Sparta Vegetation Management Project

Transcription

1 Sparta Vegetation Management Project Social and Economics Report Prepared by: John Jesenko Presale/Forest Measurements Specialist /s/ John Jesenko for: Whitman Ranger District Wallowa-Whitman National Forest

2 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C , or call (800) (voice) or (202) (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

3 Table of Contents Introduction... 1 Affected Environment... 1 Affected Geographic Area... 1 Communities, Lifestyle, Population, and Employment... 1 Effects... 2 Direct and Indirect Effects on Socio-Economics... 2 A. Economic Impact Analysis - Economic Efficiency... 2 B. Social Impact Analysis Environmental Justice... 4 Summary of Direct and Indirect Effects... 5 Cumulative Effects on Socio-Economics... 6 References... 7 List of Tables Table 1. Estimated Cost of the Alternatives... 3 Table 2. Economic Analysis Summary by Alternative... 3 Table 3. Total Timber Harvest and Non-commercial Thinning Jobs by Alternative... 5 i

4

5 Introduction This report analyzes the socio-economic effects associated with the Sparta Vegetation Management Project (hereafter called Sparta Project). It is divided into two parts, an economic impact analysis that includes an assessment of the financial and economic efficiency of the project and a social impact analysis that includes environmental justice. The effect of the alternatives on the social and economic conditions of people are discussed in terms of direct, indirect, and cumulative effects including short-term and long-term effects. Its purpose is to provide specific background information to help the Deciding Official in making a decision on which alternative to select. The economic impact analysis is used to identify potential impacts to economic conditions such as employment and income. The efficiency analysis describes economic uses and values and identifies potential benefits and costs of alternative proposals for resource management. The social impact analysis is used to identify potential changes in people s social and cultural conditions that directly or indirectly result from Forest Service actions. The objective of the environmental justice analysis is to identify potential disproportionate impacts to minority populations, low-income populations and American Indian tribes. Affected Environment Affected Geographic Area The communities most affected by the Sparta Project are the cities of Richland and Halfway, Oregon and the associated Eagle Valley and Pine Valley population. This easternmost portion or Panhandle of Baker County is mostly public land administered by the BLM and Forest Service. There are no Indian reservations within the area or established traditional use areas. Oregon State Highway 86 bisects the two valleys. The closest city is Baker City, population 9,8609,828, which is about one hour highway travel time away. Communities, Lifestyle, Population, and Employment These two small rural towns are primarily dependent on agriculture and tourism. There are no large private manufacturing businesses located in the two communities though some individuals who live in the Panhandle area commute to jobs in Baker City or around Northeast Oregon. Other Panhandle residents are employed by large manufacturers or have small wood processing businesses. Lumber and wood manufacturing businesses from the larger Northeastern Oregon geographical area usually buy timber sales such as those that would be created by the Sparta project. There are about 16,134 residents in Baker County (U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010) with an estimated 2,500 of those people in the Panhandle area. The population of the area is more than 95% white of which 3% is Hispanic. American Indians are about 1% of the population with other ethnic minorities making up the remainder. The median age in Baker County and in the City of Halfway is 48 and 50.4 years, respectively, while the City of Richland has the oldest median age in the state of Oregon, 65.6 years. Poverty rates provide some indication of the percentage of the population with low incomes. Baker County has an average poverty rate of 18.3 percent (U.S. Census Bureau Quick Facts, 2015), and the surrounding counties have 13.9 percent (Wallowa County), and 18.8 percent (Union County). The Oregon statewide average rate of persons living below poverty is 16.7 percent and the Washington statewide average is 13.5 percent (U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010). In Halfway 43.8% and in Richland 1

6 20.2% of the population live below the poverty level. The median yearly income in the Panhandle area is about $24,780 compared to the Baker County median income of $40,576 (U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5 Year Estimates). Only 1.6% of the workers in Halfway and 13.5% in Richland are employed in agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, and mining industry compared to 9.8% in Baker County as a whole. Effects The effects of the three alternatives on economic conditions such as employment and income were analyzed by comparing the anticipated changes in employment in the Panhandle area and Baker County. The effects of the alternatives on social and cultural conditions were analyzed by identifying any changes to human health and any environmental impacts to minorities. The changes could be direct such as jobs in the timber industry or traditional uses of the forest by the public; or they could be indirect effects such as secondary service jobs or declining air quality from smoke. Any cumulative effects were identified using trends in economic conditions and present and future activities that affect environmental conditions in conjunction with the proposed activity. Direct and Indirect Effects on Socio-Economics A. Economic Impact Analysis - Economic Efficiency Chapters 2 and 3 of the Wallowa-Whitman Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) discuss the variety of ways in which the public values diverse forest ecosystems. Employment and receipts generated by National Forest uses and products are important to local economies. For example grazing cattle, hunting big game, snowmobiling, picking mushrooms, or cutting firewood all have value and produce revenue and jobs as a result of or in support of these activities. It is very difficult to measure changes in employment, or the value of recreational pursuits such as hunting; especially at the scale of this project. Forest Service Handbook provides direction to analyze financial efficiency and, if needed, economic efficiency to identify the most efficient alternative that achieves the desired objectives of the project. Consideration of the proposal that maximizes net public benefits is an important element of the decision-making process. An economic efficiency analysis of Alternatives 2 and 3 was completed that focused on identifiable and quantifiable benefits and costs for each alternative in terms of the present net value (benefits minus costs) to assess which alternative comes nearest to maximizing net public benefits as defined in 36 Code of Federal Regulations Part An analysis of the No Action was not done since this alternative did not have identifiable and quantifiable ecosystem benefits and costs. Ecosystem functions provide a broad set of ecosystem services such as clean water or native forest stands that are valuable to both human and nonhuman components of the ecosystem. These ecosystem values may be assessed in economic and nonmonetary terms. Economic valuation provides a partial measure of the full range of ecosystem values in commensurate terms for assessing economic tradeoffs. Non-monetary values are necessarily assessed in terms relevant to other disciplines such as ecology or ethics. Changes in ecosystem services must be measurable and quantifiable in like terms, preferably monetary measures, in order to assess a relevant change in economic value. This analysis is based on identifiable and quantifiable economic benefits and costs and is more typically a financial comparison between revenues and costs. The objective of the economic efficiency analysis is to show a relative measure of difference between alternatives based on direct costs and values used. All dollar values have been discounted in terms of the present net value (2016 dollars). Discounting is a 2

7 process whereby the dollar values of costs and benefits that occur at different time periods are adjusted to a common time period so that they can be compared. The real (exclusive of inflation) discount rate of four percent was used in the analysis over the planning period. Table 1. Estimated Cost of the Alternatives Cost Item No Action Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Timber Sale Preparation $0 $263,238 $220,860 Transportation Planning $0 $65,810 $55,215 Timber Sale Admin $0 $87,746 $73,620 Post-Harvest Non-commercial thinning $0 $803,850 $736,650 Prescribed Fire Post Harvest Acres $0 $469,795 $414,460 Total $0 $2,190,689 $1,993,505 Table 2. Economic Analysis Summary by Alternative Project Type Timber Sales Timber Sale & Related Projects Timber Sales Timber Sale & Related Projects Entry Discounted Costs Discounted Revenues Alternative 2 Present Net Value (PNV) Benefit- Cost Ratio (B/C) Predicted High Bid Current $1,043,443 $1,217, , Alternative 3 Current $926,594 $1,042, , Notes Sale appears viable Project is above cost Sale appears viable Project is above cost Present net value (PNV) is defined as the present (discounted) net value of project benefits minus the present (discounted) net value of project costs. The PNVs displayed by alternative will include the timber sale and related projects. The related projects include non-commercial thinning and prescribed fire within timber harvest units. A benefit-cost ratio is the ratio of present net benefits to present net costs. Present net value is a more appropriate measure for comparison between alternatives when land and productive activities are limiting such as in an environmental analysis of alternatives. A benefit-cost ratio comparison is more appropriate when investment capital is limited, for example when considering budget allocation among a number of different activities. The only economic change that can currently be measured at the scale is commercial timber harvest. Alternative 1 No Action Alternative 1 proposes no treatments at this time. Fires would continue to be suppressed if possible. Ongoing activities such as camping, hunting, using snowmobiles, grazing livestock, road maintenance, use of the Brooks Ditch for irrigation, and gathering forest products such as firewood, berries, and mushrooms would continue. No logging of commercial timber or non-commercial treatments would occur. The employment and income associated with these activities would not materialize. This would directly affect employment by 3

8 continuing the current low incomes in the area. The present net value and cost benefit ratio are not meaningful since no new income is generated with the No Action. The current human uses such as hunting, camping and other recreational activities that generate employment or have value would continue at the current level or decline slightly depending on the availability of opportunities. Removal of miscellaneous forest products as well as grazing and other consumptive uses would continue at the current level. No long-term or short-term changes in the availability of forest products are anticipated resulting in no affect on traditional uses. Winter recreation, especially snowmobiling, would remain static or increase slightly as users reached the capacity of the trails and parking areas. Alternative 2 Alternative 2 incorporates vegetation treatments including cutting trees for commercial harvest and noncommercial management, prescribed fire, and connected activities such as rock source development, road reconstruction, and road maintenance. These proposed activities are described in detail in the Sparta EA. Alternative 2 would produce an estimated 22.8 million board feet (MMBF) of saw timber and biomass material. The socio-economic effects of commercial timber harvest, non-commercial treatments, road reconstruction and maintenance will be beneficial to the local economy but would be less than 1% of the local economic output, in Baker County (see Table 3, Total Timber Harvest and Non-commercial Treatment Jobs by Alternative). Alternative 2 would be the most beneficial to the local economy since it generates the most revenue and would create the most jobs. The present net value of the timber sale and related projects for Alternative 2 is $173,609, with a benefit to cost ratio of The discounted revenue associated with the timber sale is $1,217,052. Estimated revenue for this sale is based on the current market conditions. It is difficult to calculate the monetary benefit of non-commercial treatments; therefore no value has been applied to the benefits of reduction in fire risk and suppression costs, and improvements to the road systems. The qualitative benefits of the non-commercial treatments will be discussed in their respective resource sections. Alternative 3 Alternative 3 has fewer acres of vegetation treatments including the cutting trees for commercial harvest than Alternative 2. Alternative 3 also treats slightly less acreage than Alternative 2 through the use of prescribed fire. Alternative 3 would produce an estimated 18.9 MMBF of saw timber and non-saw material. These proposed activities are described in detail in the Sparta EA. The socio-economic effects of commercial timber harvest, non-commercial treatments, road reconstruction and maintenance will be beneficial to the local economy but would be less than those generated by Alternative 2 due to the fact that less commercial treatment would be done (see Table 3, Total Timber Harvest and Non-commercial Treatment Jobs by Alternative). The present net value of the timber sale and related projects is $115,551, with a cost benefit ratio of The discounted revenue associated with the timber sale is $1,042,145. Estimated revenue for this sale is based on the current market conditions. B. Social Impact Analysis Environmental Justice Executive Order (February 11, 1994) on Environmental Justice directs federal agencies to consider whether proposed alternatives may have disproportionately high and adverse environmental effects on minority populations, low-income populations, or Indian tribes. The order directs federal agencies to focus attention on the human health and environment effects to ethnic minorities (American Indians, Hispanics, African Americans, and Asian and Pacific Islander Americans), disabled people, and lowincome groups. 4

9 Alternative 1 No Action There are no minority groups or Native American tribes living within the area, therefore No Action would not directly or indirectly affect these groups. The health of low-income residents in the surrounding area could be affected by smoke from a large wildfire that could occur as a result of No Action. Many of these low-income residents are older persons who could be adversely affected by smoke. All income groups would be affected but the Panhandle area has a larger proportion than other urban areas in Baker County or other parts of Oregon. See the Sparta Fuels report for a discussion of the risk of a large fire occurring. No other environmental impacts to low income residents have been identified that would result from the No Action alternative. The cumulative effects of smoke from other planned and unplanned fires could exacerbate the effects of the No Action Alternative on the health of low-income residents of the area. Alternatives 2 and 3 There are no minority groups or Indian tribes living within the area, therefore Alternatives 2 and 3 would not directly or indirectly affect these groups. The health of low-income residents and others in the surrounding area should not be affected by smoke from prescribed fire because prescribed burning is managed to comply with state air quality standards (Sparta EA Fuels mitigations). The environmental impacts of Alternatives 2 and 3 identified in the Sparta EA are localized to the Sparta analysis area; therefore low income residents living in the Panhandle area would not be directly or indirectly affected. There would be no cumulative effects on the health of low-income residents of the area from smoke from the proposed prescribed fires in combination with other burning since air quality is managed across a large area. Summary of Direct and Indirect Effects The current employment and income in the Baker County area known as the Panhandle is low. As described under the existing conditions, Baker County has an average poverty rate of 18.3% (U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5 Year Estimates). In the City of Halfway 43.8% and in the City of Richland 20.2% of the population live below the poverty level. The median yearly income in the Panhandle area is about $24,780 compared to the Baker County median income of $40,576 (U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5 Year Estimates). Alternative 1 (No Action) would not change this current condition. There are no minority groups or Indian tribes living within the area, therefore No Action would not directly or indirectly affect these groups. No other environmental impacts to low income residents have been identified that would result from the No Action alternative. The socio-economic effects of commercial timber harvest and non-commercial treatments proposed under Alternatives 2 and 3 would be beneficial to the local economy but would be less than 1% of the local economic output, in Baker County. The present net value of the timber sale and related projects for Alternative 2 is $173,609, with a cost benefit ratio of Commercial timber harvest would generate approximately $1,217,052 with a predicted high bid of $33.09/CCF. The present net value of the timber sale and related projects for Alternative 3 is $115,551, with a cost benefit ratio of Commercial timber harvest would generate approximately $1,042,145 with a predicted high bid of 33.78/CCF. Estimated revenues for this sale are based on the current market conditions. The harvest of timber, burning, road reconstruction, and other proposed projects would provide local employment (see Table 3). Table 1 displays the costs of the alternatives and Table 2 displays the values. Table 3. Total Timber Harvest and Non-commercial Thinning Jobs by Alternative Work Activity No Action Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Timber Harvest Non-commercial Thinning TOTAL

10 1 Note: Each job represents one year of full time employment. Estimate of timber harvest jobs derived from Region 6 Log Cost 15.0 (02/04/2015). Estimate of Non-commercial treatment jobs based on past contract production on Whitman Ranger District. Jobs would occur over a 5-10 year period starting in There are no minority groups or Indian tribes living within the area, therefore none of the action alternatives would directly or indirectly affect these groups. The health of low-income residents and others in the surrounding area should not be affected by smoke from prescribed fire from any of the action alternatives because prescribed burning is managed to comply with state air quality standards (Sparta mitigation measures). Cumulative Effects on Socio-Economics ALT 1 No Action The no action alternative would not contribute to the economies of the counties surrounding this project area; therefore, it has the potential to further impact the current struggles of the timber industry in northeast Oregon. ACTION ALTERNATIVES 2 and 3 The cumulative effect of Alternatives 2 and 3 are similar, they would all provide the counties surrounding the project area with receipts which otherwise would be dollars out of the taxpayers pocket. They would provide jobs as described under the direct and indirect effects above. The income generated by this project contributes to family wage earners and local industries which in turn support other local businesses, hospitals, and services contributing to the overall economic vitality of the Counties. More of this happens under Alternative 2 than under Alternative 3. In addition, the alternatives and the effects will be similar when considering utilization of material at manufacturing facilities. The products produced from this project under all of the action alternatives would not support the local businesses and mills alone; however, when added to the wood products being removed from other private, adjacent State, and corporate lands, as well as other national forest timber sales, it contributes to the overall viability and sustainability of local mills and businesses. The acres treated would provide seasonal work/benefits over a period of 8-10 years. There would be no cumulative effects on the health of low-income residents of the area as a result of smoke from the proposed prescribed fires in combination with other burning since air quality is managed across a large area. The other environmental impacts of the action alternatives are identified in the Sparta Vegetation Management Project EA and are localized to the Sparta analysis area; therefore low income residents living in the Panhandle area would not be directly, indirectly, or cumulatively affected. 6

11 References USDA Forest Service, TEAECON (Version 6.1, 5/30/2013) Economics Program, Users Guide. Region 6, USDA Forest Service. USDA Forest Service Land and resource management plan for the Wallowa-Whitman. National Forest, Baker City, OR. FSH Economic and Social Analysis Handbook. U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5 Year Estimates U.S. Census Bureau Quick Facts, 2015 Region 6 TEA (Version 1641, TEA 10-16) 7