INTERIOR COLUMBIA BASIN ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT PROJECT

Opening

This workshop brings together an impressive number of scientists to present their work on the Interior Columbia Basin. It also brings together an impressive number of people who will use the science. This is fitting because I want to discuss today the importance of using science as a basis for management of our public lands. I also want to convey the priorities of Forest Service Chief Mike Dombeck, who I am honored to represent today.

Future of Federal Land Management

Before I discuss the linkage of science and land management, I need to state what many people at this workshop already know -- the future of federal land management across this nation is being written in the scientific studies and the management strategies for the Interior Columbia River Basin. I make this statement with no intent to slight the other important scientific assessments in the California Sierras or the Southern Appalachia, or, even the Northwest Forest Plan covering the range of the northern spotted owl. Rather, it is the Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project which, through a unique combination of resources, circumstances, risks and opportunities in this part of the country, will provide the test case for the future of federal land management.

Reflect for a moment on this unique part of America. Half of the land in the Interior Columbia Basin is administered by two agencies, the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management. Decisions affecting federal land management will impact a large area and will affect a significant portion of our citizens in this area. The future of many key fish and wildlife species will be determined by the same decisions.

Consider the extent and variety of these lands, and the processes by which they were formed. This area spans the cedar groves of the northern glaciated forests south to the high desert range and basalt walls of the Owyhee [Oh-why-hee] canyon lands. It includes the crest of the Cascade mountains inhabited by the northern spotted owl, to the continental divide where the grizzly bear resides in the Glacier and Yellowstone ecosystems. In between lies the undammed Salmon River. The deepest canyon, Hells Canyon, contrasts with the adjacent alpine heights of the Wallowa mountains.

The processes that formed this land and its unique resources span millions of years. To the west of here are the volcanic openings of the Cascades, heard from as recently as 1980 at Mount Saint Helens. To the east of Spokane, we stare into the historic floodway of Lake Missoula, an area of which Norman Maclean described so eloquently, where "the river was cut by the world's great flood, and runs over rocks from the basement of time."

Think about the circumstances we now find ourselves in with the management of these resources--the people living here, and the increasing number arriving. Contrast that with the original peoples who lived with the natural rhythm of the land and water for thousands of years. Think about what once was the world's largest salmon runs, and the most southern sockeye salmon run. Both are now imperiled. Consider the situation when this Project was initiated, and the focus on drought, large and severe fires on our forests and rangelands. Contrast the current concern with the floods of this winter as well as last year. Finally, ponder how those citizens who use the lands have faced ever-increasing uncertainty with their livelihood in recent years. Be it a person's job in the woods or riding the range, or their dependence on the fish and wildlife, the situation has become less predictable and less dependable.

We face many risks as well as many opportunities under the present circumstances. Obviously the forests, range, and aquatic ecosystems are at higher risk given the past 100 years of settlement and development. There will be ample time in the next two days for all of us to learn the details from the scientists, but it is a fact that the forests and rangelands and their watersheds deserve our attention as never before. Our communities, people, and traditional values, including the traditional values of the American Indians, deserve attention as well. As Forest Service Chief Mike Dombeck stated to Congress last month, "Clearly, we must deliver sustainable supplies of wood fiber for American homes, forage for livestock and minerals and energy that help support healthy economies, but the health of the land must be our first priority. Failing this, nothing else we do really matters."

The opportunity exists to respond in a positive manner. First, we have assembled the latest scientific information for a large area, and it was brought together in a way where we have also had the time to reflect on this science and develop of broad land management strategies. This work was done in an environment largely, but not completely, free of the controversy and injunctions associated with the old growth forests in the range of the northern spotted owl.

Collaborative Stewardship

The work to date comes as close as any effort in the Forest Service to Chief Dombeck's vision of "collaborative stewardship" for the management of the National Forests. Chief Dombeck spelled out his vision for collaborative stewardship to all Forest Service employees on his first day as Chief of the Forest Service. The use of science and technology and partnerships are both important aspects of collaborative stewardship.

The Interior Columbia Basin Project's development of new scientific information at a broad level is matched by the federal agencies developing new relationships with state, tribal and county governments at an equally broad level. The Bureau of Land Management Resource Advisory Councils in the four states and the Provincial Advisory Committees from the areas overlapping the Northwest Forest Plan are also included. For the Forest Service, the results of this new approach mean sitting down at the same table with regulatory agencies, tribal, state and county governments, local managers, and citizens to take action in addressing the needs of the ecosystem. The use of science and new partnerships form the basis for this Project charting the course for the future of federal land management. This Project's open process allowed for mutual learning and sharing of information. This conference represents another step in that path.

It means utilizing new scientific information and looking at it from perspectives of different scales. These different scales translate to both area and time. Individual projects are developed in the context of the larger area that may be affected. The effects of land management, or lack of land management can also be assessed over a longer time period.

I also want to point out that this Project has developed the first consistent basin-wide scientific information. It will provide a template for data collection that could be used by all. Prior to this Project, consistent databases across the basin were scarce. We now have an interagency approach to support a common data standard for vegetation, aquatic, fisheries, and terrestrial components of the landscape. This will greatly improve our ability to understand these systems from a larger perspective. The comprehensive information compiled for this project will be invaluable for Federal land management across the Basin. The databases and models developed through this effort will be accessible to both public and private land managers for their use. This available information is another example of collaborative stewardship where information can be shared and provide a basis for problem solving.

Science and Management: A Renewed Partnership

I obviously speak with much confidence today. I also acknowledge that we are still in the middle of this process. The science is largely complete and published, or soon will be. The management documents, the two environmental impact statements (EISs), come next. We stand at an important juncture in the management of ecosystems within the Basin. And the people of this region and its resources stand to gain most from the use of this information. As we move into the EISs, the region needs to know the basis for the work. For now, I want to focus on what we did right and how we can use our success so far. There are five points to be made about this Project and the reliance on science, which I want to discuss:

1. Science as a foundation of professional land management;
2. Science as a way to develop more effective, efficient, and even creative management strategies;
3. Science as a means to help us focus our energy;
4. Science information as a more neutral forum;
5. The science information that we need to put to use.

1. Science should provide the foundation of professional land management.

Our standing as career professional resource managers is in part based on the fact that we are knowledgeable about how natural systems function, how people value and use these natural resources, what options exist for their management, and what the outcome of different management strategies will result.

Science information like that presented here will help us gain that knowledge and, in turn, help our standing in the eyes of the public as credible career professionals. Chief Dombeck recently acknowledged the Forest Service is challenged with regaining public trust in land management decisions due to controversies with past decisions. A science foundation to our future land management will go a long way to increasing public confidence in the Forest Service.

As resource issues become more contentious and controversial, there is the risk that decisions will be made based on other considerations rather than driven by professional land management. With science as a foundation, federal agency land managers will be in a stronger position to assert the needs of the ecosystems that we manage, and meet the needs of people. We land managers will be able to make decisions with more confidence because we now have the most current scientific information available. Our improved understanding of ecological relationships and partnerships with others will help when the tough decisions must be made.

If science serves as a foundation for management, what are some examples where this may be used? A principal science finding is that ecosystems are dynamic; they change over time and in different ways. Management therefore needs to have dynamic processes to deal with the changes across the landscape.

The science information provides an understanding of processes and functions, and interactions among components in the ecosystem. This leads to a need to manage for the whole and not just the parts. For example, forest and rangelands are more than just trees and grass, pounds of fish or acres of elk habitat. Ecosystems include people; we manage ecosystems to meet people's conflicting needs. Science can help in understanding the limits of ecosystems and how those ecosystems can provide goods and services to people with management that can restore and sustain ecosystems.

Science does not dictate or make decisions on land management, but it does provide important information for developing our land management strategies.

2. Science can be a means by which we develop more effective, efficient, and even creative management strategies.

Insights from this Columbia River Basin science will improve our ability to accomplish what we set out to achieve, and do it more effectively. Our ability to restore both forest and range health, and the watersheds can be realized through creative strategies that draw on the scientific information. For example, the science team developed information which displays opportunities for restoring both forests and watersheds which will protect and expand the strong populations of fish. Some areas with a need for forest health restoration may present little downside risk to native fish such as bulltrout because the watersheds also need restoration. These areas can be emphasized under a strategy that restores conditions with multiple objectives in mind. Other areas, where present forest health needs are less and where we have fish populations in strong condition, would be a lower priority for restoration.

The broadscale science also allows us to move forward with land management, learn more as we implement, and adjust our management as we go along. Efficiencies can be gained in coordinating monitoring and research on a broadscale. A more efficient monitoring program can replace current monitoring activities that occur as part of each administrative unit. Adaptive processes demand more of our science and our management. Strategies that employ active management will need attention to detail and a thorough understanding of resource interactions. We now have that information for the first time for a vast area.

3. Science is a means to help us focus our energy.

Variability of opportunities and risks across the Basin was a key finding from the science assessment, and this information helps us go where our energy is most productive.

Scientific and technical capabilities have increased our ability to implement the Forest Service viability standard. We have been able for some time to identify species at risk, factors affecting their decline, and at a fine scale how our land management would affect their persistence. But in following the direction that fish and wildlife habitat be managed to maintain viable populations of existing native and desired nonnative vertebrate species "in the planning area," we lacked useable information at the broad scale to determine species habitat needs, species ranges, and appropriate planning area definitions. Without basic scientific information compiled and analyzed in a useful format, it was extremely difficult to develop the management strategies that must have been envisioned by the authors of this regulation. We now have the broad scale science and the GIS technology to help managers make decisions that support vertebrate species will have continued existence, "well distributed in the planning area."

We have identified communities at risk because of a change in public land management. We can use that information to design a final strategy and schedule management activities in areas where it will have the greatest effect on local employment and income.

We are beginning to understand the tradeoffs of multiple risks and opportunities. For example, in the Blue Mountains there is a need to deal with fire/fuels issues, with an opportunity to produce some wood products. But there is also the need to protect some of the few remaining salmon strongholds within the Basin. One factor appears to compel action, while another may compel a hands-off approach. Yet, failure to act carries with it its own set of risks. The science information can focus our energy into situations where we examine both the short and long-term tradeoffs of various possible actions. Turning understanding into action remains a challenge, yet this science demonstrates that action can benefit not only the resources, but also the people who value the resources as well.

4. Science information can also provide a more neutral forum around which to bring competing interests rather than starting right out with a decision that is controversial.

Rather than taking issues and debating the issues in terms developed and used by advocates on differing sides, the science information can provide the factual basis for understanding the current situation and the tradeoffs of actions or inactions. Increasing people's knowledge can be a catalyst for creative problem solving. Knowledge in itself will not create solutions, but people working together with the knowledge can. We can use the science as a way to get people talking and collaborating on solutions.

Of course, while science can be presented in a seemingly neutral approach, one can argue that science is not without its own controversies. Carefully designed studies, peer review, and adequate time are necessary if we are to have science that is useful. Paid-for studies with results and conclusions known before the investigation is started will do little to provide the neutral forum that is so badly needed on many of these issues. Dialogue and forums are valuable means to mutual learning. With a common understanding of resource conditions, trends, and options, our learning should be enhanced.

5. The science information that will be highlighted here is extensive and insightful, but it is for nothing if you, the managers and the public, don't value it and use it in your personal evaluations and in your decision-making.

I would like to repeat the fact that the scientific information developed by this Project is the first consistent basin-wide database, which provides a template for interagency databases within the Basin. Use of this information by other agencies is already proceeding. States are struggling with water quality issues and meeting deadlines for developing assessments. The science information is being examined for its utility as a common basis for watershed and water quality conditions.

We stand at a critical juncture. The science is in hand and management decisions are pending. The transition into the next century for natural resources within the Basin will depend to a large extent on how the science information gets translated into decisions. The two Draft Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) will be issued later this spring, and they will rely heavily on the science that was developed as part of this project. If you are going to participate in the public involvement for the Draft EISs, I encourage you to understand and use this science information.

Conclusion

Let me conclude by noting again that on behalf of the Chief of the Forest Service, we see this Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project, and its strong scientific basis, as a flagship effort for federal land management. This important workshop will establish that science must serve as a foundation of professional land management. The science is a way to develop more effective, efficient, and even creative management strategies, and thus allow land managers to help focus our energy. Finally, the science information can serve as a more neutral forum for resolving land management issues. But that will not happen if the science information is not put to use.

Our Chief carries the unique distinction of seeing this project launched during his tenure as acting director of the Bureau of Land Management. He is now the Forest Service Chief as the Project moves to the stage of issuing new land management strategies. He also has a Ph. D. and as a fisheries scientist can appreciate the value of the information published by this Project to be presented at this workshop. He knows how important this Project is to both agencies, and that the lands we manage in the interior Columbia Basin for the people of the United States deserve to be looked after with care.