DOCSLIB.ORG

Oregon's Forest Action Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Oregon's Forest Action Plan OREGON DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY Oregon’s Forest Action Plan Summary – Oregon's Forest Action Plan was developed in June 2010 by a team of Oregon Department of Forestry subject matter, geographic information and communications specialists to fulfill requirements of the 2008 Farm Bill that all States complete a Forest Assessment and Resource Strategy to maintain eligibility for U.S. Department of Forest Service State and Private Forestry funding for programs authorized by the federal Cooperative Forestry Assistance Act. Statewide Forest Assessment States were required to conduct an assessment of the current conditions of all forestland regardless of ownership type, and trends leading up to these conditions. In addition, states were required to identify threats to forests and opportunities for addressing threats. The final task of completing the assessment was to identify priority landscapes for implementing opportunities. What Oregon Did – Current conditions and trends leading up to these conditions were displayed in an external web-based Oregon's Forest Atlas. Threats and opportunities were organized around 6 priority issues – Communities at Risk of Wildfire, Maintain the Forestland Base, Diversity of Upland and Aquatic Habitats, Invasive Species, Water Quality and Climate Change. These are contained in Oregon’s DRAFT Statewide Forest Assessment Document. The issues were cross referenced to the USDA Forest Service’s National State and Private Forestry Themes and Subthemes and the Oregon Board of Forestry’s Goals for the Forestry Program for Oregon. Priority landscapes were developed for: 1) Urban/Rural Forest Priority Areas, 2) Communities at Risk of Wildfire, 3) Forests Vulnerable to Loosing Timber Markets, 4) Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation and 5) General Forestland Considerations (a composite prioritization across Communities at Risk of Wildfire, Forests Vulnerable to Loosing Timber Markets and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation. Resource Strategy States were required to develop a five-year action plan describing how they were going to use USDA Forest Service State and Private Forestry program – in conjunction with other state/business programs and initiatives to address the opportunities identified in the assessment. What Oregon Did – Oregon’s Resource Strategy includes a core business plan for the following USDA Forest Service State and Private Forestry Programs: Community Forest and Open Space Conservation, Forest Health Protection, Forest Legacy, Forest Stewardship, State Fire Assistance, Tree Improvement, Urban and Community Forestry, Volunteer Fire Assistance and the Western States Fire Managers for Western Wildland Urban Interface. The Strategy also summarized the following Other Statewide Plans and Programs: Community Wildfire Protection Plans, Federal Land Management Plans, Oregon Conservation Strategy, Oregon Forest Practices Act, Oregon Invasive Species Action Plan, Oregon Land Use Planning Program, Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds, State Forest Management Plans, The National Fire Plan, Tribal Integrated Resource Management Plans and Other Private Forestland Assistance Programs administered by the Oregon Department of Agriculture, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, the Oregon Department of Forestry, the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board, the USDA Farm Service Agency, the USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service and the US Fish and Wildlife Service. In addition to core program functions, the Strategy identified 50 innovative long-term strategies for the coordinated investment from all sources – state, federal, non-governmental and private – to address Oregon’s priority forest issues. Oregon Department of Forestry – Oregon’s Forest Action Plan Implementation The USDA Forest Service requires that all State and Private Forestry Program federal grant narratives, as well as proposals to the Western States State and Private Forestry Competitive Grant Program, tier to the Action Plan. The Private Forest Division updated its Stewardship Potential geographic information systems layer for prioritizing delivery of the Forest Stewardship Program cost-share funds for forest management plans based on the assessment’s General Forestland Considerations priority landscape areas. Updating Oregon’s Forest Action Plan There is overlap between the Oregon's Forest Atlas and Oregon's Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management. The desire is to get Oregon’s Five-Year Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) Report – combined with other key data sources such as Oregon’s Cooperative Aerial Survey == to meet Oregon’s assessment needs for current conditions and trends leading up to these conditions. Results should be communicated through a combination of Oregon’s On-Line Forest Atlas and the Oregon Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management. Oregon’s threats and opportunity write-ups for the priority issues are still in draft form. They have been reviewed by technical staff; but these comments have not been incorporated into the 2010 version. The issues need to be confirmed or modified and write-ups (threats and opportunities) updated accordingly. The following Priority Landscape Areas needs to be updated: Communities at Risk of Wildfire – This layer incorporated the landscape wildfire risk ratings as identified in the Departments 2006 fire risk assessment with minor modifications for the areas proximate to federal wilderness areas. This layer needs to be replaced by an updated version using the West-Wide [Fire] Risk Assessment data. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation – This layer needs to be updated based on updated Oregon Forest Biodiversity data for all of Oregon’s 6th field watersheds (i.e., both forest and non- forest) and incorporated as part of the next version of the Oregon Conservation Strategy. Oregon’s Resource Strategy needs to be updated: Coordination with the federal land management agencies; most notably the USDA Forest Service National Forests and the U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Resource Management Plans, Formal review and prioritization of the innovative long-term strategies for coordinated investment and adopted as a true 5-year plan for taking action. For example, in addition to affirming key core business functions, this plan should be used to prioritize and schedule Oregon Department of Forestry proposals to the Western States State and Private Forestry Competitive Grant Program. Prepared by Jim Cathcart, Private Forests Division, February 19, 2013 2 Oregon’s Forest Resource Strategy Federal Fiscal Years 2011 thru 2015 Coordinated and Strategic Investment of USDA Forest Service State and Private Forestry Programs TABLE OF CONTENTS COORDINATED INVESTMENT – LONG-TERM STRATEGY SUMMARY MATRIX ...2 BACKGROUND ..........................................................................................................................19 PURPOSE ....................................................................................................................................20 STATE AND PRIVATE FORESTRY PROGRAM ELEMENTS ..........................................21 Community Forest and Open Space Conservation Program .............................................21 Forest Health Protection Program ......................................................................................22 Forest Legacy .....................................................................................................................24 Forest Stewardship Program ..............................................................................................28 State Fire Assistance ..........................................................................................................30 Tree Improvement Program ...............................................................................................32 Urban and Community Forestry Program..........................................................................33 Volunteer Fire Assistance ..................................................................................................35 Western States Fire Managers for Western Wildland Urban Interface Program ...............36 OTHER STATEWIDE PLANS AND PROGRAMS ................................................................38 Community Wildfire Protection Plans ...............................................................................38 Federal Land Management Plans .......................................................................................39 Oregon Conservation Strategy ...........................................................................................41 Oregon Forest Practices Act ..............................................................................................42 Oregon Invasive Species Action Plan ................................................................................43 Oregon Land Use Planning Program .................................................................................44 Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds ..........................................................................46 Other Private Forestland Assistance Programs ..................................................................48 State Forest Management Plans .........................................................................................52 The National Fire Plan .......................................................................................................54 Tribal Integrated Resource Management Plans .................................................................55
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Concepts and Applications in Veterinary Toxicology an Interactive Guide Concepts and Applications in Veterinary Toxicology PK Gupta
    PK Gupta Concepts and Applications in Veterinary Toxicology An Interactive Guide Concepts and Applications in Veterinary Toxicology PK Gupta Concepts and Applications in Veterinary Toxicology An Interactive Guide PK Gupta Toxicology Consulting Group Academy of Sciences for Animal Welfare Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, India ISBN 978-3-030-22249-9 ISBN 978-3-030-22250-5 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22250-5 © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland Preface The book entitled Concepts and Applications in Veterinary Toxicology: An Interactive Guide covers a broad spectrum of topics for the students specializing in veterinary toxicology and veterinary medical practitioners.
    [Show full text]
  • Record of Decision (ROD)
    U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EPA REGION 1 – NEW ENGLAND RECORD OF DECISION NYANZA CHEMICAL WASTE DUMP SUPERFUND SITE OPERABLE UNIT 02 ASHLAND, MASSACHUSETTS JULY 2020 PART 1: THE DECLARATION FOR THE RECORD OF DECISION A. SITE NAME AND LOCATION B. STATEMENT OF BASIS AND PURPOSE C. ASSESSMENT OF SITE D. DESCRIPTION OF SELECTED REMEDY E. STATUTORY DETERMINATIONS F. SPECIAL FINDINGS G. DATA CERTIFICATION CHECKLIST H. AUTHORIZING SIGNATURES PART 2: THE DECISION SUMMARY A. SITE NAME, LOCATION, AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION B. SITE HISTORY AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES 1. History of Site Activities 2. History of Federal and State Investigations and Removal and Remedial Actions 3. History of CERCLA Enforcement Activities C. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION D. SCOPE AND ROLE OF OPERABLE UNIT OR RESPONSE ACTION E. SITE CHARACTERISTICS F. CURRENT AND POTENTIAL FUTURE SITE AND RESOURCE USES G. SUMMARY OF SITE RISKS 1. Human Health Risk Assessment 2. Supplemental Human Health Risk Assessment 3. Supplemental Evaluation Following Risk Assessment 4. Ecological Risk Assessment 5. Basis for Remedial Action H. REMEDIAL ACTION OBJECTIVES I. DEVELOPMENT AND SCREENING OF ALTERNATIVES J. DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES K. SUMMARY OF COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES L. THE SELECTED REMEDY M. STATUTORY DETERMINATIONS N. DOCUMENTATION OF NO SIGNIFICANT CHANGES O. STATE ROLE Record of Decision Nyanza Chemical Waste Dump Superfund Site: OU2 July 2020 Ashland, Massachusetts Page 2 of 73 PART 3: THE RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARY APPENDICES Appendix A: MassDEP Letter of Concurrence Appendix B: Tables Appendix C: Figures Appendix D: ARARs Tables Appendix E: References Appendix F: Acronyms and Abbreviations Appendix G: Administrative Record Index and Guidance Documents Record of Decision Nyanza Chemical Waste Dump Superfund Site: OU2 July 2020 Ashland, Massachusetts Page 3 of 73 PART 1: THE DECLARATION FOR THE RECORD OF DECISION A.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 12: Integrating Ecological and Social Science to Inform Land Management in the Area of the Northwest Forest Plan
    Synthesis of Science to Inform Land Management Within the Northwest Forest Plan Area Chapter 12: Integrating Ecological and Social Science to Inform Land Management in the Area of the Northwest Forest Plan Thomas A. Spies, Jonathan W. Long, Peter Stine, Susan to reassess how well the goals and strategies of the Plan are Charnley, Lee Cerveny, Bruce G. Marcot, Gordon Reeves, positioned to address new issues. Paul F. Hessburg, Damon Lesmeister, Matthew J. Reilly, The NWFP was developed in 1993 through a political Martin G. Raphael, and Raymond J. Davis1 process involving scientists in an unusual and controversial role: assessing conditions and developing plan options “We are drowning in information, while starving directly for President Bill Clinton to consider with little for wisdom. The world henceforth will be run by involvement of senior Forest Service managers. The role of synthesizers, people able to put together the right Forest Service scientists in this planning effort is differ- information at the right time, think critically about ent—scientists are now limited to producing a state-of-the- it, and make important choices wisely.” science report in support of plan revision and management —E.O. Wilson, Consilience: The Unity of (USDA FS 2012a), and managers will conduct the assess- Knowledge (1988) ments and develop plan alternatives. Implementation of the NWFP was followed by moni- Introduction toring, research, and expectations for learning and adaptive Long-term monitoring programs and research related to management; however, little formal adaptive management Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP, or Plan) goals, strategies, actually occurred, and the program was defunded after a few and outcomes provide an unprecedented opportunity years.
    [Show full text]
  • Rule 391-3-6-.03. Water Use Classifications and Water Quality Standards
    Presented below are water quality standards that are in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. EPA is posting these standards as a convenience to users and has made a reasonable effort to assure their accuracy. Additionally, EPA has made a reasonable effort to identify parts of the standards that are not approved, disapproved, or are otherwise not in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. Rule 391-3-6-.03. Water Use Classifications and Water Quality Standards ( 1) Purpose. The establishment of water quality standards. (2) W ate r Quality Enhancement: (a) The purposes and intent of the State in establishing Water Quality Standards are to provide enhancement of water quality and prevention of pollution; to protect the public health or welfare in accordance with the public interest for drinking water supplies, conservation of fish, wildlife and other beneficial aquatic life, and agricultural, industrial, recreational, and other reasonable and necessary uses and to maintain and improve the biological integrity of the waters of the State. ( b) The following paragraphs describe the three tiers of the State's waters. (i) Tier 1 - Existing instream water uses and the level of water quality necessary to protect the existing uses shall be maintained and protected. (ii) Tier 2 - Where the quality of the waters exceed levels necessary to support propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and recreation in and on the water, that quality shall be maintained and protected unless the division finds, after full satisfaction of the intergovernmental coordination and public participation provisions of the division's continuing planning process, that allowing lower water quality is necessary to accommodate important economic or social development in the area in which the waters are located.
    [Show full text]
  • Status and Trend of Late-Successional and Old-Growth Forest
    NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN THE FIRST 10 YEARS (1994–2003) Status and Trend of Late-Successional and Old-Growth Forest Melinda Moeur, Thomas A. Spies, Miles Hemstrom, Jon R. Martin, James Alegria, Julie Browning, John Cissel, Warren B. Cohen, Thomas E. Demeo, Sean Healey, Ralph Warbington General Technical Report United States Forest Pacific Northwest D E PNW-GTR-646 E Department of R P A U T RTMENTOFAGRICUL Service Research Station November 2005 Agriculture The Forest Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture is dedicated to the principle of multiple use management of the Nation’s forest resources for sustained yields of wood ,water, forage, wildlife, and recreation. Through forestry research, cooperation with the States and private forest owners, and management of the national forests and national grasslands, it strives—as directed by Congress—to provide increasingly greater service to a growing Nation. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD).
    [Show full text]
  • Newsletter Newsletter of the Pacific Northwest Forest Service Retirees—Summer 2015 President’S Message—Jim Rice
    OldSmokeys Newsletter Newsletter of the Pacific Northwest Forest Service Retirees—Summer 2015 President’s Message—Jim Rice I had a great career with the U.S. Forest Service, and volunteering for the OldSmokeys now is a opportunity for me to give back a little to the folks and the organization that made my career such a great experience. This past year as President-elect, I gained an understanding about how the organization gets things done and the great leadership we have in place. It has been awesome to work with Linda Goodman and Al Matecko and the dedicated board of directors and various committee members. I am also excited that Ron Boehm has joined us in his new President-elect role. I am looking forward to the year ahead. This is an incredible retiree organization. In 2015, through our Elmer Moyer Memorial Emergency Fund, we were able to send checks to two Forest Service employees and a volunteer of the Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest who had lost their homes and all their possessions in a wildfire. We also approved four grants for a little over $8,900. Over the last ten years our organization has donated more than $75,000. This money has come from reunion profits, book sales, investments, and generous donations from our membership. All of this has been given to “non-profits” for projects important to our membership. Last, and most importantly, now is the time to mark your calendars for the Summer Picnic in the Woods. It will be held on August 14 at the Wildwood Recreation Area.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparison of Selected in Vitro Assays for Assessing the Toxicity of Chemicals and Their Mixtures
    COMPARISON OF SELECTED IN VITRO ASSAYS FOR ASSESSING THE TOXICITY OF CHEMICALS AND THEIR MIXTURES Rola Azzi A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Chemical Safety and Applied Toxicology Laboratories School of Safety Science Faculty of Science The University of New South Wales June 2006 Certificate of Originality Certificate of Originality I hereby declare that this submission is my own work and that, to the best of my knowledge it contains no materials previously published or written by another person, nor material which to a substantial extent has been accepted for the award of any degree at UNSW or any other education institution, except where due acknowledgment is made in the thesis. Any contributions made to the research by others, which whom I have worked, is explicitly acknowledged in the thesis. I also declare that the intellectual content of this thesis is the product of my own work, except to the extent that assistance from others in the project’s design and conception or in style, presentation and linguistic expression is acknowledged. Rola Azzi June 2006 i Acknowledgments Acknowledgments I would like to express my sincerest gratitude to my supervisor Dr Amanda Hayes for her assistance, constant encouragement and expertise. Without her support and guidance this project would not have been possible. I am also grateful to Associate Professor Chris Winder, for his constant support, advice, and scientific expertise throughout my work on this project. I would also like to express my sincerest gratitude and appreciation to my uncle, Associate Professor Rachad Saliba, who was a constant support during the writing of this thesis, and was devoted to helping me grasp the science of statistics, and its ability to transform numbers into a story.
    [Show full text]
  • Tribal Wildfire Resource Guide
    JUNE 2006 re Tribal Wildfi re Resource Guide Developed in Partnership with: Intertribal Timber Council Resource Guide Resource Innovations, University of Oregon Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Nation Tribal Wildfi “According to the traditional beliefs of the Salish, the Creator put animal beings on the earth before humans. But the world was cold and dark because there was no fi re on earth. The animal beings knew one day human beings would arrive, and they wanted to make the world a better place for them, so they set off on a great quest to steal fi re from the sky world and bring it to the earth.” -Beaver Steals Fire, Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes Tribal Wildfi re Resource Guide June 2006 Developed in Partnership with: Intertribal Timber Council Written by: Resource Innovations, University of Oregon Graphic Design by: Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Nation Images from: Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Nation and the Nez Perce Tribe For thousands of years, Native Americans used fi re as a tool to manage their lands and manipulate vegetation to a desired condition. Tribes once lived harmoniously with nature until the U.S. Federal Government claimed much of their lands and changed the forests from a condition that we would today call “fi re-adapted ecosystems” into the fi re-prone forests that we now see throughout much of western United States. Many forests that were once abundant producers of natural resources are now resource-management nightmares. The cost to manage them now is astronomical compared with the natural method employed by Native Americans.
    [Show full text]
  • 12–3–08 Vol. 73 No. 233 Wednesday Dec. 3, 2008 Pages 73545–73760
    12–3–08 Wednesday Vol. 73 No. 233 Dec. 3, 2008 Pages 73545–73760 VerDate Aug 31 2005 18:03 Dec 02, 2008 Jkt 217001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\03DEWS.LOC 03DEWS sroberts on PROD1PC70 with FRONTMATTER II Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 3, 2008 The FEDERAL REGISTER (ISSN 0097–6326) is published daily, SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES Monday through Friday, except official holidays, by the Office PUBLIC of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration, Washington, DC 20408, under the Federal Register Subscriptions: Act (44 U.S.C. Ch. 15) and the regulations of the Administrative Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 Committee of the Federal Register (1 CFR Ch. I). The Assistance with public subscriptions 202–512–1806 Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402 is the exclusive distributor of the official General online information 202–512–1530; 1–888–293–6498 edition. Periodicals postage is paid at Washington, DC. Single copies/back copies: The FEDERAL REGISTER provides a uniform system for making Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 available to the public regulations and legal notices issued by Assistance with public single copies 1–866–512–1800 Federal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations and (Toll-Free) Executive Orders, Federal agency documents having general FEDERAL AGENCIES applicability and legal effect, documents required to be published Subscriptions: by act of Congress, and other Federal agency documents of public interest. Paper or fiche 202–741–6005 Documents are on file for public inspection in the Office of the Assistance with Federal agency subscriptions 202–741–6005 Federal Register the day before they are published, unless the issuing agency requests earlier filing.
    [Show full text]
  • Northwest Forest Plan
    Standards and Guidelines for Management of Habitat for Late-Successional and Old-Growth Forest Related Species Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl Attachment A to the Record of Decision for Amendments to Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management Planning Documents Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl Standards and Guidelines for Management of Habitat for Late-Successional and Old-Growth Forest Related Species Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl Attachment A to the Record of Decision for Amendments to Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management Planning Documents Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl Outline All sections of this document, considered together, are the complete compilation of standards and guidelines. However, these standards and guidelines are broken down into the following sections for clarity and ease of reference. A. Introduction - This section includes introduction, purpose, definition of the planning area, relationship to existing agency plans, introduction to the various land allocation categories used elsewhere in these standards and guidelines, identification of appurtenant maps, and transition standards and guidelines. B. Basis for Standards and Guidelines - This section includes a background discussion of the objectives and considerations for managing for a network of terrestrial reserves. This section also contains the Aquatic Conservation Strategy, which includes discussions of the objectives and management emphases for Riparian Reserves, Key Watersheds, watershed analysis, and watershed restoration. C. Standards and Guidelines - This section includes specific standards and guidelines applicable to all land allocation categories. It also contains descriptions of, and standards and guidelines applicable to, all designated areas, matrix, and Key Watersheds.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Plan 2012‐2017
    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ecological Services Asheville, North Carolina Field Office STRATEGIC PLAN 2012‐2017 THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, WORKING WITH OTHERS, CONSERVES, PROTECTS, AND ENHANCES FISH, WILDLIFE, AND PLANTS AND THEIR HABITATS FOR THE CONTINUING BENEFIT OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND______________________________________3 STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS AND OBJECTIVES_______________________________8 AFO STAFFING AND DIVERSITY PLAN____________________________________13 APPENDIX A: AFO STRATEGIC PLAN PRIORITY WORK AREA MAP/GIS METHODOLOGY__18 MAP OF AFO STRATEGIC PLAN (FIGURE 2)_______________________________33 APPENDIX B: ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES FOR WHICH AFO HAS RESPONSIBILITIES__________________________________________________________34 APPENDIX C: REFERENCES AND CITATIONS______________________________38 APPENDIX D: STAFF ACTION PLANS_________________________________________52 APPENDIX E: TABLE OF ACRONYMS_____________________________________79 2 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (Service) Asheville Field Office (AFO), an Ecological Services facility, was established in the late 1970s. Forty-one counties make up the AFO’s core work area in western North Carolina, which includes many publicly owned conservation lands, especially in the higher elevations, as well as the metropolitan areas of Charlotte, Winston- Salem, and Asheville (Figure 1). This area primarily encompasses portions of the Blue Ridge and Piedmont physiographic provinces. In addition
    [Show full text]
  • Perceptions of Forestry Alternatives in the US Pacific Northwest
    ARTICLE IN PRESS Journal of Environmental Psychology 26 (2006) 100–115 www.elsevier.com/locate/yjevp Perceptions of forestry alternatives in the US Pacific Northwest: Information effects and acceptability distribution analysis$ Robert G. Ribeà Department of Landscape Architecture, Institute for a Sustainable Environment, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403-5234, USA Available online 10 August 2006 Abstract Conflicts over timber harvesting and clearcutting versus wildlife conservation have instigated alternative silvicultural systems in the US Pacific Northwest. Major forest treatments can be the most controversial element of such systems. A public survey explored the social acceptability of 19 forest treatments that varied by forest age, level of green-tree retention, pattern of retention, and level of down wood. The survey presented respondents with photos of the treatments, explanatory narratives, and resource outputs related to human and wildlife needs. Respondents rated treatments for scenic beauty, service to human needs, service to wildlife needs, and overall acceptability. Acceptability distribution patterns were analysed for all forest treatments. These showed broad, passionate opposition to clearcutting, conflict over the acceptability of not managing forests, conflict over old growth harvests, conflict with some passionate opposition to 15% retention harvests, and unconflicted acceptance of young forest thinnings and 40% retention harvests. Modelling of these responses found that socially acceptable forestry attends to scenic beauty
    [Show full text]