Principle - Yield and Quality of Forest Goods are Sustainable

Criterion- The management plan is implemented and effective in moving toward stated goals.

Old wording: Infrastructure is laid out prior to harvesting and in accordance with prescriptions.

New wording: Transportation systems are planned and constructed prior to harvesting and according to acceptable standards

Box B: Definition:

The construction, installation and maintenance of roads, bridges, firebreaks, and skid trails needs to be planned prior to harvesting, and accomplished in accordance with the plans.

Box D: Applicability to Different Landowners. Explain any differences:

The concept applies to all owners regardless of management objective.

Box E: Overlap:

CIFOR: 3.1.1 3.1 3.2.4

Notes: The need to have plans for road systems, skid roads, and bridges prepared prior to harvesting in order to expedite the removal of commodities, and to assure that the actual work done is in compliance with the plans applies specifically to site conditions

Notes:

The measure or observation to determine if plans have been prepared for roads, bridges and skid trails prior to actual construction, and the determination to see if the construction was done in accordance with the plan, is strictly a measure of current conditions and has no predictive quality.

Notes:

These are ecosystem functions and do not apply directly to management.

Box I: Underlying Concepts:

Road engineering involves the specification of design standards and the actual engineering design, field layout, construction and maintenance of forest roads and subsidiary structures such as bridges and culverts. Parts of a major road design might be modified and improved in light of a topography assessment carried out during pre-harvesting plan operations.

• Proper road planning to reduce road density and minimize soil disturbance
• Reduction of the total area of disturbance associated with road (road width, cutting and filling)
• Keeping roads away from streams and outside stream side buffer zones
• Where a stream crossing is necessary, the crossing structure must be designed and constructed with the minimum impact on the stream
• Use of roadside ditches and properly spaced cross-drains to channel water away from the road structure and into the surrounding vegetation
• Keeping the road grade as low as possible: with a maximum grade of 10 to 20% or 6° to 11° . Section on 20% slope must not exceed 500 m in length
• Forest road must be designed and laid out in the field by skilled engineers.
• Road must be constructed at least three months before logging

• Ground skidding is not allowed on slopes greater than 15° (30%), in protected areas or stream buffer zones
• Stream crossing is not allowed and must be avoided as much as possible. If this cannot be avoided, crossing points must be clearly shown on the map and must be approved after a field checking by a forester of the RIL supervising team
• Skid trail network must be optimized according to the position and density of trees to be felled in order to minimize the length of trails to be opened in the forest

Purpose:

• To provide convenient, low-cost access to the forest for product transport and to serve the needs of forest management and protection, and at the same time be beneficial for local communities
• To minimizing soil erosion associated with roads, thereby reducing sedimentation in streams

For the Boise test, all aspects of road and skid trail construction, including location with reference to streams and slopes, installation of bridges and culverts, cross ditching, rolling dips, etc., must be done in accordance with the Idaho Forest Practices Act, Title 38, Chapter 13, Idaho Code, with the associated rules and Best Management Practices. This Act is administered by various state agencies and applies to all forested lands, and all ownerships, including Federal Lands, in the State. Similar laws have been passed in the states of Nevada, Washington, Oregon and California.

The Forest Practices Act was established, in part, to bring the State into compliance with the Federal Clean Water Act of 1972. It was established, in its current form, in 1974. While water quality was the initiating factor, the State Legislature recognized the need to protect other public resources such as soil, air, and wildlife and aquatic habitats. The economic value of forestlands and the need for ongoing growth and harvest were also recognized. These values have all been incorporated as rules (Rules Pertaining to the Idaho Forest practices Act. Title 38, chapter 13, Idaho Code, published by the Idaho Department of Lands, Boise Idaho, July 1996) and the Best Management practices associated with the rules (Forestry for Idaho, BMP’s (Best Management Practices) Forest Stewardship Guidelines for Water Quality published Jointly by the Idaho Department of Lands, the University of Idaho Cooperative Extension System, the USDA Forest Service, the Idaho Forest Products Commission, and the Forest Stewardship Program, September 1996.)

The Forest Practices Act (FPA) requires the State land Board (The Governing body for the Idaho Department of Lands, made up of the top five elected officials of the state) to adopt rules describing the minimum forest practices standards. A standing Forest Practices Act committee provides technical advice to the Board. Audits of compliance with the BMP’s and to determine if the BMP’s are accomplishing the goals of the Act are conducted periodically. Evaluations based on these audits are compiled, and changes to the rules and BMP’s are made, as needed, to accomplish the goals of the Forest practices Act. Accordingly, the Idaho Legislature has amended the Forest Practices Act in 1980,19878, 1989, 1992 and 1995, with concurrent rule amendments occurring about the same time.

In practice, Forest Practice Act Advisors, working for the Idaho Department of Lands, conduct inspections, on a sample basis, of all forest practices conducted within the state. If they find infractions of the rules, they have the authority to stop all activities until the problems are repaired. This is done to assure compliance with the provision of the Act on the part of all forest managers, operators and stakeholders.

Box J: Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Management:

CIFOR: Forest roads must be constructed with environmentally sound engineering practices to minimize the impact of soil erosion and stream sedimentation for sustainable forest management.

For the Boise test, the Forest Practices Act was passed to assure the continuous growing and harvesting of forest trees, to maintain forest soils, air quality, vegetation, wildlife, and aquatic habitat. These are all parameters of sustainable forest management.

Box K: Measurement Methods:

CIFOR: Infrastructure assessment must take into account road engineering, which involves the specification of design standards and the actual design, field layout, construction and maintenance of forest roads and subsidiary structures such as bridges and culverts.

For the Boise test, we looked at the Forest Practices Act inspection reports, and compared the numbers of inspections with the numbers where management activities had to be stopped in order to assure compliance with the provision of the Act.

Box L: Data Required:

General information about the engineering designs and construction standards used in developing transportation systems.

Data or information relative to compliance with standards of road construction, protection of water quality, etc.

Box M: Data Used for the North American Test:

We used Idaho Department of Lands records for numbers of forest practices and the numbers of those practices found to be in violation of the rules.

Box N: Example Results:

The following charts illustrate the monitoring that is being done by the Idaho Department of Lands to verify compliance with the state Forest Practices Act. These charts show the total number of forest practices conducted in the respective administrative areas compared to the number that were judged to be in violation of the rules, and issued a notice of violation. We could determine if the violations involved any aspect of road or skid trail construction and maintenance by going to the state records and sorting through the reports to determine the actual cause of the violation report.

Box O: Assessing the Practicality:

For those areas that have some sort of monitoring system established, such as the Forest Practices Act inspections being done by personnel of the Idaho department of Lands, it is a very easy task to verify compliance with proper design, placement and maintenance of all components of forest transportation systems.

For areas that do not have systems of this nature, it should be relatively easy to check for the presence of engineering specifications, and to inquire if they have been followed. Field inspections may be necessary to verify compliance.

Implementation of a monitoring system, such as that being conducted by the Idaho Department of Lands would take a substantial commitment for funding and personnel. The Idaho Department of Lands 1999 Fiscal Year budget for their FPA program is $1,209,200.

Box P: Assessing the Information Value:

This information is very valuable in helping to determine that the aspects of sustainability associated with transportation systems are being achieved. Records and reports summarizing the findings of the Idaho Forest practices Act inspections are being used to verify that the provisions of the act are being met, and thus, that the specific components of the ecosystem addressed by the act are being protected and maintained.

Box Q: Overall assessment:

Rejected – Combined in part with GFE 15, CIFOR 3.3.2

Strengths: For the Boise tests area, the system is already in place and being used. This system, and others that are similar, can serve as examples and models for development and implementation in areas or countries that need this type of monitoring and verification system.

Weakness: The expense of initiating a system to verify the proper construction and maintenance of transportation systems may be prohibitively high.

Box R: Did you rewrite or revise to a new indicator. If so what?

Yes: Transportation systems are planned and constructed prior to harvesting and according to acceptable standards

Box S: References:

• Idaho Forest Practices Act, Title 38, Chapter 13, Idaho Code,
• Rules Pertaining to the Idaho Forest practices Act. Title 8, Chapter 13, Idaho Code, published by the Idaho Department of Lands, Boise Idaho, July 1996
• Forestry for Idaho, BMP’s (Best Management Practices) Forest Stewardship Guidelines for Water Quality. Published Jointly by the Idaho Department of Lands, the University of Idaho Cooperative Extension System, the USDA Forest Service, the Idaho Forest Products Commission, and the Forest Stewardship Program, September 1996.

Road construction:

• USDA Forest Service Manual (FSM 7700)
• USDA Forest Service Handbook (FSH 7109.52, 7709.55, 7709.56b, 7709.57)
• Forest Service Specifications for Construction of Roads and Bridges
• Idaho Department of Lands Geotechnical Series, Larry Morrison
• No. 1: Geotechnical Definitions, References and Glossary
• No. 2: Geologic setting of Idaho Endowment timberlands; General design implications.
• No. 3: Groundwater and it’s geotechnical effects
• No. 4: The science and "art" of Subdrainage
• No. 5: Slope stability; Theory and practice
• No. 6: Erosion and sedimentation; Principles and practical application
• No. 7: Soil compaction; Principles and equipment
• No. 8: Slide repair; principles and methods
• No. 9: Geotextiles; Applications and design procedures
• No. 10: Gabion structures; Design and construction
• No. 11: Riprap; design and construction
• No. 12: Bridges; Planning, design and inspections
• No. 13: Rock pits and rock products; Selection, development and crushing

Please record your notes on evaluating the indicator here.