Testimony of Peter Nelson Senior Policy Advisor for Federal Lands Defenders of Wildlife
|
|
- Bartholomew Sherman
- 8 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Testimony of Peter Nelson Senior Policy Advisor for Federal Lands Defenders of Wildlife Before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources U.S. Senate Hearing on the Discussion Draft Legislation, the Wildfire Budgeting, Response and Forest Management Act of June 23, 2016 Chairwoman Murkowski, Ranking Member Cantwell, and members of the Committee, My name is Peter Nelson and I am a senior policy advisor at Defenders of Wildlife where I manage our national forest policy program. Thank you for inviting my testimony today. I have been professionally involved in national forest science, policy, and management for nearly twenty years. I am a member of the Federal Advisory Committee overseeing implementation of the Forest Service s 2012 Planning Rule, as well as a member of the Beaverhead-Deerlodge Collaborative Working Group in southwest Montana. Defenders supports fixing the broken wildfire budget, a prompt transition to young growth harvest on the Tongass National Forest, and improving the effectiveness and efficiency of restoration planning and implementation on public forestlands across the country. Unfortunately, as articulated in a recent letter from 28 conservation organizations (attached at the end of this document), the draft fails to effectively resolve the wildfire budget problem, delays the Tongass transition out of old growth logging and includes provisions that threaten the conservation and management integrity of our forests and bedrock environmental laws. The Discussion Draft Fails to Solve the Wildfire Funding Problem There is broad consensus on the need to fix the wildfire funding problem, where non-fire programs are chronically starved in order to pay for fire suppression. The approach proposed in the discussion draft may alleviate short-term fire borrowing, but it fails to solve the larger problem of escalating costs. More than half of the Forest Service budget is now spent to fund fire suppression and as that percentage grows, ever more resources will be siphoned from non-fire programs. We encourage the Committee to pursue a comprehensive fire funding fix that 1) addresses the increasing ten-year average cost of the wildfire program; 2) allows access to disaster funding to respond to exceptionally costly fires; and 3) significantly reduces the need to transfer resources from non-suppression accounts and programs to fire suppression. 1
2 The Discussion Draft Obstructs Transition of the Tongass National Forest Timber Program We urge the Committee to drop the provision that blocks the finalization of the plan amendment to transition the Tongass National Forest timber program out of old growth logging and into harvest of younger trees. More than 165,000 individuals and organizations have participated in this robust public planning process and the Forest Service has sufficient information to proceed with the amendment. Unfortunately, language added to the discussion draft provision would indefinitely delay the much needed transition towards a more diverse and resilient local economy based on sustainable forestry and forest products, fishing, recreation and tourism. Limiting Analysis to Action and No Action Alternatives will Not Generate Better Decisions or Better Restoration Outcomes We appreciate the draft s attempt to set priorities for forest restoration activities. Defenders supports science-based landscape and watershed restoration, including the use of integrated actions, such as prescribed and managed fire, to achieve healthy, resilient forests. However, we believe that the provisions offered for discussion which seek to bypass the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and undermine judicial review are extreme, harmful and unlikely to lead to more focused management decisions and improved conditions on the ground. Moreover, legislating truncated decision-making will undermine accountability and legitimacy and invites a backlash that will hinder efforts to advance restoration projects. For example, the discussion draft proposes limiting analysis of alternatives for a broad range of forest management activities across public lands. Management alternatives are the heart of the NEPA process and exist for a reason to make better, more informed decisions. Limiting alternatives analysis for a poorly defined and vast suite of activities raises the risk of making uninformed, risky, and controversial decisions. This could be catastrophic in some areas, such as within a community s drinking watershed. We support the appropriate level of analysis for any given proposed action, but legislation that limits or preordains levels of analysis is counterproductive and not good public policy. The discussion draft appears to be premised on a mistaken assumption that NEPA is the primary culprit barring efforts to plan and implement forest restoration programs and projects. But as someone who has been involved with forest collaboratives, both in Montana and throughout the West, I don t see a NEPA problem as much as I see a capacity and restoration planning problem. There is a lack of tools and incentives to plan and implement forest and watershed restoration at a scale that can significantly improve conditions and achieve project-level efficiencies. Rather than blindly legislating less NEPA which always generates a storm of controversy we should be considering policies and programs that incentivize robust landscape-scale planning processes that can meet multiple restoration objectives. The success of the 4FRI project in Arizona demonstrates that large, landscape-scale projects can be planned and implemented under existing authorities. We cannot simply legislate our way to legitimate management decisions. Producing durable and defensible restoration decisions requires smarter not less analysis. The Emergency Circumstances Decision Framework Established in the Discussion Draft is Inappropriate The proposed ponderosa pine pilot program in the discussion draft is admirable in its effort to prioritize restoration in a forest type where we have a good understanding of restoration science and 2
3 practices. We must note however that the same degree of consensus does not exist in mixed conifer forests. Unfortunately, the pilot program goes down the wrong road in its use of an emergency circumstances framework for planning and implementing restoration projects. First, we don t believe this scheme can be effectively applied to potential future emergencies on public forestlands. Recent research found that less than 8 percent of forests treated to reduce fuels subsequently experienced a moderate or high-severity fire in the 20 years following the treatment. We simply don t have the ability to confidently predict where or when the next big wildfire will occur for the purposes of declaring an emergency. In addition, while we agree that grave risks to public safety may warrant emergency response, nonimminent threats to other more ambiguous values do not justify jettisoning normal decision-making and judicial review processes. We support restoration planning that identifies areas for priority actions based on science and risks to social and environmental values, and would welcome more discussion on that matter. Detailed Comments on Title III, Subtitles A and D Defenders evaluates forest management policy based on whether it will be effective in promoting positive outcomes (for example, by restoring fire-adapted ecosystems and ecological resiliency, and protecting public safety). We have extensive experience in this regard, including developing and evaluating forest resiliency projects under the Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program and the insect and disease management provisions in the 2014 Farm Bill. In general, Defenders does not support the forest management, NEPA decision-making and judicial review authorities in Title III of the discussion draft. The provisions are unlikely to lead to improved conditions on the ground, and would do much to inflame conflict and controversy over forest management. It must be noted that the Forest Service is already doing much to reduce hazardous fuels and restore ecological processes on national forests. Congress passed significant new authorizations for restoring National Forest System (NFS) lands in the 2014 Farm Bill and the Secretary of Agriculture has designated over 45 million acres of forestlands for priority restoration under those provisions, along with establishing numerous Good Neighbor Agreements with state forestry partners. Furthermore, and despite the current wildfire budget problem, the Forest Service is increasing the pace and scale of restoration on NFS lands, treating over 4.5 million acres in 2014 while producing nearly 3 billion board feet of timber. Considering the above, we are not convinced that NEPA is the primary barrier to the development and implementation of effective forest resiliency programs and projects. The success and scale (600,000 acres) of the recent Four Forest Restoration Initiative (4FRI) decision on national forests in Arizona call this assumption into question. In our experience, the lack of capacity (and program direction) to conduct robust, science-based landscape assessments that identify and prioritize project-scale resiliency restoration activities has been a major barrier to ecological restoration. For example, one national forest in Montana where Defenders is working with the Forest Service and other partners on the implementation of Farm Bill resiliency projects lacks sufficient landscape-level 3
4 ecological information to support collaborative prioritization and development of projects. Congressional attention on this tangible constraint would be welcome. Much of the problem lies in outdated forest plans that fail to reflect current restoration priorities; producing robust forest plan decisions that support implementation of broad, science-based restoration activities must be a high priority. Title III, Subtitle A Environmental Analysis for Certain Forest Management Activities Section 301, appears to assume that limiting the number of alternatives considered in environmental assessments and environmental impact statements will lead to more efficient decision-making processes and effective outcomes for a range of forest management activities. However, it is well established that alternatives are the heart of the NEPA process and exist for a reason to make better, more informed decisions (and avoid making poor decisions that miss important information yielded via comparative analysis). Limiting alternative analysis thus immediately raises the risk of making bad decisions. It is also problematic in that if analysis reveals a flaw in a proposed action, the absence of other management alternatives make it difficult, if not impossible to modify or improve the action in the final plan. Arguably the discussion draft legislation attempts to ameliorate this risk by confining the authority to limit alternative analysis to proposed management actions generated by a collaborative process or community wildfire protection plans (CWPP) that serve at least one of five primary purposes identified in the legislation. Based on our experience, using collaboration or CWPPs as a vehicle to reduce the risk of poor decision-making, particularly with regard to actions that will have significant effects on the environment, is too risky. We do appreciate that the criteria provided in the definition of collaborative process would help ensure accountability in the project planning process. However, we have seen too many collaboratives that do not have the expertise or knowledge to develop uniformly good proposals in complex forest management decision-making situations. In fact, in our experience, collaboratives can benefit from the comparative tradeoff analysis offered within NEPA for complex, comprehensive environmental decision-making. As a general matter, we place collaborative processes on a higher level than CWPPs and do not believe they should be afforded the same weight (this comment applies to Subtitle D as well). The five primary purposes intended to constrain the authority to limit NEPA analysis on a project are much too broad and do not instill confidence that Title III, Subtitle A will lead to good decisions and positive environmental outcomes. For example, it is highly unusual anymore to see a vegetation management project proposed by the Forest Service that does not have forest health and resiliency as part of the primary purpose of a project proposal. There is also no indication of how a primary purpose will be determined, and the undefined nature of the primary purposes is problematic. For example, protecting a municipal water supply (ostensibly from wildfire) requires a sophisticated and robust comparative analysis. When it comes to a community s drinking water, the risk of missing key information in conducting a truncated environmental analysis is simply too high. As a general principle and this is the system already in place with NEPA s categorical exclusions, environmental assessments, and environmental impact statements as risk, significance and uncertainty increase, more robust analysis is preferred and leads to better decisions and outcomes. We support the appropriate level of analysis for any given proposed action, but it is disingenuous for legislation to predetermine and authorize the appropriate level of analysis as proposed in the discussion draft. 4
5 NEPA requires a comparative analysis of taking no action with the effects of taking action under various management alternatives. The discussion draft appears to presume that this analytical requirement is insufficient and layers additional ambiguous criteria on top of the existing NEPA framework. Forest health, wildlife habitat, wildfire potential, insect and disease potential and economic and social factors all lack definition and therefore do not provide utility in establishing criteria for effects analysis. The language only serves to give the impression that the proposed legislation is designed to bias decision-making in favor of these undefined concepts. The result is an introduction of biased ambiguity that will likely only result in heightened controversy and conflict over management decisions, an undesirable policy outcome. In addition, it is questionable how the effects of future events would be estimated under this authority. For example, for wildfire potential, would the effects analysis assume a range of fire intensities? How would management adjust to changing conditions? Regarding the exclusion of critical habitat designated under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) from the limited alternatives provision, first and foremost it is paramount that legislation require compliance with the law. We are also concerned that the text does not reference the role of the National Marine Fisheries Service in the consultation process under the ESA. This comment applies to both this subtitle and Subtitle D. Title III, Subtitle D Accelerated Restoration Program for Ponderosa Pine and Dry-Site Mixed Conifer Forests Section 331, as currently drafted, may be a solution in search of a problem, and in fact is a major problem. The proposed subtitle undermines NEPA and associated regulations and caselaw, as well as public and judicial review of decision-making processes. The proposed pilot program on its face offers a positive purpose the restoration of ponderosa pine and other forest types. As a policy matter, there is generally broad agreement on the ecological objectives and methods for restoring ponderosa pine. It is important to note that similar agreement does not exist for mixed conifer systems, where the science, objectives and methods are less well defined. For this reason, in a policy context, we caution against lumping these forest and ecosystem types. The actual purpose of the proposed program, however, is not ecological restoration but rather the reduction of hazardous fuels, both within and outside of the wildland-urban interface. In our experience, restoration and reduction of hazardous fuels are not synonymous and reflect different management objectives, with the latter being much narrower than the former. Hazardous fuels reduction is a defensible purpose within the wildland-urban interface (WUI). Outside the WUI, the goal should be restoration of natural fire regimes and ecological resiliency. On that point, the section does refer to areas that are not in a desired condition relative to fire regime ((b)(1)(b)(ii)(i)), which implies an objective to restore natural fire regimes, but does not establish the criteria or the defensible, science-based method for how desired conditions for fire regimes would be developed. As a principle, policy proposals that articulate the defensible science-based criteria for determining which lands will be prioritized for treatment are better than those that do not specify such criteria. There are numerous definitional issues in the hazardous fuels reduction project procedures. For example, land and resource management procedures ((b)(4)(a)(i)) is unclear; highly erodible land ((b)(4)(a)(iii)) should be defined; and it is not clear why the phrase is no longer needed is 5
6 inserted into ((b)(4)(b)(ii)), adding ambiguity to the requirement, and deviating from language in Subtitle A on the same issue. We have significant concerns with the reasoning and construction of the emergency circumstances framework for decision-making and the complete dismantling of NEPA under somewhat dubious grounds. To our knowledge, the concept of emergency circumstances, as used in NEPA, has never been extended to long-term preventive actions. The Council on Environmental Quality s regulations refer to controlling the immediate impacts of an emergency (40 C.F.R ). We don t believe the concept can be effectively applied to potential future emergencies that may be nearly impossible to predict with any degree of confidence. The legislation attempts to define emergency circumstances in cases where it is extremely difficult to predict that such an emergency event is actually going to occur (by definition, an emergency is unexpected). The legislation demonstrates how difficult it is to construct a preventive emergency circumstances framework. Undefined terms create ambiguity that limit policy effectiveness and raise the likelihood of controversy, including average severe fire weather ((c)(1)(a)), difficult to contain with suppression resources likely to be available ((c)(1)(a)(i)), and a significant threat to the forest ecosystem ((c)(1)(a)(ii)(i)). As a general policy matter, we agree that significant threats to human life could warrant an emergency declaration, but a more ambiguous threat to a forest ecosystem does not rise to the same level. Similarly, the requirement to analyze effects to human life in the emergency environmental assessment ((c)(2)(c)) is warranted, but the inclusion of a bias towards jobs and federal revenue from timber sales, while of significant social value, are inappropriate within an emergency decision-making framework. Furthermore, determining the probability that a wildfire will occur in a particular area is extremely difficult. Recent research found that fuel treatments have a mean probability of % of encountering moderate or high-severity fire during an assumed 20-year period of reduced fuels (Rhodes and Baker 2008). In other words, the legislation will encourage decision makers to essentially guess where they think fire will strike, and in the absence of a defensible method to target treatments, designate extremely broad swaths of forest as wildfire emergency areas. This is not a good policy outcome as it would likely result in the declaration of emergencies in countless places all the time. Finally, the proposed pilot program fundamentally changes the judicial review of forest projects by establishing an unprecedented and undefined standard of substantial deference for decisions made under the program, which would have the effect of further reducing opportunities for oversight of forest projects. The key to securing durable restoration decisions is through solid collaboration, planning, prioritization and analysis, not legislative intervention in the judicial review process. 6
7 ** ATTACHMENT ** Alaska Wilderness League * Bark * Center for Biological Diversity Cherokee Forest Voices * Conservatives for Responsible Stewardship Conservation Northwest * Defenders of Wildlife * Earthjustice Environment America * Epic-Environmental Protection Information Center Georgia ForestWatch * Greater Yellowstone Coalition High Country Conservation Advocates * Kentucky Heartwood Klamath Forest Alliance * Los Padres ForestWatch National Audubon Society * National Parks Conservation Association Natural Resources Defense Council * San Juan Citizens Alliance Sierra Club * Southeast Alaska Conservation Council Southern Environmental Law Center * The Wilderness Society Umpqua Watersheds, Inc. * Western Watersheds Project Wild Earth Guardians * Wild Virginia June 13, 2016 The Honorable Lisa Murkowski Chairwoman Energy and Natural Resources Committee United States Senate Washington, DC The Honorable Maria Cantwell Ranking Member Energy and Natural Resources Committee United States Senate Washington, DC RE: Concerns regarding the Wildfire Budgeting Response and Forest Management Act discussion draft Dear Chairwoman Murkowski and Ranking Member Cantwell, On behalf of our millions of members and supporters, we write to highlight serious concerns with the Wildfire Budgeting, Response and Forest Management Act policy discussion draft that was released for public comment on May 25, We understand the draft may be the subject of a hearing in the coming weeks. Unfortunately, the draft fails to effectively resolve the wildfire budget problem and includes provisions that threaten the conservation and management integrity of our public forestlands and our bedrock environmental laws. This proposal limits environmental review and opportunities for public input on management of national forests and other public lands, and alters judicial review of certain forestry projects. It carves huge loopholes in the National Environmental Policy Act. Further, the draft lacks consistent requirements for forest management projects to: utilize best available science, maintain old-growth forests, focus on restoration, and preserve roadless areas. Alarmingly, the bill also promotes oldgrowth logging in the Tongass National Forest and could delay indefinitely any plan to transition to 7
8 a more sustainable regional economy in that area. These provisions are certain to generate conflict and are unlikely to yield defensible decisions and positive environmental outcomes. They should not be a part of the discussion. The draft also falls short of a real fire funding fix, and the undersigned groups do not support this approach. Among other things, any solution to the fire funding problem must address both fire borrowing and the dramatic erosion of the remaining Forest Service budget over time. This discussion draft only deals with the former and not the latter. It ignores the fact that over half of the Forest Service budget is already expended on fire suppression and that unless Congress addresses this budget erosion problem, soon only 30 percent of the agency s budget will be available for all other agency functions. Moreover, we understand that the language in the draft regarding fire borrowing is simply a placeholder suggestion to the Budget Committee. While many of our respective organizations are providing individual, detailed comments on the draft, we wanted to take this opportunity to convey to you and other members of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee our strong and collective overarching concerns with the proposal. We urge you to oppose anything short of a comprehensive response to the challenge of fire funding, to reject efforts to tack on harmful forest management provisions that promote ill-conceived logging and to steadfastly defend national forests, including essential safeguards that help protect wildlife, public access, and public participation in forest management. 8
Increasing the Pace of Restoration and Job Creation on Our National Forests
United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service February 2012 Increasing the Pace of Restoration and Job Creation on Our National Forests USDA Forest Service Executive Summary Restoration of our
OPPOSE H.R. 2406 (THE SHARE ACT )
Alaska Wilderness League * Alliance for the Wild Rockies * Animal Legal Defense Fund Animal Welfare Institute * Animals Are Sentient Beings, Inc. * Born Free USA Cascades Raptor Center * Center for Biological
Integrating Landscape Restoration and CWPP
Integrating Landscape Restoration and CWPP Two approaches: One or more CWPP embedded in a larger landscape to achieve multiple objectives CWPP that encompasses a larger landscape to achieve multiple objectives
PART I. NOMINATOR PART II. SHORT ANSWERS
PART I. NOMINATOR First Name: Bob Last Name: Davis Organization: USDA Forest Service, Region 3 Project Title: Four Forest Restoration Initiative (4FRI) Submitted by: Federal Agency Date Received: 06/14/2011
Testimony of Diane Vosick, Director of Policy and Partnerships
Testimony of Diane Vosick, Director of Policy and Partnerships The Ecological Restoration Institute, Northern Arizona University http://www.eri.nau.edu/ Before the House Federal Lands Subcommittee April
Colorado Natural Heritage Program
CNHP s mission is to preserve the natural diversity of life by contributing the essential scientific foundation that leads to lasting conservation of Colorado's biological wealth. Colorado Natural Heritage
Chapter 1b - Priority Map Development
North Carolina s Forest Resources Assessment A statewide analysis of the past, current and projected future conditions of North Carolina s forest resources 2010 Chapter 1b - Priority Map Development This
Southern California Insect related Tree Mortality. GIS Master Plan September 2003
Southern California Insect related Tree Mortality GIS Master Plan September 2003 Abstract Consecutive years of below-average precipitation from 1998 to 2003 resulted in large-scale insect outbreaks in
SEC. 4001. PURPOSE. SEC. 4002. DEFINITIONS. SEC. 4003. COLLABORATIVE FOREST LANDSCAPE RESTORATION PROGRAM.
TITLE IV--FOREST LANDSCAPE RESTORATION SEC. 4001. PURPOSE. The purpose of this title is to encourage the collaborative, sciencebased ecosystem restoration of priority forest landscapes through a process
THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR WASHINGTON
THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR WASHINGTON ORDER NO. 3336 Subject: Rangeland Fire Prevention, Management and Restoration Sec. 1 Purpose. This Order sets forth enhanced policies and strategies for preventing
The Rising Cost of Fire Operations: Effects on the Forest Service s Non-Fire Work
1 The Rising Cost of Fire Operations: Effects on the Forest Service s Non-Fire Work Overview Over 100 years ago, President Theodore Roosevelt established the U.S. Forest Service to manage America s 193-million
Case Study: The History of the San Juan Headwaters Forest Health Partnership
Case Study: The History of the San Juan Headwaters Forest Health Partnership Introduction: Wildfire is a part of life in Southwest Colorado. It plays an integral role in ecosystem health and management.
Arizona s Large Fires Suppression vs. Restoration. WESTCAS Fall 2011 Meeting Bruce Hallin Manager, Water Rights and Contracts October 27, 2011
Arizona s Large Fires Suppression vs. Restoration WESTCAS Fall 2011 Meeting Bruce Hallin Manager, Water Rights and Contracts October 27, 2011 THE PROBLEM Unhealthy Forests Since 2000, at least 1,501,654
Revising the Nantahala and Pisgah Land Management Plan Preliminary Need to Change the Existing Land Management Plan
Revising the Nantahala and Pisgah Land Management Plan Preliminary Need to Change the Existing Land Management Plan Throughout the Plan 1. There is a fundamental need for the revised plan to address how
A Marketing Strategy for Urban & Community Forestry in the West
Final Version - 01/11/2007 Page 1 of 8 A Marketing Strategy for Urban & Community Forestry in the West Developed by the Western Urban and Community Forestry Committee Of the Council of Western State Foresters
Oregon. Climate Change Adaptation Framework
Oregon Climate Change Adaptation Framework Oregon Environmental Quality Commission Climate Change Adaptation Framework Presentation at a glance: Purposes of the framework Participating agencies Climate
DIVISION ll FOREST WILD- FIRE FUNDING AND FOREST MANAGEMENT TITLE I MAJOR DISASTER FOR WILDFIRE ON FEDERAL LAND
DIVISION ll FOREST WILD- FIRE FUNDING AND FOREST MANAGEMENT TITLE I MAJOR DISASTER FOR WILDFIRE ON FEDERAL LAND SEC.. WILDFIRE ON FEDERAL LAND. Section () of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Communities and Fire Restoration. The Role of Communities in Restoring Fire as a Natural Process
Communities and Fire Restoration The Role of Communities in Restoring Fire as a Natural Process Overview 1. Frequent fire regimes dominate approximately 65% of the lower 48 states, although regional variations
Restoring Arizona s Forests: Strategies to Accelerate Action. October 3 4, 2013
Restoring Arizona s Forests: Strategies to Accelerate Action Ideas from the Restoration Investment Strategies for Arizona s Forests and Watersheds Conference October 3 4, 2013 Introduction Arizona s diverse
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Funding Highlights: Provides $23.7 billion in discretionary resources for the Department of Agriculture to invest in rural communities; nutrition assistance for vulnerable populations;
Subactivity: Habitat Conservation Program Element: National Wetlands Inventory
HABITAT CONSERVATION FY 29 BUDGET JUSTIFICATION Subactivity: Habitat Conservation Program Element: National Wetlands Inventory National Wetlands Inventory ($) FTE 27 4,7 2 28 Enacted 5,255 2 Fixed Costs
Marine Stewardship Council
Marine Stewardship Council MSC Fishery Standard Principles and Criteria for Sustainable Fishing Version 1.1 1 st May 2010 Committees responsible for this Standard This standard is intended to be used on
Thanks so much for the kind introduction, Congressman Dicks. I want to thank you for
Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack Remarks as Prepared for Delivery Seattle, Washington - August 14, 2009 Thanks so much for the kind introduction, Congressman Dicks. I want to thank you for your leadership
Section 5: Conserve to Enhance Program Goals What is Conserve to Enhance All About?
Section 5: Conserve to Enhance Program Goals What is Conserve to Enhance All About? Conserve to Enhance (C2E) was originally conceptualized as an approach to giving the environment a seat at the table
The Greater Sage-Grouse:
The Greater Sage-Grouse: Hunter opinions regarding potential conservation strategies in Colorado For: National Wildlife Federation October 30, 2014 PO Box 6435 Fernandina Beach, FL 32035 Tel (904) 277-9765
Indian Forest Management Assessment Team (IFMAT III) P.O.P.O.P.T.
Indian Forest Management Assessment Team (IFMAT-III) P.O. Box 82487 Portland, Oregon 97282 (503) 358 8521 Co-Chairs: Dr. John Gordon and Dr. John Sessions To: The Secretarial Commission on Indian Trust
Publication supported in part by an Institutional Grant (NA10OAR4170099) to the Texas Sea Grant College Program from the National Sea Grant Office,
Publication supported in part by an Institutional Grant (NA10OAR4170099) to the Texas Sea Grant College Program from the National Sea Grant Office, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S.
New York Sea Grant Strategic Plan
New York Sea Grant Strategic Plan Introduction and Process This is the new strategic plan for New York Sea Grant (NYSG) for the years 2010-2013 as requested by the National Sea Grant Office. This plan
Managing Fire Dependent Wildlife Habitat without Fire. A Land Management Practice That: 100 Years of Fire Suppression in Ponderosa pine ecosystems
Managing Fire Dependent Wildlife Habitat without Fire Dale Swedberg Chairman North Central Washington Prescribed Fire Council Land Management Practices used to Manage Wildlife Habitat A Land Management
Federal Assistance for Wildfire Response and Recovery
Federal Assistance for Wildfire Response and Recovery Katie Hoover Analyst in Natural Resources Policy September 18, 2015 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov R41858 Raging wildfires, burned
Fighting Fire with Fire: Can Fire Positively Impact an Ecosystem?
Fighting Fire with Fire: Can Fire Positively Impact an Ecosystem? Science Topic: Fire Ecology Grades: 6 th 8 th Essential Questions: What role does fire play in maintaining healthy ecosystems? How does
Sierra Nevada Forest Ecosystem Health
Sierra Nevada Forest Ecosystem Health Scott Stephens and John Battles Division of Ecosystem Science Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management University of California, Berkeley What is
The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Adirondack Wildlife Refuge and Rehabilitation Center Alliance for the Wild Rockies
The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Adirondack Wildlife Refuge and Rehabilitation Center Alliance for the Wild Rockies Animal Legal Defense Fund Animal Protection League of New
Statement of. Edwin L. Harper, PhD Senior Vice President Assurant, Inc. on behalf of the. American Council of Life Insurers
Statement of Edwin L. Harper, PhD Senior Vice President Assurant, Inc. on behalf of the American Council of Life Insurers on Protecting Americans From Catastrophic Terrorism Risk before the Subcommittee
No. 132. Land Use and Building Act (132/1999, amendment 222/2003 included) Chapter 1. General provisions. Section 1 General objective of the Act
NB: UNOFFICIAL TRANSLATION FINLAND No. 132 Land Use and Building Act (132/1999, amendment 222/2003 included) In accordance with the decision of Parliament the following is enacted: Chapter 1 General provisions
Forest-Climate Working Group:
Forest-Climate Working Group: Policy Platform 1 Forest-Climate Working Group: Policy Platform Endorsing Organizations American Bird Conservancy American Forest & Paper Association American Forest Foundation
Natural Resource Management Profile
Conducting environmental impact assessments Ensures the identification of the geographic, environmental, economic, social, and cultural scope and parameters to be used for the impact assessment study.
Statement Rick D. Cables Rocky Mountain Regional Forester U.S. Forest Service United States Department of Agriculture
Statement Rick D. Cables Rocky Mountain Regional Forester U.S. Forest Service United States Department of Agriculture Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health Committee on Resources United States House
King Fire Restoration Project, Eldorado National Forest, Placer and El Dorado Counties, Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.
This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 12/24/2014 and available online at http://federalregister.gov/a/2014-30158, and on FDsys.gov [3410-11- P] DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
March 2011 DRAFT. I. Working Forest Easements:
March 2011 DRAFT Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Division of Forestry Federal Forest Legacy Program and Minnesota Forests for the Future Program Conservation Easement Stewardship and Monitoring
Biodiversity Concepts
Biodiversity Concepts WHAT IS BIODIVERSITY? Biodiversity is the variety of life on Earth. For any kind of animal or plant each individual is not exactly the same as any other; nor are species or ecosystems.
Technology For Adaptation. Forestry Conservation Management. Dr. Javier Aliaga Lordemann
Technology For Adaptation. Forestry Conservation Management Dr. Javier Aliaga Lordemann Forests has more carbon store than the currently carbon free atmosphere. By contrast, are important sources of emissions
One Major Six Concentrations. Department of Environmental Conservation University of Massachusetts Amherst
One Major Six Concentrations Natural Resources Conservation Undergraduate Major Department of Environmental Conservation University of Massachusetts Amherst Conserving Earth s biological diversity and
Background research on the topic of urban forestry is intended to
overview urban forestry Urban Forestry Background research on the topic of urban forestry is intended to help guide the task of integrating trees and urban forestry goals and aspirations into the Portland
CLASS SPECIFICATION Environmental Specialist 30000339
City of Portland Job Code: Multiple CLASS SPECIFICATION Environmental Specialist 30000339 FLSA Status: Exempt Union Representation: City of Portland Professional Employees Association (COPPEA) GENERAL
As stewards of the land, farmers must protect the quality of our environment and conserve the natural resources that sustain it by implementing
N A T U R A L R E S O U R C E C O N S E R V A T I O N As stewards of the land, farmers must protect the quality of our environment and conserve the natural resources that sustain it by implementing conservation
CERTIFIED RANGELAND MANAGEMENT LICENSING ISSUES
State of California Memorandum To : Eric K. Huff, RPF Executive Officer - Foresters Licensing Program Board of Forestry and Fire Protection Sacramento Department of Justice 1515 Clay Street, 20 th Floor
Australian Government Response to the Senate Committee on Finance and Public Administration
Australian Government Response to the Senate Committee on Finance and Public Administration Australian Government Response to the Senate Committee on Finance and Public Administration Native Vegetation
Untreated (left) and treated (right) Sierra Nevada forests in Amador County, CA. Photos: Sierra Nevada Conservancy
Case Study Mokelumne Watershed, CA and Santa Fe, NM Avoided Costs: The Economics of Watershed Restoration Forested headwaters are the source of much of the West s drinking water. Protecting and restoring
Wildland Fire Management. A Position of the Society of American Foresters
Wildland Fire Management A Position of the Society of American Foresters Initially adopted as Fire Management in Forest and Rangeland Ecosystems by the Council of the Society on January 31, 1989, and subsequently
Environmental Law Primer. Adapted from Vermont Law School s Environmental Law Primer for Journalists
Environmental Law Primer Adapted from Vermont Law School s Environmental Law Primer for Journalists General Categories Command and Control Liability Disclosure Ecosystem and Place-based Programs Marketable
Department of the Interior. Departmental Manual
Page 1 of 10 Department of the Interior Departmental Manual Effective Date: 10/23/2015 Series: Public Lands Part 600: Public Land Policy Chapter 6: Implementing Mitigation at the Landscape-scale Originating
Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council
Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council Progress Report August 2013-August 2014 Background In July 2012, The Resources and Ecosystems Sustainability, Tourist Opportunities, and Revived Economies of the
Mainstreaming Cross-Cutting Outcomes: Gender Equality, Environmental Sustainability, Cultural Respect and Understanding. A Toolkit
Mainstreaming Cross-Cutting Outcomes: Gender Equality, Environmental Sustainability, Cultural Respect and Understanding A Toolkit January 2014 Introduction The Commonwealth Foundation has adopted a Cross-Cutting
China Protected Areas Leadership Alliance Project
Strengthening Leadership Capacity for Effective Management of China s Protected Areas Executive Summary The (CPALAP) is a multi-year initiative launched in 2008 under a partnership between the China State
Key programs and relevant studies
ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Key programs and relevant studies The Alaska Department of Natural Resources manages Alaska's surface and subsurface resources, except for fish and game. This includes
Statement of. before the. Committee on Homeland Security Subcommittee on Oversight and Management Efficiency U.S. House of Representatives
Statement of Judson M. Freed Director, Emergency Management and Homeland Security Ramsey County, Minnesota on behalf of the National Association of Counties before the Committee on Homeland Security Subcommittee
USDA Forest Service Proposed Soil and Water Restoration Categorical Exclusions Frequently Asked Questions 2013-09-05 Table of Contents
USDA Forest Service Proposed Soil and Water Restoration Categorical Exclusions Frequently Asked Questions 2013-09-05 Table of Contents What is the Final Rule implemented by the Forest Service?... 2 Why
SECTION 9 SUMMARY OF COORDINATION, PUBLIC VIEWS AND COMMENTS
SECTION 9 SUMMARY OF COORDINATION, PUBLIC VIEWS AND COMMENTS This page intentionally left blank. 9.0SUMMARY OF COORDINATION, PUBLIC VIEWS AND COMMENTS 9.1 PUBLIC OUTREACH AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Public
Peninsular Florida Landscape Conservation Cooperative. Charter. Background
Charter Background The Peninsular Florida Landscape Conservation Cooperative (Conservation Cooperative) is part of a national network of Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (LCCs). LCCs are applied conservation
Response from the Department of Treasury, Western Australia, to the Productivity Commission s Draft Report Regulatory Impact Analysis: Benchmarking
Response from the Department of Treasury, Western Australia, to the Productivity Commission s Draft Report Regulatory Impact Analysis: Benchmarking Context Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) began in Western
February 12, 2016. Water Docket Environmental Protection Agency Mailcode: 2822T 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20460
February 12, 2016 Water Docket Environmental Protection Agency Mailcode: 2822T 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20460 Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2015-0668 Dear EPA Representative: The
PARTNER CAUCUS on FIRE SUPPRESSION FUNDING SOLUTIONS
Dear Members of Congress: For years the USDA Forest Service (USFS) and the Department of the Interior (DOI) have robbed from Peter to pay Paul, by transferring money out of vital agency programs and services
Ecological Restoration Institute 2011-2015 Strategic Plan June 2011
Ecological Restoration Institute 2011-2015 Strategic Plan June 2011 I. Introduction In 1997 Dr. Wally Covington, Executive Director of the Ecological Restoration Institute testified before Congress that
NATIONAL PRIORITY 1: CONSERVE AND MANAGE WORKING FOREST LANDSCAPES FOR MULTIPLE VALUES AND USES
NATIONAL PRIORITY 1: CONSERVE AND MANAGE WORKING FOREST LANDSCAPES FOR MULTIPLE VALUES AND USES 1.1 Identify and conserve high priority forest ecosystems and landscapes. Strategy DE-1.2: Establish scientifically
An Overview of Nonprofit Governance David O. Renz, Ph.D. Midwest Center for Nonprofit Leadership at UMKC
David O. Renz, Ph.D. at UMKC This article is adapted from a chapter prepared for Philanthropy in the U.S.: An Encyclopedia (Dwight Burlingame, ed.) Governance is the process of providing strategic leadership
Wildlife Habitat Conservation and Management Program
Wildlife Habitat Conservation and Management Program Manual for Counties and Cities Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 2015 Table of Contents 1. Introduction Purpose of the habitat program Objective
Flagstaff, Arizona: Leveraging Partnerships And Public Support To Tackle Growing Wildfire Concerns
January 2016 Flagstaff, Arizona: Leveraging Partnerships And Public Support To Tackle Growing Wildfire Concerns Leaders in Wildfire Adaptation Introduction The has long been aware of the threat of catastrophic
High Conservation Value Forests 3.1. Old Growth Forests. Management & Monitoring Framework
High Conservation Value Forests 3.1 Old Growth Forests Management & Monitoring Framework HCV 3: Forest areas that are in or contain rare, threatened or endangered ecosystems. HCVF 3.1 Old Growth Areas
How To Know If A Forest Service And Bmd Plan Postfire Rehabilitation And Restoration
GAO United States Government Accountability Office Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health, Committee on Resources, House of Representatives June 2006 WILDLAND FIRE REHABILITATION
Global Environment Facility GEF OPERATIONAL PROGRAM #13 ON CONSERVATION AND SUSTAINABLE USE OF BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY IMPORTANT TO AGRICULTURE
Global Environment Facility GEF OPERATIONAL PROGRAM #13 ON CONSERVATION AND SUSTAINABLE USE OF BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY IMPORTANT TO AGRICULTURE CONTENTS Introduction..1 Convention Guidance... 2 Agricultural
Sustainable Funding Mechanisms for Restoration Work
Sustainable Funding Mechanisms for Restoration Work F EBRUARY 28, 2013 M ARCUS S ELIG D IRECTOR, COLORADO P ROGRAM NATIONAL FOREST FOUNDATION The Need The Need 4FRI 2.4M Acres 4 National Forests Funding
Do we know the cost of fires? An example from California, USA
Do we know the cost of fires? An example from California, USA Armando González lez-cabán, Ph.D. USDA Forest Service,Pacific Southwest Research Station, 4955 Canyon Crest Drive, Riverside, CA 92507 Phone
Many Voices, Many Visions: Analyzing Contemporary Environmental Issues. Teacher s Masters California Education and the Environment Initiative
11 Teacher s Masters California Education and the Environment Initiative U.S. History History-Social Science Standard 11.11.5. Many Voices, Many Visions: Analyzing Contemporary Environmental Issues California
The California Environmental Protection Agency works to restore, protect,
Environmental Protection The California Environmental Protection Agency works to restore, protect, and enhance environmental quality. The Agency coordinates the state s environmental regulatory programs
Karuk Tribe Integrating Traditional Ecological Knowledge within Natural Resource Management
Karuk Tribe Integrating Traditional Ecological Knowledge within Natural Resource Management Traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) plays a significant role in the Karuk Tribe s approach to natural resource
Ecosystem Restoration in British Columbia An Overview. Greg Anderson Provincial Ecosystem Restoration Manager 2009
Ecosystem Restoration in British Columbia An Overview Greg Anderson Provincial Ecosystem Restoration Manager 2009 Presentation Topics Where are we at & how did we get here? Understanding Ecosystem Restoration
LIVING LANDS Helping Land Trusts Conserve Biodiversity
LIVING LANDS Helping Land Trusts Conserve Biodiversity Land Trust Biodiversity Survey, Winter 2006 Purpose of Survey To better understand local land trusts current activities and interest in biodiversity
864 653-7224 SFI INC. LAUNCHES NEW STANDARD LEADS FOREST CERTIFICATION FORWARD
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Rick Cantrell January 12, 2010 SFI Vice President and COO 864 653-7224 SFI INC. LAUNCHES NEW STANDARD LEADS FOREST CERTIFICATION FORWARD WASHINGTON Sustainable Forestry Initiative
1. Passing on Your Assets. Photo courtesy of Sean Pollock
To find out if an estate planning attorney has experience working with landowners and land assets, you can ask him or her to describe a typical client, how often he or she works with families and land
Response Levels and Wildland Fire Decision Support System Content Outline
Response Levels and Wildland Fire Decision Support System Content Outline In wildland fire management, practitioners are accustomed to levels of incident management, initial attack response, dispatch levels,
Wildfire Risk Reduction, Fuels Treatment, and Federal Land Management Planning: Incorporating Risk Analysis into Landscape- and Project-level Planning
Policy Analysis Group Jay O Laughlin, Director (208) 885-5776 jayo@uidaho.edu www.cnrhome.uidaho.edu/pag William J. McLaughlin, Dean (208) 885-6442 billm@uidaho.edu Issue Brief No. 13 July 26, 2010 Wildfire
Lesson Overview. Biodiversity. Lesson Overview. 6.3 Biodiversity
Lesson Overview 6.3 6.3 Objectives Define biodiversity and explain its value. Identify current threats to biodiversity. Describe how biodiversity can be preserved. THINK ABOUT IT From multicolored coral
NOAA NATIONAL SEA GRANT COLLEGE PROGRAM 2014 2017 STRATEGIC PLAN
NOAA NATIONAL SEA GRANT COLLEGE PROGRAM 2014 2017 STRATEGIC PLAN Sustaining our nation s ocean, coastal and Great Lakes resources through university based research, communications, education, extension
Subject: Independent Science Reviews of San Diego Wildland Task Force Report, Mitigation Strategies for Reducing Wildland Fire Risks (August 2003)
SAN DIEGO FIRE RECOVERY NETWORK Fostering recovery of our human and natural environment through sound science, improved planning, public education, and community-based action. 5 February 2004 Mr. Walter
Seattle Comprehensive Plan: Toward a Sustainable Seattle Evaluation
Plan Analysis for UAP 5794 Sustainability Planning Lab Seattle Comprehensive Plan: Toward a Sustainable Seattle Evaluation Kaitlen Scanlon March 26, 2011 Table of Contents City Context Information... 2
On behalf of the Securities Industry & Financial Markets Association. Before the House Small Business Subcommittee for Finance and Tax
Statement of Jim McCarthy, Managing Director, Retirement Plan Services Morgan Stanley On behalf of the Securities Industry & Financial Markets Association Before the House Small Business Subcommittee for
Using an All lands Framework for Conservation of Ecosystem Services
Using an All lands Framework for Conservation of Ecosystem Services Robert Deal USDA Forest Service - PNW Research Station, Portland, OR Nikola Smith USDA Forest Service - Pacific Northwest Region, Portland,
Chapter 3 Planning Issues, Opportunities, and Constraints
Chapter 3 Planning Issues, Opportunities, and Constraints Introduction This chapter describes the key factors planning issues, opportunities, and constraints that influenced development of this RMP/EA.
action plan water for life water for life action plan 1
action plan water for life water for life action plan 1 ISBN 978-0-7785-7672-3 November 2009 2 water for life action plan TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 3 Alberta Water Council renewal recommendations
September 25, 2015. Dear Concerned Citizen:
IN REPLY REFER TO 5400/1792 (ORC030) ORC00-TS-2016.0001 Cloud 19 CT Timber Sale DOI-BLM-OR-C030-2010-0001-EA Fairview NWFP Project Environmental Assessment September 25, 2015 Dear Concerned Citizen: United
The State of the Sierra Nevada s Forests
Urgent action is needed in the Sierra Nevada to avoid devastating impacts on California's environment and economy. Photo: U.S. Forest Service The State of the Sierra Nevada s Forests A Report of the Sierra
S. ll. To expedite and prioritize forest management activities to achieve ecosystem restoration objectives, and for other purposes.
TH CONGRESS ST SESSION S. ll To expedite and prioritize forest management activities to achieve ecosystem restoration objectives, and for other purposes. IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES llllllllll Mr.
Statement of Howard L. Edwards General Attorney Anaconda Copper Company Denver, Colorado and. Hearing on Non-Fuel Minerals Policy
Statement of Howard L. Edwards General Attorney Anaconda Copper Company Denver, Colorado and Hearing on Non-Fuel Minerals Policy Subcommittee on Energy and Materials Committee on Energy United States Senate
Healthy Forests Resilient Water Supply Vibrant Economy. Ecological Restoration Institute
Healthy Forests Resilient Water Supply Vibrant Economy Ecological Restoration Institute How Water Gets to Your Home MOST OF THE VALLEY S WATER SUPPLY comes from winter precipitation and runoff from Arizona
National Wildfire Coordinating Group Communicator's Guide for Wildland Fire Management: Fire Education, Prevention, and Mitigation Practices
National Wildfire Coordinating Group Communicator's Guide for Wildland : Fire Education, Prevention, and Mitigation Practices 3. 3. A. Wildland Agencies and their Roles i. National Interagency Fire Center
Multiple Species Conservation Program County of San Diego. A Case Study in Environmental Planning & The Economic Value of Open Space
Multiple Species Conservation Program County of San Diego A Case Study in Environmental Planning & The Economic Value of Open Space Amy M. Fox Land Use Law Case Study Autumn Semester, 1999 Multiple Species
STATE OF NEW YORK ATTORNEY GENERAL ANDREW M. CUOMO
STATE OF NEW YORK ATTORNEY GENERAL ANDREW M. CUOMO TESTIMONY UNITED STATES SENATE COMMITTEE ON BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS Washington, D.C. June 6, 2007 I thank Chairman Dodd, Ranking Member Shelby,
Re: Electronic Standards for Public Health Information Exchange
NCVHS June 16, 2014 Honorable Sylvia Mathews Burwell Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services 200 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20201 Re: Electronic Standards for Public Health Information
Public Land Management and Interdependent Collection of Programs
FS Agreement Number: 00-SU-11130142-080 MASTER SERVICE-WIDE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING Between the EASTERN LANDS AND RESOURCES COUNCIL THE WESTERN STATES LAND COMMISSIONERS ASSOCIATION And the UNITED