Species of Conservation Concern in Forest Planning

The 2012 Planning Rule defines species of conservation concern as those not listed under the Endangered Species Act but “known to occur in the plan area” and about which the “best available scientific information indicates substantial concern about the species' capability to persist over the long-term in the plan area” (36 CFR 219.9 (c)). In short, these are species in the plan area that the science is telling us to watch more closely to avoid a “substantial concern” becoming a “substantial risk” for that species to exist long term within forest ecosystems.

Management in forest plans is described through the use of plan components. If BASI indicates that the plan components for ecosystems developed in the forest plan would result in the SCC continuing to exist in the forest plan area, no SCC specific plan components would be needed or developed. If BASI indicates that the plan components for ecosystems developed in the forest plan would not result in the SCC continuing to exist in the forest plan area, SCC specific plan components would be needed and developed.

A possible "when and where" SCC Plan Component Story: An SCC depends upon mature aspen habitat to persist. Because the 2012 Planning Rule requires forest plans to maintain or restore ecosystems first and address any additional needs for species at risk (ESA and SCC) after, ecosystem plan components come first in the planning process. Using BASI, ecosystem plan components are developed to provide for the sustainability of aspen ecosystems. Because mature aspen sustainability is addressed within the aspen ecosystem plan components, no additional plan components are required to support the persistence of the SCC. However, if BASI leads to a determination that the same SCC needs to have no noise disturbance during nesting to successfully reproduce, then there may be a requirement to develop plan components. These plan components may guide current and future decision makers to not implement projects or perform activities in either specific mature aspen stands, or all mature aspen stands during the SCC’s nesting period.

Once the forest plan is implemented, the monitoring phase of forest planning begins. If monitoring after forest plan implementation shows the same SCC moving away from an ability to persist with the existing plan components, then the forest would use BASI to analyze and determine if changes to the forest plan are needed. Based upon BASI, the existing plan components in aspen ecosystems and/or SCC plan components may change, and/or additional plan components developed. This analysis and change process in forest planning is an example of what is meant by adaptive management under the 2012 Planning Rule. Any amendments to the forest plan would be analyzed in NEPA for a decision.

Under the 2012 Planning Rule, the Regional Forester is the Responsible Official for the identification of the SCC.

SCC is a part of forest planning that we refer to as being subject to a “substantive formal comment period” commonly referred to as “formal comment”. Formal comment periods are identified for forest planning in the directives to object the forest plan decision, an individual is required to have commented under at least one formal comment period in the entire planning process for each forest plan.

The information on SCC for each forest plan will be hosted on each forest planning website. Information and the Regional Forester's lists of identified SCC will also be hosted here.

You will provide your comments to each forest, regarding the SCC proposed, on the forest webpages associated with each plan. Links to the forest plans SCC pages can be accessed below on this page.

The number of formal comment periods on SCC throughout the planning process will depend on the timing and development of the final SCC for each forest plan. The 2012 Planning Rule requires the identification of SCC information as it is developed, and transparently sharing the SCC process through public involvement. As a result, the number of opportunities to provide formal comment, and the timing of those reviews, will vary with each forest plan revision process. Some reasons they may vary by forest plan include: the available BASI, the differences between SCC’s, different habitat conditions on different forests for the same SCC; and the overall forest plan project schedule. Each time a substantive formal comment period is initiated by a forest during the forest planning process, you may provide formal comment on SCC.

To be advised of SCC formal comment periods, and all parts of the planning process on each national forest, the best way is to sign up through forest websites to receive their direct notifications. Signing up is the best way for us to give you the information as soon as it is available. Notifications will also be made on web pages, and through social media and news outlets throughout the planning process, as well as the federal register.

You will be asked to provide comments on two things related to SCC, which are the proposed SCC in the forest plan and the analysis criteria and BASI used to determine SCC identified in the forest plan. Later in the planning process, as the forest plan is created, we will encourage you to review and provide comment on any plan components developed to address SCC and any ecosystems plan components that relate to them.

The finalization of the SCC proposed in each forest plan will vary as previously described here. Any plan components developed for SCC, and any ecosystem plan components that support the SCC, will be reviewed during the plan development phase. As previously shared here, the Regional Forester makes the decision on the SCC identified for each forest plan. The Forest Supervisor makes the decision on the forest plan, including plan components related to the SCC.