limiting their ability to lower these risks. With 41% of tribal forests in the High/Very-High Wildfire Hazard Potential rating and overstocking being a major threat (see Task B), IFMAT IV shares this concern. Participating tribes are building carbon stewardship into their forest management strategies and perceive flexibility in pursuing their forest management goals, but these approaches have not yet been woven into their longer-term plans and documents. Since most plans do not consider either climate
change or carbon stewardship, the growing influence of fire and other climate-driven disturbance and the implications of carbon management goals and forest condition interactions have not been formally linked in management goals, silvicultural strategies, AAC calculations, or other elements of the Forest Management Plans. Neither do these plans account for restrictions or practices prescribed in CARB contracts such as the maximum sizes of even-aged management treatments areas.
Forestry programs and market participation.
Among participating tribes, there are differences in the nature and level of involvement of the forestry program in planning and making carbon market arrangements. In some cases, the carbon arrangement was initiated and negotiated between tribal government, the carbon developer and buyer without substantial involvement by the forestry staff or detailed consideration of long-term forest management goals and strategies. Because a carbon
A debris barrier gate, one of many structures placed to control erosion following the 2011 Las Conchas Fire, Santa Clara Pueblo. PHOTO CREDIT: JOHN SESSIONS
Task Findings and Recommendations 175
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator