DAN OSWALD (USDA-FS-FIA/PM)
DOUG POWELL (USDA-FS-WO-FIA)
LOGAN NORRIS (SAF Task Force on sustaining log-term forest health and
productivity; also Oregon State Univ. Forestry Dean)
AL MARMELSTEIN (NBS, could not attend. Sent handout. Book available.)
GREG APLET (The Wilderness Society)
JIM MCMAHON (ESA, Sustainable Biosphere Initiative)
BLAIR CSUTI (Idaho FWS, Oregon GAP analysis director)
DOUG HEIKEN (AFSEEE)
LARRY IRWIN (NCASI)
ALLEN COOPERRIDER 
(Consultant affiliated with Reed Noss. Planned but could 
not attend. Book available coauthored by Reed Noss.)
DENNIS GROSSMAN (Nature Conservancy)
DENICE SHAW (FS-EMAP. Planned but could not attend. Other info 
provided to ECOFIA task force).
ROB ROB HENDRICKS (FS-International Forestry)
FRED SWANSON (FS-Ecological Research)
JERRY WILLIAMS (NFS regional sociologist)
LINDA KRUGER (FS-Social Research, FEMAT)
CLINT WILLIAMS (FS-NFS-INT)

DAY 2

REX MCCULLOUGH (Blue Ribbon panel; Weyerhauser)
JEFF GOEBEL (SCS/NRI specialist. Planned but could not attend. 
Held separate discussions with Tom Schmidt and WO Staff) 
BILL WILLIAMS (BLM-mgmt info needs)
STEVE FAIRWEATHER (Forest industry view; Boise-Cascade)
JAMES BROWN (Oregon State Forester perspective)
MIKE CLUTTER (Am. Forest and Paper Assoc. subcommittee on FIA; GA-Pacific)
RAY CZAPLEWSKI (FS-Research)
TIM LEWIS (FHM)
TOM UPHILL (FS-NFS-RPA)
ROB HOLMES (FS-Info. systems and tech.)
JOHN TEPLY (FS-NFS-R6 info systems)
REUBEN WEISZ (FS-Common Survey Data Structure)
JOHN BUCKHOUSE (FS-Oregon State Univ., range scientist)
JANETTE KAISER (FS-WO-rangeland health)
JOHN MILLS (FS-RPA economics and policy modeling, RPA)                       ECOFIA WORKSHOP May 1994

Summary of Introductory Remarks

Attainment of a biologically, physically, and socially sustainable and politically acceptable forest condition is a primary driver. "Flows" are as important as "stocks." Time and space are much more relevant than in the past. Vegetation rotations are not temporally independent; forest stands are not spatially independent.

Summary Of Portland Meeting

Questions Posed and Answers Given by Attendees

I. What makes FIA data and analysis products useful measures of sustainable and acceptable forest condition? Society--or more directly--its customers. FIA should make itself known, communicate its products, and develop partnerships with the

• Scientific community
• Policymakers
• Land managers (public, private) and with (large, small) holdings
• NGOs: including traditional and nontraditional organizations
• Public (including grass-roots groups, environmental educators)
• Monitoring community: those concerned with inventory, status, and trends

II. What is the business of FIA? FIA should provide

• Scientifically credible data in a timely manner using well documented, standardized (National and Regional) processes and procedures.
• Easy access to the data, at minimal cost; and provide document(s) describing what data are available and how they can be accessed.
• Timely, scientifically credible, peer reviewed analyses of current issues, research questions, and policy decisions.
• Expertise to inventory, classify, and monitor forest ecosystems at various spatial and temporal scales.
• Expertise to integrate ecological (stocks AND flows) and social data into resource analyses, broadening the scope of FIA's responsibilities beyond traditional timber inventories.

III. What are FIA information management needs? FIA should consider the

• Pro's/con's of linking with FHM, EMAP, NBS, GAP, and NRI (National Resource Inventory). Develop partnerships with non-traditional partners (NGO's, environmental groups).
• Current efforts by other organizations for inventory and monitoring and assessment of environmental health/sustainability. Identify data sources and opportunities for cooperation to avoid duplication of effort.
• Extension of FIA to all forest lands, including NP lands, NFS lands, and wilderness; and consider including range lands in the inventory.
• Collection of basic data based on vegetative cover rather than land use.

IV. What are the data and indicators of ecological health (sustainability) that FIA could provide? FIA should provide or contribute to measures of:

• Levels of tree mortality; insect and disease damage
• Net primary productivity
• Presence of exotic, endemic, and native species; number of threatened species or communities, relative vulnerability
• Air and water quality assessments
• Stand level structural complexity and species composition (richness/diversity)
• Disturbance patterns and landscape heterogeneity and their effects/function on the resource
• Temporal stability of landscape patterns (age classes, seral stages)
• Physical site characteristics (site potential, topography, aspect, elevation) including "key" physical factors of the environment that relate to wildlife dynamics (behavior as well as population)
• Landscape context (fragment size, etc.) of plots
• Current condition relative to historic range of variability
• All vegetation, not just commercial trees
• Soils data (depth, morphology, chemistry, micro-organisms)
• Dendrochronology data from tree core ring analysis
• Probability estimates (for harvest by owner class, land use change) in forecasting change with various scenarios (global change, policy options)

V. What are needed research, techniques, and analyses that FIA should address, either directly or in cooperation with other research agencies/organizations? Questions follow:

• What are the spatial and temporal scale(s) that can FIA operate effectively and accurately?
• Determine which data elements and "indicators" (those above or others) best describe ecological health (sustainability). What is the quality and effectiveness (cost) of each measurement?
• Is the plot design (fixed vs. variable, plot size, mapping procedures) appropriate for the array of indicators that are being, or will be, used?
• Is the sample design compatible with remote sensing technology; consistent across FIA units and with other inventories, across regions, ecosystems?
• Is there a need for a consistent ecological stratification model?
• What are the geostatistical techniques to link spatially explicit FIA data to map data (GIS spatial displays)?
• A National grid system on all forest and range lands needed?
• What are the impacts of past/present/future patterns of human activities and other disturbances on biodiversity?

VI. FIA should take a LEADERSHIP role on a National scale in establishing protocols and processes for

• Data management and analysis
• Inventory procedures, and
• QA/QC procedures.

VII. FIA should

• Develop a "marketing strategy" to increase FIA's visibility, to better identify its functions and responsibilities, and to demonstrate its capabilities to other agencies and organizations.
• Provide opportunities for input from "outside" organizations/agencies during the inventory planning stage.
• Continue to provide timely and accurate timber resource data.

AN ECOFIA VISION OF FOREST INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS

Our emphasis is on the vegetation component of ecosystems, and we are recognized as USDA's vegetation inventory.

We are leaders of a center of excellence for inventory and monitoring techniques (research function) and analysis.

We are the core staff who consolidates FIA, FHM, and the various inventory and monitoring efforts from NFS and S&PF (e.g., forest pest surveys and urban forest inventory), all under the WO Research Deputy area.

We maintain a network of plots across the landscape.

We measure across boundaries (e.g., biophysical, political, and ownership).

We deal with field and remotely-sensed data on both land cover and land use.

GIS, remote sensing, and information management are the "motors" that keep us running.

We focus on information management and data accessibility. We serve as a clearinghouse and repository of ecosystem data and provide linkages to diverse data sources.

We have a successful marketing strategy and are continually educating people about our work and products.

We successfully use a two-tiered approach: "top down" for national standards and direction and "bottom up" to respond to regional/subsectional needs.

We have built-in flexibility that allows us to quickly compile statistical summaries for any defined geographical area that is appropriate for our survey design (e.g., ecoregions, river basins, and states). All our data are geo-referenced to specific standards.

Our data can be analyzed at multiple temporal and spatial scales.

Summer 1994. ECOFIA Steering Committee.