Forest Management Public Summary. for. Hancock Land Company

Transcription

1 Forest Management Public Summary for Hancock Land Company Certification Code: SW-FM/COC-183 Date of Certification: April 1, 2002 Date of Public Summary: March 2002, updated for 2003 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 65 Bleecker Street, 6 th Floor New York, New York U.S.A. TEL: (212) FAX: (212) info@smartwood.org Website: This certification was conducted in collaboration with the following member of the SmartWood Network: Northeast Natural Resource Center/ National Wildlife Federation (NNRC/NWF) 58 State Street Montpelier, VT TEL: (802) FAX: (802) palola@nwf.org 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 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. 1. GENERAL SUMMARY 1.1. Name and Contact Information Source Name: Hancock Land Company Contact Person: John Gunn Address: PO Box 299, Casco, Maine Tel: (207) Fax: (207) jgunn@hancockland.com 1.2. General Background A. Type of operation Hancock Land Company (HLC) is a forest management company that manages its own forestlands, as well as offering contracted forest management to landowners interested in managing to HLC s Ecological Forestry standards and contracted oversight for harvests. HLC is being assessed as a Resource Manager candidate for certification. B. Years in operation HLC has a 153-year history of forest management that spans six generations of the Hancock family. In 1848 the company was established with the purchase of a 400-acre stand in Casco, Maine. For the next 150 years the forestlands that the company acquired were managed with a fairly low intensity harvest schedule to provide stability and guarantee potential white pine timber resources to Hancock s white pine sawmills. In 1998 a new generation of Hancocks took on the responsibilities of managing the Hancock family business. A decision was made to separate the forestland management, and mills and retail stores into two separate businesses (Hancock Land Company and Hancock Lumber respectively) that would continue to have a strong relationship with regards to products and supply but would allow each business to focus on its own opportunities for growth and development. HLC supplies a significant proportion of white pine logs to the mills but the relationship is flexible to respond to the silvicultural realities of HLC lands, and sales and purchases by both parties most stand on their own merits without subsidies. HLC has grown aggressively since 1998 as a forest management company interested in actively managing a larger forested landbase, growing staff from ½ person in 1998 to 10 staff and an intern at the time of the assessment, and purchasing significant amounts of forestland in southwestern Maine to ensure an adequate forest landbase to help supply Hancock Lumber. In recent years, HLC has been involved in several land purchases with conservation easement components which have allowed them to expand their land base

3 while simultaneously guaranteeing a forested future for the lands under easement in an area facing rapid development pressures. C. Date first certified April 1, 2002 D. Latitude and longitude of certified operation Hancock Land Company s office in Casco is at N W. This also represents a point in fairly close vicinity to their southern forestlands. The Black Mountain forestlands in Peru, Maine (the northern tier of operations) are at N and W Forest and Management System A. Forest type and land use history The Hancock family has been in the timber and lumber business since 1848 and currently owns and manages about 22,000 acres of forestland. A primary timber objective is to produce quality white pine sawlogs to be used in the three family sawmills. Prior to 1998, forest management activity was low intensity, but active forest management was evident to some extent on nearly all harvests. Recent timberland acquisitions have been from other large non-industrial ownerships that practiced a similar low-intensity management. HLC breaks down the forest types on the ownership into hardwood (22%), hemlock (2%), hemlock-white pine (5%), hardwood/softwood mixed-wood (13%), hardwoodwhite pine (6%), softwood (6%), softwood/hardwood mixed-wood (14%), white pine (11%), white pine-hardwood (11%), white pine-hemlock (7%), non-timber (1%), and inaccessible (3%). Approximately 40% of the landbase has a white pine component. B. Size of management unit and area in production forest, conservation, and/or restoration HLC owns 21,842 acres of land in southwestern Maine. Management block size ranges from under 100 acres to over 5,000 acres. About four percent of the land is inaccessible or non-timber. In 2000, HLC sold a conservation easement on about 3,300 acres of forestland containing 269 acres of rare pitch pine community. HLC is actively pursuing similar possibilities on other timberlands being considered for acquisition and currently owned by HLC. There is one property in the pool owned by another landowner that consists of 327 forested acres. C. Annual allowable cut and/or annual harvest covered by management plan The annual allowable harvest calculations for lands historically owned by HLC were determined from growth rate and mortality for different tree species and products. The growth percentages were calculated from 1996 increment cores.

4 Species/Product Annual Allowable Harvest (%) White Pine Sawlogs 3.93 Low-Grade Pine 3.93 Hemlock Sawlogs 3.73 Spruce/Fir 3.43 Hardwood Sawlogs 3.73 Hardwood Pallet 3.73 Pulp 3.73 On recent (post-1998) and new timberland acquisitions, the annual harvest level may be higher than the calculated annual growth rate, as HLC sets the stand up for future growth and silvicultural treatments, while paying off notes from the land s acquisition not covered by non-timber forest products such as the sale of development rights/easements, field/foundation stone, gravel, and cellular towers. It is HLC policy to only harvest in stands that require some silvicultural treatment. Most new land acquisitions have limited management histories and require some treatment to attain a regulated forest condition. For example, a lot with white pine stands might be managed in a modified shelterwood system that prescribes a heavy initial harvest to establish regeneration while protecting advanced regeneration and future seedlings. In this case, harvest may exceed annual growth rate yet meet stand-level silvicultural objectives established by HLC. Once treated, the annual net-growth level will determine the potential annual allowable cut. D. General description of details and objectives of the management plan/system HLC terms their forest management Ecological Forestry. HLC defines the practice of ecological forestry as the maintenance of ecological patterns and processes that ensure an adaptable ecosystem capable of providing a continuous flow of forest products by guarding against such factors as timber shortfall, fluctuating markets, insect outbreak, and climate change. Specific management objectives include consideration of temporal and spatial scales, protection for globally and regionally unique natural areas, use of silvicultural systems that promote the growth of high-quality forest products and sustainable supplies of forest products, reliance on natural regeneration silvicultural systems coupled with long rotations, protection of water quality through ardent use of Best Management Practices (BMPs), and minimal use of chemicals if no other alternative is available. Forests are managed for diverse structure and species composition across the landscape Environmental and Socioeconomic Context HLC is the largest timber harvester in southwest Maine, and one of the larger landowners. White Pine is a primary tree species for both HLC and the Hancock Lumber Companies, and the company focuses on managing for White Pine whenever practicable. The bulk of the HLC-owned land is located in southwestern Maine, where White Pine is locally abundant, and is a forest dominant in many locales. A rapidly expanding human population also characterizes Southwestern Maine, and this trend is accompanied by extensive development and sub-division pressures for undeveloped, forested property. A recent study found that Portland, Maine, less than an hour from Casco, has the worst sprawl rate in the northeastern U.S. While more people are moving into the region, there are relatively fewer people working in the traditional logging and forest products industries. Suburban development characterizes more and more of the regional landscape, and strip development is rapidly extending along some of the main arterial roadways. Recreation is an increasingly important component of the regional economy,

5 and the populations of many towns in and near where HLC lands are located explode during the summer months. In this region, much of the land ownership is highly fragmented, and forest and land use patterns partially reflect the fragmented patterns of ownership. A disturbing regional trend that HLC recognizes is the sale and conversion of productive forested land to nontimber ownership and management. In many locations in southwestern Maine where forested land has gone up for sale, land speculators and developers have outbid forest management companies such as HLC. In some cases, virtually all of the high-value timber is stripped from the site, which is then subdivided and sold off as rural house lots. When this type of sale occurs, it essentially means that the land is permanently removed from the finite area of working forest in the region. HLC is bucking the trend of increasing fragmentation of the forested land base by aggressively pursuing opportunities to consolidate and, in some cases, expand its timber holdings, and to permanently keep forested land unfragmented and dedicated to longterm forest management. HLC is also actively pursuing opportunities to partner with land trusts and conservation organizations to permanently protect working forests through Conservation Easements. A landmark Conservation Easement that HLC signed with The Nature Conservancy in 2000 permanently protected 3,012 acres of forested land at Jugtown Plains in Casco, Otisfield, and Naples, where the primary goals are timber production and sustainable forest management. An additional 269 acres of pitch pine heath barrens protected by HLC and TNC, are managed to maintain the pitch pine population and protect any plant communities that provide habitat for rare plant or animal species Products Produced and Chain of custody A. Species and volumes covered by the certificate Table 1: Certified Production Species Scientific name Volume (bd. ft.) Product White Pine 1,589,816 bd ft Spruce/Fir 95,780 bd ft 14,388 tons Pulp 128,502 bd ft Hardwood pallet 90,896 bd ft Hardwood Hemlock/Low 355,319 grade Pine/Hardwood Pallet B. Description of current and planned processing capacity HLC has no plans to produce processed and/or manufactured wood products from the logs coming off of the forestlands in the certified pool.

6 2. CERTIFICATION ASSESSMENT PROCESS 2.1. Assessment Dates June 2001 June 2001 July July 23, 2001 September 2001 October 2001 November 2001 December 2001 December 2001 March 2002 Stakeholder public notices distribution starts ( , FAX, and mail) Initial team planning Field assessment at Hancock Land Company Begin report write-up and continue stakeholder interactions ( s and interviews) Draft report to Hancock Land Company for initial review & factchecking/comment Comments received from Hancock Land Company Draft report to peer reviewers Comment back from peer reviewers Final draft submitted to SmartWood Certification Committee Precondition audit completed Certification Contract signed and received by SmartWood 2.2. Assessment Team and Peer Reviewers Assessment Team Stacy Brown, M.E.S. Environmental Policy, M.P.P.M. Public Management, Northeast SmartWood Coordinator. Mike Cline, Ph.D. Forest Biology, Maine-certified Forester Jeff Severson, M.S. Botany, Consulting Ecologist Pre-condition Auditor Stacy Brown, M.E.S. Environmental Policy, M.P.P.M. Public Management, Northeast SmartWood Coordinator Peer Reviewers David McMath, M.S. Forestry, Consulting forester G. Richard Strimbeck, Ph.D. School of Natural Resources, Ecologist and College Faculty Member Assessment Process HLC expressed interest in certification for their forestlands nearly a year prior to the assessment process, and began a conversation with the regional SmartWood Coordinator to understand what resources they would need to allocate to proceed with an assessment. As HLC became more familiar with the assessment options, they determined that a Resource Manager certification would be most appropriate for them given their forest management activities for other landowners. An assessment was scheduled for July 2001 and HLC sent a comprehensive packet for the team to review prior to the assessment of information including: an organizational chart; the Ecological Forestry Plan; sample harvest plans and road construction plans; a general map of the forest management areas; list of current forest management areas; annual production figures for the past 15 years; stakeholder information and more. The assessment team met at HLC s office on July 16 for a presentation by the HLC team on HLC s background and mission, management philosophy, systems and procedures, and a description of HLC s forestlands and the other property in the certified pool. The team began to

7 set a schedule for the next four days. Prior to this meeting the team had begun to identify the characteristics of sites that they needed to visit on the 22,169 acres of forestland managed by HLC and identified as the certified pool, and with HLC s detailed description of the properties the team was able to determine priority sites for field visits. These sites included lands that had harvest histories ranging from 20 years in the past to present (marked trees) and various harvesting systems, hydrological challenges, critical habitat and unique sites, recent acquisitions and properties that represented the diversity of size and challenges managed by HLC. The parcels visited by the team ranged from 58 to 2120 acres representing the range of property sizes HLC manages. Background information on the properties was brought into the field. The final day of the field work, the team spent several hours in HLC s office reviewing office procedures and resources related to their extensive GIS system, database, accounting process, and tax and title records. Table 2. Areas Visited by SmartWood Assessors Mgmt Block Lot # Name Town Day 1 Office visit Casco C4 53 Dubov Casco O2 15 Jugtown III Otisfield C13 67 Harris Hancock Naples O2 62 JugPort (George Otisfield Porter) Day 2 O7 223 Black Mountain Peru O7 225 Hedgehog Hill Peru Day 3 O2 14 Jugtown II Otisfield C9 61 Muddy River Naples C Phillips #1 Sebago C Tiger Hill Sebago C Fran Nelson Sebago 82 EcoLab Bridgton Highland Cove Bridgton Day 4 C8 34 Pismire Mountain Raymond Office visit Casco The team performed several follow up calls with stakeholders to this assessment process. The assessment report was prepared during the late summer and submitted for fact checking to HLC in September HLC returned comments on the draft report to the assessment team in October and following their consideration by the team and the appropriate changes to the report, the report was sent to peer review by a forester and an ecologist. The team considered and responded to all of the peer review comments, and sent the final report to SmartWood for their review in December There was a pre-condition audit in March 2002 confirming that the pre-condition had been met. As the pre-condition dealt with documentation needs, there was no need for a field visit. The audit was performed based on telephone conversations and a copy of the letter sent to the potential certified pool member, and the signed landowner agreement letter.

8 2.4. Guidelines Hancock Land Company s certification assessment was conducted using the NWF/ SmartWood criteria and guidelines as described in the Northeast Regional Guidelines for the Assessment of Forest Management September National Wildlife Federation s Northeast Natural Resource Center is a member of the SmartWood Network. These regional criteria and guidelines are the official SmartWood certification procedures for the northeastern U.S.. These criteria and guidelines are based upon the SmartWood Generic Guidelines, which have been accredited by the Forest Stewardship Council. SmartWood regional guidelines meet or exceed the SmartWood generics in requirements. Those meeting or exceeding the NWF / SmartWood criteria and guidelines will be granted SmartWood Certification status. To obtain a copy of these guidelines contact the Northeast SmartWood Coordinator at National Wildlife Federation, 58 State St., Montpelier, VT 05602, (802) tel, (802) fax, or browns@nwf.org 2.5. Stakeholder consultation process and results The purpose of the stakeholder consultation strategy for this assessment was threefold: 1) to ensure that the public is aware of and informed about the assessment process and its objectives; 2) to assist the field assessment team in identifying potential issues; and, 3) to provide diverse opportunities for the public to discuss and act upon the findings of the assessment. This process is not just stakeholder notification, but wherever possible, detailed and meaningful stakeholder interaction. The process of stakeholder interaction does not stop after the field visits, or for that matter, after even a certification decision is made. SmartWood welcomes, at any time, comments on certified operations and such comments often provide a basis for field auditing. In the case of HLC, prior to the actual assessment process, a public consultation stakeholder document was developed and distributed by , fax and mail. Through input from HLC and the assessment team members an initial list of stakeholders was developed and public announcements were distributed to them. This list also provided a basis for the assessment team to select people for interviews (in person or by telephone or through ). A list of stakeholders that were notified, and those interviewed, is available at the end of this public summary. Issues Identified Through Stakeholder Comments 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 table below summarizes the issues identified by the assessment team with a brief discussion of each based upon specific interview and/or public meeting comments. Table 3: Stakeholder Comments FSC Principle Stakeholder Comments SmartWood Response P1: FSC No comments given. Not necessary. Commitment/ Legal Compliance P2: Tenure & Stakeholder indicated that HLC sought An assessor interviewed a conservation

9 Use Rights & Responsibilities P3 Indigenous Peoples Rights P4: Community Relations & Workers Rights P5: Benefits from the Forest the opportunity to protect a core land holding, and implemented a reasonable conservation easement that met sustainable forestry standards. No comments given. Stakeholders commended HLC s involvement in the community, and fair treatment of harvesting subcontractors. Stakeholders noted that HLC s conservation easements have helped provide environmental and social benefits for the long-term. partner representative to explore this topic. The team concurs that HLC s forest management practices meet sustainable forestry standards for both land under conservation easement and other land in HLC ownership. Not necessary. The team noted both of these characteristics in the assessment report based on their own observations and field conversations. The team concurred with the stakeholders. P6: Environmental Impact A stakeholder shared concerns that HLC may have returned to sites visited by the assessment team to harvest more intensively after the field visit on sites that they had represented as having completed harvesting and accomplished initial silvicultural objectives. Stakeholder described HLC as a good conservation partner that implements good land management practices from a conservation perspective. HLC is doing some great things there. The stakeholder would be interested in pursuing future opportunities to partner with HLC if they arose. No comments given. P7: Management Not necessary. Plan P8: Monitoring No comments given. Not necessary. & Assessment P9: Maintenance No comments given. Not necessary. of High Conservation Value Forest P10 - Plantations No comments given. Not necessary. The team spoke with HLC staff about their management activities in the area in question since the assessment, and determined that the harvesting that had occurred was consistent with the scheduled activities that HLC had mentioned during the assessment. There were some stands visited by the team where harvesting was not yet complete at the time of the assessment and this is where the ongoing harvests had occurred. An assessor interviewed a conservation partner representative to explore this topic. The team concurs that the existing conservation easement works well and may serve as an appropriate model for future conservation partnerships.

10 3. RESULTS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3.1. General Discussion of Findings Table 4: Findings by FSC Principle Principle Strengths Weaknesses P1: FSC Commitment and Legal Compliance P2: Tenure & Use Rights & Responsibilities P3 Indigenous Peoples Rights P4: Community Relations & Workers Rights P5: Benefits from the Forest P6: Environmental HLC adheres to all federal, state and municipal regulations. HLC has made a clear commitment to FSC s P&C in policy and practice. HLC has surveyed and marked all property boundaries. The forestlands in the certified pool are dedicated by owners to long-term forest management. None of the lands in the certified pool are owned, or claimed, by indigenous peoples. HLC is a regional leader in providing educational opportunities and promoting sustainable forestry. HLC encourages community and professional involvement for its employees, and has an open lands policy for responsible public use of HLC forestlands. HLC has taken a proactive approach to communicating their forest management philosophy and activities with neighboring landowners. HLC employees feel valued and empowered. HLC has been entrepreneurial about looking for NTFP opportunities that contribute to the economic health of the company and allow HLC to grow their forest landbase. Notably, HLC has pursued conservation easements on several properties with unique features. HLC has invested significant resources in long-term forest management through field projects such as roadwork and monitoring, as well as hiring a skilled resource management team to guide forest management activities. HLC uses contracted Certified Logging Professionals on all harvesting jobs HLC has set up a system that attempts to give ecological considerations an equal No major weaknesses. HLC needs to create a document outlining the management responsibilities of HLC and the landowners in the certified pool respectively, and the procedures for entry and exit of the certified pool. Weakness addressed, see precondition summary below. HLC lacks a written policy of protection for sites of archaeological, cultural, historical, community and aesthetic resources. No major weaknesses. HLC needs to define the parameters for re-entry into a forest stand that has been treated intensively as a means of setting it up for future health and growth. HLC needs to ensure that Reserves and Special Management Zones are identified

11 Impact P7: Management Plan P8: Monitoring & Assessment P9: Maintenance of High Conservation Value Forest P10 - Plantations footing with silvicultural needs and other factors. HLC has an ambitious and resourceful monitoring program to systematically evaluate the impact of harvesting on community and ecosystem patterns and processes such as forest structure and composition, food resources for wildlife, denning, riparian and other aquatic habitats, etc. HLC managers take care to plan and utilize roads, skid trails, stream crossings and log landings to protect water quality and prevent soil erosion. HLC s Ecological Forestry Plan is a thorough discussion of HLC s philosophy, guidelines and considerations for forest management activities. Forest management plans are followed in the field, and updated as necessary. GIS maps are produced with a wide variety of data layers. HLC has an extensive database and documentation system which tracks all forest management activities, and forest products transported out of the forest units. HLC uses a weekly post-harvest assessment form to provide feedback and encourage consistent improvement of contractors. HLC s management plans and activities support the maintenance and enhancement of forests with high conservation value. HLC has approximately 100 acres of plantation forests (established pre-1994) within its ownership which are managed with the same system that attempts to give ecological considerations an equal footing with silvicultural needs and other factors. and marked during a season when boundaries can be accurately identified. HLC must ensure that any staff or contractors applying pesticides have the appropriate training. HLC lacks a written policy on whole tree harvesting. HLC needs to create unit management plans that have a site-specificity not covered in the Ecological Forestry Plan, but one step above the detail provided in a Harvest Management Plan. Not all HLC harvests include a quantifiable silvicultural prescription( e.g. target residual basal area and species composition percentage). HLC needs to update or conduct a natural resource inventory prior to harvest on each parcel. No major weaknesses. No major weaknesses. Precondition Compliance Pre-Condition : Hancock Land Company will create a document which outlines the management responsibilities of Hancock Land Company and the landowners in the certified pool respectively (e.g. management planning, monitoring, harvesting, quality control, marketing), the procedures and rules for entry and exit from the certified pool, and other membership requirements to participate in the certified pool. A disclosure letter will be distributed to all landowners in the certified pool detailing the above information to be signed by all participants.

12 Finding: HLC sent a copy of the required document and the disclosure letter that was distributed to the landowners in the proposed certified pool to the auditor. The letter was reviewed and found to appropriately detail the process and requirements of certification. The document outlined the management responsibilities of Hancock Land Company and the landowners in the certified pool respectively (e.g. management planning, monitoring, harvesting, quality control, marketing), the procedures and rules for entry and exit from the certified pool, and other membership requirements to participate in the certified pool. Precondition has been fully met and closed out Certification Decision Based on a thorough field review, analysis and compilation of findings by this SmartWood assessment team, Hancock Land Company is recommended to receive joint FSC/SmartWood Resource Manager and Chain of Custody (RM/COC) Certification with the stipulated conditions. In order to maintain certification, Hancock Land Company LLC 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. Hancock Land Company will also be required to fulfil the conditions as described below. Experts from SmartWood will review continued forest management performance and compliance with the conditions described in this report, annually during scheduled and random audits Conditions and Recommendations Conditions are verifiable actions that will form part of the certification agreement that Hancock Land Company 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: Effective immediately upon certification, Hancock Land Company will conduct a natural resource inventory of all forest stands prior to a timber harvest on that stand. The inventory will employ a sampling density sufficient to provide statistically accurate estimates of basal area, average DBH, trees per acre, and volumes for each commercial tree species present. The inventory information will be linked to a forest type map for the forest management unit being harvested, and incorporated into the management plan. (Criterion 3.1) Condition 2: Within six months of certification, a forest unit management plan should be developed for each unit (e.g., Jugtown, Peru, Sebago, etc.) in the Hancock Land Company ownership that describes management objectives, land-use history, resource description, and general condition, and builds upon the guidelines and policies described in the Ecological Forestry Plan. Information in the current Harvest Management Plans should be supplemented with stand-level inventory data prior to timber harvesting on that site. All additions to the certified pool from non-hancock Land Company owned lands will follow the template of the Highland Cove management plan. (Criterion 3.3) Condition 3: Within six months of certification, Hancock Land Company will define the parameters used to determine if a stand has a silvicultural need that requires active management. (Criterion 3.7) Condition 4: Within one year of certification, Hancock Land Company will adopt written policies and field practices regarding the use of heavy equipment in all hydrologically sensitive areas, and review and clarify the policy on whole tree harvesting - including specific guidelines

13 for the implementation and frequency of any whole tree harvesting in the Ecological Forestry Plan. (Criteria 4.1, 5.3, and 5.10) Condition 5: Effective immediately upon certification, Hancock Land Company will be involved with contractors in locating logging landings and major skid trails in all future harvests. (Criterion 4.6) Condition 6: Effective immediately upon certification, each timber harvest will include a quantifiable silvicultural prescription, ideally a target residual basal area and species composition percentage. (Criterion 4.7) Condition 7: Effective immediately upon certification, Hancock Land Company will identify and mark the boundaries and buffer zones for all applicable Reserves or Special Management Zones, particularly aquatic systems such as wetlands and small or seasonal streams, at a time of year when the boundaries of the feature can be accurately identified; these Reserves and Special Management Zones will also be identified on planning and harvest maps. (Criteria 5.9 and 5.10) Condition 8: Effective immediately upon certification, Hancock Land Company will require that all relevant staff and contracting pesticide applicators receive the appropriate training in proper handling, storage, and disposal of chemicals for all relevant before working on any sites where chemicals are used. In addition, Hancock Land Company will specify in written contracts that chemical applicators follow all safe and appropriate practices, citing the relevant sections of OSHA and other applicable regulations. (Criterion 5.12) Condition 9: Within one year of certification, Hancock Land Company will include language in the Ecological Forestry Plan that addresses the protection of archaeological, cultural, historical, community, and aesthetic resources. Hancock Land Company will identify known features on site maps and establish clear, consistent guidelines for protecting these features in the field. (Criterion 6.5) Condition 10: Before the addition of properties to the certified pool and within one year of certification, Hancock Land Company will add a section to their economic analysis of potential properties for acquisition that directly assesses each property s ability to simultaneously meet certification standards and Hancock Land Company s financial objectives. The format of this section of the analysis will be submitted to SmartWood when it is developed, and a summary of analysis results will be sent to SmartWood on each property as it is added to the pool. Properties that are added to the certified pool will demonstrate a clear ability to meet both these characteristics in a market that can be anticipated to have some variance. (Criterion 7.3) Condition 11: Hancock Land Company can add properties to the certified pool prior to an audit if those properties are covered by an FSC regional standard already represented through properties in the certified pool, and meet Condition 10 (7.3). When Hancock Land Company adds properties prior to an audit, they will notify SmartWood and submit the management plan and relevant economic analyses to SmartWood. (Section 5.0) Recommendations are voluntary actions suggested by the assessment team, but are not mandated or required. There were nine recommendations.

14 SmartWood Certification Annual Addendum to the Public Summary for Hancock Land Company, Audit Process A. Audit year: 2003 B. Dates of Audit: September 25-26, 2003 C. Audit Team: Michael L. Cline. B.S. in Biology, M.S. and Ph.D. in Forest Biology. Dr. Cline has been involved in forest research, management, and policy for more than 25 years at a variety of locations throughout the U.S. He conducted research for International Paper Co. for seven years, research and policy analysis for Maine Audubon Society for 10 years, was a forestry consultant and taught college courses for three years, and has been the director of Tin Mountain Conservation Center for the past five years. In addition, he has operated a forest management business for the past 13 years. He has worked as a forest auditor on various SmartWood audits in the northeastern USA. D. Audit Overview: A two-day audit was performed consisting of office consultation, presentation of new organizational chart, review of last year s assessment and progress toward meeting conditions, discussion of changes in the pool of certified lands, and field examination of a subset of the certified-lands pool (three sites in Mud Pond on Peru property and six sites on Bull Moose in Township 6) including review of copies of management plans for each. Site selection was the auditor s choice and focused upon harvests performed since the assessment. Sites Visited: On day one, the Peru property (Mud Pond Area) was visited with stops at a mixedwood selection harvest, a hardwood selection cut, a pine management area, and a wetland buffer area. On day two, Township 6 NW (Bull Moose Area) was visited with stops at a category II clearcut and several other clearcut areas, a maple grove selection cut, a shelterwood harvest, several reserve areas, the Fens ecological reserve area. E. Personnel Interviewed: The following people were consulted during this audit: Person interviewed Peter McKinley Mark Rabon Mark Rowland Shane Dulgan Position/Organization VP, Forest Operations/Ecological Planning EVP, Forestry & Marketing Project Engineer Project Engineer F. Documentation reviewed: Management plans, SmartWood 2002 FM Assessment Report, HLC organizational chart, HLC Progress Report on SmartWood Conditions, HLC harvest volumes for Aug 2001-Aug 2003, Ecological Monitoring Scheme, Forest Management & Operations Plans, operations agreements, GIS forest type and management maps.

15 1.2 General Audit Findings and Conclusions HLC continues to practice exemplary forest management on certified lands while conserving forest structure, biodiversity, and other non-timber values. Its operations generally conform with FSC principles and meet or exceed financial goals for the company. All conditions applied following the initial assessment have been addressed in the spirit of improving land stewardship; however, some refinement will necessary to address concerns regarding four of the 11 conditions. Since becoming certified last year, HLC has added the Bull Moose Unit in Township 6 to the certified pool, including 7,833 acres. As with all other HLC lands, the unit is managed according to the Ecological Forestry Plan and the Forest Management & Operations Plan developed in July An expanded forest inventory system has been developed as well as an ecological monitoring scheme Staffing changes have occurred at HLC since the assessment last year. The current organizational structure is listed below. Matt Hancock, Chairman, President & CEO Jeff Hall, EVP, Non-Timber, Sales & Acquisitions Alec Jarvis, Resource & Forest Engineer Mark Rabon, EVP, Forest Management & Marketing Peter McKinley, VP, Forest Operations/Ecological Planning Mark Rowland, Project Engineer Shane Dulgan, Project Engineer Renee Bogart, GIS/IS Manager Marina Douglas, VP & CFO Tricia Johnson, Wood Systems Reconciliation 1.3 Status of Conditions and Corrective Action Requests (CARs) A. Compliance Summary of Previously Issued Conditions and CARs Condition 1 has been partially met. The Forest Management & Operations Plan doesn t include statistically accurate information on pre-harvest basal area, average DBH, or volumes. Conditions 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, and 11 have been met and are ongoing. Condition 4 has been partially met; however, one active harvest operation in Township 6 NW showed extensive, serious rutting due to wet soil conditions. The contractor clearly disregarded the change in soil conditions and continued logging despite damage to the soils. The forester in charge of the operation immediately shut the operation down. Condition 9 has been met and is closed. Condition 1: Partially Met. Replaced by CAR Condition 2: Met/Ongoing. Condition 3: Partially Met. Replaced by CAR Condition 4: Partially Met. Replaced by CAR Condition 5: Met/Ongoing. Condition 6: Met/Ongoing. Condition 7: Met/Ongoing. Condition 8: Partially Met. Replaced by CAR 4-03.

16 Condition 9: Closed Condition 10: Met/Ongoing. Condition 11: Met/Ongoing. B. New CARs Issued in this Audit CAR Prior to the 2004 audit, HLC must demonstrate that the comprehensive inventory information collected is analyzed, incorporated and readily available in the FM&O Plans for each harvest operation. CAR Prior to the 2004 audit, HLC will develop a policy that describes the stand conditions under which clearcutting will be used as a silvicultural method and the desired outcome of the practice. In addition, guidelines will be developed that indicated the size and condition of retention areas or residual trees to be left in the stand, target number of snags or wildlife trees, and methods for conserving coarse woody material and other relevant elements of forest structure. CAR Effective immediately, HLC will develop specific standards that describe the site/soil conditions under which contractors will terminate operations in order to avoid site degradation and erosion. Foresters will provide these standards to contractors as part of their Operations Agreement. In addition, contractors should be supplied with copies of Maine s forestry BMPs and attend BMP training sessions. CAR 4-03: Prior to the 2004 audit, HLC must develop a standard contract template for pesticide applicators that includes provisions requiring chemical applicators to follow all safe and appropriate practices, citing the relevant sections of OSHA and other applicable regulations. HLC must also secure and maintain a copy of the most current FSC Chemical Pesticides Policy and ensure that employees and contractors have ready access to the policy. HLC must refrain from using any chemicals prohibited under the FSC Chemical Pesticides policy. Employees involved in decisions or activities relating to application of chemicals must be familiar with the FSC policy.