By Matt Greene October 30, 2013

1. A Snapshot of Northern Spotted Owl Data on Small Non Industrial Landowners Presentation to the Department of Fish and Wildlife and California Forestry Association By Matt Greene October 30, 2013

2. Summary of Participation • Consulting RPF’s/Consulting Firms were asked a series of 7 questions to assess NSO populations and possible problems. • 14 RPFs from Humboldt, Mendocino, and Sonoma Counties responded to the request from Forest Landowners of California (FLC) and the California Licensed Foresters Association (CLFA). • Ownerships were small family forest (as small as 11 acres) and larger ranches up to 16,000 acres. • All lands are managed under selection silviculture, most under NTMPs except those that exceed the maximum acreage.

3. RPFs were asked the following questions: • Approximately how many acres do you manage? • Over the past 10 years, in your opinion, do you believe that NSO habitat has increased, decreased, remained the same? • How many Activity Centers are currently present (do not "double-count" birds which you know are already being monitored by industrial neighbors)? • Has this number increased, decreased, or remained the same from 10 years ago? • If increased, by how may NSOs? If decreased, by how many NSOs? • Do barred owls occur? If so, approximately how many activity centers? • Based upon your judgment, do you feel that any NSOs have been displaced by barred owls? If so, how many?

4. Question 1 • Approximately how many acres do you manage? • This survey was answered by 14 RPFs/Consulting Firms which manage 163,495 acres across three coastal counties.

5. Question 2 • Over the past 10 years, in your opinion, do you believe that NSO habitat has increased, decreased, remained the same? • 8 RPFs believed that over the past 10 years habitat available for NSO has increased • 4 RPFs believed that habitat conditions have remained roughly the same over the past 10 years. • One RPF felt that habitat conditions have declined in his area of surveys over the past 10 years. • One RPF did not offer an opinion.

6. Question 3 • How many Activity Centers are currently present (do not "double-count" birds which you know are already being monitored by industrial neighbors)? • The fourteen RPFs are actively managing 110 NSO activity centers. • In addition as a follow-up, RPFs noted that an additional 125 activity centers are having an affect on managing their clients lands. Most of this was from overlapping core areas on neighboring lands. Other affects included hauling restrictions and seasonal buffers.

7. Questions 4 and 5 • Has this number increased, decreased, or remained the same from 10 years ago? • For 8 RPFs the number of activity centers stayed the same. • For 3 RPFs the number of activity centers increased (by 8 as a result of new clients and new areas being surveyed). • For 2 RPFs the number of activity centers decreased. One activity center was destroyed by fire. Six other activity centers appear to have been abandoned due to barred owls moving in.

8. Question 6 • Do barred owls occur? If so, approximately how many activity centers? • Every RPF surveyed has barred owls that are now living on their clients lands. • At least 49 barred owl activity centers have been identified across the lands that these 14 RPFs manage. • Detections of barred owls began as early as 2000 and have continued to increase.

9. Question 7 • Based upon your judgment, do you feel that any NSOs have been displaced by barred owls? If so, how many? • 6 RPFs said no. • 7 RPFs said yes. • These 4 RPFs provided evidence that 12 NSO activity centers appear to have been displaced by barred owls over the past 10 years.

10. Observations from RPFs and Biologists • Many of the NSOs I'm monitoring appear to be getting quieter and respond either early (early March) or late (July) in the season and no response during mid-season.  Their response is 1 or 2 hoots or whistles then nothing.   • What I have noticed is that Barred Owls have moved into the best habitat in Sonoma County, those that have been under selection forestry for many years which have multiple age classes and structure, or that are old growth (Armstrong State Park) or that still have a significant portion of legacy trees still in existence (Fort Ross and Salt Point State Park). From these areas, the BOs have moved out into the surrounding areas and began dispersing NSOs where ever they come in contact.

11. Observations Cont. • Because Sonoma County is mostly small ownerships, intermixed with a high amount of urban and agriculture, there isn’t the amount of suitable habitat that may be found in other counties. Many of the activity centers are deficient in available habitat because of the urban interface. • The affect of a 2-year survey protocol is significantly hampering operations on small nonindustrial lands. There is no ability to react to market conditions. It is growing increasingly difficult to convince landowners to put out money when market conditions are so volatile.

12. Prepared by Matt Greene Forestry & Biological Consulting 35640 Hauser Bridge Road Cazadero, CA 95421 707-847-3761 calforestry@gmail.com