---

We are excited to announce that long-time Idaho Department of Lands forester, Bill Love, recently joined the forestry staff of Inland Forest Management, Inc.

Love, who recently retired from the Idaho Department of Lands (IDL), has a long and distinguished history of working with private forest landowners in Idaho in numerous capacities. His extensive knowledge, genuine integrity, and friendly, outgoing working style will be of great benefit to clients. Love’s responsibilities with IFM will include helping with all phases of forest landowner service and assisting with the company’s wildland urban interface fire mitigation efforts.

In his previous positions with the IDL, Love served as Chief – Bureau of Forestry Assistance for Idaho and private forestry specialist in Sandpoint and Bonners Ferry. He is a certified forester and Tree Farm inspector, and is actively involved in numerous organizations including the Idaho State Forestry Contest and the Idaho Forest Owners.

---

IFM and the North Idaho tree farm family have lost some very special landowners over the last year or so. Two of these individuals, Bob Scates and Dean Stevens, just passed away within the last few months. Bob and Dean were a unique breed—dedicated to land stewardship and also active in the political realm of the conservation world.

Bob Scates owned a large Tree Farm near Spirit Lake, Idaho, served in the Idaho State Legislature and retired from a successful dentistry practice in Coeur d’Alene. He was the consummate tree farmer—zealous about growing trees; always busy pruning, thinning and performing other tasks aimed at improving his forest. He also actively defended private landowner interests as a legislator and never hesitated to sing the praises of forest management to anyone who would listen. As recognition for his tremendous accomplishments, in 1986 he was named Idaho Outstanding Tree Farmer of the Year.

Dean Stevens managed family forestland on Priest Lake and near Worley, Idaho, where, as a boy, he nurtured a love of the land and saw the value of sound land stewardship. He chose to pursue a career in teaching but enthusiastically instilled the concept of a land management ethic throughout his community. Dean was also an Idaho State Legislator as well as a member of the Bonner County Board of Commissioners—platforms he used to diligently promote natural resource management issues and the best interests of his constituents.

Bob and Dean join other valued members of the forest landowner community who have passed within the last year or so, including Bill Lukens (past president of the Idaho Forest Owner’s Association), Dr. Don Satterland (Professor of Forest Watershed Management, emeritus, Washington State University) and Phil Munn (all around great guy).

We at IFM have had the privilege and honor of working for these remarkable individuals and will always cherish the time spent with them as well as the lessons they’ve taught us.

---

Inland Forest Management, Inc., was recently awarded the contract for managing Bonfire, Bonner County’s hazardous forest fuels reduction program. This program strives to reduce the risk of wildfire in the wildland/urban interface around communities by removing flammable forest fuels. The federally funded program focuses on creating fuel breaks by thinning and pruning trees and cutting brush to protect subdivisions and other areas where people live. IFM also administers similar programs in Boundary, Kootenai and Benewah Counties. If you live in a forested setting in any of these counties and are interested in learning more about these programs, please contact our office.

---

One hundred years ago, an event took place in North Idaho that continues to have a major effect on our forest environment and management policies. On August 20, 1910, toward the end of an unusually dry summer, gale-force winds suddenly struck, transforming multiple existing fires into a huge, explosive conflagration that burned 3.1 million acres of forest, as well as numerous towns, mining camps, homesteads, railroad trestles, and other structures. Approximately 100 buildings (the eastern third) in Wallace were destroyed.

Miraculously, only 85 people died (although many more were seriously injured), mainly thanks to heroic efforts of individuals such as USFS crew foreman Ed Pulaski, who led 42 of his firefighters into a mining tunnel, where he commanded them to lie on their faces while he threw water on the burning support timbers of the tunnel before being overcome by the heat and smoke. Pulaski and all but six of his men survived and, although the survivors were “in a helpless condition” when rescued, all eventually recovered.
After the fire, many forest stands previously composed of white pine, larch and fir ended up regenerating with lodgepole pine. Also, serious soil erosion occurred on steep, denuded slopes, leaving vast expanses of exposed bedrock in many drainages. In fact, due to soil damage some areas never reforested and remain brush fields to this day. An estimated 30 to 40 percent of the fire area subsequently re-burned due to the dead timber left by the fire. In addition, a bark beetle epidemic developed following the fire and killed millions more board feet of white pine. Much of the burned area is now stocked with even-aged timber and heavy fuels, thus making conditions ripe for another catastrophic fire.

Forest management policies were forever changed. At the time, the fledgling U.S. Forest Service was being considered for elimination but the huge fire clearly demonstrated the importance of this agency, which immediately started a policy of aggressively suppressing all wildfires. (In 1950, the Smokey Bear campaign was created to help promote this policy.) This very proactive fire suppression approach has also contributed to the heavy fuel build up in our current forests.

This year, in honor of the 100th anniversary of the event, the Inland Empire Society of American Foresters annual meeting will focus on the 1910 Fires: their history, impact on forest management and policy today, and the likelihood of such devastating fires occurring in the future. The meeting will be held, quite appropriately, in Wallace, Idaho, on May 20 – 22, 2010. For more information about the meeting and how to attend, visit www.iesaf.org

---

The expertise of a forester can be an invaluable asset as landowners work toward improving their forest. However, there oftentimes is confusion about who qualifies as a forester and how he or she fits into land management.

It is the role of a professional forester to maintain the balance between human needs and desires, and our forests’ ability to sustain these “services.” A forester not only sees the need to build a house but also incorporates science and biology to help understand how the landscape will respond to the removal of needed resources.

More than a hundred years ago, at a time when our forests were being harvested with little regard for the future, a father asked his boy, “How would you like to be a forester?” The boy, Gifford Pinchot, who later became one of the first (and most notable) professional foresters in the United States, later remarked, “I had no more conception of what it meant to be a forester than the man in the moon…. But at least a forester worked in the woods and with the woods—and I loved the woods and everything about them….” (Reference: ForestHistory.org)

Among his many accomplishments, Pinchot was instrumental in forming the Forest Service and urging President Teddy Roosevelt to protect and manage forests for future generations. He also worked to help define forestry as “The greatest good for the greatest number in the long run.”

Since Pinchot’s time, the forestry profession has become more specialized and diverse. Today’s foresters—university extension foresters, consulting foresters, state and federal foresters, urban foresters, industrial foresters, research foresters, etc.—fill many different roles and play an important part in determining how our forests are managed while working for the “greatest good.”

Although this diversity strengthens the profession, it can also lead to confusion as to who is, or is not, a forester. In essence, a forester is an individual who has obtained a four-year degree in natural resource management and works in the forestry field. Two professional organizations, the Society of American Foresters (SAF) and the Association of Consulting Foresters (ACF), provide competency and credentialing standards for foresters. The main difference between the two lies in how specific the certification is. The SAF offers its members a Certified Forester (CF) designation, which is open to all types of professional foresters, whereas the ACF offers its credentialing system specifically to Consulting Foresters (those foresters available to assist private forests owners on a fee basis). You can get more information on these two organizations and a list of qualified foresters in your area by visiting their respective websites at safnet.org or acf-foresters.org.

Regarding consulting foresters (like Inland Forest Management, Inc); they play a unique role in that they focus strictly on the welfare of the forest landowner. These foresters avoid conflicts of interests, such as buying logs or logging, and adhere to a stringent Code of Ethics.

Obviously defining what, or more importantly, who a forester is goes beyond training and experience. It is ultimately defined by the resource. In the famous words of Aldo Leopold, another leader in the field of forestry, “Conservation is a state of harmony between land and man.” It is a forester’s duty to help preserve this harmony.

Examples of Duties Performed by a Professional Forester:

• Preparing forest management plans
• Monitoring and assessing forest health, and developing management strategies for protecting the forest from insects, disease, and wildfire
• Preparing and maintaining inventories of forest resources
• Measuring and appraising timber volume
• Preparing harvest plans
• Marketing forest products
• Managing wildlife habitat
• Analyzing wildfire hazard
• Participating on teams with other natural resource professionals in the development and preparation of environmental assessments, environmental impact reports, and environmental impact statements.
• Providing expert testimony during litigation
• Managing community watersheds for water and timber production
• Educational assistance to forest landowners

(This article is also appearing in the Inland Northwest Land Trust newsletter www.inlandnwlandtrust.org.)

---

IFM has been recently awarded a contract with Kootenai County to serve as Project Manager for the county’s FireSmart Program. IFM already manages similar programs in Boundary and Benewah Counties, and additional efforts are taking place in other Inland Northwest counties.

These efforts involve using federal dollars to reduce hazardous forest fuels around subdivisions and other developments, and improving escape corridors. The goal of the programs is to provide landowners with better defensible space and access in the event of a wildfire. Specific tasks associated with the projects generally involve removing brush, thinning and pruning trees, and disposing of slash (forest debris). This work is usually accomplished at little to no cost to the landowner.

Steve Bloedel and Don Gunter are the IFM project managers for these grants. If you are interested in learning more about this program, please contact our office.

---

There is keen forest landowner interest in the subject of carbon trading and sequestration. In fact, this topic has almost eclipsed the terrible log market as the most common conversation theme among forest owners!

This is a confusing subject, which is further complicated by the wide range of organizations and evolving standards determining the future of this commodity. To better understand how the carbon trading world relates to forest owners, let’s answer a few common questions:

What is forest carbon trading?

In a nutshell, trees take carbon (carbon dioxide) out of the air and store it as wood fiber, while factories and other entities, put carbon into the air during manufacturing processes. Next, carbon producers are pressured by the government and a heightened public consciousness to reduce emissions by either lowering discharges at the factory or, in lieu of that, paying forest owners to keep carbon stored (sequestered) in trees. The end result is that producers purchase carbon credits from forest owners because it is cheaper than making the required factory improvements to reduce emissions. To encourage this effort, the government is considering cap and trade legislation to establish incentives for this market-driven system.

What’s required for a landowner to get involved with carbon trading?

Other requirements also apply, but the key elements are: 1) A property must have a forest management plan in place and be certified for sustainable forest management by a group such as the American Tree Farm System. 2) A thorough baseline inventory (wood volume, growth projection, etc.) must be conducted to determine the amount of carbon stored within the forest now and into the future. 3) Landowners must be willing to maintain a certified forest for a set period of time. Fifteen years is fairly common, but the time frame may vary up to 100 years.

How is the value of carbon determined and traded?

Currently there is only one formal trading platform in the U.S., the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX), which conducts transactions in metric tons. There are also informal “Over the Counter” trading opportunities. Like other commodities, the value of a ton of carbon is determined by supply and demand. And since cap and trade legislation would greatly increase demand, it is assumed the value of carbon would correspondingly rise if Congress were to pass such legislation.

What are carbon credits worth?

Within the last few years carbon traded at a high of more than $7/metric ton, but the value of carbon traded on the CCX has dropped dramatically to its current level of just $.25/metric ton. That huge fall makes the plunge in sawlog prices look minor in comparison! Also, the current trading system allows carbon traders to accumulate credits which, like stocks or bonds, can be held and sold in the future, hopefully at a higher rate.

How much money can a landowner make?

That’s the wild card! Again, like the stock market, a host of variables influence the net return to landowners. With present CCX prices, selling on the exchange makes no sense and “over-the-counter” sales have their own special challenges. But let’s speculate on a possible Inland Northwest carbon sale scenario. Say a landowner sells 2 ton/acre of carbon sequestration valued at $2/metric ton (net return). The landowner would then receive $4/acre ($2 times 2 ton) per year.

Until this muddy subject has been clarified—numerous organizations are involved in determining standards (some have likened it to a “tug-of-war”), everybody is waiting to see what happens with proposed cap and trade legislation, and carbon values are very shaky—it appears premature to jump into the carbon market now.

Editor’s note: This is a brief overview of a very complex subject. IFM will continue to monitor this situation and keep you informed. If the time is right for you to actively pursue carbon trading opportunities, we will be here to serve your needs.
— M. Wolcott