Land Use Change on Non-Federal Land in Oregon and Washington

Similar documents
Participation. Workers Compensation Insurance Seminar. May 22, Nick Beleiciks

ADOT Statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Program Summary of Phase IV Activities APPENDIX B PEDESTRIAN DEMAND INDEX

The Blue Heron Slough Conservation Bank

Deer Management Unit 255

Deer Management Unit 252

How Policy Drives Mode Choice in Children s Transportation to School

DMU 005 Antrim County Deer Management Unit

Deer Management Unit 122

Northwest Parkland-Prairie Deer Goal Setting Block G7 Landowner and Hunter Survey Results

Florida Seagrass Integrated Mapping and Monitoring Program

Big Game Survey Results

Sport Fishing Expenditures and Economic Impacts on Public Lands in Oregon

Deer Management Unit 249

2015 Florida Black Bear Hunt Summary Report

SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS COMPANY COLUMBIA, SOUTH CAROLINA

Managing Chesapeake Bay s Land Use, Fish Habitat, and Fisheries: Studies. Jim Uphoff & Margaret McGinty, Fisheries Service

REPORT OF THE ENGINEERING & PLANNING DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION

Demographic and Economic Trends in the Tri-State Region

Tulsa Metropolitan Area LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

5/DMU 069 Otsego County Deer Management Unit

Evan Johnson, Tindale Oliver & Associates. Alan Danaher, P.E., PTOE, AICP, PTP

Deer Management Unit 152

DMU 057 Missaukee County Deer Management Unit

DMU 024 Emmet County Deer Management Unit

Introduction to Pennsylvania s Deer Management Program. Christopher S. Rosenberry Deer and Elk Section Bureau of Wildlife Management

Accounting for Growth: Policy Implications for the Partnership

DMU 006 Arenac County Deer Management Unit

Minnesota Deer Population Goals

Deer Management Unit 349

Central Hills Prairie Deer Goal Setting Block G9 Landowner and Hunter Survey Results

Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations APPENDIX C TRANSIT STATION ACCESS PLANNING TOOL INSTRUCTIONS

Minnesota Deer Population Goals. Sand Plain Big Woods Goal Block

2019 Annual Recalculation and Reappraisal Setup Studies for All Residential Properties in Columbia County for Property Tax Assessment

Teton County Related Hunting and Fishing Spending, For the Wyoming Wildlife Federation. David T. Taylor & Thomas Foulke

DMU 008 Barry County Deer Management Unit

2010 Wildlife Management Unit 501 moose and deer

Arterial Management Plan for US Route 250 and State Route 623

Pedestrian Demand Modeling: Evaluating Pedestrian Risk Exposures

DMU 452 Northern Multi-County Deer Management Unit

Rochester Area Bike Sharing Program Study

Cleve Gaddis Gaddis Partners, RE/MAX Center & USA Management

Agenda Item Summary BACKGROUND. Public Involvement ISSUE ANALYSIS. Attachment 1

Kentucky s Surface Transportation System

White-tailed Deer Age Report from the Deer Harvest

Summary report on all harvested species on Patuxent Research Refuge from September 1 - January 31, 2017 Deer Harvest

Rural Ontario s Hidden Sector: The Economic Importance of the Horse Industry Final Report

MINNESOTA GROUSE AND HARES, John Erb, Forest Wildlife Populations and Research Group DNR, Grand Rapids, MN 55744

Note: You do not need to be a Wisconsin landowner; we ll consider any woodland owner in the Midwest region.

2017 DEER HUNTING FORECAST

The Role and Economic Importance of Private Lands in Providing Habitat for Wyoming s Big Game

Progress Table GreenStep HIA Best Practices

METHODOLOGY. Signalized Intersection Average Control Delay (sec/veh)

LAKE BLUFF PARK DISTRICT BLAIR PARK SWIMMING POOL Questions and Answers OVERVIEW

Regional Planning & Tracking our Progress: Lessons from the Highlands

11 th Annual Oregon Economic Forum!

Mill Creek/Rose Valley Watershed General Information Presented by Dr. Mel Zimmerman Lycoming College CWI

DMU 082 Wayne County Deer Management Unit

TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE TOWN OF THOMPSON S STATION, TENNESSEE PREPARED FOR: THE TOWN OF THOMPSON S STATION

Northwest Economic Research Center College of Urban and Public Affairs Forecast Breakfast Economic Outlook

DMU 053 Mason County Deer Management Unit

make people aware of the department s actions for improving the deer population monitoring system,

WALKNBIKE DRAFT PLAN NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE

DMU 056 Midland County Deer Management Unit

Spatial Patterns / relationships. Model / Predict

Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan

Town of Whitby Official Plan Review OVERVIEW

Speed Limits in the Hoddle Grid

Resident Outdoor Recreation for Fremont County, WY July 1999

DMU 073 Saginaw County Deer Management Unit

Traffic Impact Analysis Walton Acres at Riverwood Athletic Club Clayton, NC

Perspectives of a State Director Selective fisheries as a tool in fisheries management and salmon recovery

PUBLIC OPINION STRATEGIES

AUDIT U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM GRANTS

Sport Fishing Expenditures and Economic Impacts on Public Lands in Washington

tattersall park RBY EBSCO RETAIL PROPERTIES

July 24, Kalispel Tribe of Indians Update on Efforts to Suppress Northern Pike and Policy Implications

2009 Master Plan & Reexamination Report Verona, New Jersey

CORRESPONDENCE/MEMORANDUM

DMU 045 Leelanau County Deer Management Unit

RANDWICK CITY COUNCIL Residential Discussion Paper SUMMARY DOCUMENT

Outmigration and the Changing Economy of the Great Plains

DMU 047 Livingston County Deer Management Unit

INDIANA UTILITY DEMAND & RATES FORECAST

CITY OF COCOA BEACH 2025 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. Section VIII Mobility Element Goals, Objectives, and Policies

Performance Measure Summary - San Jose CA. Performance Measures and Definition of Terms

Performance Measure Summary - Chicago IL-IN. Performance Measures and Definition of Terms

Performance Measure Summary - Denver-Aurora CO. Performance Measures and Definition of Terms

REMOVE BARRIERS TO, ENCOURAGE CREATION OF AND PROVIDE GUIDELINES FOR SAFE ROUTES (ALL DISTRICTS)

Colorado Economic Update

Know Your River Conwy Salmon & Sea Trout Catchment Summary

SMART 1 Public Meeting #1. February 24, 2016

2005 Arkansas Nongame Wildlife Conservation Survey

ROCKWALL CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT

DMU 038 Jackson County

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 3: EXISTING CONDITIONS ANALYSIS FOR THE VILLAGE GREEN MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT

Monitoring Population Trends of White-tailed Deer in Minnesota Marrett Grund, Farmland Wildlife Populations and Research Group

Traffic Impact Study. Westlake Elementary School Westlake, Ohio. TMS Engineers, Inc. June 5, 2017

NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE STATEWIDE FISHERIES MANAGEMENT FEDERAL AID JOB PROGRESS REPORTS F EUREKA COUNTY Small Lakes and Reservoirs

The Impact of TennCare: A Survey of Recipients 2006

Stronghold Investment Partnership Basin Liaisons 2009

Transcription:

Land Use Change on Non-Federal Land in Oregon and Washington 1974-2014 Presented at: Forest Inventory and Analysis Client Meeting Mt. Hood Community College, October 11, 2017

Background The Development Zone Project ( Dzone ) is an ongoing study of land use change on non-federal land in Oregon (since 1974) and Washington (since 1976) Dzone uses FIA aerial photo point and plot locations as sample points for collecting data on land use type and structure density Project years: Oregon 1974, 1984, 1994, 2000, 2005, 2009, 2014 Washington 1976, 1994, 2006, 2013

Some Key Questions How have land use patterns varied as population has increased? Oregon s population increased by 1,690,000 between 1974 and 2014 (74% gain) Washington s population increased by 3,247,000 between 1976 and 2013 (89% gain) How have land use patterns changed since the implementation of comprehensive statewide land use planning? Oregon s Land Conservation and Development Act of 1973 (fully implemented by mid 1980s) Washington s Growth Management Act of 1990 (largely implemented by mid 1990s) How have land use trends been impacted by the Great Recession and subsequent recovery?

Methods Aerial imagery is interpreted at each sample point, for each Dzone year Oregon 37,775 sample points Washington 44,554 sample points Each sample point is assigned to one of eight land use classes Structures are counted within an 80-acre circular buffer around each sample point Use of the same methodology for all dates allows for consistent evaluation of change since the 1970s

Land Use Classes Resource uses Wildland forest Wildland range Mixed forest/agriculture Mixed range/agriculture Intensive agriculture Developed uses Low-density residential Urban Other (sand, water, bare rock, etc.)

Land Use Class Examples

Land Use Class Examples

Structure Count Example: 2005

Structure Count Example: 2009

Structure Count Example: 2014

Structure Count Example: 2005

Structure Count Example: 2009

Structure Count Example: 2014

Current Land Use (Oregon 2014, Washington 2013)

Land Use Change (Oregon 1974-2014, Washington 1976-2013)

Non-Federal Land Remaining in Resource Uses (Oregon 1974 2014, Washington 1976 2013) Oregon Washington 100% 95% Percentage of Land Remaining 90% 85% 80% 75% 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014

Non-Federal Land Remaining in Resource Uses (Oregon 1974 2014, Washington 1976 2013) West Side East Side Oregon Washington Oregon Washington 100% 100% 98% 98% Percentage of Land Remaining 96% 94% 92% 90% 88% 86% 84% Percentage of Land Remaining 96% 94% 92% 90% 88% 86% 84% 82% 82% 80% 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 80% 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014

Non-Federal Land Remaining in Wildland Forest Use (Oregon 1974 2014, Washington 1976 2013) Oregon Washington 100% 95% Percentage of Land Remaining 90% 85% 80% 75% 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014

Change in Area of Non-Federal Land in Wildland Forest Use, By Owner Type (Oregon 1974 2014, Washington 1976 2013) Forest industry Other private Non-Federal public All non-federal owners Change, in percent Oregon 0% -7% -1% -2% Western Oregon 0% -10% -1% -3% Eastern Oregon 0% -4% 0% -1% Washington -1% -11% -1% -5% Western Washington -1% -24% -1% -7% Eastern Washington -1% -4% -1% -3%

Non-Federal Land Remaining in Intensive Agriculture Use (Oregon 1974 2014, Washington 1976 2013) Oregon Washington 100% 95% Percentage of Land Remaining 90% 85% 80% 75%

Average Area of Non-Federal Land Changing from Resource to Developed Uses, per New Resident (Oregon 1974 2014, Washington 1976 2013) 1.00 0.90 0.80 0.70 0.60 Oregon Washington Acres 0.50 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 1974-1984 1984-1994 1994-2005 2005-2009 2009-2014 1976-1994 1994-2006 2006-2013

Non-Federal Land Remaining in Wildland Forest Use with Less Than 10 Residents per Square Mile (Oregon 1974 2014, Washington 1976 2013) Oregon Washington 100% 98% 96% Percentage of Land Remaining 94% 92% 90% 88% 86% 84% 82% 80%

Structures per Square Mile on Non-Federal Land in Resource Uses, Oregon 1974-2014

Structures per Square Mile on Non-Federal Land in Wildland Forest Use, by Ownership Class, Oregon 1974-2014

New Structures on Private Land in Wildland Forest Use, by Distance to More Developed Uses, Oregon 2005-2014

Net Average Annual Conversion of Private Land from Resource Uses to More Developed Uses, Before and After Implementation of Land Use Plans 0.18% 0.16% Oregon Washington Net Average Annual Loss of Privately- Owned Resource Land (percent) 0.14% 0.12% 0.10% 0.08% 0.06% 0.04% 0.02% 0.00% 1974-1984 1984-1994 1976-1994 1994-2006

Net Average Annual Conversion of Private Land from Resource Uses to More Developed Uses, Before and After the Great Recession 0.18% 0.16% Oregon Washington Net Average Annual Loss of Privately- Owned Resource Land (percent) 0.14% 0.12% 0.10% 0.08% 0.06% 0.04% 0.02% 0.00% 1994-2009 2009-2014 1994-2006 2006-2013

Ongoing Work: Land Use and Water Quality 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Sample Points within Forested Land Use Sample Points within Non-Forested Land Use Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor Average Oregon Water Quality Index Condition (Water Year 2014)

Where to Find More Information Forests, Farms and People: Land Use Change on Non-Federal Land in Oregon, 1974-2014 (Lettman et al., 2016) Available at: http://inr.oregonstate.edu/biblio/forests-farms-people-land-use-change-non-federal-land-oregon- 1974-2014 Changes in Land Use and Housing on Resource Lands in Washington State, 1976-2006 (Gray et al., 2013) Available at: https://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/pnw_gtr881.pdf Coming soon: Land Use Change on Non-Federal Land in Oregon and Washington: 2017 Update Contact: Dan Hubner, dhubner@fs.fed.us