This file was created by scanning the printed publication.
Errors identified by the software have been corrected;
however, some errors may remain.
Symposium Conclusions and
Recommendations 1
Celedonio Aguirre-Bravo2
Executive Summary-This document proposes strategic
actions for addressing the main concI usions and
recommendations of the November 1998 North American
Science Symposium held in Guadalajara, Mexico. Central to
the syntheses delivered in this symposium was the conclusion
that a fundamental improvement in the a pproaches currently
used for inventorying and monitoring ecosystem resources is
required if human civilization is to meet current and future
environmental uncertainties. Symposium syntheses also
revealed a strong consensus for moving toward a unified
framework for inventorying and monitoring ecosystem
resources in N orthAmerica. Accordingly, the strategic action
plan proposed here focuses on meeting these challenges
through the development of practical functional mechanisms
for networking across institutions and nationalities,
implementation of science and technology exchange
programs, and study of workable options for establishing a
network of pilot study areas. As demonstrated in the
Guadalajara symposium, working in partnership for
supporting and carrying out the action proposals described
in this document is an essential condition for achieving
meaningful and successful outcomes.
Resumen Ejecutivo-EI presente documento propone
acciones estrategicas para darle seguimiento a las principales
conclusiones y recomendaciones del Simposio Cientifico
Norteamericano de Noviembre de 1998 celebrado en la
Ciudad de Guadalajara, Mexico. De suma importancia en las
sinteses resultantes del simposio fue la conclusion de que se
requiere de un mejoram.iento fundamental en los
planteamientos us ados actualmente para inventariar y
monitorear recursos de los ecosistemas forestales para que
la civilizacion humana pueda enfrentar las incertidumbres
ambientales presentes yfuturas. De acuerdo a 10 anterior, el
plan de acciones estrategicas propuesto en este documento
se enfoca a enfrentar estos retos a traves del desarrollo de
mecanismos funcionales de vinculacion entre instituciones y
nacionalidades, implementacion de programas de
intercambio cientifico y tecnologico, y estudio de opciones
factibles para el establecimiento de una red de areas de
estudio piloto. Como quedo demonstrado en el simposio de
Guadalajara, el trabajar colaborativa y cooperativamente es
una condicion esencial para lograr resultados significativos
yexitosos.
Ipaper presented at the North American Science Symposium: Toward a
Unified Framework for Inventorying and Monitoring Forest Ecosystem
Resources, Guadalajara, Mexico, November 1-6,1998.
2Celedonio Aguirre-Bravo, USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO 80526, USA, Phone: (970) 498-1169. Fax:
(9'70) 498-1010. E-mail: caguirrelrmrs@fs.fed.us
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-12.. 1999
Background _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
In November 1998, a group of four hundred specialists
from government and nongoverment institutions of Canada,
United States, and Mexico met in Guadalajara (Mexico) to
confront a variety of issues concerning the advancement of
monitoring science and technology for the assessment of
forest ecosystem resources in N orthAmerica. Many scientists
from other countries also participated in this NorthAmerican
Science Symposium on Toward a Unified Framework for
Inventorying and Monitoring Forest Ecosystem Resources.
Four plenary and fifteen workshop sessions were conducted
to discuss a diversity of related subjects and provide specific
conclusions and recommendations for advancing the
integration of ecosystem inven tory and moni toring programs
across disciplinary and institutional boundaries, and
continental (that is, geographic and temporal) scales. Specific
recommendations were presented at the end ofthe symposium
for review and targeted follow up. Sponsor representatives
signed a non-legally binding statement in which they
expressed their intent to continue working in partnership to
support research and technology transfer efforts on
monitoring for ecological assessment of ecosystems and the
environment. This action plan proposal has been prepared
for review and approval by the appropriate experts and
executives of the sponsoring institutions.
The resulting conclusions and recommendations from this
symposium clearly emphasize the urgent need to work in
partnership across institutional and national boundaries to
further advance ecosystem monitoring science and technology
in North America. Although there are many ongoing
inventory and monitoring programs, as well as related
research efforts, the information they provide is inadequate
to meet society's needs. Understanding the vulnerability of
ecosystems to disparate drivers of environmental change is
central to the major issues society faces. The generation of
knowledge allowing this understanding constitutes a
fundamental condition to ensuring the sustained productivity
of ecosystems and their multiple values to society. Scientists
in this symposium concurred that existing approaches to
ecosystem resource inventory and monitoring must change
radically if they are to help meet national and global needs.
In North America, as in other multinational systems, the
sustainable availability of natural resources and the healthy
condition of ecosystems are indisputably the primary
foundation for economic and human development. Sustaining
these ecological systems, managing and mitigating change
in those that have already been damaged, and particularly
anticipating the impacts of potential global change scenarios
on human health, are among the most critical challenges
that societies face today and into the foreseeable future.
521
To confront these challenges, the design of new inventory
and monitoring programs needs to be based on an integrated
approach to successfully provide answers to the complex
questions scientists and the public need to know. While most
existing inventory and monitoring programs are effective at
tracking specific ecosystem resource components, the
information they generate is inadequate for providing
complete , scientifically defensi ble, environmental syntheses
of how drivers of change impact or might impact natural
resource and ecosystem condition at different scales of time
and space resolution.
For North America, being a multinational free trade
economy, it is essential to develop a common strategy for
advancing existing approaches to ecosystem resource
inventorying and monitoring. Though at present the North
American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) countries do not
have such an strategy in place, its development and
implementation is particularly important given the
geographic adjacency, and ecological, economic and sociocultural linkages and interdependencies. Building this
institutional capacity would make possible the development
of comprehensive environmental syntheses to inform society
about the status of ecosystem resources and the
environment-and if they are changing, why and how that
change is taking place. Symposium participants noted that
if scientifically-credible information is not available to provide
policy alternatives, the documented impacts ofglobal change
on the environment and human health will prevail, with the
potential to increase the level of uncertainty.
In light ofthe considerable analysis that took place during
this symposium, the thrust of the main conclusions and
recommendations points toward strengthening and
diversifying the existing network of partnerships to further
advance the science and management of ecological monitoring
for assessment of ecosystems in North America. This action
plan proposal, therefore, constitutes an important outcome
of this symposium. Specifically, it addresses the critical need
for developing a common strategy for supporting ecosystem
monitoring and research efforts ~hrough truly effective actions
of international cooperation and collaboration that assure
transfer of technology and access to scientific information.
Context for Action _ _ _ _ _ __
The symposium conclusions and recommendations
emphasize that there are many examples of the important
roles that ecological monitoring and research have played in
developing the understanding required to support sound
policy and appropriate management actions. At the same
time, it was also pointed out that many of the environmental
issues that now confront us are larger in scope and of grea ter
complexity than those previously addressed. There are
compelling reasons-both scientific and economic-for
moving toward the design of more integrated/comprehensive
strategies for monitoring ecosystem resources and the
environment. Scientifically defensible and credible
information generated from such strategies is important so
that society can differentiate between actual and perceived
environmental issues and can act on them appropriately.
In North America, environmental protection and
management agencies are currently involved in major
522
reassessment and redirection of their ecosystem resource
inventory and monitoring programs. Not only these programs
differ in their rationale but also in their monitoring strategy
and scales of resolution. Each institution's inventory and
monitoring program has a wealth of information and
experiences for further advancing ecosystem monitoring
science at regional and continental scales. Complex
environmental issues (i.e., climate change, primary
productivity, insects and diseases, or human health)
controlled by upper level systems (i.e., climate, environmental
policy, or resource management decisions) cannot be properly
addressed by current inventory and monitoring strategies.
Existing ecological monitoring programs have often been
adequate for their intended purposes but the data and
information they generate are usually not directly
comparable. Primarily, the focus of these programs is often
on single resources or single ecosystem resource groups.
Given the necessarily circumscribed information generated
by these programs, it is difficult to say much about the
interactions between and among ecosystem components, at
least not at different scale levels. Cooperative and
collaborative networking with institutions that have relevant
programs is essential to advance science and technology for
inventorying and monitoring ecosystem resources in North
America.
Other problems arise when the spatial and time scales of
inventory and monitoring programs are substantially
different. Similar conflicting situations emerge when the
indicators design strategy, sampling and measurement
strategies, vary between and among inventory and
monitoring programs. Central to all these issues, however,
is the limited availability of economic resources to support
disjoint inventory and monitoring programs. Given current
and future budget scenarios, moving toward a unified/
integrated framework for inventorying and monitoring
ecosystem resources seems to be a most cost-effective solution.
A North American Strategy for moving toward a unified
framework for inventorying and monitoring ecosystem
resources must take into consideration situations such as
spatial and time scales, economic and human resources, and
international linkages. As discussed in this symposium,
these and many other related issues of common interest
create a window of opportunity for addressing and putting
into action several of the main recommendations presented
and discussed at the North American Science Symposium.
Priority Areas for Action _ _ _ __
I. Strengthening and Diversifying
Partnership Networks
As in previous North American meetings, the participants
of this symposium strongly recommended establishing
functional mechanisms to foster and encourage tri-national
cooperation and collaboration in order to further improve
the development of ecosystem monitoring science and
technology in North America. Successful actions to confront
the diversity of issues addressed at the Symposium require
the establishment of a functional networking strategy that
guarantees cooperation and collaboration across institutional
and national jurisdictions. For this networking strategy to
USDA Forest Service ProceedinQs RMRS-P-12. 1999
be successfully operational, it must provide a common
platform where the actors and players responsible for
advancing ecosystem monitoring science and technology can
address their issues in a fashion that is equal and impartial.
Previous North American Science Symposia have taken
place under this organizational criteria and their results
have been highly successful and meaningful to society.
In response to this recommendation, therefore, it would be
in the best interest ofexisting and future partners to establish
formally a World Ecosystem Resource Monitoring for
Assessment Network (WERMAN). In order to serve its
partners in the most effective possible manner, WERMAN's
mission and goals needs to be anchored on a common ground
of mutually beneficial conditions and opportunities. Taking
this step, the formal establishment ofWERMAN , will provide
purpose and direction to all cooperative and collaborative
efforts that need to be undertaken for moving toward a
unified framework for inventorying and monitoring
ecosystem resources in North America. Accordingly, the
"Action Proposal Statement" signed by executives of the
institutions that sponsored the North American Science
Symposium provides an important foundation for supporting
this specific recommendation for action.
II. Science and Technology Exchange
Central to the symposium's main conclusions and
recommendations is the critical need for developing a joint
cooperative and collaborative strategy for science and
technology exchange on integrated approaches for
inventorying and monitoring ecosystem resources.
Symposium participants expressed consensus for moving
toward a unified N orthAmerican framework for inventorying
and monitoring ecosystem resources. However, design
strategies for moving toward this desirable condition should
be adaptative and must recognize individual mandates and
priorities of participating institutions. Consequently,
improving and diversifying the flux of science and technology
information exchange among institutions and across
nationalities is an important requirement for implementing
this recommendation. At present, as it was noted, there are
serious differences in institutional capacity (i.e., economic,
social, cultural, scientific, technological, organizational, and
educational) among countries which act as major
impediments for advancing ecosystem monitoring science,
as well as for developing cost-effective ecosystem resource
monitoring strategies. These differences, however, should
not be a-_deterrent for cooperative action when dealing with
ecological issues of regional and global significance.
Cooperative training and education, therefore, are essential
for advancing monitoring science and technology across
institutional jurisdictions and nationalities. Specifically,
the symposium participants recommended working in
partnership to support scientific, technology, and educational
exchange actions on the following issue areas of common
interest for institutions in North America and abroad:
•
•
•
•
•
Global Ecological-Economic Issues;
Ecosystem Resource Monitoring Science;
Ecological and Economic Indicators;
Integrated Statistical Sampling Designs;
Site Measurement Protocols and Metadata Standards;
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-12. 1999
•
•
•
•
•
•
Quality Assurance and Quality Control Strategies;
Data and Information Management Systems;
Statistical Data Analysis Processes;
Development of Integrated Environmental Syntheses;
Remote Sensing and GIS Technology Applications;
Effective Information Communication Strategies.
III. Network of Pilot Study Areas
Symposium participants also proposed the establishment
of pilot study areas to serve as learning/educational centers
for advancing ecosystem resource monitoring science and
technology applications. For this purpose, processes for
establishing pilot study areas should take into account the
value ofexisting inventory and monitoring networks. Building
upon existing networks has a number of scientific and
technical, organizational, logistical, economic, and
operational advantages. While conducting the science and
technology exchange activities referred to above, partner
institutions participating in this process may commit
themselves to study viable strategies for establishing pilot
study areas for addressing specific inventory and monitoring
questions. Through this adaptive process, proposed actions
for establishing pilot study areas not only will have better
technical and scientific foundations, but also stronger political
and organiza tional support from partner insti tutions . Under
this rationale, partner institutions involved in these processes
will experience a smoother transition moving toward higher
levels of integration in their inventorying and monitoring
programs.
Action Proposals _ _ _ _ _ __
Proposal I
To establish the World Ecosystem Resource Monitoring
for Assessment Network (WERMAN).
Action-Meet with executives from sponsoring
institutions to discuss strategies for the establishment of
WERMAN, its goals and objectives, scope, function,
organization and coordination, and funding considerations.
Proposal II
To carry out a series of educational/training workshops on
the specific issue areas referred to above. As continuous
annual programs, these workshops will constitute the main
vehicle for science and technology exchange between and
among institutions in North America.
Action-Meet with executives from sponsoring
institutions to discuss the proposal, and ifthere is consensus,
then to define strategies for funding support and
implementation.
Proposal III
To develop a design strategy for the establishment of
"Pilot Study Areas for Ecosystem Resource Inventory and
Monitoring" that can be used as a prototype model for
523
implementing similar initia tives elsewhere in N orthAmerica
or other countries.
Action-Meet with executives from sponsoring
institutions to discuss current efforts in a pilot study area in
northern Mexico, define strategies for continuing supporting
this project, and decide ifit could be used as an option for the
purpose of implementing this proposal.
524
Approach
Hold a two-days meeting with executives from the
sponsoring institutions to discuss and decide on the specific
proposals and actions described in this document. Preliminary
reviews of this document will be conducted previous to
meeting. Also, executives will be contacted to determine
date and location for this meeting. Basically, the meeting's
agenda will primarily focus on action items described in this
proposal.
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-12. 1999
Appendix: Conclusions and
Recommendations by
Issue Area
Remote Sensing Applications
Recognizing that remote sensing, using various tools from
Landsat to sketch mapping, serves an important function in
forest inventory and monitoring across our three nations,
and that it also has limitations that must be recognized
(Workshop Session Chairs: Mr. Harry Hirvonen, Science
Advisor, Canadian Forest Service, Natural Resources
Canada, Canada and Dr. Jose L. Palacio Prieto, Director,
Instituto de Geografia, UNAM, Mexico):
• It is recommended that mechanisms be established to
facilitate exchange of both research and monitoring
results and information among the three countries;
• It is recommended that joint mechanism for quality
control and quality assurance be established among the
three countries to allow comparability and applicability
of remote sensing tools;
• It is recommended that a priority for joint research be to
determine the appropriate linkages between interpretation from remote sensing and ground plots and surveys
for validation.
Data Management and Analysis
Support Systems
Forest inventory data are key to decision-making. Using
portable data recorders allows the data to be error checked
in the field where it is best corrected, plus the data feed easily
and quickly into a data base management system. This
system should be designed with inventory data in mind,
should have sufficient metadata to describe the data, and
should make it easy to retrieve. Analysis software should
make it easy to generate almost any combination ofthe data
that the analyst wants, and should produce estimates of
reliability. The data should provide the necessary inputs to
projection models to assist in q.ecision-making.
Knowledge bases can be combined with the data to further
refine the decision-making process. Concepts and uses of
metadata in ecosystem monitoring can be extended to know ledge bases that provide formal logical specifications for
interpretation of monitoring data. Knowledge bases in general provide three significant features: consistent interpretation of information, clear documentation of the reasoning
that produces an interpretation, and fast, easy access to the
logical basis for conclusions. The EMDS system in particular
is noteworthy for its abilities to reason with incomplete
information, prioritize missing information, and provide a
logic framework for integrating numerous and diverse types
of monitoring data (Workshop Session Chair: Dr. Douglas S.
Powell, National Monitoring Coordinator, USDA Forest
Service, Washington, DC, USA).
Forest Inventory Case Studies (Mexico)
Most of Mexico's forest inventories are biased toward the
timber resource commercial component for management
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-12. 1999
purposes. Required by Mexican Law for authorizing forest
resource management plans, these inventories are conducted by forestry technicians from Units for Conservation
and Forest Development (UAFIUCODEFO) or other Consulting Forestry Companies~ As specific programs, they are
quite divergent in their rationale (i.e., purpose, goals, objectives) and design strategies (i.e., sampling design, criteria
and indicators, integration and linkages, comprehensiveness, field measurement protocols, quality assurance and
quality control, information management systems, data
analysis systems, syntheses, and reporting). Many of these
strategies which are critical for generating scientificallydefensible and -credible information are often not documented when designing these programs. While the information of these inventories is primarily used for timber
management purposes, its utility for assessing the state and
condition of forests for management planning purposes is
questionable. Landowners participation in processes of designing forest resource inventories is critical to insure the
social significance, technical credibility, management utility, and long-term scientific value of the data and information generated through these programs. To a large extent,
these problems are brought about by the lack of a coherent/
integrated/comprehensive/interoperable national framework
for inventorying and monitoring forest ecosystem resources.
Therefore, it is recommended to develop and implement a
systematic/adaptive strategy for moving toward a unified
framework for inventorying and monitoring ecosystem resources. Working in partnership for the development of such
a framework constitutes an important condition for achieving successful results. (Workshop Session Chair: Dr. Miguel
Caballero Deloya, Jefe del Area de Capacitacion, Program a
de Proyecci6n Externa, Centro de Agricultura Tr6pical de
Investigaci6n y Ensenanza (CATIE), Turrialba, Costa Rica).
Science and Policy
In light of a considerable theoretical basisCand with
strong empirical evidenceCfor global environmental change
phenomena and their occurrence, and in recognition that
Humankind's activities contribute to such change, we recommend that (Workshop Session Chair: Dr. Sidney Draggan,
Senior Science Advisor, US Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, DC, USA):
• Ecological system-based, watershed-scale approaches
are needed to identify, study, assess and manage options
for dealing with such global environmental change;
• Identifying, studying and acting on global environmental change phenomena requires frameworks that incorporate the scientific, social, cultural, economic and political dimensions of the phenomena through wide
stakeholder participation; and
• Planning and implementation of research and assessment, and planning and implementation of management actions and decisions must be based on clear
communication among stakeholders;
• Researchers planning and implementing monitoring,
inventory or other observational activities must seek
and must have clear understanding of the questions
expected to inform the positions of either managers and
decision makers or other stakeholders;
525
• Environmental management actions or decisions need
to derive from a stakeholder-inclusive process or framework for identifying, measuring, assessing and characterizing the nature of a problem or issue. Also, such
processes or frameworks are needed to disclose appropriately the options for resolution or management ofthe
problem or issue. That is, there must be acceptance of the
notion of procedural justice; and
• Researchers, managers and decision makers need to
recognize the substantial role for sound science in the
decision process by providing appropriate support for
such processes as quality assurance and independent
peer review in the generation of science intended to
underlie actions or decisions.
Evolving Complexity
Canada, U.S., and Mexico each has a variety of forest
inventory and monitoring programs, many with long histories. Complexity has certainly evolved and accelerated (Plenary Session Chair: Dr. Robert Lewis, Research and Development, Director, USDA Forest Service, Washington, DC,
USA). Some examples include:
Timber inventory -> multi-resource inventory -> integrated
inventory;
• Local -> global;
• Political boundaries -> ecosystems;
• Periodic inventories -> annual inventories;
• Technology: walking with paper -> satellite with digital
recording;
• File cabinets -> sophisticated databases, metadata, GIS;
• Paper table/graph reports -> publish on Internet;
• Little public interest -> great public involvement;
• Little political influence -> great political influence (particularly in Mexico);
• Status of resource -> changes and trends -> projections;
• Working in isolation -> collaboration, partners, networks;
• Timber supply -> invasive species, threatened and endangered species, disturbance, restoration, water quality, wildlife habitat, needs of local communities, other
forest products, human dimension.
In light of the above, the following is recommended:
• Recognize this change in complexity;
• Understand that such change will continue;
• Keep inventory and monitoring systems as simple as
possible to get job done;
• Use adaptive management in inventory and monitoring
design to deal with evolving complexity.
Specific Resource Inventory
and Monitoring
Unified frameworks for inventory and monitoring must
recognize and provide opportunities for specific and detailed
case studies to provide information on both local! regional
ecosystem processes and as a source of new technologies for
extensive monitoring programs. There are a host of new
measurements that will be required to address emerging
global change issues. An integrated framework should
526
an tici pate and embrace new measures as they come off of the
testing bench. New tools and approaches to data modeling
will make possible a degree of analysis and information
generation not previously anticipated. It is recommended
that acceptance of some of these techniques, wether designated sample units or spatial analysis procedures, need to be
considered as common standards for acceptance in an integrated NorthAmerican framework (Workshop Session Chair:
Mr. Bruce Pendrel, Canadian Forest Service, Natural Resources Canada, Canada).
Multiresource Inventory and Monitoring
A main conclusion in our session was that annualized
inventories are an exciting new development in the US, of
considerable utility to industry, environmentalists, andgovernment. As in several instances, it shows the tremendous
potential for pay-off if the 3 countries (and others such as
Argentina too) could work together on such issues. Another
issue raised in our session was that we cannot make good
progress on aquatic inventories until good questions are
raised. Until then we cannot resolve issues well of how
closely terrestrial and aquatic inventories need to be done
together. The US is now investigating how to integrate the
two national natural resources inventories, the NRI of the
Natural Resources Conservation Service and the FIA of the
USFS, both agencies in the US Department of Agriculture.
Several pilot studies on this are planned in Minnesota at this
time. In Canada, the national forest inventory information
continues to be integrated with the National Ecozone/
Ecoregion Framework. Ed Wiken suggests integrated monitoring and state of the environment reporting by the 3
countries. Why is this important? As an example noted by Ed
Wiken: forestry and land practices in the mountainous
regions of Mexico could affect the numbers of Monarch
butterflies summering in southern Ontario in Canada (Workshop Session Chair: Dr. Hans Schreuder, Scientist, RMRS,
USDA Forest Service).
Biodiversity Inventory and Monitoring
Protecting biodiversity is internationally recognized as a
high priority in forest ecosystem management. The purpose
of this workshop was to address questions and issues
regarding how biodiversity is defined, measured, inventoried,
and monitored to assess the impacts of human activities
against a backdrop of natural environmental change. We
review key points and comments that summarize the
workshop talks and the questions and comments from the
audience. There were several underlying similarities in the
talks presented in the session. First, the governments and
land management agencies of our three countries have
responded to growing public demands for preserving native
species of plant and animals as well as providing sustainable
forest products. Second, most speakers recognized that
current information on biodiversity is woefully inadequate.
High resolution maps of hot spots of diversity, rare and
endangered species, and critical habitats are not available in
Canada, the USA, or Mexico. Third, there are few
standardized protocols for collecting information on mul tiple
biological groups and associated habitat characteristics at
local, regional, national, and international scales. Lastly,
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-12. 1999
cooperative efforts have been lagging on technology transfer
and information management among agencies within and
between countries. It is against this common backdrop that
the speakers and the audience sensed both urgency and
opportunity.
Judy Loo reported that Canada lacked a coordinated
vegetation monitoring system. Although the Canadian Forest
Service is characterizing and modeling some plant and
animal distributions, and provinces are assessing endangered
species, much more work is needed to provide timely
information to land managers. Thomas Stohlgren showed
how multi-scale sampling techniques are used to rapidly
assess hot spots of biodiversity and areas of unique species
assemblages with an emphasis on reducing the impacts of
invasive exotic species. Maintaining natural disturbance
regimes and monitoring key indicators of multiple stresses
to biodiversity were noted as important components for
preservation.
James Comiskey demonstrated the use of multi-scale
sampling techniques to identify hot spots of biodiversity in
the Urubamba Region in southeastern Peru. In combination
with the Smithsonian Institution, and other forest monitoring
programs, these methods provide an integrated approach to
ecological assessments.
Jose Delgado provided a comprehensive review of the
status of biodiversity in Mexico with a disturbing evaluation
of the loss of rare and critical habitats, combined with
increasing demands for forest products, especially lumber
and firewood. The introduction of exotic species,
over-exploitation of natural resources, and illegal trade of
rare species all threaten forest biodiversity. Gilberto
Chavez-Leon echoed these concerns with an example of
decreasing bird diversity due to non-sustainable land use
effects in Michocan, Mexico. Raul Rosenberg focused on the
need to define critical habitat and to understand the spatial
and temporal variation of habitats and animals for
conservation. J. Jimenez recommended inventory methods
to evaluate the vertical and horizontal stand structure of
uneven-aged forests. One key feature of the method was the
assessment of a suite of indIcators of species and structural
diversity. Ubaldo Zaragoza wrapped up the formal
presentations with a report on organic matter accumulation
and decay in mangrove forests? a subtle reminder that the
ecological processes that maintain forest structure also
maintain patterns of biodiversity.
Michael Huston summarized the main points of the
presentations in the context of understanding ecological
theory as a basis for planning inventory and monitoring.
Theories on the energetics and dynamics of populations can
provide important insights on the distributions of species
and patterns of heterogeneity. He called for the integration
ofGIS-based models based on remotely sensed and field da ta
with process-based biophysical models.
Most questions and subsequent discussions focused on
needs common to everyone in attendance. Greater financial
support is needed from government agencies and
non-government agencies to rapidly acquire detailed
information on patterns of biodiversity, the status of rare
species and habitats, and trends in populations of concern
relative to human activities. A second commonality was the
need to increase the sharing of techniques and technology,
including jointly-sponsored, international inventory and
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-12. 1999
monitoring programs. The third common need, which was
also a goal of the conference itself, was to increase
communication among scientists and land managers among
our countries.
We sensed a feeling of optimism, fueled by promises of
cooperation and sharing. Wehave much to learn, and even
more to accomplish in the urgent protection of the biodiversity in North America. There is no shortage of enthusiasm
(Workshop Session Chairs: Thomas J. Stohlgren,
Midcontinent Ecological Science Center, U.S. Geological
Survey, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA; Judy Loo, Canadian
Forest Service, Natural Resources Canada, New Brunswick,
Canada; Jose Concepcion Boyas Delgado, Forestry Branch,
CIR-Centro,INIFAP-SUGAR, Mexico; and Reporter: Michael
Huston, Environmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA).
Long-Term Ecological Research
and Monitoring
The goal for the symposium was to build on the best
science and technology available to assure that the data and
information produced in .future inventory and monitoring
programs are comparable, quality assured, available, and
adequate for their intended purposes, thereby providing a
reliable framework for characterization, assessment, and
management of forest ecosystems in North America. This
provided an excellent opportunity to demonstrate how longterm research and information management provided at
Long Term Ecological Research sites in Canada, U.S. and
Mexico could aid the needs offorest management. Two of the
sessions in the symposium where U.S. speakers presented
results from LTER were Long Term Ecological Research
Monitoring and Information Management Systems. The
primary objectives of the Long Term Ecological Research
Monitoring session addressed issues and alternatives to
integrate these sites and other monitoring programs into a
more comprehensive, integrated approach for monitoring
forest ecosystems. In the I nform a tion Managemen t Systems
session, speakers addressed questions and issues regarding
the design of information management systems for supporting the needs of integrated/comprehensive inventory and
monitoring frameworks as well as research (Workshop Session Chair: James Gosz, Professor, University ofNew Mexico,
Alburquerque, NM, USA).
The sessions also developed recommenda tions to be made
to the general symposium. Of special note in the Long Term
Ecological Research session, participants from the three
countries agreed to form the North American Regional
LTER Network. Initially, the sites from the U.S. LTER
Network, Canadian Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Network, and proposed Mexican MEXLTER Network
will make up this regional network. We anticipate, and will
work for, the addition of other North American sites/networks in the future. The North American Regional Network
will join with regional networks in Asia Pacific, Latin
America and Central Europe and other countries in the
International LTER Network (ILTER) to increase international collaboration.
The first meeting of the Regional Network will occur in
late 1999 (place to be determined) and a second meeting will
527
occur in association with the All-Scientist LTER and Ecological Society of America meeting at Snowbird, Utah in
2000. These meetings will focus on developing scientific
questions and research necessary to develop regional-scale
analyses, scientific exchanges/interactions and training/
education. A number of other specific recommendations for
the overall symposium were made in the two sessions. For
the Long Term Ecological Research session:
• Develop analyses and syntheses of existing inventory,
monitoring and research data based on important scientific and management questions;
• Integrate intensive site studies with extensive site studies. Monitoring and research efforts should be linked
and integrated;
• MonitoringlInventory should be an adaptive activity.
Continual evaluation and assessment are important.
Monitoring/inventory activities should be a result oftopdown and bottom-up considerations. National needs
(management needs) and pragmatic considerations of
scientific feasibility must be considered;
• Utilize the new paradigms based on current scientific
understanding and incorporate into assessments of inventory, monitoring and research needs;
• Maintain a long-term view on the needs for inventory,
monitoring and research (as well as satisfying shortterm objectives);
• Use conceptual models (and theory) to integrate research and monitoring efforts;
• Monitoring networks and intensive research si tes should
evaluate methods and approaches for determining how
well intensive sites provide representative information
on ecosystem dynamics and the mechanisms underlying
those dynamics for the surrounding region;
• Develop exploratory project(s) to address this issue;
• Interactions among scientists and sites in Mexico, U.S.
and Canada are very important. Students should be
involved in those interactions;
• Consider the human factor in our research and monitoring of ecosystems;.
• Develop facilities and necessary infrastructure at intensive study sites to increase opportunities for research
and monitoring activities. Increased numbers of studies
facilitate the development of the comprehensive understanding of the ecosystems;
• The North American Regional L TER Network should
aim at providing needed input to the decision-making
processes; and
• Design research/inventory/monitoring activities to understand ecosystems along the environmental gradients
present in North America.
Sampling DeSign and Analysis Processes
We have a once-in-a-generation opportunity for North
American collaboration aimed at increasing the consistency and utility offorest ecosystem inventory and monitoring programs across North America. All three countries are
presently redesigning their inventory and monitoring systems (Workshop Session Chair: Andrew Gillespie, National
Forest Inventory Coordinator, USDA Forest Service,
528
Washington, DC). Thus the opportunity exists to go as far
towards a common framework as we want:
• One extreme: a single North American system with a
single sample design, grid, remote sensing, and linked to
more intensive monitoring efforts. This is probably more
extreme than is politically feasible at the moment, although there are no technical obstacles.
• A more practical approach would be a 'common database' approach, similar to the US and Canadian systems
currently in place, where data are collected according to
somewhat different procedures, then are amalgamated
into a single database.
• The simplest, lowest risk approach would be to simply
share information on an ongoing basis as we develop our
systems - share copies of manuals, planning documents,
exchange invitations to meetings, etc., to assure that
easy opportunities for collaboration are not missed.
There are some important areas for future research,
which could be taken in a collaborative fashion. Priorities
include:
• Development of remote sensing tools and techniques for
increasing sampling efficiency, and increasing the range
of products (maps, analyses) produced by inventory
programs;
• Development of modeling, estimation procedures, especially for time series data;
• Integrating data across scales, specifically for purposes
of planning forest operations;
• Spatial analysis tools and techniques for analyzing and
portraying data.
Criteria and Indicators
The variety of indicators reported on makes it clear that
there must be ongoing collaboration and cooperation of the
development and testing ofthese indicators by participants,
nationally and internationally. A suite of indicators be
tested in Mexico in 1999, or as soon as possible, similar to the
process of testing in Boise, Idaho in 1998. Indicators should
be tested those used in the Montreal process Indicators for
Sustainable Development (Santiago Declaration) to provide
a common example for several countries (Workshop Session
Chair: Dr. J. Peter Hall, Canadian Forest Service, Natural
Resources Canada, Canada).
Quality Assurance Systems
While it was recognized that effective Quality Assurance
(QA) is being included in some forest resource monitoring
programs, the participants were concerned that general
application of sound quality assurance principles to forest
monitoring in North America is far from adequate (Workshop Session Chair: Dr. John Lawrence, Aquatic Ecosystems Protection Branch, Director, Environment Canada,
Canada). The following was recommended: That data quality assurance be a recognized component of all forest
monitoring programs in the United States, Mexico
and Canada.
While the participants recognized the value of discussing
data quality assurance at workshops held at periodic
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-12. 1999
intervals, it was felt that some form of ongoing effort was
required to promote potential benefits of good data quality
and encourage QA implementation. The following was
recommended: That the organizers build on the imdings of this Symposium, and that held in Mexico City
in 1995, by establishing a permanent tri-partite quality assurance working group to:
• Promote the awareness of data quality and identify a
minimum desirable level of QA;
• Establish dialogue to promote communication of QA
policies and procedures;
• Select one or two parameters for a pilot tri-partite QA
initiative.
Information Management Systems
The goal of our session was to foster the development of
improved information management systems for forest inventory and monitoring programs in North America. Our
approach was to share experiences in the development of
information systems for different types of forest monitoring
programs and to discuss mechanisms for the sharing of data
and information between monitoring programs (Workshop
Session Chair: Dr. Craig Palmer, Professor, University of
Las Vegas, NV, USA).
Several participants noted that regional and continental
scale forest ecosystem data for North America are not
readily accessible. No directory of forest monitoring databases across North America currently exists. The utility of
data that is accessible is often limited due to inadequate data
descriptions (metadata). No forum currently exists to help
improve the exchange offorest moni toring information across
North America. Several initiatives have been proposed for
the development of forest information systems at national
and global scales, but these efforts are not coordinated. To
address the need for improved information sharing, the
participants made the following recommendations:
• That a vision for enhanced sharing of forest ecosystem
information across North America be developed as soon
as possible. This vision should include the development
of a directory offorest data bases, agreement on metadata
standards for the sharing of information and to prevent
data entropy or the loss of data utility with time, the
development of approaches to encourage data sharing,
and the development of data access and data synthesis
tools to assist users of forest data bases.
• That the organizers build on the findings of this Symposium, by establishing a permanent tri-partite information management working group to promote cooperation
within and between countries for the management of
forest ecosystem data. One model for this working group
is the Information Managers Committee of the Longterm Ecological Research (LTER) network. The initial
efforts of the work group should include a cooperative
pilot study effort with the involvement of all three
countries. A primary objective would be to promote
communication between information managers offorest
monitoring programs to encourage data sharing, capacity building and technology transfer. The ultimate goal
would be the development of a Federated Information
Infrastructure for forest monitoring data across North
America.
Assessment and Results Application
The session had a good cross section of views from each
country (i.e. Canada, USA & Mexico), from a variety of scales
(i.e. local, regional, national), and from diverse types of
forest assessments. Collectively, there was a great deal of
consistency in the elemental parts of each presentation. In
summary, the answers provided by assessments are only
important if you asked the right questions at the onset
(Workshop Session Chair: Dr. Ed. B. Wiken, Canadian
Council on Ecological Areas, Canada). It is recommended
that he three countries initiate and further develop continental wide forest assessments on concerns of common
interest such as:
• Forest protected area assessments;
• Forest health assessments; and
• Biodiversity and wildlife habitat assessments.
Such assessments should be employed to enhance the use
and application of forest criteria and indicators. Assessments at the national, regional and local scale should be
continued and refined to address increasingly specific needs,
peculiar to individual countries or regional ecosystems.
Forest assessments should be promoted as an iterative and
adaptive process; a process that is flexible in addressing
issues, design considerations and products (Table 1).
Table 1.-Assessments and results applications: strategy design elements.
IssuesIn the sense of topics
Air pollution
Land use management
Biodiversity
Protected areas
Forest health
Decision making needs
Others ...
Design considerationsin the sense of
Using ecosystems as a base
Using core science principles
Players, audiences, participants, stakeholders
Temporal and spatial scales
Data selection and relevance
Cost effectiveness
Financial resources
USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-12. 1999
Productsin the sense of our ability to
Produce general assessments
Meet legal obligations
Meet policies
Meet regulations
Deliver concise and relevant information
Produce environmental syntheses
Others ...
529