home > overview > documents > 2002-2004 project report

ForestERA Project Report, 2002 – 2004: Executive Summary

Suggested citation:

Sisk, T.D., H.M. Hampton, J. Prather, E.N. Aumack, Y. Xu, M.R. Loeser, T. Munoz-Erickson, B. Dickson, and J. Palumbo (2004). Forest Ecological Restoration Analysis (ForestERA) Project Report, 2002 – 2004: Executive Summary. Retrieved [month day, year], from http://forestera.nau.edu/overview_2002-2004_project_report.htm.

Full report available on CD-ROM (contact us).

Introduction

A century of exploitation and fire suppression has altered the composition and structure of ponderosa pine ecosystems across western North America, resulting in lower productivity, decreasing habitat, and declining watershed values. The most pronounced effects, however, are related to changes in fire regimes, particularly the heightened probability of large and intense wildfires, disturbances that were rare in the evolutionary history of ponderosa pine and associated species. Increasingly destructive fires, coupled with the increasing extension of human communities and infrastructure into forested regions, has generated high risks of catastrophic wildfire that cannot be addressed through traditional fire suppression and forest management approaches. Over much of the West, public concern about wildfire and the increasing awareness of important values supplied by healthy forests have highlighted the call for ecosystem restoration.

The Forest Ecosystem Restoration Analysis Project – ForestERA – provides the data, tools, and analytical framework for developing landscape-level strategies for ecosystem restoration, and assessing the impacts and implications of alternative management scenarios. The work, funded through an emergency Congressional appropriation to the Ecological Restoration Institute in response to several devastating fire seasons, has developed a science-based ‘toolbox’ for setting management priorities and assessing proposed actions in a the larger spatial framework employed by planners and the public. Insightful planning and implementation of effective on-the-ground management requires analytical approaches that integrate diverse types of information, ranging from forest and watershed conditions, to wildlife needs, to public values and regional economic and demographic trends. ForestERA Project efforts draw upon diverse data sets and build on scientific insights and methodological advances from landscape and restoration ecology, and conservation biology, utilizing the technical capabilities of geographic information systems (GIS) and spatial statistics. This new capacity allows users to expand their perspective from the few, small study sites for which detailed scientific information is available, to projections of conditions in less-studied areas, and the probable outcomes of contemplated management activities over large landscapes.

In tandem with these scientific advances, the ForestERA Project has developed a capacity for supporting landscape-scale assessment through a public process that incorporates the values and insights of diverse participants, including decision makers, scientists, activists, and the interested public. By making sound science available in an easily accessible form, and by involving the broadest range of collaborators possible, the ForestERA team has worked to provide a new capacity for landscape assessment that complements existing forest planning efforts and links national and regional objectives with the practical world of project-level forest management. These reports detail the results of the first phase of the ForestERA Project, an ongoing effort to inform and enhance efforts to restore and conserve forest ecosystems and the human and ecological communities dependent upon them.

Findings, Products, and Outcomes

This report from the first 2 years of the ForestERA Project is organized into 3 volumes, each covering a different focus area. While the detailed scientific results from our efforts are evident in the pages that follow, here we summarize key results pertaining to the implementation of ForestERA data, analytical methods, and decision support tools in landscape assessment efforts.

Volume 1:Comprehensive ForestERA Project Report

The sweeping scope and objectives of the ForestERA project necessitated integrated planning of science and decision support efforts, as well as a staged project plan that engaged decision makers, public interest groups, and citizens at every stage. The study region includes the contiguous ponderosa pine forests from the Gila National Forest in New Mexico, northwest across the Mogollon Plateau, to the Kaibab Plateau in northern Arizona. The diverse ecological, social and political contexts across this large region required a sound science strategy that could weather the often divisive debates revolving around the issues of fire, conservation of biodiversity, and cultural and economic values associated with forest conditions and management directions. Insights from the work conveyed in Volume 1 include the following:

• Outreach, responsiveness to potential cooperators, and attention to the needs of users are critically important in preparing the way for science to move out of the laboratory and into the decision process. ForestERA’s considerable investment in outreach has proven to be one of the most efficient uses of time and resources, with returns evident in the depth of stakeholder participation, the dissemination of scientific information, and the initial applications of landscape assessment tools.
• The data matter. Collaborators and users of ForestERA products consistently demonstrated a keen interest in the development, quality, and appropriate uses of spatial data. In contrast to the popular idea that science provides specialized information that is difficult for the lay person to understand, we found that most people engaged in forest issues were keen to interact with our team during the data development process, and they calibrated their expectations and interpretation of results in light of the origin, accuracy, and resolution of information.
• Quality data products get used. Ours are organized into ‘Foundational Data’, including vegetation composition and structure, topography, soils, and other basic information that served as input to ForestERA models and tools; ‘Derived Data’, including outputs from models and analyses that describe conditions such a fire risk and hazard, wildlife habitat quality, and watershed conditions; and ‘Supplemental Data’ that were compiled to support collaborator-driven analyses and meet the needs of particular decision makers and interest groups.
• Applications of ForestERA demonstrated that spatial data and models must be transparent, thoroughly explained and discussed by potential users, and integrated in their application. By assuring that this is the case, ForestERA users can ‘take ownership’ of the science and, supported by experienced and sensitive scientific and technical experts, use it in an appropriate and helpful manner.
• Spatial tools enhance decision support. In addition to the provision of data and analytical tools, the ForestERA Project provides a flexible but highly structured decision support system that ensures appropriate use of science while avoiding the rigid ‘black box’ framework that characterizes many decision support systems. We found that this approach, powered by new GIS tools and interactive modeling modules specific to forest restoration and management, allowed users to participate together in a process where different skills, experiences, and values could be brought into the deliberative process in a manner that was complementary, rather than conflicting.

Volume 2: Western Mogollon Plateau Adaptive Landscape Assessment (WMPALA)

Drawing on the development of capabilities described in Volume 1, the ForestERA Project launched a sequential series of in-person and virtual workshops, focusing on a 2-million+-acre area on the Western Mogollon Plateau that spanned several National Forests and included State and private lands. Following a Pilot Project in October, 2003, ForestERA, together with the Ecological Restoration Institute, hosted a series of stakeholder workshops where over 40 participants prioritized areas and subsequently developed scenarios that mapped appropriate restoration treatments across this large, multi-jurisdictional landscape. WMPALA was where ‘the rubber met the road’, as we tested our ideas of how the science and tools, developed over an intensive 18-month effort, informed and influenced the assessment process. Among our findings:

• Collaborative, science-based, adaptive landscape assessment can efficiently and effectively prioritize restoration efforts. The workshops clearly showed that it is possible to produce a solid identification and prioritization of landscape features in critical need of protection and restoration.
• ForestERA tools were adequate to the task of participatory, adaptive assessment over large landscapes, and, in general, the processes to date have been successful in moving the debate toward a more scientifically informed footing.
• Products from WMPALA are being used by decision makers at the regional level, at the scale of individual National Forests, and by counties and communities developing Community Wildfire Protection Plans.
• Hands-on work with the best available data made participants more aware of and comfortable with the uncertainty involved in scientific analysis. Participants edited spatial data, identified new information sources, and requested specific refinements that improved the assessment process.
• Stakeholder ownership and facilitator flexibility are key to success. Participants appreciated flexibility in the assessment process, in conjunction with competent scientific support. This allowed individuals to request specific data and direct analyses, where appropriate.
• Engaging participants in follow-up discussions via “virtual workshops” was challenging, yet these efforts were successful at disseminating the work accomplished in 3-day, in-person workshops. As the WMPALA process continues, we expect that more participants may take advantage of this forum for discussing landscape assessment issues.
• Clarification of goals is an integral component of the assessment process. Workshop participants repeatedly reexamined workshop goals, potential products, and how those products might be used. This resulted in a ‘spiraling’ route toward progress, where initial discussions and analysis led to a refinement of goals, which in turn influenced the work of the group. Adaptive approaches to landscape assessment should acknowledge that progress is often not linear or predictable.

Volume 3: Integrating Forests, Grasslands, Woodlands, and Social Data

During the WMPALA workshops, we recognized that grasslands were critical components of ponderosa pine ecosystems, not only ecologically (as demonstrated by the influence of herbaceous vegetation on fire behavior, primary ecosystem production, and habitat quality), but also with respect to human values and decision processes. Drawing on six years of research on grasslands and grazing in the Sisk lab, which was supported in part through grants from the Ecological Restoration Institute, the ForestERA team contributed to the development of new ecological and social analyses that integrated grassland and forest issues across a quarter-million-acre study area southeast of Flagstaff, AZ. Results of this work have leveraged considerable prior research investment through the adaptation of ForestERA data and tools, and the focusing of integrated monitoring strategies addressing ecological, social, and economic variables. Volume 3 details results pertaining to livestock management, the effects of drought and climatic variability, and the development of data-driven monitoring plans to support adaptive management.

• Grazing and grassland productivity. We measured an average increase of 35% in aboveground plant productivity due to a simulated early-season grazing event that removed upwards of 90% of all plant biomass. This increase in aboveground productivity suggests that some forms of livestock grazing may be compatible with increased production of fine fuels and forage.
• Long- and short-term impacts may differ. We documented a dampening effect of repeated defoliations on the response of aboveground productivity. Multiple defoliation events in previous years may lessen the ability of plants to respond positively to defoliation and lead to a net loss of aboveground productivity over the long term.
• Climate and grazing interactions are complex. In a year of low precipitation, defoliation of grassland plots had no effect on the production of most plant species; while in a wetter year, defoliation increased aboveground production. These data suggest that managers need flexible plans with respect to livestock grazing.
• Grassland cover has been overestimated. The ForestERA estimates of canopy cover for woodland areas on Anderson Mesa exceed current estimates based on USFS Terrestrial Ecosystem Survey (TES) data. ForestERA-generated data show that across more than 33% of the Anderson Mesa study area, one of Arizona’s wettest and most productive grassland systems, canopy cover exceeds Forest Service thresholds for classification as grassland.
• Grasslands in decline. We estimate that 13,000-20,000 ha (approx 12-20%) of grassland have been converted into woodland or forest since the early 20th century. Much of this type conversion has occurred in the fawning grounds of the declining Anderson Mesa herd of American pronghorn, a management indicator species for the U.S. Forest Service. These results are helping agencies and conservation organizations identify priority areas for grassland restoration.
• Recreation is the dominant land use. Most of the population uses the grasslands/forest landscape for non-motorized recreation (76.6%), while only 12% use the land for food production.
• People support restoration but lack information. Primary residents indicated a high level of political support for forest restoration, with little differences noted among different population segments. Our survey results indicate that the population is interested in participating in land management issues, but they lack sufficient information on the issues and opportunities to be involved.

Conclusions

Our forests are shared resources that will benefit from the thoughtful and creative application of hard-won insights from decades of ecological research and considerable experience gained through a century of public involvement in forest management.

The fundamental conclusions from the first two years of the ForestERA Project is that planning for the restoration and sustainability of healthy, productive ponderosa pine ecosystems can be enhanced by sound science, when it is delivered in a manner that engages diverse groups of decision makers, scientists, and citizens in informed debate of management options. Over the past decade, rapid development of scientific understanding and analytical capabilities has led to strong commitments to science-based ecosystem management. However, the call for more complex analysis can, when pursued in a single-minded manner, fuel a technocratic dialog that leads to protracted debate, conflict, and policy impasse. The ForestERA Project provides a framework for addressing landscape-level questions associated with forest management by linking good data and powerful analytical tools with a participatory public process that puts science in the hands of engaged stakeholders, so that they can work with decision makers to explore and articulate alternative approaches for restoring forest health and moving toward adaptive approaches to sustainable forest management.

These changes in our approach to science can shift perspectives on forest management, in general, encouraging the development of public processes that draw on scientific understanding and incorporate it into a more transparent and inclusive planning effort that makes scientific, social, and political sense. Public science is one way to develop greater trust in the policy development process and sustain society’s commitment to restoring forest ecosystems. The ForestERA Project, working with a large and diverse group of collaborators and stakeholders, will continue working toward these goals by providing quality data, rigorous science and practical tools for landscape assessment of forest restoration and management objectives.

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to all the many stakeholders who have attended our open houses, filled out questionnaires, participated in workshops, and have otherwise shaped this project with their diverse perspectives and experience. Thanks go to Mark Finney and Chuck McHugh (USDA Forest Service), Pete Fulé, and Charlie Denton (Ecological Restoration Institute) for aid in fire modeling, and John Bailey (NAU), Bill Romme (Colorado State University), and Doc Smith (ERI) for expertise in forest treatment modeling. We greatly appreciated Bob Hart’s (USGS) help in developing our preliminary fire-sensitive watershed layer and Brad Piehl’s (JW Associates, Inc.) assistance in developing methods to predict post-fire soil erosion and sedimentation. For wildlife modeling data and expertise we thank Norris Dodd, Mike Ingraldi, Steve Rosenstock, and Brian Wakeling of the Arizona Game and Fish Department, Bill Block, Joseph Ganey, and Jeff Jenness of the USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station, Carol Chambers and Paul Beier of Northern Arizona University, Kerry Griffis-Kyle of Syracuse University, and Shaula Hedwall of the US Fish and Wildlife Service. We thank the Diablo Trust for their collaboration on the Grasslands project. For overall project comments, we thank Heather Green, Bruce Higgins, Tammy Randall-Parker, Walker Thornton, Reuben Weisz, Jim Beard, Laura Moser, and Cecelia Overby (Forest Service), Taylor McKinnon (Grand Canyon Trust), Steve Gatewood (Greater Flagstaff Forests Partnership), Ed Smith (The Nature Conservancy), Bill Austin (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service), Rick Miller (Arizona Game and Fish Dept), Kathryn Thomas (USGS), Mike Wilson and Gretchen Moisen (FIA), and Brian Nowicki and Todd Schulke (Center for Biological Diversity). We also greatly appreciate the advice and review provided by our Science Advisory Committee: Barry Noon (CSU), Craig Allen (USGS), and Greg Aplet (The Wilderness Society).

None of this work could have been attempted, much less completed without the Ecological Restoration Institute at NAU, which provided funding and other forms of support for all phases of this project. Additional funding and in-kind support were received from USDA Forest Service, Environmental Protectiona Agency, N.A.U., Arizona Game and Fish Department and the Diablo Trust.

Obviously, this is a highly collaborative project, and we appreciate the collective efforts and contributions of all, even those who we have inadvertently omitted here.

Last updated February 11, 2005