Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Current Perspectives on Sustainable Forest Management: North America

  • Integrating Forestry in Land use Planning (P Bettinger, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Forestry Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Increased availability of current forest resource information provides an opportunity to evaluate the continued concerns about forest sustainability in North America. The purpose of this study is to assess and discuss the current state and trends of North American forest resources, sustainable forest management, and their implications for forest sustainability.

Recent Findings

Recent information indicates that forest sustainability in North America is not under threat. Forest area, inventory, and carbon stocks have been increasing while wood harvest has been declining. Large expanses of forest resources are covered by management plans, and many forests are certified. The areas of concern include forest fires and bark beetle infestations in primarily public forests in the western USA and Canada, and continued loss of forest cover in Mexico.

Summary

Despite progress made in gathering information on forest resources, evaluating forest sustainability remains challenging. Practicing sustainable forest management is made difficult by unfavorable market conditions and the ensuing lack of funding, challenges in developing and implementing forest management plans, and uncertainties including potential impacts of climate change, population growth, and changing markets.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Hardin G. The tragedy of the commons. Science. 1968;162(3859):1243–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Meadows DH, Meadows DL, Randers J, Bhrens WW III. The limits to growth: a report for the Club of Rome’s project on the predicament of mankind. New York: Universe Books; 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  3. World Commission on Environment and Development. Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Siry JP, Cubbage FW, Ahmed MR. Sustainable forest management: challenges and opportunities. Forest Policy Econ. 2005;7:551–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Second Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forest in Europe. Resolution H1: General Guidelines for the Sustainable Management of Forests in Europe. 1993. http://www.foresteurope.org/docs/MC/MC_helsinki_resolutionH1.pdf. Accessed 6 Jan 2018.

  6. [FAO] Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Sustainable forest management. 2018. http://www.fao.org/forestry/sfm/en/. Accessed 6 Jan 2018.

  7. [MP] Montréal Process. 2015. The Montréal process criteria and indicators for the conservation and sustainable management of temperate and boreal forests. 5th ed; 2015. http://www.montrealprocess.org/documents/publications/techreports/MontréalProcessSeptember2015.pdf. Accessed 9 Aug 2016.

  8. Schmithüsen F. Three hundred years of applied sustainability in forestry. Unasylva. 2013;64:3–11.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bettinger P, Boston K, Siry JP, Grebner DL. Forest management and planning. London: Academic Press; 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  10. •• [FAO] Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Global Forest Resources Assessment 2015: Desk reference Rome; 2015. The Food and Agriculture of the United Nations regularly monitors the state of the world's forests and their management and uses. The report provides reliable up-to-date information on the condition of forest resources.

  11. • JP S, Bettinger P, Merry K, Grebner DL, Boston K, Cieszewski C, editors. Forest plans of North America. London: Academic Press; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  12. [PEFC] Programme for Endorsement of Forest Certification. PEFC Global Statistics: Certified Forest Area by Country; 2017. https://www.pefc.org/images/documents/PEFC_Global_Certificates_-_Sep_2017.pdf. Accessed 22 Jan 2018.

  13. [FSC] Forest Stewardship Council. FSC Facts & Figures July 4, 2016. https://ic.fsc.org/en/facts-and-figures. Accessed 22 Jan 17.

  14. • [USFS] U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service. National Report on Sustainable Forests – 2010. FS-979. Washington, DC; 2011. This report assesses the state of forests in the USA and tracks forest sustainability indicators. The indicators developed by the Montreal Process Working Group reflect environmental, social, and economic concerns regarding forests and help measure progress towards sustainability.

  15. [USFS] U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service. National Report on Sustainable Forests – 2010. Washington, DC; 2018. In press.

  16. Chamberlain J. Values of nonwood products sales on national forest and Bureau of Land Management lands. Personal communication 2018. Excel file, received 29 January 2018 from James Chamberlain. Blacksburg: USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station.

  17. Hood H, Harris T, Siry J, Baldwin S, Smith J, Caulfield J. U.S. South Annual Review: 2016, Timber Prices & Markets, A summary of US South stumpage and delivered prices, logging rates, biomass & chip prices, timberland transactions, & forest product market conditions in 2016. Athens: Timber Mart-South; 2017. 36p.

  18. [NRC] Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service. Non-timber forest products. Natural Resources Canada; 2016. http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/forests/industry/products-applications/13203. Accessed Feb 2018.

  19. • Cubbage FW, Robert RR, Rodriguez Paredes D, Mollenhauer R, Kraus Elsin Y, Frey GE, et al. Community forestry enterprises in Mexico: sustainability and competitiveness. J Sustain For. 2015;34(6–7):623–50. The authors summarize an extensive economic and sustainability assessment of Mexico's ejidos and community forests enterprises (CFEs), largely in the central and northern mountain states. Most of CFEs were making profits from management and harvesting of their native forests, and most were sustainable in the short run as measured by having annual growth rates that exceeded annual harvest levels. Timber remained the largest contributor to CFE income, at about 90% of all receipts, which was complemented by nontimber products and payments for environmental services.

  20. Butler BJ. Family forest owners of the United States, 2006. General Technical Report NRS. Newtown Square: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station; 2008.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  21. Zhang D, Butler BJ, Nagubadi RV. Institutional timberland ownership in the US South: magnitude, location, dynamics, and management. J For. 2012;110(7):335–61.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Oswalt SN, Smith WB, Miles PD, Pugh SA. Forest resources of the United States, 2012: a technical document supporting the forest service update of the 2010 RPA assessment. General Technical Report 91, Washington Office; U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service; 2014. http://www.srs.fs.usda.gov/pubs/gtr/gtr_wo091.pdf. Accessed 5 Mar 2015.

  23. Edmonds RL, Agee JK, Gara RI. Forest health and protection. Long Grove: Waveland Press, Inc.; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Teale SA, Castello JD. Regulators and terminators: the importance of biotic factors to a healthy forest. In: Castello JD, Teale SA, editors. Forest health: an integrated perspective. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2011. p. 81–114.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. Manion PD. Evolution of concepts in forest pathology. Phytopathology. 2003;93:1052–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Potter KM, Koch FH. Large-scale patterns of insect and disease activity in the conterminous United States and Alaska, 2006. In: Potter KM, Conkling BL, editors. Forest Health Monitoring 2008 national technical report. General Technical Report SRS-158. Asheville: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station; 2012. p. 63–72.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Potter KM, Paschke JL. Large-scale patterns of insect and disease activity in the conterminous United States and Alaska from the national insect and disease survey, 2015. In: Potter KM, Conkling BL, editors. Forest Health Monitoring: national status, trends, and analysis, 2016. General Technical Report SRS-222. Asheville: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station; 2017. p. 21–42.

    Google Scholar 

  28. [FHP] Forest Health Monitoring: national status, trends, and analysis, 2016. General Technical Report SRS-222. Ashville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station; 2017. pp. 21–42.

  29. [NRC] Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service. The state of Canada’s forests: annual report 2017. NRC, CFS. Ottawa; 2017. http://cfs.nrcan.gc.ca/publications?id=38871. Accessed 5 Feb 2018.

  30. [FAO] Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Global forest resources assessment 2015 country report: Mexico. Rome: FAO; 2014. 261p.

  31. Bond WJ, Keeley JE. Fire as a global “herbivore”: the ecology and evolution of flammable ecosystems. Trends Ecol Evol. 2005;20(7):387–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Vinton JV. Wildfires: issues and consequences. Hauppauge: Nova Science Publishers, Inc.; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  33. [USFS] United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service. MODIS active fire mapping program: fire detection GIS data. https://fsapps.nwcg.gov/afm/gisdata.php. Accessed 12 Jan 2018.

  34. • Potter KM. Large-scale patterns of forest fire occurrence in the conterminous United States, Alaska, and Hawaii, 2016. In: Potter KM, Conkling BL, editors. Forest health monitoring: national status, trends and analysis, 2017. General Technical Report SRS-233. Asheville: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station; 2018. p. 45-64. The U.S. Forest Service produces annual reports on the status and trends of forest health indicators across the United States; each report includes a chapter presenting spatial and temporal assessments of forest fire occurrences across the United States. This chapter is from the most recently published forest health report, and describes the methods used to quantify forest fire occurrences across North America in this paper.

  35. [NALCMS] North American Land Change Monitoring System. Land Cover, 2010 (Landsat, 30m). http://www.cec.org/tools-and-resources/map-files/land-cover-2010-landsat-30m. Accessed 6 Feb 2018.

  36. [FAO] Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Land tenure and rural development, FAO land tenure studies. Rome; 2002.

  37. Hewes JH, Butler BJ, Liknes GC, Nelson MD, Snyder SM. Public and private forest ownership in the coterminous United States: distribution of six ownership types. Forest Collins, CO: Forest Service Research Data Archive; 2014. http://www.fs.usda.gov/rds/ archive/Product/RDS-2014-0002. Accessed 5 Feb 2018.

  38. Guerra EH. Community forestry in Mexico. Brussels: Fern-Making the EU Work for People & Forests; 2015. 26p.

  39. Kishor N, Rosenbaum K. Framework for assessing and monitoring forest governance: a user's guide to a diagnostic tool. Rome: Program for Forests (PROFOR), Food and Agriculture Organizaton of the United Nations; 2012. 32p.

  40. • Boston K, Merry K, Grebner DL, Cieszewski C, Bettinger P, Siry JP. Synopsis of forest management plans of North America. In: Siry JP, Bettinger P, Merry K, Grebner DL, Boston K, Cieszewski C, editors. Forest plans of North America. London: Academic Press; 2015. p. 443–8. The authors summarize case studies of contemporary forest management plans developed in North America. Sustainability concepts are centeral to the development of forest management plans but many economic challenges to their implementation persist.

  41. Shepard WE, Dippon D. Western Oregon districts, Bureau of Land Management, United States of America. In: Siry JP, Bettinger P, Merry K, Grebner DL, Boston K, Cieszewski C, editors. Forest plans of North America. London: Academic Press; 2015. p. 423–32.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA

    Jacek P. Siry

  2. Department of Forestry and Environmental Resources, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA

    Frederick W. Cubbage

  3. Department of Forestry and Environmental Resources, North Carolina State University, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA

    Kevin M. Potter

  4. International Institute of Tropical Forestry, USDA Forest Service, Rio Piedras, PR, USA

    Kathleen McGinley

Authors
  1. Jacek P. Siry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Frederick W. Cubbage
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kevin M. Potter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kathleen McGinley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jacek P. Siry.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Integrating Forestry in Land use Planning

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Siry, J.P., Cubbage, F.W., Potter, K.M. et al. Current Perspectives on Sustainable Forest Management: North America. Curr Forestry Rep 4, 138–149 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40725-018-0079-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40725-018-0079-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation