Prescribed burns could be a part of stewardship contracts
Tucked away in the fine print of the Fiscal Year 1999 Omnibus Appropriations Act was section 323 of Public Law 108-7. This section granted authority to the USDA Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management, “to enter into stewardship projects with private persons or public or private entities, by contract or by agreement, to perform services to achieve land management goals for the National Forests or public lands that meet local and rural community needs.”
Learning curve
According to Dale Remington, sales forester for the National Forests in North Carolina, stewardship contracts were restricted to pilot projects in the beginning. “Basically we were allowed to go out and try different things to see what works and what doesn’t,” Remington said. He said there were a couple of projects in North Carolina plus scores of projects across the country. Remington said the projects were well received by all parties and that the Forest Service was given the authority to continue using stewardship contracts to manage National Forests through 2013. “And I believe it [stewardship contracting] will be extended beyond that deadline,” Remington said, “because it’s been so successful.”
Stewardship contracts differ greatly from the old timber sale bids. “There are many differences,” Remington said. “To begin with it’s a collaborative effort from the start.” He said the Forest Service tries to get its partners, the public, interested non-profits, prospective contractors and other interested parties involved early in the scoping process. “In my 30-year career, I’ve seen the Service at odds with any number of groups and now we’re talking with them,” said Remington. “We won’t agree on everything but we try and come up with a plan that everyone can live with.”
Ben Prater, associate executive director of Wild South, said his organization has been involved in some of the pilot programs and believes stewardship contracting is the wave of the future. “It’s a new way of doing business and if done right, it’s a great tool,” Prater said.
Prater and Remington were on the same page regarding the benefits of stewardship contracting too. They both lauded the fact that stewardship contracting allows the revenue generated to stay in the region. In the past, the majority of revenue collected from a timber sale went to the treasury department. But under a stewardship contract that money stays local and can be used for other projects without further appropriation.
Where conventional timber sales are basically revenue generators and usually go to the highest bidder, stewardship contracts are tools used to achieve forest management goals. According to Remington that means he can award bids based on the “best contract” rather than the most money. He said that under stewardship contracts the Forest Service could lay out the goals and objectives and let the contractor tell them how they planned to achieve those goals.
Stewardship contracts can also be spread over a larger area than conventional timber sales. Most conventional timber sales are confined to only the specific area the commercial timber is going to come from. Most of them only impact around 150 to 250 acres. Under stewardship contracts, the Forest Service designates the stewardship area and it can range from a simple stream corridor to an entire basin and encompass as many as 2,000 or more acres. Contractors may be asked, as part of the contract, to create wildlife openings, to treat exotic invasives, to implement timber stand improvements, to reduce fuel load and/or perform other silviculture treatment designed to enhance the overall forest health.
Prater believes that the openness and up front collaboration incorporated by the stewardship model may help ease the litigious relationship many environmental groups had with the Forest Service. “Under the old timber-driven contracts, the NEPA [National Environmental Policy Act] process was basically the only way the public could have any input – and that usually meant law suits,” he said.
Remington said, “it’s a different business, it’s a different time and everybody has to adapt. I like the stewardship contract because it allows us to step back and look at the bigger picture.”
Putting the plan on the ground
“We don’t care if we’re the primary contractor, the secondary contractor or a consultant,” said Dave Wilson, director of stewardship with the National Wild Turkey Federation (NWTF), “we just want to see the program on the ground.”
The NWTF was one of the earliest groups to partner with the Forest Service in conjunction with stewardship contracting. They have worked on projects across the country, including North Carolina and are currently working on the Mulberry/Globe stewardship project in the Grandfather District.
Wilson said he believes stewardship contracts offer a better understanding of “outcomes value.” He said, “it allows us or whoever the contractor is to utilize the value of the timber sold to do much needed restoration work.”
And putting the plan on the ground puts local companies to work. And the fact that stewardship contracts can have a 10-year lifespan, they can keep people working for a while. It might require a new mindset and some new skill sets but Wilson said most timber companies don’t mind the learning curve. “We have timber contractors willing to stay after they’ve cut the marketable timber and create wildlife openings or do other types of restoration work.
“The bottom line for us is that increasing and improving habitat, improves the forests, thus improves the habitat for wild turkeys as well as other wildlife.”
Spreading the word
Smoky Mountain News will go to print before the Pisgah Chapter of the Society of American Foresters meets on Tuesday night (January 18) but Dale Remington will be talking to the chapter about stewardship contracting and the opportunities for regional natural resource professionals and organizations. Rob Lamb, chair of the Pisgah Chapter and executive director of Forest Stewards, a non-profit connected with Western Carolina University to promote and implement forest stewardship in the Appalachians, said he would be wearing both of his hats to the meeting Tuesday. Lamb said it would be interesting to find out what kind of roles registered foresters might play in stewardship plans and what kinds of roles might be available to Forest Stewards.
“I’m especially pleased to see the bigger landscape approach and learn about all the new opportunities that could result from stewardship contracting,” Lamb said.
“Ben Prater, associate executive director of Wild South, said his organization has been involved in some of the pilot programs and believes stewardship contracting is the wave of the future. “It’s a new way of doing business and if done right, it’s a great tool,” Prater said.”
I am very disappointed that a Wild South member would make such a statement. And, indeed, to quote Ben Prater: “It’s a new way of doing business” which will encourage more extraction of resources supported by a public that sees only “revenue”. In these hard economic times this is especially detrimental to the stated goals of protecting wild forests, habitat, clean air, clean water, preventing global warming – the list goes on! Bad press Ben Prater – not in the founding spirit of Wild South at all.
Thanks for the comment Barbara but I believe it’s a disservice to Prater and Wild South to take 1/2 a quote out of context. Prater didn’t simply say it’s a new way of doing business. He said, as you quoted correctly in your first paragraph “It’s a new way of doing business AND IF DONE RIGHT, IT’S A GREAT TOOL.”
It’s clearly a new way of doing business. Instead of the FS cruising timber and selecting the highest quality timber and then letting a bid – they are sitting down first with organizations like Wild South, Southern Environmental Law Center, Wild Turkey Federation as well as timber companies and others and saying ‘we would like to see restoration in this area – any ideas how we can accomplish this.’
Clearly the FS will, at least for now, continue to let traditional bids as well. And I’m sure that Wild South, SELC and other groups will continue, as they have in the past, to fight against extraction solely based on profit. But I applaud their initiative to say ‘we want a place at the table and we want to help guide the process to insure that forests and habitats are restored in a wholistic and ecologically sound manner.’
Restoration is clearly in the founding spirit of Wild South:
Wild South was born in 2007 from the merger of:
The Southern Appalachian Biodiversity Project: a regional non-profit organization based in Asheville, NC, dedicated to empowering citizens to appreciate, defend and RESTORE the native biodiversity of the Southeast.
Wild South: a grassroots forest protection organization based in Moulton, AL, dedicated to inspiring individuals and groups to preserve, RESTORE and enjoy the South’s natural landscapes.
Restoring diversity and removing exotic invasives increases the overall health of wild forests and insures more diverse wildlife habitat. And healthy forests promote clean air and clean water and provide more relief from global warming than unhealthy or degraded forests.
I don’t believe Wild South is selling you out. I believe they are clearly following their mission of defending and restoring the native biodiversity of the Southeast. And as I said I applaud their desire to be on the ground floor of stewardship contracting because I am one of the “public” who believes they are looking after my interests and promoting my desire to be surrounded by healthy, diverse wild forests that support a myriad of flora and fauna.
Thanks again for reading and sharing!
I have been a member of Wild South since the Bankhead Monitor was a double-sided sheet of typing paper! I understand what you are saying; you are preaching to the choir. However, if you bring “local money” into the mix you are ultimately going to have more of the public at large urging extraction because most of the public doesn’t understand how few places there are that can be protected for wildlife and environmental health – or that it’s even needed! This is what I believe, and I truly hope that I am totally wrong!
Here, in Bankhead National Forest, the USFS is removing understory in some places. This will lead to drier conditions in those areas, less total wildlife cover, food and habitat and less wildlife. The number one problem for wildlife species survival is presented through habitat loss due to human activities. Food sources like blueberries, dogwoods, service berries, wild cherries, muscadines and others have been leveled and chopped to pieces in these un-natural “mono-aged” compartments. I am not describing green plots or wildlife openings touted to provide forage for wildlife – this is something different and something new for this forest.
Last year it was so hot that my tomatoes and bell peppers actually cooked on the vine instead of ripening. Can you imagine how the forest is going to feel where the understory has been removed this summer when those hot temperatures return? In some of the “restored” areas last spring the canopy was so thin that my face actually got a sun-burn while hiking! And I urge you to come to Bankhead National Forest and have a look at what in fact has been done in the name of “restoration” by this USFS. You will be shocked! I will be glad to take you out and show you.
This forest would restore itself to a natural state if everyone of us just went away. Wildlife and the forests were very healthy when the white settlers first came to this country. I have read of the mature, open forests with the great abundance of wildlife – so, clearly, man did not have to manipulate the forests for wildlife. Much of what the USFS is doing is to provide a livelihood for themselves and their language of “restoration” and “natural processes” are smoke screens for actions that, in my opinion, are detrimental to the environment, wildlife and the forests.
I know that you know all this – and that we all want the same thing. We have differing opinions on management and “resources”.
Hi Barbara,
Our opinions and goals for healthy forests are probably quite similar. I haven’t lost sight of the fact that stewardship contracting arose out of the “Healthy Forests Initiative: And to know what I thought & think of that policy see:
http://www.smokymountainnews.com/issues/09_03/09_03_03/out_naturalist.html.
That’s why I want to see groups like Wild South at the table to help hammer out these stewardship contracts. My editor at SMN forwarded an email announcing a Master Stewardship agreement between USDAFS & NCWRC & asked if I wanted to use it in my column – my response:
How bout both? You could do a short brief with the announcement – I want to talk about some concerns I have – I think it’s important that environmental groups – Wild South – WNCA etc. have a place at the table. I fear if you have only FS & NCWRC, National Wild Turkey Federation, Ruffed
Grouse Society and Quail Unlimited – you will wind up with basically forests managed for game species.
I think stewardship contracting has terrific potential but only as long as it’s truly about ecological and environmental stewardship & restoration. I would love to see someone like The Nature Conservancy or Wildlife Federation or Sierra Club added to the Master Stewardship list.
Ciao
I support and hope for true ecological and environmental restoration and protection on our public lands. I will have reservations about “stewardship” associated with “money” until it proves to me wrong -(Please!). Deep ecology needs to be the guide for restoration – starting with the tiniest of organisims and the relationships inherent in entire environmental systems.
If only everyone could know and care about the unseen ecology and the web of life that exists beyond the scope of our eyesight. I recommend reading “Teaching The Trees, Lessons from the Forest” by J. Maloof, a teacher of biology and environmental studies at Salisbury University in Maryland. The book is small but fascinating and ends all too soon! You will not want to put it down.
I definitely believe that Wild South and other organizations that care about global warming, wildlife habitat, clean air and water and human health should have a seat at the table!
Barbara