 

partially offsets the cost of thinning dense stands of ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa Dougl. ex. Laws.). 

Now in its sixth year, the WMSC has developed significant credibility as an efficient and effective program, with 

its success based on long-term partnerships built across 

diverse social, economic, and environmental interests 

(Mattor et al. 2009). In addition to ecosystem restoration 

and hazardous fuel reduction, the WMSC was designed to 

facilitate the development of a wood products industry better suited to utilize the small-diameter trees that characterize the area (Abrams and Burns 2007, Steelman and Kunkel 

2003). Future Forest serves as a wood broker, which has 

distributed the wood removed from the Apache-Sitgreaves 

to 20 other businesses since 2004.5 Strategies developed 

through the WMSC to integrate locally based forest products industries have established a vitally important network 

of wood product facilities producing wood pellets, biomass 

energy, pallets, lumber, furniture, molding, soil fertilizer, 

and animal bedding, which were able to productively 

absorb the biomass removed with the recovery funding. 

Five logging contractors work with Future Forest to remove 

the wood from the forest and deliver it to these businesses 

(Sitko and Hurteau 2010). Although there is a guarantee 

within the WMSC to fund a minimum of 5,000 acres of 

harvesting per year, 35,166 acres have been treated over the 

5 For a list of businesses associated with the WMSC see Sitko and 

Hurteau (2010: 70).
29

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Table 3-1—Project recipients and funding obligated to date

 Total funding Funding

Recipient Project category and description amount mechanism

Dollars

Future Forest (all task orders), Forest Restoration and Fuels Reduction (WFM): 9,707,000 4 contracts

Specialized Tree Service Work pertaining to White Mountain (WMSC contract

(contract), APC Pallets Stewardship Contract (eight task orders), includes 8 task 

Incorporated (grant), two site preparation for reforestation, precom- orders),1 grant

others to be decided mercial thinning, expansion of Eager Mill

Multiple Recreation Infrastructure and Roads (CIM): 7,990,000 1 agreement,

Campground improvements, trail maintenance, 48 contractsa

Forest Service road maintenance

White Mountain Apache Tribe White Mountain Apache Tribe Projects: 7,730,000 1 agreement, 

Restoration of Forest Service and tribal 2 grants

lands, fuel reduction on Fort Apache Indian 

Reservation, watershed enhancements, 

development of nursery to support

 restoration efforts

a Estimated number of contracts awarded as of January 2011. 

WFM = Wildland Fire Management.

WMSC= White Mountain Stewardship Contract.

CIM = Capital Improvement and Maintenance.

life of the stewardship contract (2004 to present) as of April 

2010 (Sitko and Hurteau 2010). The rural development and 

integrated harvesting and utilization approaches, coupled 

with the collaborative framework of the WMSC, made it 

possible to quickly and efficiently implement several million 

dollars worth of task orders for treatment under the contract 

(fig. 3-7). 

Because of the existing stewardship contract, previously completed National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) decisions, project planning, field preparation, and 

a dedicated Forest Service staff, immediate implementation 

of the Recovery Act-funded task orders was significantly 

enhanced. The forest was able to implement the WMSC 

with recovery funds because it had already been competitively bid. According to one district silviculturist, “The 

White Mountain Stewardship project never lost a beat with 

ARRA because they didn’t have to develop a new contract 

... the only thing they do differently because of ARRA is to 

charge to a different job code.” This was possible because 

the task orders (planned and approved harvesting on a 

specific number of acres) had already been prepared. 

Figure 3-7—Chain flail debarker feeds chipper on White Mountain 

Stewardship Contract.

Courtesy of Future Forest

The WMSC is expected to treat 10,000 acres for forest 

restoration and hazardous fuel reduction using economic 

recovery funding in 2010 and 2011. As of June 2010, Future 

Forest had accomplished work on four of the eight recoveryfunded task orders: Excalibur, McKay, Butler, and Greer C. 

The forest restoration/fuel reduction projects on the ASNF 

will continue with harvesting work on West Chevlon, 
30

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Wolf A, Nutrioso 2, and Mineral BX. Task orders are 

described on the basis of hundreds of acres and the desired 

treatment prescriptions. Additionally, the recipient quarterly 

reports by Future Forest provide information on the number 

of tons of fiber removed. For example, during the last 

quarter ending June 30, 2010, approximately 12,187 tons 

were removed on the Butler 

Task order, which is more than 50 percent completed.

The ASNF also used Recovery Act funding to provide 

forest restoration and fuel reduction opportunities for other 

local contractors who are not associated with the WMSC by 

advertising several smaller projects. These included a project to remove hazard trees from developed recreation sites 

intended to provide work for unemployed arborists and firemitigation contractors. Another project, Nutrioso Wildland 

Urban Interface (WUI) Pinyon-Juniper Restoration, intends 

to protect watersheds and aquatic species as well as reduce 

fire risk to adjacent private property by thinning 1,500 

acres of dense forest stands. The Pinyon-Juniper Thinning 

and Mastication Project will restore 3,700 acres where this 

vegetation type is spreading beyond its historical range. 

Another recovery grant has been used to develop a 

minority-owned pallet mill in Eagar at the site of the closed 

Stone Forest Industries mill. This builds upon an existing 

local strategy that providing mill capacity is essential to 

make wood removal affordable. Another recent example is 

the creation of Pure Wood Products, a new spinoff company 

from Future Forest, which received a $75,000 resource 

advisory committee grant to conduct marketing and develop 

a demonstration project for wood straw, and a $250,000 

grant from the USDA Forest Service Forest Products Lab 

to purchase machinery (a veneer machine and “muncher”) 

to manufacture wood straw. These new industries, as well 

as increased production of biomass energy at the Snowflake 

White Mountain Power plant, will provide new outlets for 

recovery-funded biomass removal.

Socioeconomic benefits—

An average annual treatment of 7,700 acres per year took 

place in the WMSC’s first 5 years, prior to Recovery Act 

funding (Sitko and Hurteau 2010). This work resulted in 

approximately $13,300,000 in annual expenditures within 

White Mountain communities by local businesses, and 

more than $600,000 generated in annual taxes paid to local 

governments (Sitko and Hurteau 2010).

The economic recovery funding has allowed Future 

Forest to continue its commitment to work with other 

local companies and develop the local wood products 

infrastructure and community economic status (fig. 3-8). 

With this funding they were able to initiate contracts with 

two additional logging companies, totaling 14 employees. 

Both of these logging contractors had been working on the 

White Mountain Apache Tribe reservation and were out of 

work because of the closure of the tribal mills. Several new 

employees were hired, including a veteran who had recently 

returned from Iraq, and a block layer who was out of work 

owning to the recession.

Figure 3-8—Unloading chips at Forest Energy Corporation 

pellet mill.

Courtesy of Future Forest

In addition, Future Forest’s product diversity makes 

it more likely that there will be markets for at least some 

products during challenging economic times. Future Forest’s commitment to the local economy is also evident when 

they sell wood to these processors below market value as 

a means of keeping them in business. According to Future 

Forest’s Managing Partner, “I trust these guys and I need to 

keep them in business.” The recovery task orders provide 

seasonal but steady work for these companies, and as a 

result of the recovery money, the mill and logging capacity 

of the region is increasing. It is estimated that 319 jobs per 
31

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Table 3-2—Jobs reported on the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest

Number of Reporting period

contracts/ Feb.–Sept. Oct.–Dec. Jan.–Mar. Apr.–June July–Sept.

Recipient agreements 2009 2009 2010 2010 2010

Number of jobsa

Forest restoration and fuel reduction (WFM):

Future Forest 1 contract — 113 113 85 72

(8 task orders)

Specialized Tree Service 1 contract — — — 1 —

APC Pallets 1 grant 3 10 — 10 —

Still to be awarded 2 contracts — — — — —

Recreation infrastructure and roads (CIM):b

Multiple recipients 48 contracts, 28 20.1 6 15.1 55.3

1 agreement

White Mountain Apache Tribe projects:

White Mountain Apache Tribe 1 agreement, — 15 39 50 65.8

2 grants

Note: (—) indicates that no quarterly report was available. 

a

 Job numbers are full-time equivalent jobs. See appendix for reporting methodology.

b

 Jobs data are estimates associated with contract work. 

year have been attributed to the WMSC (226 direct and 93 

indirect) including local wood products and harvesting jobs 

(Sitko and Hurteau 2010). Prior to recovery funding, many 

of these businesses were shutting down and contractors 

were moving out of the region. The number of jobs created 

through the WMSC with recovery funding is reported in 

table 3-2.

Environmental benefits—

The WMSC work was initiated as a means to mitigate fire 

risk throughout the area. The management prescriptions 

have since shifted to better represent historical vegetative 

conditions, provide improved habitat conditions for native 

species, especially Mexican spotted owl (Strix occidentalis 

lucida) and northern goshawk (Accipiter gentilis), and 

protect municipal watersheds while still reducing fire risk 

conditions. Surface fires should now be able to run through 

the treated stands without creating an uncharacteristic 

stand-replacing fire. Just as the rural development benefits 

of the WMSC have been advanced by an integrated 

community-based economic approach, the ASNF’s forestry, 

wildlife, and hydrology staffs have become more integrated 

in their environmental analyses and project design. 

Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest, 

Recreation Infrastructure and Roads

Project recipients and partners—

In this report, emphasis will be placed on those Recovery 

Act recreation projects intended to complete the major 

deferred maintenance projects on the Hoyer Campground, 

Luna Lake Campground, Big Lake Recreational Area 

Campgrounds, and East Fork of the Black River Campgrounds; to upgrade and reconstruct 26 miles of the Saffel 

Canyon All Terrain Vehicle Trail; to reconstruct and surface 

3 miles of the Rim Vista Trail; and to resurface, stabilize, 

and improve drainage on roads within and connecting the 

ASNF and local communities. 

Six local contractors who had previously worked for 

the ASNF were used to complete these projects. Most of 

these projects were implemented in an efficient and timely 

manner by local contractors because IDIQ contracts were 

already in place for most of them. Recreation and engineering staff on the ASNF had previously completed a considerable amount of planning and design work on several of 

these recreation facility and road improvement projects 

prior to Recovery Act funding becoming available. Overall, 

this meant the recovery financial resources could be used 
32

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

within an existing framework of indepth strategic planning 

and local collaboration, another example of the high level of 

preparedness on the part of ASNF staff.

The first phase of the Hoyer campground renovations 

was one such project (fig. 3-9). This campground is located 

just north of the small town of Greer, adjacent to three small 

reservoirs and the Little Colorado River, and includes 91 

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)-accessible camping 

units that generally remain occupied from mid-May to the 

end of September. Hoyer and 30 smaller campgrounds on 

the ASNF have a significant direct economic and cultural 

connection to the local community. Local merchants rely on 

seasonal tourists for sales of fishing and hunting gear, groceries, and camping amenities, as well as dining and retail 

sales. Because of the local community’s direct economic 

connection to the campground, they place a high value on 

it and are willing to support and invest in it. The Hoyer 

Campground is being worked on by five contractors—four 

on roads related to the campground, one on facilities. Phase 

1, completed in 2009, consisted of resurfacing roads and 

widening camping spurs, installing new tables and fire 

rings, and replacing faulty toilet units. This phase was 

successfully completed quickly because the contracting officer’s representative and contractors had experience working 

together. They had completed enough design work to award 

contracts and were able to adjust as needed. Accomplishments completed by December 2009 include:

Figure 3-9—Hoyer Campground Spur Upgrade, ApacheSitgreaves National Forest.

James Dietrich

• Demolished seven restrooms and prepared for vault 

toilet installation.

• Reconstructed and resurfaced Hoyer Campground’s 

main road.

• Enlarged, improved, and resurfaced 91 camping 

spurs and picnic spaces.

• Improved drainage and erosion control.

Four local contractors were hired to upgrade and 

stabilize the campground roads (table 3-1). Each contractor 

is well established in the community and had been doing 

brisk business prior to the recession. Once the recession 

started, these contractors were forced to take smaller 

jobs and were unable to sustain the levels of employment 

they maintained prior to the recession. Because the Hoyer 

Campground construction project funding was received 

very quickly, two of these companies were able to secure 

a contract in time to stave off bankruptcy and resulting 

dismissal of their employees.

Road construction and maintenance projects are a 

second large Recovery Act effort occurring across the 

ASNF on National Forest system roads (NFSRs, 249, 249E, 

24, 26, 275, 405, 688, and 8007) and campground loops and 

culverts (Big Lake and Luna Lake Campgrounds). Eight 

contractors have been granted contracts to upgrade and 

maintain roads connecting communities and campgrounds 

across the forest. “All roads lead to Big Lake” is a commonly heard phrase because practically every road and 

highway connects the towns of Showlow, Greer, Springerville, Eagar, Alpine, and others to the USFS campgrounds 

in what is called the Big Lake Complex. The roads therefore 

provide an important economic pathway for tourists travelling between campgrounds and local towns throughout the 

region. 

In the latest quarter ending June 30, 2010, numerous 

road resurfacing, paving, and culvert replacement projects 

have begun. The construction consists of activities such as 

crushing and stockpiling aggregate, asphalt patching and 

resurfacing, soil stabilization, and fog sealing and striping of parking lots and roadways (June 30, Recovery Act 

quarterly reports). Geisler Skidding Contractors, Marks 
33

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Trucking and Tractor Works, Sug Rogers Construction, 

and V Mountain Construction have been the recipients of 

recovery funding for this work.

A third major recreation project is the Saffel Canyon 

Trail renovation, which entails upgrading and reconstructing this 26-mile trail (fig. 3-10). This is the only trail 

specifically designed for all-terrain-vehicle (ATV) use on 

the forest, and has developed into a large economic boon for 

the area. The Saffel Canyon Trail, and the annual “Outlaw 

Jamboree” showcasing it, directly contribute to the local 

economy through demand for lodging, restaurants, supplies, and the promotion of other regional attractions. Many 

people discover the trail at the Jamboree and bring their 

families and friends back to enjoy it on subsequent visits. 

The Town of Eagar received a $276,300 grant from Arizona 

State Parks for Saffel Canyon Trailhead upgrades, improved 

stream crossings and drainage, and moving the trail out 

of a riparian area. A key reason the recovery money was 

received for the Saffel Canyon Trail project is because of the 

importance of this trail to the community and the community’s resulting financial and political support. 

Numerous recreation infrastructure projects will 

continue throughout 2010 and 2011 (fig. 3-11). These include 

Phase II of the Hoyer Campground renovations (shower and 

potable water facilities), installing vault toilets at the Luna 

Lake Campground, and the continued upgrading of the 

roads and campground areas. The road construction across 

the ASNF, including the Hoyer Campground, will continue 

throughout the year.

Figure 3-10—Saffel Canyon Trail Bridge on the ApacheSitgreaves National Forest.

Figure 3-11—Big Lake restroom facilities.

James Dietrich

James Dietrich

Socioeconomic benefits—

As with the forest stewardship projects, the recreation 

projects supported by the Recovery Act funding helped to 

maintain the local contractor capacity. At least two of the 

companies were within a week of filing for bankruptcy 

before receiving Recovery Act contracts. The funding has 

allowed these companies to maintain or rehire employees 

while keeping them solvent during the recession. The 

projects also provided the companies an opportunity to 

increase their efficiency through shared equipment and 

resources (e.g., instead of bringing two rollers to a job site 

they coordinate to share just one roller). A major economic 

benefit of the recreation projects is the positive impact of 

the renovations on the local tourism-dependent communities. Because tourism is an economic mainstay of these 

communities, the reconstruction of the Saffel Canyon Trail, 

the roads, and the Hoyer Campground and other recreation 

facilities will provide greater incentive for visitors to visit 

the area. The investment in recreation facilities and related 

transportation infrastructure on the ASNF will result 

in significant dividends in terms of the quality of visitor 

experiences over the next 30 years, and strengthening the 

local tourism economy.

Environmental benefits—

The recreation projects provide the ASNF the opportunity 

to mitigate environmental risks occurring from aging 

restroom facilities, trail erosion, and road degradation. This 

results in less sedimentation, erosion, and pollution and 
34

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

in improved overall watershed health. These large-scale 

projects greatly reduce deferred maintenance needs on the 

forest, allowing other maintenance to occur on the basis of 

annual ASNF budgeting.

White Mountain Apache Tribal Projects

Project recipients and partners—

The White Mountain Apache Tribe received $7,730,000 

in Recovery Act funding for three projects—a variety of 

Rodeo-Chediski forest rehabilitation efforts, the Apache 

Greenhouse project, and a Tribal Forest Protection Act 

agreement with the ASNF (table 3-1). Each of these projects 

relates to the Rodeo-Chediski Wildfire through restoration 

and rehabilitation efforts as a means to employ tribal members and restore the forest landscape. Having completed the 

burned area emergency rehabilitation (BAER) efforts in 

2005, the tribal forestry staff was well positioned through 

experience and awareness of ongoing needs for postfire 

rehabilitation. Recovery Act funding for the White Mountain Apache Tribe was allocated to eight fire rehabilitation 

objectives, which focus primarily on hazard tree removal, 

erosion control, fence building, cultural resource protection, 

and reseeding efforts. 

Planning and preparation for the greenhouse project 

had started prior to ARRA, which facilitated its approval 

for funding. The tribe received recovery funding to build 

a new greenhouse to replace six dilapidated greenhouses 

operated by the Bureau of Indian Affairs over the past 

30 years. The greenhouse will allow for native seedling 

production for Rodeo-Chediski rehabilitation efforts, and 

seedlings to market to the USDA Forest Service for rehabilitation in other areas. On the reservation alone there is a 

need to plant 700 acres of trees, at 200 trees per acre. 

The tribe worked with the ASNF over the past few 

years to develop a Tribal Forest Protection Act (TFPA) 

agreement and objectives. Under TFPA, a tribe can propose fire mitigation work to be conducted on neighboring 

national forest land (USDA FS 2005). The forest has 30 

days to review the proposal and submit a recommendation 

to the Regional Forester, who then has 90 days to approve 

or reject it. In this case, the White Mountain Apache and 

the ASNF submitted a joint proposal, which improved the 

chance of approval. With the regional forester’s approval 

for the TFPA project, it was then submitted for Recovery 

Act funding, with an emphasis on the tribal job training and 

employment benefits. The Recovery Act funding received 

for this project will focus on forest thinning on the Los 

Burros Complex of the Lakeside Ranger District, near 

several existing WMSC task order projects. This project 

is administered through the ASNF, with some of the prep 

work and hand thinning completed by the tribe, and followup mechanical treatments completed by Future Forest, 

contracted through the WMSC (table 3-1). This is one of 

a small number of TFPA projects funded through ARRA 

nationwide. 

The tribe has accomplished a considerable amount of 

Recovery Act-funded forest rehabilitation work in a short 

time. The hazard trees project was nearly complete as of 

May, 2010. The tribe assessed 2,000 dead and standing trees 

(fig. 3-12) and hand crews have removed approximately 

1,000 hazard trees. The hazard trees were connected in 

some cases with work on streambanks to reduce erosion. In 

a second project, 55 culverts were identified in the RodeoChediski burn area. Heavy equipment is being brought in 

to clean out brush and rocks that had collected upstream 

of the culverts and they will be re-armored with rock. 

Another project will revegetate 2,000 acres where aerial 

reseeding efforts following the Rodeo-Chediski Fire had 

high mortality. The recovery crews have completed 390 

acres of reseeding so far. Five college student interns have 

Figure 3-12—Apache crew members marking a wildlife tree.

A. McCabe
35

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

been hired to map the areas needing seeding next year. A 

fourth project involves cultural resource protection efforts 

to protect sacred springs and cemeteries across the reservation. Forty-one springs and 24 cemetery sites have been 

identified and mapped since the Rodeo-Chediski Fire. The 

Recovery Act funding has been used to repair and place 

new fencing around these springs and cemeteries, remove 

hazard trees, as well as place erosion control barriers 

around them. The BAER program supported construction 

of 110 miles of fencing in 2004–2005 to protect the burned 

areas from cattle and horses. Thirty and a half miles of this 

fence have been repaired as of June 30, 2010. The recovery 

money has also been allocated for erosion control on 25 

family farms on the reservation where streambank erosion 

resulting from the fire has affected their viability. The sites 

have been prioritized, and erosion control on eight of the 

farms has been completed. 

A 10-person thinning crew has conducted preparatory 

fieldwork for the TFPA project. This includes collecting 

data on 11.38 miles of road, 1.7 miles of fence, and 1.34 

miles of trails. Crews have also been working in rocky 

areas where mechanical thinning cannot take place. 

Approximately 350 acres have been completed of the 1,200 

acres within the Brushy Project, with a total of 2,800 acres 

remaining on three other project sites (ARRA quarterly 

report, June 30, 2010). An administrative staff member has 

attended planning meetings with the ASNF to plan future 

tribal work on adjacent ASNF land. 

The tribe is strongly committed to a community-based 

approach to the Greenhouse Project, implementing it in five 

phases to ensure its success: planning, design, construction, 

operation, and evaluation. Since October 29, 2009, tribal 

staff have been focusing on the first two phases of planning 

and design. They have assessed four building sites, and 

selected a 20-acre property near a public school complex 

south of Whiteriver where it will be constructed. This site 

offers improved road access, nearby electricity, and low 

snow-loading potential. A detailed work plan for developing 

solar power and biomass for heating has been completed, 

as well as a market feasibility study and a production and 

sales forecast. Construction work has begun on the new 

greenhouse site, including building the boundary fence, 

staking out building locations, preparing global positioning 

system GPS maps, and circulating information for community awareness (June 30, 2010, ARRA quarterly report). The 

greenhouse project will result in native seedling production 

for postfire rehabilitation efforts on the reservation and the 

ASNF, with sowing beginning in early 2011. 

The TFPA project consists of four 1,000-acre task 

orders, with two task orders to be prepared in 2010 and the 

remaining two prepared in 2011. Once these are prepared, 

Future Forest will implement the mechanical treatments 

and the tribe will conduct the precommercial thinning. In 

addition to on-the-ground treatments, the forest management training and certification of tribal members will 

continue throughout the TFPA project. Both the greenhouse 

and TFPA projects, coupled with the growing tribal forestry staff expertise and leadership, provide the tribe with 

increased opportunities for future partnerships with the 

ASNF and other national forests. 

Socioeconomic benefits—

The Recovery Act funding has employed many members 

of the White Mountain Apache Tribe for the three projects 

thus far (fig. 3-13; table 3-2). This includes timber crews 

doing forest rehabilitation and erosion control work, 

assessment efforts, greenhouse planning efforts, and fence 

repairs. It is anticipated the greenhouse will employ 30 staff 

members for operations once the construction is complete. 

Figure 3-13—Apache crew members working on the Tribal Forest 

Protection Act project.

A. McCabe
36

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Another major economic benefit of the ARRA funding 

for the tribe is the opportunity for formerly unemployed 

members to be trained in forest management, with the 

potential for future employment with the tribe or the ASNF, 

which are both currently in need of trained forestry technicians. With the closing of the Fort Apache timber mill, and 

the impact of the Rodeo-Chediski wildfire, the Recovery 

Act funding is filling a key gap and could provide an 

important bridge to more creative use of biomass and forest 

management for the tribe. Tribal forestry representatives 

express a strong desire to be highly successful, with the 

recovery projects as a stepping stone to improved forest 

resource management.

Environmental benefits—

The tribal projects focus on postfire rehabilitation efforts 

and forest wildfire mitigation programs (figs. 3-14 and 

3-15). These projects will continue the erosion reduction, 

reseeding, and fire mitigation efforts across the reservation 

begun by the BAER program. The tribe’s hazardous 

fuels project will result in watershed enhancements on 

5,000 acres within the Rodeo-Chediski Fire area and they 

anticipate producing more than 800,000 seedlings for 

burned area rehabilitation through the greenhouse program 

to reestablish native vegetation across this area. The Tribal 

Forest Protection Act project on ASNF land will provide 

the tribe with additional fire mitigation protection, as 

well as increased skills and employment opportunities for 

conducting forest management practices in the future.

Effects on the Agency

The ASNF’s success in obtaining Recovery Act funding 

almost doubled its normal budget, and the forest was able 

to channel almost all of this funding to on-the-ground 

projects by not adding additional Forest Service staff. Many 

employees see the recovery funding as “a once-in-a-lifetime 

opportunity” to get a backlog of projects accomplished on 

the ground while working closely with local communities. Referring to the amount of work being accomplished, 

one recreation staff member characterized Recovery Act 

projects as “the closest thing he would ever see to the 

CCC [Civilian Conservation Corps] days.” The ASNF has 

a history of being opportunistic in obtaining funding for 

projects. The mechanisms they have in place to quickly 

obligate funding allowed them to successfully administer 

the recovery funds. The commitment to maximizing 

economic recovery funding is evident by the Forest Leadership Team’s decision not to hire new staff to help with the 

projects because they wanted to get as much money on the 

ground as possible. 

Several employees mentioned that Recovery Act projects are their number one priority but that they have three 

other “once in your career” projects occurring at the same 

time—the forest plan revision, the implementation of the 

Travel Management Rule, and the ongoing White Mountain 

Figure 3-15—Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest Blue Ridge 

Demo posttreatment.

Figure 3-14—Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest Blue Ridge 

Demo pretreatment.

Sam Burns Sam Burns
37

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Stewardship Contract. The employees interviewed were 

clearly working hard, putting in long hours, and under a 

great deal of stress, but none of them regretted getting the 

high level of recovery funding; there was a strong “can do” 

attitude. A district ranger commented that the ASNF is a 

“high-performing forest,” and that certainly seems to be 

the case based on their extensive work with the recovery 

projects. 

The training aspects of the economic-recovery-funded 

TFPA project will benefit both the ASNF and the tribe. 

There is currently a shortage of forest technicians in the 

area, and the training and certification programs for tribal 

members will benefit the forest and provide tribal employment over the long term.

The economic recovery projects have improved the 

impression the Forest Service makes among community 

members in a politically conservative area where many 

people are still concerned about mill closures and reduced 

livestock grazing. These projects have increased the capacity of the ASNF and community to work together and created an opportunity for better relations. Funded recipients 

praised the agency for successfully coordinating projects, as 

well as being cognizant of their funding needs. 

Challenges

Although there have been numerous benefits resulting from 

the economic recovery projects, four primary challenges 

preventing a full realization of these benefits were noted 

by participants. First, although the ASNF was able to use 

several existing contracts to implement these projects 

smoothly, implementation was more challenging when the 

forest needed to develop new contracts. The forest staff 

appreciated not having to oversee the Economic Recovery 

Operations Center (EROC) paperwork, but the contracting 

process using the EROC was slower initially than many 

anticipated. Some project recipients noted frustration in 

the slowness of the initial contract awards and payments, 

which created anxiety for some contractors. Additionally, 

contract recipients often found the additional reporting to be 

cumbersome, especially when dealing with EROC representatives who weren’t familiar with the local situation, such 

as construction and forest restoration limitations during the 

exceptional heavy snow conditions beginning in December 

2009. 

Another challenge is that the Recovery Act funding 

is being implemented in addition to other high-priority 

programs on the ASNF, particularly the forest plan revision 

and implementation of the Travel Management Rule. This 

has created an increased staff workload that most likely 

cannot be sustained over an extended period. The ASNF 

Leadership Team appears to be successfully articulating 

priorities and managing workloads, but these projects add a 

high degree of stress to the forest employees.

A third challenge results from the substitution of 

economic recovery funding for the appropriated WMSC 

funding. Partners in the WMSC were under the impression 

the recovery funding would be added to the existing appropriated WMSC funding and were deeply disappointed when 

the recovery funding instead was largely used to replace it. 

By using regularly appropriated USFS funds, the WMSC’s 

biomass removal averaged 7,700 acres a year from 2004 to 

2008. When economic recovery funds were added in 2009, 

Future Forest’s volume increased to 10,000 acres per year. 

The local timber and wood products industry became 

particularly frustrated because they believe they could have 

expanded their capacity even higher if Recovery Act and 

regularly appropriated USFS dollars could have been used 

in tandem. Their estimate was that with the addition of two 

logging companies and the new contract with the Snowflake 

White Mountain Power plant in 2009, they would be able 

to complete between 12,000 and 15,000 acres per year. 

Industry representatives believe they were asked by the 

Forest Service, at the initiation of the WMSC, to significantly increase both the volume of forest restoration and 

fuel reduction and build a biomass utilization infrastructure 

and market through local investments of both social and 

economic capital. The use of economic recovery resources 

in 2009–2010 may have produced a short-term spike in 

industry capacity, but absent the regularly appropriated 

funding, the long-term net gain anticipated by ASNF and 

community partners could not be attained. 
38

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Because economic recovery resources could not be 

used to conduct NEPA analyses, the emerging concern is 

that the ASNF will not be able to keep up in future years 

with the minimum 5,000 acres called for in the WMSC. 

Even though the ASNF staff are beginning analysis on 

several large NEPA projects, budget and staffing issues 

have interviewees concerned it will be difficult to build 

the task order “shelf stock” back up in a timely manner for 

2011. One person described the situation as “a locomotive 

about to run out of track.” As a result, several people have 

questioned why the industry would risk investing in a much 

larger restoration initiative being proposed, the Four Forest 

Restoration Initiative (4FRI, a restoration effort to also 

include the Coconino, Kaibab, and Tonto National Forests) 

if the Forest Service is having difficulty maintaining funding of the smaller WMSC in a coordinated manner with the 

recovery funding. 

Finally, the White Mountain Apache Tribe had spent a 

considerable amount of time planning the projects for which 

they received economic recovery funding. The multiple, 

Recovery Act-funded forest restoration and fuel reduction 

projects began in October 2009, and although a great deal 

has been accomplished, organizing the teams and developing budgets for the diverse range of projects has required 

steady and committed effort. Time is required for each 

project to be screened and approved by the Tribal Planning 

Project Review Committee. Organizing a diverse forest 

rehabilitation program subsequent to a very large wildfire 

has been the greatest challenge for implementation of the 

tribal projects. 

Key Findings

This case study illustrates how the Recovery Act funding 

has benefitted the ASNF, the surrounding communities, and 

the White Mountain Apache Tribe by providing opportunities to simultaneously move toward ecological and rural 

development goals. These recovery projects will have longterm impacts in terms of improved recreation experiences, 

increased forest health and wildfire mitigation, economic 

development, strengthened partnerships, and creating a 

strong foundation for tribal forest management. 

The case study projects provide environmental benefits 

by mitigating fire danger, improving habitat conditions, 

reducing erosion and other damages from the RodeoChediski Fire, improving water quality, and reducing 

environmental impacts from trails, roads, and campground 

facilities. The forest and watershed restoration efforts 

provide improved quality of life and reduced risk of fire, 

smoke, and erosion to local community members. They also 

improve the potential for increased recreational and tourism 

activities throughout the area, which clearly depend on 

national forest recreation infrastructure and amenities. 

The economic recovery projects appear to be having a cumulative social benefit by enhancing the ASNF’s 

ability to get more work done on the ground, building on 

its existing partnerships and programs of work, creating 

socioeconomic opportunities for local communities and 

the White Mountain Apache Tribe, and demonstrating that 

past collaborative efforts are most advantageous in building 

stewardship-oriented partnerships and relationships. In particular, ARRA support of the WMSC has enhanced a fully 

integrated approach to forest health improvement, hazardous fuel reduction, biomass utilization, and rural economic 

development in a region that has undergone significant 

economic and social transitions, but nevertheless remains 

largely dependent on diverse uses of national forest lands. 

Key findings from this case are summarized here:

Existing collaborative relationships, with individuals 

and with organizations, that the ASNF has established 

over the years made it possible to spend a large sum 

of Recovery Act money quickly. Beginning in 1997, the 

ASNF worked to establish collaborative relationships with 

regional partners to support integrated forest management and community development efforts. Community, 

tribal, Forest Service, and nongovernmental leaders have 

concretely formed a set of working groups, community 

forestry organizations, and collaborative processes that 

actively support each other within a regional network. 

This organizational framework consists of the Natural 

Resources Working Group, The Arizona Sustainable 

Forest Partnership, the Northern Arizona Wood Products 

Association, county-level community wildfire protection 

planning groups, and The White Mountain Stewardship 
39

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Monitoring Board. The network can be described as a 

landscape-level community forestry system, which has 

been able to iteratively develop and implement outcomes in 

the following areas: ecological restoration, development of 

biomass utilization infrastructure, and fuel reduction and 

fire risk mitigation. This process of collaboration between 

community leaders and stakeholders has established a firm 

foundation for new project implementation, evident in the 

immediate implementation of several recovery projects. The 

economic recovery funding built upon and further strengthened these relationships, in some cases initiating new ones, 

resulting in coordinated investments throughout the region. 

This made it possible to spend a large sum of Recovery Act 

money quickly and effectively, thus achieving the goals of 

the act. 

Project-level preparedness on the part of regional Forest 

Service offices, the community, and tribal leaders made 

it possible to utilize Recovery Act funds quickly and 

efficiently. Many of the economic-recovery-funded projects 

were already developed and NEPA ready; the institutional 

organizations and arrangements were already in place to 

carry them out. This readiness made it possible to utilize 

Recovery Act funds quickly and efficiently. The implementation of projects beneficial to both community and agency 

goals can be attributed to the extraordinary readiness of the 

community, agency, and tribal leaders. Local communities 

were highly motivated to organize cooperatively to address 

local resource issues (e.g., maintaining Hoyer Campground 

and initiating the reconstruction of the Saffel Canyon ATV 

Trail, and to continue wildfire rehabilitation). The White 

Mountain Apache Tribe had a rigorous process in place 

for developing and implementing projects based on their 

challenging experiences with the Rodeo-Chediski wildfire 

and the subsequent BAER planning process. Tribal forestry 

staff has increasingly worked with the ASNF to coordinate 

cross-boundary efforts via the TFPA. The preexisting TFPA 

agreement with the ASNF allowed both the agency and 

tribe to quickly implement forest restoration/fuel reduction 

projects on neighboring ASNF land. The ASNF was also 

able to quickly tap into a stockpile of NEPA-ready and 

prepped projects and existing contracts with local businesses (i.e., The White Mountain Stewardship Contract, 

IDIQ contracts). In addition, the agency used its Facilities 

Master Plan, Recreation Sites Facility Plan, and extensive 

NEPA preparations, to establish an advanced level of readiness prior to the Recovery Act project submissions. 

Alignment of Recovery Act-funded projects with 

community needs and community capacity increases 

socioeconomic benefits. At a regional scale, there was good 

alignment of recovery projects with the future management 

directions of the ASNF and the longer term social and 

economic well-being of the communities. The combination 

of projects across the ASNF, the White Mountain Apache 

Tribe, and other regional communities was a successful 

match with the needs of the community (such as investing 

in infrastructure to enhance visitor experiences), agency 

(such as continuing to rebuild a wood products industry oriented to forest restoration), and tribe (such as diverse efforts 

to improve forest health and management after the RodeoChediski Wildfire). These projects took into account local 

capacities to accomplish the work being done. The ASNF 

was able to successfully work with many local companies, 

who are often unable to take on large projects, by creating 

several smaller contracts for each project. The economic 

recovery projects focused on a very appropriate mix of 

areas vital to the long-term well-being of local cultures and 

economies as well as ecological landscapes. The recovery 

investment is therefore being optimized because the projects 

are inclusive of diverse stakeholders and socioeconomic 

needs and are within the specific capacity of the region. 

Agency and community leaders having a community 

development orientation are able to make good, strategic, socioeconomic investments that will provide longterm benefits to the community. The outlook of individual 

agency and community leaders matters greatly; those who 

think about community development needs as a part of 

“business as usual,” rather than as something unique to 

ARRA, sought to invest in projects that will have long-term 

socioeconomic benefits to communities. A majority of the 

projects were initiated by community, agency, and tribal 

leaders who possess a broad community development 

orientation. These leaders do not envision the Recovery 

Act program as merely a series of separate projects but as a 
40

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

means to continue to build long-term community well-being 

and resilience. As a result, the distribution of recovery funding on the ASNF and nearby communities has been a good, 

strategic, socioeconomic investment. Leaders in the ASNF 

also played a significant role in expediting and implementing the recovery projects through their commitment to 

authentically use collaborative objectives and tools.

Recovery projects on the Apache-Sitgreaves National 

Forest and the White Mountain Apache Tribe 

reservation have the potential to act as a bridge, 

transitioning communities toward more diverse and 

sustainable economies. Recovery Act projects cover a 

diverse spectrum of investments: the pellet mill in Eager, 

the wood straw manufacturing demonstration at Pure 

Wood Products, increased biomass energy production at 

the Snowflake White Mountain Power plant, the Apache 

Greenhouse project, and improved recreation opportunities. 

This diversity in investment is likely to lead to a more 

resilient economy by reducing dependency on traditional 

forms of forestry. Individuals also stand to benefit: although 

many of the Recovery Act jobs are not expected to be 

permanent, recipients of those jobs received valuable job 

training, which will serve as a bridge to future employment 

in emerging industries. 

Lessons Learned

It is important to develop a strategy for balancing appropriated funding with supplemental funding in order to 

achieve project goals on both fronts without diminishing 

the impact of either. In the future, opportunities to undertake forest restoration work that contributes to community 

development may be supported with appropriated funding 

(as with the White Mountain Stewardship Contract) or with 

supplemental funding, such as the Recovery Act money. 

When supplemental funds become available, it is important 

to be clear on how they will be balanced with appropriated 

funds to achieve project goals so that stakeholders do not 

build false expectations. In this case, stakeholders felt that 

Recovery Act dollars were used to replace, rather than 

supplement, the appropriated White Mountain Stewardship Contract money. To them, this represented a missed 

opportunity to institute forest restoration at a larger scale. 

A combination of the two funding sources (appropriated and 

Recovery Act resources) would have provided longer term 

benefits for implementation of forest restoration and fuel 

reduction, in part because they could be used for different 

but complementary activities. For example, appropriated 

funds could have been used to support project preparation 

(e.g., NEPA analysis, task order preparation) in addition 

to implementation while Recovery Act funds were used to 

carry out work on the ground. In the future, if appropriated 

funding cannot be maintained in conjunction with supplemental funding, it would benefit funding recipients and 

affected community members to receive a clear explanation 

in a collaborative manner to avoid creating false expectations and mistrust.

Providing resources to maintain NEPA preparation 

over the long term will make it possible to quickly take 

advantage of funding opportunities when they arise.

Because many of the economic-recovery-funded projects 

on the ASNF were already developed and NEPA ready, 

Recovery Act funds were utilized quickly and efficiently, 

leading to rapid job creation. Had the ASNF not had a large 

stock of NEPA-ready projects, implementation would have 

been hindered considerably, especially given that Recovery 

Act funding could not be used for NEPA preparation. Now 

that most of the ASNF NEPA-ready projects have been 

implemented, the forest is concerned that they will be 

unable to find funding to replenish the stock, and worries 

that without NEPA-ready projects they will see a drop in 

their accomplishments for Fiscal Year 2011. Therefore, the 

ASNF case study demonstrates both the importance of having a large stock of NEPA-ready projects, and the need to 

continue investments in activities that contribute to projectlevel preparedness so that when funding opportunities 

like the Recovery Act come along, projects can be easily 

implemented and jobs rapidly created. 

Being proactive with public outreach builds support 

for government initiatives like the Recovery Act, and 

improves relationships between the agency and the community. Many rural communities, in the face of a declining 

timber industry, have experienced a strained relationship 
41

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

with the Forest Service over the last two decades. In this 

case, many local people are fiscally conservative and did not 

favor the concept of stimulus spending. However, by working through existing relationships and taking care to select 

projects that met communities’ development needs, the 

agency was able to send a positive message to communities. 

In particular, the relationship between the Forest Service 

and the White Mountain Apache Tribe grew substantially. 

Forest Service employees expressed satisfaction that they 

were finally able to “make good” on past promises. Funding 

recipients praised the agency for successfully coordinating 

projects, as well as being cognizant of their funding needs. 

Individuals working on recovery projects were able to 

recognize the agency’s concerns for their well-being, and 

as a result their opinion of the agency improved. However, 

although those individuals directly involved with the 

Recovery Act projects were very supportive, interviewees 

suggested a general lack of local public awareness about 

the recovery projects. In the future, a more proactive 

public outreach campaign could better build support and 

strengthen partnerships with the community by increasing 

local awareness of mutual benefits and outcomes. 

When forest stewardship is linked to a community 

development strategy, outcomes are enhanced. Investments in forest restoration, wildfire rehabilitation and 

mitigation, and strategic rural economic development can 

be enhanced by taking a holistic community development 

approach to national forest and tribal natural resource 

management. This means continually integrating local 

community resources, such as leadership, collaborative 

partnerships, common problem-solving, mutual socioeconomic benefits, and industrial skills and capacities into the 

planning and implementation process of forest management. 

Strengthening community-based approaches to forest stewardship can increase the likelihood of successful outcomes, 

including increasing community resilience, expanding 

economic multiplier impacts, enhancing long-term social 

relationships and networks, capturing opportunities for 

training and leadership development of diverse stakeholders, and implementing cross-boundary, multijurisdictional 

landscape conservation. In essence, a strong community 

development approach will greatly increase forest stewardship investments in many areas of resource management, 

most especially in wildfire mitigation, visitor use, forest 

restoration, and biomass utilization.

Acknowledgments

Appreciation is extended to the staff of the ApacheSitgreaves National Forest, to the staff of the White 

Mountain Apache Tribe, to the contractors and recipients 

of the ARRA project funding, and to community 

representatives and leaders in the White Mountain 

Region. Without your support and contributions, our 

efforts to describe the diverse efforts related to ARRA 

funding in this case study would have fallen short. Thanks 

as well to all those who reviewed this document. Many 

thanks to all of you for your time and knowledge. Thanks 

to Sophia Polasky for gathering socioeconomic indicator 

data, and for assistance with report preparation.

References

Abrams, J.; Burns, S. 2007. Case study of a community stewardship success: the White Mountain 

stewardship contract. Flagstaff, AZ: NAU Ecological 

Restoration Institute. http://www.fs.fed.us/r3/asnf/

stewardship/o-docs/Northernpercent20Arizonapercent20Universitypercent20ERIpercent20Casepercent20Studypercent20Whitepercent20Mtnspercent20Stewardshippercent20Contractpercent202007-08.

pdf. (24 July 2010). 

Arizona Department of Health Services. 2010. RodeoChediski Fire Public Health Assessment. http://www.

azdhs.gov/phs/oeh/pdf/rvsd_rodeo_ched_red_assmnt. 

pdf. (29 July 2010).

Arizona Governor’s Forest Health Oversight Council. 

2007. Statewide strategy for restoring Arizona’s forests: 

sustainable forests, communities and economies. 

Executive summary. http://www.azforests.org. 

(7 June 2010).
42

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Mattor, K.; Burns, S.; Cheng, A.S. 2009. Regional 

networks supporting community-based forest 

stewardship and benefits: a case study of the northern 

Arizona partnerships. Greenville, SC: U.S. Endowment 

for Forestry and Communities, Inc. http://www.

usendowment.org/images/CS4_Northern_AZ_

Partnerships.pdf. (24 July 2010).

McClure Consulting LLC. 2010. White Mountain 

Stewardship Project economic assessment. Unpublished 

report prepared for White Mountain Stewardship Project 

Multi-Party Monitoring Board. On file with Sue Sitko, 

The Nature Conservancy, 1715 W. John L. Fish Lane, 

Suite 4, Lakeside, Arizona 85929. 

Sitko, S.; Hurteau S. 2010. Evaluating the impacts of 

forest treatments: the first five years of the White 

Mountain Stewardship Project. Phoenix, AZ: The 

Nature Conservancy. 110 p.

Steelman, T.A.; Kunkel, G. 2003. Eagar Arizona case 

study, December 1–4, 2003. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina 

State University. 14 p. http://www.ncsu.edu/project/

wildfire/Arizona/EagerCaseStudy.pdf. (24 July 2010).

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2005. 

Tribal Forest Protection Act briefing paper, April 5, 2005. 

http://www.fs.fed.us/forestmanagement/stewardship/

tribal/documents/Briefing_paper_TFPA.pdf. (24 July 

2010). 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 

2010. USDA Forest Service American Recovery 

and Reinvestment Act Projects. http://fs.usda.gov/

Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5098109.pdf. 

(27 June 2010).

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census 

[USDC BC]. 2010a. Annual estimates of the resident 

population by selected age groups and sex for counties: 

April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2009. http://www.census.gov/

popest/counties/asrh/CC-EST2009-agesex.html. 

(4 Oct. 2010).

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 

[USDC BC]. 2010b. Small area income and poverty 

estimates, state and county data: 1989, 1993, 1995–2008. 

http://www.census.gov/did/www/saipe/data/statecounty/

index.html. (4 Oct. 2010).

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for 

Education Statistics [USDE NCES]. 2010. Common 

core of data. http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/. (18 Oct. 2010).

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics 

[USDL BLS]. 2010. Local Area Unemployment Statistic 

Program. http://www.bls.gov/lau. (4 Oct. 2010).
43

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Chapter 4: A Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service Recovery Act 

Projects on California’s North Coast

Susan Charnley 1

Summary

California’s north coast region is heavily forested, mountainous, and contains many rural communities where 

natural-resource-based jobs—particularly in forestry—have 

long been important. The economic recession that started 

in 2007 added to what many interviewees perceived as 

having been depressed economic conditions in the area’s 

rural communities since the 1990s. The Forest Service 

contributed an estimated $5,675,444 in American Recovery 

and Reinvestment Act (Recovery Act) funding for projects 

on the Six Rivers National Forest (SRNF) and in Humboldt 

County, including an invasive plants project, a biomass 

powerplant, a pole and post mill project, and a major 

renovation to one of its research labs. Accomplishments 

include:

• Removing roadside brush along 749 miles of SRNF 

roads to improve road and fire safety, forest access, 

and resource protection while creating short-term 

jobs for four recipient organizations.

• Maintaining 122 miles of nonmotorized trails on 

the SRNF to enhance recreation opportunities and 

employ young adults working through youth job 

corps programs.

Total Forest Service Recovery Act Investment, 

California (as of 09/08/09): ~$194,069,000 

(California projects: $186,861,000; California 

share of multistate projects: ~$7,208,000)

Forest Service Recovery Act Investment, 

North Coast (as of 06/30/10): $5,765,444 

Case Study Location: Six Rivers National Forest 

and Humboldt County 

Counties: Humboldt (Primary); Del Norte, Trinity, 

Siskiyou (Secondary)

Project Type: Roadside brush removal, trail 

maintenance, invasive plant assessment, biomass 

powerplant, pole and post mill, Forest Service 

facility renovation 

Fast Facts

• Surveying private and tribal lands for meadow 

knapweed, an invasive plant, and helping 

landowners build capacity to control its spread.

• Providing grant money that helped leverage funds 

needed for refurbishing a biomass powerplant and 

constructing a pole and post mill that will strengthen 

the local restoration economy, support hazardous 

fuel reduction on public and private lands, and create 

long-term sustainable jobs.

1 Susan Charnley is a research social scientist, U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, 

620 SW Main Street, Suite 400, Portland, OR 97205. 

Susan Charnley

Susan Charnley
44

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

• Building a second-floor addition to a Forest Service 

research lab, creating construction jobs in a local 

economic sector hard hit by the recession.

Several Forest Service employees went out of their way 

to distribute project work to diverse recipients in order to 

create economic opportunities for local groups. Although 

many jobs were short term and seasonal in nature, they 

often had important benefits beyond their duration and the 

income earned from them—such as building the capacity 

of individuals and organizations to undertake work related 

to forest management in the future. Recovery money also 

made it possible for some recipients to leverage resources 

(funding, training, labor) they would not have obtained 

otherwise, amplifying project benefits. Strong relationships between the Forest Service and community groups 

were important in helping the agency implement the act 

efficiently, in helping recipients benefit, and for making 

strategic investments to enhance long-term community 

development.

The Case

When the 2007 economic recession hit California’s north 

coast, several people interviewed for this study said that the 

region had been suffering from recession since the 1990s, 

and that the most recent economic hardship only added to 

what was already a chronic problem of underemployment 

in the area’s rural communities. As one interviewee stated, 

“You know, we were hit by a recession years ago. It seems 

that this area is so poverty-stricken that it’s hardly affected 

things, you can’t go much lower...” 

The focus of this case study is Humboldt County, 

located on the northern California coast, and the Six 

Rivers National Forest (SRNF) (fig. 4-1). Eighty percent of 

Humboldt County is forested, and much of it lies in California’s Coast Range that rises to 7,000 feet on the SRNF. 

The county has historically had a natural-resource-based 

economy revolving around forestry, salmon fishing, dairy 

farming, and ranching (Van Kirk 1999). Timber was the 

main economic driver of the local economy until the 1970s; 

the county has nearly 1.5 million acres of timberland, 

second only in California to neighboring Siskiyou County 

(Laaksonen-Craig et al. 2003). Since that time, the economy 

has diversified and forestry has declined dramatically as 

a result of changing markets, harvest restrictions, and 

conflict related to concerns about threatened species and 

the environment. This decline is what led the interviewees 

quoted above to perceive chronic recession in rural parts 

of the county where natural resources remain one of few 

options for creating local employment. Nevertheless, in 

2009, Humboldt County accounted for nearly 14 percent 

of all of the timber harvest volume produced in California, 

and was the second largest timber-producing county in the 

state (CABE 2010). Humboldt County is also known for 

its old-growth coast redwood trees (Sequoia sempervirens 

(D. Don) Endl.) and for being “the heartland of high-grade 

marijuana farming in California” (Samuels 2008). 

In 2009, Humboldt County had a population of 129,623 

(USDC BC 2009). Population growth in the county between 

2000 and 2009 has been much slower than in California as 

a whole, at 2.55 percent (8.73 percent for California) (fig. 

4-2). The county’s rurality ranking is 5, meaning that it is 

not adjacent to a metropolitan area, but has a city with at 

least 20,000 residents.2 That city is Eureka, the county seat, 

with an estimated population of 25,247 in 2009 (USDC 

BC 2010b). The second large city in the county is Arcata, 

On one hand the recession wasn’t as dramatic... 

as other places, ‘cause we were already in a recession, right? Already a depressed economy, already 

high unemployment or underemployment before 

the recession...there probably isn’t a day that goes 

by here that somebody doesn’t come in looking 

for work.

—Trinity County Resource 

Conservation District employee

2

 The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service 

has developed rural urban continuum codes that classify counties 

by whether they are metropolitan (codes 1–3) or nonmetropolitan 

(codes 4–9), and nonmetropolitan counties by their degree of 

urbanization and proximity to metropolitan counties. The higher 

the ranking, the more rural the county. See http://www.ers.usda.

gov/Briefing/Rurality/RuralUrbCon/ for more information.
45

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Figure 4-1—Case-study counties and the Six Rivers National Forest, California.

!

!

! San Francisco

Eureka

Redding

Six Rivers National Forest

Humboldt

County

Siskiyou

County

Trinity

County Redding

Del

Norte

County

National forest

Case-study location

Case-study location/national forest

with an estimated population of 17,132 in 2009, and home 

to Humboldt State University. Otherwise, the county is 

characterized by many small, rural communities scattered 

across its 3,572 square miles. There are also eight Indian 

reservations in the county, including the Hoopa Valley 

Reservation—the largest in California—which covers 

87,170 acres (HCCDS 2002). Native Americans made up an 

estimated 6.5 percent of the total county population in 2008 

(USDC BC 2009). Thirty percent of county land is in public 

ownership, 73 percent of which is federal (HCCDS 2002). 

Two-thirds of Humboldt 

County’s timberlands are 

owned by private industry 

(Dyett and Bhatia 2002); 

more than 99 percent of 

the timber harvested in the 

county in 2009 came from 

private lands (CABE 2010).

In 2008, 19.8 percent of 

the county population was 

living below the poverty line 

(fig. 4-3), and the median 

household income stood 

at $39,627, two-thirds that 

of California as a whole 

(fig. 4-4). In January 2010, 

Humboldt County’s unemployment rate peaked at 12.8 

percent, nearly twice what 

it was in January 2007, at 

6.5 percent (fig. 4-5). School 

enrollment has declined 

steadily over the past decade 

while the percentage of 

students eligible for free or 

reduced-price lunches has 

been rising, reaching a height 

of 52 percent of all enrolled 

students during the 2008–09 

school year (figs. 4-6 and 

4-7). Humboldt County 

has a Forest Service economic distress ranking of 7.3 The 

secondary counties included in this case study (because 

they include SRNF lands) have economic distress rankings 

of 7 (Del Norte), 9 (Trinity), and 10 (Siskiyou). 

3

 The Forest Service calculated economic distress rankings for 

every county in the United States, and used them as the main 

criterion for making economic recovery project funding decisions. 

Rankings are on a scale from 1 to 10 with 10 signifying the highest 

level of economic distress. See USDA Forest Service 2009 for 

information on how rankings were developed.

Geospatial Service and Technology Center, USDA Forest Service
46

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Humboldt County received more than $57 million 

in Recovery Act funds to support local schools, county 

programs and services, tribes, and local infrastructure 

projects, among other things (Times-Standard, Feb. 

21, 2010). Said the County Department of Health and 

Human Services Director, “In a lot of ways, it’s been an 

economic lifeline for states, and certainly for Humboldt 

County...” The Forest Service contributed an estimated 

$5,765,444 for projects on the Six Rivers National Forest 

and elsewhere in Humboldt County, including an invasive 

plants project on private lands in the community of 

Weitchpec, a wood-to-energy project and a pole and post 

mill project in the community of Blue Lake, and for a 

major renovation to one of its research labs located on the 

Humboldt State University campus. This chapter examines these diverse projects in turn, assesses their socioeconomic benefits, and identifies challenges associated 

with their implementation. It concludes by describing key 

findings from the socioeconomic assessment and lessons 

learned with regard to creating local economic opportunity when undertaking Forest Service work in the future. 

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Population change from 2000 (percent)

Year

United States

California

Humboldt County

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

-1

Figure 4-2—Change in population for the United States, California, and Humboldt County, 2000–2009 (USDC BC 2010a).

Figure 4-3—Population living in poverty in California and 

Humboldt County, 1989–2008 (USDC BC 2010c).

Figure 4-4—Median household income for California and Humboldt County in 2008 dollars, 1989–2008 (USDC BC 2010c).

20

19

18

17

16

15

14

13

12

11

10

19901992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

Population in poverty (percent)

Year

California

Humboldt County

65

60

55

50

45

40

Median household income, adjusted

for 2008 inflation (thousand dollars)

35

19901992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

Year

California

Humboldt County
47

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Figure 4-5—Monthly unemployment rates for California and Humboldt County, 1990–2010 (Bureau of Labor Statistics 2010).

Figure 4-6—Change in school enrollment for California and 

Humboldt County, 1991–2008 (National Center for Education 

Statistics 2010).

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

Monthly unemployment (percent)

California

Humboldt County

Jan. 1990

Jan. 1991

Jan. 1992Jan. 1993

Jan. 1994

Jan. 1995

Jan. 1996

Jan. 1997

Jan. 1998Jan. 1999

Jan. 2000

Jan. 2001

Jan 2002

Jan. 2003

Jan. 2004

Jan. 2005

Jan. 2006

Jan. 2007

Jan. 2008

Jan. 2009

Jan. 2010

Date

30

20

10

0

-10

-20

-30

1997–98

1999–00

2001–02

2003–04

2005–06

2007–08

School enrollment, change

from 1991 (percent)

School year

1991–92

1993–94

1995–96

California

Humboldt County

Figure 4-7—Change in number of students eligible for free 

or reduced-price lunch programs in California and Humboldt 

County, 1991–2008 (USDE NCES 2010). Note: Reduced-price 

lunches were made available after 1999.

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

-10

Free or reduced-price lunch 

eligibility change from 1991 (percent)

California

Humboldt County

1997–98

1999–00

2001–02

2003–04

2005–06

2007–08

School year

1991–92

1993–94

1995–96
48

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Methods

This case study was conducted using both qualitative and 

quantitative social science research methods. Qualitative 

data were gathered during face-to-face, semistructured 

interviews with people involved in the Recovery Act 

projects. Fieldwork to conduct these interviews took place 

between February and June 2010. A total of 36 individuals were interviewed for this case study. Interviewees 

included 16 Forest Service employees who helped develop 

or implement the projects, and 20 local government, 

business, and nonprofit organization representatives who 

received Recovery Act funds or who benefited from jobs 

created or retained as a result of the projects. Additional 

qualitative data were obtained from published sources such 

as newspapers and local government publications, Forest 

Service documents, and federal Web sites. Quantitative data 

regarding the Recovery Act projects and jobs were obtained 

from Forest Service databases and federal Web sites, including Recovery.gov and USAspending.gov. Socioeconomic 

indicator data describing the local population and economy 

of the case-study area came from a number of sources, such 

as the U.S. Census, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the 

Bureau of Economic Analysis. For more information on 

research methods and data sources, see the appendix to 

this report.

Six Rivers National Forest: Roadside 

Brush Removal and Recreation Projects

The SRNF occupies a 140-mile-long, narrow stretch of 

California’s northwest coast region from the Oregon border 

to the Mendocino County line. To the east, the forest is 

bordered by the Klamath and Shasta-Trinity National 

Forests. The Six Rivers is mostly mountainous, and is 

dominated by coniferous tree species (fig. 4-8). As the name 

implies, six major rivers cut across the forest: the Smith, 

Klamath, Mad, Trinity, Van Duzen, and Eel. The forest 

occupies parts of four counties, with 43 percent of its lands 

in Del Norte County, 35 percent in Humboldt County, 21 

percent in western Trinity County, and 1 percent in western 

Siskiyou County. Rainfall is high, ranging from an average 

of about 50 inches annually in the south to more than 100 

inches in the north, causing vegetation to grow quickly. In 

the past, this was a major timber-producing forest. Today 

the forest is best known for its timber, dispersed recreation, 

and excellent fishing opportunities. The Six Rivers has 

four districts—Gasquet, Orleans, Mad River, and Lower 

Trinity—together making up a total of 957,590 acres. The 

Six Rivers is also responsible for administering the Ukonom 

District of the Klamath National Forest; that district is not 

included in this case study.

The SRNF received a total of $2,478,786 in Recovery 

Act money to fund projects relating to recreation, roadside 

brush removal, road maintenance and improvement, and 

facilities decommissioning as follows:

• Roadside brush removal = $1,014,000

• Recreation = $444,786

• Road maintenance and improvement = $920,000

• Facilities decommissioning = $100,000

All of these projects fell into the capital improvement 

and maintenance category; the forest received no wildland 

fire management funds.4 The following subsections provide 

an overview of the roadside brush removal and recreation 

projects. The road maintenance and improvement and facilities decommissioning projects are not included here because 

most had not begun at the time fieldwork was conducted.

Figure 4-8—The Six Rivers National Forest.

4

 The Recovery Act appropriated money to the Forest Service in 

two categories: $650 million for “capital improvement and maintenance” projects such as road, bridge, and trail maintenance and 

decommissioning, facilities improvement and maintenance, and 

remediation of abandoned mines; and $500 million for “wildland 

fire management,” including hazardous fuels reduction, forest 

health protection, and ecosystem improvement activities on 

federal, state, and private lands.

Susan Charnley
49

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Roadside Brush Removal 

Project description—

The Recovery Act directed federal agencies to begin expenditures and activities as quickly as possible to speed job 

creation. To implement economic recovery projects quickly 

after passage of the act, the Forest Service asked national 

forests to identify projects that could be implemented 

within 60 days with the “first 10-percent” round of funding released. The Six Rivers recommended roadside brush 

removal as a project for the first 10-percent round because 

it could be done under a National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) categorical exclusion, there was a large backlog 

of deferred maintenance in brush removal on the forest, 

and there were two existing indefinite delivery, indefinite 

quantity (IDIQ) contracts for brush removal to which they 

could quickly add money. Thus, in March 2009 the Six 

Rivers received $1,014,000 to remove brush along 749 miles 

of its 2,989 miles of forest roads.5 As one forest interviewee 

put it, “We’re doing a lot of brushing that would have never 

got done otherwise.”

High rainfall on the Six Rivers means that brush 

grows quickly, creating a need to remove roadside brush 

every 3 to 5 years on average. The forest roadside brush 

removal budget in normal years cannot cover this level of 

maintenance. Therefore, roads used most by passenger cars 

(maintenance level 3 to 5 roads) are the focus of attention, 

whereas roads that get less use or require a high-clearance 

vehicle (maintenance level 2 roads) often have vegetation 

that brushes the side of passing vehicles or that is too thick 

to allow passage. The recovery funds are enabling the Six 

Rivers to remove brush along many of their level 2 roads, 

some of which had not had vehicles on them in years 

because they were so overgrown. Roadside brush removal 

is seasonal work and is generally carried out between April 

and December, depending mainly on snowfall. 

Project recipients—

The Six Rivers separates brush removal projects from other 

road maintenance projects. Doing so makes it possible to 

award brush removal projects to businesses that do not 

have the wide range of equipment needed to undertake 

more comprehensive road maintenance work. The Six 

Rivers typically undertakes roadside brush removal by 

contracting with mechanical operators (fig. 4-9). However, 

removing brush by hand creates more jobs than removing 

it by machine. To accomplish the large volume of recovery5

 This project is one of the regionwide road maintenance 

projects (CIM-0521-0501-1R).

Figure 4-9—Machine used for mechanical brush removal.

Susan Charnley

funded brush removal work quickly, to spread project 

benefits to diverse recipients, and to maximize job creation, 

the forest awarded brush removal projects to four recipients 

(table 4-1). 

Two of the recipients (Tumblin D Enterprises and 

Wendt Construction) were contractors with whom the Six 

Rivers had existing IDIQ contracts for mechanical brush 

removal. Adding task orders to these contracts allowed 

recovery money to be obligated quickly. The forest also 

put an additional contract out for competitive bid that 

was awarded to Tumblin D. Tumblin D Enterprises is a 

two-person, father-son business based in Siskiyou County 

that specializes in brush removal. They have undertaken 

contract work for the Six Rivers for several years. The 

recovery projects have kept them working at capacity 

during the 2009 and 2010 seasons. Wendt Construction is 

a diversified construction contracting business located in 

Humboldt County, where its employees also reside. Wendt 

has worked for other federal and state agencies previously; 
50

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

the contract for mechanical brush removal was its first with 

the Six Rivers. 

The Forest Supervisor also approached two local nonprofit organizations that have natural resource work crews 

with the capacity to undertake brush removal by hand (fig. 

4-10): the Northern California Indian Development Council 

and the Trinity County Resource Conservation District. 

The Six Rivers used agreements to obligate Recovery Act 

money to fund these organizations in doing the rest of the 

brush removal work, a new approach for the forest on this 

type of project. Agreements can be used to obligate money 

quickly and to target local groups for work opportunities. 

The Recovery Act encouraged agencies to support 

tribes in spending recovery funds, and doing so was an 

objective of the Forest Supervisor. The Northern California 

Indian Development Council, based in Humboldt County, 

provides development programs to 104 tribes throughout 

California to help them achieve self-determination. Locally, 

they offer employment opportunities and job training 

programs for American Indians who reside in Del Norte, 

Humboldt, and Siskiyou Counties. They have worked 

with the Six Rivers in the past, but not on brush removal 

projects. Through this agreement, they were able to employ 

two six-person crews composed of local tribal members. 

The Trinity County Resource Conservation District works 

to address natural resource problems across ownerships 

and creates job opportunities for local residents in environmental restoration and education, and forestry. Their 

natural resource crews have worked with the Six Rivers 

and adjacent national forests in the past on fuel reduction 

projects. Members of the two six-person crews employed by 

this project reside in Trinity County.

Socioeconomic and environmental benefits—

From the perspective of project recipients, the roadside 

brush removal project has created a large number of jobs 

and benefitted a diverse group of recipients, some of whom 

had not previously done this type of work on the Six Rivers. 

Jobs created and retained as of September 30, 2010, are 

reported in table 4-2. For some recipients, the main project 

benefit was short-term jobs at a time when they needed 

Figure 4-10—Removing roadside brush by hand.

Table 4-1—Roadside brush removal project recipients and funding

 Total funding Funding

Recipient Project description amount mechanism

Dollars

Tumblin D Enterprises Mechanical brush removal, 319.6 road miles, Del 326,304 Service contract

Norte, Humboldt, Trinity, and Siskiyou Counties

Tumblin D Enterprises Mechanical brush removal, 61 road miles, 60,184 Task order to

Humboldt and Siskiyou Counties IDIQa contract

Wendt Construction Mechanical brush removal, 69.6 road miles, 100,102 Task order to

Trinity County IDIQ contract

Trinity County Resource Manual brush removal, 181.5 road miles, 263,331 Agreement

Conservation District Humboldt and Trinity Counties

Northern California Indian Manual brush removal, 59 road miles, 199,591 Agreement

Development Council Del Norte and Siskiyou Counties

Source: Six Rivers National Forest.

a IDIQ = Indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity contract.

Susan Charnley
51

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

work. Even if the work only lasted a few months, some 

said it would help them qualify for unemployment benefits 

once it ended. The opportunity to work locally was also 

appreciated. For tribal members, the value of working 

on lands in their ancestral territory to which they have a 

strong connection is important. For other recipients, the 

brush removal project has helped fill in seasonal gaps in 

employment and filled out their work year, increasing job 

security. Interviewees from the Trinity County Resource 

Conservation District identified some associated benefits 

to crew members: “...a greater sense of self worth and 

pride”; “for the first time in a lot of years one of the crew 

was able to buy a house”; “they have the security now 

that they can actually buy a new car, I mean instead of old 

bangers.” Several of the crew members were former loggers 

or come from logging families. Brush removal work keeps 

them in the community carrying on the family tradition of 

working in the woods. Finally, project recipients have the 

opportunity to build their reputation for undertaking natural 

resource work, which can help them compete for future 

projects with the Forest Service. 

A number of on-the-ground benefits are also associated 

with roadside brush removal. Road safety is a major benefit, 

as removing brush improves visibility along roadways, 

especially around turns. Fire safety is another benefit 

because removing brush helps roads function as firebreaks 

and improves access for firefighters in case of fire. From 

a natural resource standpoint, opening up roads makes it 

possible for Forest Service employees to get out and identify 

road maintenance and restoration needs on the forest that 

Table 4-2—Full-time equivalent jobs reported, Six Rivers roadside brush removal 

Reporting period

Feb.–Sept. Oct.–Dec. Jan.–Mar. Apr.–June July–Sept.

Recipient 2009 2009 2010 2010 2010

Number of jobsa

Tumblin’ D Enterprises 2 2 2 2 2

Wendt Construction — 2 — — —

Trinity County Resource Conservation District 10 0 4.9 0.21 3.15

Northern California Indian Development Council — 23 — — —

Source: Recipient quarterly reports.

Note: A dash (—) indicates that no quarterly report was available. 

a

 See appendix for an explanation of how job numbers were calculated.

should be addressed to prevent resource damage. Increased 

access also improves agency understanding of the road system to assist with travel management planning. In addition, 

brush removal makes it easier to implement forest management projects and makes projects like timber sales more 

cost-effective by offsetting the cost of brush removal that 

might otherwise be borne by these projects. A major benefit 

to the public is increased access to the forest for recreation, 

gathering nontimber forest products, and other uses.

Challenges—

One challenge raised by the roadside brush removal project 

pertains to a potential tradeoff between accomplishing forest work in a way that is cost-effective and efficient for the 

Forest Service, versus a way that maximizes local economic 

opportunity. Conducting brush removal by machine versus 

by hand points to this tradeoff. Hand work is labor intensive 

and maximizes job creation. It also results in a more aesthetically pleasing outcome, meaning it is a good approach 

to use on roads that receive a lot of visitor traffic. Hand 

crews can also get to places that machines may not be able 

to reach when roads are in bad shape. However, all agency 

interviewees concurred that mechanical brush removal 

is more efficient in time and cost. As one Forest Service 

interviewee put it, “...if we’re given a limited amount of 

money and we’re expected to do a maximum amount of 

work, we’re not going to hire labor-intensive contractors. 

But if we’re told that...we need to get the money out into 

the economy and here is a whole bunch of money, then 

that’s okay...we can put a ton of people to work out there.” 
52

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

The cost of mechanical brush removal averaged $1,149 

per mile, and the cost of brush removal by hand averaged 

$2,417 per mile.

Another dimension of this tradeoff relates to how 

much workers should be paid. The Service Contract Act 

and the Davis Bacon Act stipulate that federal contractors 

should be paid prevailing wages, depending on the type 

of work performed, which is specified. These acts do not 

apply to wages paid under agreements. One recipient set 

wages for crew members that were comparable to prevailing 

wages, but as a result could not accomplish the work for the 

estimated bid price. Forest interviewees felt it was irresponsible to taxpayers to pay these wages when the work could 

be done at lower cost using a hand crew that received lower 

wages. This debate raises the question of how important it 

is to create family-wage jobs in agency efforts to increase 

local economic opportunity.

A third dimension pertains to the use of agreements 

to accomplish work. Roadside brush removal is typically 

carried out using contracts, but agreements made it possible 

to obligate money quickly and target specific groups for 

recovery funds. Some Forest Service interviewees were 

frustrated by the use of agreements for brush removal 

because they perceived them as being less binding from 

a legal standpoint than contracts and as providing a lower 

level of assurance that work would be accomplished according to agency specifications. 

A second challenge relates to the rapidity with which 

the roadside bush removal project was implemented. 

Although the Forest Service as a whole was under pressure 

to obligate money and implement projects quickly, the time 

challenge was more acute with the first 10-percent round of 

recovery funds. Forest employees identified roads for brush 

removal by consulting a database rather than by inspection, 

which was impractical. As a result, it wasn’t clear what 

condition many roads were in and what the actual scope 

of work was prior to writing contracts and agreements. If 

recipients were paid an hourly rate to perform the work, this 

might not have been an issue. But the Six Rivers is accustomed to soliciting brush removal bids on a cost-per-mile 

basis. Only one of the four recipients had experience bidding brush removal projects this way; the rest were used to 

being paid for time and equipment. These recipients found it 

difficult to estimate what their costs per road mile would be, 

especially since road conditions were uncertain. Once the 

project was implemented, forest employees proved flexible 

in switching out road miles if the roads initially proposed 

were too difficult to work on or inaccessible. Nevertheless, 

this was a source of concern for recipients who feared 

running in the red on the project. Short timelines also 

prevented the forest from consulting and coordinating with 

other agencies and partners in planning and carrying out 

the brush removal—a problem for other recovery projects 

as well.

This and other economic recovery projects also greatly 

increased the workload for Six Rivers employees. The forest 

did not hire new staff to help manage this workload, posing 

a risk of decreased project oversight and communication 

between the agency and the recipients. 

Recreation–Trail Maintenance

Project description—

The Six Rivers National Forest has 400 miles of trails, about 

90 percent of which are nonmotorized, and a little over 

one-third of which are wilderness trails. The forest received 

$444,786 in recovery funds for trail maintenance work 

along 122 miles of nonmotorized trails and construction 

of 1 trail mile.6 In comparison, the annual target for trail 

maintenance on the forest was 13 miles in fiscal year 2009 

and 14 miles in fiscal year 2010. Ideally, forest trails are 

maintained on a 4-year cycle. But the Six Rivers doesn’t 

have the funding to accomplish this level of maintenance, 

and some high-use trails need maintenance every year, 

so low-use trails can go much longer than 4 years without 

receiving attention. Limited budgets mean that the forest 

uses volunteer groups, such as the American Hiking 

Society, Sierra Club, and Back Country Horsemen of 

America to assist with trail maintenance when possible. 

Working with volunteers often makes it possible for the 

forest to exceed its trails maintenance targets. However, 

the relative remoteness of the Six Rivers from major urban 

6

 These projects are part of the $9,673,000 that California received 

for nonmotor/nonwilderness trail projects in many counties 

throughout the state (CIM 05-03T).
53

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

areas makes this uncommon. Thus, the recovery funds 

represent an opportunity for the forest to address a major 

backlog in trail maintenance work in Del Norte, Siskiyou, 

and Trinity Counties. Work will be performed during the 

summers of 2010 and 2011. Trail maintenance falls under a 

NEPA categorical exclusion; this project was “shovel ready” 

when recovery funds arrived.

Project recipients—

The trail maintenance work is being accomplished 

through agreements with three project recipients: the 

Bridgeville Community Center and two youth corps 

groups—the California Conservation Corps (CCC) and the 

Northwest Youth Corps (NYC) (table 4-3). The Bridgeville 

Community Center is located in Bridgeville, California, 

a small, unincorporated rural community that lies along 

the Van Duzen River in Humboldt County. Bridgeville 

was a timber town until the early 1990s. The Bridgeville 

Community Center is a nonprofit organization that provides 

social and health services to children and families in the 

Bridgeville area, and serves as an umbrella organization 

for local groups like the volunteer fire department and 

the Van Duzen Watershed and Fire Safe Council. The 

council has a 10-person natural resource crew that works 

on private and public lands in the watershed. This crew 

will do the recovery project work. The crew is trained to 

help fight fires and reduce hazardous fuels; this will be 

its first trail maintenance project. The District Recreation 

Officer recruited the crew for the trails project because they 

had a good reputation from undertaking a previous fuels 

project on the forest, and “...to me, that’s really what it 

was all about: these people live there.” Community Center 

interviewees felt that the Six Rivers had gone out of their 

way to build them into the recovery project and provide 

them with work.

The Recovery Act stipulated that the Forest Service 

should use, where practical, groups that serve young adults 

in carrying out projects. The CCC and NYC are two such 

groups (fig. 4-11). The Six Rivers has been working with 

the CCC and NYC on trails projects for years. The Forest 

Service Pacific Southwest Region (Region 5) office has 

master agreements with both organizations that make 

it easy for national forests in California to submit task 

orders when needed. The pressure to spend Recovery Act 

money quickly made it expedient for the Six Rivers to 

work through these agreements. The CCC, although it is a 

statewide organization, has a residential center in Fortuna, 

Humboldt County, where most youth crew members who 

work on the Six Rivers reside. Crew members come from 

all over California, especially large urban areas such as 

Los Angeles and Sacramento, and some are from other 

states. The NYC is based in Eugene, Oregon, and crew 

members are mostly from Oregon, Washington, and Idaho. 

Ten to twelve-person trail crews from these organizations 

generally work in “spikes” for 5 or 8 days at a time, often 

camping together in the forest during this period (fig. 

4-12). The Six Rivers also hired two temporary employees, 

both local, to oversee the work.

Table 4-3—Trail maintenance project recipients and funding

Total funding Funding

Recipient Project description amount mechanism

Dollars

Bridgeville Community Center Maintain 17 miles of trail in Trinity County 58,065 Agreement

California Conservation Corps Maintain 75 miles of trail in Trinity, Siskiyou, 240,718 Task order to

and Del Norte Counties and construct master agreement

one trail mile in Humboldt County

Northwest Youth Corps Maintain 30 miles of trail in Siskiyou and 124,540 Task order to

Del Norte Counties master agreement

Six Rivers National Forest Liaison with and coordinate trail crews 21,463 Agency hire

Source: Six Rivers National Forest.
54

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Figure 4-11—California Conservation Corps trail crew member 

working on a Six Rivers National Forest trail.

Figure 4-12—California Conservation Corps trail crew camp on 

the Six Rivers National Forest.

...every year I would get a crew, I would hire 

them...and by the time the grant cycle ended, I’d 

have a really good crew, but no more funding. So 

what inevitably happens is the really good people, 

they manage to find work elsewhere, or drift off; 

basically, every year you have to restart....So my 

ultimate goal was to try to find something to keep 

us working year-round. And that’s where the whole 

beauty of this operation with the Forest Service 

comes in, because we’re able to fill in those gaps.

—Bridgeville Community Center trail crew leader

Susan Charnley

Socioeconomic and environmental benefits—

At the time of fieldwork, the only recipient that had begun 

work was the CCC. The NYC crews started in July 2010, 

and the Bridgeville Community Center crew started in 

August 2010, following closure of the northern spotted owl 

(Strix occidentalis caurina) nesting season. Thus, project 

benefits could only be anticipated. Full-time equivalent 

jobs reported as of September 30, 2010, are estimated in 

table 4-4. 

The main project benefit anticipated by the Bridgeville 

Community Center crew leader interviewed was that the 

work would fill in a gap to help provide year-round employment for his crew, as do Forest Service hazardous fuel 

reduction projects. He anticipates the project will provide 25 

days of work for his 10-person crew. The natural resource 

crew depends on soft money projects for work, many of 

which are for fuel reduction, funded by grants through the 

Fire Safe Council. 

“So right now, I have 18 months to complete my 

grant. That gives me plenty of time to do Forest 

Service projects, so we’re just kind of bouncing 

different projects around like the fuel reduction 

project....when they run out of money for that, then 

we’re going to work on my grant for a little bit. Then 

the trails project’ll start up and that’s about, I think 3 

weeks worth of work...so we’ll go back and work for 

them. And then we’ll go back to my grant. And so, 

what happens is now we’re able to work year-round.” 

Susan Charnley
55

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Table 4-4—Full-time equivalent jobs reported, Six Rivers trail maintenance project 

Reporting period

Feb.–Sept. Oct.–Dec. Jan.–Mar. Apr.–June July–Sept.

Recipient 2009 2009 2010 2010 2010

Number of jobsa

Bridgeville Community Center — — 0 0 1.82

California Conservation Corps — 0 0 5.89 6.70

Northwest Youth Corps — — 0 0 5.88

Six Rivers National Forest 2 temporary jobs totaling 159 days of work, summer 2010

Source: Recipient quarterly reports and Six Rivers National Forest.

Note: A dash (—) indicates that no quarterly report was available.

a

 See appendix for reporting method.

With the help of recovery funds, the crew leader 

anticipates his crew will be employed full time well into 

2011. There are important social benefits associated with 

this employment. The community’s remoteness means that 

local teenagers must take an estimated 2-hour bus ride (one 

way) to the nearest public high school. As a result some 

never graduated. The trail crew leader observed:

...These are guys that, given a chance, really shined. 

Not given a chance, could have ended up really 

anywhere.... It’s been really satisfying to be able 

to see these guys be able to do stuff, and feel good 

about what they’re doing. And this is all they want 

to do is live in the woods and work out here. So from 

a social end, its’ just really nice to see. I mean these 

guys are raising kids and you know, it’s a big deal. 

Finally, because most crew members have not done 

trail work before, the project will provide them with the 

opportunity to develop new skills. Hopefully, this will lead 

to future opportunities to do trail and other work for the 

Forest Service. 

Project benefits to the CCC and NYC also go beyond 

the temporary employment created. Recovery projects have 

helped keep these youth job corps programs running during 

the economic recession. The CCC, for example, relies on 

project sponsors such as the Forest Service for 60 percent of 

its budget. Working on trail projects gives urban youth an 

opportunity to spend time in the woods and gain an appreciation for nature. It also enables them to do work having 

concrete results, which creates a sense of accomplishment 

and raises self-esteem. In addition, the trail work builds job 

skills and helps youth learn about the Forest Service and 

make connections. Several eventually get seasonal jobs with 

the agency in recreation or fire that can lead to permanent 

employment. The work experience and job skills that result 

also help participants get jobs in other fields because they 

learn to get along with people from diverse backgrounds, 

work hard, and show up on time. And the income earned 

(crew members are paid minimum wage) is important both 

for the youth and their families at home. The CCC also 

has other programs that participants benefit from, such as 

resources at the residential center to help them complete 

their GEDs if they have not finished high school.

So as our reputation and our skills advance...our 

goal is to be working for the Forest Service a whole 

bunch for a long time. Yep, and the best way is 

to diversify so we’re not doing just one thing, we 

can be able to be a resource crew, which means, 

whatever they need done, we can go do it.

—Bridgeville Community Center trail crew leader

From the Forest Service standpoint, roughly 

one-quarter of the SRNF trail system will be in great 

condition once the project is complete, increasing 

connectivity between existing trails and increasing 

recreation opportunities on the forest. Increased recreation 

opportunities benefit local residents and visitors, and a 
56

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

potential rise in visitation means more economic benefit 

to local communities. Improved trail conditions also mean 

less natural resource damage—if trails are in good shape, 

hikers, mountain bikers, and horseback riders won’t try 

to make their own trails, which can lead to erosion. Trail 

maintenance also increases access for fire crews in case 

of fire.

Challenges—

The only challenge reported by interviewees came from 

the Forest Service side. Recreation officers on the Six 

Rivers made the Recovery Act trails project a top priority, 

adding it to their normal workload. Although they rose to 

the occasion and greatly appreciated the funding and the 

opportunity to address a major backlog in trail maintenance 

work, the increased workload to identify and coordinate 

projects, collate supporting project data, and do required 

reporting has been challenging.

Invasive Plants, Humboldt County–

Meadow Knapweed Population 

Assessment Project7

Project Description

Although the SRNF did not receive recovery funds for 

forest health protection or ecosystem restoration and 

improvement, one such project was funded in Humboldt 

County for work on private lands. Forest Service Region 5 

State and Private Forestry received $7,179,000 for invasive 

plant projects on state and private lands throughout the 

region, with specific projects to be chosen by states (USDA 

Forest Service 2010). In California, Forest Service recovery 

funding to support invasive plant control and eradication 

projects went as a grant to the California Department 

of Food and Agriculture, which works with county 

departments of agriculture that serve as local regulatory 

authorities representing the state. The Humboldt County 

Department of Agriculture administers the recovery 

funding that the California Department of Food and 

Agriculture made available for invasive plants management in the county.

In California, the state gives invasive plant species different ratings, depending on the level of concern. If a plant 

has a pest rating of “A,” the state is required to dedicate 

resources to control or eradicate it. Meadow knapweed 

(Centaurea x pratensis Thuill), native to Europe, is an 

A-rated species in California (fig. 4-13). It occurs in northwestern California in Del Norte, Humboldt, and Siskiyou 

Counties, which represent the southern end of its documented range in North America. This species favors moist 

and disturbed areas such as meadows and pastures, forest 

openings, roadsides, and riverbanks. It can spread rapidly 

and out-compete native species, and is unpalatable to both 

wildlife and livestock. Meadow knapweed is much more 

Figure 4-13—Meadow knapweed.

7

 Referred to as “Invasive Plant Region-Wide” (WFM-05-04FHC) 

in USDA Forest Service 2010.

widespread in Oregon and Washington than in California, 

and a main goal of this project is to keep it from spreading 

farther into the state. For the past several years, the plant 

has been moving southwestward along State Highway 199 

into Del Norte County from Oregon. Discrete populations 

in Humboldt County are the result of long-distance dispersal vectors such as vehicles, equipment, or straw. 

In light of the localized extent and leading-edge 

distribution of meadow knapweed, the California Department of Food and Agriculture provided Forest Service 

recovery money in the amount of $23,684 to the Humboldt 

County Department of Agriculture, and $23,980 to the Del 

Norte County Department of Agriculture to address the 

problem. In Del Norte County, most of the money is being 
57

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

spent on controlling the spread of meadow knapweed along 

Highways 199 and 101 and in other parts of the county, with 

control work performed by county employees. In Humboldt 

County, project work will focus on private and Yurok 

Tribal lands in the rural community of Weitchpec, located 

at the confluence of the Trinity and Klamath Rivers. Many 

community residents are members of the Yurok Tribe. The 

recovery project builds on work that has been ongoing to 

manage this species for the past 5 years in this area. Tribal 

members have recently been collaborating in the effort. 

The project consists of surveying private property and 

Yurok Tribal lands to look for the plant, mapping places 

where it occurs, conducting outreach to landowners about 

the plant and how to treat it, removing the plant in places 

where the landowner is willing and the population is small 

enough, and developing outreach including newspaper 

articles and a brochure that was mailed to every Weitchpec 

boxholder. Surveying meadow knapweed generally occurs 

during a short time in the summer when the plants are 

blooming and easy to see. The primary method of invasive 

plant removal in Humboldt County is pulling by hand, with 

weed whacking treatments occurring on large infestations. 

Other methods including tilling and grazing have been considered but not used to date. Herbicides (e.g., Milestone8 ) 

have proven effective on meadow knapweed, but past use 

of herbicides associated with commercial timber harvest in 

local communities has generated controversy and therefore 

is not considered a realistic option at this time. This project 

will take place for about 6 weeks during the summers of 

2010 and 2011. 

Project Recipient

The Humboldt County Department of Agriculture, working 

through the Humboldt County Weed Management Area, 

which reviews and recommends proposals submitted to 

the county, contracted with the Mid-Klamath Watershed 

Council (MKWC) to undertake this project. The MKWC is 

a local nonprofit organization that does watershed restoration work throughout the mid-Klamath watershed, which 

extends from Weitchpec upriver to the Irongate Dam near 

Hornbrook. Programs of the MKWC include fisheries restoration and monitoring, watershed education, fire and fuels, 

and invasive weeds management. Their invasive weeds 

program has worked with the SRNF in the past on invasive 

species projects. Treatment of meadow knapweed is one of 

two recovery projects that MKWC has received (the other is 

for fisheries restoration). The MKWC has been collaborating with the SRNF, Humboldt County Weed Management 

Area, and local tribes to control meadow knapweed since 

2005. Treatment of the plant spans multiple years owing to 

the discovery of new sites and the subsequent treatment of 

plants that germinate from seeds in the soil. The MKWC 

has been able to leverage their recovery funds by coordinating with a CCC crew funded under a different Recovery 

Act project to remove meadow knapweed from a heavily 

infested meadow. 

Socioeconomic and Environmental Benefits

An important benefit of this project is that it includes 

funding for survey and outreach work with landowners. 

Integrated and cross-jurisdictional efforts are the only way 

to address invasive species management in this area. The 

MKWC gets its weed treatment money largely from grants 

and contracts, most of which fund invasive species removal 

only. By conducting surveys, MKWC can get a better idea 

of the extent of the species population in the Weitchpec area 

where meadow knapweed is concentrated. Through outreach, MKWC can educate landowners about the plant and 

demonstrate treatment methods landowners can implement. 

Outreach is also a way of relationship building between 

landowners and their watershed council. The MKWC estimates it will work with 200 landowners and their families 

in the Weitchpec area in the course of the project, and that 

information about their work will reach thousands of area 

residents through publishing articles in the local newspaper. 

By collaborating closely with the Yurok Tribe, MKWC 

hopes to help the Yurok build capacity to control meadow 

knapweed and other invasive plants on tribal lands, pursue 

grants, and develop their own invasive plant projects. The 

MKWC has collaborated with a Yurok Tribal forestry crew 

that assists in the treatment of the plant toward this end.

8 The use of trade or firm names is for reader information and does 

not imply endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture of 

any product or service.
58

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

This project has also helped MKWC build their 

invasive weeds management program. The contract funded 

purchase of equipment, such as tools and global positioning 

systems that they can use in the future. They are also refining their protocols for meadow knapweed control as part of 

the project.

Regarding jobs, MKWC created two temporary field 

crew jobs (table 4-5). One employee is a resident of Humboldt County, and one a resident of neighboring Siskiyou 

County. Crew members will be trained in invasive species 

management work, a skill that may lead to future job opportunities. Recovery funding also helped support MKWC 

staff, who rely on soft money to fund their positions; thus, 

it helped with job retention at MKWC. The MKWC staff 

person interviewed reported that Recovery Act funding 

from the Forest Service and other agencies had created a 

noticeable increase in local job opportunities (e.g., for crew 

members) in restoration and invasive species management. 

We’ll have a definable idea of what the population 

actually is. And we’ll have a way through surveys 

to actually outreach to a lot of people...about what 

this plant is and why they might want to remove 

it from their property...We’re going to reach a lot 

of people and we’re going to actually know where 

the meadow knapweed is and treat it along the way 

to try to keep it from spreading, and show other 

people how to treat it so they can treat it themselves.

—Mid-Klamath Watershed Council

Invasive Weeds Program Coordinator

Table 4-5—Full-time equivalent jobs reported, meadow knapweed population assessment

Reporting period

Feb.–Sept. Oct.–Dec. Jan.–Mar. Apr.–June July–Sept.

Recipient 2009 2009 2010 2010 2010

Number of jobsa

Mid-Klamath Watershed Council — — — 0.15 0.32

Source: Recipient quarterly reports.

Note: A dash (—) indicates that no quarterly report was available.

a

 See appendix for reporting method.

The main environmental benefit of the project is to contain meadow knapweed and reduce its stand density so that 

native species or noninvasive plants can recover in the areas 

treated, and importantly, to reduce the potential for weed 

export from infested areas to currently uninfested areas in 

wildland or agricultural settings. Early detection and treatment is the best way to contain or eradicate invasive plants. 

Challenges

One challenge associated with this project pertains to access 

to private lands, which can be difficult, especially private 

timber company lands. Another challenge is the fact that 

controlling meadow knapweed requires persistent effort 

over time. This means private landowners must take more 

responsibility for controlling the plant on their properties. It 

also means that sustainable funding is needed to support the 

effort. The recovery money will help for two summers, but 

will not support ongoing efforts to control this species. 

Blue Lake Biomass Powerplant and 

Blue Lake Roundwood Project 9

Project Description

The Blue Lake biomass powerplant (fig. 4-14) is one of two 

wood-to-energy projects funded by the Forest Service in 

California. In January 2008, Renewable Energy Providers, 

Inc. (REP) purchased the assets of the Blue Lake powerplant, an 11.5-megawatt biomass powerplant located in the 

small, rural community of Blue Lake in Humboldt County. 

9 These projects are referred to as “Renewable Energy Co-generation 

Facilities Northwest California” (WFM-05-01-WTE), and “Blue Lake 

Power, LLC” (WFM-1111-2B) in USDA Forest Service 2010.
59

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Blue Lake lies in the Mad River Valley and had a population of 1,115 in 2009 (USDC BC 2009). The plant was built 

in the mid-1980s and operated until 1999, when its initial 

power sales agreement ended. At that time, the cost of producing power from woody biomass was much higher than 

the cost of producing power from nonrenewable sources, 

and it was not economical for the plant to keep operating. 

The market has changed since California’s Renewables 

Portfolio Standard was established in 2002. Under current 

regulations, and following the Governor’s Executive Order 

S-21-09 signed in September 2009, 20 percent of the retail 

sales from California’s investor-owned electric utilities 

must come from eligible renewable energy resources by 

December 31, 2010, and 33 percent of the retail sales from 

all electric utilities, including those that are publicly owned, 

must come from renewable resources by 2020. Woody 

biomass is one eligible renewable resource.

Renewable Energy Providers began refurbishing the 

Blue Lake powerplant shortly after purchasing it, with the 

goal of having it on line by December 2008. The estimated 

cost of the project was $10 million. Unfortunately, in 

September 2008, the main investor in the project had to 

pull out because of a severe reduction in his credit line, a 

direct result of the national credit crisis associated with 

the economic recession. Banks were not lending money 

either. As a result, the project ground to a halt and workers 

were laid off. Renewable Energy Providers spent the next 9 

months looking for replacement financing. In spring 2009, 

REP was contacted by an employee from Forest Service 

Region 5, State and Private Forestry, with whom they had 

an existing relationship. He told them about the opportunity 

to fund wood-to-energy projects with Recovery Act money. 

The Region 5 employee was responding to the Forest 

Service request for projects, and identified two biomass 

energy plants in Region 5 that were being repowered and 

were close to completion; were located near national forests 

and could make use of biomass from them; and could create 

jobs quickly, but needed some additional financing to bring 

them on line. In other words, they were essentially “shovel 

ready” projects having a high likelihood of success. The 

Blue Lake powerplant was one of the two. Region 5 was 

successful in obtaining $4,500,000 for the two projects, 

and REP submitted a grant application for part of these 

funds. An important key to success in this case was the 

presence of a Forest Service Region 5 employee who had 

long-term knowledge of biomass utilization opportunities 

in California, and who was able to promote this project for 

funding.

Renewable Energy Providers found a lending institution (an equity company, as banks still weren’t lending) 

that committed to loaning them $8 million in July 2009, 

contingent upon obtaining the Forest Service funding. 

They were awarded a Recovery Act grant in the amount of 

$2,006,550 to help them restart the plant in September 2009. 

With these funds, the lender went ahead with the $8 million 

loan to REP, as the Forest Service grant provided credibility 

to the project, helped minimize risk, and ensured that full 

financing was available to make it work. Without the Forest 

Service grant, REP says it would never have gotten the loan, 

and the project would have remained at a standstill. In this 

case, the Recovery Act grant was critical for leveraging the 

funds needed to make the Blue Lake powerplant refurbishing a success. As one REP principal said, “The grant we 

got, without any hesitation, made it possible; without this...

we wouldn’t have been able to borrow enough money.” 

The biomass plant was up and running by May 2010, 

and as of August 2010 was in a period of transition to 

becoming fully operational. The plant needs about 90,000 

bone dry tons of fuel annually to operate, which will come 

from a combination of public, private industrial, and tribal 

lands, mill waste, and green waste. Renewable Energy 

Figure 4-14—The Blue Lake biomass powerplant.

Susan Charnley
60

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Providers sells its power to the San Diego Gas and Electric 

Company, with a 15-year contract. Although the plant is not 

currently a cogeneration plant (in which the steam produced 

by burning woody biomass is used for other things besides 

power), REP is discussing potential cogeneration with some 

neighboring businesses. 

The biomass plant is only one of two projects that 

REP is developing at the Blue Lake site with Recovery Act 

funding. The second project is the Blue Lake Roundwood 

Project, which entails establishing a pole and post mill 

adjacent to the powerplant site. Financing for this project 

comes in part from a Recovery Act grant in the amount 

of $248,000 from the Forest Service Forest Products 

Laboratory in Madison, Wisconsin. Renewable Energy 

Providers had already applied to the Forest Service Woody 

Biomass Utilization Grant Program to obtain funding for 

the project. The project qualified, and the lab was able to 

use Recovery Act money to fund it. By installing a pole and 

post mill, it will be possible to sort and use small-diameter 

wood removed through forest thinning projects to produce 

value-added roundwood products in addition to fuel for the 

powerplant. The money earned from the sale of the higher 

value dowels or poles will help offset the cost of biomass 

removal undertaken to supply fuel for the powerplant. 

Finding ways to make biomass removal more economical is 

important in the north coast region, which is mountainous, 

making transport of material out of the forest relatively 

difficult and costly. The roundwood products will be made 

from redwood (Sequoia sempervirens Endl.), Douglas-fir 

(Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco), and pine (Pinus

spp.). The REP principals have obtained other grants 

through the Forest Products Laboratory’s Woody Biomass 

Utilization grant program in the past.

The mill project is estimated to cost $1 million. Again, 

Recovery Act funding is helping REP leverage other 

money, with the grant making it easier to attract investors. 

One partner investing in the project is the local Blue 

Lake Rancheria Tribe. As of August 2010, one doweling 

machine had been purchased, and REP expects the mill to 

be operational by December 2010. The recovery grant is 

helping to finance the purchase and installation of the mill 

and associated equipment. The roundwood products will 

be sold to C&R Forest Products in Santa Rosa, California 

(Sonoma County), a wholesale distributor of roundwood, 

stakes, and lumber. This company will reportedly buy as 

much product as REP can produce at the mill. 

Project Recipient

Renewable Energy Providers, based in Redding, California, 

(Shasta County) was incorporated in 2006 with the purpose 

of developing biomass energy powerplants in northern 

California. They plan to do this either by building new 

plants or buying old plants and refurbishing them, as is 

the case with the Blue Lake Power biomass project, their 

first major project. Renewable Energy Providers has five 

principals. Two are also principals of a consulting firm 

called Continental Resource Solutions, Inc., and one is also 

a principal of Mountain Engineering. These two consulting 

firms are managing the restart of the Blue Lake powerplant.

Socioeconomic and Environmental Benefits

From an economic standpoint, the job effects of the Blue 

Lake powerplant and pole and post mill can be broken 

down into two categories: jobs created to refurbish the 

biomass plant and get the pole and post mill constructed 

and running; and jobs that will be sustained over the long 

term, once the powerplant and mill are operational. In the 

case of the biomass plant, the Recovery Act grant funded 

jobs associated with getting the plant up and running, as 

reported in table 4-6, including jobs for workers who supply 

and transport wood fuel. Roughly two-thirds of the workers 

were local residents of Humboldt and neighboring Trinity 

Counties. The remainder were nonlocal because of the 

technical expertise required that is not available locally—

for example, the ability to do boiler work. The vast majority 

of these jobs were short term in nature, and created between 

October and December 2009. The major local contractors 

were North Coast Fabricators and Humboldt Bay Instrument and Electric (both located in Humboldt County), in 

addition to several other small contractors from northern 

California. The major nonlocal contractor was Industrial 

Service Corporation in Vancouver, Washington. 
61

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Table 4-6—Full-time equivalent jobs reported, Renewable Energy Providers

Reporting period

Feb.–Sept. Oct.–Dec. Jan.–Mar. Apr.–June July–Sept.

Recipient 2009 2009 2010 2010 2010

Number of jobsa

Blue Lake biomass powerplant 1.2 54 6.6 1.81 —

Blue Lake roundwood project 0 0 0 0 0

Source: Recipient quarterly reports.

Note: A dash (—) indicates that no quarterly report was available.

a

 See appendix for reporting method.

In the case of the roundwood mill, REP estimated that 

five jobs would be created with Recovery Act funding.10

None had been reported as of September 2010 because the 

project had not started yet (table 4-6). Workers on the mill 

project are anticipated to be local, as Humboldt County has 

a lot of capacity and expertise associated with mill work. 

Renewable Energy Providers estimates that six longterm, sustainable jobs will be created at the mill once it is 

operational.

Regarding long-term, sustainable jobs at the Blue 

Lake Power biomass plant, 17 full-time, family-wage jobs 

had been created to run the plant as of August 2010. All 

but one of these employees reside locally in Humboldt 

I was out of work for maybe 6 months...hoping to 

find something again here local, before I rejoined 

the Millwrights Union out of Pleasanton...that put 

me back on the road. Well, I’ve got a family and 

my wife and kids so I did that here and there until 

I was lucky enough to get on out here. It pays a lot 

better to go out of town and work, but you’re out 

of town working, away from your family and...

you can’t raise kids like that. For Humboldt County 

this is a great job, it really is, it’s a good paying job, 

you’re home, so it’s a real plus for me to be able to 

be home.

—Blue Lake Power employee

10 http://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/tmu/2009_Successful_ARRA_

and_WBUG.pdf.

County. Eight of the employees worked previously at a 

local pulp mill, the last in California, which closed in 2008 

partly because of the economic recession, causing more 

than 200 people to lose their jobs. The pulp mill was one 

of the largest nongovernmental employers in Humboldt 

County. “Every job that’s lost really hurts here,” said one 

laid-off employee who was interviewed. These employees 

are extremely grateful to be reemployed at the Blue Lake 

powerplant. Many unemployed people don’t want to leave 

the area to find other jobs because they have family here.

The Blue Lake powerplant was described by employees interviewed as having a positive work environment, 

where people cooperate, interact, and communicate to 

solve problems together and do whatever needs to be done 

to make things work. Eight of the new employees also 

received on-the-job training for a 3-month period, paid for 

by a Recovery Act grant through the California Employment Development Department and administered through 

Humboldt County, that covered part of their salaries during 

the training period. The benefit to Blue Lake Power from 

salary savings was estimated at $50,000. 

The plant will also create long-term, sustainable jobs 

for biomass suppliers—e.g., chipper operators, loader 

operators, and truck drivers (fig. 4-15). Before shutting 

down, the pulp mill was getting 110 to 140 truckloads of 

wood chips per day, about 80 percent of which was sawmill 

residue, and about 20 percent of which was small-diameter 

wood from forests. Once the mill shut down, the workers 

who supplied this material lost a major client. The indirect 

economic effects of retaining and creating these long-term 

jobs will also benefit local communities.
62

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

As several interviewees noted with frustration, 

long-term, sustainable jobs and indirect jobs created as 

a result of the economic recovery projects are important 

to communities, but are not counted when it comes time 

to report job numbers to the Forest Service in quarterly 

reports.

As one Forest Service employee stated, “...you only 

report what the economic stimulus dollars have paid for 

directly. And that’s a nut case because...the logging jobs, 

the hauling jobs, wouldn’t exist [without recovery funds]...”.

An important benefit of the two projects to REP will 

be the accomplishment of having completed successful 

projects. Doing so demonstrates business success, which 

makes it easier to convince potential investors to support 

future bioenergy projects the company develops. Moreover, 

once REP begins to see profit from the plant and mill, they 

will have capital they can invest in future projects.

From an environmental standpoint, the Blue Lake 

powerplant will generate about 92,000 megawatts of 

electricity a year from a renewable resource, enough to 

power some 7,000 homes. Together with the pole and post 

Figure 4-15—Woody biomass chip truck unloading fuel for the 

Blue Lake powerplant. 

11 This project is termed “Arcata Forest Science Lab Seismic and 

Safety Retrofit” (CIM-2721-3) in USDA Forest Service 2010.

There will always be a bunch of people working 

here, and there will always be trucks coming in, 

and that will create a lot more cash flow here than 

there was before.

—Renewable Energy Providers Principal

So the real economic impact of the grant is not 

necessarily what the jobs created or maintained are 

in the report...to me the real economic impact, the 

long-term one...creates stability in a community 

and all that kind of thing.

—Renewable Energy Providers Principal

Susan Charnley

mill, it will strengthen the forest restoration industry in 

Humboldt County and help both public land managers and 

private forest landowners meet their management objectives 

for reducing hazardous fuels and restoring forest health by 

creating a market for small-diameter wood. The plant will 

also utilize mill waste and nonmerchantable materials that 

might otherwise end up in a landfill or be burned. 

Challenges

The main challenge associated with the biomass powerplant 

has been getting it financed. Renewable Energy Providers 

hoped to get new financing for the plant as quickly as 

possible once the original investor pulled out. Although they 

were approached by Region 5 in the spring of 2009 about 

receiving a recovery grant, they didn’t get the money until 

September. Interviewees acknowledged this was fast for 

the Forest Service, but would have liked to obtain the grant 

money sooner. Regarding the pole and post mill, attention 

is only now shifting to focus on it because REP has been 

trying to get the biomass plant operational and up to full 

capacity before getting the mill going.

Redwood Sciences Laboratory 

Second Floor Addition Project11

Project Description

The Redwood Sciences Laboratory, located in Arcata, 

California, is one of seven research facilities that the Forest 

Service’s Pacific Southwest Research Station maintains in 

California. The Redwood Sciences Laboratory second-floor 

addition project came about as one component of a bigger 

project that was planned several years before the Recovery 

Act was passed (fig. 4-16). In the mid-2000s, the Redwood 
63

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Sciences Laboratory identified a need to update the building 

to comply with changes in California’s seismic code. Money 

was set aside to undertake a seismic retrofit of the lab, 

including some remodeling, starting in summer 2007. In the 

course of planning the seismic retrofit and remodel (which 

was not funded with Recovery Act money), the possibility 

arose of adding another floor to part of the lab—a secondfloor addition. Doing so would provide scientists with more 

office and lab space and assist with long-term planning. The 

Redwood Sciences Laboratory was designed and built in 

the early to mid-1970s. The original design called for three 

stories, but only one story was built on the south end and 

two stories were built on the north end. The seismic retrofit/

remodel and second-floor addition projects were originally 

packaged as one, but eventually the project was split into 

three phases: a seismic retrofit and remodel that could be 

undertaken with lab employees in the building (phase 1); 

continuation of work under phase 1 to be done with the 

building unoccupied (phase 2); and the second-floor addition (phase 3). A contract for phase 1 was processed in fiscal 

year 2008, and work began in summer 2008. 

By the time planning began on the contract for phase 2, 

there were concerns about having enough money to cover 

phase 3. In the course of the seismic retrofit and remodel, 

additional damage (such as dry rot, insect, and weather 

damage) was found in the building walls, increasing the 

work and costs associated with that part of the project. 

When the opportunity to submit Recovery Act projects for 

potential funding arose that winter, the Pacific Southwest 

Research Station requested money to pay for a number of 

construction projects, including the Redwood Sciences Lab 

second-floor addition. They were successful in obtaining 

$1,008,424 for this project. Lab employees moved out of the 

building in February 2010, and phases 2 and 3 of the project 

started in spring 2010. Phase 2 is being implemented with 

original project funds using one contractor, and phase 3 is 

being implemented with Recovery Act funding and a different contractor. The second-floor addition project started 

in April, and is anticipated to take until October 2010 to 

complete. The project got off to a slow start because of heavy 

and late rains, and additional work was identified as the 

project progressed.

Project Recipient

Despite the project location in Humboldt County, the 

construction company that was awarded the contract for 

this project was Ausland Builders located in Grants Pass, 

Oregon, some 160 miles away. The Recovery Act stipulated 

that to the maximum extent possible, contracts should 

be awarded as fixed-price contracts through competitive 

procedures (section 1554). Ausland Builders has roughly 

25 employees and has been in business since 1947. They 

specialize in commercial construction, and often work on 

state and federal government contracts in southern Oregon 

and northern California. Grants Pass is located in Josephine 

County, Oregon, which has an economic distress ranking of 

9. The construction industry in southern Oregon has been 

extremely hard hit by the recession, causing more contractors 

to bid on government projects (owing to stimulus dollars), 

and to bid on contracts farther from home. In addition to 

being licensed to work in Oregon and California, Ausland 

Builders recently became licensed to work in Washington, 

and may get an Idaho contractor’s license to expand 

their ability to compete for work. Nevertheless, because 

they specialize in commercial (as opposed to residential) 

construction, and often work on government contracts, 

their business was not as adversely affected as many other 

construction companies in the region. Company employees 

typically work year-round, as commercial construction is 

much less seasonal than residential construction. 

Figure 4-16—The Redwood Sciences Laboratory, Arcata, 

California, under construction.

Susan Charnley
64

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

A full work crew for the Redwood Sciences Laboratory 

second-story addition project consists of six people. Three 

of the people employed on the project are from Ausland 

Builders in Oregon; a project manager (who was a new 

full-time, permanent hire for the company in 2009), and 

two construction workers (fig. 4-17). Up to four workers are 

being hired locally to complete the crew. They are recruited 

through Labor Ready, a temporary employment agency 

for construction and other workers based in Redding, 

California (Shasta County). Workers on the project are paid 

prevailing wages as stipulated under the Davis-Bacon Act, 

depending on their job. By hiring part of their crew locally, 

Ausland Builders keeps the project cost down (no lodging 

requirements). Many supplies are also purchased locally.

Socioeconomic Benefits 

The socioeconomic benefits of the Redwood Sciences 

Laboratory second-floor addition project can be classified 

in terms of benefits to Forest Service employees who work 

at the lab, to the project recipient, and to local communities. 

In terms of Forest Service employees, the project will 

add approximately 6,650 square feet of space to the lab. 

This space will be used for functioning labs; for storing 

equipment, data, and archived documents; and for housing 

more people (such as university collaborators, as the lab 

is located on the campus of Humboldt State University). 

A new sprinkler system for the entire building was also 

installed as part of the project, increasing fire safety. These 

benefits will be long term.

Regarding benefits to the recipient, the Redwood 

Sciences Laboratory project helped Ausland Builders 

retain its employees; none lost their jobs as a result of 

the recession. Moreover, two new employees were hired 

as a result of this and other Recovery Act projects the 

company received. Although the second-story addition 

project is relatively short term, it provides local workers 

with temporary jobs and income (table 4-7). These jobs 

fill in gaps between other employment opportunities. For 

permanent employees of Ausland Builders, this is one 

of many projects that helps keep them employed yearround. Construction projects such as this one create jobs 

in an economic sector that was especially hard hit by the 

recession, helping to replace one type of job that was lost. 

The requirement to pay federal contractors prevailing 

Davis-Bacon wages helps ensure that the people employed 

are making a fair wage.

Regarding benefits to local communities, this project 

raises the question of whether there are any in cases where 

the project recipient is nonlocal. In fact, many Recovery Act 

project recipients are not based in the counties where the 

projects they were awarded are being implemented, despite 

Figure 4-17—Employee of Ausland Builders working on the 

Redwood Sciences Laboratory second-floor addition. 

Table 4-7—Full-time equivalent jobs reported, Redwood Sciences Laboratory

Reporting period

Feb.–Sept. Oct.–Dec. Jan.–Mar. Apr.–June July–Sept.

Recipient 2009 2009 2010 2010 2010

Number of jobsa

Ausland Builders — — 0 3.5 2.08

Source: Recipient quarterly reports.

Note: A dash (—) indicates that no quarterly report was available.

a

 See appendix for reporting method.

Susan Charnley
65

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

the fact that county economic distress ranking was the main 

criterion the Forest Service used to make decisions about 

which projects to fund. As this case demonstrates, some 

benefits did accrue locally. Local workers were hired onto 

the project work crew, as were local subcontractors who 

performed electrical, plumbing, and welding work. Workers from Oregon spent money locally by buying food and 

other items and staying in hotels, as did the Forest Service 

contract administrator who was assigned to the project. And 

many supplies were purchased locally. These trickle-down 

effects help benefit local communities.

Challenges

Interviewees reported that the challenges associated with 

this project were (1) the weather, which kept it from starting 

sooner and (2) the overall Recovery Act project workload. 

Because of the surge of increased work with multiple 

Recovery Act projects, the Forest Service was not always 

able to provide a contract officer representative at the 

project site on a daily basis, which sometimes hampered 

communication between the agency and the contractor, 

and slowed progress.

Key Findings From the California 

North Coast Projects

This case study of Forest Service Recovery Act projects 

on California’s north coast looked at several project types: 

roadside brush removal and trail maintenance on the Six 

Rivers National Forest, an invasive plants population assessment on private and tribal lands, a biomass powerplant 

and roundwood mill project, and a construction project to 

improve a Forest Service research lab. An assessment of 

these diverse projects in one location makes it possible 

to identify several key findings with regard to the socioeconomic benefits of Forest Service Recovery Act investments. They are summarized here.

Decisions made by individual employees within the 

Forest Service organization were key in determining 

how the benefits of recovery funds were distributed.

Several Forest Service employees went out of their way to 

distribute funds to diverse project recipients and to develop 

Recovery Act projects with local organizations—even when 

it took more time and effort to do so, and there was pressure 

to spend money quickly—because they were committed 

to creating local jobs during the recession and to helping 

multiple organizations benefit (fig. 4-18). They also made an 

effort to create jobs for groups targeted for assistance by the 

Recovery Act–specifically, tribes and youth. Agreements 

proved to be a useful tool in this regard because they made 

it easier to target local groups for employment and to create 

local community benefit. The Six Rivers roadside brush 

removal and trail maintenance projects illustrate this point.

Figure 4-18—Forest service employee working with Recovery 

Act contractors.

Susan Charnley

Many of the Recovery Act jobs created are short term 

and seasonal in nature, lasting only a few weeks or 

months until a one-time project is complete. Nevertheless, these jobs have often had important socioeconomic 

benefits beyond their duration and the income earned 

from them. Recovery money made it possible to get the 

Blue Lake powerplant and pole and post mill up and running. Many long-term sustainable jobs will be created at 

the biomass plant and mill and for those who supply them 

with raw materials, and associated indirect jobs will benefit 

the local community. These jobs retained and created with 

Recovery Act money are not counted in recipient quarterly 

reports. Several other recipients, such as the Bridgeville 

Community Center, the Northern California Indian 

Development Council, and the Trinity County Resource 

Conservation District have work crews who rely on seasonal 

and short-term projects funded with soft money. Recovery 
66

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

projects helped groups like these fill in gaps in employment 

and fill out their work year so that they could have a more 

steady income flow. Recovery projects also helped many 

workers develop new skills and strengthen relationships 

with the Forest Service. Doing so may lead to more work 

in the future.

Recovery Act funds made it possible to accomplish work 

of a type and at a scale that would not have happened 

otherwise. The SRNF was able to address a huge backlog 

of deferred roadside brush removal. It also performed trail 

maintenance on more than eight times the number of trail 

miles that comprise its annual target, making it possible to 

improve access to parts of the forest where trails had not 

been maintained in years. Similarly, the meadow knapweed population assessment funded activities that rarely 

get funded through typical grants, which usually pay for 

removal alone. By supporting activities like landowner 

outreach that are often difficult to fund, conducting the 

project in a collaborative way, and building on past work, 

the meadow knapweed population assessment project 

will help landowners and tribes increase their capacity to 

undertake invasive species control themselves—implying a 

much broader environmental benefit than if the project had 

focused on invasive plant removal only.

Recovery Act funds made it possible for some recipients 

to leverage resources that they would not have obtained 

otherwise, amplifying project benefits. A $2 million 

grant from the Forest Service enabled Renewable Energy 

Providers to secure an $8 million loan from a private lender, 

making it possible to refurbish the Blue Lake biomass 

powerplant and bring it online. Without the recovery grant, 

they would not have obtained needed financing for the 

project. Similarly, a $248,000 grant from the Forest Products Laboratory helped them attract another investor for the 

pole and post mill. Recovery Act funds also helped some 

recipients leverage training funds. Blue Lake Power and the 

Trinity County Resource Conservation District received 

job training money from the California Economic Development Department that partially paid for employee salaries 

for 3 months while they worked on recovery projects. This 

funding helped recipients stretch their recovery money 

and supported important worker training. Recovery funds 

also helped leverage labor. The Mid-Klamath Watershed 

Council was able to coordinate with a CCC work crew on 

the meadow knapweed eradication project in Humboldt 

County, increasing the scope and benefits of this project. 

Finally, recovery projects helped position some recipients to 

leverage future funding for their work. The Mid-Klamath 

Watershed Council was able to strengthen its invasive plants 

program with recovery money, which will put them in a 

stronger position to compete for grants in the future.

Existing relationships between the Forest Service and 

community groups played an important role in helping 

the agency implement the Recovery Act efficiently, 

in helping recipients benefit, and in making strategic 

investments to enhance long-term community benefits.

Regarding implementation, having funding mechanisms in 

place such as IDIQ contracts and master agreements made 

it easier for the Forest Service to obligate money quickly 

and create jobs right away. Knowledge of local groups, 

their needs, and their capacity also made it possible for the 

Forest Service to identify potential projects and partners 

for funding on short notice when the initial request for 

recovery projects came out of the Washington office. The 

SRNF projects illustrate these points. On the recipient 

side, groups like Renewable Energy Providers that had 

experience applying for Forest Service grants were able to 

quickly respond to requests for proposals when recovery 

funds became available. Similarly, contractors experienced 

at bidding on Forest Service projects and doing government 

contract work were at an advantage in going about the 

competitive bid process once Recovery Act contracts came 

out relative to those who had never bid on a Forest Service 

contract before and didn’t fully understand how to do so. 

Ausland Builders is one example. Finally, the ability to 

create long-term community benefit when opportunities like 

Recovery Act funding come along calls for making strategic 

investments. Forest Service personnel who understand 

community needs and opportunities and think beyond 

the box of how to meet annual targets are well-positioned 

to identify these kinds of investments, as the Renewable 

Energy Providers example demonstrates. This finding 
67

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

points to the importance of strong local relationships 

between the Forest Service and community groups. 

However, there is a potential risk in working with existing 

partners and known organizations. Nonrecipients were not 

interviewed for this study. The speed with which recovery 

projects had to be implemented may have prevented some 

groups that did not have existing relationships with the 

Forest Service, or experience competing for Forest Service 

grants and contracts, from benefitting.

Although project recipients were not always local, 

they nevertheless contributed to local economies and 

may have come from economically distressed counties. 

County economic distress ranking was the main criterion 

used by the Forest Service to identify projects for funding.

Thus, Forest Service Recovery Act projects were awarded 

largely on the basis of project location. Number and type 

of jobs that would be retained or created by a project was 

not considered. The Recovery Act contained no language 

giving local businesses preference in competing for contracts. And, in some cases, there was no local capacity to 

undertake the kind of work needed. Because many businesses were desperate for work, the Forest Service received 

contract bids for projects that came from companies located 

far from the project location, including other states. They 

also received some extremely low bids on projects—many 

companies were simply trying to keep going, with no profit 

margin, giving them a competitive edge. Consequently, not 

all project recipients were local—defined here as having 

their business located in the same county as the project. 

Conversely, sometimes local recipients subcontracted with 

businesses from out of the area because there was no local 

capacity to undertake some tasks. The projects discussed 

in this case study had a total of 10 recipients. Seven out of 

10 were located in the same county as the project or as the 

Six Rivers National Forest supervisor’s office (Humboldt); 

3 of the recipients were not local. Two came from southern 

Oregon and one from Shasta County, adjacent to Trinity 

County, with an economic distress ranking of 10. The 

two counties where the Oregon recipients are based had 

economic distress rankings of 10 (Lane) and 9 (Josephine). 

Thus, although project recipients did not always come from 

the county where the project was located, in this case they 

came from counties that had high economic distress rankings. Two of the nonlocal recipients hired local residents 

for part of the project work, and all spent money locally by 

purchasing supplies, eating and sleeping locally, and so on. 

Thus, although project recipients were not always based in 

the same county as the project place of performance, they 

contributed to local economies.

Forest Service economic recovery projects helped 

achieve the goals of the act. The Recovery Act had 

five goals. Three of them are relevant here:

• To preserve and create jobs and promote economic 

recovery.

• To assist those most impacted by the recession.

• To invest in transportation, environmental protection, and other infrastructure that will provide 

long-term economic benefits.

Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment 

Act projects in California’s north coast region preserved and 

created jobs, assisted people affected by the recession, and 

invested in transportation, environmental protection, and 

infrastructure that will provide long-term benefits. These 

accomplishments will be more fully realized and sustained 

when an economic recovery occurs.

Lessons Learned

The Recovery Act was notable in that it directed the Forest 

Service to invest in environmental restoration, protection, 

and improvement activities, and capital improvement and 

maintenance projects in a manner that would create economic opportunity for local residents. Doing so is a laudable 

objective for the Forest Service in the future. What can be 

learned from this case study to help the agency achieve this 

objective post-Recovery Act?

• Implementing Forest Service projects in a way 

that breaks the work into pieces that can be undertaken in diverse ways by diverse recipients helps to 

increase local community benefit from projects.

• Agreements are valuable tools for targeting 

local groups for project work and for building 

partnerships.
68

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

• Infrastructure investments that strengthen and 

diversify local economies are anticipated to lead 

to sustainable, long-term job creation and rural 

community development—for example, projects 

that help build an integrated restoration economy 

by funding wood-to-energy and other biomass 

utilization projects, such as mills that process and 

add value to small-diameter wood.

• There can be tradeoffs between maximizing 

local community benefit and maximizing agency 

efficiency and cost-effectiveness when implementing projects; decisions about how to balance these 

tradeoffs will be influenced by agency resources, 

goals, and priorities.

• Maintaining strong relationships between Forest 

Service employees and local communities, and 

having employees that understand community needs 

and capacities, will help the agency make the most 

of rural community development opportunities when 

they arise and accomplish project work efficiently.

Acknowledgements

I thank all of the Forest Service employees and project 

recipients interviewed for this study for sharing their time 

and insights with me. I also thank the employees of the Six 

Rivers National Forest who helped me gather information 

for this study. In addition, I thank Milt Wingert and Bill 

Rice for helping me choose a case-study location and 

get oriented. Pam Jakes and John Schelhas played a key 

role in developing the research project and in providing 

thoughtful insights and support along the way. I am grateful 

to Sophia Polasky for her research assistance in obtaining 

the corporate data included in this report, and for her help 

in its preparation. Finally, I thank the reviewers for their 

suggestions on improving the manuscript.

References

California Board of Equalization [CABE]. 2010. 

California timber harvest by county year 2009. Report 

YT-36 compiled 4/22/2010. http://www.boe.ca.gov/

proptaxes/pdf/ytr362009.pdf. (September 7, 2010).

Dyett and Bhatia Urban and Regional Planners. 2002. 

Humboldt 2025 General Plan Update: Natural resources 

and hazards. Volume 1. http://co.humboldt.ca.us/gpu/

documentsbackground.aspx. (September 22, 2010).

Humboldt County Community Development Services 

[HCCDS]. 2002. Advance Planning Division. http://

co.humboldt.ca.us/planning/maps/nr_report/publiclands.

pdf. (September 8, 2010).

Laaksonen-Craig, S.; Goldman, G.E.; McKillop, W. 

2003. Forestry, forest industry, and forest products 

consumption in California. ANR Publication 8070. 

Davis, CA: University of California, Division of 

Agriculture and Natural Resources. 19 p.

Samuels, D. 2008. Dr. Kush: how medical marijuana is 

transforming the weed industry. The New Yorker, 

July 28, 2008, 13 p.

Times-Standard. 2010. A stimulating question: a look 

at how $57 million in stimulus funds were spent in 

Humboldt. February 21; Sect. A:8.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2009. 

Forest Service activities and the American Recovery 

and Reinvestment Act of 2009: estimating measures of 

economic distress. Administrative Report. On file with: 

Susan Charnley, Pacific Northwest Research Station, 

620 SW Main St., Suite 400, Portland, OR, 97205. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 

2010. USDA Forest Service American Recovery 

and Reinvestment Act projects: January 21, 2010. 

Washington DC.
69

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census 

[USDC BC]. 2009. State and county quick facts.

 http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/06023.html. 

(September 22, 2010).

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census 

[USDC BC]. 2010a. Annual estimates of the resident 

population for counties: April 1, 2000, to July 1, 2009. 

http://www.census.gov/popest/counties/CO-EST2009-01.

html. (October 4, 2010).

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census 

[USDC BC]. 2010b. Annual estimates of the resident 

population for incorporated places in California: April 

1, 2000, to July 1, 2009. http://census.gov/popest/cities/

tables. SUB-EST2009-04-06.csv. Washington, DC. 

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 

[USDC BC]. 2010c. Small area income and poverty 

estimates, state and county data: 1989, 1993, 1995–2008. 

http://www.census.gov/did/www/saipe/data/statecounty/

index.html. (October 4, 2010).

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for 

Education Statistics [USDE NCES]. 2010. Common 

core of data. http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/. (October 18, 2010).

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics 

[USDL BLS]. 2010. Local Area Unemployment Statistic 

Program. http://www.bls.gov/lau. (October 4, 2010).

Van Kirk, S. 1999. Humboldt County: a briefest of 

histories. Prepared for the Shades of Humboldt Project, 

Humboldt County Library. http://library.humboldt.edu/

nwcnews/history/briefhis.html. (September 7, 2010).
70

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831
71

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Victoria Sturtevant, Jessi Kershner, and Pamela Jakes1

Summary

Evergreen Forest Products operates the only sawmill and 

cogeneration facility in Adams County, Idaho. Caught 

between expensive saw logs and a soft lumber market, the 

company’s owners considered closing their sawmill. As 

explained by one owner, “We lost quite a bit of money the 

last couple of years. My concern was that we might have 

to shut down, get out of the business—it was coming to 

an end. We were fortunate enough to get some cheaper 

logs, and then at the same time the [Recovery Act funding] 

came along.”

The dry kiln and restacker project funded by American 

Recovery and Reinvestment Act (Recovery Act) funds 

improved the competitiveness of the Evergreen mill in a 

tough economic climate by increasing efficiency and processing capacity, doubling the amount of wood the company 

can transport on each truck from their sawmill to their 

planer mill more than 100 miles away. Savings in trucking 

costs are spent on buying additional saw logs and on wages 

for new employees at both sawmill and planer facilities. 

About 100 people were employed constructing the dry 

kiln and restacker, many of them from the surrounding 

county, which had lost many construction and timber 

Total Forest Service Recovery Act Investment, 

Idaho (as of 09/08/09): ~$99,267,770 

Idaho projects: $98,292,600; Idaho share of 

multistate projects: ~$975,170

Forest Service Investment, Evergreen Kiln and 

Restacker: $2,500,000

Project Location: Tamarack, Idaho

Target Counties: Adams County 

Project Type: Build dry kiln and wood restacker 

at sawmill site

Fast Facts

industry jobs. The construction project indirectly benefited 

steel and equipment manufacturing businesses and local 

service industries, such as motels, restaurants, and stores. 

Keeping the mill open protected 60 core jobs. When 

the market for lumber improved, another shift added 60 

more; since the market has gone down again, the mill is 

back to one shift. Evergreen is an important consumer 

of the Payette National Forest’s byproducts from forest 

management for wildlife habitat improvement and 

hazardous fuel reduction. The mill’s demand for these 

products may grow as a result of its increased efficiency 

and mill capacity. 1 Victoria Sturtevant is a professor emeritus, Southern Oregon 

University, 1250 Siskiyou Blvd, Ashland, OR 97520. Jessi Kershner

is an environmental scientist in Seattle, WA 98119. Pamela Jakes is 

a research forester, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Northern Research Station, 1992 Folwell Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55108.

Jessi Kershner

Chapter 5: A Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service Recovery Act 

Projects: Evergreen Forest Products Dry Kiln and Restacker, Idaho

Victoria Sturtevant
72

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

The Case

Evergreen Forest Products is located in 

Tamarack in Adams County, Idaho, north of 

Boise and west of McCall, Idaho, near the 

Idaho/Oregon border, and is surrounded by the 

Payette and Boise National Forests (fig. 5-1). 

The Project

I would say that kiln project was just a 

huge morale booster to get. Yes, that helped 

us actually keep in business ‘cause we were 

to the point where we were bleeding badly, 

losing millions, and we had to make our 

mind up. Do we stay in the business or do 

we get out and go find something different? 

[Evergreen owner and vice president] 

Portions of the Recovery Act dollars 

allocated to the USDA Forest Service were 

directed toward enhancing the wood products 

industry and capacity for woody biomass 

utilization. Building the wood products 

industry will increase the capacity of the land management 

agencies to complete needed forest management activities. 

Evergreen Forest Products was chosen to receive $2.5 

million to construct a plant with three dry kilns and a 

restacker. They were chosen on the basis of being one of 

the “main players” in the Adams County wood products 

economy and for meeting the selection criteria for projects to 

be shovel-ready, create jobs, and serve a county of concern 

(table 5-1). The mill owners had been looking to purchase 

a dry kiln system and planer in order to increase efficiency 

and remain profitable, but were unable to secure industrial 

revenue bonds. The coordinator of the four-county Woody 

People pretty well understood that the 

mill is important to the community and 

it provides jobs. And by having a dry 

kiln funded in part by recovery funds, 

that’s a good thing.

—Payette National Forest employee

Figure 5-1—Location of case study and surrounding areas in Idaho.

Biomass Utilization Partnership (WBUP), a retired Forest 

Service district ranger, helped move their proposal forward.

When they got that down to where we thought they 

would be competitive, $2.5 million for them and 

their facility, we knew that was going to be stretching them pretty hard [and in the end] they spent 

$800,000 of their own money to make it happen. 

Everything was ready to go, they were sitting 

champing at the bit to get the money—they [Forest 

Service] were so slow getting the money out after it 

was awarded. He [mill owner] was worried that they 

would lose a season. [WBUP Coordinator]

!

!

! ! !

Boise 

National 

Forest

Boise

Adams

County

McCall

Council

New Meadows

Boise 

National 

Forest

Boise

Adams

County

National forest

Case-study location

Case-study location/national forest

Payette

National 

Forest

Tamarack

 Geospatial Service and Technology Center, USDA Forest Service
73

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Table 5-1—Project recipient and funding

Recipient Project description Total funding amount Funding mechanism

Evergreen Forest Products, LLC Construct dry kilns and $2,500,000 Grant

(WFM-0460-01WTE) restacker, resurface log yard

Work on the dry kiln plant began as soon as the snow 

melted in the spring of 2009, and was completed in 

February, 2010 (fig. 5-2). Immediately, jobs were created in 

construction: pouring concrete, welding, assembling the 

kiln and restacker. The kiln project entailed building a large 

concrete pad for rails that carry loads of rough green 

lumber, separated by stickers, from the sawmill into the 

three double-track dry kilns, where it is dried for an average 

of 30 hours. Dry lumber exits the kiln on rails and is taken 

to the restacker (fig. 5-3). There the stickers are removed, 

and lumber is sorted and restacked for shipping (fig. 5-4). 

A new pipe was built to bring steam from the boiler in the 

cogeneration facility, located across the highway, to the 

new dry kiln plant (fig. 5-5). Fiber optic cable connects 

the kiln control room to the cogen boiler control room, 

and a computer monitors the system, coordinating the 

kiln operator’s steam requirements with the cogen 

boiler operator’s steam availability. Heat from the steam 

condensate is used to remove ice and snow from the 

concrete slabs that serve as the input and output 

aprons of the kilns. 

Figure 5-2—Green lumber waiting for kiln drying. 

Jessi Kershner

Figure 5-3—Mill Manager Mark Krogh and employees sorting 

wood in restacker. 

USDA Forest Service

Figure 5-4—Bins of removed stickers outside the restacker where 

dry lumber is processed for shipping. 

Victoria Sturtevant

Figure 5-5—Steam line joining cogeneration boiler and kiln plant. 

Courtesy of Yanke Energy
74

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Figure 5-6—New Meadows 

welcome sign. 

Figure 5-8—Change in population for the United States, Idaho, 

and Adams County, 2000–2009 (USDC BC 2010a).

I think the stimulus package of $2.5 million has 

really, really done something for our county. And 

when you have a population of 3,500 people and 

you get another 20 to 40 jobs, it’s a big deal. As 

you get another 30 to 40 jobs in New York City, 

nobody knows, but here we know we got ‘em.

—Adams County Commissioner

The jobs and market for raw material generated by 

the mill and biomass plant are important to the long-term 

viability of the local economy and forest management. The 

mill is also important as a source of chips and sawdust for 

paper and for its potential for additional energy production.

Tracing the mill’s supply chain and position in the network 

of forest industry operations reveals the wider benefits of 

the project not directly associated with the production of 

lumber, including wildland fuel reduction, protection of 

homes in the wildland-urban interface, provision of renewable energy, and forest habitat for wildlife. The Recovery 

Act dollars going to this project, therefore, not only 

stimulate the local economy, but are building capacity for 

restoration efforts on private and public lands, particularly 

the Payette National Forest.

So for the the National Forest System [if the mill 

had closed], we would have seen lower prices for our 

stumpage, possibly some no-bids on projects that 

were maybe designed to restore the forest and restore 

wildlife habitat...maybe gotten no takers. Then we 

would have had to pump more money, which we 

don’t have a lot of, into subsidizing, into actually 

paying people to do stewardship, that would have 

been tougher [Payette National Forest employee].

The Community

Council, the county seat of Adams, is a community of a 

little over 700 people located in the Weiser River valley, 

about 130 miles northwest of Boise. Tamarack, site of 

Evergreen Forest Products, and New Meadows, with 500 

residents (fig. 5-6), are nestled in the Meadows Valley 

about 25 miles north of Council (fig. 5-7) on State Route 

95. Most of the county’s 

population of 3,862 is 

dispersed throughout 

the countryside or 

distributed among a 

handful of unincorporated 

communities. County 

population has remained 

relatively stable over 

the last decade. There 

were just 44 more people in 2009 than in 1999 (Idaho 

Department of Labor 2010), a significantly lower growth 

rate than the state (fig. 5-8). School enrollment data reflect 

the decline of school-aged children in the county (fig. 5-9) 

and the loss of young families.

Victoria Sturtevant

Figure 5-7—Council’s antique fire truck.

Victoria Sturtevant

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Population change from 2000 (percent)

Year

United States

Idaho

Adams County

20

15

10

5

0

-5
75

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Figure 5-9—Change in school enrollment for Idaho and Adams County, 1987–2008 (USDE NCES 2010).

Idaho

Adams County

30

20

10

0

-10

-20

-30

1996–97

1997–98

1998–99

1999–00

2000–01

2001–02

2002–03

2003–042004–05

2005–06

2006–07

2007–08

2008–09

School enrollment, change

from 1987 (percent)

School year

1987–88

1988–89

1989–90

1990–91

1991–92

1992–93

1993–94

1994–95

1995–96

Forested hillsides are the backdrop for these valleys and 

communities; federal or state governments (USDA Forest 

Service and Idaho State Department of Lands) manage 80 

percent of the forested lands (a vast majority of the county’s 

lands), and a portion of the remaining forest land is industrial timberland owned by Potlatch Corporation. Ranching 

(cattle and sheep), farming, and mining formed the core 

of the county’s economy in the early 20th century. Mining 

went bust in the 1920s; farming, especially the oncethriving fruit industry, declined soon after. The economy of 

the area improved in 1939 when the Boise-Payette Lumber 

Company built a sawmill in Council and started logging 

operations in the surrounding mountains. After a flush of 

growth, the economy stabilized for several decades, and 

county identity centered on logging and ranching.

The recent recession was just one of the many economic blows dealt to the natural-resource-based region in 

the last few decades. During the housing slump of the early 

1980s, timber-related jobs began to decline. In 1995, the 

Boise Cascade mill at Council was closed, eliminating 75 

jobs; equipment was moved to Papanoa, Mexico. The closed 

mill site was turned over to the city, which has turned it 

into a business park that currently houses a small finishing 

mill. During the next few years, three other Boise mills in 

the four-county region closed (Horseshoe Bend in 1998, 

Cascade and Emmet in 2001) (Draffan, n.d.). Evergreen 

Forest Products was the only sawmill left in this region until 

Emerald Forest Products recently rebuilt on an old BoiseCascade mill site approximately 100 miles to the south 

(funded partially with Recovery Act funds).

Adams County has a current unemployment rate of 15 

percent and a net rate change between 2007 and 2008 of 

6.6 percent (Idaho Department of Labor 2010). It has been 

assigned an economic distress ranking of 9 by the Forest 

Service.2 Labor force data for the county show a 25 percent 

rise in the number of people employed from 2000 to 2007, 

followed by a drop of 10 percent in 2008 (Idaho Department of Labor 2010). The unemployment rate mirrored the 

employment data, reaching a 10-year low in 2007 of 4.9 

percent and then began rising to 10 percent in 2008 and 15 

percent in 2009 (Idaho Department of Labor 2010). Figure 

5-10 shows unemployment at 20 percent in 2010, although 

lower during summer months when there are jobs in tourism and natural resources. Income data reflect this fluctuation in employment (fig. 5-11). Much of the loss of jobs was 

2 The Forest Service calculated economic distress rankings for 

every county in the United States and used these rankings as the 

main criterion for making Recovery Act project funding decisions. 

Rankings are on a scale from 1 to 10 with 10 signifying the highest 

level of economic distress. See USDA FS (2009) for information 

on how the rankings were developed.
76

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

in construction, as work stopped on Tamarack Resort in 

neighboring Valley County.

Currently, the five largest employers in Adams County 

are four government entities (county, city, USDA Forest 

Service, school district) and the hospital. County commissioners see natural resources as the base of the economy and 

the path out of their high unemployment rate (which they 

say got as high as 28 percent). As one commissioner put it, 

When the mill closed down it kind of took away 

our resource-based economy which was good 

wage-earning jobs. And we got transformed into a 

recreational-based economy because we have a great 

quality of life here, so we got restructured if you 

will. Well, that doesn’t pay the bills. .... and we’ve 

been working very hard trying to come back up to 

the resource-based economy because my perception 

as county commissioner is that we honestly believe 

that it’s a renewable resource. If it’s stewarded 

correctly, everybody wins. 

Figure 5-10—Monthly unemployment rates for Idaho and Adams County, 1990–2010 (USDL BLS 2010).

Figure 5-11—Median household income for Idaho and Adams 

County in 2008 dollars, 1989–2008 (USDC BC 2010b).

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

Monthly unemployment (percent)

Idaho

Adams County

Jan. 1990

Jan. 1991

Jan. 1992Jan. 1993

Jan. 1994

Jan. 1995

Jan. 1996

Jan. 1997

Jan. 1998Jan. 1999

Jan. 2000

Jan. 2001

Jan 2002Jan. 2003

Jan. 2004

Jan. 2005

Jan. 2006

Jan. 2007

Jan. 2008

Jan. 2009

Jan. 2010

Date

50

45

40

35

Median household income, adjusted

for 2008 inflation (thousand dollars)

30

Idaho

Adams County

19901992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

Year
77

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Methods

This case study was conducted using both qualitative and 

quantitative social science research methods. Qualitative 

data were gathered during face-to-face, semistructured 

interviews with people involved in the Recovery Act 

project. A total of 12 individuals were interviewed for 

this case study during fieldwork in Adams County during 

April and June 2010; additional interviews were completed 

via telephone. Interviewees included three Forest Service 

employees, three county commissioners, the Evergreen mill 

owner, a biomass utilization partnership director, two mill 

employees, and two local business employees who benefited 

from jobs created or retained as a result of the project. Additional qualitative data were obtained from published sources 

such as newspapers and local government publications, 

Figure 5-12—Expression of local identity. 

The local culture is aligned with the commissioner’s 

emphasis on natural resources as the foundation of the 

area’s economy (fig. 5-12). Almost everyone is related to 

someone who works or has worked in the woods or mills, or 

drives a lumber or log truck. The general sentiment heard in 

these towns is articulated by this New Meadows resident: 

We need the wood products industry; without it they 

might as well shut the towns down... might as well 

cut this part of Idaho out and make it a retirement 

town. McCall’s hurting; all the towns around here 

are hurting since the mills closed. This is peoples’ 

incomes—there’s nothing else, especially since they 

are shutting off the forest. 

Victoria Sturtevant

Forest Service documents, and Web sites. Quantitative data 

regarding the Recovery Act projects and jobs were obtained 

from Forest Service databases and federal Web sites, including Recovery.gov and USAspending.gov. Socioeconomic 

indicator data describing the local population and economy 

of the case-study area came from a number of sources, such 

as the U.S. Census, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the 

Bureau of Economic Analysis. For more information on 

study methods and data sources see the appendix.

Project Recipients and Partners

Evergreen Forest Products, also called Tamarack Mill, was 

started in the early 1970s by the grandfather of the current 

owners (the Krogh family). In 2002, the Kroghs purchased 

the Evergreen mill from their uncle; the family also owns 

Clearwater Forest Industries, 100 miles north in Kooskia. 

The father, Robert Krogh, is still involved, along with his 

three sons. Rodney oversees both operations, Mark manages the Evergreen Forest Products sawmill, and Jeff runs 

the Clearwater Forest Industries planer mill in Kooskia. As 

boys, Rodney, Mark, and Jeff worked on a cleanup crew 

and became familiar not only with the plant operations and 

industry, but with many of the employees, some of whom 

are still employed at the mills today. Like other endangered 

small family mills, Evergreen and Clearwater have seen 

their share of reductions and closures. 

At the Evergreen mill, the family bulldozed an obsolete 

kiln and planer, leaving only a sawmill and cogeneration 

facility. At Clearwater Forest Industries, they shut down 

their sawmill and logging operation, leaving three dry 

kilns and a planer, and laid off about 75 employees (Idaho 

Department of Labor 2007). As a result of these changes, 

logs were processed at the sawmill in Tamarack and then 

trucked to Kooskia to be dried and planed. This process was 

terribly inefficient and expensive; a limited number of green 

boards could be sent up to Kooskia on a given truckload. 

This inefficiency was a driving force behind the Kroghs’ 

decision to build a new dry kiln at Evergreen (fig. 5-13), 

as it would almost double the number of boards that could 

be sent to Kooskia (fig. 5-14).

Evergreen Forest Products’ 6-megawatt cogeneration 

plant, opened in 1983, burns 100,000 tons of wood per year 
78

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

at capacity, and sells enough electricity to Idaho Power 

Company for 4,000 to 5,000 homes. This income helps 

support the sawmill, especially when the market for lumber 

declines. The cogen plant is powered primarily by hog 

fuel from the sawmill (bark, wood chips, and shavings), 

although woody debris from private land and other wood 

products businesses is also used (fig. 5-15). Another cogen 

facility is being proposed for the county, which will provide 

another market for Evergreen hog fuel and more electricity 

to Idaho Power. Public lands may provide more of this fuel 

in the future; some stewardship contractors are interested 

Figure 5-13—Dry lumber outside of kiln waiting to be restacked.

Figure 5-14—A truck carries twice the load when lumber is 

kiln dried.

Jessi Kershner Jessi Kershner

Figure 5-15—Wood products and energy production system. 

Planer Packager

Chips Saw logs

Clearwater Forest Industries

Public and private

forest land

Cogen

plant

Dry

kiln

Sawmill

Evergreen Forest Products

Idaho

Power

Proposed

county

cogen

facility
79

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

in investing in chippers to take to the woods but reluctant to 

take on debt unless federal contracts provide a dependably 

continuous supply of material.

The operations continue to work in tandem: Clearwater 

Forest Industries, which employs about 25 workers, finishes 

rough boards trucked from the Evergreen Forest Products 

sawmill, which employs about 60 workers (fig. 5-16). The 

finished boards are packaged, stored, and then shipped to 

customers throughout the West. Chips and sawdust from 

Clearwater augment the Evergreen cogen fuel supply; 

higher grade chips and sawdust from the Evergreen and 

Clearwater mills are sold to paper mills, such as Clearwater 

Paper (formerly Potlatch Corporation) in Lewiston. 

Now any truck heading north empty, after leaving the 

finished lumber from the planer mill in Boise, stops at the 

sawmill to pick up dry boards to be brought up to the planer 

in Kooskia. As explained by the mill owner, “We do less 

trucking and at the same time doubled the amount of lumber 

on each truck. It just makes us more competitive with the 

other mills, where we had a disadvantage, maybe, with that 

haul. Now we don’t have that. We’re on level footing.” 

Socioeconomic Benefits

Recovery Act funding directly resulted in a significant 

number of jobs being created or retained in Adams and 

neighboring counties to construct the three dry kilns and 

restacker, and make associated improvements in and around 

the mill (table 5-2). Workers who benefited indirectly from 

Recovery Act funds spent on the kiln construction (fig. 

5-17) included those working at rock pits, driving dump 

trucks, operating equipment, and prepping ground; also, 

There’s no question that the money was well 

spent in our county because it created short-term 

jobs, it boosted long-term jobs, and, at worst, 

it created an environment where at any given 

moment the infrastructure is there for it to turn 

the key and start up a lot more jobs that are 

available there, now the infrastructure is online.

—Adams County Commissioner

Figure 5-16—Evergreen Forest Products facility.

Victoria Sturtevant

there were fabricators, 

electricians, and laborers. Steel for fittings 

was supplied from as far 

away as Salt Lake City 

and Portland, Oregon, as 

were controls (including 

computers and programmers). Suppliers were 

having a tough time getting some parts for the kiln because 

they weren’t stocked; credit restrictions kept inventories 

low. Local beneficiaries of construction business were 

hotels, campgrounds, restaurants, and the local hardware 

store. Many of these businesses had shut down because of 

the downturn in construction or were in danger of shutting 

down during the late fall and winter, but were able to stay 

open because of infusion of business from kiln construction. 

Initially, the dry kiln and restacker increased production capacity and the mill added another shift, expanding 

Figure 5-17—Kiln construction.

USDA Forest Service

Table 5-2—Full-time equivalent (FTE) jobs reported 

by Evergreen Forest Products

Reporting period

Feb.–Sept. Oct.–Dec. Jan.–Mar. Apr.–June July–Sept.

2009 2009 2010 2010 2010

Number of FTE jobsa

— 80 100.86 — —

Note: See the appendix for reporting method.

a A dash (—) indicates that no quarterly report was available.
80

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

from 60 workers to 120; however, when the lumber market 

slumped again in late spring of 2010, many mills, including 

Evergreen, cut to one shift. Evergreen maintained its core 

crew, many of whom have 20 to 30 years of seniority, as 

well as 4 to 5 workers who were brought on after the kiln 

project (fig. 5-16). They work in family-wage jobs, $33,000 

to $34,000 a year, with health benefits for themselves and 

their families and 401k retirement accounts. Most workers 

are from Council and New Meadows; very few are from 

McCall. Some drive down from the north, and a few come 

and stay during the week in housing at the mill site.

In a region dependent on the wood products industry 

and suffering from the downturn in real estate, the mill 

is having no trouble finding willing workers. The owner 

describes the situation, 

You know, about 3 or 4 years ago when they were 

building Tamarack Resort, we couldn’t find anybody. We had a terrible time trying to find people to 

work. Because you could go over there and swing 

a hammer for $30 an hour, so it was just ridiculous 

you just couldn’t find applicants. Now, my brother’s 

application file is that [3 inches] thick, it’s just crazy 

how many people are looking for work around here.

And there’s very little turnover because of inadequate 

performance or because people have moved on to other 

opportunities. The mill manager explained, 

There’s just not that much out there that will pay 

what a sawmill pays, and while that’s not the greatest job in the world, as far as hourly rate goes, it’s far 

above anything else they could do anywhere in this 

area. Plus we have insurance programs that you simply don’t get in most of the jobs that you would find 

in a rural area. So, no, there’s not a lot of turnover.

As the kiln project offers more stability to the mill, 

workers are feeling their jobs are less threatened and are 

taking the opportunity to buy homes. The mill manager 

gave an example of two employees who bought houses in 

the last month. “I’m sure they wouldn’t have been able to 

do that otherwise.... They saw the opportunity and they 

decided to take their chance...and I think both of them are 

workers that you’re not going to let go.”

Extensive training is required to work at the mill 

and is conducted in order to provide a workforce with a 

variety of skills and to provide for the safety of workers 

and compliance with environmental regulations. This 

training provides backup for skilled positions such as filers 

and sawyers, allows flexibility for illness or vacations, and 

reduces tedium and repetitive exertion, as rotation among 

stations can take place every few hours. The core group 

can do almost every job in the mill. Few of the additional 

people hired had prior experience working in a mill. Some 

had worked in the woods, such as in logging; others had 

done landscaping or were mechanics. Many had been in 

construction, primarily home building; three had worked 

at the mill, left to create a home construction business, and 

were back at the mill because of the downturn in building. 

Most were over 40 years old; many younger applicants lack 

seniority, are unable to pass physicals or drug tests, or lack 

skills or a work ethic. One worker hired said he would have 

had to move to the Treasure Valley (Boise area) to find work 

if it weren’t for the Evergreen mill job; this would have no 

doubt been the case for others.

Evergreen was able to bring on one person with 

extensive experience in millworker safety, quality control, 

and environmental regulations to serve as an additional 

manager. He has been in the forest products business for 

42 years with a career path that included working for the 

Krogh brothers’ grandfather and progressing to management positions, including overseas. Unemployed for 14 

months after losing his job as safety and environmental 

director at another mill, he was looking to come back to 

the area he and his wife loved.

Both the Payette and the Boise [National Forests] 

have traditionally been the highest producers 

as far as doing treatment work and producing 

volume for various mills across our region. So 

it certainly has been a high-priority area.

—State and Private Forestry employee
81

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Figure 5-18—Eighty percent of Adams County’s forests are on public lands. 

Figure 5-19—Large-diameter logs from state lands milled 

at Evergreen Forest Products. 

Environmental Benefits

Although at face value this mill and restacker 

project provides primarily economic benefit, 

its environmental benefits are numerous, 

from providing a market for logs and biomass 

to lowering dependence on oil and reducing 

carbon output. The mill increases the feasibility of treatments on forest lands by creating 

demand for products coming off forests. 

The USDA Forest Service manages federal 

forest lands for wildlife habitat, wildland fire 

mitigation, watershed values, and recreational 

opportunities (fig. 5-18). Raw materials for 

industrial processes, whether for traditional 

wood-based products or bioenergy, are now a byproduct. 

In the past, much of the wood waste after harvesting or 

thinning has been piled and burned; now, in order to reduce 

greenhouse gas emissions, air pollution, and dependence 

on oil, the Forest Service is looking for renewable energy 

markets for their noncommercial material and biomass. 

And, of course, a competitive market for this material 

reduces the cost of treatments on forest lands. 

Currently, logs milled at Evergreen come from private 

and state lands. Tight credit forced some nonindustrial 

private landowners to sell timber to raise cash for their business operations (such as planting crops or buying cattle). 

Some interviewees speculated that large-diameter trees 

on state lands are being sent to the mill out of fear that the 

mill would be shut down (fig. 5-19). In the past, Evergreen 

bought logs directly from the Forest Service; in the future, 

they expect to purchase logs from logging contractors who 

have been awarded federal land stewardship contracts, 

which have essentially replaced traditional timber sales. 

The local loggers want to do those [stewardship 

contracts], so we have given them a set price that 

we will not go under, and then we work with them 

on the project. But they have full responsibility, 

it’s under their name. And we’ve helped them 

out, getting them off and going with bonding, and 

whatever we have to do to kind of help them get 

going, because they want to do this and they like to 

Victoria Sturtevant

Jessi Kershner

control and be able to set their own schedule. And 

so they’ve really taken to this idea where it’s called 

“gate wood”—you pay for it when it comes in. And 

so the loggers are doing everything, they’re going 

to the sale, cruising it, putting out a bid, and we 

give them a price, and well, it may go up but it will 

never go down, to protect the loggers. And so they 

love having that control [Evergreen owner and vice 

president]. 
82

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

The environmental benefit of the mill’s cogeneration 

plant is compromised when the market for lumber is soft 

because the mills reduce production and, therefore, byproducts for burning. During the last recession, as Evergreen’s 

sawmill downsized to stay in balance with the log and 

lumber market, it decreased the hog fuel available for the 

cogen plant, which then ran at lower capacity, making it less 

profitable to sell electricity. As production increases, more 

biomass will be created, some of which could be burned in 

the county’s planned cogen plant. 

Another benefit that can be credited to the kiln project 

is that fewer trucks are needed to haul dry lumber north 

to be planed than were needed to haul the same amount of 

green timber north, thereby reducing fuel consumption and 

carbon emissions. Some trucks on the route are carrying 

high-grade shavings to paper mills or chipped fuel to the 

cogen plant. Moreover, keeping jobs in Adams County, 

rather than sending workers to Treasure Valley (Boise area) 

and Valley County (McCall area), reduces the environmental costs of commuting. 

The trucks that were hauling were called round trippers 

because they would come down in the morning, pick 

up a load, take it there, drop it off, come back and 

get another one. They’re not hauling lumber now; we 

switched them from hauling lumber to hauling shavings 

because now we have extra shavings... So those 

same guys that were hauling lumber now are hauling 

shavings [Evergreen owner and vice president].

Other Recovery Act Projects

and Partnerships

On the Payette and Boise National Forests, $8 million 

of Recovery Act-funded contracts were awarded for 

hazardous fuel reduction projects, road and bridge 

projects, noxious weeds and invasive species projects, 

and recreation improvements. Most of these projects will 

be implemented in 2010 and 2011 and will produce raw 

material (projected at 25 million board feet of sawtimber 

and 50,000 tons of hog fuel chips) for local industry and 

utilities. Recovery projects will also free up regular forest 

funding for other projects.

Various groups involved with economic development 

and resource management recognize the central role of 

Evergreen sawmill in providing a market for material 

produced by forest restoration and fuels management. Idaho 

Smallwood Partners is a four-county effort organized to 

encourage the reestablishment of the wood industry in 

southwest Idaho (http://www.idahosmallwoodpartners.com/

about.cfm). The member counties—Adams, Gem, Valley, 

and Boise—have joined together to promote management of 

second-growth forests and produce products from smalldiameter timber from forest restoration on the Boise and 

Payette National Forests. One of the partners, the Woody 

Biomass Utilization Partnership (WBUP), is a group of 

public agencies, private companies, and technical experts 

in these counties. Established in 2007 and funded by the 

Forest Service, USDA Rural Development, Idaho Department of Commerce, the four counties, and industry, this 

group is tasked with identifying and developing sources and 

uses for woody biomass. They identify and develop markets, 

mechanisms, and technology to get supply to those markets 

and promote product and organizational development that 

will aid in the development of woody biomass businesses 

and markets. The WBUP also secured funding to complete 

inventories of future woody biomass availability for 

southwest Idaho, resulting in the southern Idaho Coordinated Resource Offering Protocol (CROP) (http://www.

crop-usa.com). 

A lot of people, a lot of interest groups that used 

to be just litigating us, or appealing us, they’re 

coming together saying, “We think there’s a 

better way. We do believe in restoration forestry. 

We do believe you need to do some active 

management for wildlife. We can get behind 

an effort like this and support that...” This is 

the first time the Payette tried something like 

this. We’ve said, “What have we got to lose?” 

Let’s try something different. Let’s let people be 

empowered in the community and they develop 

the proposal....”

—Payette National Forest employee
83

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation and WBUP 

established the Payette Forest Coalition, a collaborative 

group representing a broad range of interests including 

conservation groups, the timber industry, the environmental community, recreational groups, and local, state, and 

federal government (fig. 5-20). Several meetings and field 

trips were held by 

the coalition in 

2009–2010, resulting in management 

recommendations 

for wildlife habitat 

improvement, 

wildland fire hazard 

reduction, woody 

biomass utilization, and recreation 

trail improvement (USDA FS 2010, Wagner 2010). Adams 

County enthusiastically participates in this group, which 

is committed to integrating community economic vitality, 

forest health, and restoration of wildlife habitat. It promises 

to create a source of biomass for the county’s proposed 

cogeneration facility and to create jobs on both the supply side (harvesting logs and collecting biomass) and the 

production side (mills and cogen plants). 

The current WBUP coordinator, a retired Forest 

Service district ranger, describes why the Forest Service 

is interested in the viability of the local wood processing 

industry. “If I’ve got no sawmills, then there’s nothing we 

can get done in the Forest Service in the way of management, especially to try to utilize the small material,” he 

noted. “If you don’t use the small material, we aren’t going 

to go anywhere.” 

The WBUP assisted USDA Forest Service State and 

Private Forestry in soliciting proposals for economic 

recovery funding; nearly $10 million was secured for 

four projects in Idaho that would create jobs in the wood 

products industry and create opportunities for biomass 

utilization. In addition to the $2.5 million to Evergreen 

Forest Products for new dry kilns, $4 million went to 

Figure 5-20—Payette Forest Coalition. Payette National Forest

Emerald Forest Products to build a new sawmill and 

shavings plant (Gem County), $2.75 million to Garden 

Valley Schools for a biomass burner (Boise County), and 

$500,000 to Treasure Valley Forest Products to expand a 

pellet plant operation in Mountain Home (Elmore County). 

Challenges

The Evergreen mill and cogeneration plant is depending on the Payette Forest Coalition’s Mill Creek-Council 

Mountain Landscape Restoration Project to help meet 

their demand for raw material, as are other planned county 

natural resource projects. This project was nominated but 

not selected for Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration 

Program funds, which would help implement the coalition’s 

proposed restoration projects on a 50,000-acre area on the 

Council Ranger District, creating local jobs and providing 

materials for mills and cogen facilities, as well as restoring 

forest health. 

Recovery Act investment in the wood products industry of southwest Idaho is a demonstration of the Forest 

Service commitment to maintaining the natural resource 

economy infrastructure. However, until projects like Mill 

Creek Council are launched, the region’s economic vitality 

remains hampered by the limited amount of material coming off federal forest lands. With such a large percentage of 

land owned by the federal government, communities rely 

not only on federal management of natural resources, but 

federal support for county services and school districts. 

Residents and mill managers see a disconnect between 

community and the local Forest Service priorities; additionally, they feel abandoned by the multinational timber 

corporations and flummoxed by volatile lumber markets. 

As stated by one,

So I don’t see a proactive thing with the Forest 

Service as far as the communities go, related to 

sawmills. Nor do I see it in the big businesses if 

you look at Boise Cascade and that kind of thing. 

Their focus isn’t on the community; it’s on the 

bigger picture....
84

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Looking to the Future

Regional players such as the county commissioners, the 

WBUP, the Payette Forest Coalition, and local mill owners, contractors, and investors recognize the importance 

of Recovery Act funds for connecting the “dots” of the 

new resource-based economy and forest restoration. The 

community will see the benefits of federal investment more 

fully when these groups’ efforts come to fruition, resulting 

in a more reliable flow of products from the forests and 

steady jobs in the industry. Children may be attending 

better-funded schools, and might look forward to a future 

that could include jobs involving stewardship of local 

valleys and forests. The future of the workforce, however, 

may be a concern, in terms both of young workers’ ability 

to pass physicals for employment at the mill and of their 

continuing interest in the woods-related work.

The current owners and managers of Evergreen Forest 

Products are poised for future growth when logs are more 

competitively priced and construction boosts the demand 

for lumber. Evergreen’s owners are looking ahead to the 

day they can build the new planer at the Tamarack site; the 

buildings funded by the Recovery Act were designed to 

link to a planer. Similarly, the county is looking ahead to 

better economic times, and landmark collaborative forest 

restoration projects await funding and implementation. 

Threads of a new forest restoration economy are being knit 

together collaboratively in an integrated approach to forest 

ecosystem health and community well-being (fig. 5-21). 

Recovery funds allow the Forest Service to be a strong 

partner in this effort.

Key Findings

Knowledge of local conditions was important to the 

project’s success. Forest Service and regional leaders 

recognize that Evergreen Forest Products—as both an 

employer and a supplier and consumer of wood materials—

is critical to sustaining the county’s natural resource 

economy and developing the region’s network of sawmills 

and biomass plants. This project contributes to the health 

of that regional economic system.

Project investment provides security for local employees. As a family-owned business for several generations, 

Evergreen has demonstrated a long-term commitment to 

the region; in turn, they are rewarded by a reliable and loyal 

core workforce with extensive training and 20 to 30 years 

experience. Recovery Act investment in the mill provided 

a sense of job security to workers strongly rooted to the 

community.

Even short-term jobs provided economic benefits. 

Short-term construction and service jobs created by this 

project allowed local businesses providing supplies and 

services to remain open during an otherwise slow season. 

Long-term benefits depend on economic recovery. This 

Recovery Act project has made the mill more profitable by 

decreasing transportation costs. Increased cashflow could 

result in the purchase of more logs, providing a market for 

logs coming off national forests via stewardship projects. 

Increased cashflow could also add another production shift, 

doubling the number of jobs at the mill. This increased 

production capacity can take place only when the economy 

and construction sector recover, or if planned stewardship contracts materialize (i.e., if there is a better balance 

between the price of lumber and timber). 

Lessons Learned

Increase project impacts by building on community 

capacity. Because this recovery project reinforces 

core community values (that natural resource jobs are 

sustainable), complements county efforts at economic 

development (biomass cogeneration), and supports 

collaborative processes (Woody Biomass Utilization 

Figure 5-21—A TransAmerica bike trail rider passing the kiln.

Victoria Sturtevant
85

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Partnership and Payette Forest Coalition), it is well aligned 

with regional efforts to build local economies and restore 

forest ecosystems. Tying the Forest Service project to other 

projects ongoing in the community helps magnify potential 

impacts.

Help the community understand the importance of 

the Forest Service project to community well-being.

Although Recovery Act funds are invested in community 

timber industry infrastructure, some residents perceive a 

disconnect between forest management and community 

well-being. A more active economic recovery public 

outreach effort would help demonstrate the national forest’s 

commitment to both the community and forest management 

for multiple benefits.

Develop projects that contribute to the natural-resourcebased economy. The adjacent county has attracted a 

number of equity and amenity migrants, real estate developers, and recreation-based businesses. Two years ago it was 

a model community in transition from timber dependence; 

now it has a bankrupt resort, deflated housing prices, and 

shuttered establishments. Adams County regards these 

events as an object lesson demonstrating that a naturalresource-based economy is more sustainable than tourism.

Support or develop projects that can adjust to shifting 

economic conditions. The sister mills’ complementary but 

potentially independent production processes—sawmill, 

planer, and cogen plant—allow some flexibility for adapting 

to shifting markets for lumber, chips, and electricity. 

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Rodney Krogh, owner and vice president 

of Evergreen Forest Products, for his generous assistance as 

principal contact for this study. He arranged for a visit to the 

project site and interviews with employees, and improved 

the accuracy of this report. State and Private Forestry and 

Payette National Forest staff provided important information, and community leaders and residents offered perceptions of the economic recovery project and community 

context. Sophia Polasky gave important support gathering 

the quantitative data, producing the case study, and generally keeping us on track. 

References

Draffan, G. [N.d.]. Profile of the Boise Cascade 

Corporation. Public Information Network. 

http://www.endgame.org/boise.html. (August 2010).

Idaho Department of Labor. 2007. North Central Idaho 

News (November). http://labor.idaho.gov/lmi/pubs/

idempnews/archived/ieseacurnov7.pdf. (August 2010).

Idaho Department of Labor. 2010. Adams County 

workforce trends (June). http://labor.idaho.gov/lmi/pubs/

AdamsProfile.pdf. (August 2010).

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA 

FS]. 2009. Forest Service activities and the American 

Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009: estimating 

measures of economic distress. Administrative Report. 

Washington, DC. 3 p.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA 

FS]. 2010. Highlights (Spring). Payette National Forest. 

http://www.fs.fed.us/r4/payette/news/Highlights%20

2010%20web.pdf. (August 2010).

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census 

[USDC BC]. 2010a. Annual estimates of the resident 

population for counties: April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2009. 

http://www.census.gov/popest/counties/CO-EST2009-01.

html. (October 4, 2010).

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. 

[USDC BC]. 2010b. Small area income and poverty 

estimates. State and county data: 1989, 1993, 1995–2008. 

http://www.census.gov/did/www/saipe/data/statecounty/

index.html. (October 4, 2010).

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for 

Education Statistics [USDE NCES]. 2010. Common 

core of data. http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/. (October 18, 2010).

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics 

[USDL BLS]. 2010. Local area unemployment statistic 

program. http://www.bls.gov/lau. (October 4, 2010).

Wagner, S. 2010. Forest restoration grant would be 

a boon to local economy and forest health. Blue 

Heron Communications (June). http://www.rmef.org/

NewsandMedia/NewsReleases/2010/RestorationGrant.

htm. (August 2010).
86

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831
87

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Chapter 6: A Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service Recovery Act 

Projects: Huron Fuels Treatment Project, Michigan

Pamela Jakes1

Summary

“Iosco jobless rate passes 20 percent” read the headline 

in the Oscoda Press, February 3, 2010 (Nelson 2010). 

Although never described as prosperous, in the past, Iosco 

and neighboring Alcona, Crawford, and Oscoda Counties 

had benefited from diverse economies, with jobs found 

in small manufacturing plants, timber harvesting, wood 

processing facilities, and four-season recreation. But the 

economic downturn has been felt even in the relatively 

isolated communities of the Huron National Forest. When 

the opportunity arose to propose projects for Forest Service 

Recovery Act funding, staff on the Mio and Huron Shores 

Ranger Districts asked how they could develop a safe 

Total Forest Service Recovery Act Investment in 

Michigan (as of 09/08/09): ~$39,382,290 (Michigan 

projects: $34,557,000; Michigan share of multistate 

projects: ~$4,825,290)

Total Forest Service Investment in Huron Fuels 

Treatment Project Case Study: $3.8 million 

Project Location: Mio and Huron Shores Ranger 

Districts, Huron National Forest, Michigan 

Counties: Alcona, Crawford, Iosco, and Oscoda 

Project Type: Constructing new fuelbreaks, 

maintaining existing fuelbreaks, reducing fuels in 

the wildland-urban interface, improving health of 

federal forest land 

Fast Facts

1 Pamela Jakes is a research social scientist, U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, 1992 

Folwell Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55108.

Everyone’s benefiting in the county ‘cause the 

money’s flowing in through all those paychecks 

every 2 weeks... That’s the best stimulus you 

could do.

—Forest Service employee

project that would provide jobs, support local governments, 

and invest in area businesses. Wildfire is recognized as 

the number one natural hazard in the area, with forests 

composed of one of the Nation’s more volatile forest types 

and individual homes or developments scattered among 

the trees. The recovery project designed by the districts 

resulted in the hiring of eight students under the Student 

Temporary Employment Program (STEP) and 80 individuals as temporary employees who reduced the wildfire risk 

in east-central Michigan by constructing new fuelbreaks 

and maintaining fuelbreaks established as early as the 1940s 

and 1950s, mitigating wildfire risk in the wildland-urban 

interface, and improving the health of federal forest land. 

Counties received more than $270,000 to extend mowing along roads and provide support to the Forest Service 

Huron National ForestHuron National Forest
88

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

recovery crews. The forest and Oscoda County partnered 

to obtain high-resolution photography of the entire county, 

improving emergency response and planning, and allowing 

the county to more equitably assess property taxes. More 

than $1 million went to private businesses, with the largest 

contracts awarded for equipment rental, vehicle leasing, 

and to reduce fuels and improve wildlife habitat using a 

stewardship contract. In addition to providing income 

to residents and boosting the local economy, the project 

created, maintained, and protected infrastructure; built 

human capital; and improved the quality of life. Environmental benefits included reduced fuels loads, conversion 

of sites to more ecologically appropriate species, improved 

Kirtland’s warbler (Dendroica kirtlandii) habitat, and 

creation of barrens for wildlife habitat.

The Case

The communities in Alcona, Crawford, Iosco, and Oscoda 

Counties (fig. 6-1) have been referred to as “little towns in 

the big woods.” Nearly two-thirds of the land area in the 

Figure 6-1—

The Huron Fuels 

Treatment Project 

case study included 

Michigan’s Alcona, 

Crawford, Iosco, and 

Oscoda Counties, 

and the Huron 

Shores and Mio 

Ranger Districts 

of the Huron 

National Forest.

 Geospatial Service and Technology Center, USDA Forest Service

!

!

Saginaw

Grayling

Saginaw

Grayling

Oscoda

National forest

Case-study location

Case-study location/national forest

Oscoda County

Alcona 

 County

Iosco 

 County

Crawford County

!

Huron

National Forest 
89

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

four counties is forested, ranging from a low of 46 percent 

for Iosco County to a high of more than 84 percent in 

Crawford County (Pugh et al. 2009). Stands of pines (Pinus

spp.), aspen–birch (Populus spp.–Betula spp.), northern 

hardwoods, and oak (Quercus spp.) are most common. The 

Huron National Forest was established in 1909 and worked 

with partners to restore “the lands that nobody wanted.” 

More than half of the forest land in the area is now in public 

ownership, with the Huron National Forest being the largest 

public land manager. These forests supported a booming 

lumber industry in the mid-1800s, but by the end of the 

century the merchantable pine had been logged and the 

area experienced a series of devastating fires. Large fires 

continue to occur in the area approximately once every 

28 years (Simard et al. 1983), with the most recent, the 

Meridian Boundary Fire, burning more than 8,500 acres 

on May 18, 2010.

Prescribed forest burning is a long-established practice 

in the area (fig. 6-2). The Huron National Forest burns 

approximately 3,500 acres per year to achieve management 

objectives including fuel reduction and site preparation. 

It is an important tool for creating wildlife habitat, and, 

historically, has been used to manage jack pine (Pinus 

banksiana Lamb.) for the endangered Kirtland’s warbler. 

The practice has not been without incident and was 

temporarily discontinued after the 1980 Mack Lake Fire. 

On May 5, 1980, a prescribed fire was ignited in jack pine 

Figure 6-2—The prescribed forest burning conducted by 

Recovery Act employees continued a long-established practice 

on the Huron National Forest. 

Huron National Forest

slash to prepare the site for regeneration. The fire escaped, 

resulting in the death of one firefighter, the destruction of 

44 structures, and the loss of 24,000 acres of forest (Simard 

et al. 1983). More recently, forest staff have demonstrated 

their commitment to prescribed burning for hazardous fuel 

reduction by conducting many burns, including one around 

the ranger compound adjacent to the town of Mio. Local 

residents now generally accept prescribed burning as a 

management tool.

Logging is still important to the area’s economy, 

but it is only a small fraction of what it was in the past. 

Today’s wood processing facilities (including oriented 

strand board, lumber and other construction material, 

and furniture manufacturers) contribute to an economy 

that includes small manufacturing plants supplying parts 

to the automotive industry, shops overhauling aircraft, 

construction and real estate businesses meeting the 

demand for retirement and second homes, and the many 

establishments serving recreationists. Jobs in many of these 

sectors have been disappearing over the past decade. It has 

not been uncommon for employees with more than 20 years 

of experience losing jobs they expected to retire from. 

The unemployment rate in the area has exceeded that of 

the state of Michigan (fig. 6-3), and measures of individual 

and household economic health have been generally worse 

here than in the state as a whole (figs. 6-4 through 6-6). 

Since the mid 2000s, population in the four case-study 

counties has declined faster than in the state (fig. 6-7), with 

many of those who continue to live in the area feeling that 

they cannot look for employment elsewhere because of 

shared child custody agreements, the need to care for an 

elderly parent, or because they were loathe to leave their 

support system behind. School enrollment has also declined 

during this period (fig. 6-8).

The Mio and Huron Shores Districts decided that the 

best approach for helping their neighbors persevere during 

the latest down-turn, would be to provide temporary jobs 

working in the woods to reduce wildfire risk and improve or 

restore ecosystem health. The first Recovery Act employees 

arrived on July 5, 2009, more than doubling the size of the 

Mio District. The Recovery Act employees participated 

in 4 weeks of training that stressed safety (including first 
90

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Figure 6-3—Monthly unemployment rates for Michigan and an average for the four Michigan case-study counties, 1990–2010 

(USDL BLS 2010).

Figure 6-4—Median household income for Michigan and each Michigan case-study county, in 2008 dollars, 1989–2008 

(USDC BC 2010b).

25

20

15

10

5

0

Monthly unemployment (percent)

Michigan

Alcona, Crawford, Iosco, and Oscoda Counties (averaged)

Jan. 1990

Jan. 1991

Jan. 1992Jan. 1993

Jan. 1994

Jan. 1995

Jan. 1996

Jan. 1997

Jan. 1998

Jan. 1999

Jan. 2000

Jan. 2001

Jan 2002Jan. 2003

Jan. 2004

Jan. 2005

Jan. 2006

Jan. 2007

Jan. 2008

Jan. 2009

Jan. 2010

Date

19891990

19911992

1993

199419951996

1997

1998

1999

20002001

2002

2003

20042005

2006

2007

2008

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

Median household income, adjusetd for 

2008 inflation (thousand dollars) 

Year

Michigan

Alcona County

Crawford County

Iosco County

Oscoda County
91

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Figure 6-5—Percentage of population living in poverty for Michigan and each Michigan case-study county, 1989–2008 

(USDC BC 2010b).

Figure 6-6—Change in number of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch programs in Michigan and each Michigan 

case-study county, 1988–2008 (USDE NCES 2010). Note: reduced-price lunch added in 1999.

19891990

19911992

1993

199419951996

1997

1998

1999

20002001

2002

2003

20042005

2006

2007

2008

Population in poverty (percent)

Year

Michigan

Alcona County

Crawford County

Iosco County

Oscoda County

25

20

15

10

5

Michigan

Alcona County

Crawford County

Iosco County

Oscoda County

250

225

200

175

150

125

100

75

50

25

0

-25

1996–97

1997–98

1998–99

1999–00

2000–01

2001–02

2002–03

2003–042004–05

2005–06

2006–07

2007–08

2008–09

School year

1988–89

1989–90

1990–91

1991–92

1992–93

1993–94

1994–95

1995–96

Free or reduced-price lunch program 

eligibility, change from 1988 (percent)
92

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

aid and cardiopulmonary resuscitation), firefighting skills, 

chainsaw operation, heavy equipment operation, physical 

fitness, and what it means to work for the Forest Service. 

Additional firefighting training resulted in their being red 

card qualified for wildland fire suppression. After classroom 

training, the new employees served as apprentices in the 

woods before transitioning to their jobs clearcutting jack 

pine to create fuelbreaks, thinning red pine (Pinus resinosa

Aiton) to reduce fuels and promote more valuable timber, 

creating barrens for wildlife habitat, and prescribed burning 

in an attempt to put fire back in the ecosystem. The training 

was repeated in March 2010 when the second field season 

began. In addition to their planned activities, Recovery Act 

employees helped suppress wildfires in the area, including 

the May 2010 Meridian Boundary Fire. The crews also 

assisted with reforestation projects and restoration of 

areas damaged by off-road vehicles. Several Recovery Act 

employees traveled to the Wayne and Chequamegon-Nicolet 

National Forests as members of a special Huron-Manistee 

National Forests fire use team.

Figure 6-7—Change in population for the United States, 

Michigan, and each Michigan case-study county, 2000–2009 

(USDC BC 2010a).

Figure 6-8—Change in school enrollment for Michigan and each Michigan case-study county, 1988–2008 (USDE NCES 2010).

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Population change from 2000 (percent)

Year

10

8

6

4

2

0

-2

-4

-6

-8

United States

Michigan

Alcona County

Crawford County

Iosco County

Oscoda County

Michigan

Alcona County

Crawford County

Iosco County

Oscoda County

40

30

20

10

0

-10

-20

-30

-40

-50

1996–97

1997–98

1998–99

1999–00

2000–01

2001–02

2002–03

2003–042004–05

2005–06

2006–07

2007–08

2008–09

School year

1988–89

1989–90

1990–91

1991–92

1992–93

1993–94

1994–95

1995–96

Student enrollment, change from 1988 (percent)
93

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

The districts have purchased fuel, equipment, and other 

supplies for the crew from local businesses. Agreements 

with counties call for a number of services that complement 

ongoing projects. County crews are expanding normal 

right-of-way brush removal operations into the forest to 

create fuelbreaks along potential evacuation routes. In 

some areas, they are constructing new fuelbreaks. They are 

filling water tanks to support prescribed burns and moving 

Forest Service machinery between field sites. A stewardship 

contract was awarded in September 2010 for projects to 

reduce fuels and improve forest health. These contracts 

and agreements will extend into 2012, with contract work 

scaling up as the temporary employees leave in September 

2010. 

Methods

This case study was conducted using both qualitative and 

quantitative social science research methods. Qualitative 

data were gathered during face-to-face, semistructured 

interviews with people involved in the recovery project. 

Interviews took place between February and July 2010. 

A total of 24 individuals were interviewed for this case 

study. Interviewees included nine Forest Service employees 

who helped develop or implement the projects; seven local 

government, business, and nonprofit organization representatives who received Recovery Act funds; and eight individuals who benefited from jobs created or retained as a result 

of the project. Data were collected from another 36 Forest 

Service regular and Recovery Act employees during three 

focus groups. Additional qualitative data were obtained 

from published sources such as newspapers and local 

government publications, Forest Service documents, and 

federal Web sites. Quantitative data regarding the recovery 

project and jobs were obtained from Forest Service databases and federal Web sites, including Recovery.gov and 

USAspending.gov. Socioeconomic indicator data describing 

the local population and economy of the case-study area 

came from a number of sources, such as the U.S. Census, 

the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Bureau of Economic 

Analysis. For more information on study methods and data 

sources see the appendix.

Project Recipients and Partners

Nearly $1.5 million of the $3.8 million received for this 

project was used by the Mio and Huron Shores Ranger 

Districts to hire temporary Forest Service employees 

(table 6-1). Most of these temporary employees were local 

residents, with one employee commuting 21⁄2 hours each 

direction. Prior to coming to the Forest Service, Recovery 

Act employees held a variety of jobs including waitress, 

cook, teacher, toolmaker, builder, contractor, mechanic, and 

assembly-line worker. A portion of these funds were also 

used to cover the salary and travel for detailers from other 

Forest Service units to supervise field crews.

At the moment they’re pretty glad to see that their 

neighbors are employed... . They’ve all just driven 

down the highway and seen the ARRA project 

signs... but they don’t know those people, and they 

see that a big company got some more money to 

do a project. But when they see this it gets them 

a little that we’ve employed some people, and it’s 

local people.

—Forest Service employee

It’s put all of us back on our feet again. There’s 

nothing to really say about it. It saved my life... 

I’d be belly up... [before the recovery job] there 

was weeks when I made $30 a week. That’s what I 

lived on.

—Recovery Act employee

Counties have received more than $418,000 from the 

Huron Fuels Treatment Project and have provided $261,647 

in matching funds to support the agreements. Recovery Act 

participating agreements were established with the road 

commissions in Crawford, Iosco, and Oscoda Counties 

to construct and maintain fuelbreaks, remove brush from 

roadsides, move Forest Service equipment across the district 

as needed by the field crews, and haul water to drop tanks to 

support prescribed burning projects. 
94

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Oscoda County also entered into an agreement with 

the Huron National Forest to obtain high-resolution aerial 

photography of the entire county, with each structure in the 

county photographed from four sides and above. The new 

photography will allow county assessors to track changes 

in property value, and ensure fair and equitable property 

taxation. County commissioners also see its usefulness in 

supporting more efficient provision of emergency services 

and a variety of county marketing activities. However, as 

one commissioner observed, “we’re one of the poorest one 

or two counties in the state of Michigan and there’s no way 

Table 6-1—Huron Fuels Treatment project recipients and funding awarded as of June 30, 2010

Total funding

Recipient Project description amount

Dollars

County:

Iosco County Road Commission Hazardous fuel treatment, maintenance of fuelbreaks along 111,000

county and Forest Service roads

Oscoda County Road Commission Maintenance of fuelbreaks along county and Forest Service roads 117,954

Crawford County Road Commission Construction and maintenance of fuelbreaks along county and 41,128

Forest Service roads

Oscoda County Procurement of 565 square miles of high-resolution aerial 148,573

photography

Businesses:

ACME Auto Leasing LLC Truck leasing 284,592

LCM Surveying and Engineering Cadastral surveys of property boundaries 106,617

Bob Mitchell and Associates Cadastral surveys of property boundaries 65,487

Cedar Ridge Forestry Timber marking and volume estimation 28,772

International Trading Cct LLC Equipment rental 442,096

Northern Timberlands, Inc. Fuel treatments and habitat improvements 394,806

Forest Service:

Temporary employees Fuel treatments, habitat improvements, forest management 1,448,908

Detailers to serve as crew supervisors Fuel treatments, habitat improvements, forest management 38,476

Travel for crew supervisors Fuel treatments, habitat improvements, forest management 7,750

we could afford to do it.” Mio District staff heard about the 

project and recognized its value for work in the wildlandurban interface. They worked with the county to purchase 

the photography as part of the Huron Fuels Treatment 

Project. 

More than $1 million was awarded to businesses to carry 

out and support Huron Fuels Treatment Project activities. The 

largest contract was awarded to a Michigan company to lease 

heavy equipment. Another significant amount, more than 

$390,000, was awarded in September 2010 for a stewardship 

contract that includes an 863-acre timber harvest that will 

create more open and less volatile vegetation conditions, 

restore and maintain watersheds, produce habitat for rare 

and endangered species, and promote healthy forests. A 

large contract went to a Connecticut company for vehicle 

rental, and the contract was filled with 12 new Ford pickups, 

benefitting Michigan’s automotive industry. Contracts for 

land surveying were awarded to two local firms. Local 

businesses continue to provide supplies, lodging, and 

equipment for crews through micro-purchasing authorities. 

...it’s been a wonderful thing for our business. And 

personally I don’t even know if I’m in favor of all 

the money that’s [going out the door for Recovery 

Act projects], but it has had a great impact and a 

definite benefit on our company, and personally on 

myself and the other two gentlemen I work with. 

—Recovery Act funding recipient
95

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Other Recovery Act Projects

The Huron-Manistee National Forests received recovery 

funding for two other wildland fire management projects: 

$200,000 for fuel reduction and timber sale marking and 

$420,000 for land-line surveys. Ten projects totaling 

nearly $4 million in recovery funding were undertaken to 

improve infrastructure such as trails, facilities, and roads. 

In addition, the Huron-Manistee National Forests received 

$430,000 through the Forest Service’s Northern Research 

Station for roads and watershed projects in the Udell-Pine 

River Experimental Forest. The Huron-Manistee projects 

are among a number of regionwide Recovery Act projects 

(solar wells, well abandonment, environmental compliance, 

and water/waste water condition surveys) that are funded at 

the regional level. The Huron Fuels Treatment Project is not 

directly linked to other ongoing recovery projects.

Figure 6-9—Many of the Recovery Act employees live in the area 

because they love the outdoors, so they were enthusiastic about the 

outdoor nature of their new jobs.

I personally love [this type of work]. I could do it 

every day for the rest of my life.

—Recovery Act employee

Economic Benefits

For the field season beginning July 5, 2009, 70 employees 

were hired by the Huron National Forest, including 8 

students. Of those hired in 2009, 53 returned to work for 

the 2010 field season, and 18 new employees were hired to 

cover attrition from the previous year. Over the two field 

seasons, 88 individuals were temporarily employed by the 

forest on the recovery project. Temporary employees were 

hired primarily at the GS-2 and GS-3 levels, but the experience gained in the first field season meant many of those 

who returned for a second field season were hired at higher 

GS levels. 

Recovery Act employees indicated that the Forest 

Service jobs were very different from jobs they had held 

previously. For many, the salaries (generally $10.75 to 

$12.00 per hour) and benefits (annual and sick leave) 

were better than what they could have obtained in the 

private sector. The “military-like” rules and organization 

that characterizes the Forest Service were different from 

previous jobs, and some employees, particularly those 

It’s... watching out for each other, you know we 

drilled that into their heads, your guys go out as a 

team, you come back as a team, you take care of 

each other, you’re only as strong as your weakest 

person... .

—Forest Service employee

with military experience, found them reassuring because 

expectations were clear and they knew who to approach 

with questions or issues. Employees talked about the 

agency’s focus on safety and working as a team as being 

major differences from other jobs they have held. People 

live in this area of the state because they love outdoor 

activities, so the opportunity to work outdoors was a 

definite plus for these individuals (fig. 6-9). Women, in 

particular, talked about an increase in self-confidence as 

they learned how to use chain saws and drive larger heavyduty vehicles. Fifteen of the 88 employees have moved 

on to other jobs in both the private and public sectors. 

The recovery jobs were bridges for eight employees who 

were able to move to seasonal jobs on the Huron-Manistee 

National Forests and forests in South Dakota and New 

Mexico, and were life rafts for seven other individuals, 

keeping them afloat until they were called back to old jobs 

or found new permanent jobs.

Huron National Forest
96

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Agreements with counties generally did not result in 

new jobs, but allowed the counties to retain employees and 

provided them more flexibility in how they spend their 

funds (table 6-2). For example, the Iosco County Road 

Commission maintains an emergency account that they 

use when work exceeds the amount budgeted. In the past, 

they have primarily accessed the account to respond to 

emergencies, such as road cleanup following snow, ice, and 

windstorms. Because incoming department funds from 

vehicle registration and fuel taxes have declined, the Road 

Commission anticipated having to draw on this account 

to cover employee salaries for routine construction-season 

projects, potentially decreasing their ability to respond 

to emergencies. However, they were able to avoid this 

drawdown because Road Commission employees worked 

on Recovery Act projects, and that portion of their salaries 

was covered by Recovery Act dollars. Recovery Act funds 

directly contributed to public safety by covering the costs of 

mowing vegetation along roads thereby improving visibility, 

especially in regard to avoiding deer-vehicle collisions, and 

decreasing fire risk (priorities for the county and Forest 

Service), and indirectly contributed to the county’s ability 

to respond to emergencies by providing an alternative to the 

expenditure of emergency funds for routine projects. 

Oscoda County and the Huron National Forest entered 

into an agreement, using Recovery Act funds, to obtain 

aerial photo coverage of the county. Although these 

Recovery Act funds did not directly create any new jobs, 

the usefulness of these photos to the county for fair and 

equitable taxation, the provision of emergency services, 

and other as yet undefined uses has encouraged the county 

to hire an employee to manage the county’s information 

technology system. The county had one person working 

part-time (5 hours per week) providing services related 

to geographic information system (GIS) applications, 

but because they anticipate that this photography will be 

extremely useful for a variety of purposes, a commissioner 

said, “we turned it into a full-time position because of this 

project.” So, although this new position is not being funded 

by Recovery Act dollars, the availability of photos paid for 

by Recovery Act funds directly contributed to the creation 

of this position. 

... if [the Road Department] didn’t have [the 

recovery project] I don’t know what we would 

have done.

—Recovery Act funding recipient

Table 6-2—Full-time equivalent jobs reported for Huron Fuels Treatment project

Reporting period

Feb.–Sept. Oct.–Dec. Jan.–Mar. Apr.–June July–Sept.

Recipient 2009 2009 2010 2010 2010

Number of jobs a

Crawford County Road Commission — — 0 0 0

Iosco County Road Commission — — — 0.09 0.11

Oscoda County — — — 3.00 3.00

Oscoda County Road Commission — — — — —

ACME Auto Leasing LLC — — 0 0 —

Bob Mitchell and Associates — — 0.47 0.25 0.60

Cedar Ridge Forestry — — — 3.00 0

International Trading CCT LLC — — — — —

LCM Surveying and Engineering

Northern Timberlands, Inc.b — — 0 0 0

Note: A dash (—) indicates that no quarterly report was available.

a

 See appendix for reporting method.

b

 Contract awarded in September 2010.
97

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

For at least one private business, the Recovery Act 

dollars “probably kept us in business.” This business 

provides services necessary to property development, 

but with the downturn in the economy, demand for these 

services decreased dramatically and the business lost 

significant income. The recovery-project-generated work 

enabled this business to keep a three-person office open that 

they thought would have to close at least temporarily.

Local businesses providing supplies and equipment 

(e.g., fuel for vehicles, chain saws and chain-saw parts, 

timber-marking paint, posts of boundary markers) and 

lodging for detailers working on the recovery project 

indicated that the increased income was welcome, but did 

not necessitate hiring additional employees or directly result 

in the retention of employees.

Many of the departments and businesses the Huron 

National Forest worked with on the recovery project 

were departments and businesses they had worked with 

previously. This was less likely to be the case for contracts 

sent to Economic Recovery Operations Centers. Because of 

the extraordinary focus on allocating the funds as quickly 

as possible, it was easier to work with known partners 

than take the time to identify new partners or develop the 

relationships necessary to begin projects.

Social Benefits

Besides the income and increased revenue entering local 

communities through the recovery project, social benefits 

fall into four categories: create, maintain, and protect infrastructure; boost the local economy; build human capital; 

and improve quality of life.

Recovery Act funds contributed to local infrastructure 

by creating and maintaining fuelbreaks and removing brush 

along roads. Emergency managers anticipate that when 

the area experiences a wildland fire in the future, these 

and other recovery project accomplishments will reduce 

damage to infrastructure and prevent the loss of homes and 

structures by decreasing fire intensity and improving access 

for firefighters. 

Related to fire suppression, several of the Recovery 

Act employees are members of local volunteer fire 

departments. The knowledge and experience they gained 

Figure 6-10—Wildland firefighter training received by Recovery 

Act employees made them competitive for positions in other 

Forest Service units. 

Huron National Forest

in wildland firefighting is being carried back to volunteer 

fire departments and improving suppression capabilities 

throughout the region (fig. 6-10).

In terms of the local economy, businesses have 

benefited not only from purchases made to support recovery 

project activities, but also from the additional dollars 

Recovery Act employees have spent locally. Recovery Act 

employees indicated that because they know their jobs are 

temporary, they have not invested their paychecks in major 

purchases, like a new car, but have used the money to pay 

their bills and purchase every-day necessities.

The recovery project built human capital within the 

region by educating and training temporary employees. 

Employees developed a number of skills that can be 

transferred to other jobs. District staff served as mentors to 

Recovery Act employees, providing training and experience 

that qualifies them for other Forest Service employment. 

Interested employees have been shown how to apply for 

federal jobs online. The intensive classroom and field 

training in fire suppression and chain-saw operation has 

made many of these employees highly competitive for 

fire-suppression positions. Eight Recovery Act employees 

have found other Forest Service seasonal employment on 

the Huron-Manistee, Cibola, Black Hills, and Medicine 

Bow/Routt National Forests. Several students hired under 

the STEP program have changed their majors and are now 

looking forward to careers in natural resource management. 
98

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

The recovery jobs had major positive impacts on 

employees’ quality of life, particularly on health. Recovery 

Act employees participated in a forest-wide health fair 

that provided health screening and education at no cost to 

employees. They started each day with 1 hour of physical 

activity, including long hikes while wearing a firefighter’s 

pack. Self-confidence and pride also improved. Recovery 

Act employees talked about wearing their “HMF Fire 

Management” shirts into local businesses and being asked 

about what was happening on the forest. They took pride 

in being able to talk about the importance of projects they 

were working on. 

A greater sense of community developed as a result 

of the project. People who would not normally associate 

with each other were brought together on field crews, 

including employees of different ages and education. These 

individuals worked together productively, and have been 

enthusiastic participants with coworkers and their families 

in potluck lunches, the district holiday party, and other 

social activities. 

Finally, the Recovery Act employees are experiencing 

what is for many of them a different kind of employment. 

Safety and teamwork are emphasized. This knowledge and 

skills will serve them well in future employment and in 

their lives. 

“I know a number of businesses in town that are 

really thankful that [the Recovery Act project is] 

here, because people have steady paychecks... the 

bars that sell food and stuff like that, the pizza 

place, the Shell, the Marathon, Verizon. All these 

businesses have money coming from the people 

who work [on the Recovery Act project]... I would 

say a lot of money pours out into this town from 

the stimulus, especially on paydays.” 

—Recovery Act employee

... as far as getting stuff done, this is a rare 

moment... [the number of acres being treated are] 

not something we could do in a normal year. So 

we’re definitely getting a lot of critical work done 

in the fuel reduction area that we couldn’t get done 

if we didn’t have this opportunity. 

—Forest Service employee

Environmental Benefits

The goal of the project is to treat more than 8,000 acres of 

national forest land to:

• Reduce surface fuel loads through prescribed 

forest burning.

• Reintroduce fire in the ecosystem through 

prescribed burns.

• Disrupt fuel continuity by clearcutting jack pine.

• Convert sites to more ecologically appropriate 

species.

• Improve Kirtland’s warbler habitat (fig. 6-11).

• Create barrens for wildlife habitat.

Specific activities being funded by recovery dollars, 

anticipated accomplishments and objectives are shown in 

table 6-3.

Figure 6-11—Recovery Act employees completed a number 

of projects that improved or created habitat for the endangered 

Kirtland’s warbler. 

Pamela Jakes
99

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Table 6-3—Activities undertaken, amount accomplished, objectives achieved, Huron Fuels Treatment Project, 

October 1, 2010

Activity Accomplishment Objective(s) achieved

Land survey 40 miles Prepare for future management activities by establishing

property boundaries

Timber harvest 730,000 cubic feet Reduce wildfire risk by managing fuels and improving 

forest health, support local timber economy

Timber marking 767 acres Reduce wildfire risk by preparing for future harvests that 

will manage fuel and improve forest health, support local 

timber economy

Timber harvest stewardship contract 863 acres Reduce wildfire risk by managing fuels and improving 

forest health, create habitat for rare and endangered 

species, support local timber economy

County mowing along roadways 899 acres Reduce wildfire risk by maintaining existing fuelbreaks, 

contribute to public safety by maintaining visibility 

along roads, support local government

County fuelbreak construction 184 acres Reduce wildfire risk by constructing new fuelbreaks, 

support local government

Forest Service prescribed burning 2,000 acres Reduce wildfire risk by managing fuel and improving 

forest health, create local jobs

Forest Service hand clearing 3,000 acres Reduce wildfire risk by managing fuel and improving 

forest health, create local jobs

Obtain high-resolution 6-inch 565 square miles Improve emergency response by obtaining data for wildfire

aerial photography preattack planning, support local government

These projects have been planned and are occurring 

across the landscape. Implementing fuel treatments and 

other forest management projects at a landscape scale 

is more efficient than implementing them piecemeal 

as funding becomes available. The former approach 

maximizes desired impacts, because such projects 

complement each other.

Effects on the Agency

The project is enabling the districts to meet vegetation management goals at an accelerated rate, halving the backlog 

of approximately 3 years worth of National Environmental 

Policy Act (NEPA) approved projects. 

The project is being managed as an incident, using 

the same assignments and responsibilities found on 

a Type II incident management team. Because many 

district employees have fire experience, this organization 

has made project deployment easier. Those without 

incident experience say this organization helps facilitate 

communication within the team, clarifying decisionmaking. 

It also provides experience that qualifies some career 

employees for new positions on future incidents. District 

staff is gaining experience developing and implementing 

stewardship projects, including designing and marketing 

sales of submerchantable material. District employees feel 

the recovery project has helped them become more efficient 

managers and administrators. 

Support from district leaders has allowed a number 

of employees to set aside normal work for high-priority 

recovery work. Other employees have been responsible for 

supervising recovery field crews in addition to their normal 

workload. For these employees, stress has been significant 

and morale has suffered. Two conditions were cited as 

having negative impacts on morale. Summer is the time 

when employees often go on details to gain training and 

experience necessary to advance within the agency, and 

earn overtime working on weather and condition-dependent 

field projects. Perceptions of some Huron National Forest 
100

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

employees were that they had to pass up detail opportunities 

and had fewer opportunities to earn overtime because of the 

recovery project. However, both the 2009 and 2010 western 

fire seasons were slow, and detail opportunities were limited 

for permanent employees. Permanent seasonal employees’ 

work periods were extended by several months because of 

the recovery project, and overtime was paid to permanent 

employees who had dual responsibilities to support the 

project and handle their normal duties. Hiring detailers to 

supervise recovery field crews helped reduce some of the 

workload.

Occasionally, approved forest management projects 

on the districts were delayed because agency funds were 

not available for the necessary preliminary work such as 

surveying landlines or marking timber. Some of these tasks 

were completed as part of recovery projects, allowing other 

forest management projects to move forward. The additional 

timber harvesting associated with these forest management 

projects helps support local loggers, truckers, and people 

employed in forest product industries. The districts feel 

that the fuel reduction work accomplished as part of the 

recovery project will help them compete for additional 

Huron-Manistee National Forests funds. If this happens, 

districts may have funds in the future to continue hiring a 

limited number of people on a seasonal basis.

Finally, the recovery project helped build relationships 

between the districts and the community. Local businesses 

were encouraged to compete for recovery contracts 

and benefited from the local purchasing of supplies to 

support field crews. They credit Forest Service leadership 

for making the community aware of Recovery Act 

opportunities and helping businesses work their way 

through the contracting and agreement processes. As a 

result, local residents have developed a better understanding 

of what the Forest Service does on public lands. 

Challenges

Challenges most often mentioned by Forest Service employees working on the recovery project involve administration 

and budget. Normally, when the agency is involved in 

a disaster or emergency situation, staff are “unleashed” 

and given the freedom to work creatively. However, with 

Recovery Act funding, Forest Service employees describe 

a “political fear” that led to perceived extraordinary and 

excessive amounts of oversight. 

For example, restrictions on the use of micropurchase 

check-writing authority prevented the agency from using 

some local small businesses who do not accept credit 

cards. Micropurchase cardholders needed the written 

approval of the Forest Supervisor for even the most basic 

supply purchases. Normally these cardholders would have 

the authority to make these procurements. Working with 

Economic Recovery Operations Centers presented another 

administrative challenge. Heavy equipment needed for the 

crews did not arrive for 4 months, after crews had been laid 

off for the season. Ironically, in a state dependent on the 

automotive industry, the company awarded the contract to 

lease new vehicles was located in New Haven, Connecticut. 

(The contractor did purchase 12 new Ford pickup trucks to 

meet the requirements of the contract.) Most local Forest 

Service employees feel that if they had been allowed to 

work with their normal contractors and contracting officers, 

the project could have delivered more benefits to local 

communities in less time. 

Because the district spent the majority of Recovery Act 

project dollars on temporary employees, they experienced a 

tsunami of new employees. This resulted in a high demand 

for trainers, supervisors, and mentors, with some permanent 

employees filling all three roles at once. Purchasing 

equipment to dress and equip more than 50 new employees 

for wildland fire and fuel management work was difficult 

given restrictions placed on the purchase of durable goods 

and use of credit cards. The districts were not allowed to use 

Recovery Act funds to purchase critical durable items like 

chain saws, radios, or other firefighting equipment. Finding 

vehicles to transport the field crews was a challenge early 

on, with some permanent employees changing their work 

schedules to guarantee access to necessary transportation. 

Finally, the use of stewardship contracts to achieve 

wildland fire and forest restoration objectives necessitated 

the development of new skills in contracting. Stewardship 

contracts require more documentation and approvals than 

normal service or timber sale contracts. This significantly 

lengthened the time and effort to get this contract out for 
101

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

advertisement. District staff have had to learn how to mark 

and market sales that will produce material for which there 

is virtually no market and therefore little economic value. 

However district staff are learning to work with this new 

tool and are identifying new partners who can utilize smalldiameter material. 

District employees felt that the key to meeting many of 

these challenges was patience. Their experience was that 

as higher level administrators clarified direction in regard 

to Recovery Act funds, they became more comfortable in 

approving requests that had previously been denied.

Key Findings

Forest Service leadership played a number of critical 

roles that contributed to the successful implementation 

of the Recovery Act Project. First, leadership played a 

strong role selling local government and businesses on the 

benefits of accessing Recovery Act funds for local projects. 

Second, they were willing to let some normal work slide 

in order to develop and implement the project. Third, 

leadership insisted that the first priority in designing the 

project was safety, and they took the time to train Recovery 

Act employees to help insure a safe and productive work 

environment. Because of limits on what Recovery Act 

funding could be used for, leadership was willing to use 

other nonrecovery resources to make the project work. 

Finally, they worked with staff to identify training and skill 

development opportunities within the Recovery Act project 

for regular district staff.

Project success built on previously established relationships. Strong long-established relationships between the 

districts and county governments allowed the districts to 

move quickly to establish agreements and get the Recovery 

Act money out the door.

The project was well accepted within the community 

because it addressed critical local needs. There was 

significant local need for jobs, and the Recovery Act project 

created jobs in the woods that built on the local outdoor 

culture, which generated broad interest in and support 

for the project. The project reduced wildfire risk thereby 

addressing a recognized critical need in the community. 

Improved Kirtland’s warbler habitat built support for the 

project outside the local area.

Hiring a large number of local citizens created a number 

of benefits. Local hiring helped spread the economic benefits of the project throughout the community. Recovery Act 

employees were able to talk about Forest Service priorities 

and projects and contributed to increased understanding of 

district programs throughout the community. Finally, hiring 

a large number of local residents generated a great deal of 

good will within the community.

It pays to be prepared. The Huron National Forest was 

well prepared to conduct the project. First, the forest had 

NEPA projects on the shelf, which meant that Recovery 

Act employees were working on critical projects immediately. Forest Service regular staff wanted to make sure 

that Recovery Act employees felt like they fit into the 

established district structure and culture, so they discussed 

challenges to bringing in so many new employees prior to 

their arrival. Finally, they organized the project using an 

Incident Management Team, which established clear lines 

of communication and responsibilities.

The districts were able to accomplish a significant 

amount of mission-critical work while contributing 

to the local economy and reducing the impacts of the 

recession on local citizens. Although the work could 

have been performed by contractors, the level of contracting that would have been required could not have been 

accomplished within the given timeframe. In addition, 

district staff felt that local businesses would not have been 

competitive if the project had been developed as one or two 

large service contracts, and that a nonlocal contractor would 

have had limited local economic benefits. Hiring temporary 

employees was the quickest way to get the most money 

into the local community. Recovery Act and regular Forest 

Service employees said that it would have been more helpful 

to have a longer time to spend Recovery Act funds internally—to have hired fewer employees for a longer period of 

time. All the Recovery Act employees who have not found 

other employment will be unemployed at the end of fiscal 
102

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

year 2010. Although they appreciate that Forest Service 

employment has allowed them to develop new job skills, 

build some savings, and extend unemployment benefits, 

they see that there is even more work to be done on the 

forest and would like the opportunity to improve the health 

of the local forests while they improve their own health 

(economically and physically).

Lessons Learned

Be prepared. The experience of the Huron Fuels Treatment 

Project reinforces the Boy Scout motto of “Be Prepared.” 

The forest was prepared in that it had long-established 

relationships with the local counties and businesses. These 

relationships allowed the forest to move quickly to bring 

local counties and businesses in as partners on the recovery 

project. In addition, the forest was prepared in that it had 

several years of NEPA-approved projects ready to go, 

allowing the forest to put Recovery Act employees to work 

immediately on high-priority projects. 

Take the time to know the local community and its 

capacities. Leaders were well acquainted with the local 

economic and social contexts, helping them develop a project that not only benefited the forest, but also local residents, 

businesses, and governments. This resulted in a project that 

generated significant local benefits, including broad-based 

support for the recovery work and Forest Service work in 

general. Developing this type of local knowledge takes a 

Forest Service leader who is out in the community, talking 

to and working with local individuals and organizations, 

and who is in place long enough to build relationships that 

benefit all partners. 

Even short-term jobs or small amounts of extra funding 

can produce significant benefits. Even though the jobs 

created by the districts as part of the recovery project were 

temporary and relatively short term, they had significant 

positive social and economic impacts on the individuals and 

families affected. In addition, the money that went into the 

pockets of the Recovery Act employees was quickly spent 

on necessities, spreading the economic benefits to local 

businesses. Although bringing on such a large number of 

employees caused some stress and required some flexibility 

for Forest Service employees, the positive impacts were felt 

quickly throughout the community.

Acknowledgments

Thanks to District Ranger Steve Goldman, my principal 

contact for this study, for his guidance and support, and for 

making the necessary contacts and arranging interviews 

with Forest Service staff, Recovery Act employees, county 

commissioners and staff, and local business owners. The 

case study of the Huron Fuels Treatment Project would not 

have been possible without Steve’s help. I am especially 

grateful to all the people who shared their perceptions 

and knowledge of the recovery project through interviews 

and focus groups. Thanks to Sophia Polasky for her work 

gathering the quantitative data presented in this case study, 

producing case study reports, and taking care of all the 

details that keep a project such as this running smoothly. 

Finally, thanks to Susan Charnley and John Schelhas 

for their guidance and support in developing the project, 

analyzing the data, and developing knowledge transfer 

products.

Sources

Nelson, H. 2010. Iosco jobless rate passes 20 percent. 

Oscoda Press. 134(1): 1, 3.

Pugh, S.A.; Hansen, M.H.; Pedersen, L.D.; Heym, D.C.; 

Butler, B.J.; Crocker, S.J.; Meneguzzo, D.; Perry, 

C.H.; Haugen, D.E.; Woodall, C.W.; Jepsen, E. 

2009. Michigan’s forests: 2004. Resour. Bull. NRS-34. 

Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Northern Research Station. 210 p.

Simard, A.J.; Haines, D.A.; Blank, R.W.; Frost, J.S. 

1983. The Mack Lake Fire. Gen. Tech. Rep. NC-83. 

St. Paul, MN: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station. 36 p. 
103

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census 

[USDC BC]. 2010a. Annual estimates of the resident 

population for counties: April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2009. 

http://www.census.gov/popest/counties/CO-EST2009-01.

html. (4 Oct. 2010).

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census 

[USDC BC]. 2010b. Small area income and poverty 

estimates, state and county data: 1989, 1993, 1995–2008. 

http://www.census.gov/did/www/saipe/data/statecounty/

index.html. (4 Oct. 2010).

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for 

Education Statistics [USDE NCES]. 2010. Common 

core of data. http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/. (18 Oct. 2010).

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics 

[USDL BLS]. 2010. Local area unemployment statistic 

program. http://www.bls.gov/lau. (4 Oct. 2010).
104

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831
105

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Chapter 7: A Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service Recovery Act 

Projects: Route of the Olympian Rails to Trails, Montana

Victoria Sturtevant, Jessi Kershner, and Pamela Jakes1

Summary

Mineral County, Montana, like many places in the West 

with closed mills and mines, has been struggling to chart 

a new course in its resource-based economy. One strategy, 

supported by the county, Lolo National Forest, and national 

groups such as the Rails-to-Trails Conservancy, is to further 

develop recreational opportunities, such as the Route of the 

Olympian, a new recreational trail on abandoned railroad 

grades with spectacular scenery, trestles, and a tunnel. This 

multiuse trail joins the increasingly popular Route of the 

Hiawatha bicycle trail in Idaho and is expected to bring 

more users and increased income for communities along the 

route. Although funding has been available for acquiring 

land and undertaking some small projects such as minor 

bridge repairs, major work on the route has been delayed 

because of the inability to fund a required engineering 

assessment of the tunnel and trestle. When the Northern 

Region requested proposals for American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act (hereafter referred to as the Recovery 

Act) funding, Superior District staff saw an opportunity 

to move forward with the project. Recovery Act funding 

Total Forest Service Recovery Act Investment, 

Montana (as of 09/08/09): $70,973,300

Forest Service Investment, Route of the Olympian 

Rails to Trails: $1,064,742

Project Location: Lolo National Forest, Superior 

Ranger District

County: Mineral 

Project Type: Perform trestle and tunnel repairs on 

abandoned railroad grades for a new recreational trail

Fast Facts

allowed the assessment, design, and restoration of the 

tunnel, trestle, and rail bed. 

The Route of the Olympian will differ from the 

Hiawatha trail in that it will allow seasonal motorized use 

in addition to nonmotorized use, as proposed by a collaborative planning group convened by the Superior District 

Ranger. The trail bed has seen years of local use by allterrain vehicles, snowmobilers, bicycles, horses, and trucks, 

and the route’s management plan proposes to continue these 

uses on a limited basis. The restoration project, along with 

a management plan for the route, will allow the district to 

expand and control access, ensure the safety of users, and 

protect the environment.

1 Victoria Sturtevant is a professor emeritus, Southern 

Oregon University, 1250 Siskiyou Blvd, Ashland, OR 97520. 

Jessi Kershner is an environmental scientist in Seattle, WA 

98119. Pamela Jakes is a research forester, U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, 1992 

Folwell Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55108.

Corrine L. Kegel

Victoria Sturtevant
106

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Short-term economic benefits of this project consist of 

job opportunities created by contracts with construction and 

engineering firms. Long-term economic benefits are anticipated for businesses along the route. Social benefits follow 

the restoration of this section of the Milwaukee Railroad 

grade, leveraging the investments of partners, creating new 

recreational opportunities for the public, and restoring a 

piece of railroad history. 

The Case

The Route of the Olympian recreational trail will be located 

in Mineral County, on the border of the Idaho panhandle, 

primarily on land managed by the Superior District of the 

Lolo National Forest (fig. 7-1). 

Figure 7-1—Case-study location and surrounding areas in Montana.

National forest

Case-study location/national forest

!

! !

Missoula issoula

Mineral 

County

Superior

St. Regis

Lolo National Forest

Superior

St. Regis

This trail is truly an important addition to our 

trail system. The public will now have trail access 

from St. Regis to Pearson. This trail also connects 

to a larger system that moves through Idaho 

and into Washington, and there are numerous 

efforts underway across Montana to establish a 

historically significant trail system along the old 

Milwaukee Railroad grade. It’s important as a 

recreational opportunity and also for the economic 

benefits to the many small communities along 

the route, as visitors from across the country will 

come to ride on this trail.

—USDA Forest Service 2009b

 Geospatial Service and Technology Center, USDA Forest Service
107

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

The Project

The rails-to-trails movement has grown with the demise 

and consolidation of major railroads; some 19,000 miles 

nationwide have been converted to biking trails. Rail rightsof-way, wider and flatter than the single tracks favored by 

many mountain bikers, are popular for family recreation. 

The Milwaukee Road, officially known as the Chicago, 

Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad, abandoned its 

Pacific extension in 1980. The names of the recreational 

routes, Hiawatha and Olympian, evoke the legacy of the 

long-distance passenger train, the Olympian Hiawatha, 

popular for both its aesthetics and speed. 

A lot of work must be completed before all 30 miles of 

the Route of the Olympian from Taft to St. Regis, Montana, 

can be officially opened to the public. The Dominion 

trestle (100 feet above the riverbed) lacks guard rails; both 

trestle and tunnel lack secure riding surfaces (fig. 7-2). The 

parking lot at the east portal (most popular point of access 

for the existing Route of the Hiawatha and connecting to the 

Route of the Olympian) is inadequate for accommodating 

summer crowds. A gap in the trail exists at Saltese where 

a complicated mix of ownership limits access to or around 

another trestle bridge. Finally, the U.S. Forest Service 

must develop a plan that juggles the competing needs and 

wishes of local residents and potential visitors for access by 

all-terrain vehicle (ATV) riders, bicyclists, snowmobilers, 

and neighbors.

The Dominion trestle was abandoned when the Milwaukee Railroad went bankrupt; since then, guard rails 

have fallen off, and its roadbed, made of concrete tubs 

filled with rubble and connected by metal spacers that have 

rusted and shifted, is full of potholes. The Forest Service 

received appropriations from Congress to purchase land 

along the road, but the real obstacle was funding an evaluation of what was required to upgrade the trestle and tunnel. 

Potential sources of funding were available for doing the 

work, but none for assessing the actual costs, which the 

Forest Service had estimated at more than a million dollars. 

As explained by a ranger district employee, “We had made 

progress, but to me the real roadblock to all this was the 

assessment part; because there was potential funding 

out there for the actual work, but the grant groups that I 

normally work with they just will not pay for things that 

do not occur on the ground.” 

The Recovery Act funding enabled the district to hire 

an engineering firm, DJ&A, to perform a thorough assessment and design a plan for moving forward with construction (fig. 7-3). An engineer at DJ&A (retired Forest Service) 

is consulting on construction oversight, as well. Restoration 

funded by the Recovery Act will be concentrated on 8 

miles of the trail. For the road, restoration includes filling in potholes in areas where old timber trestles were 

intentionally filled with dirt, stabilizing talus slide areas, 

and resurfacing the road. For the tunnel, concrete will be 

repaired and ballast removed. At the trestle, work involves 

repairing the west abutment (100-year-old concrete as in the 

tunnel), fixing expansion joints, and removing all ballast 

and ballast tubs and replacing them with glu-lam wood deck 

and new walkways with handrails. Finally, gravel will be 

crushed and stored for repair of the bed and road from the 

parking lot to the tunnel. Recovery Act funds granted to the 

neighboring Idaho Panhandle Forest will almost double the 

parking area at East Portal (fig. 7-4). 

Assessment work took place during fall 2009, repair 

design was completed in early spring 2010. Construction 

on the road, tunnel, and trestle has just begun, with the first 

pothole filled July 20, 2010, and will continue until snowfall 

and will resume when it melts in 2011. A management plan Figure 7-2—Abandoned Dominion trestle. 

Victoria Sturtevant
108

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Figure 7-3—Map depicting the Route of the Olympian, I-90 corridor, communities in the area, and trail access points. 

Taft

West

portal

Mullan Lookout

Pass

Saltese

Haugan

DeBorgia

St. Regis

Tunnel

and trestle

closed to

public

Tunnel

Route 

of the

Hiawatha 

Trestle

MONTANA

IDAHO

90

East

portal Section currently available for safe riding

Deer Creek

Ward Creek

Twomile Creek

Big Cr eek Twelvemile Creek

Silver Creek

Dominion

Creek

Dominion

Creek

RainyCreek

St. Regis River

No bridge o brid

Clark Fork

o

Mineral County

Detail area

Milwaukee Road railbed

(Route of the Olympian)

Access points

Towns

MINERAL

COUNTY

0 5 10 15 Miles

MONTANA

Adapted from map by Ken Barnedt, The Missoulian

for access and use should be completed by 2012. At present 

there is no expectation that a concessionaire will manage 

access, shuttles, and bike rental; instead, these services will 

be offered by community businesses along the trail. 

The Community

Mineral County is Montana’s 38th most populous county, 

with an estimated 3,862 residents in 2009. Located in 

western Montana, it is bordered by Idaho on the west, 

Missoula County to the east, Sanders County to the north, 

and the Bitterroot Mountains to the south. Interstate 90 

runs through the length of the county, frequently crossing 

the winding Clark Fork and St. Regis Rivers. Its terrain 

is mountainous and forested, lying within the Lolo 

National Forest. Outdoor recreation opportunities abound, 

Figure 7-4—During the summer months, cars line the parking lot 

of the neighboring Hiawatha trailhead.

Jessi Kershner
109

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

including hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, biking, skiing, 

snowmobiling, and whitewater rafting. Superior, about 

15 miles east from the anticipated end of the Route of the 

Olympian, is the county seat and location of the Superior 

Ranger District office (fig. 7-5). It has a recognizable town 

center, a hospital, a school system, and county offices. 

Superior had a population of 880 in 2007 (Montana 

Department of Labor and Industry 2009). 

Given that 84 percent of the county is timberland, and 

84 percent of that is national forest (Jones and Brandt 2009), 

it is natural that timber and the Forest Service would be 

central to the local economy. Tricon Timber’s stud mill in 

St. Regis is the largest employer in the county, producing 

value-added products such as flooring and standard 

construction studs. It typically employed about 100 people, 

but in fall of 2008, with the downturn in the lumber market, 

it cut the night shift, laying off 40 people. Tricon also 

operates a small post and pole plant at the old lumber mill 

in Superior. Two other businesses, a pellet mill and a bark 

plant, share the mile-long site that started as the Diamond 

Match mill in 1953, which then was bought by DAW 

Forest Products in 1983, then by Crown Pacific in 1993 

(Briggeman 2006). When Crown Pacific closed in 1994, 

350 jobs were lost, which indirectly led to an additional 

loss of 500 to 800 jobs in the area (Hebert 2008). 

Figure 7-5—The town of Superior straddles the Clark Fork River and is surrounded by the Lolo National Forest.

Victoria Sturtevant

That was a real devastation to this community. I 

personally can’t say we’ve gotten over it, because 

every time we hold some type of meeting, it always 

comes back to “when the mill was open, we were 

able to do this, or we were able to that.” So I don’t 

know that they have moved as far beyond that mill 

closure as some community fathers would hope they 

would. But it’s time [County extension employee].

The Forest Service has assigned Mineral County an 

economic distress ranking2 of 4. The population dropped 

sharply from 2006 to 2009, unlike Montana as a whole 

(fig. 7-6). The unemployment rate in Mineral County 

peaked at 14 percent in March of 2010, but is lower during 

the summer months (fig. 7-7), and household income has 

remained low, in comparison to the state of Montana (fig. 

7-8). The percentage of the county population living in 

poverty reached 17.2 in 2007 (fig. 7-9); students’ eligibility 

for school lunches has increased dramatically during the 

past 2 decades (fig. 7-10).

2

 The Forest Service calculated economic distress rankings for 

every county in the United States, and used these rankings as the 

main criterion for making Recovery Act project funding decisions. 

Rankings are on a scale from 1 to 10 with 10 signifying the highest 

level of economic distress. See USDA FS 2009a for information on 

how the rankings were developed.
110

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Figure 7-6—Change in population for the United States, Montana, 

and Mineral County, 2000–2009 (USDC BC 2010a).

Figure 7-7—Monthly unemployment rates for Montana and Mineral County, 1990–2010 (USDL BLS 2010).

Figure 7-8—Median household income for Montana and Mineral 

County in 2008 dollars, 1989–2008 (USDC BC 2010b).

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Population change from 2000 (percent)

Year

United States

Montana

Mineral County

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

20

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

Monthly unemployment (percent)

Montana

Mineral County

Jan. 1990

Jan. 1991

Jan. 1992Jan. 1993

Jan. 1994

Jan. 1995

Jan. 1996

Jan. 1997

Jan. 1998Jan. 1999

Jan. 2000

Jan. 2001

Jan 2002Jan. 2003

Jan. 2004

Jan. 2005

Jan. 2006

Jan. 2007

Jan. 2008

Jan. 2009

Jan. 2010

Date

50

45

40

35

Median household income, adjusted

for 2008 inflation (thousand dollars)

30

Montana

Mineral County

19901992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

Year
111

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Figure 7-9—Population living in poverty for Montana and 

Mineral County, 1989–2008 (USDC BC 2010b).

Figure 7-10—Change in percentage of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch programs in Montana and Mineral County, 1989–2008 (USDE NCES 2010). Note: Reduced-price 

lunch program was introduced in 1998.

25

20

15

10

19901992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

Population in poverty (percent)

Year

Montana

Mineral County

200

175

150

125

100

75

50

25

0

1989–90

1990–91

1991–92

1992–93

1993–94

1994–95

1995–96

1996–97

1997–98

1998–99

1999–00

2000–01

2001–02

2002–03

2003–04

2004–05

2005–06

2006–07

2007–08

2008–09

Free or reduced-price lunch eligibility

change from 1989 (percent)

School year

Montana

Mineral County

Population data for Mineral County suggest that 

younger families are leaving, and older-aged cohorts are 

moving in. The biggest decrease came in those aged 25 

to 34 (and children, aged 5 to 14); the largest growth was 

in those aged 45 to 54 (and older children, aged 15 to 24) 

(McCollum 2009). School enrollment reflects this loss of 

young families (fig. 7-11), and was particularly apparent 

after the mill closed down.

A lot moved out of the community and went 

elsewhere; they sought an education, sought a 

totally different lifestyle than what they knew as 

millworkers. Those were the people who really took 

advantage of education and retraining and moved 

on, making lives for themselves in another community. Unfortunately the people who left were the 

people who made this community thrive. They were 

community volunteers, they were active in their 

churches, they were active in the civic organizations 

in town. When those people left, some of that dried 

up [County extension employee]. 

The abundance of natural amenities and public land 

have been major draws for new people in the county. The 

Superior District Ranger gives an example: 

One guy moved here from New Hampshire... had a 

big business, moved here, said, ‘I picked the biggest 

green blob on the map I could 

find and I moved there!’ Many 

people have said the same 

thing, in a similar sort of way. 

So, there is a groundswell of 

people moving in, they want 

to see a healthy forest with 

lots of wildlife for them to 

hunt and fun things to do—

recreational opportunities. 

I think that’s probably the 

wave of the future.... 
112

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Montana

Mineral County

15

10

5

0

-5

-10

-15

-20

-25

1996–97

1997–98

1998–99

1999–00

2000–01

2001–02

2002–03

2003–042004–05

2005–06

2006–07

2007–08

2008–09

School enrollment, change from 1989 

(percent)

School year

1989–90

1990–91

1991–92

1992–93

1993–94

1994–95

1995–96

Figure 7-11—Change in school enrollment for Montana and Mineral County, 1989–2008 

(USDE NCES 2010).

Most of the growth in the Mineral County economy 

has taken place in the service sector; between 1970 and 

2000, 80 percent of new employment was in services 

(particularly health, legal, and business services, and retail 

trade) (McCollum 2009). Nearly 20 percent of the county’s 

employment is in the public sector (county, state, and 

federal governments), and much of the growth in income 

over the past 36 years has been “nonlabor” (investment, 

retirement, and government transfer payments). Many 

people commute out of the county to work, and this number 

has been increasing since 1990 (McCollum 2009). 

Recreation and tourism provide a growing contribution 

to the economy of Mineral County; visitors from throughout 

the country come to raft, mountain bike, fish, ski, hunt, 

hike, camp, horseback ride, snowmobile, ride off-road 

vehicles, and sightsee (fig. 7-12). Travel to Montana has 

increased 20 percent over the past decade (Crowser et al. 

2009), and Mineral County is the most frequently used 

entry point to the state. Nevertheless, many of these visitors, 

as well as Montanans, drive on the interstate through the 

county without stopping. The Mineral County Challenge, 

funded in part by the state of Montana, is an effort to draw 

together the county’s communities and natural resource 

managers to find feasible economic opportunities. In 

partnership with Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks and 

the USDA Forest Service, represented by both the Lolo 

National Forest and the Rocky Mountain Research Station, 

the group conceptualized eight economic development 

projects, five relating to recreation and three to wood 

products (Murray 2010). 

Figure 7-12—Recreation and tourism businesses contribute to 

the economy. 

Victoria Sturtevant
113

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Methods

This case study was conducted using both qualitative and 

quantitative social science research methods. Qualitative 

data were gathered during face-to-face, semistructured 

interviews with people involved in the Recovery Act 

project. Fieldwork to conduct these interviews took place 

between May and July 2010 in Mineral County and Missoula; additional information was collected via emails 

and phone. A total of 13 individuals were interviewed. 

Interviewees included three Forest Service employees who 

developed or implemented the project, three community 

members, three employees of firms who received Recovery 

Act funds, three who work in local community development, and the concessionaire for the Route of the Hiawatha. 

Additional qualitative data were obtained from published sources such as newspapers and local government 

publications, Forest Service documents, and federal Web 

sites. Quantitative data regarding the Recovery Act projects 

and jobs were obtained from Forest Service databases and 

federal Web sites, including Recovery.gov and USAspending.gov. Socioeconomic indicator data describing the local 

population and economy of the case-study area came from 

a number of sources, such as the U.S. Census, the Bureau of 

Labor Statistics, and the Bureau of Economic Analysis. For 

more information on study methods see the appendix.

Project Recipients 

DJ&A, a small engineering consulting firm, has three 

contracts related to this project for assessment, design, and 

construction oversight, totaling $120,382 (table 7-1). Their 

Missoula office (the other is in Helena, Montana) employs 

30 employees who do a wide range of work, including 

surveying, municipal works, water resources, and civil, 

environmental, transportation, and bridge engineering. The 

primary consultant on this project is in the bridge engineering group, which has had a number of Forest Service 

contracts (including repairs on the Hiawatha trail), many 

recently funded by the Recovery Act. The firm was started 

30 years ago by former Forest Service engineers, and the 

consultant for this project is also a retired Forest Service 

engineer. 

Well, we do a lot of work with the Forest Service 

and the Lolo National Forest; it’s one of the forests 

we do work for. And so we probably approached 

them initially, partially because when I worked for 

the Forest Service in Montana about 15 years ago, I 

did the design of the bridges and tunnels on the west 

side, the Idaho side, of the Hiawatha trail. And so we 

knew that kind of work pretty well [DJ&A engineer].

Table 7-1—Project recipients and funding awarded as of June 30, 2010

 Total funding Funding

Recipient Project description amount mechanism

Dollars

Northwest Montana Counties Trail Maintenance and Reconstruction, CIM-0100-03T:

DJ&A Preliminary engineering assessment 49,595 Task order

DJ&A Design 46,437 IDIQa contract

DJ&A Construction oversight 24,350 Contract

Dick Anderson Construction Trestle and tunnel repairs 874,692 Contract

No vendor selected yet Gravel crushing and stockpiling 199,935

North Idaho Counties Trail Maintenance and Reconstruction, CIM-0100-02T:

Price contracting Design 24,142 Task order

Price contracting Staking 4,232 Task order

Price contracting Construction 456,271 Task order

a

 IDIQ = indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contract.
114

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Having worked in the Forest Service Regional Office 

for 17 years, the principal engineer on this project is familiar 

with both the people and the land, which he says is effective, “because I know the people and they know me, and it’s 

just fun work. I’m doing what I did 20 years ago” (DJ&A 

engineer). The recession has affected the kind of work the 

firm has seen during the past 2 years. Municipal engineering 

and subdivision work has dried up, while road and bridge 

work on public lands has increased.

We’ve been pretty fortunate that we do as much Forest Service work as we have because that’s actually 

probably doubled, which has enabled us to keep some 

of our other people busy moving them across lines 

into the Forest Service road-bridge side of things ... 

You know I would say of the work we did last year for 

the Forest Service, which was probably $2.5 million, 

I would say probably at least two-thirds to threefourths of that was ARRA money [DJ&A engineer].

DJ&A did not hire new people for this contract, but was 

able to retain people in the firm who were not employed on 

other contracts (table 7-2). In addition, three subcontractors 

were used for the assessment; like the engineering firm, 

they didn’t hire new people, but were able to avoid layoffs. 

This project is estimated to have provided 1 person-year 

equivalent of work in all three phases of the project (DJ&A 

engineer). This has been highly skilled and technical work, 

involving professional surveyors but mostly professional 

engineers; wages ranged from $35 per hour for assessment 

support staff to $200 per hour for tunnel consulting from a 

firm in Seattle. DJ&A has had no trouble finding contractors 

for the project, including a local back-hoe operator out of 

Table 7-2—Jobs reported for the Route of the Olympian project

Reporting period

Feb.–Sept. Oct.–Dec. Jan.–Mar. Apr.–June July–Sept.

Recipient 2009 2009 2010 2010 2010

Number of jobsa

DJ&A — — 0.62 0.01 —

Dick Anderson Construction — — — — 0.29

Price Contracting — — — 0 0

Note: A dash (—) indicates that no quarterly report was available. 

a

 Job numbers are full-time equivalent jobs. See appendix for reporting method.

Wallace, “everybody we used was very available” 

(DJ&A engineer). 

DJ&A receives its funding from a task order under 

an existing indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity (IDIQ) 

contract; currently they are in the first year of a 5-year 

contract. For DJ&A, it was a smooth process to get the 

funding and work with The Economic Recovery Operations 

Center (EROC): “As it worked out, the contracting officer 

in the EROC is a retired Forest Service contracting officer 

whom everybody had worked with in the past, so it was 

pretty painless” (DJ&A engineer).

The other major project contractor is Dick Anderson 

Construction, a Montana-based company with offices 

in Helena, Great Falls, and Bozeman, with a consistent 

workforce of 175, at peak, 250. Since 1975, Dick Anderson 

Construction has grown from a small, private client company to a corporation experienced in handling multimillion 

dollar commercial and government projects. The Dominion 

trestle and tunnel repairs contract, at $875,000, is relatively 

small for the company, but appreciated. 

Like most construction companies, Dick Anderson 

Construction has seen a downturn in its workload in the 

past 2 years; the resulting seasonal layoffs are the first the 

supervisor of the Hiawatha project has seen in his 15 years 

with the firm. In the past, the firm has focused mostly on 

large commercial and health care facilities, but now the 

work is concentrated more on road and bridge construction, 

because of Recovery Act funding, “and we’ve done a bunch 

of these ARRA projects. We do them all the time” (Dick 

Anderson supervisor). They have done some projects with 

the National Park Service, but this employee is unaware of 

other contracts with the Forest Service. 
115

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Given that the trestle is 100 feet from the ground and 

specialized equipment will be needed to remove its ballast 

from the bridge deck and lay the new surface (fig. 7-13), the 

supervisor’s safety record was an important consideration in 

choosing this firm (fig. 7-14). 

Figure 7-13—Removing rubble from the trestle.

The contractor bids for the construction work were 

evaluated by the Forest Service on five criteria: (1) technical 

approach to perform the work, (2) experience in projects 

with similar size and scope, (3) key personnel, (4) past performance, and (5) cost. Dick Anderson was chosen not only 

because they were low bidder, but also because they scored 

the highest in the other four criteria above. Because of the 

heavy equipment required and technical nature of the work, 

no local contractors qualified. Dick Anderson Construction intends to spend as much as possible in the local area, 

however: “And one thing with this company that we always 

try to do when we come into rural areas...we always try to 

pick up some local help, source what we can through local 

suppliers.” 

They are subcontracting locally for trucking and 

possibly excavating and machining, and purchases of 

materials (e.g., fuel, lumber, bolts) will be made locally.

We’re going to use some local gravel contractors, 

I’ve got a local subcontractor to do the chip sealing on the deck, and hopefully we’ll end up with a 

local excavation contract to do the work, so yeah 

absolutely a lot of the money’s going to go out right 

here. We always like hiring people local, if they have 

the qualifications and everything like that [Dick 

Anderson Construction supervisor]. 

Local hires for the crew working on tunnel and trestle 

repairs were found by word of mouth in regional construction networks. One carpenter who applied is extremely 

qualified, “maybe even overqualified for the position” (Dick 

Anderson Construction supervisor). Total crew size will be 

6 to 8 employees; the number who can work at the site is 

constrained by the tight construction area (trestle and tunnel, and hillside road), and access to the area will be limited 

not only by the crowds in the parking lot, but also work on 

parking lot expansion, an Idaho Panhandle National Forests 

Recovery Act project. The Dick Anderson project supervisor and one laborer will live onsite in a trailer for 4-day 

weeks. Crew members will make prevailing, governmentstandardized rates, including health benefits, retirement, 

and travel pay. 

Corrine L. Kegel Corrine L. Kegel

Figure 7-14—Dick Anderson Construction Company takes extra 

safety precautions while working on trestle repair.
116

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Both DJ&A and Dick Anderson Construction are 

looking down the line to the further expansion of this trail, 

hoping their work on this trestle will result in a contract for 

Saltese trestle. 

Partners

Five Valleys Land Trust has supported the trail extension 

efforts since 2007, mostly as a brokering organization, 

negotiating land purchases and providing bridge funding to 

secure the land until public funding became available. Five 

Valleys was awarded a $95,000 grant from the Montana 

Fish, Wildlife, and Parks Recreational Trails program as 

partial reimbursement for land purchase. Land and Water 

Conservation funds were used by the Forest Service to complete the purchase from Five Valleys. Grant Kier, Executive 

Director of Five Valleys Land Trust, has made this public 

statement of support for the Route of the Olympian trail: 

We are pleased to extend Five Valleys’ long history 

of private-public partnerships, helping secure valuable natural lands for public access and enjoyment. 

We expect that this trail extension will also prove to 

be an economic benefit to St. Regis. It is important 

to us that Five Valleys is able to assist with important acquisitions that add significantly to the rich 

recreational and economic opportunities in western 

Montana (USDA FS 2009b).

The Rails-to-Trails Conservancy, a nonprofit organization based in Washington, D.C., with a mission to create 

a nationwide network of trails from former rail lines and 

connecting corridors, has been consulting on this project 

continuously. The organization conducted a study regarding 

the potential for development of the Old Milwaukee Trail 

across Montana. As stated by a Forest Service employee 

who started riding the trail and dreaming about its restoration after this study, “The Conservancy started showing up 

in Superior area, collecting data, and their analysis indicated that it looked positive—that something good could 

happen with bike trail development on the Montana side.”

The Route of the Olympian Hiawatha (originally the 

name of a passenger train that traversed the Milwaukee 

Road, for which the Montana and Idaho portions of the 

recreational trail are named) was placed on the National 

Register of Historic Places, thanks to the efforts of a number of citizens and Forest Service personnel who recognized 

the historical importance of the railroad. Interpretive signs 

for the Route of the Olympian have been completed with 

another source of funding and will be placed along the new 

trail. Other potential partners and grant sources will emerge 

as the Route of the Olympian is completed. 

Other Recovery Act Projects

The Idaho Panhandle National Forests received economic 

recovery funds for work on the parking area at the east 

entrance to the Route of the Hiawatha (soon to be the west 

entrance of the Route of the Olympian). The work will 

include excavation, grading, surfacing, and dust abatement. 

There will also be construction of a restroom and installation of a gate, a catenary arch, signs, and landscape rocks. 

This work began in late summer 2010, about the same time 

as the tunnel and trestle restoration.

Economic Benefits

Most of the local economic benefits of the Route of the 

Olympian trail investment will take time, coming down the 

road with new recreationists. In the winter, as many as 150 

snowmobilers a day ride the future Route of the Olympian 

(currently called the Milwaukee Road), according to Nightriders Snowmobile Club (Chaney 2009). Hunters use it in 

the fall to access mountain trails and campsites (fig. 7-15). 

Various kinds of motorized and nonmotorized riders use it 

in spring and summer for recreation. During the Route of 

the Hiawatha season (May to September) it is hoped that 

bicyclists will continue on to the Route of the Olympian, 

and stay or eat in Mineral County. In Idaho, the Hiawatha 

trail has contributed to economic development of Mullen 

and Wallace, and the Trail of the Coeur d'Alenes bike path 

is said to have transformed the business communities of 

places like Harrison, Plummer, and Cataldo (Chaney 2009); 

80 percent of their business is attributed to bicycle tourists 

(Schneider 2010) (fig. 7-16).

Four small towns along the route, Saltese, Haugan, 

DeBorgia, and St. Regis, are expected to benefit from this 

recreation business. St. Regis, which pulls business off the 
117

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Figure 7-15—Hunters and their families camp along the 

Milwaukee Road railbed. 

Figure 7-16—Bicyclists on the completed trail underneath 

catenary arches remaining from the old railroad. Catenary 

arches were used to hold electric wires powering the trains.

All the way from the pass down, our hope is that 

they will come. They will make Mineral County, 

or the west end of Mineral County, at least, a 

destination. They will come, they will ride, they 

will play on the trail but they will also hike the 

trails in the forest, they come to Superior, utilize 

the float business—let them go down the gorge. 

From Alberton to Saltese you could probably come 

here and spend one week and never see the same 

trail twice and go down the river and never see 

the same spot on the river twice, just by different 

places going in and out. I wish we could bring this 

county together and go forward with that hope. 

This is what we’ve got, let’s make Mineral County 

a destination spot for hiking, camping, canoeing, 

fishing, rafting, hunting, and snowmobiling.

—County extension employee

Victoria Sturtevant

Victoria Sturtevant

interstate, is recognized by the state as having a tourist 

infrastructure and can levy a resort tax. As explained by 

a resident, “St. Regis is really hoping for a big boom from 

the Route of the Olympian. To get more trail down there 

where people have to come into St. Regis and stop” [County 

extension employee].

A survey of 2,963 users of the Route of the Hiawatha 

estimates that for every 1,000 people using the Hiawatha 

trail, 1,960 economic transactions occurred (a transaction 

is defined as a person spending money on one or more 

individual items, such as restaurant meals, lodging, gas, 

oil, bicycles, souvenirs, etc.). Those transactions are valued 

at $154,168 per year; 60 percent have taken place in Idaho, 

and 25.4 percent in Montana (McCollum and Miller 2010). 

One can extrapolate from these figures the economic impact 

of future riders of the Olympian trail in Montana. Riders 

on the current Hiawatha trail come mostly from the west 

(Washington, California, Oregon, Idaho, and Utah), north 

(British Columbia), and farther (e.g., Maine, Florida, Iowa); 

many would welcome further trail opportunities, having 

come so far. In the study, 58 percent of the riders of the 

Hiawatha trail said that they would continue into Montana if 

the trail extended east. If even half of those surveyed riders 

do ride into Montana, and if we assume two economic 

transactions per rider at a rate of $78 per transaction, the 

value of those riders would exceed $65,500. 
118

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Figure 7-17—Three generations of cyclists enjoy recreational 

opportunities provided by the trail.

Victoria Sturtevant

Social Benefits

Restoring the Dominion Creek tunnel and trestle is another 

step in the complex, lengthy legal and political process of 

developing the Route of the Olympian recreation route, 

which is planned as an extension of the 17-mile Route of the 

Hiawatha, with its seven restored railroad trestles and 10 

tunnels. The extension of this unique recreational opportunity is a social benefit for the visitors who come from all 

over the country and world and span multiple generations. 

Keeping it available for traditional uses is of value to longtime residents and an expression of Forest Service commitment to these local interests (fig. 7-17).

It’s taken more than three decades of dreaming and 

planning to turn this stretch of railroad history into 

a public passageway again.

—Chaney 2009

Although the actual work on the trail does not require 

an environmental assessment, planning for use does. The 

scoping document for managing use of the Route of the 

Olympian incorporates the recommendations of a collaborative group formed in 2009; this diverse group includes 

local and regional residents, and representatives of several 

organizations, including the Nightriders Snowmobile Club, 

Bitterroot ATV Club, St. Regis Resort Board, Milwaukee 

Rails to Trails Group, Friends of the Coeur d’Alene Trails, 

and Adventure Cycling. Because a wide variety of recreationists are keenly interested in the future management of 

this recreation route, it is hoped that this collaborative group 

can effectively address the sometimes conflicting needs of 

multiple local users and visitors, and that participation in 

this planning will create a sense of ownership and responsibility among locals who have used parts of the trail for 

decades. The social benefits of this participation in planning 

and monitoring of the trail include relationship building and 

increased trust. 

User safety is another social benefit resulting from this 

Recovery Act project. Although access has been blocked 

with barricades, they are continually moved or destroyed 

by the public. Before it was closed for construction, the 

railroad bed, tunnel, and trestle were used by cyclists, 

hikers, and ATVers. The Friends of the Coeur d'Alene Trails 

Web site provides a map and description of the trail from 

the east portal to Saltese with the text warning potential 

cyclists, 

“The gravel in this tunnel is loose and undulating. 

You might consider walking through the tunnel. Just 

past the tunnel there is a trestle which crosses over 

Dominion Creek. There are no guard rails to prevent 

a 100-foot fall. You might consider walking across 

the trestle” [http://friendsofcdatrails.org/other_trails.

html#6] [fig. 7-18].

Environmental Benefits

The rubble that was used to fill in the trestles to form the 

roadbed (or trail) poses an environmental hazard, as it could 

slide and block or divert streams. Some culverts under these 

roads were identified by the assessment as needing repair; 

work will be completed in the future to avoid the environmental damage experienced on the Idaho side in 1997. The 

road and trail grade includes a number of very high fills, or 

embankments, over small drainages. When these culverts 

fail, the water pressure can “blow out” the fill, as it did in 

Idaho in 1997, resulting in about 500,000 cubic yards of 

sediment moving into downstream streams and rivers. And 
119

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Figure 7-18—A long way down from the Dominion Creek trestle without guard rails.

Victoria Sturtevant

the wooden trestles themselves could fail and fill streams 

with rubble and potentially toxic materials, such as lead 

paint. “So I think that’s [repairing the culverts and trestle] 

a real benefit, a long-term environmental benefit” (DJ&A 

engineer). 

There may be some additional indirect environmental 

benefits. Resurfacing the roads and trestles may help in 

controlling noxious weeds, and if ATV riders are attracted 

to the new route, they may stay out of more sensitive areas. 

Effects on the Agency

Years before receiving recovery funding, the district had 

submitted a proposal for Capital Improvement Project 

funding and in 2012 will receive $385,000 for trailhead and 

bed improvements. Small amounts of funding have been 

secured for other parts of the project, such as Resource 

Advisory Committee dollars provided by Secure Rural 

Schools Act funding for small bridges. The primary 

“dreamer and planner,” a Forest Service employee who has 

been inventing solutions to the many challenges posed by 

access and restoration needs, explained that extending the 

Hiawatha Trail was something the district had been thinking about since the Idaho portion was done in 1992. “Even 

before the Recovery Act came into our lives, we decided 

we will find the grant money to fix these things. There’s got 

to be grant money out there to fix these things ... we had 

moved forward,” she said. Recovery Act funding provided a 

huge leap forward, particularly the engineering assessment 
120

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

that found the repairs to be less expensive than anticipated. 

In addition to needed assessment and construction work, 

economic recovery funds enabled the hiring of a civil 

engineer who is responsible for securing contractors and 

supervising the work on this, as well as other Recovery Act 

capital improvement projects.

Challenges

Much of Mineral County still identifies strongly with forestbased work and the timber industry. 

Well, and so much of their identity, their cultural 

identity is locked into that [timber industry]: their 

family legacy, their history. You know it makes all 

the sense in the world... . But at some point you have 

to sit down and ask yourself, how can we accommodate this community in a progressive way to bring 

[new people and economic opportunities] [Economic 

development consultant]. 

Although recreation and tourism are evident contributors to the local economy and five of the projects identified 

by the Mineral Challenge involve tourism, a strong contingent in the county hopes that the timber economy will 

revive, and they vent their frustration at the Forest Service 

for the decline in timber volume from federal lands. This 

frustration spills over into other access issues on federal 

lands and creates difficult working relationships between 

the county and the forest. As stated by a local resident, “In 

order for us to do it, the Forest Service has got to become 

a partner. They’ve got to be a partner with ‘yes’ and not a 

partner of ‘no, we can’t do it.’ Until that time, I do not see 

much hope of that happening—as a community of destination.”

Reconciling competing user groups (and their conflicting cultures) poses a challenge for Forest Service management of the new route. The district ranger’s foresight in 

assembling a collaborative group to develop a complex 

plan for alternate uses over the seasons (e.g., bicyclists only 

during the summer months with off-road vehicles (ORVs) 

using parallel Forest Service roads in some sections) may 

be undercut by pressures from either the bicyclists who are 

represented by outside organized interests, or motorized 

users, most of whom are local. Some of the attributes that 

allow partnerships to find common goals, such as attachment 

to place and commitment to community development, are 

not shared by all stakeholders. Sentiments on both sides run 

strong (currently comments on the scoping document are 

evenly split between the two), verging toward polemical, as 

in this posting on the New West blog site: “The Forest Service still clings to the fallacy of ATVers and hikers/bikers 

peacefully and safely sharing the same trail. And that it can 

write a travel plan that pleases everybody when in reality it’s 

almost guaranteed to please nobody” (Schneider 2010).

Private land ownership presents challenges for access 

to the route, particularly at Saltese. Prior to 2007, the federal 

government owned 60 percent of the 30-mile stretch of old 

Milwaukee Railroad, but the federal ownership was fragmented and no one segment was long enough to be a suitable 

recreation route. Between 2007 and 2009, 13 land parcels 

from one major landowner were purchased, with the help of 

Congress and Five Valleys Land Trust, so now 85 percent of 

the stretch from Taft to St. Regis is managed by the national 

forest. Roads or access points are available so that people 

can ride the entire route, and the Forest Service is negotiating additional access so that travelers can bypass the Saltese 

trestle without trespassing, but the bypass is currently 

undeveloped, and the 100-foot-high Saltese trestle requires 

major repairs for it to be available for public use (fig. 7-19). 

Figure 7-19—Saltese trestle. 

Jessi Kershner
121

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

...[The project is] going to have a tremendous benefit for the Forest Service community relationship. 

I think right now, not a lot of the community realize it’s going on. There’s been a couple newspaper 

articles talking about it. It’s kind of something that 

people are remotely aware of it, but until it actually 

opens up I don’t think it will be a big deal.

—DJ&A engineer

Missoula, in the adjacent county and about 60 

miles east of Superior, serves as a retail, cultural, and 

business center for the region. One would expect that 

Mineral County’s recreational opportunities would draw 

Missoulians, yet studies have shown their limited use of 

the existing Route of the Hiawatha (McCollum and Miller 

2010). 

One challenge for expanded Mineral County recreational income is to draw people from neighboring 

Montana and Idaho counties. 

People in Missoula tend to recreate more toward 

the east: boating, rafting, fishing on the rivers and 

Flathead Lake. But I don’t know why ... there aren’t 

more people using the trail. But I see the same thing 

in the parking lot; I see Washington plates, Idaho 

plates. The fact is last Wednesday we were looking 

at plates and I’m sure there were 40 to 50 cars and 

I saw 2 Montana plates. ... there were probably 

more Texas and Florida plates than Montana plates 

[Economic development consultant].

Looking to the Future

The first 13 miles of the Route of the Hiawatha were opened 

to the public in 1998; the 1.7-mile St. Paul Pass Tunnel to 

the east portal parking lot was opened in 2001. Annual 

visitation has grown from 8,000 in 1999 to 32,000 in 2009 

(and is on target to exceed that number in 2010); employment by the concessionaire has increased during that period 

from 8 to 25 (Lookout Pass concessionaire). The Hiawatha 

trail has a national and international reputation, thanks in 

part to media outlets such as National Public Radio and 

Sunset Magazine. Idaho has a network of bike trails with 

a synergy that earned Idaho the International Mountain 

Biking Association’s ranking as the number-one mountain 

biking state in the United States. As mentioned earlier, local 

Farther east of the planned route, short stretches of right-ofway have already been turned into homesites or driveways, 

posing a challenge for further development of the route.

Securing future funding for maintaining the route and 

purchasing additional private parcels may pose a challenge, 

although district staff have been resourceful and farsighted 

in creating this project. Because of the short time for preparing the Recovery Act project proposal, they were unable 

to align it with other grant application timeframes, but from 

experience with previous grants, such as the Recreational 

Trail Grants Program from Montana Fish, Wildlife, and 

Parks, they know that recovery funding will “be a huge help 

because they [funders] like to look at the cumulative amount 

of money that’s gone into the project” [Superior District 

employee].

If you’re looking for pure economic benefits, it’s 

going to be over the next 20 to 30 years when 

there’s 5,000 to 10,000 users [per year].

—DJ&A engineer

At present, the county’s limited tourist infrastructure 

may constrain the economic benefits realized locally from 

visitors riding the Routes of the Olympian and Hiawatha. 

Although St. Regis has a clear identity as a tourist community, and some older motels and resorts are sprinkled 

along the interstate, Superior’s economy as the county seat 

is more oriented toward forest products and government 

services. As a local put it, “So people come here; this is a 

hub but it’s not a tourism hub, it’s more of a business hub.” 

Superior’s economic development strategy is to bring in 

larger businesses that pay family wages, hopefully woodproduct-related businesses to replace the closed mill. The 

few tourist-oriented business operators, such as bed and 

breakfast owners, could use a network for referrals or 

shared marketing, for example, to maximize benefits from 

increased tourism. 
122

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

businesses in Idaho towns have relished their new visitors, 

particularly restaurants, motels, and resorts. 

... his place gets packed with people who have been 

riding the trail. They stop there on their way home 

to have dinner. McDonald’s in Kellogg sees a huge 

influx of people who stop there. So it’s become 

vital for the local communities. It’s bringing a lot of 

people [Lookout Pass concessionaire].

Is this the future for the Route of the Olympian? With 

multiple access points and multiple user groups (e.g., motorized and nonmotorized, during different times of the year), 

jobs are less likely to be concentrated in one place or a 

couple of towns, but entrepreneurs along the trail will have 

opportunities to benefit from increased traffic and demand 

for diverse services that might carry throughout the year 

(e.g., bike shops during the summer, snowmobile service 

during the winter). There is every expectation that much of 

the Hiawatha trail traffic will continue down the Olympian, 

that more weekend recreationists from eastern Montana will 

access the trail at various points, and that travelers along 

I-90 will find a new reason to get off the highway. 

Well you know, the Milwaukee road could continue 

all the way to Missoula, and there’s some groups that 

have been working on that and if this could be a connection all the way to Missoula this could be huge! 

Eventually you could go from Missoula all the way 

to Tacoma, Washington on an interconnect. And 

that would really be something. And it would be a 

big economic stimulus for the whole region along 

Interstate 90 [Lookout Pass concessionaire].

The residents of Mineral County are resilient; as stated 

by a local resident, “...you know the people that live in 

these communities are so prone to low income that one 

more hit was just another hit, we’ll get through it, and we’ll 

move on.” The forests, mountains, rivers and open skies of 

the county are its assets and serve as a foundation for its 

economy and quality of life. Forest products will continue 

to be important, and, by all accounts, Tricon Timber is 

a well-managed and forward-looking company that will 

continue to provide a base of employment in the county. 

Other forest products, such as landscaping bark and pellets, 

have a market, and manufacturers of these products have 

succeeded, despite the costs of transportation from the 

remote location. 

Key Findings

Completing sections of the project before the project 

was fully funded allowed the agency to take advantage 

of Recovery Act funding when it became available.

Prior investments by the federal government and regional 

nongovernmental organizations to purchase private parcels 

along the route were made in expectation that the Forest 

Service would be able to accomplish restoration work of 

the tunnel and trestles; however, this was not possible with 

existing funding mechanisms. Recovery funding allowed 

the Forest Service to “make good on a promise.”

Project completion is expected to contribute to a new 

recreation-based economy. This restoration of a previous 

railway route has preserved a piece of history, provided rich 

recreational opportunities for future generations, provided 

short-term jobs and contracts for Montana businesses, and 

promises to attract tourist revenue for the local economy. 

The agency hopes that the project will improve relations 

with local communities. Relationship building between 

the Forest Service and the community is taking place in a 

somewhat strained atmosphere as economic development 

depends on access to federal lands, which residents feel has 

been restricted. Trust has been built by the Forest Service 

through a collaborative recreation trail user group, district 

staff participation in the Mineral County Challenge, and 

technical assistance from the Rocky Mountain Research 

Station. 

Lessons Learned

Local culture cannot be ignored when developing 

projects. Recreation and tourism are development 

strategies that require investment in an economic and 

social infrastructure, not only of financial capital, but 

in a new mindset and a tolerance for people, as described 

by one businessman, “with credit cards in their lycra 

biking shorts.” 
123

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Develop projects that contribute to local economic development goals. Working with the local community to define 

and implement an agency role in recreational development 

demonstrates the Forest Service willingness to align with 

community planning efforts and help ensure that development and implementation of a user management plan are 

transparent and equitable. Forest communities in transition 

can pose a challenge for the Forest Service. When future 

directions are charted or newcomers’ desires are heeded, 

agency leadership may be perceived as turning their back 

on traditional interests. This case demonstrates the importance of incorporating existing users and community needs.

Human capital in the form of retired Forest Service 

employees can be valuable when reaching out to local 

communities. Retired Forest Service employees working as 

contractors bring a knowledge of the land, the people, and 

institutional mechanism.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Corrie Kegel, Civil Engineer on the 

Superior District, Lolo National Forest. As principal 

contact for this study she provided much-needed assistance, 

arranging visits to the project site and interviews with 

district staff and contractors, and providing photographs 

of the construction. Sharon Sweeney, District Ranger, 

and Beth Kennedy, route planner, were generous with 

their time during field visits, as well as with comments 

that improved the accuracy of the report. Thanks, also, 

to contractors, community development specialists, and 

residents who shared their expertise and perceptions of the 

recovery project and community context. Sophia Polasky 

provided important support gathering the quantitative data, 

formatting case studies, and generally keeping us on track. 

References

Briggeman, K. 2006. Former Superior lumber mill now 

home to three wood products businesses. Missoulian 

(November 21). http://www.crmw.org/News%20Articles/

Archived/LS_Msln._11-14-06.htm. (August 2010).

Chaney, R. 2009. Workin’ on the rail trail: Milwaukee 

Road bed in public hands, but much to be done. 

Missoulian (August 12). http://missoulian.com/

lifestyles/recreation/article_7e941c68-87ba-11de-a1cc001cc4c002e0.html. (August 2010). 

Crowser, C.; McCollum, D.; Brooks, R. 2009. Recreation 

and tourism in Mineral County. In: Mineral County 

Challenge: positioning for prosperity in the changing 

West. Superior, MT: Mineral County Challenge 

Brochure: viii–ix.

Hebert, M. 2008. Tricon layoffs push Mineral to state’s 

6th-highest unemployment rate. Clark Fork Chronicle 

(September 28). http://www.clarkforkchronicle.com/

article.php/20080928214350250. (August 2010).

Jones, G.; Brandt, J. 2009. Forest products industry 

in Mineral County. In: Mineral County Challenge: 

positioning for prosperity in the changing West. 

Superior, MT: Mineral County Challenge Brochure: 

vi–vii.

McCollum, D. 2009. Mineral County today. In: Mineral 

County Challenge: positioning for prosperity in the 

changing West. Superior, MT: Mineral County Challenge 

Brochure: iv–v.

McCollum, D.; Miller, S. 2010. Biking the Hiawatha Trail: 

preliminary results from a survey of users. Fort Collins, 

CO: Rocky Mountain Research Station. 26 p. 

Montana Department of Labor and Industry. 2009. 

Demographic and economic information for Mineral 

County (April). http://www.ourfactsyourfuture.org/

admin/ uploadedPublications/3484_CF09 Mineral.pdf. 

(August 2010).

Murray, J.Q. 2010. Mineral Challenge chooses eight 

economic development projects. Clark Fork Chronicle 

(July 2). http://www.clarkforkchronicle.com/article.

php/20100702110549837. (August 2010).

Schneider, B. 2010. Make new rail trail bicycle only. 

New West, Travel and Outdoors. (May 6). http://www.

newwest.net/topic/article/make_new_rail_trail_bicycle_

only/C41/L41/. (August 2010).
124

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA 

FS]. 2009a. Forest Service activities and the American 

Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009: estimating 

measures of economic distress. Administrative Report. 

Washington, DC. 3 p. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA 

FS]. 2009b. Remaining parcels acquired for railroad 

trail. Lolo National Forest News and Events. (August 6). 

http://www.fs.usda.gov/wps/portal/fsinternet/!ut/p/c4/04_

SB8K8xLLM9MSSzPy8xBz9CP0os3gjAwhwtDDw9_

AI8zPyhQoY6BdkOyoCAGixyPg!/?ss=110116&navtype

=BROWSEBYSUBJECT&cid=STELPRDB5084024&

navid=180000000000000&pnavid=null&position=New

s&ttype=detail&pname=Lolo%2520National%2520Fore

st-%2520News%2520&%2520Events. (Aug. 2010). 

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census 

[USDC BC]. 2010a. Annual estimates of the resident 

population for counties: April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2009. 

http://www.census.gov/popest/counties/CO-EST2009-01.

html. (4 Oct. 2010).

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 

[USDC BC]. 2010b. Small area income and poverty 

estimates, state and county data: 1989, 1993, 1995–2008. 

http://www.census.gov/did/www/saipe/data/statecounty/

index.html. (4 Oct. 2010).

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for 

Education Statistics [USDE NCES]. 2010. Common 

core of data. http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/. (18 Oct. 2010).

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics 

[USDL BLS]. 2010. Local area unemployment statistic 

program. http://www.bls.gov/lau. (4 Oct. 2010).
125

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Wayde Morse 1

Summary

Along the Cheoah River in western North Carolina is found 

one of the highest regional concentrations of the plant 

Virginia spiraea (Spiraea virginiana Britton). This plant is 

federally listed as threatened, making it a priority for 

conservation. It is threatened by nonnative invasive species 

such as kudzu (Pueraria montana (Lour.) Merr.) and privet 

(Ligustrum sinense Lour.) that grow over and shade out the 

native plant, causing it to die. Other federally listed species, 

including the Appalachian elktoe (Alasmidonta raveneliana) 

(an endangered mussel) and the spotfin chub (Erimonax 

monachus) (a threatened fish), are affected by these same 

invasives through degraded stream habitat. Both the 

protection of federally listed species and treatment of 

nonnative invasive species are high priorities for the Forest 

Service. The Cheoah River nonnative invasive plant control 

project, funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (hereafter referred to as the Recovery Act), was 

developed to address these priorities and create local jobs. 

The project, located on the Cheoah Ranger District of the 

Nantahala National Forest, is within Graham County, one of 

the poorest counties in North Carolina with median incomes 

that are significantly lower than the rest of the state and 

poverty levels hovering at around 19 percent. The people of 

Total Forest Service Recovery Act Investment, 

North Carolina (as of 09/08/09): ~$25,411,000 

(North Carolina Projects: $23,616,000; North 

Carolina share of multistate projects: ~$1,795,000)

Recovery Act Investment, Case Study 

(as of 6/30/10): $332,911 

Case Study Location: Nantahala National Forest

County: Graham 

Project Type: Nonnative invasive plant control

Fast Facts

1 Wayde C. Morse, School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, 

Auburn University, 3301 Forestry and Wildlife Sciences Bldg., 

Auburn, AL 36849. This work was performed under Recovery Act 

Joint Venture Agreement # 10-JV-11260489-083.

Graham County have been particularly hard hit during the 

recession with unemployment rates fluctuating around 15 to 

19 percent. The Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians (EBCI) 

has reservation land located within and around Graham 

County and makes up a relatively sizeable proportion of the 

economically disadvantaged. To accomplish the multiple 

ecological and economic goals of this project, an agreement 

was developed to use the services of the Western North 

Carolina Alliance (WNCA) and their expertise on invasive 

species management to train and manage two crew supervisors. Additionally, a partnership with the Cherokee 

supplied two five-person temporary work crews. The crew 

members were hired through the Vocational Opportunities 

of Cherokee, Inc., a temporary employment service that 

Wayde Morse

Wayde Morse

Chapter 8: A Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service Recovery Act 

Projects: Cheoah River Nonnative Invasive Plant Control, North Carolina
126

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

works with Cherokee people that have disabilities or 

barriers to employment. With the opportunity to accomplish 

a number of Forest Service goals, develop and enhance 

partnerships, and put people to work during the recession, 

the Recovery Act agreement provided a valuable resource to 

achieve these ends. 

The Case

The Cheoah River nonnative invasives project is located in 

Graham County at the western tip of North Carolina (fig. 

8-1). The population of the United States and North Carolina continue to grow while population levels in Graham 

County have remained flat (fig. 8-2). By a number of different measures, Graham County is one of the poorest in North 

Carolina. This county has been particularly hard hit during 

the recession with unemployment rates fluctuating around 

15 to 19 percent (fig. 8-3). The percentage of students 

eligible for subsidized lunch programs has risen while the 

total number of students enrolled has decreased (figs. 8-4 

and 8-5). Median incomes are significantly lower than the 

rest of the state, and poverty levels are hovering at around 

19 percent (figs. 8-6 and 8-7). Graham County has a Forest 

Service economic distress ranking of 8.2 “Times are tough 

here, it seems like even in good times,” a local resident 

remarked. The EBCI has reservation land located within 

and around Graham County and faces significant economic 

difficulties. As noted by one interviewee, “it seems like the 

Cherokee Reservation has always had high unemployment, 

even higher than the rest of the workforce.” The county is 

2

 The Forest Service calculated economic distress rankings for 

every county in the United States, and used these rankings as the 

main criterion for making Recovery Act project funding decisions. 

Rankings are on a scale from 1 to 10 with 10 signifying the highest 

level of economic distress. See USDA FS 2009 for information on 

how the rankings were developed.

!

Indian reservation

National forest

Case-study location

Graham

County

Eastern Band of 

Cherokee Indians 

reservation Nantahala

National Forest 

Asheville

Cheoah

River

Figure 8-1—Location of case study and surrounding areas in North Carolina.

Figure 8-2—Change in population for the United States, North 

Carolina, and Graham County, 2000–2009 (USDC BC 2010a).

 Geospatial Service and Technology Center, USDA Forest Service

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Population change from 2000 (percent)

Year

United States

North Carolina

Graham County

20

15

10

5

0

-5
127

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Figure 8-3—Monthly unemployment rates for the state of North Carolina, and Graham County, 1990–2010 (USDL BLS 2010).

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

Monthly unemployment (percent)

North Carolina

Graham County

Jan. 1990

Jan. 1991

Jan. 1992Jan. 1993

Jan. 1994

Jan. 1995

Jan. 1996

Jan. 1997

Jan. 1998Jan. 1999

Jan. 2000

Jan. 2001

Jan 2002

Jan. 2003

Jan. 2004

Jan. 2005

Jan. 2006

Jan. 2007

Jan. 2008

Jan. 2009

Jan. 2010

Date

Figure 8-4—Change in number of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch programs in North Carolina, and Graham 

County, 1987–2008 (USDE NCES 2010). Note: Reduced-price lunches were made available after 1999.

180

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

Free or reduced-price lunch eligibility

-20

change from 1989 (percent)

1996–97

1997–98

1998–99

1999–00

2000–01

2001–02

2002–03

2003–042004–05

2005–06

2006–07

2007–08

2008–09

School year

1987–88

1988–89

1989–90

1990–91

1991–92

1992–93

1993–94

1994–95

1995–96

North Carolina

Graham County
128

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Figure 8-6—Median household income for North Carolina and 

Graham County, in 2008 dollars, 1989–2008 (USDC BC 2010b).

Figure 8-7—Population living in poverty for North Carolina and 

Graham County, 1989–2008 (USDC BC 2010b).

50

45

40

35

30

Median household income, adjusted

for 2008 inflation (thousand dollars)

25

19901992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

Year

Year

North Carolina

Graham County

25

22

18

15

12

9

Population in poverty (percent)

19901992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

Year

North Carolina

Graham County

Figure 8-5—Change in school enrollment for North Carolina and Graham County, 1987–2008 (USDE NCES 2010).

40

30

20

10

0

-10

-20

1996–97

1997–98

1998–99

1999–00

2000–01

2001–02

2002–03

2003–042004–05

2005–06

2006–07

2007–08

2008–09

School enrollment, change from 1987 

(percent)

School year

1987–88

1988–89

1989–90

1990–91

1991–92

1992–93

1993–94

1994–95

1995–96

North Carolina

Graham County
129

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

largely composed of federal and other public lands. Historically the economy of the region was based on the timber 

industry, small farming, and hunting. Correspondingly, the 

Forest Service played a significant economic role through 

direct employment, the provision of timber, and reforestation efforts.

A former Forest Service employee remarked on the 

history of the region, “Large timber companies moved 

in and then the Forest Service ended up purchasing the 

land from back early on,” resulting in the Forest Service 

becoming one of the larger employers in the region. The 

Forest Service economic contribution to the area decreased 

dramatically during the early and mid 1980s with losses 

of temporary employees and youth and senior citizen programs and reductions in timber harvests, which dwindled 

dramatically by the early 1990s. One former Forest Service 

employee noted that:

We cut anywhere from 6 to 10, 11 million feet of 

timber a year. We did reforestation work on hundreds of acres. I think our total program, we were 

doing some years over 2,000 acres a year of reforestation. That was all contracted mostly after we lost 

our temporary employees.... Now the Forest Service 

is just a small, very small part of the economy. Most 

of the sawmills have closed....direct employee hiring 

is dramatically less, the amount of contracted dollars 

are dramatically less, timber sales are dramatically 

less, so it had a huge impact here.

A local resident describes the economic situation in 

Robbinsville in Graham County, “Yeah, it is not like we 

have ever been a big boom town that I can remember; really, 

the downtown since we have been here has never really 

been a flourishing place.” The current economic base is 

largely founded on the Stanley Furniture Plant employing 

several hundred people. Construction and the school system 

are reportedly the other major employers in the Robbinsville 

area. The current recession has had a major impact on 

all these employers because of declining revenues. These 

trends were regionwide. A local resident describes how the 

local economy has been hit, and somewhat surprisingly 

benefited, from the recession: 

The other construction companies including those 

building here locally, 2 years ago the bottom 

dropped out, and... most of their people have been 

out of work. Luckily, Stanley has been adding 

people. They consolidated their furniture plant here 

and closed their other ones, this is all that’s left here 

in Robbinsville. They hire over 500 people; without 

that we would be in bad shape.

Most of the land in Graham County is public land, 

which limits some types of development but may enhance 

others. More recently, the region has become an amenitybased destination for recreation and the development 

of second homes. There are several areas in the county, 

particularly lakeside communities, that have until recently 

benefited from the development of vacation homes, adding 

to the tax base and boosting revenues for local businesses. 

This region has been a prime destination for migration out 

of Atlanta, Georgia, and a significant number of folks from 

Florida. However, this market was significantly affected 

by the recession, as one Forest Service interviewee noted, 

“with the economy and gas prices, and the housing market, 

Graham County suffers from having an overabundance of 

vacation homes that nobody can afford to own or drive up to 

rent for a weekend. So it was too heavily marketed....” The 

recession has severely curtailed the construction industry 

and private housing development in the region. The loss 

of revenue from owners of second homes and a fall-off 

of employment in the construction of these homes have 

affected regional businesses and government revenues. 

One positive economic influence is the growth of 

tourism in Graham County. The Forest Service provides 

a significant amount of camping, hiking, fishing, and 

river and lake recreation opportunities. As one WNCA 

interviewee noted, the decline in the forest industry has 

been partially offset by the increase in recreation: “At the 

same time our mountain areas have surged in recreation 

and tourism, and recreation is one of the biggest drivers 

of our economy and certainly growing all the time.” One 

recreation opportunity related specifically to the Cheoah 

River is boating and kayaking. Several times a year the 

Santeetlah Dam at the head of this stretch of the Cheoah 

River releases high flows downstream. Dam releases into 
130

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

the river sparked the hope that there would be significant 

tourism and economic impact from river-related recreation 

activities. A number of rafting and kayaking guides (fig. 

8-8) and businesses in the region offer seasonal trips, 

rentals, accommodations, and food. At least one interviewee 

thought that these businesses had not reached their full 

potential because there are not enough days of high water 

flow from dam releases. 

Figure 8-8—Rafting and kayaking outfitters.

Figure 8-9—Gathering place on “Tail of the Dragon” route.

Another tourist opportunity is the Cherohala Skyway 

that traverses the national forest. This is a scenic byway that 

attracts significant motorcycle traffic and sightseers. It was 

described by one WNCA interviewee as the “little version 

of the Blue Ridge Parkway—clearly that is a good thing for 

Graham County.” A separate stretch of road along Highway 

129 is heavily traveled by and marketed to motorcyclists 

and is referred to as the “Tail of the Dragon” (fig. 8-9) for 

its high number of twists and curves. There have been a 

number of motorcycle rallies and Miata, Smart Car, Mini, 

and other automobile rallies organized around these roads 

that have contributed to the region economically. When 

asked if they thought the recession has affected this form 

of tourism, one interviewee responded, “No, there are still 

1,000 motorcycles every day on the skyway. [However] 

That is my only indicator.” Tourism income for the area is 

primarily captured through a small number of hotels and 

motels, restaurants, and convenience stores. There are also 

a substantial number of cabin owners and cabin rentals that 

contribute to the tourism industry. 

The local people in Graham County generally have 

been described as independent, self-sufficient, and often 

skeptical of outsiders while enduring substantial economic 

hardship. One Forest Service employee described the 

isolated nature of many of the people of the region: “There’s 

lots of folks who live in the woodworks so to speak, out 

remotely, and making a living any way they can.” Another 

interviewee further described them as “very isolated; they 

stay close to home...and they are very independent, selfsufficient and raise gardens and they don’t really need all 

this outside stuff.” 

Within Graham County is the Snowbird community 

of the EBCI. The Snowbird Cherokee, located near 

Robbinsville, also have a number of people employed at 

the Stanley Furniture plant. However, the major portion 

of the EBCI reservation is located northeast of Graham 

County and on the southern border of the Great Smoky 

Mountains National Park. The town of Cherokee is a center 

of population and economic activity on the reservation and 

a gateway community to the national park. The recession 

has also hit the EBCI in a number of ways. One EBCI 

interviewee mentioned how a tribal children’s fund had 

declined and a number of people had lost jobs. However, in 

the last few years, there has actually been economic growth 

in the community. Recent opportunities for employment 

have been construction jobs associated with the expansion 

of the casino in the town of Cherokee and also construction 

of a new school. A number of tribal members, and many 

other regional people, have jobs on the construction sites 

Wayde Morse

Wayde Morse
131

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

and working at the casino. Additionally, as part of the 

agreement the casino has with the tribe, each tribal member 

receives a check twice a year. The amount of the check 

depends, in part, on the proceeds that the casino brings in. 

The check amounts have thus been affected by the recession 

as well. Other jobs in the town of Cherokee have been 

developed to enhance the culture, as described by one 

EBCI interviewee:

The tribe actually had done a good job at finding a 

lot of jobs and different organizations to keep people, 

you know, on track with what they have been trained 

to do, as well as keep them on track with what they 

are culturally gifted to do. So there is the museum, 

the co-op, the Indian village, that allows people to 

practice and get paid to do some of the things that 

were part of our culture.

It was also reported that the recession has had an 

influence on bringing families together within the EBCI; 

they help each other out in times of need, which the 

interviewee felt was a special strength of the Cherokee 

people and culture. 

The Cheoah River nonnative invasives project is 

located on the Cheoah Ranger District of the Nantahala 

National Forest. The project is designed to treat nonnative 

invasive species and protect the federally listed species, the 

Virginia spiraea (Spiraea virginiana Britton). Both of these 

factors make the project a high priority. However, obtaining 

funding to address these issues at a scale and over a period 

that will have significant long-term impact is difficult to 

arrange. The Forest Service saw the economic recovery 

funding as an opportunity to achieve a significant invasive 

species control regimen that would protect a listed species 

and provide temporary employment in one of the poorest 

counties in North Carolina over a period of several years. 

The project was also seen as an opportunity to further 

develop working relationships with two groups, the WNCA, 

a conservation group, and the EBCI. The location of the 

project complemented and therefore leveraged invasive 

species control efforts currently underway by Alcoa, the 

North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), 

and the Little Tennessee Land Trust. 

Methods

This case study was conducted by using both qualitative 

and quantitative social science research methods. Qualitative data were gathered during face-to-face, semistructured 

interviews with people involved in the Recovery Act 

projects. Fieldwork to conduct these interviews took place 

between June and August 2010. A total of 22 individuals 

were interviewed for this case study. Interviewees included 

6 Forest Service employees who helped develop and/or 

implement the projects, 3 local tribal and nonprofit organization representatives who received Recovery Act funds, 10 

individuals who benefited from jobs created or retained as 

a result of the project, and 3 local individuals not directly 

associated with the project. Additional qualitative data were 

obtained from published sources such as newspapers and 

local government publications, Forest Service documents, 

and federal Web sites. Quantitative data regarding the 

Recovery Act projects and jobs were obtained from Forest 

Service databases and federal Web sites, including Recovery.gov and USAspending.gov. Socioeconomic indicator 

data describing the local population and economy of the 

case-study area came from a number of sources, such as the 

U.S. Census, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Bureau 

of Economic Analysis. For more information on study 

methods and data sources see the appendix.

Project Recipients and Partners

Through the use of two cooperative agreements for the 

Cheoah River nonnative invasives project, the Forest 

Service could use the skills and management of the WNCA 

and noncompetitively target the EBCI with economic 

opportunities (table 8-1). The original agreement was for 

treatment of populations of nonnative invasive species on 75 

acres, treating land on the Cheoah River along U.S. highway 

129. This area has a large concentration of the threatened 

plant, Virginia spiraea. The initial agreement was to support 

9 weeks of treatment work plus travel over a 3-year period 

ending in 2011. Owing to success in the first year and the 

availability of additional funding through other Recovery 

Act projects being under budget, the project has recently 

been extended (09-PA-11084419-070 and 09-PA-11084419-
132

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

078) to include an additional 75 acres (150 total) and a total 

of 23 weeks of employment for the period of 2010–2014. 

The remaining 2009 funds and an additional $110,830 of 

new funding will support the new work for the EBCI with 

$121,781 left for the WNCA. Project skill updates include a 

requirement that at least one person per crew be chain-saw 

certified. The new funding will allow treatment of both 

sides of the river and both sides of U.S. 129, which has 

heavy infestations of invasives. The project includes five 

distinct areas. 

1. River East—66 acres, east of the Cheoah River 

and west of U.S. 129.

2. Dam River West—9 acres, just north of the Dam 

and west of the river.

3. Road East—75 acres, to the west of River East 

and adjacent to and east of U.S. 129.

4. Dense Bittersweet West—less than 2 acres, 

west of the river. 

5. West Bank Mimosa (removal of individual trees).

This expansion is intended to have longer lasting 

impact from the treatment. Additional monitoring will also 

take place. However, although there are many areas where 

invasives need to be treated throughout the forest, for the 

scope of this project, additional hires were not deemed 

advantageous as indicated by a Forest Service employee:

There wasn’t a great advantage to expanding the 

number of employees because of the job at hand. 

Having two crews of five with a crew leader is a 

good size to get it done in a reasonable amount 

of time. 

Table 8-1—Cheoah River Nonnative Invasive Plant Control project recipients and funding obligated to date

 Total funding Funding

Recipient Project description amount mechanism

Dollars

Western North Over 3 years, eight invasive species, threatening to 164,081 Agreement with 

Carolina Alliance displace native species and alter habitats, will be one modification

reduced through the creation of pretreatment

monitoring plots and the application of herbicide

Eastern Band of 75 acres of area treated for nonnative plant control 168,830 Agreement with

Cherokee Indians on Forest Service lands one modification

Project WFM-0811-11fhf

The WNCA is a regional nonprofit grassroots 

organization whose mission is to protect and restore the 

natural communities of the mountain counties of western 

North Carolina. They are based in Asheville, North 

Carolina, in Buncombe County. The organization has a 

history of monitoring activities proposed on the national 

forests and using the public comment process to engage 

citizens in forest management issues. In this role, the 

WNCA and the Forest Service have sometimes had an 

adversarial relationship, with the WNCA suing the Forest 

Service over some planning and management decisions.

The WNCA has significant expertise working with 

nonnative invasive species. Recently, the organization has 

put considerable effort into addressing the issue of invasive 

species through education, identification, and eradication 

efforts. Having their expertise was critical in providing 

trained oversight for the crews working in an area with 

federally listed species. It is this expertise and familiarity 

that led the Forest Service to seek out the WNCA as a 

partner on this project. This was also seen as an opportunity 

to work with the WNCA in a more collaborative way than 

had previously occurred. The relationship was described by 

a WNCA interviewee as a win-win for both parties: 

The Forest Service decided that we were a good 

entity to come to when this stimulus project came 

around, and they knew we cared and I think they 

felt that we had more involvement and caring... not 

that a contractor wouldn’t be good, but an average 

contractor applying for a job is just getting a job. 

We actually really care and want to get rid of those 
133

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

plants. We’ll go to great lengths when we need to 

and try to fire people up about it and so I think that 

probably, that and our comfortable working relationship with resource folks is why they approached us 

and approached me, and I have been delighted. It has 

been the best thing that has ever happened, I think.

The recession has also affected the WNCA and they 

had to lay off one staff person. Much of their resources 

come from private donors, foundations, and membership 

drives, each of which were affected by the recession, 

thus limiting potential resources. However, owing to the 

WNCA’s work on invasives, they have been able to land two 

stimulus projects that have filled the gap in these depressed 

times:

We’ve gotten lots of invasive funding from different 

sorts of grants and contracts in the stimulus project 

and so ironically even as things have been bad, 

the stimulus package in our area and in the areas I 

work it has been just tremendous. I am coordinating 

another stimulus package that comes from Fish and 

Wildlife Service ... so a year ago, if you had told 

me I would be coordinating two stimulus projects, 

I would have told you you were crazy.

The decision to target the EBCI for employment in 

the agreement was linked to the proximity of the project 

to Cherokee lands, the economic status of the region, and 

a desire to build upon the relationship with the tribe. The 

Cherokee community of Snowbird is located in Graham 

County near the town of Robbinsville and very close to the 

project location. The major portion of the EBCI Reservation, including the town of Cherokee, is located northeast 

of Graham County and within an hour of the project site. 

The Forest Service was “very interested because of the 

proximity to the tribal lands, and in terms of being able to 

find local labor, we saw this as a natural,” a Forest Service 

employee remarked. From the beginning, this project was 

perceived as one that would not be a contract put out for 

bid, but one for which an agreement would be developed 

“so that the tribe could take advantage of the work.” 

A number of public and private groups are coordinating 

efforts to address the issue of invasive species by regionally 

targeting control efforts. Although not funded through 

the Recovery Act, the Cheoah River nonnative invasives 

project was designed to coordinate and leverage the efforts 

of other partners to expand the treatment of invasives. 

The Forest Service had already done an inventory of the 

Cheoah River on exotics as part of the Santeetlah Dam 

relicensing for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

(FERC) associated with the Alcoa Power Generating’s 

Tapoca Hydroelectric project. A small grant that came as 

part of the FERC relicensing allowed for some treatment 

of invasives by a qualified biologist, specifically around 

the 16 subpopulations. The biologist created a map of the 

16 subpopulations and of the location of the infestations 

of invasives. However, although some work had begun, 

the resources necessary to carry out a project across the 

whole 6-mile stretch of river were not available within the 

Forest Service. The Cheoah River nonnative invasive plant 

control coordination efforts sprang from this limitation, 

as described by a Forest Service employee: “The ultimate 

idea is to first treat everything in between where someone 

else with their other contract is treating next to the Virginia 

spiraea population,” thus leveraging efforts to address the 

impacts of invasives on the federally listed plant. 

Because of the threatened species presence in the 

project area, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was consulted, and their support was given regarding the treatment 

program. The Forest Service also has a cooperative agreement with the NCDOT to define their relationship with this 

specific project and coordinate the invasives treatment so 

that they have the most complementary effect. The Forest 

Service is to supply the NCDOT with mixed herbicide to 

spray areas associated with this project and gives permission to spray along the right of way on national forest 

land. The NCDOT has the scale of equipment and sprayers needed to treat the large amounts of kudzu along the 

roadside in the treatment area not otherwise available to 

the project. The NCDOT will also be working on Alcoa 

lands to address roadside infestations. 

The Little Tennessee Land Trust is also working on 

invasives in Yellow Creek, which is a tributary to the 

Cheoah and so complements the economic recovery project. 

Additionally, the Cherokee Environment and Natural 
134

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Resource Office has expressed interest in treating invasives 

on tribal lands. Finally, another small but potentially 

useful resource is being considered with the Nantahala 

Outdoor Center, who offered to provide inflatable rafts to 

move equipment across the river to treat invasives on the 

opposite bank starting in 2010. Each of these efforts further 

enhances the efforts of the Cheoah River nonnative invasive 

plant control project.

To expand and coordinate efforts to address invasives 

across the region, the WNCA, the Appalachian Trail 

Conservancy, and Equinox Environmental Consultation 

and Design, Inc., are coordinating a broad partnership (the 

Southern Appalachian Cooperative Weed Management 

Partnership) with the Forest Service, National Park Service, 

Tennessee Valley Authority, NCDOT, North Carolina 

Department of Natural Resources Forestry Division, and 

North Carolina State Parks and Recreation Division to 

address the issue of invasives. With as many partners as 

possible, they have begun to focus efforts on invasives 

using the Appalachian Trail as a central focus because the 

interests of so many of those partners intersect on the trail. 

This kind of loose partnership is designed to take advantage 

of different resources and different funding opportunities as 

they become available. One WNCA interviewee described 

the situation in the following way:

We use the nonprofit abilities for our organization and 

the Appalachian Trail Conservancy to gain funding, 

and so we are applying for grants and trying to keep 

all this money going to focusing on building this and 

getting more and more people involved in invasive 

plant removal on public lands here. 

Table 8-2—Jobs reported by recipients for Cheoah River project

Reporting period

Feb.–Sept. Oct.–Dec. Jan.–Mar. Apr.–June July–Sept.

Recipient 2009 2009 2010 2010 2010

Number of jobsa

Western North Carolina Alliance 2 2 2 2 2

Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians — 12 12 12 —

Note: A dash (—) indicates that no quarterly report was available. 

a

 Job numbers are full-time equivalent jobs. See appendix for reporting method.

Socioeconomic Benefits

A number of temporary jobs are directly and indirectly 

associated with the Cheoah River nonnative invasive plant 

control project. There were two primary targets for employment as part of this project: two supervisors with thorough 

knowledge of invasive species hired by WNCA, and two 

field work crews of five individuals each from the EBCI 

(table 8-2). Although the total number of jobs created is 

relatively small and temporary, the economic impact on the 

individuals who were hired is often very significant.

The WNCA was tasked with hiring two crew supervisors who had expertise with invasive species. The 

supervisors were trained by WNCA managers on safety, 

plant identification, and treatment procedures specific to 

this project. The supervisors would conduct training of 

the crews on the identification and treatment techniques 

for invasive species and supervise work in the field. 

Supervisors were also tasked with establishing monitoring 

plots to assess the impact of treatments over time. The 

agreement with the WNCA also provided temporary 

funding for the manager and executive director and support 

staff, providing a few additional weeks of work for them. 

This was important for that organization because the 

WNCA was itself not immune to the recession and had to 

lay off one staff person. As a WNCA manager described it, 

“three of our folks, myself, our administrative person, and 

the executive director were given a new level of work we 

would not have otherwise had.” A WNCA supervisor said 

that the broader picture of conservation employment 

in Asheville was equally bleak: “Asheville definitely 

decreased exponentially the amount of jobs they had 

available during the toughest part of the recession” in 
135

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

that a number of long-established conservation groups were 

laying off individuals. Another supervisor noted: “After 

I had gotten out of school, I was putting in for jobs and 

putting in for jobs; I went on a ton of interviews and was 

just at my last straw.” As a WNCA manager said regarding 

the plight of the supervisors before the recovery job:

I employ two supervisors who were both unemployed. 

College educated, ready to go, just couldn’t find a 

job. And this has been wonderful for them because 

they have gained the experience and they are now 

connected with a number of people and even in 

agencies and getting other little temporary, small 

contracts here and there. 

The supervisors have developed their own skills, led 

training on invasive and threatened plant identification, and 

completed complex treatment monitoring. During the 2009 

season, it was realized that having the ability to use a chain 

saw on some of the larger invasives stems would be a useful 

timesaving and safety element. Therefore, at least one of 

the supervisors for the 2010 season was chain-saw certified, 

which is another important skill and résumé builder. Both 

supervisors also gained valuable experience supervising 

diverse work crews. Supervisors highlighted the positive 

attitudes, cooperation, and fun they had with the crews. 

One supervisor noted that, “It has been a vast learning 

opportunity for me and a great opportunity in many, many 

ways to expand my skills as a supervisor and to have that 

flexibility and work with the diversity and group dynamic.” 

Furthermore, the experience was very useful toward their 

career paths: “...just the kind of experience and work that I 

was looking to have during the 2- to 4-year period between 

my master’s and maybe something more permanent, so... 

the stimulus money was right there when I needed it.” A 

WNCA manager reported on the relationships within the 

work crews in the following way: “The people that were 

sent to us were excellent, they cared, they appreciated 

learning this, and they liked working outside. According to 

my supervisors, they got along really well with each other. 

It went remarkably smoothly.”

Both supervisors continue to work in the field in North 

Carolina (fig. 8-10). One of the supervisors from 2009 was 

already able to land a permanent position with the State 

Forestry Division:

He was real gung-ho and he was ready to go. He was 

sitting home doing nothing, and this just was perfect 

for him because it gave him work to do right up to 

the point where he got hired by the state and it filled 

in a gap for him and gave him work experience and 

money. And he was pretty excited about it. 

The other supervisor returned this summer but was 

actually able to fill the interim with another stimulusfunded project as a field surveyor on hemlock woolly 

adelgid (Adelges tsugae Annaud) infestations. The supervisor remarked, “So, for me, I actually was able to find two 

employment positions during what seemed to be, according 

to the news, the height of our national recession, due to 

stimulus money.” 

The other agreement was developed to employ two 

five-member temporary work crews to treat the invasive 

species. Part of the coordinator’s salary with the Cherokee 

Environment and Natural Resource Office was covered 

with an in-kind contribution. The EBCI further contracted 

with the Vocational Opportunities of Cherokee, Inc. (VOC), 

which is a temporary employment coordination service that 

works with the Cherokee people. The VOC works primarily 

with individuals with disabilities and barriers to employment. The VOC hired tribal crew members from two areas: 

five individuals came from Snowbird in Graham County 

Figure 8-10—Crew supervisor and monitoring plot.

Wayde Morse
136

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

and five from around the city of Cherokee. The only direct 

employment for residents of Graham County was from the 

Snowbird Cherokee work crew. The EBCI was specifically 

targeted for this project. However, the majority of EBCI 

members do not live in Graham County but are from the 

town of Cherokee, which is still within northwestern North 

Carolina. Therefore, how one describes “local” employment 

is important for looking at employment impacts.

A number of the work crew from 2009 have returned 

for work again in 2010 (fig. 8-11). There was a positive 

perception among the workers as to the nature of the work 

they were doing. One work crew member described his job 

this way:

Basically, I had to identify the plants first, get used 

to what we were looking for and everything. We 

went out to the little part of the woods. We would cut 

the plants close to the root and dab the chemical on 

it. Basically, that’s all we do. 

Overwhelmingly they preferred to work outdoors. One 

EBCI interviewee commented, “I like working outdoors, 

so as long as I’m outside, it’s even more fun, though, in the 

woods.” Another noted that, “I cannot stand to be cooped 

up in a building, 8 to 10 hours a day. Just can’t do that.” It 

was also noted that this was an opportunity for the workers to get to know fellow tribe members from different 

parts of the reservation, because one crew was from the 

Cherokee area and the other from Snowbird. There was also 

a significant interest in the opportunity to learn about the 

different threatened and invasive plants: “Learning more 

about the plants. That’s something I’d like to do more is 

learn more about the plants.” A sense of pride in the work 

was conveyed by one worker, “We set a record for as much 

ground as we covered, in a short period of time. We covered 

more than they expected!” It was also seen as an eyeopening experience with several interviewees explaining 

that now they see the nonnative invasives everywhere they 

go. Several of the work crew are building on the experience 

they gained to pursue careers in natural resources. One 

of the crew got his herbicide application license and got a 

full-time job treating invasives. Another individual is taking 

courses in firefighting, and another spoke of studying plants 

in school. However, a number of the employees were young 

and in the process of figuring out what they wanted to do. 

Finally, there were several interviewees who were simply 

happy to do anything to get a paycheck. 

Several of the tribal members were in fairly dire straits, 

with some individuals reportedly reliant on food from 

churches, competing for jobs cutting grass, or living out 

of their cars. “Personally, I didn’t live in a home for about 

a year,” said one. “I lived in my truck and as I was saying, 

it was hard to find employment around here.” He said a 

friend told him about the job. “He said I know how you can 

get help through this [Recovery Act] and you can get your 

vehicle fixed up and find a shelter at the same time, then 

you can get employed. I was glad he told me and that is 

how I got back on my feet.” Another was just glad to get an 

opportunity to work. “It was good because we needed the 

money and still need the money and I’m just glad it came 

back along.” An EBCI interviewee thoughtfully summed up 

the local sentiment, “I know it seems a drop in the bucket 

compared to how large something like a recession is, but 

locally it seems to be making a very large impact, at least 

during the times that the contract is going.” For most of 

the individuals, the pay through the VOC on this project 

was similar to what they receive on other projects, such as 

construction or on other VOC jobs. There were a few who 

had higher paying career jobs such as trucking that were 

lost during the recession, but most were just beginning 

their careers. Owing to the number of economic recovery 

projects in North Carolina, including this one, several 

temporary positions were created within the Forest Service 

Figure 8-11—Work crew crossing bridge in front of kudzu 

infestation.

Wayde Morse
137

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

to manage them. Managers were involved with developing 

contracts and agreements, presenting them, getting them 

approved, following through on the bid process and 

selection, attending work meetings, and ensuring that 

Recovery Act reporting procedures were observed. The 

individual who is currently filling this 13-month assignment 

in the Forest Service, and was between permanent jobs, 

stated that “financially I was pretty strapped, so when I saw 

this job I applied for it.” At least part of this employment 

opportunity was based on the Cheoah River nonnative 

invasive plant control project. 

Other socioeconomic benefits associated with the 

project include the training and job potential for the EBCI 

contracting on invasive species management projects. A 

strong pool of trained workers is being developed, the 

mechanism for developing contracts and agreements has 

been formalized, a recruitment tool to find additional 

workers (VOC) has been identified, all leading to the 

ability to formally bid on future contracts. Although 

not certified for herbicide application, the EBCI work 

crews gained valuable experience and could go work 

anywhere with any herbicide applicator. The regulations 

stipulate that one certified person be onsite, supervisor or 

otherwise, and the rest of the crew can work under their 

certification. The Cherokee Tribe, through the VOC, has 

provided solid work crews leading one Forest Service 

interviewee to state that now that they “know about them, 

we could list them on a list of contractors when we want 

to put something out for bid.” According to several Forest 

Service employees, there will likely continue to be the 

need for this type of work on Forest Service lands based on 

ecological considerations. One tribe member felt that the 

agreement was a great avenue for the tribe to work with the 

Forest Service and a chance to prove that they could be a 

great asset, and hopefully a priority asset when the Forest 

Service needs workers. One interviewee noted that this 

agreement was pursued with the intent to establish a solid 

working relationship for the specific objective of pursuing 

future contracts. The work provided crew members 

experience with outdoor groundwork in the natural 

resources field as well as the opportunity for crew members 

to gain knowledge of and work with the Forest Service. 

Additionally, the work crews are developing knowledge 

and experience treating invasives, and workers on this 

project are seen as potential employees if the opportunity 

for growth in the Tribal Environment and Natural Resource 

Office arises when their forest management plan is 

formalized. An EBCI interviewee mentioned that the tribal 

lands forests are not in great shape and that this agreement 

“allows us to gain knowledge with other agencies so we can 

bring that knowledge back to our homelands” and address 

the issue of invasive species. 

The work has helped to forge new relationships, 

establishing a greater sense of community among participating individuals and organizations. According to one 

tribe member, “The Western Alliance impressed me. It was 

a treat to meet them, and it was a treat that they enjoyed 

working with our guys...I want to brag on both sides about 

how they came together and worked and did this.” Another 

interviewee from the WNCA summarized the relationship 

this way: 

We just thought the whole thing was positive, we 

enjoyed working with the Cherokees and that was 

another win, win, win. Our organization has always 

wanted to work with the Cherokees, many people 

don’t know how and don’t know the connections, 

and this just provided a great opportunity for us to 

work with them. 

The community benefited because they were the ones 

out there working to protect it. A WNCA supervisor noted 

that “because we are working in their greater backyard, 

some seemed inspired by the opportunity to make a difference in their local community.” Additional social benefits 

have arisen from this project in the form of education on 

the issue of invasive species. An EBCI member commented 

that it gave the tribal work crews:

A better understanding of what it is like to do the 

groundwork, but at the same time to go back to their 

community and talk with some of their family members and some of their elders about what they are 

doing. And probably trigger to elders the memory 

they have of these species that are threatened now 

due to the invasives.
138

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

The project has led to a greater awareness of the issue 

of invasive species. This is true for the Cherokee work 

crews but it is also true for the general public. There have 

been several press releases regarding this project as well 

as signs in the area that identify the Recovery Act work 

that has been undertaken. As noted by a Forest Service 

employee, “The very fact that it gets publicity, it makes 

people more aware of invasives and the problems that there 

are.” Both of these get the word out about invasive species 

and the threatened species they are working to protect. 

Beyond the direct economic benefits of employment, 

some of the primary social benefits are derived through the 

ecological protection of invasives and eradication of invasives. A system that maintains its native components was 

identified as valuable. These values translate most directly 

to the economic impacts of recreational use of the river (fig. 

8-12). Boaters and kayakers were often mentioned as direct 

beneficiaries of the Cheoah River nonnative invasive plant 

control project. The white-water rafting community takes 

advantage of the water releases to put boaters on some class 

4 and 5 rapids. Although the releases are designed to maintain a healthy stream ecosystem, including the scouring 

benefits for the Virginia spiraea, it also provides improved 

aesthetics for the boaters. That the boater community finds 

a healthy ecosystem important is evidenced by the fact that 

one of the boater companies, Nantahala Outdoor Center, 

has offered to lend equipment to be used during the project. 

However, any fisher or hiker, or motorcyclist and driver 

along the Cherohala Skyway or the Tail of the Dragon 

interested in native species or who appreciate the aesthetics 

of a system not covered in kudzu (Pueraria montana 

(Lour.) Merr.) or privet (Ligustrum sinense Lour.) would 

benefit. As one individual put it, “I would say that protecting things that attract tourism here and enhancing and 

restoring these areas, that’s probably the best possible thing 

that we could do economically.” It was further explained by 

a WNCA employee that when the economy recovers, the 

recreation and aesthetic resources are what will be critical 

to economic growth: 

When it comes back, we certainly hope that we have 

got at least our national parks and national forests 

in good shape and as healthy shape as possible, and 

that’s where the tourists like to go and it’s only going 

to increase. So I see the economy improving in those 

areas if we protect our resources, the goose that lays 

the golden egg. If we don’t kill that, we will keep 

getting the gold.

Finally, one Forest Service employee described how 

the combination of multiple economic recovery projects 

across the state made a significant difference in employment 

opportunities, even if each of the individual projects did not 

alone provide a high number of jobs: 

I was impressed by the orders of magnitude beyond 

the initial investment, how that spins off into the 

economy. Sometimes four- and fivefold by the 

time it is spent. In any one location it may not be 

dramatic, but I think when you add up all the pieces 

of the impact to the various communities, it will be 

significant. It’s just that the projects are so dispersed 

over a whole state... It has benefited virtually every 

ranger district, each of the eight ranger districts, a 

lot of communities.

Environmental Benefits

The U.S. Forest Service has identified invasive species 

as a high-priority issue across all national forests. The 

Forest Service in North Carolina has also identified 

invasive species as a high-priority issue with the Cheoah 

River as a special target area owing to the presence of 

threatened species including the Virginia spiraea (fig. 

8-13). The Cheoah River site is one of the densest sites 

Figure 8-12—Rafting outfitters.

Wayde Morse
139

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

of the species in North Carolina with a recorded 16 

subpopulations. The threat to Virginia spiraea is that 

invasive species will outcompete, grow over, and shade out 

the plant, causing it to die (fig. 8-14). The site also borders 

the Joyce Kilmer Wilderness Area, increasing the priority 

level for treating invasive species. The environmental 

assessment for invasives on the Nantahala and Pisgah 

National Forests had already been done, making the project 

shovel ready for the economic recovery funds. 

When asked if this project was a high priority to the 

Forest Service, one employee responded, “Absolutely, if 

you think back to the [Forest Service] Chief’s four threats 

several years ago, one was invasive species. And that really 

hasn’t changed for us.” However, a Forest Service employee 

reported that the level of invasive species management 

for this project would likely not have been done without 

Recovery Act funding because of budget constraints: 

I think just the fact there is no way you can get the 

amount of funding for nonnative invasive treatments, to get it done. [Invasive species have] been 

identified as a big threat by the Forest Service, but 

the amount of funding pushed toward it is small. 

This was said to be the case even though invasive 

species projects are generally viewed as “white hat” 

projects, about which no one complains that they are 

being done. 

The Cheoah River was dammed and dewatered in the 

1950s to provide hydropower. A road was also built parallel 

to much of the river. These factors alter the ecosystem, are 

problematic for native vegetation, and provide opportunities for nonnative species to invade. The Virginia spiraea, 

a shrub, is a federally listed species that requires water 

scouring to maintain openings. Currently, there are about 

10 significant water releases per year for 2 days each that, 

according to a Forest Service employee, are designed “to 

provide better habitat, suitable habitat for the fish, for rare 

species in a more viable ecosystem within the stream.” 

Through overgrowth and shading, these invasive plants 

threaten to displace native species and alter habitats along 

the river. Other species including the Appalachian elktoe 

(Alasmidonta raveneliana) (an endangered mussel) and 

spotfin chub (Erimonax monachus) (a federally threatened 

fish) will benefit indirectly from these treatments through 

improved stream habitat.

The ultimate ecological goal of this project is to 

eliminate as much as possible the nonnative invasive plant 

species to prevent them from threatening Virginia spiraea 

and to improve native habitat. However, other native plant 

species are also protected, thus maintaining historical 

ecosystem health and functioning. This has additional 

benefits to the native wildlife species that benefit from 

the healthy ecosystem. The coordinated efforts that are 

eradicating the invasives across larger areas amplify these 

benefits. However, as a Forest Service interviewee noted, 

Figure 8-13–Virginia spiraea.

Figure 8-14–Princess tree covering Virginia spiraea.

Gary Kauffman Gary Kauffman
140

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

“We are just scratching the surface of the work we have to 

do on invasive species.” The scale of the invasive species 

issue was framed by a Forest Service interviewee drawing 

an analogy to an island:

Especially given the sense that we are treating an 

island. If we define an island as between the road 

and the river, that, in a way, is an island, and it was 

surrounded by invasives...but the level outside there 

is much different, along the road in particular, on 

both sides of the road, where the infestations were 

so high. 

The heavy presence on the road was the reason for 

coordination with the NCDOT and also for extending the 

area covered in an agreement modification to include treatment across the road. This is seen as an important tactic to 

control the seed sources of the invasives for the region. 

With a more cautionary approach, a Forest Service interviewee noted: 

It is not a success yet. I don’t think we should say 

yet. It is a success that it has started and it’s initiated 

and it is ongoing and the money will be there for 

awhile and it will last through 2014. I don’t want to 

answer that until we are closer to the finish. And 

seeing how we have done.

All parties involved indicated the treatment operation 

was successful in terms of how the work was done in the 

field, the logistics, and how well the crews and supervisors 

worked with each other. Nonnative invasive plants are 

treated through three methods, including (1) foliar application (spraying herbicide on the foliage directly), (2) cut 

surface application (cutting the stem and spraying the cut 

surface with herbicide), and (3) basal bark application 

(spraying herbicide on the woody stem). To further protect 

the Virginia spiraea, 50-foot buffers are left around any 

occurrence for treatment by specialists. Eight species of 

nonnative invasive plants have been identified for treatment 

along 6 miles of Forest Service land on the Cheoah River 

between Santeetlah Dam and Lake Cheoah: 

1. Oriental bittersweet (Celastrus orbiculatus Thunb.)

2. Mimosa (Albizia julibrissin Durazz.)

3. Chinese yam (Dioscorea oppositifolia L.)

4. Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense/vulgare) and 

European privet (Ligustrum vulgare L.)

5. Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica Thunb.)

6. Princess tree (Paulownia tomentosa (Thunb.) 

Siebold & Zucc. ex Steud.)

7. Kudzu (Pueraria montana var. lobata (Willd.) 

Maesen & S. Almedia)

8. Multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora Thunb.)

The idea was to hit it hard the first year or two and 

then go back in for repeat treatments of invasives that were 

missed or were not treated effectively or to identify and 

treat new plants that have emerged (fig. 8-15). Pretreatment 

assessment of the monitoring sites began in July 2010, and 

initial reports are that treatments were largely successful 

and are likely to be higher than the planned 80 percent 

success rate for the first season. 

 An interesting side note of the cultural adaptation 

to the presence of invasive species was made. One tribal 

interviewee shared his thoughts linking some of the current project effort to eradicate invasives and new cultural 

applications of some of the invasive plants. Regarding one 

invasive (Japanese honeysuckle), he wondered, “We are 

using it to make baskets and everyone else is killing it. Why 

can’t the co-op come and get that harvest and have them 

ready for members who say they want to make baskets?” In 

this way, the plant would be harvested to be used for baskets 

before the crews came by and cut them and applied herbicide, helping both with cultural use and eradication. 

Figure 8-15–Crew girdling invasive plant.

Wayde Morse
141

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Effects on the Agency and Its Partners

The project has enabled the district to develop an invasive 

species management project at a scale not likely to have 

occurred without the Recovery Act funding. Through this 

project, the Forest Service was able to coordinate with 

a number of organizations to leverage invasive species 

management across an even greater area. The ability to 

coordinate helps to address a number of future seed sources, 

making the success of treatment over the longer term much 

more likely. 

The project was managed with two participating 

agreements. This enabled the Forest Service to choose 

specifically who they would be working with. The targets 

for this agreement were for needed expertise of the WNCA 

and the proximity to and desire to work with the EBCI. A 

Forest Service employee noted that agreements tend to be 

more difficult:

Agreements are so complicated that I am not sure I 

would recommend having everybody familiar with 

it. That is why you have an agreement specialist, 

but it does mean a lot of work between the resource 

person and the agreement person....it’s a lot more 

coordination.

However, it does offer more flexibility if changes are 

needed. This specific agreement with the EBCI was seen 

as a real learning experience, because the Forest Service 

had worked mostly with contracts in which they write 

My dream on invasive exotic plants is that someday, a few people like me are not going to be doing 

it, a few Forest Service staff, we are not going to 

knock out plants. But someday, every garden club, 

Boy Scout troop, every school, local community 

group, even neighborhood friends, getting together 

and going out doing, instead of just river clean-ups 

and litter pickups, they are going out and doing 

invasive species plant removal. People doing this 

in their backyards.

—Conservation group manager

specifications and accept bids. Forest Service personnel also 

observed that greements take more time and negotiation, 

but are more of a partnership:

I think that with the tribe it was a learning experience for both of us. Both of us were ready to throw 

our hands up in the air several times. We never 

did, but it was just, there were just a lot of nuances 

dealing with the tribe that I would have never 

anticipated....But I’m certain if we went through that 

mechanism again it would be much more streamlined. We would both know what was going on and 

how to handle it.

The first time through the process was difficult, or at 

least time consuming: Now that it has been done, it is a 

model that can be followed to begin closer relations with 

the EBCI. This is likely the key long-term benefit of the 

project related to collaboration between the Forest Service 

and the EBCI and the WNCA conservation group. Now 

that relationships have been established and tested with 

high levels of success, it is likely that these groups can 

continue to work together on invasive species issues. This 

is important as the Forest Service has a lot of acreage that 

needs treatment for invasive species, a high-priority issue. 

Additionally, the WNCA works on other lands not managed 

by the Forest Service and can continue to contract with the 

newly trained employees with the VOC and others who 

need temporary employment on other projects. So not only 

was a relationship enhanced between the Forest Service 

and the EBCI, but one was built between the EBCI and the 

WNCA. Furthermore, with some further certification of 

individuals in chemical herbicide management, the EBCI 

could work directly with the Forest Service on contracts. 

The Cheoah River nonnative invasive plant control 

project has had impacts on the workload of the Forest 

Service participants in terms of paperwork, reporting, 

oversight, and time. One Forest Service employee remarked 

about the recovery projects across North Carolina:

It definitely displaced [other work]. Oh yeah. I think 

it did that to everybody across the forest and is still 

doing that. But I can’t say that anything did not 

get done because of it....It is great that everything 
142

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

got done on the ground and is getting done on the 

ground. It is just that there was no relief anywhere 

else. Basically do more in the same time.

A similar sentiment came from another Forest 

Service employee:

Now will we meet all our targets? Yes. We meet our 

targets, that’s what we do. Has there been a lot of 

stress in the system? Yes, absolutely.

Challenges

One of the challenges mentioned was increasing local 

employment under this agreement. While highlighting 

the links made to the different organizations, one Forest 

Service interviewee noted that, “I think we failed in not 

attracting as many local folks as maybe we could have.” 

The interviewee pointed out that a large percentage of the 

money stayed in Asheville and that half of the work crews 

were from outside Graham County. The interviewee also 

mentioned that there was not the experience in Graham or 

Cherokee Counties to take the role that the WNCA had by 

providing expertise. 

Another issue that was identified with a project that is 

trying to leverage so many different actors is communication. A Forest Service employee explained this idea in the 

following way:

There is just so much going on; that is why I have 

all these files. You don’t know how many countless 

meetings we have had between the various groups 

of things that have happened along the river with 

the Fish and Wildlife Service, Alcoa, and the DOT. 

I think the challenges are communicating. I was 

communicating with folks last night at 8 p.m. doing 

some of the control work with kudzu. 

The primary challenges were related to negotiating the 

agreement with the EBCI. As mentioned previously, there 

were some paperwork issues that needed to be worked out 

the first time through. However, a tribal perspective on the 

agreement process was a bit different: “It was very easy, I 

mean on my end. On the Forest Service end it probably was 

not; they did the bulk of the work.” The agreement needed 

to go through the chain of command of the tribe, and that 

reportedly took a while. The individual also noted that the 

Forest Service has been very flexible on the new agreement 

modifications to include items that were overlooked or 

underfunded in the original agreement. Furthermore, the 

individual felt that the Recovery Act reporting was a very 

easy process.

Other areas of concern were of the scale of the project. 

Many were very excited to have the funding to do such a 

large invasives project, but a number of others cited the very 

small scale of the work relative to the size of the problem. 

It was mentioned that to address the issue of invasives, a 

forestwide (and outside of forests) program was necessary. 

Additionally, to counter some of the impacts of the 

recession, a much larger worker component was needed. 

A WNCA employee suggested that:

It would be nice if these projects were going on all 

over the Forest Service land. Logging roads and 

trails and along highways, which are horrible places 

for invasives, and on private lands. Maybe there 

will be a way of figuring out a way to make money 

removing invasive plants. That’s pie in the sky right 

now!

A former Forest Service employee referred to previous 

Forest Service programs that, if restored, could address 

all manner of backed-up work including road, trail, and 

campground maintenance and invasives management:

Some of those programs that I thought were so 

successful years ago like in the 70s—YACC, YCC, 

and that older American program we had, the 

Senior Citizen Conservation Employment Program 

[were] great ways to put people to work. If you’re 

not familiar, Young Adult Conservation Corps 

was a program set up for 18- to 25-year-old young 

unemployed. They worked 1 year....I thought during 

this recession, they would have come up with one or 

two of those programs to really put people to work, 

but they didn’t.
143

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

More generally, an additional concern is that the heavy 

workload may not be ending in the near term as some 

recovery projects are designed to last for years with no 

additional oversight funding. This may have an impact as 

the stress continues over time. A common theme among 

several Forest Service employees was the duration of the 

agreements and contracts related to all economic recovery 

projects:

In terms of paper work, I still have to spend more 

time. It will be an issue in the future, because we are 

extending this out for a long time. Even though this is 

an agreement, someone has to oversee it, but there is 

no money coming into the Forest Service to pay for it.

Furthering this notion of long-term impacts is that 

multiple Recovery Act contracts meant that the Forest 

Service hired a number of temporary employees to help 

with the additional burden of the increased work. However, 

many of those temporary terms will expire soon, and 

that will leave additional work for current Forest Service 

employees. “Most of us are going away,” said one of these 

temporary employees, “and there is still this big load on top 

of a group of Forest Service employees that do that work on 

the ground. They are already stretched way thin.” 

The small number of Recovery Act jobs that were 

provided by this project were short term and seasonal 

in nature, but provided significant impact on the lives 

of many of those who were hired. Furthermore, the jobs 

have had important benefits beyond their duration. 

Many of the same temporary employees are returning this 

year, and a few individuals have been able to use their 

experience to obtain other jobs or change career paths. The 

scale of the project (number of hires for the short term) 

meant that the larger socioeconomic impacts were likely 

minimal. However, the relationships built provide the basis 

for continued collaboration on invasive species projects that 

could have longer term employment and environmental 

consequences. The battle to eradicate invasive species is 

a high priority on national forest, tribal, and state lands in 

North Carolina and with additional funding could provide 

significant and long-term employment for the EBCI and 

WNCA and within Graham County. 

Recovery Act funds made it possible to accomplish 

work that has almost universal stakeholder support 

at a scale that would not have happened otherwise. 

Operational lessons learned as part of this project can be 

applied elsewhere. Invasive species control is considered a 

“white hat” type of project; everybody is in favor of doing 

it. It is also considered a high priority by the Forest Service. 

However, funding to conduct effective eradication takes 

significant time and resources, and without both of those, it 

cannot be accomplished. It appears that too often the priority of invasive species management and budget priorities 

do not match. The Recovery Act funding has allowed this 

project to be performed at a scale and over a period not 

frequently budgeted for. The project has developed useful 

organizational partnerships with the necessary expertise 

and efficient low-tech low-training treatment methods and 

has a significant monitoring program associated with it. As 

treatment progresses to identify effectiveness, this project 

may be used as a model for future invasive management 

efforts. It is likely that invasive species will only increase as 

a problem on national forests (and other public and private 

lands), and cases such as this may help us to understand the 

resources necessary to treat this ever-growing problem. 

It is a good thing hiring locals; it sure helped me, 

because I was laid off and it was getting pretty 

rough. To see that recovery money actually help 

people meant a lot to me, and what it did for the 

environment really meant a lot.

—Crew supervisor

Key Findings

The Cheoah River nonnative invasive plant control project 

was reported to be highly successful at promoting Forest 

Service mission goals related to natural resource management and goals of the Recovery Act regarding the economic 

impact on individuals who were hired. In the analysis of the 

project, several key findings with regard to the socioeconomic benefits of Forest Service Recovery Act investments 

were identifiable.
144

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Being prepared in advance, preparing a detailed plan, 

and building on the work of others facilitated success 

in this project. This project was possible because the 

environmental assessment on invasives had been completed 

for the entire forest and initial mapping of the endangered 

and invasive species had been done. A Forest Service 

employee regarding the National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) and a team supervisor regarding Forest Service 

preparedness stated that:

I think this was, to some extent, a lesson in the 

benefits of having projects on the shelf, having all 

the work being done and ready to go...and the reality 

is that for our agency, people who are prepared get 

rewarded.

As noted by a WNCA supervisor:

That everything went as smoothly as planned is a 

testament to the preparation on the end of the Forest 

Service...having solid maps that gave a very good 

sense of how big that particular stretch of invasives 

is and what types of species we would be expecting 

to see...and handling all the logistics and details.

The use of an agreement allowed the Forest Service 

to build desired relationships. The new or enhanced 

relationships will facilitate future collaborations. A prior 

respectful, but adversarial, relationship with the WNCA 

became a very collaborative partnership for this project. 

Working with the EBCI meant that the Forest Service was 

working with a different culture and different approval 

procedures and additional time was necessary for getting 

an agreement approved. Successful negotiation of the 

agreement process and very positive reviews of the working 

relationships between all the groups provided the impetus 

and the institutional knowledge of how to work together in 

the future. The project provided all involved the opportunity 

to better understand the economic plight of western North 

Carolina counties, to learn about local people, the Cherokee, 

and local officials.

Lessons Learned

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act directed the 

Forest Service to achieve mission objectives and provide 

economic opportunities for local residents. There were 

several lessons that may be applied to future Forest Service 

projects. 

• Even small levels of temporary employment 

can have significant impacts on individual lives. 

However, targeted employment doesn’t necessarily 

lead to a geographic economic impact in the area 

targeted.

• Multiorganizational coordination is more time 

consuming to set up initially but can lead to greater 

impacts on the landscape.

• Having a number of projects NEPA-ready will 

allow the agency to quickly respond to future 

opportunities. 

• Purposefully targeting organizations through the use 

of agreements can be an effective tool to enhance 

relationships. There may be a steep learning curve 

the first time through the process, but it will be 

easier the next time around.

• Publicizing the work being done on Forest Service 

lands—enabled by the Recovery and Reinvestment 

Act—with onsite signs, articles in the local news 

media, and provision of information at local meetings can do a lot to build public support. Many of 

these projects were “white hat” projects that were 

viewed positively by all stakeholders.

Acknowledgments

I thank all of the Forest Service, WNCA, and EBCI interview participants who took time out of their very busy 

schedules to provide many insights to this case and provide 

valuable and timely reviews of the report. I also thank the 

WNCA and EBCI employees who were hired with Recovery Act funding for sharing their very personal stories. 

Thanks to those who reviewed this document, and to 

Sophia Polasky for gathering socioeconomic indicator 

data and assisting with report preparation.
145

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

References

Cohen, Alice. 2009. 12 private sector jobs created to control 

invasive plants. In: National forests in North Carolina: 

USFS News Release. U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service News Release. November 12.

Rose, Z. 2009. Non-native plants targeted by multi-agency 

program: invasive species hurting habitat. The Graham 

Star. November 19.

USDA Forest Service [USDA FS]. 2009. Forest Service 

activities and the American Recovery and Reinvestment 

Act of 2009: estimating measures of economic distress. 

Administrative Report. Washington, DC. 3 p.

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census 

[USDC BC]. 2010a. Annual estimates of the resident 

population for counties: April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2009. 

http://www.census.gov/popest/counties/CO-EST2009-01.

html. (4 Oct. 2010).

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 

[USDC BC]. 2010b. Small area income and poverty 

estimates, state and county data: 1989, 1993, 1995–2008. 

http://www.census.gov/did/www/saipe/data/statecounty/

index.html. (4 Oct. 2010).

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for 

Education Statistics [USDE NCES]. 2010. Common 

core of data. http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/. (18 Oct. 2010).

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics 

[USDL BLS]. 2010. Local area unemployment statistic 

program. http://www.bls.gov/lau. (4 Oct. 2010).
146

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831
147

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Chapter 9: A Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service Recovery Act 

Projects: Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, Oregon

Emily Jane Davis and Cassandra Moseley1

Summary

The U.S. Forest Service provided more than $45 million 

in American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (hereafter 

referred to as the Recovery Act) funds to preserve and 

create jobs, assist people impacted by the economic 

recession, and invest in environmental protection and 

infrastructure on and around the Rogue River-Siskiyou 

National Forest (RRSNF) located in southwestern Oregon 

and northern California. This report focuses on Recovery 

Act work performed in the four Oregon counties of Coos, 

Curry, Jackson, and Josephine (fig. 9-1). Between March 

2009 and July 2010, the forest awarded:

• About 53 contracts and 7 agreements for two phases 

of hazardous fuel reduction projects. 

• Eleven contracts and 3 agreements for meadow 

restoration, and botanical and habitat enhancement 

projects. 

• Two contracts and an agreement for two large 

road projects, and two contracts for deferred road 

maintenance projects.

• Three agreements for maintenance of the Pacific 

Crest Trail.

• Three contracts for toxic mine cleanup.

Total Forest Service Recovery Act Investment, 

Oregon (as of 09/08/09): ~$177,027,200 (Oregon 

projects: $167,809,700; Oregon share of multistate 

projects: $9,217,500 

Forest Service Recovery Act Investment, Rogue 

River-Siskiyou National Forest (as of 06/30/10):

$45,457,000

Case Study Location: Rogue River-Siskiyou 

National Forest, southwestern Oregon 

Counties: Jackson, Josephine, Coos, and Curry

Project Types: Hazardous fuel reduction, habitat 

restoration, road maintenance and reconstruction, 

trail maintenance, mine cleanup

Fast Facts

1 Emily Jane Davis is a faculty research assistant with the 

Ecosystem Workforce Program at the University of Oregon. 

Cassandra Moseley is the Director of the Ecosystem 

Workforce Program at the University of Oregon.

The forest used a mix of traditional service contracts, 

stewardship contracts and agreements, and other types 

of agreements to implement these projects. Because of 

the number of contractors and nonprofits in southwestern 

Oregon, nearly all of the contracts and agreements were 

awarded to firms from the four-county region, especially 

Jackson and Josephine Counties. One of the most effective 

strategies at reaching smaller contractors and communities 

came in the second phase of project selection and contracting, where the Forest Service was able to develop contracts 

and agreements accessible to small businesses and nonprofits in the more rural, isolated parts of the region. 

Emily Jane Davis

Emily Jane Davis
148

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

These investments will help maintain and protect the 

human and natural resources of southwestern Oregon into 

the future. The Recovery Act funds on the RRSNF have 

provided significant employment and training opportunities 

to dozens of local forestry support contractors and their 

workers, road contractors, youth crews, and several local 

nonprofit environmental and educational organizations 

across the region. They have also helped protect communities from wildfire risk, restore overstocked forests 

and encroached meadows, reestablish wildlife habitat and 

native plants, improve forest road infrastructure and safety, 

maintain popular trails, and prevent toxic discharges from 

entering the Applegate watershed. 

National forest and grassland

Case-study location/national forest

Coos

County

Curry

County

Jackson

County

Josephine

County

Douglas

County

Klamath

County Medford !

Rogue River-Siskiyou

National Forest 

Figure 9-1—Location of case study and surrounding areas in Oregon.

 Geospatial Service and Technology Center, USDA Forest Service

The Case

The RRSNF is located in six counties in southwestern 

Oregon and two counties in northern California. The forest 

covers almost 1.8 million acres from the Cascades to the 

southern Oregon coast (fig. 9-1). It contains six designated 

Wild and Scenic Rivers, including the Rogue River, which 

drains more than 75 percent of the forest’s land area. The 

rugged Siskiyou Mountains of Josephine and Jackson 

Counties and the southern Cascades to the east create steep, 

remote slopes across much of the region. Coast Douglasfir (Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco), pine (Pinus

spp.), other conifers, and hardwoods such as madrone 

(Arbutus menziesii Parah) and oak (Quercus spp.) compose 
149

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

piling, burning, reforestation, and firefighting. Among these 

businesses are some of the largest forestry companies in the 

Nation, which perform forestry work across the West. 

All four case study counties have experienced unemployment and poverty rates that are significantly higher than 

Oregon averages (figs. 9-2, 9-3). Poverty has markedly risen 

since 2007 as incomes have fallen (fig. 9-4). 

Jackson County contains a rapidly growing urban 

population, and its larger communities along the Interstate 5 

corridor have economies that are more diversified than those 

of rural Josephine, Coos, and Curry Counties. Population is 

declining in Coos and Curry Counties (fig. 9-5). Josephine 

County relies on its natural resources and recreation and 

has limited diversification. Its poverty rates have reached 

above 19 percent (fig. 9-3). Tourism has supported moderate 

economic development along the Coos and Curry County 

coasts, but this region remains depressed from the decline 

of the timber industry in the 1990s. Coos County is home 

to the Coquille Tribe, which has forested reservation land, 

several businesses, and a forest management plan that provides economic benefit to the tribal community. All of the 

case study counties experienced a dip in school enrollment 

in 2005–2006 (fig. 9-6), although free and reduced-price 

lunch availability has not risen at the same rate as the state 

average for Oregon (fig. 9-7), except for Coos County.

Methods

This case study was conducted using both qualitative and 

quantitative social science research methods. Qualitative 

data were gathered during face-to-face, semistructured 

interviews with people involved in the Recovery Act 

projects. Fieldwork to conduct these interviews took place 

between April and July 2010. We interviewed 27 individuals 

for this case study. Interviewees included 13 Forest Service 

and Oregon Department of Forestry employees who helped 

develop or implement the projects, and 14 local government, 

business, and nonprofit organization representatives who 

received Recovery Act funds. Additional qualitative data 

were obtained from published sources such as newspapers 

and local government publications, Forest Service documents, and federal Web sites. Quantitative data regarding 

the Recovery Act projects and jobs were obtained from 

the region’s diverse forests. Conifers have increasingly 

encroached on the open oak woodlands and meadows that 

once dotted the landscape. Fire is a major historical driver 

of ecological change, but past suppression practices and 

climate change have changed fire severity and frequency 

here. Significant fires such as the 2002 Biscuit Fire, during 

which much of the 180,000-acre Kalmiopsis Wilderness 

burned, have increased community and agency desire to 

carry out hazardous fuel reduction and active forest restoration to protect both human and ecological values. There has 

been pressing need but little ability to reduce forest fuels 

and practice restoration across the landscape to address 

the overstocked conditions found on the RRSNF. Costs 

and labor requirements for conducting thinning, piling, 

and burning in steep terrain can be extensive. Budgetary 

constraints have also limited meadow restoration, trail 

maintenance, and road maintenance. 

These forests historically supported an extensive timber 

industry that relied on public lands. Public lands make 

up 54 percent of Jackson County, 68 percent of Josephine 

County, 27 percent of Coos County, and 69 percent of Curry 

County (National Atlas and Bureau of Land Management 

2009). The region also contains portions of the Oregon and 

California railroad grant lands. Timber harvest revenues 

once supported schools and other social services through 

direct payments to local governments. Currently, only 

limited wood products infrastructure remains. In Jackson 

County, Boise Cascade LLC operates lumber, plywood (mill 

currently closed), and veneer mills in White City; in Josephine County, Rough and Ready Lumber Company operates 

a sawmill in Cave Junction; in Coos County, GeorgiaPacific and Southport Forest Products operate sawmills in 

Coos Bay; and in Curry County, South Coast Lumber operates a plywood plant and sawmill (currently idled) in Brookings. Smaller mills and secondary manufacturing facilities 

are located in Jackson County at Medford, White City, and 

Murphy, and in Coos County at Broadbent and Coquille. 

Biomass One operates a biomass energy plant in White 

City, and Rough and Ready has cogeneration capacity and 

is in the feasibility stage of starting a biomass and pellet 

plant. In Jackson County, there is a high concentration of 

contracting businesses that perform tasks such as thinning, 
150

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Figure 9-2—Monthly unemployment rates for Oregon, and each Oregon case-study county, 1990–2010 (USDL BLS 2010).

Figure 9-3—Population living in poverty for Oregon and each Oregon case-study county, 1989–2008 (USDC BC 2010b).

19891990

19911992

1993

199419951996

1997

1998

1999

20002001

2002

2003

20042005

2006

2007

2008

Population in poverty (percent)

Year

25

20

15

10

5

Oregon

Coos County

Curry County

Jackson County

Josephine County

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

Monthly unemployment (percent)

Jan. 1990

Jan. 1991

Jan. 1992

Jan. 1993

Jan. 1994

Jan. 1995

Jan. 1996

Jan. 1997

Jan. 1998

Jan. 1999

Jan. 2000

Jan. 2001

Jan. 2002

Jan. 2003

Jan. 2004

Jan. 2005

Jan. 2006

Jan. 2007

Jan. 2008Jan. 2009

Jan. 2010

Date

Oregon

Coos County

Curry County

Jackson County

Josephine County
151

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Figure 9-4—Median household income for Oregon and each Oregon case-study county, 1989–2008 (USDC BC 2010b).

Figure 9-5—Change in population for the United States, Oregon, and each Oregon case-study county, 2000–2009 (USDC BC 2010a).

19891990

19911992

1993

199419951996

1997

1998

1999

20002001

2002

2003

20042005

2006

2007

2008

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

Median household income, adjusted for 

2008 inflation (thousand dollars) 

Year

Oregon

Coos County

Curry County

Jackson County

Josephine County

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Population change from 2000 (percent)

Year

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

-2

United States

Oregon

Coos County

Curry County

Jackson County

Josephine County
152

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Figure 9-6—Change in school enrollment for Oregon and each Oregon case-study county, 1987–2008 (USDE NCES 2010).

Figure 9-7—Change in number of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch programs in Oregon and each Oregon 

case-study county, 1987–2008 (USDE NCES 2010). Note: Reduced-price lunches were made available after 1999.

30

20

10

0

-10

-20

-30

-40

-50

-60

1996–97

1997–98

1998–99

1999–00

2000–01

2001–02

2002–03

2003–04

2004–05

2005–06

2006–07

2007–08

2008–09

School enrollment, change from 1987 (percent)

School year

1987–88

1988–89

1989–90

1990–91

1991–92

1992–93

1993–94

1994–95

1995–96

Oregon

Coos County

Curry County

Jackson County

Josephine County

Oregon

Coos County

Curry County

Jackson County

Josephine County

200

175

150

125

100

75

50

25

0

-25

1996–97

1997–98

1998–99

1999–00

2000–01

2001–02

2002–03

2003–04

2004–05

2005–06

2006–07

2007–08

2008–09

School year

1987–88

1988–89

1989–90

1990–91

1991–92

1992–93

1993–94

1994–95

1995–96

Free or reduced-price lunch eligibility

change from 1986 (percent)
153

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Forest Service databases, and federal Web sites, including Recovery.gov and USAspending.gov. Socioeconomic 

indicator data describing the local population and economy 

of the case-study area came from a number of sources, such 

as the U.S. Census, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the 

Bureau of Economic Analysis. For more information on 

study methods and data sources, see the appendix. 

Project Recipients

Hazardous Fuel Reduction

The majority of Recovery Act fuel reduction work in 

southwestern Oregon has been labor intensive. The terrain 

and forest conditions require on-the-ground crews who are 

skilled at thinning with chain saws, piling thinned material, pruning limbs to eliminate ladder fuels, and burning 

the piles when fire conditions permit (fig. 9-8). More than 

20 contracting businesses in this region have some or all 

of these capabilities. This density of businesses in forestry 

support work creates intense competition for work on the 

RRSNF. For several contractors, working on Recovery Act 

projects “at home” on the RRSNF was an atypical experience, as the contractors frequently travel across the West 

over the course of the year to perform this sort of work. 

These businesses range in size and experience. For 

example, Grayback Forestry has more than 200 employees 

in the region and has been active for over 30 years. Some of 

Figure 9-8—A worker piles thinned material at the Siskiyou 

Mountains Ranger District.

these businesses have absorbed former loggers who became 

unemployed in the 1990s. Many of the owners and workers 

in forestry support are Hispanic (Sarathy 2006). Contractors 

may have resided in Oregon for decades and established 

families, be seasonal laborers who piece together a year’s 

work between forestry and agriculture, or be guest workers 

under the H2B program. They uniformly suggested that 

Recovery Act contracts allowed them to maintain jobs 

that would otherwise be lost during the recent economic 

downturn. 

Funds for fuel reduction came in two phases (table 9-1). 

The first phase was for “shovel-ready” or National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)-approved projects to take place 

in the most economically distressed areas in Josephine, 

Coos, and Curry Counties. The RRSNF awarded three contracts rapidly, without bids, by March 2009 to contractors in 

their indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contract 

pool. Through this process, two contracts were awarded to 

Grayback Forestry from Josephine County and one to Diamond Fire from adjacent Douglas County. One interviewee 

reported controversy because a work opportunity in Curry 

County went to a Josephine County contractor. However, 

there were no known forestry support businesses in Curry 

County that could conduct this work. 

In addition to the early contracts, the forest also created 

agreements with the Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF) 

and Josephine County Forestry Department. Through two 

agreements, several ODF foresters were engaged to lay 

out the planned fuels work, inspect work quality, serve as 

point of contact between the contractors and the Forest 

Service, and supervise contractors doing pile burning after 

fire season and in future years. This enabled the ODF to 

maintain the valuable capacity of several of its foresters in 

the face of a statewide forestry budgetary crisis (fig. 9-9). 

At this stage, the forest also entered into an agreement for 

county foresters to conduct layout work on the Wild Rivers 

Ranger District. Finally, the forest created one agreement 

with Ashland-based Lomakatsi Restoration Project, Inc. 

as part of an existing stewardship agreement in Josephine 

County. In 2008, the Wild Rivers Ranger District had begun 

Emily Jane Davis
154

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

a 10-year, 10,000-acre master cost-share stewardship agreement intended to achieve forest restoration through community collaboration, workforce training, and bolstering of 

local restoration capacity.

After April 2009, Recovery Act contracts administered 

on the RRSNF were handled by the regional Economic 

Recovery Operations Center (EROC) in Sandy, Oregon. 

The Forest Service had four EROCs across the country to 

help national forests manage their increased administrative burden. The EROC was responsible for the awarding 

of contracts. During the second phase of fuel reduction 

projects beginning in March 2010, the EROC awarded 42 

contracts, the majority of which were performed in Jackson 

and Josephine Counties. The forest had the discretion to 

plan and lay out the fuel reduction jobs. Contracts ranged 

Figure 9-9—The skills of Oregon Department of Forestry staff 

were crucial to the layout and supervision of American Recovery 

and Reinvestment Act fuel reduction projects.

Table 9-1— Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest Recovery Act project recipients and funding

 Total funding Work locations Funding 

Recipients Project name and description amount (county) mechanism

Dollars

Lomakatsi Restoration Reducing threat of wildfires in 303,900 Josephine Agreements,

Project, Inc. central and southwest Oregon, contracts

Oregon Department of Forestry WFM-0600-1 Josephine

Grayback Forestry, Inc. Curry, Josephine

Diamond Road Maintenance Curry, Coos

Multiple recipients Eight-county hazardous fuel 28,125,000 Forestwide Agreements, 

reduction, WFM-06XX-01HF contracts

Gage IT Construction, LLC Regionwide road 804,000 Forestwide Contracts

Agness Company deferred maintenance, Curry

CIM-06XX-01R

Federal Highway Administration Agness Road phase 2 5,600,000 Coos Contracts

Johnson Rock Products road reconstruction, Curry

CIM-0610-02R

Federal Highway Administration Upper Chetco River bridge 1,100,000 Curry Agreements

abutment replacement, 

CIM-0610-12R

Multiple recipients Terrestrial habitat enhancement 1,400,000 Forestwide Agreements, 

botany and wildlife (meadows), contracts

WFM-0610-04FHF

Student Conservation Association Pacific Crest trail maintenance, 148,000 Jackson Agreements

Northwest Service Academy CIM-06XX-04T Jackson

EERG (engineering remediation) Blue Ledge Copper Mine toxic 8,500,000 Jackson Contracts

waste clean-up, CIM-0610-01A

Emily Jane Davis
155

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

from approximately $100,000 to $1,000,000, allowing 

accessibility for contractors of different sizes. The EROC 

only awarded four of these contracts to businesses outside 

of the four-county region. Agency staff and contractors 

expressed that the EROC understood the importance of 

the Recovery Act to local businesses. With the exception 

of these four contracts, all of the contractors were from 

Jackson and Josephine Counties. On the Powers Ranger 

I was afraid we’d get on the phone and they’d say, 

“we’re cranking out the contracts, we’re doing it 

the most expeditious way that we can, and tough 

luck.” And that was not the case at all. They said 

“let’s talk it all through.”

—Interviewee

District, a contracting officer representative explained that 

she and the EROC sought a Coos County-based business to 

perform a recent contract, but could not find any. 

Finally, the forest entered into three agreements in this 

second phase to provide youth crew involvement, pile burning, and project management. In addition to its stewardship 

agreement on the Wild Rivers District, Lomakatsi received 

a task order at this stage of funding to conduct fuel reduction and restoration as part of the Ashland Forest Resiliency 

Project, an ongoing collaborative effort to treat overstocked 

stands and protect diverse values in the Ashland watershed. 

Meadow Restoration and Botanical and 

Wildlife Enhancement

Economic recovery spending on meadow restoration and 

enhancement work was much less than on fuel reduction 

(table 9-1). However, Forest Service staff focused 

considerable effort on ensuring diverse contract recipients 

and creating broad community benefits in awarding these 

projects. Through this work, they provided opportunities 

to small nonprofits and local businesses. On the Powers 

Ranger District, the Coos Watershed Association entered 

into an agreement to carry out thinning and piling to 

address meadow encroachment. This local nonprofit 

organization employs a number of former forest industry 

workers for skilled ecological restoration work in Coos 

County. On the Gold Beach Ranger District, a Curry 

County-based nursery received a contract to propagate 

rare native plants for botanical enhancement. On the Wild 

Rivers Ranger District, a local environmental education 

nonprofit, the Siskiyou Field Institute, entered an agreement 

to organize a youth crew for meadow restoration and 

maintenance of interpretive sites of botanical interest in 

Josephine County. On the High Cascades Ranger District, 

a Jackson County contractor was awarded a contract for 

thinning, piling, and burning for meadow restoration, and a 

local botanist will collect data on the success of native plant 

reintroduction.

Large Road Projects and Deferred Maintenance

The RRSNF awarded four contracts and one agreement for 

two major road projects and three deferred maintenance 

jobs (table 9-1). The major road projects are reconstruction of sections of the Agness Road (Forest Route 33) and 

repair of a slipping bridge abutment on the Chetco River. 

Choice of contractor for these reconstruction projects is 

the responsibility of the Federal Highway Administration. 

These contracts had not been awarded as of August 1, 

2010. However, local companies have captured the three 

deferred maintenance projects. A company from Coos Bay 

is performing paving on the northern section of the Agness 

Road, which connects Powers to the Curry coast. A Jackson 

County construction business has begun forestwide regulatory sign replacement. A contractor in the small community 

of Agness has been awarded a contract for culvert replacement on a major forest road in Curry County. This business 

provides family-wage jobs in the rural region east of Gold 

Beach where the majority of employment opportunities are 

lower paying tourism and recreation jobs. 

Pacific Crest Trail Maintenance

The Student Conservation Association and Northwest 

Service Academy entered into agreements to perform trail 

maintenance work on the High Cascades Ranger District 

(fig. 9-10). Although these organizations are based in Seattle 

and southwestern Washington, respectively, they trained 

and managed crews that included some local youth. 
156

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Blue Ledge Copper Mine Cleanup

This project was funded for $8,500,000 under the Recovery 

Act and is managed through a memorandum of understanding between the Forest Service and the Environmental 

Figure 9-10—The High Cascade Ranger District in the mountainous eastern side of the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest.

Table 9-2–Full-time equivalent jobs reported in quarterly reports, Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

Number of Reporting period

contracts/ Feb.–Sept. Oct.–Dec. Jan.–Mar. Apr.–June July–Sept.

Work type agreements 2009 2009 2010 2010 2010

Number of jobsa

Reducing threat of wildfires in

central and southwest Oregon, 53 contracts, 35.85 57.05 195.76 430.59 400.19

WFM-0600-1, and eight-county 7 agreements (3 contracts, (11 contracts, (10 contracts, (17 contracts, (16 contracts,

hazardous fuel reduction, 2 agreements) 4 agreements) 4 agreements) 5 agreements) 2 agreements)

WFM-06XX-01HF

Terrestrial habitat enhancement— 11 contracts, — — 0 7.84 14.91

botany and wildlife (meadows), 3 agreements (2 contracts) (3 contracts, 

WFM-0610-04FHF 2 agreements)

Deferred road maintenance 2 contracts — — — 0 5.0

CIM-06XX-01R (1 contract)

Agness Road phase 2— 2 contracts — — — 0.47 1.95

road reconstruction, (1 contract) (1 contract)

CIM-0610-02R

Upper Chetco River bridge 1 agreement — — — — —

abutment replacement,

CIM-0610-12R

Blue Ledge Copper Mine toxic 3 contracts — — — — 44.9

waste cleanup, (3 contracts)

CIM-0610-01A

Pacific Crest Trail maintenance, 3 agreements — — 0 0 2.07

CIM-06XX-04T (3 agreements)

Note: See appendix for reporting method.

a A dash (—) indicates that no quarterly report was available.

Protection Agency. Three contracts for toxic discharge 

remediation and stream rehabilitation were awarded to a 

northern California business based in Contra Costa County, 

roughly 360 miles south of Medford. This work is equipment intensive rather than labor intensive, and requires a 

contractor with heavy machine capacity. 

Socioeconomic Benefits

The benefits of Recovery Act spending on the RRSNF have 

included job creation and retention (table 9-2), worker training opportunities, a small amount of biomass utilization, 

distribution of economic benefits across counties, reduced 

community wildfire risk, stronger collaborative relationships, investment in local community capacity, enhancement of visitor and resident national forest experiences, and 

maintenance of state and county forestry resources.

Emily Jane Davis
157

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Jobs Created and Retained

Recovery Act spending on the RRSNF has supported jobs 

in forestry support, seed propagation, road maintenance, 

trail maintenance, and environmental remediation. There 

are different wages, working conditions, and duration 

associated with each type of work. The majority of these 

jobs are manual labor and seasonal in nature. 

Forestry support work in a landscape like the RRSNF 

is inherently labor intensive and generates high numbers 

of jobs per person-hours. This region is home to a high 

concentration of forestry support businesses and a large 

manual labor pool. The RRSNF was an ideal location for 

Recovery Act funding because of these circumstances. Several contractors added employees to complete Recovery Act 

fuel reduction projects. Lomakatsi and the Siskiyou Project 

worked with the Wild Rivers Ranger District to provide 

workforce training and employment opportunities to 130 

workers on the Hope Mountain Stewardship Project. Such 

stewardship approaches can help maximize the socioeconomic benefits of economic recovery investments (Charnley 

et al. 2009). Grayback Forestry hired 40 additional workers 

to complete their economic recovery projects. Grayback 

reported receiving hundreds of calls expressing interest 

in employment from across the country. Every contractor 

interviewed said that the main benefit of Recovery Act 

opportunities was keeping their existing crews working, 

and that without the economic recovery work, they would 

have been forced to lay off employees (fig. 9-11). Contractors took different approaches to completing fuels work on 

the ground. Some deployed larger crews of 25 across a unit, 

and others used crews of 4 to 10 to work on sections of a 

unit at a time. For example, 3Bs Forestry reported 9.43 jobs 

created for one 375-acre fuels contract, and 26.95 jobs for 

a 470-acre fuels project, showing how even within a single 

company, different strategies were employed. Jobs created 

tended to correlate with large numbers of acres. Cutting 

Edge Forestry reported the most jobs created per contract: 

52.14 jobs for 840 acres of treatment. But some larger 

contracts did not create as many jobs; Summitt Forests 

reported 15.21 jobs for a 706-acre contract. Business owners 

explained that there was a tension between several considerations: efficiency, cost-effectiveness, type of terrain, 

appropriate levels of supervision for varied crew sizes, and 

maximizing job duration for employees. They suggested 

that smaller crews could prolong job duration and quality 

of work, but that it was not always financially feasible, and 

larger crews were more efficient.

Road construction and maintenance tend to offer higher 

wages and job quality than forestry support jobs. The 

Davis-Bacon Act requires standard pay levels for federal 

projects in construction, heavy equipment, and highway 

work. These wages are set according to job type. Businesses 

such as the Agness Company and Johnson Rock Products 

must pay these wages to their employees on economic 

recovery projects (fig. 9-12). Crew members on these road 

projects are therefore earning quality pay, and, in turn, their 

spending trickles into their local economies. 

Jobs in meadow restoration, habitat enhancement, and 

trail work went to contractors and to nonprofit organizations 

that carried out the work using youth crews. For example, 

Figure 9-11—Contractors in the area were able to stay in business 

throughout the recession thanks to recovery projects.

Emily Jane Davis
158

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Curry County staff worked with the Oregon Youth Conservation Corps to create 12 jobs (reported in interview) 

in meadow restoration and botanical enhancement. The 

involvement of youth-oriented nonprofits enabled local 

youth in Jackson, Josephine, and Curry Counties to earn 

seasonal wages, and in cases of extreme poverty, contribute 

income to their families, many of which have unemployed 

parents. However, the jobs themselves are project based and 

of limited duration. 

Training and Workforce Development

Recovery Act funds provided several opportunities for 

workforce training. As part of its Recovery Act-funded 

work, Lomakatsi provided an indepth forestry training 

course to build the technical and labor skills of 32 new 

workers from Cave Junction, Takilma, and O’Brien, 

communities in the economically distressed Illinois Valley 

(Lomakatsi Restoration Project and Siskiyou Project 2009). 

New employees to Grayback Forestry, which is a member of 

the Oregon Training and Apprenticeship Program, received 

formal classroom and field training on skills such as first 

aid and chain-saw handling. Grayback employees have an 

option to apprentice as a journeyman forest worker. Workers 

with this certification have developed higher levels of skill 

and capacity to capture future employment opportunities. 

Figure 9-12—The Agness Road Company, from the small community of Agness, captured road maintenance opportunities 

through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

Youth working on trails in Jackson County and meadow 

and botanical area enhancement in Josephine and Curry 

Counties acquired new labor and technical skills, learned 

responsibility, and were able to build connections with local 

and state nonprofits. 

Biomass Utilization

Biomass utilization to help offset costs of fuel reduction 

treatments was possible on the 220-acre Page Snow Park 

unit under the Wild Rivers Master Stewardship Agreement. 

Lomakatsi has so far treated 110 acres of 60-year-old plantation stands. These older second-growth conditions permitted some commercial harvest of small-diameter (less than 

12 inches in diameter) trees. South Coast Forest Products in 

Brookings and Rough and Ready in Cave Junction utilized 

this material for lumber and biomass cogeneration. 

Distribution of Economic Benefits

An important dimension of economic recovery spending 

on the RRSNF was that Forest Service staff actively sought 

to distribute recovery benefits to economically distressed 

communities and to ensure equal access to opportunities. 

The forest supervisor’s office dedicated the initial $3 

million in fuel reduction funds to projects in Josephine, 

Coos, and Curry Counties where unemployment rates 

were the highest (fig. 9-13). On the Gold Beach Ranger 

District, both the district ranger and a county commissioner 

prioritized spreading youth work opportunities and 

trickle-down impacts from fuel reduction evenly across 

Curry County. Businesses and agency staff expressed that 

essential rural infrastructure such as schools and hospitals 

indirectly benefited from any increased flow of resources in 

their communities. 

Reduced Community Wildfire Risk

Thinning reduces the fire danger facing rural communities 

and helps restore the ecological values of the forest for multiple uses. This is of particular importance in the Ashland 

watershed. The boost that Recovery Act funds gave to the 

Ashland Forest Resiliency project has helped move forward 

a plan for water supply protection and forest restoration that 

has the support and participation of diverse stakeholders. 

Emily Jane Davis
159

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Figure 9-13—Coastal communities in Coos and Curry Counties have growing tourism and recreation sectors, but still suffer high 

unemployment levels as a result of the declining timber industry.

Strengthened Collaborative Relationships

The RRSNF has used Recovery Act fuel reduction 

funds to further stewardship projects that are grounded 

in collaboration. Collaboration has been crucial to 

forest management across southwestern Oregon. As one 

interviewee remarked, “forest restoration in a sensitive 

watershed really, really needs community engagement.” 

Partnerships with The Nature Conservancy, Lomakatsi, 

Southern Oregon University, and the City of Ashland have 

brought diverse capacities and skills to the Ashland Forest 

Resiliency project. The City of Ashland had previously 

facilitated community participation in the NEPA process 

for this project under the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 

2003. Another example is the Wild Rivers Ranger District, 

where Lomakatsi and the Siskiyou Project have served as 

bridges between communities and the Forest Service in 

an area that has seen high levels of conflict around forest 

management. Their emphasis is on building trust and 

finding solutions to treat the land while bringing diverse 

benefits from Recovery Act resources to the region. 

Investment in Local Communities

Agency staff worked to involve local businesses, youth 

crews, and nonprofit partners in meadow restoration, 

habitat enhancement, and trail maintenance. These partners 

expressed that the National Forest and EROC “got it,” and 

were willing to work to ensure local benefits. Enhancement 

work on the Wild Rivers Ranger District brought together 

the regional Jobs Council to furnish a youth crew, and the 

Siskiyou Field Institute and Klamath Bird Observatory 

to coordinate project management. Youth performing 

trail maintenance, meadow restoration, and botanical 

and wildlife enhancement received training in labor and 

technical skills. 

Emily Jane Davis

We didn’t want to spend these stimulus dollars, we 

wanted to invest them. And not only invest them so 

that we have a more resilient workforce, but so we 

have a better functioning community. So that’s why 

we involve the local nonprofits, the local governments, and the private sector.”

—Joel King, District Ranger (retired), 

Wild Rivers Ranger District
160

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Enhancement of Resident and Visitor Experiences

Youth crews also provided enhancement of interpretive sites 

for community and visitor education and enjoyment through 

their work on the Wild Rivers Ranger District. In Jackson 

County, maintenance on the Pacific Crest Trail on the High 

Cascades Ranger District has improved the safety and value 

of a nationally renowned, heavily used trail. Improvements 

to road infrastructure along the Agness Road and Chetco 

River Road in Coos and Curry Counties, popular recreation 

corridors on the Wild and Scenic Rogue and Chetco Rivers, 

will greatly enhance visitor experience and safety when 

traveling with boat trailers and campers. Additionally, 

these projects will increase the ability of the communities 

of Agness and Powers to access outside resources, travel 

safely, and ensure that routes are passable for emergency 

vehicles. 

Maintenance of State and County 

Forestry Capacity

The RRSNF also sought to provide Recovery Act benefit to 

state and local government agencies by creating agreements 

with the Oregon Department of Forestry and Josephine 

County Forestry Department. Two agreements with the 

ODF for fuel reduction work helped maintain jobs for 

several ODF foresters in the face of a statewide forestry 

budgetary crisis. At this stage, the forest also entered into 

an agreement for Josephine County foresters to conduct 

layout work on the Wild Rivers Ranger District. With the 

gradual loss of its traditional timber revenues since the 

1990s, Josephine County struggles with administration of 

key county services. Economic recovery resources have 

helped support the county’s important forestry capacity.

Environmental Benefits

Hazardous Fuel Reduction

Hazardous fuel reduction projects allow treatment of 

overstocked stands, a return to natural condition with a 

hope of reintroducing fire, and an opportunity to bring 

treatments toward a landscape scale (fig. 9-14). Fuel loads 

are high in southwestern Oregon, but the difficult terrain 

makes treatment costly. Recovery Act funds have enabled 

the Forest Service to move ahead in important areas 

along transportation and recreation corridors and near 

communities. Having these resources has also afforded a 

more cohesive, landscape-scale view of forest restoration 

rather than “placing postage stamps of treatment here 

and there.” For example, the Hope Mountain Stewardship 

Project, which began before the Recovery Act as a 30-acre 

demonstration, ultimately treated almost 800 acres with an 

infusion of economic recovery funds. The RRSNF was well 

prepared with potential projects when Recovery Act funds 

became available because it had focused in recent years on 

obtaining NEPA approval for large project areas. 

Agreements with Lomakatsi on the Wild Rivers and 

Siskiyou Mountains Ranger Districts accomplish more than 

simply treating more acres. Because Lomakatsi emphasizes 

skilled workforce training, the work on the Hope Mountain 

Stewardship Agreement and the Ashland Forest Resiliency 

project will enhance local capacity for performing quality 

restoration. Through worker training, collaborators on the 

Hope Mountain Project formed an ecological restoration 

advisory team of experts and local stakeholders to monitor 

ongoing work and evaluate future proposals. The Siskiyou 

Project, a local nonprofit, developed monitoring plots that 

will help partners on the project to adaptively learn and 

adjust management practices as necessary. The Ashland 

Forest Resiliency Project will also ensure protection of Ashland’s watershed, late-successional reserves, and old-growth 

forest from severe wildfire impacts. 

Figure 9-14—Once fuel reduction work is completed, the forest is 

less vulnerable to high-severity fire.

Emily Jane Davis
161

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Meadow Restoration and Botanical and 

Wildlife Enhancement

Overstocked stands have caused the loss of unique meadow 

habitats and native species on the RRSNF. Restoration 

projects are helping to reestablish native plants and grasses 

and protect and expand winter range for elk and other 

species of ecological and game significance (fig. 9-15). 

Meadow restoration work on the Gold Beach Ranger 

District has also given a local nursery the opportunity to 

practice rare plant propagation.

Blue Ledge Copper Mine Cleanup

This project is anticipated to improve water quality, aid 

restoration of aquatic life lost because of mine discharge, 

and prevent sulfuric acid and toxic metals from reaching 

the greater Applegate River drainage.

Effects on the Agency

During the first round of hazardous fuel reduction funds 

in March 2009, the RRSNF acquisition management staff 

dealt with contract administration. For all Recovery Act 

work after April 2009, contract awarding and administration took place through the EROC Northwest. The RRSNF 

ranger districts planned and laid out the fuel reduction units. 

This allowed the districts to create contracts accessible to 

local contractors of different sizes. Ranger districts also 

worked with the EROC. The supervisor’s office provided 

overall program management, coordinated with the regional 

office, and supported the districts as needed. Despite the 

central role of EROC, workloads from the Recovery Act 

were still high on the forest. Although a few ranger districts 

hired one or two temporary staff, they largely shouldered 

the increased work requirements on top of their regular 

program. The agency sought to prioritize creating jobs in 

the private and nonprofit sectors as opposed to jobs in their 

offices. 

Staff at the forest supervisor’s office and all five ranger 

districts greatly appreciated the infusion of economic 

recovery funds on their forest. The amount of funding for 

hazardous fuel reduction alone was 20 times the size of 

the forest’s annual appropriated budget available for fuel 

reduction work. This allowed the accomplishment of highpriority work that has been “on the shelf.” On the Powers 

and Gold Beach ranger districts, there has typically been 

little fuel reduction, but the districts are at risk of mixed 

and high-severity fires in some of their forest types. These 

ranger districts were enthusiastic about their ability to treat 

important areas. 

Figure 9-15—Open oak meadows are found across the Rogue 

River-Siskiyou National Forest but are threatened by conifer 

encroachment.

Emily Jane Davis
162

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

Challenges

Despite the extensive benefits that Recovery Act funding 

has brought to the RRSNF and its local communities, there 

also have been challenges. 

Lack of Business Capacity in Coos and 

Curry Counties

Although the RRSNF enabled a large number of local companies to work on labor-intensive projects, these businesses 

are almost entirely in Jackson and Josephine Counties. 

There are hardly any known forestry support contractors 

in Coos or Curry Counties. Communities like Powers once 

had a base of small contractors who worked with the Forest 

Service. Depressed forest industry conditions and difficulty 

in accessing changing federal bid mechanisms have eliminated many of these local businesses. This situation is illustrative of the challenges that “public lands communities” 

located in or adjacent to large tracts of federally managed 

lands face. Curry County is 69 percent public land. Without 

measures to support and redevelop local business capacity, 

the ability of its communities to benefit from their natural 

resource base is limited. The impacts from Recovery Act 

fuel reduction work in these counties have been solely from 

crews purchasing supplies, food, and lodging. However, 

there are strong local construction contractors in this area. 

Companies from Coos Bay and Agness were able to capture 

two road maintenance projects. 

Job Quality and Durability in Forestry 

Support Work

Recovery Act funding has provided opportunities for 

contractors to maintain crews, and in some cases, add jobs 

and equipment. However, the concentration of contracting businesses in Jackson and Josephine Counties created 

highly competitive bidding conditions for this work. Forest 

Service staff reported receiving over 13 bids per contract. 

Agency staff and contractors acknowledged that bids were 

very low, particularly in the first few months of Recovery 

Act activities. One contractor commented that “our bids are 

getting very, very low...it was shocking to me. It doesn’t 

make sense to us how other companies get these jobs without losing money.” All contractors interviewed discussed 

the challenge of low bids. The ability of contractors to cover 

their costs, ensure safe working conditions, and pay fair 

wages through such low bids is uncertain. Contractors who 

held more than one contract reported that they attempted to 

balance losses on difficult jobs with gains on others. 

Another challenge is job quality and duration in 

forestry support jobs. Labor-intensive jobs in forestry 

support can have poor working conditions. Wages, benefits, 

training, and safety provisions can differ greatly from 

contractor to contractor. There is evidence that restoration 

work can create skilled family-wage jobs (Nielsen-Pincus 

and Moseley 2010). However, such quality jobs tend to be 

those similar to traditional forest industry or road construction activities, such as thinning larger commercial-value 

logs from plantations or using heavy equipment to restore 

a stream channel. Jobs such as thinning and piling tend 

to earn lower wages (Moseley and Reyes 2006), although 

workers on federal service contracts are paid fixed service 

wages (fig. 9-16). It is rare for a forestry support worker to 

Figure 9-16—Workers hand-thin madrone with chain saws.

Emily Jane Davis
163

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

hold a family-wage, year-round position. A large proportion 

of the forestry support workforce in southwestern Oregon 

is Hispanic. Hispanic workers can be American citizens or 

landed immigrants, but many are migrant laborers or guest 

workers under the H2B program. Studies of contracting 

work across the West have found that Hispanic workers are 

more likely than White workers to be seasonal laborers who 

travel far from their homes, lack benefits, and experience 

unsafe working conditions (Moseley 2006, Sarathy 2008). 

There is also some concern that guest workers who may not 

stay in the region are not appropriate recipients of Recovery 

Act job opportunities. Public perception of the economic 

recovery often assumes that Recovery Act dollars should 

benefit local communities through durable family-wage job 

creation. 

Actualizing an Integrated Restoration Economy

Because costs of transport remain high and infrastructure 

is limited, most thinned material from Recovery Act fuel 

reduction projects is burned in the woods rather than 

utilized as biomass. The exception was thinning in the 

Page Snow Park unit, on the Wild Rivers Ranger District, 

where older second-growth materials were sent to South 

Coast Forest Products and Rough and Ready for lumber and 

woody biomass. However, extensive biomass utilization 

has been difficult in this area because of the rugged, remote 

terrain and high costs of transport to processing facilities. 

This means that the majority of jobs created through fuel 

reduction in southwestern Oregon have been at the removal 

end of the forest restoration economy, where they are 

limited in duration. Although the biomass workforce and 

markets are in their infancy, processing and green energy 

at the utilization end promise skilled work opportunities for 

rural communities and a market to make ecological restoration pay. At a fundamental level, the abysmal timber and 

housing markets temporarily limit large financial returns 

on Forest Service Recovery Act investments, but lessons 

learned from biomass utilization on the Page Snow Park 

project may eventually help communities move to capture 

alternative value streams, if there is social support. 

Key Findings

Contracts and agreements of different sizes helped 

spread benefits. By breaking down a project into different 

sets of activities and a range of sizes, the RRSNF created 

opportunities to engage a range of contract skills, equipment, and size. 

Recovery Act work opportunities helped maintain 

forestry support job opportunities in the region. 

Although only a few contractors reported adding jobs to 

complete Recovery Act work, all contractors interviewed 

indicated that the opportunities that the work provided 

kept them from reducing their existing workforce. 

Recovery Act funding provided crucial momentum to 

existing forest restoration and stewardship contract 

projects. Recovery Act funds contributed to the Ashland 

Forest Resiliency (AFR) project and to work under the Wild 

Rivers Master Stewardship Agreement, which are both multiyear projects. These resources helped support the ongoing 

collaborative AFR process, and allowed the Hope Mountain 

Stewardship Project to expand its acres treated. 

Lessons Learned

Proper time and coordination is necessary to design 

projects to maximize local benefit. Although “shovelready” projects in the initial round of fuel reduction money 

were targeted to distressed counties, there was a rush to get 

the contracts out, which meant that there was limited time 

to consider breaking them up into sizes accessible to smaller 

contractors, to ensuring community collaboration on forest 

management decisions, or to develop any new relationships 

with nonprofit partners. Meadow restoration and enhancement funding, which came out more slowly and later in 

the year, gave district offices the time to reach out to local 

partners and establish arrangements that would maximize 

community benefits.

Recovery Act project outcomes will reflect the socioeconomic opportunities and constraints of their local 

context. The benefits of economic recovery projects will 

be multiplied if they are invested in a place with existing 

partnerships and a commitment to building the capacity 
164

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

for a restoration economy. Stewardship agreements and 

contracts, biomass utilization components, nonprofit 

partnerships, and county partnerships all have the ability 

to put not only job creation but also retention and workforce development at the forefront of economic activity. 

Examples:

A. Through a preexisting master stewardship agreement and two key nonprofit partnerships on the 

Wild Rivers Ranger District, Recovery Act funds 

were invested in several fuel reduction projects with 

workforce training as a central objective. As a result 

of years of collaboration, the trust and cooperation 

that could ensure broad benefits from the recovery 

projects were already in place.

B. A Curry County commissioner and the Gold Beach 

District Ranger actively sought youth and jobs 

corps organizations and ensured that the EROC 

understood their desire to offer opportunities to 

local partners. 

Economic recovery projects are an opportunity to learn 

valuable lessons for the future. In the future, these experiences could offer valuable evidence about the catalytic 

role of the Recovery Act in collaborative efforts. Efforts to 

coordinate, implement, and monitor both projects are also 

building community understanding of and involvement in 

forest restoration. The unique model that the partners are 

using to leverage their individual capacities and accomplish 

work that requires social support will be a valuable source 

of lessons for future projects.

Acknowledgments

We thank the interviewees who provided their time to 

this project, Rob Budge and Debra Globig for their helpful 

reviews, Sophia Polasky for gathering socioeconomic 

data and manuscript preparation, and Nina Rinaldi for 

interview transcription. Funding for this project was 

provided by USDA Forest Service Research Joint Venture 

Agreement 10-JV-11260489-074, and by Sustainable 

Northwest through a grant from the U.S. Endowment 

for Forestry and Communities.

References

Charnley, S.; Moseley, C.; Donoghue, E. 2009. 

Implementing the economic stimulus on national 

forest lands: using hazardous fuel reduction to create 

local jobs. Briefing Paper No. 16. Eugene, OR: 

University of Oregon, Ecosystem Workforce Program. 

http://aaa.uoregon.edu/images/userfiles/file/BP%2016.

pdf. (July 2010).

Lomakatsi Restoration Project and Siskiyou Project. 

2009. Restoring sustainability: 2009 annual report 

of the Wild Rivers Master Stewardship Agreement. 

http://www.siskiyou.org/c-far/MSAAR2010.pdf. 

(July 2010).

Moseley, C. 2006. Working conditions in labor-intensive 

forestry jobs in Oregon. Working Paper No. 14. Eugene, 

OR: University of Oregon, Ecosystem Workforce 

Program. http://ewp.uoregon.edu/pdfs/wp14.pdf. 

(July 2010).

Moseley, C.; Reyes, Y. 2006. Job quality in logging 

and forestry services in Oregon. Working Paper No. 

13. Eugene, OR: University of Oregon, Ecosystem 

Workforce Program. http://ewp.uoregon.edu/pdfs/wp13.

pdf. (July 2010).

National Atlas and Bureau of Land Management. 2009. 

Map layer information: public land survey system. 

http://www.nationalatlas.gov/atlasftp.html#plss00p. 

(July 2010). 

Nielsen-Pincus, M.; Moseley, C. 2010. Economic and 

employment impacts of forest and watershed restoration 

in Oregon. Working paper No. 24. Eugene, OR: 

University of Oregon, Ecosystem Workforce Program. 

(Spring 2010).

Sarathy, B. 2006. The latinization of forest management 

work in southern Oregon: a case from the Rogue Valley. 

Journal of Forestry. 104(7): 359–365. 

Sarathy, B. 2008. The marginalization of pineros in the 

Pacific Northwest. Society and Natural Resources. 

21(8): 671–686. 
165

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census 

[USDC BC]. 2010a. Annual estimates of the resident 

population for counties: April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2009. 

http://www.census.gov/popest/counties/CO-EST2009-01.

html. (4 Oct. 2010).

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 

[USDC BC]. 2010b. Small area income and poverty 

estimates, state and county data: 1989, 1993, 1995–2008. 

http://www.census.gov/did/www/saipe/data/statecounty/

index.html. (4 Oct. 2010).

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for 

Education Statistics [USDE NCES]. 2010. Common 

core of data. http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/. (18 Oct. 2010).

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics 

[USDL BLS]. 2010. Local area unemployment statistic 

program. http://www.bls.gov/lau. (4 Oct. 2010).
166

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

This study was conducted using a case-study approach, a 

common research method applied when social scientists 

want to study the who, what, how, and why of contemporary 

events within a real-life context (Yin 2003). In this case, the 

research team was interested in how USDA Forest Service 

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (hereafter 

referred to as Recovery Act) projects were developed and 

carried out, why they were chosen, who was involved, how 

they affected the agency, what the environmental impacts 

were on lands where they were implemented, and what the 

economic and social effects were for project recipients, 

employees, and rural communities. The research team 

was asked by Forest Service Washington office Recovery 

Act staff to conduct case studies in several states that had 

received a substantial amount of Forest Service Recovery 

Act funding (which totaled $1.15 billion). Eight states were 

selected: Alabama, Arizona, California, Idaho, Michigan, 

Montana, North Carolina, and Oregon.

Case-study sites within each state were identified 

based on the following criteria: (1) relatively high county 

economic distress ranking (see USDA FS 2009), (2) rural 

location, (3) high level of Forest Service investment, 

(4) early implementation and significant on-the-ground 

outcomes by summer 2010. We identified sites that met 

as many of these criteria as possible by talking to the 

Recovery Act point(s) of contact in each Forest Service 

regional office. We then talked to the point of contact for 

each recommended case study to get a sense of the status 

of project implementation; anticipated environmental, 

economic, and social outcomes; and the local Forest 

Service unit’s interest in being involved in an assessment of 

socioeconomic impacts. The research team met to discuss 

the recommended projects for each state. In consultation 

with Washington office Recovery Act staff, we chose case 

studies that best met our criteria, that represented a range of 

project types (e.g., fuel reduction, invasive species management, road or trail construction, biomass utilization, facility 

improvements), and that involved different branches of the 

Forest Service (National Forest System, State and Private 

Forestry, and Research and Development). 

Qualitative data about the projects and their effects 

were gathered using semistructured, face-to-face interviews. We used purposive sampling to select interviewees 

(Lindlof and Taylor 2002). This method is appropriate 

when scientists need to identify key informants who have 

specialized knowledge about the event being studied. 

Working with the local point of contact, we identified Forest 

Service employees who had knowledge of how the project 

was developed and carried out, partners who had received 

Recovery Act funds and participated in project implementation, and individuals who benefited from jobs created or 

retained as a result of the project. Most interviews were 

recorded and transcribed for analysis purposes. Additional 

qualitative data were collected from secondary sources such 

as local newspapers, existing socioeconomic studies, and 

Forest Service documents.

Quantitative data about social and economic conditions in the case-study locations were obtained from the 

U.S. Census Bureau’s Population Division and Small Area 

Income and Poverty Estimates Program, the American 

Community Survey, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the 

National Center for Education Statistics, the Bureau of 

Economic Analysis, and the Department of Agriculture’s 

Economic Research Service to help understand the state 

and local socioeconomic context. Table A-1 describes these 

sources and the data that came from them, in more detail.

Quantitative data about Recovery Act projects 

highlighted in the case studies were obtained from 

corporate databases including USAspending and Recovery.

gov. Table A-2 describes these sources in more detail. 

Figures for number of jobs reported came from quarterly 

reports submitted to Recovery.gov by award recipients. 

Recovery Act investment by state was calculated using 

information provided by the Forest Service Washington 

office, current through September 8, 2009. In states that 

received funding for multistate projects, the total investment 

Appendix
167

Socioeconomic Assessment of Forest Service American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects: Eight Case Studies

Table A-1—Sources of socioeconomic data used in case studies

Source Data Web address

Population Division, U.S. Census Bureau Population estimates including total http://www.census.gov/

population, population by age group, popest/counties/asrh/

population by race, and origin.

1990, and 2000–2009.

Local Area Unemployment Statistics Monthly unemployment, 1990–2010. http://www.bls.gov/lau/

Program, Bureau of Labor Statistics

Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates Percentage of resident population living in http://www.census.gov/

Program, U.S. Census Bureau poverty, and median household income, did/www/saipe/index.html

1989–2008.

National Center for Education Statistics, School enrollment, K-12, and students http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/

U.S. Department of Education eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, 

1986–2008.

USDA Economic Research Service Percentage of resident population who have http://www.ers.usda.gov/

completed high school and college, 1970, Data/Education, and

1980, 1990, 2000. Rural Urban Continuum http://www.ers.usda.gov/

Codes, 1974, 1983, 1993, 2003. Briefing/Rurality/

Regional Economic Information System, Employment by industry, 1990–2000, http://www.bea.gov/

Bureau of Economic Analysis 2001–2007.

American Community Survey, Housing statistics. http://www.census.gov/

U.S. Census Bureau acs/www/

Table A-2—Sources of government spending data used in case studies

Source Description Web address

USAspending.gov, maintained by the Database of all federal awards. Data include http://www.usaspending.gov/

U.S. Office of Management and Budget award identification numbers, project

descriptions, funding, recipient information, 

and more.

Recovery.gov (official Web site of Database of Recovery Act spending, http://www.recovery.gov/

Recovery Act spending) including quarterly reports filed by 

award recipients detailing job creation.

figure is further broken down to indicate funding for both 

state-specific projects, and the state’s share of multistate 

projects. Because there were no readily available data 

indicating each state’s share of a multistate project, it was 

assumed that every state involved in a multistate project 

received an equal portion of the funding. Therefore, investment figures for states that received multistate project funding are given as approximations rather than hard figures. 

Approximations are indicated with the use of a tilde (~).

The Recovery Act requires recipients to report number 

of jobs in the form of fractional full-time equivalent (FTE) 

jobs. Only jobs that are funded directly by Recovery Act 

dollars are considered, and there is no differentiation made 

between existing jobs or newly created jobs. At the end of 

each quarter, the recipient takes the total number of hours 

worked and funded by the Recovery Act, and divides it by 

the number of quarterly hours that constitute a full-time 

schedule to calculate the number of FTE jobs. The number 
168

GENERAL TECHNICAL REPORT PNW-GTR-831

of quarterly hours constituting a full-time schedule may differ depending on job standards, but is typically 520. (This 

assumes that a typical full-time position is 40 hours per 

week. A quarter is 13 weeks, 40 multiplied by 13 is equal 

to 520.) Therefore, if a recipient records that in one quarter, 

three employees worked a total of 1,300 hours that were 

paid for by the Recovery Act, they will divide those 1,300 

hours by 520 and report 2.5 FTE jobs. 

Drafts of each case-study document were reviewed by 

at least three individuals who participated in their development, including Forest Service employees and project 

recipients, prior to publication.

References

Lindlof, T.R.; Taylor, B.C. 2002. Qualitative 

communication research methods, 2nd ed. Thousand 

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 376 p. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service [USDA 

FS]. 2009. Forest Service activities and the American 

Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009: estimating 

measures of economic distress. Administrative Report. 

Washington, DC. 

Yin, R.K. 2003. Case study research: design and methods, 

3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 181 p. 
Pacific Northwest Research Station

Web site http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw

Telephone (503) 808-2592

Publication requests (503) 808-2138

FAX (503) 808-2130

E-mail pnw_pnwpubs@fs.fed.us

Mailing address Publications Distribution

	 	 Pacific Northwest Research Station

 P.O. Box 3890

	 	 Portland, OR 97208-3890

Metric equivalents

When you know: Multiply by: To find:

Inches 2.54 Centimeters

Feet 0.305 Meters

Yards 0.914 Meters

Miles 1.609 Kilometers

Acres 0.405 Hectares

Square feet 0.0929 Square meters

Square miles 2.59 Square kilometers

Cubic yards 0.765 Cubic meters

Tons 0.907 Tonnes or megagrams
U.S. Department of Agriculture

Pacific Northwest Research Station

333 SW First Avenue

P.O. Box 3890

Portland, OR 97208-3890

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use, $300