Tables

This is TABLE A. EXAMPLES OF NATIONAL FORESTS AND NATIONAL GRASSLANDS INTEGRATING ES INTO THEIR PLANNING Don’t know where it should go

Forest or Project
Nez Pearce-Clearwater National Forest‚ Idaho Early Adopter
Chugach National Forest‚ Alaska Early Adopter
Cibola National Forest‚ New Mexico Early Adopter
El Yunque National Forest‚ Puerto Rico Early Adopter
Inyo‚ Sequoia‚ and Sierra National Forests‚ California Early Adopter
Francis Marion Forest‚ South Carolina Mid Adopter
Nantahala and Pisgah National Forests‚ North Carolina Mid Adopter

This is TABLE B. NATIONAL FORESTS AND NATIONAL GRASSLANDS INTEGRATING ES AT THE PROJECT LEVEL Don’t know where it should go

Forest or Project
Marsh Project‚ Deschutes National Forest‚ Oregon
Cool Soda Project‚ Willamette National Forest‚ Oregon

Table 1. An example of an alternatives matrix (or decision table) for 2 management alternatives affecting 4 services.

Status Quo/BAU Alternative A Alternative B
Service 1
Service 2
Service 3
Service 4

MDCA Slide4

Alternative actions
Measures Status quo Downstream dam Upstream release
Number of bird 1 (breeding pairs on forest) 200 220 205
Wildlife viewing at walkway site (qualitative scale) One iconic sp < 5 One iconis sp < 5‚ one > 5 Both > 5
Flood Events (annual average) 0.2 0.15 0.2
Implementation cost ($MM NPV) 0.1 1.0 0.8

MDCA Slide7

Measures Status quo Downstream dam Upstream release
Number of bird 1 (breeding pairs on forest) 200 (0) 220 (1) 205 (0.25)
Wildlife viewing at walkway site (qualitative scale) One iconic sp < 5 (0.14) One iconis sp < 5‚ one > 5 (0.86) Both > 5 (1)
Flood Events (annual average) 0.2 (0) 0.15 (0.8) 0.2 (0)
Cost ($MM NPV) 0.1 (1) 1.0 (0) 0.8 (0.6)

MDCA Slide9

Alternatives
Measures (weights) Status quo Downstream dam Upstream release
Number of bird 1 (breeding pairs on forest) (w = 0.11) 200 (0) 220 (1) 205 (0.25)
Wildlife viewing at walkway site (qualitative scale) (w = 0.06) One iconic sp < 5 (0.14) One iconis sp < 5‚ one > 5 (0.86) Both > 5 (1)
Flood Events (annual average) (w = 0.28) 0.2 (0) 0.15 (0.18) 0.2 (0)
Cost ($MM NPV) (w = 0.55) 0.1 (1) 1.0 (0) 0.8 (0.6)
Overall value 0.56 0.39 0.42

MDCA Slide11 – Table 4bb

Category Ratio Points Relative Satisfaction
Neither 10 0
One‚ < 5 2x 20 0.14
One‚ ≥ 5 2.5x 25 0.21
Both < 5 5x 50 0.57
One < 5‚ other ≥ 5 7x 70 0.86
Both ≥ 5 8x 80 1

MDCA Slide12 – Table 4dd

Measure (units) Range Rank Ratio Weight
Cost 0.1-1.0 1 10 0.55
Bird 1 (pairs) 100-220 3 2 0.11
Flood events (ave #/yr) 0.15-0.2 2 5 0.28
Viewing (index) One < 5 – both > 5 4 1 0.06

MeansEnds – Slide2

Potential management alternatives
ALT. 1
Mechanical Thinning
(Site A – Lowland)		 ALT. 2
Prescribed Burning
(Site A – Lowland)		 ALT. 3
Mechanical Thinning
(Site B – Upland)		 ALT. 4
Prescribed Burning
(Site B – Upland)		 ALT. 5
Chemical Cheatgrass Removal
(Site C)		 ALT. 6
Chemical Cheatgrass Removal
(Site D)
Desired Ecological Condition
& Ecosystem Service		 Fuel conditions result in a low threat to community √ √ √ √
Visibility and healthy air maintained √ √ √ √ √ √
Desired Ecological Condition (identified by managers) Riparian areas resilient to fire √ √
Ecosystem Service
(identified by community)		 Hunting/wildlife watching opportunities improved √ √
Hiking/camping opportunities maintained √ √ √
Timber harvest sustained √ √
Habitats/species protected √ √ √ √ √ √

MeansEnds – Slide12

Ecosystem Services Mechanical Thinining (Lowland) Mechanical Thinning (Upland)
Respiratory Health + +
Commuter Visibility + +
Fire Risk Reduction + +
Climate Stability + +
Timber + +
Hiking + +
Camping + +
Recreational Hunting +/- +/-
Wildlife Watching +/- +/-
Biodiversity Existence ++ +
Boating + +
Fishing - N/A

+ Positive impact on service
– Negative impact on service
+/- Positive or negative impact on service

MeansEnds – Slide13

Ecosystem Services Mechanical Thinining (Lowland) Prescribed Burning (Lowland)
Respiratory Health + +
Commuter Visibility + +
Fire Risk Reduction + +
Climate Stability + +
Timber + N/A
Hiking + +
Camping + +
Recreational Hunting +/- +/-
Wildlife Watching +/- +/-
Biodiversity Existence +/- +/-
Boating + +
Fishing - –

+ Positive impact on service
– Negative impact on service
+/- Positive or negative impact on service

Additional MeansEnds – Slide?

Ecosystem Services Mechanical Thinining (Upland) Mechanical Thinining (Lowland) Prescribed Burning (Lowland)
Respiratory Health + + +
Commuter Visibility + + +
Fire Risk Reduction + + +
Climate Stability + + +
Timber + + N/A
Hiking + + +
Camping + + +
Recreational Hunting +/- +/- +/-
Wildlife Watching +/- +/- +/-
Biodiversity Existence + ++ ++
Boating + + +
Fishing N/A - –

+ Positive impact on service
– Negative impact on service
+/- Positive or negative impact on service

Overview – Slide 9

Alternative management actions
Ecosystem services Status quo Mechanical thinning Prescribed Burning
Fire-risk reduction
Wildlife-related recreation
Water yield
Cost
Alternative management actions
Ecosystem services Status quo Mechanical thinning Prescribed Burning
Fire-risk reduction These cells are populated with some measure of the expected change in service and,
when possible, a weight or value indicating the importance of that change to stakeholders.
Wildlife-related recreation
Water yield
Cost These cells are populated with the direct or opportunity costs of each alternative.

WayPoints – Slide 1
Table 1 Empty matrix based on the Eco Forest Scenario

Alternative management actions
Ecosystem services Status quo Downstream dam Upstream Release
Protection of at-risk species
Wildlife Watching
Flood risk reduction
Cost
Alternative management actions
Ecosystem services Status quo Downstream dam Upstream Release
Protection of at-risk species Each of these cells are populated with some measure of the expected change in service provided and
where possible these are subsequeltly updated with measures indicating benefit to people.
Wildlife Watching
Flood risk reduction
Cost These cells are populated with the costs for each alternative.

WayPoints – Slide 2
Table 2 Qualitative ecological data/ no data on social preferences

Alternative management actions
Ecosystem services Status quo Downstream dam Upstream Release
Protection of at-risk species 0 ++ +
Wildlife Watching 0 + ++
Flood risk reduction 0 + 0

WayPoints – Slide 3
Table 3 Quantitative ecological data (E)/ no data on social preference

Alternative management actions
Ecosystem services Status quo Downstream dam Upstream Release
E ΔE E ΔE E ΔE
Protection of at-risk species 200 breeding bird pairs in forest 0 220 breeding bird pairs in forest +20 breeding bird pairs 205 breeding bird pairs in forest +5 breeding bird pairs
Wildlife Watching 1 iconic species seen < 5 times 0 1 iconic species seen < 5 times‚ 1 seen > 5 +1 iconic species seen > 5 times Both iconic species seen > 5 times +1 iconic species seen > 5 times‚ > number of sightings of other iconic species
Flood risk reduction 2 flood events per decade on average 0 1.5 flood events per decade on average 25% fewer flood events per decade 2 flood events per decade on average 0

WayPoints – Slide 4
Table 3 Quanlitative or quantitative ecological data (E)/ qualitative social date (S)

Alternative management actions
Ecosystem services Status quo Downstream dam Upstream Release
E S ΔE S ΔE S
Protection of at-risk species 200 breeding bird pairs in forest Pretty good +20 breeding bird pairs better +5 breeding bird pairs A little bit better
Wildlife Watching 1 iconic species seen < 5 times fair +1 iconic species seen > 5 times Nice improvement +1 iconic species seen > 5 times‚ > number of sightings of other iconic species Could add sig. value, bring in more visitors
Flood risk reduction 2 flood events per decade on average Significant problem 25% fewer flood events per decade Very helpful 0 Still significant problem

WayPoints – Slide 5
Table 5a Qualitative ecological data/ quantitative social preferences (MCDA)

Alternative management actions
Status quo Downstream dam Upstream Release
Protection of at-risk species Numbers of breeding pairs (weight) 200 (0) 220 (1) 205 (0.25)
Wildlife viewing at walkway site Qualitative # sightings/species (weight) One iconic sp < 5 (0.14) One iconic sp < 5‚ one > 5 (0.86) Both > 5
Flood risk reduction Flood events/yr (weight) 0.2 (0) 0.15 (0.8) 0.2 (0)

WayPoints – Slide 6
Table 5b Quantitative ecological data/ quantitative social preferences (monetization)

Alternative management actions
Ecosystem Services Downstream dam Upstream Release
Protection of at-risk species $120k $30k
Wildlife watching $8.5k $10k
Flood risk reduction $750k $0

MCDA Slide 5 – Relative Satisfaction/# breeding pairs of Bird 1

MCDA Slide 6 – Relative Satisfaction/10 year average of annual risk of flood

— Upstream Landowners
— Downstream Landowners

MCDA Slide 6 – Relative Satisfaction/Dollars Gained

— Risk Prone
— Neutral
— Risk Adverse

MCDA Slide 8 – Cumlative weight

• Cost
• Breeding Pairs
• Flooding
• Bird Viewing

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

Monetary_Slide1

Valuation Method Description Examples of Ecosystem Services Valued
Market Valuationa Market Analysis and Transactions Derives value from household’s or firm’s inverse demand function based on observations of use Fish
Timber
Water
Other raw goods
Production Function Derives value based on the contribution of an ecosystem to the production of marketed goods Crop production (contributions from pollination, natural pest control)
Fish production (contributions from wetlands, seagrass, coral)
Revealed Preferences Hedonic Price Method Derives an implicit value for an ecosystem services from market prices of goods Aesthetics (from air and water quality, natural lands)
Health benefits (from air quality)
Recreation Demand Methods Derives an implicit value of an on-site activity based on observed travel behavior Recreation value (contributions from:
Water quality and quantity
Fish and bird communities
Landscape configuration
Air quality)
Defensive and Damage Costs Avoidedb Damage Costs Avoided Value is inferred from the direct and indirect expenses incurred as a result of damage to the built environment or to people. Flood protection (costs of rebuilding homes)
Health and safety benefits (treatment costs)
Averting Behavior / Defensive Expenditures Value is inferred from costs and expenditures incurred in mitigating or avoiding damages Health and safety benefits (e.g., cost of an installed air filtration system suggests a minimum willingness-to-pay to avoid discomfort or illness from polluted air)
Replacement / Restoration Cost Value is inferred from potential expenditures incurred from replacing or restoring an ecosystem services. Drinking water quality (treatment costs avoided)
Fire management
Public Pricing Public investment serves as a surrogate for market transactions (e.g., government money spent on purchasing easements). Non-use values (species and ecosystem protection)
Open space
Recreation
Stated Preference Contingent Valuation (open-ended and discrete choice) Creates a hypothetical market by asking survey respondents to state their willingness-to-pay or willingness-to-accept payment for an outcome (open-ended), or by asking them whether they would vote for or choose particular actions or policies with given outcomes and costs (discrete choice). Non-use values (species and ecosystem protection), Recreation
Aesthetics
Choice Modeling / Experiments Creates a hypothetical market by asking survey respondents to choose among multi-attribute bundles of goods with associated costs and derives value using statistical models. Non-use values (species and ecosystem protection), Recreation
Aesthetics
‚