Introduction

The purpose of my blog is to share with you what I have learned based on my experience as a practicing forester in California and Washington and as the general contractor in our former homestead in Mendocino County, California and our current homestead in Kittitas County, WA. As a forester, for more than a decade, I have practiced forestry within the context of a strong land ethic that endeavors to balance economic return with the beauty, clean water, clean air, wildlife habitat, recreation and carbon storage offered by well managed forests. As home and property owners, my family and I challenge ourselves to make our footprint smaller, through conservation, sourcing quality materials from well managed sources as close to home as possible and use of alternative technologies within a budget. Thank you for visiting my blog and I hope that the information provided will help you as a steward of the forest and in the place that you call home.

January 29, 2006

Causes of Decline of Inland Douglas-fir

By Thembi Borras

A reader from the Iron Peak area of Mendocino County asks why a number of good-size Douglas fir have died over the last five or so years?

Jack Marshall, Forest Pathologist at the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, corroborated the readers observations reporting an increase in the death of Douglas-fir in the vicinity of Willits north to Laytonville. However, the number of dead trees observed has been declining since its height in 2003. The flat-headed fir borer and the Douglas-fir engraver beetle are the likely mortality agents. The flat-headed fir borer can cause mortality in any sized Douglas-fir tree. The Douglas-fir engraver beetle can cause mortality in trees less than 10" in diameter. Weakened trees are most susceptible to intrusion by insects. Biologic pressures and environmental pressures can cause trees to become weak. Weak trees are destined to be outcompeted by their neighbors and relegated to a suppressed or intermediate crown position. Environmental pressures include drought, the effects of a disrupted fire cycle, soil compaction and increased exposure to the elements. Biologic pressures include disease agents. In this case, the Dermea canker causes dieback of limbs and tops which may invite the entrance of the Douglas-fir engraver beetle.

Another reader from the Blue Rock Creek area asks a series of related questions: Can the bark beetle that is killing the Douglas-fir be stopped? Should we let them continue since they are only taking out the "weak" trees? How should they be cut and removed without spreading the beetle?

Native pests will always be in the area, but you can be active in protecting the non-symptomatic population. The Douglas-fir engraver beetle, a bark beetle, and the flat-headed fir borer are native insects. Through early removal of the symptomatic tree, you can slow the population growth. Once cut, treat the slash by lopping and scattering, piling and burning or chipping. Debarking the logs is also effective in that the habitat where beetles breed and larvae feed is destroyed. If you cut an infected tree into firewood, tarping and sealing the piles of wood with clear plastic is an effective way to prevent the emergence of the beetle from the wood. Go to http://www.fire.ca.gov/ click on resource management, then pest management and finally Tree Notes #3 or go directly to http://ceres.ca.gov/foreststeward/pdf/treenote3.pdf for more information.

A portion of this production was gleaned from a conversation with Jack Marshall, Forest Pathologist at the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. If you have a local disease or insect question for Jack Marshall, he can be reached at Howard Forest in Willits at 707-459-7448.

January 22, 2006

Jackson Demo State Forest Draft Environmental Impact Report Alternatives Evaluation

By Thembi Borras

The Board of Forestry and Fire Protection has released a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the proposed management plan for JDSF and seeks public input. JDSF is 50,000 acres and is the largest of the eight Demonstration State Forests that the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF) operates. Since 2001, timber harvest on JDSF has been suspended due to legal action; the DEIR for the proposed management plan is intended to move the status of management of JDSF from inactive toward active.

I evaluated the seven alternatives proposed in the DEIR based on silviculture, growth and yield and the use of herbicides, which I believe are essential issues.

Note: Uneven-Aged management includes prescriptions such as single tree selection and group selection. Even-Aged management includes prescriptions such as clearcutting, seed tree and shelterwood. Annual allowable harvest is projected out a minimum of 10 years.

Alternative A (minimal management)
Uneven-Aged Management/ Even-Aged Management: No harvest, no site preparation, no thinning, no planting.
Annual Allowable Harvest: Not applicable.
Herbicide Use: Limited for road maintenance.

Alternative B (continue 1983 plan)
Uneven-Aged Management: Yes.
Even-Aged Management: Yes.
Annual Allowable Harvest: 36 million board feet (MMBF)/year (nearly equal to the present estimated growth).
Herbicide Use: Yes.

Alternative C1 (CDF May 2002 DFMP, preferred Alternative by CDF)
Uneven-Aged Management: Yes, allowed on approximately 24,000 acres.
Even-Aged Management: Yes, allowed on approximately 11,000 acres.
Annual Allowable Harvest: 31 MMBF/year.
Herbicide Use: Yes.

Alternative C2 (CDF November 2002 Plan)
Uneven-Aged Management: Yes, allowed on approximately 22,500 acres.
Even-Aged Management: Yes, allowed on approximately 10,000 acres.
Annual Allowable Harvest: 31 MMBF/year.
Herbicide Use: Yes.

Alternative D (Citizens Advisory Committee proposal)
Uneven-Aged Management: Yes.
Even-Aged Management: No clearcutting. Other prescriptions restricted to limited demonstration.
Annual Allowable Harvest: 25 MMBF/year.
Herbicide Use: Herbicides would not be allowed in site preparation or vegetation control. There would be a three-year moratorium on chemical use for control of invasive species.

Alternative E (Late Seral Forests)
Uneven-Aged Management: Yes.
Even-Aged Management: No.
Annual Allowable Harvest: 8 MMBF/year.
Herbicide Use: No.

Alternative F (Older Forests Emphasis)
Uneven-Aged Management: Yes.
Even-Aged Management: No.
Annual Allowable Harvest: 19 MMBF/year.
Herbicide Use: Use herbicides only if other approaches fail.


Alternative D (Citizens Advisory Committee proposal), in my opinion, appears to have the greatest chance of successfully balancing environmental values, economic viability and public support. If there is enough public buy-in, then perhaps further legal wrangling can be avoided. Alternative D also best fits my vision of public forest management because it is strong on building inventory, strong on selection prescriptions and does not suggest incorporating herbicide use as a customary part of forest management. Building inventory and improving stand structure are cornerstones of sustainable forestry, although selection prescriptions do not inherently imply improved stand structure, this is only inherent in good decisions made on the ground regarding which trees will be cut and which will be left. Selection prescriptions done well are opportunities to take value from the forest and improve the transportation infrastructure, at the same time keeping pre harvest habitat the same as post harvest habitat, improving aesthetics by maintaining a continuous forest canopy and encouraging fewer large stems and minimizing adverse watershed effects through a low level of canopy removal.

January 8, 2006

Late Spring Rains Result in an Increase in Foliar Pathogens

By Thembi Borras

In the past several months, the madrone tree outside my window has become increasingly unhealthy looking. More than 75% of the surface area on 50% of the leaves have turned brown.

So I called Jack Marshall at the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and asked him, why? Late spring rains in 2005 created a prime environment, high moisture during a warmer time of the year, for the growth of foliar pathogens including the native foliar pathogen causing the brown spots on the madrone outside my window. The consequence will likely be slowed growth, given that the photosynthetic area of the leaves has been obstructed, but the madrone will not likely die and will slowly recover.

A little more than a month ago, Mr. Marshall started observing the end of branches on interior live oak trees were dead or dying. The cause is Discula quercina, a native branch canker fungus that kills branch tips and buds. Similar to the madrone foliar pathogen it was accelerated by the environmental conditions set forth by the late spring rains.

New Sudden Oak Death (SOD) occurrences may manifest as a result of the late spring rains. Phytophthora ramorum, a water mold fungus that many believe to be nonnative, causes Sudden Oak Death in some of its hosts and occurs as a foliar pathogen in other hosts, such as California bay laurel. Bay laurels are thought to be very important in spreading the disease as the fungus readily produces spores on moist bay leaves. The spores of Phytophthora ramorum are then ready for transport, by mechanisms such as wind and water, to new hosts. According to Brock Dolman of the Occidental Arts and Ecology Center, "This past summer SOD finally really hit Sonoma County due to our late wet spring…" To get a thorough grasp on SOD and its movement go to the California Oak Mortality Task Force web site at www.suddenoakdeath.org.

The complexity of the environment that surrounds us never ceases to amaze me.

A portion of this production was gleaned from the book Diseases of Tree and Shrubs by Sinclair, Lyon and Johnson and a conversation with Jack Marshall, Forest Pathologist at the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. If you have a local disease or insect question for Jack Marshall, he can be reached at Howard Forest in Willits at 707-459-7448.

January 1, 2006

Is your road up to the big, fast water challenge?

By Thembi Borras

The winter storms are delivering big, fast water causing some stream crossings to fail, road rock to be lost, sink holes and road failures. Well designed roads and stream crossings take into account large storm events. Moreover, when well designed roads and stream crossings are properly constructed and installed, they are better able to resist the big, fast and infrequent water as we have been having. The best time to determine if your road is holding up to the big, fast water challenge is during the storm. If it is not safe, you can often project, where the high water level was, based on debris, mudlines and waterlines, after the storm.

Indicators that your road is not adequately drained include waving farewell to your road rock, the capacity of your ditch relief culverts and inside ditches are being exceeded and rills are forming in your road bed.

An indicator that your culverted stream crossing is not adequately designed is the capacity of the culvert is being exceeded. Plugging is often evidence that a culvert is undersized. When a stream crossing plugs it can spell bad news. In the winter of 1995/1996 an undersized culvert plugged on our private dirt road. The diverted water traveled 125 yards where it outleted carrying 30 cubic yards of the roadbed to the creek, facilitated by the well formed berm on the outside edge of the road.

At the same time your are evaluating your road during a storm you can do effective short-term maintenance, with a shovel or a hoe, that will protect your investment. Dig ditches to get the water off the road as quickly as possible and deliver it to a stable location. Remove any blockages from culvert inlets. Clear your inside ditches of debris but keep growing things in the ditch, to slow the water and meter sediment, unless you need the capacity. Long term fixes include sizing your stream crossings for 100 year storm events and where appropriate can include replacing culverts with rock armored fill crossings, installing more frequent cross drainage and reshaping roads to have outslope.

In the spring, remember the big fast water of 12-30-05 and ask yourself if your road could be improved, it may not be cheap, but it could save you money and inconvenience in the end. Remember the goals of road improvement are to reduce the chance of sediment delivery because of episodic events, reduce chronic delivery of sediment and reduce maintenance.

The Handbook for Forest and Ranch Roads by Pacific Watershed Associates will aid you in your road management decision making and is available through the Mendocino County Resource Conservation District (707-468-9223) and the Navarro River Resource Center (707-895-3230).