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

race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or 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 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,

1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an

equal opportunity provider and employer.
United States

Department of

Agriculture

Forest Service

Report of the

Forest Service 

FY 2002

Healthy Forests and

Grasslands—Financial and

Performance Accountability
About This Document

This document presents an accountability report for the U.S. Department of Agriculture

(USDA) Forest Service for fiscal year (FY) 2002, consistent with the Reports Consolidation

Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-531). The consolidated report combines the agency’s Financial

Statement, including the Management’s Discussion and Analysis section, the Annual

Performance Report, the Federal Manager’s Financial Integrity Act Report, and selected

information from the annual Report of the USDA Forest Service.

Combining these various reports will accomplish the following:

• Present a cohesive and comprehensive picture of USDA Forest Service accountability;

• Eliminate duplicative reporting;

• Provide a single source for corporate information; and

• Facilitate the integration of financial accountability with performance accountability.

The report provides a comprehensive overview of the USDA Forest Service, including who

we are, what we do, and how well we met performance goals set for FY 2002. This

information is relayed through the mission statement, major program area descriptions,

organizational chart, discussion of the major issues facing the USDA Forest Service, and

analyses of the agency’s financial statements, performance goals, and results. To provide a

complete picture of how well the USDA Forest Service is doing, the report addresses the

agency’s financial performance and the management controls being taken to ensure accountability. Significant progress in improving the USDA Forest Service’s financial accountability

was achieved in FY 2002, resulting in an unqualified audit opinion. A complete analysis of the

USDA Forest Service financial position from the agency, as well as from the Office of

Inspector General (OIG), can be found in Appendixes A and B, respectively.

Required supplementary information concerning land stewardship, heritage assets, human

capital, research and development, and deferred maintenance can be found in Appendixes C

and D. A thorough description of each performance goal, the FY 2002 results, and conclusions

can be found in Appendix E. Program details, historically published in the annual Report of

the USDA Forest Service, can be found in Appendix F. Finally, a glossary of agency acronyms

and abbreviations can be found in Appendix G.

If you have comments or questions about this report, please send them to

USDA Forest Service

Attn: Program and Budget Staff

Stop Code 1132

1400 Independence Avenue, S.W.

Washington, DC 20250-1132

A copy of this report can be obtained at http://www.fs.fed.us/publications.
i

Contents

Message from the Chief . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii

Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v

Success Stories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii

USDA Forest Service Management’s Discussion and Analysis

Mission and Organizational Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 

Mission Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Organizational Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Land Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Overview of Major Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

National Forests and Grasslands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Forest and Rangeland Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

State and Private Forestry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Fire and Aviation Management Program/

The National Fire Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Working Capital Fund. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Major Issues Facing the USDA Forest Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Community and Land Protection/National Fire Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Healthy Forests Initiative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Process Predicament . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Invasive Species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Watershed Restoration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Impacts from Transfer of Funds to Fight Fires . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

Financial and Program Accountability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Analysis of Agency Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Highlights. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

National Fire Plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Watershed Restoration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Invasive Species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Financial Accountability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Performance Management in the Future . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Summary of FY 2002 Performance Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Analysis of Agency’s Financial Position . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Liabilities and Net Position. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Budgetary Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Financial Management Controls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

Financial Systems and Controls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

Management Followup to OIG/GAO Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

Financial Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

Federal Financial Management Improvement Act (FFMIA) 

Compliance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

FY 2002 Remediation Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

FY 2003 Remediation Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Limitations of Financial Statements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Contents

Appendixes

A-Principal Financial Statements and Notes, FY 2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Consolidated Balance Sheet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Consolidated Statement of Net Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

Consolidated Statement of Changes in Net Position . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

Combined Statement of Budgetary Resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

Consolidated Statement of Financing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

Notes to the Principal Financial Statements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

B-U.S. Department of Agriculture Office of Inspector General 

Financial and IT Operations Audit Report for FY 2002. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

C-Required Supplementary Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97

D-Required Supplementary Stewardship Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115

E-Performance Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122

F-Report of the USDA Forest Service FY 2002 Program Details . . . . . . . . . . . . 222

G-Glossary of Acronyms and Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271

ii
iii

Message from the Chief

A lot has happened this past year that created significant challenges for the USDA Forest Service.

The fire season of 2002 was the most expensive and second largest in our Nation’s history, made

even worse by the death of 23 wildland firefighters throughout the country. Approximately 

$1 billion was transferred from other programs to support fire suppression efforts. The impact of

the transfer on contributing programs in many cases will not be recognized until the field season of

2003 or beyond. Serious forest health problems exist on more than 70 million acres of public lands

administered by the Forest Service. Burdensome processes that delay or derail our ability to

complete needed work have created difficulites in delivering on many of our commitments. 

Despite challenges, the Forest Service had a very productive year in fiscal year (FY) 2002.

Through the dedicated efforts of many employees, the Forest Service obtained a clean audit

opinion, signifying that our financial records are in order. This is a significant accomplishment, one

the agency has been trying to reach for many years. A key goal for the future will be to maintain

this level of financial accountability, and in doing so, we must continue our efforts in such areas as

account reconciliation and reporting of fire suppression obligations.

Despite the large number of acres that were burned during the severe fire season of 2002, it is

phenomenal to note that the Forest Service, along with its firefighting partners, suppressed 99

percent of all fires during initial attack. Through the concerted efforts of these men and women,

untold natural resources were protected and homes, businesses, and lives were saved. 

During FY 2002, the Administration and the Forest Service took major steps to improve forest health.

In August, the President unveiled the Healthy Forests Initiative, which has raised the Nation’s level of

consciousness about the forest health crisis. This initiative further emphasizes efforts of the National

Fire Plan (NFP), a cooperative program between the Forest Service and the U.S. Department of the

Interior, which, in part, addresses the hazardous fuels problem, a major impediment to forest health.

Through projects associated with the NFP, more than 1.3 million acres of hazardous fuels have been

treated to reduce the risk of catastrophic fires, especially around communities adjacent to forested

public lands. Other forest health issues being addressed by the Forest Service include efforts in 

collaboration with partners at many levels to eliminate the introduction and control the spread of

invasive plant and animal species, and watershed restoration projects that, in part, improve the

quantity and quality of fresh water that comes from our national forests. 

The Forest Service issued The Process Predicament report to identify the problems in getting

projects completed on time, while meeting regulatory and statutory requirements. This is a major

first step in resolving the issue. Once the problem areas can be identified and agreed upon,

solutions can be found to expedite needed projects, while at the same time ensuring regulatory and

oversight opportunities are in place and followed.

These activities and many others are moving the agency forward in its mission “to sustain the

health, diversity, and productivity of the Nation’s forests and grasslands to meet the needs of

present and future generations.” This Report of the Forest Service FY 2002 provides a 

comprehensive picture of agency accountability, incorporating both financial and performance

information. We must continue to build on our successes and lessons learned to ensure that our

Nation’s public lands remain the best in the world.

Thanks to all who contributed to our success in FY 2002.

DALE N. BOSWORTH

Chief

Executive Summary

This document consolidates three reports previously published as separate documents. Those

reports are the Financial Statements and Management’s Discussion and Analysis, the Annual

Performance Report, and the Report of the Forest Service.

Reviewers of this Report of the Forest Service should find the information helpful in

understanding the mission of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service, the

agency’s major issues, and how well it accomplished major goals and objectives.

For more than a century, the USDA Forest Service has served as a world leader in the

management, protection, and use of forest, rangeland, and aquatic ecosystems. In addressing

many challenges in fiscal year (FY) 2002, the USDA Forest Service:

• Continued implementing a 10-Year Comprehensive Strategy to reduce wildland fire

risks to communities and the environment.

• Implemented the Healthy Forests Initiative to improve the condition of the Nation’s

forests and grasslands.

• As a continued priority, addressed the increasing threat of insects, disease, and

noxious weeds—including those classified as invasive species—to the integrity and

viability of forest and rangeland ecosystems.

• Continued to emphasize restoration and enhancement of watersheds.

• Addressed the impacts that resulted from transferring funds to fight fires in FY 2002.

• Continued improvement of the agency’s financial and performance accountability to

obtain an unqualified audit opinion.

The National Fire Plan was implemented in FY 2001 in response to a devastating FY 2000 

fire season. The multiyear plan focuses on reducing the impacts of wildland fire on rural

communities, reducing the long-term threat from catastrophic fires, and ensuring sufficient

firefighting readiness. To achieve these goals, the USDA Forest Service is working with

communities to reduce hazardous fuel buildups, restoring fire-affected ecosystems, and

equipping communities with wildland firefighting tools to reduce fire risk. In addition, the

USDA Forest Service is reducing the risks to life, property, and ecosystems by training

employees on how to respond to incidents that may threaten homeland security or become

national disasters and emergencies.

The Healthy Forests Initiative is a major new effort to reduce the risk of catastrophic wildland

fire on the Nation’s forests and grasslands and return these lands to healthy condition. The

Healthy Forests Initiative works to reduce the unnecessary regulatory obstacles that hinder

active forest management, expedite procedures for forest thinning and restoration projects, and

ensure that sustainable forest management and appropriate timber production objectives of the

1994 Northwest Forest Plan are being achieved.

The USDA Forest Service continued an invasive species program coordinated by State and

Private Forestry, Research and Development, National Forest System, and International

Programs. The program’s goal is to reduce adverse social, economic, and ecological impacts

of key invasive pests, insects, plants, and diseases threatening forest, rangeland, wildland, and

urban ecosystems in the United States. Agency efforts include the long-term strategy of using

extensive partnerships with international governmental organizations; other Federal agencies;

State, local, and tribal governments; nonprofit organizations; and private landowners.

v
vi

The USDA Forest Service continues to demonstrate innovative ways to improve watershed,

forest, range, water, and habitat conditions with a number of multiyear projects in partnership

with other Federal agencies and State, local, and tribal governments. Additionally, the USDA

Forest Service is increasing cooperative efforts with States involved in water rights adjudications for developing alternative solutions to maintaining sustainable water supplies. This

will involve the investment of water mitigation restoration projects.

The FY 2002 fire season was devastating not only to the 6.7 million acres burned, but 

also in terms of cost. The USDA Forest Service transferred $1 billion from discretionary 

and mandatory accounts to meet suppression costs. Many programs moved upwards of 

$100 million into suppression accounts. While many of these same programs either met 

or exceeded FY 2002 performance targets, the transfers will have an impact in FY 2003 

and beyond.

USDA Forest Service reorganized its financial management to improve financial and

performance accountability. Major issues that were addressed include reliability of the real

and personal property accounting and realigning the year-end closing, financial statement, and

financial audit liaison responsibilities. As a result of these changes, lessons learned from the

FY 2001 year-end process, and assistance from the USDA Office of the Chief Financial

Officer, the USDA Forest Service reengineered its processes, focused on account reconciliations,

and attained an unqualified audit opinion in FY 2002.

In addition to addressing these significant issues, the USDA Forest Service achieved or

exceeded a significant portion of its performance targets in FY 2002. In areas where target

definition weaknesses were identified, the agency will prepare a definable, measurable, and

verifiable standard for future year accounting and reporting purposes.
vii

The USDA Forest Service had a very successful fiscal year (FY) 2002, achieving or surpassing

its goals in many areas. Despite transferring approximately $1 billion from programs throughout

the agency to suppress fires during the most expensive fire season on record, much was

accomplished on National Forest System lands, as well as in partnerships with all levels of

government, nongovernment organizations and groups, other cooperators, and private

landowners. Although the transfer of funds had some effect on programs during FY 2002, major

impacts are expected in FY 2003 and beyond. In many cases, accomplishments in FY 2002 were

achieved because of funding and planning done in prior fiscal years. Many accomplishments

occurred prior to the start of the fire season. As the fire season heightened and fund transfers

were made, some projects or partnerships were necessarily delayed or foregone. 

A listing of all the accomplishments would be impractical. Some of the success stories of the

agency that highlight the efforts made by its employees in FY 2002 are described below. In

addition to these, other highlights can be found in the Analysis of Agency Performance.

Reportable program accomplishments are in Appendix E and program details can be found in

Appendix F. 

The USDA Forest Service received an unqualified audit opinion on the FY 2002 financial

statements. This is the first time since the agency has been producing financial statements that it

has received an unqualified opinion. Of four possible levels, the unqualified audit opinion is the

highest that auditors provide. For FY 2001, the agency received a disclaimed opinion from the

Office of Inspector General, the lowest level possible. To improve from a disclaimed opinion to

an unqualified opinion in 1 year is a tremendous accomplishment and reflects the leadership and

dedication of those committed to improving financial performance in the USDA Forest Service.

Although the agency is proud of its accomplishment, more improvements are still needed. 

In FY 2003, the agency will work to correct existing problems identified in the audit, as well as

to improve and modernize reporting systems that do not substantially comply with Federal

financial management systems requirements, applicable accounting standards, or the United

States Government Standard General Ledger at the transaction level. Through the continued

dedication and hard work of its employees, the USDA Forest Service looks forward to

maintaining the impressive unqualified audit achieved in FY 2002.

Over the past several years, the Millionaire Camp and Bassi Falls area on the Pacific Ranger

District of Eldorado National Forest received considerable resource damage from motorized

vehicle use off of National Forest System roads. Off-highway vehicle users created many

unauthorized roads that were on steep slopes or crossed drainages, causing considerable soil

compaction and erosion problems. A study by Colorado State University found the erosion rate

in the area was over 8,000 pounds per acre per year, which is 400 - 600 times the baseline

erosion rate for the Sierra Nevada of 13 pounds per acre per year. In addition, the high level of

recreation also created other law enforcement problems, including unsafe firearms use, illegal

campfires, excessive trash, substance abuse issues, and other unlawful activities. Private land in

the area was also impacted by this recreational use.

In a cooperative effort between the USDA Forest Service and the private landowner during the

spring of 2002, approximately 400 acres were rehabilitated in the recreation area. Various 

Success Stories

Financial Accountability

Watershed Restoration
viii

off-highway vehicle groups, other interested groups, and individuals that were concerned with

the resource damage also provided input and labor during the project. Restoration efforts

included obliterating the unauthorized roads, installing waterbars and spreading mulched straw

to promote soil stabilization, placing rock and log barriers to prevent off-highway vehicle access,

and providing educational information through public contacts and signage. Additional

restoration activities are planned, including planting ponderosa pine saplings throughout the area

during the spring of 2003. As a result of the efforts in 2002, resource damage and law

enforcement incidents in the area decreased dramatically. This area, which was once considered

unsafe, is again being used for family-oriented recreation.

Leafy spurge is an invasive species present in much of the Northern United States. It displaces

native vegetation by shading, competing for water and nutrients, and emitting plant toxins that

prevent the growth of plants underneath it. Leafy spurge is extremely difficult to eradicate

because of its persistent nature and ability to regenerate from small pieces of root. Although

several systemic herbicides have been found to be effective, multiple treatments are necessary

every year for several years, making control an extremely expensive undertaking. If left

uncontrolled for a single year, leafy spurge can reinfest rapidly. 

Biological control offers a highly promising management tactic for leafy spurge. Six natural

enemies of leafy spurge have been imported from Europe, including a stem- and root-boring

beetle, four species of root-mining flea beetles, and a shoot-tip gall midge. Federal and State

officials in many Northern States carry out cooperative large-scale field-rearing and release

programs for these biological control agents. The results, although not as immediate as when

herbicides were used, have been impressive. As these agents continue to build up to larger

numbers within the next few years, results are expected to continue to improve. Unlike

herbicides that require repeated applications, biological agents are self-sustaining and always

present to control leafy spurge. These biocontrol methods work well in combination with other

tools in integrated pest management strategies. These tools include cultural and mechanical

controls such as reseeding, clipping, and burning, which give desirable grasses and plants a

competitive advantage while reducing leafy spurge’s dominance. 

Invasive Species

Resource damage prior to restoration Site after restoration

Monitoring biological control

insects on leafy spurge
USDA Forest Service 

Management’s Discussion 

and Analysis

3

Organizational Structure

Mission and Organizational Structure

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service’s commitment to land

stewardship and public service is the framework within which natural resources are managed.

Implicit in this statement is the agency’s collaboration with public, private, and nonprofit

partners.

As one of the principle Federal agencies in natural resource management, the USDA Forest

Service provides leadership in the protection, management, and use of the Nation’s forest,

rangeland, and aquatic ecosystems. The USDA Forest Service’s management approach

integrates ecological, economic, and social factors to maintain and enhance the quality of the

environment to meet current and future needs. Through implementation of land and resource

management plans, the agency provides for the health, productivity, and diversity of the

natural resources on our national forests and grasslands. Outcomes include high-quality

outdoor recreation opportunities, healthy watersheds that provide clean water, abundant

wildlife and fish, improved rangeland conditions, timber, and mineral resources for current

and future generations. 

The USDA Forest Service is a world leader in forestry and natural resource research. By

conducting and sponsoring basic and applied scientific research, the agency leads the way in

increasing the knowledge and understanding of the composition, structure, and function of

forest, rangeland, and aquatic ecosystems, as well as in increasing the efficient use of natural

resource products.

Through technical and financial assistance, the USDA Forest Service supports all 50 States

and private landowners in practicing good stewardship, promoting rural economic

development, and improving the natural environment of cities and communities. The USDA

Forest Service strives to develop and use the best available scientific information to meet

agency goals and objectives. Domestic and international activities are directed at developing

values, products, and services in such a way as to maintain ecosystem health. 

The Chief of the USDA Forest Service and the Associate Chief provide leadership at the

national level from the headquarters office, located in Washington, DC. National-level policy

and direction are formulated and provided to the field offices in response to Administration

priorities, congressional direction, and other national issues. Six deputy chiefs, nine regional

foresters, six research station directors, one area director, and the directors of the Forest

Products Laboratory (FPL) and International Institute of Tropical Forestry (IITF) report

directly to the Chief. 

The mission of the agency is accomplished in many ways through several different but

cohesive organizational structures. In the National Forest System, regional offices link the

Washington Office to individual national forests and grasslands, managed by forest

supervisors. These units are subdivided into ranger districts that are managed by district

rangers who report to the forest supervisor. Research and development is performed through

a network of research stations and work units throughout the country, as well as at the FPL in

Madison, WI, and IITF in Puerto Rico. The State and Private Forestry deputy area

coordinates through regional offices and the Northeastern Area office to provide assistance to

State and local governments, forest industries, private landowners, and forest users in the

The mission of the USDA

Forest Service is to sustain the health, diversity,

and productivity of the

Nation’s forests and

grasslands to meet the

needs of present and

future generations.

Mission Statement
4

The USDA Forest Service is a large, geographically dispersed organization. The National

Forest System comprises 155 national forests, 20 national grasslands, 5 national monuments,

the Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie, and 6 land utilization projects. These units are located

in 44 States, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands, and encompass over 192 million acres. The

USDA Forest Service regional boundaries and administrative units are shown on page 7.

Land Management

management and protection of non-Federal forest land. Through International Programs, the

agency works with other Federal agencies, nonprofit development organizations, wildlife

organizations, universities, and international assistance organizations to link people and

communities striving to protect and manage forests throughout the world. 

The current organizational structure is shown on page 5. A proposed reorganization, currently

in the Department of Agriculture for review, is shown on page 6.
5

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF

ASSOCIATE CHIEF

INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS OFFICE OF COMMUNICATION

CIVIL RIGHTS

Deputy Chief,

Office of Finance (CFO)

Associate Deputy Chief

6 Research 

Stations

As of May 2001Supercedes Chart Dated: June 16, 1997Prepared by: Human Resources Management Staff, Washington Office

USDA Forest Service Organizational Structure

The agency manages the 192 million acre National Forest System for many purposes; administers a comprehensive research program; provides for cooperaassistance to States, communities, and private forest landowners in the United States; and conducts international forestry activities in cooperation with other 

Forest Products Lab 9 National Forest System Regions S&P Forestry NE Area Internation

Tropica

Financial ManagementFinancial Reports &AnalysisProgram & BudgetAnalysisFinancial ManagementSystems

Acquisition ManagementHuman ResourcesManagementSenior, Youth, &Volunteer ProgramsInformation ResourcesManagement

Legislative AffairsPolicy AnalysisStrategic Planning &Resource Assessment

Science Policy,Planning, Inventory,& InformationResource Valuation& Use ResearchVegetation Management &Protection ResearchWildlife, Fish, Water,& Air Research

EngineeringLandsRecreation, Heritage,& WildernessResourcesMinerals & GeologyMangementForest & RangelandManagementWildlife, Fish,Watershed, Air & RarePlantsEcosystemManagementCoordination

Fire & AManageCooperaForest HProtectiConservEducatio

Deputy Chief,

Business Operations

Associate Deputy Chief

Deputy Chief,

Programs & Legislation

Associate Deputy Chief

Deputy Chief,

Research & Development

Associate Deputy Chief

Deputy Chief,

National Forest System

Associate Deputy Chief

Depu

State & Pr

Associate 

LAW ENFORCEMENTAND INVESTIGA
6

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF

ASSOCIATE CHIEF

INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS LAW ENFORCEMENTAND INVESTIGAT

CIVIL RIGHTS

Deputy Chief,

Budget & Finance

Associate Deputy Chief

6 Research 

Stations

Proposed to Supercede Chart Dated: May 2001Prepared by: Human Resources Management Staff, Washington Office

USDA Forest Service Organizational Structure

Proposed

Forest Products Lab 9 National Forest System Regions State & Private Forestry Northeastern Area Internation

Tropica

Financial & AccountingOperationsFinancial Policy &AnalysisProgram & Budget Financial ManagementSystemsFinancial Reports &Reconciliations

Acquisition ManagementHuman ResourcesManagementSenior, Youth, &Volunteer ProgramsInformation ResourcesManagement

Legislative AffairsPolicy AnalysisOffice of CommunicationStrategic Planning &Resource Assessment

Science Policy,Planning, Inventory,& InformationResource Valuation& Use ResearchVegetation Management &Protection ResearchWildlife, Fish, Water,& Air Research

EngineeringLandsRecreation, Heritage,& WildernessResourcesMinerals & GeologyMangementForest & RangelandManagementWildlife, Fish,Watershed, Air & RarePlantsEcosystemManagementCoordination

Fire & AManageCooperaForest HProtectioConservEducatioUrban & Forestry

Deputy Chief,

Business Operations

Associate Deputy Chief

Deputy Chief

Programs, Legislation, &

Communication

Associate Deputy Chief

Deputy Chief,

Research & Development

Associate Deputy Chiefs

Deputy Chief,

National Forest System

Associate Deputy Chiefs

Depu

State & Pr

Associate 

National Fire Plan

Chief of Staff
7

Stanislaus

VALLEJO

ALBANY

DeSoto

Ko

ote

n

a

i

Olympic

 Mt.Baker

Snoqualmie

Trinity

M

e

n

d

o

cin

o

U.S. Department of Agriculture

FOREST SERVICE

Okanogan

Wenatchee Kaniksu

Winema Deschutes Challis

Modoc

Plumas

Tahoe

Sierra

Cle

v

ela

n

d

Humboldt

Cache

Wasatch

Prescott

Coronado

Carson

San Juan

Uncompahgre Gunnison

White River

Teton

Bridger

Tongass RIO PIEDRAS

Caribbean

Homochitto

MISSISSIPPI

To

m

big

b

e

e

HollySprings

Mark Twain

MarkTwain

Hiawatha

Hoosier

DanielBoone

Nantahala

National Headquarters

Research Station Headquarters
8

The National Forest System (NFS) is managed under the principles articulated in the National

Forest Management Act. The natural resources contained within the NFS are managed to meet

the needs of the Nation in a sustainable manner. NFS encompasses approximately 192 million

acres of aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems, including tropical and boreal forests, grasslands,

and important wetlands. Administration of NFS lands uses a multiple-use land management

approach that sustains healthy ecosystems, repairs damaged ecosystems, and addresses the

need for resources and commodities. NFS provides support to National Fire Plan (NFP)

implementation through its burned area emergency rehabilitation (BAER) program, as well as

other restoration and rehabilitation programs. NFS operations provide an array of multiple

uses, including, but not limited to, the following:

• Administering and managing recreation, wilderness, and heritage areas;

• Restoring, recovering, conserving, and enhancing fish and wildlife and their

habitats;

• Managing forest, rangeland, minerals, and water resources in a sustainable manner;

• Conducting resource inventories and assessments of NFS lands; and

• Providing a safe environment for the public and for USDA Forest Service

employees.

National Forests and

Grasslands

Overview of Programs
9

The Research and Development (R&D) deputy area of the USDA Forest Service is one of the

world’s leaders in forest conservation research. R&D serves society by developing and

communicating the scientific information and innovative technology required to manage,

protect, use, and sustain our Nation’s forests. Research projects conducted by R&D scientists

contribute to the stewardship of land, real property, and society by providing more affordable

housing, creating jobs, and improving the health of trees, forests, and forest ecosystems.

Innovative research applications permit the USDA Forest Service and other public and private

land managers to monitor and manage forest responses to environmental change, contributing

immeasurably to the sustainability of the Nation’s forests and rangelands and improving

human health. The R&D deputy area also provides support for implementing the NFP.

R&D operates six research stations; the Forest Products Laboratory in Madison, WI; and the

International Institute of Tropical Forestry in Puerto Rico. It employs over 500 scientists and

hundreds of technical and support personnel at 65 principal field sites throughout the Nation.

The R&D program focuses on the following seven functional areas to meet the needs of

society:

1. Enhancing the productive capacity of forests and rangelands;

2. Improving forest and rangeland health;

3. Preserving forest and rangeland contributions to carbon cycles;

4. Conserving soil, water, and air resources;

5. Enhancing long-term multiple socioeconomic benefits;

6. Protecting biodiversity; and

7. Monitoring forest inventory and health.

Forest and Rangeland

Research
10

State and Private Forestry (S&PF), a deputy area of the USDA Forest Service, is a Federal

leader in providing technical and financial assistance to landowners and resource managers to

help sustain the Nation’s urban and rural forests and protect communities and the environment

from wildland fires. S&PF programs help bring forestry to all landowners—woodlot, tribal,

State, and Federal—in efficient, nonregulatory ways. Through management, protection,

conservation education, and resource use efforts, S&PF helps facilitate sound stewardship

across lands of all ownerships on a landscape scale, while maintaining the flexibility for

individual forest landowners to pursue their objectives. S&PF plays a key role, along with

NFS, R&D, and the U.S. Department of the Interior in implementing the NFP to manage the

impacts of wildland fires on communities and the environment. S&PF operations provide for

the following activities:

• Maintaining healthy and productive forest ecosystems by preventing, detecting, and

suppressing damaging insects and disease;

• Providing technical and financial assistance to States and local fire agencies to

promote efficient wildland fire protection on Federal, State, and private lands; 

• Maintaining healthy, sustainable rural and urban forests through stewardship

planning, active management, and professional technical assistance for States and

private landowners;

• Improving the quality of living conditions in urban areas through the management

of urban natural resources; 

• Protecting forests from fragmentation and conversion to nonforest uses; and

• Improving the economic well-being of natural resource-dependant rural

communities.

State and Private

Forestry
11

The Fire and Aviation Management (FAM) Program protects life, property, and natural

resources on the 192 million acres of NFS lands. The USDA Forest Service also enters into

cooperative fire protection agreements with States and other Federal agencies, such as the

Department of the Interior and the Department of Defense. The FAM Program is guided, in

part, by the fundamental principles articulated in the NFP as adopted by the Secretaries of

Agriculture and the Interior in FY 2000, as well as the 10-Year Comprehensive Strategy,

signed by the Secretaries in August 2001, and the 10-Year Comprehensive Strategy

Implementation Plan, signed in May 2002. Among many programmatic functions, NFP funds

are used to support actions that help prevent, detect, and take initial suppression actions on

wildland fires. The program also supports fire operations, including fire suppression efforts

and the reduction of hazardous fuels to minimize the potential for large, destructive wildfires.

In addition, it funds and supports communities through Economic Action Programs and

Cooperative Forest Fire Prevention Programs for States and volunteer fire departments. The

NFP also encompasses Forest Health Monitoring Programs for Federal and cooperative lands,

joint fire sciences, fire facilities, and restoration of burned-over lands. Research efforts include

a variety of projects supporting firefighting capacity, rehabilitation and restoration, hazardous

fuels reduction, and community assistance.

Fire and Aviation

Management

Program/The National

Fire Plan
12

The Working Capital Fund (WCF) is a revolving fund established in 1956 for furnishing

supply and equipment services in support of programs of the USDA Forest Service. Currently,

the WCF includes 10 activities approved by the Chief of the USDA Forest Service and the

Secretary of Agriculture: fleet services, including rental and maintenance; aircraft services,

including operation and maintenance; supply services, including photo reproduction, sign

shop, and seed supply; tree nursery services; and computer services, including the replacement

of computer hardware and software. 

The WCF is credited with advance payments in connection with firm orders and

reimbursements from appropriations and funds of the USDA Forest Service, at rates 

approximately equal to the cost of furnishing the supply and equipment services.

Working Capital Fund
13

The USDA Forest Service faced and met many challenges in fiscal year (FY) 2002. The

extreme fire season impacted nearly all programs within the agency, as approximately 

$1 billion was transferred from other agency programs to support firefighting efforts.

Healthier forests would greatly reduce the potential for catastrophic fires; as a result, fire

suppression costs should, on average, decrease dramatically. The President highlighted the

need to return our Nation’s forests and grasslands to a healthy condition, including the need to

address not only the hazardous fuels situation, but also the threat from noxious weeds and

other invasive species, the need to protect and improve the country’s watersheds, and the need

to address the economic impacts of changes in land management policies and practices. Major

challenges the USDA Forest Service faces include efforts to:

• Continue implementation of the 10-Year Comprehensive Strategy of the National

Fire Plan (NFP) to reduce wildland fire risks to communities and the environment;

• Implement the Healthy Forests Initiative to improve the condition of the Nation’s

forests and grasslands;

• Address the “Process Predicament” to improve the timeliness and effectiveness of

agency decisionmaking;

• Address the increasing threat of insects, disease, and noxious weeds—including

those classified as invasive species—to the integrity and viability of forest and

rangeland ecosystems;

• Restore and manage watersheds;

• Address the impacts that result from transferring funds to fight fires in FY 2002;

and

• Continue improvement of the agency’s financial and performance accountability

and attain an unqualified audit opinion from the USDA Office of Inspector General

(OIG) related to the USDA Forest Service’s annual financial statements.

The incredibly disastrous fire seasons of FY 2000 and FY 2002 have vividly illustrated the

negative impacts hazardous fuels buildup in forested areas can have on watersheds and

biological resources, especially in the wildland-urban interface. Catastrophic fires in the first

half of the 1900s caused the Nation to adopt a policy of fire prevention and suppression.

Ironically, firefighters became so effective at suppressing fires that small trees and brush

increased to dangerously high fuel levels. The severe fire season of FY 2000 led to the

adoption of the NFP in an effort to protect life and property and minimize losses of natural

resources. As evidenced by the enormous fires in the West during the summer of 2002,

although much fuel reduction work has been done since the NFP was developed, it will take

many years to restore the Nation’s forests to a healthy and fire-safe condition.

The NFP implements an ambitious program of work while preparing the longer-term

foundation to reduce fire risk and restore healthy, fire-adapted ecosystems on the Nation’s

forests and rangelands. The key points of the NFP are to:

• Continue to make all necessary firefighting resources available, 

• Restore damaged landscapes and rebuild communities,

• Invest in projects to reduce fire risk,

• Work directly with local communities, and 

• Be accountable. 

Major Issues Facing the 

USDA Forest Service

Community and 

Land Protection/

National Fire Plan 
14

The 10-Year Comprehensive Strategy and Implementation Plan were developed cooperatively

among Federal, State, tribal, and local governments; local community groups; and other

interested parties to address the multitude of issues related to wildland fires. Many activities

and efforts took place in FY 2002 in support of the goals and objectives embraced by the NFP.

In April, the Interagency Wildland Fire Leadership Council was established to achieve

consistent implementation of the goals, actions, and policies of the NFP and the Federal

Wildland Fire Management Policy. In May, the 10-Year Comprehensive Strategy

Implementation Plan was signed by the Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior and 17

State governors, in furtherance of the 10-Year Comprehensive Strategy. In August, President

George W. Bush announced the Healthy Forests Initiative that, in part, supports several of the

actions addressed by the 10-Year Comprehensive Strategy and Implementation Plan. In the

area of NFP research support, the Joint Fire Science Program (created in 1998 by the USDA

Forest Service and the Department of the Interior) provides support in hazardous fuels

management; the USDA Forest Service Research and Development (R&D) deputy area

conducts research projects addressing NFP goals.

Many management practices, such as thinning, timber stand improvement, and prescribed

burning, can be systematically blended to meet site-specific forest needs. To achieve these

desired outcomes, the USDA Forest Service and the Department of the Interior work with

communities to reduce hazardous fuels buildups, restore forested ecosystems impacted by

catastrophic fire, and equip those communities and homeowners with the tools necessary to

reduce wildland fire risks. Aid is provided through State, volunteer, and rural fire assistance

programs, as well as Economic Action Programs.

While these efforts will help reduce threats to communities at risk, large wildland fires will

not be eliminated. Long-term and comprehensive programs in fire prevention, fire

suppression, and fuel treatments involving other Federal agencies, States, tribes, and

communities will be necessary before the current fire environment is changed to one that is

less destructive and costly. To this end, the USDA Forest Service is currently working on

improvements to wildland fire planning systems, focusing fuel treatment in areas where

communities are at risk; working with other Federal and State agencies to plan interagency

landscape-level fuel treatment programs; and expanding fire prevention programs.

In August 2002, President George W. Bush initiated the Healthy Forests Initiative to address a

variety of impediments to returning the Nation’s forests to healthy conditions. The need for

healthier forests is essential. Catastrophic damage to forests through wildland fires severely

impacts plants, animals, and fisheries, and can lead to diminished soil productivity and

erosion. Unhealthy forests are less able to withstand infestations of invasive species.

Detrimental economic consequences to local communities dependent on natural resources

often result from a loss of revenue from less tourism and reduced opportunities for the local

wood products and ranching industries, as well as the service industries that support them. In

addition, damaged watersheds result in a variety of economic costs to communities.

The Healthy Forests Initiative focuses on three main areas: 

1. Significantly step up efforts to prevent the damage caused by catastrophic wildfires

by reducing unnecessary regulatory obstacles that hinder active forest

management; 

Healthy Forests

Initiative
15

2. Expedite procedures for forest thinning and restoration projects; and 

3. Ensure sustainable forest management and appropriate timber production of the

1994 Northwest Forest Plan are being achieved. 

Regulatory actions, whether legislative, judicial, or agency-imposed, have, in some instances,

delayed the implementation of forest management practices or hindered rapid response to

emergency situations. One goal of the Healthy Forests Initiative is to seek solutions to

processes, procedures, and situations that hinder our ability to manage the Nation’s natural

resources.

Treatment of hazardous fuels is a major step in returning our Nation’s forests to a healthy

condition. This issue is a major component of the NFP through the 10-Year Comprehensive

Strategy and Implementation Plan. By finding ways to expedite forest thinning and restoration

projects, the Healthy Forests Initiative will provide support to this element of the NFP. 

In the Northwest, ecomonic and environmental issues were addressed in the 1994 Northwest

Forest Plan. Due to a variety of factors, the intent of the plan has not been fully addressed.

Efforts will once again be concentrated on fulfilling the intent of the plan, resulting in

healthier, more productive forests, as well as providing economic stimulus to local

communities.

A more complete description of the Healthy Forests Initiative is located on the Internet at

www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/healthyforests/toc.html.

The USDA Forest Service is an agency of dedicated, hard-working employees who are

committed to wise natural resource management. The agency strives to manage the lands and

resources for which it is responsible to meet the requirements and desires of the American

public. Unfortunately, requirements often impede the agency from effectively addressing

rapid declines in forest health. The requirements also hinder the agency’s ability in other

aspects of multiple-use management. Three problem areas stand out:

1. Excessive analysis—confusion, delays, costs, and risk management associated

with the required consultations and studies;

2. Ineffective public involvement—procedural requirements that create disincentives

to collaboration in national forest management; and

3. Management inefficiencies—a deteriorating skills base and inflexible funding

rules have helped to create problems that are compounded by the sheer volume of

the required paperwork and the associated proliferation of opportunities to

misinterpret or misapply required procedures.

These problems frequently place line officers in a costly procedural quagmire, where a single

project can take years to move forward and where planning costs alone can exceed $1

million. Even noncontroversial projects often proceed very slowly. The time it takes to

complete many projects was addressed as part of President Bush’s Healthy Forests Initiative.

The agency estimates that planning and assessment consume 40 percent of total direct work at

the national forest level. Although some planning is obviously necessary, USDA Forest

Service officials have estimated that improving administrative procedures could shift up to

Process Predicament
16

$100 million a year from unnecessary planning to actual project work to restore ecosystems

and deliver services on the ground.

The USDA Forest Service is deeply committed to the principles of sound public land

management in a democracy—long-term planning on an ecosystem basis, extensive public

involvement, interagency consultation and collaboration, and ample opportunities for public

redress. The USDA Forest Service has the tools and techniques to stop invasive species,

reduce the danger of catastrophic fire, and restore ailing watersheds to health. Permitted to

use the tools and apply the techniques of modern management, the USDA Forest Service can

ensure healthy, resilient ecosystems across national forests and grasslands for all Americans.

It is time to tailor the USDA Forest Service’s statutory, regulatory, and administrative

framework to the new era of public land management. Part of the solution will be internal.

The problem goes far beyond the range of control of any single agency or single branch of the

government, however. The USDA Forest Service will need to work with partners, both in and

out of government, to establish a modern management framework. By working together with

partners to create and operate within such a framework, the USDA Forest Service can focus

more of its resources on responsible stewardship and thereby improve public trust and

confidence in the agency’s ability to care for the land and serve people.

The USDA Forest Service is committed to diminishing the rate of introduction and infestation

of invasive species on forests and grasslands. Invasive species, including animals, insects,

plants, and associated pathogens, are a significant threat to the integrity and viability of forest

and rangeland ecosystems. They contribute to tree mortality and high-intensity wildland fires,

causing billions of dollars in damage annually. Invasive species put many resources at risk,

including wilderness, wildlife, forage, visual quality, reforestation, recreation opportunities, as

well as other factors such as land values and farming. For example, millions of forested acres

are at risk along the leading edge of a gypsy moth front. In Oregon and California, more than

25,000 acres of Port-Orford-cedar root disease have been identified on Federal lands. On the

192 million acres of National Forest System (NFS) lands, approximately 4 million acres of

noxious native and nonnative weeds have been identified.

The USDA Forest Service invasive species program is a coordinated effort implemented

through International Programs and three deputy areas—State and Private Forestry (S&PF),

R&D, and NFS. The goal of the program is to reduce adverse social, economic, and

ecological impacts of key invasive pests, insects, plants, and pathogens threatening forest,

rangeland, wildland, and urban ecosystems in the United States. In part, this goal is being

reached by emphasizing partnerships, operations, and research and development activities that

prevent, monitor, and control invasive species, and restore impacted ecosystems.

To date, USDA Forest Service efforts have focused almost exclusively on insects, plant

pathogens, and terrestrial noxious weeds, such as fire ants, gypsy moths, zebra mussels, Asian

long-horned beetle, Sudden Oak Death disease, purple loosestrife, and yellow star thistle. The

frequent introduction of invasives, however, requires immediate focus on other species as

well, including aquatic weeds, nonnative fish, cogon grass that alters habitat of gopher

tortoises, species that directly impact migratory songbird habitat, and species that displace

valued native animals and plants. One example of the latter is the bullfrog that is invading the

Invasive Species
habitat of the Oregon spotted frog. Prevention efforts also need to be increased, such as

preventing the spread of weed seed along travel corridors and in the back country.

The long-term strategy of the USDA Forest Service invasive species program includes the use

of extensive partnerships with international government organizations, other Federal agencies,

State and local governments, nonprofit organizations, and private landowners. In conjunction

with these entities, the USDA Forest Service will work to prevent the introduction of invasive

species, eradicate new infestations, manage populations of established invasives, and restore

impacted ecosystems. To effectively address invasive species problems, however, it takes

appropriate resources and a strong collaboration with our partners.

Forests are key to clean water. Maintaining supplies of clean water and protecting watersheds

were major reasons why public domain forests and rangelands were reserved, starting in the

late 19th and early 20th centuries. About 80 percent of the Nation’s freshwater resources

originate on forests, which cover about one-third of the Nation’s land area. National forest

lands contribute 14 percent of the total national runoff. The forested land absorbs rain, refills

underground aquifers, cools and cleanses water, slows storm runoff, reduces flooding, sustains

watershed stability and resilience, and provides critical habitat for fish and wildlife. In

addition to these ecological services, forests provide abundant water-based recreation and

other benefits that improve the quality of life. The calculated marginal value of water from all

national forest lands is about $3.7 billion per year. 

The importance of clean water cannot be overstated. As stewards of much of the Nation’s

water supply, the USDA Forest Service has a responsibility to ensure that water resources are

plentiful, available, and of high quality. National forest activities, however, have affected

water quality and productivity of the land. Problem watersheds and processes are often

masked by the size of the landscape, or are noticeable only when flooding or other disturbances occur. Although most watersheds on national forests appear healthy on a large scale,

extensive localized rehabilitation needs still exist on these lands. The agency is working hard

to identify and restore degraded watersheds to productive conditions.

Watershed Restoration 

17
18

Disturbances in forest and grassland vegetation from drought, wind, fire, insects, and

pathogens occur even in properly functioning ecosystems in watersheds. Some past

management practices—such as fire exclusion, poor timber harvesting practices, and human

development—have created watersheds that experience more frequent or intense fire disturbances

than in the past. Many of these forests and grasslands are overcrowded with increased 

susceptibility to drought and insect and disease outbreaks. In addition, the construction of

high-density and insufficiently maintained road networks poses severe problems and risks for

forest resources, both as land disturbance and as access routes that concentrate human

activities and pollution.

Healthy ecosystems are an essential part of healthy watersheds. Watershed restoration includes

recovering natural timber and grass stands and fuels composition, decommissioning and

obliterating noncritical road systems, and restoring and protecting riparian and wetland areas.

Solutions to watershed issues and restoration require working collectively and collaboratively

across mixed ownerships within the watersheds. By working collaboratively with other

Federal and State agencies, local communities, private landowners, and organizations, the

USDA Forest Service can restore watersheds to healthy and sustainable conditions. 
In FY 2002, the United States experienced the most expensive fire season in history. More

than 6.7 million acres burned, nearly double the 10-year average. Colorado, Arizona, and

Oregon experienced their largest fires in the last century. To combat fires nationwide, the

USDA Forest Service transferred approximately $1 billion from discretionary and mandatory

accounts to help cover fire suppression costs. As a result of these transfers, projects at all

levels of the organization were deferred. Impacts are as follows:

Program or Fund Amount Transferred

Research and Development $23 million

State and Private Forestry $77 million

National Forest System $155 million

Wildland Fire Management $95 million

Capital Improvement and Maintenance $157 million

Land Acquisition $143 million

Working Capital Fund $95 million

Permanent Appropriations and Trust Funds * $269 million

*Permanent Appropriations and Trust Funds include Knutson-Vandenberg (K-V),

Salvage Sale, Timber Purchaser Elect, Brush Disposal, and Recreation Fee

Demonstration Project funds.

The effect of FY 2002 transfers to support fire suppression requirements cannot be easily and

fully quantified. Although a number of programs were able to accomplish their FY 2002

goals, there are significant impacts that will continue to be manifested in FY 2003 and

beyond. Examples of impacts, though not inclusive, are illustrative of how transfers will

affect USDA Forest Service programs.

Where funding is replenished in FY 2003, an extremely heavy workload would occur as

limited agency personnel would be tasked with trying to meet procedural requirements for

developing and awarding grants, agreements, and contracts. It is probable that

accomplishments could be delayed until FY 2004 or later. Additionally, the extra workload

would also fall on our cooperators, including States, territories, tribes, and nongovernmental

organizations. For example, research agreements have been deferred, jeopardizing

relationships with partners and reducing research capacity; one result is that some critical

insect control work has been deferred.

Another example of impacts of fund transfers will be observable through delays in the

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. In many cases, project environmental

documentation had to be postponed due to fund transfers. This will have a ripple effect,

causing certain projects to be delayed or even cancelled, thus affecting longer-term

programmatic efforts. Loss of planning dollars for certain programs will have serious

consequences and may result in court actions because of nonperformance. Further, if funding

is not repaid, it could affect the necessary gathering of data and inventory information for

specific NEPA documents.

The examples of agency-wide impacts will continue to be visible. With over 20 percent of the

agency’s entire budget being transferred to support fire suppression costs, the on-the-ground

effect is major and long term. It will be manifested in many programmatic efforts that are

either delayed or foregone in FY 2003 and beyond.

Impacts from Transfer

of Funds To Fight Fires

19
20

Financial and program accountability is essential for the USDA Forest Service to achieve its

commitment to land stewardship and public service. The agency, through aggressive efforts,

continues to improve accountability in both areas. As a result, Congress, USDA Forest Service

managers, and other agency stakeholders can evaluate agency programs and activities through

relevant, reliable, and accurate information, including budget, accounting, and program data.

Through continued focus of fiscal resources, additional improvement can be achieved.

These efforts have included implementing activities to comply with the Federal Managers’

Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA), Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990, Government

Performance and Results Act (GPRA), and the Federal Financial Management Improvement

Act (FFMIA). Since FY 2000, the USDA Forest Service has been using the Foundation

Financial Information System (FFIS), a U.S. Standard General Ledger-based financial

management system fully compliant with Federal financial requirements. A new field-based

Budget Formulation and Execution System (BFES) was implemented in FY 2001. 

Financial management policies, business practices, and systems have been further updated

over the past year as a basis for sustained improvement of records for all agency accounts,

including more than $4 billion of property managed by the USDA Forest Service.

Reconciliation teams were formed to improve the data integrity within the agency’s

accounting system. Through implementation of BFES and FFIS, and adherence to GPRA, the

agency is moving forward with development of integrated processes and systems that provide

linkages among the formulation of budgets, the accomplishment of work on the ground, and

the associated cost of the work.

The USDA Forest Service must continue to further improve business and accounting

processes and systems, as well as capitalize on the strengths of the new systems. To sustain

the major efforts of FY 2002, the agency must continue to ensure that employees are fully

trained in the various aspects of financial management policy; information about agency

financial operations is readily available using a variety of reporting tools; and critical financial

management processes, policies, and procedures are current, in place, and operating.

Computer-based financial system availability has been expanded and better meets agency

requirements. Some older systems that continue to feed data to FFIS, however, often do not

meet current requirements for Federal financial management and need to be replaced or

eliminated. This effort, led by the USDA, will continue for several years and will require a

significant amount of agency resources to complete.

Through the agency’s partnership with USDA Offices of the Chief Financial Officer and

Inspector General and a private accounting firm over the past several years, agency records

supporting real property and Fund Balance with the Department of the Treasury have been

greatly improved. Monetary values for real property were established throughout the agency 

in FY 2001. The monetary value for real property assets is now auditable and provides the

information necessary for the management of these assets. The Fund Balance with Treasury

was reconciled as of September 30, 2001, to the balances maintained by the Treasury. Based

on this action and the significant improvements in the development of policies, procedures,

and reconciliation processes during FY 2002, the reconciliation of the Fund Balance with

Treasury is now sustainable and auditable. 

Financial and Program

Accountability
21

A National Fire Plan database to track, monitor, and account for NFP spending was

implemented and used by the USDA Forest Service and other wildland fire management

agencies to support reporting of accomplishments and activities. Recording of commitments

to enhance funds control was successfully piloted on national contracts called up to support

national fire suppression resources. 

Efforts in FY 2002 have created the framework for a number of new initiatives that are

scheduled for implementation in FY 2003. These include:

• Implementing tools to generate financial and performance reports from Web-based

accounting databases;

• Continuing refinement and generation of quarterly status of funds analyses that

track USDA Forest Service spending;

• Developing financial statements on a quarterly basis to facilitate upward reporting

processes;

• Continuing evaluation of information requirements to further reduce the volume of

data maintained in the USDA Forest Service general ledger system;

• Reducing data elements, which will result in less data to track, starting with FY

2003 budget planning; and 

• More efficient handling of the agency’s indirect costs to increase system

performance while maintaining accountability.
22

The USDA Forest Service fiscal year (FY) 2002 Annual Performance Plan committed the

agency to delivering a range of natural resource-based benefits to the American people in

accordance with the 2000 Strategic Plan goals and objectives. The USDA Forest Service 2000

strategic goals are as follows:

Goal 1 – Ecosystem Health

Goal 2 – Multiple Benefits to People

Goal 3 – Science and Technical Assistance

Goal 4 – Effective Public Service

The USDA Forest Service’s responsibility as a natural resource management agency is to

restore and maintain the health of the land. Through various programs, the USDA Forest

Service manages and protects public lands, and provides technical and financial assistance to

other governmental entities, nongovernmental organizations, private landowners, and others.

The agency strives to provide exemplary service to its customers and to track its

accomplishments through the annual performance plans. These plans are the basic

management tools used to direct resources and implement key strategies and efforts in

achieving long-term goals and objectives.

At the end of this section, a table lists performance goals and accomplishments of the USDA

Forest Service during FY 2002 as measured against the goals established in the Annual

Performance Plan for FY 2002. At the time of the audit, the agency did not have final

accomplishments to report for some of the activities and outputs due to varied reporting 

cycles with cooperating agencies, mainly State programs of various authorities. Most of the

accomplishments affected were within the Cooperative Forestry Staff of State and Private

Forestry (S&PF) and report data on a calendar year basis.

Several performance highlights are presented below to illustrate the progress the USDA

Forest Service made during FY 2002 in "caring for the land and serving people." 

During FY 2002, the National Fire Plan (NFP) program built on the accomplishments the

USDA Forest Service made in FY 2001, the first year of the program. Much was

accomplished, both internally and with cooperators. Fund transfers from NFP projects to

support fire suppression, however, impacted projects in the S&PF, National Forest System

(NFS), and Research and Development (R&D) deputy areas.

Approximately 1.3 million acres were treated for hazardous fuel reduction. In addition, NFP

funds were used to treat fire-damaged lands through insect and pathogen suppression projects.

Due to program impacts from the severe fire season, much of the work will be undertaken in

the spring of 2003.

Introduction

Analysis of Agency Performance

Highlights

National Fire Plan 
23

The 10-Year Comprehensive Strategy Implementation Plan was signed by the Secretaries of

Agriculture and the Interior, along with 17 State governors on May 23, 2002. 

The USDA Forest Service, in cooperation with the Department of the Interior, collaborated

with tribes and States and continued work to identify and prioritize fuel treatments. The

groups focused on projects to reduce the wildland fire risk to wildland-urban interface

communities. This effort is designed to bring together Federal and State land managers, local

community leaders, and other partners to develop a cohesive strategy for protecting people

and sustaining natural resources. 

R&D projects in FY 2002 supported hazardous fuels reduction through the Joint Fire Science

and Forest and Rangeland Research programs. Fuels reduction research focused on prioritizing

areas for treatment; determining the impacts of treatments on wildlife, fish, and riparian areas;

and developing new uses and systems for harvesting forest undergrowth and small-diameter

trees. Other research is under way through R&D for key areas of the NFP. 

The USDA Forest Service developed and used watershed restoration business plans to direct

and prioritize collaborative recovery efforts, establish accountability mechanisms, develop and

strengthen public and private partnerships, identify on-the-ground work accomplishments, and

provide direction in the development of annual reports for large-scale watersheds.

Collaborative watershed restoration efforts during FY 2002 resulted in many environmental

improvements throughout the Nation. Examples include the improvement and reestablishment

of riparian and wetland habitats; rehabilitation or obliteration of low-use and unused road

networks; improvement of recreational sites and trails; restoration of wildlife and fisheries

habitat; instream habitat improvement; stabilization of stream banks; and the production of

traditional forest products, such as timber.

Watershed Restoration
24

Noxious weeds and other invasive species threaten forest and rangeland health nationwide. In

FY 2002, aggressive actions were taken to control insect infestations such as gypsy moths in

the East and Midwest, southern pine beetles in the South, and Douglas-fir tussock moths and

bark beetles in the West. Treatments and research efforts were also made to control Sudden

Oak Death disease and cheatgrass in the West, Formosan subterranean termites in the South,

exotic pine shoot beetles in the Midwest and Northeast, and hemlock woolly adelgids in the

Northeast and Northwest. Control actions have been undertaken on aquatic invasive species,

such as the zebra mussel. 

In FY 2002, the USDA Forest Service attained an unqualified audit opinion from the Office 

of Inspector General. This is the highest audit opinion attainable. The agency achieved this

opinion through the hard work and dedication of employees at all levels of the organization.

For more details, refer to Appendix B – U.S. Department of Agriculture Office of Inspector

General Financial and IT Operations Audit Report for FY 2002.

In FY 2002, the USDA Forest Service began to move toward a new, outcome-oriented budget

and planning structure that provides linkages among resources, program activities, and results.

Future budgets will integrate data from the strategic goals and objectives and will demonstrate

the consequences of various funding levels on actual on-the-ground work accomplished. 

A results-oriented budget and planning structure will provide the Congress, Department of

Agriculture, USDA Forest Service leadership, and the public with a clearer understanding 

of the benefits attained through taxpayers’ dollars that finance the management of agency

programs. 

The ability of the USDA Forest Service to effectively integrate budget and performance

management depends on having appropriate measures, as well as collecting high-quality data

to support these measures. In FY 2003, the USDA Forest Service will continue to refine

accomplishment reporting requirements and the links to both the Budget Formulation and

Execution System and the Foundation Financial Information System. The agency will focus

on the relevancy, accuracy, and burden associated with data collection efforts and accounting

codes used to charge costs of various activities.

The tables on the following pages display revised performance activities and outputs for FY

2002. The USDA Forest Service FY 2002 Annual Performance Plan is based on the USDA

Forest Service 2000 Strategic Plan. The table identifies activities and outputs by strategic

objective as presented in the performance plan. 

Most activities for FY 2002 shown in the table have verified accomplishments. To be

consistent with the independent audit, those activities that were not verified at the time of

audit remain unreported.

The effect of FY 2002 transfers to support fire suppression requirements cannot be easily and

fully quantified. Although a number of programs were able to accomplish their FY 2002 goals

(as shown in the following table), there are significant impacts which will continue to 

be manifested in FY 2003 and beyond. Examples of impacts, though not inclusive, are

illustrative of how transfers will affect USDA Forest Service programs.

Invasive Species

Financial Accountability

Performance

Management in the

Future

Summary of FY 2002

Performance Measures
25

If funding is replenished in FY 2003, an extremely heavy workload would occur as limited

agency personnel would be tasked with trying to meet procedural requirements for developing

and awarding grants, agreements, and contracts. It is probable that accomplishments could be

delayed until FY 2004 or longer. Additionally, the extra workload would also fall on our

cooperators, including States, territories, tribes, and nongovernmental organizations. For

example, research agreements have been deferred, jeopardizing relationships with partners

and reducing research capacity; one result is that some critical insect control work has been

deferred.

Another example of impacts of fund transfers will be observable through delays in the

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. In many cases, project environmental

documentation had to be postponed due to fund transfers. This will have a ripple effect,

causing certain projects to be delayed or even cancelled, thus affecting longer-term

programmatic efforts. Loss of planning dollars for certain programs will have serious

consequences and may result in court actions because of nonperformance. Further, if funding

is not repaid, it could affect the necessary gathering of data and inventory information for

specific NEPA documents.

The examples of agency-wide impacts will continue to be visible. With over 20 percent of the

agency’s entire budget being transferred to support fire suppression costs, the on-the-ground

effect is major and long term. It will be manifested in many programmatic efforts that are

either delayed or foregone in FY 2003 and beyond.
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35

The USDA Forest Service annually produces a series of financial statements to summarize the

financial activity and associated financial position of the agency. The principal statements

include the Consolidated Balance Sheet, Consolidated Statement of Net Cost, Consolidated

Statement of Changes in Net Position, Combined Statement of Budgetary Resources, and

Consolidated Statement of Financing. The agency’s goal in producing these statements is to

provide relevant, reliable, and accurate financial information about USDA Forest Service

activities. The USDA Forest Service received a waiver for producing comparative statements

for fiscal year (FY) 2001 and FY 2002. Through analysis of the agency’s FY 2002 financial

statements, the following key points are highlighted.

The USDA Forest Service reports $6.9 billion in assets at the end of FY 2002, of which 99.53

percent is classified primarily in three major categories. First, 56.6 percent is General

Property, Plant and Equipment (General PP&E)—primarily forest road surface improvements,

culverts, bridges, campgrounds, administrative buildings, other structures, and equipment.

Second, 41.1 percent is fund balances with the Department of the Treasury—primarily funds

derived from congressional appropriations and funds held in trust for accomplishing purposes

specified by law. Third, 2 percent, or approximately $122 million, is accounts receivable—

primarily amounts due from other Federal entities or the public as a result of the delivery of

goods and services, and specific activities performed by the USDA Forest Service.

The approximately $3.9 billion of General PP&E includes assets acquired by the USDA Forest

Service to be used for conducting business activities, such as providing goods or services.

General PP&E does not include the value of heritage assets (agency assets that are historical

or significant for their natural, cultural, aesthetic, or other importance and generally are

expected to be preserved indefinitely) or the value of stewardship assets (primarily land held

by the agency as part of the National Forest System (NFS) and not acquired for, or in

connection with, other General PP&E). Although heritage and stewardship assets may be

considered as priceless, they do not have a readily identifiable financial value and are not

recorded within the financial statements of the USDA Forest Service. An in-depth discussion

of stewardship assets is presented in Appendix D— Required Supplementary Stewardship

Information.

Fund balances of approximately $2.8 billion recorded with the Department of the Treasury

(congressional appropriations and trust funds) are available to the agency to pay authorized

expenses and finance purchase commitments. 

The USDA Forest Service reported $2.2 billion in liabilities at the end of FY 2002, representing

probable future expenditures arising from past events. Federal agencies, by law, cannot make

any payments unless Congress has appropriated funds for such payments. A portion of

liabilities reported by the USDA Forest Service for FY 2002, however, is currently not funded

by congressional appropriations. For example, 27 percent ($599 million) consists of unfunded

amounts needed to pay employees for annual leave they have earned but not yet taken and

Federal Employees’ Compensation Act benefits that have accrued to employees for death,

disability, medical, and other approved costs that have not been paid. Additionally, $54 million

of the reported liabilities are custodial liability funds that belong to non-USDA Forest Service

Assets

Liabilities and Net

Position

Analysis of Agency’s Financial Position
36

entities. A majority of this amount is funds for payments to States. These amounts are held by

the agency in special receipt accounts pending transfer to an appropriate party. 

A net position of $4.65 billion is reported for FY 2002, consisting of 56.7 percent ($2.7 billion)

for unexpended appropriations consisting of undelivered orders as well as unobligated funds

and 43.3 percent ($2.0 billion) as the cumulative results of operations. Unexpended appropriations reflect spending authority made available by congressional appropriation that has not

yet been used. Cumulative results of operations reflect the cumulative effect of excess

financing over expenses for a budget account since its inception.

The USDA Forest Service reported approximately $541 million of earned revenue before

elimination and $323 million after elimination during FY 2002. The majority of earned

revenues received arise from two sources: providing goods and services and reimbursable

activities. Goods and services include such items as the sale of forest products (timber and

firewood); recreational opportunities (campgrounds); mineral resources; livestock grazing; and

special land use fees for power generation, resorts, and other business activities conducted on

NFS lands. Reimbursable activities include work completed for individuals and businesses

cooperating with the agency, as well as work completed for other Federal agencies, mainly in

accordance with the Economy Act.

The USDA Forest Service distributes a portion of earned revenues to eligible States in

accordance with existing law. In FY 2002, approximately $375 million of FY 2001 receipts

were distributed to 41 States and Puerto Rico in accordance with the Secure Rural Schools

and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000. This funding benefits public schools and

roads in communities hosting national forests and pays for local forest stewardship projects.

The FY 2002 Net Cost of Operations for the USDA Forest Service indicates the impact of

deducting earned revenues from program costs. The net operating costs for the agency were

$5.4 billion. An analysis of the $5.9 billion of total gross program costs before eliminations

shows that approximately 54 percent ($3.2 billion) was associated with the National Forests

and Grasslands. The Forest and Rangeland Research program accounted for approximately 

4 percent ($250 million). The State and Private Forestry (S&PF) program accounted for

approximately 5 percent ($290 million). The Fire and Aviation Management program

accounted for approximately 36 percent ($2.1 billion), which includes emergency wildfire

suppression activities. The Working Capital Fund (WCF) program costs amounted to $143

million before elimination and -$76 million after elimination.

The USDA Forest Service had budget authority of approximately $5.1 billion in FY 2002.

These are general Government funds administered by the Department of the Treasury and

appropriated for the agency’s use by Congress. A portion of the appropriation, $474 million,

was designated by Congress to repay agency funds transferred from other accounts in FY 2000

and FY 2001 for emergency wildland fire management requirements. The agency must

routinely exercise its statutory authority to transfer from other funds available to fight

wildland fires. When such transfers take place, the agency requests appropriations from

Congress to repay transferred funds in order to accomplish the purpose for which the funds

were first provided.

Revenues

Expenses

Budgetary Resources
37

This section of the Management’s Discussion and Analysis (MD&A) provides information on

the USDA Forest Service’s compliance with the:

• Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA);

• Inspector General Act Amendments (Audit Followup); and 

• Federal Financial Management Improvement Act (FFMIA).

The FMFIA requires agencies to annually provide a statement of assurance regarding the

effectiveness of management, administrative and accounting controls, and financial

management systems. 

The USDA Forest Service believes that maintaining integrity and accountability in all

programs and operations is critical for good government; demonstrates responsible

stewardship over assets and resources entrusted to our care; ensures high-quality, responsible

leadership; ensures the sound delivery of services to our customers; and maximizes desired

program outcomes. 

New efforts are under way to improve timely implementation and closure of audit recommendations. For FY 2002, the USDA Forest Service is reporting two new material weaknesses,

Financial Management Internal Control and Computer Security, and updating the status of

four open material weaknesses under Section Two of FMFIA. The USDA Forest Service is

requesting closure of three material weaknesses and one financial system nonconformance. 

The following table shows significant progress by the USDA Forest Service in aggressively

pursuing initiatives to fully integrate the accounting system, link all financial systems

electronically, and provide data integrity and consistency.

Management Controls: Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act

Section Two Material Weaknesses Correction Date

Timber Sale Administration Requesting closure in FY 2003

Financial System Completion of all corrective actions in 

FY 2003

Special Use Permits Published its Categorical Exclusions

Regulation for Special Uses Actions in the

Federal Register for notice and comments;

Completion of all corrective actions in 

FY 2003

Personal Property Requesting closure in FY 2003

Contracting Requesting closure in FY 2003

Performance Reporting New measures implemented in FY 2002;

Completion of all corrective actions in FY 2004

Timber Sale Environmental Analysis Developed an Administrative Control Plan in

FY 2001; Completion of all corrective actions in

FY 2004

Financial Management Internal Controls Completion of corrective actions in FY 2003

Computer Security Completion of corrective actions in FY 2003 

Section Four System Nonconformances Correction Date

Real Property Management Information System Requesting Closure in FY 2003

Financial Management Controls

Financial Systems 

and Controls
38

The USDA Forest Service continues to resolve open audit recommendations. As of September

30, 2002, the USDA Forest Service has 28 audits with 139 open recommendations that are 

1 year old and older. 

The USDA Forest Service has aggressively acted to correct the agency’s financial systems,

thereby improving the quality of financial data. FY 2002 marks the third year using the

Foundation Financial Information System (FFIS), which is fully compliant with Federal

financial requirements and incorporates the U.S. Standard General Ledger.

The FFMIA of 1996 requires that Federal agencies use the U.S. Standard General Ledger,

comply with Federal accounting standards, and establish financial management systems that

support full disclosure of financial data, including the full cost of Federal programs and

activities. If an agency is not in compliance with these requirements, the FFMIA requires that

the agency head establish a remediation plan to bring the agency’s financial management

systems into substantial compliance.

For FY 2001, the Office of Inspector General (OIG) reported in its opinion of the USDA

Forest Service’s financial statements that the agency’s financial management systems were in

noncompliance in the areas listed in the following table:

Management Followup

to OIG/GAO

Recommendations

Financial Management

Federal Financial

Management

Improvement Act

Compliance

FY 2002 Remediation

Plan

FFMIA Requirement

1. All feeder systems are

integrated or electronically

interfaced with the core

financial system.

2. Internal controls over data

entry, transaction

processing, and reporting

shall be applied consistently throughout the

system to ensure the

validity of information and

the protection of Federal

Government resources.

Area of Noncompliance

1. INFRA Real Property subsystem is not interfaced with

the FFIS.

2.a. General ledger adjustments

were made so that FFIS

account balances would

agree with Treasury records.

2.b. Inaccurate posting models,

which were established by

the USDA Office of the Chief

Financial Officer Associate

CFO for Financial Systems,

resulted in erroneous general

ledger account balances.

2.c. Invalid obligations and

payables were entered into

FFIS.

Target Completion

Date

TARGET

COMPLETED

December 31, 2002

TARGET

COMPLETED

TARGET

COMPLETED
39

FFMIA Requirement

2. (Continued)

3. Agency financial

management systems

shall enable the agency

to prepare, execute, and

report on the agency’s

budget in accordance

with OMB Circulars A11, A-34, and other OMB

circulars and bulletins.

4. Adequate training and

user support shall be

provided to the users of

financial management

systems.

5. Financial management

systems shall provide

financial reports in a

timely and useful

fashion.

At the time this section of the report was finalized, the FY 2002 auditor’s opinion has not

been issued. No material weaknesses, reportable conditions, or issues of noncompliance have

been identified, so the USDA Forest Service’s remediation plan is pending. When the

auditor’s report is issued, it will be included in the Report of the Forest Service as Appendix

B.

Area of Noncompliance

Audit trails and support for

billings and receivables are

inadequate. Field units did not

obtain monthly listings to verify

the accuracy and validity of

accounts receivable. Amounts

were reported as accounts

receivable even though not valid.

Some accounts receivable

transactions were duplicated.

3. USDA Forest Service violated

the Anti-Deficiency Act in FY

2000 by overobligating

Wildland Fire Management

appropriations.

4. USDA Forest Service users

lacked specific training on

setting up agreements in the

Project Cost Accounting

System and in processing

billings and advance

liquidation documents.

5. USDA Forest Service should

develop and utilize monthly

reports, which are more

helpful to field units.

Target Completion

Date

TARGET

COMPLETED

TARGET

COMPLETED

December 31, 2002

TARGET

COMPLETED

FY 2003 Remediation

Plan
40

Pursuant to the requirements of the Chief Financial Officer’s Act of 1990, as amended by 

the Government Performance and Results Act, the USDA Forest Service prepared financial

statements to report the financial position and results of USDA Forest Service operations. 

The FY 2002 financial statements consist of the Consolidated Balance Sheet, Consolidated

Statement of Net Cost, Consolidated Statement of Change in Net Position, Combined

Statement of Budgetary Resources, Consolidated Statement of Financing, Required

Supplementary Stewardship Information, and Required Supplementary Information. 

The following limitations apply to the preparation of the FY 2002 financial statements:

• The USDA Forest Service prepared the financial statements to report the financial

position and results of operations of the organization, pursuant to the requirements

of 31 U.S.C. 3515 (b).

• While the agency prepared the statements from the books and records of the entity

in accordance with the formats prescribed by the Office of Management and

Budget (OMB), the statements are different from the financial reports used to

monitor and control budgetary resources that are prepared from the same books

and records.

• The statements should be read with the realization that they are for a component of

a sovereign entity. Liabilities not covered by budgetary resources cannot be

liquidated without the enactment of an appropriation. Payment of all liabilities

other than for contracts can be abrogated by the sovereign entity.

Limitations of Financial

Statements
41

Appendix A—Principal Financial Statements and Notes, FY 2002

Consolidated Balance Sheet

Consolidated Statement of Net Cost

Consolidated Statement of Changes in Net Position

Combined Statement of Budgetary Resources

Consolidated Statement of Financing

Notes to the Principal Financial Statements
42

U.S. Department of Agriculture

Forest Service

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET

As of September 30, 2002

(In Thousands)

Assets:

Intragovernmental:

Fund Balance with Treasury (Note 3) $ 2,824,948

Accounts Receivable, (Note 4) 66,110

Investments 2,040

Advances to Others 30

Total Intragovernmental 2,893,128

Cash 73

Accounts Receivable, Net (Note 4) 55,626

Inventory and Related Property, Net 22,207

General Property, Plant & Equipment, Net (Note 6) 3,890,915

Advances to Others 7,763

Total Assets (Note 2) $ 6,869,712

Liabilities:

Intragovernmental:

Accounts Payable $ 988

Other (Note 8) 545,577

Total Intragovernmental 546,565

Accounts Payable 374,537

Environmental and Disposal Liabilities 7,069

Other (Note 8) 1,287,614

Total Liabilities (Note 7) 2,215,785

Net Position:

Unexpended Appropriations 2,638,108

Cumulative Results of Operations 2,015,819

Total Net Position 4,653,927

Total Liabilities and Net Position $ 6,869,712

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
43

U.S. Department of Agriculture

Forest Service

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF NET COST

For the Year Ended September 30, 2002

(In Thousands)

Intragovernmental Gross Costs $ 679,311

Less: Intragovernmental Earned Revenues (170,095)

Intragovernmental Net Costs 509,216

Gross Costs With the Public

Grants 606,678

Indemnities 11,510

Stewardship Land Acquisition 107,593

Operating Costs 3,698,369

Depreciation Expense 300,360

Reimbursable Costs 190,093

Other 133,578

Less: Earned Revenue from the Public (152,626)

Net Costs with the Public 4,895,555

Net Cost of Operations (Notes 10 and 13) $ 5,404,771

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
44

U.S. Department of Agriculture

Forest Service

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN NET POSITION

For the Year Ended September 30, 2002

(In Thousands)

Results Unexpended

of Operations Appropriations

Beginning Balances 3,452,585 2,847,662

Prior Period Adjustments (Note 12) (1,375,243) -

Beginning Balances, as adjusted 2,077,342 2,847,662

Budgetary Financing Sources:

Appropriations Received - 1,278,935

Appropriations Transferred-in/out - (161,063)

Other Adjustments (rescissions, etc.) - 3,497,097

Appropriations Used 4,855,441 (4,824,523)

Transfers in/out without Reimbursement 320,722 -

Other Financing Sources:

Donations and Forfeitures of Property 4,280 -

Transfers in/out without Reimbursement, Net (41,332) -

Imputed Financing 188,824 -

Other 15,313 -

Total Financing Sources 5,343,248 (209,554)

Net Cost of Operations 5,404,771 -

Ending Balances 2,015,819 2,638,108

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
45

U.S. Department of Agriculture

Forest Service

COMBINED STATEMENT OF BUDGETARY RESOURCES

For the Year Ended September 30, 2002

(In Thousands)

Budgetary Resources:

Budget Authority:

Appropriations Received $ 5,095,687

Net Transfers (102,407)

Unobligated Balance:

Beginning of Period (Note 15) 1,251,351

Net Transfers, Actual 110,006

Spending Authority from Offsetting Collections:

Earned

Collected 883,972

Receivable from Federal Sources (157,139)

Change in Unfilled Customer Orders

Advance Received (42,179)

Without Advance from Federal Sources 26,379

Subtotal 711,034

Recoveries of Prior Year Obligations 68,289

Permanently not Available (18,568)

Total Budgetary Resources $ 7,115,392

Status of Budgetary Resources:

Obligations Incurred (Note 14):

Direct $ 5,217,161

Reimbursable 685,845

Subtotal 5,903,006

Unobligated Balance:

Apportioned 897,946

Exempt from Apportionment (4,817)

Unobligated Balance Not Available 319,258

Total Status of Budgetary Resources $ 7,115,392

Relationship of Obligations to Outlays:

Obligated Balance, Net, Beginning of Period (Note 15) $ 1,496,066

Obligated Balance, Net, End of Period:

Accounts Receivable (91,873)

Unfilled Customers Orders from Federal Sources (146,088)

Undelivered Orders 984,926

Accounts Payable 426,709

Outlays:

Disbursements 6,287,869

Collections (841,793)

Subtotal 5,446,076

Less: Offsetting Receipts 851,463

Net Outlays $ 4,594,613

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
46

U.S Department of Agriculture

Forest Service

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF FINANCING

For the Year Ended September 30, 2002

(In Thousands)

Resources Used to Finance Activities:

Budgetary Resources Obligated

Obligations Incurred $ 6,065,323

Less: Spending Authority from Offsetting Collections and Recoveries 797,742

Obligations Net of Offsetting Collections and Recoveries 5,267,581

Less: Offsetting Receipts 851,407

Net Obligations 4,416,174

Other Resources

Donations and Forfeitures of Property 4,280

Transfers In/Out without Reimbursement (41,332)

Imputed Financing from Costs Absorbed by Others 188,824

Other 15,313

Net Other Resources Used to Finance Activities 167,085

Total Resources Used to Finance Activities 4,583,259

Resources Used to Finance Items Not Part of the Net Cost of Operations:

Change in Budgetary Resources Obligated for Goods, 165,858

Services, and Benefits Ordered but Not Yet Provided

Resources That Fund Expenses Recognized in Prior Periods (162,916)

Budgetary Offsetting Collections and Receipts That Do Not Affect (162,259)

Net Cost of Operations

Resources that Finance the Acquisition of Assets (1,082,292)

Other Resources or Adjustments to Net Obligated Resources that 505,217

Do Not Affect Net Costs of Operations

Total Resources Used to Finance Items 

Not Part of the Net Cost of Operations (736,392)

Total Resources Used to Finance the Net Cost of Operations 5,319,651

Components of Net Cost of Operations That Will Not Require or Generate

Resources in the Current Period:

Components Requiring or Generating Resources in Future Periods:

Increase in Annual Leave Liability 6,755

Increase in Exchange Revenue Receivable from the Public (266,142)

Other 2,540

Total Components of Net Cost of Operations That Will Require or Generate

Resources in Future Periods (Note 18) (256,847)
47

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF FINANCING

(Continued)

Components Not Requiring or Generating Resources:

Depreciation and Amortization 300,360

Revaluation of Assets or Liabilities 40,804

Other 803

Total Components of Net Cost of Operations That 

Will Not Require or Generate Resources 341,967

Total Components of Net Cost of Operations That

Will Not Require or Generate Resources in the Current Period 85,120

Net Cost of Operations $ 5,404,771

The accompanying Notes are an integral part of the Financial Statements
48

Notes to the Principal Financial Statements

FY 2002 (Audited)

The USDA Forest Service was established on February 1, 1905, as an agency of the United

States, within the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), for the purpose of maintaining and

managing the Nation's forest reserves. It operates under the guidance of the Under Secretary

for Natural Resources and Environment (NRE). The USDA Forest Service policy is

implemented through nine regional offices, six research offices, one State and Private Forestry

(S&PF) area office, the Forest Products Laboratory (FPL), and the International Institute of

Tropical Forestry (IITF), with 868 administrative units functioning in 44 States, Puerto Rico,

and the Virgin Islands. 

The USDA Forest Service’s mission includes the following major segments: 

• National Forests and Grasslands—Protection and management of approximately

192 million acres of National Forest System (NFS) land, which includes 34.8

million acres of designated wilderness areas. In addition, the USDA Forest Service

partners with other nations and organizations to foster global natural resource

conservation and sustainable development of the world’s forest resources. 

• Forest and Rangeland Research—Research and development of forestry and

rangeland management practices to provide scientific and technical knowledge for

enhancing and protecting the economic productivity and environmental quality of

the Nation’s 1.6 billion acres of forests and associated rangelands. 

• State and Private Forestry—Utilization of cooperative agreements with State and

local governments, tribal governments, forest industries, and private landowners to

help protect and manage non-Federal forests and associated rangeland and

watershed areas. 

• Fire and Aviation Management (FAM)—The Fire and Aviation Management

program protects life, property, and natural resources on the 192 million acres of

NFS land, and covers an additional 20 million acres of adjacent State and private

land. 

• Working Capital Fund (WCF)—The WCF is used for the purchase or construction

of buildings and improvements, as well as for furnishing supply and equipment

services in support of USDA Forest Service programs. 

The accompanying financial statements of the USDA Forest Service include the accounts of

all funds under the USDA Forest Service’s control. 

Basis of Presentation: These financial statements were prepared to report the financial

position and results of operations and changes in net position of the USDA Forest Service, as

required by the Chief Financial Officer’s Act of 1990 and the Government Management

Reform Act of 1994. They have been prepared from the books and records of the USDA

Forest Service in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and in accordance

with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Bulletin 01-09, Form and Content of

Agency Financial Statements. The USDA Forest Service has an OMB-approved waiver, which

provides an exemption from producing comparative financial statements as part of its fiscal

year (FY) 2002 financial statements. 

Basis of Accounting: Transactions are recorded on an accrual and a budgetary basis of

accounting. Under the accrual method, revenues are recognized when earned and expenses

Note 1. Significant

Accounting Policies 

A. Reporting Entity

B. Basis of Presentation

and Accounting
49

when a liability is incurred, regardless of when cash is exchanged. Under the budgetary basis,

however, funds availability is recorded based upon legal considerations and constraints. Any

prior period adjustments are recorded in accordance with Federal Accounting Standards

Advisory Board Statements of Federal Financial Accounting Standards (SFFAS) No. 21,

Reporting Corrections of Errors and Changes in Accounting Principles. 

The U.S. Department of the Treasury processes cash receipts and disbursements on behalf of

the USDA Forest Service. Funds on deposit with Treasury are primarily special, trust, and

appropriated funds that are available to pay current liabilities and to finance authorized

purchase commitments. 

Cash consists of undeposited collections and currency for change making and petty cash. 

Payments made by the USDA Forest Service in advance of the receipt of goods and services

are recorded as advances at the time of payment and recognized as expenditures/expenses

when the related goods and services are received. Advance payments are a provision of some

contracts and cooperative agreements to facilitate procurements and joint projects with small

businesses, nonprofit organizations, and local environmental groups. For example, the USDA

Forest Service may make an advance payment to a county government under a cooperative

agreement to make repairs on a local bridge. 

This category reflects only WCF operating materials and supplies, which consist of tree seeds

for a variety of tree species and tree seedlings (nursery stock). The WCF sells these items

primarily to USDA Forest Service units, State forestry commissions, and schools. The tree

seeds and seedlings are used for reforestation. Customers are billed for items purchased; thus,

costs of providing these items are recovered. Management has established no allowance

against these inventories because losses from spoilage, obsolescence, damage, etc., are

considered immaterial. 

General Property, Plant and Equipment (PP&E) includes real and personal property used in

ordinary business operations that has a useful life of 2 years or more. Real and personal

property is recorded at cost or estimated cost. As of October 1, 2001, the USDA Forest

Service raised its capitalization thresholds for new acquisitions of real property from $5,000

to $25,000, and for internal use software from $5,000 to $100,000. Its threshold for personal

property remained at $5,000. 

Liabilities represent the amount of monies or other resources that is likely to be paid by the

USDA Forest Service as a result of a transaction or event that has occurred. The USDA Forest

Service cannot satisfy a liability, however, without an appropriation. Liabilities for which

there is no appropriation, and for which there is no certainty that an appropriation will be

enacted, are classified as unfunded liabilities. The Government, acting in its sovereign

capacity, can abrogate liabilities. Note 7, Liabilities Not Covered by Budgetary Resources,

segregates liabilities covered by budgetary resources from liabilities not covered by budgetary

resources. 

C. Fund Balance with the

U.S. Treasury and

Cash

D. Advances

E. Inventory and Related

Property 

F. General Property, Plant

and Equipment

G. Liabilities
50

The USDA Forest Service’s estimated Government–related environmental liabilities relate

principally to the future remediation of certain landfills, buildings, and other related sites in

accordance with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws. Such estimates do not consider

the effect of future inflation, new technology, laws, or regulations. 

The full value of probable and estimable amounts related to unsettled litigation and other

claims against the USDA Forest Service is recognized as a liability and expense. Expected

amounts related to litigation and other claims include amounts to be paid by the Department

of the Treasury on behalf of the USDA Forest Service from a permanent appropriation for

judgments and from other appropriations. The USDA Forest Service is a party in various

other administrative proceedings, legal actions, environmental lawsuits, and other claims

brought by or against the USDA Forest Service. In the opinion of the USDA Forest Service

management and the opinion of legal counsel, the ultimate resolution of these proceedings is

currently indeterminable. 

In accordance with Federal Government accounting guidance, the USDA Forest Service

recognizes the liability and associated expense of employee pensions and other retirement

benefits (including health care and other post-employment benefits) at the time the

employee’s services are rendered. 

Pension expenses, retirement health benefits, and related liabilities are recorded at estimated

actuarial present value of future benefits, less the estimated actuarial present value of normal

cost contributions made by, and for, covered employees. Other postemployment benefit

expenses and related liabilities are recognized when the future outflow of resources is

probable and measurable on the basis of events occurring on or before the reporting date. 

The Federal Employees’ Compensation Act (FECA) provides income and medical cost

protection to Federal civilian employees injured on the job, employees who have incurred a

work-related occupational disease, and beneficiaries of employees whose death is attributable

to a job-related injury or occupational disease. Claims incurred for benefits for the USDA

Forest Service’s employees under FECA are administered by the U.S. Department of Labor

(DOL) and are ultimately paid by the USDA. Consequently, the USDA Forest Service

recognizes a liability for this compensation that has two components: (1) an accrued liability

that represents money owed for claims paid through the current fiscal year and (2) an actuarial

liability that represents the expected liability for approved compensation cases beyond the

current fiscal year. 

Annual leave is accrued as it is earned and the accrual is reduced as leave is taken. Each year,

the balance in the accrued leave account is adjusted to reflect current pay rates. To the extent

current- or prior-year appropriations are not available to fund annual leave earned but not

taken, funding will be obtained from future financing sources. Sick leave and other types of

leave are expended as taken. 

The USDA Forest Service employees participate in either the Civil Service Retirement

System (CSRS) or the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS). On January 1, 1984,

CSRS employees were required by Congress to begin paying contributions to the Medicare

portion of Social Security. At that time, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) began

H. Environmental and

Disposal Liabilities

I. Comments and

Contingencies

J. Imputed Pension and

Other Retirement

Benefits

K. Workers’

Compensation 

Liability

L. Employee Annual, Sick,

and Other Leave

M. Retirement Plans
51

creating the administrative provisions of FERS. FERS officially became effective January 1,

1987, pursuant to Public Law 99-335. The time between January 1, 1984, and January 1,

1987, is called the “interim period.” Employees hired after December 31, 1983, are covered by

FERS and Social Security. 

For employees covered under FERS, the USDA Forest Service withholds, in addition to Social

Security, 1 percent of gross earnings. For employees covered under the CSRS, the USDA Forest

Service withholds 8.51 percent of their gross earnings. The USDA Forest Service matches the

employees’ contribution and the sum is transferred to CSRS. The USDA Forest Service does not

report CSRS assets, accumulated plan benefits, or unfunded liabilities (if any) applicable to its

employees. Reporting such amounts is the responsibility of the OPM. 

On April 1, 1987, the Federal Government initiated the Thrift Savings Plan (TSP), which is a

retirement savings and investment plan for Federal employees covered by both FERS and

CSRS. FERS employees may contribute up to 12 percent of their gross pay to the TSP. The

USDA Forest Service automatically contributes 1 percent of a FERS employee’s gross salary to

the TSP. For the first 3 percent of gross pay contributed by a FERS employee, the USDA Forest

Service will match the contribution dollar for dollar. For the next 2 percent contributed, the

USDA Forest Service will match 50 cents per dollar contributed. CSRS employees may

contribute up to 7 percent of their gross pay, but there is no matching contribution. 

The maximum amount of employee contributions to the TSP is established on a calendar year

basis. The maximum amount that FERS employees can contribute to the TSP in calendar year

2002 is the lesser of $11,000 or 12 percent of their gross pay. The maximum amount that CSRS

employees can contribute to the plan in calendar year 2002 is the lesser of $11,000 or 7 percent

of their gross pay. The sum of employee and the USDA Forest Service contributions is

transferred to the TSP, which is administered by the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board.

The USDA Forest Service is funded principally through Congressional appropriations and other

authorizations from the Budget of the United States. The USDA Forest Service receives annual,

multiyear, and no-year appropriations that are used, within statutory limits, for operating and

capital expenditures. Other funding sources are derived through reimbursements for services

performed for other Federal and non-Federal entities, sale of goods to the public, gifts from

donors, and interest on invested funds. 

Appropriations are recognized as revenues at the time the related programs or administrative

expenses are incurred. Appropriations expended for property and equipment are recognized as

expenses when an asset is consumed in operations. Other revenues are recognized when earned;

that is, when goods have been delivered or services rendered. 

In accordance with Federal Government accounting guidance, the USDA Forest Service

classifies revenue as either “exchange revenue” or “non-exchange revenue.” Exchange revenue

arises from transactions that occur when each party to the transaction sacrifices value and

receives value in return. In some cases, the USDA Forest Service is required to remit exchange

revenue receipts to Treasury. In other instances the USDA Forest Service is authorized to use all

or a portion of its exchange revenues for specific purposes. Non-exchange revenue is revenue

the Federal Government is able to demand or receive because of its sovereign powers. 

N. Revenues and Other

Financing Sources
52

The USDA Forest Service reports the full cost of products and services generated from the

consumption of resources. Full cost is the total amount of resources used to produce a product

or provide a service unless otherwise noted. In accordance with SFFAS No.7, Accounting for

Revenue and Other Financing Sources, the USDA Forest Service’s pricing policies are set to

recover full cost except where mandated by law or otherwise for the public good, such as in

the case of grazing fees. 

Total assets consist of both entity and nonentity. Nonentity assets are those assets not available

for use in the operations of the USDA Forest Service and consist primarily of amounts

recorded in the National Forest Fund account, Budget Clearing Account, and General Fund

Proprietary Receipts, such as collections of fines and penalties. 

As of September 30, 2002, total nonentity assets consist of: 

In Thousands 

Intragovernmental 

Fund Balance with Treasury $ 609,033 

Accounts Receivable 195

Total Intragovernmental 609,228 

Accounts Receivable 58,915

Total Nonentity Assets 668,143 

Total Entity Assets 6,201,569

Total Assets $ 6,869,712 

The U.S. Department of the Treasury processes cash receipts and disbursements. Funds with

the Department of the Treasury are primarily special, trust, and appropriated funds that are

available to pay current liabilities and finance authorized purchase commitments. Fund

balances with Treasury include both entity and non-entity fund balances. It is the policy of the

USDA Forest Service to record the amount of Fund Balance with Treasury, consistent with the

balances reflected according to the records of the U.S. Department of the Treasury. Fund

Balances on September 30, 2002, consisted of the following: 

In Thousands 

A. Fund Balances: 

(1) Trust Funds $ 308,076 

(2) Revolving Funds 107,817 

(3) Appropriated Funds 2,214,795 

(4) Other Fund Types 194,260 

Total $ 2,824,948

B. Status of Fund Balances with Treasury 

(1) Unobligated Balance 

(a) Available 957,845 

(b) Unavailable 83,117 

(2) Obligated Balance Not Yet Disbursed 1,203,480 

(3) Suspense, Deposit, and Other Funds 580,506 

Total $ 2,824,948 

Note 2. Nonentity

Assets

Note 3. Fund Balance

with Treasury
53

Intragovernmental accounts receivable represent amounts due under reimbursable and

cooperative agreements with Federal entities for services provided by the USDA Forest

Service. An allowance for receivables deemed uncollectible was not established for these

amounts because monies due from other Federal entities are considered fully collectible. 

Accounts receivable (Non-Federal) are composed primarily of reimbursements and refunds of

fire prevention and suppression activities. An allowance for receivables deemed uncollectible

was established for 20 percent or 80 percent, according to the age of the receivable.

Governmental accounts receivable as of September 30, 2002, were as follows: 

In Thousands

Accounts Receivable $ 197,626 

Allowance for Doubtful Accounts (142,000)

Accounts Receivable, Net $ 55,626 

Nonentity accounts receivable are composed primarily of timber harvest. An allowance for

timber-related receivables is established based on analysis of individual accounts. 

A seizure is the act of taking possession of goods in consequence of a violation of public law.

Seized property consists of monetary instruments, real property, and tangible personal property

in the actual or constructive possession of the seizing and the custodial agencies. Such property

is not legally owned by the USDA Forest Service until judicially or administratively forfeited.

Seized evidence includes cash, weapons, nonmonetary valuables, and illegal drugs. 

Pursuant to Federal Financial Accounting and Auditing Technical Release No. 4, Reporting on

Non-Valued Seized and Forfeited Property, the value of seized property with no legal market

in the United States (e.g., weapons, chemicals, drug paraphernalia, gambling devices) is not

included on the consolidated balance sheet. 

As of September 30, 2002, the USDA Forest Service seized property included: 

Seized Property Category In Thousands 

Financial & Other Monetary Instruments (Cash) $ 28 

Personal Property (20 Items) 131 

Non-Valued Items (See Below*) 

Total $ 159 

* Nonvalued items are further detailed below: 

The USDA Forest Service has custody of illegal drugs and weapons taken as evidence for

legal proceedings. In accordance with Federal Financial Accounting and Auditing Technical

Release No. 4, Reporting on Non-Valued Seized and Forfeited Property, the USDA Forest

Service reported the total amount of seized drugs below by quantity (kilograms) only. 

Note 4. Accounts

Receivable

Note 5. Forfeited and

Seized Property
54

Illegal drugs and weapons have no salable value to the Federal Government and are destroyed

upon resolution of legal proceedings. Seized property on September 30, 2002, included: 

Evidence (kg) 

Cocaine 0.06566 

Marijuana 5,362.682 

Cannabis Cultivation—Plant 17,427 (Plants) 

Methamphetamine 0.61919 

Mushrooms 0.089 

Weapons (firearms) 546 Items 

Depreciation of General Property, Plant and Equipment for the USDA Forest Service is

recorded on the straight-line method based on the useful lives listed below. As of September

30, 2002, the USDA Forest Service’s PP&E consists of the following: 

In Thousands

Useful Life Accumulated 

Property Class (Years) Cost Depreciation Book Value 

Personal Property 5-20 $ 998,190 $(607,552) $ 390,638 

Real Property 10-50 7,206,355 (3,706,078) 3,500,277 

Total $ 8,204,545 $(4,313,630) $3,890,915 

Liabilities not covered by budgetary resources as of September 30, 2002, consist of the

following: 

In Thousands

Intragovernmental 

Judgment Fund $ 189,300 

FECA 63,910

Governmental 

Actuarial FECA 365,607 

Leave 170,098 

Contingent Liabilities 37,400 

Payment to States 105,073 

Environmental and Disposal Liabilities 7,069 

Total Liabilities Not Covered by Budgetary Resources 938,457

Total Liabilities Covered by Budgetary Resources 1,277,328 

Total Liabilities $ 2,215,785 

Note 6. General Property,

Plant and Equipment,

Net 

Note 7. Liabilities Not

Covered by Budgetary

Resources
55

The following table segregates Other Liabilities between Covered and Not Covered by

Budgetary Resources and between Intragovernmental and Governmental as of September 30,

2002. 

In Thousands 

Other Liabilities Covered by Budgetary Resources 

Noncurrent Current Total 

Intragovernmental 

Employer Contributions & Payroll Tax $ - $ 6,718 $ 6,718

Other Accrued Liabilities - 58,777 58,777

Advances from Others - 26,101 26,101

Trust and Deposit Liabilities - 181,076 181,076

Custodial Liability - 23,355 23,355

Other Liabilities - (3,660) -3,660

Total Intragovernmental $ - $ 292,367 $ 292,367 

Noncurrent Current Total 

Other Accrued Liabilities $ - $ 477,170 $ 477,170

Advances from Others - 31,443 31,443

Trust and Deposit Liabilities - 23,579 23,579

Purchaser Road Credits - 42,024 42,024

Custodial Liability - 31,138 31,138

Other Liabilities - 4,082 4,082

Total Governmental $ - $ 609,436 $ 609,436 

Other Liabilities Not Covered by Budgetary Resources

Noncurrent Current Total 

Intragovernmental 

Treasury Judgment Fund $ 189,300 $ - $ 189,300

Unfunded FECA 36,668 27,242 63,910

Total Intragovernmental $ 225,968 $ 27,242 $ 253,210 

Noncurrent Current Total 

Actuarial FECA $ 365,607 $ - $ 365,607

Payments to States 105,073 - 105,073

Unfunded Annual Leave 9,098 161,000 170,098

Contingent Liabilities 37,400 - 37,400

Total Governmental 517,178 161,000 678,178

Total Other Liabilities $ 743,146 $ 1,090,045 $ 1,833,191 

Note 8. Other Liabilities
56

As of September 30, 2002, the USDA Forest Service’s major components of other liabilities

are as follows: 

Advances from Others: Advances from Others consist of monies on deposit for

cooperative work project agreements with the public. 

Trust and Deposit Liabilities: Trust and Deposit Liabilities, Governmental, consist

primarily of cash prepayments and deposits from timber purchasers before the actual harvest

of timber. The remaining Trust and Deposit Liabilities include liabilities that have been

temporarily included in suspense accounts. 

Custodial Liability: Custodial Liability consists of amounts held in special receipt accounts

that belong to non-USDA Forest Service entities. (See Note 20 for more on Custodial

Liability.) 

Purchaser Road Credits: Purchaser Road Credits (PRCs) are liabilities arising under

timber sales contracts issued through April 1999 that are still in effect. Under the terms of

certain timber sales contracts, timber purchasers are allowed to construct roads to gain access

to timber. If the USDA Forest Service has a use for the roads upon contract completion, the

timber purchaser is given a credit, referred to as a PRC, for the value of the roads, to the

extent their service lives exceed the contract’s duration. Effective April 1999, in accordance

with 16 U.S.C. § 535a, such PRCs are prohibited on newly issued timber contracts. 

The amount of the PRC granted to contractors in connection with pre-April 1999 contracts is

based on a USDA Forest Service engineering estimate made at the time of the timber sale. A

PRC is established when the USDA Forest Service accepts the road. At that time, an asset (a

component of Property, Plant and Equipment) and a liability (Unearned Revenue) are recorded

for the amount of the PRC established. 

On applicable contracts, the timber purchaser can use the PRC as an offset to payments on

timber harvested. As the PRC is used in lieu of cash in paying for timber harvested, the

amount in Unearned Revenue is reduced and current year revenue is recognized. If all PRCs

have not been applied when the contract is closed, they are canceled and the amounts are

removed from the Unearned Revenue account. PRCs that are not applied against the timber

sale contract price are, in effect, donated to the Federal Government. 

Treasury Judgment Fund: The USDA Forest Service pays small tort claims out of its own

funds. Other legal actions exceeding $2,500, however, fall under the Federal Tort Claims Act.

These are paid from the Claims, Judgments, and Relief Acts Fund (Judgment Fund)

maintained by the Department of the Treasury. Absent a specific statutory requirement, the

USDA Forest Service is not required to record a liability or reimburse the Judgment Fund for

payments for tort claims made on its behalf. These payments, however, are recognized as an

expense and an imputed financing source in the Statement of Net Cost and Statement of

Change in Net Position. Payments reported from torts and court of claims for FY 2002

amounted to $9,184 thousand. 
57

The Contract Dispute Resolution Act (CDRA) governs litigation arising from contract disputes

(such as from timber sales contracts). Subsection 612(c) provides that CDRA payments made

on behalf of Federal agencies by the Judgment Fund shall be reimbursed to the Fund.

Consequently, the debtor Federal agency is required to record a payable to the Judgment Fund.

Those amounts remain a receivable on Financial Management Service’s (Department of the

Treasury) books and a payable on the debtor agency’s books until reimbursement to the Fund

is made by the agency. On September 30, 2002, the Department of the Treasury indicated that

the USDA Forest Service is liable for $189,300 thousand. 

Federal Employees’ Compensation Act Liabilities: Liabilities under the Federal

Employees’ Compensation Act (FECA) are incurred as a result of workers’ compensation

benefits that have accrued to employees, but have not yet been paid by the USDA Forest

Service. Workers’ compensation benefits include the current and expected future liability for

death, disability, medical, and other approved costs. The DOL actuarially determines the

expected future liability for the USDA as a whole, including the USDA Forest Service. The

USDA Forest Service is billed annually as its claims are paid by the DOL. Payment to the

DOL is deferred for 2 years so that the bills may be funded through the budget. Payments to

the DOL are recognized as an expense in the Statement of Net Cost. The amounts of unpaid

FECA billings constitute the accrued FECA payable. 

The total components of accrued FECA payable as of September 30, 2002, are as follows: 

In Thousands

Not Covered by Budgetary Resources, Intragovernmental

Liability for FECA $63,910 

Not Covered by Budgetary Resources, Governmental

Expected Future Liability for FECA 365,607 

Total $429,517 

Pending Litigation and Unasserted Claims (Contingencies): As of September 30,

2002, the USDA Forest Service has five legal actions pending; based on information provided

by legal counsel, management believes an adverse decision is probable. The estimated loss is

$37,400 thousand. 

The USDA Forest Service has other pending legal actions for which the likelihood of adverse

outcomes is reasonably possible. The potential loss related to these actions totals approximately

$1,660,000 thousand. 
58

The USDA Forest Service enters into leasing agreements through the General Services

Administration (GSA) and through leasing authority delegated by GSA to enter into leases 

of general facilities (buildings and office space), equipment and land. Leases may include

renewal options for periods of 1 or more years. Most leases are cancelable upon certain

funding conditions. The future USDA Forest Service operating lease agreement payments 

as of September 30, 2002, are as follows: 

Asset Category

(In Thousands)

Fiscal Year Personal Property Real Property Totals 

FY 2003 $ 1,112 $ 47,686 $ 48,798

FY 2004 698 43,966 44,664

FY 2005 395 41,334 41,729

FY 2006 174 38,365 38,539

FY 2007 38 35,869 35,907

After FY 2007 14 237,177 237,191 

Total $ 2,431 $ 444,397 $ 446,828 

The USDA Forest Service reflects costs through five primary responsibility segments:

National Forests and Grasslands, Forest and Rangeland Research, State and Private Forestry,

Fire and Aviation Management, and the Working Capital Fund. 

The following table illustrates program costs by segments. 

Note 9. Lease Liabilities

Note 10. Program Costs

by Segment 
59

USDA Forest Service 

Program Costs by Segment 

For the Year Ended September 30, 2002 

(In Thousands) 

Intragovernmental Gross Costs $ 484,430 $ 15,080 $ 13,396 $ 385,596 $ (1,056) $ 897,446 $(218,135) Less: Intragovernmental Earned Revenue (134,542) (20,229) (5,794) (9,530) (218,135) (388,230) 218,135 Intragovernmental Net Costs 349,888 (5,149) $ 7,602 376,066 (219,191) 509,216 - Gross Costs with the Public: 

Grants 376,213 3,642 216,899 9,897 27 606,678 - Indemnities 10,151 253 194 893 19 11,510 - Stewardship Land Acquisition 107,593 - - - - 107,593 - Operating Costs 1,760,486 206,286 51,748 1,608,200 71,649 3,698,369 - Depreciation Expense 252,033 2,084 423 3,285 42,535 300,360 - Reimbursable Costs 102,322 22,293 2,683 62,795 - 190,093 - Other 99,935 (66) 8 5,286 29,415 133,578 - 

Less: Earned Revenues from the Public (90,055) (2,636) (99) (59,836) - (152,626) - Net Costs with the Public 2,617,678 231,856 271,856 1,630,520 143,645 4,895,555 - Net Cost of Operations $ 2,967,566 $ 226,707 $ 279,458 $ 2,006,586 $ (75,546) $ 5,404,771 $ - 

NationalForests andGrasslands

Forest andRangelandResearch 

State andPrivateForestry

Fire andAviationManagement

WorkingCapitalFund

Total Working

CapitalFundElimination
60

Stewardship assets acquired through purchase in FY 2002 amounted to $107,592 thousand

and consisted of land, easements, and rights-of-way. Stewardship land is all land that is not

general-purpose land; i.e., land that does not have a general-purpose building on it.

Stewardship land costs include purchase cost and any salary costs, survey costs, title costs,

closing costs, restoration costs, or any other expenses necessary to prepare the land for its

intended use. 

In FY 2002, the USDA Forest Service discovered and corrected accounting errors that

occurred in previous fiscal years. A summary of the adjustments follows: 

In Thousands

Cumulative Results 

of Operations 

Beginning Balance, as Previously Stated $ 3,452,585 

Corrections Related to: 

General PP&E (915,061) 

Accounts Payable (312,121) 

Net Position (305,541) 

Accounts Receivable (76,347) 

Other 233,827 

Total Prior Period Adjustments (1,375,243) 

Beginning Balance, as Restated $ 2,077,342 

The breakdown of USDA Forest Service’s net costs by Budget Functional Classification is as follows: 

Gross Cost and Earned Revenue by Budget Functional Classification:

In Thousands 

Budget 

Functional 

Classification Gross Cost Earned Revenue Net Cost 

300 Natural Resources $ 5,226,684 $ 345,512 $ 4,881,172 

and Environment

350 Agriculture 349 191 158 

450 Community and 249 - 249 

Regional Development

800 General Government 500,210 (22,982) 523,192 

Total $ 5,727,492 $ 322,721 $ 5,404,771 

Intragovernmental Total Cost and Earned Revenue by 

Budget Functional Classification:

In Thousands 

Budget Functional 

Classification Gross Cost Earned Revenue Net Cost 

300 Natural Resources $ 679,185 $ 170,092 $ 509,093 

and Environment

350 Agriculture 82 3 79 

800 General Government 44 - 44 

Total $ 679,311 $ 170,095 $ 509,216

Note 11. Cost of

Stewardship

PP&E 

Note 12. Prior Period

Adjustments 

Note 13. Gross Cost and

Earned Revenue by

Budget Functional

Classification 
61

Note 16. Permanent

Indefinite

Appropriations 

The following permanent indefinite appropriations exist for the purposes shown, with funds

available until expended. 

APPROPRIATION NAME PURPOSE 

Brush Disposal Deposits from timber purchasers are used

for disposal of brush and other debris from

cutting operations on timber sale areas. 

Licensee Programs, Smokey Bear Royalty income from character licensing is

and Woodsy Owl used to promote forest fire prevention and

environmental quality. 

The OMB usually distributes budgetary resources in an account or fund by specific time periods, activities, projects, objects, or a combination of these categories. Apportionments by fiscal quarters are classified as Category A apportionments. All other apportionments are classified as Category B apportionments. USDA Forest Service apportionments are not made on a

quarterly basis; therefore, they are classified as Category B apportionments. 

Reporting Requirements for Transfer Appropriation Accounts – OMB Bulletin No. 01-09,

Section 9.36, prescribes that the parent should report the activity in its financial statement,

unless the allocation is material to the child’s financial statements. If the allocation transfer 

is material to the child’s financial statements, the child should report the activity relating to

the allocation in all of its financial statements, except the Statement of Budgetary Resources.

The parent should continue to report the appropriation and the related budgetary activity in 

its Statement of Budgetary Resources. It is the responsibility of the parent to ensure that the

reporting to Treasury, through FACTS I, is consistent with the presentation in the financial

statements. The USDA Forest Service is required to report two treasury symbols as “child”:

the Transfer Appropriation accounts related to the DOL, Job Corps Civilian Conservation, 

and the Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Trust Fund. Job Corps is a DOL

residential training program for unemployed and underemployed young people, financed by

the DOL, conducted on campuses on national forest land, and the supervised by USDA Forest

Service employees. Based on the above guidance, both accounts were excluded from the

Statement of Budgetary Resources in FY 2002, resulting in adjusted beginning balances. 

The impact on the Statement of Budgetary Resources is as follows: 

In Thousands 

Unobligated Balance, Beginning of Period: 

FY 2001 Ending Balance Adjustment FY 2002 Beginning Balance 

$ 1,342,828 (91,477) 1,251,351 

Obligated Balance, Net, Beginning of Period: 

FY 2001 Ending Balance Adjustment FY 2002 Beginning Balance 

$ 1,540,125 (44,059) 1,496,066 

Note 14. Apportionment

Categories of

Obligations Incurred 

Note 15. Adjustments to

Beginning Balance of

Budgetary Resources 
62

APPROPRIATION NAME PURPOSE 

Forestlands Restoration and Improvements Forfeitures of cash and surety bonds are

used by USDA Forest Service to complete

improvement or rehabilitation work left

unfinished by permittees or timber

purchasers. 

Recreation Fee Collection Costs Up to 15 percent of recreation fee revenue

may be used to cover fee collection costs. 

Recreation Fee Demonstration Program Recreation fee revenue is used for

operation, maintenance, and improvements

of recreation areas and related habitat. 

Timber Roads—Purchaser Election Program Deposits from timber purchasers are used

by the USDA Forest Service for roads and

bridges required for timber sales. 

Timber Salvage Sales Income from the sale of damaged timber is

used to design, engineer, and supervise the

preparation of future salvage sales. 

Timber Sale Pipeline Restoration Fund Income from the sale of healthy timber is

used to prepare more timber sales and

reduce the backlog of recreation projects. 

Road and Trails for States 10 percent of the national forest receipts

are used for roads and trails within the

national forests in the States where the

receipts were collected. 

Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie Rental Fees Income from user fees and sales is used for

the costs of restoration, prairie

improvement, and administration. 

Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie Income from user fees and sales is used 

Restoration Fund for the costs of restoration, the visitor

center, and facilities construction. 

Operation and Maintenance of Quarters Rental fees for Government-owned housing

are used to maintain those residences. 

Land Between the Lakes Management Fund Income from recreation user fees is used

for management costs, including salaries

and expenses. 

Payment to Minnesota Income from national forests in Minnesota

is used for an annual payment to benefit the

Boundary Waters Canoe Area. 

Payments to Counties— Income from national grasslands is used for 

National Grasslands Fund an annual payment to counties where the

grasslands are located. 

Payments to States—National Forest Fund Income from national forests is used to

partially fund payments to States where the

forests are located. 
63

Note 17. Explanation of

Differences Between the

Statement of Budgetary

Resources and the

Budget of the United

States Government 

The Budget of the United States Government with actual numbers for the fiscal year was not

published at the time of the audit. It was published in the spring of 2003. Copies may be

obtained from the Government Printing Office. 

The USDA Forest Service’s FY 2002 difference between the liabilities not covered by

budgetary resources and the change in components requiring or generating resources in future

periods results from liabilities not covered by budgetary resources being recorded in the

current year to the Statement of Net Cost; while liabilities not covered by budgetary resources

are cumulative over fiscal years. The components of the Net Cost of Operations that will

require or generate resources in the future are as follows: 

Increase in Annual Leave Liability $ 6,755 

Increase in Exchange Revenue Receivable from the Public (266,142)

Other (FECA Liability) 2,540

Total Components of Net Cost of Operations 

That Will Require or Generate Resources in the Current Period $ (256,847) 

The USDA Forest Service has the following routine transfers without reimbursement: 

Transfers In 

Trading Partner Account Title Purpose

Department of Labor Job Corps Civilian Provide training for 

Conservation underemployed youths 

Department of Transportation Federal Highway Trust Fund Maintenance and upkeep

of Federal highway traversing national forest

lands

Note 18. Explanation of

the Relationship

Between Liabilities Not

Covered by Budgetary

Resources and the

Change in Components

Requiring or Generating

Resources in Future

Periods. 

Note 19. Description Of

Transfers That Appears

As A Reconciling Item

On The Statement Of

Financing 
64

The USDA Forest Service, as of September 30, 2002, had collected the following funds, of

which portions are due to States and counties. The largest component of custodial collections

comes from the sale of products and services from the national forests and grasslands. These

amounts payable are included in Other Liabilities as Custodial Liability: 

In Thousands

Beginning Balance $ 280,469 

Revenue Activity: 

Sources of Collections: 

National Forest Fund Receipts 21,648 

Payments and Receipts, National Grasslands 11,253 

Miscellaneous 3,514 

Total Cash Collections 36,415 

Total Custodial Revenue and Beginning Balance 316,884

Disposition of Collections: 

Transferred to Others: 

States and Counties (Payments to States) (306,799) 

(Increase)/Decrease in Amounts Yet to Be Transferred (10,085) 

Total Disposition (316,884) 

Net Custodial Activity $ - 

The USDA Forest Service recognizes the following funds as dedicated collections. These funds are

used as dedicated for the benefit of enhancing and maintaining NFS lands, including reforestation.

Donations are handled on a cash basis and all others are accounted for on the accrual basis. 

Trust Funds

Note 20. Incidental

Custodial Collections 

Note 21. Dedicated

Collections 

TREASURY

SYMBOL

12X8028 

12X8029 

12X8034 

12X8039 

12X8046 

1269X8083 

12X8203

FUND/NAME 

Cooperative Work 

Mount Saint Helens

Highway 

Gifts, Donations, and

Bequests for Forest and

Rangeland Research

Land Between the

Lakes Trust Fund 

Reforestation Trust

Fund 

Federal Aid to

Highways 

Gifts and Bequests 

PURPOSE 

Advances from cooperators 

Repair highways 

Segregate donations for

research 

Donations to National

Recreation Area 

Reforestation 

Maintain Federal highways in

USDA Forest Service land 

Segregate general donations 

AUTHORITY

16 U.S.C.

498,72(c),72a,

76b,81 

23 U.S.C.

203,207 

16 U.S.C.

1643b 

112 Stat.

2681-317 

16 U.S.C.

1606a 

31 U.S.C.

3515 

7 U.S.C. 2269 
65

TREASURY

SYMBOL

12X5004

12X5010

12X5072

12X5201

12X5202 

12X5203

12X5204 

12X5206

12X5207

12X5212 

12X5213 

12X5214 

12X5215 

12X5216 

12X5217 

12X5219 

12X5220 

AUTHORITY

96 Stat. 1983 

107 Stat. 1610 

101 Stat. 1330-265 

16 U.S.C. 500 

16 U.S.C. 472(I)(2) 

16 U.S.C. 501 

16 U.S.C. 472(a) 

16 U.S.C. 490 

16 U.S.C. 580h 

94 Stat. 3372 

16 U.S.C. 577g,

577g-1 

31 U.S.C. 488a 

16 U.S.C. 579c 

96 Stat. 1984; 16

U.S.C. 484a 

16 U.S.C. 539d,

539c 

5 U.S.C. 5911 

102 Stat. 1809 

FUND/NAME

Land Acquisition

Recreation Fees 

Fees, Operations,

and Maintenance of

Recreation Facilities 

Payments to States,

National Forest Fund 

Timber Roads,

Purchaser Election 

Roads and Trails for

States, National

Forest Fund 

Timber Salvage Sales 

Expenses, Brush

Disposal 

Range Betterment

Construction of

Facilities or Land

Acquisition

Payment to Minnesota

(Cook, Lake, and

Saint Louis Counties)

from the National

Forest Fund 

Licensee Program 

Restoration of Forest

Lands and

Improvements

Acquisition of Lands

to Complete Land

Exchanges 

Tongass Timber

Supply Fund

Operation and

Maintenance of

Quarters

Resource

Management Timber

Receipts

PURPOSE

Watershed management 

Collection costs 

Maintain recreational

facilities 

Revenue sharing grant 

Timber sale area purchasers’ roads 

Recreation road and trail

improvements 

Prepare salvage sale

and reforest after sale 

Timber operators’

amounts for brush 

disposal 

Improvements to grazing

lands 

Inactive 

Revenue sharing grant 

Smokey Bear and

Woodsy Owl licensing

royalties used for fire

prevention 

Environmental restoration 

Land exchange and

acquisition for forest

management purposes 

Management of timber

supply in Alaska 

Government-owned

quarters rents finance

maintenance 

Accelerate management

practices of natural

resources 

Special Funds
66

TREASURY

SYMBOL

12X5223 

12X5224 

12X5225 

12X5264 

12X5268 

12X5277 

12X5278 

12X5360 

12X5361 

12X5363 

12X5462 

12X5896

FUND/NAME

Quinault Special

Management Area 

Strawberry Valley 

Land Transfer 

Pacific Yew

Timber Sales Pipeline

Restoration Fund 

Recreation Fee

Demonstration

Program 

Midewin 

National Prairie Rental

Fee Account 

Midewin National

Tallgrass Prairie

Restoration Fund 

Land Between the

Lakes Management

Fund 

Administrative Rightsof-Way and Other

Land Uses Fund 

Valles Caldera Fund 

Hardwood Technology

Transfer and Applied

Research Fund 

Payments to Counties,

National Grasslands

PURPOSE

Management of special

Quinault tribal area 

Transfer of specific land

tract 

Management of Pacific

Yew species, natural

source of Taxol pharmaceuticals 

Prepare timber sales

and reduce the backlog

of recreation projects 

Maintenance of recreation areas, support of

recreation program at

demonstration sites 

Maintenance of Midewin 

Restoration of Midewin 

Maintenance of national

recreation area 

Maintenance of 

commercial filming sites 

Maintenance of Valles

Caldera Preserve, NM 

Support and stimulation

of hardwood forestry

practices 

Revenue-sharing grant

Special Funds

AUTHORITY

102 Stat. 3328 

102 Stat. 2828;

2829 

106 Stat. 862 

110 Stat. 1321-206

Sec. 327 

16 U.S.C. 4601-6a 

110 Stat. 602 

110 Stat. 602 

112 Stat. 2681-315 

113 Stat. 1501A196, Sec. 331 

114 Stat. 605 

112 Stat. 297-298,

Sec. 343(e) 

7 U.S.C. 1012
67

Appendix B—U.S. Department of Agriculture Office of Inspector

General Financial and IT Operations Audit Report
68
69

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Washington, D.C. 20250

Date: 1/9/03

REPLY TO

ATTN OF: 08401-1-FM

SUBJECT: Audit of Fiscal Year 2002 Forest Service Financial Statements

TO: Dale Bosworth

Chief

Forest Service

ATTN: Mary Sally Matiella

Chief Financial Officer

Forest Service

This report presents the auditor’s opinion on the Forest Service’s Principal financial statements

for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2002. The report also includes an assessment of Forest

Service’s internal control structure and compliance with laws and regulations.

KPMG Peat Marwick LLP (KPMG), an independent certified public accounting firm, conducted

the audit. We monitored the progress of the audit at all key points, reviewed the working papers

and performed other procedures, as we deemed necessary. We determined the audit was 

conducted in accordance with auditing standards generally accented in the United States of

America, “Government Auditing Standards” (issued by the Comptroller General of the United

States), and the Office of Management and Budget Bulletin No. 01-02, “Audit Requirements for

Federal Financial Statements.”

It is the opinion of KPMG that the financial statements present fairly, in all material aspects, the

Forest Service’s financial position as of September 30, 2002, and its net costs, changes in net

position, budgetary resources, and reconciliation of net cost to budgetary obligations for the year

then ended, in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. KPMG’s report on

internal controls contains six material internal control weaknesses. The material internal control

weaknesses included the need for improved controls over:

• The reconciliation and accountability of Fund Balance with Treasury;

• accurate recording of property transactions;

• selected automated application programs;
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97

Appendix C—Required Supplementary Information

Deferred Maintenance

Statement of Budgetary Resources by Segment

Intragovernmental Amounts
98 See Independent Auditor’s Report 

Deferred maintenance is maintenance that was scheduled to be performed and was delayed

until a future period. Deferred maintenance represents a cost that the Government has elected

not to fund, and therefore, the costs are not reflected in the financial statements. Maintenance

is defined to include preventative maintenance, normal repairs, replacement of parts and

structural components, and other activities needed to preserve the asset so that it continues to

provide acceptable service and achieve its expected life. It excludes activities aimed at

expanding the capacity of an asset or otherwise upgrading it to service needs different from,

or significantly greater than, those originally intended. Deferred maintenance is reported for

general Property, Plant and Equipment (PP&E), stewardship assets, and heritage assets. It is

also reported separately for critical and noncritical amounts of maintenance needed to return

each class of asset to its acceptable operating condition. 

As of September 30, 2002, Deferred Maintenance Totals by Asset Class

$ In Thousands 

Asset Class Overall Cost to Return Critical Noncritical

Condition (1) to Acceptable Maintenance (2) Maintenance

Condition (3) 

Buildings and 

Administration 

Facilities Varies $ 518,153 $ 189,342 $ 328,811

Dams Varies 29,975 9,438 20,536

Heritage Varies 73,187 42,090 31,097

Range Improvements Varies 491,062 490,899 163

Recreation Facilitiesa/ Varies 291,071 99,224 191,847

Roads and Bridges Varies 4,954,964 1,161,371 3,793,594

Trailsa/ Varies 137,888 51,316 86,573

Wildlife, fish, threatened 

& endangered species Varies 4,287 3,017 1,270

Totalsb/ $ 6,500,586 $ 2,046,697 $ 4,453,890 

Total USDA Forest Service “system” road mileage is 382,300 miles as of September 30, 2002. 

a

The USDA Forest Service used the Fiscal Year (FY) 2001 Deferred Maintenance values for

General Forest Area under the recreation facilities component and for trails under the trails

component. These components were in a computer application transition at the time of

collection and the process for collecting data was not operational. 

b

Overall agency indirect cost of managing the program is 19 percent (not included in the

figures above). 

(1)Overall Condition: Condition of major classes of property range from poor to good

depending on location, age, and type of property. There is currently no comprehensive

national assessment of USDA Forest Service property. The current deferred maintenance

estimates were based on statistical and random sampling. The USDA Forest Service is

working on a long-range plan to make condition assessments on all major classes of property. 

(2)Critical Maintenance: A requirement that addresses a serious threat to public health or

safety, a natural resource, or the ability to carry out the mission of the organization. 

(3)Noncritical Maintenance: A requirement that addresses potential risk to the public or

employee safety or health (e.g., compliance with codes, standards, or regulations). Addresses

potential adverse consequences to natural resources or mission accomplishment. 

Overview 

Deferred Maintenance 
99

See Independent Auditor’s Report 

The USDA Forest Service uses condition surveys to estimate deferred maintenance on all

major classes of PP&E. There is no deferred maintenance for fleet vehicles and computers

that are managed through the agency’s working capital fund. Each fleet vehicle is maintained

according to schedule. The cost of maintaining the remaining classes of equipment is

expensed. 

Condition of Administrative Facilities: The condition of administrative facilities is

summarized by the following: 

• 22 percent of buildings are obsolete, over 50 years old, 

• 27 percent of buildings are in poor condition needing major alterations and

renovations, 

• 24 percent of buildings are in fair condition needing minor alterations and

renovations, and 

• 27 percent of buildings are in good condition needing only routine maintenance and

repairs. 

Condition of Dams: The overall condition of dams is below acceptable. The condition of a

dam is acceptable when the dam meets current design standards and does not have any

deficiencies that threaten the safety of the structure or public, or are needed to restore

functional use, correct unsightly conditions, or prevent more costly repairs. 

Condition of General Property, Plant and Equipment: The standards for acceptable

operating condition for various classes of general PP&E, stewardship and heritage assets are

as follows: 

• Buildings: Comply with the National Life Safety Code, the Forest Service Health and

Safety Handbook, and the Occupational Safety Health Administration as determined by

condition surveys. 

• Dams: Managed according to Forest Service Manual (FSH) 7500, Water Storage and

Transmission, and Forest Service Handbook (FSH) 7509.11, Dams Management, as

determined by condition surveys. 

• Heritage Assets: These assets include archaeological sites that require determinations of

National Register of Historic Places status, National Historic Landmarks, and significant

historic properties. Some heritage assets may have historical significance, but their

primary function within the agency is as visitation or recreation sites and, therefore, may

not fall under the management responsibility of the heritage program. 

• Range Structures: The condition assessment was based on: 1) a determination by

knowledgeable range specialists or other district personnel of whether or not the structure

would perform the originally intended function, and 2) a determination through the use of

a protocol system to assess conditions based on age. A long-range methodology is used to

gather this data. 

• Developed Recreation Sites: This category that includes campgrounds, trailheads,

trails, wastewater facilities, interpretive facilities, and visitor centers. All developed sites

are managed in accordance with Federal laws and regulations (CFR 36). Detailed

management guidelines are contained in FSM 2330, Publicly Managed Recreation

Opportunities and regional and forest level user guides. Standards of quality for developed

recreation sites were developed under the meaningful measures system and established for

the following categories: health and cleanliness, settings, safety and security, responsiveness, and the condition of facility. 
100 See Independent Auditor’s Report 

• Roads and Bridges: Conditions of the NFS road system are measured by various

standards that include applicable regulations of the Highway Safety Act developed by the

Federal Highway Administration, best management practices for road construction and

maintenance developed by the Environmental Protection Agency and States to implement

the nonpoint source provisions of the Clean Water Act, road management objectives

developed through the forest planning process prescribed by the National Forest

Management Act, and the requirements of Forest Service manuals and handbooks. 

• Trails: Trails are managed according to Federal law and regulations (CFR 36). More

specific direction is contained in FSM 2350, Trail, River, and Similar Recreation

Opportunities and the Forest Service Trails Management Handbook (FSH 2309.18). 

• Wildlife, Fish, and Threatened and Endangered Species Structure: Field biologists

at the forest used their professional judgment to determine deferred maintenance. Deferred

maintenance was considered as upkeep that had not occurred on a regular basis. The

amount was considered critical if resource damage or species endangerment would likely

occur if maintenance was deferred much longer. 
101

See Independent Auditor’s Report 

U. S. Department of Agriculture

Forest Service

Combined Statement of Budgetary Resources by Responsibility Segment

For the Year Ended September 30, 2002

(In Thousands)

Budgetary Resources:

Budget Authority:

Appropriations Received $ 2,727,573 $ 241,368 $ 292,250 $ - $ 1,834

Borrowing Authority - - - - Contract Authority - - - - Net Transfers 36,485 (16) 5,524 - (144,4Other - - - - 

Unobligated Balance: 

Beginning of Period (Note 15) 1,022,324 76,605 32,933 23,221 96Net Transfers, Actual 6 - - - 110Anticipated Transfers Balances - - - - 

Spending Authority from Offsetting Collections: 

Earned 

Collected 150,080 23,290 7,782 228,439 474Receivable from Federal Sources (55,902) (82,528) (7,544) (2,184) (8,9

Change in Unfilled Customers’ Orders 

Advance Received (32,219) 3,987 2,687 26 (16,Without Advance from Federal Sources 9,930 14,852 (370) - 1

Anticipated for the Rest of Year, Without Advances - - - - Transfers from Trust Funds - - - - Subtotal 71,890 (40,399) 2,555 26,281 450

Recoveries of Prior Year Obligations 37,880 2,255 418 8,160 19Temporarily not Available Pursuant to Public Law - - - - Permanently not Available (11,747) (2,013) (663) - (4,Total Budgetary Resources $ 3,884,412 $ 277,800 $ 333,017 $ 257,662 $ 2,362

Fire and AviationManageme

WorkingCapitalFund

NationalForests andGrasslands

Forest andRangelandResearch

State andPrivateForestry
102

See Independent Auditor’s Report 

U. S. Department of Agriculture

Forest Service

Combined Statement of Budgetary Resources by Responsibility Segment

For the Year Ended September 30, 2002

(In Thousands)

Status of Budgetary Resources:

Obligations Incurred (Note 14) $ 3,057,093 $ 279,869 $ 285,613 $ 161,695 $ 2,118Unobligated Balance:

Apportioned 657,232 14,675 51,213 (163,160) 337Exempt from Apportionment (4,817) - - - Other Available - - - - 

Unobligated Balance Available 174,904 (16,744) (3,809) 259,126 (94,Total Status of Budgetary Resources 3,884,412 277,800 333,017 257,662 2,362

Relationship of Obligations to Outlays:

Obligated Balance, Net, Beginning of Period (Note 15) 776,562 37,858 375,413 129,445 176Obligated Balance Transferred, Net - - - - Obligated Balance, Net, End of Period:

Accounts R eceivable (14,545) 38,349 3,509 (3,953) (115,Unfilled Customers Orders from Federal Sources (98,738) (41,114) (1,510) - (4,7Undelivered Orders 307,360 83,678 355,475 16,397 222Accounts Payable 311,170 24,842 (11,760) 19,271 83

Outlays:

Disbursements 3,336,500 277,394 322,808 253,449 2,097Collections (117,862) (27,277) (10,468) (228,465) (457,7Subtotal 3,218,638 250,117 312,339 24,984 1,639

Less: Offsetting Receipts 534,067 23,246 6,293 218,409 69Net Outlays $ 2,684,571 $ 226,871 $ 306,046 $ (193,425) $ 1,570

Fire and AviationManagem

WorkingCapitalFund

NationalForests andGrasslands

Forest andRangelandResearch

State andPrivateForestry
See Independent Auditor’s Report 103
104 See Independent Auditor’s Report 
See Independent Auditor’s Report 105
106 See Independent Auditor’s Report 
See Independent Auditor’s Report 107
108 See Independent Auditor’s Report 
See Independent Auditor’s Report 109
110 See Independent Auditor’s Report 
See Independent Auditor’s Report 111
112 See Independent Auditor’s Report 
See Independent Auditor’s Report 113
114 See Independent Auditor’s Report 
115

Appendix D—Required Supplementary Stewardship Information

Stewardship Property, Plant and Equipment

Stewardship Investments
116 See Independent Auditor’s Report 

The Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board, Statement of Recommended Accounting

Standards No. 8, provides the following definitions: 

• Stewardship Assets—Property owned by the Federal Government that physically

resembles Property, Plant and Equipment, but differs in that the value may be indeterminable or have little meaning, including: 

- Heritage Assets 

- Stewardship Land 

• Stewardship Investments—Expenses and investments incurred for education and training

of the public that is intended to increase national economic productive capacity

(investment in human capital), and research and development intended to produce future

benefits. 

• Stewardship Responsibilities—Information on the financial impact of continuing to

provide current programs and services 

The USDA Forest Service estimates that about 300,000 heritage assets are on land that it

manages. This information was estimated from the nine Forest Service regions and the

Department of the Interior Report to Congress. Some of these assets are listed on the National

Register of Historic Places and some are designated as National Historic Landmarks. 

The USDA Forest Service heritage resource specialists on the 155 national forests maintain

separate inventories of heritage assets. Most of these assets receive no annual maintenance. 

A long-term methodology to better assess the extent and condition of these assets is being

formulated. A module in the agency’s real property management Infrastructure (INFRA)

system has been developed and implemented for heritage assets. The extreme fire season 

and competing priorities, however, have prevented full population of the database. 

The following table shows the number of heritage assets by category and condition for FY

2002. 

Category 2002 Estimated (Sites) Condition 

Total Heritage Assets 302,063 Poor-Fair 

Eligible for the National 

Register of Historic Places 47,175 Poor-Fair 

Listed on the National Register 3,491 Fair 

Sites with structures listed 

on the National Register 1,383 Poor-Fair 

National Historic Landmarks 17 Fair 

Historic Structures: Constructed works consciously created to serve some human purpose.

They include buildings, monuments, logging and mining camps, and ruins. 

National Historic Landmarks: Includes sites, buildings, or structures that possess exceptional

value in commemorating or illustrating the history of the United States, and exceptional value

or quality in illustrating and interpreting the heritage of the United States. The Secretary of

the Interior is the official designator of National Historic Landmarks. 

National Register of Historic Places: Includes properties, buildings, and structures that are significant

in U.S. history, architecture, and archaeology, and in the cultural foundation of the Nation.

Eligible for the National Register: Those sites formally determined as eligible for the National

Register through the Keeper of the National Register or documented by consultation with

Stewardship Property, Plant and Equipment 

Heritage Assets 

Heritage Assets

Definitions 
See Independent Auditor’s Report 117

State Historic Preservation Offices. Previous reports included all sites potentially eligible for

the National Register. 

The USDA Forest Service manages over 192 million acres of public land, most of which is

classified as stewardship assets. These stewardship assets are valued for: 

• Environmental resources; 

• Recreational and scenic values; 

• Cultural and paleontological resources; 

• Vast open spaces; and 

• Resource commodities and revenue they provide to the Federal Government, States, and

counties. 

The following table shows the net change in acres between FY 2001 and FY 2002 in national

forests by various purposes. 

FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2002 

Description of

National Forest System Ending Balance Net Change(1) Ending Balance Condition(2)

(NFS) Lands (Acres) (Acres) (Acres)

National Forests (acres) 187,826,753 -11,074 187,815,679 Varies 

National Forest Purposes * 143,848,797 15,322 143,864,119 Varies 

National Forest Wilderness Areas 34,812,657 -59,890 34,752,767 Varies 

National Forest Primitive Areas 173,762 0 173,762 Varies 

National Wild and Scenic 

River Areas 945,155 512 945,667 Varies

National Recreation Areas 2,910,364 0 2,910,364 Varies 

National Scenic Areas 129,178 1,257 130,435 Varies 

National Scenic - Research 

Areas 6,637 0 6,637 Varies 

National Game Refuges and 

Wildlife Preserve Areas 1,166,374 31,725 1,198,099 Varies 

National Monument Areas 3,659,862 0 3,659,862 Varies 

National Monument Volcanic 

Areas 167,427 0 167,427 Varies 

National Historic Areas 6,540 0 6,540 Varies 

National Grasslands 3,838,685 489 3,839,174 Varies 

Purchase Units 355,236 6,452 361,688 Varies 

Land Utilization Projects 1,876 0 1,876 Varies 

Research and Experiment Areas 65,731 -860 64,871 Varies 

Other Areas 295,814 0 295,814 Varies 

National Preserves* 0 89,716 89,716 Varies 

Total NFS Acreage 192,384,095 84,723 192,468,818 

Road Miles (3) 380,999 1,301 382,300 

Trail Miles (4) 133,087 0 133,087 

* National Preserves acres were included in National Forest Purposes acres last year. 

Stewardship Land 
118 See Independent Auditor’s Report 

(1 ) Net Change: At the time of submission of this information to the auditors, the net

change values include the net effects of the USDA Forest Service land transactions, with 

the exception of the Northern Region’s 2002 transactions. Land is acquired through purchase

or exchange for several reasons: to protect critical wildlife habitat and cultural and historic

values; to support the purposes of congressional designation; and for recreation and 

conservation purposes.

(2) Condition of National Forest System (NFS) Lands: The USDA Forest Service

monitors the condition of NFS lands based on information compiled by two national inventory

and monitoring programs. Annual inventories of forest status and trends are conducted by the

Forest Inventory and Analysis program in 45 States, covering 65 percent of the forested lands

of the lower 48 States. The Forest Health Monitoring program is active in 48 States, providing

surveys and evaluations of forest health conditions and trends. While most of the 192 million

acres of forest land on NFS lands continues to produce valuable benefits (e.g., clean air, clean

water, habitat for wildlife, and products for human use), significant portions are at risk to pest

outbreaks and/or catastrophic fires. Between 1997 and 2001, tree mortality caused by insects

and diseases was detected by aerial surveys on approximately 8 million acres of NFS forest

land. About 33 million acres of NFS forest land are at risk to future mortality from insects and

diseases (based on the current Insect and Disease Risk Map). Nearly 73 million acres of NFS

forest land are prone to catastrophic fire based on current condition and departure from

historic fire regimes (Fire Regimes 1 & 2 and Condition Classes 2 & 3). Approximately 9.5

million acres are at risk to both pest-caused mortality and fire. Invasive species of insects,

diseases, and plants continue to impact our native ecosystems by causing mortality to, or

displacement of, native vegetation. The National Fire Plan has focused our efforts to prevent

and suppress future fires adequately and restore acres that are at risk. Risk to fires was

reduced by fuel hazard treatments on 1.4 million acres of NFS lands in 2001 and 1.2 million

acres in 2002. Insect and disease prevention and suppression treatments were completed on

over 1 million acres of NFS lands in 2001 and nearly 1 million acres in 2002. 

(3) Road Miles: Net change to the total road miles occurs through new construction and

correction of errors in the system’s inventory and includes miles of unclassified roads that 

had previously been excluded. 

(4) Trail Miles: The number of miles reported continues to be based on a 1996 inventory. 

The number of trail miles has not since been updated. Reconstruction of existing trails has

been the predominant activity over the previous 5 years. 

Land Utilization Projects: A unit reserved and dedicated by the Secretary of Agriculture for

forest and range research and experimentation. 

National Forests: A unit formally established and permanently set aside and reserved for

national forest purposes. The following categories of NFS lands have been set aside for

specific purposes in designated areas: 

• Wilderness Areas: Areas designated by Congress as part of the National Wilderness

Preservation System. 

• Primitive Areas: Areas designated by the Chief of the USDA Forest Service as primitive

areas. They are administered in the same manner as wilderness areas, pending studies to

determine sustainability as a component of the National Wilderness Preservation System. 

Stewardship Land

Definitions 
See Independent Auditor’s Report 119

• Wild and Scenic River Areas: Areas designated by Congress as part of the National Wild

and Scenic River System. 

• Recreation Areas: Areas established by Congress for the purpose of ensuring and

implementing the protection and management of public outdoor recreation opportunities. 

• Scenic-Research Areas: Areas established by Congress to provide use and enjoyment of

certain ocean headlands and to ensure protection and encourage the study of the areas for

research and scientific purposes. 

• Game Refuges and Wildlife Preserve Areas: Areas designated by Presidential

Proclamation or by Congress for the protection of wildlife. 

• Monument Areas: Areas including historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures,

and other objects for historic or scientific interest, declared by Presidential Proclamation

or by Congress. 

National Grasslands: A unit designated by the Secretary of Agriculture and permanently held

by the USDA under Title III of the Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenant Act. 

Purchase Units: A unit of land designated by the Secretary of Agriculture or previously

approved by the National Forest Reservation Commission for purposes of Weeks Law

acquisition. The law authorizes the Federal Government to purchase lands for streamflow

protection, and to maintain the acquired lands as national forests. 

Research and Experimental Area: A unit reserved and dedicated by the Secretary of

Agriculture for forest and range research experimentation. 

Other Areas: Areas administered by the USDA Forest Service that are not included in one of

the above groups. 
120 See Independent Auditor’s Report 

Net Cost of Operations: $104 million. 

In partnership with the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), the USDA Forest Service operates

18 Job Corps Civilian Conservation Centers. Job Corps is the only Federal residential

employment and education training program for economically challenged young people, ages

16-24. The purpose of the program is to provide young adults with the skills necessary to

become employable, independent, and productive citizens. Job Corps is funded from DOL

with the program year beginning on July 1 and ending on June 30 of each year. During FY

2002 (July 1st to June 30th), there were 8,976 participants with 3,748 placements. The

average starting hourly wage for USDA Forest Service Job Corps students was $8.49, which

is above the DOL national average rate. 

Established in 1964, Job Corps has trained and educated about 219,000 young people. The

program is administered in a structured, coeducational, residential environment that provides

education, vocational and life skills training, counseling, medical care, work experience,

placement assistance and followup, recreational opportunities, and biweekly monetary

stipends. Job Corps students can choose from a wide variety of careers, such as urban

forestry, heavy equipment operations and maintenance, business clerical, carpentry, culinary

arts, painting, cement and brick masonry, welding, auto mechanics, health services, building

and apartment maintenance, warehousing, and plastering. The 18 centers had 2,056 women

students training in nontraditional vocations last program year. The program received the

National Job Corps Association Community Partners Alpha Award for the partnership of the

Frenchburg Job Corps Center and the Hazard Community College in helping young people

earn college credits. Over 700 Job Corps students assisted the agency in its firefighting

efforts. An Interagency Agreement between the Secretaries of the Interior, Labor, and

Agriculture was signed for the establishment of the first National Apprentice Training

Program—which will allow Job Corps students to participate. The Firefighter Apprentice of

the Future representative is one of our female Job Corps students. 

FY 2002 Net Cost of Operations: $267 million

USDA Forest Service Research and Development (R&D) conducts ecological and social

science research to understand ecosystems, including how humans influence those ecosystems

and how forests can be managed sustainedly for both environmental conservation and

economic expansion. R&D staffs are involved in all areas of the USDA Forest Service,

supporting agency goals by providing the science and technology that is incorporated into

natural resource decisionmaking. A representative summary of FY 2002 accomplishments

includes:

• Produced a new low-cost filter for removing pollutants from water;

• Released “The Southern Forest Resource Assessment,” which will be featured in a special

issue of the Journal of Forestry;

• Developed a 5-year research plan to address the emerging threat posed by Sudden Oak

Death disease;

• Developed a new instrument to detect trees infested by Asian longhorned beetles;

Research and

Development - Forest

and Rangeland

Research

Stewardship Investments 

Human Capital – 

Job Corps Civilian

Conservation Center – 

FY 2002 
See Independent Auditor’s Report 121

• Created a nationwide map that displays areas most likely to experience catastrophic

wildfires and to need immediate fuels reduction;

• Conducted the first national survey that determined the value of the urban tree resource in

the United States at $2.4 trillion;

• Developed technology to produce ethanol using biomass materials such as corn hulls,

corn cobs, and woody materials; and

• Reduced harvesting costs for industry and provided protection for environmentally

sensitive riparian areas as a result of research on soil compaction.
122

Appendix E—Performance Information
123

Based on the goals and objectives of the USDA Forest Service Strategic Plan (2000 Revision),

the Annual Performance Plan for fiscal year (FY) 2002 committed the USDA Forest Service

to delivering a range of natural resource-based benefits to the American people. The USDA

Forest Service’s strategic goals outlined in the 2000 Revision are:

Goal 1. Ecosystem Health

Goal 2. Multiple Benefits to People

Goal 3. Science and Technical Assistance

Goal 4. Effective Public Service

The USDA Forest Service Strategic Plan, Annual Performance Plan, and budget each play an

important role in performance management. The USDA Forest Service budget provides a

framework for meeting the goals by describing the actual "on-the-ground" work that needs to

be done. In FY 2001, the USDA Forest Service defined a set of corporate-wide activities that

will better define on-the-ground work. These activities were linked to individual appropriations, but also to specific strategic objectives. For each strategic objective, agency leadership

and program staffs developed annual performance goals to attain the long-term goal in the

strategic plan. The performance data in this report is measured against the goals established in

the Annual Performance Plan for FY 2002.

The USDA Forest Service put a new system in place for field-based reporting starting with the

FY 2001 end-of-year accomplishment reports. Individual forests enter data into spreadsheets

and provide reasons if performance data is outside of a +/- 5 percent range of the targets.

Individual forest data is consolidated into a national database for regional and national review,

validation, and analysis. This system is intended to incorporate a USDA Office of Inspector

General (OIG) recommendation (from report 08-001-0001-HQ June 2000) for implementing

reasonableness checks into the reporting process.

To eliminate the need for duplicate documents, and further enhance the relationship between

budget and accomplishments, the FY 2003 USDA Forest Service Budget Justification will

also serve as the FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan. The USDA Forest Service continues to

work on improving the quality of the data that measures its work activities.

The following pages provide narratives of each annual performance goal for FY 2002.

Performance Information

Introduction
124

Strategic Goal 1.

Ecosystem Health
125

At least 3,400 cities and towns in 43 States, with a total population of over 60 million people,

obtain at least a portion of their drinking water from watersheds located on National Forest

System (NFS) lands. Agency hydrologists and sanitary engineers provide technical assistance

to many of these communities in delineating areas that are the source of this water, as well as

assessing pollution risks from various types of land use, atmospheric deposition, and since

September 11, 2001, terrorism. The Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996 require

these assessments be completed by the States by May 2003. While this requirement has

received little public attention, it is an example of how various levels of government work

together for the public good, thus ensuring taxpayers are getting good value. 

The Environmental Compliance and Protection (ECAP) program provides for the cleanup of

hazardous substances on national forest lands to improve and protect watershed conditions

and human and ecological health. In addition to cleanup projects, the ECAP program is

helping to establish an environmental management system, including environmental

compliance audits, to systematically improve environmental performance of the agency. The

Abandoned Mine Land (AML) program, closely linked to ECAP, focuses specifically on

cleaning up abandoned mines in high-priority watersheds. 

Many activities contribute to the improvement of watershed conditions and fisheries habitat.

For example, protection and rehabilitation of the soil resource contributes to sustainable fish

populations by reducing the amount of soil transported to lakes and streams. Returning

unnecessary roads to a forested condition through decommissioning also lessens adverse

impacts to forest resources such as water quality and fish habitat. 

Administering proposed mineral operations ensures proper design and layout and identifies

appropriate mitigating and final reclamation measures. Proper administration minimizes

erosion, sedimentation, pollution, and other adverse effects. It also helps maintain ecological

functions and the quality, quantity, and beneficial uses of surface and ground waters during

and after the conduct of operations. Analyses are conducted collaboratively with State and

Federal agencies and the public. After operations begin, emphasis is placed on inspection and

monitoring to ensure that operators comply with mitigating measures to protect watershed

conditions and ensure the measures are providing adequate protection.

Planned work in the watershed, soils, air, and weather programs was greatly affected by the

reassignment of many field personnel to emergency fire suppression and emergency watershed

rehabilitation activities during the summer and fall of 2002. This resulted in the postponement

of many planned watershed improvement projects, soil mapping contracts, and water quality

monitoring work to FY 2003. It also resulted in reduced technical assistance to States and

local communities by agency hydrologists in assessing the vulnerability of drinking water

sources to pollution and terrorism. In addition, fewer watershed assessments were completed

in FY 2002.

Fifteen multiyear community-based watershed restoration partnership projects continued in

FY 2002. These partnerships crafted innovative ways to improve watershed, forest, range,

water, and habitat conditions at a river-basin scale. An example is the devastating Hayman

fire, which burned over 142,000 acres in and around one of these partnerships—the Upper

South Platte Watershed. Four issues are being addressed in relation to catastrophic fires: 

Overview 

FY 2002 Performance
126

(1) vegetation landscape patterns, (2) soil development and movement, (3) water quality and

quantity, and (4) aquatic habitats. More information is available on these partnerships via the

Internet site: www.fs.fed.us/largewatershedprojects.

Two emphasis areas made considerable progress in FY 2002. The first focused on communitybased efforts to improve water quality and restore large watersheds across ownerships. The

second was continued cooperative efforts between the agency and the States of Colorado and

Idaho to explore new options for providing instream flows for fisheries on national forest

lands without adversely affecting existing water rights for agricultural diversions. If ultimately

successful, new options for handling disputes over water uses could emerge.

Conflict over the total maximum daily load (TMDL) of specific pollutants in water resulted in

marginal progress in water quality management in 2002. One of the key questions is whether

TMDL allocations of nonpoint pollutants, such as sediment in the water column, can or should

be made to all landowners in a watershed that does not meet State water quality criteria

because it contains an impaired body of water. While various courts have issued rulings on

this question, there is no consistency among them. The USDA Forest Service continues to

maintain its position that the Clean Water Act (CWA) itself provides TMDLs that do not apply

to nonpoint sources. 

The USDA Forest Service completed a significant number of hazardous material cleanup

projects under the ECAP/AML program, including 18 mine cleanups and 14 non-mine

cleanups. The accomplishment greatly exceeded the target, due in part to reallocation of

funds, initial plan studies, and removal and remedial actions during the course of the year.

Under the ECAP program, the USDA Forest Service met its target of completing 11 environmental compliance audits, helping units identify operational improvements needed to comply

with environmental regulations.

Road decommissioning targets were reduced substantially from FY 2001 to FY 2002 to

address a concern that road maintenance funds were not necessarily being spent on the highest

critical priorities. Results indicate that the concern was at least partially valid. While the

mileage of roads decommissioned decreased from 2,164 miles in FY 2001 to 734 miles in FY

2002, the accomplishment of road deferred maintenance projects increased from 2,325 miles

to 5,837 miles.

Because of a misunderstanding of reporting standards and definitions for mineral operations

administered to standard, comparison with prior years is not meaningful. Targets in 

FY 2002 for mineral operations administered to standard were based on revised definitions of

what was to be counted. The new definitions, however, were still not clear to the field. As a

result, the actual accomplishment fell short of the target. The potential consequences of the

shortfall are lessened because the operations not being reported are smaller operations that

have much less potential for adverse impacts to the environment.
127

No national level reviews of the water, air, soils, or weather programs were made in FY 2002. 

The Engineering Staff conducted a monitoring review of Region 1 in FY 2002. The review

reinforced the findings in prior year monitoring that unmet critical resource deferred

maintenance needs are a major concern.

One program evaluation for the Minerals and Geology Management Program was conducted

in FY 2002 in Region 9. There were no significant findings or recommendations. 

There are several challenges to watershed management in the agency: (1) delineation of 5th Level

HUCs for the entire country will take several more years; as a result, it is unknown how may

HUCs will include NFS lands, thus requiring associated condition tracking of soil and water

resources in the future; (2) local assessment of watershed conditions is being used instead of

nationally consistent criteria and protocols; and (3) reassignment of soil, water, and air specialists

to emergency firefighting duties for weeks or months results in the inability to complete

previously planned soil, water, and air work; lost or delayed information includes sites not

monitored and data not gathered that is needed later to interpret watershed and soil conditions.

Sorting through the myriad of Federal, State, and local laws and regulations governing water

is an ever-challenging task and one that creates very different roles, responsibilities, and

expectations that vary with each Administration. There are approximately 25 Federal laws that

govern agency management of water resources, hundreds of State laws, and thousands of

State regulations with which agency officials are expected to comply. It is extremely difficult

to ensure that all laws and regulations are being recognized and followed.

The USDA Forest Service is also facing a shortage of hydrologic skills as the ranks are

thinned through retirements and other vacated positions that are not filled. The agency faces

great challenges to meet State TMDL requirements, including extensive restoration and

monitoring to complete these mandatory projects. Planning will require greater than normal

levels of hydrologic expertise to identify and quantify instream flow needs, especially in

western national forests. 

The results of field evaluations show that the decommissioning of roads, although necessary

and important, is a difficult endeavor due to extensive administrative processes that are

required prior to actually executing the work. 

Abandoned mine lands comprise the majority of sites impacting NFS lands via the release of

hazardous substances. The USDA Forest Service estimates that there are over 40,000

abandoned mine sites, of which an estimated 1,800 to 2,000 will require hazardous material

cleanup. The estimated cost to complete needed work on these mining sites exceeds $3

billion. At historic funding levels, it is estimated that it will take 150 years to clean up these

sites. 

In late FY 2000, the USDA Forest Service adopted a policy of requiring all existing mineral

and energy operations to be properly inspected, monitored, and bonded before new operations

are approved. This requirement, however, is not being reached. Priority is given to operations

in sensitive settings and to those that may be logistically easier to reach. Although an adequate

Program Evaluations

Conclusions and

Challenges
128

job is being done, the agency would do a better job with more inspections.

The problem with the 5th level HUCs has been described above, and until the Federal

interagency team completes the delineation in all 50 States, the agency will not know how

many HUCs include NFS lands.

Regional program managers report ECAP/AML accomplishment and financial data on a

project-by-project basis. This itemization of work plans, progress, and accomplishments lends

credence to the project’s report. A portion of this program is funded using transfer appropriations from USDA; that portion has been audited in prior years by the General Accounting

Office and the Office of Inspector General. 

The roads accomplishment data comes from reporting actual work accomplished at the

national forest level, which is aggregated at the regional level and finally into a national

accomplishment. At the forest level, the data is collected by road program managers and

verified by budget personnel. The forest data is reviewed at the regional and Washington

Office levels for reasonableness. In addition, road monitoring activities are conducted on

approximately 25 percent of the approximately 383,000 miles of road on NFS lands each year.

Limited budgets prevent additional monitoring.

Outputs shown with a data source indicator of MAR are collected in the Management

Attainment Reporting database. The data is compiled by the districts and forests and then

reviewed by regional and national offices for reasonableness. Further validation is not

considered cost effective; accuracy of the data is dependent on entries made at the forest level.

Verification, Validation,

and Limitations of Data

Sources
129

Strategic Objective 1b: Provide ecological conditions to sustain viable populations of

native and desired non-native species and to achieve objectives for management

indicator species (MIS)/focal species.

Annual Performance Goals and Associated Measures:

(1) Accelerate the protection and recovery of threatened and endangered species on

national forest lands.

Measure: Populations, status, and trends for selected threatened and endangered species

on national forest lands.

(2) Ecological conditions are maintained or improved to provide habitat for native and

desirable non-native species.

Measure: Number of National Forest System land and resource management plans that

have established measurable objectives and monitoring programs for populations,

habitats, and/or ecological conditions for threatened and endangered species,

species for which there are viability concerns, and other MIS/focal species.

(3) Population trends for native and desirable non-native species are maintained or

improved.

Measure: Populations for selected species.

(4) Manage habitat and facilities to support wildlife viewing, as well as harvest of fish

and game.

Measure: Harvestable surpluses of fish and game species are available.
130

National forests and grasslands provide habitat for more than 3,000 vertebrate and

invertebrate species and more than 10,000 plant species. Essential work on each national

forest and grassland includes managing habitats for these species to maintain the

diversity, viability, and productivity of plant and animal communities. This includes

actions to restore, recover, and maintain habitat and ecosystem conditions necessary for

healthy populations of fish, wildlife, and native plants.

Stream and lake improvements (acres and miles) are designed to restore and improve

habitats for inland, anadromous, and threatened and endangered aquatic species.

Terrestrial wildlife habitat restoration and enhancement focus on a variety of species,

including threatened, endangered, and sensitive species, as well as management indicator

and focal species. Enhanced acres improve and maintain diversity and productivity of

wildlife and rare plant species, and thus provide for their use and enjoyment by current

and future generations. 

Efforts to support migratory species are spearheaded by International Programs (IP).

Through habitat improvement work, migratory species conservation partnerships, and

strengthening conservation capacity in countries where migratory bird species live, IP

strives to ensure the viability of more that 80 migratory species. Through these

partnerships, USDA Forest Service funds have been leveraged. With a relatively small

investment of USDA Forest Service expertise from IP, the agency has worked with

foreign and domestic partners to enhance habitats and populations of migratory species.

In the case of some bird species, such as the endangered Kirtland’s warbler, IP’s work

outside the United States is invaluable in preserving the species.

A new set of measures has been established, which are believed to be more reflective of

annual performance goals. During this transition year we continue to report in acres and

miles accomplished, but future years will depict outcomes of our management efforts. 

In FY 2002, the national forests accomplished 104 percent of their target in improving

stream habitats and 116 percent in lake habitats. Examples of habitat improvements

include reducing sediment input and stream bank erosion through structural and

nonstructural instream, riparian, and upland treatments; restoring riparian habitat

functions for natural recruitment of large wood; creating pools within streams, thereby

providing hiding cover for fish and increasing spawning gravel; removing or modifying

human-made barriers to allow free movement of aquatic life throughout the stream; and

increasing lake fertility. 

Approximately 85 percent of the target for improving terrestrial habitat was

accomplished in FY 2002. Examples include using prescribed fire; maintaining early

successional habitats; regenerating aspen and oaks; planting and seeding to improve

forage conditions; and developing water sources in arid lands. Work within the wildlife,

fisheries, and rare plants program, however, was significantly affected by the emergency

fire suppression needs and activities during FY 2002. Approximately 8 percent of the

wildlife and fisheries funds was redirected to emergency suppression efforts, as well as a

large percentage of wildlife, fisheries, and rare plants employees, which resulted in less

time devoted to program implementation.

Overview

FY 2002 Performance
131

Partnerships are key to the successful implementation of the wildlife, fisheries, and rare plant

program. In particular, the Challenge Cost-Share Grant Program encourages direct public

involvement in managing these resources on national forests and grasslands. Established in

1986, the program has grown from 57 partners and 120 projects to more than 2,500 partners

and 2,000 projects in FY 2002. A variety of State agencies and private organizations worked

with the USDA Forest Service in FY 2002 to leverage $19.4 million of appropriated funds

into over $46 million of habitat projects benefiting wildlife, fish, rare plants...and people!

Partnership capacity continues to increase through the efforts of several positions shared and

housed with partner organizations.

An example of a successful partnership is on the White Mountain National Forest in New

Hampshire, culminating in the delisting of the endangered Robbins’ cinquefoil (Potentilla

robbinsiana), a rare plant. In a long-term cooperative effort with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife

Service, Appalachian Mountain Club, New England Wild Flower Society, New Hampshire

Natural Heritage Program, and others, the recovery plan was implemented to the extent that

this species is no longer in danger of extinction. 

National forests and grasslands provide exceptionally important habitat for birds; to improve

our ability to conserve and manage birds, the agency has become a partner in the North

American Bird Conservation Initiative. The USDA Forest Service’s participation in this

partnership initiative with other Federal, State, university, and nonprofit conservation organizations is enhancing our agency’s ability to coordinate and integrate efforts in bird

conservation. This has resulted in more effective conservation and restoration activities on

national forests and grasslands and provided for bird-related recreational opportunities. 

Similarly, the agency has become a member of Partners in Amphibian and Reptile

Conservation, a coalition of Federal and State agencies, tribes, universities, nonprofit conservation organizations, and industry groups. The group coordinates efforts to conserve

amphibians, reptiles, and their habitats through partnerships across the country. Benefits for

the agency will include better understanding of conservation management needs on national

forests and grasslands, as well as standardized survey protocols. 

IP led and supported 13 field projects in FY 2002 that increased habitat capability outside the

United States for migratory bird species. Projects were selected based on species or habitats

that are of greatest concern to American conservationists or are of importance to indigenous

cultures in North America. Support for these projects included technical conservation training

for key people in host nations.

Through an interactive Web broadcast sponsored by IP, an estimated 700,000 students in the

United States, Canada, and Mexico learned how they can help migratory birds.

A national level trust fund review was conducted, with onsite field inspections in the Southern

Region. Overall, wildlife and fisheries projects funded through the Knutson-Vandenberg fund

were well planned, documented, and implemented; however, some opportunities to use

additional available funding to accomplish meaningful habitat improvements were missed.

This review occurred early in the year; due to fire suppression activities, other planned

reviews were cancelled. 

Program Evaluations
132

The USDA Forest Service is challenged with providing more funding resources and qualified

personnel to manage habitat to maintain viable populations and provide for diverse and

sustainable wildlife, fish, and rare plant species. For example, national forests and grasslands

provide habitat for 422 listed species (up from 415 in 2001) and more than 2,900 sensitive

species. The agency must increase knowledge of management needs; develop or adopt conservation and recovery strategies and implement strategies to achieve recovery objectives; and

meet appropriate statutory, regulatory, and policy requirements that apply. The agency

continues to work effectively with State, Federal, and nongovernmental partners, who are

cornerstones of these programs.

In FY 2002, the USDA Forest Service provided testimony on fish passage at road crossings on

national forest lands in the Pacific Northwest at a U.S. House of Representatives

Appropriations Committee hearing. While primarily a fish passage issue, other aquatic species

may be impacted by passage problems at road crossings. On public lands in Oregon and

Washington alone, there are over 10,000 road culverts on fish-inhabited streams. Many do not

effectively allow all life stages of fish to pass freely, denying them important habitat. Recent

assessments have identified 250 culverts, which if modified or replaced, would increase

access to over 1,000 miles of anadromous fish habitat. The agency is assessing passage

problems and prioritizing culvert restoration to ensure efficient and effective use of funds to

maximize benefits to aquatic resources. Although public attention is currently focused on

salmon passage in the Northwest, similar needs occur throughout the National Forest System. 

Up to 40 percent of migrating waterfowl depend on the boreal forests of North America, but

habitat is steadily disappearing due to oil and gas development, agriculture, some forest

management practices, and other activities. The agency must develop partnerships with other

Federal agencies, State and local governments, and private corporations and organizations to

mitigate the impacts of development on migratory species. International partnerships are

important as well. One example is the Copper River International Migratory Bird Initiative,

which is working to conserve the millions of migratory birds that depend on the Copper River

Delta and other feeding and breeding sites along the Pacific Coast from Alaska to as far south

as South America. Some examples of Copper River Delta species are the Western Sandpiper,

Dusty Canada Goose, and Trumpeter Swan. 

Outputs shown with a data source indicator of MAR are collected through the Management

Attainment Reporting process. The data is compiled by the districts and forests and then

reviewed by regional and national offices for reasonableness. Further validation has not been

considered cost effective; accuracy of the data is dependent on entries made at the forest level.

Historically, no data has been collected on migratory species work; therefore, the measure

“land impacted for the management and conservation of migratory species – acres of

migratory habitat impacted” was removed from the annual performance plan.

Conclusions and

Challenges

Verification, Validation,

and Limitations of Data

Sources
133

Strategic Objective 1c: Increase the amount of forests and grasslands restored to or

maintained in a healthy condition with reduced risk and damage from fires, insects and

diseases, and invasive species.

Annual Performance Goals and Associated Measures:

(1) Hazardous fuel conditions are treated to reduce the threat of high-intensity wildland fires

to communities, watersheds, or species at risk, particularly in wildland-urban interface areas,

and areas with extreme risk to high-intensity wildfire.

Measure: Percent of wildland-urban interface areas with completed fuel treatments. Percent

of all acres with fuel levels meeting condition class 1.a

(2) Targeted nonnative invasive species are managed to reduce populations, infested areas,

and risk.

Measure: Percent of acreage treated to reduce the rate of spread of invasive species. Percent

decrease of infested acreage. Percent of acreage at high risk of insect and disease infestation

treated to reduce the rate of spread.b

(3) Reduce the risk of loss to communities and residences from wildland fire.

Measure: Percent of affected communities with prevention and education programs in place,

and where firewise treatments are being applied on the ground.a

(4) Agency fire management organizations are operating at maximum efficiency in the

prevention, detection, and suppression of wildland fire to protect life and property.

Measure: Fire Fighter Production Capability (FFPC) rating for initial attack of wildfires is

maximized. Percent of needed support resources available for deployment in support of large

wildfire incidents.b

(5) Affected communities have increased State, local, and private firefighting resources

capability and readiness to respond to wildfires.

Measure: Percent of affected communities with increased firefighting capability and

readiness.b

a Data is not collected with these criteria, so accomplishments cannot be reported directly to

this measure.

b Percentage figure not available.
134
135

The health of our forests and grasslands is important to the Nation for a variety of reasons,

including the production of clean water, forage for livestock and game, timber and other forest

products, a wide variety of recreation opportunities, and many other uses. Forest and grassland

health, however, is threatened by noxious weeds, invasive plant and animal species, and forest

fires. The USDA Forest Service is combating these issues very aggressively through initiatives

such as the National Fire Plan; the Healthy Forests Initiative; partnerships with various

Federal, State, tribal, and local governments; partnerships with natural resource organizations;

and other efforts. 

Nonnative invasive species are a significant threat to the forests of the United States from

both an economic and ecological perspective. Management efforts seek to prevent the spread

of noxious weeds and pests, treat new noxious weed and pest infestations without delay after

discovery, and provide information and education on control techniques. Noxious weed

treatment returns the vegetative community to a more natural state and restores land productivity by eliminating or controlling invasive weeds that threaten native plant communities.

Similarly, pest control efforts attempt to control forest and grassland pests to minimize the

economic and environmental damage they cause. One pest, the Asian longhorned beetle, has

the potential to have a $670 billion impact on the Nation’s forests. Another, the hemlock

woolly adelgid, is killing hemlock trees along the East Coast to the point of altering stream

flows and temperatures, and decimating the important ecological niche that hemlock serves as

a large tree. Partnerships and other coordinated efforts with private landowners and local,

county, and State governments are key to preventing the spread of invasives and in the

development of treatment regimes. 

Prescribed fire and other fuel-reduction treatments of the hazardous fuels programs enhance

forest and range health by reducing the intensity of wildfires, protecting wildland-urban

interface areas, promoting forage production, and maintaining fire-dependent ecosystems.

The Wildland Fire Preparedness and Wildland Fire Operations programs and associated

firefighting capability are necessary to ensure that fires are controlled for firefighter and

public safety, for property and resource protection, and to minimize large wildland fire

suppression costs. Cooperative fire assistance programs help State and local governments

maintain a base level of wildland fire protection readiness, and provide public service

advertising and education promoting partnerships designed to help reduce wildland fire

occurrence. 

The Forest Health Management Program provides for the detection, monitoring, evaluation,

prevention, and suppression of forest insects, diseases, and invasive plants on forest and

rangelands managed by the National Forest System (NFS), other Federal agencies, and

governments of States, territories, and tribes. Forest health management specialists evaluate

risk for resource damage and determine prevention, suppression, and maintenance treatments

based on the results of the risk evaluations. Aerial and ground surveys are conducted for

insects and diseases in areas of risk. The program includes development of technologies to

improve efficiency and effectiveness of management of forest pests. The activities of the

program enhance forest and rangeland health by protecting wildland-urban interface areas,

water resources, critical wildlife habitats, and recreational oportunities. See also a discussion

of Forest Health Management under strategic objective 3c.

Overview
136

Approximately 1.6 million acres of forests and grasslands were treated for insects, diseases,

and invasive plant species, which is 4 percent of the estimated infested acreage of public lands

in the United States. More than 575,000 acres were treated to reduce the rate of spread of

gypsy moth through the National Gypsy Moth Slow the Spread (STS) Project. Approximately

100,000 acres were treated to prevent insect and disease outbreaks. Although much work was

done to reduce the spread of other pests such as sudden oak death and hemlock woolly

adelgid, data is not available.

Noxious weed treatment activities accomplished 152 percent of the target in FY 2002. Almost

160,000 acres were treated, including 130,868 acres accomplished with vegetation and

watershed management funds; 7,287 acres accomplished with contributed funds; 13,728 acres

using Knutson-Vandenberg (K-V) funds; and 8,041 acres using other funds. This reflects the

priority that the national forests are putting on this very important program. The fires of fiscal

year (FY) 2000 and FY 2001 created situations that allowed for an increase in noxious weeds

on NFS lands; therefore, additional emphasis was placed on this program to alleviate

problems that stemmed from the previous fire seasons. With the disastrous fire season in FY

2002, hundreds of thousands of additional acres will undoubtedly be at risk to invasive

species in the near future.

A huge workforce of Federal, State, tribal, local, and contract resources was needed to battle

the extremely severe fire season that occurred in fiscal year (FY) 2002. Suppression efforts

from initial attack to large escaped fire support were provided by 10,480 firefighters,

including 65 interagency hotshot crews and 277 smokejumpers. In addition, 995 engines, 94

helicopters, 44 airtankers, and 218 pieces of heavy equipment were deployed throughout the

country to assist firefighters. For the first time, a significant number of contracts, for 52 crews

and 95 engines, was awarded to assist with initial attack. These resources equate to a FFPC of

15,608 chains per hour.

Fuel reduction treatments totaled 1,257,903 acres, nearly a 93 percent accomplishment rate.

This rate is significant since over $24 million in the fuel treatment program was redirected to

cover wildland fire suppression costs during FY 2002. Fuel mitigation work in the nonwildland-urban interface was nearly 58,000 acres short of the projected accomplishment, and

in the wildland-urban interface about 36,000 fewer acres were treated than was projected.

Additionally, the agency signed a joint memorandum with the Department of the Interior

defining the collaborative process for fuels project development.

The Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior, along with 17 western governors, signed a

document titled, The 10-Year Comprehensive Strategy Implementation Plan—A Collaborative

Approach for Reducing Wildland Fire Risks to Communities and the Environment. This plan

sets uniform performance requirements for delivery of the 10-Year Comprehensive Strategy

for both Federal and State partners.

The activities and outputs for planning and administering both regular and salvage timber

sales play a beneficial role in meeting this strategic objective, but they are more closely

aligned with strategic objective 2c, which provides sustainable levels of desired uses, values,

products, and services from the Nation’s forest and grasslands. Therefore, accomplishments

for these activities and outputs are reported under that objective.

FY 2002 Performance
137

International Programs (IP) has supported a number of activities that address the eradication

or control of invasive species. Many of the activities are in collaboration with the Forest

Health Protection (FHP) and Research and Development (R&D) staffs, as well as with USDA

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service and USDA Agricultural Research Service.

Some of the activities include a workshop on the current knowledge about the Asian

longhorned beetle in the United States and China; support for two German scientists to work

in the United States, along with ongoing information exchange between international

scientists on Sudden Oak Death data; research into chemical and biological control agents for

the Asian longhorned beetle, hemlock woolly adelgid, kudzu, mile-a-minute weed, beech bark

scale, and Japanese knotweed; and development of a database of invasive plants from Asia.

Accomplishments of the Forest Health Management Program can be found under strategic

objective 3c.

The Washington Office NFS staff conducted a review of the noxious weed program within the

Pacific Southwest Region of the USDA Forest Service in FY 2002. While the review found

that partners at the Federal, State, and local levels are working collaboratively on cooperative

weed management projects, it identified significant challenges to overcome. 

Progress and accomplishment reports have been submitted by implementing units for each of

the International Programs projects mentioned above. No field reviews were performed in FY

2002.

The FY 2002 fire season was very severe. In response, the agency took many steps to reduce

the risk of catastrophic damage. The USDA Forest Service and Department of the Interior

worked together closely to start implementation of the National Fire Plan. Oversight reviews

were made to help managers and administrators make adjustments in programs to ensure

proper direction and provide on-the-ground accountability. The following list provides a

sample of the processes the USDA Forest Service used in FY 2002 to ensure firefighter and

public safety, mitigation of private and public property losses, and cost reduction:

• Completed a hazard abatement plan and started implementation of specific actions

designed to increase firefighter safety and enhance training.

• Completed three national-level large fire cost reviews to assess the effectiveness of fire

suppression actions with respect to decisionmaking and cost containment.

• Contracted with the National Academy of Public Administration for a study on wildland

fire suppression costs. The academy published the results in a document titled, Wildfire

Suppression: Strategies for Containing Costs.

• Started, with the Department of the Interior, a computer system design process for a new

fire planning system. The Fire Program Analysis (FPA) system will replace the present

system over the next few years. FPA will be designed as a more comprehensive land

management decision-support system than what presently exists.

• Created the Wildland Fire Leadership Council to coordinate and implement the National

Fire Plan and the Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy among Federal agencies,

States, counties, and tribes. The council approved a standard fire management plan

template for use by the USDA Forest Service and the Department of the Interior. Fire

Program Evaluations
138

management plans tier from land and resource management plans and provide direction

for the full range of fire management activities on public lands.

Forest Health Management reviews included the Chief’s Overviews of the National Fire Plan

for Regions 8 and 10, which addressed insect outbreaks as they relate to fire risk. These

reviews emphasized the need for prevention and restoration activities on forest lands. An

invasive plant activity review for Region 5 (California and Hawaii) recommended that the

region’s invasive plants program better integrate with other agencies. 

Finding solutions for controlling and eradicating invasive species is a long-term process.

There have been some promising management techniques, and chemical and biological

control agents, but most are in the development stage. Additionally, the need for information

and communication between the USDA Forest Service and its partners has become evident to

prevent invasive species from establishing themselves in the forests and grasslands of the

United States.

Findings and conclusions from the Washington Office NFS review of the invasive plant

program identified that Section 7 consultation under the Endangered Species Act with the U.S.

Fish & Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service, primarily in northern

California, needs to be improved and streamlined. The review also found that there is a need

to better integrate the USDA Forest Service noxious weed program with other agencies,

especially with respect to fire suppression. The review concluded that communication between

the regional office and the field needs improvement, especially in assigning clear priorities in

developing the program budget for invasive plants. The review found that national forests are

having difficulty in completing site-specific National Environmental Policy Act analyses

requirements while trying to address issues related to new invaders, newly infested sites, and

expanding populations of existing infestations. This was particularly true for infestations

associated with wildfire suppression and rehabilitation. 

The increasing number of acres burned in wildfires in recent years on national forests and

adjacent lands is resulting in new potential habitat for noxious weeds. As a result, the number

of infected acres is increasing on burned lands and adjacent unburned areas. Treatment efforts

will need to be amplified to deal with this growing problem.

The USDA Forest Service will continue its emphasis on firefighter and public safety and large

fire cost containment. At the same time, an expansion of the fuel treatment program will be

sought, especially in the wildland-urban interface. The agency will be working cooperatively

with other Federal agencies and State and local governments to minimize the impacts of

wildland fire on public and private lands. Implementation of the 10-Year Comprehensive

Strategy will assist Federal, State, and local land managers with coordination, collaboration,

and actions to reduce the risk of wildland fire to communities and the environment.

In August 2002, the President introduced the Healthy Forests Initiative. This program

implements core components of the 10-Year Comprehensive Strategy. It provides additional

Administrative endorsement of the strategy and will improve regulatory processes to ensure

more timely decisions. This will lead to greater efficiencies, a restoration of forest health, and

a reduction of the risk of catastrophic wildland fire.

Conclusions and

Challenges
139

Noxious weed treatments are reported directly to the Washington Office upon request at the

end of the fiscal year. Currently, no electronic database system is available to track this work.

A database system to monitor infected acres, acres treated, methods used, and dates of

treatments is being developed and tested at this time. 

Common interagency performance measures for Fire and Aviation Management were

developed for baseline data collection in FY 2002 and FY 2003 and for program measurement

in FY 2004. These new performance measures will supplement existing measures. The new

measures are outcome-oriented and are integrated with the agency Government Performance

and Results Act strategic and annual performance plans. Data collection and display problems

may arise as the new measures are implemented.

In previous years, Forest Health Management technical assistance, which includes biological

assessments and technology transfer to forest managers, was converted to acres treated or

protected, which resulted in different estimates of actual work performed. There is no direct

link, however, of technical assistance to number of treated acres. The transformation of

technical assistance to treated acres is no longer used. Thus, the actual number of forest health

acres protected decreased by nearly 1 million acres when compared to estimates for the FY

2002. This decrease in acres protected reflects changes in how these acres were calculated in

the past. For FY 2002 acomplishments, “Acres protected” equals “Acres treated” to better

reflect actual work performed.

Verification, Validation,

and Limitations of Data

Sources
140

Overview

Strategic Goal 2.

Multiple Benefits to

People 

Recreation is the fastest growing use on the national forests and grasslands, and it is where

most Americans meet the USDA Forest Service. The Recreation, Heritage, and Wilderness

Resources (RHWR) program provides a wide spectrum of recreational settings and opportunities that are consistent with good land stewardship. The RHWR program is managed to

improve the capability of the Nation’s forests and grasslands to provide diverse, high-quality

outdoor recreation opportunities. The recreation program oversees a multibillion dollar

recreation infrastructure that includes facilities and trails and supports activities such as

camping, picnicking, winter sports, hunting, fishing, and visiting cultural sites. Activities such

as these contribute to economic diversification in and around national forests and grasslands.

To provide diverse, high-quality outdoor recreation opportunities, the USDA Forest Service

has implemented several strategic activities, including user surveys, to gather information for

use in priority setting and decisionmaking. The survey data released in September 2002

indicates that 214 million national forest visits occurred in fiscal year (FY) 2001. During the

11,420 survey days, 64,045 visitors were interviewed. The survey results are compiled at the

forest level and expanded to provide estimates at the regional and national levels. National

Visitor Use Monitoring Process data addresses monitoring elements in the USDA Strategic

Plan and the 2003 National Report on Sustainable Forests, an international monitoring plan.
FY 2002 Performance

In addition to providing benefits to people, the RHWR program advances ecosystem health

through the administration and management of partnerships and tourism, interpretive services,

recreation special uses, congressionally designated areas, national forest scenic byways,

scenery management, wilderness stewardship, and heritage resources. The focus is on

minimizing impacts and educating users in low-impact and responsible use through programs

such as Leave No Trace and Tread Lightly!, as well as the preservation of special areas. 

The USDA Forest Service delivers annual outputs, as identified above, that lead to the

accomplishment of the long-term outcomes in the agency’s strategic goals and objectives.

With public input, the USDA Forest Service has developed a strategic framework that

includes five core principles to focus RHWR priorities and actions; each is linked to and

complements the strategic goal of providing multiple benefits to people. The five core

principles are settings, service, conservation education and interpretation, community

connections and relationships, and partnerships.

NatureWatch is a cooperative program among private industry, conservation groups, the

USDA Forest Service, and other Federal and State agencies to foster conservation of wildlife,

fish, plants, and their habitats. The program provides nature-viewing opportunities for the

public and encourages safe and sound viewing ethics through signage and educational

programs. Nature viewing is a popular outdoor activity, with more than 50 million annual user

days on national forests and grasslands. 

In some areas of the Nation, the impacts of the fire season were reflected in reduced outputs

due to the presence or threat of fire in and around recreation areas and through diversion of

financial and human resources to aid in firefighting efforts. Wherever possible, the effects of

the diversion of funds were absorbed internally to minimize the impact on service to the

public. 

Nationally, seasonal recreation capacity was slightly under target. The Rocky Mountain and

Southwestern Regions were down to 71 percent and 80 percent of their target respectively,

due to fire closures and diversion of funds and personnel to meet the fire emergency.

Agencywide capacity using appropriated funds totals 280 million PAOT-days to standard;

during FY 2002, the capacity provided was less than half of that amount. 

The number of days administered to standard in general forest areas slightly exceeded

expectations. Limited understanding of the new output measure caused an underestimation of

capability of the target in some regions. In addition, increased dispersed area patrols, primarily

due to the increased fire danger and use closures, had the serendipitous effect of meeting

higher standards in some dispersed areas. 

Delivery of interpretation and education was down overall due to significant fires in the

Rocky Mountain and Southwestern Regions. Fire suppression costs and forest closures

impacted the ability of these regions to provide products and deliver programs to the public.

Other regions, however, succeeded in providing substantial interpretive products and

programs, such as those associated with the 2002 Winter Olympics, Lewis and Clark

Bicentennial, and American Frontiers as part of National Public Lands Day. In addition, the

Interpretive Service’s program held a national symposium for visitor center directors. The

141
142

symposium increased the skill level of the directors, thereby ensuring the long-term vitality of

USDA Forest Service programs and materials provided at our visitor centers. 

Many of the 214 million visits were made possible by recreation service providers through the

Special Use Program. Of the more than 25,000 permits, 14,243 were administered to standard,

114 percent of the goal for FY 2002. Other accomplishment highlights include hosting of

approximately 30 million skiers; working to support legislation that would benefit organizational camps and outfitter services; establishing a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)

with the National Ski Areas Association to support their Environmental Charter program;

establishing a MOU with the Association of Small Business Development Centers to assist

agency permittees in business planning and agency personnel in acquiring business acumen;

and a revision of agency policy for campground concessionaires to allow for accounting of

indirect costs.

The Recreational Fee Demonstration Program, started in 1996, was implemented at 87

projects on 80 national forests in 32 States and Puerto Rico in FY 2002. The public benefit is

reflected in additional expenditures of close to $121 million for the period 1996-2002 toward

critically needed services and facilities, including repairs and maintenance, health and safety,

interpretation and signage, annual operations, law enforcement related to public use, facility

and habitat enhancement, and resource preservation. In FY 2002, the agency developed a draft

framework for a consistent national fee program and worked closely with Department of the

Interior agencies to coordinate more consistent cross-agency program delivery to benefit the

recreating public. 

Accomplishments for NatureWatch were significant, reflecting the ability of national forests to

leverage dollars with partners.

Due to the need to divert resources to fire, a program review in Region 10 was postponed

until funds are again available.

Two reports on the Recreation Fee Demonstration Program were issued to Congress in April

2002. The annual interagency report provided detailed financial results and highlights of

program accomplishments for FY 2001. An interagency interim report provided results 

from the first 4 years of the program, including evaluation of investments, expenditures,

experimentation, and research, as well as lessons learned and future direction for the

Recreation Fee Demonstration Program.

A recent court case determined that a certain type of special use authorization is a contract 

as opposed to a license. This decision has resulted in the agency reviewing its entire Special

Use Program to determine which authorizations could be classified as contracts. A major

adjustment to agency policy will be needed to address these findings, along with training 

of personnel in contract administration procedures.

The southern province of the Pacific Southwest Region (Southern California) conducted 

a review of its Special Use Program. The review highlighted several concerns related 

to monitoring of expiration dates and followup on billing and collection procedures. 

A special team within the region is developing an action plan to address these findings. 

Program Evaluations
Conclusions and

Challenges

Public use at developed recreation sites is increasing. The agency estimates the annual direct

costs to operate specific developed recreation sites at full-service standards to be $108

million. This amount far exceeds available appropriations. Therefore, the agency addressed

the issues through managing concessions; using volunteer and human resource programs;

developing partnerships with nongovernmental organizations, other agencies, and private

sector businesses; reducing the quality of the service; shortening the time facilities are open;

and continuing to defer needed maintenance.

A greater emphasis on reconstruction of existing sites along with higher levels of maintenance,

rather than new construction, will allow the agency to improve the quality of the recreation

experience. In addition, the agency elevated the need for facility master planning as a critical

first step to realign the agency recreation offerings with available resources and customer

demand. Inventory, facility condition, Meaningful Measures (MM), and National Visitor Use

Monitoring Process data will all be used in determining the environmentally and financially

sustainable mix of facilities that best meets customer demand.

The Recreation Fee Demonstration Program evaluation report concluded that, while the

program successfully raised new revenue to invest in critical recreation needs, greater

consistency is needed both within the USDA Forest Service and among the other agencies

that participate in the program. The Interagency Recreation Fee Leadership Council was

formed to address this and other program issues. The council membership includes the

Department of Agriculture Under Secretary for Natural Resources and Environment and the

Department of the Interior Assistant Secretary for Policy Management and Budget, along with

agency heads and legislative affairs directors.

Special use permit administrators continue to feel the pressure of declining resources. The

agency recognizes the need to develop additional human and financial resources for special

use administration. The agency is considering methods to improve financial resources,

including retaining special use rental fees and working with the Administration to draft

legislation to allow for private sector investment in Government-owned facilities. In addition,

the difference between target and actual accomplishment is primarily due to confusion in

interpreting the definition of the standards, as well as inconsistent application of standards

across all field units. The definition of the standard for this activity for the future has been

revised to present a more meaningful description of work, incorporating simplified attributes.

Progress continues with the application of consistent costing as MM data is being used in

budget formulation. In addition, the inventory, standards, and costing components of MM are

now being used for developed site analysis and management. Agency guidance being

prepared to conduct recreation facility master planning incorporates MM concepts and data.

The agency has secured private consulting services to review our financial analysis process as

it relates to the recreation program to help us refine our resource allocation framework. 

The Special Uses Database System (SUDS) continues to improve in the second year of its

implementation. While a great improvement over the previous system, the agency continues

to find gaps in the information migration process. 

Outputs shown with a data source indicator of MAR are collected through the Management

Attainment Reporting process. The data is compiled by the districts and forests and then

Verification, Validation,

and Limitations of Data

Sources

143
144

reviewed by regional and national offices for reasonableness. Further validation has not been

considered cost effective; accuracy of the data is dependent on entries made at the national

forest level.
145

Strategic Objective 2b. Improve the capability of wilderness and protected areas to

sustain a desired range of benefits and values.

Annual Performance Goals and Associated Measures:

(1) Manage uses and activities to prescribed standards to protect wilderness resources. 

Measure: Percent of wilderness areas with uses and activities meeting prescribed standards.

(2) Forest management practices contribute to the mitigation of haze and other air-quality

concerns.

Measure: Forest management practices contribute to the mitigation of haze and other airquality concerns.
146

The USDA Forest Service manages 33 percent of the National Wilderness Preservation

System, 97 of the 160 designated national wild and scenic rivers, and the majority of backcountry opportunities available on public lands. Providing good-quality, undeveloped outdoor

recreation opportunities and appropriate resource stewardship depends on a number of factors.

The performance measure for wilderness stewardship is characterized by a number of

components that collectively determine whether the resource is being managed to standard.

These components include the development and implementation of a variety of plans that

reflect the stewardship activities for wilderness. Such activities include fire, noxious and

invasive plant management, wilderness education, air quality monitoring, identification and

monitoring of adequate wilderness area standards, and completion of recreation site

inventories. 

Heritage resources, which are also protected, provide numerous benefits to the American

people, including key connections to the Nation’s historic and prehistoric past. Heritage

resources cover a broad spectrum, including the physical remains of prehistoric and historic

cultures, locations of cultural or religious significance, written records, and oral histories.

Interest in heritage tourism is increasing and is being accommodated through increased

protection, interpretation, and “hands on” opportunities to experience cultural resources on

National Forest System (NFS) lands. The performance measure is based on several

components used to determine whether the resource is being managed to standard. These

components include resources identified and evaluated, protected, monitored, and preserved;

heritage values promoted; and heritage data integrated into natural resource analyses, plans,

and articles.

Air quality strongly affects the condition of both natural and cultural resources. The Clean Air

Act holds the agency responsible for protecting forest air quality and air quality-related values

from the adverse effects of air pollution. Forest air-quality conditions result from the

cumulative impacts of regional emission sources; the agency has limited ability to effect

changes in air quality. The USDA Forest Service participates in Federal and State regulatory

programs and policies that protect its resources. The air quality performance measures address

visibility, ozone, and acid precipitation in all forest areas that monitor air quality, not only

those designated as Class I air quality wildernesses. The agency encourages and supports the

development of monitoring programs that are based on national or State protocols and are

fully integrated with a national strategy. 

The Forest Service Wilderness Monitoring Committee, along with other Federal wilderness

management agencies, drafted “A Protocol to Monitor and Evaluate Trends in Wilderness

Character.” When completed, this protocol will provide the specific methodology needed to

evaluate whether or not our stewardship efforts are protecting and restoring wilderness

character as required by law. 

Through continued support to the interagency Arthur Carhart National Wilderness Training

Center, wilderness accomplishments include: 

• Nine unit wilderness workshops, attended by 260 managers and staff, resulting in

increased awareness of wilderness and proficiency in its stewardship by agency personnel.

In addition, planning and wilderness suitability processes were established on two units.

• The first multiagency-unit wilderness workshop, which resulted in increased collaboration

Overview

FY 2002 Performance
147

and consistency in wilderness stewardship across agency boundaries. 

• Development and support of the Internet Web site wilderness.net, highlighted by National

Geographic Society’s online magazine Best of America, realizing a 25 percent daily

increase in the number of visitors to the site.

• Review of the K-12 Wilderness and Land Ethic curriculum to determine the degree to

which lessons meet national education standards. The curriculum will be shared with

thousands of teachers and students over 3 years through a partnership with the National

Park Service and Student Conservation Association Lewis and Clark Corps of Discovery II

Project beginning in 2003.

• Began production of “American Values: American Wilderness,” a video slated for national

broadcast to increase public awareness, understanding, appreciation, and support of the

National Wilderness Preservation System. The video is expected to be viewed by

thousands of people over 3 years through partnership with the National Park Service and

Student Conservation Association Lewis and Clark Corps of Discovery II Project

beginning in 2003. 

The USDA Forest Service facilitated improved interagency coordination in implementing the

Wild and Scenic Rivers Act through its participation in the Interagency Wild and Scenic

Rivers Coordinating Council. The council, initiated in 1995, continues to develop technical

products, provide training of field personnel, and expand its Web site, significantly increasing

consistency in the management of designated wild and scenic rivers and evaluation of study

rivers.

To help achieve the objectives of the USDA Forest Service strategic plan, a subordinate

document, “The Wild and Scenic Rivers Agenda,” has been developed. The agenda defines

priorities for developing plans and administering 97 designated rivers, as well as protecting

nearly 700 study rivers identified to date through the agency’s planning processes.

Despite the extreme wildland fire season of FY 2002, heritage sites managed to standard

reached 98 percent of the national target. Two regions fell moderately short of their goals, but
148

these regions were most affected by the demands of the fire season, specifically by shifting

attention from program activities to wildfire suppression and rehabilitation. Other regions that

were not as affected by wildfire managed to compensate by exceeding targets. Most regions

are within 5 percent of target goals.

The USDA Forest Service addressed the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) national

visibility goal during FY 2002 in several ways. The USDA Forest Service participated in all

five regional visibility planning organizations, established or updated memoranda of

understanding with States to implement effective smoke management programs, continued to

review Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permits to minimize impacts of large

new off-forest facilities, ensured that its activities in nonattainment areas conformed to State

or tribal air quality implementation plans, and continued to support and improve air quality

monitoring programs. 

Evaluation of the heritage program supports the continued practice to set targets at a modest

level because flat or reduced heritage funding necessitates accomplishment of program goals

while providing support to other USDA Forest Service programs. While this work helps

protect heritage resources from the effects of other USDA Forest Service undertakings, it does

little to accomplish heritage program goals as mandated in the National Historic Preservation

Act. 

The number of air quality monitoring sites has not changed, but the activities and outputs

table above shows the addition of many new sites that are considered inventory until they

have at least 3 years of data. The deployment of visibility monitors was completed in FY

2002. The PSD permit reviews continue to remain high due to increased emphasis on

building energy facilities. Currently, the air quality result measures are based on 10-year

rolling average trends. The USDA Forest Service is working with the National Park Service

(NPS) and the EPA on the trends protocol, which may result in change to the measurement

standards. 

In FY 2002, the EPA and several States began auditing the visibility monitoring sites. 

In addition, the Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments (IMPROVE)

program—which does extensive, long-term monitoring of national parks and wilderness areas

and establishes current visibility conditions, tracks changes in visibility, and determines the

cause of visual impairments—recognizes site operation excellence. Two USDA Forest Service

sites were recognized this year for data collection efficiency, having entered 100 percent of

their data in the IMPROVE database.

The USDA Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and EPA accomplished 

real-time smoke monitoring this year on several major fires. Smoke data was available on the

Internet to the fire teams and county health officials, updated every 15 minutes. A review of

the effort has been completed and improvements are in progress. This was the first year for

EPA’s smoke emergency response team that resulted from a review and recommendations

made 2 years ago. Improvements to the Web site are being tested.

Program Evaluations
149

People are visiting national forests and grasslands in record numbers. Our challenge is to meet

the soaring demand for nature’s amenities while safeguarding the health of the lands and

protecting the resources. Education efforts must involve more partnerships to reach the growing

number of users seeking opportunities for solitude, and rediscovering the Nation’s heritage. The

USDA Forest Service will continue to refine the measures and performance goals to accurately

monitor the efforts to educate visitors and gauge their satisfaction and preferences.

A continued trend in declining funds in the heritage program inhibits our ability to adequately

protect and interpret cultural resources. Although the agency continues to find ways to use

outside partnerships and assistance to even greater degrees, there are a limited number of

heritage personnel to initiate these actions. The USDA Forest Service also faces growing

public demand for heritage tourism while our ability to provide those opportunities declines.

Partnerships and public programs help keep the program viable. The Passport in Time (PIT)

volunteer program is instrumental in protecting sites, and continues to accomplish as much as

25 percent of the preservation work on national forests.

Visitors to national forests and grasslands expect clean, clear air and cherish the natural

resources and majestic vistas associated with the special places. Monitoring conducted in

national forests documents that, in most areas, air quality is better than the standards set by

EPA. In addition, air quality is improving or remaining stable in about 40 percent of the units

where monitoring occurs. Some of the areas occasionally experience essentially pristine air

quality conditions unaffected by air pollution. 

Unfortunately, air quality in national forests is not always pristine. Some natural resources,

such as trees and lakes, readily show the impacts from air pollution. In many cases, significant

damage has been done before the impacts become visible. The USDA Forest Service will

continue to communicate information about air pollution conditions in the national forests to

the public. The agency will provide advice and technical assistance to State, Federal, and tribal

regulatory agencies; work cooperatively through partnerships with a variety of stakeholders in

the development of air pollution control strategies; and promote pollution prevention practices

through education and outreach, use of clean vehicles, solar power generation, emissions

inventories, and mitigation of pollution from activities in the national forests.

The USDA Forest Service’s Wilderness Program conducted the first national upward reporting

exercise using Infra-WILD in FY 2002. The data is being used for program management and

public information dissemination purposes. This information will form the basis for the State

of the Wilderness Report, which is currently under development. 

The USDA Forest Service completed a database of eligible or suitable wild and scenic rivers

for use in the forest plan revision process and ongoing national forest management. Through

its reporting functions, the database provides for ready assessment of the status of the wild

and scenic river study program nationally, regionally, and at the forest level. Additionally, it

provides river managers with a repository of key information on wild and scenic study rivers.

Updated data quality protocols for the IMPROVE monitoring network have been in place for

3 years. Network audits are being conducted by EPA and State regulatory agencies to assess

and maintain quality. Problems with the backlog of data from the contractor have been fixed.

Conclusions and

Challenges

Verification, Validation,

and Limitations of Data

Sources
150

Strategic Objective 2c. Improve the capability of the Nation’s forests and grasslands to

provide desired sustainable levels of uses, values, products, and services.

Annual Performance Goals and Associated Measures:

(1) Products and services are provided for subsistence, commercial, and noncommercial uses

within sustainable limits.

Measure: Percent of products and services that are provided within sustainable limits.

(2) New bio-based products, including energy, are developed from small-diameter and lowvalue trees.

Measure: Extent of use of new bio-based products developed from small-diameter and lowvalue trees.

(3) Heritage and significant geologic resources are protected, stabilized, and monitored.

Measure: Percent of priority heritage and significant geologic resources protected, stabilized,

and monitored.

(4) Accelerate carbon sequestration through active forest management.

Measure: Number of acres restored through management to a sustainable forest condition.

(5) Critical lands or interest in lands are secured for administrative, resource management,

and public needs.

Measure: Number of acres of identified critical lands acquired in full fee or interest in lands

through conservation easements to protect the private forest land base to meet administrative,

resource management, and other public needs. * 

* Measure 5 has been rewritten to replace the original measure of “Percent of identified critical lands or interest in

lands that are secured for administrative, resource management, and public needs.” It is not feasible to collect the

data as stated in the original measure.
151
152
153

The agency provides a sustainable supply of values, products, and services from National

Forest System (NFS) lands, and encourages and supports other landowners to do the same.

Through State and Private Forestry (S&PF) programs, assistance is provided to a variety of

partners in land management, land conservation, and natural resource-related economic

development efforts.

National forests are an important source of timber from Federal lands. Timber from the

national forests supplements timber provided from private lands to meet our growing demand

for products derived from trees. Today, the majority of national forest timber sales are

designed to incorporate multiple objectives, including insect and disease prevention and

control, wildlife habitat improvement, and fuels reduction. In addition, national forests are

also an important source of forage for livestock under grazing permits that allow the permit

holder to use and occupy NFS lands. Mineral operations on NFS lands provide energy

resources, base and precious metals, and industrial minerals for industry partners to develop

and produce, thereby contributing to local economies. The Minerals and Geology

Management Program provides for the management, protection, and use of geologic resources

on national forests including caves, fossils, interpretive sites, and rock-collecting areas.

National forests are monitored and evaluated through land and resource management plans

(LRMPs). Plan reports describe plan implementation evaluations, how effective management

actions are in achieving desired results, and the validity of underlying assumptions made in

the plans. Results are used in adaptive management to keep plans current and adjust decisions

to correct or improve management of the NFS lands. 

Land consolidation through acquisition or exchange enables the agency to better manage

Federal lands within or adjacent to NFS boundaries. Emphasis is placed on acquisitions that

will improve outdoor recreation, protect critical wildlife habitat, preserve cultural resources,

and respond to urban and community needs. Administrative benefits are provided by reducing

property boundaries, protecting property rights, acquiring rights-of-way, authorizing special

uses, and simplifying road management and fire protection. Many of these activities are

essential to local economies and the sustainable supply of goods and services and provide for

the public’s enjoyment, future use, and access to NFS lands.

Within the S&PF deputy area are several programs that address the goals, measures, activities,

and outputs of this objective. The goal of Economic Action Programs (EAPs) is to build the

capacity of natural resource-dependent communities to manage change. In addition to building

crucial working relationships and partnerships with communities, direct financial and

technical support is provided to rural communities for addressing current and relevant issues

and opportunities, such as developing new bio-based products, including energy, by using

small-diameter and low-valued material. These programs are primarily delivered through the

Economic Recovery, Rural Community Assistance, Rural Development, Wood In

Transportation, and Forest Products Conservation and Recycling program components. 

Essential to accomplishing economic goals are partnerships with other Federal agencies, State

foresters and economic development organizations, university extension services, county and

local governments, resource conservation and development (RC&D) councils, nonprofit

organizations, private landowners, and many others. Partnerships that involve all the following

Overview

National Forest System

State and Private Forestry
154

major components are a prerequisite for success: raw material acquisition, technical and

financial feasibility, capital, workforce, marketing, and business skills. Failure in one

component can result in failure of the entire venture. See also a discussion of EAPs under

strategic objective 3a.

The goal of the Forest Legacy Program (FLP) is to protect environmentally important forests

threatened by conversion to nonforest uses. The program operates on a “willing buyer and

willing seller” basis and is completely nonregulatory in its approach. No eminent domain

authority or adverse condemnation is authorized for this program. The FLP acquires land

through full fee or conservation easement real estate transactions that typically take 12 to 24

months to complete. Therefore, budget allocations in a fiscal year may not result in acres

acquired in the same fiscal year. Due to the voluntary nature of the program, acreage goals

can only be estimates. 

The Forest Stewardship Program (FSP) helps landowners become better informed of the value

of their forest resources and how they can manage these resources to produce the goods and

services they desire on a sustainable basis. Preparation of forest stewardship plans allows

landowners the opportunity to identify their primary management objectives and learn how

these objectives can be achieved. See also the Forest Stewardship discussion under strategic

objectives 2d and 3a.

Overall, the agency fell below its expected targets for many activities and outputs due to

personnel and funding shifts to meet the fiscal year (FY) 2002 firefighting efforts. The

impacts affected both NFS and S&PF program areas.

Accomplishments from the NFS include:

• Approximately 76.5 percent of LRMP monitoring and evaluation reports was

accomplished. Program effectiveness relies on consistent data collection over time,

using standard protocols and long-term sampling procedures designed to assess

specific changes in resource condition.

• The total timber sale program achieved almost 81 percent of its target for timber

volume offered for sale. Of the total, salvage timber offered was 107 percent of its

target. 

• The number of completed NEPA process decision documents signed this fiscal year

was lower than planned as national forests fell behind in achieving the objectives of

the grazing allotment NEPA schedule due to diverting employees to fire

assignments or to work on appeals and litigations. Priorities shifted between

allotments, and as a result, some work was completed early while other NEPA

analysis work has been delayed. 

• Approximately 70 percent of land acquisitions and exchanges was accomplished.

• Nearly 97 percent of the national forest boundary line marking and maintenance

goal was achieved. 

• Resolved 441 trespass and encroachment cases to remove unauthorized use and

occupation of public lands. 

• The agency met 100 percent of its goal of managing all targeted acres of NFS lands

to standard on grazing allotments across the country. 

FY 2002 Performance

National Forest System
155

For “mineral operations processed to standard,” the USDA Forest Service cannot predict the

number of proposals that might be submitted in a given fiscal year. Targets shown for FY

2002 represent field office capability; however, the number of new proposals in any given

year is dependent on market conditions and other factors. Although processing can be delayed

by environmental requirements or temporary unavailability of personnel, there are no longterm backlogs in this program. 

In FY 2002, 115 percent of the special use permit target was administered to standard and 121

percent of land use proposals was processed above the national target. The agency is currently

revising the process to track accomplishments reported by the national forests in processing

land use proposals and administering land use authorizations. Concurrently, a more concise

and measurable definition of “administered to standard” is being developed for consistency in

reporting accomplishments in the future.

Through the EAPs, the agency has provided both technical and financial support to new 

small, rural businesses that produce products made from small-diameter and low-value trees.

The USDA Forest Service made significant progress in facilitating the development of new 

bio-based products; additional accomplishments were forestalled by continued emphasis on

implementing the National Fire Plan (NFP) and the transfer of program funds to help cover

firefighting costs in FY 2002. Numerous examples exist, however, of projects that have made

progress in FY 2002, including bio-diesel made from poplar trees; red maple trusses; schools

and other institutions being heated by wood chips; small-scale, bio-power systems producing

electricity and heat from forest residues; small-diameter roundwood trusses; wood flooring,

cabinets, paneling, and furniture being made from low-value species; juniper/plastic

composites; and others.

FLP acquisitions of 57,009 acres fell short of the target of 200,000 acres for FY 2002, partly

as a result of the transfer of program funds to help cover firefighting costs during the year.

This resulted in delays to projects that were due to be completed during the fiscal year. 

In addition, appraisal review services that the agency normally provides to States for FLP

projects were diverted, also resulting in delays to some projects expected to close in FY 2002.

These projects will carry into FY 2003; completion is expected if the funds are restored.

Through FY 2002, the Forest Legacy Program has protected over 300,000 acres since

inception. Other significant accomplishments include new and enhanced partnerships with

State agencies and nongovernmental organizations. Furthermore, many State-led agencies that

participate in the program have improved their capacity to conserve important and sensitive

forests.

Forest stewardship plans were written for 18,102 ownerships covering nearly 1.64 million

acres of NIFP lands in FY 2002. In total, nearly 25 million acres of NIPF lands are covered

under approximately 217,000 forest stewardship plans. 

State and Private Forestry
156

There were no program evaluations conducted by the Ecosystem Management Coordination

Staff during FY 2002. 

Timber sale program evaluations in FY 2002 included reviews of the timber sale appraisal,

preparation, harvest administration, and theft prevention programs in Region 9 (Eastern

Region). It was found that the Region 9 timber sale appraisal handbook needs updating, 

which will be done in FY 2003. It was also found that the currency, completeness, and

application of timber sale-related environmental analyses and documentation varied widely 

in the region. It was recommended that a review of regional procedures and standards for

environmental analysis and documentation be made to ensure they agree with national

procedures and standards. 

In the spring of 2002, the INFRA Rangeland Module, which is the corporate database of

national forest grazing allotments and permits, was reviewed to evaluate progress on the

completion of allotment NEPA procedures. It showed that national forests met approximately

50 percent of their scheduled work. The delay in meeting the schedule was due to difficulty 

in moving through the NEPA process itself, appeals of project decisions, lack of trained field

personnel, and inadequate project funding. Livestock grazing program evaluations were

planned at the regional and national forest levels, but the reviews were cancelled late in the

fiscal year.

One program evaluation for Minerals and Geology Management was conducted in FY 2002 

in Region 9. There were no significant findings or recommendations. 

Land Ownership Adjustment Program oversight evaluations were conducted for all regions 

in FY 2002. Evaluations were completed to ensure that land exchanges are being processed

consistently with applicable laws, regulations, and policies. Evaluations were also conducted

to ensure that regions properly manage delegations and third party activities and provide

oversight for their Land Ownership Adjustment Program. 

Due to the need for redirecting resources to cover fire suppression costs, no regional or

national evaluations were conducted this year for EAPs.

A FLP review of Region 6, which provides service to the States of Washington and Oregon, 

was conducted in FY 2002. The region was found to be providing excellent service to the States.

The region recognized that the growth of the program requires a dedicated staff position. This

new position will provide assistance to Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington. 

The FLP underwent an extensive inquiry by the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on

Appropriations Surveys and Investigations staff. That investigation looked at all of the regions

across the country and included participating States and other partners. A report of findings

was published in June 2002. The USDA Forest Service prepared a response to the report

outlining actions taken and to be undertaken to address issues raised in the report.

The Washington Office Cooperative Forestry Staff undertook an evaluation of the implementation

of all the FSPs in Region 6. The evaluation indicated that implementation of the FSPs was

very successful. No significant issues were identified.

Program Evaluations

National Forest System

State and Private Forestry
157

The agency needs to strengthen its reporting of monitoring and evaluation results. Those

reports not published in FY 2002 will be included in the unit’s FY 2003 monitoring and

evaluation report. A national meeting with regional monitoring and evaluation coordinators

and monthly conference calls will stress compliance with these targets. Additionally, the

agency will strengthen the relationship between these reports and strategic and annual

performance plans. 

Environmental and species protection provisions are evolving faster than the agency can react

to them. The currently poor timber market conditions have significantly affected our ability to

accomplish our vegetative management objectives through the timber sale program. Timber

sales being planned and prepared are affected by appeals and lawsuits on other sales, leaving

no prepared sales in the pipeline to replace those that are delayed or withdrawn. Sale

preparation costs are also increasing faster than outyear budget plans anticipate, so field units

have less ability to meet assigned targets. In addition, the Timber Sale Pipeline Restoration

Fund has not yet been able to increase the pipeline. 

The agency expects that animal unit months of grazing under permit will decline slightly as

more allotment management plans are reviewed and evaluated using the NEPA process. New

livestock grazing permits will be issued following these allotment analyses; an expected

decline in permitted numbers is expected to be reflected in these permits. As new decisions

are made, the acres under grazing are expected to decline slightly. Because of this, the acres 

of grazing allotments administered to standard will decline commensurately.

The USDA Forest Service continues to keep pace with the number of proposed energy and

mineral operations while meeting various environmental requirements, despite the need for

employees to work on many different priorities. In part, this is the result of the decline in new

proposals due to delays, additional costs, and uncertainty of energy and mineral development

approvals on NFS lands.

Over the next several years, key opportunities are expected for exchange or purchase of lands

from industry and other private landholders for the national forests. Many areas within or

immediately adjacent to existing national forests contain important resources. If acquired,

these purchases will help the USDA Forest Service meet critical objectives related to public

outdoor recreation opportunities, critical wildlife habitat, and wilderness or other 

congressionally designated areas. These purchases will also improve management efficiency

and decrease property management administration costs. 

The agency is facing serious challenges in being able to adequately manage its 45,000

nonrecreation special use authorizations and in conducting monitoring and inspections to

ensure compliance with existing authorizations. At current funding levels, the agency is able

to administer only about 25 percent of its authorizations annually, and a growing number of

authorizations have expired. The agency lacks the resources needed to aggressively evaluate

the impacts of existing uses and occupancies, to determine whether or not to continue to

authorize use or occupancy, and to identify provisions needed in new authorizations to

adequately protect NFS lands and resources. 

Conclusions and

Challenges

National Forest System

Program Evaluations
158

The increasing relocation of the public into the rural landscape, as well as the exploding

wildland-urban interface, is significantly increasing the volume and frequency of

encroachments and unauthorized trespasses on USDA Forest Service lands. Fire rehabilitation,

fire suppression, and fuels reduction activities occurring along the boundaries of the national

forests impact public lands. The greatest challenge will be to ensure that boundary lines are

marked and maintained in those areas where increased populations and public use have

increased the impacts on public lands.

There are many creative ideas emerging through the EAPs for developing new, bio-based

products from small-diameter and low-value trees. This past fiscal year has seen numerous

products working their way into the market. For every two successes, however, there are four

failures—converting a concept into a reality is a difficult task. The EAPs are getting better at

identifying and prioritizing potentially successful efforts. The financial and technical resources

have been increased with the advent of the NFP, thus providing more seed funds and helping

launch new, bio-based products. Challenges include sustaining funding to continue activities

during the startup, learning, and development stages; helping these enterprises become 

self-sufficient; and meeting the demand for services. 

The FLP is a growing program that has expanding appeal to States, nongovernmental partners,

and Congress. An increase in program funding to $65 million for FY 2002 and the

introduction of seven additional participating States bode well for future accomplishments.

Unfortunately, the same caveats stated above apply to future years. The typical uncertainty

associated with real estate transactions and voluntary participation by private landowners

inherently makes target setting more art than science.

Annual FLP accomplishments vary greatly, but expanding field unit capacity and additional,

consistent funding will improve program performance predictability. Funding for the FLP

increased for FY 2002 to $65 million, and the FY 2003 President’s Budget proposes approximately

$70 million. This increased funding will result in accelerating accomplishments, but will also

put a strain on the current capacity of services. Options such as outsourcing and expanded

partnerships may help the agency’s ability to provide services. 

As a result of the House Committee on Appropriations investigation into the FLP, new

program policies and process approaches have been developed and will be implemented over

the next several years. These will improve program management efficiency and effectiveness

and fiscal accountability.

An analysis of FSP plans conducted in 2000 indicated that plan writers were not always

adequately addressing nontimber values to the extent required by statute. As a result, a desk

guide and a Web site were developed to assist landowners and plan writers in writing forest

stewardship plans, including information on forest management for timber and nontimber

values. Additional evaluations will be needed to determine the effectiveness of these tools.

State and Private Forestry
159

Outputs shown with a data source indicator of MAR are collected through the Management

Attainment Reporting process. The data is compiled by the districts and forests and then

reviewed by regional and national offices for reasonableness. Further validation has not been

considered cost effective, so accuracy of the data is dependent on entries made at the forest

level.

The USDA Forest Service took several actions in FY 2001 and FY 2002 to improve the

quality of the MAR data for completion of forest plan reports. A new database, Natural

Resource Information System (NRIS), is starting to be used to accumulate monitoring data

and facilitate its evaluation using consistent methods. NRIS was designed and implemented to

reduce the amount of time for data entry and tabulation, and to minimize the risks of errors

from manually consolidating data entry sheets; to facilitate field review of accomplishments

reports; and to improve data analysis, control, and validation efforts. This system addresses

Office of Inspector General recommendations in a June 2000 report on implementing “reasonableness” checks in the reporting process. 

The forest products activities and outputs are presumed to be provided within sustainable

limits because the levels of most outputs provided today are significantly less than the levels

provided in the past. To move toward achievement of the established annual performance goal

of “products and services are provided for subsistence, commercial and non-commercial uses

within sustainable limits,” it is necessary to establish how sustainability will be defined and

measured. Processes designed to assess sustainability are under development. In the

meantime, periodic assessments of inventory and monitoring data must serve as indicators of

sustainability.

“Timber sale volumes offered for sale” is entered by field personnel into the Sales Tracking

and Reporting System (STARS), from which accomplishment reports are run. In addition,

timber sale “sold and harvest” information for each sale is recorded on form 2400-17, and

regularly inputted into the Timber Sales Accounting (TSA) System. These processes are

managed in conformance with the direction provided in the Timber Management Information

System Handbook (FSH 2409.14), Chapter 30, Timber Sale Information and Chapter 40,

Timber Harvest Information, as well as the Automated Timber Sale Accounting Handbook

(FSH 6509.17).

Keeping track of recent range project decisions once a NEPA analysis is completed is

accomplished using the Range Module within the INFRA database. This database is used 

on all forests with a livestock grazing program. There are numerous steps to completing 

an analysis and making a project decision, and the INFRA database tracks this information. 

In spring 2002, the database contained up-to-date information for nearly all grazing allotments

on NFS lands. Data input has fallen off since this effort was completed. The number of

decisions made after new NEPA analyses reflects this data input problem. Similarly,

information on allotment acres administered to standard may actually be higher than reported.

To correct these problems, the database and entry forms are being modified to allow tracking

starting in FY 2004. This is expected to improve reporting and accuracy.

Land ownership case information is entered on a Proposed Exchange form (FS-5400-10) 

or proposed Purchase Sheets (FS-5400-9) at the field level in conformance with direction

Verification, Validation,

and Limitations of Data

Sources

National Forest System
160

provided in the Land Acquisition Handbook (FSH 5409.13). The acquired acreage reported on

the digest sheets is then entered into the MAR system by each unit for national reporting.

Lands Special Use Authorization (SUA) information is entered into the INFRA Special Uses

Database System (SUDS) at the field level to track scheduled and completed SUA

inspections. In FY 2002, SUDS was modified to collect data of completed inspections into its

biannual data collection snapshot. The accuracy of data is dependent, in part, on whether

inspections are documented in SUDS. 

Individual forests and grasslands record boundary management accomplishments in their

respective Corner Status Atlas in conformance with direction provided in the Surveying

Manual (FSM 7150). These accomplishments are physically marked on hard copy maps and

then reported in the MAR system by each region for national reporting. Boundary

management accomplishments will soon be electronically tracked in the Automated Lands

Program (ALP) database.

Title management information is reported in several formats. Small Tract Act case information

is reported through Form 5500-3, Small Tract Act Parcels Report; land status information is

reported through the Land Areas Report and also in the ALP system; and title claims are

reported through the litigation process or through administrative procedures. These reporting

requirements have been in place for several years and provide an accurate and reliable

measurement of the annual accomplishments and the agency’s progress in resolving access

issues. 

The data source for FY 2002 accomplishments of the EAPs is a new database used to assess

and account for the program’s activities. The database was significantly revised during FY

2002, and program managers in the Washington Office are continuing to evaluate and expand

the capabilities of the tool. The intent is to maintain an accurate and reliable database that will

help manage, track, monitor, and report all EAP assistance and activities, including new biobased products from small-diameter and low-valued trees.

The FLP has developed a national database (Forest Legacy Information System) through the

National Information Center in St. Paul, MN, associated with the Northeastern Area. This

Web-based system allows program managers to update information and increases their ability

to estimate project completion dates and form accurate target estimates in future years.

FSP data entered by each State has been closely scrutinized. In cases where there was a

marked difference in FY 2002 data entry compared with FY 2001 data, the State has been

contacted to ensure that the numbers are accurate.

State and Private Forestry
161

Strategic Objective 2d. Increase accessibility for a diversity of people and members of

underserved and low-income populations to the full range of uses, values, products, and

services.

Annual Performance Goals and Associated Measures:

(1) Agency plans, programs, and activities demonstrate involvement of interested and

affected people from all segments of society, including underserved and low-income

populations.

Measure: Percent of persons participating in agency processes, programs, and activities that

represent underserved and low-income populations.

(2) All segments of society, including underserved and low-income populations, have the

capacity to effectively participate in the planning, delivery, and consumption of USDA Forest

Service products and services.

Measure: Percent of USDA Forest Service administrative units whose products and services

meet target population accessibility standards.*

* Forest Stewardship Program (FSP) services are administered by State forestry agencies. The USDA Forest

Service does not keep national records of the percent of State forestry agency units that meet target population

accessibility standards. This measure will be rewritten to better reflect FSP goals. 

The USDA Forest Service provides services and opportunities to Americans of all racial and

ethnic backgrounds. Through a variety of employment and economic outreach programs, the

agency strives to encourage and increase participation of many diverse individuals and

groups. Many of these efforts are directed at minority, poor, and other underserved groups

throughout the Nation. 

The agency’s strategic plan and the strategic public outreach plan, goals, and objectives

provide the corporate umbrella for many national efforts and local activities already under

way. They also provide new opportunities to work and learn together, ensuring that all

Americans, including the underserved, participate in natural resources management and

benefit from agency programs and service. Our Nation is rapidly changing and becoming

more diverse. This increases the agency’s need to find common ground and build relevance

with all segments of society, including underserved populations and communities, in order to

carry out the agency’s mission, plans, programs, and activities. These improvements result in

a more productive work environment and better customer service.

In the development of forest management plans, including Forest Stewardship Plans, the

USDA Forest Service helps a diversity of landowners. The distribution of nonindustrial

private forest (NIPF) landowners participating in the development of forest management

plans is tracked by race and ethnicity. (See also Forest Stewardship Program discussions

under strategic objectives 2c and 3a.)

Overview
162

The USDA Forest Service continues to accomplish and expand upon the USDA Civil Rights

initiatives integral to customer service delivery. Through the strategic public outreach plan,

the agency continues to establish and build positive working relationships with underserved,

minority, low-income, and limited-resource communities in collaborative land stewardship, as

well as to improve customer service and increase program delivery and outreach.

Communities affected include Hispanic, Asian-Pacific Islander, African American, and other

multiracial/cultural community-based organizations. 

The USDA Forest Service national headquarters provided seed money to field units that

demonstrated excellent public outreach partnerships with diverse, underserved communities.

These excellent models of public outreach with underserved communities are the focus of

agencywide dialogue to improving customer service, public outreach, and collaborative

stewardship initiatives. 

The USDA Forest Service implemented a partnership agreement with the National Network of

Forest Practitioners (NNFP) to help implement the National Fire Plan (NFP), a key national

initiative. This agreement ensured underserved communities are integral to the implementation

of aspects of the NFP and Large-scale Watershed Restoration Projects initiatives. NNFP

implemented a series of local and regional meetings delivered through external communitybased organizations and underserved communities.

The USDA Forest Service developed the National Hispanic Radio outreach pilot project,

which included a contract with the Hispanic Radio Network (HRN), La Red Hispana, Inc.

The contractor aired more than 30 USDA Forest Service program stories nationally and

internationally across the HRN radio affiliates. Spanish language stories included wildfire

prevention and suppression activities, careers in natural resources and requirements of such

careers, and other USDA Forest Service programs offered at the field units. 

The Pacific Southwest Region and the University of California, Berkeley, created a

partnership to support numerous community-based organizations. The partnership worked to

establish a forum for dialogue between the USDA Forest Service and underserved

communities, called “People for Forest, Forest for People—Just Forest Symposium.” The

forum has been planned for FY 2003. 

Civil Rights Impact Analyses (CRIA) and Social Impact Assessments are integral to national

forest land and resource management plans and other administrative decision processes. During

FY 2002, the USDA Forest Service implemented these analyses and assessments for numerous

programs and policies. Noteworthy actions include establishment of the Forest Service Limited

Tree Removal Policy/Program and several USDA Forest Service organization management

decisions. The CRIA tool ensures that diverse perspectives, values, uses, products, and services

important to affected American populations are considered and engaged.

The USDA Forest Service national outreach coordinator and the USDA Office of Outreach

coordinated several FY 2002 events to provide technical assistance and resources to

underserved communities, including the Third Annual Small Farmers Conference in

Albuquerque, NM, as well as assistance in the development and implementation of the 2002

Farm Bill.

FY 2002 Performance
163

The agency is striving to improve minority participation in the FSP, which assists, through

States, NIPF landowners in development of forest management plans and encourages sound

natural resource practices. Minority landowner participation in the FSP was 2.9 percent of the

total in FY 2002. Minority participants identified themselves as Black (2.1 percent), Native

American/Alaska Native (0.2 percent), Asian American (0.5 percent), or Hispanic (0.1

percent). The percent of non-Caucasian participants has decreased since the most recent prior

data on the racial/ethnic makeup of landowners was collected in 1978. At that time, participation

by race/ethnic origin was Black (4.6 percent), Native American/Alaska Native (1.1 percent),

Asian (0.8 percent), and Hispanic (0.2 percent). It is unclear if the lower participation

percentage is due to a decrease in minority ownership of NIPF since 1978, or because there is

a need to greatly enhance program outreach. The USDA Forest Service has, in any case, taken

measures to improve outreach, including the publication of an outreach handbook and its

distribution to our State partners. Some States have also initiated outreach efforts such as

hosting landowner field days and workshops, as well as creating outreach positions.

The USDA Forest Service conducted field unit civil rights compliance reviews and

implemented Senior Executive Service Performance evaluations. The reviewers found many

positive examples of customer service and positive work environments, as well as the need for

improvement in coordination and training. The USDA Forest Service published the Fiscal

Year 2002 Information and Reporting Requirements report to USDA and the U.S. Department

of Justice, delineating servicewide compliance reviews of federally assisted programs and

program complaint resolutions that were accomplished.

The Washington Office Cooperative Forestry Staff evaluated program implementaiton in

Region 6. The evaluation indicated that implementation of the FSP was very successful. No

significant issues were uncovered.

Overall, the USDA Forest Service continues to improve employee morale, decrease

employment complaints, maintain a low number of program complaints, increase organizational

capacity to perform at a higher level, and experience fewer retention problems. Decreasing

national budgets continue to place pressure on field units and the headquarters to restructure

the workforce and organization infrastructure.

To make the FSP more successful with minority landowners, the USDA Forest Service needs

to have more reliable data on the racial and ethnic makeup of potential program participants.

At this time, the agency is working to gather this information on current NIPF landowners.

The data collection efforts now under way will not be complete for several years. In the

meantime, the USDA Forest Service will continue to encourage State partners to reach out 

to underserved landowners and ensure they have fair and equal access.

Conclusions and

Challenges

Program Evaluations
164

The agency maintains and manages the USDA Forest Service Employee Complaint System,

the Program Discrimination Complaints Database, and the Human Resources Management

FOCUS Database, which allow assessments, actions, and improvement of situations as they

arise. No significant data limitations were identified in these systems. 

Data related to the FSP that was submitted by State counterparts has been reviewed and

analyzed. While the data can serve as an indicator, it may not be entirely accurate. Although

the agency prefers that States collect the data using a written form filled out voluntarily by the

landowner, some States are determining race/ethnicity by the appearance of the participant,

which can be inaccurate at times.

Verification, Validation,

and Limitations of Data

Sources
165

Strategic Objective 2e. Improve delivery of services to urban communities

Annual Performance Goals and Associated Measures:

(1) Improve the livability within urban areas by helping to ensure that urban trees, forests,

and other green spaces are diverse, healthy, and lasting.

Measures:* Increased total number of communities participating in urban forestry programs

at all levels of management (project, formative, developmental, and sustained). Increased

percentage of communities participating at the developmental and sustained levels of

management (with open space assessments, ordinances, and management plans).

* The original measure read “Percentage increase in green space in selected cities. Increased number of

communities engaging in urban forestry practices that address air quality conditions. Increased percentage of

communities with urban forestry and open space assessments, ordinances, and management plans.” The agency

never established a strategy to measure annual increases in green space in cities. The measures above are more

appropriate to the goals of the Urban and Community Forestry (U&CF) Program.
166

While research studies increasingly demonstrate that well-managed urban trees and forests

contribute to improved air quality, since 1997 States have only reported the number of

communities participating at any level of urban and community forestry programs. The higher

the level of participation, the more likely that urban trees and forest resources contribute

positive benefits for air quality, stormwater retention, urban cooling, and a myriad of other

positive environmental, economic, and social benefits. Responsibility for these benefits is

shared among many Federal, State, and local programs. 

State and Private Forestry’s (S&PF’s) Urban and Community Forestry (U&CF) Program

provides leadership in improving and expanding urban forest ecosystems. The U&CF Program

assists local communities in recognizing the value of their urban trees and forests, building

capacity to manage community forest resources, and supporting community vitality through

public involvement, commitment, and action. Communities are encouraged in the strategic use

of tree planting; urban forest management to help mitigate the effects of flood hazards and air,

water, soil, and noise pollution; and the reduction of energy use and community beautification.

These efforts also contribute social and economic benefits by creating community gathering

places and recreation opportunities, increasing real estate values, and helping communities

attract and retain businesses.

The U&CF Program leads communities to provide better stewardship of urban natural

resources. The program offers expert advice, innovative technology, and financial assistance

to ensure that there are healthy trees and forests where people live, work, and play.

Metropolitan areas collectively support nearly one-quarter of the Nation’s total tree canopy

cover. Program funding contributes to community economic stability, natural beauty, public

health, and quality of life. The U&CF staff works cooperatively with State foresters and other

partners to effectively deliver the Federal program and develop urban and community forestry

programs at the State and local levels. The program currently places emphasis on four areas:

strengthening State and local capacity, helping to make cities more livable to help reduce

urban sprawl, assessing the condition of urban natural resources, and strengthening applied

research and technology transfer.

USDA Forest Service Research and Development (R&D), in cooperation with U&CF, has

initiated a long-term strategy to assess tree cover in urban areas nationwide every 10 years.

The first assessment, published in August 2000, established a 1992 baseline of 27 percent tree

cover in urban areas nationwide. The second assessment, which will update these numbers for

2002 and provide the first indication of regional and nationwide trends, will not be completed

for another 2 to 3 years.

Based on preliminary reports by the States, 11,686 communities participated in U&CF

programs nationwide during FY 2002. This number is larger than the 10,500 anticipated, in

part because additional Federal and State funding for financial and technical assistance in FY

2001 contributed to increased community involvement that carried over into 2002. This

situation occurs when States receive Federal funds near the end of the Federal fiscal year and

may not issue subgrants to communities until the following year. As a result, some States may

not report accomplishments for a fiscal year until the following year. Between 1997 and 2002,

the program experienced modest but steady increases in Federal funding that were reflected in

accomplishments. Over these 5 years, the States reported that the number of participating

Overview

FY 2002 Performance
167

communities increased steadily from 27 percent to 43 percent of all eligible communities.

USDA Forest Service and State-supported projects attracted 2.3 million hours of volunteer

assistance in 2002, an increase of about 700,000 volunteer hours from the previous year,

which greatly exceeded projections. 

In 2002, Congress appropriated $1.5 million for the USDA Forest Service to “participate in

developing living memorials using trees that will recognize the tragic losses that occurred on

September 11, 2001, in New York City, the Pentagon area, and southwest Pennsylvania.” By

the first anniversary in September 2002, the U&CF “Living Memorials Project” had already

awarded $933,300 in Federal grants ranging from $13,000 to $236,000 to establish publicly

accessible memorial sites. In addition, grant recipients received technical support in the form

of training, on-the-ground assistance, Web-accessible technical materials, and online mapping.

In Virginia, the USDA Forest Service is working with the Virginia State forester and officials

from the Pentagon, Arlington County, and American Forests to develop additional memorial sites. 

The USDA Forest Service continued its partnership with more than 130 public and private

organizations that have joined forces in Chicago Wilderness, an unprecedented alliance

dedicated to protecting and restoring the region’s natural heritage and to inspiring the region’s

residents to become active stewards. Since 1995, the U&CF program has helped Chicago

Wilderness fund more than 170 urban forestry projects across the region, extending from

northeastern Illinois into Wisconsin and Indiana. Projects under way in 2002 with USDA

Forest Service support include two efforts: the Illinois Biodiversity Basics, a program aimed

at increasing awareness and support among educators for the recovery of biodiversity in the

region and the Metropolitan Natural Landscaping Initiative, which promotes the use of trees

and other natural vegetation around corporate, institutional, and local government buildings. 

Urban watershed stewardship activities around the country continued to receive U&CF

support in FY 2002. Regions and State partners provided technical assistance and grants to

communities and Native American Tribes to undertake collaborative efforts to manage,

protect, restore, and maintain natural resources and watersheds in their communities. Some

projects engaged underrepresented groups and youth organizations in community-based

watershed restoration efforts. The program works with States to define and implement natural

resources protection and restoration efforts within large urban areas, as well as to address

issues of environmental justice and urban sprawl in project design and implementation.

One example is Revitalizing Baltimore, a regional partnership working to improve urban

natural resources in and around Baltimore, MD. This national model for community forestry

and watershed restoration equips city residents to care for natural resources, while employing

these resources to revitalize their neighborhoods. Over the last 7 years, Revitalizing Baltimore

has helped to green 45 urban neighborhoods by planting more than 3,560 street trees and

9,800 riparian trees and shrubs in over 500 projects involving more than 3,000 volunteers

annually. The partnership also provided stewardship education to over 6,600 students and 500

adults. It actively reaches out to culturally diverse communities to help residents in a variety

of urban forestry projects. Examples include planting trees along streets and streams,

transforming vacant lots into community green space, improving neighborhood parks and

schoolyards, monitoring streams and habitats, and fostering stewardship of natural resources

through youth education and adult training. 
168

In 2002, the USDA Forest Service conducted new Geographic Information System (GIS)-

based urban ecosystem analyses for metropolitan areas in San Antonio, TX; Fayetteville, AR;

San Juan, PR; New Orleans, LA; and Philadelphia, PA. More detailed GIS-based analyses

were also completed for Atlanta, GA, and Roanoke, VA. The U&CF program continued to

support development and delivery of GIS planning tools for integrated forest ecosystem

analysis, such as the American Forests’ CITYgreenTM analysis package and TreePeople’s

T.R.E.E.S. Project. These cost-benefit programs assist State and local governments in

documenting the effectiveness of using green infrastructure approaches in improving planning

and management in rapidly growing communities. 

The U&CF Program completed a National Technology Transfer Strategy and Action Plan in

FY 2002. As part of this process, the national team also completed the first phase of a market

analysis to “identify barriers and/or obstacles from inadequate staffing and funding that

prevent effective delivery of technology transfer research and information.” This social/market

research is designed to help those involved in urban and community forestry become more

effective in disseminating technical knowledge and education information. The products from

this project will include a market analysis summary that outlines the findings, presents “key

messages” to overcome barriers, and provides a simple and direct strategy to motivate the

target audience; a PowerPoint presentation for local government officials and leaders to

highlight the importance of investing in green infrastructure and community forests; and a

handbook that provides a step-by-step process for implementing the strategy and promoting

investment in community trees.

The U&CF Program participated in a review of all Cooperative Forestry programs in 

Region 6. The purpose of the review was twofold: (1) to monitor and improve program

management, delivery, coordination, and communication between the Washington Office and

the Pacific Northwest Region; and (2) to ensure that the USDA Forest Service is providing

high-quality service through all cooperative programs to State forestry and economic

development organizations, the agency’s National Forest System (NFS) and R&D deputy

areas, nongovernment organizations, urban centers, communities, and private landowners. 

The review found that all Cooperative Forestry programs provide the tools, approaches, and

authorities needed to shift to seamless government within Region 6; the region is working

across boundaries and the U&CF Program is a key element in making this shift successful;

and Cooperative Forestry programs in the Pacific Northwest are being well managed and

delivered. 

Over the past decade, since inception, the U&CF Program has shown exciting

accomplishments and increasing public awareness and participation in State and local U&CF

programs. Financial support to State and local programs has built a structural capacity leading

to greater numbers of self-sustaining efforts. Every dollar of Federal funding leverages

another 4 dollars invested by State and local public organizations in planting trees and

maintaining the urban forest. 

Even with these successes, the need is growing for greater scientific understanding and

applied research into urban forest health, structure, and function within the landscape to better

monitor and sustain the long-term benefits provided by these forests. As urban areas expand

Program Evaluations

Conclusions and

Challenges
169

ever more rapidly into less-developed rural areas, a growing percentage of the Nation’s natural

resources—including key national forests—will merge with urban forest ecosystems. For this

reason, it is critical that we begin to look at and influence vital connections on the landscape.

From declining inner-city neighborhoods to increasingly fragmented rural forests, a new

emphasis on linking and managing the Nation’s “green” infrastructure will enable the agency

and the U&CF Program to work effectively across the landscape with other Federal, State,

and local partners to contribute to and build more sustainable communities.

The USDA Forest Service will continue to track trends in participating communities,

volunteer participation in U&CF programs, and sustainability of local programs. Various cities

are using new tools, developed by USDA Forest Service R&D and other partners, to help

assess urban forest benefits and functions (e.g., air pollution removal and carbon sequestration).

With these tools, communities are improving management of urban forests to improve human

health and environmental quality. The agency has also begun to assess urban tree canopy

cover every 10 years. By 2006, the agency will complete the second assessment and report 

on trends in tree cover for urban areas nationwide.

One challenge to continuing the steady increase in numbers of participating communities and

in the level of participation may come in FY 2003 with a reduction in capacity in State

programs. Several factors converged during FY 2002, causing States to begin reducing U&CF

technical and financial assistance to communities. These factors include the downturn in the

national economy that seriously impacted State budgets, the mid-year borrowing of funds

from U&CF and other agency accounts to help cover unexpectedly high wildfire suppression

costs, and deferral of final FY 2003 appropriations until calendar year 2003, which further

delayed U&CF grants to States. 

During November 2002, U&CF coordinators in the States provided FY 2002 annual

accomplishments on line using the Performance Management and Accountability System

(PMAS), a Web-accessed database. Regional coordinators and Washington Office staff

personnel reviewed the submitted data prior to acceptance. To the greatest extent possible, 

the information in this report was validated via e-mail, phone calls or Web-based reports. 

Verification, Validation,

and Limitations of Data

Sources
170

Strategic Goal 3.

Science and Technical

Assistance
171
172

The USDA Forest Service provides financial, scientific, and technical support to States, tribal

governments, rural communities and businesses, and private landowners in support of local

economies and to provide protection from wildland fires.

Through the State Fire Assistance (SFA) and Volunteer Fire Assistance (VFA) programs, the

USDA Forest Service provides financial and technical assistance to help States, territories, and

communities implement fire preparedness and wildland fire mitigation activities. These

activities increase their ability to protect the natural resources and property that small

communities rely on for their economic livelihood. See also a discussion of fire assistance

programs under strategic objective 1c.

The USDA Forest Service uses the Economic Action Programs (EAPs), such as Pacific

Northwest Assistance and others, to build working relationships with rural communities and

provide them with technical and financial assistance. USDA Forest Service employees across

the country work with local elected officials, grassroots community organizations, community

forestry practitioners, and a multitude of other partners in a wide variety of community-based

activities. Partnerships are formed to strengthen, diversify, and expand local economies; build

local capacity to develop, implement, and monitor community strategic plans; integrate

natural resource stewardship with opportunities to expand and create jobs and locally owned

businesses; develop new products and markets for ecosystem restoration byproducts; improve

transportation networks; and increase access to technology. 

In FY 2002, EAP authorities, networks, and partnerships of the EAPs were also used by the

National Fire Plan (NFP) to help rural communities and organizations seek market-based

opportunities for natural resource businesses and services. Through the additional financial

resources of the NFP, the agency uses EAPs to build local capacity in areas at risk from

wildfires due to concentrations of high-hazard fuels. Additional discussion of EAPs can be

found under strategic objective 2c.

The 9.9 million non-industrial private forest (NIPF) landowners in the United States control

48 percent of the Nation’s forests, but only about 7 percent of these lands are covered by

written forest management plans. Stewardship management plans and multiresource practices

on these non-Federal forest lands help enhance forest and rangeland health across the entire

landscape. See also a discussion of the Forest Stewardship Program (FSP) under strategic

objectives 2c and 2d.

States and territories receive State Fire Assistance grants to address wildfire hazards in the

wildland-urban interface through fuels reduction, community projects, prevention, creation of

defensible space around property, and FIREWISE education campaigns. In 2002, the

Cooperative Fire Assistance Program provided SFA grants to 46 States and 4 territories. Four

States, two territories, and the District of Columbia did not receive cooperative fire assistance

because they were not able to submit their grant applications before the transfer of funds to

cover extraordinary fire suppression costs in 2002. Some States that did receive grants did not

receive the full funding anticipated when targets were established. Shortfalls in meeting

targets are attributable primarily to the lack of program contributions from these States. Grants

issued allowed the States, territories, and rural communities to increase their capacity to fight

wildland fire. The program supplied additional firefighting equipment, safety gear, communiOverview

FY 2002 Performance
173

cations equipment, and training for both volunteer and governmental firefighters. FY 2002

was the second year for specific funding to address significant hazard mitigation needs across

the Nation. 

VFA grants were awarded to 43 States in FY 2002. Seven States did not receive VFA

assistance because they were not able to submit grant applications before funding was stopped

when funds were transferred to cover the enormous fire suppression costs during FY 2002.

Some States that did receive grants did not receive full funding anticipated when targets were

established. As with the SFA program, a shortfall in meeting the target is attributable in part 

to the lack of program contributions from these States. In addition, due to priorities in some

States, the average grant size to communities went up, with the result that fewer departments

may be assisted than anticipated. Grants enabled rural fire services to increase their capacity

to fight wildland fire and associated community protection in the wildland urban interface.

Special emphasis has been on training and personal protective equipment for volunteer

wildland firefighters. The new National Fire Plan Operations and Reporting System

(NFPORS) database has improved our ability to track VFA target accomplishments and 

NFP goal progress. The data produced is considered reasonably sound and supportable.

Expectations are that future data collection and reporting will improve as the NFPORS

database is adjusted in FY 2003 to collect more complete data.

Forest stewardship plans were written for 18,102 ownerships covering over 1.64 million acres

of NIPF forest lands in FY 2002. This brings the total number of acres under forest

stewardship plans to just under 25 million and the total number of plans to about 217,000. 

The FY 2002 target of 1,407,800 acres was exceeded by more than 131,000 acres.

The USDA Forest Service exceeded its goal for number of rural communities working under

broad-based local strategic plans. In addition to those communities with completed plans,

more than 200 other communities are working on new plans. With the continued emphasis on

implementing the NFP and the transfer of program funds to help cover firefighting costs of

FY 2002, regional and local coordinators of EAPs spent only limited time and other resources

to help rural communities develop new or revise old local strategic plans. NFP-EAP funding

was used, however, to assist over 222 rural communities in integrating wildfire protection and

prevention and hazardous fuels management into new or existing local strategic action plans,

an increase of 41 over FY 2001. Rural communities use these plans to develop the capacity

for collaborative resource management and sustainable development projects.

In FY 2002, with not all regions reporting final totals, over 1,300 rural communities and

organizations received direct technical or financial assistance via the EAPs (including both

regular core program and NFP-funded assistance). The total number receiving assistance is

greater than in FY 2001 due to the heightened focus on communities at risk from wildfires.

Even though funding was transferred to cover firefighting costs, communities receiving

assistance included 325 underserved rural communities, 91 tribal communities, and 102

communities of other minority groups.

Through base EAP and NFP-EAP funds, rural communities and organizations implemented

over 820 projects, including activities aimed at maintaining or expanding local businesses. A

substantial number of projects were not initiated due to the redirection of funds for firefighting.
174

During FY 2002, the new PMT database was used, evaluated, and revised for management 

of the EAPs. This tool is critical to the full implementation of the USDA Forest Service’s

National Strategic Plan for Economic Action Programs: Working Together for Rural America:

2000 and Beyond – Integrating Natural Resource Management and Rural Community

Assistance. Although this new tool is helping with certain aspects of monitoring and

evaluation, only small advances were made in FY 2002 to build the capacity in rural

communities to measure and evaluate their own progress toward their strategic goals. 

This remains a key emphasis area for future efforts.

The Forest Products Laboratory (FPL) is conducting research on various applications that may

open up new markets for material that can help offset the costs of hazardous fuel reduction.

Such applications could be used by rural communities in economic development efforts. For

example, FPL is developing new uses for small-diameter and low-valued trees. Water filters

made from material removed from forests during thinning operations are used to clean up

mine waste. New drying techniques for ponderosa pine are eliminating crook and twist

prevalent in small diameter trees. Forest residues are combined with plastic to produce a

multitude of niche products, such as roofing, highway signs, and specialty products. Small

roundwood logs, 4 to 6 inches in diameter, are being used as trusses and I-beams. Electricity

and heat are being produced from forest residues and material from thinning operations, using

small-scale modular wood gasification systems. 

Joint fire and aviation reviews scheduled in Region 2 and Region 6 in FY 2002 included the

SFA and VFA programs. These reviews were postponed due to the severe fire seasons both

regions experienced. These reviews have been rescheduled for the spring of FY 2003.

Regions conducted reviews of State programs. 

The Washington Office Cooperative Forestry Staff undertook an evaluation of the implementation of all FSP components in Region 6. The evaluation indicated that implementation of the

FSP was very successful. No significant issues were uncovered.

Due to the need to emphasize the EAP component of the NFP under tight budget and time

constraints, EAP managers did not conduct any national or regional program reviews devoted

solely to EAPs in FY 2002. EAP managers, however, participated in a Cooperative Forestry

Program review in the Pacific Northwest Region.

A common finding is that States are having difficulty implementing their programs. State

budgets are strained and they have very limited ability to increase staffing commensurate 

with the level of activity being generated by the NFP incentives. Nevertheless, partnering 

and collaboration are helping all agencies to work more effectively to deliver these programs. 

FY 2002 was the second year of increased emphasis on assistance to communities in the

wildland-urban interface. There is a visible increase in the public interest in the wildland fuel

and interface issues. Communities and landowners seem to be more engaged in the issue than

ever before. The challenge for the State foresters and the Federal agencies is to work closely

together to avoid complicated and confusing delivery of assistance programs. Also, regions

and States learned from the difficulties posed by the FY 2002 borrowing strategy to cover fire

suppression costs that it will be important for States to have grant request packages submitted

early in FY 2003 to ensure grant funding. 

Program Evaluations

Conclusions and

Challenges
175

The FSP continues to be successful. Landowner enrollment has remained constant since

program inception. A study of FSP participants conducted in FY 2000 indicated that

landowners were highly satisfied with their plans and that a high percentage would recommend

the program to others. An analysis of plans conducted that same year indicated that plan

writers were not always adequately addressing nontimber values to the extent required by statute.

This issue has been addressed by the production and distribution of a desk guide to writing

forest stewardship plans and by the creation of a Web site designed to provide landowners 

and plan writers with information on forest management for timber and nontimber values.

Implementation of the early stages of the NFP-EAPs has once again shown that where

partnerships have developed, where community capacity is in place, and where problems

(such as wildfire risks) and opportunities (such as small-diameter roundwood products) 

are more clearly defined, rural communities and their supporting organizations are able to

successfully compete for resources to revise, update, or implement their strategic plans. 

Those communities without local strategic plans were much less ready to engage in NFP

implementation and were more likely to need community-organizing, training, and other basic

assistance before they could seek market-based opportunities associated with hazardous fuels

reduction on public lands.

Regional reviews of State programs revealed no significant shortfalls or failures. State actions

under grants were being delivered in accordance with grant objectives. State priorities are

focused appropriately on wildland-urban interface issues and protection of threatened

communities. There are many documented successes that demonstrate the effectiveness of

Federal grants to States for community protection and interagency collaboration. In nearly all

cases, State foresters expressed a concern that their ability to deliver program increases is

severely limited by staffing shortages.

Time is needed to create a common community vision and a set of goals that include natural

resource and other concerns, such as time to build trust and learn how to become involved in

programs and processes. Long-term USDA Forest Service commitment of adequate staffing

and financial resources is essential to helping rural communities move from dependency to

resiliency. Community leaders look to the EAPs to leverage much more than dollars even

though financial resources are essential to managing the changes they face. The availability of

agency resources is problematic as budgets fluctuate and staffing is redirected to other priorities.

The implementation of the NFPORS database was not completed until late in the year so there

was some difficulty in meeting reporting timeframes. The database provides a good

foundation of information; however, several shortcomings have been identified. Followup

with several regions was necessary to verify and validate data. Measurement of “communities

assisted” remains difficult as there are so many ways to define a “community.” Also, there are

many types of assistance that may be provided to a community. Identifying actual numbers of

communities assisted as opposed to “assists to communities” remains a challenge.

Adjustments to the database and development of better definitions, direction, and training will

strengthen reporting and verification in the future. 

Verification, Validation,

and Limitations of Data

Sources
176

FSP data entered by each State has been closely scrutinized. In cases where there was a

marked difference in data entry compared with FY 2001 data, the State has been contacted to

ensure that the numbers are accurate.

For FY 2002, the data source for EAP is a new PMT database, which is being used by

program managers and field coordinators to assist rural communities and organizations.

At the time of this report, all regions had not completed their data entry, with particular data

entry shortfalls associated with incomplete grant award processes for the regular EAPs and

NFP-EAPs. During FY 2002, the database was significantly revised; program managers in the

national headquarters continue to upgrade the database structure and evaluate the quality and

consistency of data entry and the reporting system. Regional program managers monitor

available data for completeness and accuracy. Although data quantity is adequate for assessing

the progress made in FY 2002, additional modifications and enhancements will be made to

further improve the consistency and reliability for FY 2003 data entry and reporting. More

design work is needed to take advantage of the full potential of the database to assist

communities and the agency in describing and measuring progress toward long-term goals.
177

Strategic Objective 3b. Increase the effectiveness of scientific and technical assistance

delivered to domestic and international interests.

Annual Performance Goals and Associated Measures:

(1) USDA Forest Service conservation education materials support agency mission/programs

and enhance the public’s understanding.

Measure: Percent of customer (educators) satisfaction with materials.

(2) Current and accurate information is delivered using a variety of media including Webbased technology, and is available to other agencies, partners, and the public to support

analysis and decisionmaking.

Measure: Percent of user satisfaction with usefulness of information and technology

provided.

(3) Management of overseas habitats for U.S.-based migratory species is effectively

supported.

Measure: Percent increase in overseas habitats of selected U.S.-based migratory species.

(4) Advanced technology is developed for construction of durable and affordable housing.

Measure: To be determined.

(5) Provide technical assistance to support the management of selected protected areas in

other countries.

Measure: To be determined.

(6) Environmental performance in pulp and paper processing is improved through research.

Measure: To be determined.
178

The USDA Forest Service provides a wide range of scientific and technical assistance to

numerous entities such as local, tribal, State, Federal, and foreign governments; nongovernmental organizations and partnerships; forest landowners; and the general public. Although

virtually all functions and levels of the agency provide some form of assistance to one or

more external entities, scientific and technical assistance is delivered to domestic and international interests mainly through Research and Development (R&D), Conservation Education,

and International Programs (IP). The assistance and products provided by these staffs

contribute considerably to maintaining and improving the health and productivity of forest,

rangeland, and aquatic ecosystems from the local to the global level. Through these efforts,

land managers in all 50 States, U.S. territories, and throughout the world benefit from

improved management alternatives.

Conservation Education strives to educate people to take informed actions to sustain natural

and cultural resources. This requires an integrated and coordinated program that addresses

current issues and concerns that face the public, as well as long-term environmental and

resource management concepts.

Efforts to support migratory species are spearheaded by IP. Through habitat improvement

work, migratory species conservation partnerships, and strengthening conservation capacity in

countries where migratory bird species live, IP strives to ensure the viability of more that 80

migratory species. Through these partnerships, USDA Forest Service funds have been

leveraged. With a relatively small investment of expertise from IP, the agency has worked

with foreign and domestic partners to enhance habitats and populations of migratory species.

In the case of some bird species, such as the endangered Kirtland’s warbler, International

Programs work outside the United States is invaluable in preserving the species.

The level of customer satisfaction with materials produced by Conservation Education 

was measured by a national USDA Forest Service Customer Service Survey conducted from

March through June 2002. Customer service surveys were conducted at the national level and

in five geographic regions from March to June of 2002 to assess customer satisfaction with 

the delivery of the Conservation Education program. Individual surveys were combined for a

national report of customer satisfaction with Conservation Education. In that survey, customers

reported a high level of satisfaction with the content of USDA Forest Service-produced

conservation education materials. Customers expressed a high level of satisfaction that these

materials are based on scientific findings and support current agency direction.

USDA Forest Serivce R&D produced 8,831 research products, tools, and technologies that

were transferred to users. A simple tabulation of the numbers of research products, however,

clearly was not sufficient to convey the breadth and depth of the R&D program. Several

accomplishments are highlighted in the following paragraphs, while others are featured

throughout this annual report to demonstrate how scientific knowledge and research products

contribute to resource sustainability. 

Forest Products Laboratory (FPL) scientists have constructed a research/demonstration house

on the grounds of FPL that serves as a research laboratory and a forum for information

transfer to builders and the public. Some of the research focuses on moisture-related durability

issues, including mold growth and biodeterioration. Other research is addressing the increased

Overview

FY 2002 Performance
179

use of recycled materials, structural composites and engineered wood products from

underutilized species, improved natural disaster performance, and increased energy efficiency.

FPL has been a national leader in evaluating properties of deconstructed lumber, developing a

grade stamp for lumber reuse in engineered applications, and wood recycling. The Environmental

Protection Agency estimates that 245,000 buildings are demolished in the United States each

year, involving more than a billion board feet of lumber. Reusing lumber and fiber from

building demolition is an increasingly popular means of extending the forest resource and

reducing material in landfills. 

FPL scientists have also developed a new filter for removing pollutants from water. The

current focus of this research is to develop filtration systems for sources of water pollution

such as agricultural or urban storm water runoff and acid mine drainage. The benefits of this

research to the American public are twofold. First, this research directly contributes to the

development of low-cost technologies for protecting the quality of water resources. Second,

ecosystem health is enhanced through the development of new technologies for converting

low-value forest residues into higher-value products such as water filters and related products. 

Scientists from FPL have developed the ability to produce ethanol using biomass materials.

Biomass includes woody materials and agricultural wastes such as corn hulls and corn cobs.

This is an important advancement for the biomass conversion industry, and it is especially

significant for the production of renewable fuels from agricultural and woody residues.

When this technology is fully implemented, farmers and woodlot owners will be able to sell

agricultural and small-diameter, low-grade hardwood residues; the timber industry could

recover additional value from processing wastes; and the grain processing industry could

increase ethanol production from grain hulls.

Similarly, FPL scientists are providing important advances in paper science and technology.

Improved, lightweight, high-opacity printing papers are the result of technologies such as

biopulping, microwave pretreatment for thermomechanical pulping, oxalic acid pulping, and

fiber loading with simultaneous alkaline peroxide bleaching. 

In 1999, the Southern Research Station developed a database system to organize and distribute

delivery of USDA Forest Service research publications via the Internet. Since that time, several

modifications and enhancements have improved online delivery of publications. Last spring

the database was expanded to include records from other stations and laboratories. The public

has benefited from this fast, effective mechanism for delivery of research products; the

database currently receives 2,000-3,000 requests per day and is fully indexed by major search

engines. 

The Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) Program developed software that allows users to

create customized maps on forest and rangelands based on their own criteria. The Web page

for accessing this FIA Mapmaker software was one of the most popular on the North Central

Research Station Web site. The support provided by this program included the first release of

annualized inventory data, a feature long requested by State foresters.
180

International Programs led and supported 13 field projects in fiscal year (FY) 2002 that

increased habitat capability outside the United States for migratory bird species. Projects were

selected based on species or habitats that are of greatest concern to American conservationists

or are of importance to indigenous cultures in North America. Support to these projects

included technical conservation training for key people in host nations.

Conservation Education customer service surveys were conducted at the national level and in

five geographic regions from March to June of 2002 to assess customer satisfaction with

program delivery. The regions surveyed were Alaska, the Intermountain West, the Northeast,

the Pacific West, and the South. The national survey was on the National Symbols (Smokey

and Woodsy) Program. These individual surveys were also combined for a national report of

customer satisfaction with Conservation Education. The highest overall customer satisfaction

levels were reported in the South, Alaska, and Intermountain West areas. The national survey

report identified high customer satisfaction with the content of agency-produced education

materials. Customers expressed a high level of satisfaction that these materials are based on

scientific findings, are presented in a user-friendly format, meet educational standards required

by their organization, and support current agency direction.

Within R&D, the six regional research stations, the FPL, and the International Institute of

Tropical Forestry annually evaluate needs at the various levels, assign priorities, and request

funding. Their requests are carefully reviewed and coordinated with needs identified as critical

at the national level and then merged into a National Research Program. The base R&D

program, however, is assembled from individual field submissions.

Customer, research user, and peer comments are considered and critically reviewed when

identifying research needs at regional levels. Valuable guidance in shaping the R&D program 

is provided in this process. For example, as R&D began reaching out to underserved

communities, a need to expand our social science research effort was identified. Many

minorities do not know about national forests; others, because of perceived barriers, do not 

use them. R&D believes this is a subject worthy of special emphasis.

No evaluations were conducted in FY 2002 on International Programs.

By surveying customers nationwide, the Conservation Education Staff has determined that

there is a high level of satisfaction with the content of its materials, but there is also room to

improve the delivery of those materials and related educational services to educators, youth

leaders, and other members of the public. Notification of the availability of materials and

services and the actual distribution of those materials need to be improved and expanded to

satisfy the current demands. The USDA Forest Service will continue to emphasize cooperation

with other education partners, such as other agencies, nonprofit educational institutions, and

State and private organizations to effectively and efficiently address this public need.

The most direct means for obtaining the percent of customer satisfaction is through a survey 

of customers as was done in FY 2002. It is not practical, however, to survey our customers

annually. Future measurement of this annual performance goal, for those years when a survey

is not conducted, should be the percent of materials developed and used during the year that

support public understanding of priority natural resource program issues or objectives as

identified by USDA Forest Service leadership. 

Program Evaluations

Conclusions and

Challenges
In a science agenda for the next fiscal year, the Administration presented research and

development opportunities that are intended to continue global leadership in science and

technology. The science agenda includes existing and emerging research and development

priorities that require significant levels of coordination and planning. The priority-setting and

coordination process reflects the Administration’s objectives of maintaining excellence and

maximizing the efficient and effective use of the Nation’s resources.

The multitude of opportunities requires wise selection of which programs to launch,

encourage, and enhance, and which to reevaluate, modify, or redirect in keeping with national

needs and capabilities. For example, the area of science for sustainability seeks to increase our

understanding of complex systems and addresses challenges to global sustainability in areas

such as energy, environmental protection, food and water, and health.

As directed by the President’s Management Agenda, R&D program management and

effectiveness will be improved through the application of explicit investment criteria. The

criteria will help improve program management and funding decisions, which will ultimately

increase public understanding of the possible benefits and effectiveness of Federal

investments in research and development. Satisfying the research and development

performance criteria for a given program should serve to set and evaluate performance goals

for purposes of the Government Performance and Results Act.

International partnerships continue to be valuable in protection efforts for migratory species

and their habitats. Up to 40 percent of migrating waterfowl depend on the boreal forests 

of North America, but habitat is steadily disappearing due to oil and gas development,

agriculture, some forest management practices, and other activities. The agency must develop

additional partnerships with other Federal agencies, State and local governments, and private

corporations and organizations to mitigate the impacts of development on migratory species.

International partnerships are important as well. One example is the Copper River

International Migratory Bird Initiative, which is working to conserve millions of migratory

birds that depend on the Copper River Delta and other feeding and breeding sites along the

Pacific Coast from Alaska to as far south as South America. Some examples of Copper River

Delta species are the Western Sandpiper, Dusky Canada Goose, and Trumpeter Swan.

The Conservation Education customer service survey was conducted through a nationally

recognized survey firm. The maximum sampling error for this survey is plus or minus 

3.1 percent at the 90 percent confidence level.

The complex and unstructured processes found in the research and development arena are less

easily quantified. In the physical sciences, measurement such as length, temperature, and mass

may be measured using single standard units—the adequacy of each measurement depends 

on the qualities of the instrument, but the standards are well defined and widely accepted. 

In contrast, the creative aspects of research and development make direct measurement

impossible. The dilemma is balancing objectivity with the subjective selection and interpretation

of measurement indicators, recognizing the cognitive and social structure of science. Three

dimensions of research and development—concept generation, product development, and

leadership—are distinct phenomena with unique characteristics within the innovative process

of research. These dimensions are not amenable to forced correlations and patterns, which can

result in comparing apples and oranges, so to speak. 

Verification, Validation,

and Limitations of Data

Sources

181
182

Alternatively, indicators may be used for certain aspects. The degree to which such indicators

“measure” research and development performance depends on their accuracy, their quantity,

and whether any one indicator may be aggregated with others for indexing. Empirically, this

means one measure will be inherently insufficient to capture all the information required.

The current single measure of R&D performance—number of products, technologies, and

tools produced—has a reasonably high bias for accuracy, precision, and repeatability, but has

variable tolerance and sensitivity. A more plausible approach would be to use a set of

performance measures that can be linked to outputs. A systematic design and understanding 

of the process by which R&D impacts agency performance, and to which the agency remains

committed to working with users and the scientific community, will allow us to identify and

define meaningful performance measures for the future.

Historically, no data has been collected on migratory species work; therefore, no validation 

is done by International Programs.
183
184
185
186

Research, inventory, and monitoring are valuable tools used by the USDA Forest Service to

enhance the scientific understanding of ecosystems to support decisionmaking and sustainable

management of the Nation’s forests and grasslands. Responsibility for gathering and analyzing

the information gathered lies within the programs of Research and Development (R&D),

National Forest System (NFS), and State and Private Forestry (S&PF).

The mission of R&D is to develop, demonstrate, and disseminate scientific information and

technologies to protect, manage, and use in a sustainable manner those renewable resources in

rural, suburban, and urban areas. The knowledge and research products provided by R&D

scientists contribute considerably to maintaining and improving the health and productivity of

forest, rangeland, and aquatic ecosystems, as well as to providing important information for

USDA Forest Service policies and programs.

On NFS lands, integrated inventories meet multiple information needs for national forests and

grasslands achieved by collecting data on the status or conditions of resources, including

vegetative and physical characteristics as well as human dimensions. Inventories occur at

multiple scales and are, or will be, conducted to national standards. 

Assessments also occur at multiple scales and provide information relevant to a broad range

of resource management issues. Broad-scale assessments are used to evaluate ecosystem

composition, structure, and processes and evaluate indexes of ecological, social, and economic

sustainability. Watershed assessments provide the contextual information necessary to focus

and prioritize restoration and management. Findings associated with assessments are used to

identify topics of general interest or concern to be addressed in land and resource management

plans (LRMPs).

LRMPs guide management decisions for all national forests, grasslands, prairies, and the Land

Between The Lakes. Plans develop long-term strategies while recognizing the need to make

short-term decisions and provide a framework for making future site-specific project decisions.

Plans are dependent on data and information collected by inventories and assessments of

specific resource issues, conditions, and trends. The development or revision of LRMPs is 

a multiyear process.

The Forest Health Management Program provides for the detection, monitoring, evaluation,

prevention, and suppression of forest insects, diseases, and invasive plants on forests and

rangelands managed by the NFS, other Federal agencies, States, territories, and tribal

governments. With the exception of invasive plants, Forest Health Management also provides

the same activities on NFS lands. Forest health management specialists evaluate risk for

resource damage and determine prevention, suppression, and maintenance treatments based on

results of the risk evaluation. Aerial and ground surveys are conducted for insects and diseases

in areas of risk. The program includes development of technologies to improve efficiency and

effectiveness of management of forest pests. The activities of the program enhance forest and

rangeland health by protecting wildland-urban interface areas, water resources, critical

wildlife habitats, and recreational opportunities. See also the discussion of Forest Health

Management under strategic objective 1c.

Overview
187

With a wide-ranging and inclusive knowledge base derived from these research, inventory,

and monitoring tools, land managers throughout the United States and its territories are

afforded improved management alternatives that cover both public and private lands.

Much was accomplished by R&D, NFS, and S&PF in fiscal year (FY) 2002. 

The accomplishments of each are delineated below.

During FY 2002, R&D produced 8,831 research products, tools, and technologies that were

transferred to users. A simple tabulation of the numbers of research products, however, clearly

was not sufficient to convey the breadth and depth of the R&D program. Several

accomplishments are highlighted in the following paragraphs, while others are featured

throughout this annual report to demonstrate how scientific knowledge and research products

contribute to resource sustainability. 

R&D sponsored the Forest Science Summit, which brought representatives from Federal

agencies, State foresters, nongovernmental organizations, universities, and environmental

groups to respond to the National Research Council’s Report on National Capacity in Forest

Research. One component of this report is improvement of research services to underserved

customers and communities. Strategies and actions have been developed and are being

implemented to address concerns raised in the report.

The Southern Forest Resource Assessment, a 3-year study that examined the history, status,

and likely future of southern forests, was released this year and will be featured in a special

issue of the Journal of Forestry. The citizen-centered process used in the development of the

assessment was a model for engaging the public in the research arena, and assured that the

results addressed the concerns of the citizens. The results have clearly affected the public

dialog about southern forests, and are being used to develop and direct future programs and

activities.

R&D conducted the first national survey to determine the value of the urban tree resource in

the United States and calculated it to be about $2.5 trillion. City managers, planners, and

private corporations use this information to determine the potential risk of loss to the resource

due to various events such as fire, insect outbreaks, and others that damage or destroy urban

trees.

An urban tree resource study of the urban forest of South Lake Tahoe by the Center for Urban

Forest Research in Davis, CA, revealed the need for more active participation of homeowners

to mitigate existing fire hazards. A press release was issued locally to advise homeowners of

the findings and to stress that community involvement is absolutely necessary for effective

fire hazard mitigation, especially in neighborhoods with predominantly small lots. 

North Central Research Station scientists developed a new instrument to detect trees infested

with Asian longhorned beetles. They also initiated a bilateral research program with China to

understand this exotic pest. This invention will help find outbreaks of this pest more rapidly

than current inspection techniques allow. The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

(APHIS) used the new device in New York’s Central Park, saving most trees in this historic

location from destruction.

FY 2002 Performance

Research & Development
188

Responding to demands for riparian forest buffer information, the Rocky Mountain Research

Station published an article that provided the first summary and synthesis of the peerreviewed scientific literature on buffer performance in mitigating water quality problems.

Policymakers and land managers are increasingly calling for a clear estimate of how much

reduction in nonpoint source pollution can be achieved by buffer installation programs on

private lands. 

A major conclusion from this summary was that expectations for program success are

currently not well founded in the research literature. 

Scientists are improving models of natural stand development in the Douglas-fir-western

hemlock forests where they occur on public and private lands of the Pacific Northwest. The

improved models incorporate new knowledge about disturbance regimes and their biological

legacies, such as live trees, snags, and logs; the complexity of stand structures and forest

development; and the development of later stages in long-lived forests. 

Technology transfer and conservation education receive greater emphasis each year from

R&D. During FY 2002, almost 25,000 copies of the Natural Inquirer, a science education

journal for middle school and early high school students, were distributed worldwide. Of

these, over 600 copies were in Spanish. The supporting Web site provides widespread access

to R&D information.

Also, through electronic means, R&D has provided vastly improved ways for internal and

external customers to be better served, including ease of access to scientific publications,

program opportunities, employment, and financial assistance. This has also helped meet the

Paperwork Reduction Act and Government Paperwork Elimination Act requirements.

R&D also continued to demonstrate this strong customer-driven approach through the Forest

Inventory and Analysis (FIA) Program. FIA is the Nation’s forest census, reporting annually

on status and trends in the Nation’s forested resources. FIA is a collaborative effort funded by

R&D, S&PF/Forest Resource Inventory and Analysis, S&PF/Forest Health Protection (FHP),

and NFS/Inventory and Monitoring, plus many State forestry agencies. In FY 2002, the FIA

program expanded coverage from 65 percent to 73 percent of the Nation’s forested lands by

adding Colorado, New Hampshire, New York, and Washington to the program, bringing us

closer to our goal of 100 percent implementation by FY 2003. More details are available in

the FY 2002 FIA Annual Business Report, available on the Internet at fia.fs.fed.us.

In an effort to increase service provided to underserved populations, R&D has implemented

new forest inventory methods tailored to urban areas and tropical forests. The new methods

for urban forests were pilot-tested in FY 2002. The International Institute of Tropical Forestry

(IITF) collaborated with the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico to inventory all of the island’s

forests. This will be the first-ever inventory to include urban forests of the island.

The USDA Forest Service completed five LRMP revisions and one new plan in FY 2002. 

In FY 2003, the agency will continue to revise its planning rule to improve the revision

process and the quality of resulting plans. These regulations are designed to take advantage 

of lessons learned over the past 20 years of forest planning. Setting forth a process that makes

sustainability the foundation of planning and decisionmaking, the new rule will engage the

National Forest System
189

public in defining the future of NFS lands and create plans with a sound scientific basis.

A total of 134 LRMP assessments was completed in FY 2002, 6 percent below the national

target. Broad-scale assessments are generally conducted for specific purposes on a forest or a

multiforest area. Because the purposes and scopes of assessments vary considerably, flexibility 

is necessary for planning, developing, implementing, and reporting on the results of these

assessments. Each successive broad-scale assessment benefits from lessons learned from

previous efforts. The Southern Appalachian Assessment was recently completed in 2 years at

relatively low cost, and the results have been shared by a number of Federal and State agencies

and have proved invaluable in support of land and resource management planning for the region.

The USDA Forest Service also completed 30,347,000 acres of above-project inventories. 

This accomplishment is made up of a number of component parts with associated targets,

some of which were met and others not. Adjustments by program managers shifted

component measures of the total target to support LRMP revisions, amendments, and

watershed assessments. For example, targets for “Terrestrial Ecological Unit Inventories—

acres inventoried” were shifted among eco-subregion, landscape, and land unit scales, which

enabled forests to focus basic inventories and complete core Geographic Information System

(GIS) coverage in support of identified priorities and needs. 

The Forest Health Management Program had many accomplishments in FY 2002. Of special

note are the following:

• Implemented a Slow the Spread (STS) strategy on more than 575,000 acres to control

gypsy moth infestations in areas that extended from North Carolina to Wisconsin.

• Surveyed over 744 million acres of forest lands for damage caused by forest insects and

diseases.

• Treated over a million acres of Federal, State, tribal, and private forest lands for insects,

diseases, and invasive plants. These acres were treated to provide suppression and

prevention of major pests, including hemlock woolly adelgid, gypsy moth, southern pine

beetle, and other bark beetles. These acres are in addition to those treated for the gypsy

moth in the STS program.

• Cooperated with USDA APHIS in survey, eradication, and community education efforts

to combat Asian longhorned beetle infestations in Chicago and New York.

• Maintained programs to prevent further spread of established invasive pathogens such as 

Port-Orford-cedar root disease in Oregon and California and white pine blister rust in the East.

• Supported the risk assessment and eradication projects for Sudden Oak Death in

California and Oregon.

• Provided technical assistance to Federal, State, and tribal land managers in preventing

pest outbreaks and maintaining healthy forest ecosystems, conducting surveys to detect

and evaluate forest pest outbreaks, coordinating action where pest outbreaks or other

forest health problems overlapped ownership boundaries, and monitoring and reporting

trends in forest ecosystem health indicators for all forests of the United States.

• Responded to nationwide threats to forest ecosystems from nonnative invasive species,

such as Sudden Oak Death and emerald ash borer outbreaks.

• Conducted evaluation monitoring projects to investigate forest health issues related to fire

risk, invasive species, and fire effects in the burned and unburned areas.

• Conducted a successful pilot on the Early Detection Survey System with APHIS to

rapidly detect new, unwanted introductions of exotic insects and diseases around nine

State & Private Forestry
190

U.S. port facilities.

• Maintained development, pilot tests, and demonstrations of new technologies, materials,

methods, and strategies to improve the efficiency of the management of forest pests.

No program evaluations were conducted by the Ecosystem Management Coordination (EMC)

Staff of NFS during FY 2002.

Within R&D, the six regional research stations, the Forest Products Laboratory, and the

International Institute of Tropical Forestry annually evaluate needs at the various levels,

assign priorities, and request funding. Their requests are carefully reviewed and coordinated

with needs identified as critical at the national level and then merged into a National Research

Program. The base R&D program, however, is assembled from the individual field

submissions.

Customer, research user, and peer comments are considered and critically reviewed when

identifying research needs at regional levels. Valuable guidance in shaping the R&D program

is provided in this process. For example, as R&D began reaching out to underserved

communities, a need to expand our social science research effort was identified. Many

minorities do not know about national forests while others, because of perceived barriers, 

do not use them. R&D believes this is a subject worthy of special emphasis.

In FY 2002, 13 percent of research work unit descriptions were revised to reflect changes in

the proposed research mission, problem, or approach.

R&D program reviews were conducted at several stations. Employees and station customers

were interviewed in each case. As a result, a number of changes have been made to enhance

program delivery internally and to external customers. 

Forest Health Management reviews included the Chief’s Overviews of the National Fire Plan

for Regions 8 and 10, which addressed insect outbreaks as they relate to fire risk. These

reviews emphasized the need for prevention and restoration activities on forest lands. An

invasive plant activity review for Region 5 (California and Hawaii) recommended that the

region’s invasive plants program better integrate with other agencies. 

In a science agenda for the next fiscal year, the Administration presented research and

development opportunities that are intended to continue global leadership in science and

technology. The science agenda includes existing and emerging research and development

priorities that require significant levels of coordination and planning. The priority-setting and

coordination process reflects the Administration’s objectives of maintaining excellence and

maximizing the efficient and effective use of the Nation’s resources.

The multitude of opportunities requires wise selection of which programs to launch,

encourage, and enhance, and which to reevaluate, modify, or redirect in keeping with national

needs and capabilities. For example, the area of science for sustainability seeks to increase our

understanding of complex systems and addresses challenges to global sustainability in areas

such as energy, environmental protection, food and water, and health.

Program Evaluations

Conclusions and

Challenges
191

As directed by the President’s Management Agenda, R&D program management and

effectiveness will be improved through the application of explicit investment criteria. The

criteria will help improve program management and funding decisions, which will ultimately

increase public understanding of the possible benefits and effectiveness of Federal

investments in research and development. Satisfying the research and development

performance criteria for a given program should serve to set and evaluate performance goals

for purposes of the Government Performance and Results Act.

NFS will continue to improve the definition of its inventory indicators to improve the quality

and usefulness of the information gathered. To ensure further improvements to the inventory

and monitoring program, the EMC staff will continue to prepare inventory and monitoring

program plans and schedule, develop, and test protocols and accomplishment tracking tools. 

The complex and unstructured processes found in the research and development arena are not

easily quantified. In the physical sciences, measurement such as length, temperature, and mass

may be measured using single standard units—the adequacy of each measurement depends on

the qualities of the instrument, but the standards are well defined and widely accepted. In

contrast, the creative aspects of research and development make direct measurement

impossible. The dilemma is balancing objectivity with the subjective selection and interpretation of measurement indicators, recognizing the cognitive and social structure of science.

Three dimensions of research and development—concept generation, product development,

and leadership—are distinct phenomena with unique characteristics within the innovative

process of research. These dimensions are not amenable to forced correlations and patterns,

which can result in comparing apples and oranges, so to speak. 

Alternatively, indicators may be used for certain aspects. The degree to which such indicators

“measure” research and development performance depends on their accuracy, their quantity,

and whether any one indicator may be aggregated with others for indexing. Empirically, this

means one measure will be inherently insufficient to capture all the information required.

The current single measure of R&D performance—number of products, technologies, and

tools produced—has a reasonably high bias for accuracy, precision, and repeatability, but has

variable tolerance and sensitivity. A more plausible approach would be to use a set of

performance measures that can be linked to outputs. A systematic design and understanding of

the process by which R&D impacts agency performance, and to which the agency remains

committed to working with users and the scientific community, will allow us to identify and

define meaningful performance measures for the future.

Outputs for NFS in the chart above shown with a data source indicator of MAR are collected

through the Management Attainment Reporting (MAR) process. The data is compiled by the

ranger districts and national forests and then reviewed by regional and national offices for

reasonableness. Further validation has not been considered costeffective, so accuracy of the

data is dependent on entries made at the national forest level.

The method for calculating the performance measure “million acres of above-project inventory

completed” was changed to better reflect the MAR data collected at the field level. The measure

“assessments completed” now represents only landscape/watershed scale assessments.

Verification, Validation,

and Limitations of Data

Sources

Research & Development

National Forest System
192

In previous years, Forest Health Management technical assistance, which includes biological

assessments and technology transfer to forest managers, was converted to acres treated or

protected, which resulted in different estimates of actual work performed. There is no direct

link, however, of technical assistance to number to treated acres. The transformation of

technical assistance to treated acres is no longer used. Thus, the actual number of forest health

acres protected decreased by nearly 1 million acres when compared to estimates for the FY

2002. This decrease in acres protected reflected changes in how these acres were calculated in

the past. For FY 2002 accomplishments, “Acres protected” equals “Acres treated” to better

reflect actual work performed.

State & Private Forestry
193

Strategic Objective 3d: Broaden the participation of less-traditional research groups in

research and technical assistance programs.

Annual Performance Goal and Associated Measure:

(1) Develop active, ongoing participation of less-traditional groups in research and technical

assistance programs.

Measure: Percent increase in the number of less-traditional technical and research groups

participating in research and technical assistance programs.

The USDA Forest Service provides services and opportunities to Americans of all racial and

ethnic backgrounds. Through a variety of employment and economic outreach programs, the

agency strives to encourage and increase participation of diverse individuals and groups in

research program management and community capacity building. Many agency programs

and services are directed at minority, poor, and other underserved groups throughout the

Nation. 

USDA Forest Service management is concerned with the potential for disproportionately

high adverse human health or environmental effects from its programs, policies, and

activities on minority and low-income populations. It is important to find common ground

and build relevance with all segments of society, including underserved populations and

communities, to effectively carry out the agency’s mission, plans, programs, and activities. 

The mission of the USDA Forest Service Research and Development (R&D) deputy area is

to develop, demonstrate, and disseminate scientific information and technologies to protect,

manage, and sustainedly use those renewable resources in rural, suburban, and urban areas.

The knowledge and research products provided by R&D scientists contribute considerably to

maintaining and improving the health and productivity of forest, rangeland, and aquatic

ecosystems, as well as providing important information for USDA Forest Service policies

and programs. Many efforts have been undertaken to increase the knowledge of, and participation in, the research programs of the USDA Forest Service and its partners and cooperators

among minorities and other underrepresented groups.

Conservation Education emphasizes delivery of program materials and services to audiences

identified in the Forest Service Interim Strategic Public Outreach Plan of April 2000 as

underserved customers, populations, or communities. According to the plan, these audiences

include minority groups (including American Indians or Alaska Natives), persons below the

poverty level, and persons with disabilities. Conservation Education also emphasizes delivery

to urban communities in consideration of the growth of urban populations in comparison to

rural populations. This requires national emphasis because the majority of Forest Service

field units are located in rural communities.

Overview
194

The USDA Forest Service continues to accomplish and expand upon the USDA Civil Rights

initiatives integral to customer service delivery. Through the strategic public outreach plan,

the agency continues to establish and build positive working relationships with underserved,

minority, low-income, and limited-resource communities in collaborative land stewardship, as

well as to improve customer service and increase program delivery and outreach. Efforts are

under way to increase the diversity of the research community through participation with

universities and other partners in supporting enrollment of minorities and other underrepresented groups in natural resource research fields. Communities affected include Hispanic,

Asian-Pacific Islander, African American, and other multiracial/cultural community-based

organizations. 

The national headquarters provided seed money to field units that demonstrated excellent

public outreach partnerships with diverse, underserved communities. The field units and

project managers obligated 80 percent of these funds to accomplish additional local results.

These excellent models of public outreach with underserved communities are the focus of

agencywide dialogue for improving customer service, public outreach, and collaborative

stewardship initiatives. 

The USDA Forest Service implemented an agreement between the Pacific Southwest Region

and the University of California-Berkeley. This partnership supports numerous communitybased organizations and works to establish a forum available to the USDA Forest Service for

dialog with these underserved communities, called “People for Forest, Forest for People—Just

Forest Symposium.” Implementation of the forum has been planned for fiscal year (FY) 2003.

The USDA Forest Service headquarters implemented initiatives on civil rights partnerships,

outreach, and capacity building with several land grant colleges, universities, and centers of

excellence. Federal financial assistance was administered by USDA Forest Service regions

and research stations. Capacity building includes (1) increasing school capacity for accreditation, more classes, USDA Forest Service research, and natural resource applicability; (2)

providing meaningful student work experiences; (3) providing undergraduate and graduate

academic development integral to growing agency research programs that are addressing

problems, thereby achieving place-based solutions; (4) building community capacity through

technology transfer; (5) making USDA Forest Service research and technical assistance

accessible to 

less-traditional research groups and underserved communities; (6) improving service to

underserved communities through public outreach efforts; and (7) enhancing the internal

retention capacity of a skilled, representative workforce.

An example of USDA Forest Service partnership and outreach efforts is the Clark Atlanta

Initiative, an education and research partnership among the agency’s Forest Products

Laboratory (FPL), Clark Atlanta University (CAU), the Institute of Paper Science and

Technology in Atlanta, and the University of Wisconsin-Madison. The objectives of the

initiative are to attract CAU students into undergraduate and graduate programs focused 

on forest products utilization research and to diversify the scientific workforce in natural

resources utilization. The FPL has four specific goals for the program. The first is outreach

and education among underrepresented groups through (1) highlighting career opportunities 

in research; (2) encouraging and assisting underrepresented group members to pursue degrees

FY 2002 Performance
in engineering, chemistry, biological sciences, materials science, forest products technology,

and economics; and (3) increasing the diversity of participants in the programs of all initiative

partners. The second objective is recruiting and preparing underrepresented group members

for careers with the agency. Third is identifying and recruiting successful candidates for the

USDA Forest Service Scientist Recruitment Initiative. The final objective is identifying and

implementing research projects of common interest and benefit among the participating

institutions.

Results of research programs are reaching an ever-widening range of diverse audiences—with

ever-broadening benefits to the agency and its customers. For example, the newly established

wildland-urban interface research work unit in the South serves a distinctly urban/suburban

population—a new, diverse, and increasingly important constituent base for the USDA Forest

Service.

Another example is ongoing research on cultural diversity in land use in northern New

Mexico that is helping the agency deliver fair and effective programs to the historically

underserved people of the area, including many small and limited-resource farmers and

ranchers and land owners.

A team, including representation from R&D, has been assigned to evaluate the existing

Washington Office (WO) Tribal Relations Program/Organization and to make recommendations on how the organization can be more responsive to Native American programs and

responsibilities. In conjunction with this effort, the R&D organization created a team to

review on-going activities and provide a framework identifying additional opportunities to

support the agency’s Tribal Relations Program.

A benefit to tribal relations was realized through R&D’s close involvement in addressing

Sudden Oak Death, particularly in California and Oregon. Many Native American tribes in

these areas were not aware of the fungus that causes this disease, and the impact to the oaks,

and more specifically, the acorns that are used in a number of tribal religious ceremonies.

R&D has played a major role in addressing the issue and in communicating with tribal leaders

about the disease and ongoing research activities to address it.

A 10-year partnership between the USDA Forest Service and Alabama A&M University

resulted in a program receiving full accreditation from the Society of American Foresters, the

professional society of foresters in the United States and beyond. The USDA Forest Service’s

largest student recruitment initiative program is at Alabama A&M, with up to 40

undergraduate students in training at any one time. Because of this partnership with Alabama

A&M, the agency has increased employment of African American foresters, and Alabama

A&M has faculty, facilities, and a research program worthy of recognition.

R&D sponsored and participated in the Minorities in Agriculture, Natural Resources, and

Related Sciences Symposium, host to over 800 minority college students throughout the

United States. R&D shared information on USDA Forest Service career opportunities and

provided career advice to individual students.

The National Urban Tree House program provided educational opportunities to almost 5,000

urban or minority youth. There are currently four operational sites nationwide.

195
196

In a national customer service survey conducted in 2002, almost 63 percent of Conservation

Education customers reported that they were involved with traditionally underserved

populations. In addition, approximately 32 percent identified the community that they served

as an urban community. No specific targets have been assigned to this aspect of the goal;

however, measurements obtained through the customer service survey and subsequent annual

accomplishment reports are used to help managers decide on program emphasis.

The USDA Forest Service conducted field unit Civil Rights Program reviews. The reviewers

found many positive examples of program attributes and effective use of resources, but noted

some areas for administration improvement, better coordination, and training.

The six regional research stations, the FPL, and the International Institute of Tropical Forestry

annually evaluate needs at the various levels, assign priorities, and request funding. Their

requests are carefully reviewed and coordinated with needs identified as critical at the national

level and then merged into a national research program. The base R&D program, however, 

is assembled from the individual field submissions.

In FY 2002, 13 percent of research work unit descriptions were revised to reflect changes in

the proposed research mission, problem, or approach.

Program reviews were conducted at several stations. Employees and station customers were

interviewed in each case. As a result, changes have been made to enhance program delivery

internally and to external customers.

A series of customer service surveys were conducted in 2002. Refer to the program evaluation

for strategic objective 3b for a full description.

Overall, the USDA Forest Service continues to improve administration of the civil rights

partnership and outreach program. Decreasing national budgets continue to place pressure 

on field units and the headquarters to improve service delivery.

Customer, research user, and peer comments are considered and critically reviewed when

identifying research needs at regional levels. Valuable guidance in shaping the R&D program

is provided in this process. For example, as R&D began reaching out to underserved

communities, a need to expand our social science research effort was identified. Many

minorities do not know about national forests while others, because of perceived barriers, 

do not use them. R&D believes this is a subject worthy of special emphasis.

Information obtained through the 2002 customer service survey for Conservation Education

indicates a strong emphasis on delivering conservation education materials and services to

underserved populations and, to a lesser degree, to urban populations. However, no baseline

has been previously established for the measurement of accomplishment in this arena.

Measurements from 2002 and subsequent years will provide a baseline for future management

decisions on program emphasis and direction.

Program Evaluations

Conclusions and

Challenges
197

The complex and unstructured processes found in the research and development arena are 

not easily quantified. The current single measure of R&D performance—number of products,

tools, and technologies produced—has a reasonably high bias for accuracy, precision, and

repeatability, but has variable tolerance and sensitivity. A more plausible approach would be 

to use a set of performance measures that can be linked to outputs. A systematic design and

understanding of the process by which R&D impacts agency performance, and to which the

agency remains committed to working with users and the science community, will allow us 

to identify and define meaningful performance measures for the future.

No limitations of data sources have been identified by the Civil Rights Staff for the

information that they have gathered and use.

The Conservation Education customer service survey was conducted through a nationally

recognized survey firm. The maximum sampling error for this survey is plus or minus 

3.1 percent at the 90 percent confidence level.

Verification, Validation,

and Limitation of Data

Sources
198

Strategic Objective 4a: Improve financial management to achieve fiscal accountability.

Annual Performance Goals and Associated Measures:*

(1) Maintain an effective and efficient service-wide financial management organization.

Measure: Review the activities and structure of the headquarters’ Budget and Finance

deputy area and implement identified changes within the fiscal year.

(2) Manage an integrated performance accountability process that provides for program and

financial management accountability.

Measure: Develop a conceptual design of an agencywide performance accountability system

that integrates program and financial management information.

Measure: Develop and implement a comprehensive range of financial management

performance measures and establish financial management performance benchmarks. 

(3) Maintain continuous improvement in USDA Forest Service activities to support more

efficient and effective financial management.

Measure: Support the valuation of the agency’s property with less than a 5 percent error

factor.

Measure: Reconcile 100 percent of the agency’s fund balance with the U.S. Department of

the Treasury.

Measure: Reconcile subledgers monthly with the agency’s general ledger.

Measure: Prepare quarterly financial statements.

* The annual performance goals and objectives have been rewritten from the FY 2002 Annual Performance

Report to better reflect the agency’s financial goals and issues.

Strategic Goal 4.

Effective Public Service
199

The USDA Forest Service continues to emphasize fiscal accountability as the agency manages

public funds and property entrusted to it throughout the Nation, as well as internationally.

Toward this end, the agency made significant strides during fiscal year (FY) 2002 in the

development and maintenance of an efficient and effective financial management organization.

USDA Forest Service financial management has been strengthened this past year through the

accomplishment of key activities. Included have been efforts impacting the agency’s financial

management organization and the processes used to monitor performance and related accountability. Other critical projects included management of the agency’s annual budget and records

supporting the valuation of USDA Forest Service property. Conducted in a coordinated,

planned environment, these activities all support the agency’s stewardship of public assets.

Effective public service requires that the USDA Forest Service improve financial management

to achieve fiscal accountability. To accomplish this objective, three key goals have been

identified in the table above for FY 2002. These goals are a modification of the three goals

originally published as part of the USDA Forest Service FY 2002 Annual Performance Plan,

dated March 2001. Appropriate modifications of the original published annual goals became

evident as the agency continued implementing financial management improvements

throughout FY 2002. 

In FY 2002, USDA Forest Service achieved an unqualified audit opinion from the Office of

Inspector General (OIG) for the first time. Many factors contributed to achieving this

milestone, but tantamount was the hard work and dedication of employees throughout the

agency in working toward this goal. 

Another important element was an evaluation of core responsibilities and a subsequent

reorganization of the Budget and Finance (B&F) staff in the Washington Office, which

allowed the agency to better manage those responsibilities. The reorganization of the

headquarters’ financial management staff resulted in a flattened organization through the

elimination of 11 branch chiefs and a 16 percent decrease in total staffing. 

Defining performance expectations and measuring actual performance are other key aspects 

in achieving fiscal accountability. Efficient and effective management of financial resources

includes not only maintaining accurate and timely records of the expenditure and collection 

of Government funds, but also measures of what has been accomplished through the use of

such funds. During FY 2002, the agency designed a pilot system for integrating program and

financial management accountability. Linking accountability in this fashion provides the

agency with a valuable managerial tool. 

The agency also successfully developed and implemented key financial management

performance measures. As a result, measures depicting actual individual performance by units

agencywide are reviewed every month by USDA Forest Service management. These measures

provide management with a valuable tool for tracking accomplishments and identifying areas

needing additional support.

Continuous improvement requires continuous efforts, targeted to accomplish specific

Overview 

FY 2002 Performance
200

objectives. In attaining the unqualified audit opinion, the USDA Forest Service successfully

supported the valuation of property agencywide with an error factor of less than 5 percent and

successfully reconciled 100 percent of the agency fund balances with the U.S. Department of

the Treasury. The USDA Forest Service also successfully completed monthly reconciliations

between subledgers and the agency’s general ledger, and completed quarterly financial

statements on time.

A review was conducted of the core responsibilities and associated organizational structure of

the headquarters’ B&F staff during FY 2002. Through this review, the B&F staff was

streamlined, including reducing managerial positions. In addition, key organizational changes

within the staff were completed in FY 2002, permitting a sustained focus on critical financial

management activities such as reconciling agency accounts, including cash, real and personal

property, and other assets.

The USDA Forest Service achieved significant progress in improving financial management

within the agency in FY 2002. The activities and organizational structure of the headquarters’

B&F staff were reviewed, with significant changes made to improve the unit’s efficiency and

effectiveness. Similar reviews of the roles and responsibilities of units throughout the agency

will need to be completed, along with reviews to identify the most efficient structure to

accomplish the tasks of financial management. 

A strong basis for measuring and reporting program and financial management performance

was developed in FY 2002. In future years, the agency will formalize an integrated

performance management process. This integration will require close coordination between

program and financial management staffs. Through integrated monitoring, the agency will be

able to accurately measure and report on USDA Forest Service financial management

activities.

Financial management is a continuous process. Similarly, the USDA Forest Service will

continuously improve the efficiency and effectiveness of agency financial management

processes and systems. During FY 2002, the agency made significant progress in reconciling

agency accounts and supporting the valuation of property. Through these reconciliations,

sustainable business processes have been identified. It is critical for the agency to continue 

to develop, implement, and monitor sustainable business processes agencywide as needed.

Validation of USDA Forest Service financial management activities is achieved through 

a number of methods, including reviews, the use of financial management performance

measures, and audits. A key audit conducted annually by the U.S. Department of Agriculture

Office of Inspector General (OIG) is the audit of agency financial statements. The audit

opinion expressed by the OIG relative to the annual financial statements compiled by the

agency is an excellent means of validating the integrity of USDA Forest Service financial

management and the degree to which an outside party may rely on specific amounts reported.

In this audit, the USDA Forest Service received an unqualified opinion, the highest level

attainable.

Program Evaluations

Conclusions and

Challenges

Verification, Validation,

and Limitations of Data

Sources
201
202

National Forest System (NFS) lands provide a wealth of opportunities for all segments of

American society. Millions of visitors use our national forests and associated transportation

system for work, recreation, and other uses. Safety and security of all users on NFS lands are

paramount and are the primary responsibility of the Law Enforcement and Investigations

(LEI) Program. In addition, LEI has the responsibility to protect natural resources and other

property under the agency’s jurisdiction. LEI cooperates with Federal, State, and local law

enforcement agencies and other USDA Forest Service programs to achieve these goals. 

Major responsibilities of the LEI staff include providing a highly visible patrol presence and

prompt response to public and employee safety incidents and to violations of laws and

regulations. The staff conducts criminal and civil investigations; responds to acts of domestic

terrorism, unlawful civil disobedience, and other critical incidents that occur on NFS lands or

facilities; and provides security-planning and operational support and investigates threats

against agency facilities, interests, or employees. In addition, LEI is responsible for reducing

the production of domestic cannabis and other controlled substances on, and the smuggling of

illegal drugs through, NFS lands.

Overview 
203

Increased forest visitation, urban encroachment, and increasingly urbanized users are

impacting NFS lands, raising health and safety risks to the public and employees, and

threatening resource viability. Consequently, the demands on agency law enforcement

personnel continue to increase.

Forest visitors use more than 360,000 miles of roads and more than 130,000 miles of trails

that exist on national forest lands. Maintenance of facilities, roads, and trails is needed to

ensure that these systems do not degrade to the point of causing resource damage or injury to

employees and national forest visitors. Facility, road, and trail maintenance ensures that legal,

environmental, and safety requirements are met as much as possible within funding

constraints and helps provide for the safety of forest visitors and employees. Maintenance of

roads directly affects national forest management, because the road system provides the access

necessary to achieve forest plan objectives. Maintenance of facilities results in improved

customer service and satisfaction, higher employee productivity, improved public image,

improved safety and security, and lower Worker's Compensation costs. Adequate facilities also

increase productivity in environmental resource development and use. 

A variety of road, trail, and facility maintenance work was done in fiscal year (FY) 2002.

During FY 2002, approximately 88 percent of all roads were operated at maintenance levels

equal to or greater than the objective maintenance level. The measure for road maintenance

was changed for FY 2002 from “miles of road maintained to standard” to “miles of road

maintained to objective maintenance level” to better define the accomplishment required. 

In FY 2002, miles reported under the new measure were 8.5 percent lower than that reported

under the old measure at the end of FY 2001. The reported miles of trail maintenance and

improvement are 105 percent of target. The agency has emphasized reducing the backlog of

trail improvement and maintenance and is completing trail inventories, assessments, and

condition surveys to determine the existing situation and plan for the future.

Approximately 36 percent of passenger car roads had no critical health and safety deferred

maintenance needs and only 5 percent had no critical deferred maintenance needs of any type.

Deferred maintenance is maintenance that was scheduled to be performed but delayed until a

future period, and can be either critical or noncritical. Critical maintenance involves situations

where health and safety concerns need to be addressed, whereas noncritical maintenance

involves routine and other non-emergency types of maintenance. In FY 2000 and FY 2001,

a single mileage figure was reported for the road maintenance accomplishment. In FY 2002,

the agency delineated both critical and non-critical maintenance activities. Reporting both

activities better reflects the common situation where critical activities are performed and

noncritical work is deferred. Many roads in the lowest maintenance level (1 - stored roads)

require no maintenance, yet they are also reported as maintained to objective maintenance level.

The national average of bridges inspected on schedule for FY 2002 was 66 percent of the

target. Many inspections were conducted by State engineers; in some cases the reports were

not received in time to get the results entered into the database. In addition, there is a lack of

trained and certified bridge inspectors, and in FY 2002, some inspections were delayed due to

diversion of staff resources for fire duty.

FY 2002 Performance
204

The reported miles of trail maintenance and improvement were 105 percent of the target due

to an emphasis on reducing the backlog of trail improvement and maintenance. In addition,

the agency is in the process of completing trail inventories, assessments, and condition

surveys to determine the existing situation and plan for the future. Project work was supplemented by long-term partnerships and other volunteer assistance; however, staff shortages and

fire emergencies continued to challenge backlog progress.

The number of capital improvement projects accomplished was 55 percent of the target. The

shortfall was due to the transfer of construction funds to support fire suppression nationwide.

Law enforcement activity in general was down in FY 2002. Approximately 157,000 incidents

were reported to have occurred on NFS lands, which is below previous years. This could be

attributed to the high fire activity, which closed some national forests to visitors and involved

many LEI personnel with related fire activities. LEI personnel also contacted more than 

1 million people, providing such services as general information, obtaining information on

criminal matters, assisting with visitors’ problems, and search and rescue. Criminal investigators

opened 1,650 resource investigations and closed 1,184, including offenses such as timber and

forest product theft, archeological resource damage and theft, and arson. In addition, they

conducted 154 internal criminal misconduct investigations. 

USDA Forest Service facilities have unfortunately been the target of attacks by domestic

terrorists and other individuals who oppose Federal law or agency policies. In August 2002, 

an $800,000 arson fire destroyed an agency research facility in Warren, PA. The Earth

Liberation Front claimed responsibility for this action and made additional threats against

agency facilities and employees. LEI conducted a number of security assessments on agency

facilities located throughout the country and provided expertise to agency managers in

planning for and responding to emergency incidents.

As part of a large cooperative security task force operation, LEI also provided more than 100

personnel to the Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, UT, both on and off Olympic venue sites.

A number of other emergency incidents throughout the year resulted in employees being

moved throughout the Nation to meet demands.

The White House National Strategy for Homeland Security defines responsibilities for all

Federal agencies. LEI’s homeland security capability lies in its local enforcement and

intelligence expertise on the millions of acres of NFS lands. Partnerships with Department of

Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) Terrorism Task Forces and numerous other

entities were initiated and strengthened by LEI in FY 2002. 

There are approximately 31,860 nonrecreation special use authorizations that may have

varying degrees of vulnerability. These authorizations cover everything from irrigation ditches

to large-scale dams, small private radio antennas to large industrial microwave sites, and

worm harvesting operations to energy generation and water treatment plants. While the USDA

Forest Service does not have the explicit duty to protect these sites, this does not preclude its

responsibility to require that any activities are conducted and maintained in a safe and secure

manner.
Program Evaluations

FY 2002 was a devastating fire season, not only in the resources lost, but also in suppression

costs. LEI personnel investigated hundreds of fires, many of them arson caused. Due to LEI’s

investigative efforts, an agency employee was arrested and charged for starting the Hayman

fire in Colorado, which burned over 150,000 acres and many structures. The Rodeo-Chediski

fire in Arizona burned over 500,000 acres and hundreds of structures. LEI investigated the fire

in cooperation with the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and the FBI, which led to the arrest of

two BIA employees. LEI investigators also arrested a man in Tennessee for arson. He is

suspected of setting fires to the NFS lands for the past 30 years. 

The Engineering Staff conducted a road program monitoring trip in Region 1 (Northern)

during FY 2002. The monitoring revealed that many national forests do not have adequate

road management objectives. 

Due to the diversion of funds to fire suppression activities, the Region 10 (Alaska) Recreation,

Heritage, and Wilderness Program review, including a review of the trail program, was

postponed to FY 2003. 

A general activity review of the Southwestern Region Law Enforcement and Investigations

program was conducted during FY 2002. The review found strong relationships between LEI

and other USDA Forest Service programs and a strong commitment by personnel to resource

management values. The Southwestern Region’s implementation of the Recreation Fee

Demonstration Program on the Tonto National Forest has improved public safety and

emergency response, as well as reduced general crime and drug use problems. The creation of

the new Valles Caldera National Preserve within the NFS in New Mexico and its management

by a board of citizens and agency officials presented unprecedented agreements regarding

provision of law enforcement services. During the review, this process was found to be

proceeding well.

Unfortunately, the review also found ongoing problems throughout the region. This is perhaps

best illustrated along the Mexican border. The Coronado National Forest shares over 55 miles

of direct border with Mexico. The review confirmed the ongoing extraordinary impacts and

significant safety risk presented by international border traffic in undocumented immigrants

and drug smuggling and use.

The USDA Forest Service estimates there is a $10 billion backlog of deferred maintenance

and capital improvement needs on the road system, a $2.8 billion backlog in facilities, and a

$280 million backlog in trails. At current funding levels, the backlog continues to grow and

has extensive adverse impacts on national forest visitors and resources.

The USDA Forest Service published a new road management policy in FY 2001. The policy

required all national forests to complete a forestwide roads analysis by January 12, 2003. In

doing this analysis, national forests compared their available road maintenance funding with

the funding needed to maintain the road system at its objective level. Alternative

transportation strategies were developed that, while greatly reducing the number and

maintenance levels of open roads, resulted in a road system that can be maintained to

applicable standards within the available budget. As these strategies are implemented, the

percentage of roads maintained to objective maintenance levels will continue to decline,

resulting in a lower percentage of roads reported open and available to intended traffic

Conclusions and

205
206

The USDA Forest Service currently owns more than 40,000 buildings, of which 60 percent 

are older than 30 years. The agency is prioritizing facilities to be upgraded to meet health,

sanitation, and accessibility standards. At the same time, the agency must be prepared to

remove buildings and infrastructure that no longer meet its needs, are not in tune with the

natural setting, present significant health and safety problems, or are too expensive to

maintain. To protect and ensure the proper care of natural settings, the agency will need to

strengthen some heavily used and fragile sites. New construction is expected to be limited 

and will focus only on resolving resource impacts, meeting identified demand, and helping 

to diversify local economies. 

Appropriations are not sufficient to bring all existing facilities to an acceptable standard or 

to construct new facilities that meet changing customer demands or reduce environmental

impacts. The USDA Forest Service is developing a Facilities Management Strategy to address

the funding shortfall that includes a facility master planning process, facility working capital

fund, and guidelines for decommissioning and disposal of unwanted facilities. In addition, the

USDA Forest Service will continue to look at opportunities to partner with volunteers,

nongovernmental organizations, private sector businesses, and other agencies to get the job

done.

The public is becoming increasingly interested in the trails program. Additional resources 

will be needed to complete inventory, assessment, and condition survey needs; maintain and

continue partnership outreach efforts; and provide other volunteer support. Recent fires of

2001 and 2002 have added to direct and indirect trail and trail structures damage, resulting 

in additional rehabilitation needs in some regions. The current annual appropriation for trail

maintenance is estimated to be 50 percent of the need. 

Inclusion of additional trail resources inventory data in the infrastructure database will

improve overall accountability. Program budgets were supplemented in FY 2002 by a 

variety of partnership and collaborative volunteer efforts to accomplish trail operation and

maintenance needs, and that is expected to continue. Increased emphasis should result in

improved accomplishments in FY 2003.

NFS lands are heavily impacted by the production and illegal importation of controlled

substances and other drug activity. The USDA Forest Service has primary responsibility for

drug enforcement on NFS lands. LEI personnel eradicate domestic marijuana plants, locate

clandestine methamphetamine operations on NFS lands throughout the Nation, and interdict

illegal drug smuggling along both international borders. Armed growers, booby-trapped sites,

and toxic chemicals pose a tremendous risk to the public and employees. Additionally,

watersheds, vegetation, soils, and wildlife are at a great risk from toxic chemicals, fertilizers,

and wildlife poisoning and poaching. LEI is striving to achieve a 100 percent response rate 

for both enforcement and investigative capabilities and to completely eliminate marijuana,

methamphetamine, and other drug production and trafficking on NFS lands, as well as 

drug-related activities affecting those lands. 

LEI is undertaking efforts in facility security assessments, primarily at highly vulnerable

research labs, and is defining a national plan for identifying and protecting USDA Forest Service

assets, including those under special use permits. LEI has designated a homeland security

coordinator to facilitate all LEI efforts in sharing information; collecting and disseminating

intelligence; and preventing, enforcing, and investigating terrorist acts. 
As part of the USDA Forest Service mission of managing more than 192 million acres of NFS

lands, the agency must ensure public and employee safety and resource protection. The events

of September 11, 2001, have changed how the agency views security and impacts on international

borders. The USDA Forest Service Homeland Security Committee set a goal to maintain the

security of USDA Forest Service operations and critical infrastructure. One of the objectives

under this goal is to reduce and mitigate impacts and implications to NFS lands, facilities, 

and public safety due to unchecked illegal traffic coming across the international borders that

may facilitate terrorist activities.

The agency recognizes its responsibility as a Federal law enforcement entity in providing

assistance and augmentation to agencies assigned to border security. The agency, however, is

often the only Federal agency working in these remote areas and is the best trained, equipped,

and knowledgeable in these locales. Given adequate permanent staffing, the USDA Forest

Service and LEI will be uniquely suited to participate with and augment any agency or task

force that is designed to safeguard the U.S. borders and the interests affected by these borders.

To reach these targets, LEI must obtain additional funding for personnel. The targeted

minimum level of service is one or more law enforcement officers on each USDA Forest

Service unit. Until the base level of service is reached, LEI’s goal is to maintain, rather than

reduce, its current enforcement and investigative capabilities. LEI will prioritize enforcement

and investigative actions, giving priority to responses to crimes against persons and their

property over natural resource-related crimes.

The majority of the roads and trails data referenced is obtained through the USDA Forest

Service INFRA database. This database provides access to data that is input at the field level.

Therefore, there are limitations to the accuracy of this data. Currently, the only active process

for data verification and validation is through condition surveys throughout the year. These

surveys provide a look at the progress of the performance measures.

The measure “percent of roads open to intended traffic” is limited in its applications.

Monitoring trips to the regions continue to indicate that the forests are over-reporting this

value. The roads analyses discussed above will begin to address this issue. 

Although current trail data is incomplete, in the near future we expect the INFRA trails

module, complemented by cost information from Meaningful Measures, and assessment and

condition survey from Trails Assessment and Condition Survey to provide complete trail

information by local, regional, and national levels, as well as by State and political divisions.

LEI implemented a new electronic enforcement and investigative database in FY 2002, the

Law Enforcement and Investigations Management Attainment Reporting System. This system

is a compilation of two older systems and fully integrates enforcement and investigations data.

The system also adds modern Geographic Information System (GIS) crime mapping

capabilities to provide more responsive management feedback about agency law enforcement

effectiveness. 

Verification, Validation,

and Limitations of Data

Sources

207
208

The primary limitation to a fully functioning database is data input. LEI also lacks the

resources needed to verify, enter, and maintain the tremendous amount of field data collected.
209

Strategic Objective 4c: Improve and integrate informational systems, data structures,

and information management processes to support cost-efficient program delivery.

Annual Performance Goals and Associated Measures:

(1) The public and employees are satisfied with the accessibility and usefulness of

information systems, service, and data structures.

Measure: Public and employee satisfaction rating.

(2) Information system and data structures provide employees and the public ready access to

current economic, social, and ecological data and information using current technology.

Measure: Percent of available and current technology that is incorporated in projects and

products.a

Measure: Percent increase of Intranet hits annually. Gigabytes of information available on

the Washington Office World Wide Web.b

a No data was collected for this measure in FY 2002. For FY 2003 and beyond, new information technology

contracts will be performancebased, and data will be measured annually.

b Original measure tracked Internet hits, but Intranet hits have been tracked instead, so wording was changed.

“Gigabytes of information...” added as part of the measure.

Public and employee surveys are undertaken to assess satisfaction with accessibility and

usefulness of information systems, service, and data structures. The USDA Forest Service

then makes improvements to computer and network architecture in order to support seamless

access to information kept on agency Intranet and Internet servers. 

Several changes in activities and system modifications have been made in the past several

years to improve the delivery of services. Implementing the Enterprise System Management

(Tivoli) environment improved central operations and supports the computer infrastructure as

well as central backup/restoration for online storage and contributes to accessibility, service,

and usefulness of systems. The Information Resources Board was established to ensure that

information resource investments are directed to priority program requirements. 

Data standards are key to sharing data with customers from both the public and private

sectors, as well as combining data with partners to perform broad-scale natural resource

analyses for areas that overlap USDA Forest Service boundaries. The agency established

internal data standards, the Geographic Information System (GIS) Data Dictionary being a

prime example. The agency is also involved in setting interagency data standards, participating in the National Wildfire Coordination Group, the Federal Geographic Data

Committee, and others. 

Overview
210

The steady stream of advancements in information technology is driving increasingly high

expectations for increases in services and convenience of service. The Government is a

principal service provider and its leaders are accountable for meeting these growing service

demands. The President’s Management Agenda challenges Federal agencies to become

citizen-centric and to expand e-Government. 

Based on observations and trend analyses, from fiscal year (FY) 2001 to FY 2002, the agency

increased the amount of information available to employees from 630,000 gigabytes to more

than 750,000 gigabytes. During the same period, information available to external customers

via the Internet increased from an estimated 65 gigabytes to 133 gigabytes. Access to the

information appears to have increased dramatically during the past year as well. Internally,

employee access to the agency’s Intranet at the Washington Office more than doubled from

FY 2001 to FY 2002. In FY 2002, approximately 82 million “hits” were recorded; this

increased to more than 167 million in FY 2002. The USDA Forest Service Internet Web site

also experienced a surge from 280 million “hits” in FY 2001 to more than 510 millions “hits”

this fiscal year. The amount of information made available to employees is increasing at a rate

of about 20 percent a year, whereas the amount of information made available to the public,

while currently at a much lower base, is growing at a rate of more than 50 percent a year.

A survey by Gartner Incorporated, which is discussed in the Program Evaluations section,

revealed that 78 percent of employees rate the quality of the information technology

equipment and the quality of deskside support as “OK,” “Good,” or “Excellent.” The overall

quality of the computing environment was rated “OK” or better by 70 percent of employees.

The agency made great progress in the implementation of the Natural Resource Information

System (NRIS), an inventory and monitoring system that is on schedule to be fully

operational by the beginning of FY 2004.

The USDA Forest Service contracted during the first half of FY 2002 with Gartner

Incorporated (Gartner) to conduct a performance evaluation of the agency’s Distributed

Computing Environment (DCE). Gartner applied its standard Government Managed Services

Assessment methodology that includes Gartner’s Total Cost of Ownership methodology, a

rigorous sourcing analysis, and an internal end-user survey. The study found that the DCE

total cost of ownership per user is $11,254 compared to a peer group average (PGA) of

$10,519. The direct cost (operations and customer support, including amortization of hardware

and software) portion of that total is $5,139, which is 29 percent higher than the peer group.

Since the direct cost component of the study includes amortization of hardware and software

and the agency’s equipment was newer than that of the peer group (since the agency

completely replaced its Data General computing infrastructure in 1999) partially explains this

discrepancy. The cost of operations labor indicates that the agency has a much lower ratio of

users to support staff (25) than the peer group average (100), resulting in operations costs that

are 32 percent higher than the PGA. The agency’s indirect costs for end user operation of the

equipment and software are 7 percent below the PGA. This was affected in part by the

comparatively lower salaries of USDA Forest Service end users compared to the peer group.

The Gartner end-user survey found that 78 percent of agency end users rated the quality of the

official deskside support as “OK,” “Good,” or “Excellent,” and 78 percent rated the quality of

FY 2002 Performance

Program Evaluations
211

their computing and communication devices as “OK,” “Good,” or “Excellent.” The survey

also found 44 percent of users required co-worker custom application support more than 12

times in the last year (3.7 times the PGA), and 55 percent of users reported they received no

training for standard applications.

The Gartner report recommended 20 actions the agency could take to lower total costs of

ownership and improve customer satisfaction. Some of the most significant of these are:

• Consolidate servers and databases;

• Update hardware and software master contracts;

• Continue to move to an enterprise solution (Tivoli) for the management of the DCE;

• Move to a single point of contact help desk;

• Implement end user training on all applications;

• Move to a Virtual Private Network telecommunications architecture;

• Negotiate service levels with line management;

• Adopt standards, approve enterprise architecture, and ensure applications and systems

software are adequately tested before being released into production operations;

• Request assistance from the Chief to communicate the evolving nature of information

technology support, the need for standards, and the need for both information technology

and program delivery personnel to change business practices to increase productivity and

service delivery to the public; and

• Implement a continuous improvement program for information resources management that

actively seeks out and applies best practices.

The DCE performance review indicated many areas in which the agency’s Information

Resource Management (IRM) community can improve and thereby reach and sustain higher

levels of performance. The overall rating of employee satisfaction is slightly below the norm.

Implementing a central full-time help desk (the End User Support Center) and increasing

employees’ access to information systems training are two actions IRM is taking to most

directly address employee satisfaction. Another action IRM will pursue, based on the review,

is to better communicate about, and involve management in, decisions as to the services the

IRM community will provide and the resource allocations this will require. IRM is also

strengthening its standards, enterprise architecture, and software testing practices as advised

by the DCE study.

The study did not address the public’s satisfaction with the information resources offered by

the USDA Forest Service, but it is known throughout the industry that better organized,

consistently designed Web sites supported with an effective search engine can greatly improve

the public’s experience. The IRM and Office of Communications (OC) staffs are

implementing improvements in this area. 

Staffs from IRM, OC, R&D, and others working on applications development and geospatial

information face a number of challenges both in improving current performance and on

measuring performance achieved. The biggest measurement challenges are to assess the

public’s satisfaction with the agency information provided and to determine the utility of the

information provided, not just the quantity. The agency will be implementing an information

quality Web site that will contain some mechanisms to measure the public’s perception of the

quality of USDA Forest Service information.

Conclusions and

Challenges
212

The gigabytes of information available to internal and external customers, as reported in the

performance section above, are based on close observation, but have not been verified. The

amounts shown are based on extrapolations of incomplete data. The usage trends are a good

representation of what is occurring. IRM will endeavor to collect the data more comprehensively in FY 2003. The challenge is that the USDA Forest Service still has 10-15 small World

Wide Web (WWW) installations around the agency that provide fairly unique information and

services to the public. This lack of central management makes it somewhat more difficult to

get accurate supply measurements. This problem also exists on the USDA Forest Service

Intranet or FSWEB. IRM is pursuing consolidation of the agency’s WWW sites and is

evaluating tools capable of gathering supply information across the agency’s Intranet.

The number of hits on the Internet or Intranet is even harder to measure than the amount of

disk capacity, for the same reasons; therefore, the information provided is only for the

Washington Office. For the WWW, the hits measured are estimated to be at least 80 percent of

the total hits across all agency WWW sites. For the FSWEB, there is no plausible way to

extrapolate from the number of hits measured at the Washington Office. To track the use of

the total FSWEB, the agency is searching for a tool capable of measuring Web hits across the

entire USDA Forest Service Intranet.

The customer satisfaction numbers are based on a proven methodology developed by Gartner

Incorporated. IRM is investigating the requirements needed to conduct an annual internal

survey. Surveying external users will be more challenging; IRM will investigate options as

part of establishing an information quality WWW site.

IRM is also developing additional metrics for measuring performance and will use them in

defining service level agreements in contracts for IT products and services. Among these are

two customer satisfaction measures. The first will assess employee satisfaction with the

corporate hardware and software available to them, and the second assesses employee

satisfaction with the End User Support Center in resolving problems using corporate

hardware, software, national applications, and agency-run networks. The data for these

measures is required by contract, will be audited, and thus will be of high quality.

Verification, Validation,

and Limitations of Data

Sources
213

Strategic Objective 4d: Improve the skills, diversity, and productivity of the workforce.

Annual Performance Goals and Associated Measures:

(1) The skills of USDA Forest Service employees are sufficient to meet agency needs and

commitments for program delivery.

Measure: Percent increase in number of employees meeting skill requirements to

accomplish program delivery.

(2) Affirmative Employment Program goals/objectives are met for all underrepresented

groups.

Measure: Percent decrease in number of job categories with underrepresentation by

affirmative action target groups.

(3) USDA Forest Service employees demonstrate improved productivity.

Measure: Cost per work unit index is stable or declining.

Our Nation is rapidly becoming more diverse. As a result, the USDA Forest Service needs to

find common ground and build relevance with all segments of society—including

underserved populations and communities—to effectively carry out its mission, plans,

programs, and activities.

The agency’s Civil Rights (CR) and Human Resources Management (HRM) Staffs formed a

partnership in the overall leadership of the agency’s Strategic Workforce and the Affirmative

Employment Program Plan. The agency’s Strategic Public Outreach Plan provides a

corporate umbrella for many current national and local efforts to diversify the workforce,

improve customer service, and provide employment opportunities for the American public. 

The agency’s Continuous Improvement Process (CIP) provides a venue for all employees to

participate in surveys to identify areas within the agency where relative strengths and

weaknesses exist and to effect improvements. The CIP data covers 17 areas, including

rewards and recognition, training and career development, fairness and treatment of others,

communication, and use of resources. The process is all-inclusive, with specific questions

developed to gather information from full-time, part-time, seasonal, temporary, and student

employees, as well as from Senior Community Service Employment Program (SCSEP)

enrollees.

Overview
214

The USDA Forest Service continues to accomplish and expand upon the USDA CR initiatives

integral to customer service delivery. During fiscal year (FY) 2002, the agency held a national

meeting that featured broad Title VI and related program training for civil rights and resource

program managers and supervisors.

The national headquarters provided seed monies to the field units who demonstrated excellent

public outreach partnerships and conservation education efforts with diverse, underserved

communities. The field units and project managers who used these funds accomplished

additional local results. These excellent models of public outreach with underserved

communities are the focus of agencywide dialog regarding customer service, public outreach,

and collaborative stewardship initiatives. 

The USDA Forest Service implemented the National Hispanic Radio outreach pilot project,

which included a contract with the Hispanic Radio Network (HRN), La Red Hispana, Inc. The

contractor aired more than 30 USDA Forest Service program stories nationally and internationally across HRN radio affiliates. Spanish language radio stories included wildfire

prevention and suppression activities, careers in natural resources and requirements of such

careers, and other agency programs offered at the field units. 

The agency implemented an agreement between the Pacific Southwest Region (Region 5) and

the University of California-Berkeley to provide support to numerous community-based

organizations in civil rights and human resource issues. A forum for dialog between the

agency and underserved communities, called “People for Forest, Forest for People – Just

Forest Symposium,” was developed, and will be held in FY 2003.

FY 2002 Performance
215

In collaboration with the Washington Office (WO) Ecosystem Management Coordination

(EMC) Staff, the CR Staff completed development of an environmental justice and Civil

Rights Impact Analysis/Social Impact Analysis Web site on the agency’s Intranet. This Web

site coordinates key information regarding preparation and implementation of civil rights

impact analyses and environmental justice assessments for employees agencywide and

provides direct links to other key related WO program staff Web sites.

The USDA Forest Service conducted numerous Civil Rights Impact Analyses (CRIA) that

were regional, station, or national in scope. Some noteworthy efforts include establishment 

of the USDA Forest Service Limited Tree Removal Policy/Program and several organization

management decisions. The HRM and CR staffs use CRIA tools and decisionmaking

processes to conduct assessments of impacts on workforce diversity, local program delivery,

and customer service.

During FY 2002, the agency held another organizational assessment survey called CIP 2001.

Employee participation increased from 47 percent in FY 2000 to 49 percent in FY 2002.

Emphasis was made on making the survey more accessible to field personnel and resulted 

in providing the survey in several formats, including a Web-based shortened survey and a

Web-based original survey format sampling 1,000 employees. In addition, Spanish and

English versions were offered in hardcopy format. Survey results indicate that there were nine

areas in which the agency is doing well. Compared to other Federal agencies that administered

this survey, the agency scored the highest in the area of diversity and had similar high scores

in two other areas: work and family life/personal life, and fairness and treatment of others. 

The USDA Forest Service has become a member of the Office of Personnel Management’s

Performance America Network, which enables Government organizations at all levels to

benchmark themselves against other high-performing organizations to share strategies that

work and establish an effective forum for discussing successes and strategies. 

The Civil Rights Leadership Team (CRLT), composed of Washington Office CR leadership

and CR directors from all regions and stations, continues to be an integral part of the CR

Program. During the past fiscal year, the team has developed a task map that outlines all

required civil rights reports, produced a brochure describing the core values and goals of 

the CRLT, developed a communication plan for the team, and organized several ad hoc teams

to develop means for improving strategic outreach and program delivery. The CRLT has

provided guidance and leadership to enhance civil rights organizational effectiveness and has

contributed to continuity, consistency, and accountability in CR programs. 

The USDA Forest Service conducted program reviews and implemented Senior Executive

Service Performance evaluations around workforce diversity, customer service, and outreach

to underserved populations. The reviewers found many positive examples of customer service

and positive work environments, as well as the need for improvement in coordination and training.

The agency has been recognized as a Model Employer of Choice (the largest agency

designated) by the Partnership for Federal Agencies for its effective development and use 

of CIP to improve the work environment of its employees.

Program Evaluations
216

Overall, the USDA Forest Service continued to improve employee morale, decreased

employment complaints, increased program complaints, increased organizational capacity to

perform at a higher level, and experienced fewer retention issues in FY 2002 than in previous

years. Decreasing national budgets continue to place pressure on field units and the

headquarters to restructure the workforce and facility infrastructure.

The CIP continues to provide definitive data to measure organizational effectiveness over time

by providing direct feedback from employees. Managers, supervisors, and employees work

together to develop long-term plans to address and improve work environment issues and

concerns identified in the survey to improve employee morale. The agency expects to realize

improved employee performance in the upcoming year as a result of strategically addressing

the areas of improvement identified by the CIP Survey. 

The agency maintains and manages the USDA Forest Service Employee Complaint System,

the Program Discrimination Complaints Database, and the Human Resources Management

FOCUS Database, which allow assessments, actions, and improvement of situations as they

arise. No significant data limitations were identified in these systems. 

Conclusions and

Challenges

Verification, Validation,

and Limitation of Data

Sources
Strategic Objective 4e: Ensure equal employment opportunity in employment

practices.

Annual Performance Goals and Associated Measures:

(1) The agency offers a work environment that values the contribution of all employees and

manages employment complaints in a productive way.

Measure: Percent decrease in the number of formal internal and external equal employment

opportunity (EEO) complaints.

(2) Identify and resolve the root causes of EEO complaints.

Measure: To be determined.

An integral part of USDA Forest Service leadership is the management of the Equal

Employment Opportunity (EEO) complaint process which provides for earlier resolution of

complaints at lower cost and at lower levels of the organization. The USDA Forest Service

Employment Complaints Program is going through continuous improvements, conducting

several pilots and emphasizing early intervention. 

The agency continues to emphasize a collaborative approach to evaluating and resolving EEO

complaints. This model is an effective means of coordinating the various perspectives needed

to fully explore resolution options and has improved the quality of work produced by all

involved in the complaint resolution process. Resolutions are reviewed for adherence to Equal

Employment Opportunity Commission, USDA, and agency settlement and delegation policies.

The total number of both informal and formal EEO complaint filings decreased in fiscal year

(FY) 2002. The per capita complainant filing rate, using a permanent workforce of approximately

30,450, was 0.58 percent, which is less than the Government-wide average of 0.66 percent.

The resolution rate for informal EEO complaints was 54 percent, which is 13 percent higher

than in FY 2001. Formal complaints closed by either settlement or decision increased 

significantly in FY 2002. There were 222 closures compared to 139 the previous year.

Monthly Leadership Reports on complaint statistics were developed and are distributed to 

top-level management and Civil Rights (CR) directors. These reports assist in the analysis of

complaint numbers, resolution rates, and patterns and trends evident in complaint filings.

Development of a new complaint database was undertaken; the database is expected to

become fully operational in FY 2003. The new database will improve the tracking and

analysis of complaints and will be available to CR directors in the field.

Training on EEO complaints, both the process and ways to prevent and deal with complaints,

was provided to USDA Forest Service managers. 

Overview 

FY 2002 Performance

217
218

In May 2002, USDA Forest Service dispute resolution practitioners met for 3 days for training

and discussion of mutual concerns. Civil Rights directors, Human Resources Management

staff, and Early Intervention Program staff continue to work collaboratively throughout the

organization to address EEO complaints.

The USDA Forest Service Washington Office CR Staff looks at EEO complaint activity as

part of its Title VII reviews of selected regions and stations. One such review was conducted

during FY 2002. The 5-year trend showed a consistent decrease in activity from six

complaints in FY 1998 to three complaints in FY 2002. There was a high rate of resolution

averaging over 50 percent over the 5-year period. Reprisal was noted as a basis for several

complaints in 4 of the 5 years of informal complaint data. The formal complaint filings were

below the USDA’s average filing rate of 0.6 percent per capita based on permanent full-time

and part-time employees.

Statistical data reflected positive indicators for the USDA Forest Service in FY 2002. Fewer

EEO complaints were filed and more were resolved than in previous fiscal years. The agency

continued to promote use of alternative dispute resolution procedures, while refining its

database and reporting mechanisms to aid in the analysis of complaint patterns and trends.

The agency will continue to build on these efforts in FY 2003, with a focus on complaint

analysis, prevention, and resolution.

The agency maintains and manages the USDA Forest Service Employee Complaint System,

the Program Discrimination Complaints Database, and the Human Resources Management

FOCUS Database, which allow assessments, actions, and improvement of situations as they

arise. No significant data limitations were identified in these systems. 

Program Evaluations 

Conclusions and

Challenges

Verification, Validation,

and Limitations of Data

Sources
219

Strategic Objective 4f: Provide appropriate access to National Forest System lands and

ensure nondiscrimination in the delivery of all USDA Forest Service programs.

Annual Performance Goal and Associated Measure:

(1) USDA Forest Service programs are managed in accordance with all accessibility laws,

regulations, policies, and guidelines.

Measure: Percent increase in number of programs in compliance with accessibility laws,

regulations, policies, and guidelines.

USDA Forest Service programs are required to provide equal opportunity in the delivery of

its program to all program beneficiaries. No agency, office, or employee of the USDA can

exclude from participation in, deny the benefits of, or subject to discrimination, any person in

the United States on the grounds of race, color, sex, age, national origin, religion, or physical

ability under any program or activity administered by the agency, office, or employees. (See

USDA Regulation 7 CFR Part 15 and 15d – Nondiscrimination in USDA Conducted

Programs and Activities.)

Through the integration of accessibility across agency functions, the USDA Forest Service

will ensure that there is access to facilities and programs at all levels of the organization. All

new or reconstructed facilities, exhibits, or informational materials are required to meet the

accessibility guidelines. No separate funding is provided to improve accessibility; it is

integrated into all projects. Accessibility improvements are completed using a wide range of

funding sources, such as capital investment and maintenance, the Fee Demonstration

Program, Transportation Equity Act (TEA-21), cooperative agreements, and grants.

Accessibility awareness training and support are needed by all staff. Furthermore, the agency

must provide the tools and staff needed to make consistent accessibility-related decisions.

Both of these needs were addressed in fiscal year (FY) 2002. Emphasis has been placed on

including policies, procedures, and actions on accessibility in agency unit reviews.

A Title VI managers meeting was conducted by the Civil Rights (CR) Staff to provide

training on equitable program delivery and outlined complaint process resources to be used

by units. In addition, the agency has continued to provide advice and counsel across deputy

areas and field units on the processing of complaints and case status. The agency also

continues to identify complaint trends and develop resources for use by units.

The May 2002 Conference for the Disability Program offered guidance to employees on

Equal Employment Opportunity complaint and Alternate Dispute Resolution processes and

program access, along with resources valuable to individuals with disabilities.

A contract was issued with Johnson and Johnson Associates (JJA) to develop an assessment

tool to administer compliance reviews on regions, stations, and areas as outlined by the

agency’s 5-year compliance review plan. JJA consultants’ reports will provide resultsoriented findings with, recommendations for action plans. This process is designed to assist

the USDA Forest Service in developing compliance strategies.

Overview 

FY 2002 Performance
220

National forests improved more than 1,050 facilities and related programs in FY 2002. This

work included a wide range of accessibility improvements, such as campgrounds, picnic tables,

interpretive sites, trails and trailheads, boating and fishing access sites, cabins, shelters,

informational materials, improved access for the hearing impaired, and an Access Guide for

Incident Facilities. The total expenditure to complete all FY 2002 forest recreation accessibility

improvements was $53,045,220. 

An accessibility awareness training module was developed and distributed in both CD and

transparency formats to staff at each level of the agency by the accessibility program

coordinator. The total expenditure for this agencywide training module was $4 million. 

The agency planned to develop a decision matrix on motorized mechanical uses for restricted

areas. Through work with staffs on many levels of the agency, however, it was determined

that a decision matrix would not be the most helpful tool. Instead, a policy was developed

regarding motorized use in restricted areas. No additional funds were expended to meet this

field-identified need.

Through coordination with the CR Staff, the compliance review process has been revised to

include a component on accessibility. In addition, accessibility implementation is a part of all

unit reviews. 

Each region has reviewed its accessibility accomplishments and reported them to the national

office. The results indicate a significant improvement in program and facility accessibility

across the agency. Every region has increased the number of programs and facilities that are

accessible. In addition, 80 percent of accessibility transition plans have been completed for

existing facilities that are not now accessible.

The regional reviews have highlighted the need to standardize the information reporting

formats in order to be able to access the total percent of facilities and programs that are

accessible across the agency. 

In August 2002, a CR delivery and employment programs compliance review was conducted

on the Forest Products Laboratory by JJA consultants. Findings for the employment program

were very comprehensive and recommendations will lead to improvements in the program.

The assessment of program delivery found that the application of the broad standards of

compliance used by NFS for most recipients of Federal funds does not meet the needs of the

majority of research stations.

The USDA Forest Service provided a FY 2002 Information and Reporting Requirements

report to the USDA and the Department of Justice indicating servicewide compliance reviews

of federally assisted programs.

Program Evaluations
221

Tools are needed to assist the field in the integration of accessibility. The necessary tools

identified by the national forests and regions include accessibility guidelines for outdoor

recreation areas, the integration of accessibility policy into the USDA Forest Service Manual,

and a user-friendly guidebook that combines outdoor recreation accessibility guidelines with

the agency’s philosophy and policies regarding universal design. Partners have requested a

tool to assist outfitters/guides under special use permit to integrate persons with disabilities

into their programs, as is required by law. Each of these projects will be undertaken in FY

2003.

It is estimated that people made approximately 235 million visits to national forests in FY

2002. Only 17 program-related discrimination complaints are on record with the USDA Office

of Civil Rights (OCR), of which 5 were new complaints in FY 2002. The USDA Forest Service

continues to identify trends and barriers that are the root causes of complaints. OCR makes all

final determinations in the cases.

The data shows an increase in discrimination complaints regarding access to recreation lands

due to national origin, disabilities, or age. As a result, the USDA Forest Service has developed

a National Recreation Accessibility Plan that strategically addressed access to agency programs

and facilities. An off-highway vehicle use decision tool has been developed, which addresses

the recurring issue of access to National Forest System lands. 

In addition to the need for standardized reporting formats, information concerning the 

accessibility of programs and facilities should be integrated into the agency database system 

in order to have information readily available.

Data on discrimination complaints in the agency is tracked in USDA by the OCR, Program

and Investigations Division, which periodically runs reports for the agency. The USDA Forest

Service does not do any data entry or retrieval from this system; therefore, the validation of

information is the responsibility of the OCR.

Conclusions and

Challenges 

Verification, Validation,

and Limitations of Data

Sources
222

Appendix F—Report of the USDA Forest Service FY 2002 

Program Details
223

Table Title . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Page

1. National Forest System lands administered by the 

USDA Forest Service as of September 30, 2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .225

2. Extramural research funded through USDA Forest Service Research 

appropriations—fiscal years 2000-2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .226

3. Summary of forest stewardship plans and acres 

accomplished by State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .227

4. Roads decommissioned, reconstructed, and constructed by the USDA Forest

Service—fiscal year 2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .229

5. Reforestation needs as of October 1, 2002, by State, 

national forest, and site productivity class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .230

6. Reforestation and timber stand improvement acreages certified as 

satisfactorily stocked, by State and national forest—fiscal year 2002 . . . . . . . .235

7. Certification of reforestation and timber stand 

improvement acreages by region—fiscal year 2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .241

8. Timber stand improvement needs as of October 1, 2002, 

by State, national forest, cubic foot productivity class, 

and type of treatment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .242

9. Pesticide use report—fiscal year 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .247

10. Payment to States from national forest receipts—

fiscal years 1998-2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .252

11. Summary of selected cooperative forest management and 

processing program activities— selected fiscal years, 1945-2002 . . . . . . . . . . .253

12. Summary of selected cooperative forestry management 

and processing activities by region—fiscal year 2002 (NIPF lands) . . . . . . . . .254

13. Summary of selected cooperative forest management 

and processing activities by State—fiscal year 2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .255

14. Forest Legacy Program Status—Land protected to 

date as of September 30, 2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .257

15. Timber offered, sold, and harvested by region—fiscal years 2001-2002... . . . .258

Appendix F—Report of the USDA Forest Service FY 2002 

Program Details
224

16. Number of sales and timber volume sold and harvested 

by State—fiscal year 2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .259

17. Uncut timber volume under contract by region 

(all products)—fiscal years 1998-2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .260

18. Forest land management funding—fiscal years 2000-2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .261

19. Sold value of special forest products—fiscal years 2001-2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . .262

20. Miles of boundary line located by region—fiscal year 2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .263

21. Road maintenance accomplishments—fiscal year 2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .264

22. Road construction and reconstruction by timber 

purchasers—fiscal year 2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .265

23. Purchaser election roads constructed by the USDA Forest 

Service—fiscal year 2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .266

24. Percent of bridges inspected as scheduled – fiscal year 2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .267

25. Summary of USDA Forest Service Senior, Youth, and Volunteer Program—

fiscal year 2002/program year 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .268

26. Workforce Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) 

profile by pay levels, as of June 29, 2002. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .269

27. Permanent and excepted-conditional employees by 

race/national origin and gender, as of June 29, 2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .270

28. Number of paid employees by type of appointment—

fiscal years 1996-2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .270
225

Table 1. National Forest System lands administered by the USDA Forest Service as of

September 30, 2002
226

Table 2. Extramural research funded through USDA Forest Service Research

appropriations—fiscal years 2000-2002
227

Table 3. Summary of forest stewardship plans and acres accomplished by State

2002 2001 Cumulative (1991-2002)

State, Commonwealth, 

or Territory Plans1 Acres Plans1 Acres Plans1 Acres

Alabama 490 70,360 369 65,278 3,493 737,586

Alaska 33 74,348 40 32,509 837 3,186,261

American Samoa 55 23 37 32 392 1,513

Arizona 9 1,235 10 1,137 213 249,624

Arkansas 293 45,868 152 26,950 2,483 423,120

California 63 7,745 95 25,341 619 314,236

Colorado 102 15,019 57 16,988 1,982 500,961

CMI 1 5 5 14 6 19

Connecticut 37 3,072 23 7,059 412 50,453

Delaware 31 1,543 57 2,777 638 39,964

District of Columbia 0 0 0 0 0 0

Fed St of Micronesia 0 0 0 0 0 0

Florida 216 52,621 125 28,180 1,538 510,772

Georgia 310 97,538 249 53,709 3,131 924,109

Guam 5 200 3 332 219 2,001

Hawaii 5 3,790 33 7,186 96 21,687

Idaho 62 8,645 66 5,242 1,710 130,134

Illinois 4,916 145,001 2,983 93,532 19,068 623,021

Indiana 820 45,890 724 30,251 15,768 613,674

Iowa 256 16,290 369 18,331 8,207 301,632

Kansas 36 1,385 64 3,170 1,391 81,973

Kentucky 685 58,233 819 76,543 12,866 1,387,234

Louisiana 170 28,818 47 5,107 1,181 126,954

Maine 209 22,654 603 65,101 5,460 571,412

Marshall Islands 0 0 0 0 0 0

Maryland 458 15,629 598 20,535 5,415 272,589

Massachusetts 89 6,087 91 5,841 2,840 247,355

Michigan 128 20,610 202 29,439 3,544 481,690

Minnesota 593 62,694 680 75,418 11,076 1,100,460

Mississippi 75 17,011 70 14,026 938 206,355

Missouri 99 16,550 80 13,553 2,860 399,358

Montana 68 38,492 63 24,777 1,031 548,407

Nebraska 57 8,052 37 4,353 1,279 82,145

Nevada 28 287 19 3,626 237 87,026

New Hampshire 36 9,626 94 15,336 2,370 465,185

New Jersey 46 10,287 64 4,458 670 79,780

New Mexico 45 62,524 38 118,286 453 480,499

New York 665 69,182 668 80,198 15,776 1,469,729

North Carolina 399 52,188 489 49,157 2,837 403,438

North Dakota 102 3,811 152 5,053 1,682 81,643

Ohio 697 37,655 888 42,166 15,107 727,827

Oklahoma 119 19,872 71 12,798 1,100 261,599

Oregon 74 23,620 43 17,478 1,311 341,086

Palau 0 0 0 0 3 76

Pennsylvania 147 26,873 114 23,699 2,110 342,837

Puerto Rico 18 2,260 31 1,020 99 5,898

Rhode Island 9 945 18 889 336 15,546
228

2002 2001 Cumulative (1991-2002)

State, Commonwealth, 

or Territory (continued) Plans1 Acres Plans1 Acres Plans1 Acres

South Carolina 246 50,515 238 63,717 3,016 785,734

South Dakota 18 397 7 797 1,006 40,831

Tennessee 148 19,430 197 35,888 2,245 385,802

Texas 335 52,753 292 43,394 2,956 663,651

U.S. Virgin Islands 1 5 7 543 32 1,154

Utah 2 2,531 7 30,331 103 233,335

Vermont 18 2,212 49 10,113 1,932 289,276

Virginia 45 8,794 348 56,559 5,968 916,919

Washington 412 34,560 250 20,037 3,936 297,333

West Virginia 226 33,364 239 37,628 3,766 576,644

Wisconsin 3,678 202,796 3,326 184,043 35,533 1,839,257

Wyoming 217 27,928 185 7,061 1,723 162,688

Total 18,102 1,639,823 16,585 1,616,986 217,000 25,091,492

1 Landowner forest stewardship plans.

Table 3. Summary of forest stewardship plans and acres accomplished by State
229

Region Decommissioned Reconstruction Construction

(miles) (miles) (miles)

Northern (R-1) 233.0 2,354.1 13.0 

Rocky Mountain (R-2) 125.2 659.6 15.8 

Southwestern (R-3) 162.9 118.4 0.6 

Intermountain (R-4) 148.4 244.1 3.7 

Pacific Southwest (R-5) 113.5 309.7 7.0 

Pacific Northwest (R-6) 153.6 2,593.0 11.1 

Southern (R-8) 67.9 1,107.0 6.2 

Eastern (R-9) 64.0 346.8 13.2 

Alaska (R-10) 13.2 124.0 18.5 

Total 1,081.7 7,856.7 89.1 

1 Reconstruction and construction miles accomplished are from Capital Improvement and Maintenance Appropriation,

Deferred Maintenance Funds, Purchaser Election inventory revisions, new construction, and Non-USDA Forest Service

funds. Decommissioned miles are regardless of funding source.

Table 4. Roads decommissioned, reconstructed, and constructed by the

USDA Forest Service—FY 2002 1
230

Table 5. Reforestation needs as of October 1, 2002, by State, national forest, and site 

productivity class 1/
231

Table 5. Reforestation needs as of October 1, 2002, by State, national forest, and site 

productivity class 1/
232

Table 5. Reforestation needs as of October 1, 2002, by State, national forest, and site 

productivity class 1/
233

Table 5. Reforestation needs as of October 1, 2002, by State, national forest, and site 

productivity class 1/
234

Table 5. Reforestation needs as of October 1, 2002, by State, national forest, and site 

productivity class 1/
235

State, Commonwealth, or territory 2/ National Forest (NF) (Acres) (Acres) Alabama NFs in Alabama (subtotal) 887 0 0 129 1,016 0 1,059 0 0 AlaskaChugach 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Tongass 448 0 0 2,833 3,281 0 0 2,979 0 

Subtotal 448 0 0 2,833 3,281 0 0 2,979 0 

Arizona Apache-Sitgreaves 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 904 0 

Coconino 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Coronado 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Kaibab 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prescott 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tonto 177 0 0 0 177 0 0 0 0 

Subtotal 177 0 0 0 177 0 0 904 0 

Arkansas Ouachita 856 74 5,106 0 6,036 0 5,004 899 0 

Ozark-St. Francis 313 0 1,104 0 1,417 0 2,120 123 0 

Subtotal 1,169 74 6,210 0 7,453 0 7,124 1,022 0 

California Angeles 89 0 0 0 89 0 536 566 0 

Cleveland 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Eldorado 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,055 680 0 Humboldt-Toiyabe 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Inyo 22 0 0 0 22 0 0 1,200 0 Klamath 897 0 7 21 925 0 1,380 2,751 0 Lake Tahoe Basin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34 0 Lassen 531 0 0 0 531 0 0 696 0 Los Padres 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 15 0 Mendocino 989 0 0 0 989 0 0 243 0 Modoc 0 0 0 0 0 0 133 2,450 0 Plumas 0 0 0 0 0 0 349 3,529 0 Rogue River 50 0 0 0 50 0 0 0 0 San Bernardino 0 0 0 0 0 0 136 0 10 Sequoia 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,141 906 0 Shasta-Trinity 567 0 0 0 567 0 1,977 3,444 0 Sierra 37 0 0 0 37 0 1,588 1,689 0 

Reforestation Timber stand improvemen

Planted

Seeded

With site

preparation 3/

Without site

preparation 3/ Total

Cleaning

Release

Precommercial

Thinning

Fertilization

Artificial regeneration Natural regeneration
236

State, Commonwealth, or territory 2/ National Forest (NF) (Acres) (Acres) California (continued) Siskiyou 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Six Rivers 0 0 0 0 0 0 681 764 0 Stanislaus 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,028 0 0 Tahoe 1,468 0 0 51 1,519 0 1,606 2,333 0 

Subtotal 4,650 0 7 72 4,729 0 15,628 21,300 10 1,

Colorado Arapaho and Roosevelt 166 0 207 25 398 0 0 0 0 

Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre and Gunnison 0 0 173 254 427 0 0 0 0 Manti-La Sal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 259 0 Medicine Bow and Routt 76 0 205 1,038 1,319 0 0 0 0 Pike and San Isabel 0 0 0 15 15 0 0 0 0 Rio Grande 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 San Juan 55 0 0 397 452 0 0 695 0 White River 189 0 0 247 436 0 0 0 0 

Subtotal 486 0 585 1,976 3,047 0 0 954 0 

FloridaNFs in Florida (subtotal) 1,882 1,450 0 0 3,332 0 208 0 0 Georgia Chattahoochee-Oconee (subtotal) 423 0 0 0 423 0 0 250 0 IdahoBoise 539 0 0 540 1,079 0 702 2,028 0 

Caribou-Targhee 146 0 15 0 161 0 0 307 0 Clearwater 1,444 0 10 30 1,484 0 23 0 0 Idaho Panhandle 6,318 0 69 66 6,453 0 864 2,918 61 2,Kootenai 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Nez Perce 1,887 0 40 22 1,949 0 0 168 0 Payette 1,783 0 89 0 1,872 0 0 371 0 Salmon-Challis 71 0 24 40 135 0 0 0 0 Sawtooth 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Subtotal 12,188 0 247 698 13,133 0 1,589 5,792 61 2,

Illinois

Shawnee (subtotal) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Reforestation Timber stand improvement

Planted

Seeded

With site

preparation 3/

Without site

preparation 3/ Total

Cleaning

Release

Precommercial

Thinning

Fertilization

Artificial regeneration Natural regeneration
237

State, Commonwealth, or territory 2/ National Forest (NF) (Acres) (Acres) Indiana Hoosier (subtotal) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Kentucky Daniel Boone (subtotal) 108 0 0 0 108 0 0 0 0 Louisiana Kisatchie (subtotal) 566 0 0 0 566 0 0 0 0 MaineWhite Mountain (subtotal) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Michigan Hiawatha 1,371 463 956 1,890 4,680 0 1,170 24 0 

Huron-Manistee 707 71 1,105 341 2,224 0 177 31 0 Ottawa 776 0 2,880 6,272 9,928 0 0 0 0 

Subtotal 2,854 534 4,941 8,503 16,832 0 1,347 55 0 

Minnesota Chippewa 98 0 360 0 458 0 485 0 0 

Superior 1,734 41 195 6,325 8,655 0 2,638 0 0 

Subtotal 1,832 41 555 6,325 8,753 0 3,123 0 0 

Mississippi NFs in Mississippi (subtotal) 3,381 0 330 0 3,711 0 2,704 825 0 Missouri Mark Twain (subtotal) 0 0 3,387 0 3,387 0 0 0 0 Montana Beaverhead-Deerlodge 117 0 591 226 934 0 0 218 0 

Bitterroot 824 0 0 789 1,613 0 0 0 0 Custer 199 0 233 235 667 0 0 0 0 Flathead 1,574 0 239 17 1,830 0 0 1,051 0 Gallatin 346 0 97 44 487 0 0 0 0 Helena 32 0 441 31 504 0 0 0 0 Kootenai 5,841 0 573 90 6,504 0 0 2,169 0 Lewis and Clark 530 0 178 121 829 0 0 165 0 Lolo 2,408 0 1,248 513 4,169 0 22 691 0 

Subtotal 11,871 0 3,600 2,066 17,537 0 22 4,294 0 

Nebraska

Nebraska (subtotal) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Reforestation Timber stand improvement

Planted

Seeded

With site

preparation 3/

Without site

preparation 3/ Total

Cleaning

Release

Precommercial

Thinning

Fertilization

Artificial regeneration Natural regeneration
238

State, Commonwealth, or territory 2/National Forest (NF) (Acres) (Acres)Nevada

Humboldt-Toiyabe 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Inyo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lake Tahoe Basin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Subtotal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

New Hampshire

White Mountain (subtotal) 0 0 472 2,059 2,531 0 41 0 0 

New Mexico

Carson 452 0 0 272 724 0 0 0 0 Cibola 120 0 0 17 137 0 0 0 0 Gila 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lincoln 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Santa Fe 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Subtotal 572 0 0 289 861 0 0 0 0 

New York

Green Mountain (subtotal) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

North Carolina

NFs in North 

Carolina (subtotal) 460 0 1,069 0 1,529 0 1,382 0 81 

Ohio

Wayne (subtotal) 85 0 0 0 85 0 0 0 0 

Oklahoma

Ouachita (subtotal) 31 0 240 0 271 0 0 0 0 

Oregon

Deschutes 1,989 0 464 1,415 3,868 0 0 0 0 Fremont 5,044 0 1,672 1,000 7,716 0 0 1,406 0 Klamath 23 0 0 0 23 0 41 0 0 Malheur 1,372 0 480 49 1,901 0 0 2,612 0 Mt. Hood 928 0 0 0 928 0 0 961 0 Ochoco 1,335 0 0 242 1,577 0 0 1,135 0 Rogue River 315 0 0 0 315 0 0 0 0 Siskiyou 0 0 0 0 0 0 128 157 0 Siuslaw 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Umatilla 2,060 0 4 828 2,892 0 0 0 0 Umpqua 451 0 0 0 451 0 0 716 0 Wallowa-Whitman 2,842 103 700 884 4,529 0 0 1,652 0 

Reforestation Timber stand improvement

Planted

Seeded

With site

preparation 3/

Without site

preparation 3/ Total

Cleaning

Release

Precommercial

Thinning

Fertilization

Artificial regeneration Natural regeneration
239

State, Commonwealth, or territory 2/ National Forest (NF) (Acres) (Acres) Oregon (Continued) Willamette 933 0 0 530 1,463 0 88 3,628 2,138 

Winema 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Subtotal 17,292 103 3,320 4,948 25,663 0 257 12,267 2,138 

Pennsylvania Allegheny (subtotal) 0 0 514 7 521 0 160 0 0 Puerto Rico Caribbean (subtotal) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 South Carolina Francis Marion and Sumter (subtotal) 237 0 0 0 237 0 1,776 142 493 South Dakota Black Hills (subtotal) 0 0 0 4,612 4,612 0 0 2,303 0 Tennessee Cherokee (subtotal) 209 0 269 0 478 0 636 0 0 TexasNFs in Texas (subtotal) 200 0 724 827 1,751 0 319 172 0 UtahAshley 0 0 0 2,562 2,562 0 0 450 0 

Dixie 418 0 515 0 933 0 0 1,741 0 Fishlake 59 0 0 0 59 0 0 0 0 Manti-La Sal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 87 0 Uinta 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Wasatch-Cache 0 0 44 897 941 0 0 0 0 

Subtotal 477 0 559 3,459 4,495 0 0 2,278 0 

Vermont Green Mountain (subtotal) 0 0 293 0 293 0 52 0 0 Virginia George Washington and Jefferson (subtotal) 9 0 1,127 113 1,249 0 681 156 0 Washington Colville 1,001 0 95 403 1,499 0 0 402 0 

Gifford Pinchot 0 0 0 0 0 0 45 956 0 Idaho Panhandle 154 0 0 0 154 0 0 0 0 Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie 100 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 

Reforestation Timber stand improvement

Planted

Seeded

With site

preparation 3/

Without site

preparation 3/ Total

Cleaning

Release

Precommercial

Thinning

Fertilization

Artificial regeneration Natural regeneration
240

State, Commonwealth, or territory 2/National Forest (NF) (Acres) (Acres)Washington (Continued)

Okanogan 879 0 0 1,133 2,012 0 0 2,070 0 Olympic 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,505 1,794 Umatilla 882 0 51 473 1,406 0 0 348 0 Wenatchee 429 0 66 6,523 7,018 0 0 223 0 

Subtotal 3,445 0 212 8,532 12,189 0 45 7,504 1,794 

West Virginia

George Washington 

and Jefferson 0 0 158 0 158 0 0 199 0 Monongahela 106 0 653 214 973 0 570 0 0 

Subtotal 106 0 811 214 1,131 0 570 199 0 

Wisconsin

Chequamegon-Nicolet

(subtotal) 906 191 4,672 3,749 9,518 0 37 0 0 

Wyoming

Bighorn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Black Hills 0 0 0 1,675 1,675 0 0 0 0 Bridger-Teton 329 0 111 0 440 0 0 0 0 Caribou-Targhee 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Medicine Bow and Routt 83 90 95 466 734 0 0 894 0 Shoshone 880 42 0 131 1,053 0 0 0 0 Wasatch-Cache 0 0 0 402 402 0 0 0 0 

Subtotal 1,292 132 206 2,674 4,304 0 0 894 0 

Total 68,243 2,525 34,350 54,085 159,203 0 38,760 64,290 4,577 6

1/ Data source is Reforestation & TSI Needs Report (2400-K) Table 21. This information is required by the National Forest Management Act of 1972/ Unlisted States had no reforestation or timber stand improvement certification as of October 1, 2002.3/ Site productivity class refers to the amount of wood produced in cubic feet per acre per year in a natural, unmanaged stand.

Reforestation Timber stand improvement

Planted

Seeded

With site

preparation 3/

Without site

preparation 3/ Total

Cleaning

Release

Precommercial

Thinning

Fertilization

Artificial regeneration Natural regeneration
241

Table 7. Certification of reforestation and timber stand improvement acreages by region—

fiscal year 2002 1/
242

Table 8. Timber stand improvement needs as of October 1, 2002, by State, national forest,

cubic foot productivity class, and type of treatment 1/
Table 8. Timber stand improvement needs as of October 1, 2002, by State, national forest,

cubic foot productivity class, and type of treatment 1/

243
244

Table 8. Timber stand improvement needs as of October 1, 2002, by State, national forest,

cubic foot productivity class, and type of treatment 1/
245

Table 8. Timber stand improvement needs as of October 1, 2002, by State, national forest,

cubic foot productivity class, and type of treatment 1/
246

Table 8. Timber stand improvement needs as of October 1, 2002, by State, national forest,

cubic foot productivity class, and type of treatment 1/
247

Table 9. Pesticide use report—fiscal year 2001
248

Table 9. Pesticide use report—fiscal year 2001
Table 9. Pesticide use report—fiscal year 2001

249
250

Table 9. Pesticide use report—fiscal year 2001
251

Table 9. Pesticide use report—fiscal year 2001
252

Table 10. Payment to States from national forest receipts—fiscal years 1998-2002 1/
253

Table 11. Summary of selected cooperative forest management and processing program

activities—selected fiscal years, 1945-2002 
254

Table 12. Summary of selected cooperative forest management and processing activities by

region—fiscal year 2002 (NIPF lands) 1/
255

Table 13. Summary of selected cooperative forest management and processing activities by

State—fiscal year 2002
256

Table 13. Summary of selected cooperative forest management and processing activities by

State—fiscal year 2002
257

Table 14. Forest Legacy Program Status—Land Protected to Date as of 

September 30, 2002 1/
258

Table 15. Timber offered, sold, and harvested by region —fiscal years 2001-2002
259

Table 16. Number of sales and timber volume sold and harvested by State—fiscal year 20021/
260

Table 17. Uncut timber volume under contract by region (all products)—fiscal years

1998-2002 1/
261

Table 18. Forest land management funding—fiscal years 2000-2002 1/
262

Table 19. Sold value of special forest products—fiscal years 2001-2002 1/
263

Table 20. Miles of boundary line located by region—fiscal year 2002 1/
264

Table 21. Road maintenance accomplishments—fiscal year 2002
265

Table 22. Road construction and reconstruction by timber purchasers—fiscal year 2002
266

Table 23. Purchaser election roads constructed by the USDA Forest Service—fiscal year 2002
267

Table 24. Percent of bridges inspected as scheduled—fiscal year 2002
268

Table 25. Summary of USDA Forest Service Senior, Youth, and Volunteer Program—fiscal

year 2002/program year 2001 
269

Table 26. Workforce Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) profile by pay

levels, as of June 29, 2002
270

Table 27. Permanent and excepted-conditional employees by race/national origin and

gender, as of June 29, 2002 1/

Table 28. Number of paid employees by type of appointment—fiscal years 1996-2002
271

Appendix G -Glossary of Acronyms and Abbreviations
272

Acronym Full Name of Term

AML abandoned mine lands

BFES Budget Formulation and Execution System

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

CIPContinuous Improvement Process

CRIA Civil Rights Impact Analysis

CSRS Civil Service Retirement System

DOL U.S. Department of Labor

EAPEconomic Action Programs

ECAPEnvironmental Compliance and Protection

EEO Equal Employment Opportunity

EMC Ecosystem Management Coordination (staff)

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

FECA Federal Employees’ Compensation Act

FERS Federal Employees Retirement System

FIA Forest Inventory and Analysis

FLPForest Legacy Program

FPL Forest Products Laboratory

FS R&D USDA Forest Service Research and Development (deputy area)

FY fiscal year

GAO General Accounting Office

GPRA Government Performance and Results Act

GS General Schedule (pay plan)

IMPROVE Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments

INFRA Infrastructure database

IPInternational Programs (staff)

IRM Information Resources Management (staff)

K-V Knutson-Vandenberg (trust fund)

LEI Law Enforcement and Investigations (staff)

LRMPLand and Resource Management Plan

MAR Management Attainment Reporting (system)

N/A Not applicable

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act

NFPNational Fire Plan

NFS National Forest System (USDA Forest Service deputy area)

NIPF non-industrial private forest

NR not reported or not required

NRIS Natural Resource Information System database

OIG U.S. Department of Agriculture Office of Inspector General

OMB Office of Management and Budget

P&L Programs and Legislation (USDA Forest Service deputy area)

PAOT persons at one time

PGA peer group average

PMAS Performance Measures Accountability System

PP&E Property, Plant and Equipment

R&D Research and Development (USDA Forest Service deputy area—

same as FS R&D)

Glossary of Acronyms

and Abbreviations
273

Acronym Full Name of Term

RAR Roads Analysis Report

RBAIS Research Budget Attainment Information System

RHWR Recreation, Heritage, and Wilderness Resources (staff)

S&PF State and Private Forestry (USDA Forest Service deputy area)

SFA State Fire Assistance (program)

SFFAS Statements of Federal Financial Accounting Standards

STARS Sales Tracking and Reporting System

SUDS Special Uses Data System

TMDL total maximum daily load

TSA Timber Sale Accounting system

TSPThrift Savings Plan

TRACS Timber Activity Control System

U&CF Urban and Community Forestry (staff)

U.S.C. United States Code

USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture

VFA Volunteer Fire Assistance (program)