Redistributed as a Service of the National Library for the Environment*
|
Redistributed as a Service of the National Library for the Environment* |
|
|
|
Ecosystem Management: Federal Agency Activities 94-339 ENR DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES The Forest Service mission statement is: "Caring for the Land and Serving People". The Forest Service understands ecosystem management to mean using an ecological approach to achieve the management of national forests and grasslands by blending the needs of people and environmental values in such a way that national forests and grasslands represent diverse, healthy, productive, and sustainable ecosystems. The Forest Service has developed guiding principles to implement its mission statement "Caring for the Land and Serving People," one of which is to use an ecological approach in assessing and managing land and related resource values in a sustainable manner. The Forest Service envisions ecosystem management as a holistic approach to natural resource management, moving beyond a compartmentalized approach that focuses on the individual parts of the forest. It is an approach that steps back from the forest stand and looks at the forest landscape and its position in the larger environment in order to integrate the human dimensions of natural resource management. Its purpose is to achieve sustainability of all resources. Scientific Foundation The scientific basis for ecosystem management is provided by Forest Service Research and cooperating scientists from other institutions. Forest Service Research is focusing its resources on developing and providing scientific and technical knowledge to improve the productivity, health, and diversity of forests and grasslands. An enhanced scientific underpinning is fundamental to taking an ecosystem approach to managing our natural resources on a sustainable basis. Policy Level Actions In June 1992, the Forest Service announced ecosystem management as the framework for managing the national forests and grasslands. This announcement followed a two-year experiment in ecological approaches to management that we called "New Perspectives". Although Ecosystem Management is a new land management philosophy, the Forest Service is well positioned to develop ecological approaches building upon nearly 100 years of land management experience and a broad array of expertise including Forest Service Research scientists and field-level resource professionals. This effort is supported by the direction provided by the Organic Act, the Multiple Use-Sustained Yield Act, the National Forest Management Act, and the forestry provisions of the 1990 Farm Bill. To carry out ecosystem management, Forest Service land managers are directed to understand the structure, function, and variability of ecosystems and to develop appropriate site specific management activities. Because of its complexity, ecosystem management requires an accelerated scientific effort and the efficient incorporation of science into on-the-ground projects. It also depends on grass-roots participation in decision-making and partnerships to achieve shared goals. The Forest Service has established a Reinvention Team as part of the Vice-President's National Performance Review that will recommend organizational changes to meet the needs of ecosystem management. The Forest Service has adopted an ecological unit framework to provide a scientific basis for ecosystem management. The framework is a classification and mapping system for stratifying areas into ecological units that have common biological and environmental factors. These factors include climate, physiography, water, soils, air, and natural communities. We have been working closely with other Federal agencies as we developed this framework. In September 1992, we directed our field units to develop action plans for the implementation of ecosystem management. We have identified changes that need to be made to our regulations to streamline our land management planning process and to base it upon ecosystem management principles. We will propose these regulatory changes in May 1994. We have completed some major regional ecosystem assessments and are beginning some others. An example was our participation in the interagency Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team (FEMAT) report for the Pacific Northwest and northern California spotted owl forests. We also prepared the Eastside Forest Ecosystem Health Assessment for eastern Oregon and Washington. Also being completed by the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management is a strategy for protecting the habitat of Pacific salmon and steelhead (PACFISH) for Oregon, Washington, California, Alaska, and Idaho. Another is just beginning for the Sierra Nevada in California. We are developing a national strategy for monitoring and evaluation as an integral part of ecosystem management. Program Level Actions Over the past several years, the Forest Service has conducted numerous experiments, demonstrations, and pilot efforts evaluating practices and activities that support an ecosystem management approach. At the program level, the Forest Service is emphasizing the role of fire management, forest health strategies, social impact assessment training, and a support framework to address decisionmaking across multiple spatial and temporal scales. We have numerous program level examples of ecosystem management on national forests, in our research programs, and in cooperation with other landowners in our State and Private Forestry program. These examples include: restoration of sand pine-scrub oak ecosystems eliminated by development in Florida; restoration of eastern Washington and Oregon forests affected by fire suppression and insect outbreaks; and restoration of spruce and hardwood ecosystems in Alaska following epidemic spruce beetle infestations. Rangeland projects include: the Yavapai Ecosystem Management Project in Arizona; Negrito Project in New Mexico; Taylor/Priest Grazing Allotment Project in Colorado. Other projects emphasize special management areas: wetlands of Alaska's Copper River Delta; Butte Valley National Grassland in California; and old-growth forests of the Carson National Forest in New Mexico. Each of these programs demonstrate not only aspects of improved ecological approaches to resources but also the human aspects of ecosystem management. Grass roots participation as well as scientists and managers working side by side in the development of these programs are critical elements. Interagency Cooperation The Forest Service is an active member of the Interagency Ecosystem Management Work Group which carries on the day-to-day work of the Office of Environmental Policy's Interagency Ecosystem Management Task Force. The Task Force was established to implement an ecosystem approach to environmental management. The Forest Service is co-founder and an active participant of the Interagency Ecosystem Management Coordination Group and the Department of Agriculture's Ecosystem Management Coordination Team. Both groups are designed to share information, coordinate projects of interest across agency lines, and provide a forum for the development of new concepts in ecosystem management. The Forest Service is active in exchanging personnel with other agencies to promote understanding, support, and acceptance of ecosystem management programs. Examples include the President's Commission on Sustainable Development; the National Biological Survey to participate in program and policy development; coordination with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) on rangeland reform; close work with the State Department to develop criteria for sustainable development; partnerships with the Environmental Protection Agency, the BLM, and the National Association of State Foresters among others, to develop and implement Forest Health Monitoring. The Forest Service is participating on a coordinating committee with the BLM, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, Department of Defense, and the Nature Conservancy to promote the role of Research Natural Areas in ecosystem management. The Forest Service is also working with the BLM to develop parallel land management planning regulations which will incorporate the same principles of ecosystem management. This effort will greatly improve the coordination of plans and activities on both National Forest System lands and lands administered by BLM. State and Private Landowner Cooperation Ecosystem management includes a commitment to work with even more partners than we've had in the past. Because ecosystems cross boundaries, many Federal, State, and county agencies; Tribal governments; private landowners; community leaders; and corporate foresters are interested in ecosystem management. We recognize the sensitivity of private property rights and the questions about how ecosystem management can be implemented across property boundaries. Our objective is to provide technical and financial assistance to Federal and State land managers and to nonindustrial private landowners. Through this effort, we can help land managers and landowners meet their objectives for their land by encouraging the use of sound ecological approaches. Longstanding partnerships with Federal land managers, State foresters, nongovernment organizations, local officials, and landowners have developed strong, successful working relationships. These relationships foster ecosystem approaches at all levels to achieve sustainable forests, as well as sustainable communities. The State foresters, working independently and through the National Association of State Foresters, are major partners in delivery of State and Private Forestry programs to the field level. Ongoing coordination is maintained with national associations representing local community groups, such as the National Association of Counties and the National Association of Conservation Districts. Examples of State and Private Forestry programs that provide an excellent opportunity to inform, involve, and coordinate ecosystem approaches are:
International Cooperation Because ecosystems and related resource values extend beyond national boundaries, the Forest Service is participating in an international forum to develop criteria for sustainable forest and rangeland management. The Forest Service is also working with the U.S. Agency for International Development, the Peace Corps, and other international agencies to provide technical assistance, training, and cooperative research for sustainable management of the world's forest resources. Examples include, chairing the Committee on Reforestation at the International Tropical Timber Organization meeting; participating in the Global Forest Conference in Indonesia; the U.S.-Japan Cooperative Program where an agreement was signed to increase technical assistance to developing countries; and assisting in the drafting of an agreement for the International Convention on Desertification. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) To meet forest planning and implementation requirements, GIS is being used to increase the data and analysis accuracy, and to reduce the time needed for analysis. Approximately 334 Forest Service sites have some type of interim GIS system. GIS capability has greatly enhanced our ability to assess and develop alternative scenarios for activities that have the potential to affect the environment. The following are a few examples of the types of analysis being performed by the units using interim GIS and other supporting technology in the Forest Service:
Gap Analysis The Forest Service is a key cooperator in supplying information for Gap Analysis, an ecosystem assessment designed to provide critical information in order to conserve native plant and animal species and communities. It is being used to implement conservation strategies for these species and communities. The first assessments have been completed in many of the Western States. Other Technology Remote Sensing The Forest Service has been using remote sensing methods for the detection and characterization of natural resources since the 1930's. Remote sensing methods are used for the interpretation of aerial photography for timber inventory, stand vigor, and volume, mapping of insect and disease areas, fuels management, land line surveys, and mapping to support GIS. Image Processing The Forest Service has been using image processing since the 1970's. The Forest Service has a number of image processing centers for processing satellite imagery to serve as a source of vegetation layers for GIS. Satellite data are used to create integrated resource inventories, to map vegetation, to detect change, and to delineate critical wetlands and wildlife habitat. Global Positioning System (GPS) The Forest Service is using GPS for environmental mapping, timber cruising, rangeland and wildlife habitat mapping, fire boundary locations, and other resource mapping needs. GPS is also used for map editing, and has also assisted in the development of GIS data bases. The Forest Service has approximately 500 GPS units throughout the agency, and currently administers 20 base stations, with more base station installations planned in the near future. Future Imaging Technology The Forest Service is using airborne video to quickly and efficiently update data bases for difficult-to-photograph locations such as southeastern Alaska. Video technology and the development of a portable aerial video system are now coming on line in the Forest Service. A system referred to as the "Fire Mouse Trap" is being used for mapping fire perimeters and to identify "hot spots" within the fire perimeter. This information can be relayed to a GIS workstation at the fire base headquarters determining fire suppression needs. A discussion of the technological tools is incomplete without considering the context for their use and the information available by GIS technology. Two efforts underway address these issues. Decision Support Framework We have established an agency-wide effort to establish a Decision Support Framework for ecosystem management that will provide both formal and informal decision support policy and procedural guidelines. This will include a series of analytical tools and decision support systems, and maintenance for those tools and systems. It will also include training and education focusing on ecosystem management principles, decision support, analytical methods, and the use of software tools. Information Management While technology such as GIS and remote sensing will be invaluable for ecosystem management, one essential element of any technology or analytic methodology is the availability of current inventory information for which there are recognized, well-defined data standards. We have recognized a need to address the integrated inventory of resources and the social, economic, and ecological conditions and trends at multiple spatial and temporal scales. Increased competition for resource uses and values, changing social views, requirements of laws and regulations, and the need to focus on the long term sustainability of ecosystems have required natural resource management to become more holistic and integrated. Although the Forest Service can implement ecosystem management under the current budget structure, the present structure does have complexities that make implementation considerably more difficult. A number of modifications to the current budget structure have been proposed to facilitate implementation of ecosystem management. This proposal is seen as a first step in implementing recommendations of the National Performance Review and will make ecosystem management easier to plan, accomplish and monitor. Additional proposals for budget restructuring will be implemented as further experience is gained using an ecosystem management approach. The current budget structure evolved in response to highly functional resource management programs which parallel constituent groups. The highly detailed budget structure establishes fiscal controls on the input side of management through numerous budget line items. This structural detail has resulted in extremely functional, costly, and complex accounting and reporting systems that hamper the agency's ability to implement the highly integrated resource approaches needed to support ecosystem management. Extremely limited reprogramming opportunities do not allow managers the ability to adjust to rapidly changing conditions. Budgets prepared two to three years in advance of program execution often face conditions, costs, and issues that were not predicted during original formulation. Therefore, the Forest Service has proposed simplifying and consolidating the number of items defined in the budget structure for Fiscal Year 1995. The agency has proposed reducing main appropriations from 13 to 8 and funding line items from 72 to 42. This will simplify accounting, increase flexibility, and reduce the highly functional nature of programs. The Forest Service is also proposing line items that differentiate strongly between operations, maintenance, and capital investment. A specific line item has been requested to recognize Ecosystem Planning, Inventory, and Monitoring. In addition, reprogramming authority has been requested to allow movement of up to 15 percent of each line item without prior approval, as opposed to the present constraint of 10 percent or a maximum of $250,000. The Forest Service will explore additional budget restructuring as more experience is gained with budgeting and implementing ecosystem management. Given the state of understanding gained to date, we believe the restructuring proposal for FY 1995 is the necessary first step to provide support and flexibility for implementing ecosystem management. Ecosystem management is the main focus for the Forest Service. Priorities have been and will continue to be shifted to ensure that actions needed to support ecosystem management are provided the necessary resources. The Forest Service is moving ahead as rapidly as possible to organize the testing and experimentation of ecosystem management over the last several years into a consistent agencywide approach. About three percent of the Forest Service's ecosystem management work is being completed by outside contractors. These activities are primarily information collection and synthesis. ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT LIMITS AND OPPORTUNITIES We are looking at several areas where we will need to change our current policies to implement ecosystem management. There may be areas where changes in our existing statutory framework would be desirable. We do know that we will need to change our regulations to streamline our land management planning process and to base it upon ecosystem management principles. We plan to submit these proposed changes in 1994. The Forest Service operates under a number of natural resource laws and the Forest Service, with the Office of General Counsel, is reviewing these existing laws to see if there are ways to implement ecosystem management more efficiently. The Forest Service will require that all processes and activities will involve the public and other cooperators throughout the implementation of ecosystem management. The Federal Advisory Council Act (FACA) of 1972 (P.L. 92-463) poses a challenge in developing this full public participation. We have asked the Office of General Counsel to assist us in complying with the act and still conduct an extensive public participation program. The Forest Service faces challenges similar to other Federal agencies with declining budgets and staff. The development of techniques to support ecosystem management and agency-wide implementation require significant adjustments in essential information, analytical tools, planning processes, field actions, and monitoring activities. This necessitates adjustments in workforce skills and institutional processes. Based on the Reinvention Team's report and a continuing evaluation of ecosystem management skill needs, the Forest Service will address staffing adjustments by retraining some existing employees and emphasizing ecosystem management skills in the hiring of new employees. Presently, we are sharing critical skills between Forest Service units and by assignments from other agencies and organizations. The Forest Service intends to play a leadership role in fully developing an ecosystem management approach for managing resource values and human interactions. This role will be a highly collaborative one with other agencies, organizations, universities and interest groups. The short term future is one of continued development of essential tools and techniques to support ecosystem management. The agency has been deeply involved in pilot projects and experimentation for several years and is shifting toward consolidating the best available understanding from these efforts and building a consistent agency-wide approach. There is a continuing focus on developing or accumulating the latest and best available knowledge about resource values and human interactions. The Forest Service is moving ahead with an ecological approach that focuses on long term sustainability of the environment, economies, and communities. While many issues will remain highly controversial, ecosystem management will provide a better basis through which to view and understand these issues and to develop sustainable solutions. CONTACT Bill Sexton DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES Ecosystem management is one of 6 major initiatives of the Soil Conservation Service's (SCS) Strategic Plan. To carry out this initiative, SCS has developed an action plan. SCS has defined its ecosystem management role in terms of ecosystem-based assistance to resource managers (land owners and users). SCS is not a land managing agency. Our programs are delivered to landowners, users, and decision makers through Soil and Water Conservation Districts and other cooperating entities. SCS field personnel provide science-based technical assistance that provides information to clients so that they can practice effective ecosystem management. SCS ecosystem-based assistance:
SCS ecosystem-based assistance to clients uses and builds upon the SCS planning process and the SCS Field Office Technical Guide and other technical handbooks and manuals. SCS will utilize a watershed (hydrologic unit) or other geographical area to identify community concerns and needs based on impaired ecosystems and their resources and on opportunities for ecosystem enhancement. Ecosystem concerns and opportunities will then be expressed in ecosystem level plans that can be translated into individual land user plans. SCS task forces currently are:
Coordination of training with other Federal agencies is underway with the purpose of achieving increased efficiency and cost savings. Soil and water quality indicator development is also proceeding through interagency task groups and through the USDA Resources Conservation Act process. Outputs from these groups will be used to focus supplemental training activity, to direct hiring of persons with new and needed specialties, and to help guide reorientation of staff and organization. Ecosystem-based assistance requires a delivery mechanism and organizational framework that will allow functional boundaries to be established that account for socioeconomic, political, and legal constraints. Ecosystems can be delineated in time and space based upon specific criteria. Subsystems can be defined that address processes, inputs, and outputs. This ability to conceptually and functionally nest ecosystems within ecosystems offers tremendous flexibility. One convenient method of nesting is along defined hydrologic boundaries. Within this framework ecosystems can be nested: sub-fields within fields, fields within farms/ranches, farms/ranches within watersheds (or subwatersheds), watersheds within ecoregions. SCS will use this approach, when appropriate, as a framework for analysis of ecosystem conditions and for delivering technical and financial assistance to our clients. This operational model has been embodied in an SCS strategy document entitled " The SCS Water Management Action Plan" and in a complementary document, "The Watershed Approach to Nonpoint Source Pollution Prevention and Control." Although the latter document focuses on one facet of outputs from a watershed approach to ecosystem management -- water quality improvement -- the approach is a good vehicle to bring agency and public involvement to bear on all resource issues. Ecosystem-based assistance for the management of natural resources is defined in the SCS Action Plan as the application of appropriately integrated ecological, economic, and social factors through the SCS planning and assistance process in order to maintain and enhance the quality of the environment to best meet our current and future needs. At the national Federal level, SCS participates on the White House Ecosystem Management Work Group, the Interagency Ecosystem Management Coordination Group, initiated and co-chairs the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Ecosystem Management Ad-hoc Team, and a Forest Service (FS)/SCS work group. The USDA team, consisting of 9 agencies, has developed draft definitions and policy and will help its member agencies coordinate research, projects and related activities. The FS/SCS work group is collaborating on training and many projects, including ecosystem assessments and geographical information systems. Our role with the interagency team has been one of information exchange and preparation of a set of keywords that will facilitate dialogue on this issue. SCS' strengths are in coordinating ecosystem management-related programs and activities among interested parties and in its technical and planning assistance capabilities. Our daily activity involves Federal, State and private sectors. SCS provides technical assistance in cooperation with conservation districts established under State law. These districts are locally-elected representatives. Almost all SCS conservation work is accomplished with districts, private landowners, and organizations. In recent years, SCS has met community needs for a more sustainable resource approach by using a consensus-building process called Coordinated Resource Management Planning. In this process, all stakeholders, representing many different interests and organizations, are invited to the table to address various resource and socioeconomic concerns. Action is taken when consensus is reached. Some examples of this collaborative process include:
SCS has made extensive use of geographic information systems (GIS) for the past ten years, at all organizational levels of the agency. We currently support over 250 GIS installations at County, State, Regional, and National levels. Agency applications of GIS include the generation of ecosystem planning maps at the field level and many map-interpretive products using SCS databases such as the National Resources Inventory (NRI) and the National Soil Information System (NASIS). SCS maintains 52+ years of field-collected natural resource data on a wide variety of resources. Though most of these data are tabular, we make extensive use of them by using GIS to aid development of alternatives that support the management of ecosystems for productivity and conservation. GIS is also used to support the strategic planning that is necessary for policy analysis. Recently we released a report on potential problems on areas that are sensitive to agricultural chemical use. This national-level analysis takes advantage of the NRI and NASIS field collected data at a national level and uses mathematical modeling to generate interpretive maps. Those maps aid problem visualization by displaying ground water quality as it is affected by agricultural chemical use. GIS is also being used extensively within SCS to support the graphic analysis and display of soils data and to support field and watershed-level water quality modeling programs. The current SCS budget structure can accommodate ecosystem management. Both the appropriation and activity structure within each appropriation account provide management with this flexibility. However, SCS' authorizing legislation is primarily intended to prevent erosion and flooding and to improve water quality. Some concern has been expressed by USDA's Office of General Counsel that SCS' authority should be broadened. Ecosystem-based assistance makes provisions for local involvement and partnerships. These linkages will help provide flexibility in addressing ecosystem concerns by filling technical voids that SCS cannot fill. There is a need to amend some laws to allow for broader assessments and planning. For example, Public Law 93-566, Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act, as amended, limits watershed planning to 250,000 acres. Yet, it is an excellent vehicle for ecosystem management activities. To carry out an ecosystem-based assistance approach, SCS needs authority to plan within a larger area, address more resources and fund more planning than authorized by this current law. The 250,000 acre limitation is appropriate for planning and installing measures on the mainstreams, but is meaningless when planning and implementing upstream and nonstructural measures. With regards to changing priorities, current program priorities are conservation compliance required by the 1985 and 1990 Farm Bills, wetland protection and delineation, and water quality. SCS is taking an ecosystem approach with the water quality activities. SCS has been moving toward improving ecosystem management through its programs for some time, and there is greater awareness that priorities will be changing -- particularly after the December 31, 1994, deadline for conservation compliance mandated in the 1985 Farm Bill has passed. There are at least three additional factors that will help to shape SCS' future ecosystem-based assistance capability:
Most ecosystem management work is carried out by SCS employees working with partners. Some assessment and GIS studies are conducted under contract. In some cases, SCS has memoranda of understanding with State agencies or conservation districts to provide additional assistance to clients. SCS also enters into contracts to cost-share financial assistance that supports improved ecosystem management by clients. Great Plains Conservation Program long-term agreements and Resource Conservation and Development project measures are examples of this type of contractual arrangement. ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT LIMITS AND OPPORTUNITIES SCS envisions its future role in ecosystem management through ecosystem-based assistance as:
SCS has very few legal restrictions to impede ecosystem-based assistance. Insufficient staff and significant staff reductions could curtail our efforts in two ways.
To address the technical qualifications needs, SCS is developing a more comprehensive and integrated training program and a technical needs inventory. To meet enhanced skill needs, SCS anticipates recruiting and hiring a wider variety of talents in field such as agroecology, agroforestry, animal ecology, limnology, systems ecology, landscape ecology, and human ecology. CONTACTS Diane Gelburd
|
CRS Reports Home
|
||
 |
National Council for Science and the Environment 1725 K Street, Suite 212 - Washington, DC 20006 202-530-5810 - info@NCSEonline.org |
 |
