Delivering Natural Resource Values: Four Threats to Our Mission
Forest Service Chief Dale Bosworth
Israel Visit
Volcani Center, Israel—February 10, 2004
It’s a pleasure to be here in Israel. I don’t often
get out of the United States, and I’m finding that opportunities
like this are great learning experiences. I believe we can mutually
benefit from sharing our experiences and comparing notes.
I’ve been the main beneficiary so far, because you’ve
been showing me around. But now I guess it’s my turn to share
some experiences with you. So I’d like to tell you about some
of the challenges we face as land managers in the United States.
There are different perspectives on those challenges, depending
on whom you ask. If you ask an environmentalist, you’ll get
a different perspective than if you ask a logger. Even our federal
land managers have different perspectives because our missions are
so different.
My perspective is from my 38 years of experience in the Forest
Service. I’d like to start by telling you a little about our
agency’s history and purpose. Then I’ll go into the
main challenges we face today. We call them the four threats: fire
and fuels, invasive species, loss of open space, and unmanaged outdoor
recreation. Finally, I’ll say a little about what we’re
doing to address each threat.
History and Purpose
Next year, the Forest Service will be a hundred years old. A hundred
years ago, most people thought that our nation’s forest resources
would last forever, no matter how much we cut them and burned them.
It took vision to foresee a time of timber shortages and degraded
watersheds.
Fortunately, we had visionary leaders at the time, and we weren’t
the only ones with vision. Awhile back, I participated in a celebration
at the Israeli Embassy in Washington. It was the 100th anniversary
of the Jewish National Fund, which also had the foresight to restore
and manage forests and rangelands in Israel. Our organizations have
common roots.
About a hundred years ago, our leaders set aside a system of forest
reserves to protect watersheds and timber resources for future generations.
Today, the Forest Service manages about 77 million hectares of national
forest land, or about 8 to 9 percent of our nation’s land
base. We also administer state and private forestry programs nationwide,
and we have the world’s largest research organization for
natural resource management.
Our mission is to protect the nation’s forests and grasslands
for multiple uses—such as water, wildlife, and recreation—and
for sustained yields of timber, forage, and other products. Although
our mission has stayed the same, our management has changed enormously
in the last 30 or 40 years. I’ll talk about some of those
changes before discussing the four main threats we face today.
One thing that’s changed is what Americans want and expect
from their national forests and grasslands. Fifty years ago, we
thought we faced a timber famine. State and private timber stocks
were exhausted following World War II, and there was a huge postwar
demand for lumber to help fulfill the American dream of owning a
single-family home. For decades, every U.S. Administration placed
high demands on the Forest Service for national forest timber.
That began to change with the first Earth Day in 1970. We got some
new environmental laws, and I think that did us a lot of good as
a nation. It gave us some national sideboards and a shared sense
of purpose.
Out of that purpose came a new approach to national forest management.
It’s sometimes called ecosystem management. It has a number
of basic features: watershed analysis, landscape-scale planning,
collaboration across different ownership boundaries, and adaptive
management. It capitalizes on new information technology. It emphasizes
working closely with communities—making public involvement
as meaningful as possible through collaborative decisionmaking.
A new set of values also emerged. Today, people in the United States
value the outdoors for a higher quality of life. People value places
with clean water, scenery, wildlife, and opportunities for outdoor
recreation. So our primary job at the Forest Service is to protect
the water, the scenic beauty, the wildlife habitat, and everything
else that people value for a high quality of life.
Four Threats
That brings me to the four threats. In the past, people focused
on timber harvest and roadbuilding as the biggest problems on national
forest land. In my view, those just aren’t the biggest threats
we face. The biggest threats today are fire and fuels, invasive
species, loss of open space, and unmanaged outdoor recreation. I’ll
say a little about each, beginning with fire and fuels.
Since 2000, America has had some of our worst fire seasons in 50
years. Two years ago, we had record fires in four states, and a
fifth came close. Last fall, we had a record fire season in southern
California. Twenty-four people lost their lives and more than 3,700
homes were destroyed. More people died and more homes were lost
in the debris flows that followed when rains fell on slopes where
the fires last fall had burned away the vegetation.
Later this week, I will be part of a preliminary discussion at
American Independence Park, where we are planning a lasting memorial
to interagency wildland firefighters in the United States and Israel
who have lost their lives in the line of duty. In the last 10 years
alone, we have lost about 180 wildland firefighters in the United
States. The relationship between the Forest Service and JNF began
about 15 years ago, and it initially revolved around fire management
and suppression.
The underlying issue is that so many of our fire-dependent ecosystems
have become overgrown and unhealthy. In my view, the answer is to
restore ecosystems before the big fires break out. Where
fire-dependent forests are overgrown, we’ve got to do some
thinning, then get fire back into the ecosystem when it’s
safe. And in shrubby systems such as chaparral in southern California,
we’ve got to use more prescribed fire to take some of the
heat out of those systems.
A second major threat comes from nonnative invasive species, including
invasive insects, diseases, plants, and birds. With the globalization
of trade in commercial products such as wood and livestock, the
United States has gotten a growing number of invasive species. For
example, in five western states the number of new weeds generally
fell by decade from the 1880s to the 1960s, but it has been rising
ever since. Invasive plants now cover about 53 million hectares
in the United States. That’s an area about a third larger
than all of California, and it is expanding at a rate of about 700,000
hectares per year. At that rate, all of Israel would be swallowed
up in about 3 years.
The costs are enormous. By one estimate, all invasives combined
cost Americans about $138 billion per year in total economic damages
and associated control costs. But the ecological costs are even
worse. One study found that invasives have contributed to the decline
of almost half of all imperiled species in the United States.
The problems are all across the board. One study of fish species
across North America found that two out of three extinctions were
at least partially caused by introduced species. Introduced diseases
have also affected major forest trees such as western white pine,
American elm, and American chestnut. We are losing our national
heritage.
A third threat is loss of open space. Every day, the United States
loses about 1,600 hectares of open space to development. That’s
more than 1 hectare per minute, and the rate of conversion is getting
faster all the time. In some places, we’re losing large, relatively
undisturbed forests that endangered mammals like grizzly bear need
to survive. In other places, we’re losing rangeland that many
native plants and animals need to survive, including elk. And where
private open space is lost, recreational pressures on public lands
tend to grow.
That brings me to the fourth threat—unmanaged outdoor recreation.
A good example is off-road vehicles, such as all-terrain vehicles.
In the United States, the number of off-road vehicle users has just
exploded. It grew from about 5 million in 1972 to almost 36 million
in 2000.
Ninety-nine percent of the users are responsible. But with all
those millions of users, even the one percent who are the problem
can have enormous impacts. Each year, the national forests get hundreds
of miles of unauthorized roads and trails created by repeated cross-country
use. We’re seeing more erosion, water degradation, and habitat
destruction. We’re seeing more conflicts between users. We
have got to improve our management so we get responsible recreational
use based on sound outdoor ethics.
Finding Solutions
These are the four main threats we face today—fire and fuels,
invasive species, loss of open space, and unmanaged outdoor recreation.
These are the main things that keep us from delivering the values
that Americans want—clean water, wildlife habitat, and so
forth.
We’re doing something about them. With respect to fire and
fuels, the long-term solution is to restore healthy ecosystems,
and we’ve made a start through a federal program called the
National Fire Plan. The area we treat with thinning and prescribed
burning together with other federal agencies has gone way up in
recent years. In fiscal 2002, it was about 900,000 hectares—twice
as much as 5 or 10 years ago.
But we need to do more. A big hindrance has been all the process
we need to go through. It’s caused huge delays and eaten up
our resources. Our forest supervisors often tell me that they spend
60 to 70 percent of their direct resources on planning and assessment,
including a lot of needless paperwork.
We’re fixing that. Through the Healthy Forests Initiative
and a new piece of legislation called the Healthy Forests Restoration
Act, we’ve gotten some new legal and administrative tools
for streamlining some of our processes. For example, where we need
to move quickly against a threat from fire or insects, we’ve
reduced the need for exhaustive environmental studies. That should
also let us redirect some of our resources to the ground, where
it counts.
With respect to invasive species, we find that prevention and control
can work pretty well if they’re done across ownerships on
a landscape scale. The Forest Service has some good partnership
programs with the states, such as “Slow-the-Spread”
for gypsy moth and weed-free hay certification for animals used
to pack in recreationists and other people. We had good success
working with the city of Chicago to stop the Asian longhorned beetle.
We’re now preparing a national strategy for dealing with invasive
species. It will probably focus on a few of the worst problems.
With respect to loss of open space, one solution is to keep ranches
and working forests in operation. The Forest Service sponsors conservation
easements through the states so that willing landowners can keep
their lands forested, and we’ve just had a big increase in
funding for that program. For example, we just signed an agreement
to protect 132,000 hectares of working forest in Maine through a
conservation easement. We also have forage reserves that ranchers
can use to give their grazing allotments a rest, and we’ve
gotten new funding for conservation easements on grasslands. Through
programs like these, we can work together across the landscape to
keep the land whole.
Finally, we’re making a big effort to improve our management
of outdoor recreation. Over the next several years, all national
forests will assess inventories of roads, trails, and areas used
by ORVs. From those inventories, they will designate a system of
routes offering the best opportunities for ORV use while still meeting
our responsibility to protect the environment. The focus will be
on improving our travel management. We also want to engage user
groups and get more volunteers involved. We want ORV users to take
responsibility for their national forests, to tread lightly on the
land, and to pass on a “tread-lightly” ethic to others.
Partners and Friends
These are some of the problems we face and some of the approaches
we’re taking for more sustainable natural environments in
the United States. Before closing, I’d like to say a few words
about our relationship with the Jewish National Fund.
The Forest Service and JNF have developed a collaborative relationship
around our common responsibility to manage arid and semi-arid wildlands.
I mentioned our common roots. Both of our organizations are celebrating
a hundred years as responsible stewards of the land.
A hundred years ago, our conservation mandate was this: to provide
the greatest good for the greatest number for the longest time.
We now talk about the same thing in terms of sustainability. Both
of our organizations are focused on providing a sustainable future
for our wildlands in the face of great pressure from this or that
special interest.
That’s why it makes sense for us to work together. Our collaborative
work with JNF over the last 15 years has led to progress in both
of our countries toward sustainable forests and rangelands. Based
on that success, we’ve decided to expand on our more traditional
collaborative projects in wildland management. We are entering a
new phase of collaboration. Specifically, we are working closely
with the JNF leadership to explore ways of better understanding
and adapting to changing public attitudes.
In the past, we tended to see sustainability primarily in terms
of the quantitative measures of economic and ecological productivity.
Today, we also see sustainability in terms of the value that society
places on the lands we manage. The quantitative measures are still
important, but both of our organizations are trying to do a better
job of understanding how the public values its natural resources
and evaluates the job we’re doing of sustainably
managing those resources. As part of that here in Israel, the Forest
Service has agreed to join an International Evaluation Committee
that JNF is chartering to look at the professional management of
Israel’s wildlands. I am sure we will learn from this experience.
Time for Change
In closing, I’ll sum up. In my 38 years at the Forest Service,
I’ve seen some enormous changes. Our forests have changed,
society’s needs and expectations have changed, and the tools
at our disposal have changed.
The way we manage the land has also changed. We’ve learned
that what we leave on the land is more important than what we take
away. Today, we focus on delivering the full range of the values
that Americans want for quality of life: clean air and water, habitat
for wildlife, and all the rest.
What hasn’t changed enough is the debate. Too often, we’re
still debating issues from 20 or 30 years ago—issues like
timber harvesting and roads. But we’ve started to change the
debate. I think we’re getting more people focused on the real
threats we face today—fire and fuels, invasive species, loss
of open space, and unmanaged outdoor recreation.
We’ve made a start in addressing the four threats. The challenge
will be to continue the momentum. For the Forest Service, that means
implementing the new legal and administrative tools we’ve
gotten in the right way. If we do, I think we’ll see steady
progress on the ground, at least for fire and fuels. But I think
we can also make headway against the other threats.
Maybe we can make some headway together. I am interested in learning
more about how our collaboration with the Jewish National Fund is
solving these types of problems. I’d be interested in hearing
more from you about these problems here in Israel. If we can learn
something from you about how to tackle these problems, then maybe
we can move forward more quickly in the United States.
I appreciate the opportunity to spend this time with you and would
be happy to answer any questions you might have about our situation
in the United States.
#
|