Source: http://www.stateforesters.org/nasf-letter-community-forest-program-open-space-conservation-program-comments-march-9-2011
Timestamp: 2013-05-22 06:30:34
Document Index: 632087564

Matched Legal Cases: ['§230', '§230', '§230', '§230', '§230', '§230', '§230', '§230', '§230']

NASF Letter: Community Forest Program - Open Space Conservation Program comments (March 9, 2011) | National Association of State Foresters
NASF Letter: Community Forest Program - Open Space Conservation Program comments (March 9, 2011)
The National Association of State Foresters (NASF) is a non-profit organization comprised of thedirectors of all of the nation's state and territorial forestry agencies. Our members have a public trustresponsibility for managing and protecting two-thirds of the nation's forestland, which is held in privateor non-federal public ownership. We greatly appreciate the opportunity to provide the followingcomments regarding the Community Forest and Open Space Conservation Program (CFP) as containedin the Federal Register on January 6, 2011 (Vol. 76, No.4, Page 744).
§230.2 DEFINITIONSThe definition of "forest lands" found in the proposed rule includes lands that are at least five acres insize, suitable to sustain natural vegetation, and at least 75% forested. To account for the variation inforest types from state-to-state, we propose that the agency replace the proposed definition with thefollowing:Forest lands. Lands that are defined in state statute, state regulation, by the state forester,State-wide Forest Resource Assessments and Strategies, or as defined by the state Assessmentof Need (through the Forest Legacy Program).We also propose that applicants be required to consult with a forester when drafting their communityforest plan (see trailing comments under §230.4 APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS). We define forester asfollows:Forester. A professional that holds a bachelor's degree (or higher) from an SAF-accreditedforestry program or is licensed, certified, registered or otherwise credentialed by states or othercertifying bodies.
§230.3 APPLICATION PROCESSThe Federal Register notice (Vol. 76, No.4), through the supplementary information on page 745,indicates, "The proposed rule requires the State Forester or equivalent Tribal Government official toforward all applications with recommendations to the Forest Service." We do not believe the 2008 FarmBill requires State Foresters to provide a recommendation and support the language included in theproposed rule that tasks State Foresters with reviewing and providing an assessment of eachapplication. We support the language (as found in §230.3(a)) that provides flexibility for State Forestersto provide recommendations should that responsibility be desired.The proposed rule indicates that State Foresters will review all applications by local governments andqualified nonprofits for eligibility and compatibility with landscape conservation efforts. State Foresterswill forward applications to the Forest Service along with an assessment of the application and adescription of the technical assistance they may render in support of applications and an estimate ofneeded financial assistance. In terms of identifying technical assistance that State Foresters mayprovide, is the Forest Service looking for potential costs of land management support over time or forfront end planning support? If State Foresters need to identify technical assistance over time, whatshould the timeline be?
§230.4 APPLICATION REQUIREMENTSThe proposed rule defines "community forest plan" as a tract-specific plan that guides the managementand use of the community forest, developed with community involvement. We believe it is appropriateto require all applicants to consult with a professional forester (see proposed definition in commentsfound under §230.2) particularly when providing descriptions of forest types and vegetative cover,describing the relationship of the property and its contributions to a landscape conservation initiative,accounting for the long-term use and management of the property and other forestry-relatedcomponents of the community forest plan. All applicants should be required to consult with aprofessional forester when drafting their community forest plan, but only those plans included as part ofa community forest project that has been funded under the CFP should be required to be approved bythe State Forester.
§230.5 RANKING CRITERIA AND PROPOSAL SELECTIONThe 2008 Farm Bill established the Forest Resources Coordinating Committee (FRCC). The FRCC is toprovide direction and coordination of actions within USDA and with states and the private sector toaddress the conservation, protection and enhancement of the nation's nonindustrial private forest land.The responsibilities of the FRCC seem to logically extend to establishing ranking criteria for the CFP.NASF recommends that a community's sustained commitment to their urban and community forests(e.g., as demonstrated through Tree City USA or other public recognition programs, hiring of cityforesters, establishment of tree boards) should be considered when ranking applications. In addition,ranking criteria should also consider the community's ability to manage the community forest after it isacquired through the program.Most, if not all, states will include important statewide and landscape scale objectives relating to forestconservation and management, forest-based education, and other objectives (consistent with the CFP)in their State-wide Forest Resource Assessment and Strategy. We recommend additional rankingcriterion should be included that give preference to those projects that are consistent with the goals,objectives, and strategies of the State-wide Forest Resource Assessment and Strategy in that state.
§230.10 TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FUNDSThe proposed rule indicates CFP technical assistance funds will only be provided when a project isapproved and funded in a State Forester's jurisdiction. This would mean State Foresters would have tocover the administration cost of processing the application for projects that are not guaranteed to beapproved. Further, state forestry agencies will likely be called on to provided technical assistancebeyond the completion of the grant period (i.e. 2-3 years). State Foresters are unsure of how they wouldcover costs associated with providing administrative and technical assistance associated with the CFP(i.e. prior to project selection and following the grant period). Should the money come from Urban andCommunity Forestry, Forest Stewardship Program or Rural Forestry Assistance funds? NASF opposesdiverting resources that will limit the important role existing programs have in responding to prioritiesidentified in the State-wide Forest Resource Assessments and Strategies. Is it possible for states withprojects submitted within their jurisdiction to be reimbursed for any technical assistance provided inhelping applicants prepare proposals and draft community forest plans? Could states be reimbursed fortime spent providing technical assistance and/or processing on a "per application" basis?
§230.09 Ownership and Use RequirementsThe proposed rule calls for applicants to complete the final Community Forest Plan within 120 days ofland acquisition. NASF recommends that applicants complete the final Community Forest Plan within 90days of land acquisition and have it approved by the State Forester within 30 days of submission.Further, updates provided to the plan (on a 10 year basis as proposed) should be approved by the StateForester.
We greatly appreciate your consideration of our recommendations and look forward to working withthe Forest Service as the agency moves forward with program implementation. Please do not hesitate tocontact us in the event you have questions as you move forwards in finalizing program rules.
Sincerely,Jeff Jahnke, President
Resource Type: LetterIssue Topic: Other Log in to post comments