Estimating Timber Value in Leave-tree Buffers Western Mensurationists Meeting WA-DOR Forest Tax Laurence Reeves

Purpose of Study “Forest & Fish” Bill (HB 2091, 1999 spec. session) increased Forest Practice requirements Eligible timber harvests get 16% FET credit to offset compliance costs Study was mandated to examine the degree to which credit covers costs Nov 2002 deadline to Legislature

Overview of Methodology Identify eligible units for cruising Measure leave-tree volume Allocate volume between old and new Forest Practice rules Assign value to volume Analyze data Summarize results

Methodology- Unit Identification Harvest must be completed, tax paid and FET credit received Credit eligibility based on complying with one or more of six EARRs Only cruised units with RMZ, wetland and/or steep/unstable slope Did not cruise units with RMAPs only (no leave-trees) or HCP/WA (non-uniformity)

Methodology- Measuring Trees 3-person teams using relaskops, tapes, laser rangefinders and MC-5 computer 100% tree visitation for DBH and specie. FF, bole height and log grade were continually sampled, 20% min target SuperAce 98 extrapolates FF, bole height and log grade to entire population L.O.s may request cruise data, some have check-cruised units with similar results

Methodology-Allocating Volume Lack of consensus whether to measure incremental or total FP rule impact Decided to cruise all EARR leave-trees then remove trees in SuperAce based on old FP rules and WRT/GRT reqs. Remaining trees allocated to new FP rules SuperAce generates 3 volume reports based on total, new and old FP rules

Methodology- Assigning Value DOR Stumpage Value Tables used to value leave-tree volume Timber quality codes in Tables are based on % of #2 sawmill grade for DF & WH and % #3 sawmill grade for RA Export sorts not a factor in cruise or valuation Values produced for all 3 groups (total, new and old FP rule volume)

Methodology- Analyze Data Main focus is on credit versus leave-tree value, but also examining % of total FPAs receiving credit and credit qualifier With roughly 100 cruises statewide, only large strata are possible, such as east vs. west and large vs. small harvester Harvest units differ widely by size, aquatic resources, timber quality, etc: data are not normally distributed and highly variable

Methodology-Summarize Results Because of high variability, presenting an average doesn’t tell whole story Median or weighted-average statistic may give better representation due to large tail Overall, value of leave-tree buffers tends to be larger than FET credit Majority of value (and volume) lies in area required by new FP rules Most FPAs get credit for only RMAPs

Current Status (as of 6/11/02) Progress: 96 units cruised –81 westside, 15 eastside –77 large, 19 small harvesters –4 with no impact –we have 13 identified units left to cruise Budget Complications –In March 2002 we had to curtail remote harvest units due to budget crisis