program status and what is being accomplished. When analyzing the status of each FMIP program component IFMAT observed programs are out of date or not even been started. For example, BIA central office data shows, based on 2019 data, that Category 1 tribes frequently wait more than 9 years beyond the scheduled CFI update, that the CFI analysis takes 3 to 9 years to complete, and that more than one-third of the FMP’s are more than 15 years old. For the Category 2 tribes, the 2019 records show that most tribes wait more than 9 years beyond the scheduled CFI update, that the CFI analysis is usually completed within 3 years, but more than 50% of the FMPs are more than 15 years old. Although IFMAT heard from tribes on our site visits that the CFI analysis at FIP has been slow, IFMAT was unable to confirm an accurate status. In reviewing the FMPs, IFMAT found FMPs that relied on old inventories due to the delay in CFI updates and analysis. Successful program management starts out at the top, with a strong presence at the Central Office and Regional Office levels to oversee the funding and project selection. The Forest Inventory and Planning group, FIP (formerly BoFRP), is one of the most important keys to a successful FMIP program, but they are not able to provide the assistance needed by many tribes and BIA agencies. The staffing at these offices has been reduced to a point where proper program
“Tribal cultural needs and revenue don’t need to be mutually exclusive.” —IFMAT IV focus group participant
than the AAC, primarily due to “catch-up” on past volumes that were not sold. Underachievement of the allowable cut is a cost to tribes in terms of potentially lost revenue. Using the methodology from Task A, the estimated direct potential loss in tribal revenue from not offering the full allowable cut during the period 2010 to 2019 was almost $400 million (Table F.4). A major challenge facing tribal and BIA leaders is to understand Table F.4. Estimated potential lost revenue by region from not offering the full allowable harvest.
what is causing tribes to not achieve their desired cut levels so that actions can be taken. Where tribal goals have changed, the 2015 BIA policy permitting non-expiring plans may have contributed to delayed updating of forest management plans. Where lack of markets, low prices, or long-haul distances exist, the recent Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (2021), along with revised DOI policies, may provide financial resources to offset investments in hazardous fuel reduction in green timber sales that may help tribes to close the gap between their harvest program and their allowable cut. FMIP Business Reporting Processes and Support The business and budgeting reporting processes used by the FMIP program need to be modernized to provide clear and accurate documentation on the program at all levels. The FMIP program is complex, with many components needing to tracked to ensure currency of the ultimate Forest Management Plan. Proper program management relies on this information to make the best decisions possible for the program implementation. Many gaps in the current reporting procedures were identified during this assessment, making it difficult to fully understand the
2010-2019 Total Value ($millions, nominal)
Region Alaska Eastern
0.41
19.69
Eastern Oklahoma Great Plains
0.18
7.00
Midwest
91.75
Navajo
5.04
Northwest
181.68
Pacific
23.02
Rocky Mountain Southern Plains Southwest
4.60
15.77
10.18 40.29
Western
Total
399.61
“The plan took longer for it to get approved than when it actually lasted [14 years to write, 10 years operational].” —IFMAT IV focus group participant.
128 Assessment of Indian Forests and Forest Management in the United States
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator