underfunding of the recurring program and reverses the trend of declining ratio of recurring funding to project funding. This is in the right direction, but still falls short of equity for tribal versus federal forests. One indicator of the impact of inadequate forestry funding is revenue potentially lost to tribes due to inability to offer the entire volume in the allowable annual cut (AAC). This potential lost revenue, about $400 million between 2010-2019 (see Table A.5 and Task F), can be estimated by multiplying the difference between the tribal AAC summed regionally minus the volume offered for sale summed regionally times the average stumpage price for the BIA region. This assumes the timber not offered was (1) of equal stumpage value to the timber offered, (2) that stumpage value the tribe would have received in that year was the same as the price for the sold volume, (3) that the additional supply would not have affected the stumpage price, (4) that the volume not offered for sale could not be captured in later years, and (5) that the tribe wanted to harvest the entire allowable cut (see Task F). This direct loss of revenue affects tribal services, forest-related employment, and the indirect economic activity generated by timber harvest. Other impacts of not harvesting the AAC are reduced forest resilience including heightened risk of mortality from drought and wildfire, and delayed or reduced potential growth from either regenerated stands or thinned stands. The large areas of Indian Country burned over the last decade highlight risks of not meeting the AAC.
Figure A.4. Recurring and non-recurring funding for the BIA Forestry Program (USDI Greenbook, various years) excluding hazardous fuel reduction funding and adjusted for inflation to 2020 using the Consumer Price Index.
ϭϬ͕ϬϬϬ ϭϱ͕ϬϬϬ ϮϬ͕ϬϬϬ Ϯϱ͕ϬϬϬ ϯϬ͕ϬϬϬ ϯϱ͕ϬϬϬ ϭϬ͕ϬϬϬ ϭϱ͕ϬϬϬ ϮϬ͕ϬϬϬ Ϯϱ͕ϬϬϬ ϯϬ͕ϬϬϬ ϯϱ͕ϬϬϬ
Ϭ ϱ͕ϬϬϬ Ϭ ϱ͕ϬϬϬ
ϮϬϬϰ ϮϬϬϲ ϮϬϬϴ ϮϬϭϬ ϮϬϭϮ ϮϬϭϰ ϮϬϭϲ ϮϬϭϴ ϮϬϮϬ ϮϬϮϮ ZĞĐƵƌƌŝŶŐ EŽŶZĞĐƵƌƌŝŶŐ ϮϬϬϰ ϮϬϬϲ ϮϬϬϴ ϮϬϭϬ ϮϬϭϮ ϮϬϭϰ ϮϬϭϲ ϮϬϭϴ ϮϬϮϬ ϮϬϮϮ ZĞĐƵƌƌŝŶŐ EŽŶZĞĐƵƌƌŝŶŐ
Figure A.5. Estimated potential value from missed sale offerings summed over all BIA Regions (nominal dollars)
ϳϬ
ϲϬ
ϱϬ
ϰϬ
ϯϬ
ϮϬ
ϭϬ
Ϭ
ZĞŐŝŽŶĂůdŽƚĂů
as tribes bring additional forest land into trust, often because of adjudication of existing land claims, purchases of private lands within the reservation boundaries, and as additional tribes develop forestry programs. The decline in recurring funding has put pressure on tribal forestry organizations to reduce staff, to substitute technicians for forestry professionals, and, in some cases, positions have not been replaced in order to provide cost of living adjustments to remaining staff (see Task C).
The recent Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (2021)
provided significant resources to offset investments in hazardous fuel reduction in green timber sales. One likely contribution to the slow implementation of that program is lack of staff capacity due to inadequate recurring funding. The House of Representatives proposed 2023 funding (July 2022), that increases recurring funding to $36 million and project funding to $33 million, appears to recognize the severe
60 Assessment of Indian Forests and Forest Management in the United States
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator