NW Woodlands-Spring 2001€¦ · count them. While I have no argument with the science presented for the pro-tection and recovery of a number of andromenous fish with regard to ripar-ian

Northwest Woodlands4033 S.W. Canyon Rd.Portland, OR 97221

Non Profit OrgU.S. POSTAGE

PAIDPORTLAND, ORPERMITNO. 1386

NNNNoooorrrrtttthhhhwwwweeeesssstttt WWWWooooooooddddllllaaaannnnddddssssSUMMER 2011 • VOLUME 27 • NO. 3

A Publication of the Oregon Small Woodlands, Washington Farm Forestry, Idaho Forest Owners & Montana Forest Owners Associations

This magazine is a benefit of membership inyour family forestry association

NEXT ISSUE . . .Taxation

WATER AND RIPARIANMANAGEMENTWWAATER AND RIPTER AND RIPARIANARIANMANAGEMENTMANAGEMENTNew Ideas for RiparianManagement AreasNew Ideas for RiparianNew Ideas for RiparianManagement AreasManagement Areas

Clean Water:Emerging IssuesClean WClean Water:ater:Emerging IssuesEmerging Issues

What is Fish Habitat?What is Fish Habitat?What is Fish Habitat?

How Can I Makethe Stream on MyLand Better for Fish?

How Can I MakeHow Can I Makethe Stream on Mythe Stream on MyLand Better for Fish?Land Better for Fish?

Forests andDrinking WaterForests andForests andDrinking WDrinking Waterater

2 . NORTHWEST WOODLANDS . SUMMER 2011

3 PRESIDENTS’ MESSAGES

6 DOWN ON THETREE FARM

28 TREESMARTS

30 TREEMAN TIPS

31 CALENDAR

TABLE OF CONTENTS DEPARTMENTS

FEATURES

Summer 2011

STAFF:LORI D. RASOR, EditorMICHELE DOCY, Assistant4033 S.W. Canyon Rd.Portland, OR [email protected] GRAPHICS, Graphic Design

Northwest Woodlands AdvisoryCommittee Members:Bob BrinkRick DunningMike HeathJim JamesJohn PoppinoLori RasorEd Styskel

Northwest Woodlands is publishedquarterly by the World ForestryCenter for the Oregon SmallWoodlands Association, WashingtonFarm Forestry Association, IdahoForest Owners Association andMontana Forest Owners Association.

Other than general editing, the articlesappearing in this publication have not beenpeer reviewed for technical accuracy. Theindividual authors are primarily responsible forthe content and opinions expressed herein.

ON THE COVER:8

12

16

20

22

24

This riparian management zoneshows a native tree communitythat is hardwood dominated,which provides plenty of shadefor fish habitat. Inset: Researchhas shown the importance ofwood in streams to provide poolsand fish habitat, including hidingcover. Photos courtesy of OregonForest Resources Institute

26 TREES PAY US BACK DOLLAR-FOR-DOLLAR

ALSO IN THIS ISSUE . . .

NEW IDEAS FOR RIPARIAN MANAGEMENT AREASLearn the science behind riparian management areas and what you can do tobest manage your property to protect water quality, wildlife, and fish, whilealso meeting your own management needs.BY GEORGE G. ICE

CLEAN WATER AND FAMILY FOREST MANAGEMENT: SOME EMERGING ISSUESClimate change, wildfires and invasive species...learn how to incorporate newresearch findings into management strategies.BY PETER A. BISSON

WHAT IS FISH HABITAT?Keeping fish happy in the streams on your property requires an understandingof the riparian system and the interaction between streams and terrestrialcomponents.BY BOB DANEHY

WHAT CAN I DO TO MAKE THE STREAM ON MY LANDBETTER FOR FISH?If you are ready to make your streams better for fish, start by firstunderstanding what fish need, and then find the best opportunity to makeimprovements.BY BOB DANEHY

DOES YOUR LOGGING ROAD NEED A CLEAN WATERACT PERMIT?A federal court ruling may impact your logging roads…and leave manyquestions unanswered.BY JULIE WEIS

NEW WATER QUALITY CONTROLS AFFECTING WOODLAND OWNERS IN OREGON’S COASTAL ZONEBY JULIE WEIS AND PAUL W. ADAMS

FORESTS AND DRINKING WATER: FACT OR FICTION?Here is a quick and informative “quiz” on forests and drinking water.BY PAUL W. ADAMS

s a slightly informed observer,the following is my opinion onwatershed success for the recov-

ery of salmon. Salmon are pretty easyto manage in as much as they return totheir natal stream and allow us tocount them. While I have no argumentwith the science presented for the pro-tection and recovery of a number ofandromenous fish with regard to ripar-ian protection, I have many questionsabout the potential for success of theseriparian areas.

While the science tells us that cer-tain features, primarily water tempera-ture, large woody debris, and lack ofsilt, are key elements for the success ofsalmon, I see other variables that makethe success of riparian protection amoving target. Nature has always sub-jected species such as salmon to manyof the same conditions that we attemptto alleviate. Low oxygen, variablestream flows, mass wasting, and oceanconditions have always been a threatto salmon.

As I see it, at least for the five mainspecies of salmonids (there are six) theirsurvival is a numbers game. They laydown 2,000 or so eggs in their redds forgood reason, as their survival rate is onthe order of one percent. With adequatenumbers they will use every availablespawning area to full advantage withexcess numbers being necessary toensure they do. With a hatchery envi-ronment and feeding to a larger sizebefore release, returns may approach

three percent. The Japanese found thisout when they aggressively establishedchum salmon hatcheries on 226 streamson Hokkaido and Honshu Islands backin the 1960s. I’m unsure that thesehatcheries are still operating, but Iassume they are. The establishment ofthis added number of fry had one ofthe greatest impacts on salmon in theNorth Pacific. Interestingly, in the 1970sreturning fish to streams to the HoodCanal and other drainages in the PugetSound Basin saw an obvious decline.

I believe a Desired Future Condition(DFC) in the very small streams weprotect requires that returns to thesestreams must approximate the preset-tlement numbers to be successful. InAlaska where the commercial salmonfishery is a huge industry, many natalstreams are monitored to ensure anoptimal return. Commercial fishing

cannot commence until the predictedreturn shows that it will reach therequired goal. Also, in systems thatappear to be threatened or may evenhave streams that have lost all returnwill have the entire bay closed to com-mercial fishing for numerous yearsuntil runs are adequately reestablished.Even at that Alaska uses hatcheries.I’ve read that 70 percent of the pinksalmon return to Prince William Soundis hatchery stock. The Canadians alsoenhance salmon production. The pre-dicted sockeye return for the FrazerRiver system in 2010 was 25 million,but was actually 34 million. I’m notsure what the Russians are doing withregard to enhancement, but they stilluse fish traps on Sakhalin Island nownamed Ostrov Sahalin.

The aforementioned is by no meanscause for any conclusions about salmonrecovery in the small streams we protect.The problem for me is, just how long doI have to wait to see my efforts come tofruition given the fact that salmon arehighly exploited? What I see in HokeCreek does not meet my expectations forrecovery. Nor do I believe it ever will,given the current enhancement andexploitation of salmonids. Providingharvestable salmon and achieving recov-ery of wild salmon in all our streamsseems questionable to me. ■

Water Flows Downhill

A

NORTHWEST WOODLANDS . SUMMER 2011 . 3

PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE

SAM COMSTOCK

Washington

Seedling Nursery Since 1974

“Serving Many of the Reforestation Needs of the World From This Location Since 1889”

We bring experience with owners that care about their product and customers.

Approximately 10 million seedlings in annual production1 container site (plugs), 2 bareroot/transplant sites (p+1, 1+1)

Contract growing and spec seedlings for forestry and Christmas tree production

LET US GROW YOUR SEEDLINGSDavid Gerdes Mike Gerdes

[email protected]

FORESTERS • NURSERYMAN • SEEDSMAN

SILVASEED COMPANYP.O. Box 118 • Roy, WA 98580 • (253) 843-2246

Forestland For [email protected]

Forester/Broker

he Idaho Forest Practices Act(FPA) regulates harvesting activi-ties on all private forestlands with-

in the state. The Idaho FPA administra-tive rules are promulgated by the ForestPractices Act Advisory Committee(FPAAC), which meets several times ayear to discuss all facets of the IdahoFPA. For many years, there has been anFPAAC Shade Subcommittee, tasked tobetter define forest management adja-cent to Class 1 (fish-bearing) streams.This committee has been lookingspecifically at trees that provide over-the-stream shade, and contributions oflarge organic debris (LOD) into thestream.

Currently in Idaho, along each sideof all Class 1 streams, there is a 75-footstream protection zone (SPZ) whereoperators must retain 75 percent of theexisting shade following each harvest

(the “shade rule”). Also, there is a tree-retention rule requiring operators toleave varying quantities and sizes oftrees within a 50-foot zone on eitherside of Class 1 streams. The shade rulehas always been a tough rule to regu-late; it is difficult to quantify with noformal, standard system in place as tohow an operator measures shade. Inaddition, one can remove 25 percent ofthe existing shade with each harvest,which could be misappropriated if alandowner wanted to harvest every fewyears or even every year. In my years inIdaho, I haven’t seen much abuse withthe existing regulation, though theopportunity to do so is definitely there.I know many of the larger privatelandowners in the northern part of thestate generally avoid harvesting withinthe 75-foot SPZ adjacent to Class 1streams—definitely exceeding the cur-rent FPA standards.

During both the 2000 and the 2004Idaho Department of EnvironmentalQuality (DEQ) quadrennial water-

quality audits, over-the-stream shadealong Class 1 streams was identified asan area of concern. Both the federalEnvironmental Protection Agency(EPA) and Idaho DEQ are closely scru-tinizing water temperature in all Idahostreams. Water temperature affects fishhabitat, dissolved oxygen levels, bacteriaand algae populations, and water pH.Vegetation providing effective shadeover Class 1 streams can be one of themajor influencing factors on water tem-perature. The table shows the currentIdaho water temperature standards:

The Shade Subcommittee, in orderto address the audit findings and theEPA/DEQ concerns, has been creatinga new system that will help landownersbetter quantify shade needs, and thecorresponding tree retention, alongClass 1 streams. The new proposed sys-tem will be based on forest types (dryto wet). Cruise plots within the 50-footbuffer zone of the SPZ will most likelyneed to be measured prior to harvest.The measurements from the plots willbe used to calculate existing shade, aswell as determine how many trees (bydiameter class) can be removed in theupcoming harvest. What little I haveseen of this new system is a very rea-sonable, quantifiable system based ongood science. The rule modificationsthat FPAAC approves over the nextyear or two will take much of theguesswork out of Class 1 riparian man-agement and help landowners to betterminimize water temperature increaseson their forestlands. ■


KENNON McCLINTOCK

Idaho

New System Will HelpMeasure Shade


T Idaho’s Water Temperature CriteriaUse Warm Water Seasonal Cold Cold Water Salmonid Bull Trout

Metric SpawningMDMTa 33°C (91°F) 26°C (79°F) 22°C (72°F) 13°C (55°F) N/AMWMTb N/A N/A N/A N/A 13°C (55°F) MDATc 29°C (84°F) 23°C (73°F) 19°C (66°F) 9°C (48°F) N/A

aMDMT = Maximum Daily Maximum Temperature bMWMT = Maximum Weekly (7-day average) Maximum Temperature cMDAT = Maximum Daily Average Temperature

A full serviceNatural Resourceconsulting firmsince 1984

HOME OFFICE (208) [email protected]

EASTERN WASHINGTON(509) 276-4699 • [email protected]

WESTERN MONTANA(406) 544-7169 • [email protected]

➤ Reforestation➤ Log Marketing & Inventory➤ Harvest Administration➤ Forest Management Plans

www.consulting-foresters.com

➤ Estate Planning➤ Water Resources➤ Timber Appraisals➤ Fire/Fuels Management➤ GPS/GIS Services

TREE MANAGEMENT PLUS, INC.Working with family forest owners managing their woodlands since 1977Professional Forester, Accredited Logger, Cut-to-Length Logging, Seedling Sales & Reforestation Services

CONTACT Tom Fox at 360-978-4305 • 422 Tucker Rd., Toledo, WA 98591

s I write this message, water andriparian management issues arecertainly a timely topic as the

Pacific Northwest has been rained, driz-zled, misted, hailed, and snowed uponwithout letup for months. We all havewater issues: too much, too little, or justthe right amount, but not in the rightplace or at the right time. Frustrating!

You think you’re managing just yourtimber, but in addition, you are manag-ing the public resources of air, water,and wildlife for the state of Oregon andthe nation. No one will interfere if youcut your timber before it’s mature, but ifyou make poor decisions that affectwater quality while harvesting timber,road construction, or road maintenanceyou will hear from an ODF stewardshipforester or an irate neighbor.

How old were you when you firstheard the terms riparian and watershed?Today every elementary student cangive you a working definition of theseterms and hopefully has been involvedin some restoration project throughhis/her school. This upcoming genera-tion of citizens will graduate with a farhigher basic knowledge of watershedissues than previous generations.Whether this will lead to a reasonablevoting record on their part remains tobe seen. OFRI continues to air TV adsthat demonstrate the woodland com-munity’s commitment to best manage-ment practices in the woods.

Water quality has been identified inpublic surveys as one of the top valuesthe public expects from forests. Formanagement guidance in protectingwater quality, we in Oregon rely on theOregon Forest Practices Act, which reg-ulates private forest activities. Oregon’s

FPA was the first of its kind in thenation, passed in 1971 and modifiedregularly by the Board of Forestry. Thelatest modifications have dealt withbuffers for fish-bearing streams to keepour water sediment-free and cool.

I found the scientific articles in thisissue of Northwest Woodlands to be fasci-nating. Again I was reminded that: treeson the south side of the stream providethe majority of the shade to cool thewater; their roots stabilize the soil; astream with quiet pools and good gravelprovides spawning grounds for a widevariety of fish; leaf litter in the waterattracts insects which in turn become fishfood; the entire streambank becomes aconnective corridor for wildlife.

Oregon’s FPA laws are based on thebest available science. But, as in all sci-ence, as we develop scientific answers tosome questions we find many additionalquestions that we need to address. Howwide do riparian areas need to be to beeffective? What mix of conifers andhardwoods is best? How should we bedealing with invasive species in riparianareas? And, if riparian areas are soimportant, why aren’t ranchers andfarmers held to the same standard?

I think it’s important that we wood-land owners keep our social contractwith the public by following FPA ripari-an rules as they are refined. Oregoniansare supportive of tree farming as longas they are assured we use best manage-ment practices. The Tree Farm Systemsign says it best: Water, Wildlife, Wood,and Recreation. The last word is recre-ation—have some fun in that water!You’ll find us in our Luckiamute swim-ming hole every summer. ■


IFOAPRESIDENT: Kennon McClintock208-255-9158 • [email protected]

VICE PRESIDENT: Jim Nichols208-582-0024 • [email protected]

SECRETARY: Janet Benoit208-683-2407 • [email protected]

TREASURER: Ozzie Osborn208-664-3889 • [email protected]

EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT:Kirk DavidPO Box 1257 • Coeur d’Alene, ID 83816208-683-3168 [email protected]

OSWAPRESIDENT: Nancy Hathaway541-758-5510 • [email protected]

1st VICE PRESIDENT: Scott Hayes503-992-1509 • [email protected]

2nd VICE PRESIDENT: Donna Heffernan541-786-2257 • [email protected]

2nd VICE PRESIDENT: Roy Hendrick, III541-469-6254 • [email protected]

2nd VICE PRESIDENT: David Schmidt541-979-7523 • [email protected]

SECRETARY: Katie Kohl 541-451-1734 • [email protected]

PAST PRESIDENT: Ken Faulk541-929-8422 • [email protected]

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Jim James187 High Street NE, Suite 208 • Salem,OR 97301 • [email protected]

WFFAPRESIDENT: Sam Comstock360-427-2725 • [email protected]

1st VICE PRESIDENT: Steve Stinson360-736-5918 • [email protected]

2nd VICE PRESIDENT: Matt Hobbs509-442-3578 • [email protected]

SECRETARY: Michelle Blake360-790-5498 • [email protected]

TREASURER: Bill Scheer, Jr.360-269-3850 • [email protected]

1st PAST PRESIDENT: Bob Brink360-686-3524 • [email protected]

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Rick DunningP.O. Box 1010 • Chehalis, WA 98532 360-736-5750 • [email protected]

S TAT E O F F I C ERS

You Think You’re JustManaging Timber, But...

A


NANCY HATHAWAYOregon

u Now is the Time to Get Ready to Plant

❑ Preparing your site for planting is where you get thebest value for your investment of time and money. Itis SO much harder to treat invasive weeds once theyhave become established and you have to workaround your newly planted seedlings.

❑ Order seedlings if you haven’t already. Some speciesand stock types are scarce and you may need to waitan extra year for the right seedlings before you plant.

❑ Grazing animals and rubber tires from tractors aregreat soil compactors. Compacted soils don’t allowfor good root growth and need to be broken upbefore you plant. Your soils should be dry in latesummer and should be ripped only when they aredry. Use a heavy piece of equipment with a rippertooth capable of getting down 18 inches or moreinto your soil. Rip your site in parallel rows and laterplant your seedlings in the ripped rows.

❑ Control woody vegetation with foliar herbicide appli-cation. Himalayan blackberries, Scotch broom, unde-sirable hardwoods, salmonberry, and the like can becontrolled with a foliar herbicide application beforeplanting. If you are reforesting and harvest occurredduring the summer, you may wish to wait a year tolet your brush recover enough for a foliar spray to beeffective. Brush with just a few resprouted leaves willnot adsorb enough herbicide. Spraying too late inthe fall can have a similar effect as some of your tar-get plants begin to harden off and won’t translocateyour herbicide from their leaves to their roots.

❑ If you have larger landowner neighbors, considerjoining your project to one of theirs. For an aerial her-bicide application you might also get hooked into acooperative flight with other small woodland ownersorganized by a forestry consultant or with a neigh-boring industrial forestland owner to hold your costdown and increase the likelihood your operation willget done.

u Invasive Weed Control. Remember, controlling inva-sive weed populations is your responsibility.

❑ Now is the time to control Himalayan blackberrieswith foliar herbicides. Based upon the type of chemi-cal you use and the seedlings planted, you may do a“directed” spray, avoiding contact with your trees, oran “over the top” spray. The reason September isgood for blackberry control is they are storing foodin their roots for next year. Good is any time after youhave ripe berries and before you have a frost. Thiscould be late August to the end of October for manyof you. Preferred herbicides are Glysophate (Accord)and Triclopyr (Garlon 4). With Accord, you need towait for Mother Nature to rinse the dust off theleaves before applying as the active ingredientsbond with the dust particles and are not adsorbedby the leaves. Suspended solids in your water sourcewould act just like the dust particles. For rates andtiming for your area, check with your local forester orchemical dealer, and make sure you follow the labelinstructions. Rubber boots, rain pants and waterrepellant gloves are now standard apparel when Iapply herbicides. Crossbow and Roundup herbicidesare not registered for forest use.

u Invasive Weed in the Spotlight: Bedstraw, any plantfrom the genus Galium, also called cleavers.

❑ My wife calls bedstraw “sticky weed.”You may have apet name for it around your place. I have it fromother Down on the Tree Farm committee membersthat livestock and chickens will eat it, so it may havesome redeeming qualities.

❑ You are probably more familiar with the seed headattached to your socks or the frayed cuff of yourpants. Or maybe attached to one of your pets.Running your contaminated socks or pants throughthe wash does not remove the seed head. You mayeven discover they have relocated to the inside ofyour socks.

❑ What have you heard about Bedstraw? True or False

• Native to the Northwest? True. Two varieties areOregon bedstraw, Galium oreganum, and catchweed


AUGUST

SEPTEMBER

OCTOBER

DOWN ON THE

TTTTRRRREEEEEEEE FFFFAAAARRRRMMMM

WHAT TO DO IN . . .

TIPS & TRICKS OF THE DAY: The way to get ahead isto stay late and hoe one more row. The problem for someduring this recession is they haven’t had a row to hoe.Tree farmers are more fortunate than most though, astheir tree farms provide opportunities to stay late and domore work.

bedstraw, Galium aparine. Catchweed bedstraw isthe plant you are probably most familiar with.

• Pioneer Day Mattress Ticking Material, hence thecommon name bedstraw? True.

• 756,000 seeds per pound? True.

• Seed available commercially? False.

• Will it mysteriously appear on the site where I justeradicated Himalayan blackberries? Probably.

• It is a serious problem in young conifer plantations.False.

• Stem is rectangular like the mint family. True.

❑ Bedstraw is not an invasive we need to put a lot ofeffort into controlling as tree farmers. Maybe weshould think of it as a native invasive and only dealwith it occasionally. It pulls easily and doesn’t appear tohave much root mass when compared to the mass offoliage. It doesn’t like Accord.You are better off for youreffort in time and/or money to focus on non-nativeinvasive species and/or other tree farming activities.

u Fall is Here and Winter is Just Around the Corner. It isTime to:

❑ Get your property ready for hunters, whether youwant them or not. If you have hunting trespass prob-lems and don’t hunt the area yourself, maybe youshould consider leasing the hunting rights for yourland to someone who does like to hunt and let themdeal with the trespassers. This has been done suc-cessfully by many landowners throughout the USA.

❑ Water is going to freeze, so drain it out of your equip-ment and/or add antifreeze. While you are at it, youmight want to add fuel stabilizer to small equipmentthat might be sitting for a few months.

❑ Maintain water bars, and clean out ditches and cul-verts. Seed bare ground by the end of September.

❑ Cover burn piles so you have a dry spot on the lowside and/or into the prevailing wind. Any pile burnsbetter with wind pushing the fire into your pile.

❑ Once you are confident the fire season has past, getthat fall burning done!

u Woods Words

❑ Jammer: One who gets 10 pounds into a 9 poundcontainer? No, we are actually talking about a type oflogging machine. Also known as the Idaho Jammer,this highly portable cable yarding machine was pop-ularized in the last half of the 20th century for thesteep slopes of northern Idaho. Most of thesemachines were put together by local loggers andcame on a variety of self propelled and towable trail-ers. Also a loading rig of almost any kind.

u Good of the Order

❑ Woodlands Carbon Company, www.woodlandscar-bon.com, recently had their first sale of family forestowner carbon. Mike Barnes is the guy to call at 971-237-5364.

❑ Oregon Small Woodlands Association has their newwebsite up and running, www.oswa.org. The pastissues of the Northwest Woodlands magazine areavailable in the members section. Another good rea-son to be a member.

❑ Watch Washington Farm Forestry Association’s web-site at www.wafarmforestry.com for a websiteupgrade coming soon.


Down on the Tree Farm is edited by David Bateman with

help from Linn County Small Woodlands members Aaron

White, Joe Holmberg, Jonathon Christie, Roy Stutzman, and

Neal Bell, and OSU Extension Forester Rick Fletcher.

This column is a project of the Linn County Small

Woodlands Association and the OSU Extension Master

Woodland Managers. Suggestions always welcome; send

to Dave Bateman at [email protected].

WARREN R. WEATHERSMBA, ACFRegisteredProfessional Forester

Certified General Appraiser

Forest and Rural PropertyAppraisal & Analysis

Pacific Northwest and AlaskaAppraisals for: Estate Planning &

Tax Reporting • Dispute ResolutionTakings • Damages

541-937-3738PO Box 39 • Lowell, OR 97452

By GEORGE G. ICE

reas with spe-cial protectionadjacent to

streams go by manydifferent names,including buffers,equipment exclusionzones, filter strips, riparian manage-ment zones, riparian managementareas, shade strips, stringers, andwater course and lake protectionzones. Throughout this article we willrefer to them as riparian managementareas (RMAs) as we describe somenew ideas about forest RMAs andhow they should be managed. Whilemost of the examples provided hereare from Oregon, the findings are rel-evant to other Northwest forestlands.

One of the first and most influen-tial tests of alternative riparian forestmanagement was the Alsea Water-shed Study in the central OregonCoast Range. The original study(1959-1973) assessed the effects oftimber harvesting on water, aquatichabitat, and salmonid resources(especially coho salmon and cut-throat trout) using a paired watershedapproach. Paired watershed studiesmeasure outputs from a control and atreated watershed during a calibra-tion and a post-treatment phase.During the calibration phase the rela-tionship between the two watershedsis established. The treatment effect isthe difference between the observedoutputs from the treated watershedand the expected outputs, based onthe control watershed, during the

post-treatment period. Flynn Creek Watershed served as

an undisturbed control. Deer CreekWatershed was patch cut with RMAsleft along fish-bearing reaches of thestream. Needle Branch Watershedwas nearly completely clearcut andsubsequently slash burned; nostreamside vegetative buffer was leftto protect it. Slash was initially felledacross the stream and then removed.In some reaches equipment was oper-ated in the stream channel.

Needle Branch experienced dramat-ic water quality changes for tempera-ture and dissolved oxygen (fish, likehumans, need oxygen—passed throughgills—for respiration). Changes in dis-charge, sediment, and nutrients werealso measured. Dissolved oxygendeficits were believed to result from ele-


A

New Ideas for Riparian Management Areas

GOLDGoodyear Nelson Hardwood

Port Blakely Tree Farms

Weyerhaeuser Company

Weyerhaeuser Hardwoods

SILVERBloedel Timberlands

Boise Cascade, LLC

Cascade Hardwood, LLC

Idaho Forest Group

M&R Services Company

Pacific Denkmann Company

RSG Forest Products, Inc.

SILVER (continued)

Simpson Investment Company

Timber Services, Inc.

West Fork Timber Company

Weyerhaeuser Real Estate Development Co.

BRONZEDrummond & Associates

Forestpark Lands, LLC

Giustina Resources

Goldstein Law Office, PLLC

IFA Nurseries, Inc.

Northwest Farm Credit Services

BRONZE(continued)

Northwind Forest Consultants

O’Neill Pine Company

SDS Lumber

Washington HardwoodsCommission

ANNUAL MEETING SPONSORS

Hampton Tree Farms, Inc.

Mueller Sack LLC

Pursley Logging Co., Inc.

Silvaseed Company

Stihl Northwest

Washington FARM FORESTRYA S S O C I A T I O N

CORPORATE PATRON PROGRAMMany thanks to the patrons listed below who have contributed so generously to our association:

vated stream temperatures and loadingof fresh slash in the stream. In con-trast, Deer Creek (with RMAs) experi-enced much less change in water quali-ty and no statistically significantchanges in fish. These results con-tributed to adoption of the OregonForest Practices Act and developmentof rules to protect water quality andfish habitat in 1971. This and otherstudies identified RMAs as a key prac-tice to maintain water quality, andRMAs are part of forest practice orStreamside Management Act rules inall the states within the NorthwestWoodlands geographic area. Figure 1shows the Needle Branch Watershedafter harvesting and site preparation in1966 compared to the watershed afterit was harvested in 2009.

How wide is enough?One of the most divisive issues

related to assessing forest practices

rules is the question,“How wide is wideenough?” for anRMA. In reality, thiscannot be answeredbecause RMAs mustbe defined in at leastthree dimensions: (1)width; (2) reach extent(length); and (3) man-agement practice lim-its. In turn, effective-ness can be measuredusing multiple metricsfrom fish productivityto various water quali-ty parameters. One ofthe key findings fromefforts to synthesizeour understanding ofRMAs is that theretends to be a law ofdiminishing returnsand the greatest bene-fits to streams aresecured from the por-tion of riparian forestnearest the stream (seeFigure 2). RMA widthcan be a poor predic-tor of performance for some func-tions. A study at Oregon StateUniversity by Jon Brazier andGeorge Brown found that timber vol-ume and buffer width were poor cri-teria for controlling stream tempera-

ture. Instead, effective shade or“...canopy density along the path ofincoming solar radiation...” was thekey riparian forest parameter influ-encing stream temperature.


PHO

TOS

CO

UR

TESY

OF

GEO

RG

E IC

E

Needle Branch Watershed as part of the Alsea Watershed Study Revisited. Photo on the left shows the watershed after harvest,stream cleanout, and hot prescribed burn in 1966. Photo on the right shows the same watershed in 2009 with riparian vegetation leftalong fish-bearing reaches.

–Continued on next page–

Figure 2.

Figure 1.

Synthesis of research from NCASI Technical Bulletin 799showing that riparian functions are satisfied most efficient-ly near the stream and that it takes more and more of theRMA to affect additional benefits (law of diminishingreturns). [POM=fine particulate organic matter,LOD=large organic debris] The three dark purple linesshow the results from three separate studies of LOD, eachfinding that 70-90% of LOD is coming from the first 25meters (82 feet) of the stream adjacent riparian area. Thetwo light purple lines (including the dotted line) stoppingat about 60 meters (196 feet) are two different representa-tions of sediment removal patterns. SOURCE: NCASI. 2000. Riparian Vegetation Effectiveness. Technical Bulletin 799.Research Triangle Park, NC: National Council for Air and Stream Improvement.

Professional ForestryServices, Inc.

Mike Jackson, CF, ACF

360-943-1470Since 1960

100 Ruby St. S.E., Ste. BTumwater, WA 98501

Forest Appraisal • ManagementExpert Witness • Hazardous Trees

Fax 360-943-1471www.proforestry.com

Riparian management areascannot overcome all impacts

There sometimes seems to be a per-ception that RMAs can overcome allupslope impacts. While RMAs oftendramatically reduce such impacts,they cannot be the only best manage-ment practice (BMP) applied in awatershed. Deer Creek in the AlseaWatershed Study provided a goodexample. While temperature and dis-solved oxygen were largely protected,sediment outputs increased as a resultof forest management activity eventhough RMAs were used. The causeis believed to have been sidecast roadfailures in the upper basin. A study atthe same time as the Alsea, in the H.J.Andrews, also experienced extensiveroad failures that scoured one water-shed to bedrock in some reaches andcaused massive sediment deliverydownstream despite the presence ofRMAs (Figure 3).

Can streams benefit from ripariandisturbance?

The Alsea Watershed Study andsubsequent research taught us thatriparian buffers can significantlyreduce impacts to sediment, tempera-ture, and dissolved oxygen by main-taining cover and shade, reducing soildisturbance near the stream, keepingfresh slash out of the stream, andmaintaining forest floor conditionsthat allow for trapping and settling ofsediment. Early concerns aboutdepressed dissolved oxygen concen-trations, as well as concerns aboutfish passage, led to stream cleanouts.Subsequent research found that in-stream large wood was important inproviding pools and fish habitat.More recent work in small streamsidentified the importance of wood forhiding cover. Today the benefits ofin-stream large wood are widelyaccepted. One of the most remark-able and controversial findings in thisera was that some (but certainly notall) debris flows that deposit materialfrom tributaries can provide benefi-cial habitat for fish.

There are curious anomalies in

research findings related to fish andtheir responses to riparian forest con-ditions. In many, perhaps most caseswhere streams are exposed to directsolar radiation, fish populations actu-ally increase as long as streamwatertemperatures remain below harmfullevels and in-stream wood is notremoved.

A key observation from a series ofstudies in the Oregon Coast Rangewas that more open or hardwood-dominated riparian stands can pro-vide “hot spots” for fish productivity(we think because more light leads toincreased primary production andsupports macroinvertebrates that canbe food sources for fish, but perhapsalso because fish can see prey easier),but this is most likely where there issufficient in-stream large wood. Theriparian conditions that contribute tolarge wood recruitment and relativelyopen canopy conditions do not gener-ally occur with the same stand condi-tions (although there may be opportu-nities to thin riparian stands to focusgrowth on residual trees and simulta-neously increase light to streams).Without active management of ripari-an stands we cannot and should notexpect to optimize conditions for fish

everywhere at the same time.Perhaps the most direct test of

how active riparian management canaffect fish populations is a study byDr. Peggy Wilzbach and colleaguesin northern California. Using a repli-cated block study design, they testedwhether adding salmon carcasses (toenhance low nutrient concentrationsand possibly provide direct food forfish) or opening riparian canopiesaffected trout populations. The ripar-ian canopies were opened by cuttingnear-stream hardwoods. The authorsfound that opening the riparian for-est resulted in an increase in troutbiomass, but addition of salmon car-casses did not. Interestingly, earlyversions of the Oregon ForestPractices Act allowed “staggered har-vesting” along streams as long asthey did not significantly increasestream temperatures.

Other emerging concerns aboutriparian management areas

While land managers haveembraced RMAs as an effective prac-tice to protect water quality, there areemerging concerns about their use.

At some point active managementof riparian areas may be necessary to


PHO

TO C

OU

RTE

SY O

F G

EOR

GE

ICE

Concentrated flows off roads and debris flows can overwhelm RMAs, resulting in deliveryto streams. RMAs can improve water quality but cannot overcome all upland impacts.

Figure 3.

regenerate desirable forest stand con-ditions. For many years silvicultural-ists have warned that without activemanagement buffers will suppressregeneration of trees along the streamcorridor. Dr. Dave Hibbs, professorat Oregon State University, has statedthat: “Side light will allow the devel-opment of a shrub understory. Asexisting trees senesce, a gradual suc-cess to a shrub community will prob-ably occur. No tree regeneration islikely in absence of deliberate effortsto secure it.” Dr. Mike Newton,emeritus professor from Oregon StateUniversity, noted that the principlesfor regeneration success found onupland sites (e.g., healthy, largeseedlings; control of competition; fullsunlight) can also be applied toregeneration of riparian forest stands,although riparian areas face addition-al risks such as beaver.

Lack of active riparian manage-ment can be a major problem if non-native noxious shrubs such as butter-fly bush (Buddleja davidii) invaderiparian areas. Butterfly bush canform dense thickets that crowd outnative plants. There are dozens ofinvasive riparian plants of concernfor forest riparian areas.

We typically think that forest har-vesting increases water yields byreducing evapotranspiration, butwater supply concerns are increasingand RMAs could be a practice ofconcern. Deep-rooted riparian vegeta-tion can access streamwater duringlow soil moisture periods. RMAs maycreate conditions where riparian vege-tation, exposed to full sunlight, couldhave increased uptake of water. Insome water-short regions, such as theSouthwest, there are proposals toremove invasive riparian vegetation(e.g., saltcedar, Tamarix chinensis) thatare using large amounts of water.

Of course, another major concernis the economic impact of leavingRMAs. If rules require increasinglyextensive and management-limitingRMAs there can be economic coststo landowners, especially wherestream networks are dense.

Pollution control tradingOne emerging area of interest is the

use of pollution control trading tominimize costs. The idea is to tradehigh-cost pollution control solutionsfor lower cost controls. One of thewater quality issues for the WillametteBasin in Oregon is water temperature.Presumably, a company dischargingheated water could trade with a forestlandowner to provide an offset to ther-mal pollution by maintaining treesalong a stream. The forest landownerwould be paid for this pollution con-trol and the discharger would savemoney over a costly diffuser or otherpollution control practice. There are afew problems with this scheme: shadeis already maintained under the ForestPractices Act rules; all water pollu-tants, including thermal pollution,decline as flow moves downstream;and pollutants of interest may not becontrollable by forest or riparian forestmanagement alternatives.

OptimizationWhen we optimize we either get

more out of the same investment or wespend less to get the same benefits. Theconcept of optimization, while perhapsnot often feasible for pollution tradingstrategies with other industries, is stillan area of interest in most pollutioncontrol communities. Agriculture hasbeen especially aggressive at trying todevelop tools to simultaneously testBMP effectiveness and the costs associ-ated with BMP alternatives. Oneexample of optimization is a study byWeyerhaeuser Company that looked atthe tradeoffs of increasing RMAsalong headwater channels while reduc-ing RMAs along mainstem reaches sothat no net increase or decrease in areain RMAs was realized. Could thisstrategy result in a balance that opti-mizes environmental benefits with noadditional cost to the landowner?

ConclusionsThese observations can be sum-

marized as follows:• RMAs can reduce negative water

quality impacts and retain large wood

for future recruitment.• RMAs cannot always reduce

upslope impacts to acceptable levelsand must be part of a watershedpackage of BMPs.

• RMAs do not necessarily repre-sent optimal habitat conditions forfish. Recently logged stream reacheswhere riparian forests have beenremoved can actually have elevatedfish populations as long as largewood is not removed.

• There are potential long-termconsequences of managing uniformbuffers, such as creation of persistentriparian brush stands and possiblereductions in streamflow, especiallyduring low flow periods.

• There appear to be opportunitiesto increase fish productivity by open-ing some reaches and managing for amixture of riparian canopy species,wood recruitment potential, andreach exposure levels.

• There are opportunities to exploreoptimization strategies that balancethe economic costs of RMAs withtheir environmental benefits in waysthat achieve water resource objectives.

If you are a small woodlandlandowner and you have streams,lakes or wetlands in or adjacent toyour property, you will need to under-stand the state rules for RMAs thatyou operate under. You know yourproperty better than anyone else.Most states allow for alternative prac-tices if you can show that they meetor exceed the protection provided bythe standard rules. Think about howyou can best manage your property toprotect water quality, wildlife, andfish, but also meet your own manage-ment needs. Be open to pollution con-trol trading options if they are eco-nomically beneficial for you. Followdebates about revisions to the rulesfor forest RMAs and make sure theymake sense for your woodlands. ■

GEORGE G. ICE is a NCASI Fellow,National Council for Air and StreamImprovement, Inc., in Corvallis, Ore.He can be reached at 541-752-8801 [email protected].


By PETER A. BISSON

ver the lasttwo decadesmost atten-

tion given to issuesconcerning waterquality and forestmanagement in thePacific Northwest has focused onprotecting habitat for salmon andtrout. The attention has been cat-alyzed by multiple listings of fishpopulations under the EndangeredSpecies Act and by adoption ofwatershed-based HabitatConservation Plans (HCPs) andnegotiated legal agreements for stateand private lands. Additionally,efforts to recover salmon by protect-ing water quality and restoringstream and riparian habitat have

included ambitious regional programssuch as the Puget Sound Partnership(www.psp.wa.gov/) and the North-west Power and ConservationCouncil’s Program for the ColumbiaRiver Basin (www.nwcouncil.org/fw/Default.asp). Most of these programsfocus on federal and state lands, largeindustrial forests, and tribal lands, butsmall privately-owned forests play akey role in protecting water qualityand conserving fish and wildlife.

Demand for clean water for a vari-ety of uses will increase. Watershedsare where we live, grow crops andcreate various forms of industry. Asthe Pacific Northwest’s human popu-lation expands, competition for waterand the ecological goods and servicesthat water provides will grow moreintense. While protecting fish habitatwill remain important, it will be onlyone of a suite of issues with whichfamily forest managers charged withprotecting water resources mustremain engaged. In almost everycase, they will be faced with balanc-ing the ecosystem needs of fish withthe need for drinking water, sanita-tion, energy, agriculture, commerceand recreation.

With this in mind it is helpful toreview emerging issues that are ofinterest to small woodland owners:climate change, wildfires and invasivespecies. That climate is changing isbeyond scientific dispute, even

though the causes of change maycontinue to be publicly debated.With climate change the frequencyand severity of wildfires will alsochange, as will the patterns of inva-sion of new plants and animals intothe Pacific Northwest and elsewhere.Each of these factors can cause sig-nificant changes in water quality andquantity, but their specific impacts inthe context of forest management,and what can be done about them,are incompletely known. This articleexamines each issue from a scientificstandpoint and considers how newfindings can be incorporated intofamily forest management strategies.

Climate changePotential effects of climate change

on water quality in the PacificNorthwest include: (1) higher airtemperatures resulting in increasedprecipitation falling as rain ratherthan snow; (2) diminishing wintersnow pack and reduced flows duringsubsequent low flow periods; (3) pos-sible increases in peak storm flows;and (4) rising water temperatures (seeFigure 1).

Climate scenarios predict anincrease in large floods, wildfires, andforest pathogen outbreaks, some ofwhich have potential to actuallyimprove habitat as a result ofenhanced floodplain connections andtrees entering streams. Many effects


Clean Water and Family Forest Management:Some Emerging Issues

O

I n s u r i n gt h e F u t u r e

with the right expertise

Timber Appraisal

Allowable Cut Determination

Harvest/Reforestation Planning

Timber Sale Management

Water Rights

Survey, Land Use & Engineering

(541) 267-2872Coos Bay ◆ Dallas ◆ Forest Grove

www.stuntzner.comwww.nwforestryservices.com


of climate warming, however, willhave negative consequences for watersupplies and aquatic organisms, atleast in the short term. Summer watershortages are likely to be exacerbatedby reduced snowmelt runoff—a prob-lem affecting the water needs of bothfish and humans. Severe wildfires andmore frequent intense rainstorms cancause stream changes (heavy sedi-mentation, streambed scour and lossof riparian forests) that result in mor-tality and reduced productivity ofaquatic organisms, as well as directthreats to water supplies and proper-ty. Over decades to centuries, wild-fires and floods contribute to main-taining aquatic habitat, but the short-term consequences of these events aresocially undesirable. Managers aretherefore faced with the difficult taskof formulating strategies that balancethe long-term benefits and short-termrisks of these rare events.

From a habitat standpoint, main-

taining as much water as possible instreams and lakes during dry periodsis an effective way of combating theharmful effects of climate change,and there will be obvious benefits todownstream water users of keepingflows as high as possible. Connectingrivers to their floodplains by allowingthem to meander and maintain sur-face connections to floodplain pondsprovides a safety valve that helps

reduce the scouring effect of highflows on spawning locations, pro-vides refuges for aquatic organisms,and improves water quality. Some ofthe ways small woodland owners canhelp buffer the adverse effects of cli-mate change include:

• Minimize increases in water tem-perature by maintaining well-shadedriparian areas.

PHO

TOS

CO

UR

TESY

OF

P.B

ISSO

N

Examples of the effects of climate change on water quality: (a) shrinking perennialdrainage network of headwater streams; and (b) extreme low flows during the dry season.

Figure 1.



• Maintain a forest stand structurethat retains snow water and pro-motes fog drip, and reduces the “rainon snow” effect associated with forestopenings in the transient snow zone.

• Disconnect road drainage fromthe stream network by divertingrunoff away from active channels tosoften discharge peaks during intensestorms.

• Ensure that fish have access toseasonal habitats, e.g., floodplainponds in winter or cool water areasin summer.

• Protect springs and seeps fromwater appropriations that wouldlessen habitat quality and down-stream water availability.

WildfiresWildfires cause immediate increas-

es in water temperature, althoughdirect heating is brief. Some fire retar-dants used to control wildfire containchemicals that can harm aquatic lifeif present in sufficient concentrations.

More significantly,however, sedimentconcentrationsusually rise in thepost-fire environ-ment, watershedsbecome moreprone to land-slides, peak flowsoften increase dur-ing storms, streamfood webs arealtered, and loss ofriparian vegetationleads to higherprolonged streamtemperatures. Allof these changescan be harmful tofish and they typi-cally cause problems for downstreamwater users. Nevertheless, the role ofwildfire in maintaining long-termhabitat complexity has been shown inseveral recent studies. Wildfires havebeen found to be a catalyst for deliv-

ering trees and boulders to streams.These fire-derived materials can func-tion as aquatic habitat for more thana century and help maintain the pro-ductivity of salmon and trout.

The debate within the naturalresource community over what areappropriate pre- and post-fire foresttreatments goes far beyond maintain-ing clean water, and therefore it is use-ful to consider the issue of streamprotection in a much larger context.Because climate change will lead tomore and hotter wildfires for a varietyof reasons, the question arises: “Whatcan be done to reduce short-termdamage to aquatic and riparian con-ditions while conserving the long-termhabitat benefits of fire?” At present,there are no simple answers to thisquestion. Fuels reduction treatmentsmay be worthwhile in riparian areaswhere the risk of intense fire is veryhigh, but some riparian zones are notlikely to burn severely and fuels treat-ments may compromise aquatic habi-tat development and harm waterquality if they reduce wood recruit-ment, alter floodplains, and damagestream banks. Likewise, post-firetreatments such as salvage loggingand erosion control using hay balesmay be appropriate in some locations,but inappropriate in others.

Family forest managers are encour-

PHO

TO C

OU

RTE

SY O

F P.

BIS

SON

Invasive riparian plants such as Japanese knotweed can spreadasexually through rhizome fragmentation, spawning isolatedplants (a) that coalesce to form dense thickets. Water qualityimpacts of these invaders are poorly understood.

Figure 2.


aged to examine the recent literatureon wildfires and water quality in thewestern U.S., as perspectives on therole of fire have changed over the lastdecade and future fire regimes will dif-fer from those of the past. The topicof fire management and water qualityprotection will continue to be of inter-est to scientists in the coming years.

Invasive speciesInvasive species are not usually

associated with clean water issues inthe Pacific Northwest, but they mayhave a significant impact on waterconditions such as nutrient concen-trations. Many invasive aquaticspecies (plants, invertebrates, andfish) are concentrated in coastal andinterior lowlands where many familyforests are located, and invasive ripar-ian plants are spreading throughoutthe Pacific Northwest at a rapid rate.

For example, several varieties ofAsian knotweed are consideredthreats to native vegetation and areinvading many watersheds where theyare capable of displacing nativeshrubs and trees (see Figure 2). Theproliferation of invasive species willbe aided by climate change, more fre-quent wildfires, and expanded humandevelopment. Although there are pro-grams in place to detect and controlsome unwanted invaders, many willsimply become part of our futureforested landscape.

We have a very incomplete under-standing of the impacts of invasivespecies on water quality and quanti-ty. In some parts of western NorthAmerica dense growth of non-nativespecies such as tamarisk have low-ered streamflow by taking up water.Whether reduced flows can be attrib-uted to invasive riparian plants in thePacific Northwest is not clear andprobably unlikely in high-rainfallcoastal areas. Programs aimed ateliminating invasive plants for habi-tat reasons, however, often rely onherbicides to kill these aggressiveinvaders and multi-year treatmentsare common. For species such asknotweed, stem injection of herbi-

cide by hand is often the method ofchoice, with the added benefit ofreducing entry of the chemical intostreams compared to application byspraying; however, this method islabor intensive. However, there arefew scientific studies of the effects ofinvasive species on small woodlandstreams, and more work is needed.

Establishing realistic clean water goalsClimate trends, a changing fire

regime, invasive species, and a num-ber of other factors related to humandevelopment will make it more diffi-cult for streams in forested water-sheds to conform to existing waterquality standards. One conclusionseems clear: We will not be able torestore streams to conditions thatexisted prior to Euro-American settle-ment. Instead, we face a future inwhich conditions, even in the mostpristine watersheds, will differ fromthe past. For some fish, especiallythose adapted to cold waters, theenvironmental margin between sur-vival and local disappearance willgrow thinner. This poses a challengeto water quality regulators to developclean water goals that are realistic inthe face of inevitably changing condi-tions, and to small woodland man-agers to develop conservation strate-gies that strive to reduce risk in thosecircumstances where aquaticresources are imperiled. In the PacificNorthwest, scientists are activelyinvestigating methods of identifyingenvironmental “hotspots” over largegeographic areas (places where pre-dicted changes and highly sensitive

species overlap), in which temperedwater quality expectations can be metby innovative management approach-es that provide for effective waterstewardship. ■

PETER A. BISSON is a research fish-eries biologist for the USDA ForestService, Pacific Northwest ResearchStation, in Olympia, Wash. He can bereached at 360-753-7671 [email protected].

By BOB DANEHY

s a woodlotowner you like-ly have inti-

mate knowledge ofthe ground you man-age and the associat-ed plants and animalsthat live in the woodlot. The forestyou are managing has grown, beenharvested, and regrown. During thatcycle of growth, relative abundancesof various biota may have fluctuated,but overall most are probably stillthere. In the following, I will focus onthe riparian system, which can bedefined as the stream and associatedareas adjacent to the stream. Most ofthe animals in the forest will use theriparian system for water or to forage.For other organisms, most obviouslyfish, this system is where they live allthe time. The reason I use ripariansystem rather than riparian zone orriparian area is because “system” indi-cates that there are interactionsbetween the stream and terrestrialcomponents. In fact, each is depend-ent on the other, as the stream is criti-cal for a healthy riparia and theriparia is critical for a healthy stream.While the primary focus of this article

will be on fish and what it takes tokeep fish happy, remember: Becauseof the availability of water, ripariansystems are hotspots for forest life!

The riparian systems that surroundthe stream on your property provideresources and influence instream con-ditions for the fish that live in thestream. Ecologists have spent careersdefining the habitat of many organ-isms and building complex scientificmodels to measure habitat quality.Underlying all that science, habitat foranimals can be described by threecomponents—food, cover, and water.In general for fish, good habitatmeans adequate food available withinthe stream or from surrounding vege-tation, places to rest or hide, andwater of good quality.

Food. Fish eat a variety of prey; acommon approach used by fish instreams is to target food that is floatingdownstream. Those drifting prey are oftwo basic types: (1) aquatic animals—mostly insects—that leave the substratepurposely or accidentally; and (2) ter-restrial items—again mostly insects—that fall in the stream from adjacentvegetation. Many of the driftingaquatic insects are developing from lar-vae to adults. If they do not becomeprey, they emerge as adults from the

water, find a mate, and deposit eggsback in the stream (more on life cycleslater). The period of time out of thewater as adults can range from hoursto months, and during that time theyare potential prey for many forest ani-mals. The aquatic part of the system issupporting the terrestrial food web.Conversely, those terrestrial insects thatfall into the stream and are consumedby fish provide an example of the ter-restrial part of the system supportingthe aquatic food web.

Cover. The cover that the ripariansystem provides is produced by thesystem itself. For fish the cover is thesubstrates that comprise the streambed; the pools that are scoured in thebed; the banks that are undercut; andlarge in-channel wood. By far inforested streams the most importanttype of cover is large wood, as notonly does it grow and is delivered fromthe riparian system, but it creates,maintains, and forms most of theother cover types. In forests, a ripariansystem without large wood in thestream is one with poor fish habitat.

Water. Water quality is the thirdpiece of the habitat triangle for fish.Since forest chemicals are beyond thescope of this article, let’s assume thatyou strictly follow the manufacturer’sinstructions and adhere to all applica-ble best management practices associ-ated with forest chemicals. If that’s thecase, there are only two water quality


What is Fish Habitat?

A

PHO

TOS

CO

UR

TESY

OF

BO

B D

AN

EHY

The photo on the left is a Coho salmon stream and a stream reach in need of structure. Note the shallow water, unsorted substrates,and alder canopy. Photo on the right shows two structures right after placement (note hard hat for scale) in the stream. Through timethe structures will capture floating debris, the stream will become more complex, and velocities will change, which will scour bed andsort gravels.

concerns for your forest stream—ele-vated water temperatures and higher-than-normal delivery of sediment.

Stream temperature is controlledby a few factors, but mostly it is theamount of direct sunlight that hits thewater surface. If the buffer can inter-cept most of the direct sunlight, thestream will have close to its expectedthermal regime. Cases can be madefor openings to increase production ofalgae that helps instream bugs andultimately fish; however, by and largea well-shaded stream provides betterfish habitat than an unshaded one,not to mention that the trees are asource of food and nutrients and alsoeventually contribute cover as largewood. Water temperature is extremelyimportant to fish; since their bodiesare the same temperature as the water,their metabolic rates are dictated bythe temperature of the water. Instreams with high levels of food, fishcan grow well even in moderatelywarm water. However, in late summerwhen flows are low and temperaturesare their highest, instream food pro-duction is low. In summary, shade isgood for fish.

Another factor that influencesstream temperature is complex chan-nels. I previously described streamswithout wood as being poor fishhabitat because of lack of cover. Thewood has an additional benefit as itcaptures substrates (sediments) mov-ing downstream during high flows(bed load), which develop a streambed. This area of a riparian systemthat extends from the top of thestream bed to the underlying bedrockis called the hyporiec zone. Flowingwater moves between this zone andthe surface water through down-welling and upwelling, which allowsheat to dissipate and keep part of theflow out of direct light. This is anoth-er example of the riparian systeminteracting to keep water tempera-tures cool, as the terrestrial vegeta-tion shades the stream and con-tributes the trees that fall into thestream and capture bedload thatdevelops the hyporiec zone.

Fine sediment is a natural part ofstreams; high flows will lift small par-ticles off the bed and transport themdownstream. Fine sediment type willvary with local geology, as places withhigh amounts of clay can createcloudy or muddy water, whereas inplaces with sandstone, sand willdeposit in slow water areas (for exam-ple, along stream margins) or on highterraces as the high flows recede. Forfish, the water quality concern occurswhen there are higher than normal

amounts of fine sediment in theirhabitat. Sediment deposition cancome from a single episode, such as alandslide bringing in a pulse of sedi-ment, or more chronic delivery fromroad networks. The impact on habitatis greatest while very young fish arerearing in the substrate. While cloudyor muddy water may perhaps interferewith feeding, those conditions usuallylast only for a couple of days. The



PHO

TO C

OU

RTE

SY O

F B

OB

DA

NEH

Y

Large wood plays an important part of the riparian system and is critical for the sur-vival of trout and salmon that inhabit the stream.

STARKER FORESTS, INC.Celebrating75 years

1936 to 2011Corvallis, Oregon Phone 541-929-2477Come see us for a free permit to hike, bike, hunt or horseback ride.Or… Join us during the summer months for an afternoon bus drivethrough the forest. For more information on these bus trips, pleasecall Corvallis Tourism, 541-757-1544.

For additional information, visit our website:www.starkerforests.com


major impact occurs when there is somuch fine sediment that it covers thesubstrate and suffocates the develop-ing eggs. Water quality impacts to fishby high water temperatures and exces-sive fine sediment are common, yettheir detrimental effects can be mini-mized with thoughtful planning (seeaccompanying article on page 20).

Another concept to keep in mindwhen thinking about what makesgood habitat for fish is their life cycle.Depending on which fish live in yourstream they may live their entire life(resident species) or only live part oftheir life (migratory species) on your

property. Fish start as eggs, usuallydeposited in the stream bottom,emerge as young (fry), mature intojuveniles, and develop into sexuallymature adults, then start the cycleagain. Each life stage requires differ-ent types of habitat. The habitat isstill comprised of food, cover, andwater; however, the habitat needschange during the life cycle. Forexample, the cover required by a frythat is less than an inch in length isvery different than what is needed foran adult. Therefore, from a fish stew-ardship viewpoint, streams with littlecomplexity are unlikely to be able to

provide the range of habitat needsrequired for the entire life cycle.

Each species of fish has a differentlife cycle. To make it even more com-plicated, there are species in whichpopulations from different locations oreven individuals within populationshave differences in their life cycles (forexample when they migrate). In theNorthwest there is probably onesalmonid species (trout or salmon)inhabiting your streams, so I’ll focuson that group. However, please remem-ber there are other fish from sculpin todace, and even lamprey that may alsobe in your stream, each with their ownhabitat requirements and life cycle.

One major difference in thesalmonids is when they spawn.Cutthroat trout and steelhead trout(rainbow trout are the freshwaterform) spawn in the spring, while mostother salmonids spawn in fall or earlywinter. For fish that spawn in the fall,their eggs will develop through winterand emerge in early spring, whereasfish that spawn in spring will emergelater in the spring or early summer.Once out of the substrate young fishmust begin feeding quickly. Since theycan’t swim well, slow water habitat,particularly very shallow water thatcan exclude predators, is required.Mortality is high during this life stageand individuals that grow quickly aremore likely to survive to the next lifecycle stage. Depending on the size ofthe reproducing females, hundreds ofeggs are produced. Survival of a smallfraction of offspring through the firstsummer is typical.

Habitat requirements change rapid-ly during the first year of a salmonid’slife. This is why complexity within thestream channel is desirable. What iscomplexity? In forested streams itstarts with large wood in the channel.Earlier I discussed the riparian systemas a link between the terrestrial andaquatic areas, and there is no biggerlink within that system than largewood and the recruitment of largewood from the riparian corridor.

Trees eventually die, be it from dis-turbance such as windthrow, the

Wildlife ServicesCompany, Inc. 5227 Gifford Rd. SW • Olympia, WA 98512

Phone: 1-360-352-6055URL: www.seadust.bizContact: Dan L. Campbell

[email protected] K. [email protected]

U.S. Patent No. 6,652,870 B2

• Wholesale and Retail• Protect New Growth & Overwinter• Treat Before or After Planting• Protect Western Redcedar• Protect Riparian Plantings• New Applicators Available

Protect Your Trees – Protect Your Investment

®

Control of Rubbing Damagewww.willowbuckrub.com

CHECKOUT:

Q U E S T I O N S ?

When you consider that only 10% of the world’s forests are certified, we have

a long way to go. The good news is that there are a number of credible forest

certification programs. And each one, including SFI, encourages responsible forestry.

For more on forest certification and what you can do, visit www.sfiprogram.org.

SUPPORTRESPONSIBLEFORESTRY.

stream undercutting the bank, orpests and diseases. These trees cancontribute to the complexity of thestream channel by falling toward thestream. If the tree is big relative to thestream, it can contribute to fish habi-tat for decades. Natural mortalityfrom a mature riparian system willsupply a steady supply of large woodto channels.

Once in the stream, the large wooddisrupts flow paths, creating a rangeof velocities; substrates being trans-ported downstream during high flowsare deposited and sorted; and thebranches, root wads, and bole createcover in and around the tree. Organicmaterial such as leaves, branches, andtwigs from the stream-adjacent treesget caught up in the structure. Themost obvious habitat feature is cover,but the accumulated organic materialserves as homes for aquatic insectsthat become prey items and sortedsubstrates create patches of potentialspawning habitat. Fish habitat isenhanced by the complex suite offlow and substrate conditions that areformed by the large wood in the chan-nel. These habitats develop throughtime, so as decades pass, large woodeventually breaks up, and new treesfall in creating a mosaic that changesbut still provides habitat for all lifehistory stages.

Biologists speak of habitat or lifecycle bottlenecks. The bottlenecks arehabitat factors that limit a particularlife cycle stage. It could be a lack ofgravels of the appropriate size forspawning, low velocity water foremerging young to feed in, or rearinghabitat such as pools for juveniles. Forexample, for Coho salmon, winterrearing habitat is critical to make itthrough the first winter before leavingfor the ocean. The habitat that hasbeen was found to be lacking isalcoves or side channels that are out ofthe main flow during winter storms.Developing good habitat throughout aspecies life cycle can greatly help fishpopulations’ health, and complexriparian systems can do that.

So far I have largely spoken of

freshwater habitats as they are onyour tree farm. While the features ofthose described for resident fish stillapply, the species that migrate to theocean, large rivers, or lakes have otherconcerns. The life history strategy ofmoving to larger waters allows thefish to grow much larger as the foodresources are better in those habitats.Depending on the species, individualsmay return in 1.5 years (Coho) or asmany as four or five years later forsome steelhead trout and Chinooksalmon. These fish will grow fromoutgoing young (smolts) of a fewinches to incoming adults of a couplefeet. One additional aspect of habitatfor these migrating fish is fish passage,both downstream and upstream.Migration problems are a product ofhuman development: dams and roads.Movement pass dams are beyond thescope of this piece, but road crossingsare certainly something woodlot own-ers need to be aware of. Before the life

cycle can start over, the returning fishneed to reach the spawning grounds.Even for fish that do not move longdistances, culverts can be a habitatconcern as most salmonids moveupstream to spawn, so they couldneed to get past road crossings.

Just as in the past couple ofdecades, the future will present chal-lenges to forest managers. With somany species of fish already listed asthreatened or endangered in thePacific Northwest, fish will remain afocus of regulators. Collectively if wecan demonstrate that fish and fibercan coexist through proactive andthoughtful management of both, per-haps the next generation of tree farm-ers will have a bright future. ■

BOB DANEHY is an aquatic biologist,Western Timberlands Research,Weyerhaeuser Company, Springfield,Ore. He can be reached at 541-988-7521 or [email protected].


Purchasing alder sawlogs, pulp and

timber at the following locations:

Arlington, WA (360) 435-8502

Centralia, WA (360) 736-2811

Longview, WA (360) 577-3887

Eugene, OR (541) 689-2581

Coos Bay, OR (541) 267-0419

Garibaldi, OR (503) 322-3367

WeyerhaeuserSustainable Forestry Initiative


By BOB DANEHY

hope that many of you haveasked this question. Before offer-ing some approaches and sugges-

tions, let us first be clear about theregulatory landscape. Much of thePacific Northwest is under some levelof regulation with ESA (EndangeredSpecies Act). Therefore, before doinganything with your stream, first con-sult with your local state fish agencyoffice to determine if there are anyrestrictions such as when work can bedone or types of projects allowed. Forexample, using cabling to hold materi-als in place is usually not allowed.Depending on the project, permitsmay be required for actions likeadding structure to the stream, whichmay be considered fill. In any circum-stance, it is best to consult with thelocal fish biologist about what youwould like to do. He or she will likelybe very helpful, have knowledge ofother local efforts, and may even beaware of funding sources. In Oregon,

watershed councils have become theprime group for fish habitat restora-tion and most have some funding. Inother states there will be groups rang-ing from agencies to nonprofits withwhich the local state fish biologist willbe able to help you make contact.

As the owner of a property youprobably have a good understandingof the history of that property. It mayhave been in your family for genera-tions. If you do not know the history,this is your first step.

Undoubtedly, the property youhave managed has been logged atleast once. However, what other activ-ities occurred and how was the earlylogging done? Was mining part of thehistory? Berms of rock along thebanks are a tell-tale sign of mining.Was the stream straightened at anytime? Straightening shortens the dis-tance, which thereby increases the gra-dient, and therefore the velocity anderosive power of the stream. Is there

evidence of a past debris flow? On thewestside, if the riparian system isalder dominated and there is any sortof stream gradient, it likely had adebris flow. What is the fire historyand how intense and extensive was thefire? Most eastside forests haveburned in the last couple hundredyears. Was the stream used to trans-port logs? If so, the channel may stillhave too much bedrock substrate.

Once you know the history, youhave a better idea of why the streamlooks like it does. If you know of astream nearby of similar size thatdoesn’t have the same history or hasbeen impacted to a lesser extent, itcan give you a perspective of what thestream could be like and thereforehelp to formulate a restoration goal.

Restoration and enhancement offish habitat starts outside the ripariansystem. The two primary water quali-ty concerns for fish in forested groundare water temperature and fine sedi-

I

What Can I Do to Make the Stream(s)on My Land Better for Fish?

For AdditionalRestoration Information

• ENG—National EngineeringHandbook, Part 654, NRCS StreamRestoration Design. NEH-654 is ahighly technical handbook that is1,600 pages in length. It is only avail-able online and as CD-ROM. For theCD-ROM version, visit http://nrc-spad.sc.egov.usda.gov/DistributionCenter or call 1-888-526-3227. To viewthe online version, go to http://direc-tives.sc.egov.usda.gov/viewerFS.aspx?id=3491.

• Google “fish habitat enhancementfor small streams” and it will bring uphundreds of references. Refine thesearch by adding your state or water-shed or structure type.

PHO

TO C

OU

RTE

SY O

F B

OB

DA

NEH

Y

Complexity can be increased with boulder structures. Weirs collect bedload and createpools. Other boulder structures, such as boulder clusters, create ranges in flow and substratecharacteristics.

ment. State practices differ across thePacific Northwest and each set of reg-ulations addresses these issues in aslightly different manner.

In the accompanying piece on fishhabitat, I described bottlenecks, whichyou will recall are habitat factors thatlimit a particular life cycle stage. Onelate-summer bottleneck for fish acrossthe Pacific Northwest is high watertemperatures. It is a time of low flowand cloudless days of intense sunlight.One way fish habitat on your streamscan be improved is keeping consistentshade on the stream. In states wherebuffer regulations allow some selec-tion of which trees are harvested, sim-ply walking the stream on an Augustafternoon and marking which treesprovide shade is an important step inrestoration. Shade matters and itgrows! Depending on the width or theorientation, effective shading willvary, but with a long-term approach awell-shaded stream can be established.

Roads are an essential part of for-est management and minimizing sedi-ment delivery is an important restora-tion action. Fine sediment is part ofthe stream ecosystems as high flowsgradually erode one bank as otherbanks are rebuilt. In a managed for-est, roading, particularly road cross-ings, can add higher than normalamounts of fine sediment. That sedi-ment can smother the eggs in winterand cover food-producing gravels. Asa landowner you probably know howmany road crossings you have andwhich ones deliver the most sedimentto the stream. For crossings in steepto moderate terrain, the road lengthdelivering runoff in ditches can beshortened to reduce sediment inputs.During storms, as ditch length getslonger, volume increases and thatincreases the erosive power of therunoff. Ditch relief culverts or waterbars, which direct runoff into the for-est floor, accomplish two things: theyreduce the length of road delivering tothe stream and decrease the erosivepower of the runoff.

Next, you will want to walk thechannel. If you can walk the channel

without needing to climb over some-thing every 25 yards, the stream needsmore complexity. Increasing that com-plexity by adding large wood to thestream at the time of a future harvestcan be cost effective as machinery isnearby and lower quality trees can beused. These “sticks-in-cricks” projectsare popular and there is a lot of infor-mation available on how to size thewood so it is stable and designs thathave been shown to be most effective(see sidebar).

The second feature to look for ishow well connected the stream is tothe floodplain. If the stream wasmined, otherwise straightened, orused to transport logs, the main chan-nel may be down cut and not be wellconnected to the potential habitatthat could be developed in the flood-plain. Look for evidence of old chan-nel meanders. Reconnecting thesepotential habitats at all flows or highflows can provide rearing habitat for

young fish and cover for large fishduring high flows. Adding complexityin the channel and reconnecting themain channel to secondary channelscan provide your stream with a rangeof habitats for different stages of thelife cycle.

Improving fish habitat in thestreams of your forest need not besome big project involving consultantsand contractors. It is about having anunderstanding of what the fish needand looking for opportunities. Thoseopportunities could be during ascheduled harvest, a funding sourceyou identify, or even a big storm thatknocks some trees down. ■

BOB DANEHY is an aquatic biologistfor Weyerhaeuser Company inSpringfield, Ore. He can be reachedat 541-988-7521 or [email protected].


Garlon® Herbicide VersatilityTargeted control of unwanted competing brush.

Freshly Cut StumpsApply Garlon 3A right after cutting hardwoods.

Resprouted Hardwoods• Garlon 4 Ultra Thinline hand spray for small bigleaf

maple clumps.• Low Volume Basal with Garlon 4 Ultra in W.E.B. oil

for small to large clumps.

9685 Ridder Rd. S.W., Suite 190 • Wilsonville, OR 97070

For information on this or any other herbicides, call:Bruce Alber 503-227-3525–western Oregon & western WashingtonJoel Fields 509-928-4512–eastern Washington, Idaho & MontanaCarl Sostrom 509-928-4512–eastern Washington, Idaho & MontanaScott Johnson 916-991-4451 & Jerry Gallagher 530-570-5977–California

BY JULIE WEIS

f you are a wood-land owner whovalues certainty in

life, you may notwant to read thisarticle right beforebedtime. This isbecause after 30-plus years of log-ging roads being exempt from CleanWater Act permitting requirements,the Ninth Circuit Court of Appealsrecently jettisoned the exemption andconcluded that stormwater runofffrom logging roads is subject toClean Water Act permitting require-ments. As discussed below, the NinthCircuit did so in an opinion that leftmany basic questions unanswered.For example, how would a woodlandowner who uses a forest road to haula load of timber even get a CleanWater Act permit given that the

Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) has no permit program inplace for logging roads?

The Ninth Circuit is the largest ofour Courts of Appeal, covering ninewestern states and two U.S. territoriesand presently boasting 46 judges. Ifyou are reading this article, there is agood chance you live within thecourt’s jurisdiction. In August 2010, athree-judge panel of Ninth Circuitjudges concluded that two publicroads used for logging and related sil-vicultural activities on Oregon’sTillamook State Forest were “pointsources” of pollution (similar to a fac-tory discharge pipe), thus requiringClean Water Act permits (NationalPollutant Discharge EliminationSystem, or NPDES, permits). Becauseof the decision’s potentially far-reach-ing ramifications—its impacts couldextend into the everyday world of allroads, public or private, that feature

ditches or culverts designed to captureand properly dispose of stormwaterrunoff—the Ninth Circuit was askedto rehear the case. But on May 17,2011, the court declined to do so.Instead, the court issued a revised ver-sion of its logging roads decision thatincluded a previously-missing justifi-cation for why the court had subjectmatter jurisdiction over the case.

The logging roads decision aroseout of an Oregon district court casefiled in 2006 by the NorthwestEnvironmental Defense Center(NEDC) against Oregon’s StateForester, the individual members ofOregon’s Board of Forestry, and fourOregon forest products companies:Hampton Tree Farms, Inc., StimsonLumber Company, Georgia-PacificWest, Inc. and Swanson Group, Inc.The lawsuit claimed that stormwaterflowing into ditches alongside twopublicly-owned roads on theTillamook State Forest in northwest-ern Oregon was transporting sedi-ment into streams and rivers in amanner that constituted “dischargeof a pollutant from a point source”and hence required a Clean WaterAct permit.

In 2007, the Oregon district courtdismissed the logging roads lawsuiton the grounds that any discharge ofpollutants from the public roads wasexcluded from the Clean Water Actpermitting system by the EPA’s so-called Silvicultural Rule (found at 40C.F.R. § 122.27(b)(1)). Under thisrule, timber harvest operations, sur-face drainage, or road constructionand maintenance from which there isnatural runoff are exempt from thepermitting requirement because theyare diffuse, “nonpoint” pollutionsources. NEDC appealed the dis-


I

Does Your Logging Road Need a Clean WaterAct Permit? Thanks to the Ninth Circuit Court

of Appeals, the Answer May Be Yes

missal of its case, leading to theNinth Circuit’s 2010 conclusion that“stormwater runoff from loggingroads that is collected by and thendischarged from a system of ditches,culverts, and channels is a pointsource discharge” requiring a CleanWater Act permit. The Ninth Circuitdid not invalidate the SilviculturalRule outright, but it certainly ren-dered the rule impotent with respectto logging roads.

The technicalities of the NinthCircuit’s decision are not the point ofthis article, although they may pro-vide the basis for a request for U.S.Supreme Court review of the deci-sion. In a nutshell, the Ninth Circuittook issue with EPA’s authority toadopt the Silvicultural Rule in a waythat exempted logging road stormwa-ter runoff from the Clean Water Act.The court also held that certainamendments to the Clean Water Actdealing with stormwater dischargeshad not exempted logging roadstormwater runoff from the CleanWater Act’s permitting requirement.

So why the above reference to theSupreme Court, and what does thelogging roads decision mean in apractical sense?

First, the four Oregon forest prod-ucts companies in the case, joined bythe Oregon Forest Industries Counciland the American Forest and PaperAssociation, have decided to seekU.S. Supreme Court review of thelogging roads decision. In May 2011,the forest products entities had askedthe Ninth Circuit to stay its decisionwhile they decided whether to seek

further judicial review, but the NinthCircuit denied that request on June 3,2011. The Ninth Circuit’s refusal tostay its decision means the logging

roads decision now is the law inAlaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii,Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon,


New Water Quality Controls Affecting Woodland Ownersin Oregon’s Coastal Zone

By Julie Weis

If you are a woodland owner in Oregon’s expansive coastal zone, you may be affectedby a September 2010 legal settlement that will soon cause the state to impose new landmanagement restrictions on individual properties in an effort to improve water quality.The settlement has its origins in an Oregon district court lawsuit brought against theNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the EnvironmentalProtection Agency (EPA) under the federal Coastal Zone Act ReauthorizationAmendments (CZARA). Under CZARA, states like Oregon must develop an acceptablemanagement plan (called a Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program) for controllingnonpoint source pollution from logging and other land uses. Otherwise a state risks los-ing federal grant monies available under the Coastal Zone Management Act.

NOAA and EPA have not fully approved Oregon’s program due to concerns aboutthe adequacy of Oregon’s Forest Practices Rules, particularly with respect to riparianareas, landslide-prone acreage and forest roads. The lawsuit thus used the threat of lostfederal funding to leverage a settlement that puts significant pressure on Oregon todevelop so-called “implementation-ready” Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs),described in the settlement as a “new and novel approach to achieving and maintainingwater quality standards” in Oregon’s coastal zone. Currently, this issue and remedyappear to be unique to coastal Oregon, with no obvious implications for other localareas or nearby states.

The new and novel TMDL approach envisions coastal zone woodland ownersanswering to two state regulatory authorities, Oregon’s Department of EnvironmentalQuality (DEQ), and the Oregon Department of Forestry. Under the new approach,DEQ will develop allowable daily pollution loads (i.e., TMDLs) and water qualitymanagement plans for specific waterbodies, then assign individual load allocations toproperty owners adjacent to those waterbodies. Landowners, including woodland own-ers, then will be required to implement property-specific plans for controlling pollutioninputs to adjacent waterbodies. DEQ also will establish “safe harbor” best manage-ment practices (BMPs), which if used by a landowner would act as a surrogate for sat-isfying the individual load allocations.

If this sounds like a major change to you, it is—woodland owners historically havenot been subjected to direct water quality regulation by DEQ for forest practices, noranything resembling an individual pollution load allocation. Rather, Oregon law tasksthe Board of Forestry (BOF) with establishing BMPs for forest practices so that “non-point source discharges of pollutants resulting from forest operations on forestlands donot impair” water quality standards. These BMPs are better known by woodland own-ers as the water protection measures of Oregon’s Forest Practice Rules. In an effort toavoid a clash between DEQ and BOF over regulation of Oregon forest practices, thenew TMDL approach will recognize the validity of BOF BMPs that are “at least asprotective as the DEQ BMPs.” But if the BOF BMPs are deemed insufficient for agiven coastal waterbody, a local woodland owner either would have to comply withDEQ’s safe harbor BMPs, or develop and obtain approval for their own BMPs.

Oregon’s coastal zone is large—it encompasses almost all watersheds that drain intothe Pacific Ocean—so many Oregon woodland owners are potentially affected by thissettlement. How implementation of the settlement will play out, and whether DEQwill face a challenge to its assertion of authority over woodland owners, remains to beseen. But for now, DEQ is moving forward on its implementation-ready TMDLapproach, starting with those lucky Oregon woodland owners in the Mid-Coast Basin,which includes the Alsea, Siletz-Yaquina, Siltcoos, and Siuslaw sub-basins.

Paul Adams, professor and Forest Watershed Extension specialist at Oregon StateUniversity, also contributed to this sidebar.

–Continued on page 31–

INTERNATIONAL FORESTRYCONSULTANTS, INC.

Professional Forestry Services

Forest Asset ManagersGIS and Certification Services

Throughout the Pacific Northwest

[email protected] HansonDennis Dart

(425) 820-3420

By PAUL W. ADAMS

ublic opinionsurveys inthe Pacific

Northwest repeatedlyshow that most peo-ple rate clean drink-ing water among thehighest values associated with ourforestlands. The minds-eye image of aclear, cool, easy-flowing stream shad-ed by an evergreen forest canopy canbe pictured by almost anyone. Suchimages contribute to public concernsabout forestland use and related man-agement practices, which often focuson potential impacts to water suppliesand other aquatic resources. Wood-land owners typically share many ofthese concerns, even when relyingupon a well water supply or a munici-pal water system that has only anindirect connection to forestlands.

The broad and ongoing interest inforests and drinking water leads tomany different ideas, perceptions andquestions. Even if you know exactly

where your own water supply origi-nates, hopefully you’ll find this “Factor Fiction?” approach interesting andinformative as it reviews this topic. Itdraws from both forest watershedresearch studies as well as our knowl-edge and experience with specificdrinking water sources and issues onforestlands in the region.

Most drinking water in the PacificNorthwest comes from forestlands.Fact or Fiction?

Generally, this is a fact. Uplandareas dominated by forest cover typi-cally are where most of stream andriver water originates as rain orsnowmelt, so these areas supply mostof the water volume at municipal sys-tem intakes. Initial pioneer settlementsin the region simply tapped nearbyrivers and streams. But as towns andcities grew, public leaders looked tocleaner sources upstream, sometimesacquiring key portions of or entireforest watersheds for that purpose.

Undisturbed forest watersheds area consistently pure source ofdrinking water. Fact or Fiction?

This is fiction. The simple reason isthat during the rainy or snowmeltseason, natural erosion on hillslopesand in stream channels occurs even inpristine watersheds, leading to rela-tively high levels of sediment instream runoff. Water quality studieshave verified this, and practical expe-rience during major storms typicallyshows a need for extra water treat-ment of the muddy water, or the useof alternate supplies from wells orstorage reservoirs.

Drinking water is pure water.Fact or Fiction?

This is pure fiction. Virtually alldrinking water, whether from an indi-vidual well, municipal system, orcommercially marketed bottle, con-tains more than just H2O (i.e., hydro-

gen combined with oxygen). In fact, ifyou drank truly pure water (which ismost closely approximated by distilledwater) it would taste “flat” and unap-pealing. The typically benign mineralsand other compounds (e.g., calcium,sodium, bicarbonate) added to waterin small amounts as it moves throughthe atmosphere and soil help givewater its unique “taste.” Interestingly,most bottled water sold in the U.S. issimply tap water that’s had the chlo-rine from municipal treatmentremoved prior to bottling—other nat-ural minerals are left in the water orsome even may be added prior to bot-tling to give it more “body.”

How forests currently are managedis a critical concern for drinkingwater. Fact or Fiction?

This is a fact, at least with respectto wildfire hazards on federal forest-lands. These hazards have increaseddramatically in recent decades, espe-cially on federal lands east of theCascade crest and other areas of pineand drier mixed conifer forests. Someof the largest water quality impactsever observed on forestlands haveoccurred after major wildfires. Inaddition to potentially heavy sedi-ment from hillslope and channel ero-sion, streams can have higher temper-atures from canopy shade loss and


Did You Know?The Organic Act, passed by the U.S.

Congress in 1897, established the pri-mary purpose of the western federalforestlands that became our NationalForests. It states that these lands are“...for the purpose of securing favor-able conditions of water flows, and ...acontinuous supply of timber.” TheO & C Act of 1936 similarly states thatthe western Oregon BLM lands are for“...providing a permanent source oftimber supply, protecting watersheds,regulating stream flow, and ...the eco-nomic stability of local communities.”The U.S. Forest Service and BLM thusrecognize the compatibility of waterand timber production from forest-lands, and for over a century theseagencies have supported research tobetter understand how to maintainand improve that compatibility.

Forests and Drinking Water: Fact or Fiction?

P

PHO

TO C

OU

RTE

SY O

F PA

UL

AD

AM

S

Each person uses about 100 gallons ofwater per day, but only a small fractionof that amount needs to be pure enoughto drink. Local water shortages ariseprimarily from high volume uses such astoilet flushes and landscape irrigation.

excess nutrients (e.g., nitrates) as ashand soil leachates are flushed tostreams after wildfire.

This can be fiction in mixed land usewatersheds. The intakes for manymunicipal water systems are locatedin the lower parts of large watershedsthat have many different land uses.Thus, most of the water volume canoriginate on forestlands but the quali-ty of that water can be greatly alteredby downstream land uses. Even withharvest and other forest practices,research and stream monitoring showthat other land uses (agriculture,urban and suburban development)typically have much greater potentialimpacts on local water quality. Forexample, pesticide applications onforestlands in Oregon represent lessthan four percent of the amountapplied annually on agricultural lands(OR Dept. Agriculture, 2007 pesticideuse report).

Forests help add water to ourdrinking water supplies. Fact orFiction?

This is fiction, except where heavyfog occurs frequently. Like otherplants, trees draw up and transpire(i.e., evaporation through the pores ofleaves and needles) significantamounts of moisture from the soil. Inaddition, the large amount of surfacearea in the forest canopy results inevaporation losses from leaves, nee-dles and other surfaces when wettedby lighter rain or snow showers. Inforested watersheds, these water loss-es total about 10-20 inches annually.Thus, although forestlands providerelatively high quality water, the“cost” is that we must share some ofthe rain and snowmelt with the treesand other plants in the forest. Theonly exception is some unique coastaland mountain locations where “fogdrip” (heavy condensation on treeand other plant surfaces that drips tothe ground like rain) adds significantamounts of moisture.

We’re now facingdrinking water short-ages, even on the“wetside” of theregion. Fact or Fiction?

This is fiction withrespect to our needsspecifically for drinkingwater, but overall watershortages are growingthroughout the region.Although each of ususes roughly 100 gallonsof water per day, onlyabout five percent ofthat use actually requireswater quality levels thatensure safe human con-sumption. Other water uses requiremuch greater amounts of water,including toilet flushing, residentialand agricultural irrigation, and indus-trial processes. Supply problems areincreasing not because we need moredrinking water, but because oftenthere is only a single municipal systemto meet all major needs. Such situa-tions offer few or no alternative watersources, and thus shortages can ariseas we produce and consume excep-tionally high quality water to flushtoilets and water lawns.

Protecting most trees from harvestis most important in watershedprotection. Fact or Fiction?

This is fiction. Limiting disturbancein streamside areas and protectingmany of the trees that provide shadeand woody debris can provide notablewater quality benefits. However, it isoverly simplistic to assume that pro-tecting most trees from timber harvest(including those in riparian areas) is

best for watershed resources in thelong run, as the earlier wildfire hazardsexample also suggests. Managementpractices that maintain or help restorefavorable soil conditions (especiallyhigh infiltration) are most importantfor good water quality and flow. Andgiven that forestlands provide consis-tently higher quality water suppliesthan any other land use, watershedprotection starts with practices andpolicies that help maintain forestlanduse, including some allowances for eco-nomic benefits from those lands. ■

PAUL W. ADAMS has been a professorand Forest Watershed Extension spe-cialist at Oregon State University since1980. His work at OSU has includedstudies on the Seaside and Astoriamunicipal watersheds, as well as anoverview entitled “Municipal WaterSupplies from Forest Watersheds inOregon: Fact Book and Catalog,” pub-lished by the Oregon Forest ResourcesInstitute in 2001. He can be reached [email protected].


PHO

TO C

OU

RTE

SY O

F PA

UL

AD

AM

S

Because wildfires can seriously damage water supplies, for-est thinning and brush control to reduce fire hazards can beimportant. Although dry forest types are especially vulnera-ble, this wildfire and heavy sedimentation occurred in theDallas city watershed in northwest Oregon.


By CYNTHIA ORLANDO

ost smallwoodlandowners

already know treesare a vital componentof a rural communi-ty—providing bene-fits and increasing the economic valueof your property over time, but whatabout an urban community? Treessupply a community’s residents with amultitude of benefits including cleanair, clean water, wildlife habitat, andpsychological well-being. When acommunity’s trees are well-cared for,most visitors deduce the citizens arewell-cared for, too.

Many city dwellers look to theirsmall woodland owner friends forinformation about trees. Well, here isinformation you can share about howurban trees improve life for your city-dwelling friends. Consider just a fewof the ways both urban and ruraltrees benefit the communities in whichwe live.

Environmental benefitsAir pollution control is one way

trees help improve livability in ourneighborhoods, as trees remove bothsolid and gaseous pollutants from theair.

Trees also reduce stormwaterrunoff costs by intercepting, using,and storing rainfall. Progressive localgovernments are increasingly lookingtoward non-built stormwater manage-ment strategies like trees to reduce thecosts of constructing storm watercontrol infrastructure.

Energy conservationWith summer here, it’s a great time

to appreciate how much trees can helpus with energy reduction. Deciduoustrees planted on the south, west andeast aspects of a home can create wel-come shade, reducing air-conditioningcosts during the hottest months ofsummer.

Solar panels typically are placed onsouth-facing roofs, but trees and solarpanels can coexist. Planting trees to

shade the west side of your home willleave plenty of exposure for the pan-els, while keeping the house cool insummer.

Likewise, evergreens planted on thenorth or west sides of your home canreduce winter heating costs by servingas windbreaks; buffering occurs bestwhen evergreen foliage is maintainedclose to the ground. Another tip:when planning gardens, select areason the south or east side of largetrees—leaf mulch during the winter isgreat for garden soil.

Economic benefits in urban areasHow about economic contribu-

tions? Can trees really help a commu-nity weather the storm of a recession?Studies have shown that shoppers arewilling to spend more money in tree-lined business districts than in districtswithout trees.

In addition, several studies haveshown that homebuyers and realestate agents assign between 10 and 23percent of the value of a residence tothe trees on the property. Local gov-ernments capture some of this mone-tary value, since enhanced propertyvalues increase the tax base.

Trees in urban areas provide a greatreturn on the investment, but usuallydon’t get the credit. That’s starting tochange. A Davis, California, studyestimated its city’s trees to be worth$35 million, and a study of trees inPortland appraised their capital valueat $1.1 billion, or $15.3 million inannual benefits to residents.

What about costs? Is it expensivefor a city to maintain a strong treeprogram? Costs of tree managementcompare favorably with the costs ofmaintaining streets, sewers, and otherassets. And over time, records shouldshow that while most other urbanassets decline in value, trees grow invalue.

M

In Both Rural and Urban Settings, Trees Pay UsBack Dollar-for-Dollar, and Then Some

[email protected]

Forest Seedling Network1740 Shaff Rd. #306

Stayton, OR 97383

DISCOVER Our Interactive WebsiteConnecting Forest Landowners with

Services and Contractors

www.forestseedlingnetwork.com

OREGON • WASHINGTON • IDAHO • MONTANA • C ALIFORNIA

Buy/SellSeedlingsUse OurMap Search

Find VendorServices &Contractors

ValuableResourcesNews, Updates & EventsTips, Notes, Links & AdviceSeed Zone Maps

Product Groups:Forest Seedlings • Christmas Tree SeedlingsConifer Liner Stock Seedlings • Forest Tree SeedNative Woody Plant Seedlings

Overall, it’s the mature trees withlarger crowns that provide us with thegreatest benefits. Just remember, pro-viding enough room on-site for thetrees’ roots and ultimate height is animportant consideration—so taketime to select the right site before youplant a tree.

Mature trees around your homeWhether you live in the city or the

country, a healthy, stately or majestictree can add thousands of dollars tothe sale value of your home and yourneighborhood.

Here are some guidelines to createstateliness from young trees:

• Plant a species that will create alarge canopy in plenty of rooting spaceand plenty of sun, away from over-head wires, sidewalks, and driveways.

• Keep grass and lawnmowersaway from the tree by covering thearea under the canopy drip-line withbark mulch.

• Do not harm the trunk.• Water the tree to establish it for at

least three to four dry seasons, reduc-ing the frequency of watering everyyear. That is, water weekly during thefirst dry season; bi-weekly in June-October during the second year; andthree to four times during the summerand fall the following year.

• Do not disturb the area under theircanopy; make sure your older trees arewell maintained by an arborist certifiedby the Pacific Northwest Chapter ofthe International Society ofArboriculture (PNW-I.S.A.).

Prune during winter months anddon’t top

While we’re on the topic of mainte-nance, a quick reminder: Make sureyou prune any ornamental trees inneed of pruning during the wintermonths, rather than during warmerweather. Pruning when trees are dor-mant minimizes risks of pest prob-lems associated with wound entry,and allows trees to use the full grow-ing season to begin closing and com-partmentalizing wounds.

If done correctly, pruning can

lengthen a tree’s life, increase its valueto the landscape, and minimize liabili-ty problems. If done improperly, how-ever—especially if trees are over-pruned or “topped”—pruning canlead to numerous problems includinginsects, decay, safety issues, and ulti-mately, a shorter lifespan for the tree.

Avoid topping your trees. Topping—the indiscriminate cutting back of treebranches to stubs—is a common butdetrimental practice. Many peoplemistakenly top trees because theygrow into utility wires, interfere withviews or sunlight, or simply grow solarge that they worry the propertyowner. Without its protective crownof leaves and branches, a tree cannotfeed itself or protect its sensitive barkfrom damaging sun and heat.

If you have questions about cor-rect pruning techniques, contact a cer-tified arborist, your local universityextension agent, your state forestryurban forestry program, or visitwww.treesaregood.com/treecare/treecareinfo.aspx.

More management tips for thetrees on your property

Before building around trees, con-tact a consulting forester to identifyhow to get the most value out of thetrees you need to remove. Sawmillstake logs only in certain lengths, so ifyou take a tree down and would liketo sell it, make sure it’s a marketablelength.

A consulting forester can also tellyou whether the trees you want toremove might destabilize the rest ofthe stand when they’re gone and howto thin your remaining trees for opti-mal health. Consulting foresters, stew-ardship foresters and other resourceprofessionals can advise you on waysto manage your forestland/trees forwildlife habitat or other objectives,and how to establish or reestablishtrees on your property.

Upright dead trees with loosebark and decaying wood are incredi-bly valuable for nesting holes; theyalso host insects that birds and otherwildlife are happy to eat. To increase

habitat for birds and other desirablewildlife, consider maintaining a fewsmall snags or wildlife trees on yourproperty, but not big or near enoughto the house to cause damage if theyfall.

Oregon State University (OSU)Extension Service has many helpfulwildlife-related publications availableonline at http://extension.oregon-state.edu/catalog/details.php?sort-num=0628&name=Wildlife.

Fire-prone communitiesOf course, if you live in a fire-prone

community, you’ll want to considerwhich tree species might make the bestchoices when planted close to yourhome. Thick bark and the high mois-ture content of their foliage make pon-derosa pine and western larch goodfire-resistant tree planting choices.

Maintain a safe distance betweenyour home and any potential fuelsources such as dead or dying treesand vegetation, and remove as muchdead vegetation around your propertyas you can to help lessen the chanceof a rapid fire spread.

Arborvitae and blackberries arefire-prone plants to avoid, andremember not to pile firewood within30 feet of your home. For more infor-mation about protecting your homefrom wildfire, visit www.firewise.org/resources/homeowner.htm.

Healthy trees = healthy communitiesIn short, trees make important

social, environmental, and economiccontributions to our rural and urbancommunities in which we live, and ourquality of life. Properly managed,healthy trees signify time and moneywell spent, a good indicator of ahealthy property and community. ■

CYNTHIA ORLANDO holds a B.S. inforest management and is a certifiedarborist with the Oregon Departmentof Forestry in Salem. She can bereached at 503-945-7421 [email protected].


TreeSmarts: Answers to Your TaxPlanning Questions is a new columnthat will appear in every other issueof Northwest Woodlands (summerand winter). Whether your interest isin how new tax policies might affectyou, learning strategies to betterarrange your financial and businessaffairs, or something else, columneditor Rosemary Sanchez will answerquestions from landowners on anytopic related to estate, business andtax planning. As readers have not yethad a chance to send in their ques-tions, this inaugural column providesa brief update on a few tax items ofinterest to landowners.

Estate Planning: New Laws, NewOpportunities—Now What?

The Tax Relief, UnemploymentInsurance Authorization and Job

Creation Act of 2010 (TRA 2010)enacted new laws for federal gift,estate, and generation-skipping trans-fer (GST) taxes. These new laws haveopened a window of opportunitythat allows us to move from anuncertain tax environment to certain-ty. However, this window of opportu-nity is limited as these new laws areonly effective through December 31,2012.

The new estate tax law providesfor an estate tax exemption of $5 mil-lion for each individual ($10 millionfor married couples). This means thatan individual who dies in 2011 or2012 may exempt the first $5 millionof assets from estate tax (with a 35percent maximum estate tax rate onthe excess). Also, the survivingspouse can use the unused portion ofthe estate tax exemption of the

deceased spouse. This is referred to asthe “portability” provision. Forexample, if the deceased spouse used$3 million of the estate tax exemp-tion, the executor of the deceasedspouse’s estate may elect to transferthe “unused” estate tax exemption of$2 million to the surviving spouse.Keep in mind, however, this portabil-ity provision is available for deathsthat occur through December 31,2012.

The portability provision allowsthe surviving spouse to use thetransferred exemption from thedeceased spouse toward their ownlifetime gifts or toward their estate.This benefit is only available if thesurviving spouse makes the gifts ordies in 2011 or 2012.

The new gift tax law increased theamount of the gift tax exemption,which allows a taxpayer to make giftsduring their lifetime from $1 millionto $5 million to be exempt from gifttax (with a 35 percent maximum gifttax rate on the excess). For example,if the taxpayer made gifts duringtheir lifetime of $1 million through2010, under the new law the taxpayeris entitled to make an additional $4million of gifts during their lifetime.Keep in mind, however, this addition-al $4 million available for gifting isonly good until December 31, 2012.

One type of gift that would maxi-mize the advantage of this new lawwould be a gift of assets that havefuture appreciation and income earn-ing potential such as units in a familylimited partnership (or similar enti-ty). This is a tremendous planningopportunity for a taxpayer to trans-fer a significant amount of wealthout of their estate during this limitedwindow of opportunity.

The new laws “reunified” theestate and gift tax exemptions avail-able to an individual. What does thatmean? It means that an individualmay transfer up to $5 million ofassets during their lifetime (subject togift tax) or at their death (subject to

TreeSmarts: Answers to Your Tax Planning Questions▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲▲

▲

▲

▲

▲

▲

▲

▲

▲

▲

▲

▲

▲

▲

▲

▲

▲

▲

▲

▲

▲

▲

▲


Area Resource ManagersWashington . . . . . .Mark Wentzel 253-677-5115Oregon . . . . . . . . . .Carl Harrison 541-729-2403Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . .Fred Omodt 208-263-2141

You can also visit us at www.ldm.com

Buying Douglas Fir and Red Cedar Poles

A professional staff providing the most productive wayof bringing your Poles to market.

Services include:• Pole marking • Facilitate access to certified• Quality control Pole Loggers and Haulers

during harvest Buying Douglas Fir and• Free estimates Red Cedar Poles

estate tax), but the maximum gift andestate tax exemption on a combinedbasis is limited to $5 million. Forexample, let’s assume the deceased tax-payer utilized $3.5 million of their gifttax exemption during their lifetime.Therefore, at the date of death, thedeceased taxpayer has an estate taxexemption remaining of $1.5 million(total of $5 million gift/tax exemptionless the $3.5 million gift tax exemp-tion). If the taxpayer’s estate at date ofdeath is greater than $5 million, thenthe estate is subject to estate tax as theestate/gift tax exemption of $5 millionwas fully utilized ($3.5 million gift taxexemption plus the remaining estatetax exemption of $1.5 million).

The new generation-skipping trans-fer tax (GST) law increased theamount of the GST exemption from$1 million to $5 million with a maxi-mum tax rate of 35 percent.

These changes provide a tremen-dous opportunity to mitigate estate,gift and GST taxes.

Review Your WillAll wills should be reviewed to

determine what the outcome would beunder the new laws regarding the dis-tribution of assets and funding oftrusts. Many estate planning strategiesprovide that an individual’s assets funda family trust (aka, credit shelter trust)with the maximum exemption amount,and then fund a marital trust (provid-ing for the surviving spouse) with theexcess assets. If the estate is below $5million, all the assets will fund the fam-ily trust with no assets available tofund the marital trust based on thecurrent law. This may or may not bewhat the individual intended.

The current window of opportunityand time of certainty for estate plan-

ning has a closing date of December31, 2012. Those individuals that recog-nize the opportunities and work withtheir estate planning team will be ableto pursue winning strategies to accom-plish their estate planning goals. Pleasesee your estate planning advisor foryour specific situation implementingany of the above information in com-pliance with current income, estate,and gift tax laws.

TreeSmarts: Answers to Your TaxPlanning Questions is edited byROSEMARY SANCHEZ, a partner andCPA with Bancroft Buckley Johnston &Serres LLP in Seattle, Wash. She is amember of the AICPA and Board ofDirector of the WSCPA. Questions tobe answered in future columns can beemailed directly to Rosemary [email protected].


Certified PublicAccountants

1501 4th Avenue Suite 2880Seattle, WA98101-1631www.bbjsllp.com

206.682.4840

Disclaimer: To ensure compliance withrequirements imposed by the IRS, any taxadvice contained in this communicationwas not intended or written to be used,and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i)avoiding tax-related penalties that may beimposed on the taxpayer under theInternal Revenue Code or applicable stateor local tax law, or (ii) promoting, market-ing or recommending to another party anytax-related matter(s) addressed herein.

DEAR TREEMAN, I grow ponderosapine on property that was a formerwheat/alfalfa ranch. Pocket gophersare a part of the landscape and take25 percent +/- of planted seedlings. (Iaggressively treat for the rascals.) In anewly planted section, I wrapped theroots with small mesh chicken wire.Now I have to move these youngseedlings/trees and am finding theyhave impressive roots. Could thechemicals on the wire have washedoff and contributed to their hand-some root structures? —Vic

DEAR VIC, Chicken wire is a form ofgalvanized wire, the main ingredientsconsisting of zinc-coated steel, con-taining a substantial amount of iron.While both iron and zinc are part ofthe mix of nutrients required bytrees, deficiencies are not particularlycommon in most Pacific Northwestsoils. So nix on the chemical benefits.Perhaps the excrescence of roots wasoccasioned by the excessive excava-tion of the planting hole in order toaccommodate the seedling and thewire wrap? Then again, perhaps weare digging too deep here, so nix onthe physical benefits.

Let us consider the geometric struc-ture of the chicken wire: hexagonal innature.This structure can be found inother types of chemical compoundssuch as non-aromatic polycyclic hydro-carbons, including steroids. A deriva-tive of this group includes brassinoste-riods, a unique class of plant growthregulators with structural similarity toanimal steroid hormones. In otherwords, your trees are “on the juice.”

Small wonder theyhave such “hand-some”structures!But have those“rascals”caused adiversion in ourdeductive reasoning?

While the persuasive, precedingargument should satiate the mostanalytical of minds, if we must harboranother guess, perhaps a succinctinvestigation of the former wheat/alfalfa ranch plant physiology will bringus to a successful conclusion. All of thatnitrogen gas (N2) in our atmosphere isunusable for your trees until itbecomes ammonia (NH3). Alfalfa is alegume, and as such, contains root nod-ules with the bacteria Sinorhizobiummeliloti, capable of biological nitrogenfixation.Those trees of yours are grow-ing in a nitrogen-rich environment andwith impressive roots to show for it!And without any assistance from thosepernicious pocket gophers. —Treeman

DEAR TREEMAN, I recently attended atimber sale workshop in which youwere the speaker. You mentionedsomething about “playing the game”with the Scribner log volumes andhow it is a battle with log buyers. Asystem as antiquated as Scribnershould be eliminated and the use ofthe metric system would be a muchbetter method of determining pay-ment for your logs. —Jim

DEAR JIM, You aren’t the first to sug-gest a change in the methodology oflog measurements in the PNW. Andlikely not the last. Over 10 years ago,there was a major effort in academiaand some of our public agencies foradoption of the cubic measuring sys-tem.The argument was one of equi-tability between buyer and seller:measuring the total fiber content in alog versus product recovery, the basisfor the Scribner Log Rule, amongstothers. After all, the entities promotingthis change were from the govern-ment and they were/are here to help.

A cynical analysis, dare we say real-ist, of the change will tell you it was

due to that ubiquitous factor thatcomes into play anytime someone orsome agency believes the rulesincline to their disadvantage: money.Eliminate the Scribner log scaling“game,” pay for the entire fiber con-tent of the log, and everyone will behappy. But as my mother used to say,“Not so fast there, Buster.”

Did anyone believe the privatetimber companies would voluntarilyrenounce this entrenched method oflog measurement for one developedin a large part by the government?Actually, there were some companiesthat began offering the option ofpayment by cubic (cunit) or Scribner.What could have been more equi-table than allowing someone to bepaid the “old way” or a “new andimproved” method? Well, not so fastthere, Buster.

Buyers, and their respective mills,have been measuring logs by bothmethods for a number of years: oneto measure mill efficiency and theother as a basis of payment to theseller. Companies possess huge data-bases of the ratios between ScribnerLog Rule and the cubic system basedon individual log length(s) and diam-eter(s). When offering a choice onmethod of measurement/payment,they merely plugged these ratios intothe pricing structures and the seller,with an occasional small variation,received the same amount of money.

Fast forward to today and we seethe payment option has disappeared,Scribner reigns supreme, once againlending credence to the old axiom:the more things change the morethey remain the same. Or as Thoreausaid: Things do not change; wechange. —Treeman

DEAR TREEMAN, How much longerare we going to have to endure yourdiatribes? —Lee

DEAR LEE, At least until the globalwarming advocates who place thephenomenon’s cause-and-effect atthe feet of anthropogenic contribu-tions of carbon dioxide include ourplanet’s most significant greenhousegas, water vapor, into their equations.Did I hear something about glaciersin the nether world? —Treeman

Tips From The Treeman▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲

Steve Bowers


▲▲▲▲▲▲ ▲▲▲▲▲ ▲▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲▲

AKS Engineering and Forestry

fax 503-925-896913910 S.W. Galbreath Dr., Suite 100

Sherwood, OR 97140email: [email protected]

website: www.aks-eng.com– CALL Keith Jehnke or Alex Hurley –

u Surveyingu Engineeringu Logging Roadsu Timber Cruising

503-925-8799

Washington, and two Pacific Islands.It also means the case now will besent back to the Oregon districtcourt—the Ninth Circuit’s decisiondid not impose a remedy on the stateand forest products industry defen-dants, instead ordering the districtcourt to conduct further proceedingsconsistent with the logging roadsdecision to address the remedy issue.At press time, the forest productsentities had asked the Ninth Circuitto reconsider their request for a staygiven their commitment to petition-ing the Supreme Court for relief.

Second, if the case is not revisitedby the Supreme Court (a very smallpercentage of requests for SupremeCourt review are granted), some

observers believe that many privateand governmental entities will berequired to obtain a permit for thedischarge of stormwater from log-ging roads under their control orownership. Although it is difficult topredict the way in which the Oregondistrict court will fashion a remedy,the Ninth Circuit’s acceptance of theargument that road use by log trucksis an industrial activity opened adoor for requiring point source per-mits.

But woodland owners are oftenreferred to specifically as nonindustri-al landowners. Does that mean thelog truck drivers who use woodlandowners’ roads will have the permit-ting obligation even without havingcontrol or ownership over the road-way? And given that roads on wood-land properties almost always areused for other purposes, can the“industrial” label be applied? Also,given that EPA currently does nothave a permitting program in placefor logging roads, how might oneapply for a Clean Water Act permitto avoid potential environmental lia-bility? If permits are required, EPA’sdelegation of Clean Water Act per-mitting authority to states will causethe time-consuming permittingprocess to fall in most cases onalready-overburdened state agenciesthat historically relied on comprehen-

sive systems of “best managementpractices” (in the Pacific Northwest,these are each state’s forest practicesrules) to address the issue of silvicul-tural stormwater runoff.

In short, the Ninth Circuit’s log-ging roads decision offers the wood-land owner anything but certainty.So stay tuned as the parties seekSupreme Court review, or perhaps asa legislative solution becomes a pos-sibility—the logging roads decisionnow has caught the attention of atleast some members of Congress. AMay 23, 2011, letter to EPA signedby 44 members of the House ofRepresentatives, including PacificNorthwest Representatives fromboth the Republican and Democraticparties, urged EPA to reaffirm thewisdom of using best managementpractices to control stormwaterrunoff in the forest setting, and totake action to “limit the scope of”the logging roads decision. ■

JULIE WEIS is a partner in theHaglund Kelley Jones & Wilder lawfirm in Portland, Ore., where sheenjoys putting her natural resourcesbackground to work on environmentallaw matters, including forest productsissues, as part of a busy civil litigationpractice. She can be reached at 503-225-0777 or [email protected].


AKS Engineering and Forestry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30

Assisi Software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25

Bancroft Buckley Johnston & Serres . . . . . . . . . . . .29

Forest Seedling Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26

GeneTechs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

Hampton Tree Farms, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

International Forestry Consultants . . . . . . . . . . .23

Lusignan Forestry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

McFarland Cascade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28

Northwest Forestry Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12

Northwest Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

ODF–Private Forests Division . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22

Oregon Forest Resources Institute . . . . . . . . . . .13

Oregon State University Foundation . . .Back Cover

Professional Forestry Services, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . .9

Seadust Wildlife Controllant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18

Silvaseed Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

Starker Forests, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17

Stuntzner Engineering & Forestry . . . . . . . . . . .12

Sustainable Forestry Initiative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18

Tree Management Plus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

Trout Mountain Forestry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

Warren Weathers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

WFFA Corporate Patron Program . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

Weyerhaeuser . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19

Wilbur-Ellis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21

World Forest Investment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

ADVERTISERS’ INDEX

C A L E N D A R2011 National Tree Farmer Convention, August 9-11, Albuquerque, NM. Contact: AmyYambor, 202-463-5172, [email protected].

Forest Owners Field Day, August 20, Chimacum, WA. Contact: Andy Perleberg, 509-667-6658, [email protected].

53rd Annual Pacific Northwest Christmas Tree Association Tree Fair and Show, Sept. 9-10,Vancouver, WA. Contact: PNWCTA, 503-364-2942, [email protected].

Forest Owners Field Day, Sept. 10, Whidbey Island, WA. Contact: Kevin Zobrist,425-357-6017, [email protected].

Forest Products Forum, Sept. 22, Portland, OR. Contact: Bryan Doyle, 978-496-6338,www.getfea.com/component/content/article/210#fea_fpf_portland.

Inland Empire SAF Annual Meeting, Sept. 23-24. Contact: Dick Reid, IESAFCommunications Chair, [email protected].

2012 WFFA Annual Meeting, May 3-5, 2012, Spokane Valley, WA. Contact: Erica Norquist,360-736-5750, [email protected].

Send calendar items to the editor at [email protected] by August 15, 2011 for the fall issue.

Road Permitscontinued from page 23

Through a partnership with Oregon State University, you can address the challenges of transferring timberland in a way that reflects your values and extends your legacy.

CALL OR E-MAIL TO LEARN MOREZak Hansen • OSU Foundation • College of Forestry • 541-737-4016 • [email protected]

Family. Forestry.Stewardship.

OUR EXPERTS CAN ADVISE ON:

• Transferring timberland to heirs

• Donating timberland to OSU’s research forests

• Planning a gift that provides income in retirement

• Creating a scholarship, faculty fund, or program fund in your family name

YOUR LEGACY. YOUR UNIVERSITY.

Documents

NW Woodlands-Spring 2001€¦ · count them. While I have no argument with the science presented for the pro-tection and recovery of a number of andromenous fish with regard to ripar-ian