forest legacy assessment of need identifying future forest legacy areas governors commission for...

Forest Legacy Assessment of Need

Identifying Future Forest Legacy Areas

Governor’s Commission for Protecting the Chesapeake Bay through

Sustainable ForestryDecember 21, 2005

Charge to the CommissionProvide guidance and recommendations

in the preparation of an updated

Forest Legacy Assessment of Need

that identifies

1) environmentally important forestlands that are

2) threatened by present or future conversion to nonforest uses

Today’s Objectives:

Review proposed process to identify and evaluate Forest Legacy Areas

Evaluate potential new areas Revisit currently designated Forest

Legacy Areas Receive your comments to further refine

Assessment of Need

Two Key Components to Consider… Identification of Forest

Legacy Areas

Evaluation of specific projects Which projects get

nominated State-wide? How well will

nominations compete at a National level?

Identifying Focus Areas, i.e. narrowing our window of opportunity

Use existing Landscape Analysis Tools Strategic Forest Lands Assessment (SFLA)

Ecological, Economic and Vulnerability models

Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project (SAP)

Adopt a regional approach Western, Central, Southern and Eastern forest

management regions Distinct management issues within each region

A Review of the Landscape Assessment Tools

Strategic Forest LandsEcological Assessment

The ecological model gives priority or greater weight to large forest blocks, particularly those with:

•More forest “interior” conditions •Greater diversity of habitat types •More stream or erodible soils protection •More closely located to other forest blocks vs isolated patches

Evaluates the ecological values important to land conservation programs.

Strategic Forest Lands Economic Assessment

Biophysical, environmental, socioeconomic and policy factors include:

•Species composition•Soil productivity•Environmental constraints on timber harvest operations

(wetlands, steep slopes, streams)•Population density •Parcelization •Role of the forest products industry in the local economy•Existing working landscape protection initiatives (e.g. Rural Legacy and Forest Legacy Areas) •Existing public and private forest land protection

Evaluates the potential of forest land to yield economic benefits associated with timber management activities.

Strategic Forest LandsVulnerability Assessment

Factors used to determine how vulnerable an area is include:•Current level of protection arising from public ownership, conservation or agricultural easements •Development constraints imposed by environmentally sensitive features, including wetlands and riparian areas, steep slopes, and sensitive habitats. •Proximity to population centers•Road access and density•Existing or planned water and sewer service areas•Local zoning

Evaluates the vulnerability of a given acre of forest to development as well as factors that make its conversion less likely.

Forest Stewardship Spatial Analysis Project

(SAP)

Higher priorities are given to forest land that are: •Ecologically important (similar to SFLA Ecological Model)•Near existing protected lands•Adjacent to privately owned forests covered by Forest Stewardship Management Plans

Evaluates the potential benefits and suitability of privately owned forest land for the Forest Stewardship Program.

Important Public Values Scenic resources Recreational opportunities Public water supply

protection Wetlands Interior forest habitat Rare, threatened and

endangered species habitat Chesapeake Bay water

quality improvement Forest products utilization Threatened by conversion

to non-forest uses

FLA Eligibility Criteria Available Assessment Tools

SFLA Ecological Model

Tools to SupportForest Legacy Needs Assessment

Tools to SupportForest Legacy Needs Assessment

FLA Eligibility Criteria Available Assessment Tools

Forest Stewardship SAP

Important Public Values Scenic resources Recreational opportunities Public water supply

protection Wetlands Interior forest habitat Rare, threatened and

endangered species habitat Chesapeake Bay water

quality improvement Forest products utilization Threatened by conversion

to non-forest uses

Important Public Values Scenic resources Recreational opportunities Public water supply

protection Wetlands Interior forest habitat Rare, threatened and

endangered species habitat Chesapeake Bay water

quality improvement Forest products

utilization Threatened by conversion

to non-forest uses

FLA Eligibility Criteria Available Assessment Tools

SFLA Economic Model

Tools to SupportForest Legacy Needs Assessment

SFLA Vulnerability Model

Tools to SupportForest Legacy Needs Assessment

Important Public Values Scenic resources Recreational opportunities Public water supply

protection Wetlands Interior forest habitat Rare, threatened and

endangered species habitat Chesapeake Bay water

quality improvement Forest products utilization Threatened by

conversion to non-forest uses

FLA Eligibility Criteria Available Assessment Tools

Locating Focus Areas IDENTIFY Ecologically and Economically Important

Forest Lands Medium and High valued forests (SFLA)

FILTER At least 50% forest cover/assessment area Medium to High Stewardship Potential (SAP) Medium to High Vulnerability (SFLA)

RELATE to other programs and objectives Maryland’s Green Infrastructure 1995 Forest Legacy Areas Rural Legacy Areas Existing Protected Lands

Today’s Draft Focus Areas are …

A starting point only Located through GIS analysis; each step

is a map layer Defined through a select set of spatial, or

mapped data

What else should we consider?

Demonstration

Western Region example Step through the process Illustrate the “Regional” approach

High, Medium, Low rankings determined on regional basis vs Statewide basis

Results for remaining regions

SFLA Ecological Rank

LowMediumHigh

Mapping unit = 30 m2 (~1/3 acre) grid cell

Very Fine Grained Resolution

Difficult for isolating significant “Focus Areas”

IDENTIFY: Ecologically Important Forest LandsWestern Region

SFLA Ecological Rank

LowMediumHigh

IDENTIFY: Ecologically Important Forest LandsWestern Region

Mapping unit = 2.5 km hexagons

Summarizes fine grained information for broader “Focus Area” evaluation

hexagon vs

grid cell

By 2.5 km hexagons (natural breaks)

SFLA Economic Rank

LowMediumHigh

IDENTIFY: Economically Important Forest LandsWestern Region

SFLA Economic Rank

LowMediumHigh

IDENTIFY: Economically Important Forest LandsWestern Region

By 2.5 km hexagons (natural breaks)

SFLA Ecologic and EconomicComposite Score

LowMediumHigh

IDENTIFY: Ecologically AND Economically Important Forest Lands

Western Region Focus Areas

By 2.5 km hexagons (natural breaks)

SFLA Ecologic and EconomicComposite Score

MediumHigh

Removing watersheds withlow composite SFLA score

IDENTIFY: Ecologically AND Economically Important Forest Lands

Western Region Focus Areas

By 2.5 km hexagons (natural breaks)

IDENTIFY: Ecologically AND Economically Important Forest Lands

Percent Forest Cover (2002)

FILTER: At least 50 % Forest Cover Western Region

By 2.5 km hexagons (natural breaks)

SFLA Ecologic and EconomicComposite Score

MediumHigh

Removing watersheds withforest cover <50%

FILTER: At least 50 % Forest Cover Western Region Focus Areas

By 2.5 km hexagons (natural breaks)

IDENTIFY: Ecologically AND Economically Important Forest Lands

FILTER: At Least 50% Forest Cover

Spatial Analysis Project (SAP) Score

LowMediumHigh

FILTER: Medium to High Stewardship Potential Western Region

Spatial Analysis Project (SAP) Score

LowMediumHigh

FILTER: Medium to High Stewardship Potential Western Region

By 2.5 km hexagons (natural breaks)

SFLA Ecologic and EconomicComposite Score

MediumHigh

Removing watersheds withlow stewardship potential

FILTER: Medium to High Stewardship Potential Western Region Focus Areas

By 2.5 km hexagons (natural breaks)

IDENTIFY: Ecologically AND Economically Important Forest Lands

FILTER: At Least 50% Forest Cover

FILTER: Medium to High Stewardship Potential

SFLA Vulnerability Rank

Not at RiskLow RiskMedium RiskHigh Risk

FILTER: Medium to High Vulnerability Western Region

SFLA Vulnerability Rank

LowMediumHigh

FILTER: Medium to High Vulnerability Western Region

By 2.5 km hexagons (natural breaks)

FILTER: Medium to High Vulnerability Western Region Focus Areas

SFLA Ecologic and EconomicComposite Score

MediumHigh

By 2.5 km hexagons (natural breaks)

IDENTIFY: Ecologically AND Economically Important Forest Lands

FILTER: At Least 50% Forest Cover

FILTER: Medium to High Stewardship Potential

FILTER: Medium to High Vulnerability

Removing watersheds withlow vulnerability

Reviewing the process…

SFLA Ecologic and EconomicComposite Score

MediumHigh

Removing watersheds withlow composite SFLA score

IDENTIFY: Ecologically AND Economically Important Forest Lands

Western Region Focus Areas

By 2.5 km hexagons (natural breaks)

IDENTIFY: Ecologically AND Economically Important Forest Lands

SFLA Ecologic and EconomicComposite Score

MediumHigh

Removing watersheds withforest cover <50%

FILTER: At least 50 % Forest Cover Western Region Focus Areas

By 2.5 km hexagons (natural breaks)

IDENTIFY: Ecologically AND Economically Important Forest Lands

FILTER: At Least 50% Forest Cover

SFLA Ecologic and EconomicComposite Score

MediumHigh

Removing watersheds withlow stewardship potential

FILTER: Medium to High Stewardship Potential Western Region Focus Areas

By 2.5 km hexagons (natural breaks)

IDENTIFY: Ecologically AND Economically Important Forest Lands

FILTER: At Least 50% Forest Cover

FILTER: Medium to High Stewardship Potential

FILTER: Medium to High Vulnerability Western Region Focus Areas

SFLA Ecologic and EconomicComposite Score

MediumHigh

By 2.5 km hexagons (natural breaks)

IDENTIFY: Ecologically AND Economically Important Forest Lands

FILTER: At Least 50% Forest Cover

FILTER: Medium to High Stewardship Potential

FILTER: Medium to High Vulnerability

Removing watersheds withlow vulnerability

SFLA Ecologic and EconomicComposite Score

MediumHigh

RELATE: Rural Legacy AreasWestern Region Focus Areas

Rural Legacy Areas

By 2.5 km hexagons (natural breaks)

SFLA Ecologic and EconomicComposite Score

MediumHigh

Green InfrastructureHubs and Corridors

RELATE: Green InfrastructureWestern Region Focus Areas

By 2.5 km hexagons (natural breaks)

Acquisitions

Easements

Protected Land

SFLA Ecologic and EconomicComposite Score

MediumHigh

RELATE: Existing Protected LandsWestern Region Focus Areas

By 2.5 km hexagons (natural breaks)

MediumHigh

Central Region Focus Areas

By 2.5 km hexagons (natural breaks)

SFLA Ecologic and EconomicComposite Score

Deer Creek FLA

ElkNeckFLA

Forest Legacy Areas

Rural Legacy Areas

MediumHigh

By 2.5 km hexagons (natural breaks)

SFLA Ecologic and EconomicComposite Score

Deer Creek FLA

ElkNeckFLA

RELATE: Forest Legacy Areas and Rural Legacy Areas Central Region Focus Areas

Green InfrastructureHubs and Corridors

MediumHigh

By 2.5 km hexagons (natural breaks)

SFLA Ecologic and EconomicComposite Score

Deer Creek FLA

ElkNeckFLA

RELATE: Green InfrastructureCentral Region Focus Areas

Acquisitions

Easements

Protected Lands

MediumHigh

By 2.5 km hexagons (natural breaks)

SFLA Ecologic and EconomicComposite Score

Deer Creek FLA

ElkNeckFLA

RELATE: Existing Protected LandsCentral Region Focus Areas

DoncasterFLA

CrownsvilleFLA

By 2.5 km hexagons (natural breaks)

SFLA Ecologic and EconomicComposite Score

MediumHigh

Southern Region Focus Areas

Battle/ParkersFLA

Forest Legacy Areas

Rural Legacy AreasDoncasterFLA

CrownsvilleFLA

By 2.5 km hexagons (natural breaks)

SFLA Ecologic and EconomicComposite Score

MediumHigh

RELATE: Forest Legacy Areas and Rural Legacy AreasSouthern Region Focus Areas

Battle/ParkersFLA

DoncasterFLA

CrownsvilleFLA

Battle/ParkersFLA

By 2.5 km hexagons (natural breaks)

SFLA Ecologic and EconomicComposite Score

MediumHigh

RELATE: Green InfrastructureSouthern Region Focus Areas

Green InfrastructureHubs and Corridors

DoncasterFLA

CrownsvilleFLA

By 2.5 km hexagons (natural breaks)

SFLA Ecologic and EconomicComposite Score

MediumHigh

RELATE: Existing Protected LandsSouthern Region Focus Areas

Acquisitions

Easements

Protected Lands

Battle/ParkersFLA

By 2.5 km hexagons (natural breaks)

SFLA Ecologic and EconomicComposite Score

MediumHigh

Eastern Region Focus Areas

WyeRiverFLA

Chincoteague FLA

By 2.5 km hexagons (natural breaks)

SFLA Ecologic and EconomicComposite Score

MediumHigh

RELATE: Forest Legacy Areas and Rural Legacy AreasEastern Region Focus Areas

WyeRiverFLA

Chincoteague FLA

Forest Legacy Areas

Rural Legacy Areas

By 2.5 km hexagons (natural breaks)

SFLA Ecologic and EconomicComposite Score

MediumHigh

RELATE: Green InfrastructureEastern Region Focus Areas

WyeRiverFLA

Chincoteague FLA

Green InfrastructureHubs and Corridors

By 2.5 km hexagons (natural breaks)

SFLA Ecologic and EconomicComposite Score

MediumHigh

RELATE: Existing Protected LandsEastern Region Focus Areas

WyeRiverFLA

Chincoteague FLA

Acquisitions

Easements

Protected Lands

Today’s Objectives:

Review proposed process to identify and evaluate Forest Legacy Areas

Evaluate potential new areas Revisit currently designated Forest

Legacy Areas Receive your comments to further refine

Assessment of Need

Two Key Components to Consider… Identification of Forest

Legacy Areas

Evaluation of specific projects Which projects get

nominated State-wide? How well will

nominations compete at a National level?

Parcel Ecological Value

Ecological Score of GI within Parcel

Acres of Green Infrastructure (GI)

Percent of Parcel in GI Acres of Protected Land

within 1 Mile Contribution to Protection

of Hub or Corridor

Composite Score

Parcel Economic Value

Economic Score of Forest within Parcel

Parcel Size (acres) Percent of Parcel

Forested Forest Patch Size Proximity to Existing

Forest Stewardship Plans

Composite Score

Important Public Values Scenic resources Recreational opportunities Public water supply

protection Wetlands Interior forest habitat Rare, threatened and

endangered species habitat Chesapeake Bay water

quality improvement Forest products utilization Threatened by conversion

to non-forest uses

FLA Eligibility Criteria Available Assessment Tools

SFLA Ecological Model

Tools to SupportForest Legacy Needs Assessment

Are there any criteria that we need to consider that aren’t on this list?

Focus Areas to …Forest Legacy Areas Are there areas that didn’t show up as focus areas in our

model that you think are important? What is the correct size threshold for Forest Legacy Areas

(currently 30,000 to 100,000 acres)? Are there underlying ecological or economic elements that

we missed? What is the most appropriate way to delineate precise

area boundaries based on physical and/or jurisdictional features? County boundaries Property boundaries Water bodies Roads

Forest Legacy Areas to…Projects Do you agree with our State Review and

Prioritization Process as explained, including the Regional approach?

Do you have comments on the Evaluation Criteria for individual parcels? Parcel Evaluation Tools

Ecological, Economic and Stewardship Values Degree of Risk/Vulnerability to conversion

Should we begin to develop specific nomination thresholds? Establish Value Thresholds

Example: minimum ecological value = High

Do you think our approach is an objective and defensible one that…

Allows a rigorous, scientifically defensible approach for delineating Forest Legacy Areas and evaluating potential properties;

Improves Maryland’s ability to compete at a National level?

Are there other criteria or programs that need to be more prominent in our approach? The Nature Conservancy Matrix Forest

Blocks Local Land Preservation, Parks and

Recreation Plans (LPRP) Local Land Use Controls

MDP parcelization studies Zoning

Targeted Soil, Water and Air quality benefits

Matrix forest blocks: characteristics:

• dominant native forest vegetation type

• covers extensive areas (80% rule)

• occurs over broad range of environmental conditions

• structure & function driven by regional-scale processes

• important habitat for wide-ranging species

• embedded small & large patch communities

(multiple matrix forest types per ecoregion, at all scales)

Matrix Forest Blocks

TNC Prioritized Conservation Areas

Guiding conservation site selection

Your Final Thoughts…

Do you have additional comments on the proposed process?

How should we treat the existing Forest Legacy Areas created in the 1995 AON?

Are there specific geographic areas or additional criteria we need to consider?

Should we move forward and continue to refine this process as described?

Where do we go from here?

Forest Cover

Forest Legacy Areas

Rural Legacy Areas

2002 Forest Cover

Forest Cover

2002 Forest Cover

Acquisitions

Easements

Protected Lands