the pinchot letter

Leadership in Forest Conservation Thought, Policy and Action

EXECUTIVE OFFICE: 1616 P Street NW, Suite 100, Washington DC 20036 202/797-6580 FAX: 202/797-6583 WEB: www.pinchot.orgGREY TOWERS NATIONAL HISTORIC LANDMARK: P.O. Box 188, Milford, PA 18337 570/296-9630 FAX: 570/296-9675

In conjunction with the Milford(Pennsylvania) Experimental For-est, the Pinchot Institute estab-

lished a project last year to supportcommunity forestry in the northerncoastal plain of Ecuador. The pro-ject—intended to sustain the forest-lands in that region and sparkeconomic development—is a partner-ship between the Pinchot Instituteand four other organizations: the U.S.Peace Corps, the USDA Forest Ser-vice, Fundacion Jatun Sacha(Ecuador’s largest conservation non-governmental organization), and anetwork of rural communities prac-ticing sustainable forestry in north-western Ecuador. The partners havecreated a pilot project in the commu-

nity of Cristobol Colon, with 300families that together own 45,000hectares (about 111,150 acres) of wettropical forests in the foothills of theAndes.

The northern coastal plain ofEcuador is one of the most threat-ened biodiversity hotspots in SouthAmerica, with less than 3% of its orig-inal forests still remaining. A study byBotanist Alwyn Gentry of a 200-hectare forest stand found over 1,000plant species—more than half ofwhich are woody plants, and manyendemic to that region. Meanwhile,small communities of colonists andindigenous peoples struggling withpersistent poverty own much of the

forestland that has not yet been con-verted to banana, coffee, and oil palmplantations. In many of these com-munities, since the markets for agri-cultural crops such as coffee, bananas,and milk have failed, the economiclifeline for farmers is selling wood har-vested from their primary forests.

During the last decade, USAIDand other funders have made large in-vestments to encourage sustainableforestry in rural communities in thisregion. The ten-year Sustainable Usesfor Biological Resources (SUBIR)project, the most ambitious of theseprograms, was successful in helpingcommunities gain legal title to theirlands and pioneer a simple, but effec-

News from the Pinchot Institute for Conservation Vol. 8, No.1 Spring 2003

INSIDE

F Part II: Asset ManagementApproach ....................page 5

F Rocky Roads in Rocky Top?...................................page 7

F Conservation and the Arts.................................page 16

F Part II: Letter of FinalInstructions ..............page 22

The Pinchot Letter

(continued on page 2)

Tropical Sustainable Forestry: A New Community Forestry Program in Northwestern Ecuador

Cristobol Colon, a community of 300 families located 45,000 hectares adjacent to the 200,000hectare Cotacachi-Cayapas Reserve close to Colombia, South America

Celebrating 40 Years of Partnership with the USDA Forest Service1963F 2003

Dedicated by former President John F. Kennedy, Jr. at Grey Towers National Historic Landmark to carry forward Gifford Pinchot’s forest conservation legacy.

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Chair, Peter C. Pinchot, Milford, PAVice Chair, Dr. James R. Grace, Harrisburg, PATreasurer, Jackson F. Eno, Hartford, CTSecretary, DeNise E. Cooke, Bushkill, PAWilliam H. Banzhaf, Arlington, VAMichael Berry, Lakewood, COGordon Connor, Laona, WIRolf Diamant, Woodstock, VTGerald F. Groswold, Winter Park, COJ. Robert Hicks, Jr., Richmond, VALori P. Knowles, Garrison, NYDr. Patricia A. Layton, Clemson, SCMary D. Nichols, Sacramento, CADr. Charles E. Owubah, Washington, DCGifford Pinchot, III, Bainbridge Island, WARichard L. Snyder, Milford, PAJane E.S. Sokolow, Riverdale, NYSean O. Strub, Milford, PAFrank Tugwell, Arlington, VAGreg E. Walcher, Denver, COM. Carter Wall, Chicago, ILDr. Daowei Zhang, Auburn, AL

Ex officioEdgar B. Brannon, Milford, PADr. V. Alaric Sample, Washington, DC

EmeritusDr. John C. Barber, Warsaw, VADr. John Gray, Little Rock, AKHugh C. Miller, Richmond, VAThomas Schenarts, Kenett Square, PA

Forest Service LiaisonElizabeth Estill, Washington, DC

CounselJohn Austin, Esq., Washington, DC

STAFF

WashingtonDr. V. Alaric Sample, PresidentKendra D. Miller, Director, External AffairsJennifer J. Becker, Operations ManagerAndrea Bedell Loucks, Program AssociateWilliam C. Price, Program AssociateStephanie Kavanaugh, Research AssociatePeter Kostishack, Research AssociateNaureen Rana, Research AssociateYenie L. Tran, Administrative Assistant

Grey TowersNancy Pinchot, Director, Conservation and the ArtsPeter Pinchot, Milford Experimental ForestErin Laberta-Gross, Adminstrative Coordinator

Senior FellowsDr. Antony S. Cheng, Dr. Perry R. Hagenstein,Dr. Dennis C. LeMaster, Catherine M. Mater, Dr. Char Miller, Jeff M. Sirmon,Dr. Harold K. Steen

tive, approach to sustainable forestmanagement that works well in acommunity setting. However, despitethis important work, little progresshas been made in translating goodforestry into economic developmentthat addresses the underlying reasonsfor deforestation.

The Pinchot Institute became in-volved in Ecuador through a PeaceCorps volunteer, David Smith, whoworked for several years with the Mil-ford Experimental Forest on commu-nity deer management and otherforestry projects. David went to

Ecuador with a copy of Gifford Pin-chot’s Primer of Forestry, which waswritten in response to the NorthAmerican period of forest exploitationthat parallels the rapid loss of primaryforests in South America today.

The community forestry projectin Ecuador is a direct example of theapplication of the principles of forestconservation defined by Gifford Pin-chot a century ago. Pinchot describedgood forestry as the ability to “useand preserve the forest at one and thesame time.” Moreover, he stressedthat conservation meant that “natur-

al resources must be developed andpreserved for the benefit of the many,and not merely for the profit of afew.” This was a socially progressivenotion that lay at the heart of thecoalition of interests that defined thefirst American conservation revolu-tion.

In Ecuador, Smith soon recog-nized that Cristobol Colon wouldcontinue to exploit its forests untilfamilies could make a decent living bymanaging them sustainably. Furniture

THE PINCHOT LETTER spring 2003

2

ABOUT THE PINCHOT INSTITUTE

Recognized as a leader in forest conservation thought, policy and action, the Pinchot Institute for Conser-vation was dedicated in 1963 by President John F. Kennedy, Jr. at Grey Towers National Historic Landmark

(Milford, PA)—home of conservation leader Gifford Pinchot. The Institute is an independent nonprofit orga-nization that works collaboratively with all Americans nationwide—from federal and state policymakers to citi-zens in rural communities—to strengthen forest conservation by advancing sustainable forest management,developing conservation leaders, and providing science-based solutions to emerging natural resource issues. Fur-ther information about the Pinchot Institute’s programs and activities can be found at www.pinchot.org.

The Pinchot Letter is a tri-annual publication of the Pinchot Institute for Conservation.Contributing writers: Pinchot Institute and Grey Towers staff; Julian Block, JD, LLM;

Peter & Nancy PinchotEditor and project coordinator: Kendra D. MillerDesigner: Peter Lindeman, OSP Inc., Arlington, VA© 2003 Pinchot Institute for Conservation

Printed on recycled paper.


manufacturers pay community mem-bers about $0.10 per foot for rough-sawn boards. At these prices, evenwhen farmers cut as many trees as theycan, their families still make consider-ably less than $1,000 per year sellingtheir lumber wholesale. Given this,there is little chance of making a last-ing transition to sustainable forestrypractices, and the remaining forestswill probably continue to be convert-ed to unsustainable agricultural enter-prises. This was exactly the kind ofsituation Pinchot was addressing in hisexhortation that conservation mustprovide benefits to the “common per-son” if it is to succeed as a policy.

Shortly after he arrived in Cristo-bol Colon, David Smith asked theMilford Experimental Forest—a pro-gram of the Pinchot Institute thatuses the Pinchot family’s Pennsylva-nia forest as a testing ground for sus-tainability issues that can be appliedelsewhere—to help him develop aninnovative pilot to address the prob-lems faced by his community. Thusthe partnership between the PeaceCorps, USDA Forest Service, Funda-cion Jatun Sacha, the community net-work, and the Pinchot Institute wasformed. The pilot study will explorehow to help the community cut fewertrees and return a greater profit to itsmembers by developing cooperativebusinesses in the value-added pro-cessing and marketing of wood prod-ucts.

Last December, the Instituteraised $70,000 from private donorsto purchase appropriately scaled toolsto allow the community to begin pro-ducing finished wood products. Thetools include a portable bandsawsawmill, a kiln powered by solar ener-gy and wood heat, a diesel generator,a planer/molder and other carpentrytools, and an outboard motor andlogging arch to transport wood to thesawmill.

Once the tools are delivered tothe community, the bulk of the pro-ject will focus on technical assistanceto help them learn the skills of sus-tainable forest management, produc-tion and marketing of high-valuewood products, and business man-agement. A critical element of theproject will be to create the institu-tional capacity in Ecuador to train andmentor community members in mar-keting and business development.

The project has five components:

Forest management. Assistancein developing forest managementplans and training paraforesters with-in the community who can assumemany of the functions of a forester.

Agroforestry. Assistance in de-veloping model agroforestry plots toreforest failing agricultural lands witha wide diversity of short-term cropsand forest trees.

Wood product development.Study of the wood properties of thehundreds of tree species and the de-velopment of simple wood productsthat have a potential market. Trainingcommunity members in the use of thesawmill, kiln, and carpentry tools toproduce high-quality products.

Marketing. Initial assistance in se-lecting several products that the com-munity can make and sell right away,and then carrying out an extensivemarketing study of the most prof-itable products produced by theirskills and wood species, both forEcuadorian markets and eventually,for international markets.

Business management. Trainingcommunity members in the basicskills of running a viable business, in-cluding business plans, accounting,credit management, etc.

The US Peace Corps has placedtwo volunteers in Cristobol Colon(one in community forestry, the otherin business management), and hasmade an atypical commitment to con-tinue placing volunteers there for five

3

spring 2003 THE PINCHOT LETTER


Cattle pasture, coffee and cacao plantation:three failing crop markets.

Segundo Moreno milling a hardwood treeinto rough-sawn boards with a chainsaw.Such technique leaves over 50% of the usablewood wasted in the forest and greatlyincreases the rate of harvest for the same eco-nomic return.

Portable bandsaw sawmill with a kerf nar-rower than a chainsaw, these saws can cutsmaller diameter material, thereby greatlyincreasing the marketable yield from eachtree.

years to ensure the success of the pilotproject. Next year, two more volun-teers will be placed in adjacent com-munities to help these areas adapt thelessons learned in Cristobol Colon.Fundacion Jatun Sacha will be thelead organization in delivering tech-nical assistance and mentoring, andwill hire for two new positions—amarketing specialist and a part-timebusiness management trainer—to sus-tain these initiatives.

The USDA Forest Service is pro-viding the design for the solar kiln andassistance in identifying the propertiesand potential uses for the large diver-sity of tree species in Ecuador’s coastalplain. The Pinchot Institute is help-ing to create the vision for the pro-ject, convening the partners, raisingfunds, and providing research and as-

sistance in value-added processing,marketing, and community forestry.

In subsequent years, the partnersplan to translate the results of thepilot project to other areas of thecommunity forestry network and toan assemblage of indigenous commu-nities in the Ecuadorian Amazon. Theultimate goal is to help reverse the lossof forests in this region by providingcommunities with the tools and skillsto build a viable local economy basedon sustainable management of theirworking forests.

Past achieving that goal, there areseveral policy issues arising from thispilot project that could evolve into fu-ture policy studies for the Pinchot In-stitute. For example, a criticalquestion for tropical forestry is how

to provide financial incentives for re-forestation by the small landownerswho own vast areas of failing agricul-tural lands. Emerging carbon seques-tration markets may provide atremendous new opportunity to payfarmers to plant new forests, but aswith certification, there will be greatchallenges in translating this financialopportunity down to the scale of themany thousands of farmers who own20 or 40 hectares of farmland.

We will keep you posted on newdevelopments in our communityforestry program in Ecuador. Formore information or to offer sugges-tions, please contact Al Sample at(202) 797-6580, [email protected] or Peter Pinchot at (570)296-9313, [email protected].


4

PARTNERING THROUGH THE CFC

Considering the reality of the current marketplace, we realize that now, more than ever, we need to diversify ourbase of financial support, begin establishing relationships with new friends who recognize the value of our work, andbuild an endowment to ensure that our programs can continue to impact forest policies and conservation. Your fullytax-deductible gift made through the current Combined Federal Campaign (CFC) can help us do this, plus muchmore.

By ensuring that we have well-maintained forests, your gift also helps our nation to have cleaner air, better qual-ity water, reduced pollution and toxic substances, sustainable timber, more affordable energy resources and suppliesof fish, and properly maintained rivers, beaches, and shorelines. In turn, this gives us more opportunities for out-door recreation, an abundant quantity and variety of wildlife, and affordable grazing lands and soil conservation forour animals.

Please don’t forget us. With over 3,000 nonprofits participating annually in the CFC campaign, we want to makesure that we can continue to fund our efforts—work that directly supports yours. Only by working together can wespread the roots of forest conservation.

For more information on how to contribute through the CFC and ensure that you’re kept informed of our workand exciting events at Grey Towers, please contact Kendra Miller at 202-797-6580 or [email protected].

Pinchot Institute for Conservation: a new member of the Con-servation and Preservation Charities of America federation.Check your guide for our new charity number.

Editor’s Note: The following articleconcludes this segment, which ran in thelast issue of this newsletter (volume 7,number 3).

Land stewardship in the contextof sustainable forest manage-ment implies more than just

minimizing abuse. Stewardship im-plies an active husbanding of the landand its resources, to provide for theneeds of the current generation, butalso to convey these resources to fu-ture generations in as good or bettercondition than they were received.

Americans today are the benefi-ciaries of a forest legacy created by far-sighted leaders of the ConservationMovement more than a century ago.The nation now has more forest areathan at any time since the AmericanRevolution. Yet we find that in manyinstances, the value of these assets—interms of timber quality, wildlife habi-tat, biodiversity and other measures—is declining. The notion of increasingnet asset value of forest resources—building principal as it were—seemsto have disappeared from the profes-sional lexicon of forest management,even as we wax eloquent on terms likesustainable forestry and ecosystemmanagement.

MANAGING THE FOREST AS ANAPPRECIATING ASSET

Almost since Faustmann (1848)first published his model for deter-mining optimal rotation length onthe basis of “financial maturity,” manyforesters and forest owners have in-stinctively rejected this model, largelybecause it focuses so much on thevalue of near-term production andfails to adequately account for the ac-

cumulation of asset value. In manyforest enterprises, both public and pri-vate, where ownership of the land isexpected to continue into the indefi-nite future, a key objective is to steadi-ly increase and concentrate the assetvalue of the land and timber. Currentharvest levels are set to capture po-tential mortality before it occurs, aswell as to take advantage of favorablemarkets.

What the neoclassical economicparadigm would regard as an unac-ceptably low return on equity (rela-tive to the cost of capital) must beviewed in a larger context. In Europe,where centuries-old forest enterpriseshave endured through multiple wars,currency devaluations, and otherevents that have put most forms of in-vestment at great risk, forests haveserved as a stable, reliable, and tangi-ble asset. In other parts of the world,the recent advent of timber invest-ment management organizations (or

“TIMOs”) has been stimulated by in-vestors seeking a stable, appreciatingasset that, because its value tends tofluctuate in the opposite directionfrom most forms of equity invest-ment, lowers the level of risk associat-ed with their overall investmentportfolio (Binkley, 1996). Ironically,prevailing accounting rules in theUnited States do not allow the inclu-sion of the appreciating value of forestassets when publicly-held corpora-tions calculate their earnings. Thismay explain, in part, the continuingtransfer in ownership of industrialtimberlands in the U.S. from inte-grated forest products companies toTIMOs (Block, 2001).

Shifting from a forest manage-ment regime characterized by declin-ing asset value, to a truly sustainableforest management one in which assetvalue is increasing, or at least neutral,often involves a decrease in currentproduction. Regulated use of naturalresources, limiting current productionto what can be sustained without adecline in asset value, is seldom pop-ular with resource users. Voluntary,market-based solutions are widelypreferred, but to the extent that mar-kets continue to imperfectly reflectthe value of essential ecosystem ser-vices to society, there will be a con-tinuing need for targeted interventionthrough government policy (Daily,1997). This is one of the perennialand central challenges in natural re-source conservation, whether thecontext is timber harvesting, grazing,or marine fisheries (Hardin, 1968).Successfully addressing this challengewill be one of the keys to sustainabledevelopment.

5


PERSPECTIVE

An Asset Management Approach to Forest Stewardship (Part II)Dr. V. Alaric SamplePresident, Pinchot Institute for Conservation

Dr. V. Alaric Sample


SUSTAINABILITY AS IF FUTUREGENERATIONS MATTERED

Over the past century, the prac-tice of sustainable forest managementhas become increasingly complex.Early models of forest management,at first aimed simply toward sustain-ing the supply of timber by equatingharvest with growth, have expandedto accommodate an array of otherforest values that society has deemedimportant to perpetuate—waterquality, wildlife habitat, recreationalvalues and more. Most recently, thesehave included critical habitat forthreatened or endangered species,and the capacity for sequestering at-mospheric carbon to mitigate globalclimate change. Forest managementhas also been made more complex byan increasingly sophisticated under-standing of the ecological function-ing of forests, and the effects ofmanagement interventions in theseecosystems. A major challenge forforestry is to produce increasingly di-verse products and services from theforest, while reflecting a knowledgeand understanding of the natural lim-itations to do so in eternally sustainedways.

But to truly accomplish this in thecontext of land stewardship—thecareful husbanding of land and re-source assets so as to pass them alongto the next generation in as good orbetter condition than they were re-ceived—requires a different concept-ual framework. Much of the publicdebate during the past several decadesover forest management, and man-agement of the federal forests in par-ticular, has revolved around the“forest factory” analogy—politicallydetermining what mix of products thepublic wants from the factory, and op-erationally determining how to pro-duce that mix when there aretradeoffs or outright conflicts in theprocesses by which various factoryoutputs are produced (Sedjo, 1996).The development of linear program-

ming and other types of optimizationmodeling during the early 1970s,when traditional forestry approacheswere coming under unprecedentedlegal and political challenge, furtherenticed resource managers to believethat there was a rational analytic solu-tion to their problem. Operations re-search developed to optimize thecombination of petroleum productsmanufactured from a refinery (Dael-lenbach and George, 1978; Baumol,1977) was expected to tell resourcemanagers not only how to balance theproduction of ostensibly conflictingforest outputs, but how to do so in away that would maximize net publicbenefit (Bowes and Krutilla, 1989).

A better analogy to guide foreststewardship—building net asset valueover time and giving future genera-tions due consideration—may be thatof managing a perpetual trust. Afterall, the factory analogy assumes asteady depreciation of the factory it-self, such that its value at the end of itsproductive life is essentially zero. Atrust is a fiduciary relationship inwhich a trustee holds and managesproperty for the benefit of another(Strauss, 1998). In trusts, the purposeof this vehicle and its beneficiaries areclear, the trustee can be held ac-countable to legally well-defined stan-dards of prudence, and beneficiariesare able, and expected, to activelymonitor the actions of the trustee toprotect their interests. Most trusts in-volving the management of forests,such as state trust lands and privateconservation trusts are perpetual, i.e.,intended to produce benefits forever(Fairfax, 2000). The trustee of a per-petual trust may not favor any gener-ation of beneficiaries over any other.In a land management context, thisamounts to a legally enforceable com-mitment to sustainable forest man-agement (Souder, Fairfax and Ruth,1994) and a presumption that the“principal”—the asset value of theland and forest itself—is maintainedor enhanced over time.

CONCLUSION

Any political and institutionalframework that will allow the dimin-ishment of asset value that has takenplace on the National Forests over thepast half-century is a system that isbroken and needs to be fixed. Who toblame is irrelevant. Though it willnever be perfect, the underlying sys-tem can be made more immune tothe foibles of individual players ingovernment and the proclivities ofspecial interest groups that will alwayshave an inside track over average citi-zens.

As in any representative democra-cy, it is the duty of citizens to be vigi-lant, to ensure that their trustees aremanaging the assets of the NationalForests well. But transparency andmeaningful periodic reports from theForest Service on the state of the na-tion’s forests can foster an informed,involved citizenry—without theagency having to fritter away its re-sources on fruitless administrativeprocesses and endless legal challenges.

The body of law that has devel-oped around the enforceability of per-petual trusts, and the courts’interpretations of reasonable pru-dence on the part of trustees, couldbe a source of new insights into mod-els of governance for the NationalForests that are more open and trans-parent to the beneficiaries, and at thesame time, are more flexible and cost-efficient in enabling the trustees tofulfill the duties with which they havebeen charged.

REFERENCES

Baumol, W. 1977. Economic Theory andOperations Analysis. Englewood Cliffs,NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Binkley, C., Raper, C. and C. Washburn.1996. “Institutional Ownership of USTimberland.” Journal of Forestry94(9):21–28.


6


Last summer saw the mark of animportant event in the South,in particular, the state of Ten-

nessee. At that time, then GovernorDon Sundquist announced to a gath-ering of media, forestry, and repre-sentatives from environmental groupsthat the state had decided to certifyits forests. On the podium with theGovernor were representatives fromthe Tennessee Conservation League,the Forest Stewardship Council, andthe Pinchot Institute for Conserva-tion.

Principally under the guidance ofthen State Forester Ken Arney and hisstaff, this event was the culmination oftwo years of work with the TennesseeDivision of Forestry (TDF). As thefirst Southern state to be recommend-ed for certification (the North Caroli-na Division of Forest Resources wasthe first to become certified under SFIand FSC), this designation is seen asquite an accomplishment for a statein which, ironically, forestry issuesmostly dominate the legislative agen-da. In the last year, more bills onforestry were introduced in the Ten-nessee state legislature than in anyother state’s legislative body.Nonetheless, in the midst of vocifer-ous debates on forestry and bud-getary issues that have plagued allstates in recent years, TDF becamecertified.

SmartWood, a certifier for theForest Stewardship Council (FSC),conducted a preliminary assessment(or “scoping”) in the summer of2001, as part of the Pinchot Insti-tute’s “Dual Assessment” projects.Other project participants includedthe North Carolina Division of ForestResources, North Carolina State Uni-versity, Duke University, the MaineBureau of Parks and Lands, and theMarsh-Billing-Rockefeller National

Historical Park. Based upon Smart-Wood’s positive findings, the state un-derwent a full FSC assessment later inthe year and became eligible for certi-fication, providing that they meet 30conditions over the next few years. Inaddition to the FSC assessment, TDFalso underwent a Sustainable ForestryInitiative (SFI) “gap-analysis,” alsofunded through the Pinchot Institute.The auditor, PriceWaterhouseCoop-ers, recommended several changes inthe Division’s management systemnecessary to further develop their SFIprogram prior to becoming certifiedthrough this system.

Before the press conference, withproject partners gathered in his office,Tennessee Commissioner of Agricul-ture Dan Wheeler joked to Ken Arney(now with the Forest Service’s South-ern Research Station), that he had justread through the FSC conditions andfigured Ken would be getting somecalls during the year. It is no secretthat the conditions Tennessee is re-quired to meet will be difficult. AsGovernor Sundquist stated at thepress conference, those conditions areimportant measures that the Divisionshould strive to accomplish.

After a more than two-year col-

laboration with the Tennessee Divi-sion of Forestry, the Pinchot Insti-tute’s involvement in the state is justbeginning. Similar to the efforts ofthe Southern Center for SustainableForests following North Carolina’sdual assessments, we are focused onproviding outreach to other landown-ers. In this sense, our dual assessmentprojects are both a test of certificationand a tangible demonstration to therest of the state’s wood producers.The 156,000 acres managed by Ten-nessee’s forestry division are but adrop in the bucket for a state in whichthe vast majority of timberlands areprivately-owned—mostly by smallnon-industrial private landowners.Given this, the Institute’s challenge inTennessee will be to navigate thetechnical and political differencesamong the certification programs andeffectively draw on their strengths toconvince these landowners that certi-fication can be a powerful mechanismto reinforce and reward sustainableforestry management.

Some of the trends regarding thelong-term health of these privatelymanaged ecosystems are disturbing.By 2040, Tennessee is projected tolead all southeastern states theamount of hardwood harvests that ex-ceed growth. In fact, for the entireSouth, the extent of hardwood forestsis projected to shrink by 26% duringthis time period (Alig 2003). Thistrend is principally occurring onsmaller private forestlands, many ofwhich send their wood to chip mills.Some of these forestlands will becomeplanted pine, others will be convertedentirely to something else. Duringthis same period, the acreage of pineplanted on abandoned farmland, andsites where natural pine and hard-wood forests were harvested will in-crease by 62%. This projection is acontinuation of the trend seen over

7


Rocky Roads in the Rocky Top? Landowner Forest Certification

From left to right: former TennesseeGovernor Don Sundquist, Pinchot InstitutePresident Al Sample, and Marty Marina, for-mer Director of the Tennessee ConservationLeague.

the last 45 years, during which the ex-tent of pine plantations increasedfrom 2 to 30 million acres (Siry2002). So far it is doubtful that in-creased management intensity insome places has resulted in compen-satory habitat-creation in other areas(Conner and Hartzell 2002). The im-plication of declines in biological rich-ness and abundance are easier tounderstand. For example, the nation-al Breeding Bird Survey reported de-clining populations for 32.8% ofwoodland, and 53.5% of shrublandbird species between 1966 and 1996(Trani 2002).

It is for these reasons that the In-stitute has partnered with the Ten-nessee Conservation League (TCL)and, with generous support from theChattanooga-based Lyndhurst Foun-dation, to conduct an outreach cam-paign on certification throughoutTennessee. Last summer, Senior Fel-low Catherine Mater spanned pointsbetween Memphis and Knoxville onInterstate 40 encouraging representa-tives of the state’s forest products in-dustry to join the Tennessee ForestCertification Awareness Team(TFCAT). Members of this team willhelp to promote certification as avaluable tool for Tennessee woodgrowers and processors that also helpsto both slow these trends and sustainthe landowners’ forests.

Last August, the TCL and Pin-chot Institute held six meetings acrossthe state for land- and mill-owners,foresters, and others in the forest

products industry. Also present weremembers of environmental groups,academic institutions, and the forestryextension. The Tennessee Division ofForestry told of their experience withSFI and FSC certification. They alsodetailed the changes they need tomake as an organization to maintaintheir FSC-certified status, and thesteps needed to complete the SFI as-sessment process. SmartWood’sSoutheastern regional director de-scribed the FSC assessment process,including the nuts-and-bolts of groupcertification. Finally, representativesfrom PriceWaterhouseCoopers andMeadWestvaco discussed the require-ments and processes of becoming cer-tified under SFI and the advancesmade towards developing monitoringsystems for private landowners thatsupply SFI-certified companies. Theyalso described the potential role ofAmerican Tree Farm System, anothercertification program, in becoming avalued supply source. During thecourse of these sessions, the feasibili-ty of getting certified became clear tothe attendees. What’s more, many leftwith the assessor’s phone numbers intheir pockets. Similar to what the at-tendees learned, a full discussion ofthe systems, values and benefits tocertification will be discussed in thenext issue of this newsletter.

Based on our experiences over thepast few years of facilitating the adop-tion of certification on large tracts ofpublic lands, it is clear that certifica-tion improves management. The abil-ity of third-party auditing to distill

and integrate a range of forest man-agement values is ushering in a newera in forestry. However, thelandowner statistics in southernwoodbasket states—whose timberoutput and ecosystem fragmentationare simultaneously increasing—tell ofa daunting outreach challenge. De-spite valiant efforts, public forestry ex-tension agents have managed to reachonly a fraction of the landowners inmany states. The stewardship offorests in states, like Tennessee, maydepend on the success of certificationprograms to enroll these landowners.In light of this, the Pinchot Institutewill continue its certification outreachin Tennessee, as well as evaluate therigor and scope of the different certi-fication programs.

For more information, please con-tact Will Price at (202) 797-6578,[email protected] or CatherineMater at (541) 753-7335, [email protected].

REFERENCES

Alig, R.J.; D.M. McAdams; J.R. Mills;B.J. Butler; and R.J. Moulton. 2003.“Private Forest Management andInvestment in the U.S. South:Alternative Future Scenarios.” ForestPolicy for Private Forestry: Global andRegional Challenges. (eds. L. Teeter, B.Cashore, and D. Zhang). CABIPublishing, New York, NY.

Conner, R.C. and A.J. Hartzell. 2002.“Forest Area and Conditions.” SouthernForest Resource Assessment. (eds. D. N.Wear and J. G. Greis). USDA ForestService Southern Research Station.Asheville, NC. GTR-SRS 53.

Siry, J.P. 2002. “Intensive ManagementPractices.” Southern Forest ResourceAssessment. (eds. D.N. Wear and J.G.Greis). USDA Forest Service SouthernResearch Station. Asheville, NC. GTR-SRS 53.

Trani, M.C. 2002. “TerrestrialEcosystems.” Southern Forest ResourceAssessment. (eds. D.N. Wear and J.G.Greis). USDA Forest Service SouthernResearch Station. Asheville, NC. GTR-SRS 53.


8

Certified pencils produced by Musgrave Pencil Company for the Tennessee Forest CertificationAwareness Team (TFCAT).

Block, N. and V.A. Sample. 2001.Industrial Timberland Divestitures andInvestments: Opportunities andChallenges in Forestland Conservation(DP-09-01). Washington, DC: PinchotInstitute.

Bowes, Michael and John V. Krutilla.1989. Multiple-Use Management: TheEconomics of Public Forestlands.Washington, D.C.: Resources for theFuture.

Daily, G. 1997. Nature’s Services:Societal Dependence on NaturalEcosystems. Washington, DC: IslandPress.

Faustmann, M. 1848. “Calculation ofthe Value Which Forest Land andImmature Stands Possess for Forestry.”Allgemeine Forst – und Jagd-Zeitung,vol 15. Reprinted in the Journal ofForest Economics, 1(1), 1995.

Fairfax, S. 2000. “State Trust LandsManagement.” In: Sedjo, R. (ed.), AVision for the U.S. Forest Service: Goalsfor Its Next Century. Washington, DC:Resources for the Future.

Hardin, G. 1968. “The Tragedy of theCommons.” Science, 162(1968):1243–1248.

Sedjo, R. 2000. “Does the ForestService Have a Future? A Thought-Provoking View.” In: Sedjo, R. (ed.), AVision for the U.S. Forest Service: Goalsfor Its Next Century. Washington, DC:Resources for the Future.

Souder, J., Fairfax, S. and L. Ruth.1994. “Sustainable ResourcesManagement and State School Lands:The Quest for Guiding Principles.”Natural Resources Journal 34:271–304.

Strauss, S. 1998. Wills and Trusts. NewYork: W.W. Norton.

9


BECOME AN INNOVATOR FORFOREST STEWARDSHIP

Concerned about the changing global climate? Not sure if the naturalresources we enjoy today will be here tomorrow for future genera-tions? Dissatisfied with the quality of your water?

Not sure if you can make a difference? Well, you can. Make today yourfirst day as an innovator for forest stewardship by becoming a PinchotAssociate.

As a Pinchot Associate, you will join others across the nation whoinvest resources the Pinchot Institute needs to quickly, yet thought-fully, respond to natural resource issues before they become policiesthat ruin our environment, diminish our livelihood or destroy ourquality of life. The flexibility your unrestricted gift provides enables usto collaborate nationwide with all of America’s people—from rurallandowners to federal policymakers—to sustain natural resources andbuild economic capacity through educational programs, research onforest-management policies, and technical assistance for on-the-groundprojects.

As a natural resource steward, becoming a Pinchot Associate willenable you to feel good about protecting our environment while help-ing others. For your gift of $100 or more, we will:

F Keep you informed of timely natural resource issues through ThePinchot Letter;

F Send you advanced notification of our workshops, seminars, confer-ences, and newly released publications;

F Give you special recognition in our newsletter and annual report;

F Send you invitations to special events we host in your community,Washington, DC, and at Grey Towers so you can see for yourselfhow you are helping to advance forest conservation.

Your gift can be made to the Pinchot Institute through the CombinedFederal Campaign or by returning the enclosed envelope. For informa-tion on additional tax-advantaged ways to become an innovative con-servationist and follow in Gifford Pinchot’s footsteps, please contactKendra Miller at (202) 797-6580 or [email protected].

Pinchot Institute for Conservation is a member of the Conservationand Preservation Charities of America. Check your guide for our list-ing and charity number under this federation.

(continued from page 6)

Improving community-based for-est stewardship depends uponstrengthening local-level institu-

tional capacity to carry out the manydifferent kinds of activities involved inresponsible ecosystem management.In many areas of the National ForestSystem, the steady decline in timbersales over the past decade has beenparalleled by a decline in local capaci-ty to perform important land stew-ardship functions (i.e., roadrehabilitation or stream improve-ments) that had once been bundledinto timber sale contracts. Today, thegrowing needs in ecosystem restora-tion, whether for watershed protec-tion or hazardous fuels reduction, isresulting in an increased need forcommunity-based firms with the ex-perience and expertise to carry outthis work.

How is the Forest Service facili-tating institutional capacity-buildingin local communities? Are there waysto improve upon this? In the past, theForest Service had a well-developedsystem for estimating local employ-ment derived from timber harvesting,yet the agency does not yet have a sys-tematic way of determining the effectsof ecosystem restoration and landstewardship projects on local incomeand employment. As a result, it isnearly impossible to determine whoreceives the primary and secondarysocial and economic benefits of itscontract programs, limiting the ForestService’s ability to effectively con-tribute to the well-being of the ruralcommunities in which its customerslive and do business.

The Pinchot Institute for Conser-vation, in cooperation with the ForestService’s Southern Research Station,Mater Engineering, Ltd., and theUniversity of Oregon’s EcosystemWorkforce Program, is conducing a

study of the economic benefits com-munities derived from land manage-ment contracts and timber sales on sixNational Forests: the Coconino (AZ),Deschutes (OR), Willamette (OR),Arapaho-Roosevelt (CO), Bitterroot(MT), and Nantahala (NC) NationalForests. This project will address threeimportant questions regarding collab-orative community-based stewardshipon these forests over the past fiveyears:

F Who buys the timber; who getsthe service contracts; who doesthe work; where are theylocated, and how diverse is thecontractor base?

F How big are the contracts; whatare their management objectives;what size and type of materialsare offered, and how regularly iseach type offered?

F What is the variation in contractand resource offerings within aforest landscape over time? Howdoes this variation affectcontractor and productioninfrastructure in ruralcommunities?

Overall, the end-result will be anincreased understanding of how wecan best improve the symbiosis be-tween forest management and com-munity prosperity by developing abetter understanding of the contribu-tions land stewardship projects maketo local income and employment. Wecan also determine what factors havethe greatest influence on how wellthese activities contribute to long-term capacity building at the locallevel, and testing how communities inother areas might use these results toperiodically evaluate the effects ofland stewardship activities on theirlocal economy.

Generous support for this projectcomes from the Ford Foundation, theNational Forest Foundation, and theUSDA Forest Service. For more in-formation, please contact PeterKostishack at (202) 797-6580 or [email protected].


10

Community Benefits from National Forest Management Activities

In 1890, after a year of studyingforestry in Europe, Gifford Pin-chot returned to an American

landscape that was rapidly being ex-ploited for timber, in which federalpublic land laws were liberal, and gov-ernment forestland was being sold totimber and mining companies for aslittle as ten cents an acre.1 At the time,government timber could either havebeen given away or sold with the land,but could not be sold apart from theland, leading to widespread theft ofthe resource.

The frontier perception of over-abundant resources, enabled by a vir-tual absence of governance, createdan atmosphere in which there was noincentive to practice forestry or sus-tainable natural resource manage-ment. The following year, however,Congress passed the Noble-BowersAmendment, authorizing the forma-tion of Forest Reserves. While itwould take another six years beforethe Pettigrew Amendment definedthe purpose of these reserves—“toimprove and protest the forest, to se-cure favorable waterflow, and to fur-nish continuous supplies of timber tothe public”—this legislation repre-sented an important shift in how thenation thought about public forestsand enabled the establishment of asystem for ensuring that the benefitsfrom those resources accrued to thepublic good.

Forest Reserves, which later be-came know as National Forests, andthe agency responsible for them, theUSDA Forest Service, are examples ofinstitutions for common propertymanagement. Their structure and therules that govern them have been cre-ated and continue to adapt, based

upon a political discourse that centerson the role that government shouldplay in managing public resources.Management issues, ranging fromtimber harvesting, to ecosystem man-agement, to a growing trend towardcommunity-based forestry, are allrooted in fundamental questions ofhow society develops robust institu-tions to ensure the protection of peo-ples’ rights to benefit from publicgoods.

While there are many benefits ofpublic forests—clean air, drinkingwater, biodiversity, recreation, carbonsequestration—that are appreciatedby everyone, other benefits, not tomention costs, associated with publicforests are borne to a much greaterdegree by the communities that live intheir proximity (i.e., jobs and eco-nomic outputs on the benefits side,and a diminished tax base and fire riskon the cost side). Thus, an ongoingchallenge for our public land man-agement institutions is to find a bal-ance between providing greater localcontrol over forest management with-out relinquishing the greater public’spower to affect decisions about re-sources that belong to all Americans.

Although there is a tendency toconsider the discourse on public for-est management in terms of a pendu-lum that swings from one pole toanother (protection vs. extraction,federal vs. local), the reality is muchmore complicated, owing in large partto a unique set of attributes of com-mon property resources and the com-plex ways in which society makesmanagement decisions about sharedresources. A growing body of theoryon common property managementprovides some framework for think-

ing about the appropriate roles of in-stitutions managing public forests andthe characteristics of those that areable to conserve resources in whichall have some stake.

While the traditional concept ofcommon property predicts a “tragedyof commons” scenario, in which mul-tiple users with free access will in-evitably over-harvest a resource untilit is exhausted2, a new body of empir-ical common property research revealsthat users tend to self-organize andestablish rules about use that protectresources from over-depletion3.Under this growing consensus, over-exploitation of resources is thought tobe symptomatic of the absence orbreakdown of resource managementinstitutions.

Studies of the attributes of com-mon property management institu-tions, primarily in developingcountries, have identified a set of char-acteristics found in robust, self-gov-erning, natural resource managementsystems, which are summarized by Os-trom, 19994. These characteristics in-clude that: a) there is clear definitionof the boundaries of the resource andthe rules that govern who has rights touse it; b) the rules of governance areperceived as fair by the users; c) thoseaffected by the rules can participatemeaningfully in their modification; d)there is a system for monitoring theuse of the resources that is account-able to the users; e) those who violaterules are sanctioned; f) there aremechanisms in place for conflict reso-lution; g) government authorities rec-ognize this organization; and h) thereare nested layers of institutions, whichcan deal with the externalities of use atappropriate scales.

11


The Forest Service and Community Organizations:New Roles for Public Land InstitutionsPeter KostishackResearch AssociatePinchot Institute for Conservation

These characteristics of self-gov-erning, common property institutionsmay be useful to the Forest Service inbroadening its own institutionalstrategies for achieving forest conser-vation. They suggest that there is animportant responsibility for the agencyto build the capacity of local manage-ment institutions, as well as to providea larger institutional matrix that canproperly account for the broader ex-ternalities that stem from the manage-ment decisions of these institutions.

A growing trend in community-based natural resource management,or community forestry, has given theForest Service a real opportunity toadapt its structure and operations toput more power over forest steward-ship into the hands of communities.The relevant questions that areemerging from this trend are: dothose communities have the necessaryinstitutional capacity to be good stew-ards of the resources, and what broad-er institutional structure can ensurethat community needs remain incheck with societal demands on apublic resource? Although the ForestService has done much to establish itsrole as a promoter of community-based forestry, greater investment isstill needed in the following areas.

First, the Forest Service mustconstantly work to involve the publicmore meaningfully in the develop-ment and modification of the rulesthat govern forest use. This requiresthe agency to serve as a convener andfacilitator of public decision-makingabout forestlands. Forest rangers andsupervisors who actively engage thepublic under a collaborative steward-ship approach have already madegreat strides in this direction, but inmany parts of the agency, this ismore rhetoric than practice.5 A fur-ther dimension to this responsibilityis to provide effective systems forconflict resolution that can be usedwhen disputes arise between interestgroups at various scales of forestmanagement.

Second, the Forest Service can domore to invest in institutional changeand development at local levels. Somecommunities have a wealth of priorexperience with organizing and canquickly become engaged in forestmanagement when given the oppor-tunity. Others have more trouble or-ganizing, either because popularengagement in resource managementhas been suppressed in the past or be-cause top-down models or powerfulsingle interests have dominated localorganization. Despite numerous ex-amples of effective watershed organi-zations and Resource Conservationand Development districts, not allcommunities have equal ability to cre-ate effective resource management in-stitutions.

Communities of place tend to beheterogeneous, power is not sharedequally between members, and theirboundaries, which change over time,are rarely clearly defined. All of thesefactors can increase the costs of creat-ing or altering local management in-stitutions. Programs that support theformation and development of localorganization, provide technical and fi-nancial assistance to decrease suchcosts, and facilitate exchange betweencommunity organizations enable themto share methods and collaborate oncommon issues that help build com-munities’ capacity to effectively engagein natural resource management.

Third, the Forest Service’s wealthof methodology and knowledgeabout ecosystem science can con-tribute to developing systems of mon-itoring that are inclusive of thosedependent on the forest, and whichuse recognizable indicators to mea-sure change. The complexity of forestecosystems means that it is not alwayseasy to understand the full environ-mental or societal costs of manage-ment activities. In the case ofcommon property resources, not onlydo users need to be able to measureimpacts, they also need to understandhow those impacts affect resources

and values both within and outside ofthe management boundaries. Publicland management institutions thusplay a critical role in defining resourcesystems and facilitating a shared visionof those systems that enable the pub-lic to: a) monitor its use of resourcesand b) adapt its use when systems arethreatened.

Fourth, the Forest Service mustalso provide the macro-institutionalframework that legitimizes the in-volvement of communities in forestmanagement, and simultaneouslysupplies an effective forum for ad-dressing conflict between values atlocal, regional, and national levels.Research has shown that when therights of a group to design its own re-source management rules are recog-nized by government authorities, theyare less frequently challenged incourts or in administrative or legisla-tive settings.4 Local autonomy canbest be preserved if it is nested withindifferent levels of organization thatenable larger problems to be ad-dressed at institutional levels of theappropriate scale. Partnerships may beimportant administrative tools for es-tablishing those relationships betweendifferent institutional levels. The For-est Service should draw upon its al-ready tiered organizational structureand invest in building institutional re-lationships that will serve to work outproblems collaboratively with stake-holders, at a scale that is appropriateto the issue.

In the final chapter of BreakingNew Ground, Gifford Pinchot out-lines three great purposes of conser-vation policy:

First: wisely to use, protect,preserve, and renew the naturalresources of the earth. Second:to control the use of the natur-al resources and their productsin the common interest, and tosecure their distribution to thepeople at fair and reasonablecharges for goods and services.


12

Third: to see to it that therights of the people to governthemselves shall not be con-trolled by great monopoliesthrough their power over nat-ural resources.6

Pinchot saw that federal controlof forested land was an approach tocurbing powerful monopolies thatsought power over the supply, prices,and benefits of natural resources atthe expense of the greater publicgood.7 Throughout the UnitedStates, the public—starting at thecommunity level—has also made im-portant strides in developing robustinstitutions for the management ofcommon forests that, in their ownway, are preventing forest resourcesfrom being eroded by what Pinchotcalled “concentrated wealth.” Fromthat perspective, it is clear that theconservation goals of the Forest Ser-

vice and local forest management in-stitutions compliment one another.

The growing momentum in com-munity forestry does not detract fromthe purpose of the Forest Service, butinstead introduces a new set of re-sponsibilities for the agency. As withall institutional change, there are costsassociated with making that change,but by finding ways to support andlegitimize local authority in forestmanagement, the agency will benefitthrough the existence of a powerfulnetwork of conservation allies.

REFERENCES

1. Pinchot, Gifford. 1947. BreakingNew Ground. Harcourt, Brace, and Co.New York.

2. Garrett Hardin. 1968. “The Tragedyof the Commons,” Science,162:1243–1248.

3. Ostrom, Elinor. 1999. Governing theCommons: The Evolutions of Institutionsfor Collective Action. CambridgeUniversity Press, New York.

4. Ostrom, Elinor. 1990. Self-Governance and Forest Resources. Centerfor International Forestry ResearchOccasional Paper No. 20.

5. Pinchot Institute for Conservation.2002. Report to the USDA Forest Serviceon Phase I of the PartnershipDevelopment Program.

6. Pinchot, Gifford. 1947. BreakingNew Ground. Harcourt, Brace, and Co.New York.

7. Miller, Char. 2001. Gifford Pinchotand the Making of ModernEnvironmentalism. Island Press.Washington, DC. pp. 333–34.

13


YOUR PARTNERSHIP TO ENSURE THE FUTURE

The climate has not changed much since last year. Nonprofit organizations across the country are still facing newchallenges in the current economy. The recession had a major impact on philanthropic foundations that provide muchof the support for the nonprofit sector. Furthermore, public support for nonprofit organizations is still at an all-timelow as our nation is at war with Iraq. As a result, our country is still experiencing a decline in tax revenues, corporateprofits, and deficits in federal and state budgets.

The Pinchot Institute for Conservation is not immune to these economic trends. During the past several years,the Institute’s board and staff have built a Working Capital Fund for unrestricted/general operating support. Fur-thermore, we established the Pinchot Legacy Fund in 2001 as an endowment to help ensure the Institute’s long-termfinancial health and well-being. Such support is essential to our steadily providing timely research and policy analy-sis on key natural resource conservation issues as they arise. And in times such as these, the Working Capital Fundand Pinchot Legacy Fund become essential to continuing, without interruption, the kinds of innovative, quality pro-grams for which the Institute has become known.

By far, the most important source of such support is unrestricted contributions from people like you. Throughour annual campaign, donations via the Combined Federal Campaign, matching employer contributions, credit cardcontributions made through a secured server on our website, and a number of innovative planned giving opportu-nities, those of you committed to conservation are helping to ensure that we continue to play a leading role in thistask of discovering new and creative solutions to the challenges of sound natural resource management.

Now more than ever, we need your support. If you have already contributed, especially as a Pinchot Associateand/or major donor, we gratefully acknowledge your contribution and the continued vitality it brings. If you havenot yet contributed, please consider doing so now, when it is most important to our having a lasting, positive impacton the future of conservation.

For more information on the different ways you can donate to the Pinchot Institute, please contact KendraMiller at (202) 797-6580, [email protected] or visit our website at www.pinchot.org.

Senior Fellow Dr. Char Miller re-ceived the 2002 National Out-door Book Award in the

History/Biography category for hisbrilliant biography on Gifford Pin-chot titled, Gifford Pinchot and theMaking of Modern Environmentalism(Island Press/Shearwater Books,2001).

The award, the most prestigioushonor for authors and publishers ofoutdoor books, was presented toMiller at a special evening ceremonyat the International Conference onOutdoor Recreation and Educationheld in Charleston, SC late last year.

In this excellent biography, Millerilluminates Gifford Pinchot’s extraor-dinary life while chronicling the his-torical development of theEnvironmental and Conservationmovements. The book is framed insuch a way that one can understandthe important evolution in his think-ing about conservation and the envi-ronment, his intense commitment tosocial justice, and his conviction thatonly through world-wide conserva-tion global peace be reached.

“This biography was designed tolocate Pinchot within his family’s longand remarkable past, to suggest thathe came from a tradition of public ser-vice, and had a deep fascination withpolitics,” said Miller. “Those princi-ples are why he is as much a man ofhis time as he is of ours.”

Gifford Pinchot’s influence is feltto this day on the policies that guidethe management of lands used bymodern day Americans for hiking,fishing, biking, and other forms ofoutdoor recreation. Now celebratingits 40th anniversary since its dedica-

tion by former President John F.Kennedy, Jr. at Grey Towers Nation-al Historic Landmark, Pinchot’s in-fluence is also the guidance for thePinchot Institute for Conservation’sinitiatives to conserve forests andother natural resources.

The book has also won threeother awards in the past year: the2002 Independent Publishers Associ-ation Biography Prize; ForeWordMagazine’s Gold Award for Biogra-phy; and the 2002 Connecticut BookAward for Biography.

So what will Miller do now that hisbook has won so much acclaim? “Well,I'd love to say I am lounging on atropical beach somewhere,” saysMiller, “but in truth I am having ablast teaching a range of classes at Trin-ity University, and working on a num-ber of new projects. So, I'm busyinstead of lingering over a glorioussunset.”

Char Miller was appointed as a se-nior fellow to the Pinchot Institute in1989. He is also a history professor atTrinity University (San Antonio, TX),where he teaches a range of classesfrom U.S., African American, andAmerican environmental history. Cur-rently, he is working on several newprojects, including “EnvironmentalAtlas of the United States and Cana-da” (Routledge), for which he is theeditor-in-chief, and two collections ofhis own essays—“Urban Sprawl: Landand Life in San Antonio” and“Counting the Rings: Essays onForests and Conservation.” For moreinformation on Char, his awards or tobook a speaking engagement, pleasecontact Taryn Roeder his Island Presspublicist, at (202) 232-7933, ext. 20,or [email protected].

NEW PUBLICATIONSThe Pinchot Institute is pleased to announcethe following new publications, produced in2002, that are available for distribution:

POLICY REPORTS

F Certification Assessments on Public &University Lands: A Field-based,Comparative Evaluation of the ForestStewardship Council (FSC) and theSustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI), byCatherine M. Mater, V. Alaric Sample,and Will Price

F Introduction to the National Fire Plan:History, Structure & Relevance toCommunities, by Peter Kostishack &Naureen Rana

DISCUSSION PAPERS

F Building an Ecosystem RestorationWorkforce: Report from a NationalPolicy Discussion, by Peter Kostishack

F Strengthening the Ties that Bind, byAndrea Bedell Loucks

F Farm Bill 2002 Forum: Review andDiscussion of Forestry Opportunities, byStephanie Kavanaugh, Nadine Block,and Naureen Rana

F Plantations & Protected Areas:Considering a Policy Framework,Symposium Proceedings

F Crosswalks: Linkages Between theIPF/IFF Proposals for Action & TheMontreal Process Criteria andIndicators, by Nadine Block

PINCHOT DISTINGUISHEDLECTURE SERIES

F Forestry & Modern Environmentalism:Ending the Cold War, by PatriciaNelson Limerick

BOOKS

F Gifford Pinchot and the Making ofModern Environmentalism, by CharMiller ($25.00)

With the exception of publications in whicha price is noted, single copies of any publica-tion will be sent FREE of charge. Multiplecopies of free publications are available at thecost of shipping/handling. Requests can bemade by mailing a Publications Request form(found on our website at www.pinchot.org)along with a check/money order (madepayable to “Pinchot Institute”) to: PinchotInstitute for Conservation, 1616 P Street,NW, Suite 100, Washington, DC 20036.Requests that do not require payment can beemailed to [email protected] or sentvia fax at (202) 797-6583.


14

Yet Another Prestigious Award

In 1986, the Pinchot Institute forConservation inaugurated its an-nual Pinchot Distinguished Lecture

series to introduce new thinking tothe public about the history and com-plexity of forest conservation. Sincethen, the lectures have covered suchtopics from the need for vision inforestry to the history and future ofthe National Forest System—issues allfrom a domestic standpoint.

On February 21, 2003, the Insti-tute hosted Professor Dr. FranzSchmithüsen, of Zurich’s Swiss Fed-eral Institute of Technology, at its firstdistinguished lecture to cover globalissues. Dr. Schmithüsen’s one-houraddress, “The Global Revolution inSustainable Forest Policy: A EuropeanPerspective,” compared and contrast-ed American and European forestpolicy development through the lensof common interests in sustainableforest management.

As evidenced by last summer’sWorld Summit on Sustainable Devel-opment (Johannesburg, SouthAfrica), there has been an increasedlevel of scrutiny on forestry policiesand management in the UnitedStates, especially as it relates to globalintegration. More than a century ago,American and European forestry di-verged when Gifford Pinchot andothers adapted what they learnedfrom their training in Europe to theunique circumstances of Americanforests. Now, with the advancementof global policies for sustainable forestmanagement, such practices are re-converging.

In his lecture, which was well re-ceived by more than 100 of the Pin-chot Institute’s guests at Washington,DC’s prestigious Cosmos Club, Dr.Schmithüsen discussed the majorchallenges in the development of

American and European forest policy.Such challenges include developingconsistent approaches and solutionsto structure adaptive policy and legalframeworks; ways to redefine the rolesof the private and public sectors; howto find equitable and effective bal-ances between the benefits and re-sponsibilities of stakeholders; thechanging role of government from in-tervention to participation; and jointresponsibilities to ensure sustainableeconomic and social development inrural and urban areas that safeguardthe environment and protect flora,

fauna and our cultural heritage. ThePinchot Institute will publish and dis-tribute the transcription from this lec-ture by summer 2003. After thelecture, Dr. Schmithüsen had an op-portunity to visit the birthplace of theAmerican Conservation Movement(Grey Towers National HistoricLandmark in Milford, PA), with long-time colleague, Dr. Dennis LeMaster,now a Pinchot Institute senior fellow

after two-terms of service on theboard of directors.

A native of Oberkassel, Germany,Dr. Schmithüsen is professor andchair of Forest Policy and ForestEconomy at the Swiss Federal Insti-tute of Technology in Zurich,Switzerland (ETH Zurich), an inter-nationally renowned scientific andtechnical university, where he also re-ceived his doctorate in forestry sci-ences. Having worked for severalinternational agencies—in particularthe Food and Agriculture Organiza-tion of the United Nations (FAO)and the World Bank—his assignmentshave encompassed work in forest de-velopment and education in over 20countries in Africa, Asia and LatinAmerica.

Dr. Schmithüsen’s research is fo-cused on policy conditions for sus-tainable forest management,developments in forest law and publicadministrations, private utilizationrights, and combined resource man-agement systems as they relate to stateand communal forestlands. Currently,he serves as co-chairman of the Re-search Group on Forest Law and En-vironmental Legislation for theInternational Union of Forestry Re-search Organizations (IUFRO).

15


2003 Pinchot Distinguished Lecture on Global Issues in Sustainable Forestry

Dennis LeMaster and Franz Schmithüsen atGrey Towers.

Art has the power to enrich thesoul and capture the heart. Ithas also been proven to stim-

ulate one’s mind in new and differentways. For these reasons, the PinchotInstitute has inaugurated Conserva-tion and the Arts, a new program atGrey Towers National Historic Land-mark, its Milford, Pennsylvania home.The program intends to explore themany connections between natureand art, and the ways in which the artscan help people more fully under-stand why nature should be protect-ed.

There are many examplesthroughout history that demonstratethis linkage: paintings, photographs,sculptures, music, poems and essayshave awakened and sensitized peopleto the value of nature, even stimulat-ing a protective response to its de-struction. This is exactly whathappened to Gifford Pinchot’s father,James, a New York businessman whoreturned to his hometown of Milfordin 1884 to build Grey Towers. An ar-tistically sensitive man, James Pinchotwas a friend and patron of HudsonRiver School painters who also col-lected their paintings.

Around the middle of the 19thcentury, Hudson River painters beganto see nature in a new way. They be-lieved it was their sacred obligation tocapture, on canvas, the extraordinarybeauty of the American landscape be-fore the advance of civilization de-stroyed it altogether. As credited byGifford, his father James Pinchot wasone of the first men in America totranslate this artistic insight into a sci-entific understanding of the problemof natural resource depletion, whichthus influenced his son to embarkupon a career in forestry, and subse-quently, pave the way towards theAmerican Conservation Movement.

Similarly, during the 1960’s and70’s, when Ansel Adams’ and ElliottPorter’s photos opened the eyes of anew generation of nature lovers, theseartistic insights, once again, propelledAmericans into the environmentalmovement, essentially a second con-servation revolution. This time, thefocus was on air and water pollution,old growth preservation and the per-ils of species extinction.

We are now at a new juncture inour understanding of conservation.The old ways of conservation seem

less effective than they were, and is-sues such as global warming and theloss of nature (on a global scale) seemeven larger and more daunting. Asthe third revolution in conservationthought unfolds around us, it is fairlycertain that, as in the past, people willlook to the arts to offer a new and en-larged concept of nature that will helpus preserve and conserve our remain-ing natural resources. In deference tohistorical trends, the Conservationand the Arts program believes in thepower of art to help take us to thatnext level.


16

The Arts Connection: Conservation and the Arts

Asher B. Durand (1796–1886), “Kindred Spirits” (1849). Courtesy New York Public Library.

CHAMBER MUSICAT GREY TOWERS

Since chamber music symbolizesthe open and sensitive dialogue thatwe hope to make the hallmark of dis-cussions on conservation at GreyTowers, Conservation and the Artswas launched last summer with achamber music series with a full sea-son of 14 concerts presented withinseven months. Aptly titled the Kin-dred Spirits Chamber Music Series,the series evokes the Asher B. Durandpainting of the same name as ourguiding spirit.

Considered most emblematic ofall the Hudson River paintings, thepowerful link between humans, art,and nature is strongly conveyed. De-picted are two figures standing on apromontory over the stream—Thomas Cole, originator of the Hud-son River School, and William CullenBryant, an artist/poet whose elo-quent descriptions of America’s nat-ural beauty helped to define a newkind of nature—one that no longerneeded to be seen as terrifying or asan enemy to be vanquished (a modelthat served us well in the wildernessyears of a young America), but insteadas a visually inspiring, spiritually re-freshing entity that is increasinglyworth protecting.

One of the high points of thechamber music season was the VegaString Quartet’s sensitive rendering ofa piece by Anton Webern, whichbegan with an evocative descriptionby the violist of those strange scratch-ings and odd harmonies often alien toour ears. “Most music,” she said, “isfor our emotions. Webern is music forour imagination. Imagine that it isnighttime, and that we step outsideGrey Towers to the natural world. Wehear a bird call like a stone falling outof the sky. The wind shakes a treebranch, startling a small frog thatjumps into the moat with a splash.”In a quiet voice sparkling with gentlehumor, she described each sound that

was carved out of the black night.Then they played the Webern to apreternaturally quiet audience.

Through the Vega String Quartetand other Kindred Spirits concerts,one’s visceral perceptions of nature,when layered and textured with theevocative properties of music, createsa new sensitivity for the audience,both to the music and to the naturalworld around us. This is the kind ofexperience we want to continue tocreate, not just in music, but also indance, sculpture, poetry, writing, andthrough conversations on the con-nection between the two.

WHAT’S NEXT?

Conservation and the Arts is stillin its infancy. As such, we are just be-ginning to look closely at the role thearts play in linking humans to nature.Evidence shows that this is a primarylinkage, which seems to go back be-fore the beginnings of recorded his-tory. Therefore, examining thatlinkage is the crux of the program. Tothat end, we are planning a series ofseminars and conferences that willbring together artists, intellectuals,environmentalists, and policymakersto expose the underlying assumptionsabout the role of art in our basic un-derstanding of nature.

In addition to these kinds of con-versations, we intend to commissionnature-based art—an art form that,though seemingly grows up unbiddenout of the landscape yet is part of na-ture and distinctly art. This kind ofartwork on the grounds of Grey Tow-ers will serve as visual evidence thatthere is an interface between natureand art, which the program fully in-tends to explore through the lectureseries. It was exciting to discover thatexperts within the USDA Forest Ser-vice, National Endowment for theArts, and the National Endowmentfor the Humanities have also begunto examine similar questions that con-cern the Conservation and the Arts

program. We intend to work closelywith these federal agencies in ourshared goal of stimulating new dia-logue about art and nature.

Eventually, we hope to have artist-and scholar-in-residence programs atGrey Towers, inviting people to spendup to four weeks examining and writ-ing about a particular facet of arts andconservation or creating a work of art,such as outdoor sculpture, photogra-phy, painting, poetry, music or fictionthat advances the concept of art in na-ture.

Last, but certainly not least, theKindred Spirits Chamber Music Se-ries will continue to bring some ofNew York city’s finest musicians toperform at Grey Towers. Furtherdown the line, we also plan to com-mission a new musical work that willexemplify the role of nature in orga-nizing the sounds that we call music.

Through these means, we hope tocapture the imagination of you, ourreaders, and America’s other naturelovers, land managers, and policy-makers, thus helping them find newand innovative ways of using an alter-nate medium to address the compli-cated environmental issues of today.For more information on this pro-gram and its initiatives, please contactDirector Nancy Pinchot at (570)296-9630 or [email protected].

17



18

UPCOMING EVENTS

Activities at Grey Towers National Historic Landmark, Milford, PAUnless noted otherwise, please call (570) 296-9630 for more information.

April 26 & 27, 1 and 3 p.m.House tours and self-guided Tree andForestry trail hikes in conjunction withMilford’s Pear Blossom Festival.

May 3Children’s hands-on planting programwith Grey Towers HorticulturistElizabeth Belcher. Pre-registrationrequired; group size limited. Please call(570) 296-9661 before April 26.

May 10, 7-10 a.m.International Migratory Bird Walkwith the Gifford Pinchot AudubonSociety. Please call (570) 296-2244between 7-8 p.m. for more informa-tion.

May 17-18, 1 and 3 p.m.House tours in conjunction with theMilford Jazz Festival.

May 24, 10 a.m.-4 p.m.Regular house tour schedule resumesevery hour on the hour, 7 days/week.

May 30-31, 7 p.m.Music at Grey Towers program withMilford resident Yosif Feigelson. Fortickets or more information, pleasephone (570) 296-2877.

May 31, 5:30–7 p.m.Major Donor Recognition Event before

the Music at Grey Towers program.

June 7, 7 p.m.Just Fishing Talk with Grey TowersMuseum Specialist Rebecca Philpot.

June 14Flag Day Demonstrations by the LostArt Lacers.

June 20-21, 7 p.m.Music at Grey Towers’ Summer Solsticeconcert. For tickets or more informa-tion, please phone (570) 296-2877.

July 4-5, 7 p.m.Music at Grey Towers’ IndependenceDay folk concert. For tickets or moreinformation, please phone (570) 296-2877.

July 11, 18, 25, 10 a.m.Reading Ranger program for childrenages 4-8. Group size is limited soplease pre-register. Registration andmore information through the PikeCounty Library, (570) 296-8211.Parents are encouraged to stay!

June 19 & 20, July 17 & 31,August 28, 10 a.m.-2 p.m.“Come Paint With Me” with regionalartists who use the landscape as theirinspirational background to createunique works. Please call (570) 775-

6896 for more information.

Aug. 11, 10 a.m.-4 p.m.Gifford Pinchot’s Birthday! Celebrateby hiking our Forestry Trail and freehouse tours every hour on the hour.

August 15-16, 7 p.m.Music at Grey Towers’ chamber musicconcert. For tickets or more informa-tion, please phone (570) 296-2877.

August 23, 7 p.m.Eleanor Roosevelt, a special presentationin honor of Federal Women’s Day byhistorian Peter Osborne of theMinisink Valley Historical Society.

September 19, 7 p.m.Presentation on hawks by ForestService employee and avid birder JimLockyer.

September 20, 9 a.m.Gifford Pinchot Audubon Society leadsa Hawk Watch. Meet at Grey Towersto carpool to nearby site. Please call(570) 296-2244 between 7-8 p.m. formore information.

September 27Children’s hike and concert

The Pinchot Institute is pleasedto welcome the followingmembers to its Board of Di-

rectors: Mr. J. Robert Hicks, Jr., Di-rector of Development at RichmondGoodwill Industries, Inc. (Richmond,VA); Ms. Lori P. Knowles, LL.B,B.C.L., L.L.M, Associate for Law &Bioethics and Director of Educationand Outreach at The Hastings Center(Garrison, NY); Ms. Mary D.

Nichols, Secretary, California Re-sources Agency (Sacramento, CA);and Dr. Charles E. Owubah, Moni-toring and Evaluation Specialist,World Vision, Inc. (Washington,D.C.). We also congratulate a newlytenured and long-time board mem-ber, Dr. Dennis C. LeMaster, on hisappointment as Senior Fellow to thePinchot Institute for Conservation.Additionally, we extend a farewell to

Mr. John Henshaw, the Institute’slong-standing administrative liaisonfrom the USDA Forest Service’s Pol-icy Analysis staff (Washington office),as well as heartfelt congratulations onhis appointment as the agency’s For-est Legacy Program Manager (Re-gions 5, 6 and 10) for State andPrivate Forestry (Vallejo, CA office).

Passages

VOLUNTEERS HELPING SPRINGGARDENS GROW

Grey Towers’ Volunteer Horticul-ture Team, comprised of individualsfrom the community, will once againassist the Forest Service staff thisspring with some projects around theestate, which include:

Harvesting the thousands of daf-fodils, tulips, crocus and other springblooms found along the estate’s en-tryway. These flowers will be pressedinto bookmarks that will be sold inthe Grey Towers gift shop and onlineat www.pinchot.org.

Volunteers will also create newplant beds across the estate and en-large the existing ones adjacent to itsnewly renovated farmhouse (Pleasesee the Fall 2002 issue of this newslet-ter, vol. 7, no. 2, for more informa-tion on the renovation.) These bedswill include perennials transplantedfrom elsewhere on the estate groundsand some interesting shade-tolerantand deer-resistant ferns.

As usual, volunteers will continu-ally plant seasonal containersthroughout spring, summer and fall.

CONSTRUCTION UPDATES

THE LETTERBOX: Renovation ofThe Letter Box—the unique out-building, now a Save America’s Trea-sures project discussed in each issue ofThe Pinchot Letter in 2002, whichonce was Gifford Pinchot’s office andarchives—is moving forward with ananticipated completion date of earlyJuly. When completed, the buildingwill serve as an education and researchcenter on forest conservation in thetri-state area.

Recently, contractors removed

two layers of old flooring to exposethe original brick and bluestone floorand, over the next few months, willinstall the new HVAC system. Sneakpreview: look for the built-in red oakbenches, Gifford Pinchot’s canoe and,in spring, a unique way to recognizemajor donors to The Letter Box.

PHASE IV, VISITOR SERVICES: Thefourth phase of the Grey Towers ren-ovation includes a new Visitor Re-ception Pavilion, enhancedpedestrian walkways, improvementsto the entry driveway, and a largerparking lot to ensure visitor’s safetyand address security requirements forfederal facilities.

The Commonwealth of Pennsyl-vania—in recognition of Grey Towers’significance to the history of the state,the American Conservation Move-ment, and given the site’s role as animportant economic asset—has con-tributed $2 million toward the pro-ject. The project should go to bid by

April and groundbreaking will hope-fully take place early this summer. Ef-forts are underway to provide signageand educational exhibits that will in-form the visitor about the project.

STAFF NEWS

Though the faces may be thesame, the duties and responsibilitieshave grown for several Forest Serviceemployees at Grey Towers. The fol-lowing changes were made to helpGrey Towers continue its shift to“post-renovation” operations, to ac-commodate expanded programs, andthe growing demand for services.Debra Croston, Information Tech-nology Specialist now focused ontelecommunications and systems sup-port; Ellen Geis, Assistant Directorfor Administration, responsible forgrants and agreements, budget, con-tracting, administration; Joy Tormos,Administrative Operations Assistantfocused on administrative and pro-curement; Rebecca Philpot, Muse-

19


GREY TOWERS NEWS NOTES

NEWS OF PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES AT GREY TOWERS NATIONAL HISTORIC LANDMARK

The Letter Box

um Specialist, charged with historiccollections care, conference support,and housekeeping; and Lori McK-ean, Public Affairs Specialist responsi-ble for media, marketing, internal andexternal communications, and the li-aison for key partners, such the Pin-chot Institute for Conservation,lending assistance for program devel-opment at Grey Towers. Additionally,we extend a farewell to ConferenceCoordinator Janet Gonzales, as wellas heartfelt congratulations on her re-cent appointment as Human Re-sources Specialist in Region 3 at theForest Service.

Several employees recently earnedawards and recognition: Grey Towersmaintenance team members JohnLaDolce and Bob Wicksnes werecommended for their extra effort ofmoving the historic collection intothe new curatorial storage building;Lynn Dennis, Interpretive Assistantcharged with monitoring the nation-al acid rain station, which has been lo-cated at Grey Towers for more than10 years, was recently recognized bythe National Atmospheric DepositionProgram for five years of excellence in

field observations and for successfulcompletion of a field operationscourse given by the Central AnalyticalLaboratory of Illinois State WaterSurvey. Length of service awards andpins were given to: Marie Chambers,curatorial, 5 years; Bill Rosanelli,Lead Tour Guide, 15; Deb Croston,administrative, 20; Carol Severance,curatorial, 20; and Ed Brannon, Di-rector, 30 years. Ed also received a“Special Gifford Pinchot Leadershipfor Interpretation” award from theForest Service, due in large part to hisaccomplishments related to GreyTowers’ renovation and program de-velopment.

GREY TOWERS IN THE MEDIA

Steve Dunsky, Forest ServiceVideo Specialist (Region 5) and hisstaff interviewed Pinchot family mem-bers, Dr. Char Miller (noted GiffordPinchot biographer, Trinity Universi-ty history professor, and Pinchot In-stitute senior fellow), and EdBrannon at Grey Towers to prepare avideo on the history of the Forest Ser-vice in celebration of its Centennial in2005.

Grey Towers’ Great Hall was thesetting for a photo shoot for an articleon influential women in NortheastPennsylvania. The article, which ap-peared in Milford Magazine (Winter2003 issue), includes the contribu-tions of Cornelia Pinchot, who wasvery influential in her husband Gif-ford’s political career, Nancy Pinchot,director of the Conservation and theArts program at Grey Towers, andLori McKean.

CONSERVATION EDUCATIONPROGRAMS

The new school year was a busyseason for Grey Towers ConservationEducation programs, with nearly1,000 school children from the NY-NJ-PA region attending programs onforestry, forest history, fire preventionand, of course, Grey Towers as thehistoric home of Gifford Pinchot,founder and first chief of the ForestService. All ages especially enjoyed thenew Forestry Trail where, amongother things, they learned to read treerings, identify trees and study decom-posing logs.


20

GREY TOWERS MORTIMER GARDEN INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY

Through the generosity of Elisabeth and Charles Mortimer, the Elisabeth S. Mortimer Garden Internship atGrey Towers National Historic Landmark was established in 1994 to provide an aspiring horticulturalist withinvaluable practical experience.

Set along the Delaware Water Gap in Milford, Pennsylvania, Grey Towers is a 116-year-old, French-chateauesque mansion designed by Richard Morris Hunt. The 101-acre site, administered by the USDA ForestService, consists of formal, landscaped and wooded grounds. The student chosen for this opportunity willreceive a $2,000 stipend and hands-on experience that will challenge and broaden practical applications learnedin horticultural theory.

The Mortimer Garden internship opportunity is open to students above the freshman level who are interestedin a variety of fields of study. Past participants in this 10-12 week summer program were enrolled in such disci-plines as ornamental horticulture, forestry, and landscape architecture.

Resumes are being accepted now for Summer 2003. For more information on the application process or onthis unique opportunity, please contact Grey Towers Horticulturalist Elizabeth Hawke at (570) 296-9661 [email protected].

21


The Pinchot Institute is pleasedto recognize its newest part-ners (for 2002) to the Pinchot

Associates and Major Donor pro-grams. The Pinchot Associates arecomprised of insightful individualswho give an unrestricted gift at the$100 level (or more) to help the In-stitute administer its programs in atimely, yet thoughtful, manner. Majordonors are individuals who give a giftof four figures (or more) for either re-stricted or unrestricted purposes.

We welcome these individuals andorganizations for new gifts receivedbetween January 1–December 31,2002 that affiliated them with the fol-lowing groups. During economicallychallenging times, these individuals’generosity is the fuel that enables us toachieve Gifford Pinchot’s sustainableforestry legacy, which helps to pro-mote healthy forests and therefore, ahealthy environment. For our newestaffiliates, and those who have given inthe past, we are truly grateful.

New Partners Towards Advancing the Pinchot Legacy

PINCHOT ASSOCIATES

Ned Ames & Jane Sokolow FAnonymous F AWA Electronics FJoe & Ronnie Biondo* F GeorgeBohlinger, III FDick & Ann Bury FThomas Bullock F Garry & ShelleyBrewer F Theodore Cart F Davis R.Chant Real Estate F Arthur CirkusFoundation F Art & Jean Cooper FChris & Beth Dunworth F Glyn &Nancy Eisenhauer F Frank M. EwingFoundation, Inc.* F John Fry FMartin & Billie Gold F Perry Ha-genstein F Bob & Carolyn Hicks FPat Layton F Peter & Alice JaneLoewrigkeit F Eric & MarthaLorin F Dan & Bert MacLeod FLee & Sonda Miller F John & SusanMullin F Marvin & Frances Naftal*FNick & Maggie Niles F Laird Nor-ton Family Fund* F Art Ridley FKirk Rodgers F Tom Schenarts FDuke & Joan Schneider F Richard &Gayle Schuster F Marty Scotzin FSusanne Smith F Gus & CameronSpeth F John Steffenson* FMichaelTrenner & Maylene Syracuse* F

The Pinchot Institute is pleasedto welcome Stephanie Ka-vanaugh as a Research Associ-

ate in the International Forest Policyand Planning program area. Stephanierecently completed a Master of Sciencein Sustainable Development and Con-servation Biology from the Universityof Maryland at College Park, whereshe concentrated on environmentalpolicy and collaborative processes. HerMaster’s project, “Improving ForestCertification in the United States:Linking the Research Community tothe Evolution of Forest CertificationPractices,” was written as a policy re-port for the Pinchot Institute.

Stephanie brings to the Instituteexperience coordinating national en-vironmental campaigns for the Na-tional Parks ConservationAssociation and the Public InterestResearch Groups (PIRG). Profes-sionally, she has designed education-al materials for the World WildlifeFoundation and researched the po-tential biological and socioeconomiceffects of a non-native oyster speciesfor the Chesapeake Bay Foundation.During her undergraduate years,Stephanie studied marine ecology inAustralia and participated in eco-nomic development projects inBarasas, Haiti.

A native of Chicago, Illinois,Stephanie enjoys trail running, seakayaking, independent film andmusic, and weaving on her 1970’sGlimakra table loom. She first becameinterested in ecology and the envi-ronment during elementary school,when her parents took her on regularcamping trips to Michigan’s Luding-ton State Park.

Pinchot Institute Welcomes New Research Associate

Larry & Anne Tishler F Art & GwenWarnke F Art Watres F KatharineWay F Frederick & Margaret L. Wey-erhaeuser Foundation* F Rick Wey-erhaeuser* F Ted & NancyWeyerhaeuser F Steve Winnett &Laura Knoy

MAJOR DONORS

Barbara Buchanan F Barth & Rose-mary D’Ascoli F Stan & Lynn Day(in memoriam) F Pike County Com-missioners F Bob & Amy Litzen-berger FDennis & Linda Stackhouse

* Denotes additional affiliation as a majordonor.

All donors for 2001–2002 will beindividually recognized in the up-coming annual report. For more in-formation on the Pinchot Associates,please see page 9 of this newsletter orcontact Kendra Miller at 202-939-3454 or [email protected], whereyou can also obtain more informationon becoming a major donor.

In the last issue of this newsletter,I talked about the importance ofa letter of final instructions, and

began to identify what it contains. Inthis segment, I have provided addi-tional, helpful tips to assist you withpreparing your letter.

STRATEGY. Writing the lettershould not to be a daunting chore.Still, it is tedious to organize theneeded records that clutter up yourdesk drawers, closets and other stor-age spaces. What I advise clients is tobreak up the work of sorting throughfinancial papers into segments of nomore than a couple of hours at atime—insurance one evening, invest-ments another, and so on. There is aside benefit to this do-it-yourself pro-ject: your desk will be less cluttered,and you wind up tossing out lots ofstuff as you organize your records.

RESOLVE TO KEEP YOUR LETTER

UP-TO-DATE AND ACCESSIBLE. Tomake the letter most useful to yourfamily, update it as needed. Look overthe information and make any neces-sary amendments whenever there aremajor changes in your affairs—for in-stance, a marriage, divorce, birth of achild or job change. In essence, youwant to make sure that some seem-ingly small changes do not add up toa fairly big one, which is why it is agood idea to review the letter on aregular basis—say, at year-end orwhen tax time rolls around.

Unlike a will, your letter is not alegal document. That is why you re-main free to revise it as frequently asyou wish to without the formalities(or legal fees) required for a will to belegally effective (i.e., signing and dat-ing by you in the presence of witness-es, and signing by witnesses who are

not beneficiaries under the will).Make several copies of your letter. At-tach one to your copy of your will,send one to your lawyer or executor,and perhaps keep one in the deskdrawer or wherever your family willfirst look upon your death. On a per-sonal note, my wife and I do our re-view every December and e-mailcopies to our children.

AVOIDING A NIGHTMARE. Unlessthe heirs have a letter of final instruc-tions, they will have to reconstruct theassets without guidelines, which canresult in a nightmarish situation thatcauses family disputes and significant-ly increases legal (and other) expens-es.

Like other lawyers, I have oftenbeen called in to help heirs search forproperty. My most memorable casewas that of a much-married widowwith children from each of her mar-riages. After her death, the half broth-ers and half sisters found themselvesscavenging for such documents as awill, insurance policies, stock certifi-cates, and bank statements. It was notuntil years afterwards that the squab-bling siblings stumbled upon stockcertificates secreted in the mother’sarmoire. Worse still, missing jewelryhad them eyeing one another dis-trustfully, until they finally discoveredthe gems behind a loose board in thecloset of a summer home that, fortu-nately, had remained in the family.

FINAL TIPS. To speed things upand lessen the children’s expenses, Iadvised them, as I do all heirs, of sev-eral long-standing techniques for re-constructing assets that they couldemploy without my assistance. Forstarters, all they had to do was moni-tor mom’s mail during the filing sea-

son from banks, brokerage outfits andother financial institutions, and for1099 forms. Those forms wouldshow interest, dividends and other in-come sources. As anticipated, the1099s eventually enabled them totrack down much of her property.

The children might have beenable to reconstruct other assets fromher tax returns. The possibilities in-cluded the existence of retirementplans and the ownership of real estatefor which she had claimed deductionsfor property taxes. Unfortunately,that approach was unavailable, as theyfound that she had not filed 1040s foryears.

What if the mother had filed, butthe copies were unlocatable? Then thefastest way to obtain them is from thepreparer of her returns, assuming sheused one. The law, in most cases, re-quires preparers to keep copies for atleast three years after the filing dead-line. Failing this, the children can getcopies from the IRS by submittingForm 4506 (Request for Copy of TaxForm), which is generally received atleast 60 days after submission.

Meanwhile, the needlessly pro-tracted search continued. As a conse-quence, so did my fee—though basedon an hourly rate that I deemed mod-erate—which continued to swell, acircumstance that discomforted thechildren and comforted my creditors.

Julian Block is an attorney and asyndicated columnist in Larchmont,New York. Block has been cited by theNew York Times as a “leading taxprofessional” and by The Wall StreetJournal as an “accomplished writeron taxes.” He can be contacted at [email protected].


22

FROM THE PROFESSIONALS

Letter of Final Instructions: Why You Need One (Part II)Julian Block, JD, LLM

23


IN YOUR OPINION...In 2001, the Pinchot Institute for Conservation received anoverall superior rating from Dunn & Bradstreet, the leadingprovider of business information worldwide. In addition tohearing the thoughts of the surveyed organizations, wewould be delighted to learn yours.

How did you initially hear about us?

______________________________________________

If you could characterize us in three words or less,which would you choose? ________________________

______________________________________________

Why? _________________________________________

______________________________________________

______________________________________________

In your own words, please describe what we’re tryingto accomplish?

______________________________________________

______________________________________________

Is this something you believe in?

______________________________________________

In your opinion, what are our strengths? ___________

______________________________________________

Our weaknesses?________________________________

______________________________________________

Thank you for your time and attention. Please fax or mail this questionnaire to:

Pinchot Institute for Conservation1616 P Street, NWSuite 100Washington, DC 20036Fax: 202-797-6583

THE PINCHOT LETTER

News from the Pinchot Institute for Conservation

FAX / MAIL-IN RESPONSE FORM

❏ I would like to be notified via email of new issues ofThe Pinchot Letter available on your website.

❏ Please add my friend or colleague to your mailinglist to receive The Pinchot Letter; their contactinformation is below.

❏ I would no longer like to receive The Pinchot Letter,please remove my name from your mailing list.

Name __________________________________________

Company_______________________________________

Address ________________________________________

_______________________________________________

_______________________________________________

Email __________________________________________

Phone__________________________________________

Fax ____________________________________________

Additional remarks/ comments/suggestions:

_______________________________________________

_______________________________________________

_______________________________________________Thank you! Please fax or mail this form to:

Pinchot Institute for Conservation1616 P Street, NWSuite 100Washington, DC 20036Fax: 202-797-6583

Other tax-advantaged ways to help usconserve America’s forestlands are to:

F Contribute in-kind goods or services to the Institute.

F Donate online on a secure server via ourwebsite, www.pinchot.org.

F Have your employer maximize yourinvestment through its matching giftprogram.

F Donate appreciated securities through yourbroker or a donor advised fund, like FidelityInvestment’s Charitable Gift Fund.

F Establish a future or planned gift from yourassets that would offer you exceptionalbenefits, such as a guaranteed income for afixed number of years after retirement.

For more information on these and other waysto make an investment towards the future ofAmerica’s forests, please contact Kendra Millerat (202)797-6580 or [email protected].

Partner with us by making a fully tax-deductible gift to:

F The Working Capital Fund — to help usprovide decision makers with timely informationand analysis on key issues in natural resourcepolicy.

F The Pinchot Institute Legacy Fund —planned/deferred gifts for an endowment toensure our long-term financial well-being.

F The 101 Scholarship and Mortimer Gardenfunds — to offer internships and scholarships tofuture natural resource professionals.

F The Grey Towers Fund — to offer trainingworkshops, educational conferences, and to assistwith other initiatives at Grey Towers, theInstitute’s home.

OR

F Become a Pinchot Associate and receive advancednotification of our activities and publications;special mention in our printed materials; andinvitations to events held in your community,Washington, DC and at Grey Towers.

Combined Federal CampaignThe Pinchot Institute for Conservation is a member of the Conservation andPreservation Charities of America. (Check your guide for our listing and charitynumber under this federation.) All gifts are tax-deductible.

Leadership in Forest Conservation Thought, Policy, and Action.

1616 P Street NW, Suite 100, Washington, DC 20036

CHANGE SERVICE CORRECTED

CONTINUING THE PINCHOT LEGACYHOW CAN You MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN FOREST CONSERVATION?

NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONU.S. POSTAGE PAIDSILVER SPRING, MD

PERMIT NO. 1400

the pinchot letter

Documents