THE ROLE OF THE USDA FOREST SERVICE, NORTHEASTERN AREA
AND STATE FORESTRY AGENCIES IN SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT.

        No one can predict the future -- how people will live, or what  exactly they will need --  but, it is possible to foresee the likely effects of some of  today's decisions and to make choices that honor the interests of present and future generations.

(President's Council on Sustainable Development 1996).

1. INTRODUCTION

             Sustainability is an overarching goal for a diverse array of public and private organizations, agencies, and individuals and it is an extraordinary challenge.  The collective efforts of all are needed to mobilize the skills, capacity, and resources  to achieve this goal.  This paper provides a brief discussion of sustainability and sustainable forest management and outlines the particular steps the USDA Forest Service (FS), Northeastern Area of State and Private Forestry (NA) and the 20 State Forestry Agencies in the Northeastern Area Association of State Foresters (NAASF) will take to move toward this desired condition.   The implementation measures and associated actions are intended to provide focus to efforts of the Federal-State partnership and to spur outreach, partnerships and collaboration with those who have overlapping responsibilities and concerns.  These include:  the Northeastern and North Central Research Stations and Region 9 of the FS, other state and federal agencies operating in the Northeast and Midwest, Indian Nations, communities, municipalities, universities, professional associations, forest-based industries, environmental groups, and forest landowners.

1.1.  Sustainable Forest Management

            Sustainability is a complex idea involving economic, environmental and social factors.  The terms forest sustainability, sustainable forestry and sustainable forest management are often used interchangeably and are closely linked to definitions of sustainable development. Commonly cited definitions for all these terms generally include or imply the following elements: the continued existence and use of forests to meet human physical, economic and social needs, the desire to preserve the health of forest ecosystems in perpetuity, and the ethical choice of preserving options for future generations while meeting the needs of the present (See Box 1).          

             Sustainability concerns the interactions between humans and forests in wildland, rural, urban and suburban settings and the effects of this interaction at local, landscape, regional, national and global scales.  In discussions of sustainability, forests are defined as ecosystems dominated by trees but with other components of nature such as shrubs, herbs, mammals, birds, insects, microorganisms, soil, air, and water and the interactive processes that bind them together. The concept of sustainability incorporates the knowledge that forests play a major role in sustaining human health and welfare. They contribute to the long term viability of watersheds, communities and economies. 

            The social, cultural and economic realities of urban, suburban  and rural communities have a far reaching influence on the continued existence, use, and condition of forests.  To operate sustainably forest managers may need to devote as much time to convening and facilitating agreement on the desired future conditions of the forests under their stewardship or authority as on planning and implementing the technical methods to produce the desired goods and services in an environmentally sound manner. Sustainability depends on citizens and stakeholders adopting stewardship and individual responsibility as tenets by which to live and moving from conflict to collaboration  (President's Council on Sustainable Development, 1996).                           

            The NA Five Year Strategic Plan (1995-1999)  identified healthy sustainable forests, sustainable economic development and information resource management as the major strategic issues for the period.  The NAASF review of  NA in July, 1997 recognized the continued importance of sustainability issues and the need to increase the general understanding and acceptance of sustainability concepts through the next planning cycle.  Major NAASF review recommendations included:

1)  The seven criteria of sustainability developed through The Montreal Process (Box 2) should be adopted as areawide Sustainable Forest Management Goals.

2)  Monitoring and assessment of forest resource conditions should be conducted based on these criteria and work should begin in the Northeast and Midwest to integrate the use of C&I into FS programs and policies.

            This is consistent with the FS Natural Resources Agenda released March 2, 1998 from the Chief's Office and with recommendations of The National Association of State Foresters (NASF) White Paper --- Forests for a Sustainable Future:  The Use of Criteria and Indicators in Sustainable Forest Management.  The FS Agenda and the NASF White paper highlighted the need to fully fund forest inventory and monitoring programs and to use measurements such as the Montreal Process Criteria and Indicators (C&I).  The Agenda committed the FS to work with State, local, and other partners to use C&I to report on the health of all forested landscapes across the nation by 2003.

2.  IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES

            The role of NA and the States is presented by four basic implementation approaches and associated actions.  The implementation measures are described in detail below.  They are:

1) Adopt C&I as a framework for sustainability;

2) Support Inventory, Monitoring and Assessment programs and partnerships;

3) Evaluate existing and potential State and Private Forestry conservation, management, and protection services and partnerships; and

4) Provide opportunities for professional and public education and communication.

2.1. Adopt Criteria and Indicators as a Framework for Sustainability

            Many people in the Northeast and Midwest are asking whether or not forests are being managed sustainably.  They wonder if taxpayer dollars are committed wisely.  They ask whether forestry efforts today are achieving economic, environmental, and socially desired outcomes.  Sustainability C&I are a means of gauging success by measuring real world outcomes in lieu of program outputs.  Criteria are goals or categories which reflect broad public values and recognized scientific principles.  Indicators within each category provide a means of measuring forest conditions and tracking changes in environmental, economic and social conditions.  Together they provide a framework which resource managers and citizens can use to systematically establish and clarify desired economic, social, and environmental conditions and to track  progress in meeting those conditions.  Progress in sustainability is determined by evaluating the sum of the indicators for each criterion and all criteria together rather than any one in isolation. 

            A sustainability framework with seven criteria and 67 indicators was developed by The Montreal Process Working Group (Box 2, Appendix A) to measure conditions associated with temperate and boreal forests in the member countries.        

The seven Montreal Process Criteria are:

1) Conservation of biological diversity,

2) Maintenance of the productive capacity of forest ecosystems,

3) Maintenance of forest ecosystem health and vitality,

4) Conservation and maintenance of soil and water resources,

5) Maintenance of the forest contribution to global carbon cycles,

6) Maintenance and enhancement of long-term multiple socio-economic benefits to meet the needs of societies, and

7) Maintenance of the legal, institutional and economic frameworks for forest conservation and sustainable management.

             Indicators associated with Criteria 1-5 relate specifically to forest conditions, attributes, or functions which generally can be quantified.  Those associated with Criterion Six relate to the values and benefits associated with the environmental and socioeconomic goods and services that forests provide.  Criterion Seven addresses the overall policy framework supporting the conservation and sustainable management of forests in an area.  Criteria Six and Seven, which characterize the deliberate interactions between people, their communities, and the environment include many descriptive or qualitative measures as well as some quantitative ones.

            NA and NAASF have determined that the seven Montreal Process Criteria are useful goals to adopt at the 20-State level.  NA and NAASF states will work cooperatively with national efforts to identify common measurement and reporting protocols and to tie the 2003 RPA assessment to them.  In this way the national assessment process can become an important pathway for the flow of information among States, NA and the national level.  And it will allow the aggregate of individual monitoring efforts to be greater than the sum of the parts.  Clearly efficiencies can be achieved by cooperating with national and international efforts.  For example, for even fairly simple indicators such as "extent of area by forest type relative to total forest area", there are variable ways to proceed.  Questions to be answered include:  which forest type definitions should be used; are shrublands, savannah and regenerating clearcuts included; what point in time is used to determine the total forest area?  NA and the States will cooperatively evaluate each of the Montreal Process indicators for its value in guiding regional and state level programs and policy initiatives.  Evaluation will consider things like technical soundness,  feasibility of implementation at a variety of scales and the degree to which standardization is necessary and possible among States as well.

            Adoption of a C&I framework at the Area, State or local level does not automatically translate into more intensive measurement and assessment of all of the Montreal Process indicators.  Decision-makers at these levels could decide that the national evaluation provides enough detail for their purposes, therefore, no additional data collection or assessment is necessary.  They could decide that more intensive measurement and assessment of the national indicators would meet their needs.  Or they could decide that different or additional indicators and measurements are needed to answer recurrent questions which cannot be assessed on a national basis.  Table 1 sets out examples of indicators useful at different scales.

Table 1.  Example of indicators useful for assessments at various scales.  Example indicators were drawn from the  Montreal Process, State, and local efforts. Montreal Process indicators are identified by an asterik *.

Indicator	National	Regional	State or within State
Biological Diversity
Extent of area by forest type relative to total forest area *.	X	X	X
Extent of area in permanent natural openings to total forest area.			X
Number of forest-dependent species that occupy a small portion of their former range *.	X	X
Legal, Institutional and Economic Framework
Encourage best practice codes for forest management*.	X		X
Percent compliance with BMP's			X
etcetera

       Each of the twenty states currently measure various indicators of sustainability.   NA and the States  will collectively look to other projects such as the Maine Council on Sustainable Forest Management, the Minnesota Environmental Indicators Initiative, the Mid-Atlantic Integrated Assessment and the Great Lakes Assessment, for proven methods of measuring environmental, social and economic outcomes in a bottom-up fashion to meet State and Area-wide needs.  They will see what lessons can be learned from private initiatives such the American Forest and Paper Association's Sustainable Forestry Initiative, the  Forest Stewardship Council principles and criteria effort and the National Forestry Association Green Tag Forestry efforts.  

              Developing and measuring criteria and indicators is only half the job of implementing the C&I framework.  The other half is obtaining technical review of the synthesized information and involving public and private agencies, organizations and stakeholders in the use of this information.  One must  accept that there are uncertainties associated with inventory and monitoring and some subjectivity involved in determining the significance of research and monitoring results.  In addition, the process of making decisions based on this information requires citizen and stakeholder involvement with the public agencies responsible for implementing public laws and regulations and with policy-making bodies.  Federal, State, and local agency personnel have a significant charge to be convenors and facilitators in the interpretation and use of this information always keeping in mind the highly charged dynamics involved in balancing the needs of individuals with those of the public good.

Adoption of the C&I Framework for Sustainability will be accomplished by: 

1)  NA will establish funding sources for the long-term coordination and staffing of a forest sustainability information clearinghouse.  NA coordination responsibilities are among States, FS, other public agencies, non-government groups, and  stakeholder groups.

2)  NA will develop a 1998 report on the status of  Forest Health and Sustainability in NA covering all lands and ownerships using C&I as an outline.

3)  The Northeast/ Midwest Forest Roundtable will convene a broad range of stakeholders (government and non-government scientists, managers, community leaders; and landowners, industrial and non-industrial) to develop findings and recommendations for policy or program action based on the report.  This information will to be incorporated into the NA Strategic Plan (2000-2005). 

4)  NA will bring together recommendations for area-wide and State level indicators for each of the seven Criteria.  These will include cross-state protocols, an NA-wide reporting process, a reporting cycle, and the staff expertise, time, GIS,  analytical, and decision-support capabilities needed to implement them.  Appropriate linkages among State, national and regional indicators and timetables will be identified.

2.2. Support Inventory , Monitoring, and Assessment  Programs  and Partnerships

            The purpose of inventory, monitoring and assessment is to provide information which allows citizens and resource managers to accurately evaluate the status of forest health, the effects of forest management and to debate policy options using common data.  Public agencies have a particular role to play in ensuring that information collected is appropriate, complete, accurate and unbiased, and that it is assessed using the best available science. The United States' First Approximation Report on Criteria and Indicators highlighted the need for current public forest inventory and monitoring systems to coordinate on the definition, methodology, and protocols used in inventory and monitoring in order to capture the entire picture of forestry as it is practiced in this country.

            There are several inventory, monitoring and assessment programs within the FS.  The FS  Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) and the Forest Health Monitoring (FHM) programs are the primary sources of information on forests in the Northeast and Midwest.  The FIA program provides information on the extent, age and distribution of forest cover types, timber production, and forest landowners intentions.  This program is in the process of converting from a decadal to an annual monitoring cycle. The FHM program is a cooperative federal-State program that measures environmental indicators and stressors on an annual basis and within the next several years will be fully implemented over all ownerships in all states in NA. In addition, National Forests and many State forestry agencies conduct multiple resource inventories and monitoring to support project level and local planning.  Although FHM, FIA, and National Forest inventories and monitoring have specific and unique objectives, there is considerable overlap.  Efforts are underway to make operational and statistical connections among them and to reduce duplicative efforts.  Similar efforts could be extended to State forestry inventory and monitoring programs and other federal and State agency efforts.

            Assessments involve the compilation and synthesis of social, economic, physical and biological information, including information on past and present conditions, cause and effect relationships, trends, and forces of change, all of which may affect our choice of actions.  They provide a context for decision-making but do not prescribe particular treatments or land allocations.  

            The Forest and Rangelands Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974 (RPA) requires the Secretary of Agriculture to prepare an assessment of the Nation's renewable resources on all forest and rangelands every 10 years and to prepare and transmit an updated national renewable resources program every five years.  The  desired situation is that national, regional and State, inventory, monitoring and assessment activities are linked sufficiently through standard definitions and information protocols.  This will make information readily available for addressing policy questions as they arise and will improve efficiency (time, people, cost) and limit redundancy among all levels of government.  The next RPA Assessment will provide a framework for reporting on C&I.   Implementation of the NA C&I effort in cooperation with the RPA reporting process across the 20 States will improve the information base for decision-making and give greater visibility to regional concerns at the national level.

            The FS National Hierarchical Framework of Ecological Units is a tool that will be used in inventory, monitoring, and assessment throughout NA (Appendix B ).  The eight level spatial hierarchy of ecological units forms the basis for the framework by using a standardized regionalization, classification and mapping system to stratify the Earth into progressively smaller areas of increasingly uniform ecological potential.  These units  provide a means of integrating  research, inventory, and monitoring information from multiple disciplines and organizations for assessments across political, administrative, and jurisdictional boundaries.    

            Much of the data needed to measure and assess sustainability resides within other agencies and organizations.  Measurement and assessment of  C&I across NA can be used as a vehicle to build on existing partnerships and engage new partners in cooperatives to inventory, monitor and assess forest conditions and opportunities for sustainable forestry.   State Forest Resource Planning programs provide a similar opportunity to capitalize on current interest in C&I to get a more complete picture of resource management at the State level. Of continuing importance is the need to work in partnership with other agencies and organizations to compile and analyze existing data, and identify and prioritize the acquisition of new information.     

      The FS and States cooperate with a variety of partners on various  national, region, subregional, State-wide or local monitoring projects.    NA can work on the area-wide scale and coordinate with the national office to ensure compatibility.  Relationships can be strengthened with the USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service, Natural Resource Inventory and Cooperative Soil Survey Programs and The Nature Conservancy.  In addition, coordination can be promoted on important issues such as biodiversity, water quality, demographic information, wildlife, and remote sensing with the following groups, respectively, Natural Heritage Program Cooperators, the U.S.Geological Survey and Environmental Protection Agency, the National Census Bureau, the US Fish and Wildlife and State agencies, and the USGS GAP Analysis Survey.   Other efforts include ten US states and four Canadian Provinces cooperating in the North American Maple Project through a memorandum of understanding with the USDA Forest Service, and the Vermont Monitoring Cooperative.

      NA and the States will work to develop a comprehensive picture of forestry in the Northeast and Midwest by implementing the following action:

1)   The FS and State forestry agencies will be the primary agencies that compile information and report on the status and trends of all forest resources across NA and within respective states.  NA will facilitate this compilation and synthesis.

2)  NA will facilitate the compilation and assessment of information on C & I  from all branches of the FS and other agencies for periodic area-wide reports on the Conservation and Sustainable Management of Forests of the Northeast and Midwest States.

3)  Cooperate with national efforts and initiate appropriate NA-wide efforts to develop common inventory and monitoring protocols for indicator measurements across state borders and other agency and administrative units.  First priority will be to develop consistency or compatibility among NFS, S&PF, and the State forestry agencies and then among multiple agencies within ecological units. 

4)  Identify information gaps in our ability to monitor progress in achieving sustainability and develop means to address those gaps.

5)  Fully support on-going efforts to link and integrate FIA, FHM, NFS and State forest resource inventories and monitoring.  Include the integration of FIA, FHM, NFS and State forest resource inventory plots and plots on other state and federally owned land.

6)  NA and State inventory and monitoring and C&I assessments will feed into the RPA  assessment.

7)  Continue  support for ecological classification, mapping and characterization efforts and use ecological units in the assessment process.  Specifically support ecological mapping and characterization efforts across all land at the broad Ecoregional and Subregional levels,  provide technical and financial assistance to initiatives at designated scales, initiate cooperative efforts to scientifically validate information, and support scientists and managers to develop interpretations of ecological units for management.

2.3 Evaluate Existing and Potential State and Private Forestry Conservation,  Management  and Protection Programs, Services  and Partnerships.

            There is  consensus that existing State and Private Forestry programs do not meet the total need for public service.  Changing social, economic, and political dynamics are increasingly changing the way the forestry community must do business.  Examples are presented in studies such as Prospects and Opportunities for Sustainable Management of America's Nonfederal Forests (National Research Council, 1998), the President's Council on Sustainable Development report Sustainable America A New Consensus for Prosperity, Opportunity, and a Healthy Environment for the Future, and the Sampson and DeCoster Report Public Programs for Private Forestry A Reader on Programs and Options.  

            These social, economic, and political conditions combined with changes in the extent and integrity of forests due to development, argue that innovative programs and policies are needed to complement traditional federal and State efforts.  Today, NA and the States provide three basic types of service in addition to field inventory and monitoring.  These include: resource conservation, management and protection programs; technology transfer activities; and special project development and implementation.  Appendix C  lists the FS State and Private Forestry Cooperative Forest Management and Protection Programs.

            Technology transfer is the conveyance of technical information.  It involves drawing on staff expertise to assist in program implementation and to conduct training for resource professionals or landowners, developing and implementing projects which demonstrate key natural resource implementation strategies, synthesizing existing research and data, developing handbooks or modeling tools such as the Northeast Decision Model, or simply providing referrals based on a professional network. 

            Special projects are those which are not associated with regular program activities and are generally focused on resolution of a specific issue or a problem in a specific area. They include examples such as the jointly sponsored Forest Fragmentation Symposium held in Maryland, water quality initiatives in the Chesapeake Bay and New York City Watersheds, dealing with emergencies such as the Asian Longhorn Beetle infestation on Long Island and the Ice Storm Damage in Northern New England, developing ecological units across NA, participating in national initiatives such as the USDA Urban Resource Partnership, and facilitating collaborative efforts such as The Northern Forest Lands Project and the Highlands Regional Assessment Project of New Jersey. 

            Collaboration with State and federal forest partners and others is essential for program success.  Active involvement of county foresters, forest industry, and forest landowners, and  private forest interest groups (e.g. National Woodland Owners Association and the Association of Consulting Foresters) is also essential.  The need for a landscape and even larger scale sustainability focus in mixed ownerships, which is sensitive to individual and local needs and trends, makes the development of voluntary partnerships and cooperation very important. Resulting partnerships will provide opportunities to learn together, reach creative solutions, compound effectiveness and reach mutual goals.  This can save time, money, duplication of effort and avoid confrontation and backsliding pitfalls.  This collaboration must begin early to articulate a clear policy of sustainable forest management and a guiding framework to provide coherent direction to all cooperative forestry programs. 

             NA and the States must increase efforts to facilitate cooperation and foster innovative projects that deal with emerging issues and resource conflicts in a cost effective manner.   The  contributions and the value of various partners programs and initiatives must be recognized.  That includes both traditional programs such as the Tree Farm program, and newer initiatives such as AF&PA's Sustainable Forestry Initiative, the National Woodland Owners's Green Tag Forestry and Green Certification, and the International Standards Organization (ISO) standards. 

The following actions, undertaken with partners, will  increase State and private forest management effectiveness.

1) NA and State forestry program and professional staff will facilitate and participate in the peer review of the NA Forest Health and Sustainability Report and the evaluation of our capacity to measure C&I at multiple scales.

2)  NA and State program leaders will work with partners and stakeholders to identify existing program contributions to each sustainability goal at local, State, and area-wide levels.  They will  prepare recommendations for the NA strategic plan on how to align and integrate existing NA programs and activities to achieve sustainable forest management.

3) Increase the viability of the State forest resource planning program in NA and utilize state and federal program staff to ensure C&I assessments are appropriately linked to NA and State resource planning and policy setting initiatives.

4) Use C&I as a framework for reporting program accomplishments and outcomes under the Government Performance Review Act (GPRA) and the RPA.  Provide technology transfer services in the area of green certification and ISO standards implementation.

5)  Evaluate other sustainable forest management efforts in various sectors and programs and integrate them where appropriate.  Develop and maintain collaborative relationships and processes with stakeholders and partners involved in sustainable forest management efforts.

6)  Identify, address, and involve all forest ownerships in initiatives and programs to achieve sustainable forest management (NFS, Department of Defense, Department of Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, State, County, forest industry, non-industrial private).   Identify existing and new partners and key players with desires to achieve sustainable forest management.

7)  Fund  special projects and demonstrations of sustainable forest management.

2.4 Provide Education and Communication Opportunities for Professionals and the Public.

            Forest management has environmental, social, economic and political implications.  Professionals operating in today's environment need to have a broader range of skills and expertise at their disposal than any time in the past.  To be relevant, credible and judged trustworthy they must  have the best scientific and technical knowledge available and the communication skills to lead and implement efforts to conserve and sustainably manage the forests. NA and the State Forestry agencies must be well informed on both technical and socio-political fronts forming around sustainable forest issues.

            NA and the State forestry agencies will provide training and educational opportunities so that  resource professionals are knowledgeable and able to provide clear guidance and consistent messages to their colleagues, clients and the public.  Stakeholders are included at all stages of program and project planning and implementation so that decisions are made with full knowledge of public expectations. Forest resource managers are able to convey clearly to decisions-makers the environmental, social, economic and, sometimes, political ramifications of their management recommendations.  In this information rich era it is also important that communicators be supported by the technology and communication tools needed to work with an ever increasing population.

Actions to implement the education and communication measure include; 

3.0 Conclusion

            The FS and the State Forestry Agencies have critical roles to play in the conservation and sustainable management of forests.  The strategy outlined above recognizes that business as usual is not enough to solve the complex  problems encountered as more pressure is placed on the natural environment by an increasing population.   Clear, accurate information on the state of the forest resource and the life cycles it supports is needed for decision-making.  NA and State resource professionals will work to facilitate the collection, evaluation and dissemination of information and to foster collaborative approaches to the conservation and sustainable management of the forest resource and the quality of life which a healthy environment can support. 

            The NA/NAASF initiative has four major aspects:

1) Adoption of a framework of C&I of sustainability which provides information on the condition of the forest resource and the balance between human and environmental needs.  This information is not reserved for natural resource professionals but is shared widely.

2) Enhancing inventory, monitoring and assessment of the forest resource and related social and economic systems and facilitating cooperation among the many agencies and organizations with overlapping responsibilities.

3)  Evaluation and realignment of resources within the agency to support sustainable forest management.   4)  Development of effective communication and education approaches and processes for a broader array of stakeholders and professionals.

References

American Forest and Paper Association 1995a. Sustainable Forestry:  Principles and Implementation Guidelines.  American Forest and Paper Association, 111 19th Street, NW, Suite 800, Washington D.C. 20036.

Kolb, T.E., M.R. Wagner, and W.W. Covington 1994.  Concepts of Forest Health. "Journal of Forestry 92(7): 10-15" in Amaranthus, Forest Sustainability:  An Approach to Definition and Assessment at the Landscape Level 1997. USDA Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station PNW-GTR-416

Sustaining Maine's Forests:  Criteria, Goals, and Benchmarks for Sustainable Forest Management,  Dept. Of  Conservation, 22 State House Station, Augusta, ME 04333-0022).

Maser, 1994. Sustainable Forestry, St. Lucie Press:  Boca  Raton, FLA

Noss 1993.  "Sustainable Forests or Sustainable Forestry?"  In Defining Sustainable Forestry.  G. Applet, N. Johnson, J. T. Olson and V. A. Sample, eds.  Washington D.C.:  Island Press. 328 pp.

President's Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD, Feb. 1996.  Sustainable America:  A new consensus for prosperity, opportunity, and a healthy environment for the future.  PCSD, 730 Jackson Place, NW, Washington, D.C. 20503.  (202) 408-5296.  http://www.whitehouse.gov/PCSD.

World Commission on Environment and Development (The Brundtland Commission), Our Common Future, Oxford:  Oxford University Press, 1987. p43.)

Appendix A

THE MONTREAL PROCESS CRITERIA AND INDICATORS FOR THE

CONSERVATION AND SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT

OF TEMPERATE AND BOREAL FORESTS

Criterion 1:  Conservation of biological diversity.

Ecosystem Diversity

1.  Extent of area by forest type relative to total forest area.

2.  Extent of area by forest type and by age class or successional stage.

3.  Extent of area by forest type in protected area categories as defined by IUCN or other classification systems.

4.  Extent of areas by forest type in protected areas defined by age class or successional stage.

5.  Fragmentation of forest types.

Species Diversity

6.  The number of forest dependent species.

7.  The status (rare, threatened, endangered, or extinct) of forest dependent species at risk of not maintaining viable breeding populations, as determined by legislation or scientific assessment.

Genetic Diversity

8.  Number of forest dependent species that occupy a small portion of their former range.

9.  Population levels of representative species from diverse habitats monitored across their range.

Criterion 2:  Maintenance of productive capacity of forest ecosystems.

10.  Area of forest land and net area of forest land available for timber production.

11.  Total growing stock of both merchantable and nonmerchantable tree species on forest land available for timber production.

12.  The area and growing stock of plantations of native and exotic species.

13.  Annual removal of wood products compared to the volume determined to be sustainable.

14.  Annual removal of non-timber forest products (e.g. fur bearers, berries, mushrooms, game), compared to the level determined to be sustainable.

Criterion 3:  Maintenance of forest ecosystem health and vitality.

15.  Area and percent of forest affected by processes or agents beyond the range of historic variation, (e.g. by insects, disease, competition from exotic species, fire, storm, land clearance, permanent flooding, salinization, and domestic animals.

16.  Area and percent of forest land subjected to levels of specific air pollutants (e.g. sulfates, nitrate, ozone) or ultraviolet B that may cause negative impacts on the forest ecosystem.

17.  Area and percent of forest land with diminished biological components indicative of changes in fundamental ecological processes (e.g. soil, nutrient cycling, seed dispersion, pollination) and/or ecological continuity.

Criterion 4:  Conservation and maintenance of soil and water resources.

18. Area and percent of forest land with significant soil erosion.

19.  Area and percent of forest land managed primarily for protective functions, e.g. watersheds, flood protection, avalanche protection, riparian zones.

20.  Percent of stream kilometers in forested catchments in which stream flow and timing has significantly deviated from the historic range of variation.

21.  Area and percent of forest land with significantly diminished soil organic matter and/or changes in other soil chemical properties.

22.  Area and percent of forest land with significant compaction or change in soil physical properties resulting from human activities.

23.  Percent of water bodies in forest areas (e.g. stream kilometers, lake hectares) with significant variance of biological diversity from the historic range of variability.

24.  Percent of water bodies in forest areas (e.g. stream kilometers, lake hectares) with significant variation from the historic range of variability in pH, dissolved oxygen, levels of chemicals (electrical conductivity), sedimentation or temperature change.

25.  Area and percent of forest land experiencing an accumulation of persistent toxic substances.

Criterion 5:  Maintenance of forest contribution to global carbon cycles.

26.  Total forest ecosystem biomass and carbon pool, and if appropriate, by forest type, age class, and successional stages.

27.  Contribution of forest ecosystems to the total global carbon budget, including absorption and release of carbon.

28.  Contribution of forest products to the global carbon budget.

Criterion 6:  Maintenance and enhancement of long-term multiple socio-economic benefits to meet the needs of societies.

Products and consumption

29.  Value and volume of wood and wood products production, including value added through downstream processing.

30.  Value and quantities of production of non-wood forest products.

31.  Supply and consumption of wood and wood products, including consumption per capita.

32.  Value of wood and non-wood products production as a percentage of GDP.

33.  Degree of recycling of forest products.

34.  Supply and consumption/use of non-wood products.

Recreation and tourism

35.  Area and percent of forest land managed for general recreation and tourism, in relation to the total area of forest land.

36.  Number and type of facilities available for general recreation and tourism, in relation to population and forest area.

37.  Number of visitor days attributed to recreation and tourism, in relation to population and forest area.

Investment in the forest sector.

38.  Value of investment, including in forest growing, forest health and management, planted forests, wood processing, recreation and tourism.

39.  Level of expenditure on research and development, and education.

40.  Extension and use of new and improved technology.

41.  Rates of return on investment.

Cultural, social and spiritual needs and values.

42.  Area and percent of forest land managed in relation to the total area of forest land to protect the range of cultural, social and spiritual needs and values.

43.  Non-consumptive-use forest values.

Employment and community needs.

44.  Direct and indirect employment in the forest sector and the forest sector employment as a proportion of total employment.

45.  Average wage rates and injury rates in major employment categories within the forest sector.

46.  Viability and adaptability to changing economic conditions, of forest dependent communities.

47.  Area and percent of forest land used for subsistence purposes.

Criterion 7:  legal, institutional and economic framework for forest conservation and sustainable management.

Extent to which the legal framework (laws, regulations, guidelines) supports the conservation and sustainable management of forests, including the extent to which it:

48.  Clarifies property rights, provides for appropriate land tenure arrangement, recognizes customary and traditional rights of indigenous people, and provides means of resolving property disputes by due process.

49.  Provides for periodic forest-related planning, assessment, and policy review that recognizes the range of forest values, including coordination with relevant sectors.

50.  Provides opportunities for public participation in public policy and decision-making related to forests and public access to information.

51.  Encourages best practice codes for forest management.

52.  Provides for the management of forests to conserve special environmental, cultural, social and/or scientific values.

Extent to which the institutional framework supports the conservation and sustainable management of forests, including the capacity to:

53.  Provide for public involvement activities and public education, awareness and extension programs, and make available forest related information.

54.  Undertake and implement periodic forest-related planning, assessment, and policy review including cross-sectoral planning and coordination.

55.  Develop and maintain human resource skills across relevant disciplines.

56.  Develop and maintain efficient physical infrastructure to facilitate the supply of forest products and services and support forest management.

57.  Enforce laws, regulations and guidelines.

Extent to which the economic framework (economic policies and measures) supports the conservation and sustainable management of forests through:

58.  Investment and taxation policies and a regulatory environment which recognize the long-term nature of investments and permit the flow of capital in and out of the forest sector in response to market signals, non-market economic valuations, and public policy decisions in order to meet long-term demands for forest products and services.

59.  Non-discriminatory trade policies for forest products.

Capacity to measure and monitor changes in the conservation and sustainable management of forests, including:

60.  Availability and extent of up-to-date data, statistics and other information important to measuring or describing indicators associated with criteria 1-7.

61.  Scope, frequency, and statistical reliability of forest inventories, assessment, monitoring and other relevant information.

62.  Compatibility with other countries in measuring, monitoring, and reporting on indicators.

Capacity to conduct and apply research and development aimed at improving forest management and delivery of forest goods and services, including:

63.  Development of scientific understanding of forest ecosystem characteristics and functions.

64.  Development of methodologies to measure and integrate environmental and social costs and benefits into markets and public policies, and to reflect forest related resource depletion or replenishment in national accounting systems.

65.  New technologies and the capacity to assess the socioeconomic consequences associated with the introduction of new technologies.

66.  Enhancement of ability to predict impacts of human intervention on forests.

67.  Ability to predict impacts on forests of possible climate change.

Appendix B

National Hierarchical Framework of Ecological Units

General correspondence between ecological units, scale of application and potential uses within the National Hierarchical Framework of Ecological Units.*

Application Scale	Purpose of Use	Ecological Units
Global, continental, regional levels	Long term, broad scale planning and assessment.  Broad applicability for modeling and sampling	Domain Division Province
Multi-forest, state or multistate projects, river basin projects.	Strategic and multi-agency analysis and assessment.  Data aggregation.  Generating and testing research hypotheses.  Technology transfer/data extrapolation.	Section Subsection
Areq-wide, forest, state, multi-county, watershed, riparian or wildlife corridors.	Multiple resource assessment and analysis.  Tactical and long term operational planning.  Data aggregation.  Research and monitoring design.	Ecological Land Type Ecological Land Type Phase

*  The boundaries for ecological unit maps do not change as do historical or current condition maps which makes them ideal for establishing baseline conditions  and predicting the possible effects of a variety of management activities. These features makes it an ideal tool for building partnerships with other agencies and organizations.

--------------------------------------------------

                Appendix C

 State and Private Forestry Resource Management Programs

Program	Description
State Forest Resource Planning	Promotes the development of comprehensive state forest resource plans which integrate multiple values and uses for the long term benefit of society and the natural resources people depend upon.
Urban and Community Forestry	Promote planning for and management of forest and related resources in populated areas to achieve locally identified social, economic and environmental goals.
Stewardship and Stewardship Incentives	The goal of these programs is to ensure landowners apply environmental and economic resource management principles to benefit themselves, future landowners and the public.  Through the program landowners are encouraged to develop a professionally prepared management plan.  In addition the incentives portion of the program allows landowners to cost-share development and implementation of their land management plan.
Economic Action Program	Work to help communities, businesses, groups and individuals use renewable natural resources as a catalyst to create diversified and sustainable economic activitiy.
Natural Resource Conservation Education	Promotes understanding of natural resources and ecosystems -- their interrelationships, conservation, use, management, and value to society.  Promote critical thinking skills that enable people to recognize the complexity of resource issues and to make choices within social, political, scientific and economic realties and foster individual responsibility to conserve, preserve and wisely use our natural resources.
River Basin and Watershed Planning	Work in specially designated watersheds to help local organizations develop environmentally, socially, and economically sound plans to restore impaired watersheds and protect against flooding.  Provide technical and financial assistance to landowners in installing forestry works or improvement.
Forest Legacy	Uses the purchase of development rights from willing landowners to prevent conversion of environmentally important forest lands to non-forest uses.
Forest Health Protection	Ensure that forest health concerns are considered in forest planning and management, identify, improve and tranfer new technologies, provide assistance in coordination of regional issues, produce information that will inform land managers on forest health problems.
Cooperative Fire Protection	Rural fire prevention and control, rural community fire protection and the loan of federal excess personal property to state forestry agencies and cooperators for wildland and rural community fire protection.
Resource Conservation and Development	Promote the conservation, development and utilization of natural resources to improve economic conditions and to enhance the quality of life in designated multi-county geographical areas.

Appendix D

Acronyms

AF & PA	American Forest and Paper Association
C & I	Criteria and Indicators
FHM	USDA Forest Service, Forest Health Monitoring Programs
FIA	USDA Forest Service, Forest Inventory and Analysis
FS	USDA Forest Service
FSC	Forest Stewardship Council
ISO	International Standards Organization
NA	USDA Forest Service, State and Private Forestry Branch, Northeastern Area
NAASF	Northeastern Area Association of State Foresters.  Association includes 20 states in the Northeast and Midwest United States
NFS	USDA Forest Service, National Forest System
PCSD	President's Council on Sustainable Development
RPA	USDA Forest Service, Forest and Rangelands Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974
USDA	United States Department of Agriculture

 

Appendix E

Commitee on the Role of the USDA Forest Service Northeastern Area and States in Sustainable Forest Management.

            This joint committee was charged with providing guidance and recommendations to NA and  NAASF on implementation of sustainable forest management

Appendix E
Commitee on the Role of the USDA Forest Service Northeastern Area and States in Sustainable Forest Management.

Constance A. Carpenter	Sustainable Forests Coordinator, USDA Forest Service, Durham, NH.
Marvin Brown	State Forester, Missouri Department of Conservation, Jefferson City, MO.
Chuck Gadzik	State Forester, Maine Department of Conservation, Augusta, ME.
Austin Short III	State Forester, Department of Agriculture, Dover, DE.
Jim Grace	State Forester, Department of Environmental Protection, Harrisburg, PA.
Warren Archey	NAASF Chair, Department of Environmental Management, Pittsfield, MA
Susan Francher	Representative, Northeast Forest Resource Planners, NH Division of Forests and lands, Concord, NH.
Dan Ernst	Chairperson, Northeast Area Forest Resource Program Leaders,IN department of Natural Resources, Indianapolis, IN.
Don Mansius	Director Policy, Maine Department of Conservation, Augusta, ME.
Susan Lacy	Natural Resource Analyst, USDA Forest Service, Radnor, PA.
Mary Carol Koester	Asst. Director of Information, USDA Forest Service, Radnor, PA.
Lloyd Casey	Forest Health and Resource Management, USDA Forest Service, Radnor, PA.
Steve Bratkovich	Marketing Specialist, USDA Forest Service, St. Paul, MN.
Lew McCreery	Rural Development, USDA Forest Service, Morgantown, WVA.
Bob Neville	Urban Forestry, USDA Forest Service, Durham, NH.
Frank Koenig	Eastern Region Liaison, USDA Forest Service, Morgantown, WVA.