Forest Health: Overview

Forest Health: Overview

95-548 ENR
Updated March 27, 1998
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Forest Health: Overview
Ross W. Gorte
Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
Environment and Natural Resources Policy Division
Summary
The pine ecosystems in the intermountain West are considered by many to be
unhealthy. While the data are inconclusive, studies show at least localized problems of
timber mortality and dense stands of small trees, including a shift away from the fire- and
drought-resistant pines in mixed conifer stands. The comprehensive land management
planning processes of the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management were
intended, in part, to address such issues, but to date, efforts by the agencies, the interest
groups, and Congress have focused on separate authorities and funding for forest health
activities -- salvage timber sales, prescribed burning, thinning, and other timber stand
activities.
What Is the Problem?
Many of the forests in the intermountain West -- from the Black Hills of South
Dakota to the Cascades and the Sierra Nevadas, and from the Canadian border to Arizona
and New Mexico -- are dominated by pines, especially Ponderosa, Western white, and
lodgepole pines. The pine ecosystems of the West are considered by many to be in
unnatural and unhealthy conditions, with excessive numbers of trees and excessive tree
mortality, leading to insect and disease epidemics and to increased risk of catastrophic
fire.1
Timber mortality in the intermountain West has risen since 1976 -- in total, per acre,
and as a percent of inventory. Timber mortality (per acre and as a percent of inventory)
2
is often higher on the national forests than on other timberlands. However, mortality on
1For a further discussion of this relationship, see CRS Report 95-511 ENR, Forest Fires and
Forest Health.
2Data on timber mortality, timber inventory, and timberland area are from: Douglas S. Powell,
Joanne L. Faulkner, David R. Darr, Zhiliang Zhu, and Douglas MacCleery. Forest Resources of
the United States, 1992. Gen. Tech. Rept. RM-234. Ft. Collins, CO: U.S.D.A. Forest Service,
Sept. 1993. 132 p. (Hereafter referred to as Forest Resources, 1992.)
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

CRS-2
the national forests of the intermountain West appears to be no worse than on other
timberlands -- timber mortality in 1991 was higher than in 1976 in nearly all regions for all
landowner classes. Furthermore, timber mortality per acre is higher in the Pacific Coast
States (Alaska, Washington, Oregon, and California), because the remaining dense old-
growth stands have high mortality rates; timber mortality is a greater percentage of
inventory in the Eastern regions (Northeast, North Central, Southeast, and South Central),
because conifers have relatively short lifespans in the humid Eastern climates.
Although existing Forest Service data do not show abnormal timber mortality in the
intermountain West, certain health problems might not be captured by those data. The
Forest Service data are based on periodic inventories, typically on a 10-year cycle; thus,
the 1991 data are, on average, at least 5 years old. If timber mortality in the intermountain
West has risen because of the drought that began in the early 1980s, the data might not yet
reflect that increase. Two other forest health problems also would probably not be
reflected in the comprehensive timber data. One is excessive numbers of small trees, with
little or no net growth, due to stand stagnation without mortality; this could be a particular
problem for the Ponderosa and lodgepole pines, which are well adapted for dry and
infertile conditions. The other problem, fuel buildup, is more likely in the intermountain
West, because the arid conditions slow the decomposition of the wood.
The forest health problems of the intermountain region have been developing over
a long period, although the deterioration of the forests may have been accelerated by the
past decade of drought. The problem began with livestock overgrazing in the Western
pine forests in the 1800s; this reduced vegetative competition for the trees, especially from
grasses, some of which inhibit tree regeneration and growth. The problem has been
exacerbated by logging, both before and since the national forests were established, that
has emphasized cutting large-diameter old-growth pines, and leaving smaller trees and
other species (particularly the true firs). However, the most significant cause may have
been fire suppression over the past 75 years that virtually eliminated the natural cycle of
frequent fires.
These anthropogenic factors have altered the Western pine forests. The pure pine
forests (pure being defined by foresters as more than 80% of the trees in one species) have
seen substantial increases in fuels and in seedlings and saplings. Historically, frequent,
low-intensity fires in Ponderosa pine forests reduced the fuels and killed many of the
seedlings and saplings. According to a recent study in northern Arizona, the Coconino
National Forest averaged 23 trees per acre prior to settlement, but now has 851 trees per
acre.
3 The frequency of stand replacement fires in lodgepole pine forests has also declined,
leading to more trees and more fuels per acre than occurred prior to 1900.
The mixed conifer forests have been similarly altered, with substantial increases in the
number of small diameter trees and in the quantity of woody fuel. However, the species
composition of these forests has also changed, with much more Douglas-fir and true fir
than existed 150 years ago. This is the result of logging the high-value species (the inland
W.W.
3
Covington and M.M. Moore. "Postsettlement Changes in Natural Fire Regimes and Forest
Structure: Ecological Restoration of Old-Growth Ponderosa Pine Forests." In: Assessing Forest
Ecosystem Health in the Inland West. [R. Neil Sampson and David L. Adams, eds.] New York,
NY: Food Products Press, 1994. pp. 153-181.

CRS-3
Douglas-fir subspecies is not nearly as valuable as the subspecies that grows along the
coast and in the Cascades) and of suppressing the low-intensity fires (because pines are
less susceptible to damage from fire). Furthermore, the Douglas-fir and true firs require
more water than the pines, and thus the stress of the decade-long drought has increased
their susceptibility to insect and disease attack, and possibly set the stage for epidemics.
What Can Be Done About It?
Many people are interested in improving forest health -- for immediate and/or
sustainable wood supplies, for reducing the risks of catastrophic wildfires, and/or for
sustaining and protecting other outputs and values from the forests (e.g., water quality,
recreation, and "naturalness"). One principal goal of forest health improvement is to
reduce biomass -- small-diameter trees, dead or dying trees, and existing woody fuels; in
mixed conifer forests, shifting the species mix back to pine dominance may also be a goal.
Much of the attention on improving forest health has focused on the national forests
in the intermountain West, where they account for 60% of the timberland.4 At a forest or
landscape level, this could be addressed through national forest planning. The Forest and
Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974, as amended by the National Forest
Management Act of 1976 (NFMA), requires the Forest Service to prepare integrated,
coordinated land and resource management plans for units of the National Forest System.5
These plans are prepared using an interdisciplinary approach, "to achieve integrated
consideration of physical, biological, economic, and other sciences," and with the public's
participation, to assure that relevant concerns and issues are addressed. Furthermore, the
plans are to be revised "from time to time when . . . conditions in a unit have significantly
changed, but at least every 15 years." Many forests are beginning the process of revising
their plans, thus providing an opportunity to address forest health concerns in forest
planning.
Some have criticized forest planning as being slow, expensive, and unresponsive to
current problems. To date, efforts to direct the Forest Service to improve forest health
6
have generally been external to the planning process. Proposals and draft bills have either
ignored national forest planning under NFMA, or directed forest health decisions to
override existing plans.
Several tools exist for improving forest health. One of the most frequently mentioned
is salvage timber sales. Salvage timber sales can be used to remove dead, dying, an
7
d
threatened trees from the forest, and therefore can be useful in reducing biomass and in
controlling insect and disease infestations. However, since commercial interest reflects
4Forest Resources, 1992, p. 43.
5Respectively: Act of Aug. 17, 1974, Pub.L. 93-378, 88 Stat. 476; and Act of Oct. 22, 1976,
Pub.L. 94-588, 90 Stat. 2949. 16 U.S.C. 1600-1614.
6See: U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment. Forest Service Planning: Accommo-
dating Uses, Producing Outputs, and Sustaining Ecosystems. OTA-F-505. Washington, DC:
U.S. Govt. Print. Off., Feb. 1992. 206 pp.
For
7
more information on this tool, see CRS Report 95-364 ENR, Salvage Timber Sales and
Forest Health.

CRS-4
timber quality, salvage sales have limited potential for reducing small-diameter trees, and
much woody material (limbs and needles) is left on the site. Environmentalists are also
concerned about salvage sales, because little is known about the ecological consequences
of extensive salvage sale programs, because the current definition of salvage does not limit
salvage sales to dead or dying trees, and because inappropriate logging has contributed to
the current problem.
Another common tool is prescribed burning. This is using fire (set intentionally or
occurring naturally) under prescribed weather and fuel conditions to reduce the quantity
of woody fuel on a site. It can be an effective tool for converting organic matter to
minerals, water, and carbon dioxide (and other gases), but protecting air quality
(particularly from airborne particulates) often limits the timing, location, and amount of
prescribed burning that can occur. Prescribed burning is also a poor tool for eliminating
small-diameter trees, because it is indiscriminate about which (if any) trees remain, and can
be a dangerous tool when weather conditions change.8
Other forest management techniques can also be used to improve forest health and
reduce the risk of catastrophe fire. One activity is precommercial thinning, to cut down
trees that are too small to have any commercial value. Release -- killing competing
vegetation chemically or manually -- can reduce timber stand densities. Pruning can elim-
inate low-growing branches, thus removing a "ladder" for fires to reach the crowns of the
trees while improving the value of wood growth. Fertilization can accelerate tree growth,
possibly overcoming stand stagnation. Planting on mixed conifer sites can help reestablish
the natural variation of native forests, both on cleared sites and in stands with relatively
low densities.
Oftentimes, these various tools and techniques need to be used in combination to
achieve the desired goal -- salvage with mixed-species planting or prescribed burning after
precommercial thinning, for example. Indeed, none of these approaches is sufficient to
improve forest health alone; rather, a coordinated program combining relevant tools and
techniques is probably necessary to improve forest health in the pine ecosystems of the
intermountain West. However, it should also be noted that most of these tools and
techniques are expensive, and the total cost may limit the ability of the agencies to improve
forest health.
Legislative Proposals
102nd-104th Congresses. Congress has addressed forest health legislation several
times over the past few years. The first comprehensive bill, H.R. 4980 in the 102nd
Congress, the National Forest Health Act of 1992, was introduced on April 9, 1992. After
July 1 hearings before the House Agriculture Subcommittee on Forests, Family Farms and
Energy, the bill was marked up and ordered reported, but a report was never filed, and
Congress adjourned without further action on the bill. Several bills were introduced in the
103rd Congress: H.R. 229, the National Forest Health Act; S. 459, the Federal Forests
8A prescribed fire in Michigan in 1980 escaped when weather conditions changed, killing one
person and destroying 44 homes and buildings. See: Albert J. Simard, Donald A. Haines, Richard
W. Blank, and John S. Frost. The Mack Lake Fire. Gen. Tech. Rept. NC-83. St. Paul, MN;
U.S.D.A. Forest Service, Sept. 1983. 36 p.

CRS-5
Health Recovery Act of 1993; and S. 2456, the Forest Health Act of 1994. However, no
hearings were held on any of these bills.
Following the severe wildfires in the intermountain West during the summer of 1994,
the Administration proposed the Western Forest Health Initiative. This program was
9
,
essentially, an acceleration of current planned, funded projects and of planned, unfunded
projects, with improved coordination with the Environmental Protection Agency on
monitoring, with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries
Service on endangered and threatened species, with the National Wildfire Coordinating
Group, and with State Foresters. However, this program was also criticized as a weak
response to the magnitude of the problem in the West.
Two bills in the 104th Congress addressed forest health. The first was the
Emergency Salvage Timber Sale Program included in the 1995 Emergency Supple-mental
Appropriations and Rescissions Act, P.L. 104-19, directing an increase in salvage timber
sales, with expedited procedures. The program was controversial, because it prohibited
most challenges to agency decisions and reinstated certain previously-halted timber sales
in the Pacific Northwest.10
The other bill was the Federal Lands Forest Health Protection and Restoration Act,
S. 391. The bill would have established a complicated program to:
(1) review forest health conditions annually;
(2) designate emergency and high risk areas;
(3) select and publish a schedule of activities: (a) to arrest the decline of and to
restore forest health; (b) to safeguard human life and property; (c) to protect
natural resources; (d) to restore ecosystem integrity; and (e) to protect Federal
investments and future revenues; and
(4) notify the public and respond to comments and challenges under expedited
procedures.
The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Forests and Public Land
Management held a hearing on the bill on March 1, 1995, but a markup scheduled for late
April 1996 was postponed to allow negotiations on a bipartisan substitute. The
negotiations concluded in June without an agreement, and the bill was reported by the
Committee, but saw no floor action.
105th Congress. Several bills addressing forest health have been introduced in the
105th Congress. H.R. 2458, the Community Protection and Hazardous Fuels Reduction
Act of 1997, would direct Forest Service and BLM programs of fuel reduction in high risk
areas of the wildland/urban interface, undertaken through requirements on timber
purchasers who would be compensated with credits that could be used to pay for the
timber. (This would parallel the Forest Service's purchaser road credit system for building
access roads; for a description of this program, see appendix E (pp. 40-41) of CRS Report
97-14 ENR, The Forest Service Budget: Trust Funds and Special Accounts.) The House
U.S.
9
Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service, State and Private Forestry. Western Forest Health
Initiative. Washington, DC: Oct. 31, 1994. 66 pp.
For
10
more information on this program, see CRS Report 96-569 ENR, The Salvage Timber Sale
Rider: Overview and Policy Issues.

CRS-6
Resources Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health held hearings on the bill on
September 23, 1997, and forwarded a marked-up version to the full committee on March
5, 1998.
H.R. 3530, the Forest Recovery and Protection Act of 1998, would enact a process
for establishing standards and criteria, for identifying and ranking priority recovery areas,
and for undertaking recovery projects on National Forest System lands. A scientific
advisory panel would provide advice on the standards and criteria and on monitoring the
results of the program. Projects would be funded with a new permanently-appropriated
special account, the Forest Recovery and Protection Fund, which would receive moneys
previously deposited in the Forest Roads and Trails Fund (i.e., 10% of Forest Service
revenues) plus any appropriations. The bill is a substitute for H.R. 2515, reported by the
House Agriculture Committee on March 12, 1998 (H.Rept. 105-440, Part I); the House
Resources Committee has waived its jurisdiction over federal forest lands to expedite floor
consideration.
The Senate has not approached forest health directly in the 105th Congress. Rather,
S. 1253, the Public Lands Management Improvement Act of 1997, would supplement both
the National Forest Management Act of 1976 (NFMA; P.L. 94-588) governing Forest
Service planning and practices and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976
(FLPMA; P.L. 94-579) governing BLM planning and practices. Forest health problems
would then be addressed within the general planning and management guidance, as
supplemented by S. 1253. The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on
Forests and Public Land Management held several workshops on a draft bill in February
and March of 1997, and hearings on the bill on October 30, 1997.