by Hans Burkhardt
In April of 1989, the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors unanimously moved to create a blue-ribbon task force Ñ the Forest Advisory Committee (FAC) Ñ to recommend ways to end further forest depletion, to gradually restore our county's forest resource to sustain maximum productivity, and to develop a local wood products industry. The eighteen members appointed by the Board included representatives of the timber industry, of public agencies involved in resource management and conservation, of independent landowners, and of environmental organizations.
After more than two years of grueling deliberations, a substantial majority of FAC members recommended that the County adopt timber harvest rules that would satisfy Mendocino County's local needs in forest management and protect our resources for the long-term. The recommendations centered on a form of harvest control designed to restore depleted forests gradually to maximum productive capacity. Under the recommended rules, up to 2% of the available timber inventory could be harvested in any year, provided certain other conditions were met to protect individual watersheds from over-cutting. This mechanism is known as "percentage of inventory" or "POI."
In June of 1992, the Board of Supervisors voted 3 to 2 to reject the FAC recommendations, over the objections of many Mendocino County residents who testified in public hearings. Now that one Supervisors who supported the FAC rules has been re-elected and two new Supervisors have taken office, the recommendations have now been reintroduced. The following information is provided to help local voters understand the issues, and to encourage them to communicate their views to the Supervisors before the issue comes to a vote.
Q: Under current law, are privately-owned forestlands regulated, or can owners do anything they like with them?
A: The native forestlands of California have public trust values and are therefore subject to regulation by the state to guarantee their protection. The State Legislature adopted the Forest Practices Act of 1973 for this purpose; the Board of Forestry makes rules at the state level to govern forest practices; and the California Department of Forestry (CDF) oversees the implementation of those rules. Counties have the right to apply for additional rules to satisfy local needs. The FAC rules are additional rules for Mendocino County; if passed, they will be implemented by CDF at no cost to the County.
Q: Don't the existing state rules and agencies provide adequate protection? Do we need County rules?
A: The state rules should protect our resource, but in practice they don't. The Forest Practices Act of 1973 was enacted to end widespread forest depletion, to restore the resource to maximum sustained productivity, and to maintain forest-related employment Ñ the same things we want here in Mendocino County. But in the twenty years since the Act was passed, the Board of Forestry has dropped the ball, and the results have been the opposite of the intent.
The Board of Forestry never fulfilled its mandate to formulate rules which would maximize forest productivity. Instead, the Board allowed forestland owners to cut all that was growing, so long as they replanted. Corporate owners Ñ who own almost all of the prime forestland in Mendocino County Ñ made full use of this opportunity to maximize short- term profits. As a result, they reduced inventory by more than 40%. Along the way, they harvested most reserves of merchantable trees, both mature and immature; they cut much more than was grown; and they used destructive harvesting methods that were cheap in the short term but very expensive for all of us in terms of soil erosion, soil fertility losses, and habitat for wildlife.
Q: What should they have done instead?
A: Forestland owners should have done precisely what the Forest Practices Act and the FAC recommend: harvest the resource for maximum sustained yield.
Q: What does that really mean?
A: When maximum growth and harvests are in balance in a forest, maximum sustained yield is the result.
The term "sustained yield" is meaningless unless one specifies the condition of the forest one wants to sustain Ñ for example, a Christmas tree farm, an old-growth forest, or a forest producing at maximum capacity (the standard for the FAC rules). When, after two decades of over-harvesting, Mendocino County's corporate spokespeople talk of practicing "sustained yield," they mean sustaining the condition of the severely depleted, underproducing forest they created.
Recently, some corporate landowners have announced that they are harvesting at a rate even lower than sustained yield. The fact is, they have no choice but to reduce cutting: the annual growth volume of their trees is higher than the available volume of merchantable timber.
Q: How do you measure maximum sustained yield?
A: The FAC recommended using the same yardstick for all landowners over 5,000 acres: no more than 2% of total inventory may be harvested in any given year. Under a 2%-of- inventory system of harvest control, harvests are based on the volume of available inventory. A healthy, full-capacity forest has an average growth rate of about 2%, so allowing annual harvests which equal 2% of total inventory is the way to grow maximum amounts of high-quality timber in perpetuity. The average age of trees in a forest regulated and harvested at 2% of inventory annually is around sixty years, with trees ranging from brand-new seedlings to 120 years in age. The average age of trees in a forest that is harvested at 9% of inventory annually is around twenty-two years.
There's been quite a bit of research done to determine what percentage of inventory will yield what level and quality of timber stands. Two percent of inventory was recommended by the FAC because, based on this solid research, it will lead to growing timber stands of various species to maximum productive capacity. Two percent of inventory will accomplish this for all of our commercially grown softwoods regardless of where they are grown within Mendocino County.
Q: Has Mendocino County lost potential timber-growth, permanent jobs, and sustainable income by allowing short-term profit-taking by corporate forestland owners?
A: It certainly has. In the period between 1973 and 1993, here is a comparison of what actually happened and what would have happened had the intent of the Forest Practices Act been fulfilled or 2%-of-inventory forest management practiced:
In other words, for a short-term gain of $621 million Ñ a financial resource mainly spent far from Mendocino County Ñ we lost over $3 billion in long-term, sustainable harvest income for the people who live and work here. Permitting the practice of over-harvesting resulted in considerable under-use of Mendocino County's forest resource, in addition to the damage it did to wildlife habitat. Due to short-term profit-taking, at least 2.3 billion board feet of timber, at a current dollar value of almost $1.4 billion, was never allowed to grow.
The number of permanent jobs derived from industry ownership is dependent on total annual forest growth. Under a 2% of inventory harvest control, annual growth would be approximately 2.5 to 3 times as high as it is currently. What this means, since approximately 80% of all timber harvested comes from industry lands, is not only that 2 to 2.4 times as many permanently-employed people would be holding forest-related jobs, but that the County would collect 2 to 2.4 times the amount of timber-yield tax income it now receives. This income would further increase for many decades, just as forest growth and harvests would.
Q: How are small forestland owners affected by the FAC recommendations?
A: Landowners holding less than 5,000 acres have three choices: (1) to operate under the same percent of inventory control as larger landowners; (2) to operate under Long-term Non- Commercial Timber Management Plans; or (3) to use the Southern Sub-District Rules, which allow higher-volume harvests that do not protect the resource from depletion.
At present, non-commercial small landowners harvest only a fraction of their growth overall. Much higher timber prices, however, will certainly provide them an incentive to increase this year's and future harvests. Should harvests eventually outpace growth, regulation for this ownership class will also be needed.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
If you would like more information, two sources are recommended. The complete FAC recommendations including the recommended rules are available from the Board of Supervisors. FAC member Hans Burkhardt has assembled a volume entitled Maximizing Forest Productivity which incorporates all the relevant documents and presents additional data concerning threats to our forests and rural lifestyle and how they can be overcome. It is available in all County libraries and in bookstores in Willits, Fort Bragg, and Ukiah.
[Ed. Note: The Board of Supervisors have scheduled a public hearing on the FAC rules for April 7th at the Cafetorium at Ukiah High School. The supervisors will probably vote on accepting or rejecting the FAC rules at the conclusion of the hearing. Written comments on the proposed FAC rules can be sent to the Board of Supervisors, Ukiah Courthouse, Ukiah, CA 95482. Your presence at the hearing on April 7th will offer support to proponents, as well as encourage a positive vote from the Board, whether or not you testify during the hearing.]
Comparison of Actual vs. 2 Percent of Inventory, 1973 - 1993
Millions of $$ Billions of bf
Actual 2% of Gain/loss Actual 2% of Gain/loss
inventory inventory
Total harvest1,155 534+ 6217.0 3.2+ 3.8
Total inventory2,5206,186- 3,6664.2 10.3 - 6.1
Harvest + Inventory3,6756,720 - 3,045 11.2 13.5 - 2.3
or, in terms of the average growth of board feet per acre,
ActualPOI 2Gain/Loss
Growth bf/acre/year268 707 - 439
Copyright Mendocino Environmental Center 1998
Permission granted to excerpt or use this article if source is cited