1. “Five Rivers” Learning our way to active management with “Options Forestry” How we did it on the Siuslaw NF USDA Forest Service Siuslaw National Forest and Pacific Northwest Research Station

2. Preservation focus Industrial focus Northwest Forest Plan 1994 2004 1984 2014 Year Range of management alternatives considered D A Struggle on to active management, by decree Learn our way to active management D The range of future directions Passive management (Nat’l Park model) A Continue Plan without adaptive management BC C B We seek to inform, the alternative of learning our way to active management. C Policy context Passive or active management?

3. Preservation focus Industrial focus Northwest Forest Plan How do we get there? 1994 2004 1984 2014 Year Struggle on to active management, emphasizing fire risks and the need to manage plantations Fight harder over the uncertainties Range of management alternatives considered D End with passive management as an unintended outcome? A Policy context

4. Preservation focus Industrial focus Northwest Forest Plan How do we get there? 1994 2004 1984 2014 Year Learn our way to active management with Options Forestry (Five Rivers) Take a harder look at the uncertainties Range of management alternatives considered C Policy context Apply multiple pathways

5. Look for and accept uncertainties that are found (especially in decision documents), Diversify management policies and practices to hedge against uncertainty, Learn from scientifically structured comparisons of different policies and practices, and Clarify interlinked roles of researchers and managers (with mutually beneficial goals). Four Principles of Options Forestry Research and Management Bormann, BT, and AR Kiester. 2004. Options forestry: acting on uncertainty. J Forestry 102: 22-27. Theory

6. Combined uncertainty = ? Kinds of uncertainty Questions Knowable: a continuum of widely held to widely questioned assumptions Unknowable Policy Science Individual mechanisms are well understood? General findings apply well at specific sites? Mechanism interactions are known? Ecosystem patterns and processes are understood? Scaling properties are known? Societal goals are actually known? Legal direction is clear? Institutions are capable of implementing policy? Stated goals are actually achieved? Specific objectives are met? Indicators of performance are met? Policy Science Goals shift, new laws are passed, September 11, … Unexpected mechanisms emerge—perhaps new biota- environment interactions under a changing climate. Theory

7. An example: applying options forestry in the Five Rivers Landscape Management Project Create late-successional habitat; Improve streams; and Reduce road maintenance costs. Initial management goals: Application

8. Plantations 226 +/- 106 trees/acre “Old-growth” 43 +/- 21 trees/acre Here There?

9. Create late-successional habitat; Improve streams; and Reduce road maintenance costs. Initial management goals: Added options-forestry goals: Acknowledge uncertainty; Diversify approaches; Learn from a rigorous operational experiment; Link researchers and managers. Application An example: applying options forestry in the Five Rivers Landscape Management Project

10. “Not enough is known for people to agree on a single approach to meet the goals of the Northwest Forest Plan, partly a result of ineffective past monitoring strategies. Especially poorly known is how plantations, riparian zones, and roads can be efficiently managed together through time. Thus, he [Forest Supervisor] saw a need to speed learning by comparing a variety of strategies for achieving late-successional conditions and aquatic conservation” The watershed is 78,000 acres The 12 experimental units average 1300 acres each Acknowledge uncertainties Diversify Speed learning Application Planning area

11. Application Notice of Intent Informal case study Five Rivers NEPA model (111 Kb pdf file) (16 Mb pdf file)(388 Kb pdf file)(71 Kb doc file) Five Rivers Project Initiation letter (not available) http://www.fsl.orst.edu/5rivers

12. Similarity analysis Large-scale map Pulsed Passive Continuous Passive Pulsed Passive Pulsed Private land 1 sq. mile Continuous Pulsed Passive –-decommissions roads, allows existing plantations and aquatic systems to achieve objectives on their own; Continuous –-maintains roads open and thins plantations and restores streams frequently and at low intensity; and Pulsed –-thins plantations and restores streams aggressively, then closes roads for 30 years before reopening them for further management. Multiple pathways Application

13. Pathway A. Active salvage, replanting, and vegetation management, constrained by ROD; no fuels-management zones around the perimeters. Pathway B. Promoting natural recovery processes & 200-ft fuels-management zones. Pathway C. Active salvage and reintroducing landscape-scale, low-intensity fire & 400-ft fuels- management zones. Biscuit Fire management experiment Three pathways randomly assigned to 3000-acre areas within 4 initially similar blocks Sourgrass block 2; high habitat potential Hobson block 3; medium habitat potential Fishhook block 1 Silver Fire and low habitat potential Briggs block 4; Low habitat potential C4 B4 A4 C1 C2 B2 A2 B3 B1 A3 C3 A1 Biscuit Fire perimeter Silver Fire perimeter Kalmiopsis Wilderness boundary Multiple pathways Kalmiopsis Wilderness boundary Biscuit Fire perimeter

14. Learning by Managers About: Learning by Researchers About: Clarify interlinked roles of researchers and managers “learn our way to active management” Knowns and unknowns about different and creative pathways How to convince ourselves and others with evidence from multiple-pathway comparisons Application What managers need to know How to learn at the scale and complexity of management Effectiveness of past management

15. There’s a lot to learn from past management, and we now have the data and technology to do it Historic air photo interpretation in GIS Vegetation changes from 1939 to 1962 Loss Gain Conversion to shrubs RSAC

16. Add in Retro study Failure: few Doug-fir (25-50%; other species 50-75%) Failure: very few Doug-fir (0-25%; other species 75-100%) Doug-fir 50-75%; other species 25-50% Success: nearly full Doug-fir stocking (75-100% canopy cover) 0%10%20%30%40%50%60% Deviation from intended full Douglas-fir stocking (% total area) All 1157 managed units on federal land in the watershed Timber management was less successful than expected (nature bats last); Management success improved over time; and “Failures” of one intent can benefit another (late-succession goals). Initial Results

17. Reducing risk by not putting all our eggs in one basket (given the high uncertainty). Reducing uncertainty by learning about different pathways (to manage landscapes to achieve late successional and riparian goals) to support better decisions and increase decision space. Improving research-management collaboration by creating a synergy with a common goal of learning, and mutually beneficial work. Increasing connection to disparate societal groups by writing better decision documents and demonstrating tolerance of different societal views. General Benefits of the Options Forestry, Five Rivers Approach