By TOM KELLY
Editor and Publisher

Green Certification. It's either a potential marketing tool without much immediate impact on the sale of forest products in the United States, or is a dangerous intrusion into private property rights slipped into America's environmental regulat ory system by a United Nations "New World Order" agency that has co-opted the USDA Forest Service, EPA, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, National Park Service, The Nature Conservancy, National Wildlife Federation, and National Audubon Society - to name some of the best known.

It depends on which of two speakers on the subject you heard on Thursday, March 14 - Dr. Michael Dunn, Chief Economist with LSU AgCenter, in the morning at the Ark-La-Tex Forestry Forum in Shreveport, or Dr. Michael S. Coffman, in the eve ning at the Pineywoods Agricultural Producers Rally in Lufkin, Texas. We managed to hear them both, Dr. Dunn for the second time in two months. The two Mikes appear to agree on the basics, but not necessarily on the motivations nor the consequences of the certification movement.

The forest products industry generally has adopted one or more of the internationally recognized forest certification standards and moved on, some more in response to public noise from environmental and consumer activist movements t han from actual governmental regulation of forestry per se - not counting federal clean water, clean air, and endangered species laws, which impact agriculture, forestry, manufacturing, mining, suburban commercial and residential development, parish, coun ty, and municipal governments. Just about everybody.

The major national and multi-national industrial forest landowners now routinely indicate in public statements about their operations that their forests are "managed sustainably," and all have either comp leted or are in process of completing "third party review" by outside auditors and experts, to certify their sustainable management plan is meets specifications, and is being followed.

A smaller group of private, non-industrial forest landowners who unders tand the economics of forestry follow many of the same practices as the industrial forestry companies, and have joined with one of the organizations which offer Green Certification as part of their benefit package. Some have done so for many years, because they know it's good forestry business. The American Tree Farm System has been around for over a half-century, and is favored by many private landowners, who may join through membership in the Louisiana Forestry Association or directly with the American T ree Farm System, based in Atlanta, Georgia.

But as momentum for green certification and such concepts as "responsible wood consumption" grows internationally, some landowners see potential for growing social and governmental restrictions on private property rights. It is to these fears and concerns that Dr. Coffman speaks.

What is it?
Generally speaking, green certification is a process for showing to the public that forests are managed "sustainably," to protect environmental concerns of clean air and water, provide wildlife habitat, and long-term replenishment of the forest trees.

Several agencies provide various levels of certification.

The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) was formed in 1947 to promote development of international standards for manufacturing, trade, and communication. In 1996, ISO established a set of standards for a variety of environmental programs - including forestry. Organizations seeking ISO recognition must prove compliance and show account ability in following all federal, state, and local laws.

Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) was established in 1994 by the American Forest & Paper Association, as a self-regulating program for industrial forest landowners and manufacturers. AF&PA members hip requires companies to comply with SFI principles and reporting, which include responsible forest management, third-party audit of policy and results. SFI is the largest sustainable forestry and certification program in the world, with about 95 millio n acres of forest land in the U.S. under management.

American Tree Farm System, in operation since 1941, recognizes private landowners who manage their forests for timber production, water quality, wildlife habitat, and recreation. Nation wide, the system i ncludes over 65,000 Tree Farms encompassing over 81 million acres of privately owned forest land, including 27 million acres of non-industrial ownership. The program requires a written management plan, initial certification by recognized inspectors, and r egular inspections and record maintenance.

Forest Stewardship Council, FSC, is the most widely known international certification program. According to its own documents, FSC sets standards for responsible forest management, but does not inspect forests. Tha t role is taken by independent, third-party certification bodies which are accredited by FSC. According to its documentation, FSC has 11 accredited Certifiers worldwide, with three operating within the U.S. The three active in North America are Smartwood (a Rainforest Alliance program), Scientific Certification Systems, and Silva Forest Foundation.

FSC standards include:

Third party certification; assessments of forest management companies based on their actual on-the-ground forest management performance; c hain of custody certification to track certified timber throughout the manufacturing and distribution process; on-product labeling to provide assurance of integrity to the final customer.
According to Dr. Mike Coffman, "landowners should be cautious about FSC certification," because standards allow outside individuals and groups to have input in on-the-ground decisions being made by the private landowner, and standards restrict and could prohibit a landowner's ability to manage with proven silvicultural pr actices that include even-aged forest management, and use of chemicals to control pests and competing vegetation.
Dr. Coffman and Dr. Dunn both agree on one point: There are significant costs associated with FSC certification.

According to Dr. Dunn's rationale, the extra cost associated with FSC certification, both in establishing the forest practices, ongoing management. and maintaining chain of custody and special labeling, will result in higher cost of the lumber products.

"If you go into Lowe's or Home Depot to buy a load of two-by-fours, and one bin is labeled $1.00, and the other is $1.50, which will you buy?" he asked at two Forest Landowner Forums earlier this year - one in Alexandria, one at Shreveport.

Dr. Dunn, the LSU AgCenter forest economist, s aid there does not yet appear to be any real evidence of big consumer demand for certified wood. Nor is there any indication that demand for non-certified wood will diminish. There is no federal requirement for green certification, and market forces will drive any movement toward certification, he believes.

"My advice to landowners?" Dr. Dunn asked. "We probably think it's more dangerous than it really is. Don't sweat it. When you see lumber yards advertising certified lumber, or consulting foresters advert ising to manage your land for certification, you can give it some thought."

Dr. Coffman, the Bangor, Maine consultant, warns of involvement with organizations subject to the International Union for Conservation of Nature, (IUCN) accredited in 1946 by the United Nations as a scientific advisory body for the UN General Assembly.

According to Dr. Coffman, the IUCN presently has 895 state, government agency, and non-governmental organizations in 133 countries, under its umbrella. Its mission, he says, is to "in fluence, encourage and assist societies throughout the world to conserve the integrity and diversity of nature and to ensure that any use of natural resources is equitable and ecologically sustainable."

In an information brochure provided to the East Texas Pineywoods Agricultural Producers Rally in March, Coffman says that "despite the IUCN's billing as a scientific body, the Spring 1996 issue of the IUCN's Ethics Working Group's publication Earth Ethics, `admits that IUCN "promotes alternative models for sustainable communities and lifestyles, based on ecospiritual practices and principles." These pantheistically-based ecospiritual practices are designed to "induce a radical change in humanity's attitudes, values, and behavior through changes in in ternational law."

Writes Dr. Coffman, "The IUCN is the perfect organization for implementing international policy at the local level. Not only are many of our federal agencies members of the IUCN, such as the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, the National Park Service, the U.S. Forest Service, and the Environmental Protection Agency, but the IUCN permits them to huddle in private behind closed doors to develop their ecospiritual strategies with the Sierra Club, Nature Conservancy, National Wildlife Federation, National Audubon Society, UNESCO, UNEP, and UNDP, which are also members."

(For further insight on current certification issues, see a separate story in this issue on the Forest Leadershio Forum, being held in Atlanta, Georgia April 25-27 as this edition of The Piney Wooods Journal went to press.

Back