BLM Public Domain Lands: Volume of Timber Offered for Sale Has Declined Substantially Since Fiscal Year 1990
Published: 2003-06-19T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: For several decades, debate over how to balance timber sales with resource protection and recreational use on federally managed lands has been at the heart of controversy surrounding federal land management. The Department of the Interior's Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is one of the federal agencies that manages some of the nation's forests--about 53 million acres--under its public domain forestry management program and offers timber for sale from these lands. With regard to BLM's offerings of timber for sale, congressional requesters asked GAO to determine (1) the statutory framework for BLM timber sales, (2) the trend in BLM timber volume offered for sale, and (3) factors contributing to any observed trends. GAO reviewed laws, regulations, and BLM policy governing BLM timber sales. GAO obtained and reviewed data on the volumes and composition of BLM timber sale offerings from fiscal years 1990 through 2002 and met with agency officials and others to identify factors affecting timber sale offering trends and their importance.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: A variety of land management and other environmental laws provide the statutory framework for timber sales on BLM public domain land. In particular, the Federal Land Policy and Management Act permits timber sales as one of several uses for BLM public lands. Timber sales also must comply with other environmental laws, such as the National Environmental Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act, and the Clean Water Act. From 1990 to 2002, the volume of timber offered for sale by BLM declined about 74 percent. Declines were experienced for each of the timber's components--sawtimber (trees or logs suitable for conversion into lumber) and other wood products (small logs used to make firewood, posts, and poles). Consequently, in 2002, the proportion of sawtimber in the total volume offered for sale was less than it was in 1990. The principal factor contributing to the decline in timber volume was the governmentwide shift in forestry program emphasis beginning in the late 1980s from timber production to enhancing forest ecosystem health. This shift was based on the need to provide more protection for nontimber resources and to place a greater emphasis on the removal of smaller trees to reduce the risks of insects, fire, and disease. As a result, according to BLM officials, timber became a by-product rather than the focus of BLM's management of its public domain forests.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: Currently, federally managed forests provide an estimated 7 percent of  the nation’s domestically produced timber and wood products while  serving several other functions, such as providing habitat for over a third  of all threatened and endangered species, serving as the nation’s single  largest source of water, and providing increasingly popular recreational  destinations. For several decades, debate over how to balance timber  sales with resource protection and recreational use on federally managed  lands has been at the heart of controversy surrounding federal forest land  management. While the Forest Service manages most federal forest lands,  the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) also  manages some of these federal forests—encompassing about 53 million  acres—located primarily in 12 western states, under its public domain  forestry management program. BLM refers to lands under this program as  public domain lands.
In relation to BLM’s offerings of timber for sale under its public domain  forestry management program, you asked us to determine (1) the statutory  framework for BLM timber sales, (2) the trend in BLM timber volume  offered for sale, and (3) factors contributing to any observed trends.  To meet these objectives, we reviewed laws, regulations, and policy  documents governing BLM’s timber sales; obtained and reviewed  information on the volumes and composition of timber offered for sale  from BLM’s annual statistical report and its timber sale information  system; and met with BLM headquarters officials and contacted several  BLM state and field offices to identify the factors and their importance.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: BLM, within the Department of the Interior, and the Forest Service, within  the Department of Agriculture, are the two primary federal agencies  involved with timber sales. In terms of acreage, the Forest Service  manages over 192 million acres of national forest system land. In contrast,  BLM manages about 261 million acres of public lands, of which about  55 million acres are forests and woodlands. BLM administers two forestry  programs: one on public domain lands and one in western Oregon. BLM’s  public domain forestry management program covers 53 million acres— about 9 million acres of forests and about 44 million acres of woodlands.  Appendix I provides a detailed listing of forest and woodland acreage  administered under BLM’s public domain forestry management program.
BLM’s forests and woodlands on public domain lands are primarily in  12 western states. Much of these lands tend to be in small, isolated parcels  that are not as productive as BLM’s western Oregon lands or the larger  forests managed by the Forest Service. BLM manages its public domain  lands through a multilevel organization—national office, 12 state offices,  and about 130 field offices—that carries out a variety of agency programs  and activities including recreation and fish and wildlife protection, in  addition to timber.
BLM’s public domain forestry management program received a small  portion of the agency’s $1.8 billion annual budget for fiscal year 2002. The  Congress appropriated about $6.2 million for the public domain forestry  management program in fiscal year 2002.
Timber offered for sale on public domain lands includes sawtimber and  other wood products. Sales of sawtimber and some other wood products  are initiated by soliciting bids from prospective buyers. In addition, BLM  offers other wood products to the public through a permit process.
section_title: Federal Land Policy and Management Act and Other Environmental Laws Provide the Statutory Framework for BLM Timber Sales
paragraphs: BLM manages its public domain forestry management program within a  statutory framework consisting of a land management statute and various  other environmental laws. The Federal Land Policy and Management Act  of 1976 (FLPMA)—the principal law under which BLM manages its public  domain forestry management program—requires BLM to manage its public  lands under the principles of multiple use and sustained yield. FLPMA  gives BLM broad management discretion over how it emphasizes one use,  such as offering timber for sale, in relation to another, such as providing  recreation. Among other things, multiple use management aims at a  combination of balanced and diverse resource uses that take into account  the long-term needs of future generations for renewable resources (for  example, timber) and nonrenewable resources (for example, minerals).  FLPMA states that BLM should consider fish and wildlife; recreation;  minerals; range; ecological preservation; timber; watershed; natural  scenic, scientific, and historical values; and other resources, as it balances  public land uses. Under the principle of sustained yield, BLM seeks to  achieve and maintain high output levels of all renewable resources in  perpetuity. Under FLPMA, BLM has broad discretion in managing its  timber sales. During its land use planning process, BLM identifies areas  that are available and have the capacity for planned, sustained-yield  harvest of timber or other forest products.
BLM timber sales on public domain lands must also comply with the  requirements of other environmental laws, including the National  Environmental Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act, and the Clean  Water Act. For major federal actions that may significantly affect the  quality of the human environment, the National Environmental Policy Act  requires all federal agencies, including BLM, to analyze the potential  environmental effects of a proposed project, such as a timber sale.  Regulations implementing the National Environmental Policy Act require  agencies to include a discussion of how to mitigate adverse impacts and a  discussion of those impacts that cannot be avoided under the federal  action. Under the Endangered Species Act, BLM must ensure that its  actions are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of species  listed as threatened or endangered or to destroy or adversely modify  habitat critical to their survival. Similarly, the requirement to meet  standards for water quality under the Clean Water Act may limit the  timing, location, and volume of timber sales.
section_title: The Volume and Composition of BLM Timber Sale Offerings from Public Domain Lands Have Changed Significantly Since 1990
paragraphs: BLM’s annual volume of timber offered for sale from public domain lands  declined 74 percent from 101 million board feet of timber in fiscal year  1990 to 26 million board feet in 2002. Over the same period, the volume of  the two components of BLM offerings—sawtimber and other wood  products—also declined: sawtimber from 80 million to 14 million board  feet (81 percent) and other wood products from 21 million to 11 million  board feet (46 percent). See figure 1.
Appendix II includes more detailed information on the volume of BLM  public domain timber offered for sale from fiscal year 1990 through 2002.
Mirroring the overall national decline, each BLM state office experienced  declines in the volume of timber offered for sale from fiscal year 1990  through 2002. Eastern Oregon experienced the sharpest decline—from  56 million to 8 million board feet—representing nearly two-thirds of the  overall decline. A BLM official explained that eastern Oregon offered an  abnormally high volume of timber for sale in fiscal years 1990 and 1991,  primarily due to a large salvage logging effort following a mountain pine  beetle epidemic. For perspective, from fiscal years 1985 through 1989,  eastern Oregon offered an average of 22 million board feet of timber per  year. Appendix III shows the volume of timber that each BLM state office  offered for sale in 1990 and in 2002 and the amount of decline.
As a consequence of the decline in the volume of timber offered for sale  during fiscal years 1990 through 2002, the proportion of the volume’s  two components also changed. As shown in figure 2, sawtimber  represented over three-quarters of the total volume in fiscal year 1990,  but had decreased to slightly more than one-half of the total volume by  fiscal year 2002. In contrast, the proportion of other wood products  increased from about one-fifth of the total volume in 1990 to about  one-half of the total volume in fiscal year 2002.
section_title: Shift in Program Emphasis Was the Primary Cause of the Decline in Timber Offered for Sale
paragraphs: Beginning in the late 1980s, the program emphasis on BLM public domain  lands, like that on most other federal forests, increasingly shifted from  timber production to emphasizing forest ecosystem health. This shift in  emphasis, required by changing forest conditions and needs, helped  cause a reduction in the volume of timber removed from all federal lands,  including BLM public domain lands. As a result of this decline in supply  volume, some sawmills that formerly processed BLM timber have closed,  making it more difficult for BLM to market timber in some areas. In  addition, the emphasis on forest ecosystem health has increased some  of the costs associated with timber sales preparation, as staff must now  prepare more extensive analysis of the effects of the timber harvest on  other resources. Faced with generally declining funding levels and fewer  foresters to prepare timber sales, and subsequently fewer sales, BLM’s  volume of timber offered for sale from its public domain lands declined.
subsections: section_title: Shift in Program Emphasis to Forest Ecosystem Health Has Contributed to Reduced Timber Sale Offerings
paragraphs: The 74 percent decline in the volume of timber sale offerings from BLM  public domain lands since 1990, according to BLM officials, was primarily  due to the shift in program emphasis to forest ecosystem health. We  previously reported that this shift in emphasis caused large declines in  timber production from all federal forests. BLM’s decline mirrored a  similar decline in offerings from the 155 national forests. For example,  between 1990 and 1997 the volume of timber offered for sale from the  national forests managed by the Forest Service declined about 65 percent,  from 11 billion to 4 billion board feet.
Since the late 1980s, growing concerns over declining ecological  conditions on federal lands—such as poor animal habitat and water  quality—resulted in federal agencies adopting a new, more scientifically  based management approach, referred to then as ecosystem management.  BLM officially adopted this approach to implementing its land  management responsibilities in 1994 to sustain resource usage in an  ecosystem—including timber production—while maintaining, and  restoring where damaged, the natural functioning of interdependent  communities of plants and animals and their physical environment (soil,  water, air). In revising forest management policy for public domain lands,  BLM increased its emphasis on managing for forest ecosystem conditions,  in addition to providing for sustained yield of its forests and woodlands.  This new policy recognized the role that insects, disease, fire, and other  disturbance mechanisms, as well as noncommercial plant species, play  in ecosystems.
The reduction in the volume of timber offered for sale also resulted  from environmental statutes and their judicial interpretations arising  from lawsuits brought by environmental and recreational organizations.  In order to increase protection of wildlife habitat, recreation, and  stream quality, the volume of timber offered for sale was reduced for  the following reasons: (1) some forest areas where timber sales had been  planned could not be used for this purpose; (2) in some areas where trees  could be harvested, fewer trees could be removed because of limitations  on clear-cutting; and (3) in some cases, BLM would not offer timber for  sale where the removal costs were too expensive for buyers.
BLM officials cited several instances where an increased emphasis on  providing greater protection to forest ecosystem resources from the  adverse effects of timber harvesting had resulted in reductions of timber  offerings on BLM public domain lands since 1990. For example, an official  in the BLM Idaho state office noted that harvesting timber by clear-cutting  is no longer performed in many locations. Likewise, concerns about  potential harm to the habitat of threatened or endangered species, such as  lynx and bull trout, led to a reduced volume of timber offered for sale. In  addition, some current harvesting methods cost more and result in less  volume, but potentially cause less harm to the species and its habitat. BLM  officials told us that in eastern Oregon they offered sales in areas where  there were fewer concerns about the harm to habitat in order to reduce  the probability of public challenge. Additionally, BLM officials in Idaho  and Oregon told us that the need to sometimes use helicopters to remove  harvested trees, in order to protect other resources from effects that  would result, for example, from constructing roads to access and remove  timber, drove up costs and further reduced the amount of timber they  could offer for sale.
In the 1990s, growing concerns about changes in forest structure and  composition, and the long-term threats that these changes posed to forest  ecosystem health, further contributed to the declines in the volume of  timber offered for sale from federal forests, including from BLM public  domain lands. The principal change in forest structure that was of concern  was the increasing density of tree stands in forests, especially of smaller  trees and brush. Among the changes in forest composition of most  concern was a reduction in the diversity of tree species. Both types of  change stemmed largely from decades of previously accepted forest  management practices, such as the exclusion of naturally occurring  periodic fires that removed smaller trees and undergrowth; replacement,  after clear-cutting, of mixed native species with a single species; and a  failure to carry out planned thinning of forests.
Overly dense, less diverse forests can lead to increasingly widespread  insect and disease infestations and greatly increase the risk of catastrophic  wildfires. Such wildfires can severely damage tree stands, wildlife habitat,  water quality, and soils, and threaten human health, lives, property, and  infrastructure in nearby communities. According to BLM, the need to  reduce forest density and restore composition diversity in forest  ecosystems has necessitated a refocusing of federal forest management  activities, including timber sale offerings, on the removal of smaller trees  and materials that generate less volume than the larger trees more  commonly offered for sale in prior years.
BLM program management officials stated that the need to restore the  structure and composition of forests is currently the primary reason that  the timber removed from public domain lands will have to continue to be  more heavily weighted towards nonsawtimber and small-diameter trees.  In many cases, the materials that need to be removed have little or no  commercial value, and thus do not affect the overall volume of timber  offered for sale. For example, a BLM official in a Colorado field office told  us that any increase in funding would first concentrate on a backlog of  areas that were overstocked following harvests several years ago, but  were never thinned of small trees that had no commercial value.
BLM officials could not quantify the effect of the shift to forest ecosystem  health on the overall decline in the volume of timber sale offerings since  1990. They noted, however, that the shift had resulted in timber becoming  largely a by-product, rather than a focus, of the public domain forestry  management program.
section_title: Shift in Program Emphasis Has Led to Mill Closures, BLM Staffing Changes, and Insufficient Inventory Data During a Period of Declining Budgets
paragraphs: The decline in the volume of timber sale offerings from federal forests as  a result of the shift in emphasis to forest ecosystem health has resulted in  a reduced supply of materials for sawmills in many areas. According to  two reports principally authored by The University of Montana’s Bureau  of Business and Economic Research and the Forest Service, the volume  of timber from national forests received by mills in Idaho and Montana  declined in the 1990s. For example, in Idaho, the volume declined from  about 729 million board feet in 1990 to 301 million board feet in 1995,  representing a decline of 59 percent. In Montana, the volume declined  from about 318 million board feet in 1993 to 215 million board feet in  1998, representing a decline of 32 percent. According to these reports,  the reduced mill capacity in these states was due primarily to the decline  in timber availability from national forests. Furthermore, these reports  indicated that the decline in timber volume from the national forests was  a contributing factor to the closure of at least 30 sawmills in these two  states. Other factors mentioned by these reports as contributing to  sawmill closures included fluctuations in lumber prices, changes in the  volume of exports and imports of lumber, and changes in the structure of  the industry.
According to BLM officials, the primary reason for sawmill closures was  the decline in the supply of timber from the larger, more productive Forest  Service lands near BLM lands. However, they noted that purchasers of  timber from BLM public domain lands also used these mills. For example,  officials in some field offices in Colorado and Idaho said several nearby  mills had closed, leading purchasers to transport timber to more distant  mills for processing. As a result, the officials noted that the purchasers of  timber from these offices have experienced higher transportation costs,  thereby reducing the attractiveness of purchasing timber from BLM public  domain lands. The officials told us that because of the relatively small  volume of timber offered for sale from BLM public domain lands, a return  to previous BLM sale offering levels would not result in sufficient supply  for the mills to reopen.
The shift in emphasis has also contributed to a need for more extensive  analysis and the hiring of more resource protection specialists during  the time that BLM’s funding for its public domain forestry management  program was generally declining. Consequently, less volume of timber was  offered because it takes longer and costs more to prepare a given volume  of timber for sale. According to officials, over the past decade, BLM has  hired more resource protection specialists, such as wildlife biologists,  botanists, and hydrologists, in order to better analyze the effects of  potential timber sales on other resources, such as wildlife habitat. At  the same time, many foresters, who are the primary staff involved in  identifying and preparing timber sales, have departed the agency either  through retirement or other means in recent years and have not been  replaced. For example, the number of BLM foresters decreased from 72 to  53 between fiscal year 1991 and fiscal year 2002. We were told that at some  field units there are no foresters remaining that have the skills needed to  prepare timber sales. Furthermore, using constant 2002 dollars, BLM’s  appropriations for the public domain forestry management program  declined from $8.5 million in fiscal year 1990 to $6.2 million in 2002. Thus,  the higher preparation costs and smaller budgets have left BLM less able  to prepare timber sales. According to BLM, it has begun recruiting new  foresters and has requested an increase of $1 million in funding in fiscal  year 2004 for the public domain forestry management program.
In addition, BLM officials told us that for the past few years the agency has  not had the funding to develop better inventory information about forests  and woodlands in order to adequately assess the effects of timber sales on  the forest ecosystem. For example, they do not have current information  on the condition of forests and woodlands, such as tree density, species  composition, and the extent of forests and woodlands affected by insects  and disease—information needed to identify potential timber sale  offerings. According to the officials, some timber sales cannot be prepared  because BLM does not have credible inventory data needed to justify  trade-offs between timber harvesting and other concerns, such as impacts  on animal species habitat. Agency officials said that the lack of knowledge  of its inventory has been a long-standing problem.
section_title: Agency Comments and Our Evaluation
paragraphs: We provided a draft of this report to the Department of the Interior for  review and comment. The department pointed out that the report achieved  its three objectives and that we had incorporated information based on  informal discussions with staff. The department said that BLM has begun  to act on some of the findings in the draft report, including recruiting  new foresters, in part to support the National Fire Plan. According to  the department, these foresters will help ensure that forest health  considerations, such as species composition, stand structure, and insect  or disease occurrence, are fully considered, in addition to hazardous fuel  reduction. BLM state directors have submitted detailed action plans to  meet state-specific needs for renewed emphasis on forests and woodlands  management. Furthermore, the department said that the President’s fiscal  year 2004 budget proposes a $1 million increase in funding for the public  domain forests and woodlands management program. The increased  funding, according to the department, will be used to improve utilization  of small-diameter wood materials, improve forest health, and provide  entrepreneurial opportunities in the wood product industry. We included  information in the report regarding BLM’s recruiting efforts and its request  for additional funding.
The department also made technical clarifications, which we incorporated  as appropriate. The department’s comments are reprinted in appendix IV.
section_title: Scope and Methodology
paragraphs: To determine the legal framework for BLM timber sales on public domain  lands, we reviewed laws and regulations governing BLM’s timber sales  activities. We also reviewed policy documents issued by headquarters and,  if available, supplemental guidance issued by state and field locations as it  relates to timber sales activities.
To determine the trend in the volume of timber that BLM offered for sale  from public domain lands, we obtained BLM information on the volumes  and composition—sawtimber, firewood, posts, poles, and other wood  products—of timber offered for sale by state office for fiscal years 1990  through 2002. We reviewed information contained in BLM’s Timber Sale  Information System and its annual publication, Public Land Statistics.
To determine what factors contributed to the trend in the volume of  timber offered for sale from public domain lands from 1990 to 2002, we  met with BLM headquarters officials and visited or contacted officials at  9 of the 12 BLM state offices and six field offices—two each in the states  of Colorado, Idaho, and Montana. We discussed with these officials how  their respective offices established timber sale goals, allocated forestry  program funding, and monitored accomplishment of planned timber sales.  We also discussed with these officials BLM’s management emphasis on  improving forest health, and the trends in (1) market conditions for timber  and other wood products and (2) BLM funding and staffing. In addition,  we reviewed BLM’s budget justifications, strategic and annual plans and  reports, land use plans, and other materials related to BLM’s timber sales  activities. To gain further perspective on the market conditions of the  timber industry, we interviewed officials and reviewed timber industry  research publications from The University of Montana. Finally, to gain a  more detailed understanding of timber sales activities on public domain  lands, we met with officials in three BLM state offices—Colorado, Idaho,  and Montana—and visited several BLM timber sale projects that were  ongoing or had been completed recently.
We conducted our review from May 2002 through May 2003 in accordance  with generally accepted government auditing standards.
We will send copies of this report to the Secretary of the Interior; the  Director of the Bureau of Land Management; the Director, Office of  Management and Budget; and other interested parties. We will also make  copies available to others upon request. In addition, the report will be  available at no charge on the GAO Web site at http://www.gao.gov. If you  or your staff have any questions, please call me at (202) 512-3841. Key  contributors to this report are listed in appendix V.
section_title: Appendix I: Public Domain Forest and Woodland Acres by BLM State Office
paragraphs: Table 1 shows the number of acres of forests and woodlands and their  total for each BLM state office.
section_title: Appendix II: Volume of Timber Offered for Sale from BLM Public Domain Forests and Woodlands, Fiscal Years 1990 through 2002
paragraphs: Table 2 identifies the volume, in board feet, of sawtimber, cords, posts,  poles, and other wood products offered for sale from public domain lands  from fiscal years 1990 through 2002.
section_title: Appendix III: Volume of Timber Offered for Sale from Public Domain Lands by BLM State Office, Fiscal Years 1990 and 2002
paragraphs: Table 3 shows the volume, in board feet, of timber offered for sale in fiscal  years 1990 and 2002, and their differences in volume, by BLM state office.
section_title: Appendix IV: Comments from the Department of the Interior
paragraphs: The following are GAO comments on the Department of the Interior’s  letter dated June 5, 2003.
subsections: section_title: GAO’s Comments
paragraphs: 1.  We changed the title to be more specific to public domain lands.  2.  In accordance with our job objectives, our report addresses the trend  in the volume of timber offered for sale from both public domain  forests and woodlands. Furthermore, the report notes that woodlands  typically have significantly lower productivity than forests.  3.  We deleted reference to the federal regulations generally not requiring  mitigation of adverse impacts resulting from operations on public  domain lands. We added information to clarify that the federal  regulations referred to in the draft report were those that implement  the National Environmental Policy Act. The department agreed with  this clarification.  4.  We agree that the change of emphasis has affected the volume of  timber offered for sale, which is already clearly articulated in the  report.  5.  We agree that both the budget and the volume of timber offered for  sale have declined significantly. We have included a reference to the  budgetary decline in a section heading.  6.  We agree that the volume of timber offered for sale from BLM’s public  domain lands is small compared to offerings from Forest Service or  state or private land. As the report indicates, the Forest Service offered  4 billion board feet of timber for sale from national forests in 1997,  while BLM offered 35 million board feet—21 million board feet of  sawtimber and 14 million board feet of other wood products—from  public domain lands. Also, the report points out that about 7 percent of  the nation’s domestically produced timber and wood products come  from federally managed forests, which include BLM and Forest Service  forests. Therefore, the remaining 93 percent is from nonfederal lands,  which include state and private lands.
section_title: Appendix V: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments
subsections: section_title: GAO Contacts
paragraphs: Barry T. Hill (202) 512-3841 (hillbt@gao.gov)
section_title: Staff Acknowledgments
paragraphs: In addition to the above, Andrew S. Bauck, Linda L. Harmon, Richard P.  Johnson, Chester M. Joy, Roy K. Judy, Rosellen McCarthy, Jonathan S.  McMurray, Paul E. Staley, and Amy E. Webbink made key contributions to  this report.