Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project Methodology Report for Washington July 2008

Transcription

1 Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project Methodology Report for Washington July 2008 Washington Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project Final Report

2 Contact Info: Steve Gibbs Stewardship Coordinator Washington State Department of Natural Resources 1111 Washington St SE PO BOX Olympia, Wa Office: Nicki Eisfeldt GIS Technician Washington State Department of Natural Resources 1111 Washington St SE PO Box Olympia, Wa Office: Washington Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project Final Report 2

3 Table of Contents: Executive Summary page 4 Stewardship Analysis Project (SAP) Introduction page 6 1. Forest Stewardship Program 2. SAP Purpose and Background SAP Implementation 1. Suitability Analysis Datalayer Development page 7 -Resource Potential page 8 -Resource Threat page 9 Datalayer Weighting Process page 10 Results page 12 Seeking Tribal Participation page Stewardship Plan Digitizing page 14 Procedures Metadata 3. Analysis & Map Product Descriptions page Appendix page 18 Washington Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project Final Report 3

4 Executive Summary The Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) was provided with a grant from the USDA Forest Service to complete a Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project for Washington. This project is aimed to aid in providing a consistent way to evaluate the Stewardship Program across the nation and promote strategic program delivery. This report contains Washington's methodology for completing this project. The Spatial Analysis Project (SAP) for the Forest Stewardship Program (FSP) was created to assess the influence the FSP has had on the landscape over the past decade and distinguish suitable areas that should be considered when providing program guidance. There are two primary components to SAP. One component is the statewide assessment of all lands eligible for the FSP. This assessment is based on a twelve-layer suitability analysis including both resource richness and threats throughout the state. The other component is a spatial database of all stewardship plans that Washington State has tracked over the last decade. Using these components together in a GIS analysis will identify areas of stewardship potential and also evaluates the success of the FSP in priority areas. Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) began the SAP process in January of 2005 and finished the project in July A good portion of that time was spent collecting data for the Stewardship plan database. All six DNR regions were included and five of six were visited, some more than once, to evaluate and collect data. Most of that time was spent going through landowner files to find eligible plans to include in the analysis. Once plans were identified, landowner properties were either hand digitized or copied from county parcel data into a geospatial database (ArcGIS personal geodatabase). In all, approximately 1,306 plans were included in the final database. This included all plans from 1997 to March After the landowner database was completed, we began completing the suitability analysis. The twelve standard layers were determined from a Federal perspective by the USDA Forest Service, and the State Forest Stewardship Committee assigned each layer its importance for the suitability analysis. Although Washington State Tribes are represented by a member of the Stewardship committee, an effort was made to contact each Tribe in Washington state so each Tribe could have a voice in the analysis. Washington DNR requested advice from Tribes in Washington about appropriate datalayers and subsequently asked each Tribe to rank the datalayers based on the priorities of their Tribe. Analysis Results: In order to conform with program guidance, and to be consistent with methodology used by other states, the following lands were included in the SAP analysis: Traditional Forest Land (5.6 million acres): Non-industrial private, including tribal, ownerships occupied by native forest vegetation. Virtually all current and prospective Forest Stewardship plans have lands in this category. Washington Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project Final Report 4

5 Shrubland (4.8 million acres): Non-forested land, currently occupied by shrub vegetation is classified as forest land according to SAP guidance. These lands are not likely to ever become forested in the traditional sense, and unlikely to be enrolled in the Forest Stewardship Program. Non-forested land (9.2 million acres): Agricultural and range lands, such as those that cover extensive parts of eastern Washington, are included in the SAP analysis presumably based on the assumption that they could potentially be capable of growing trees, and therefore, theoretically eligible for inclusion in the Forest Stewardship Program (e.g. windbreaks and afforested lands are eligible for inclusion in the Forest Stewardship Program). Realistically, the amount of this land likely to be included in the Forest Stewardship Program is negligible. Statewide, the relative Forest Stewardship priority rating of these lands is: High 13% (approx 2.6 million acres) Medium 43% (approx 8.6 million acres) Low 44% (approx 8.7 million acres) There are approximately 160,000 acres in Stewardship plans, approximately 149,000 of those acres fall within the non-industrial private forest, Tribal land mask. The current distribution of Forest Stewardship Plans, according to Forest Stewardship priority rating is: High 28% (44,685 acres) of plans Medium 49% (79,001 acres) of plans Low 16% (25,219 acres) of plans 7% (10,916acres) did not fall within our mask because of either their proximity to urban areas, recent industrial land exchanges or significant water sources included in their plan areas. Approximately 97% (1,266 plans) include areas of traditional forest landcover described above. Stewardship Potential for Washington State Washington Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project Final Report 5

6 Stewardship Analysis Project (SAP) Introduction 1 Forest Stewardship program: Established through the 1990 Farm Bill, the Forest Stewardship Program (FSP) encourages private forest landowners to manage their lands using professionally prepared forest stewardship plans. These plans consider and integrate forest resources, including timber, wildlife and fish, water, aesthetics, and all associated resources to meet landowner objectives. Nationally, the FSP has been successful in meeting the intent of the program; more than 25 million acres of private forests have been placed under professional forestry management. SAP Purpose and Background: Since its inception, the FSP has been delivered and made available to nonindustrial private forest landowners on a first-come, first-served basis. This customer-friendly approach assists landowners in improving their forest resources; however, it does not facilitate assessment of the program s full impact across the landscape. It does not take into consideration the connectivity of stewardship tracts, nor does it target landowners whose forest land has a greater need or opportunity for professional expertise and who may not have been aware of resources and programs available to them. There has been no standard or consistent way to assess the impact that stewardship plans have had on the forest resource as a whole, or in addressing regionally or nationally significant resource issues. Given limited program resources and a demand that exceeds program capacity, FSP coordinators and managers increasingly need to address accountability for results on the ground, assuring the Nation s taxpayers that program implementation is efficient and effective, and positively affects forest resources. After 18 years of implementation, it is timely to evaluate the impact the Forest Stewardship Program has had on the landscape and position the program to be strategically implemented to more effectively address critical resource management needs in the future, while meeting landowner objectives. SAP Implementation There are two major components to the Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project. First is the statewide assessment of all lands eligible for the Forest Stewardship Program within Washington State. This assessment is comprised of an overlay analysis using twelve common datalayers, which result in the classification of areas of low, medium and high stewardship potential. The datalayers, chosen by the USDA Forest service, were deemed important from a federal perspective to determine resource richness, threats, and opportunities. States also had the option to include any additional datalayers that might be appropriate to respond to any state specific issues. Washington used the twelve standard datalayers and did not include any additional datalayers. 1 Text taken from other national SAP documents. Washington Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project Final Report 6

7 Part 1. Suitability Analysis The focus of SAP is to meet Forest Stewardship Program objectives; therefore, the analysis is only applied to non-industrial private lands and Tribal lands that could be eligible for the Forest Stewardship Program. Any lands that are not eligible to receive Forest Stewardship Program benefits are excluded from the analysis. Lands that were excluded include: All public lands, urban communities, all open water and all private industrial lands. Along with the analysis mask, the suitability analysis is comprised of twelve datalayers. These layers are divided into three categories: the analysis mask, resource potential and resource threats. Datalayer Development Other Data: The Analysis Mask The analysis mask is created to ensure our analysis only occurs in the areas that apply to our desired analysis area. When we perform the analysis we can use the analysis mask to ensure processing takes place only in our selected cells. For the purpose of the SAP, the mask includes all areas that are not urban/developed areas, areas under public ownership (Federal, State, County and City agencies), open water and private industrial lands. The mask was created by using National Land Cover Dataset (NLCD) suitable areas (online source: http// mrlc/nlcd.html). The NLCD values that constituted suitable were; 33, 41, 42, 43, 51, 61, 71, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 91 and 92. These values include areas of shrubland (value 51) not typically considered forest land in Washington State. Shrubland was included in the analysis for consistency with other states. There is approximately 4.8 million acres of shrubland in our analysis mask. All suitable NLCD values were given an overall value of 1. The remaining NLCD values were given a value of No Data. This will eliminate them from our analysis area. We then created a non-industrial private lands (including Tribal lands) layer by starting with our state polygon and taking out all public lands, urban/developed lands and private industrial lands. To create our final mask we used the extract by mask tool in the Spatial Analyst toolbox. We extracted the non-industrial private lands (including Tribal lands) from the NLCD grid of suitable NLCD values. The resulting grid represents suitable NLCD values (value = 1) within our non-industrial private lands. All other lands have a value of No Data, thus eliminating them from our analysis. Washington Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project Final Report 7

8 Resource Potential 1. Riparian Corridors The riparian corridors dataset is intended to place importance on river and stream corridors where buffers of forest or vegetative cover can have a positive or restorative effect on water quality and riverine ecosystems. DNR s Forest Practices Division recommended that a 100- foot buffer for non-fish bearing streams and a 150-foot buffer for fish bearing streams would be considered best management practices. Because of processing time, this layer is not statewide and only occurs within the Analysis mask created for Washington State's SAP. All areas with a buffer were given a value of 1 all areas outside of these areas were given a value of 0. Final grid name = riparian2. 2. Priority Watersheds The priority watersheds datalayer is intended to place emphasis on landscapes that influence long-term watershed function. Priority watersheds for Washington State were determined using the 2004 Washington Water Quality Assessment/303d list produced by Washington State Department of Ecology (Online source Sixth level hydrological units listed as impaired were selected as priority watersheds. These priority watersheds were given a value of 1; other areas were given a value of 0. Final grid name = rcwatershed. 3. Threatened and Endangered Species Threatened and endangered species information was obtained by Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. The Federally Threatened animal species found in our states forested areas were selected and then buffered ½ mile. The data was converted to a grid with occurrences given a value of 1 and all other areas a value of 0. Final grid name = tande_species. 4. Public Water Drinking Supply Sources Polygons represent the buffered upstream from the intake areas where Source Water Assessment Program (SWAP) inventories should occur (More about SWAP ehp/dw/our_main_pages/swap.htm). These polygons were given a value of 1 while all other areas received a value of 0. Final grid name = drink2 5. Non-Industrial Private and Tribal Forestlands Our analysis mask is our non-industrial private lands (Including Tribal lands) layer so to create this layer we simply set the analysis mask and then reclassified the NLCD. The NLCD forested values 41, 42, 43, 51 and 91 were given a value of 1; all other areas were given a value of no data. Final grid name = nipf_land2. 6. Proximity to Public Lands A one mile buffer of public lands (Federal, State, City and County) was created to locate areas that are in proximity to public lands. It is assumed that these are areas that are near permanently protected and managed lands. Lands included in the buffer were given a value of 1 all other lands were given a value of 0. Final grid name = proximity_fin. Washington Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project Final Report 8

9 7. Wetlands The Wetlands data was obtained by US Fish and Wildlife Service (online source Values in this layer include: Freshwater forested and shrubland, freshwater emergent wetlands, freshwater ponds, estuarine and marine wetlands, riverines and lakes. The data was converted to a grid. Wetlands were given a value of 1 all other areas were given a value of 0. Final grid name = wetlands. 8. Topograhic Slope A 0-40% slope was selected from a DNR slope layer. This layer was derived from the DEM30 (Digital Elevation Model 30 Meter) elevation data. 0-40% slope was given a value of 1 while all other areas were given a value of 0. Final grid name = slope2 9. Forest Patch Size Washington State does not present many fragmented forests as much of the Eastern states do. Much of Washington s forestland is not ecologically and/or economically restricted by forest patch size. Therefore, simply a forested land layer was used to represent the forest patch size layer. Forested areas were given a value of 1 all other areas a value of 0. Final grid name = nlcdforested2. Resource Threat: 1. Forest Health Forest Health data was obtained by the DNR and USDA Forest Service Region 6 insect and disease aerial detection survey. ( ForestHealthEcology/Pages/rp_foresthealth.aspx) High and medium occurrence of defoliators and abiotic, animal and mortality agents affecting more than ¼ trees per acre were selected for the SAP. Affected areas were given a value of 1 all other areas a value of 0. Final grid name = forest_health. 2. Developing Areas This layer was obtained using Dr. David Theobald s housing density layer. For our analysis 2000 density was subtracted from the 2030 density projections to determine areas under pressure from development. The raster was reclassified so developing areas were given a value of 1 and all other areas a value of 0. Final grid name = dev_areas 3. Wildfire Assessment The wildfire assessment layer was developed using Landfire data ( Fire Regime I and Fire Regime Condition Classes 1, 2, and 3 were intersected to show areas of relatively high risk of fire. These are areas where planning and management are likely to reduce a relatively high risk of wildfire. High fire risk areas were given a value of 1 all other areas a value of 0. Final grid name = wa_fireclp Washington Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project Final Report 9

10 Datalayer Weighting Process: Datalayer Weights: Washington State s climate and landscape differ from the eastern to western portions of the state. Because of these differences, it was decided to run two analyses, one for Eastern Washington and one for Western Washington. The Stewardship Committee was asked to rank each of our datalayers for each side of the State (see Appendix for Stewardship Committee ranking form). They were asked to rank the layers from 1 to 12, 1 being of highest importance and 12 being of lowest importance. The Washington Tribes that participated in our project were also asked to rank each of the datalayers based on their importance to the Tribe. Those ranks were then included in their corresponding region of the state. The weights were then averaged and converted to mean weights. The inverse weight was then determined by subtracting each mean weight from the highest possible total weight (12). These were then converted to relative weights as a proportion of the total inverse weights. East Wildfire Assessment: 14% (0.14) Forest Health: 14% (0.14) Riparian Areas: 14% (0.14) Private Forestlands: 11% (0.11) T & E Species: 8% (0.08) Wetlands: 8% 0(.08) Forest Patch Size: 7% (0.07) Priority Watersheds: 6% (0.06) Developing Areas: 6% (0.06) Proximity to Public Lands: 5% (0.05) Public Drinking Water Sources: 5% (0.05) Topography: 3% (0.03) West Riparian Areas: 15% (0.15) Priority Watersheds: 10% (0.10) T & E Species: 10% (0.10) Wetlands: 10% (0.10) Private Forestlands: 9% (0.09) Public Drinking Water Sources: 9% (0.09) Forest Health: 9% (0.09) Developing Areas: 8% (0.08) Forest Patch Size: 7% (0.07) Proximity to Public Lands: 5% (0.05) Wildfire Assessment: 3% (0.03) Topography: 3% (0.03) Washington Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project Final Report 10

11 Data Layer Overlay Weighting Scheme Rank Scale Mean Inverse Relative Weight EAST Values from 1 to 12 (1 is the highest weight, 12 the lowest) Weight Weight (Proportion) Riparian Areas Wildfire Assessment Forest Health T&E Public Drinking Water Proximity to Public Lands Wetlands Developing Areas Topography Priority Watersheds Private Forestlands Forest Patch Size WEST Total Riparian Areas Wildfire Assessment Forest Health T&E Public Drinking Water Proximity to Public Lands Wetlands Developing Areas Topography Priority Watersheds Private Forestlands Forest Patch Size Table 1: Ranking from the Stewardship Committee and participating Tribes to establish weights for suitability analysis layers. Total Washington Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project Final Report 11

12 Results Neither the west side nor the east side had all layers hit in every cell. The analysis values for the east side ranged from 0 (100,071 cells out of a possible 72,383,972 cells) to.95 (5 cells) and values for the west side ranged from 0 (1405 cells out of a possible 14,302,687 cells) to.89 (2 cells). Both the.95 and the.89 values indicate that there were no cells that hit all layers. The 0 value indicates that there were some cells that hit none of the layers. Once the analysis was run the Jenks Natural Breaks classification algorithm was used to determine high, medium and low classes. These classes were then reclassified to grid values 1 low, 2 medium, and 3 high. West East Natural Breaks Reclassified to: Representing: Low Stewardship Potential Medium Stewardship Potential High Stewardship Potential Natural Breaks Reclassified to: Representing: Low Stewardship Potential Medium Stewardship Potential High Stewardship Potential Table 2: Stewardship potential cell values reclassified using natural breaks for both Western and Eastern Washington. STEWARDSHIP CAPABLE LANDS IN WESTERN WASHINGTON Stewardship Potential Acres Forest Non-forest Total % of Total Forest Acres % of Total Non-Forest Acres % of Total Forest High 713,351 28% 51,229 7% 764,580 23% Medium 1,577,825 62% 218,226 13% 1,796,051 55% Low 233,604 9% 489,225 64% 722,829 22% Total 2,524, ,680 3,283,460 Table 3: From Map #2A showing Stewardship Capable lands in Western Washington. STEWARDSHIP CAPABLE LANDS IN EASTERN WASHINGTON Stewardship Potential Acres Forest Non-forest Total % of Total Forest Acres % of Total Non-Forest Acres % of Total Forest High 1,734,182 21% 134,991 2% 1,869,174 11% Medium 5,704,103 70% 1,075,969 13% 6,780,073 41% Low 689,482 8% 7,278,345 86% 7,967,827 48% Total 8,127,769 8,489,305 16,617,074 Table 4: From Map #2B showing Stewardship Capable lands in Eastern Washington. Washington Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project Final Report 12

13 The results for the most part made sense with regard to where the high, medium and low areas resulted. There were some questionable high areas in the Columbia Basin. These results most likely came about because NLCD value 51 (shrubland) was included in both the forest patch size layer and the non-industrial private forestland layer. Shrubland was included in the analysis for consistency with other states analyses. These two layers accompanied by the riparian layer were all ranked fairly high causing these cells to fall into the higher category. Seeking Tribal Participation There are 31 Tribes or Tribal affiliates that occupy approximately 1.7 million acres of forest land throughout the state of Washington. These lands contain valuable resources and management opportunities, and represent an important component of landscape areas in the state. In developing shared management priorities with key partners, these lands need to be considered as a key element of any comprehensive effort to analyze forest conditions, trends, and opportunities in the state, as a means to identifying priority forest landscapes. Recognizing the need to include Tribal interests in the Spatial Analysis Project, the Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) implemented a focused effort to invite the input and voice of all affiliated Tribes that occupy or manage lands within the state. The principal purposes of this endeavor were to talk with Tribal leaders and representatives on the importance of this project, to share how the analysis and final SAP product could benefit Tribal interests, and explain why their counsel and participation was needed. To accomplish this collaboration, the Washington DNR contacted all affiliated Tribes in Washington State to encourage their participation in the analysis to ensure that their individual Tribal priorities were represented in the final SAP product. The process of communicating with Tribes was guided by DNR s Tribal Relations Manager, Rodney Cawston, and USFS Tribal Relations Staff Assistant, Gary Harris. Specifically, Tribes were invited to provide their advice and input on the ranking or relative priority to assign to each of the twelve GIS data layers. The DNR also advised Tribes on the potential use of SAP as a strategic planning tool in managing their lands, and offered to run a separate SAP analysis for their respective lands. The DNR first introduced the Spatial Analysis Project at the Affiliated Tribes of the Northwest Indians Conference in Yakima, Washington, in January, In addition to providing a brief presentation of the overall project, an informational SAP brochure that was specifically developed for the Tribes was distributed at the Conference. Tribal members were encouraged to contact the WDNR for more information, or to schedule an opportunity to meet individually to share their voice. Washington Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project Final Report 13

14 Following the conference, letters containing further documentation of the analysis and SAP data layers were sent to all 31 affiliated Tribes in Washington State to invite their participation in the project. Follow-up phone calls were then made by Mr. Cawston and Mr. Harris to individual Tribes, who did not initially respond to the letter, again encouraging their involvement and input. In all, six Tribes provided their input to the SAP by giving their ranking for the twelve standard data layers. The six Tribes who responded and participated included the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Reservation, Jamestown S Klallam Tribe, Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe, Lummi Indian Tribe, Nooksack Indian Tribe, and the Snoqualmie Tribe. The ranking provided by the Tribes, along with the rankings by the Stewardship Committee, determined the overall ranks for each data layer in the overlay analysis. Part 2. Stewardship Plan Digitizing The other main component of the Spatial Analysis Project is the collection and digitizing of Washington State Stewardship plans. These plans will be used in the suitability analysis. Washington State is divided into six DNR regions. Each region, with the exception of our Olympic Region, houses their own Stewardship plans. Each region had different way of organizing their in Stewardship plan information so collecting plan information from each region did take some time. Great cooperation from region stewardship foresters allowed files to be periodically shipped from the regions to our central office for processing. This saved both time and travel costs. We did run into some issues with the plans not containing uniform information. Planned activities were not easily found throughout the plans. We decided not to collect planned activity information for past plans, but that a process for collecting planned activity information would be added to all new stewardship plans. Washington State also made the decision to include only current plans. Stewardship plans are valid for ten years; therefore, any plan that was written and approved after 1997 was considered current and was collected. Procedures: A personal geodatabase was designed for the Web-DET application. This geodatabase stores the feature class of the stewardship plans along with the related tables that hold the information for each of these digitized plan boundaries. PLAN INFORMATION, PROPERTY ASDDRESS, and OWNERSHIP tables in the geodatabase were populated with related plan information. A custom toolbar was developed by Colorado to speed the processes of digitizing and inputting repeated plan information. Metadata Metadata was completed for all datalayers as well as for all final analysis layers. The FGDC metadata editor in ArcCatalog was used to meet Federal Geographic Committee (FGDC) standards. Washington Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project Final Report 14

15 Analysis and Map Products: The Spatial Analysis Project is made up of the suitability analysis along with map products, which also include analysis and statistical information. The eastern portion of the landscape in Washington State is so drastically different from the Western portion that it made sense to run two separate suitability analyses for each side of the state. Each of the first six maps display the Eastern and Western analyses on separate maps. A maps display results from Western Washington results and B maps display Eastern Washington results. Map #1A & 1B: Potential for Forest Stewardship Program Benefits Map #1A & 1B display each suitability analysis. The map displays high, medium and low areas of stewardship potential within our analysis mask areas for each side of the state. To complete the statistical table included in the map the extract by mask tool from the Spatial Analyst toolbox in ArcMap was used to separate the forested land analysis results from the non-forested land analysis results in our mask. By using this tool, the results are displayed spatially as well as in the attribute table. The number of cells for each value was then calculated to acres. The results are displayed in the Stewardship Capable Lands table on the map. Map #2A & 2B: Potential for Forest Stewardship Program Benefits and Existing Stewardship Plans In these maps, existing stewardship plans are displayed over the stewardship potential results. The table in the map compares stewardship plan acres to total acres capable of stewardship. The results were compiled using the extract by mask tool from the Spatial Analyst toolbox in ArcMap. The values from the resulting grid were then calculated to acres for the displayed table. Map #3A & 3B: Forest Stewardship Potential on Non-Industrial Private Forest Lands, Tribal lands and Existing Stewardship Plans Maps 3A and 3B display forest stewardship potential on non-industrial private forest lands and Tribal land. This layer was created by using NLCD forested values (41, 42, 43, 51, 61 and 91) within our analysis mask and adding it to the stewardship potential layer. The resulting layer determines stewardship potential on non-industrial private forestlands and Tribal land. The table in map #3A and #3B of stewardship potential on private lands was created using the extract by mask tool. Washington Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project Final Report 15

16 To determine the acres of stewardship potential on non-industrial private forestland and Tribal land within stewardship plan acres the stewardship potential on non-industrial private forestland and Tribal land was extracted to the Stewardship plan acres. Cell values were then calculated to acres for the resulting tables. Map #4A & 4B: Resource Richness The resource richness map displays areas of resource potential for Washington State. Resource Rich datalayers were added together using their relative weights assigned by the Stewardship Committee and Tribes in the suitability analysis. The data was normalized to match the 0 to 1 scale as used in the suitability analysis. Data Layer Overlay Weighting Scheme Rank Scale Mean Inverse Relative Weight Normalized EAST Values from 1 to 12 (1 is the highest weight, 12 the lowest) Weight Weight (Proportion) Weight Riparian Areas T&E Public Drinking Water Proximity to Public Lands Wetlands Topography Priority Watersheds Private Forestlands Forest Patch Size Total WEST Riparian Areas T&E Public Drinking 1 Water Proximity to Public Lands Wetlands Topography Priority Watersheds Private Forestlands Forest Patch Size Table 5: Overlay Weighting Scheme Rank Scale with Normalized Weights for both Eastern and Western Washington State. Washington Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project Final Report 16

17 Map #5A & 5B: Resource Threats The resource threats map defines areas considered resource threats to the Forest Stewardship Program in Washington State. The layer was created by using only the resource threat datalayers from the suitability analysis. The relative weights of each layer were kept and then normalized to match the 0 to 1 scale used in the original suitability analysis. Data Layer Overlay Weighting Scheme Rank Scale Mean Inverse Relative Weight Normalized EAST Values from 1 to 12 (1 is the highest weight, 12 the lowest) Weigh t Weight (Proportion) Weight Wildfire Assessment Forest Health Developing Areas WEST Wildfire Assessment Forest Health Developing Areas Table 6: Overlay Weighting Scheme Rank Scale with Normalized weights for Resource Threats. Map #6A & #6B: Forest Stewardship Potential on Non-Forested Non-Developed Lands and Existing Stewardship Plans Map 6A and 6B define areas with stewardship potential on non-forested and non-developed lands for Washington State. NLCD non-forested, non-developed values (31, 33, 71, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85 and 92) within our analysis mask were selected and added to the stewardship potential grid. The extract by mask tool in the Spatial Analyst toolbox was then used to determine acreage for non-forested, non- developed lands with stewardship potential and with existing stewardship plans. Map 7: Forest Stewardship Potential on Non-Industrial Private Forests vs. Non-Forest and Existing Stewardship Plans for the Spokane area Washington s regional map displays non-industrial private forests and non-forested lands with stewardship potential. The forested stewardship potential maintains the green color scale while the non-forested lands are represented by an orange color scale. The Spokane area is displayed in this map at a 1:200,000 scale. Counties, selected cities, roads, rivers, lakes were also added to the map to relate where there is stewardship potential. Washington Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project Final Report 17

18 Appendix A: Stewardship Committee Ranking Form Rank these layers 1 being highest importance to Stewardship potential and 12 being the lowest importance to Stewardship potential. EAST WEST Riparian Areas Wildfire Assessment Forest Health Threatened and Endangered Species Public Drinking Water Proximity to Public Lands Wetlands Developing Areas Topography Priority Watersheds Private Forestland Forest Patch Size Please do not hesitate to call if you have questions or comments. Thank you. Nicki Eisfeldt Washington Department of Natural Resources 1111 Washington St SE Olympia, WA nicholene.eisfeldt@dnr.wa.gov Washington Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project Final Report 18

19 Appendix B: National Land Cover Datalayer Definition Washington Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project Final Report 19

20 Washington Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project Final Report 20

21 Washington Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project Final Report 21

22 Appendix C: Tribal Participation Documents Letter to Tribes Brochure for AT&I Conference Contact spreadsheet Tribal Datalayer Ranking Form Washington Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project Final Report 22

23

24

25 Developing Areas This datalayer emphasizes areas that are projected to have an increase in housing development over the next 30 years. Which may influence long term forest management potential. Priority Watersheds This datalayer is intended to place emphasis on landscapes that impact longterm watershed function. These watersheds were chosen using Federal EPA impaired waters data. Drinking Water Supply Sources This datalayer places emphasis on areas of watersheds that drain onto public drinking water supply intake points. Wetlands This datalayer should identify wetlands where planning and management can achieve a higher degree of protection for purposes including water quality and wildlife habitat. Forest Health This datalayer places importance on areas where silvicultural treatments can address risks to forest health. Wildfire Assessment Identifies areas where planning and management are likely to reduce a relatively high risk of fire.

26 Riparian Areas This datalayer places importance on river and stream corridors where buffers of forest or vegetative cover can have a positive or restorative effect on water quality and riverine ecosystems. Forest Patch Size This datalayer represents all forestland in Washington state. Threatened and Endangered Species This datalayer identifies areas that provide habitat for Federally threatened and endangered species. Proximity to Public Lands The assumption is that Public lands are permanently protected (managed) and thus contribute to a viably large, interconnected forest landscape. This layer includes all land within one mile proximity to public lands. Private Forested Lands This datalayer is intended to place emphasis on eligible non-industrial private lands with existing forest cover. Topographic Slope This datalayer is included for timber or fiber productivity because of its relationship to ease and feasibility for forest harvesting operations. For Washington we included all lands that have 0-40% slope.

27 Benefits Tribes within Washington State are eligible to receive professional planning and technical assistance from the DNR Forest Stewardship Program. The goal of the program is to assist landowners in keeping their land productive and healthy. Tribes could potentially benefit from the inclusion in the Forest Stewardship Program as delivered by DNR Forest Practices Division and the U.S. Forest Service. Forest Stewardship Program Spatial Analysis Project DNR is seeking to collaborate with Washington Tribes to include Tribal lands in the Spatial Analysis Project. DNR s goal is to create a natural resources data layer of information including Tribal land to identify where potential for Stewardship exists. The Spatial Analysis Project can include data to indicate where resource-rich areas are located and where Forest Stewardship Program assistance can be focused. This project provides tools that can help Tribes focus future Forest Stewardship Program efforts to effectively and efficiently address critical forest resource issues. For more information about the Spatial Analysis Project and how to participate please contact:: Nicki Eisfeldt- Washington State Department of Natural Resources. Phone: nicholene.eisfeldt@dnr.wa.gov

28 Description Administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service and implemented by State forestry agencies, the Forest Stewardship Program encourages private forest landowners to actively manage their lands using professionally prepared Forest Stewardship plans. These plans consider all associated forest-related resources to meet landowner objectives, including but not limited to timber, wildlife, fish, water, and aesthetics. The Spatial Analysis Project (SAP) is a geographic information system (GIS)-based strategic management tool that allows Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to identify and spatially display important forest lands (e.g., rich in natural resources or vulnerable to threat), tracts currently under Forest Stewardship plans, and areas where there may be an opportunity to focus future Forest Stewardship Program efforts. DNR is currently working to complete the Spatial Analysis Project for Washington State. Objectives Promote strategic program delivery over traditional first-come, first-served basis. Address accountability for positive results on the ground. Provide a standard, consistent way to assess the impact Forest Stewardship plans have on the forest resource in addressing regionally or nationally important issues. Process Develop a geodatabase that spatially displays Forest Stewardship plans and captures associated management activities. Analyze 12 common data layers that address resource potentials and threats and encourage States to use additional layers to address Statespecific conditions/issues. Exclude areas not eligible for Forest Stewardship Program assistance. Overlay common and State-specific datalayers to create a composite that maps areas of highest Forest Stewardship Program potential. Assess existing Forest Stewardship tracts against the composite to quantify impact and identify opportunities. Solicit State Stewardship Committee input throughout project development. Example of overlay analysis process

29 Tribes Contacted Confederated Tribes of the Umitilla Reservation Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe Lower Elwha Klallam Lumi Indian Tribe Nooksack Indian Tribe Snoqualmie Tribe Chehalis Colville Conf. Tribes of Umatilla IR Cowlitz Indian Tribe CRITFC Hoh Kalispel Makah Tribe Muckleshoot Tribe Nez Perce Tribe NW Indian Fish Commission Point no Point Treaty Council Port Gamble S'Klallam Puyallup Tribe Quileute Tribe Quileute Tribe Quinault Indian Nation Quinault Indian Nation Samish Sauk-Suiattle Tribe Shoalwater Bay Skokomish Tribe Spokane Tribe Squaxin Island Tribe Stillaguamish Tribe Suquamish Tribe Swinomish UCUT Warm Springs CT **Hilighted Tribes participated in the SAP project

30 Rank these layers 1 being highest importance to Stewardship potential and 12 being the lowest importance to Stewardship potential. Riparian Areas Wildfire Assessment Forest Health. Threatened and Endangered Species Public Drinking Water Proximity to Public Lands Wetlands Developing Areas Topography Priority Watersheds Private Forestland Forest Patch Size Please do not hesitate to call if you have questions or comments. Please return as soon as possible. Thank you. Nicki Eisfeldt Washington Department of Natural Resources 1111 Washington St SE Olympia, WA nicholene.eisfeldt@dnr.wa.gov