2004 NFMA Planning Rule

1
2004 NFMA Planning Rule

• Arizona Oversight and Forest Health Advisory
  Council April 14, 2005
• Bob Davis, Director Planning, Watershed and Air

2

• Plan
• A detailed formulation of a program of action
• An orderly arrangement of parts of an overall
  design or objective
• Synonym plot
• Plot A secret plan for accomplishing a usually
  evil or unlawful end.

3
Recommendations from the Critique of Land
Management Planning - 1990

• The process is simple and clear
• The process is transparent, with the public
  involved throughout
• The plan is based on sound, current information
• The process addresses major issues in ways people
  can understand.
• The process is not an ordeal for citizens or
  forest personnel
• The plan results in a vision of future management
  that can be clearly understood.

4
Creating NewNFMA Regulations

• Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 1991
• Draft Rule 1993
• Committee of Scientists Report - 1999
• NFMA Rule 2000
• Administrative Review/Cost Study
• Draft Rule 2002
• Final Rule - 2004

5
Key Changes from 1982 to 2004

• 1982
• Tactical
• Lists of Activities
• NEPA Predictive
• Public Involvement
• Direction Prescriptive
• Output Oriented

• 2004
• Strategic
• Desired Vision
• NEPA/EMS Adaptive
• Public Collaboration
• Direction Guidance
• Outcome Oriented

6
The New Rule

• Plans will be strategic
• Collaboration will be integral
• Plans will be adaptive monitoring is key
• Sustainability is composed of three interrelated
  and interdependent parts- economic, social, and
  ecological

7
The New Rule

• Forest Supervisors are the Responsible Official
• Science reviews will be part of the process
• Environmental Management Systems (EMS) will be
  part of the planning process
• The Objection Process will replace appeals

8
How Will Planning Change?

• Shifting resources from up front planning into
  monitoring and plan adjustments.
• Plan Components provide guidance and vision
• Categorical Exclusion for plan revisions.
• Environmental Impact Statements, Environmental
  Assessments, or Categorical Exclusions will be
  done for project decisions.

9
Plan Components

• Desired Conditions
• Objectives
• Guidelines
• Suitability of Areas
• Special Areas

10
Desired Conditions

• Social,Economic, and Ecological attributes toward
  which management is to be directed.
• Aspirations, not commitments or final decisions
  approving projects and activities.
• May be achievable only over a long time period.

11
Objectives

• Concise projections of measurable, time specific
  intended outcomes.
• Means of measuring progress toward achieving or
  maintaining desired conditions.
• Aspirations, not commitments or final decisions
  approving projects and activities.

12
Guidelines

• Provide information and guidance for project and
  activity decisionmaking.
• They are not commitments or final decisions
  approving projects and activities.

13
Suitability of Areas

• Are identified as generally suitable for various
  uses.
• May be identified as generally suitable for uses
  that are compatible with desired conditions and
  objectives for that area.
• Are not commitments or final decisions approving
  projects and activities.
• Are approved through project and activity
  decisionmaking.

14
Special Areas

• Areas within NFS designated because of their
  unique or special characteristics.
• May be designated by statute.
• May be designated by Responsible Official in
  approving a plan, amendment, or revision.
• May be designated by a separate administrative
  process in accordance with NEPA and other
  applicable laws.

15
Public Participation - Collaboration

• Updating the Comprehensive Evaluation Reports
• Establishing the components of the Plan
• Designing the Monitoring Requirements
• Establishing the Environmental Management System

16
How will Public Participation be Different?

• Typically we develop alternatives.
• The public wants active involvement.
• Together we will develop desired conditions.
• Together we will narrow issues to result in a
  proposed plan.

17
How will Public Participation be Different?

• The proposed plan will be developed in an
  iterative approach so that it evolves through
  public participation.
• Collaboration may not be easier, but it will be
  more meaningful.
• Plans will be a result of public desires.
• The Supervisor will retain the final decision
  authority and accountability to implement the
  plan.

18
Planning Analysis

• Comprehensive evaluations
• For new plans and revisions
• Updated every five years
• Focus on need for change.
• Amendments will require evaluations pertinent to
  the issues.
• Evaluate general conditions and trends.
• Relevant and proportional to the issues and
  potential risks.

19
How will Plans address Sustainability?

• Contribute to sustaining social and economic
  systems within the plan area.
• Contribute to sustaining ecological systems by
  sustaining healthy, diverse and productive native
  ecosystems and by maintaining and restoring
  ecological conditions to support diversity of
  native plant and animal species in the plan area.

20
Social and Economic Sustainability

• Take a look at the community
• Identify the Forest niche or role in the
  community
• Develop a plan that will address that role.

21
Ecological Sustainability

• Ecosystem diversity is the primary means by which
  a plan contributes to sustaining ecological
  systems.
• As needed, plans will include additional
  provisions for TE species, species of concern
  and species of interest.

22
Environmental Management Systems (EMS)

• Is a system that addresses adaptive management.
• EMS is a systematic approach to work that
  continually improves the environment.
• Plan, Do, Check, Act
• An EMS uses independent audits to validate the
  system.

23
Environmental Management Systems (EMS)

• Every unit must have an EMS.
• EMS uses an international standard, ISO 14001.
• The ISO has 17 elements.
• More information at www. fs.fed.us/emc/nepa/inde
  x.htm

24
Summary of New Rule

• Strategic Plans
• Address need for change
• Use of Best Available Science
• Adaptive Management and Monitoring
• Public Collaboration
• Social, Economic, and Ecological Sustainability

25
Planning Model

• The Planning Model is composed of three
  Components
• 1. Vision
• 2. Strategy
• 3. Design Criteria

26
Link of Planning Model to New Rule

• Planning Rule Component Plan Model Doc.
• Desired Conditions 1. Vision
• Objectives (Goals)
• Suitable Uses 2. Strategy
• Special Designations
• Guidelines (Standards) 3. Design Criteria
• The Plan Prototype matches up equally well with
  the 1982 Planning Rule Decision Components (1982
  components that are not in the new rule are
  depicted in parenthesis above)

27
Region 3 Revision Strategy

• NFMA requires plans to be revised every 15-years.
  Our plans are 17-19 years old.
• Initiate Coronado and Cibola Grasslands this
  year.
• Initiate the remaining Arizona Forests in FY2006
  and New Mexico in FY2007.
• Complete plans by FY2010 or sooner.

28
Region 3 Revision Strategy

• Phase 1 FY2004-FY2006
• Conduct ecological, social and economic broad
  scale inventories.
• Define revision process for Region 3.
• Phase 2 Implement Revisions FY2005 to FY2010
• Phase 3 Evaluation reports and EMS.

29
For more details

• http//www.fs.fed.us/emc/nfma/index.html