These treatments are intended to provide better  growing conditions for trees and include activities such as removing  competing vegetation and thinning forests when trees are too crowded. Forest Service Reports Increasing Reforestation and Timber Stand Improvement Needs, but Inconsistent Definitions and Data Make It Difficult to Accurately Quantify Its Needs

Forest Service reports to the Congress show a generally increasing trend  in reforestation and timber stand improvement needs during the last 5  years, as shown in figure 1. While the Forest Service data are sufficiently  reliable to identify this relative trend, they are not sufficiently reliable to  accurately quantify the agency’s specific needs, establish priorities among  treatments, or estimate a budget. Forest Service Data Are Not Sufficient to Accurately Quantify the Agency’s Needs

The Forest Service’s reforestation and timber stand improvement data,  when combined with other information from Forest Service officials and  nongovernmental experts—as well as data on recent increases in natural  disturbances such as wildland fires—are sufficiently reliable for  identifying relative trends in needs. However, we have concerns about the  use of these data in quantifying the acreage of Forest Service lands  needing reforestation and timber stand improvement treatments for  several reasons. First, Forest Service regions and forests define their needs differently. Third, Forest Service regions do not always update the data to reflect  current forest conditions or review the accuracy of the data. Forest Service officials  acknowledge these problems and are preparing an action plan to address  them. Agency Officials Link Natural Causes and Management Decisions to Increasing Reforestation and Timber Stand Improvement Needs

Forest Service officials told us that reforestation needs have been rising  largely because such needs have increasingly been generated by causes  other than timber harvests, and funding to address these needs has not  kept pace. Timber harvests, which provided  sufficient revenue to pay for related reforestation needs, are no longer the  main source of such needs. According to Forest Service reports, beginning  around 2000, the acreage burned in wildland fires and damaged by insects  and diseases annually began to increase significantly, leaving thousands of  acres needing reforestation. As the acreage affected  by these natural disturbances increased, so did reforestation needs. For timber stand improvement, agency officials said that management  practices have been the primary factor contributing to the increase in  acreage needing treatment. Agency Officials Cite Adverse Effects That Could Result If Needs Are Not Addressed, but Have Not Positioned the Agency to Manage Such Effects

If reforestation and timber stand improvement needs continue to  accumulate in the future and the Forest Service is unable to keep pace  with the needs, the agency will likely have to postpone some treatment  projects. According to agency officials, the agency’s ability to achieve  forest management objectives may consequently be impaired; treatment  costs could increase; and forests could become more susceptible to fire,  disease, and insect damage. While Forest Service officials expressed  concern about the potential harmful effects of delaying projects, the  agency has not clarified its direction and priorities for the reforestation  and timber stand improvement program to reflect this concern and the  current context in which the program operates. Achievement of Management Objectives Could Be Impaired; Treatment Costs Could Increase; and Forests Could Become More Vulnerable to Fire, Insects, and Disease

The Forest Service’s ability to meet the management objectives defined in  its forest plans—such as maintaining a variety of tree species in a forest  or appropriate habitat for certain wildlife—could be impaired if  reforestation or timber stand improvement treatments are delayed.
Why GAO Did This Study

In 2004, the Forest Service reported to the Congress that it had a backlog of nearly 900,000 acres of land needing reforestation--the planting and natural regeneration of trees. Reforestation and subsequent timber stand improvement treatments, such as thinning trees and removing competing vegetation, are critical to restoring and improving the health of our national forests after timber harvests or natural disturbances such as wildland fires. GAO was asked to (1) examine the reported trends in federal lands needing reforestation and timber stand improvement, (2) identify the factors that have contributed to these trends, and (3) describe any potential effects of these trends that Forest Service officials have identified. This testimony is based on GAO's report Forest Service: Better Data Are Needed to Identify and Prioritize Reforestation and Timber Stand Improvement Needs (GAO-05-374), being released today.

What GAO Found

The acreage of Forest Service lands needing reforestation and timber stand improvement has been generally increasing since 2000, according to Forest Service officials and data reported to the Congress, as well as other studies. While the Forest Service data are sufficiently reliable to identify this relative trend, they are not sufficiently reliable to accurately quantify the agency's specific needs, establish priorities among treatments, or estimate a budget. The data's reliability is limited in part because some Forest Service regions and forests define their needs differently, and some do not systematically update the data to reflect current forest conditions or review the accuracy of the data. Forest Service officials acknowledge these problems, and the agency is implementing a new data system to better track its needs. While helpful, this action alone will not be sufficient to address the data problems GAO has identified. According to Forest Service officials, reforestation needs have been increasing in spite of declining timber harvests because of the growing acreage of lands affected by natural disturbances such as wildland fires, insect infestation, and diseases. In the past, reforestation needs resulted primarily from timber harvests, whose sales produced sufficient revenue to fund most reforestation needs. Now needs are resulting mainly from natural causes, and funding sources for such needs have remained relatively constant rather than rising in step with increasing needs. For timber stand improvement, the acreage needing attention is growing in part because high-density planting practices, used in the past to replace harvested trees, are creating needs for thinning treatments today and because treatments have not kept pace with the growing needs. Forest Service officials believe the agency's ability to achieve its forest management objectives may be impaired if future reforestation and timber stand improvement needs continue to outpace the agency's ability to meet these needs. For example, maintaining wildlife habitat--one forest management objective--could be hindered if brush grows to dominate an area formerly forested with tree species that provided forage, nesting, or other benefits to wildlife. Also, if treatments are delayed, costs could increase because competing vegetation--which must be removed to allow newly reforested stands to survive--grows larger over time and becomes more costly to remove. Further, without needed thinning treatments, agency officials said forests become dense, fueling wildland fires and creating competition among trees, leaving them stressed and vulnerable to insect attack and disease. While agency officials expressed concern about these potential effects, the agency has not adjusted its policies and priorities for the reforestation and timber stand improvement program so that adverse effects can be minimized. Forest Service officials did, however, acknowledge the need to make such changes.