1 / 14

Forest Certification Test Project on the Allegheny National Forest

Forest Certification Test Project on the Allegheny National Forest . Evaluation - June 12-16, 2006 Report – July 15, 2007. Experience from the test audit on the Allegheny NF. Why the Allegheny?. Strong local interest and support for certified forests in Pennsylvania

upton
Download Presentation

Forest Certification Test Project on the Allegheny National Forest

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Forest Certification Test Project on the Allegheny National Forest Evaluation - June 12-16, 2006 Report – July 15, 2007

  2. Experience from the test audit on the Allegheny NF

  3. Why the Allegheny? • Strong local interest and support for certified forests in Pennsylvania • Active and controversial timber sale program • A diverse and complex set of management issues to deal with

  4. Pre-assessment Documentation • Forest Plan • Forest Service Manual/Handbook Direction • Programmatic Direction Documents • Monitoring and Evaluation Reports

  5. Pre-Assessment Process • Two-day discussion of resource management programs and processes • Informal, with cross-section of resource managers and program leaders in attendance • Designed to help guide the assessment team to the answers they needed

  6. Type of Site # Sites visited Shelterwood 11 Thinning 5 Salvage thinning 5 Salvage 2-age 2 Two-age (1st cut 3 Prescribed burn 2 Perimeter fencing 3 Pine planting 1 Herbicide application 2 Lop/scatter slash 2 Landings 9 Type of Site # Sites visited Skid Trails 9+ Stand inclusions 3 Boundary lines 2 Borrow pits 2 Hiking trails 3 Forest roads 9+ Oil and gas well heads and pads 4 Riparian buffer zone 4 Wildlife openings 2 Road/stream crossing 1 ATV trail 1 Management Aspects Reviewed in the Field

  7. Oil/Gas Development

  8. Private Oil & Gas • Audit team struggled with how to access impacts from private oil & gas development (water quality, social, wildlife) • Concluded it did not have an overriding influence on the forest at this time • Concern is on balancing with other forest uses in the future

  9. What were some of the findings on the ANF? • NFS management meets or exceeds many FSC and SFI standards • Logging contractors do not consistently fulfill safe guards built into the Timber Sale Contracts and are not state certified (CAR 2/06 & 7/06) • The need to assess and manage the harvesting and monitoring of non-timber forest products (CAR 3/06) • No protocol for assessing presence or monitoring to maintain attributes of High Conservation Value Forests on abutting forestlands (CAR 9/06 & 10/06) • ANF guidelines for protecting riparian zones do not match FSC standard (CAR 4/06)

  10. What did we learn? • Our workforce is open to outside audit • Stakeholder contacts balanced the interests of our concerned publics • It was comprehensive and expanded our view on logger safety & HCVF on adjoining lands • An adequate exchange with audit team occurred after field session – No disagreement with CAR’s

More Related