The document summarizes a student capstone project analyzing the effectiveness of Washington state and federal forestry policies in mitigating erosion in state forests. The project examines how geology, erosion rates, and watershed health are impacted by clear-cutting versus untouched forests. While current policies require watershed analysis and road/harvesting guidelines, monitoring programs show room for improvement and balancing economic and environmental interests remains ongoing. The conclusion is that policies have helped mitigate slow erosion but more can be done to address landslides and incorporate geological data into analyses, monitoring, and informed policy decisions.

1. Forest Policy and
Soil Erosion in
Washington State Forests
By: Rebecca Barter
Environmental Studies Capstone
Spring 2014

2. Question
• How effective are state and federal
forestry policies in mitigating erosion in
Washington State forests?
Hypothesis
• The policies are effective
– Geology terminology
– Monitoring

3. Disciplines
• Geosciences
– Erosion: long term vs. short-term
– Water quality
• Political Science
– Washington State Code
– Language and action

4. Road Map
Background
Information
Historical
Context
Geology in a
Clear-Cut Forest
Informing
Policy
Conclusion

5. Terms
• Turbidity (NTUs)
– Suspended Sediment Concentration
– Clarity of the water
• Compaction
– Water storage
– Run off
(Ziemer 1981) (Mitchell and Stapp 2008)

6. Watershed Health
• Land stores and filters water
• Importance of trees and tree roots
– Stability
– Untouched vs. clear-cut
• Forestry impacts:
– Roads and timber harvesting
– Compaction, erosion, turbidity
(Ziemer 1981) (Mitchell and Stapp 2008)

7. Why it Matters
• December 2007
– Winter storm
– Upper Chehalis
Basin
– Weyerhaeuser
clear-cutting
– 1147 landslides
in 91mi2 area
– Contaminated
drinking water
(Stewart 2013) (Bernton and Mayo 2008)

8. Why it Matters
(Armstrong et al., 2014)
• March 2014
– Oso landslide
– Heavy rains
– Uncertain
connection
– Recent clear-
cutting in 2005
– Stillaguamish River

9. Historical Context
• Economic vs. Conservation interests
• 19th century policy - agriculture
• Policies to retain federal land
– Watershed health and conservation
• Peak harvest levels in 1920s
• Environmental policies in 60s and 70s
• Northwest Forest Plan – 1994
(Washington Forest Protection Agency) (Chiang and Reese)

10. Geology in Untouched Forest
• Low erosion rate
• 0.5ton/acre/year of sediment
• Surface litter cover, tree roots
• Disturbed  erosion rate increase by
several magnitudes
(Lal 1999)

11. Untouched Forest

12. British Columbia. Western Forest Products timber tenure clearcutting, Glditas Daqvu, May 2008. Photo: Ian McAllister
http://www.firstnations.eu/fisheries/heiltsuk-glditas_daqvu.htm

13. Clear-Cut Forest

14. Geology in Clear-Cut Forests
(Brown and Krygier, 1971)
• Long term erosion
• Suspended sediment concentrations
• Control
– Peak average of 194ppm
• Clear-cut
– Peak average of 640ppm
– 5 fold increase

15. Geology in Clear-Cut Forests
(Miller and Sias 1997)
• Short term erosion events
– Hazel landslide area
• Environmental Factors: clear-cutting
• Recharge of groundwater
– Increase in time-average recharge of 17% =
condition failure 26% of the time

16. Informing the Policy
• Washington State Code
– Forest Protection Rules
• Watershed analysis – levels 1 and 2
• Roads
– Construction and maintenance
– Outsloping, planting, culverts
– Turbidity
• Minimize erosion – long term
(Title 222 WAC)

17. Informing the Policy
• Timber Harvesting
– Exposed erodible soils, saturated soils
– Proximity to water
• Monitoring program for rate of timber
harvests
• DNR Compliance Rates for FPR
– 60-100% small forest landowners
– 89-93% industrial landowners
(Title 222 WAC) (Obermeyer and Shelly 2012)

18. Conclusion
• Was my hypothesis correct?
• Mitigating slow erosion
• Landslides
• Watershed health
• Overall: more can be done to mitigate
erosion in Washington State forests

19. Conclusion
• Language
– Roads; timber harvesting
– Less on turbidity; landslides
• Action
– Watershed analyses
– Is the information acknowledged?
– Uncertainty about monitoring programs
– DNR and excess clear cutting
(Bernton and Mayo, 2008)

20. Conclusion
(Washington State Department of Natural Resources: Forest Practices Protection 2014)

21. Conclusion
• Economic vs. environmental interests
– Still remain today
• Suggestions
– Include more geology terminology
• Turbidity, compaction, landslides
• Long term vs. short term erosion
– Realistic and feasible monitoring
programs
• Information from analyses and supervision

22. Questions?
Special Thanks to:
Dr. Claire Todd; Dr. Sid Olufs
Dr. Kevin O’Brien
499 Capstone Class