Texas Forest Ecosystem Services Valuation

1. Texas Forest Ecosystem Services Valuation

2. Forest Ecosystem Services Provisioning Services • Timber, wood fiber, fuel wood • Gas regulation and climate control • Carbon sequestration • Watershed services (water supply and quality) • Clean air • Soil stabilization and erosion control • Recreational opportunities • Aesthetic, cultural, and existence uses • Wildlife habitat and biodiversity • Soil formation Regulating Services Cultural Services Supporting Services

3. Forest Ecosystem Services (Why value?) • Most are traditionally viewed as free benefit to society, or “public good” • Overlooked or undervalued in decision-making Carbon Wildlife Timber values Soil Water Land values Cultural Values Air Decision Making

4. Objectives • Quantify and assess the values of the various non-market ecosystem services provided by the Texas forests • Compare the values of forest ecosystem services under various forest management scenarios

5. Scope All forest in Texas — 63 million acres of rural forestland (defined by FIA, public and private), and more than 1.2 million acres of urban forest

6. Scope • Types of non-market ecosystem services valued: • Carbon storage and sequestration • Water supply and filtration • Biodiversity and wildlife habitat • Cultural values • One time snap-shot

7. Valuation Framework Step 1. Specification the scope of the system to be valued Forest Ecosystem Step 2. Assessment of ecosystem services in bio-physical terms Provisioning Services Supporting Services Regulating Services Cultural Services Step 1. Specification the scope of the system to be valued Indirect Use Values Option Values Non-use Values Direct Use Values Step 3. Valuation using monetary terms Step 4. Aggregation of the values from various services Total Values

8. Methodology―Quantifying Ecosystem Services • Landscape classification (forest type, riparian status, watershed, biodiversity index…) • Multiple GIS layers Urban forest Canopy Biodiversity Hydrography, Watershed Forest Resource Analysis (FIA)

9. Methodology ―Valuing Ecosystem Services • Benefit transfer (adapting valuation estimates from previous studies to a similar area) • Original survey & econometric modeling (cultural value, asking Texans carefully designed questions to determine their willingness to pay for cultural value of the Texas forests)

10. Texas Forest Cultural Value Survey • Valuation question (Stated Choice Method): Suppose there was a ballot proposal that would result in changes in the area of forest coverage in Texas and additional costs to you in terms of higher wood products prices. Option A and B are possible alternatives, and Status-quo is the current situation. Given a choice between the three, how would you vote?

12. Comparison With Other Forest Impact Studies Note: Black-studies already done Red-Impacts will be estimated in the current study

13. Expected Results • Values of the various ecosystem services provided by the Texas forests and their aggregated value • Spatial distribution of the forest ecosystem services in Texas (GIS map) • Identify forest management scenarios that result in higher values of ecosystem services

14. Results Could Be Used to: • Raise awareness of the general public and policy makers about the importance of the Texas forests and encourage conservation of forests • Encourage decision makers to make better land use policy decisions by considering the total values of forests • Complement current economic impact report of the Texas forest sector for a more comprehensive assessment

15. Results Could Be Used to: • Identify “hot-spots” with high values of ecosystem services and encourage conservation • Encourage forest management practices that increase total values of the forests • Provide a more comprehensive assessment of the impacts of natural disasters

16. Results Could Be Used to: • Fire damage assessment Since Nov. 15, 2010, more than 4.0 million acres of forestland have been burned in Texas. • East Texas Within 4 days of fire containment, we were able to estimate the values of timber damaged and the total impacts in terms of the loss of potential forest products. Ecosystem services were addressed descriptively. • West Texas

17. Project Progress • Designed and conducted the survey on Texan’s opinion on forest ecosystem services • Mail survey (3,000) • Email survey (75,000) • 376 returned so far by mail • Estimated carbon stock and sequestration by the Texas forests, assessed the values • Estimated water originated from the Texas forests and their values • Estimated values of water filtration by the forests

18. Project Progress • Working on estimating values of wildlife habitat and biodiversity Texas Ecological Assessment Protocol (TEAP) by TPWD and EPA • Working on estimating value of urban forests Nowak (2010), USFS Northern Research Station, i-Tree model

19. Team Member Texas Forest Service: • Burl Carraway (Department Head) • Yanshu Li (Forest Economist) • Chris Edgar (Resource Specialist) • Brad Barber (GIS Manager) Texas A&M AgriLife: • Eric Taylor (Associate Professor, Forestry)