Loss of Forest Land

A Position Statement of the Society of American Foresters

Originally adopted by the SAF Council on December 5, 2004. This position will expire on December 5, 2009 unless, after subsequent review, it is further extended by the SAF Council.

Position

During most of the past century, the forest land area of the United States remained essentially unchanged. More recently, however, the amount of forest land in many states has been decreasing, a result of providing our growing population with land needed for residential and commercial development as well as highways and other infrastructure. SAF believes that much of the permanent loss of forest land occurring today is avoidable and too often the result of uncontrolled urban expansion, lack of thoughtful land use policies, over regulation, and limited economic incentives to own and manage forest land.

Recognizing that conversion of forest land to other land uses results from numerous decisions by landowners, real estate developers, and government officials, SAF encourages state and local governments to, where necessary, adopt land use policies that respect the rights and responsibilities of forest owners, while recognizing the importance of forest lands to the citizens of our local communities and states, and to the nation as a whole. SAF urges policy makers at all levels of government to recognize the essential role of forests in providing watershed and water quality protection, wildlife habitat, outdoor recreation opportunities, and the forest products that contribute to our social and economic well-being.

To help maintain the viability of privately owned forests and strengthen economic incentives for forest stewardship, SAF also urges state and local governments to adopt forest taxation systems that encourage long-term investment in sustainable forest management. Further, SAF supports efforts to reform federal and state estate tax laws to prevent involuntary liquidation and parcelization of family-owned farms, ranches, and forests when such lands are passed from one generation to the next. SAF also supports ongoing landowner education and outreach efforts, and federal and state incentive programs, that promote sustainable forest management by family forest owners. Where suited to the needs of individual forest owners, SAF encourages the use of creative voluntary agreements, such as conservation easements, as important mechanisms for ensuring long-term protection of the nation's private forestlands.

Issue

Conversion of forest land to other land uses has many undesirable ecological, social, and economic consequences. While fundamentally a result of population growth, loss of forest land to uncontrolled urban expansion, subdivision, and commercial development is to some degree avoidable and is too often a result of outdated state or local land use policies that have not kept pace with the rapid rate of growth of many urban, suburban, and rural communities..

Permanent loss of forest land and forest cover leads to degraded watershed conditions, including increased runoff and sedimentation, higher peak stream flows, loss of riparian vegetation, and higher stream temperatures, with long-term adverse effects on water quality, whether needed for domestic, industrial, or recreational uses, or for sustaining essential biological functions. Loss of forest land results in direct loss of wildlife habitat, including the habitats of many threatened or endangered species and neotropical migratory birds, and can have adverse effects on aquatic habitats and fish, particularly cold-water fish such as trout, salmon, and other anadromous species.

The gradual, but largely irreversible, fragmentation and parcelization of extensive forested landscapes into smaller, disconnected tracts creates an expanding urban-forest interface, leading to increased risk of damaging flooding and catastrophic wildfire, particularly in fire-prone ecosystems in the Western states. The remaining tracts of forest are often too small to support ongoing investment in forest management or, in aggregate, to supply the volumes of timber and other forest products that were previously attainable. Furthermore, permanent conversion of forest lands to other land uses ultimately reduces our nation's self-sufficiency in the production of forest products, thereby increasing our dependence on imports of wood and paper products from other countries (Bosworth 2003).

Loss of forest cover also reduces the ability of the United States to sequester carbon in its forests, thereby reducing our nation's ability to mitigate the potential adverse effects of climate change at a time when scientific understanding of the important role of forests in the global carbon balance is becoming more widely recognized. Lastly, conversion of forest land to other uses reduces the outdoor recreation opportunities and open space amenities needed and valued by our growing, urbanized population.

Background

Trends in forest land area:

The amount of forest land in the United States underwent a steady decline during the 300-year period prior to the 20th century as our nation was settled and developed. The amount of forest land in the United States had stabilized at approximately 759 million acres by 1907, then remained essentially unchanged through 1963 (Smith et al. 2004). Through much of the 20th century, nationwide loss of forest land acreage due to agricultural land conversion and urban expansion was offset by forestland additions resulting from natural regeneration of marginal or abandoned agricultural land, and from reforestation efforts accomplished through several government-sponsored programs, particularly the Soil Bank, Forestry Incentive, and Conservation Reserve programs (Wear and Greis, 2002).

However, for the past 40 years the acreage of forest land in several states has continued to decline, with forest lands near many urban population centers, as well as recreational and retirement communities, now being permanently converted to residential, commercial, and other non-forest land uses. Nationwide forest inventory data now show that a trend decrease in the nation's aggregate forest land area has occurred since the 1960s. From a peak of 762 million acres in 1963, total US forest land decreased by 13 million acres by 2002. While the area of forest land in most states remained stable during that period, or in some cases increased, several of the Southern states, as well as the Pacific coast states, experienced a substantial reduction in forest land area (Smith et al. 2004).

In the Southeastern United States, the states of Florida, Georgia, and North Carolina, which experienced rapid population growth and urban expansion, together incurred a net loss of approximately six million acres of forest land between 1963 and 2002. Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas have experienced an aggregate net loss of forest land of approximately 12 million acres since 1963, a result of both urban expansion and conversion of some forests to agricultural land. On the Pacific coast, the reduction in forest land acreage in California, Oregon, and Washington since the 1960s represents almost five million acres (Smith et al. 2004). Data from the two most recent nationwide forest inventory periods, 1997 and 2002, suggest that while forest land acreage in most states remained stable, or in some cases increased, the aggregate acreage of forestland nationwide has peaked and a trend reduction in forest land area is now occurring in many states. One recent study projects that the area of forestland in the United States will decrease by 23 million acres by the year 2050 from the1997 level (Alig et al. 2003).

Ecological Effects of Loss of Forest Land:

Watersheds and water quality:

It is generally recognized, and well-documented, that forested watersheds provide high quality water, whether needed for domestic, industrial, irrigation, or recreational purposes, or for maintaining essential biological functions and habitats (Black 2004). Loss of protective forest cover due to changes in land use can result in more rapid runoff following storm events, higher peak stream flows, increased soil erosion, reduced groundwater infiltration, stream channel instability, and increased sedimentation. Such adverse changes in watershed hydrologic conditions result in degradation of water quality for human uses and loss of essential ecological functions necessary to maintain aquatic and fisheries habitats (Verry 2004).

Increased peak flows, stream channel instability, and increased sedimentation together result in adverse effects on habitat conditions for fish and other aquatic species both by displacing and covering gravel beds needed for successful reproduction and by disturbing downed trees and concentrations of large woody debris that help form the riffle-pool sequences needed by fish for hiding, resting, and feeding (Ice et al. 2004).

Wildlife habitat:

Forests provide essential habitat for numerous species of birds and mammals, including many threatened or endangered species. Permanent loss of forest cover results in a reduction in available habitat and in habitat fragmentation, which causes conditions unsuitable for bird and mammal species that require large, contiguous forested landscapes (Fahrig 1999).

Wildlife and bird species displaced by a loss of forest cover in general cannot successfully relocate to other forests because other suitable habitat is normally already occupied by the same species. Consequently, overall forest-dependent wildlife and bird populations can be expected to decrease as forests are permanently converted to non-forest land uses. Further, fragmentation of forest cover results in proliferation of invasive plant species and increased wildlife disturbance by humans, including increased poaching, which can result in both increased mortality and reduced reproduction for some species.

The role of forests in mitigating global climate change:

In recent years, the important role of forests in mitigating the potential adverse effects of global climate change has been thoroughly examined and well documented (Watson et al. 2000). Forest trees, during the process of photosynthesis, absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere while at the same time producing and releasing oxygen into the atmosphere. In this process, carbon accumulates and remains stored in the woody stem, branches, leaves, and roots of trees, and in forest soils. A substantial amount of carbon also remains stored in forest products that are harvested and manufactured for use in homebuilding and other construction, as well as in furniture. In the United States, forest ecosystems and forest products represent a significant carbon dioxide sink, offsetting approximately 12 percent of US greenhouse gas emissions from industrial, commercial, and transportation sources (USDA 2004). As our federal, state, and local governments adopt policies to mitigate the potential adverse effects of global climate change, forests will be increasingly recognized by both the public and policymakers for the important role they play in carbon sequestration.

Socio-economic effects of loss of forest land:

-Parcelization:

Apart from the ecological consequences of loss of forest land, a permanent reduction in forest area within a given country, state, or locality has several negative social and economic effects. Fragmentation, or parcelization, of large, contiguous forest areas into smaller, disconnected tracts through land use conversion results in an increase in the number of individual owners, with a corresponding increase in per acre forest management expense and complexity. A forest that was once large enough to provide a predictable annual output of forest products, when disaggregated into numerous small parcels owned by individuals with diverse ownership objectives, will likely no longer retain the forest management expertise, growing stock inventory, or investment in silvicultural practices needed to support a sustainable, annual timber harvest (Haynes 2003) (Kline 2003).

-Expanding urban-forest interface:

Further, such parcelization usually results in permanent conversion of smaller tracts of forest land to other land uses, historically to agriculture and grazing but more commonly now to residential subdivision and commercial development. The encroachment of urban or suburban land uses on what was formerly forest land is described by foresters as expansion of the urban-forest interface. In addition to having adverse effects on watershed conditions and wildlife habitat, experience has shown that expansion of the urban-forest interface results in an increased risk of catastrophic wildfires, often accompanied by loss of human lives, extensive and costly property damage, and substantial increases in fire control costs, particularly in the fire-prone ecosystems of the Western states (SAF 2004).

-Reduced self-sufficiency in forest products:

Prior to 1915, the United States was essentially self-sufficient in meeting the wood and paper products needs of its growing population. Imports of wood products increased gradually through the 20th century, but during the past decade US dependence on forest product imports has steadily increased, partly a result of public policy decisions that reduced timber harvest on the national forests and other federal lands during the 1980s and 1990s (USDA-FS 2000). Since the mid-1990s, more than one-third of our annual softwood lumber requirements have been supplied by Canada, with additional amounts now being imported from South America, New Zealand, and the European Union (Haynes 2003). Unless offset by improvements in forest productivity elsewhere in the United States, permanent loss of forest land to subdivision and development will increase our long-term dependence on forest products imports from other countries, contributing to the nation's unfavorable balance of trade.

-Reduced forest products manufacturing and employment:

Primary manufacturing in the forest-based sector of the US economy, including lumber and wood products, and paper and allied products, accounts for approximately two percent of our gross domestic product and directly employs about 400,000 workers. When indirect employment provided by supplier and service industries is included, the forest sector generates employment for approximately two million workers, representing 1.5 percent of the US workforce (USDA-FS 2000). The annual output of these industries is directly dependent on their ability to obtain dependable supplies of timber, logs, and wood chips from sustainably managed forests. Permanent loss of forest land to other land uses results in a long-term reduction in sustainable timber harvests, whether at a local, state, or regional level, with reduced availability of raw materials needed by producers of wood and paper products and with a resulting loss of manufacturing capacity and employment in these industries.

-Reduced outdoor recreation opportunities:

Throughout the 20th century, the abundance of forests in the United States has been associated with growing interest in, and demand for, many traditional types of outdoor recreation, including hunting, fishing, camping, and hiking. Participation in outdoor recreation continued to grow during the 1980s and 1990s, with particularly strong growth evident in birdwatching, hiking, and backpacking (USDA-FS 2000). Since much outdoor recreation takes place in forests or forested landscapes, loss of forest lands to other land uses will result in reduced outdoor recreation opportunities, particularly near communities that are experiencing population growth and urban expansion. Paradoxically, in communities where demand for outdoor recreation is most evident, people can expect to have fewer outdoor recreation opportunities as nearby forest lands are converted to other land uses.

-Loss of open space:

Apart from the tangible effects of loss of wildlife habitat, impaired water quality, reduced timber production, and fewer outdoor recreation opportunities, loss of the open space represented by forested landscapes has other social consequences for our increasingly urbanized population. Where citizens of our cities and towns could at one time escape from the pressures of urban life and experience a natural environment within a short distance of their homes, they must now travel greater distances to relax in a natural landscape and pursue the types of outdoor recreation that provided enjoyment for earlier generations. People living in suburban communities and smaller towns, where farm and forest lands were a normal feature of the nearby landscape, are being surrounded by new subdivisions and shopping malls and finding that the beneficial effects of the natural environment are removed from their daily lives. As more forest land is permanently converted to non-forest land uses, fewer of our citizens will be able to enjoy the physical and spiritual renewal that their ancestors gained by spending leisure time within natural, forested landscapes.

References cited:

Alig, R.J., A.J. Plantinga, S. Anh, J.D. Kline. 2003. Land use changes involving forestry in the United States: 1952 to 1997, with projections to 2050. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-587, Portland, OR: USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 92p. Available online at: www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/gtr587.pdf. Accessed by authors August 2004.

Black, P.E. 2004. Forest and Wildland Watershed Functions. In A Century of Forest and Wildland Watershed Lessons, eds. G.G. Ice and J.D. Stednick. Bethesda, MD. Society of American Foresters.

Bosworth, D. 2003. Is America on Track Toward Sustainable Forests? Society of American Foresters Annual Convention Proceedings - 2003. Bethesda, MD: Society of American Foresters.

Fahrig, L. 1999. Forest Loss and Fragmentation: Which Has the Greater Effect on Persistence of Forest-Dwelling Animals? In Forest Fragmentation; Wildlife and Management Implications. eds. J. A. Rochelle, L.A. Lehmann, and J. Wisniewski. Leiden, Netherlands. K. Brill NV.

Haynes, R.W., tech. coord. 2003. An Analysis of the Timber Situation in the United States: 1952 to 2050. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-580, Portland, OR: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. Available online at www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/gtr560.pdf; accessed by authors November 2004.

Ice, G.G., P.W. Adams, R.L. Beschta, H.A. Froelich, and G.W. Brown. 2004. Forest Management to Meet Water Quality and Fisheries Objectives: Watershed Studies and Assessment Tools in the Pacific Northwest. In A Century of Forest and Wildland Watershed Lessons. eds. G. G. Ice and J. D. Stednick. Bethesda, MD. Society of American Foresters

Kline, J.D. 2003. Private forest management in urbanizing landscapes. In Teeter, L., ed. Proceedings: global initiatives and public policies: first international conference on private forestry in the 21st century. Auburn, AL: Auburn University, School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences.

Smith, W.B., P.D. Miles, P.D., J.S. Visage, S.A. Pugh. 2004. Forest Resources of the United States, 2002. Gen. Tech. Report NC-241. St. Paul, MN: USDA Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station.

Society of American Foresters. 2004. Wildfire Protection: Community Wildfire Protection Plans from Four Angles. Journal of Forestry 102(6): 4-7.

US DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 2004. U S Agriculture and Forestry Greenhouse Gas Inventory: 1990-2001. Global Climate Change Program Office. Office of the Chief Economist, US Department of Agriculture. Technical Bulletin No. 1907.

USDA FOREST SERVICE (USDA-FS), 2000. RPA Assessment of Forest and Range Lands. Available online at: www.fs.fed.us/pl/rpa/rpasses.pdf; accessed by authors November 2004.

Verry, E.S. 2004. Land Fragmentation and Impacts to Streams and Fish in the Central and Upper Midwest. In A Century of Forest and Wildland Watershed Lessons. eds. G. G. Ice and J. D. Stednick. Bethesda, MD. Society of American Foresters

Watson, R.T., I.R. Noble, B.Bolin, N.H. Ravindranath, D.J. Verardo, D.J. Doken, eds. 2000. Land Use, Land Use Change, and Forestry: A Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change (IPCC). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, U.K: Cambridge University Press. Available online at: http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc/land_use/index.htm.

Wear, D.N. and J.G. Greis. 2002. The southern forest resource assessment. Gen. Tech. Report SRS-53. Asheville, NC: USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station. Available online at www.srs.fs.usda.gov/sustain/report//index accessed by authors August 2004.