THE MISSOURI OZARK FOREST ECOSYSTEM PROJECT: EVALUATING LONG-TERM EVEN- AGED AND UNEVEN-AGED GROWTH AND HARVEST SIMULATION Thomas Treiman – Missouri Department of Conservation John Dwyer – University of Missouri David Larsen – University of Missouri

The MOFEP Project Evaluate the outcomes of three silvicultural management regimes:  Even-aged harvesting  Uneven-aged harvesting  No harvest

Analysis Tools: LMS

Starting from the first inventory * … Treatment Initial Volume ValueN No harvest 5,723$ (2,553)(424) EAM 5,946$ (2,584)(414) UAM 5,365$ (2,376)(372) * Thanks to Randy! “Value” = volume X price Adjusted for species and inflation.

P.S. Yes – this data IS on the web site!!

Grow (Project), Treat (Harvest) and Analyze MOFEP Stands

and, so, inflexible. Year Total Stands EAM Harvest EAM Thinning UAM Harvest Treatments based on the “official” MOFEP schedule

Calculate the present value of future harvests Net present value (NPV) is based on timber volume (quantity), price (in current dollars) and the discount rate. where n = 1,2,3,4....N are the species harvested t = 1,2,3,4....T are the time periods (years) when harvests are scheduled d is the discount rate p nt is the price per unit of species n in year t q nt is the quantity of species n in year t

Issues: What interest rate to use for discounting (D)? What interest rate to use for discounting (D)? Differential logging costs? Timber prices? Differential logging costs? Timber prices? What about damage due to re-entry? What about damage due to re-entry? What about the residual stand? What about the residual stand? What about risk and uncertainty? What about risk and uncertainty? What about non-market values? What about non-market values?

Compare financial outcomes Treatment HarvestResidualTotals N Vol.$ $ $NPV No harvest 0$09,001$1,3129,001$1,312$10185 (3,193.5)(462.4)(3.5) EAM 7,125$1,0942,941$45510,066$1,549$ (3,673.5)(576.2)(335.6) UAM 2,928$4656,608$9739,536$1,438$ (3,379.9)(504.3)(297.1)

Sensitivity analysis for Discount Rate Treatment Discount Rate 1%2%3%4%5%6%7% N No harvest $485$181$68$26$10$4$2185 (170.9) (63.8)(24.1)(9.2)(3.5)(1.4)(0.5) EAM $916$617$462$375$320$284$ (415.6)(366.2) (346.5)(338.4)(335.6)(335.2)(336.0) UAM $753$477$356$296$263$241$ (351.1)(324.5)(312.5)(303.4)(297.1)(293.1)(290.1)

Conclusions No significant financial difference, for the long-term one-hundred year period, between UAM and EAM. No significant financial difference, for the long-term one-hundred year period, between UAM and EAM. Re-entry? EAM impacts more acres with heavy equipment traffic. What’s the “cost”? Re-entry? EAM impacts more acres with heavy equipment traffic. What’s the “cost”? Need to include other uses such as recreation or non-traditional forest products, and non-consumptive uses, such as bequest to future generations, and amenity values, such as scenic beauty. Need to include other uses such as recreation or non-traditional forest products, and non-consumptive uses, such as bequest to future generations, and amenity values, such as scenic beauty.

Where now? Further research on non-market values (Human Dimensions) Further research on non-market values (Human Dimensions) Wait for the next harvest and: Wait for the next harvest and: –Compare actual vs. predicted –Price trends –Logging costs

Thanks! Questions?