Abstract

Protecting rare, old-growth forest associated species under the Survey and Manage guidelines of the Northwest Forest Plan: An multi-species conservation study in adaptive management

Randy Molina,
US Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station,
Forestry Sciences Laboratory,
3200 Jefferson Way,
Corvallis, OR 97331 and

Robin Lesher,
US Forest Service,
Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest,
21905 64th Ave West,
Mountlake Terrace, WA, 98043

The Survey and Manage (S&M) component of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) is an unprecedented attempt to protect rare and little known species thought to be associated with late successional and old-growth forests. Over 400 species of lichens, bryophytes, mollusks, fungi, vascular plants, amphibians, arthropod guilds, and one mammal were considered to lack full protection under the NWFP's reserve system, and thus received the Survey and Manage mitigation. This mitigation used an adaptive approach, protecting known sites while collecting new information in order to address concerns for species persistence. However, the NWFP Record of Decision provided little guidance for implementing a species conservation program of such size and complexity. Although the guidelines included a 10-year timeframe for survey completion and noted that the surveys were likely to be extensive and expensive, there remained a high level of uncertainty about the types and extent of information needed to provide the scientific basis to manage for species persistence. Many of the species are extremely rare, and their ecology and habitat needs are poorly understood. Furthermore, implementation of the S&M mitigations have interacted with other NWFP goals and objectives in unexpected ways. For example, predisturbance surveys, required for 77 species prior to ground-disturbing activities, have resulted in an unanticipated amount of "protected" acreage in matrix lands, significantly impacting agencies' ability to meet the level of timber harvest originally envisioned. Other challenges have included a shortage of taxa experts, the need to rapidly develop numerous science-based survey protocols and management guidelines for poorly known taxa, and the necessity to work across multiple agencies and coordinate efforts throughout the region.

Given the mounting difficulties of implementation, legal challenges and negative impacts on timber harvest targets, agency executives saw a clear need for a more efficient program . In 2000, a new SEIS was produced that better defined the mitigation needed for each species, along with adaptive management processes to evaluate species status. Updated species status analyses resulted in the removal of over 80 species that no longer needed protection under the S & M mitigation. In addition, a system of statistically designed, region-wide surveys (strategic surveys) was initiated to efficiently gather distribution and habitat information for multiple species and allow use of inferential, probabilistic data analysis at landscape scales. Habitat modeling and research studies were initiated as well. Currently, over 75,000 known site records exist for S&M species and provide the primary source for evaluating species distribution, habitat associations, persistence concerns, and developing adaptive conservation strategies. Although the adaptive management approach of the S&M program has yielded many successes in protecting and evaluating the status of numerous rare or poorly known species, the continued expense (about $30 million annually) and impacts on management targets has brought S&M under increased scrutiny by agency executives and the public. Two lawsuits, one by the timber industry and one by environmental groups, challenge the implementation and adaptive decision process of the S&M program. The current administration is developing alternatives to meet the original intent of S&M while balancing it with the needs of other NWFP objectives. Agency scientists are grappling with design of habitat-or system approaches that may replace or be used in combination with the predominantly species-by-species approach of S&M. Two outstanding questions remain in this regard: 1) Can habitat-based or system approaches provide protection of these rare and little known species as effectively and more efficiently than the current species approach, and 2) will alternative approaches be socially acceptable and legally defensible?