United States

Department of

Agriculture

Forest

Service

Forest Inventory And

Analysis 2000 Business

Summary

Contents

Page

Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 1

Changes from Business Reports of Previous Years ........................................................................... 1

2000 Program Highlights .................................................................................................................. 2

Outputs and Products ............................................................................................................. 2

Program Changes................................................................................................................... 3

Program Resources ................................................................................................................ 4

Partner Contributions............................................................................................................. 6

2000 Regional Highlights .................................................................................................................. 9

South ...................................................................................................................................... 9

West Coast ............................................................................................................................. 9

Interior West ........................................................................................................................ 10

North Central ....................................................................................................................... 10

Northeast.............................................................................................................................. 10

National Office .................................................................................................................... 11

Multi-Resource Applications of FIA Data ....................................................................................... 12

Grants and Agreements.................................................................................................................... 13

Comparing 2000 FIA Accomplishments With Our 1999 Goals ...................................................... 14

2001 FIA Program Direction ........................................................................................................... 15

Long-Term Strategic Direction ........................................................................................................ 17

Conclusions ..................................................................................................................................... 18

Appendix ......................................................................................................................................... 19

Glossary of Terms Used in Report Tables ........................................................................... 19

Tables (1-5) .......................................................................................................................... 21
INTRODUCTION

The Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) program of

the USDA Forest Service provides the information

needed to assess the status, trends, and sustainability

of America’s forests. This report, which summarizes

program activities in fiscal year 2000 (October 1,

1999, through September 30, 2000), gives our customers and partners a snapshot of past activities,

current business practices, and future program directions. It is designed to increase our accountability and

foster performance-based management of the FIA

program. (Note: This business report does not include

statistical information about the forests of the U.S.; if

you are interested in such information, please contact

the appropriate regional or national FIA office listed

on the back cover of this report.)

The FIA program collects, analyzes, and reports

information on the status and trends of America’s

forests: how much forest exists and where, who owns

it, and how is it changing, as well as how the trees

and other forest vegetation are growing and how

much of the forest has died or been removed in recent

years. This information can be used in many ways,

such as in evaluating wildlife habitat conditions,

assessing sustainability of current ecosystem management practices, monitoring forest health, supporting

planning and decisionmaking activities undertaken by

public and private enterprises, and predicting the

effects of global change. The FIA program combines

this information with related data on insects, diseases,

and other types of forest damage to assess the present

health and potential future risks to forests. The program also projects what forests are likely to be like in

10 to 50 years under various scenarios, for evaluating

whether current forest management practices are

sustainable in the long run and whether current

policies will allow our grandchildren and their grandchildren to enjoy America’s forests as we do today.

1

CHANGES FROM BUSINESS

REPORTS OF PREVIOUS

YEARS

The Strategic Plan for Forest Inventory and Monitoring calls for integrating the Forest Health Monitoring

(FHM) plots into the FIA program. We completed this

in 2000, incorporating the FHM plots as a subsample

of the larger set of FIA plots. These former FHM

plots are now referred to as “phase-three” plots to

distinguish them from the larger sample of basic or

“phase-two” FIA plots. However, from now on, both

phase-two and phase-three plots are considered to be

part of the FIA program and will be reported on

accordingly. Along with moving the responsibility for

implementing the phase-three plots into FIA, we have

moved the financial resources and staffing needed to

deliver that portion of the program. For this reason,

some of the financial measures reported in this and

future FIA business reports will not be directly comparable to previous years’ measures that did not

incorporate information about the phase-three plots.

Based on partner and customer feedback to our 1999

business report, we have also increased the level of

detail in reporting contributions made by program

partners outside of the Forest Service. We distinguish

between two kinds of contributions. “Contributions

towards the base program” include cash or in-kind

contributions from external program partners that

help deliver the basic FIA program outlined by Congress: 20 percent of all sample plots measured every

year, with reports at 5-year intervals. “Contributions

which add value” are contributions that do not directly support the base program but that enable

partners to derive more value from the FIA program.

Examples of the latter include State-sponsored sample

grid intensifications and the addition of new measurements. Both kinds of contributions demonstrate the

value that partners attach to the FIA program.
2000 PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS

Outputs and Products

Table 1 (in the appendix) shows some comparisons

across FIA regional units in the rates, cost, and performance of implementing the FIA program. Federal

funding of the FIA program in 2000 totaled

$39,497,000, or approximately 67 percent of the

funding needed to implement the base Federal FIA

program. In addition, partners contributed an additional $7,437,341 towards implementing or enhancing

the FIA program. We were active in 38 States in 2000

(fig. 1), covering 25,433 phase-two and 2,916 phasethree sample locations, or 8 percent and 15 percent,

respectively, of the total FIA sample locations nationwide (including forested and non-forested sample

locations). At the end of 2000, 42 percent of the

Nation was covered by the new annual FIA program,

an increase from 21 percent in 1999. The FIA program produced 123 reports and publications in 2000,

2

32 more than in 1999. The publications included 3

State statistical reports, 1 State analytical report, 29

articles in peer-reviewed outlets, and 58 articles

presented to colleagues at professional meetings.

We wrote a series of program fact sheets, available at

our national Web site fia.fs.fed.us, to present general

background on various aspects of our program. We

also developed a demonstration FIA plot in cooperation with the Society of American Foresters. This

demonstration plot, located on the SAF property in

Bethesda, Maryland, is being used to inform nationallevel partners and supporters about the FIA program.

In addition, we continued to develop our World Wide

Web resources, increasing the programmatic information available on the Web site as well as servicing

over 19,800 forest data retrievals and 5,400 timber

product output data retrievals from our online databases.

Figure 1.—States with FIA fieldwork, 2000.

Puerto Rico

Alaska

Hawaii

Annual FIA Program Fully Implemented

Phase 3 Only

Phase 3 + Periodic Phase 2 (closeout)

Periodic Phase 2 (closeout) only

FIA Implementation, 2000
Program Changes

In 2000, the FIA program completed the second of 5

years of transition outlined in the Strategic Plan for

Forest Monitoring written in response to the Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act

of 1998 (Public Law 105-185). By the end of 2003,

we expect to implement an annual FIA program that

measures at least 10 percent of all sample locations

per year in Western States and at least 15 percent per

year in Eastern States, with full reporting at 5-year

intervals. This program is referred to as the “base

Federal program” and is intended to be fully funded

by the Forest Service. All States and other partners

have the option to contribute the resources necessary

to bring the program up to the full sample intensity of

20 percent per year or to make other value-added

contributions such as funding new measurements or

additional sample locations.

The Strategic Plan also addressed integrating the

Forest Health Monitoring (FHM) program with the

FIA program. FHM is a Forest Service - State partnership that reports on status and trends in forest ecosystem health. It includes a plot sampling component

similar to FIA in concept, with a broader suite of

forest health indicators measured on a smaller sample

of plots. In 2000, we finished incorporating the plot

component of FHM into the FIA program, creating an

enhanced FIA program that now includes three

sample levels: phase one consisting of remote sensing

for stratification, phase two consisting of the original

set of FIA plots (approximately one plot per 6,000

acres), and phase three consisting of a subsample of

phase-two plots measured for a broader suite of

indicators (approximately one sample location per

94,800 acres). The remaining components of the

FHM program, including aerial damage surveys,

evaluation monitoring, and intensive site/long-term

ecological monitoring, will continue as a separate but

related FHM program. Starting in 2000, FIA was

managed as a single program for all three phases.

This current business report is the first to include

information for the full, enhanced FIA program,

including phase three.

Two major accomplishments in 2000 involved formal

negotiated agreements between FIA and program

partners. The first was the signing of a Memorandum

of Understanding between the USDA Forest Service

and the National Association of State Foresters

(NASF). This memorandum, signed on February 15,

2000, by Mike Dombeck, Chief of the Forest Service,

and Stanford Adams, President of the NASF, outlines

the commitment of these two organizations to collaborate in delivering the planned FIA program by

2003. The agreement recognizes that the FIA program

is an Agency responsibility of the Forest Service and

that the State Foresters are key partners in program

delivery.

The second major agreement involves an internal

Memorandum of Understanding between the FIA

program and the National Forest System of the Forest

Service that provides for the implementation of FIA

on all national forest lands. This agreement will

provide consistency in the strategic-scale inventory

across 100 percent of U.S. forestland and will provide

a consistent framework that national forests can build

upon to meet their more detailed planning information

needs. The agreement provides for including NFS

officials in all stages of the FIA management structure

to ensure that FIA remains responsive to national

forest needs. Along with this agreement is a commitment by the national forests to contribute $6.2 million

to the FIA budget to cover the cost of this program

expansion on national forest lands, with the understanding that the FIA program will be responsible for

providing any additional future funds needed to

maintain the base program on NFS lands.

Copies of both agreements are available in the library

section of the FIA Web site at fia.fs.fed.us.

3
Program Resources

Federal appropriated funding for FIA increased by

$7,890,088 from $23,796,912 in 1999 to $31,687,000

in 2000 (table 2 in the appendix). This increase

consists of $2,890,000 in Forest Service Research

funds formerly allocated to the FHM program that are

now considered part of the FIA program, plus an

increase of $5 million in newly appropriated funding.

This funding was augmented by $5,000,000 from the

National Forest System to cover the cost of FIA on

national forest lands and by $2,810,000 from State

and Private Forestry to continue their historical

support of the FHM plots, which are now part of FIA.

This is approximately 67 percent of the total Federal

funds of $58,879,000 in 2000 dollars needed to fully

fund the Federal share of the proposed 10 percent/15

percent base Federal program.

Of the funding available, 83 percent was spent in

direct support of FIA activities (fig. 2) including 43

percent on salaries, 21 percent in external grants, 11

percent on equipment and related expenses, and 7

percent on travel expenses. Indirect costs charged by

Research Stations accounted for 17 percent of expenditures, the same percent as in FY 1999. Figure 3

shows the appropriated and total funding available for

FIA from 1995 to 2000, as well as the projected future

total funding needed to deliver the 10 percent/15

percent base Federal program as planned by 2003.

Because these figures now include funding for phasethree fieldwork, they are not directly comparable with

figures published in earlier FIA business reports that

included only phase-two funds.

Across FIA regions, cost and productivity figures

vary because of the cyclical nature of the current

4

EOY Balance

1%

Indirect

17%

Grants

21%

Equipment & Other Direct

11%

Travel

7%

Salary

43%

Figure 2.—FIA expenditures by

category, 2000.
5

inventory system and because of differences between

field units in operational methods and ease of access.

Rates of indirect costs in FIA field units range from

about 10 to 21 percent across the country (table 2),

reflecting differences in both sources of funding as

well as Station policies. For example, some Stations

assess different rates of indirect costs for Federal and

non-Federal funds. The Washington Office has a 32-

percent rate of indirect cost because its FIA budget

includes the U.S. Department of Agriculture overhead

assessed to the entire FIA program.

FIA program staffing consisted of 342 Federal person-years of effort in 2000 (table 3 in the appendix),

up from 296 Federal person-years in 1999. This

increase largely reflects the inclusion of the phasethree fieldwork in reporting on the whole FIA program. Of the Federal FIA employees, 51 percent were

$ 0

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

$60,000

$70,000

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Appropriated Total

Total funding required in future years to

deliver the base federal FIA program by

2003

involved in the supervision and collection of field

data, 28 percent in analysis and information management, 6 percent in techniques research, and 9 percent

in program management and administration (fig. 4).

Partner Contributions

The complete FIA program required by Congress is

envisioned to be a Federal-State partnership, with

both partners contributing resources to accomplish the

work. We have agreed that the base Federal share of

this program is an annual inventory program that

collects data from 10 percent of sample locations in

the Western U.S. and 15 percent of the sample locations in the Eastern U.S. on an annual basis, with

reports for all States produced at 5-year intervals.

Figure 3.—FIA appropriated and total funds available, 1995-2003. $Millions

$70

$60

$50

$40

$30

$20

$10

$0
Partners at their discretion may choose to contribute

the resources needed to bring the FIA program up to

the full 20-percent measurements per year described

in the law. Additionally, or alternately, partners may

choose to contribute resources for other purposes that

add value to the FIA program, such as by intensifying

the base FIA sample location grid to support analysis

at finer spatial resolution, by funding additional types

of measurements on FIA sample locations, or by

providing analyses or reporting beyond that provided

by FIA. The willingness of partners to contribute

resources demonstrates the inherent value of the FIA

program.

Table 4 in the appendix lists those partners that have

chosen to contribute resources to the implementation

of the FIA program, either to achieve the 20-percent

program envisioned by Congress or to add value to

FIA data in other ways. These resources include staff

time, vehicle use, office space, equipment, travel

costs, and other non-cash items that support or add

value to the FIA program. Contributions are valued

for reporting purposes in terms of what it would cost

the Federal FIA staff to provide the same service,

which may not necessarily be the same as the actual

cost to the partner making the contribution. Overall,

partners contributed $4,209,776 towards the full 20

percent FIA program envisioned by Congress and

another $3,227,565 in contributions that add value to

the FIA program for a total of $7,437,341 in partner

contributions. This is an increase from the $4,585,889

contributed by partners in 1999. By far the greatest

contributors to the FIA program are State agencies,

which collectively contributed $7,191,408 towards

the program, accounting for approximately 97 percent

of all partner contributions.

6

Figure 4.—FIA Federal person-years by category, 2000.

Image Analysis

6%

Administration

9%

Fieldwork

51%

Techniques Research

6%

Analysis

12%

Information

Management

16%
2000 REGIONAL

HIGHLIGHTS

The following section presents general information on

the types of activities completed in each part of the

country in 2000. For more detailed information on

results, accomplishments, and impacts, please contact

the respective FIA unit.

South

The Southern Research Station FIA unit continued

periodic inventory fieldwork in North Carolina and

Alabama; implemented annual fieldwork in Arkansas

and Louisiana; and continued annual inventory

fieldwork in Virginia, Georgia, South Carolina,

Tennessee, and Kentucky. All listed States include

phase-three (Forest Health Monitoring) plots. In

collaboration with our partners, we measured a total

of 9,185 phase-two plots (10 percent of the regional

total) and 568 phase-three plots (10 percent of the

regional total).

The Southern program continued to provide national

leadership in developing and maintaining World Wide

Web support for Resource Planning Act (RPA) reporting. We attended approximately five different regional

user group and partner meetings, mostly focused on

logistic details of cooperative implementation of

annual FIA, and we held one regional user group

meeting. The unit produced 37 publications (up from

30 in 1999) including one State analytical report, one

State statistical report, and three survey unit statistical

reports. The Southern FIA unit also hosted a national

FIA science symposium, conducted 231 consultations

with FIA information users, and filled 367 specific

data requests. We continued to focus research activities on developing analytical and compilation procedures for processing annual forest inventory data.

7

The Southern Research Station also supports the

national office of the Forest Health Monitoring

program, located in Research Triangle Park, North

Carolina. The National FHM office is partly funded

by a grant from FIA to conduct indicator development research and to analyze FIA data with respect to

forest health. In 2000, the FHM unit produced two

FIA-related publications and coordinated a series of

cooperative agreements that provided for technical

support of lichen, ozone, soil, and vegetative measures.

West Coast

In 2000, the Pacific Northwest Research Station unit

continued periodic inventory fieldwork in Alaska,

initiated periodic fieldwork in Washington, initiated

annual FIA in Oregon (the first implementation of the

annual FIA system in the Pacific Northwest), and

continued phase-three fieldwork in California and

Washington. We continued a remeasurement project

in beetle-killed spruce stands on the Kenai Peninsula

that will provide data for a comparison of the extent

and condition of the forest from 1987 to 1999. Altogether, we measured 2,380 phase-two plots (6 percent

of our regional total outside of interior Alaska) and

539 phase-three plots (22 percent of our regional total

outside of interior Alaska).

We held two user group meetings in 2000, one in

Anchorage, Alaska, and one in Olympia, Washington.

We also collaborated with the Southern FIA unit to

lead a team that wrote a white paper on conducting

future inventory activities in the Pacific and Caribbean islands that are part of the United States. This

white paper will guide the future strategy for implementing FIA in these regions.

Research in 2000 focused on continuing the development of measurement and analysis methods for down
8

woody debris, woody debris, and understory vegetation. The down woody debris protocol is ready for

implementation on all phase-three plots in annual

inventory States in 2001. Understory vegetation

measures will undergo one more year of pilot testing

before implementation in 2002.

The PNW unit produced 26 publications in 2000 (an

increase from 19 in 1999), including six papers in

peer-reviewed journals and seven papers in conference proceedings.

Interior West

The Rocky Mountain Research Station FIA unit

completed periodic inventory fieldwork in New

Mexico, continued periodic inventory fieldwork in

Wyoming and South Dakota, and initiated final

closeout periodic inventory work in Idaho. We also

initiated the complete annual FIA system in Utah, the

first State to be done in the Interior West, and we

conducted phase-three fieldwork in Colorado, Idaho,

Nevada, Utah, and Wyoming. In addition, we continued ongoing phase-three fieldwork in Idaho, Wyoming, Nevada, and Colorado. We measured 5,453

phase-two plots (6 percent of the total for our region)

and 972 phase-three plots (17 percent of the total for

our region). Fieldwork in 2001 was greatly hampered

by access restrictions and difficulty in hiring crews

due to the extreme fire season.

We produced two reports specific to individual national forests, demonstrating the usefulness of FIA

data to national forests for strategic planning and

resource characterization. We continued research in

cooperation with Utah State University to develop

models for forest inventory variables as functions of

satellite-based information for mapping and stratification, generating three publications from this work.

The Rocky Mountain unit produced five publications

in 2000 (an increase from four in 1999). We also

produced a CD demonstrating forest habitat modeling

in the Uinta Mountains and a set of Web-based interactive maps of forest structure by ecoregion.

The Rocky Mountain Research Station also supports a

mathematical statistics research unit in Fort Collins,

Colorado, which conducts research on new inventory

methods aimed at increasing efficiency and effectiveness of forest inventory across the United States, with

particular reference to the FIA program. In 2000, this

unit produced 13 publications pertaining to the FIA

program including five in peer-reviewed journals.

Topics included statistical techniques to improve

utilization of the FIA mapped plot, and access accuracy of remotely sensed data. The unit has increased

research and development to better serve the needs of

the national forests, including better estimates for

small areas, combination of remotely sensed data with

FIA plots for forest planning, and surveys of rare

plants and animals. The unit served national FIA

objectives by exploring inter-agency partnerships to

efficiently produce digital land cover maps for the

entire Nation at 1:24,000 scale; helping national

forests more effectively conduct resource inventories

and monitoring programs; prioritizing technology

development for inventory and monitoring; helping

guide development of geospatial analysis capabilities

within the Forest Service; helping design an inventory

and monitoring program for the Nation’s forests on

tropical islands; and coordinating research, development, and technology transfer among NAFTA nations

on inventory, monitoring, and geomatic sciences.

North Central

In 2000, the North Central Research Station FIA unit

continued annual inventory fieldwork in Indiana,

Iowa, Minnesota, and Missouri and initiated annual

FIA in Michigan and Wisconsin. The unit also continued phase-three fieldwork in Illinois. We measured

5,905 phase-two plots (8 percent of our regional total)
and 563 phase-three plots (12 percent of our regional

total).

We processed and analyzed data from the first panels

of annual inventory data collected in Indiana, Iowa,

Minnesota, and Missouri and will be publishing our

first annual inventory reports early in 2001. In 2000,

the North Central unit produced 22 publications

including State analytical reports for Indiana and

South Dakota. We continued collaborative research

with the University of Minnesota and with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources on methods

for an annual forest inventory system, including

cooperative research into “k-nearest neighbor (kNN)”

techniques and other uses of satellite imagery for

producing forest-nonforest maps. We attended the

longstanding annual meeting of the NC user group in

Sioux Falls, South Dakota. We also led the effort to

improve public access to FIA data and analytical

tools by developing a new version of Web-based

analysis engine for public use and by partnering with

Michigan Tech University to develop and distribute a

GIS-based tool for spatially accessing and analyzing

FIA data. Finally, we began to scan historical FIA

publications into an electronic format for easier

public access.

Northeast

The Northeastern Research Station FIA unit completed periodic fieldwork in Maryland and continued

periodic fieldwork in West Virginia. These will be the

final States inventoried under the periodic system. We

also continued annual FIA in Maine and initiated

annual FIA in Pennsylvania. We continued phasethree data collection in all of these States plus Connecticut, Delaware, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New

Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

We measured 2,510 phase-three plots (10 percent of

our regional total) and 274 phase-three plots (17

percent of our regional total).

The unit produced 17 publications in 2000 (an increase from 12 in 1999) including five peer-reviewed

journal articles and nine papers presented to colleagues at professional meetings. We collaborated

with the Maine Forest Service to complete the firstever analysis of annual inventory data collected under

the new FIA system, which was released in October

of 2000. We held our first regional FIA partners

meeting in July 2000 and agreed to meet annually to

coordinate FIA-related activities with our State,

National Forest System, and State and Private Forestry partners. We continued planning for the implementation of the next National Forest Land Ownership Study, scheduled to begin in 2001.

National Office

The National Office of the FIA program provides

coordination, oversight, and guidance to the FIA field

units engaged in implementing the enhanced FIA

program. In 2000, we organized, facilitated, and

documented two FIA Executive Team meetings, three

FIA Management Team meetings, and dozens of

briefings for internal and external partners, customers,

collaborators, and supporters. In collaboration with

the Society of American Foresters, we participated in

the first national user group meeting for FIA customers, held in Alexandria, Virginia. We organized and

hosted the first meeting of the North American Forest

Commission working group on Forest Inventory,

Monitoring, and Assessment, which brought colleagues from the United States, Canada, and Mexico

together to discuss common interests in forest ecosystem monitoring.

National Office staff produced three publications and

coordinated the completion of the final draft analysis

9
for the 1997 Resource Planning Act (RPA) Assessment. We led the drafting of a Memorandum of

Understanding, signed by the Chief of the Forest

Service and the President of the National Association

of State Foresters, which outlines and underscores the

intention of the Forest Service to implement the base

Federal FIA program envisioned in the Strategic Plan

for Forest Inventory and Monitoring. We also negotiated an agreement between the FIA program and the

National Forest System that outlines the terms under

which NFS will fully participate in the FIA program.

This is the first time that FIA has been recognized as

having the responsibility for implementing a consistent forest inventory program across all U.S. lands.

MULTI-RESOURCE APPLICATIONS OF FIA DATA

Historically, the strength of the FIA program has been

in the reliable reporting of status and trends in forest

area, forest productivity, timber product outputs, and

forestland ownership patterns. This basic inventory

information is of high interest to forest managers,

planners, consulting foresters, and people associated

with the wood product industry. However, the information has also historically been of high interest to

others who are interested in the distribution and

composition of America’s forests. FIA data are used

in a wide variety of assessments, such as prediction

and measurement of changes in tree species distributions associated with global climate change; models

of the capacity for carbon sequestration through forest

growth; assessments of wildlife habitat suitability

based on forest species composition and size structure; and assessments of forest fragmentation associated with urban and suburban development.

10

With the incorporation of the phase-three (Forest

Health Monitoring) plots into the FIA program, FIA is

signaling its intention to continue addressing the

needs of our customers for multi-resource information

on America’s forests. In 2000, we completed the

incorporation of phase-three plots as a subset of our

phase-two sample grid, with every 16th phase-two plot

also serving as a phase-three plot, measured on a 5-

year cycle. Additional information currently collected

on phase-three plots includes:

• a suite of tree crown measurements documenting

the size, density, and health of tree crowns;

• determination of the relative abundance and

diversity of lichen species existing near the

sample plot;

• description of types, location, and severity of tree

damage;

• assessment of ozone damage symptoms in suitable areas near the sample plot.

In addition, in 2000, we completed pilot testing of

several additional measures that will be implemented

on all phase-three plots in 2001 including:

• a set of soil measurements, including site description and chemical analysis of litter and soil,

• a set of down woody debris and fuel measures that

will be used for carbon and fire assessments.

Finally, in 2000, we also continued testing of field

measures for a more complete set of vegetative

diversity measures that will provide information on

all vascular plants associated with the plot. We hope

to finish testing these methods in 2001 and position

the program for full implementation in 2002. As we

incorporate the phase-three data into the FIA program, we will add these data elements to our online

databases and make them available to the public.
GRANTS AND AGREEMENTS

Each year, FIA units enter into various grants and

cooperative agreements with partners to accomplish

specialized work in support of the FIA mission. In

some cases partners provide expertise that is not

available within the FIA program; in other cases they

share the workload. Table 5 in the appendix lists 87

grants and agreements funded in 2000, making up

$8,282,166 or approximately 21 percent of the total

available FIA program budget. This is a nearly fourfold increase over the total of $2,286,149 (approximately 8.2 percent of the total funds available to the

FIA program) reported in 1999. Some of the increase

11

can be attributed to the addition of the Forest Health

Monitoring funds; nearly $2.0 million of the $2.81

million State and Private funds contributed to FIA

went to cover various grants and agreements to

support phase-three indicators. The balance of the

increase is attributed to an increase in grants and

agreements to accomplish FIA fieldwork and analysis.

Most of these grants and agreements were with State

(55 percent of funds) and university (27 percent of

funds) partners (fig. 5). Other cooperators included

other Forest Service offices (16 percent of funds),

other Federal agencies (>1 percent of funds), and a

mix of private consultants and other organizations (2

percent of funds).

Figure 5.—Allocation of FIA grants and agreements, 2000.

Other Federal

1%

University

27%

State Agency

54%

Other

2%

Forest Service

16%
COMPARING 2000 FIA ACCOMPLISHMENTS WITH OUR 1999

GOALS

In the 1999 annual business report for FIA, we included a section stating our plans for fiscal year 2000. Below

we show how our actions in 2000 matched our promises in 1999.

12

In the 1999 annual report, we said that in 2000 we

would:

Implement annual FIA approaches in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, Arkansas, Louisiana, Utah, and Oregon.

Continue final periodic inventories in Alabama, Alaska,

Colorado, Idaho, North Carolina, Maryland, Washington,

West Virginia, and Wyoming.

Continue development and documentation of nationally

consistent compilation, analysis, and database management

procedures.

Implement phase-two and phase-three fieldwork together in

those States that are currently conducting annual FIA. Pilot

test soil and vegetative measures on some phase-three plots

to prepare for full implementation in 2001.

Continue collaborative stewardship of the FIA program by

holding user group meetings in all regions of the country and

at the national level

Continue to make our data more accessible and usable by

adding analytical tools and program documentation to online

FIA databases and Web pages.

Continue to conduct applied research into ways of using

technology to increase program efficiency, and continue to

develop new products to meet customer needs. Produce a

white paper summarizing experience, lessons learned, and

the status of remote sensing in FIA.

Sign an internal Memorandum of Understanding between

FIA and the USDA Forest Service, National Forest System,

to ensure that all national forest lands are in the future

covered by the same core FIA program as all other lands.

Sign a Memorandum of Understanding between the President of the National Association of State Foresters and the

Chief of the USDA Forest Service demonstrating Agency

commitment to treat the FIA program as an Agency obligation and to take all allowable steps to ensure that the base

Federal program is fully funded by Fiscal Year 2003.

In 2000, we:

Implemented and continued annual FIA in all States listed.

Continued final periodic inventory in all listed States except

Colorado.

Continued documentation of core statistical and compilation

procedures, formed an information management system

design team to develop a new system by April 2002.

Included both phase-two and phase-three fieldwork in all

annual FIA States. Tested soil and down woody debris

methods for implementation in 2001. Vegetative diversity

measures need further pilot testing in 2001.

Held at least one user group meeting in each FIA region, plus

one national user group meeting.

Added program fact sheets, publications to Web page.

Developing next generation Web interface and presentation

database for release in 2001.

Funded 79 external cooperative studies dealing with technology, of which 18 deal with some aspect of remote sensing or

spatial analysis. Sponsored research proposal competition on

remote sensing for FIA. White paper in progress.

Finalized MOU for signature in December 2000.

MOU signed by Chief Mike Dombeck of the USDA Forest

Service and NASF President Stan Adams on February 15,

2000.
2001 FIA PROGRAM DIRECTION

The FIA program is committed to implementing the Strategic Plan for Forest Inventory and Monitoring, with an

initial focus on achieving a base Federal program of 10 percent per year in the West and 15 percent per year in

the East by FY 2003. We have made significant changes to our program by forming a partnership with State

Foresters to lead and implement the FIA program in a more responsive manner. We are implementing annual

inventory systems in every region of the country.

In fiscal year 2001, we intend to accomplish the following:

q Continue transition to an annual inventory system by continuing annual inventory in all current States and

initiating an annual inventory system in Alabama, Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Nebraska,

North Dakota, Ohio, Puerto Rico (phase three only), South Dakota, and eastern Texas (fig. 6). This will

mean that annual inventory is implemented in every region of the country and will include coverage of over

65 percent of the Nation (exclusive of interior Alaska) under a cooperative program involving full FederalState partnerships in program management and delivery.

13

Figure 6.—Planned FIA fieldwork, 2001.

Puerto Rico

Alaska

Hawaii

Annual FIA Program Fully Implemented

Phase 3 Only

Phase 3 + Periodic Phase 2 (closeout)

Periodic Phase 2 (closeout) only

FIA Implementation, 2001
q Continue traditional periodic inventories to establish a baseline in advance of implementing annual inventory in Alaska, Colorado, Idaho, North Carolina, Washington, West Virginia, and Wyoming. Continue phasethree data collection in all currently active States.

q Continue development and documentation of nationally consistent compilation, analysis, and database

management procedures.

q Implement soil and down woody debris measures on phase-three plots, and continue pilot testing of vegetative diversity measures to prepare for full implementation in 2002.

q Continue collaborative stewardship of the FIA program by holding user group meetings in all regions of the

country and at the national level, and by holding one scientific symposium on FIA.

q Continue to make our data more accessible and usable by adding analytical tools and program documentation to online FIA databases and Web pages.

q Continue to conduct applied research into ways of using technology to increase program efficiency, and to

develop new products to meet customer needs; explore collaboration with the U.S. Geological Survey

through its Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics (MRLC) project.

q Implement FIA on all national forest lands in States where FIA is conducting fieldwork.

q Publish our first annual reports for the North Central and Southern FIA regions.

14
LONG-TERM STRATEGIC DIRECTION

The Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993 directs Federal entities to develop long-term

goals and performance measures to monitor progress towards those goals. Although intended to apply at the

Agency level, the GPRA framework provides an excellent tool for guiding progress at the project level as well.

The following tabulation shows an initial set of goals, performance measures, targets, and benchmarks for the

FIA program for 1998-2000. In future business reports, we will repeat this table to show how we are progressing towards our goals.

Goal Performance measure 1998 1999 2000 Target

Level Level Level Level

INPUTS

Maintain sufficient funding Percent of necessary Federal 44 47 67 100

to support the base Federal funding received

FIA program

OUTPUTS

Include 100 percent of U.S. Percent forest included in 95 95 95 100

forest lands in the FIA the FIA sample population

sample population

Keep fieldwork current Percent of forested base

sample locations visited/year:

Phase two, East 9.0 10.6 14.1 15

Phase three, East * * 11.8 20

Phase two, West 3.4 3.5 5.5 10

Phase three, West * * 19.2 20

Keep analysis current Average number of years 11 9 8 5

between State analytical

reports

Keep online database Average age (years) of 6 7 7 1

current most recent complete

panel of FIA data available

online

OUTCOMES

Customer satisfaction Percent of customers rating ** ** ** 100

service as “satisfactory”

or better

Partner financial contributions NA 14 19 25

expressed as percent of total

Federal FIA budget

* Data not available for previous years.

** Customer satisfaction survey has been developed and a baseline is being established.

15
CONCLUSIONS

We have entered a new era in partnership and collaboration in which Federal, State, and other colleagues work

side by side to plan, manage, implement, and continuously improve the FIA program. We are gathering and

disseminating information on a wider array of ecological attributes while continuing to serve our traditional

customers who require timely information on forest resources. We are increasing the timeliness of our surveys

and of our reporting to provide a continuously updated, publicly accessible information base that includes

meaningful reports and analyses as well as elemental data for others to use. We are exploring and using modern

technology to expand the scope of our products and to deliver them more efficiently. And we are openly reporting on our progress, our accomplishments, our successes, and our challenges.

In summary, we are committed to working collaboratively with our partners to deliver the best program possible

with the resources that we have at our discretion. We hope this report gives you a window into the business

practices of the FIA program, and we encourage you to help us improve the program with your feedback.

16
Glossary of Terms Used in Report Tables

APPENDIX

17

Additional Station funds.—Additional

funds redirected to the FIA unit by

the Research Station, most commonly from savings arising from

budgeted salaries for Station

positions that were left unfilled.

These funds are typically reallocated

part way through the year.

Additional WO R&D funds.—Additional funds allocated to the FIA unit

by the Washington Office Research

and Development Staff, typically

midway through the year or in

response to requests for special

projects.

Station Adjustments in FY 00.—Any

changes in the 1999 end of year

balance made during the 2000 fiscal

year. Unlike in private companies, all

Federal funds unspent at the end of a

fiscal year are subject to reallocation

by Agency officials. Efforts are made

to return unspent funds to units, but

there is no guarantee that this will

occur.

Base grid plots sampled.—The base grid

consists of one sample location per

approximately 6,000 acres (phase

two) and one location per approximately 96,000 acres (phase three).

Some partners chose to intensify

beyond the base grid.

Direct expenses.—All expenses directly

attributable to the FIA unit, incurred

as a part of doing FIA business.

Excludes indirect business costs

(such as rent, telephones, and

administrative overhead outside the

FIA unit staff), which are included

below in “Indirect expenses.”

Includes work done for other units as

a normal part of FIA business.

Includes the following items:

Salary.—Includes direct and indirect

salary costs charged to the FIA

unit. Broken into the following

categories:

Administration.—Program

Manager, Project Leader,

and clerical staff.

Image analysis.—Airphoto

interpreters, satellite image

analysts.

Field supervision.—Field crew

supervisors who spend <50

percent of time measuring

plots.

Field crews.—All staff spending at least 50 percent of

time measuring regular

plots.

QA crews.—Staff spending at

least 50 percent of time

doing quality assurance

work.

Information management.—

Programmers, compilers,

computer system support

staff.

Analysts.—Staff who analyze

data and write publications.

Techniques research.—Mainly

research staff who conduct

FIA-related research on

methods and techniques.

Travel

Office travel.—Travel costs for

all staff except field crews

and QA crews.

Field/QA travel.—Travel costs

for field crews and QA

crews.

Equipment.—Costs for durable

goods used for FIA. Includes the

following:

Imagery.—Aerial photos,

satellite imagery data files.

Vehicles.—All vehicle costs,

including such items as

operating costs, depreciation, and leases.

Field equipment.—Measurement tools and equipment

such as data recorders

carried by field crews.

Computer/telecommunications.—Computer hardware, software, communication costs.

Other.—Anything that does not

fit into one of the above

equipment categories.

Grants and agreements.—Cost of

cooperative grants and agreements that directly support the

FIA mission.

Publications.—Costs for layout,

editing, printing, and distribution of publications.

Miscellaneous.—Anything that does

not fit into one of the above

categories.

Indirect expenses.—Indirect expenses

include items such as Research

Station management salaries,

telephones, utilities, and other items

for which the FIA unit does not pay

for directly but which are deemed by

Station leaders to be a fair and

reasonable assessment for the basic

services needed to support FIA along

with other Station activities. Each

Station has its own means for

determining these assessments.
18

Rather than reporting the different

rates, we simply calculate the

“Indirect expenses” item by subtraction:

Indirect expenses = Total available

resources - Total direct expenses -

1999 end of year balance

Indirect rate.—Indirect expenses

divided by total resources available.

This is not necessarily the same as

the standard Station overhead rate;

instead this rate reflects the total

indirect cost as a fraction of the total

resources available to FIA.

NFS funds received.—Funds received

from the National Forest System in

direct support of the FIA program,

generally received from a single

Forest Service Region to cover the

cost of FIA on that Region’s lands.

2000 beginning balance.—Reported 99

EOY balance plus or minus Station

Adjustments in FY 00.

2000 EOY balance.—Funds remaining

unspent at the end of FY00. It is

hoped these funds will be available

for use in FY01. If a unit has

overspent its budget, this may be a

negative figure indicating a debt to

the Station to be paid next year.

2000 appropriation.—Funds appropriated by Congress through the Forest

Service Research and Development

budget that were sent to Stations for

their FIA units.

Number of public meetings.—Number

of user group meetings sponsored or

attended by each FIA unit. A user

group meeting is an open meeting

where a complete regional cross

section of FIA partners and customers are invited to attend. User group

meetings differ from the usual

smaller meetings with one or two

partners that all FIA units call as a

normal course of business.

Percent of total plots sampled.—Total

number of base grid plots sampled,

divided by the total number of plots

in the base grid.

Percent of full funding.—Total appropriated funds divided by the funding

needed to fully implement the base

Federal program.

Percent of region covered by annual

FIA.—Sum of forested acres in

States currently implementing annual

FIA, divided by the total number of

forested acres in each FIA region: a

measure of the degree to which the

FIA region has moved from periodic

to annual inventory.

Publications.—Number of publications

per unit, by type of publication, as

reported in official Agency attainment reports. Publications are one of

the major outputs of the FIA program. Types of publications include:

Survey Unit Reports

State Statistical Reports

State Analytical Reports

State Timber Product Output

(TPO) Reports

Other Station Publications

Peer-reviewed Journal articles

Proceeding papers

Other.—Publications that do not fit

into any of the above categories,

such as abstracts, books, or other

government publications.

Reported 99 EOY balance.—Funds

reported in the 1999 Annual Report

as unspent at the end of the 1999

fiscal year, and presumably available

for use in FY 2000.

S&PF funds received.—Funds received

from State and Private Forestry

partners in direct support of the FIA

program.

Total appropriated funds.—Total funds

available for the FIA program,

including Forest Service contributions from Research, State and

Private Forestry, and the National

Forest System. This is a measure of

Federal funding for the base Federal

program.

Total funds expended.—Sum of Direct

and Indirect expenses, from table 2.

Total program cost per base plot.—

Total funds expended divided by

total number of base grid plots

measured: another measure of the

cost of doing business in a particular

region.
19

Table 1.—Performance measures for the 2000 FIA program

Pacific Rocky North North Fort NationalNorthwest Mountain Southern Central East Collins Office Total

Total Appropriated Funds $6,983,000 $6,484,000 $11,261,000 $5,070,644 $5,765,506 $419,000 $3,513,850 $39,497,000Percent of Full Funding 44% 65% 77% 82% 70% 101% 98% 67%Contributions from partners Supporting the 20% FIA program $70,000 $392,908 $2,190,346 $881,522 $632,750 $40,000 $2,250 $4,209,776 Value-added contirbutions $0 $50,000 $42,800 $3,134,765 $0 $0 $0 $3,227,565Base Grid Plots Sampled: Phase 2, Federal Crews 1,870 5,453 1,649 5,381 2,065 16,418 Phase 2, Partner Crews 510 0 7,536 524 445 9,015 Total Phase 2 Plots 2,380 5,453 9,185 5,905 2,510 25,433 Phase 3, Federal Crews 539 972 16 434 12 1,973 Phase 3, Partner Crews 0 0 552 129 262 943 Total Phase 3 Plots 539 972 568 563 274 2,916 TOTAL BASE PLOTS 2,919 6,425 9,753 6,468 2,784 28,349Percent of total (forest and nonforest) plots sampled1

 Phase 2 (10% West, 15% East) 6% 6% 10% 8% 10% 8% Phase 3 (20% overall) 22% 17% 10% 12% 17% 15%Forested phase 2 plots sampled Count 1,293 1,136 5,564 1,766 1,823 11,582 Percent of regional total 8% 5% 16% 13% 12% 11%% Region covered by annual FIA 27% 12% 52% 89% 37% 42%Total program cost/base plot $2,392 $1,009 $1,155 $784 $2,071 $1,393Publications Survey Unit Reports 3 3 State Statistical Reports 1 2 3 State Analytical Reports 1 1 State TPO Reports 2 2 Other Station publications 4 2 2 1 1 10 Peer-Reviewed Journal articles 6 2 6 4 5 5 1 29 Proceedings articles 7 1 21 13 9 6 1 58 Other 9 2 1 1 2 1 1 17 TOTAL 26 5 37 22 17 13 3 123# Publications per Federal FTE 0.46 0.06 0.39 0.44 0.29 4.73 1.50 0.36# User Group Meetings Held 2 1 1 1 1 0 1 7

1 Excludes interior Alaska, Hawaii, and other U.S. islands, which will be handled through special projects.
20

Table 2.—Financial statement for the 2000 FIA program

Pacific Rocky North North Fort NationalNorthwest Mountain Southern Central East Collins Office Total

I. AVAILABLE FUNDS

Reported 99 EOY Balance $265,000 $182,386 $0 $104,403 $161,732 $4,700 $0 $718,221Station Adjustments to EOY Balance $0 $0 $0 ($31,031) ($85,919) $0 $0 ($116,950)2000 Initial Balance $265,000 $182,386 $0 $73,372 $75,813 $4,700 $0 $601,2712000 Appropriation $5,327,000 $3,647,000 $10,836,000 $4,518,000 $5,015,000 $419,000 $1,925,000 $31,687,000Additional Station Funds $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Additional WO R&D Funds $25,000 $50,000 $0 $110,000 $48,700 $0 ($233,700) $0NFS funds received $1,587,000 $2,595,000 $385,000 $366,000 $67,000 $0 $0 $5,000,000S&PF funds received $44,000 $192,000 $40,000 $76,644 $634,806 $0 $1,822,550 $2,810,000TOTAL AVAILABLE FUNDS $7,248,000 $6,666,386 $11,261,000 $5,144,016 $5,841,319 $423,700 $3,513,850 $40,098,271

II. DIRECT EXPENSES

Salary

Administration $355,000 $307,217 $454,017 $198,908 $258,112 $49,594 $226,583 $1,849,431Image analysis $274,332 $0 $193,842 $215,505 $297,350 $0 $0 $981,029Field supervision $392,668 $597,282 $393,023 $217,771 $199,939 $0 $0 $1,800,683Field crews $584,475 $914,406 $780,302 $725,885 $847,241 $0 $0 $3,852,309QA crews $168,605 $204,091 $466,233 $98,455 $186,647 $0 $0 $1,124,031Information management $695,825 $563,781 $1,115,660 $471,995 $552,602 $0 $0 $3,399,863Analysis $827,690 $216,495 $1,298,853 $323,770 $352,297 $0 $0 $3,019,105Techniques research $369,010 $118,390 $281,626 $270,880 $249,019 $239,709 $0 $1,528,634

Travel

Office travel $97,000 $115,853 $328,541 $90,625 $71,006 $24,543 $29,693 $757,261Field/QA crew travel $358,158 $345,977 $762,359 $233,884 $285,911 $0 $0 $1,986,289

Equipment

Imagery $60,664 $54,541 $126,000 $12,048 $71,000 $0 $0 $324,253Vehicles $254,830 $246,523 $139,500 $120,725 $109,937 $0 $0 $871,515Field equipment $226,755 $358,636 $97,000 $95,226 $13,746 $0 $11,580 $802,943Computer/Telecommunications $404,234 $181,738 $122,460 $304,438 $139,256 $3,183 $0 $1,155,309Other $257,000 $358,941 $11,971 $45,967 $194,309 $812 $0 $869,000

Grants and Agreements $426,000 $609,856 $3,513,602 $788,849 $754,806 $91,373 $2,097,680 $8,282,166Publications (printing, distribution) $18,000 $0 $10,100 $1,176 $0 $2,786 $3,593 $35,655Miscellaneous $61,754 $129,537 $104,500 $2,981 $24,138 $0 $13,786 $336,696TOTAL DIRECT EXPENSES $5,832,000 $5,323,264 $10,199,589 $4,219,088 $4,607,316 $412,000 $2,382,915 $32,976,172

III. INDIRECT EXPENSES $1,344,000 $1,157,265 $1,089,411 $924,928 $1,234,003 $11,700 $1,130,935 $6,892,242

(indirect rate) 19% 17% 10% 18% 21% 3% 32% 17%

IV. 2000 EOY Balance $72,000 $185,857 ($28,000) $0 $0 $0 $0 $229,857
Table 3.—Federal staffing (full-time equivalents) for the 2000 FIA program

Pacific Rocky North North Fort National

Northwest Mountain Southern Central East Collins Office Total

Administration 4.3 8.1 7.0 3.5 4.9 0.5 2.0 30.3

Image analysis 5.6 0.0 5.2 5.2 5.0 0.0 0.0 21.0

Field supervision 6.0 12.4 7.1 3.9 3.0 0.0 0.0 32.4

Field crew 17.8 36.5 23.1 20.8 24.7 0.0 0.0 122.8

QA crews 2.4 5.0 9.7 0.7 4.0 0.0 0.0 21.8

Information

management 9.9 9.0 18.8 7.6 8.5 0.0 0.0 53.7

Analysis 6.0 4.0 20.7 4.9 4.5 0.0 0.0 40.1

Techniques

research 4.6 2.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 2.3 0.0 19.8

TOTAL 56.5 77.0 95.0 50.1 58.6 2.8 2.0 342.0

(table continued on next page)

21

Fort Collins

Minnesota Department of Natural Resources $15,000

Colorado State University $25,000 _________

Subtotal, Fort Collins $40,000 $0

North Central

Mark Twain National Forest $20,000

Great Lakes Forestry Alliance $30,000

Illinois Division of Forest Resources $27,500

Indiana Department of Natural Resources $41,472

Iowa Department of Natural Resources $22,539

Kansas State Forest Service $19,000

Michigan Division of Forest Management $414,000 $1,460,000

Minnesota Division of Forestry $136,361 $437,765

Missouri Department of Conservation $81,193 $287,000

Nebraska Department of Forestry, Fish, and Wildlife $7,000

North Dakota Forest Service $4,000

South Dakota Department of Forestry & Natural Resource

 Management $10,000

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources $82,746 $900,000

Michigan Tech University $14,100

University of Minnesota $21,611 _________

Subtotal, North Central $881,522 $3,134,765

Northeast

Monongahela National Forest $5,000

Maine Forest Service $604,000

Maryland Forest Service $1,250

Pennsylvania Bureau of Forestry $15,000

West Virginia Division of Forestry $7,500 _________

Subtotal, Northeast $632,750 $0

Unit Partner Contributions towards Contributions which

the base program add value

Table 4.—Partner contributions towards implementing FIA in 2000
Unit Partner Contributions towards Contributions which

the base program add value

(table 4 continued)

22

Pacific Northwest

Alaska Division of Forestry $10,000

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection $20,000

Oregon Department of Forestry $20,000

Washington Department of Natural Resources $20,000 _________

Subtotal, Pacific Northwest $70,000 $0

Rocky Mountain

USDA Forest Service, Region 2 $50,000

Arizona State Land Department $25,000

Colorado State Forest Service $139,936

Idaho Department of Lands $25,000

Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation $25,000

Nevada Division of Forestry $25,000

New Mexico Forestry Division $25,000

Utah Department of Natural Resources $25,000

Wyoming State Forestry Division $25,000

University of Montana $27,972

Utah State University $50,000 _________

Subtotal, Rocky Mountain $392,908 $50,000

Southern

Alabama Forestry Commission $339,507

Georgia Forestry Commission $156,414

Kentucky Division of Forestry $276,006

Louisiana Office of Forestry $155,277

South Carolina Forestry Commission $432,191 $24,079

Tennessee Department of Agriculture $311,953

Virginia Department of Forestry $518,998 $18,721

Subtotal, Southern $2,190,346 $42,800

National Office

Society of American Foresters $2,250 _________

Subtotal, National Office $2,250 $0

Grand Total $4,209,776 $3,227,565
Table 5.—Grants and agreements entered into by FIA units, FY 2000

(table 5 continued on next page)

23

Unit Amount Recipient Purpose

Fort Collins

$5,623 Forest Health Management Unit Analysis of forest health through remote sensing

$19,450 Chojnacky Enterprise Team Volume estimation

$15,000 Gary Gadbury Small area estimation methods

$16,300 Chojnacky Enterprise Team Data visualization

$15,000 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources LANDSAT 7 15m suitability evaluation

$5,000 University of Colorado GIS Conference

$15,000 Colorado State University FIA and NRI linkages

$91,373 SUBTOTAL

North Central

$7,750 North Central Research Station 4502 Forest health expertise

$8,500 North Central Research Station 4401 Development of growth models

$17,028 US Forest Service, Region 9 Office space

$37,939 North Central Research Station 4154 Forest resource analysis

$32,315 Lumberjack RC&D Implementation of annual forest inventories

$18,000 Missouri Department of Conservation Implementation of annual forest inventories

$18,156 Iowa Department of Natural Resources Implementation of annual forest inventories

$20,775 Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Implementation of annual forest inventories

$29,887 Indiana Department of Natural Resources Implementation of annual forest inventories

$82,981 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Implementation of annual forest inventories

$168,280 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Implementation of annual forest inventories

$2,000 University of Indiana Geospatial analysis support

$10,000 University of Minnesota Satellite forest stratification

$13,333 Virginia Tech Satellite image classification algorithm

$16,000 University of Minnesota Remote sensing stratification research

$30,000 University of Missouri Geospatial analysis support

$30,000 University of Illinois Implementation of annual forest inventories

$37,500 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Satellite forest stratification

$40,000 University of Minnesota Impacts of oak decline on forest health

$83,405 University of Michigan Implementation of annual forest inventories

$85,000 Michigan Tech University Development and distribution of FIA datasets in GIS

$788,849 SUBTOTAL

Northeast

$6,000 Delaware Department of Agriculture Implementation of annual forest inventories

$17,000 Maryland Forest Service Implementation of annual forest inventories

$17,000 Massachusetts Department of Environment Implementation of annual forest inventories

$18,000 Vermont Division of Forests Implementation of annual forest inventories

$19,806 Delaware Department of Agriculture Vegetation indicator pilot

$21,000 New Hampshire Division of Forests Implementation of annual forest inventories

$36,000 West Virginia Division of Forests and Parks Implementation of annual forest inventories

$44,000 Maine Forest Service Implementation of annual forest inventories

$54,000 New York Department of Environment Implementation of annual forest inventories

$310,000 Maine Forest Service Implementation of annual forest inventories

$3,000 University of Massachusetts Implementation of annual forest inventories

$33,000 West Virginia University Timber utilization study

$64,000 Pennsylvania State University Implementation of annual forest inventories

$112,000 University of Massachusetts Ozone indicator support

$754,806 SUBTOTAL

National Office

$15,000 US Geological Survey Forest cover map of the United States

$5,000 Chojnacky Enterprise Team Biomass estimation from FIA data

$22,000 Region 1 Forest Health Protection Demonstrating use of FIA data for national forest

assessments
(table 5 continued)

Unit Amount Recipient Purpose

24

$57,500 Remote Sensing Application Center Training course development and implementation for

FIA analysts

$847,980 USFS Forest Health Monitoring National Office FHM analysis

$10,000 NE Research Station Kyoto Biomass Database

$25,000 Rocky Mountain Research Station Western FIA Fire Assessment Project

$10,000 IUFRO Global Forest Information System development

$6,200 Society of American Foresters National User Group facilitation

$123,000 Eastern Sierra Institute Lichen indicator advisor support (west)

$34,000 Oregon State University Vegetation indicator advisor

$101,000 University of Wisconsin Lichen indicator advisor support (east)

$105,000 University of Nevada at Las Vegas Quality Assurance support

$125,000 North Carolina State University Analyst support for FHM reports, manuals, monthly

reports

$134,000 University of Nevada at Las Vegas Soil indicator support

$477,000 University of Nevada at Las Vegas Information management support

$2,097,680 SUBTOTAL

Pacific Northwest

$2,000 National Park Service Ozone monitoring

$25,000 US Geological Service Spatial location of historic FIA samples

$29,000 PNW Station Evaluation of urbanization, fragmentation, and manage

ment impacts

$85,000 PNW Station Spatial analysis of forest composition

$25,000 Oregon state University Linking forest canopy measurements to wildlife habitat

models

$25,000 University of Wisconsin Uneven-aged management models

$76,000 Oregon State University Evaluation of remote sensing models for stratification

$159,000 University of Leeds Biodiversity analysis of Southeast Alaska

$426,000 SUBTOTAL

Rocky Mountain

$372,968 Colorado Forest Service Implementation of enhanced FIA

$111,888 University of Montana Analysis of Timber product outputs and utilization for the

interior western US

$125,000 Utah State University Spatial analysis of FIA data

$609,856 SUBTOTAL

Southern

$3,500 National Forests in Alabama Assistance in ozone QA

$15,000 USFS Remote Sensing Application Center Development of workplan for FIA training courses

$23,200 Southern Research Station 4104 Development of volume equations

$30,000 Southern Research Station 4851 Development of historical database for the US South

$40,000 Southern Research Station 4702 Digital camera estimation techniques

$220,621 South Carolina Forestry Commission Implementation of annual forest inventories

$236,564 Tennessee Department of Agriculture Implementation of annual forest inventories

$239,865 Louisiana Department of Agriculture Implementation of annual forest inventories

$269,714 Texas Forest Service Implementation of annual forest inventories

$287,189 Virginia Department of Forestry Implementation of annual forest inventories

$340,870 Arkansas Forestry Commission Implementation of annual forest inventories

$346,131 Kentucky Division of Forestry Implementation of annual forest inventories

$422,778 Georgia Forestry Commission Implementation of annual forest inventories

$439,105 North Carolina Department of Natural Resources Implementation of annual forest inventories

$454,410 Alabama Forestry Commission Implementation of annual forest inventories

$20,000 Rutgers university Statistical estimators for annual inventory

$40,000 Virginia Tech Development of remote sensing classification algorithms

$84,655 Mississippi State University Agenda 2020 Research

$3,513,166 SUBTOTAL

Grand Total $8,282,166
25

For information about the status and trends of America’s forests, please contact the appropriate office below:

Northeast North Central

Program Manager, FIA Program Manager, FIA

USDA Forest Service USDA Forest Service

Northeastern Research Station North Central Research Station

11 Campus Boulevard, Suite 200 1992 Folwell Avenue

Newtown Square, PA 19073 St. Paul, MN 55108

(610) 557-4075 (651) 649-5139

South Rocky Mountain

Program Manager, FIA Program Manager, FIA

USDA Forest Service USDA Forest Service

Southern Research Station Rocky Mountain Research Station

200 Weaver Boulevard 507 25th Street

Asheville, NC 28802 Ogden, UT 84401

(828) 257-4373 (801) 625-5388

Pacific Northwest

(includes Alaska and Hawaii) Statistical Techniques

Program Manager, FIA Project Leader, FIA

USDA Forest Service USDA Forest Service

Pacific Northwest Research Station Rocky Mountain Research Station

1221 SW Yamhill Street, Suite 200 2150 Centre Avenue, Bldg. A, Suite 350

Portland, OR 97205 Fort Collins, CO 80526-1891

(503) 808-2066 (970) 295-5973

National

Forest Inventory National Program Leader

USDA Forest Service 1NW

201 14th Street SW

Washington, DC 20090-6090

(202) 205-1507

All of our regional Internet homepages, as well as a wealth of statistical and other information, are available

through the national FIA homepage located at:

fia.fs.fed.us

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin,

gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status. (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 the USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).

To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue

SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.