2004 NFMA Planning Rule

2004 NFMA Planning Rule Arizona Oversight and Forest Health Advisory Council: April 14, 2005 Bob Davis, Director Planning, Watershed and Air 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. 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. Creating New NFMA 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 Key Changes from 1982 to 2004  1982  Tactical – Lists of Activities  2004  Strategic – Desired Vision  NEPA Predictive  Public Involvement  Direction Prescriptive  Output Oriented  NEPA/EMS Adaptive  Public Collaboration  Direction Guidance  Outcome Oriented 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 partseconomic, social, and ecological 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 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. Plan Components Desired Conditions Objectives Guidelines Suitability of Areas Special Areas 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. 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. Guidelines Provide information and guidance for project and activity decisionmaking. They are not commitments or final decisions approving projects and activities. 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. 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. Public Participation Collaboration Updating the Comprehensive Evaluation Reports Establishing the components of the Plan Designing the Monitoring Requirements Establishing the Environmental Management System 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. 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. 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. 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.” 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. 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 T&E species, species of concern and species of interest. 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. 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/index.htm 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 Planning Model The Planning Model is composed of three Components: 1. Vision 2. Strategy 3. Design Criteria Link of Planning Model to New Rule Planning Rule Component 1. Desired Conditions 2. Objectives (Goals) 3. Suitable Uses 4. Special Designations 5. Guidelines (Standards) Plan Model Doc. 1. Vision 2. Strategy 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) 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. 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. For more details http://www.fs.fed.us/emc/nfma/index.html