Development of a framework for understanding unsold timber offerings from the US National Forest System

Abstract

Timber sales from the US National Forest System (NFS) can provide ecological and economic benefits. Unsold (“no-bid”) offerings can result in delays, additional costs, and missed targets. We used mixed methods, including analysis of administrative data, synthesis of research, and semi-structured interviews to understand situations considered “no-bid” offerings by different stakeholders. We measured prevalence, identified causes, and generated a framework for communicating interlinkages. From 2007 to 2020, the volume not sold at first offering was 11.9% nationally. However, a substantial amount is sold subsequently, leaving 2.7% never sold. Regions with the highest percentage never sold include Alaska, Southwestern, and Pacific Southwest. A new conceptual framework developed from a literature review and interviews with NFS and industry employees identified proximate causes and underlying factors. Proximate causes include road construction, equipment requirements, and timber condition; whereas underlying factors include staffing, communication, and appraisal methods. These insights can aid communication and help develop future strategies.

Keywords:

• timber sales
• appraisal
• public land
• forest management

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), Forest Service, National Center for Natural Resource Economics Research, Southern Research Station, and National Forest System’s Directorate of Forest Management, Range Management, and Vegetation Ecology. It was implemented in part by an appointment to the United States Forest Service (USFS) Research Participation Program administered by the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE) through an interagency agreement between the US Department of Energy (DOE) and the USDA. ORISE is managed by ORAU under DOE contract number DE-SC0014664. The findings and conclusions in this publication are those of the author(s) and should not be construed to represent any official USDA, DOE, ORAU/ORISE, or other US Government determination or policy.

Many thanks to Mr. Ashton Hargrave, Dr. Charlie Blinn, and the journal’s anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on a previous version of this manuscript. Any remaining errors or omissions are the sole responsibility of the authors.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1 Multiple Use Sustained Yield Act, 16 U.S.C. § 528 (1960).

2 National Forest Management Act, 16 U.S.C. § 472a (1976).

3 USDA sets national targets for timber to be sold each year, and these targets are divided among the Regions and Forests.

4 Forest Service Organic Administration Act,16 U.S.C. § 475 (1897).

5 Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act, 16 U.S.C. § 1600 et seq. (1974).

6 National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. § 4321 et seq. (1970).

7 Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq. (1973)

8 Notably, litigation associated with protection of the Northern spotted owl under the Endangered Species Act , 16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq. (1973)

9 It is not clear which definition of “unsold” was used, as discussed below.

10 Timber sale administrators record information in TIM including volume of the timber sale, list price, sale price, year at which each Gate is completed, among others.