Resource Interactions 
Resource interactions have been the 
topic of much study and analysis since 
the passage of the Renewable 
Resources Planning Act of 1974. 
Although an obvious result of resource 
management, resource interactions are 
difficult to estimate for any large 
geographic area because they tend to be 
site specific and complex. 
Findings of this Assessment indicate 
that resource interactions will likely 
increase in the future as demands grow 
for all of the outputs of the forest and 
rangeland resource base. Although 
many interactions are positive or 
neutral in net effects, there are some 
negative ones that can constrain 
increases in supplies, especially when 
management of one resource exceeds 
the limit of tolerance and resilience of 
another. For example, roads necessary 
for timber production provide access 
for recreationists but may increase 
sedimentation if not properly contained 
through management practices to 
reduce or avoid erosion. 
Research in the South demonstrates 
that land use and timber management 
can alter land cover in ways that 
change habitats for many wildlife and 
fish species, water quality, and range 
forage output. At the present time, 
these research results are available only 
for the South, primarily because of lack 
of data regarding land-base 
descriptions and projections. This is the 
first time that changes in the forage, 
wildlife and fish, and water resources 
have been quantitatively linked to 
changes in timber volumes and land 
areas. 
The national forest plans provide 
another source of information about 
resource interactions. Analyses of these 
Nn 
bo 
data indicate that current levels of 
national forest outputs for timber, 
range, recreation, water, and wildlife 
and fish can be produced throughout 
the next 50 years at current levels of 
cost, with two exceptions: California, 
and to a lesser degree, the South. 
Increases of any of these outputs on 
national forests in any of the regions 
over time would require increased 
investment and operating funds. 
The analyses also indicate that if all 
outputs were to be increased 
simultaneously to approach 
Assessment demand projections, water 
quantity and wildlife habitat would 
tend to be negatively affected in the 
northern, eastern, and Rocky Mountain 
regions. Within the range of 
alternatives generated in the forest 
planning effort, it does not appear 
feasible for the National Forest System 
to maintain a constant proportion of all 
demands projected in this Assessment. 
To meet even part of the increase in 
demands simultaneously would 
generate substantial increases in both 
investments and operating costs. If 
these funds were to be made available, 
however, environmental impacts 
associated with increased outputs could 
largely be mitigated. 
Encouraging Renewable 
Resource Management in 
a Market Economy 
Just as there are many kinds of 
management and research opportunities 
to increase and extend the supply and 
to increase the quality of nearly all 
renewable resource products, there are 
also important obstacles to realization 
of these opportunities. Some are 
economic, some relate to lack of 
information, and some are based on 
existing policies and legislation. These 
obstacles must be recognized and 
managed if a greater proportion of the 
full potential of the forest and 
rangeland and inland-waters resources 
is to be realized. 
To bring about changes in the supplies 
of goods and services, the U.S. 
economy relies largely on a system of 
markets and prices. For example, we 
expect that the market system will 
bring forth some adjustments in 
minerals and in management of 
industry-owned timberland and private 
rangeland. Also, private-sector 
landowners may respond to market 
signals by creating opportunities for 
some forms of recreation. For some 
uses of renewable resources, however, 
the key to increasing supplies 
sufficiently and maintaining the quality 
of resource outputs is to facilitate 
improvements in the workings of 
markets. Another option is to have 
public market intervention when the 
market does not work well, as in the 
case of market externalities such as 
water pollution. 
There are four major reasons why 
supplies of some resources are not fully 
responsive to market forces: (1) 
management philosophies and 
priorities for public lands, (2) the broad 
societal nature of some resource- 
program outputs, (3) the lack of market 
prices for some resource products and 
uses, and (4) inadequate knowledge of 
resource-production opportunities. 
