Table 8.1 — Multiresource interactions in the Southeast resulting from meeting projected timber 



and range grazing demands 



Item 



Units 



1977 



1985 



1995 



Projected demands:' 











Softwood timber 



Billion cubic feet 



— 



2.42 



3.06 



Hardwood timber 



Billion cubic feet 



— 



1.01 



1.35 



Range grazing 



Million animal unit months 



— 



18.10 



21.50 



Resource use and environmental 











effects: 











Dispersed recreation use 



Percent change from 1977 



— 



10.1 



-4.0 



Herbage and browse 



Percent change from 1977 



— 



6.0 



16.0 



Wild ruminant grazing 



Percent change from 1977 



— 



-0.3 



2.0 



Water yield 



Percent change from 1977 



— 



0.4 



1.0 



Sediment 



Percent change from 1977 



— 



89.0 



116.0 



Storm runoff 



Percent change from 1977 



— 



0.3 



0.1 



Intensity of land resource used: 











National Forest lands:' 











Extensive use^ 



Percent of area 



89 



77 



72 



Intensive use^ 



Percent of area 



11 



23 



28 



Other Federal lands: 











Extensive use^ 



Percent of area 



98 



91 



89 



Intensive use^ 



Percent of area 



2 



9 



11 



Sfafe and private lands: 











Extensive use^ 



Percent of area 



78 



70 



65 



Intensive use^ 



Percent of area 



22 



30 



35 



Land resource use cost for 











all owners 



Millions of dollars 



— 



647.4 



985.1 



Marginal cost softwood timber 



Dollars per cubic foot 



— 



.16 



.24 



Marginal cost range grazing 



Dollars per animal unit month 



— 



9.85 



10.52 



'Projected demands as shown in the review draft of this study. 



'In this multiresource interaction analysis, the areas recommended for wilder- 

 ness or further planning by the RARE II process were considered wilderness. 



'The land resource use is said to be intensive if one or more of the timber, range, 

 or wildlife activities of the resource management options are intensive. Timber 

 activities are defined as intensive if intermediate treatments between regeneration 



and harvesting are conducted. Range activities are defined as intensive if prac- 

 tices, mainly species conversion, are made to maximize livestock forage pro- 

 duction. Wildlife activities are defined as intensive if vegetative manipulation 

 practices are undertaken to improve wildlife habitat. If none of the three activities 

 are intensive, the use is considered extensive. 



of the land base. Range grazing's marginal cost 

 increases in 1995 in response to the associated 

 increase in range demands. 



Northeast. — The allocated demands for timber and 

 range grazing in the Northeast are relatively small, 

 and thus competition among the various resource 

 uses is minimal. 



The only substantial change occurs in herbage 

 and browse, which rises above the 1977 value by 

 46 percent in 1995. This increasing trend for herbage 

 and browse is in line with the rising range grazing 

 demand levels and stable wild ruminant grazing 

 levels. 



Because of the slight increases in demands for 

 timber and range grazing, the intensity of land use 

 remains almost unchanged from base year levels. 

 A slight increase in intensive use occurs on State and 

 private lands, indicating that most of the demand 

 increases will be met on these lands. 



The marginal cost of timber remains unchanged 

 throughout the projection period. This indicates that 

 although timber demands increase, they remain well 

 below the maximum timber production capability 

 of the land base. However, the range grazing marginal 

 costs show a fast climb. These large increases in 

 marginal cost that result from small demand increases 

 indicate that the range grazing demand may be nearing 

 the maximum production capability of the Northeast. 



Rocky Mountains-Great Plains. — The allocated 

 timber demands on the Rocky Mountain/ Great 

 Plains regions rise less than range grazing demands. 

 Therefore, range grazing increases have the greater 

 impact on supply of dispersed recreation and other 

 environmental effects. In addition to meeting the 

 1985 and 1995 timber and range grazing demands, 

 the Rocky Mountain region is capable of increasing 

 dispersed recreation use by 18 percent and wild 

 ruminant grazing by 21 percent in 1995. There are 



324 



