Best management practices compliance monitoring approaches for forestry in the eastern United States

Michael J. Phillips, Charlie Blinn

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Many of the eastern states that have published best management practices (BMPs) or forest management guidelines have also developed compliance monitoring programs to assess the application of these BMPs or guidelines on public and private forest land. The approaches among these states to collecting on-site monitoring data (measuring compliance) and evaluating sites are variable. A survey of eastern states found that almost all southern states monitor application of BMPs, but proportionally fewer of the northern states have established compliance monitoring programs. The state forestry agencies provide the leadership for these programs in most of the eastern states. States that monitor tend to evaluate all public and private forest landowner categories located within their states. In general, northern states monitor a broader array of site resources (e.g., cultural resources, visual quality) as compared to southern states which focus on water quality and wetlands protection. However, northern states focus their monitoring on timber harvesting, forest road construction and maintenance as compared to southern states which tend to monitor a broader array of forest management activities (e.g., site preparation, reforestation). When selecting sites for monitoring, the most common approach is to select some sites from all landowner categories within the state. Many states do not specify any criteria to identify sites for monitoring so that all sites have an equal chance for selection. Some states do use specific criteria to filter sites for monitoring, most commonly size of forest management activity and proximity to water.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)263-274
Number of pages12
JournalWater, Air, and Soil Pollution: Focus
Volume4
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 7 2004

Fingerprint

Forestry
best management practice
compliance
forestry
Monitoring
monitoring
forest management
landowner
Reforestation
timber harvesting
site preparation
road construction
Road construction
reforestation
resource
leadership
Timber
Wetlands
Compliance
Water quality

Keywords

  • Best management practices
  • Compliance monitoring
  • Forest management guidelines
  • Forestry
  • Water quality

Cite this

Best management practices compliance monitoring approaches for forestry in the eastern United States. / Phillips, Michael J.; Blinn, Charlie.

In: Water, Air, and Soil Pollution: Focus, Vol. 4, No. 1, 07.09.2004, p. 263-274.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{ca9de9b9fb834098bf086cac3e497f61,
title = "Best management practices compliance monitoring approaches for forestry in the eastern United States",
abstract = "Many of the eastern states that have published best management practices (BMPs) or forest management guidelines have also developed compliance monitoring programs to assess the application of these BMPs or guidelines on public and private forest land. The approaches among these states to collecting on-site monitoring data (measuring compliance) and evaluating sites are variable. A survey of eastern states found that almost all southern states monitor application of BMPs, but proportionally fewer of the northern states have established compliance monitoring programs. The state forestry agencies provide the leadership for these programs in most of the eastern states. States that monitor tend to evaluate all public and private forest landowner categories located within their states. In general, northern states monitor a broader array of site resources (e.g., cultural resources, visual quality) as compared to southern states which focus on water quality and wetlands protection. However, northern states focus their monitoring on timber harvesting, forest road construction and maintenance as compared to southern states which tend to monitor a broader array of forest management activities (e.g., site preparation, reforestation). When selecting sites for monitoring, the most common approach is to select some sites from all landowner categories within the state. Many states do not specify any criteria to identify sites for monitoring so that all sites have an equal chance for selection. Some states do use specific criteria to filter sites for monitoring, most commonly size of forest management activity and proximity to water.",
keywords = "Best management practices, Compliance monitoring, Forest management guidelines, Forestry, Water quality",
author = "Phillips, {Michael J.} and Charlie Blinn",
year = "2004",
month = "9",
day = "7",
doi = "10.1023/B:WAFO.0000012814.22698.ef",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "4",
pages = "263--274",
journal = "Water, Air, and Soil Pollution: Focus",
issn = "1567-7230",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Best management practices compliance monitoring approaches for forestry in the eastern United States

AU - Phillips, Michael J.

AU - Blinn, Charlie

PY - 2004/9/7

Y1 - 2004/9/7

N2 - Many of the eastern states that have published best management practices (BMPs) or forest management guidelines have also developed compliance monitoring programs to assess the application of these BMPs or guidelines on public and private forest land. The approaches among these states to collecting on-site monitoring data (measuring compliance) and evaluating sites are variable. A survey of eastern states found that almost all southern states monitor application of BMPs, but proportionally fewer of the northern states have established compliance monitoring programs. The state forestry agencies provide the leadership for these programs in most of the eastern states. States that monitor tend to evaluate all public and private forest landowner categories located within their states. In general, northern states monitor a broader array of site resources (e.g., cultural resources, visual quality) as compared to southern states which focus on water quality and wetlands protection. However, northern states focus their monitoring on timber harvesting, forest road construction and maintenance as compared to southern states which tend to monitor a broader array of forest management activities (e.g., site preparation, reforestation). When selecting sites for monitoring, the most common approach is to select some sites from all landowner categories within the state. Many states do not specify any criteria to identify sites for monitoring so that all sites have an equal chance for selection. Some states do use specific criteria to filter sites for monitoring, most commonly size of forest management activity and proximity to water.

AB - Many of the eastern states that have published best management practices (BMPs) or forest management guidelines have also developed compliance monitoring programs to assess the application of these BMPs or guidelines on public and private forest land. The approaches among these states to collecting on-site monitoring data (measuring compliance) and evaluating sites are variable. A survey of eastern states found that almost all southern states monitor application of BMPs, but proportionally fewer of the northern states have established compliance monitoring programs. The state forestry agencies provide the leadership for these programs in most of the eastern states. States that monitor tend to evaluate all public and private forest landowner categories located within their states. In general, northern states monitor a broader array of site resources (e.g., cultural resources, visual quality) as compared to southern states which focus on water quality and wetlands protection. However, northern states focus their monitoring on timber harvesting, forest road construction and maintenance as compared to southern states which tend to monitor a broader array of forest management activities (e.g., site preparation, reforestation). When selecting sites for monitoring, the most common approach is to select some sites from all landowner categories within the state. Many states do not specify any criteria to identify sites for monitoring so that all sites have an equal chance for selection. Some states do use specific criteria to filter sites for monitoring, most commonly size of forest management activity and proximity to water.

KW - Best management practices

KW - Compliance monitoring

KW - Forest management guidelines

KW - Forestry

KW - Water quality

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=4344684234&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=4344684234&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1023/B:WAFO.0000012814.22698.ef

DO - 10.1023/B:WAFO.0000012814.22698.ef

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:4344684234

VL - 4

SP - 263

EP - 274

JO - Water, Air, and Soil Pollution: Focus

JF - Water, Air, and Soil Pollution: Focus

SN - 1567-7230

IS - 1

ER -