Francis Marion revised plan

One of the first of the new century (that started in 2012) of forest plans: “A summary of the proposed changes for the revised Francis Marion Land and Resources Management Plan.”

I just rediscovered this in the ‘drafts’ file.  I think I was intending to share this as a concise example of how the Forest Service tends to view the changes from old plans to plans under the new planning rule.  It does a better job of explaining ‘why’ than most.  (Hopefully these explanations come from the required assessment.)

There is a summary of key changes on p. 2.  Here are some things that I thought were noteworthy:

  • “All-lands” approach to cross-boundary issues, like connectivity
  • Focus on ecosystem units and their key characteristics
  • Identifying management areas where fire would and would not be used as a management tool
  • Also zoning based on recreation
  • More thoughtful, but continued, use of standards and guidelines (vs desired conditions)
  • Adaptive management ‘alerts’ as part of monitoring

One Comment

  1. I agree with your observation. The recognition of ‘climate change’ and its continual influence on the landscape will be an important factor to address. Also, the use of ‘geographic areas’ instead of ‘management areas’ (and their associated ‘prescriptions’) makes more sense (to me) in helping people understand their connection to the land. I believe this approach will help avoid “positioning” on issues and focus people’s attention to what management considerations are appropriate to a particular geographic area.

    Recognizing that ‘geographic areas’ are not a perfect approach on all National Forest units, I believe it is an effective step to efficiently develop/revise a land management plan.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *