Principle - Yield and Quality of Forest Goods are Sustainable

Criterion- An effective monitoring and control systems audits management’s conformity with planning

Indicator – Documentation and records of all forest management activities are kept in a form that makes it possible for monitoring to occur

Box B: Definition:

(CIFOR Source):

Documentation is the process of preparing and classifying documents and making them available to others.

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

All owners need to keep records of their activities, for their own management and planning, and as is applicable, to make the records available to other interested parties. The depth or detail of the records will differ by tenure. Agencies that are subject to public scrutiny will need greater detail than others. Detailed records of plans, processes and accomplishments, are needed by all owners in evaluating success of management activities and for planning.

CIFOR 3.1 1.1.1 3.2.1

Linkages to other Criteria/Indicators (according to CIFOR Source):

Direct link to:

• C6.2 Management objectives clearly and precisely described and documented
• C6.3 A comprehensive forest management plan is available
• C6.4 Implementation of management is conducive to sustainability

Indirect link to:

• C6.1 Forest management is implemented on the basis of legal title of the land,

recognized customary rights or clear lease agreements

 Box F: Geo-Political Scale:

Notes: This indicator equally fits all geo-political scales.

Notes "Documentation and records of all forest management activities are kept in a form that makes it possible for monitoring to occur" is both a diagnostic and a predictive indicator. It helps to make a diagnosis on the current condition of sustainability by mapping the overall available data. It also helps predicting the forest future condition by building models from data available that determine trends of sustainability. Documentation and record of all forest management activities will indicate whether the forest is in good management or not.

Notes: NA; Structure, function and composition are ecological parameters

Box I: Underlying Concepts:

All owners need to keep records of their activities, for their own management and planning, and as is applicable, to make the records available to other interested parties. Detailed records of plans, processes and accomplishments, are needed to evaluate success of management activities and for planning purposes. For those agencies that come under public scrutiny, they must both prepare and maintain records in a format that make them understandable and accessible by interested stakeholders.

Monitoring mostly consists of repeating measurements in a number of sampling units, or parts of units, and comparing the two sets of measurements and records.

Monitoring must cover:

• plot demarcation
• tree measurements and identification
• Records, etc.

There are four methods of recording field measurements:

• The use of forms that are designed without concern for subsequent calculations. The needed information is extracted from the forms and computations done apart from them. This is an inefficient method
• The use of forms with space for subsequent calculations. Excellent for inventories for which limited information is desired
• The use of forms designed for efficient transfer of data to computer input devices (punch cards, computer terminal. etc.)
• The use of methods that permit direct data entry into the computer (electronic data recorders, etc.)

Box J: Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Management:

This indicator is a useful assessment gauge for sustainable management because it allows the manager to monitor and predict trends on the use, impact, conservation and sharing of natural resources

Purpose:

• Providing information as a basis for long term planning
• To assess and minimize the frequency and extent of human errors

Box K: Measurement Methods:

Standard forms and systems for recording field information are limited. Each owner/manager often will need to design their own forms. Professional judgement is applicable to determine whether management documents exist or not; if they exist, what is their quality related to sustainability?

Box L: Data Required:

The data required are mainly maps, permanent plot inventory data, old and current aerial photographs, current satellite images

Development needs:

Standard form or system for recording field observations

Box M: Data Used for the North American Test:

Map on land ownership in the Boise Study Area, created in July 15^th, 1998 by BSU-Department of Geoscience GIS/Facility.

Data used were inventory and harvest information as well as management plan from USDA-FS Boise National Forest, Payette National Forest. Inventory and harvest data were also used from Bureau of Land Management, Idaho State Lands, Boise Cascade Corporation and other private lands.

Visits to the forest and other land use areas were carried out by the Team to make documents compatible with ground conditions.

Box N: Example Results:

Box O: Assessing the Practicality:

Yes, the Indicator can be tracked over time and should not be too costly to measure repeatedly. All forest management activities must be documented. To assess whether documentation exists or not should be easy; however, to assess its quality will require professional judgement from experts, who will normally verify the information value based on the existence of data from permanent plots. These data are frequently used to determine the current status and trend of forest resources management related to sustainability.

Box P: Assessing the Information Value:

The Indicator will provide information to managers and other stakeholders that will allow them to correct or adjust any management misconception.

Managers should balance inventory costs and collection of data relevant to sustainable forest management. It is not difficult to find inventory data for most forests in North America which does not guarantee sustainability. Quality of inventory data is what really matters.

Existence of data per se does not guarantee that the forest is being monitored. Data need to be analyzed so that there will be available information at different language levels for public involvement, planning officers, and technical and scientific monitoring.

Box Q: Overall assessment:

Accepted -

Limitation of the Indicator:

There are no standard form or system for recording field observations

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

No

Box S: References:

• Conway, S. 1976. Logging practices, Principles of timber harvesting systems. Miller Freeman Publications, Inc. San Francisco. 416 p.
• Force, J. E. and H. W. Lee. 1989. Non-industrial private forest land use in Southern Idaho. A survey of landowner objectives. Contribution No. 459, Idaho Forest, Wildlife and Range Experimentation, college of Forestry, Wildlife and Range Sciences. University of Idaho, Moscow, Id. 41 p.
• Idaho’s Forest Land Taxation Law. Revised 4/98. Prepared by the Idaho State Tax Commission, Forest Land & Forest Tax Section. Boise, Idaho.
• USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Region, Boise National Forest. 1990. Land and resource management plan for the Boise National Forest.
• USDA FS, BSU. 1998. The Evolution of Forest Management. 25 years of change on the Boise National Forest. Map at BNF 1966, 1976 and 1990. Project performed by Charlla Adams and Wendy Eklund. Contact persons: Lyn Morelan (BNF), Joe Frost (BNF) and Tyson Taylor (BSU).

Further reading (from CIFOR Source):

• Department of Natural resource and Environment. 1996. Code of Practice: Code of Forest Practices for Timber Production. Revision No.2. Gill Miller Press Pty. Ltd. Melbourne.
• Dykstra, D. and R. Heinrich. 1996. FAO Model Code of Forest Harvesting Practice. FAO. Rome.
• Dykstra, D.P. and R. Heinrich. (Ed). 1996. Forest Codes of Practice: Contributing to Environmentally Sound Forest Operations. Proceedings of an FAO/IUFRO Meeting of Expert on Forest Practices held in Feldafing, Germany on 11-14 December 1994. FAO-IUFRO. Rome.
• Husch, B., Miller, C.I., and T.W. Beers. 1993. Forest Mensuration. Krieger Publishing Company. Florida.
• Matthews, J.D. 1989. Silvicultural Systems. Clarendon Press. Oxford.
• Panayotou, T. and P.S. Ashton. 1992. Not by Timber Alone: Economics and Ecology for sustaining Tropical Forests. Island Press. Washington, D.C.
• Philip, M.S. 1994. Measuring Trees and Forest. 2^nd Edition. CAB International. Oxon.
• Prahbu, R., Colfer, C.J.P., Venkateswarlu, P., Lay, C.T., Soekmadi, R. and E. Wollenberg. 1996. Testing Criteria and Indicators for the Sustainable Management of Forests: Phase 1 Final Report. CIFOR Special Publication. CIFOR. Bogor.
• Prabhu, R.B., Weidelt, H.-J., and S. Leinert. 1993. Sustainable Management of Tropical Rainforest: Experience, Risks, and Opportunities. An Investigation Based on Four Casestudies. BMZ. Bonn.
• Stork, N.E., Boyle, T.J.B, Dale, V., Eeley, H., Finegan, B., Lawes, M., Manokaran, N., Prabhu, R., and J. Soberon. 1997. Criteria and Indicators for Assessing the Sustainability of Forest Management: Conservation of Biodiversity. Working Paper No. 17. CIFOR. Bogor.
• Young, R. A. and R. L. Giese. (ed.). 1982. Introduction to Forest Science. 2nd Edition. John Willey & Sons. New York

Please record your notes on evaluating the indicator here.

Professional judgement is applicable to determine whether management documents exist or not; if they exist, a decision needs to be made as to their quality related to sustainability.

It is not difficult to find inventory data from most forest in North America, which does not guarantee sustainability. Quality of inventory data is what really matters. Managers should be able to find balance between inventory costs and data relevance to sustainable forest management.

Existence of data per se does not guarantee that the forest is being monitored. Data requires to be analyzed so that there will be available information at different language levels for public involvement, planning officers, and technical and scientific monitoring.