Hoopa Valley Tribal Council

Transcription

1 Forest Management Public Summary for Hoopa Valley Tribal Council Certification Code: SW-FM/COC-068 Date of Certification: April 15, 1999 Date of Public Summary: December 2004 Updated 2005 This document was produced according to the guidelines of the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and the SmartWood Program. No part of the report should be published separately. Certifier: SmartWood Program 1 c/o Rainforest Alliance 665 Broadway, 5 th Floor New York, New York USA TEL: (212) FAX: (212) info@smartwood.org Website: 1 SmartWood is implemented worldwide by the nonprofit members of the SmartWood Network. The Network is coordinated by the Rainforest Alliance, an international nonprofit conservation organization. The Rainforest Alliance is the legally registered owner of the SmartWood certification mark and label. All uses of the SmartWood label for promotion must be authorized by SmartWood headquarters. SmartWood certification applies to forest management practices only and does not represent endorsement of other product qualities (e.g., financial performance to investors, product function, etc.). SmartWood is accredited by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) for the certification of natural forest management, tree plantations and chain-of-custody.

2 ACRONYMS AAC ALP CITES DBH DOC FMO FSC HCVF ILO MAI OSH P&C RMA RTE SFM SFMP SLIMF Annual Allowable Cut Annual Logging Plan Convention on Trade in Endangered Species Diameter at Breast Height Department of Conservation Forest Management Organization Forest Stewardship Council High Conservation Value Forest International Labor Organization Mean Annual Increment Occupation Safety and Health Principles and Criteria of the FSC Resource Management Act Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species Sustainable Forest Management Sustainable Forest Management Plan Small Low Intensity Managed Forest Program of the FSC INTRODUCTION This report presents the findings of an independent certification assessment conducted by a specialist representing the SmartWood Program of the Rainforest alliance. The purpose of the assessment was to evaluate the ecological, economic and social sustainability of Hoopa Valley Tribe forest management. To earn SmartWood certification, a forest management operation must undergo an on-site field assessment. This Public Summary Report summarizes information contained in the initial assessment report, which is produced based on information collected during the field assessment. Annual audits are conducted to monitor the forest management operation s activities, to review the operation s progress toward meeting their certification conditions, and to verify compliance with the SmartWood standards. Addenda providing the updated information obtained during these annual audits are included as attachments to the Public Summary Report. The purpose of the SmartWood program is to recognize conscientious land stewardship through independent evaluation and certification of forestry practices. Forestry operations that attain SmartWood certification may use the SmartWood label for public marketing and advertising. Page 2

3 1. GENERAL SUMMARY 1.1. Name and Contact Information Organization Name: Hoopa Valley Tribe Primary Contact: Nolan C. Colegrove Title: Forest Manager Mailing Address: P.O. Box 368 City: Hoopa State: CA Post.Code: Phone: Web: Fax: Location: Longitude: to 123º 45 Latitude: 41º to 41º General Background A. Type of operation: The Hoopa Tribe is a community-based, Tribal forestry operation that manages reservation forestlands for a diverse array of tangible and intangible products, including timber. 2 B. Years in Operation: The Hupa People have lived on their land for millennia. Industrial forestry has been occurring since the mid s. The Tribe began exercising self-governance in 1991 at which point they, rather than the Bureau of Indian Affairs, became responsible for forest management operations on reservation lands. April 15, 1999 C. Date first certified: D. Latitude and Longitude: Latitude: to Longitude: to Forest and Management System A. Forest type and land use history The Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation located in Humboldt County, California, totals 88,715 acres (including fee land, assignments and allotments). Tribal lands contain an estimated merchantable conifer timber inventory of over one billion board feet (Douglas-fir, grand fir, western hemlock, western red cedar, incense cedar, Port Orford cedar, Shasta red fir, white fir, Jeffrey pine, ponderosa pine, sugar pine, Pacific yew). Although the Hupa people s ancestral homeland was approximately 220,000 acres, the reservation does represent part of the tribe s traditional lands. Hupa ancestors were not relocated, and have been living in and managing these forestlands for a very long period of time. 2 Hoopa refers to the Tribe, whereas, Hupa refers to the people. Page 3

4 In the early 1990 s, the Hupa inherited a forest legacy from the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) based mainly on large-scale clear-cuts. Although the Tribe did not gain control over the management practices conducted on its lands until this time, in sharp contrast to neighboring forestlands, the Hupa have prevented the liquidation of their old-growth forests. As a result of Hupa prudence, the reservation still includes 35,000 acres of un-logged old-growth forest (mainly comprised of trees from years old). The majority of the Hoopa old growth forest is considered sparse (68%); the rest is moderately dense (20%) and dense (12%). The 35,000 acres of old growth forest represent approximately 40% of total Hoopa lands. Given that old growth forest is the dominant timber resource with which the tribe must work, approximately 21,000 acres (60%) of such forest is targeted for some type of harvest activity. The Hupa have restricted harvest in another 14,000 acres (40%) of the old growth forest in non-regeneration areas, or Restricted Harvest areas (riparian reserves, cultural sites, inaccessible and erosion hazard zones, Northern Spotted Owl (NSO) and peregrine falcon activity centers, Valley and Bald Hills urban areas, etc.). 3 Limited harvesting of old growth may occur in some management categories where timber production is not the primary objective (approximately 7,700 acres or 22% of total acreage covered by old growth). Harvesting may include: all methods potentially prescribed within wildlife corridors; shelterwood with no overstory removal; and selective harvests prescribed for mushroom areas, viewsheds, traditional wildlife species activity centers, riparian corridors, Wild and Scenic River corridors, and Priority A, Class 3 and Priority B, Class 2 & 3 Non Domestic Streams. In addition, mitigation measures designed to help provide some old growth functions are implemented, primarily in the form of reserve trees and areas that are left in modified clear cut, shelterwood, and single tree and group selection cuts. At the end of the 60-year planning period it appears that about 13,900 acres of reserved, totally un-entered old growth will remain, and that roughly 58% of the existing dense old growth will remain uncut or partially cut in reserves. These management and conservation strategies have been refined over the 5 years of SmartWood Certification. B. Size of management unit According to the Hoopa Forest Management Plan, excluding fee lands, 88,715 acres are classified as trust reservation lands subject to management activities. Of the 81,019 forested acres, 25,922 (32%) are classified as reserved and not subject to timber harvesting (riparian zones, cultural areas, geologic hazard areas, wildlife habitat and travel corridors, and non-regeneration timberlands). Of the balance, 7,250 acres are considered non-productive, with 55,543 acres of unreserved forestlands (52,943 acres are classified as commercial timberlands and 2,154 acres as non-commercial woodlands). C. Regional context 3 Acreage figures are being updated to be included as an appendix in the Forest Management Plan for the Reservation (FMP). These figures give a relative view of the situation with the best available data at present. Page 4

5 Although 3 mills were located on the reservation by the late 1950 s, the last mill closed in the early 1980 s, and most of the wood goes to mills on the Northern California coast. While the number of bids on any one sale may fluctuate, there are 5 main bidders. One current bidder is COC certified and has presented some upward price pressure on the high quality logs from Hoopa. D. Annual Allowable Cut (AAC) The annual allowable cut (AAC) calculated and applied by the BIA management team fluctuated from a high volume of 60 million board feet (MMBF) in the period to an AAC of 13 MMBF in Since achieving self-governance, the Tribe has dramatically reduced its AAC to the current volume of 9.86 MMBF (conifer and hardwood). MAI is calculated at 12 mmbf/year for conifers and 7 mmbf/year for hardwoods. E. General description of forest management In 1989, the Hupa began to manage their forest resources with trust oversight and federal approval granted by the BIA. Since 1991 the Hupa have exercised the full powers of self-governance as authorized by P.L By early 1991, the Hoopa Forestry Program was run entirely by the Tribe. The Tribe has a Forestry Division within the Natural Resources Department that administers forest management on Tribal lands. The principal contact person for the Hoopa forestry staff is the Tribal Forest Manager (Nolan C. Colegrove). The Forestry Division is complemented by 5 staff members (Supervisor, Planners, Water Quality Coordinator, Environmental Technician) of Tribal Environmental Protection Agency (TEPA). The Forestry Division includes: 1 Forest Manager with 5 Administrative Staff Members, Timber Sales Program with 2 professional foresters and 9 technicians, Forest Development Program with 3 professional foresters and 3 technicians, Forest Management, Inventory and Planning Program with 2 professional foresters and 3 technicians, Wildlife Program with 1 professional biologist, 3 permanent and 3 seasonal technicians, Tsemeta Tree Nursery staffed with 1 Nursery Horticulturist and 1 technician, Roads Sub-Division with 8 staff members, and Wildland Fire Sub-Division with 19 employees. Prior to the late 1940 s, proactive timber management was minimal on the Hoopa Reservation; fire control with accompanying road or trail construction was the primary forestry-related activity. Large-scale commercial timber harvesting began in 1947, mainly in the form of extensive, traditional clear-cuts and high grading, under the direction of the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). Early silvicultural efforts on the Hoopa forestlands were traditional for the region. Under BIA jurisdiction, even-aged, large-scale clear-cuts, tractor piling and burning, aerial seeding and synthetic chemicals resulted in many dense, second-growth stands that are poorly stocked with conifers. Roughly half of the original old-growth forest was eliminated by such practices. One of the most difficult tasks for Tribal Forestry today is to rectify problems that resulted from past management. Today, the Hupa are exploring innovative strategies that reflect a major paradigm shift in silviculture. For example: The Tribal Council has prohibited artificial chemical control of vegetative competition and invasive exotic species on timber stands; only manual methods may be used. Whereas previously there was virtually no consideration of cultural resources (i.e. Port Orford Cedar, traditional use, and spiritual areas) or special environmental resources (i.e. riparian zones and late- Page 5

6 successional forest habitat), current planning, timber sale lay-out, and harvesting activities protect such resources. The current FMP is the first plan in Tribal history that was publicly reviewed by the affected community. Local involvement ultimately reduced the potential cutting areas, and the AAC was also lowered, largely in response to concerns for cultural resources, riparian zones, and wildlife habitat. Brush-raking as site preparation has been largely rejected by the Tribe (although not completely eliminated). All California State Forest Practice Rules (generally considered the strictest in the nation) are met, and in most cases surpassed in terms of strictness, by the Tribe s self-imposed standards. Timber harvested on the Hoopa Reservation is sold to an in-house, wholly owned subsidiary of the Tribe, (not a state-chartered corporation) called Hoopa Forest Industries (HFI), which conducts harvesting activities with its own equipment according to plans laid out by Tribal Forestry. HFI places timber sales prepared by the Forestry Division up for bid. HFI has 2 year-round employees (the CEO and Woods Boss), 6 seasonal technicians, and seasonal loggers. Due in large part to some dissatisfaction with the profits being obtained by sales to HFI, the Tribe is currently considering alternatives to this in-house timber purchaser, that might generate more revenues. Due to steep slopes and high rainfall, the logging season for the Hoopa is a short 3-4 month window. As a result of this and other factors, there often exists a backlog of harvests, and the projected AAC is not always met. In 1996, for example, only 6.5 MMBF of timber sales were harvested out of the planned 10.3 MMBF. Despite reduced revenues in 1996 due largely to the inability to harvest the full annual allowable cut, the Hoopa forestry operation is economically viable and a critical pillar of the local economy. The Hupa produce high value timber, receive a higher stumpage value than others in the region, and maintain an impressive value/cost ratio. 1.4 Environmental and Socioeconomic Context Wildlife habitat on the Hoopa Reservation has been modified due to intensive harvesting which began in the mid-1940 s. As mentioned previously, about 40% of the Hoopa Reservation have been clear-cut, reducing the area of old growth timber to about 35,000 acres. Roads built for timber harvesting resulted in increased hunter access to big game animals. In some geologically unstable zones, the access roads resulted in landslides and adversely affected stream habitat. To date, the reservation is still composed of very diverse vegetation types and habitats, and no one type dominates the landscape. Logging standards include minimum retention standards for snags, downed wood, and slash piles. Oaks are often protected (particularly in clumps). Annual revenues from timber activities (minus logging and hauling costs, fees collected for planting, thinning, etc.) were $7,289,628 in 1995 and $3,802,408 in These revenues are used to fund Tribal programs, long-term forest management, and per capita payments to Tribal members. It should be noted that federal funds cover a large portion of the operating costs. Such funds are unreliable; the Federal Base budget for the Hoopa has been decreasing since 1991 in an effort by the federal government to reduce the national deficit and so-called add-on funds fluctuate. The result of these belt-tightening actions has been for the Hupa to leave some staff positions unfilled (primarily environmental specialists) but maintain the general program structure intact. Page 6

7 Tribal forestry programs emphasize social benefits and provide direct employment to more than 20 people of Indian descent, additional people who reside on the reservation, and numerous contractors (most of whom are Tribal members) who do planting and road work. Tribal members receive special preferences for employment in forestry activities. Revenues received by HFI are also indirectly beneficial to the tribe since said company is a Hupa controlled business. The Tribe has contemplated the establishment of an Endowment Fund with forestry revenues, but this objective has yet to be met. 1.5 Products While the annual allowable cut on the Hoopa Reservation is calculated to be 9.8 MMBF of conifers and 3.0 MMBF of hardwoods, the Tribe has not always harvested this amount. Over the last 10 years the production was distributed among species by the following volumes: Douglas-fir 9,800 MBF White fir 228 MBF Ponderosa pine 23 MBF Sugar pine 52 MBF Minor amounts of incense cedar, and Shasta red fir Hardwoods 589 MBF (tan oak 80% and madrone 20%) 1.6 Chain of Custody The Tribe does not own or manage any processing facility as part of their operation and therefore would not be required to undergo a separate chain of custody audit. As explained in the present report, the Tribe keeps close track of logs that are harvested and sold to processing facilities in California and Oregon. The Tribe is in the planning stages for opening a Tribal Sawmill facility. Before selling certified logs HVT will need to develop Chain of Custody procedures and include this operation under their existing certificate if it will only process Hoopa logs or acquire a separate COC certificate if they plan to buy logs on the open market. Either process will require an additional audit. Page 7

8 2. CERTIFICATION ASSESSMENT PROCESS 2.1. Assessment Dates Activity Date(s) Who Stakeholder Notification 3/04 Marco Lowenstein Client Interview 3/17/04 Kenneth Baldwin Field Visit 3/17/04 Kenneth Baldwin Field Visit 4/15/04 Ron LeValley Draft Report Produced 4/6/04 Kenneth Baldwin Draft Report Revised Marco Lowenstein Draft Reviewed by Client 5/ 24/04 Walter Smith Certification Decision 2.2. Assessment Team and Peer Reviewers Kenneth Baldwin, Team Leader, Forester: Kenneth Baldwin is a California Registered Professional Forester with 40 years of experience, the past 32 in the forests of northern California. He has been involved in land and resource management planning, fire and fuels management planning, timber sale planning and preparation, watershed analysis, forest inventory and design, stocking and survival surveying, reforestation, forest worker training, forest research, fire control, fire damage appraisals, forest recreation, forestry and environmental advocacy, and fisheries restoration. He worked as a seasonal employee for the U.S. Forest Service until 1976 and after that as a contractor/consultant for the U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, Round Valley Indian Reservation, various Resource Conservation Districts, Hayfork Watershed Research and Training Center, Institute for Sustainable Forestry, various religious and non-profit organizations, and private landowners. As a SmartWood consultant he has participated in 8 certification assessments, 17 audits, and 3 peer reviews in California and Oregon. Ron LeValley, Wildlife Biologist: Ron LeValley is Senior Biologist with Mad River Biologists in McKinleyville CA. He has a long history of working with wildlife populations in northwestern California, including consulting on forest operations for private, public and tribal entities. Ron founded Mad River Biologists 25 years ago, and is the leader of a team of biologists working on forestry, beach and dunes, and wetland issues. He has been instrumental in the development of the Marbled Murrelet Forest Survey Protocol developed by the Pacific Seabird Group, and developed the Training Program for this protocol. Ron is also the California Coordinator for the Pacific Coast Joint Venture, Associate Editor for the ornithological journal Western Birds, and Treasurer for the Pacific Seabird Group. Marco Lowenstein, SmartWood Western Regional Manager: Mr. Lowenstein has a Masters degree in Forest Science from Yale University and has worked in forestry and forest products for the past 25 years. Marco has been involved with forest certification for over 12 years, has been team leader on over 20 forest assessments and audits. Prior experience includes: SmartWood Program Coordinator for the Lake States USA; Manager of lumber and flooring dealers in Santa Fe, New Mexico; Program Director for Forest-Based Economic Development in Costa Rica and New Mexico; and Reforestation crew leader in Douglas and Coos counties in Oregon. Page 8

9 2.3. Assessment Process On , the Kenneth Baldwin met with Darin Jarnaghan, Hoopa Tribal Forestry (HTF) Timber Management Officer, Todd Salberg, HTF Silviculturist, and Mark Higley, HTF Wildlife Biologist. Documents were reviewed and operating principles, philosophies and current issues were discussed. The Culvert Replacement Map for the 2003 Pine Creek Timber Sale, which showed existing culverts and planned treatments, locations for new culverts, downspouts, and drop inlets, roadside ditch treatments, road rocking and outsloping, and new road construction., was reviewed in the office. This map was checked against actual work on the ground and found to be consistent. The as yet unnamed 2004 timber sale, which is in five compartments, was visited. Proposed road work, riparian buffers, reserve areas, and excluded units were observed. Of the original units proposed for this sale, 4 were excluded due to excessive water (springs), as they were judged to have too great a potential for damage. Another 2 units were dropped due to unstable slopes that would affect road access. And about 15% of the area was removed due to instability, sometimes due to previous harvesting or roading. On to phone contacts were made with stakeholders from the Hoopa Valley Tribe. Ron LeValley met with Mark Higley on April 15, In the morning, documents were reviewed and philosophies and current forest wildlife survey and monitoring strategies were discussed. In the afternoon Ron and Mark visited an active timber sale, a five-year old timber sale and sites were bear damage is prevalent on the reservation. The following documents were reviewed: SmartWood Certification Assessment Report for: Hoopa Valley Tribe. SmartWood SmartWood Audit reports for 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003 Culvert Replacement Map for the Pine Creek TS Environmental Assessment-Year 2003 Timber Sales Biological Opinion by the USFWS for the FY 2003 Timber Management Program 2.4. Standards The Standards used in this reassessment are the FSC Pacific Coast Working Group Standards version 7.9 as approved by the FSC International in August 2003 ( and FSC approved SmartWood Protocol Stakeholder consultation process and results Issues Identified Through Stakeholder Comments and Public Meetings The stakeholder consultation activities were organized to give participants the opportunity to provide comments according to general categories of interest based upon the assessment criteria. The comment summary below is based upon specific interview and/or public meeting comments. Table 2.5 FSC Principle Stakeholder Comments SmartWood Response P1: FSC Commitment/ Legal Compliance The Hoopa Tribal Council pushed the BIA for Trust reform as it felt the Hupa s could manage their lands better than anyone else could. They have been managing their lands for centuries. Like many Native American forestry departments, the Hoopa Valley Tribe has the primary responsibility for the Page 9

10 P2: Tenure & Use Rights & Responsibilities P3 Indigenous Peoples Rights P4: Community Relations & The Hoopa Tribe is in compliance with all applicable Federal, State, and County laws. The Hoopa Tribe has legal rights to the lands they occupy under a Trust agreement with the Federal government. The Hupa s have been occupying their lands for centuries. The Hupa were nomadic hunter-gatherers that moved into the high country during the summer to harvest and hunt and to the lowlands during the winter. To a degree they still practice traditional ways and use traditional foods. Acorns from tanoaks are used to make a mash/soup for the Jump & Deer Dance ceremonies. HTF leaves large tanoaks next to roads and in traditional gathering areas for this purpose and for people who still use this food as part of their diet. Port Orford cedar is used in the altars erected for ceremonies. This species is protected in reserves for this purpose. Angelica and other medicinal plants are protected in reserves or areas buffered during timber harvests. HTF asked the Cultural Committee whether bears that were damaging young growth timber should be hunted or trapped and relocated. The committee asked around and found that some tribal members were O.K. with hunting (traditionally, some people hunted bears when they needed food) and others favored relocation because they believed bears were their ancestors. The committee recommended relocating the bears. There are many cultural resources on the Reservation. The Cultural Committee, composed of spiritual leaders & elders, are involved in all facets of forest management. This is demanded by the tribal membership. When planning timber harvests or if old camps or trails are encountered during sale preparation, HTF contacts the Cultural Committee. Members of the committee look at the areas and sites and if the elders want them protected, they are. The committee feels they have a good working relationship with HTF and that it is responsive to their recommendations. The few times recommendations have been challenged, the Hoopa Tribal Council has always supported the committee. The Hoopa Tribe is investing in its own people. High School students can intern with the Natural Resources Department, management of their forestland with oversight by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). The tribe has shown their ability to manage the land for the benefit of their people and the environment. The Hoopa Valley Tribe was first certified in 1999 and completed four successful audits. Although the Cultural Committee is an important element of the forest management process at Hoopa, there is a continuing struggle between preserving cultural traditions and resources and making income for the tribe. There appears to be a working compromise that is acceptable to a majority of tribal members. See above HVT has been trying to provide training and education Page 10

11 Workers Rights P5: Benefits from the Forest P6: Environmental Impact P7: Management Plan P8: Monitoring & Assessment performing tasks such as monitoring owls and bears and working with the GIS. People have had their college expenses paid for to become fisheries biologists and foresters, with the stipulation that they come back to work on the Reservation. The HTF Timber Management Officer was trained under this program. The Tribe has a good relationship with Oregon Overseas, which bought logs from Hoopa in The Hoopa Tribal Council was interested in certification because when they read over the certification standards they believed there would be few changes required in their Forest Management Plan. They are a bit disappointed that certification has not returned the premium that they expected, although it opens more markets. The limitation for them on marketing logs is that there are few mills that can handle the size of logs they produce. The Tribe needs the annual revenue it gets from timber sales as it helps fund a lot of departments [They would like to have a Rainy Day Fund to dip into when markets are down so they could defer cutting in any given year.] The Tribe is breaking ground in Hoopa within 90 days for a modular home plant. It is looking into building a mill to provide lumber for the plant. It is waiting until it knows what volumes, sizes, and species will be needed for the plant. These investments will provide additional employment. Forest management is being done well. The HTF Forest Manager is doing a good job. He is on the CA Indian Forest & Fire Management Council and the Intertribal Timber Council. Compartments are entered every 7-8 years and then given a rest. Salmon are important to the Tribe. This is reflected in the road improvements and prohibition on clear cutting. The Tribe conforms to EPA, USFWS, and NOAA requirements for protections of T&E species. It is involved in the Trinity River Task Force and in litigation to protect the quality of water in the Trinity River. There were growing pains associated with HFI implementing the new Forest Management Plan. HTF hired HFI loggers to help lay out timber sale units, which was beneficial for both HTF and HFI. Oscar Billing s move from HTF to HFI has also been beneficial for both. Monitoring and assessment are done to the extent that funds are available and are more extensive than for most forest operations. for HVT and HFI employees and tribal council members to explain the management objects, silviculture and marking guidelines of the forest plan. SW has recommended that they pursue funding for conducting workshops in the field. (Recommendation 6.5.b) The building onsite manufacturing is a positive development. It will open opportunities for tribal employment. Hoopa sells logs on the open market and therefore employment on the reservation has been restricted to forestry, logging and firefighting The listing of Chinook Salmon on the Threaten Species list is of great concern to the Hupa. Salmon are a critical part of Hupa s cultural tradition. They have made stream and salmon habitat protection a high priority. See Principle 4 HVT monitoring program, while fairly well done, has room for improvement. Page 11

12 (Conditions 2 and 3) P9: Maintenance of High Conservation Value Forest About 25% of the Reservation is in reserves, which include cultural, ceremonial, and subsistence sites and areas. Timber harvesting ties in well with these reserves. For example, large trees that are good for wildlife and acorn production for human use, but not necessarily for forest products, are left as individuals or in groups. HCVF on the reservation are a great example of how tribal cultural and environmental values are inseparable. HCVF relate to cultural sites and traditional uses (including the protection of stream corridors for salmon. P10 - Plantations Not Applicable None 3. RESULTS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3.1. Findings and Conditions by Principle Principle/Subject Area P1: FSC Commitment and Legal Compliance P2: Tenure & Use Rights & Responsibilities Strengths The Hoopa Valley Tribe has operated under its own forest management plan since It has been certified since 1999 and has met, or substantially met, all required conditions. The Forest Management Plan and all operations are and have been in compliance with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws. Forestry operations meet and/or exceed the CA Forest Practice Rules. Two resource law enforcement officers with arrest authority enforce tribal law in regard to theft and poaching of forest products. Other actions have been taken to reduce illegal use. Information is shared with tribal members, except for confidential information on cultural use areas, archaeological areas, or T&E species nest sites. Information used to develop the Forest Management Plan and Environmental Assessments is solicited from tribal members. All taxes and fees have been paid in a timely manner. The Hupa s have been managing their lands for centuries. The Federal Government holds their Tribal Lands in Trust. All interior property corners are set. The BLM has surveyed, blazed and tagged boundaries and monumented corners. All customary and lawful uses are allowed. Recognized rights are included in the Tribal Constitution and ordinances, in the Forest Management Plan, and on the Weaknesses Page 12

13 tribal website. The Cultural Committee is consulted for sensitive areas and provides management recommendations, which are followed. The Cultural Committee and/or the Hoopa Tribal Council resolve tenure claims and use rights. There are no unresolved disputes over tenure and use rights. P3 Indigenous Peoples Rights Forest management operates under the 1994 Forest Management Plan, which was developed with input from tribal members, including basket makers and medicine women, and approved by the Hoopa Tribal Council. The Cultural Committee continues to provide input on forest management. The Hoopa Tribal Council has never changed a Cultural Committee recommendation. Input from tribal members is solicited during development of project Environmental Assessments. The Cultural Committee, dance leaders, and medicine women identify archaeological sites, cultural use areas, and traditional use areas. These sites are protected and their locations are kept confidential. Hoopa Tribal Forestry and the Hoopa Valley Tribe have a good working relationship with adjoining landowners regarding protections of habitat for threatened and endangered species and water quality. P4: Community Relations & Workers Rights The Tribal Employee Rights Ordinance sets standards for employees and contractors that create a high quality work environment. Liability insurance is required of all contractors and is carried by the Hoopa Tribe for its employees. The Tribal Employee Rights Ordinance sets standards for obtaining bids and gives a preference for tribal contractors if they are within 5% of the low bid. There is a core of contractors. Other hires are off a tribal list, which gives preference to tribal members. All timber sales are reserved for Hoopa Tribal Industries. Supplies are purchased from tribal businesses whenever possible. The Cultural Committee is consulted on all planned activities and its recommendations are followed. Timber sale planning is open for input from tribal members and requires approval of the Tribal Council. Page 13

14 P5: Benefits from the Forest P6: Environmental Impact Forest management is economically viable and is the largest revenue generator on Tribal lands. The Hoopa Tribe needs to harvest annually to maintain a cash flow, but there are no requirements to harvest in excess of the AAC, which in fact has not happened since the Tribe took over management from the BIA. Educational outreach to the community is ongoing. High school student interns work in the Natural Resources Department & scholarships are available to send students to college to study in natural resource management fields to eventually fill positions on the Reservation. New markets are constantly being explored. Recently a feasibility study was done for milling long boards from conifers and hardwoods for the overseas, certified market. Growth and harvest rates are sustainable and are based on inventory data, which is updated every 10 years. Descriptions of ecological processes, common and rare plants and animals and their habitats, and water and soil resources are included in the forest management plan. Assessments of environmental impacts and mitigation measures are prepared, with tribal member input, before each project and are available to the public. Protections for rare, threatened, and endangered species and their habitats are outlined in the Forest Management Plan, in Environmental Assessments, and in USFWS and NOAA Biological Opinions. Conservation areas, which include ~50% of the productive forest are included in the Forest Management Plan. Habitat areas, including Northern Spotted Owl activity center core areas, and corridors have been identified both within the reservation forest and linking to adjacent federal and private land. These corridors include Tribal forest reserves, riparian areas and areas to be managed under longer rotations with substantial mature forest structure. Silvicultural prescriptions are largely based upon current stand conditions, i.e. decadence, tanoak understory, presence of cultural species, and riparian zone. Harvest scheduling and timber sales incorporate protections for ecological diversity and conservation reserves of mature forest habitat. Ecological functions and values are being maintained, enhanced, or restored. Silvicultural practices mimic the current disturbance regimes of snow, wind, fire, insects, disease, bears, and geological events. No-harvest reserves are set aside. Native forest and structural elements are It is assumed that adequate biomass is being left on site, but only longterm effectiveness monitoring will determine this. (see condition 3) Habitat needs to be improved in some areas, especially in the northwest corner of the Reservation. Under the Tribal Landowner Incentive Program, grants are available to help allottees to do so. Thinning is being done in selected areas and underplanting in some riparian zones. (see condition 1 and 2) There is currently no corridor maps in the FMP but there is written direction that NSO dispersal habitat will not be dropped in any FMU below 50% of existing habitat. Prescriptions to achieve desired landscape conditions have not been developed. (See condition 1) Regeneration success is monitored, but no long-term effectiveness monitoring is done. No monitoring of soil fertility is done, but mitigation measures are taken to maintain fertility. (See condition 3) Page 14

15 being retained in portions of harvest units. Early successional habitat is also being created. Logged units are regenerated with conifers grown in the tribal nursery from seed collected on tribal lands or from natural seeding. All conifer species found on a unit are planted. There is little salvage logging due to ecological considerations. Trees in riparian zones and designated wildlife trees that die are not available for salvage. Objectives for retention of large woody debris in a stand must be met before salvage is permitted. The main types of harvesting, modified clearcutting and group shelterwood, maintain native forest reserve areas and structural elements to minimize abrupt edge effects. An assessment of forest types was done during development of the Forest Management Plan and again in 2003 during development of the data needed for consultation with the USFWS on T&E species. Forest types are mapped. There are adequate areas of every forest type in reserves within tribal lands and in LSRs on adjacent USFS and BLM lands and in Redwood National Park. There are no public lands on the Hoopa Valley Tribe Reservation. However, the planning process was accessible and responsive to the tribal members and interested agencies. Protected areas have been established to maintain species dependent on interior core habitats. Guidelines are written in the forest management plan and project descriptions to control erosion, minimize forest damage, and protect water resources during logging, hauling, and site preparation. Considerable effort has been made to educate HFI and HTF employees on the rationale behind guidelines in order to enhance sale preparation and logging quality. HFI loggers have been hired to help during sale preparation, which has been beneficial for both HTF and HFI. Drainage and erosion problems are identified during sale planning and are mapped on sale area maps, with appropriate mitigation measures designated. These mitigations are applied before, during, or after the sale. Emergency drainage problems are treated as soon as possible after discovery. Winter road patrols identify and correct problems before they damage resources. When culverts are replaced or new culverts installed, they are sized for a 50-year storm event. A study was done that showed there was a minimal difference between culverts sized for a 50-year and a 100-year storm event. Page 15

16 Minimum pipe sizes are 24, which are used to replace older pipes, some of which were 12 but most of which were 18. New and replacement culverts on fish bearing streams are more often than not open bottom arches. The Hoopa Valley Tribe is committed to maintaining soil fertility, riparian protection and water quality, which is reflected in its forest management. For example, during planning for the 2004 timber sales, 4 units were excluded due to excessive water (springs) as they were judged to have too great a potential for damage, 2 units were dropped due to unstable slopes that would affect road access, and about 15% of the area was removed due to instability, sometimes due to previous harvesting or roading. Riparian buffers are routinely increased where soil instability exists. Logging equipment is specified to minimize soil disturbance. Landings are reused whenever possible. New landings are designed and constructed to minimize soil erosion as specified in the Forest Management Plan. The Forest Management Plan allows no salvage of trees within the riparian protection zone Waste is minimized during logging. Clauses in operational contracts provide for protection of the residual stands. Fines have been levied when damage is excessive. Temporary roads are blocked with large earthen berms. Unnecessary roads are decommissioned as per the Forest Management Plan. Water crossing structures are pulled and crossings are winterized. Except for BIA system roads, permanent roads are open only to tribal members. During development of the Forest Management Plan, all watersheds were classified as Priority A or Priority B based on their importance as domestic water supplies and for fisheries and other resources. Most (70-85%) of the watersheds were classified as Priority A watersheds, with protections that far exceed the FSC certification standards. Protections in Priority B watersheds also exceed certification standards. Tribal lands are closed to open range grazing. No chemicals or biological control agents are used in forest management. A strategy for controlling bear damage has been incorporated into the Forest Management Plan. Strategies for control of other pests are contained within the Forest Management Plan. The Forest Management Plan and timber sale contracts contain guidelines on treatment of hazardous spills. Page 16

17 Equipment is routinely checked for leaks. As part of timber sale closure requirements, HFI must remove all equipment, cable, and garbage. Waste is taken to a transfer site and disposed of according to State law. Exotics are not utilized. HTF personnel have attended workshops on control of such invasive exotics as star thistle, scotch broom, butterfly brush, and coyote brush. P7: Management Plan The Hoopa Valley Tribe operates under a Forest Management Plan completed in P8: Monitoring & Assessment The management plan is publicly available. Presentations regarding its content and management activities are given at annual meetings and questions are answered regarding specifics. The Forest Management Plan is scheduled for amendment every 10 years, with the next amendment slated for It can be amended at any time with Tribal Council approval. It has twice been considered for amendment. It was once left unchanged and once made more stringent in its protections. A soil survey and mapping were recently completed by the NRCS for the Hoopa Valley Tribe Reservation. This survey is included in the management plan by reference. Management of NTFPs is incorporated in the Forest Management Plan. Growth and harvest rates are based on Continuous Forest Inventory data, which is updated every 10 years. Silvicultural prescriptions are prepared in conjunction with Environmental Assessments and are available to all parties participating in projects. All species are managed and harvested. This maintains the ecological composition, structure, and function of the forest. Forest Management Plan implementation is monitored through Environmental Assessments, interdisciplinary team meetings, timber sale reviews, Continuous Forest Invetory and other inventories, periodic field visits, and public meetings. The Forest Management Plan and prescribed actions are revised as needed to achieve desired future conditions. All non-confidential monitoring information is up-to-date and available to the tribal public. Regeneration success is based on first, third, and fifth year survival exams. Disturbances, such as bear damage, are tracked. T & E species are monitored before and after The Hoopa Valley Tribe s monitoring of T&E and Rare species and habitats is probably better than most entities and the best they can do given the limitations on funding and staffing. Scarce dollars are stretched through the help of high school interns in monitoring and GIS data entry. It was designed to insure that changes in the populations and major habitats of T&E and Rare species were monitored and assessed. This Page 17

18 timber sales and at other locations in long-term studies. Water temperature, suspended sediments, turbidity, and discharge are tracked on various streams. The geomorphology layer in the GIS tracks events that primarily affect streams. Soils are not monitored but they are protected. Yields of harvest volumes are tracked by species, except for Port Orford cedar, which is only used locally. Permits track pole and firewood utilization. Botany surveys are done and management practices are incorporated to protect special habitats. A road survey form is being developed to monitor preand post-road improvement to determine treatment effectiveness. Local jobs are tracked and reported in the Annual Council Monitoring Response. Public responses to management activities are solicited in a questionnaire at the annual Sovereign Day and during preparation of EAs. Input from the Cultural Committee is solicited for every timber sale or other project. The Tribal Council has never reversed a recommendation of the Committee. may not track gross changes in wildlife habitat and, by extension, wildlife populations. (see condition 2) The best type of monitoring would be that which tracks the effectiveness of resource management practices in meeting wildlife goals. But that would require another wildlife biologist and 2-3 technicians. Such monitoring is not a hot ticket item with the BIA or Federal Government and tribal funds are limited. (See condition 2) It would be more appropriate to design a separate effectiveness monitoring program to monitor parameters that would show the effectiveness of treatments in meeting resource management goals. The ability of the HTF to do this is dependent upon funding and staffing levels. (See condition 3) The Hoopa Valley Tribe s fiscal department and HTF monitor financial affairs. P9: Maintenance of High Conservation Value Forest The vegetation on the Reservation was stratified and delineated on maps during development of the Forest Management Plan. All of the forested area on the Reservation meets at least one on the certification standards HCV attributes, and some stands meet all four of the attributes. The location and attributes of these forests were determined during management planning by tribal members, scientists, forest managers, the Culture Committee, and other stakeholders. HTF coordinates efforts to provide T&E and Rare species habitat corridors between USFS, BLM, and Redwood National Park. HTF is in ongoing discussions with these land managers regarding management practices. P10 - Plantations Not Applicable Not Applicable Conditions are verifiable actions that will form part of the certification agreement that {operation} will be expected to fulfill at the time of the first audit or as required in the condition. Each condition has an explicit time period for completion. Non-compliance with conditions will lead to de-certification Page 18

19 3.2. Certification Decision Based on a thorough field review, analysis and compilation of findings by this SmartWood assessment team, Hoopa Valley Tribe is recommended to renew joint FSC/SmartWood Forest Management and Chain of Custody (FM/COC) Certification with the stipulated conditions (or contingent upon successful completion of the preconditions listed below). In order to maintain certification, Hoopa Valley Tribe will be audited annually on-site and required to remain in compliance with the FSC principles and criteria as further defined by regional guidelines developed by SmartWood or the FSC. Hoopa Valley Tribe will also be required to fulfill the conditions as described below. Experts from SmartWood will review continued forest management performance and compliance with the conditions described in this report, during scheduled and random audits Conditions and Recommendations Conditions are verifiable actions that will form part of the certification agreement that Hoopa Valley Tribe will be expected to fulfill at the time of the first audit or as required in the condition. Each condition has an explicit time period for completion. Non-compliance with conditions will lead to de-certification. Condition 1. (6.2.c): By the 2006 audit, complete and continue to implement a long-term habitat restoration/protection plan for critical species designed to accomplish explicit objectives by the end of the Tribe s 50-year vision period. In addition to the already prepared historic and current landscape pattern maps and maps delineating conservation reserves and habitat corridors (not necessarily no-cut areas), this plan must include: entry into the GIS of the historic landscape condition map (based on the 1940 era BIA aerial photos), a map of future desired habitat conditions (at the end of the Tribe s 50-year vision period) so that progress over time can be tracked. incorporation (either by reference or amendment) of maps of habitat reserves and corridors into the forest Management Plan, and specific silvicultural prescriptions to facilitate habitat development in the corridors. Condition 2. (8.2.c.1): By year three (2007) of certification develop a system to monitor and document the gross changes in wildlife habitat types over time. Condition 3. (8.2.d.1): Within two years (2006), design and apply a monitoring program to evaluate the effectiveness of forest management treatments in meeting resource objectives in the forest management plan (e.g., such as tree growth, brush competition, coarse woody debris, and wildlife habitat). Page 19

20 SmartWood Certification Annual Addendum to the Public Summary for Hoopa Valley Tribal Council 2005; SW-FM/COC AUDIT PROCESS 1.1. Auditors and qualifications: 1.2. Audit schedule Date Location /main sites Main activities 13 December 2005 Forestry office Interview staff and review documentation. 13 December 2005 Tish Tang Field review of current harvesting, road maintenance, logging, stream protection, silviculture, planting, utilization. Total number of person days used for the audit:1.25 = number of auditors participating 1 times total number of days spent for the audit Sampling methodology: The primary objectives of the SmartWood annual audit is to verify that Corrective Action Requests (CARs) required as a result of an assessment or subsequent audit of Hoopa Valley Tribal Council are being met and that their forest management practices continue to meet the FSC Principles and Criteria (P&C) and other requirements. To accomplish these objectives the SmartWood audit involved interviews with Hoopa Forestry staff, a review of documents and a field performance review of their forest management practices. Hoopa has been FSC certified since 1999 and this is their first annual audit since their reassessment in The Hoopa and SmartWood documents reviewed for this annual audit included: 2004 SmartWood Reassessment Report for Hoopa Valley Tribe; 2005 Harvest Volume; Appendix B of the Amended FMP, Riparian Management Practices; Procedures for determining Watercourse and Lake protection zone widths for Priority A and B Watersheds Silvicultural prescriptions for Tish Tang 05 Timber Sales, unit 5, 13, 27, 39 ; Maps Field sites for the performance-based evaluation portion of the audit were selected on the basis of the following objectives: Observe current or recent (since the last audit) forest management activities demonstrating continued conformance with relevant criteria of FSC P&C; Evaluate a cross section of stand sizes, forest types, harvesting and silviculture; and, Visit sites that are within a reasonable traveling distance given time limitations for auditing. FMU or Site audited Office Tish Tang Rationale for selection Interview staff and review documents that demonstrated progress towards complying with CARs. Tish Tang is a large management unit where harvesting has been concentrated during 2005 and continuing into Forest management activities demonstrated how conformance with the FSC P&C was accomplished Stakeholder consultation process Page 20