Principle – Yield and Quality of Forest goods and Services are Sustainable

Criterion- Forest management is socially efficient.

Indicator (Original Wording)- Availability and use of recreational opportunities.

Indicator (Revised Wording)- Availability and use of recreational opportunities are maintained.

Box B: Definition:

The availability and use of recreational opportunities provide a partial proxy for the value of outdoor recreation. It is important to emphasize, however, that these are not direct measures of the value of non-timber use, and provide only a partial indication of preferences.

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

N/A

Box E: Overlap:

CIFOR: M4, 5.4.2

Notes:

The indicator is diagnostic, but could also have limited predictive capability if time series trends are examined.

Box I: Underlying Concepts:

Forests provide a number of non-timber values that are difficult to measure because of the absence of information regarding their cost and use. This general lack of information on the social benefits of non-timber values is a challenge for policy-makers, planners and foresters, who must make difficult choices regarding the mix of benefits to provide. Describing the range of non-timber benefits provided by forests is a multi-dimensional problem. Indicators must, therefore, be selected that incorporate not only the importance of the forest values (worth per individual), but also the intensity of utilization (total participation levels). For non-timber values that involve forest use, a proxy such as visits to forests provides a partial indication of preferences (Canadian Council of Forestry Ministers, 1997).

Box J: Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Management :

See discussion above.

Box K: Measurement Methods:

A variety of measurement methods can be utilized to assess recreation use. For example, direct survey methods can be used such as is done by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (1991) to determine hunting, fishing and non-consumptive wildlife use. Survey methods such as these are probably the best, but can be very expensive. At specific sites, traffic counters are often used to determine the number of motor vehicles passing a particular point, from which recreation use is extrapolated. On-site monitoring methods can be used to passively sample recreation activity. Trend analysis, projecting past current levels of activity on the basis of historical observations, is frequently used in many cases.

Box L: Data Required:

The data required for the test are estimates of recreation use within the study area. These data are usually expressed in "user-days" of activity, which can imply any of several specific definitions. For example, the U.S. Forest Service reports recreation use in terms of "recreation visitor days" (RVDs) which are summary statistics. One RVD is a 12-hour summary of activity although it is unknown whether this represents one person participating for 12 hours or six persons participating for 2 hours each, etc. These data are typically available for National Forests (e.g., from the Recreation Information System, RIMs). Data for recreation use on other land tenures is much more problematic. Summary reports are occasionally available from state SCORP studies (State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans) and information on participation in wildlife-related recreation is periodically reported by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (for example, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1991).

Box M: Data Used for the North American Test:

Data for recreation use on the Boise National Forest were used for the test. These data came from the standard RIM (Recreation Information System) reports and describe RVDs for various activities on an annual basis.

Box N: Example Results:

Box O: Assessing the Practicality:

While assessing outdoor recreation use is a standard undertaking of National Forests, it is much less so for other land tenures. In fact, it may be largely unmeasured for most other tenures with the exception of hunting and fishing activities. To the extent that the National Forests are the primary suppliers of forest-based outdoor recreation opportunities, this lack of estimates on other tenures may not be untenable. However, large tracts of private industrial forest land without trespass restrictions within the study area make this presumption suspect.

Box P: Assessing the Information Value:

The information content of this indicator is very high. Use statistics for outdoor recreation are an intuitively appealing and direct measure of non-timber forest uses.

Box Q: Overall assessment:

Accepted -

Strengths:

1. Reasonably well defined and measurable.
2. Indicates direct relationship between non-timber activity and forest management

Weaknesses:

1. Some data definitions are challenging and may be somewhat unreliable.
2. Data for non-federal ownerships may be unavailable.

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

No.

Box S: References:

• Canadian Council of Forest Ministers; Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Headquarters, Ottawa, Ont. 1992. National Forest Strategy. Sustainable forests: A Canadian commitment.
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1991 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington DC.
• U.S. Forest Service. Recreation Information Management System (RIMS), periodic reports.

Please record your notes on evaluating the indicator here.