The Forester's Dilemma : Paradoxes in the Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Forestry

University of New Hampshire University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository

New Hampshire Agricultural Experiment Station Publications New Hampshire Agricultural Experiment Station

2001

The forester's dilemma : paradoxes in the criteria and indicators for sustainable forestry

Theodore E. Howard University of New Hampshire - Main Campus, [email protected]

Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.unh.edu/nhaes

Part of the Forest Biology Commons, and the Forest Management Commons

Recommended Citation Howard, Theodore E., "The forester's dilemma : paradoxes in the criteria and indicators for sustainable forestry" (2001). Bois et forêts des tropiques. 217. https://scholars.unh.edu/nhaes/217

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the New Hampshire Agricultural Experiment Station at University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in New Hampshire Agricultural Experiment Station Publications by an authorized administrator of University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. BOIS ET FORÊTS DES TROPIQUES, 2001, N° 270 (4) 75 CRITÈRES ET INDICATEURS / LE POINT SUR…

The forester’s dilemma: paradoxes in the criteria and indicators for sustainable forestry

This article focuses on criteria and indicators for sustainable forestry, E. Howard Theodore with a discussion that should be of interest for the forestry research Department of Natural Resources community as a whole. Based on local experience the problem of the limits of University of New Hampshire the content of criteria and indicators is addressed to their developers and Durham, NH 03824 users. USA

An orchid to be protected. Une orchidée à protéger. Photo B. Dupuy. 76 BOIS ET FORÊTS DES TROPIQUES, 2001, N° 270 (4) FOCUS / CRITERIA AND INDICATORS

RÉSUMÉ ABSTRACT RESUMEN

LE DILEMME DU FORESTIER : THE FORESTER’S DILEMMA: EL DILEMA DEL FORESTAL: PARADOXES DANS LES CRITÈRES ET PARADOXES IN THE CRITERIA AND PARADOJAS EN LOS CRITERIOS E INDICATEURS DE L’AMÉNAGEMENT INDICATORS FOR SUSTAINABLE INDICADORES DE LA ORDENACIÓN FORESTIER FORESTRY FORESTAL

L’aménagement forestier à long Since sustainable forestry is a com- Al ser la ordenación forestal a largo terme étant une entreprise complexe, plex endeavor, paradoxes naturally plazo una tarea compleja existen, ló- il existe par nature des paradoxes exist in the certification criteria and gicamente, paradojas en los criterios dans les critères et indicateurs de cer- indicators. There are different ways to e indicadores de certificación. tification. Différents moyens permet- establish the sustainability horizon Diferentes medios permiten fijar un tent de fixer un horizon de planifica- and alternative harvest profiles that, horizonte de planificación y posibles tion et des profils d’exploitation although sustainable, may not meet perfiles de explotación que, aunque possibles qui, bien qu’assurant un specific criteria. The application of garantizan un rendimiento sostenido rendement soutenu et la stabilité à historic range of variation data and y la estabilidad a largo plazo del bos- long terme de la forêt, peuvent ne criteria must confront issues of time que, puede que no cumplan ciertos pas satisfaire à certains critères. and spatial scales as well as how criterios. La aplicación de la evolu- L’amplitude de la variation dans le much human disturbance is natural. ción de la variación en el tiempo y de temps des données et des critères se Defining “local” in the bioregional los criterios tropieza con problemas heurte à des problèmes d’échelle context is important for addressing de escala temporal y espacial y con la temporelle et spatiale ainsi qu’à l’es- socioeconomic criteria. The forester’s estimación de la perturbación antró- timation de la perturbation anthro- ability to deal with the self-contradic- pica aceptable, cuando se define lo pique acceptable lorsqu’on définit ce tions in the criteria and indicators of que es natural. La definición del ca- qui est naturel. La définition du carac- sustainable forestry will improve with rácter “local” en el contexto biorre- tère « local » dans le contexte bioré- experience in the certification gional es importante para tratar los gional est importante pour traiter les process. criterios socioeconómicos. La capaci- critères socio-économiques. dad del forestal para gestionar las L’aptitude du forestier à traiter les Keywords: management, certifica- contradicciones internas en los crite- contradictions internes dans les cri- tion, criteria, planning, community. rios e indicadores del manejo sosteni- tères et indicateurs de la gestion du- ble mejorará con la experiencia en el rable s’améliorera avec l’expérience proceso de certificación. dans le processus de certification. Palabras clave: ordenación, certifica- Mots-clés : aménagement, certifica- ción, criterio, planificación, comuni- tion, critère, planification, commu- dad. nauté.

Douglas-fir stands of various ages in a sustainably managed forest, Washington, Pacific Northwest United States. Peuplements de sapins de Douglas (Pseudotsuga douglasii) d’âges différents dans une forêt aménagée de l’État de Washington, nord-ouest des États-Unis. Photo T. E. Howard. BOIS ET FORÊTS DES TROPIQUES, 2001, N° 270 (4) 77 CRITÈRES ET INDICATEURS / LE POINT SUR…

Introduction

Not only is sustainable forest programs in North America including It is not surprising to find self- management a complex endeavor, the International Standards Orga- contradictions in these North Ame- but there also are multiple perspec- nization’s ISO 14001, the Canadian rican systems or in certification sys- tives on what sustainable forestry is. Standards Association’s Canada’s tems around the world. It is the very The spectrum of definitions ranges National Sustainable Forest nature of forest management that from extreme anthropocentric utilitar- Management System Standard such paradoxes exist. Davis et al. ianism to extreme biocentrism (Gale, (CAN/CSA Z809-96) and the (2000) describes two types of mana- Cordray, 1994). Given the complexity Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) of gement problems, type A and of the task and the variety of view- the American Forest and Paper type B. Type A problems have clearly points, it is not surprising that there Association. The Association is the defined goals, objectives, and cons- are self-contradictions within the cri- major organization representing the traints and employ objective criteria teria and indicators that foresters US forest products industry. All mem- for selecting an optimum solution. must apply at the forest management bers must observe the guidelines es- Operations planning that use linear unit level. These internal inconsisten- tablished in the SFI program. programming fit the type A situation. cies or paradoxes are both explicit Currently, association members and Type B problems, on the other hand, and implicit in nature. SFI licensees manage 29 million have multiple and, often, conflicting In an explicit paradox, we can hectares of forestland in North goals and objectives and there is no juxtapose two criteria and immedi- America. However, unlike FSC’s third- objective criterion for identifying the ately envision the potential for con- party assessment approach, SFI best solution. Subjective judgment flict. In an implicit paradox, the incon- began largely as a second-party certi- must be employed to select the prefer- gruities are less obvious, but they are fication process; i.e. the members ad- red course of action. Sustainable for- perhaps more important because here to the association’s standards. est management is the classic type B they hide value judgments and imper- SFI now includes third-party audits problem. There are many views of fect information within seemingly ob- and has certified or is in the process what we should be sustaining and how jective criteria. of certifying nearly 20 million we should do it. As a consequence, This paper will discuss some of hectares of forest owned by twenty paradoxes naturally arise in the crite- these explicit and implicit paradoxes major forest products companies in ria and indicators that foresters apply to illustrate the difficulties foresters North America. at the management unit level. and certifiers confront when the criteria and indicators are applied at the forest management unit level. My Faidherbia albida. Niger. purpose is to raise issues that are Faidherbia albida. Niger. Photo Barbier. likely to be important as nations and regions develop criteria and indicators to fit the circumstances of their forests and societies. I will use exam- ples from the Forest Stewardship Council (hereafter, FSC) and from one of its accredited certifying bodies, SmartWood, Inc. Their role as sources for this paper does not imply any spe- cial favor or criticism. They are simply the organizations with which I am most familiar. FSC is also one of the most important organizations providing third-party certification of forests in the North America. As of December 31, 2000, 2.86 million hectares of US forestland were FSC-certified (Forest Stewardship Council, 2000a). Approximately 38 percent of this amount is publicly owned forest. In addition to FSC, there are other important sustainable forestry 78 BOIS ET FORÊTS DES TROPIQUES, 2001, N° 270 (4) FOCUS / CRITERIA AND INDICATORS

Explicit yield, and ensuring that the rate of conditions will be attained. Is 120 Paradoxes harvest does not exceed sustainable years a sufficient horizon for sustain- levels” (SmartWood, 2000). ability or is a longer period needed to An annual allowable harvest is be sure that the harvest level is truly Within FSC’s and SmartWood’s really only meaningful for larger own- sustainable? FSC 5.6 sets a standard criteria and indicators are several ex- erships that can actually support of “permanently sustainable”, but op- amples of potential self-contradic- yearly operations. However, even on erational harvest scheduling models tions. This paper will focus on two of these forests, strategic planning is require a finite planning horizon. That these: the rate of harvest criterion likely done on a larger increment of the criteria and indicators do not pro- and silvicultural prescriptions. time such as a decade. A subsection vide any clear guidance means that Hereafter, the FSC proposed stan- of SW 5.6 softens the annual allow- the managing forester must select dards for North America are refer- able cut criterion by providing and defend the planning horizon for enced as FSC x.x.x (Forest for “other harvest calculations.” sustainability for each management Stewardship Council, 2000b); However, the flexibility provided in situation. The time horizon issue is SmartWood standards are referenced the subsection appears to be an af- also connected to how to determine as SW x.x.x. terthought rather than a reflection of permanently sustainable harvest actual forest management practices. levels. The second and more important Once the sustainability horizon Rate of harvest time issue is the length of the plan- has been selected, the forester must ning horizon that ensures perma- determine the level of harvest that One of the key certification crite- nence. How long is long enough to be can be perpetually sustained. The ria is the determination of the rate of sure the level is sustainable? In man- forester will use measures of growth harvest of forest products that can be agement planning, we typically set a and yield to help determine the per- permanently sustained (FSC 5.6). The planning horizon and use simulation manently sustainable level. But managing forester must determine or optimization models to generate growth and yield are only two factors over what time period the harvesting different time profiles of harvest vol- for setting harvest levels. The initial rate should be measured and how to umes and then implement the har- age-class distribution of timber in- determine permanently sustainable vest schedule that best meets the or- ventory and the structure of the tar- levels. The time issue has two parts. ganization’s goals. In these models get sustainable forest are important, The first is a minor consideration of we set ending conditions that we too. At this critical juncture, some annual versus periodic allowable cut. hope will ensure sustainability. For early criteria developed for the north- The second is determining the time example, the forester can employ an eastern US were inappropriately spe- horizon that ensures sustainability. area control approach to regulating cific: SmartWood’s 5.6 calls for the the forest and regulation will be An allowable cut has been de- determination of an annual allowable achieved within one rotation. When rived based on well-documented esti- cut: the regulated forest is attained, we mates of growth and yield to provide “5.6 Annual allowable cut (AAC), can be more certain of its future. non-declining sustained yield of for- by area or volume, has been set or Other, non-regulated, ending condi- est products and this target is being based on conservative and well-docu- tions are also possible, but the followed in harvest planning (empha- mented estimates of growth and forester must specify when those sis added) (SmartWood, 1997).

Figure 1. Sustainable harvest patterns for even-flow, simulated area control, optimized area control, and annual growth harvest methods of harvest scheduling for a 12 decade planning horizon. Programme de coupes pour un rendement soutenu, témoin de surfaces simulé, témoin de surfaces optimisé, et méthodes de détermination de l’accroissement annuel de la coupe pour un programme de coupes à un horizon de douze fois dix ans. BOIS ET FORÊTS DES TROPIQUES, 2001, N° 270 (4) 79 CRITÈRES ET INDICATEURS / LE POINT SUR…

The paradox in this criterion is gation of optimum stand manage- that the requirement for non-declin- ment decisions without regard to for- ing yield may impede other goals of est-level smoothing can be perfectly sustainable forest management. If we sustainable, although the time profile have over-mature unmanaged stands, of harvest flows may be very irregular their removal may result in near-term (Figure 1). harvest levels that cannot be sus- A non-declining sustained yield tained in the long-run when those criterion is not really useful to owners tracts are replaced with new, man- of smaller forests who are not con- aged stands. Thus, the criterion may cerned with the continuity of vol- exclude transitions to age-class struc- umes, income, or other outcomes of tures that may actually be preferred management. The non-declining lan- on ecological, as well as social and guage employed in early SmartWood economic grounds. standards was probably linked to US Furthermore, in the transition national forest policies that dictate period between today’s existing for- non-declining even-flow harvests. est and the future’s target forest, it Originally adopted to prevent rapid may be necessary to remove timber liquidation of publicly-owned old at a rate greater than the pre-deter- growth timber in the western US, a mined level of sustainable harvest. If non-declining harvest level does not the forester applies area control fit most conditions of 21st century methods to an unregulated forest, forestry and could impede sustain- Managed stand of eastern white pine, New the harvest flows during the transi- able forestry. Hampshire, Northeastern United States. This tion period prior to regulation may be species is sensitive to air pollution. very erratic. If the initial distribution Peuplement aménagé de pins Weymouth of the age-class inventory is skewed Silvicultural prescriptions (Pinus strobus) dans le New Hampshire, towards more mature classes, the nord-est des États-Unis. Cette essence est near-term harvest flows will be above A second example of an explicit sensible à la pollution atmosphérique. the long-term sustained yield estab- paradox can be found in the section Photo T. E. Howard. lished for the regulated forest. For, on sustaining forest production and example, in forests managed to a sus- resource quality in the Northeast tainability horizon of 120 years, both SmartWood Guidelines for the the optimization and non-optimiza- Assessment of Natural Forest Mana- tion approaches to area control have gement (SmartWood, 1997): higher levels of near-term harvests ▪ Management strategies pre- size over-harvesting red maple and than the level specified by the non- vent over harvesting of individual tree other less wanted species in favor of declining even-flow alternative species (section 4.3); more commercially desirable species (Figure 1). The area control alterna- ▪ Management strategies em- such as sugar maple (Acer sacchar- tives, once regulated, are sustainable phasize improving long-term stand inum L.) or yellow birch (Betula al- to the sustainability horizon, but at a quality (section 4.4); leghaniensis Britton). Therefore, to somewhat lower level than that of the ▪ Management addresses the meet criteria 4.4 and 4.5, the forester non-declining even-flow method. restoration of degraded or low quality may need to compromise on criterion Thus, we have three alternatives that forest stands (section 4.5). 4.3. Similar dilemmas may confront are sustainable, but with very differ- foresters in managed forests any- ent harvest schedules. In many forest situations, we where in the world. The smooth flows of timber that know that, due to past management Furthermore, to the extent that are eventually accomplished with a practices and natural forces, the the criteria and indicators create ex- regulated forest are not necessary forester may be confronted with an pectations for continuous forest conditions for sustainability. Fores- overabundance of less desirable canopies, single tree or small group ters managing large and small forests species. In the northeastern United selection appear to be the preferred can also adopt management strate- States, red maple (Acer rubrum L.), a silvicultural systems. This preference gies that harvest stand growth with- species of relatively low market value, may discriminate against light-de- out regard to smoothing the harvest is claiming an increasing share of the manding tree species, which, in addi- flows from the entire forest over the forest inventory. If the goal is to im- tion to being commercially valuable, planning period. A forest manage- prove and restore forest stands, silvi- are important for sustaining wildlife ment plan that is based on the aggre- cultural prescriptions would empha- populations. 80 BOIS ET FORÊTS DES TROPIQUES, 2001, N° 270 (4) FOCUS / CRITERIA AND INDICATORS

Implicit Paradoxes foresters must have a reliable time- On the local scale, ecological parame- series of observations from which to ters such as the percent of old growth construct the historical record as well forest can range from zero to 100 per- Implicit paradoxes are subtle as a reliable prediction about the out- cent while on the regional scale, the and foresters may not be as aware of come of future management that will percentage of old growth forest may the implications of these potential be compared to that historical record. only vary between 25 and 75 percent. self-contradictions. To illustrate the The HRV can be represented as Thus, applying regional (large scale) importance of implicit paradoxes, the a graph of the relevant data with the information to more site-specific following sections address the con- indicator variable for the criterion on (small scale) management may pro- cepts of “natural” forest management the vertical axis and an appropriate duce “unnatural” results. and “local processing”. time scale on the horizontal axis The time scale over which the (Figure 2). The observations are plot- historic range of variation is meas- Natural forest ted on a grid that shows the mean ured introduces additional implicit management value of the observations and one or paradoxes. Some definitions of the two standard deviations above and historic range of natural variation in FSC certification criteria and in- below the mean. To use the graph, North America put a premier value on dicators promote natural forest man- foresters must evaluate the pattern conditions that existed prior to agement. To implement natural forest and trends as well as the average European settlement. For conven- management requires an assessment conditions and upper and lower ience, I will refer to such perspectives of what is natural. One of the impor- bounds. In Figure 2, the indicator has as holistic. The holistic critique of distant indicators of whether current and rarely ventured outside of either the turbances that began with European future management is natural is to upper or lower bounds of one or two settlement in North America is that compare the current and expected standard deviations from the aver- those disturbances were born of a conditions to those of the past. The age. However, the trend in the indica- world-view that held humanity sepa- historic range of variation (HRV) tor is clear and most recent observa- rate from nature, so-called dualism. serves as a benchmark to which com- tions are decidedly below the The critique argues that the dualist parisons can be made. long-run average. approach should be abandoned in Proposed FSC North American HRV raises issues of spatial and favor of a holistic approach that rec- standards (FSC 6.3.a) prefer manage- time scales, and of the appropriate- ognizes humanity as part of nature. ment decisions that produce out- ness of human disturbance. The spa- However, by defining natural condi- comes and conditions within the his- tial scale paradox is that the historic tions in terms of a pre-European met- toric range of variation to outcomes data are often collected across a large ric, holists must, paradoxically, adopt that are not within that range (Forest spatial scale so that, on average, the the dualist philosophy that actions of Stewardship Council, 2000b). To es- range of variation is more limited the Europeans in North America were tablish the HRV for a given situation, than it is on the local scale (Figure 3). and are, in fact, separate from nature.

Figure 2. Historic range of variation: example pattern showing value of indicator, average and ± one or two standard deviations. Amplitude de la variation dans le temps : exemple montrant la valeur de l’indicateur, la moyenne et ± un ou deux écarts-types. BOIS ET FORÊTS DES TROPIQUES, 2001, N° 270 (4) 81 CRITÈRES ET INDICATEURS / LE POINT SUR…

Few would argue that a return to late plans (the present) that we hope forests. In the face of these and other pre-European conditions in North will replicate the past in the future. future attacks, does “natural” be- America is either feasible or desir- Yet, how can we be sure that macro comes an elusive goal? able. However, there is a tendency to conditions that we cannot control and Even if we assume that these is- define natural as being free from that influence the success or failure sues can be resolved to our satisfac- Western industrial disturbances. of our management will be as expect- tion, we are still faced with the funda- The disturbances caused by native ed? Can we re-create the past if an- mental question of whether or not populations are seen as natural be- thropogenic atmospheric pollution prescriptions that take the forest cause there is the widely held view warms the global climate outside of management unit beyond the bounds that the indigenous people lived in the range historic variation? Will the of the HRV by one, two, or more stan- harmony with nature and that their forest that we have re-created in the dard deviations, are acceptable. interactions with nature were benign. image of the historical forest be more Should we reject a prescription that The paradox in that view is that native vulnerable to environmental disaster perturbs the system beyond “accept- populations also lived at the mercy of if the worst-case predictions of global able” deviation but from which it can nature. If drought was extensive, warming are realized? Would we be rapidly recover to within the bounds death and population reduction were better off simply maintaining the of natural variability? Again, time the natural consequences. Further- kinds of forests we have now? I do not scale becomes an issue. Is the ex- more, their activities were not always know the answer, but surely we traordinary variation acceptable if re- benign. Native Americans were, in should be thinking about this rather covery occurs in a decade? a rotation? fact, knowledgeable land managers than merely accepting that the forests or a millenium? The answer is clearly and made particularly heavy use of we have today are automatically infe- a value judgment, not a matter of sci- fire (Williams, 1989). Although not a rior to those of the distant past. ence. North American example, the Maori For that matter, can we really re- of New Zealand’s South Island were create the past? Global trade, for ex- also once prolific users of fire for ample, is accelerating the pace of dis- Local Processing wildlife management purposes. persion of unwanted plant and animal Excessive burning over a long time pests. In this century, we have lost The FSC principles and criteria period led to the destruction of large the once dominant American chest- for sustainable forest management areas of native beech forest that were nut (Castanea dentata) from the en- encompass a broad range of social replaced by tussock grass communi- tire eastern United States due to an and cultural issues. Many of the crite- ties that today cover thousands of imported disease. Dutch elm disease ria expect the managing forester to hectares. has largely eliminated American elm consider the impact of management There is another time dimension (Ulmus americana L.) and the hem- on local communities. For example, to the criteria and indicators that lock woolly adelgid threatens eastern FSC Principle 4 urges “(f)orest man- seek to maintain natural forest condi- hemlock (Tsuga canadensis L. Carr.) agement operations (to) maintain or tions: the future. The paradox is that from New York City to the Canadian enhance the long-term social and we are using the paleoecological border. Gypsy moth, another intro- economic well-being of forest work- record (the past), to judge existing duced pest, has had profound influ- ers and local communities” (Forest management activities and to formu- ences on the structure of eastern US Stewardship Council, 2000b). The subsections of this principle reinforce the emphasis on local communities. The goals associated with these criteria are to provide higher levels of economic and social benefits to natural resource dependent communities and to prevent exploitation of those communities. FSC criterion 5.2 also clearly favors local processing of har- vested timber: “Forest management and mar- keting operations should encourage the optimal use and local processing of the forest’s diversity of products” (Forest Stewardship Council, 2000b).

Figure 3. Local versus regional scale patterns of historic range of variation. Comparaison d’amplitudes de variation dans le temps aux échelles locale et régionale. 82 BOIS ET FORÊTS DES TROPIQUES, 2001, N° 270 (4) FOCUS / CRITERIA AND INDICATORS

The local processing prefer- Given the local processing crite- Yet, in some cases, Canadian logging ences were developed partly to avoid rion as a basis for argument, some companies use Canadian labor to har- situations in which an exporting na- advocacy groups have opposed certi- vest American timber. Many of these tion received little or no benefits. fication of specific forest owners in Canadian workers live much closer to Wood colonies were to be avoided, the northeastern United States be- the forest management unit than do and the local processing criteria seem cause those owners exported un- Americans. Would these Canadians particularly directed toward some de- processed logs. This creates an inter- be considered local workers? veloping nations, where deforesta- esting paradox. If the manager The border regions of southern tion and forest exploitation are at embraces a strict definition of local Quebec and the northern fringe of the least partially attributable to the log processing that excludes log exports northeast US share a common eco- export market. to foreign markets, there may be system and interact economically and problems with economic viability cri- socially. In assessing the criteria re- teria. The log export markets in the lated to local processing, how would northeastern US typically offer higher we judge a US forest enterprise that prices for logs than do domestic mar- exports 60 percent or more of its har- kets. These higher revenues may be vest from its forests located adjacent the critical marginal revenue incre- to southern Quebec, to buyers in ments necessary to maintain long- southern Quebec? Does this consti- term forest management and even to tute local processing? Some oppo- protect the forest from conversion to nents of forest management argue non-forest uses with higher economic that it is not local processing, but, Long leaf pine managed as habitat for red rents. paradoxically, these are often the cockaded woodpecker, a rare and endangered But the export-local market same people who favor environmen- species, Florida, Southeastern United States. issue can be even more complicated. tal protection across political bound- Forêt de Longleaf Pines (Pinus palustris) The northeastern US forest is the aries on the basis that the ecosystem aménagée comme habitat pour le pic à cocarde wood source for dozens of wood is the appropriate jurisdiction. They (Picoides borealis), espèce rare et en danger products manufacturing facilities in seem to acknowledge political d’extinction. Floride, sud-est des États-Unis. southern Quebec, Canada. Approxi- boundaries when it is convenient to Photo T. E. Howard. mately 14 percent of the annual har- their argument. It would be better if vest from the four border states of FSC and others employed a biore- Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, and gional approach in judging the de- New York is exported to Canada, gree of local processing. mostly to Quebec (Irland, 1999). The In a bioregional approach, the mills that import these unprocessed ecosystem is the preferred unit of logs are highly dependent upon this analysis and it explicitly integrates flow and several mills have long- human communities as part of those standing relationships with log sup- ecosystems. The sustainability of a pliers and landowners in the US. bioregion must encompass not only Many of these mills are located within the sustainability of the resource Loading logs for local processing, New 100 kilometers of the international base, but must combine community Hampshire, Northeastern United States. boundary between the US and sustainability beyond its economic di- Chargement de grumes destinées à la transformation locale. New Hampshire, Canada and are often closer to the mensions to include social and cultur- nord-est des États-Unis. source forest than competing mills in al sustainability of resource-depend- Photo R. Weyrick. the United States. In this context, is ent communities (Howard, Strauss- the nearby Canadian mill “local” or fogel, 1999). Thus, in a bioregional not? Some of the region’s environ- framework, log exports are not auto- mental groups have suggested that matically grounds for non-certifica- these exports are not acceptable and tion. Instead, we recognize that have proposed changes to public ecosystems, economies, and cul- policies that would limit these export tures, may transcend international flows (Northeast Natural Resource boundaries. In the present example, if Center, 1995). the managing forester adopts a biore- FSC 4.1.a calls for using local gional view, then the foreign mills in foresters, loggers, and contractors Quebec are, indeed, paradoxically, and to “hire “qualified local workers” local. Local processing of small diameter logs. Maine,, (Forest Stewardship Council, 2000b). Northeastern United States. Transformation locale de grumes de faible diamètre. Maine, nord-est des États-Unis. Photo R. Weyrick. BOIS ET FORÊTS DES TROPIQUES, 2001, N° 270 (4) 83 CRITÈRES ET INDICATEURS / LE POINT SUR…

Conclusion Bibliographic references

None of the above paradoxes, DAVIS L., JOHNSON K. N., BETTINGER P., HOWARD T. E., 2000. Forest management: to whether they are explicit or implicit, sustain ecological, economic, and social values. 4th edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, can be resolved easily. Perhaps they 804 p. cannot be resolved at all. The devel- FOREST STEWARDSHIP COUNCIL, 2000a. Forests certified by FSC-accredited certifi- opers of criteria and indicators of sus- cation bodies. www.fscoax.org/html/5-3-3.html. tainable forestry in North American FOREST STEWARDSHIP COUNCIL, 2000b. Principles and criteria for forest manage- and around the world need to consid- ment. www.fscstandards.org. er potential self-contradictions in the criteria to avoid undue tension be- GALE R. P., CORDRAY S. M., 1994. Making sense of sustainability: nine answers to tween the theoretical ideal and the “what should be sustained?” Rural Sociology, 59 (2): 311-332. realities of real forestry. Furthermore, HOWARD T. E., STRAUSSFOGEL D., 1999. Forest-dependent communities in southern it is important that managing Quebec: a bioregional approach. Annual Meeting of the New England and foresters, in conducting their respon- St. Lawrence Valley Geography Society, October 8-10, Farmington, Maine. sibilities, be mindful of the conflicts IRLAND L. C., 1999. Flows for the future: 1997 wood flows in New York, Vermont, New and tensions embedded in certifica- Hampshire, and Maine. Northeast State Foresters Association. Concord, New tion criteria and indicators. They will Hampshire. need to clearly communicate to own- NORTHEAST NATURAL RESOURCE CENTER – NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION, 1995. ers, accrediting bodies, and stake- Getting the cut out: raw log exports in the northern forest region. Montpelier, holder communities how they have Vermont, 80 p. balanced these tensions. The owners, accrediting bodies, and stakeholders, SMARTWOOD, 1997. Northeast smartwood guidelines for the assessment of natural each with their own interpretations of forest management. April 1997. “sustainable forestry”, will judge how SMARTWOOD, 2000. Generic guidelines for assessing natural forest management. well the balance has been achieved. www.smartwood.org/guidelines/forest-management-generic.html. Just as the forest itself is dynam- WILLIAMS M., 1989. Americans and their forests: a historical geography. Cambridge ic, so, too, is the certification process. University Press, New York, 599 p. The process will evolve as forest science advances and as foresters gain experience in applying the criteria and indicators in practical situations. Practicing foresters, researchers, and organizations concerned with the de- velopment of appropriate certification criteria must continue to share information and ideas if certification is ultimately to be successful.

This is scientific contribution number 2 079 from the New Hampshire Agricultural Experiment Station.

Hevea plantation in China. Plantation d’hévéas en Chine. Photo B. Dupuy.

Red oak stump, Maine, Northeastern United States. Souche de chêne rouge (Quercus rubra). État du Maine, nord-est des États-Unis. Photo T. E. Howard. 84 BOIS ET FORÊTS DES TROPIQUES, 2001, N° 270 (4) FOCUS / CRITERIA AND INDICATORS

Synopsis Les prescriptions sylvicoles LE DILEMME DU FORESTIER : Les critères et indicateurs concernant les la difficulté de définir le terme « local » PARADOXES DANS LES CRITÈRES prescriptions sylvicoles doivent être pour les besoins de la certification. Les ET INDICATEURS DE souples, de manière à donner au forestier bois bruts et les produits finis traversent L’AMÉNAGEMENT FORESTIER les moyens d’améliorer les conditions des la frontière, de même que la main-d’œuvre peuplements et d’aménager la forêt pour du bois. Certains soutiennent que les flux Theodore E. HOWARD toutes les essences indigènes. Les critères qui traversent la frontière ne sont pas lo- anciens ont souvent empêché l’abandon caux, mais cet argument omet de recon- d’essences de faible valeur commerciale, naître que les régions frontalières parta- Du fait que les définitions de la gestion et privilégié des régimes sylvicoles qui fa- gent un écosystème commun et sont durable vont d’un utilitarisme anthropocen- vorisaient les essences d’ombre. économiquement et socialement interdé- trique extrême (le « rendement soutenu ») Les critères de certification du FSC encou- pendantes. Si les forestiers américains à un biocentrisme extrême, les critères et ragent l’aménagement des forêts natu- adoptent un point de vue biorégional, indicateurs de l’aménagement forestier relles. L’évolution dans le temps de la va- alors les usines étrangères du Québec renferment des contradictions explicites riation naturelle est un indicateur utile sont locales. Dans une approche biorégio- et implicites. Les critères et indicateurs du pour comparer les conditions actuelles et nale, l’écosystème est l’unité d’analyse Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) fournis- prévues avec celles du passé. Le forestier privilégiée, et les communautés humaines sent d’excellents exemples des paradoxes doit être attentif à harmoniser l’échelle sont implicitement intégrées en tant auxquels se heurtent les forestiers au ni- des données du passé avec celle de l’unité qu’élément de cet écosystème. La gestion veau de l’unité d’aménagement. d’aménagement pour éviter de créer des durable au niveau de la région englobe la conditions non naturelles. Du fait que gestion des ressources en même temps Le rythme de récolte l’homme a influé sur les paysages fores- que la stabilité économique, sociale et Un critère de certification essentiel est la tiers, l’échelle de temps de la variation du culturelle à long terme. Ainsi, dans un détermination du rythme de récolte des passé doit répondre à la question : quelles cadre biorégional, les exportations de produits forestiers qui peut être maintenu sortes de perturbations humaines sont ac- grumes ne sont pas automatiquement des de façon durable. Le gestionnaire forestier ceptables lorsqu’on définit ce qui est na- motifs de non-certification. Au contraire, doit déterminer sur quelle durée ce rythme turel ? En outre, on fait appel au passé nous considérons que les écosystèmes, de récolte doit être mesuré, et comment il pour juger les actions et les plans d’amé- les économies et les cultures peuvent pourra fixer des niveaux de production nagement du présent, afin de reproduire transcender les frontières internationales. soutenue. Dans les modèles d’aména- le passé dans l’avenir. Cependant, les fu- gement, on choisit un horizon de planifi- tures conditions climatiques mondiales et Un travail collectif pour la certification cation, et par des méthodes de simulation le transport accru de parasites peuvent Ceux qui conçoivent des critères et indica- ou d’optimisation on détermine différents créer des conditions telles qu’une forêt re- teurs de la gestion forestière durable doi- profils de volumes de récolte dans le créée à l’image du passé pourrait être plus vent considérer les contradictions internes temps. On applique alors le calendrier de vulnérable à une catastrophe écologique. potentielles dans les critères afin d’éviter récolte qui répond le mieux aux objectifs Les principes et critères du FSC pour des conflits insolubles entre forêt idéale et du propriétaire forestier. Cependant, les l’aménagement forestier rationnel englo- forêt réelle. Les forestiers doivent se préoc- critères et indicateurs ne spécifient pas bent un large éventail de questions so- cuper de ces pressions et faire savoir aux quel doit être l’horizon de planification. ciales et culturelles, entre autres une propriétaires forestiers, organismes d’ac- Les niveaux de récolte pouvant être main- nette préférence pour la transformation créditation et communautés intéressées tenus de façon durable dépendent non locale des produits. Un système néocolo- comment ils ont neutralisé les tensions. Les seulement d’estimations de croissance nial, dans lequel l’exportation de grumes propriétaires, les organismes d’accrédita- mais également de la distribution initiale peut conduire au déboisement et à la sur- tion et les parties prenantes, chacun avec des classes d’âge et de la structure de la exploitation des forêts, doit être proscrit. sa propre interprétation de la « gestion fo- forêt aménagée à atteindre. Des critères Cependant, les marchés d’exportation de restière durable », jugeront dans quelle qui privilégient des profils temporels de grumes offrent généralement des prix plus mesure un équilibre a été réalisé. récolte (tels que le flux régulier non dé- élevés pour les grumes que les marchés Le processus de certification évoluera au croissant) peuvent exclure des transitions intérieurs. Ce surcroît de revenus peut cor- fur et à mesure des progrès de la science vers des structures de classes d’âge qui respondre à l’accroissement marginal cri- et à mesure que les forestiers acquerront pourraient en fait être préférées pour des tique de revenus nécessaire pour mainte- de l’expérience dans l’application pratique motifs tant écologiques que sociaux et nir l’aménagement forestier à long terme de critères et indicateurs en situation réel- économiques. En réalité, il y a toute une et même pour protéger la forêt d’utilisa- le. Les forestiers, les chercheurs et les or- gamme de profils de récolte, dont certains tions non forestières plus rémunératrices. ganisations concernées doivent continuer présentant une succession très irrégulière, Les marchés intégrés de produits fores- à partager l’information et échanger leurs qui assurent cependant la stabilité à long tiers du nord-est des États-Unis et de la idées pour que la certification s’impose terme. province canadienne de Québec illustrent avec succès.