Text Size:   A+ A- A   •   Text Only
Find     
Site Image
Data Information and Reporting for Indicator A.a.
Oregon Indicator of Sustainable Forest Management A.a.
Ability to measure and report on all other Oregon sustainable forest management indicators
 

Forestry Program for Oregon Strategy A:
Indicator A.a. is one of three indicators that will measure progress towards achieving Forestry Program for Oregon Strategy A: Promote a sound legal system, effective and adequately funded government, leading-edge research, and sound economic policies.
 
Quick Links -
Other Indicators for
Stategy A Reporting
________
 
 
 

Desired trend:
Data for all Oregon indicators are increasingly current, complete, and reliable.

At-a-Glance: Condition, Trend, and Information
Condition:Trend:Information:
Symbol for Poor Condition
Symbol for Uncertain Trend
Symbol for Partial Information
Poor
Uncertain
Partial 

Why is this indicator important?
Photo of Board of Forestry members and others at a tour stop in the Malheur National Forest
Board of Forestry members tour the Malheur National Forest
Public discussion and decisions related to natural resource sustainability issues should be based on comprehensive, current, and sound data.  Forests are more likely to be managed on a sustainable basis if relevant forest information is up-to-date and easily available to decision-makers, forest managers, and the general public.  Without adequate data, trends cannot be detected nor impacts estimated.  Better knowledge will lead to better decisions at all levels of forest management.  Successful implementation of Oregon sustainable forest management framework of goals, objectives, and indicators requires the continued availability of information to report on the indicators.  Information regarding the availability, frequency, coverage, and reliability of indicator data provides decision-makers and citizens with critical information for evaluating and prioritizing sustainability needs.

What does this indicator tell us about sustainable forest management?
Condition:

 
Poor

Progress has been made in providing initial reports on 16 of the other 18 Oregon Indicators of Sustainable Forest Management.  Data coverage, data currentness, data reporting frequency, and data reliability are strong for some of the reported indicators and variable for others.  Overall, adequate data are available for six of the other 18 indicators.  As more indicators are reported and data quality improves, they begin to provide a picture of Oregon’s progress in meeting the desired trends for each indicator and, in total, provide a high-level summary of our successes and challenges in achieving environmentally, economically, and socially sustainable forest management.

Trend:
 
Uncertain
Technical issues, funding, and other workloads are slowing implementation and reporting for the remaining two indicators.  Over time, it is expected the data quality for all of the indicators will continue to improve.

Information:

 
Partial
Data for the indicator is provided by Oregon Department of Forestry staff leading implementation and reporting for the other 18 Oregon Indicators of Sustainable Forest Management. At least partial data coverage currently exists for 16 of 18 indicators.  Data reporting frequency, currentness, and reliability for this indicator are good.  Regular updates of this indicator are planned, particularly when other indicators are updated. 

Types of information produced by this indicator
This indicator will produce a narrative and tabular report on the capability to collect the data and information needed to inform all other Oregon sustainable forest management indicators.
 
"Condition" is considered "good" when the information quality ratings for all the other indicators are "adequate"; "poor" when there are no reports and/or "inadequate" information quality ratings for at least half of the other indicators; and considered "mixed or fair" in all other situations.
 
"Trend" is considered "improving" when, compared to previous reporting for indicator A.a., the number of indicators with current data reports is increasing and/or the number of indicators with improving information quality ratings is increasing.  The "trent" is considered "deteriorating" when, compared to previous reporting for indicator A.a., the number of indicators without current data reports is increasing and/or the number of indicators with inadequate information quality ratings is increasing.  The "trend" is considered "uncertain" in all other circumstances.
 
"Information quality" is considered "adequate" when there are complete, updated, and reliable data for all the other indicators; "inadequate" when there are incomplete, outdated, and/or unreliable data descriptions for at least half of the indicators; and "partial" under all other circumstances.

Oregon Indicators of Sustainable Forest Management Implementation Status
Effective: April 21, 2011

Completed Step
In Progress
 
Indicator
Designed
Implemented
Data Collection
Data on Website
Roundtable Initial Evaluation
Technical
Response
Data Report to BOF
Trend Data Available
Projections Available
Target
Set
 
A.a.
Knowledge
    
A.b.
Knowledge
  
A.c.
Compliance
  
B.a.
Revenues
 
B.b.
Employment
 
B.c.
Ecosystem Services
2012?    
B.d.
Forest Sector Vitality
 
C.a.
Forestland Area
BOF
C.b.
Harvests and Inventory
Oregon Bench-mark
D.a.
Water Quality
 Oregon Bench-mark
D.b.
Aquatic Biological Integrity
  
D.c.
Forest Roads
  2012? 2012?   
E.a.
Forest Vegetation
Sept.
2011
   
E.b.
Forest Protection
  
E.c.
Species at Risk
  
F.a.
Tree Mortality
  
F.b.
Invasives
  
F.c.
Fuels
 2012? 2012?   
G.a.
Carbon
2012?   

Indicator Evaluation Assessment Symbols




Indicator Condition:
 
 
Good
 
Desired trend or target is being achieved
/ODF/resource_planning/images/symbol_state_mixed.jpg
 
Mixed or Fair
 
Conflicting factors are affecting the status in both positive and negative ways
/ODF/resource_planning/images/symbol_state_mixed.jpg
Poor
 
Desired trend or target is not being achieved
 
Indicator Trend:
 

 
/ODF/resource_planning/images/symbol_state_mixed.jpg
 
Improving
 
 
Current status is an improvement compared to previous data
 
 
/ODF/resource_planning/images/symbol_state_mixed.jpg
 
Mixed, Uncertain,
or No Change
 
There are either conflicting (mixed) trends, trend direction is uncertain, or there is no significant change compared to previous data
 
/ODF/resource_planning/images/symbol_state_mixed.jpg
 
Deteriorating
 
 
Current status is a deterioration compared to previous data
 
 
Quality of Indicator Information:
 

 
/ODF/resource_planning/images/symbol_state_mixed.jpg
 
Adequate
 
Data coverage, frequency, currency, sources, and reliability are sufficient to draw conclusions with high confidence
 
 
/ODF/resource_planning/images/symbol_state_mixed.jpg
 
Partial
 
Data coverage, frequency, currency, sources, and reliability are of mixed quality which affects the abillity to draw conclusions
 
 
/ODF/resource_planning/images/symbol_state_mixed.jpg
 
Inadequate
 
Data coverage, frequency, currency, sources, and reliability are of insufficient quality to draw conclusions
 
 

Indicator Data Quality Assessment Symbols
Data Coverage:
 

 
 
Statewide
/ODF/indicators/PublishingImages/60x49_symbol_substate_data_coverage.jpg
 
Sub-state or
Some Statewide
/ODF/indicators/PublishingImages/60x49_symbol_substate_data_coverage.jpg
 
Varies or
Incomplete
/ODF/indicators/PublishingImages/60x49_symbol_substate_data_coverage.jpg
 
Modeled Data
 
 
Data Currentness:
 

 
Previous Year
 
 
Past Five Years
 
/ODF/indicators/PublishingImages/60x60_symbol_incomplete_data_currentness.jpg
 
More than Five
Years or Incomplete
 
Data Reporting Frequency:
 

 
Annual to Five Years
/ODF/indicators/PublishingImages/60x57_symbol_five_years_plus_data_reporting_freq.jpg
 
Greater than Five Years
 
/ODF/indicators/PublishingImages/60x57_symbol_five_years_plus_data_reporting_freq.jpg
 
One-time or Incomplete
 
 
Data Reliability:
 

 
/ODF/indicators/PublishingImages/60x57_symbol_five_years_plus_data_reporting_freq.jpg
 
High, Verifiable Data
 Quality
 
/ODF/indicators/PublishingImages/60x57_symbol_five_years_plus_data_reporting_freq.jpg
 
Variable Data Quality
 
 
/ODF/indicators/PublishingImages/60x57_symbol_five_years_plus_data_reporting_freq.jpg
 
Anecdotal Information
with Limited Verification

Indicator Evaluation Assessment and Indicator Data Quality Assessment
 

Indicator
Condition
Trend
Information
Data Coverage
Data Currentness
Data Frequency
Data Reliability
A.b.
Knowledge
A.c.
Compliance
 
 
 
 
 
B.a.
Revenue
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
B.b.
Employment and Wages
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
B.c.
Ecosystem
Services
 
 
 
 
 
 
B.d.
Forest Sector Vitality
 
 
 
 
 
C.a.
Forestland Area
 
 
 
 
 
 
C.b.
Harvests and Inventory
 
 
 
D.a.
Water Quality
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
D.b.
Aquatic Biological Integrity
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
D.c.
Forest Roads
       
 
E.a.
Forest Vegetation
       
E.b.
Forest
Protection
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
E.c.
Forest Species At Risk
 
 
 
 
 
 
F.a.
Tree
Mortality
 
F.b.
Invasives
 
 
 
F.c.
Fuels
       
G.a.
Carbon
       

Indicator Status Summary
A.b. Development and maintenance of sustainable forest management knowledge
First reported in the winter of 2008.  It is likely that the indicator under-reports the number of existing K-12 forestry programs with a field component.  It is hoped that publication of this initial indicator data will result in more comprehensive future reporting.
 
Data is complete and adequate for establishing short term trends for:
  • Oregon public university and community college resident faculty engaged in forest resources instruction and forestry extension;
  • The number of family forest landowners obtaining Master Woodland Manager status or similar advanced management training;
  • Funding for forestry research at Oregon State University and the Pacific Northwest Research Station.
Data is approximate for the number of Oregon members of natural resource professional societies and trend data is not yet available.

A.c. Compliance with forestry regulations
Historical information about Forest Practices Act notifications and rule compliance is readily available.  Past comprehensive studies monitored compliance with forest practices rules and rule effectiveness; however, the Private Forests Program currently lacks capacity to continue compliance and effectiveness monitoring.  Note that the last year for which reliable reforestation rule compliance information was available was 2000.  In spite of a currently underfunded Private Forests Program, the Oregon Department of Forestry had committed to maintaining a compliance audit program. On federal lands, limited compliance monitoring continues on an ongoing basis at the National Forest and Bureau of Land Management District level for selected projects and programs.

B.a. Forest-related revenues supporting state and local government public services
Statewide information is available for this indicator first reported in March 2008. The data are current and regularly updated from reliable referenced sources.  Complete information is not available for years before 2000, for smaller geographic areas, from revenues derived from recreation, water, and other forest resources, and from forest-related state personal income tax revenues.

B.b. Forest-related employment and wages
Overall forest-related employment and compensation information is available.  Oregon Department of Forestry GIS information and employment and compensation information from the Oregon Employment Department were merged for the indicator metrics.  GIS information is now available to separate Oregon forest sector employment information into rural and urban areas and by forest-dependent communities, while still meeting data confidentiality requirements.
 
The data are current and regularly updated from reliable referenced sources.  This indicator uses the same GIS information as indicator C.a. and will be updated every five years by the Oregon Department of Forestry.  Employment and wage information will be updated annually by the Oregon Employment Department.

B.c. Forest ecosystem services contributions to society
First reported in spring 2009.  Statewide data for the recreation component of this indicator are inadequate.  While use estimates are reliable and accurate for national forests and state parks by location, estimates for other public and private lands/water are sparse or not known.  Supply estimates are reliable and accurate, but based on voluntary reporting for 2001 only with no expectations of new data collection.  Value estimates are derived from the literature for Oregon and Washington, and thus may not be accurate for Oregonians’ recreational use of lands/water in Oregon for any given year.  Statewide date for passive use, carbon sequestration, and water quality ecosystem services are inadequate.

B.d. Forest products sector vitality
First reported in September 2009.  Statewide data are available.  Unlike the other indicators, conditions and trends can change rapidly so data more than six months old can become out of date.  Recent data on trends of investment and innovation are currently insufficient for indicator reporting. National housing start and other general economic information is current, readily available and of high quality. Statewide data for production and prices of logs, lumber, plywood, and paper is recent and of high quality. Little is known about secondary forest products in Oregon. Information about productivity in the primary wood products mills is available, timely and reliable.  Little is known about productivity in secondary forest products manufacturing in Oregon.  Work is ongoing to develop time series of product value per unit harvest volume and per employee. Information about capital expenditures of Oregon’s wood and paper products manufacturers is available but this information is general and not timely.  Work is ongoing to survey key forest sector business leaders to better determine trends in investment and innovation.  

C.a. Area of non-federal forestland and development trends
Statewide information is available for this indicator.  The data are current and regularly updated by the Oregon Department of Forestry.  Complete information is available which is linked to Pacific Northwest Research Station Forest Inventory and Analysis Program field plots and forest landowner surveys.  These data, when combined with a metric of parcelization (currently in development), and changes in structure numbers (proposed metric) will allow more thorough analysis of impacts of forest policies on forest fragmentation and production of forest values.

C.b. Timber harvest trends compared to planned and projected harvest levels timber growth potential
Statewide and county-level information by ownership group is available for this indicator.  The data are current and regularly updated from reliable referenced sources by the Oregon Department of Forestry.  More aggregated information is available for years 1849-1961.

D.a. Water quality of forest streams
First reported in September 2009.  Data are available for six of ten Oregon forested hydrologic units.  The data do not represent the daily, seasonal, or annual variability of the conditions at a location. It is a snapshot of one period in time and its associated disturbances, natural and anthropogenic. However, when aggregated with hundreds of other sites to describe a larger spatial scale, some of the daily, seasonal and yearly variability is represented by using the site results as a sample that describes the larger spatial scale.  These data also represent conditions primarily during the summer months and may not be representative of conditions throughout the year. While the data distribution was fairly comprehensive on forest lands across the state, a more rigorous probabilistic sampling is recommended for better landscape and trend assessments. 

D.b. Biological integrity of forest streams
First reported in September 2009.  The data do not represent the daily, seasonal, or annual variability of the conditions at a location. It is a snapshot of one period in time and its associated disturbances, natural and anthropogenic. However, when aggregated with hundreds of other sites to describe a larger spatial scale, some of the daily, seasonal and yearly variability is represented by using the site results as a sample that describes the larger spatial scale.  These data also represent conditions primarily during the summer months and may not be representative of conditions throughout the year. While the data distribution was fairly comprehensive on forest lands across the state, a more rigorous probabilistic sampling is recommended for better landscape and trend assessments

D.c. Forest road risks to soil and water
Implementation and reports pending.  Funding issues and federal Clean Water Act litigation have slowed implementation.  Sampling protocol has been designed.

E.a. Composition, diversity, and structure of forest vegetation
Possible first report in 2011. The lack of criteria for establishing a desired trend has slowed reporting.  A rich data set of forest vegetation data has been developed in cooperation with the US Forest Service PNW Research Station.

E.b. Extent of area by forest cover type in protected area
First reported in November of 2008.  Statewide information is available for this indicator.  The data are current and regularly updated from reliable referenced sources. 

E.c. Forest plant and animal species at risk
Statewide information is available for this indicator.  The Oregon Biological Diversity Information Center (OBIC) of the Oregon State University Institute for Natural Resources publishes information on rare, threatened or endangered species in Oregon. OBIC integrates status information from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, and Oregon Department of Agriculture. Biologists working for these agencies, together with the state's herbaria and museums and the USDA Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management, provide most of the information that comprise OBIC databases.  The species lists are updated every other year, and long-term trends will be available.

F.a. Tree mortality from insects, diseases, and other damaging agents
First reported in fall of 2008.  Annual aerial surveys have been completed in a generally consistent manner for more than five decades. Consistent estimates of tree mortality and damage are available going back to 1980. Information on the number of trees, area, and volume affected by damaging agents should be available from Forest Inventory Analysis (FIA) on a five-year reporting cycle. Changes in FIA survey design have and will present difficulties in making comparisons with earlier measurements. Both the aerial survey and FIA programs are well supported and can be expected to provide data at regular intervals. Improved fire mortality information is derived from the Monitoring Trends in Burn Severity Project.
 
Forest health surveys only assess burned areas of less than 100 acres, while larger fire boundaries are surveyed by the Pacific Northwest Wildfire Coordinating Group. Oregon lacks a comprehensive statewide database of forest mortality from wildfire. Remotely-sensed canopy cover change detection data were used as a surrogate for actual wildfire tree mortality information. More years of fire mortality data are needed to confirm trends.

F.b. Invasive species trends on forestlands
First reported in fall of 2008.  Data on invasive species in Oregon is generally quite limited. The Oregon Departments of Agriculture and Forestry conduct annual trapping and monitoring efforts for high priority invasive pests and provide information on detections and ongoing eradication efforts.  The Oregon Invasive Species Council produces an annual list of the “100 most dangerous” invaders and a report card/rating of current exclusion efforts. These programs are well supported and can be expected to continue to provide information. Annual aerial surveys and periodic ground surveys of forest lands provide information on some previously established invasive insects and diseases, but are insufficient to detect new arrivals. No source has been identified that could provide statewide data on the distribution and abundance of invasive plants on forest lands.

F.c. Forest fuel conditions and trends related to wildfire risks
Implementation and reports pending.  Oregon is awaiting a western states' consensus on a reporting protocol.

G.a. Carbon stocks on forestlands and in forest products
Possible first report in 2012. Information to data is largely based on ongoing reserach and modeling.  Scientific debate continues over some of the assumptions used in modeling.  Statewide data coverage is not yet available.

Evaluation of Indicator A.a.

Metrics and Data Sources

Metric
Data Source
For each indicator, a description of the data coverage, data frequency, data source, data reliability, and references.Oregon Department of Forestry, with assistance as needed from the Institute for Natural Resources
A matrix that rates data coverage, currency, frequency, and reliability for each indicator against predetermined evaluation criteria.Oregon Department of Forestry, with assistance as needed from the Institute for Natural Resources



Related State, National, or International Indicators
  • Montreal Process: Criterion 7 - Legal, Institutional, and Economic Framework for Forest Conservation and Sustainable Management:  2003 Indicator 60 (2010 Indicator 57): Availability of up-to-date data, statistics, and other information important to measuring or describing indicators associated with criteria 1 through 7 and 2003 Indicator 61 (2010 Indicator 58): Scope, frequency, and statistical reliability of forest inventories, assessments, monitoring, and other relevant information
  • Northeastern Area:  Existence, type, and frequency of forest-related planning, assessment, and policy review